IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET {MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 U. ill 1.6 Photagmphic Sciences Corporation V iV ^v :<\^ A \ '■■ If O^ ^. '#A n>'^. #^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques Tl tc The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur □ Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul^e I I Cover title missing/ D E n Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents / > Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion — J along interior margin/ La re liure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intirieure D Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas it6 filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires; L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6td possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modif . ar une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithqde normale de filmage sont indiquds ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/oi Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxec Pages d6coior6es, tachet6es ou piqu^es Pages detached/ Pages d6tach6es Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Qualitd in^gaie de I'impression Includes supplementary materia Comprend du matdriel suppl^mentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ r~7j Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ r~7] Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ n~| Includes supplementary material/ I I Only edition available/ D Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partieilement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmies d nouveau de facon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. Tl P' 01 fil O b( t\r si ot fli si 01 Tl sh Tl w M dl er be rlj re m This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X _y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X lils iu dif ; 9r ine age The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Pubiic Archives of Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considerini; tK > condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specif icatiins. 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. L'exemplaire filmi fut reproduit grflce A la g6n6rositA de: La bibliothe^^ue des Archives publiques du Canada Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte teni de la condition at de la nettet« de Texempiaire film6, at en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimte sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat at en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmfo en commen^ant par la premidre page qui comporte una empreinte d'impression ou d'illuntration et en terminant par la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la derniire image de cheque microfiche, selon le ces: le symbols ^-^ signlfie "A SUIVRE", le symbols y signlfie "FIN". 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 cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s d des taux de rMuction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, 11 est film6 d partir de Tangle sup6rieur geuche, da gauche A droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m6thode. ata lure, : IX 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 !«€■ i LEG II SPEECH OP THE / HON. W. H. DRAPER, Q. C. AT THE BAR OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF CANADA, (FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 2i, 1843) IN DEFENCE OF THE CHARTERED RIGHTS OF THE mnmvuiiVt of min^'n eoUrfie< AUTHORISED REPORT.! TORONTO, CANADA— MDCCCXLIII. I LE( SPEECH or THK HON. W. H. DKAPER, Q. C, At TH« *AR OP THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF CANADA, (FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1843) IN DEFENCE OF THE CHAETEEEB EIGHTS or THE sintoet0tttt ot Wiim'u eoueae. jj « >.w.»^'yvNr I -r->r ■ ***■■ -■-■■**« AUTHORISED REPORT. TORONTO, CANADA-MDCCCXLIII. TOilONTO HERALD OFFICE, TYPOO. ^i» SPEECH. ■&--? ^r »« guess at the reasoning upon which the attack I desire to ward |ofF will be founded. Again, my position is em- barrassing because (without, in my present posi- ^tion, presuming to enquire who) I am compelled to believe that a measure introduced into this , hon. House has. if not its author, ita paretit by 4' adoptioni as well as its advocates and supporters within these walls ; and when I assail tho measure itself — portraying it not perhaps altogether as it has appeared in their favouring eyes — I am una- voidably assailing those who, tho' for all purposes of decision they arc judges, may in one sense be deemed the counsel of tlie cause whicli I am here to oppose. Deeply desirous to speak only of things — disclaiming all allusions to persons — intending no particular individuul even when the forms of speech compel the adoption of terms which point at some unknown antagonist — I have nevertheless abundant reason to throw my- self on the indulgence of the House, and to claim, as through you, Mr. Speaker, I do most humbly claim, not only its patient attention, but its most favourable interpretation, asking them to remember that I am here but as an advocate, and entreating them not to permit the goodness of the cause to suffer in their judgment from any indis- cretion oi fault of mine. And I have, in truth, a reason to ask this favour at their hands which I feel sensible must weigh in my behalf, for not- withstanduig the magnitude of the subject, the intricate variety of its details, and the incalcul- able importance of its possible result, I am, un- fortunately for myself, without the aid (wiiich I had at one time hoped for) of an able and learned friend whose keen discrimination, untiring re- search, and vigorous eloquence, would have added weight to my observations, strengthened what I had endeavoured to maintain, and sup- plied thatwhich I had omitted to advance. Under all these circumstances I trust, Mr. Speaker, I have made good my claim to all reasonable in- tendment and indulgence. I propose, in the first instance, to inquire into the character of this bill, as involving several highly important constitutional questions, affecting the preroga- I tive of the Crown, and the legitimate luncttona and powers of this Provincial Parliament in relation thereto. In treating of prerogative I shall not (even as an advocate using every avail- able resource to fortify the position of my client*) resort to those extreme doctrines which prevailed in ancient times, but which have long since been modified and reduced within more precise limits. I shall, I trust, be able to sustain my argument without contravening the principle that the pre- rogatives of the Crown are to be exercised for the benefit of tlie people, though I shall insist that on that very account they are to be maintained, and the rights acquired under them are to be respected. I will resort alone to principles which, tho' of the very highest ant'.quity, still flourish in fullest vigour ; which, tho' venerable for their age like some of those massive structures which adorn the glorious country on which we depend, have survived the Shocks and tempestsof change and time, and rear their lofty summits towards the sky, proud testimonies alike of the soundness of the rules by which they were constructed — of the imperishable durability of the mate- rials of which they arc composed. Principles which belotig to our constitution, matured as it is by the experience of ages ; and the disregard of which weakens not only our respect for that constitution but even its existence. The Jura Corona, according to an ancient writer, so long as they remain attached to the Crown are called prerogatives ; when granted to subjects tliey are termed franchises : of these corporations form a class, and Universities are properly speaking civil corporations. From the earliest periods of our legal history the power of the Crown to erect corporations and the neces- sity of its consent, express or implied, to their existence has been undoubted. If their origin be traced to a Royal charter, there is the express assent ; if to prescription, that implies a previ- ous grant, and equally, therefore, involves the assumption of the assent of the Crowa But, tho' the Crown has then the power to erect cor- porations, there are limits to the privileges which the Crown itself can give, and a consideration of these limits tends to explain the true nature and character of the prerogative. By the com- mon law the King cannot grant to a corporation itbe power to imprison, aad. wkore It is deemed by the IV being pa the Quec and Cam ceived it! proper to confer such powen recoune musl^ .^inost nob had to Parliament — as in regard to impriaonme^i Mcstimatio was the case with the College of Physiciani g And the and so in other cases, such as conferring an eiJlly that t( elusive right to trading on the East India Com- S authority pany, or erecting the courts of the Vice-Chan, cellors of Oxford And Cambridge, with powen to proceed in a mode different itom that pre- scribed by the common law : and Mr. Justice Blackstone states, that till of late years most of those statutes which are usually cited as having "^^ papal bu erected corporations do either confirm such u 1 1432 the have been before created by the King, or thej 4 b^ a chi enable the King to erect a corporation in future with such especial power as the statute acti forth. So that in either case the immediate creative act was usually performed by the King alone, in virtue of the prerogative. It has occurred to me, though I can scarce entertain the supposition, that the restrictive, 't^ llished by it Royal >: Aberdeei \ in 1494, .The Co ;!J I believe founded effect of the third clause which in reality gives f absorbed to the new University a monopoly to confer do- ^ lege, in greesin Upper Canada may be said to come in ^ Royal av some degree within the principle on which, in || and was the foregoing instances, the Legislature have passed acts relative to corporations. It appears to me Mifficient for the present to suggest tho rovision and ,j| University was founded in 1582, by James I., red to, of en- | who increased and confirmed both its property 1" and privileges by successive charters in 1584 and ' 1612, and in 1621. An act of the Parliament of Scotland was passed confirming various grants ;, of property made to the city of Edinburgh for ; its support^ and ratifying all previous grants and charters. In modern times the same practice has prevailed. The University of Durham ojves its existence to a Royal charter in 1837, jand , the London University to two charters granted in 1836 and 1837. My position will thus be found literally correct, and with regard to the Scotch almost equally so ; though eyen if it were otherwise it could not aflect my argument, ' because that is based not upon the practice in other countries but only where the English com- mon law prevailed. Even in our own local ex- perience, the University of Queen's College, at I Kingston, is founded by Royal charter, the act of the Legislature erecting it having been dis- allowed ; and Upper Canada Academy having been iocoipor&ted by charter in 1836, was after- portion of his I, but for the Id be equally nably involve sequence, to all not fail to erect coipor- ken, can still 'n to be un- I believethat yet in Scoti' >tion, is there id by act of the Univerp •assed in thie poratioBS as ibject is thus es, liberties, ratified, and Bs, and her wards by act of the Colonial Parliament erected into a College with University privileges and powers, and thus forms the only case liko an exception to the rule I have laid down. In incorporating this proposed new Univer- sity — and I take it to be clear that such must be considered the true efTeot, pnd operation of this act — I think I have shown* that the Colonial Legislature are assuming to do that which the Parliament of lingland neyor did — which the Parliament of Great Britain ncycr did— rand which the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland never did, Were the objection, therefore, con- fined to the exercise of this power in the erec-r tion of a new corpomtion, without Royal charter, and making such nevy corporation a University, it will be found built on the solid foundation of the undcviating practice of the Legislature of that country from which (as regards Upper Canada) our common lav^', and as regards the whole Province, our Parliamentary precedents and prfic- tice are adopted and derived. But besides that this bill thus assumes to grant that which should be granted not by Parliament but by the Crown — it is obnoxious to the further objection that it proposes to interfere with and take away privileges, liberties and franchises which the Crown has solemnly granted under the Great Setil of the Empire. This House are asked to declare their will, to exercise their power, to rescind that grant, to abrogate the royal char-* ter, to destroy that to which it has given birth and existence. I have laboujred on the one hand to prove that the former will be an act of uncon- stitutional creatio;ni, I shall now endeavour to demonstrate that the latter vj/i\\ be an act of equally unconstitutional deprivation. In fact it would seem not to require much argument to es- tablish that if the erection of an University by the Legislature was unprecedented, because pro- perly a prerogative act, the destruction of one to which the Crown has granted its charter of in- corporation must be at least equally open to doubt and objection. Inasmuch as the King's charter creates cor- porations, the Crown may mould and frame them in the first instance as it thinks fit So also the King may, by consent of the corporation, after- wards remodel them or grant additional powers 6 o. rules for llicir govcmanco, consUtrntly with the principles of the common liuv ; uml this fx- plaina why there are so niiiny instances of cor- porations having several cliarter^. Hut it is a well settled and cstaljlished principle, one for which numerous authorities may be cited, that the King cannot, by the mere prerogative, dimin- ish or destroy immunities and privilcjjcs onco conferred and vested in a subject by royal grant. Even in the case of a new charter to an already existing corporation, it rests in the option of that body to accept or reject such now cliarter, be- cause the King cannot take away, abridge or alter any liberties or privileges granted by him or his predecessors, without the consent of the in- dividuals holding them. Lord Mnnsficld, refer- ring to certain new grants made by Queen Eliza- beth to the University of Cambridge, says — " the validity of these new charters must turn upon the acceptance of the University." And though no particular form of acceptance be necessary, though exercising any portion cf new powers will evidence such acceptance, though even not objecting within a reasonable time may be held to determine the election, yet this does not the less make an express or implied acceptance ne- cessary. The case of King's College and Ma- rischal College at Aberdeen, affords a striking illustration of the correctness of the position. The facts may be thus briefly stated : after the abolition of episcopacy, as a part of the national church of Scotland, Charles the First resolved to apply part of the revenues of the dilFerent Sees to the support of the Universities, and he ap- pointed a commission to inquire into the state of those of Old and New Aberdeen. The result of the inquiry was the executing a charter, uniting these two corporations into one University, under the name of King Charles' University of Aber- deen. The two Colleges, however, did not ac- cept this new charter ; they continued separate, and were so recognized in an act of the Parlia- ment of Scotland in 1641. A second attempt to form and incorporate them into one University was made ab it the year 1 784, but proved equally ineffectual ; nor have the labours of the Royal Commissioner in 1836 and 1837 produced, so far as I have had the opportunity of tracing, any other result. But I venture nevertheless to state my unhesitating conviction, that the Imperial Parliament has not united these two Universities and Colleges against their will. From these ob- servations, I trust it will appear ostabUshcd that the Croion cannot constitutionally by the force of prerogative diminish or destroy franchises once granted. Ujwn what process of reasoning it can be urged that the Legislature can do so, I am at a loss to understand. I am not arguing against the obslract powers of Parliament to do that or any other act, nor even, that some case might not arise requiring and justifying this ex- ercise of the omnipotence of Parliament. My position is this — the Crown cannot of its mere prerogative disfranchise — the Legislature of its mere will ought not, and that ought not is mo- rally equivalent to cannot. Purely the advocates of this bill will not rest their support of it on this foundation " stet pro ratione voluntas." It may be perhaps urged as an argument why the Legislature may deal with this charter, that it has already been the subject of Legislation ; and, having been thus brought as it were within the control and under the surveillance of the Le- gislature, if what had been already done is capa- ble of further improvement, there can be no objection to the completion of what has been thus commenced. I can scarce imagine such an argument will be advanced ; because upon that ground, every corporation which had once been before Parliament on any point connected with its charter, would be from thenceforth subject to as many changes as a spirit oi experiment could suggest ; and with regard more especially to an institution like this, all confidence in its stability and usefulness would be entirely destroyed. Be- sides the precedent is not applicable ; because in the first place the sovereign, the founder and patron of King's College, invited the attention of the Legislature to the improvement of the charter; secondly, because no right, privilege, franchise or property granted by the charter, or vested in the (.'ollege, was taken away or in any way interfered with or taken away ; and lastly, because King's College accepted *the amended charter, and went into operation under its provi- sions. Any right to legislate, which may be ad- vanced on the authority of the former enactment must therefore, as it appears to me, fail. I have thus endeavoured tj vsi.iblish: 1. That the Legislature cannot, with'wH irfringing on the 'i^l prerogati' '^ tion with .That it c ) Universitiet m these ob* blishcd that >y the force franchises f reasoning ;an du so, I not arguing iment to do t some case ing this ex- imcnt. My 0/ its mere iturc of its I not is mo- c advocates »rt of it on untas." ument why charter, that [iCgislation ; were within 3 of the Lo- me is capa- can be no IS been thus le such an e upon that 1 once been lected with h subject to ment could :;ially to an its stability •oyed. Be- because in jundcr and le attention nent of the t, privilege, charter, or y or in any and lastly, ic amended er its provi- may be ad- enactment ail. Jh: 1. That ging on the prerogative of the Crown, erect a new corpora- j tion with University powers and privileges. 2. J That it cannot (excepting as an act of will and ft power, unsuatnined by reason or principle) deprive ' B corporation of the right and franchises which ' the Crown has legally granted to it, or in any way interfere with them, without the consent o' j Buch cori)oration. I have not laboured to prove ' what must bo apparent to the most cursory ob- servation, that this bill is open to these objections > ■'! but I do most earnestly submit that either of , them should be deemed sufficient to cause its re- jection ujron the same pnnciple that the Legis- lature should not of its own act confer University powers on a corporation of their own creating. They ought not, as it seems to me, to assume to transfer from King's College to this proposed University of Toronto, the franchises given by the King's charter, or the property conlerred by ^i the King's grant. "' But by this bill almost every power granted to > King's College is mutilated in consequence of 1 the controlling force given to the statutes of the University ; while all powers to regulate studies necessary to qualify under-graduates to obtain ; degrees ; to determine what degree of proficiency ' shall be deemed indispensable, or what time shall ■ be passed in a course of preparatory study ; the i' power of conferring degrees ; the assemblage in convocation ; in a word, every power or privi- '; lege which belongs to a University is taken away Professing to leave to King's College its charter as a College, it makes even this collegiate man- agement secondary and subordinate to the Uni- versity authority. When the sweeping character of this change is understood — when the remorsc- ' less destruction of every thing granted to King's ■ College by George the Fourth's charter is tho- roughly appreciated — then let any reflecting man .. ponder over these words : " We will, that these ■ our letters patent shall and may be good, firm, ' valid, sufficient and effectual in the law, accord- ^ ing to the true intent and meaning of the same, ' and shall be taken and adjudged in the most ' favourable and bcaeficial sense for the best ad- vantage of the said Chancellor, President and Scholars of our said College, as well in our -':' Cc!-?ts of Record and elsewhere, and by all and ; singular Judgesj Justices, Officers, Ministers, and other subjects whatsoever, of us, our heirs, and succcesors ;" let him next be reminded that the College to whom these " good, tinu, valid, suffi- cient and eilectual " letters patent were granted, has within six months matriculutcd its first stu- dents — that those students are now prosecuting the studies of only its scconil term— that the build- ings for it.s permanent accommodation are yet in- complete — thai however it may have been assailed out of doors, not one application has been made either to the Crown or to those judges who arc visitors on behalf of the Crown, to inquire into, check, and remove alleged abuses, if such there be, — that no charge involving the consequence of legal forfeiture has been advanced against either the corporation or its officers — that if any such charge exists, as well the corporation as its officers have, in common with every British subject, the right to defend themselves, before conviction and condemnation, before a jury — and that notwithstanding this, a bill of pains and penalties, of forfeiture and disfran- chisement — may I be excused for using such strong terms — of general and individual spoliation, is brought forward against this College — wiiat will he for the future think of the goodness, firmness, validity, sufficiency and stability of a Roya! charter, of the respect which it commands in the Legislature of this Province, or of the security of rights and privileges which have that alone for their foundation ? But the attack upon the prerogative of the Crown is not yet done with. The third clause of this bill, to which on another account I have already al- luded, contains the assertion of a right in this Le- gislature, for the future, to prevent the exercise of the Royal prerogative in the institution of any corporation or collegiate body with power to grant degrees. After taking that power from those to whom the Crown had given it, and vest- ing it in the new University, the bill in express terms declares and enacts that none of the Col- leges already established or any hereafter to be established, shall have or exercise this power. A reference to the 30th clause shews taat the at- tempt to restrict the Crown is not unintentional, for there provision is expressly made for incorpo- rating new Colleges with this University, and this is extended to Colleges which may be endowed by Her Majesty, Her Heirs, or Successors, as well as to those which may be endowed by pii- 8 vate munificence. I haVe In other respects en- deavoured to shew this td be an unprecedentoil measure ; first, in assuming the initiative in u matter which should emanate from the Crown *, i)e«ond, in diminishing and taking av7ay rights 'Wbteh the Crown has solemnly granted, and now in passing an enuucment to deprive the Crown, for all time to come, of the power of chartering Another University in Upper Canada, and to limit k to the incorporating endowed Colleges with tihis new University, provided the Board of Cen- tred, which the act creates, is of opinion that the «ndowment is sufficient ; by which is meant, that it shall be of the value of one thousand bushels •of wheat per annum. I again fearlessly assert that it is unprecedented, I do not believe it to be constitutional. Thus far of prerogative and franchise. The next thing assailed is property — and this bill con- iiScates the whole property of King's College without even the form of a trial — forfeits every tiling it possesses ere a judgment has been pro- nounceed. A judgment ! — aye, before the accu- sation is made known to the sufferer. It needs only to read the 36th and 37th clauses of the act to see that the effect is not overstated, and that all the real and personal property of the College is tranSferMtd " at one fell swoop" to the Univer- versity purposes of the newly erected corporation. I have not forgotten the temporary provision of JC500 per annum, insufficient for any really use- ful purpose, for it is too trifling on the one hand to qualify the terms I have used, and it is on the other, not an exception, because it assumes to be given to King's College by force of the act, (not left untouched to it) a miserable shred of the mu- nifiicent endowment of its founder and patron. In this disposition of the property it seems to me that the charter of the 15*h March, 1828, has been misunderstood, or the true character and effect of ii overlooked. It is not the erection of an University, a substantive corporation, to which a College or Collegef might be or were intended to be attached. Not like Oxford or Cambridge where the Universities themselves are distinct corporations, apart from the Colleges, which are also distinct corpo- rations. Here it is King's College which is in- corporated, and to King's College the powers and privileges of a University are given. .\n examination of the charter will make the point clear, and will shew that the erection of a Cot* lege is the primary object ; as a consequence the endowment which came from the same royal source must havebeeni given for that object also. It (the diarter) begins with ^-rranting that there shall be " at or near our town of York, in our said Province of Upper Canada, from this time, ONE College, with the style and privileges of an University, as hF;reinafier directed, for tlie educa' tion and instruction of youth and students in arts and faculties, to continue for ever" (" To con- tinue/or ever," such was the wish, tlie hope, the design of the Royal founder,) " to be called King's Goilege." The incorporation is of the Chancellor " of our said College" the Fresidenlt " of our said College" and the persons admitted as scholars " of our said College" This corpo- ration was enabled from time to time " to have, take, receive, purchase, acquire, hold, possess, enjoy and maintain, to and for the use of the said College any messuages, lands, &c., in U. Canada, to the yearly value of £15,000 sterling ; and more- over, " to take, purchase, acquire, havcj hold, en- joy, receive, possess, and retain, all ot any goods chattels, charitable or other contributions, gifti, or benefactions whatsoever." In pursuance of the object of the incorporation, the Crown did grant lands for an endowment, which couldonly be taken and accepted according to the charter, that is, to and for the use of the College; This must be the legal consequence and effect of every gift or grant to it by its corporate name, and the Venerable Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts presented £500 worth of books cf the standard divinity of the Church of England to the library of this College. This bill, however, takes from King's College all these lands, and ^ives them to a University (not even a College) of its own creation, a Universiiy such as never yet was incorporated by the charter cf the Sovereign, and leaves nothing to the College for whosr use the grant was made ; it takes also from King's College its library, this library of Church of England divinity, with other books, iid "fives it to a University which is to have no Proressorof Divinity, or any lecturer, class, or examination in divinity whatsoever. Can we forbear to put the question "'Hcec utrum lex est an legum omnium dissolutio ?" . , Where le annal iirely in C issolved, frown ; s [onasteri ^tcd as a por upon Jorporatio Bvert bac lult and le giant le corpo] lot leave ' jverting bcheatinj further o lay be t\ iy of the pet apart ^he royal ed ; we d f Dukes of Required. ;fthere are pwhich ca ifbr this p: Ithe doma lands in Iwhy is t , *and less fists, to I »and — as • and dem I emment • others, h there ha' and pub : of the C 2; be quest I priate th J out of tli ' I maint,; ^ grants re tc be res , pected i ' grant w 'I which tl A misa] lege mi{ 9 ake the point ion orf a Col* ; isequehce the 5 same royal it object also. ng that there York, in our om this time, ivilegeaofan fbrtlieeduca- udentsinarts " (" To con. I tiie hope, the ' to be called tion is of the the Fresidentt jons admitted This corpo- ne " to have, lold, possess, lae of the said in U.Canada, ig; andmore> lavcj hold, eil< at any goodf )utJons, gifts, pursuance of ic Crown did lich could only the charter, 'ollege* This efTsct of every * name, and the gation of the 1 £500 worth >f the Church /ollege. This >llege all these iity (not even niversuy such the charter cf to the College ; it takes also his library of 1 other books, is to have no tirer, class, or trer, Can we utrum lex ett Where can a case parallel to this be found in le annals of constitutional legislation ? Not irely in Great Britain. Coi-porations have been issolved, and tlieir estates have escheated to the (rown ; such vva3 the case on the dissolution of [onasteries by Henry the 8tli. If this is to be ited as a precedent it is not very applicable, ^or upon well understood principles, where a irporation is dissolved, its endowment should svert back to the donor or his heirs, in their de- lult and failure it escheats to the Crown. Here le giant omnipotence of Parliament dissolves le corporation the Crown has created, but will lot leave to the Crown the endowment, either as sverting back to it, as the original donor, or as (scheating ; and with regard to this precedent, a further observation suggests itself. Whatever lay be thought of the wisdom, justice, or poli- !y of the proceeding which appropriated estates, let apart for religion or charity, to other uses, the royal grants of these lands have been respect- id ; we do not hear of proposals to deprive the f Dukes of Bedford and Devonshire of lands thus Jacquired. Other forfeitures on legal principles mhere are many ; but no instance can I find :pwhich can be quoted as a precedent or authority #for this proceeding. True, their lands were once *the domain of the crown, so were once all the ands in Upper Canada But when granted, iwhy is the grant to King's College less sacred and less binding than the grant to U. E. Loyal- lists, to Militia, to Settlers, or than "hose large iand — as I have not unfrequently heard called and denounced as — improvident grants to Gov- ijemment officers, Executive Councillors and others, in former days, or than grants — of which there have been many — forpurposes of a specified , and public character. The constitutional right ■ of the Crown to make this grant cannot, at least, *; be questioned by those who would thus appro- i priate the lands which have only passed from and :; out of the Crown by force of the grant. No, Sir, J maintain that in the eye of the law all these grants rest on the same foundation, and areequal.y ' tc be respected. I ask why they are to be less res- pected in the eyes of law-makers ? True, the * grant was for a specific use and purpose, one in i which the whole Province is deeply interested. I A misapplication of funds belonging to the Col- 1 lege might and would render individuals re^prin- sible to make it good, as well as have called for and justified their removal. But this would not require an act of Parliament. The power of the Crown and of its Courts is enough, to enquire and to punish. This, if it existed, could not justify Icgislatwe deprivation, and (may I use the term which most forcibly conveys my meaning) spo- liation, for it would be a strange perversion of justice to disfranchise King's College and take away its property, because some of its officers did not use that property for the best interests and advancement of this College, according to their duty and its charter. It would be as rea- sonable to dissolve a banking corporation because one of its clerks embezzled a large amount of its property. Besides, no advocate of the bill can support it on this pretext without falsifying the preamble, which, whatever may be the strength of the reasons it advances, does not pretend to justify Parliamentary interference ui?on any such ground. Again I ask where is there to be found a precedent for legislation of such a character ? Again I say not in Great Britain. The proceed- ings there relative to charitable corporations will not be found to afford it. Time docs not permit me more tlian a passing allusion to them. Two things, however, arc to be observed. First, the careful and scrupulous investigation which pre- ceded any action ; second, the spirit of justice which pervaded — in relation to the declared ob- jects for which these corporations were instituted — in remedying abuses, restoring to their original and proper uses what had been misapplied,— or where the fulfilment of original uses had become impracticable — the selection of others, the near- est that circumstances permitted, in accordance with the spirit and intention of the founders. Nor will a reference to a neighbouring country weaken my position ; State laws which interfer- ed with corporate rights, aye, even corporate rights claimed and enjoyed under royal charters, have been, by the supreme tribunals, declared unconstitutional and void. And though the lands now in question were granted that they migiit be employed for a purpose beneficial to the people of Upper Canada, though capable of ex- tending the benefit far wider, they are not the only grants for the advancement of religion and science in which other portions of the people of Canada are interested— they rest on the self-same 10 security, that of the royal and national iionor and faith ! There is no distinction, in principle, be- tween these lands and the 2,115,178 acres grunt- ed by the French Government for such objects. Who can say where the action will stop which this bill threatens to commence ? It may re- quire change of times and circumstances ere it can reach to this extent ; but if such a wave be once permitted to roll, it will rapidly acquire strength in its progress, and who can dare hope that it will stop short just when it begins to threat- en that which he would preserve. Let those who feel an interest in the preservation of what now appears safe, pause ere they give their sanc- tion to such a course, before they establish such a precedent. A day may come when they too will appeal to the protection, the inviolable char- acter which should attend the royal honour, the national faith ; let them not now lay the founda- tion for a future unavaiUng regret, and have rea- son then to exclaim, when too late, " Quam temere in nosmct legem saacimus iniquam. " This bill is open to the further objection that it appropriates all the property thus taken away in a manner which leaves entirely unfulfilled a large part of the objects and intentions of the do- nor. I have already endeavoured to point out what, in my humble judgment, was the primary object of the charter. — I must now solicit a brief attention to its details. As I understand them, it m^ist have been intended to combine a system of Collegiate domestic discipline with a profes- sional University system of instruction. Among many reasons, which a closer examination will suggest for this opinion, I may notice the incor- poration as a College with University power, in connection with the power to make bye-laws res- pectingthesalaries, stipends, provision, and emol- uments of, and for, the President, Professors, ScJiolars, &c. thereof. Now, it seems to me, that the word Scholar, used here, means some- thing different from an ordinary student or under graduate — to, and for whom, it is certairdy not usual to provide salary or stipend. I conceive it to be intended that there should be some scholar- ship endowed — on the foundation of King's Col- lege — as in Colleges at Oxford and Cambridge, and as Trinity College, Dublin — open to compe- tition ; attainable by due proficiency, ascertained by examination ; making the successful candi- date a Scliolar of King's College, as distinguish* ed from an ordinary student ; opening the ad- vantages of the establishment to some who might otherwise be unable to attain it; stimulating youth to exertion by the prospect of honourable reward : thus materially assisting to fulfil the in- tention of the founder, not as the preamble to this bill professes to explain it, but as he declares it in the opening of the charter, namely, the edu- cation of youth in the principles of the Christian religion, and their instruction in the various branches of science and literature which are taught in the Universities in the United King- dom. The large rental which the college was permitted to enjoy, independently of personal pro- perty, jEI 5,000 sterling per annum, gives weight to this construction, and justifies the opinion that this college was designed to afford not a mere place of education, but a continued residence and support to " scholars," whose lives would be oc- cupied in litereuy and scientific pursuits. It is oidy by such collegiate establishments that men can be induced to make learning their profession, instead of being a mere auxiliary to other pursuits and occupations. Take away the means of ma- king such a provision, — of affording such a sti- mulant, — of holding out such an inducement, and you take away the hope of seeing such a class of men grow up among you ; you will have to go toother lands for your professors and teach- ers ; you will not rear them at home ; and you will find, when too late, how applicable will be the words of Dr. Hackett, in his memorable de- fence of Cathedral and Collegiate Church estab- lishments, before the Long Parliament in 1641 : " Upon the ruins of the rewards of learning, no " structure can be raised up but ignorance ; and " upon the chaos of ignorance, no structure can " be built but profaneness and confusion." To hold out such reweurd, ceases to be possible when the endowment is taken away for University pur- poses exclusively — and thus, I contend, is one principal object of the donor defeated. Again, the power of granting degrees in divi- nity, as well as in other faculties and in arts, coupled with the provision that although no reU- gious test or qualification should be required of, or appointed for, any persons admitted or matri- culated as scholars within the college, or admit- ted to any degree in any art or faculty therein. ret as to di our said make su I' scription as are n gree of ihows clej this institi .mong th( en — was hurch of f such a ;ulty; ai ^way witl ivernme [cast and i for degree ;ranting i lother coui fwhich thi Inor did it to make f |l service, a inecessarj ^no test bi ffor any d 4 , ftemplatet ;1 because I has been .J ment. - I by the pr ■ is concei ; King's C '; are takei Again design oi ^ the endo ; ly consis " contains 'I building! I lessors,! 1 mestic d evidentlj ture roor ing, woi ''. sidence. ject, and ' granted, I pose of < To sa 11 I distinguish- ing the ad- le who might stimulating f honourable fulfil the in- amble to this le declares it lely, the edu- the Christian the various which are Jnited King- college was jersonal pro- gives weight ; opinion that I not a mere "csidence and would be 00- rsuits. It is nts that men ;ir profession, )ther pursuits Tieans of ma- S[ such a sti- inducement, Being such a l^ou will have rs and teach- ne; and you cable will be 3morable de- hurch estab- ent in 1641 : learning, no orance; and tructure can usion." To Dssible when iversitypur- ttnd, is one I rees in divi- nd in arts, ugh no reli- required of, sd or matri- ; ;, or admit- I ret as to divinity, " any persons admitted, within our said college, to any degree in divinity, shall make such and the same declarations and sub- I' scriptions, and take such and the same oaths as are required of persons admitted to any de- gree of divinity in our University of Oxford," (hows clearly that among the objects for which this institution was erected — and, consequently, imong the use for which the endowment was gi- ren — was the establishment of a professor of Ihurch of England divinity for the instruction »f such as should desire to graduate in that fa- julty ; and though the amended charter did iway with those provisions which gave to the •vernment of the college an exclusive religious least and character, and did away with all tests |for degrees, it neither abrogated the power of [ranting degrees in divinity, or prescribed any vfother course of study in that faculty than that •i|which the original charter obviously intended ; J nor did it alter the powers of the College Council to make statutes for the performance of divine V? service, and the studies, lectures, and exercises I necessary to obtain a divinity degree. Though iJno test but thatof qualification was to be required for any degree, yet, it is obvious, the charter con- templated no divinity but the Church of England, because such being its first intention, no change 1 has been directed or made by the act of amend- Vjf ment. This object will, of course, be defeated f by the proposed bill as far as the new University ■ is concerned ; it will also be defeated as regards : King's College, because the means of effecting it ' are taken away. Again, the erection of buildings suitable to the design of the charter, was clearly an object of ') the endowment. The amended charter is clear- ; ly consistent with this design ; it does notliing — >; contains nothing to interfere with it. Collegiate i buildings fit for the residence of President, Pro- I fessors,Tutors, Scholars, and Students, where do- ' mestic discipline could be duly enforced, were, evidently, contemplated — not mere halls and lec- ture rooms, such as a University, strictly speak- ing, would require — but a College for actual re- ■ sidence. But this bill entirely defeats this ob- 'j ject, and deprives King's College of the means • granted, among other things, for the express pur- J pose of effecting it. Ity therein, j To say that the mode of employing this en- dowment, designed by the bill, is a better mode than that proposed in the original charter is, I apprehend, not an argument to be relied upon as a justification for taking away either the powers, privileges, or property which have been given to King't* College. It proves too much, and, there- fore, proves nothing ; for if that be a sound rea- son for revoking a grant from the Crown, made for one purpose, it ought to have equal force to revoke any grant of which a majority of the Le- gislature for the time being shall adopt a similar view. And how can it be said that if it be com- petent for a majority to adopt and carry out their own views this year, or this parliament, it will not be equally competent for a majority next year or in another parliament, again to change that which their predecessors had adopted ! Indepen- dently of the mischief which such a course must produce to the education of the youth of the coun- try, from the want of confidence which would exist as to the character and stability of its edu- cational establishment, such a course would be not constitutional legislation but arbitrary ty- ranny — the worst abuse of power which could be inflicted on this or any country. I have already argued that any attempted distinction between property obtained by grant from the Crown or from other sources, is not sustainable ; I refer to it, that in considering this part of the question it might be borne in mind. The right thus to inter- fere with vested privileges and interests is also a widely different thing from the right to see that they are not abused or diverted fh)m their origi- nal ends. If tiie right, asserted by this bill, to alter and take away, exists, with regard to ihe charter of King's College, so does it exist with regard to those of Queen's College, Victoria College, and Reglopolls College. Either these corporations have assented to the proposed chan- ges or they have not. If it has been felt neces- sary to apply for, and obtain th ir, assent — or, if it has been given voluntarily and is relied upon as fortifying this proceeding — then is the injus- tice greater to King's College, which has not as- sented, though it has the most to lose. Such an assent, too, would prove the opinion of these cor- porations that without it their charters could not be touched. If they have not assented, then is this bill only the more an invasion of vested rights. 12 But, while professedly this bill treats the sc veral institutions affected by its provisions alike, it is in reality most unequal in its operation. Queen's College and Victoria College lose, it is true, the University powers and privileges of con- ferring degrees — Rcgiopolis College loses not even these, for it never possessed them. But Queen's College has nothing taken froni it to as- sist the funds of the new University. Victoria College retains its College buildings at Cobourg for the accommodation of its Principal, Profes- sors, and Students, with all other its property. Regiopolis College, which has an endowment from the munificence of the late venerable Bish- op McDonald, remains intact as to property, though subjected to the legislative controul of tliis new University — for what reason it is diffi- cult to understand. But land and college build- ings, books and furniture, money and securities, all and every kind of property, are taken from King's College and given to the new University for its endowment and support. There can be no other ground for this unequal legislation than an assumed distinction between property, the gift of the Crown, and property, the gift of a subject. I have laboured, let me hope, not al- together unsuccessfully to controvert this dis- tinction—one, which seems to me, so fraught with error and mischief that I would never have attributed it to the framers of this bill if I could discover any c*her principle on which they are proceeding, ine inequality, however, goes farther. Erroneous and unjust as I think this distinction. King's College does not even get the poor measure of protection which au ad- herence to it would aflbrd. The 36th clause confiscates all its effects, though of its library £500 sterling's worth of books were given it but not from the Crown. Either it has not been thought worth while to inquire whether King's College owed any of its property to sources other than the royal bounty — or if the inquiry has been made, no consideration of this kind has prevailed in favour of King's College. It is but a trifling consideration ; but even of the few things which are deposited in what is intended to be a museum-— some may be the gift of individuals to King's College who surely never dreamt of becoming donors, even of trifles, to the University to be created by this bill. Far be it from me to blame the respect shown tothi right andpropertyo." these other institutions ; long may they retain them ; all I urge is, that if this be, as it undoubtedly is, justice to them, then is the injustice to King's College only the more flagrant. I have thus endeavoured to set forth and sus- tain principles and arguments, upon some or all of which I humbly conceive the bill should be rejected. Among them I have urged, both on principle and authority, the want of assent on the part of King's College as a fatal objec- tion. I will now briefly endeavour to point out rea- sons, why — assuming an equal readiness on their part to accept modifications calculated to assist them in fulfilling the great objects of the char- ter with that they displayed in accepting the amended charterof 1837 — King's College cannot nevertheless assent to this bill. And, first, the proposition contained in this .; bill, respecting the conferring of degrees in divi- nity, presents an insuperable objection, for it in- volves principles which King's College cannot sacrifice ; and on this ground, therefore, its as- I sent could never be given. In allusion to a supposed analogy between the offices of Lord High Chancellor in England, and of Vice Chancellor in Western Canada, the latter has sometimes been jocosely called the keeper of her Majesty's Upper Canadian con- science. The analogy may, perhaps, with equal propriety, be extended to the Chancellor of the University, who may be considered the keeper of the conscience of the proposed University. Of what a precious charge will he not be the custodian ! Let us imagine him robed in all the dignity of official costume — surrounded by Doc- tors and Masters, Bachelors and under graduate^ — with all academic pomp and attendance presid* ing in Convocation. For other degrees he collects the " placets" and" non-placets," and pronoun- ces the result ; but the candidates in divinity pre- senting their certificates of fitness, leave to the Convocation and the Chancellor a ministerial duty only. And first presents himself a Roman Catholic from Regiopolis — place for him, for he believes more than any who are to come after him. His certificate is regular ; and the Chan- cellor dismisses him a doctor, a teacher of theol* ogy, canyin J the diploma of the University of 13 shown totbfi itutions; long s, that if this hem, then is ily the more forth and BUS- pon some or lebill should urged, both mt of assent fatal objec- )oint out rea- inesson their ated to assist of the char- iccepting the College cannot lined in this grees in divi- on, for it in- )llege cannot refore, its as- ogy between • in England, Canada, the i? called the anadian con- )s, with equal icellor of the d the keeper 1 University. i not be the led in all the ded by Doc- ler graduate* dance preside 3s he collects nd pronoun- divinity pre- leave to the ministerial Jlf a Roman him, for he come after d the Chan- lier of theol- Jniversity of 'oronto, certifying to all whom it may concern, is fitness to fulfil that high and holy duty. Icarccly has he gone, when King's College, as remodelled by this bill, sends up her pupil : he las just subscribed the thirty-nine articles, and thero are to be found amongst them some not imatcrial difference from the faith of the last lew-made Doctor : he has just taken the oaths (f abjuration and supremacy, which involves sad iheresy in the mind of his immediate predeces- sor. But this matters not to the pliant conscience ;of our University — Tros Tyriusve mild is her Imotto ; and our Church of England man receives, Itoo, a diploma of his fitness to teach man the jroad to heaven. Make way for the next — and Queen's College sends up her duly qualified stu- dent, believing not in Episcopacy or in the propri- jetyof different orders of ministers ; laughing at itheideaof an Apostolical succession, and disappro- ving of liturgies and set forms of prayer, though coinciding with the Church of England in ma- ny points of difference from the Church of Rome. On him, too. Alma Mater smiles ; on him, too, she confers her diploma ; greeting him her son, well beloved as those who have preceded him ; equally quahfied to be a teacher of divinity. We have not done yet — what is Victoria College about? Oh! here comes from her walls the Wes- leyan Methodist : he differs from all who have preceded ; with a different Chureh Government; a difference in some articles of doctrine ; a dif- ference with those who would not leave the sup- port of their clergy to the voluntary principle. But to our conscientious University this makes no difference ; to him as to all the rest does she proffer the maternal embrace, and alike confers on him the diploma to teach that all who have preceded him arc more or less wrong. Unhappy keeper of this expansive conscience ! rre you not already debased enough ? may you not now des- cend from your seat of state and hide the shame which you have been writhing under ? No, sir, this prostitution has not yet gone far enough ; our University, like another MessaUna nondum •otiata, pants, to fold on her ample bosom, more and more divinity lovers, and courts them to her aims, careless of any other qualification but the annual revenue of 1000 bushels of wheat. Hi- therto, it may be said, that there has been an agreement on some cardinal pointa of orthodox faith ; something like a scriptural and christian accordance ; but we find the invitation held out to those who confide in the intrinsic merits of their own good works, as superseding a necessity for the mediatorial sacrifice of atonement ; who denying tlie divinity of the son of God would re- duce the Saviour of men to their own level ; and who reject, because they cannot comprehend, the sacred mystery of the Trinity. Such is the con- science of our University. I will not pursue the mockery — the bitter mockery which this vile prostitution gives rise to. We will break up our fancied convocation and let our unhappy Chan- cellor depart. But I will ask every man who has heard me if the picture be not truly painted ; whe- tiier the horror which it excites docs not arise from its stem fidelity to its original. Such is the corporate conscience ; what must be the individ- ual conscience of those, who on the one hand can sign a diploma conferring such degrees on men whose religious opinions they believe hereti- cal, or on the other receive a diploma from those whose orthodoxy they are bound by their consci- entious belief to controvert and deny? Moreover, it is to the Chancellor and Convoca- tion of this University that power is given, among other things, to legislate concerning the studies, lectures, and examinations, and all matters re- garding the same, not merely of the University, but " of the difl^ercnt Colleges." Such is the enactment of the 15th clause, and a comparison of the 29th and 31st clauses will show that vir- tually, though perhaps not nominally, the Uni- versity will possess a legislative power over divi- nity studies inconsistent with the professed free- dom of the difierent Colleges in this particular. To a system like this, which confounds truth with error, which neither requires in others nor can itself possess any standard or criterion by which the fitness for Divinity degrees can be determined, King's College carmot assent. The London University can only confer de- grees in arts and the faculties of medicine and law ; they have no power to confer degrees in Divinity, and do not therefore profess to teach it. The ground of the entire exclusion of all religi- ous tuition may be inferred from the following anecdote: — When its establishment was pro- posed and discussed, Mr. Wilberforce, who was referred to m some way about it, suggested the u propriety of making the Btudents read Puley's Evidences of Christianity ; " my dear Sir, you forget our Jews" was the answer. " Well, then," said Mr. W., " what say you to Paley's Natural Theology? " " you do not consider our infidels" was the reply. Bad as is the rejection of nil study of Divine knowledge, the indiscriminate adoption, the promiscuous granting of diplomas to bcUevers of all the different systems of the- ology is worse ; the one simply abstains from teachmg truth, the other ranks on one common footing and elevates to one common dignity the advocates of truth and the propoundcrs of error. The representation in the caput provided for each College by the ninth clause assumes the existence of several professors. Now, as the University professors will be the teaciiers and lecturers in all arts and faculties except Divinity, it appears almost absurd to assume that there will be any other than Professors of Divinity in each College, at least in such as are located near the University, and the more particularly as it is most probable that the fees payable to the University professors, whose income will be partially derived from the endowment, will be much lower than those charged by professors in Colleges who will have nothing else to depend upon. In this view, it is very improbable that there will be more than one theological professor, in the first instance, in any College who would probably be at the same time the president or principal of his College ; and the consequence to King's College would be that it would have only one professor to represent and defend its interests in a body authorized to legislate for its afiairs, professorships, masterships, and teachcrship, the studies, lectures, and examin- ations, and all other matters relating thereto ; and the number, residence, and duties of its officers, professors, teachers, scholars, and ser- vants. To this representation in a body clothed with^jSUch power and consisting, as regards the University professors, of persons not required to take any religious test whatsoever, King's Col- lege could not assent. In addition to her loss of University powers, the power of unfettered legislation in Collegiate matters is also taken away, and she would, or at least might, have only one voice in that body which would con- trol her whole internal economy. Tiie proposed Board of Control is also another! most objectionable feature. It is, for similar i purposes, unprecedented ; and it requires no great foresight to predict with confidence that it would inevitably destroy the working of the Univer- sity. It is virtually exempt from responsibility wh!!c it is entrusted with powers, on the due existence of which must depend, if not the very existence of the University, certainly its repu- tation and character for literature and discipline. The functions of this board are partly of a legisla- tive character, andoutof the thirty-three members of whom it may consist, there is no assurance that even three will have any knowledge or experience of University matters. They are also to recommend the six examiners, (a number, by the way, infinitely too small) and have no rule or qualification whatever prescribed by which they are to be governed in the selection, nor any apparent means either of knowing what is requisite, or whether a party possessed the needful attainments ; though it is obvious the value of the degrees, and the proficiency of candidates for them, will be immeasurably affected by the ability and fitness of the exam- iners. They are also to recommend candidates to fill the professional chairs ; though it may, and frequently will, happen that no really desirable selection can at the particular moment be made within the province. In the absence of any fixed rule or qualification, they will be exposed to canvassing and personal solicitation to obtain from them that recommendation which ought to be given to well-ascertained merit alone ; and the people of the most forward habits or who may have the warmest partizans will obtain an advantage over more meritorious but more modest applicants. The only precedent for a Board of Control I can at the moment call to my recollection is that for the affairs of India ; and I would earnestly recommend gentlemen to examine for themselv- how difficult has the working of that boa; d been found; even with its executive power and support, and all the numer- ous advantages which its pecuhar constitution and position give ; and then remembering the nature of the functions assigned to this board, the extent of its power, the absence of the pres- sure of any sort of responsibility, let them ask themselves what will be the probable result of i every 15 also another for similar aires no great that it would the Univer- ■csponsibility on the due ' not the very inly its repu- nd discipline, y of a legisla- iree members no assurance novvledge or They are •s, (a number, and have no rescribed by the selection, nowing wh&t assessed the obvious the roiSciency of m measurably of the exam- ad candidates lough it may, it no really sular moment I the absence they will be al solicitation idation which ;ained merit nost forward lest partizans re meritorious nly precedent moment call irs of India ; gentlemen to :ult has the 3vcn with its 1 the numer- constitution mbering the I this board, of the pres- et them ask ble result of is novel experiment. The best prospect is, that quorum can never be got together to transact usiness ; the only mischief It will then do, will e to create a temporary hindrance to the work- g of the institution, which the Legislature would hen remove. To the erection of such a Board, ing's College could not in my humble judgment ssent. The mode of its coi.^truction is also open to ost serious objection. It must be remembered hat this bill makes King's College a strictly hurch of England Theological Seminary — no- hing more. It is upon this account that the rd Bishop of Toronto is made, or rather pro- "essed to be made, a member of the Board of ontrol. Why the title he derives from the ueen's patent should not be given to him, and by a title which does not belong to him and hich does not correctly designate him or his ffice, I confess myself at a loss to understand, e is not the Bishop " of the Protestant Epis- opal See of Toronto, in connection with the (United Church of England and Ireland." He s a bishop of that united church, appointed by the ueen the temporal head if that church, duly onsecrated to the episcopal office in it, taking ;lthe oaths required to be taken by every prelate ;^f that Church on his consecration. He is not t onsecrated under the statute of the .'>9th George he Third, which confers authority on the Arch- ^bishop of Canterbury and other prelates, to con- leecrate to the episcopal office persons not ap- ■Jwinted by the Queen, or taking the oaths of >Bllegiance or supremacy, who are to fill bishop - |rics in foreign countries, out of the Queen's ,0 dominions. He cannot, dare not, desert his own -ireal position and assume the character these words would give him, or recognize the principle , they seem to assert, and therefore he never could .v:take a place at the Board of Control, and repre- fsent the interests of King's College there. This iiphraseology introduced for the first time into the :^^Legislature, must have some meaning. My ob- s^ection to it is not founded on mere verbal criti- .?fcism : there is a vital principle involved, no less |a principle than the Unity of the Church in all t parts of the empire, and the authority of the I Queen as its temporal head. This is more than a J question affecting King's College. It affects [every conscientious member of that united church. It affects the heart and feelings of every English emigrant who has made this country his adopted home. He arrives a stranger — every face, every object, new — the aspect of the coun- try — the climate — all and every thing combine to lorce on his mind the conviction that he is far from his native home. But he enters the church, and there he finds the same prayer — the same thanksgiving, which from the earliest childhood he has joined in — he kneels at the altar and par- takes of the same holy sacrament, which he has so often partaken of ere he became a wanderer in search of a resting place. Here th-'n is no change — here is home again. Thrills not his heart with holy joy as he reflects that he can at the font dedicate his children to God within the pale of his church — the church of his forefathers — the one selfsame church in whoso baptism he was himself baptized — at whose altar he made his renewal of the baptismal \ovr, and within whose communion he hoped to live and die. Who shall rob him of this his birthright — who shall sever that unity which creates and preserves such holy and happy recollections. This is no question of exclusive claims, of temporal powers or privileges. It affects ourselves and ourselves alone. We are not members of a Protestant Episcopal Church in connection with the United Church of England and Ireland, but members of that very church. Who shall trample on our right to remain so? Who that respects his own church, his own faith, his own religious feelings, will lend his aid to such an attempt ? Withered be the heart and hand that would seek even in name to sever the unity of the church to which we belong. I crave your pardon, Sir, and that of this honble. house, that for a moment I have been hur- ried away into the expression of individual feel- ings — that I have exhibited the man when you should have seen only the advocate. My apology is, that I felt what I have spoken, and that for the only time during my address, my ^lorsonal feeling has led me away from the calm deliberation which belongs to my position. I trust, Sir, I shall stand excused. I have only one further remark to add on this part of my subject. The 73rd clause is obnoxious to the same exception, as well as to the further difficulty that years will elapse before clergymen of the Church of England and gra- duates of the College (University, I suppose is 16 meant, for King's College could have no gradu- ates) could be found to fill up the seven professor- ships referred to. Upper Canada Collep:c being an appendage to King's College, it will not, I trust, be deemed travelling out of the record to make some brief observations in regard to the effect this bill will have on that institution. 'l"he objections, already urged to the unfitness of the Board of Control to recommend professors, apply to their approval of the vice principal, tutors and- masters of the school. The fiftieth clause would, I apprehend, greatly embarrass the eflicient management of the institution, for experience has shewn that the power of government over boys, at least, is best exercised w^hen entrusted to one. Divided author- ity in such a case will diminish, if not destroy the respect and obedience which the head should command. The power given by the fifty-fifth clause to some of the masters to fix their own salaries would; as it appears to me, give rise to endless jealousies and discontent ; the more be- cause I feel convinced that the funds provided by the bill would be inadequate to the maintenance and support of the establishment. The visitorial power which the 24th clause provides for w^ill also, I think, be productive of confusion, and clog instead of facilitating its exercise. The University, erected by this bill, will be, in the words of Lord Mansfield, a lay cor- poration, with temporal rights ; not an eleemosy- nary foundation as particular colleges are. The University of Toronto will not exist by virtue of a charter from the Crown, but by virtue of this bill ; and the visitorial power will not, therefore, arise from the foimder and patron's rights, but by force of the common law : and this, I appre- hend, must be exercised through some of the Queen's courts of superior jurisdiction, by pro- ceedings regularly and formally instituted. If this view prove, on careful consideration, to be correct, then it appears to me that the combina- tion of all the judges of the superior courts into a body of visitors will lead to great difficulty in the exercise of that power. I shall content myself with a few passing observations on other provisions, wliich have appeared to me, tho' of minor consequence, nevertheless to be objectionable. The ninth clause contains no provisions for convening the caput, nor any declaration of ths number which is to bo a quorum. The nineteenth will render it a matter of iar ? greater delay to pass an University statute than | it is to pass a Provincial one. The twentieth is equally defective as regards the Convocation. Perhaps it was meant to leave these points to be decided by University statuses ; but as no statutes can be passed but by the con- currence of these bodies, it seems more conveni- ent that the law should settle them in the first mstance. The twenty-ninth threatens the destruction of the union of tho Collegiate and University sys- tems of education and dicipline. The forty-fourth will deprive lecturers of the just reward of diligence and attention, and of a most useful incentive to exert themselves to attract and retain students. I do not find such a practice to prevail in any College I have read of, tho' I cannot positively assert that it does not. The sixty-fifth clause leaves it doubtful whe- ther the assignment of lands for the appropriate site of any College to be built, is to be confined tolemds at the seat of the University. The eighty-third clause refers to an act as being in force which has been disallowed by pro- clamation. The hundred and first clause does not go far enough, tho' just and right in its principle. It should not, I humbly submit, be limited to recent arrivals. There are masters of Upper Canada College who have given up appointments to come out to this country. The highest preferment in that institution was recently surrendered by Dr. McCaul, in order to take a situation in King's College. He had previously resigned prefer- ment in Trinity College, Dublin, in order to take the office of Principal in Upper Canada College. Lastly, I fear that the statute of Upper Canada 7th William IV., chap. 16, will be inoperative in an important respect, unless an additional pro- vision is introduced into this bill — for the degrees, the attainment of which shortens the necessary peiiod of study for persons desirous of becoming attomies or barristers fr^m five to three years, are in that act declared to be degrees taken in the Universities of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or in the University of ;| King's College. 17 iratiou of ths matter of far ' statute than vc as regards cant to leave sity statuses ; it by the con- nore conveni- ,- m in the lirvt | Icstruction of diversity sys- turers of the ntion, and of themselves to not find such B I have read ''^i at it does not. oubtful whe- le appropriate o be confined to an act as lowed by pro- >es not go far principle. It lited to recent ^pper Canada nents to come preferment in ndered by Dr. tion in King's gned prefer- i order to take nada College. Jpper Canada inoperative in dditional pro- )r the degrees, ' he necessary lof becoming ) three years, m taken in the om of Great [Jniversity ofj And now, Sir, I have to thank this honourable House for the patient attention with which they liavc honoured me during this long and I fear tedious argument. It would have been very easy tn have said more, but, with every effort at com- prussion. I could not, in saying less, have hoped to present an intelligible outline of the objections to the measure. In conclusion, let me intreat that, for a few moments, losing sight of the humble individual, who may have wearied you, you will imagine King's College offering this concluding summary in defence of her rights, privileges, and existence. You are asked to pass a measure which, by the abolition of all tests as regards instructors, treats as a matter of indifterence whether tlic education, the formation and cultivation of the minds of youth, be entrusted to those whose religious feel- ings will cause them to labour diligently to train them in a right direction ; or to those whose total indifference,or total unbelief,may endanger every good and vntuous principle ; a measure which treats as equally right those who believe the car- dinal fundamental doctrines of Christianity and those who disbelieve them ; which rather invites and encourages religioLS discord than seeks to remove or suppress it. Tn tiie name of that God whose truth and whcoe worship are thus disre- garded, I protest against this bill. You are asked to pass a measure unprecedent- ed in the annals of British legislation ; which assumes to exercise the Royal prerogative for this particular purpose, and to deprive your Sovereign of the right and power ever again to exercise that prerogative for a similar purpose in Upper Canada. In the name of our Queen, to whom you have .-iwom allegiance, whose prerogative it is your duty to maintain, I protest against this bUl. You are asked to pass a measurei professedly for the advancement of education, the cultivation of science and literature, which will destroy every means of so carrying on the institution as to give to patient industry its cheering prospect, to high attainment its adequate reward ; which is so re- plete with discordant elements that nothing short of a miracle can prevent the establishment from becoming a Babel of confusion, or save it from hopeless ruin which will therefore eventual- ly deprive the Province of the benefit designed by my royal and beneficent founder. — " I'lie edu- " cation of youth in the principles of the christian " religion, and their instruction in the various " branches of science and literature which are " taught in our Universities in the United King- " dom." In the name of the country I protest against your depriving me of the means and the power to fulfil the high behest for which I was brought into existence. For the sake of religion ; on every constitu- tional principle ; by every patriotic feeUng ; in the name of God ; your Queen ; your country ; I call upon you to reject this bill.