IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

- '^■' '^^ -

C^,

1.0

I.I

1.25

ilM IIM

■"' itt III 2.2
2.0

1.8

\A. Ill!!!.6

Photographic

^Sciences

Corporation

•NJ

%"%. <\'^

^l^%.<^

'"<i"

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTFt' NY 14580

(716) 872-4303

^0 'Ws^.

C/a

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

T
t«

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

D
D

n
n

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

Covers damaged/
Couverture endommagee

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e

Cover title missing/

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)

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

Bound with other material/
Reli^ avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadov^s or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge int^rieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, th&se
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le te^te,
mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmdes.

L'Institut a microfilmd le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sent peut-gtre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exi^er une
modification dans la m6tnode normale de filmage
sont indiqu^s ci-dessous.

I I Coloured pages/

Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommag6es

n Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaur6es et/ou pellicul^es

□ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages d6color6es, tachet6es ou piqu^es

n Pages detached/
Pages d^tach^es

□ Showthrough/
Transparence

□ Quality of print varie
Qualite inegale de I'i

es/
mpression

□ Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel supplementaire

□ Only edition available/
Seule

P
o
fi

b
tl
si
o
fi
si
oi

Tl
si
Tl
w

M
di
er
be

"i
re
m

Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6x6 film^es d nouveau de facon k
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires supplementaires.

This item is filmed .t the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est ^iim6 au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous.

10X 14X 18X 22X

ii>i

16X

20X

26X

30X

24X

28X

32X

etuils
IS du
nodifier
ir une
llmage

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

Library of the Public
Archives of Canada

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

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

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol —*> (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

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

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

La bibliothdque des Archives
publiques du Canada

Les images suivantes ont dt6 reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprim^e sont film^s en commengant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second
plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont film6s en commengant par la
premidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la dernidre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

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

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

srrata
to

pelure,
in A

32X

t 2 3

4 5 6

« t

The after-math of

A REVOLUTION

GEORGE STERLING RYERSON, M.D.

Member of the Legislative Assembly of Ontaria, Deuutij Surgemi-General af the Militia of

Canada, President of the I'nited Empire Loyalists Association

of Ontario, Canada.

BEING THE INAUGURAL ADDRESS AS PRESIDENT OF THE

UNITED EMPIRE LOYALISTS ASSOCIATION, DELIVERED

NOVEMBER I2rH, 1896.

TORONTO :

William: briggs

29-33 Richmond Street West.
1896

THE AFTER- MATH OF A
REVOLUTION.

DR. RYERSON'S ADDRESS

ON ACCEPTIN(i THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED EMPIRE

LOYALISTS ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO,

NOVEMBER PM, AV.'W.

Ladies and Gentlemen,— The honor which you have done
me in electincr me to this position is one of which any Canadian
may be proud, for not only is it an honorable distinction to be
the official head of so important an historical society as ours,
but it is especially so in succession to our first president, the
late Honorable John Beverley Robinson, of whose services we
were able to avail ourselves for so short a time when he was
called hence. He was a man in praise of whom I need say but
little. His eminent public services, his amiable and manly
character are familiar to everyone. He is regretted as much
as he was esteemed. He was a Loyalist and a Canadian whose
name will live in the history of our country beside that of his
distmguished father.

In forming tliis association, may it not be well for us to
pause a moment to consider who and what manner of men were
the Loyalists whom we to-day represent, what were the
pnnciples for which they suffered and lost, and for which they

risked hearth and home and all that men hold dear, what are
the results of the contest in which they were enga<jed, what the
fruits of their self-sacritice for principle and the future of the
heritage they have left to all Canadians ?

For more than a hundred years the United Empire Loyalists
have been the subject of misrepresentation, of ridicule, of abuse,
of calunmy, by men who professed to write the history of the
American Revolution. They have been represented as the
" dregs of society," as social outcasts, as " fiends in human form
opposed to all human liberty " and " the agents of tyrants and
oppressors." Yet what are the facts — and I am glad to be able
to go to an American source for them.* I rejoice that at last
a sense of justice is awakening in tlie breasts of American
writers, and that they are beginning to recognize that foul
slanders have been written of as honorable a body of men as
the world has ever seen, and that there are two sides to the
dispute which could fairly be taken while allowing men to
remain good citizens. Surely " Great is truth, it will prevail,"
even after a century of concealment and perversion,

I desire above all things to be fair, and therefore I am pre-
pared to accept the statement that the Loyalists were men of
all classes morally and socially, as in all other great movements,
but we have the statement of Ellis t that "Among those mo.st
frank and fearless in the avowal of loyalty, and who suffered
the severest penalties, were men of the noblest character and
highest position ; " and that of Tyler : " If, for example, we
consider the point with reference to cultivation and refinement,
it may seem a significant fact that among the members of the
Loyalist party are to be found the names of a great m.ultitude
of the graduates of our colonial colleges." And further, he says :
" To anyone at all familiar with the history of colonial New
England, that list of men, denounced to exile and loss of pro-

*"The Party of the Loyalists in the American Revolution." By M. C.
Tyler. The American Htatnrical Review, October, 1895.

t "The Loyalists and Their Fortunes." Vy George E. Ellis, D.D., in the
Narrative and Critical Hintory of America, p. 185, et seq.

perty on account of their opinions, will read like the bead-roll
of the oldest and noblest families concerned in the founding and
upbuildinfj of New Enji^land civilization ; and of the whole body
of the Loyalists throughout the thirteen colonies it must be said
that it contained, as one of its ablest antagonists long after
admitted, more than a third of influential characters — that is, a
very considerable portion of the customary chiefs in each
community."

It must not be supposed tliat the Loyalists were all of one
class, and that the best, socially speaking, but the well-to-do
composed the larger proportion. The officials and their rela-
tions formed, as might be naturally expected, no inconsiderable
element. Another large class were the military and naval
officers and soldiers. Next were those who represented the
commercial element in the community, the capitalists and
landed proprietors who, having much to lose and nothing to
gain from a disturbed condition of the country, were, in large
numbers, opposed to the change of government and the
unsettled state of affairs which the war occasioned. " Still
another class of Loyalists was made up of people of profes-
sional training and occupation — clergymen, lawyers, teachers,
doctors — a clear majority of whom seem to have been set
against the Revolution." It may be said, generally speaking,
that a large majority of those who may be described as conser-
vative people — people opposed to change — of all classes of
society, mechanics, tradesmen, farmers and others, were Loyal-
ists. The Loyalists " seem to have been not a profligate party,
nor an unprincipled pax'ty, nor a reckless or even a light-
minded one, but, on the contrary, to have had among them a
very considerable portion of the most refined, thoughtful and
conscientious people in the colonies. ... If they were not
actually a majority of the American people, as they themselves
claimed to be, and as some careful scholars now think they
were, they did at least constitute a huge minority of the
American people ; they formeil a section of colonial society too
important on the score of mere numbers to be set down as a
handful of obstructionists, while in any rightful estimate of

personal valno tlicy scorn to dcsorvc the couHiderntion wliicli
conscientious and cnltivatt'd people of one party never ask in
vain from similar |ie(»ple of tlu' opposite party, at least after
the issues of the controversv have closed." Thus writes ]\Ir.
Tyler. It is unfortunate that men of his call I ire were not in
control one lunulred years ajjo. How nnieh bitterness, bloodshed
and misery woidd have been saved ;* 'i'he war of 1812 mi^dit
never have taken ))lace, and the En<,dish race on this continent
permanently alienated and divided.

This brings me to speak of the issues of the contest. It is
the opinion of some writers* that the seeds of sece.ssion had
long been sown in New England by the Puritans, as dis-
tinguished from the Pilgrims, whose descendants were, for the
most part, loyal at this time. This may be true, but, at any rate,
i'or many years before the Revolution a war of ai'gument was
going on. All sorts of (piestions were discussed, constitutional,
legal, ethical, political, for it nnist be remembei'ed that the first
great colony of the world was growing up, and during the
upbuilding many problems new to the world were being
worked out, that new conditions Avere presenting themselves to
be dealt with by legislators, and that rules applicable to older
societies were found difficult to apply and even dangerous to
put in practice. Mv. Tyler puts it well when he states that the
questions may be reduced to two : " first, the (juestion of what
was lawful under the constitution of the British Empire ; and
secondly, of what was expedient under the existing circum-
stances of the colonies." The main contention was that the
British Parliament could not tax the colonists lawfully without
violation of the constitutional maxim, " No taxation without
representation."

To read some of the so-called histories of American origin
one would suppose that the colonists had been subjected to a
joke like that imposed by Alva upon the Low Countries, that
the physical endurance of the people had reached its utmost

* " The Loyalists of America and their Times." By Egerton Ryerson, D.D.,
LL.D. Toronto, 1880.

limit and tlmt rolu'llioii not unnaturullv ensued. Xotliintr
could be further from the truth. The ()ue.stions wert' purely
|iolitieul iiH between the Americnn Tory party and the Ameri-
can Whio'H, as between the Loyalists and the Sece.ssionists.

P)Ut to return, were not the American colonies represented
in the three estates of the realm in Parliament assembled ^
The Loyalists believed that they were rej)re.sente(l in the
Commons as a part of the conunons of the British Empire. It
is true that they did not elect their representatives. Neitiier
at that period did such cities as Birmingham, Manchester and
Liverpool! Veiy few peoj)le in Kni^land had votes at that
time. Yet they did not break out into (jpen rebellion. They
were .satisfied to amend the constitution by constitutional
methods. The ([Ue.stion wa.s one of constitutional law, and in
the opinion of Mr. Horace (Jray, an eminent American jurist,
"a careful examination of the (jue.stion compels this conclusion,
that there was at least reasonable <;round for holding, as a
mere matter of law, that the FSritish Parliament had power to
bind the colonies." " As a matter of abstract right," says Sii-
William Vernon-Harcourt,* " the Mother Country has never
parted with the claim of ultimate supreme authority for the
Imperial Legislature. If it did so, it would dissolve the Imperial
tie and convert the colonies into foreign and independent
states." 1 might cjuote many authorities in support of this
view did time permit. T!ie claim of the Loyalist party on this
score may be fairly stated to be a reasoiuible one, antl not one
to justify a rebellion.

Now as to the second (juestion, that of expediency under the
exi.sting circumstances in the colonies. The Secessionists' state-
ment of the case was this : " If Parliament, to which we send
no members, may tax us threepence a pound on tea, it may, if
it please, tax us a shilling, and what security have we, once
conceding this right, that we shall not be taxed excessively in
other things ? What security have we from oppression ?" To

* "Parliamentary Government in the British Colonies." By Alpheus Todd.
London, 1894.

this tluj Ijoyalists answered: "Are you not ar^uin},' before tlie
fact ? Are you not ar^uiu;; .simply against tlic pos.sihility of the
abuse of thi.s power? What reason have you for supposing
that Puriianient will abuse its power? Do you not suppose
that this, as all others, will be examined by the iiouse of
Commons in the li^dit of common-sense and justice? The
Imperial I'arliament has not overstepj)ed its powers nor is it
lik(!ly to do HO." Ihit tlien; was a small but determined set of
men who would listen to no reason. They had other objects in
view. From the first tlu; Americans [)rofessed loyalty ; the first
Continental Conj^ress ])rofessed devoted loyalty to the King.
Benjamin Franklin said in March, 1775, that he had never heard
a word in favor of Independence. Boucher states that Wash-
ington said to him in May, 1775, "that if ever I heard of his
joining in such measures 1 had leave to set him down for every-
thing wicked." On the fith of July, 177'), Congress made a
declaration : " Lest this (hiclaration should disipiiet the minds
of our friends and fellow-.subjects in any part of the Empire, we
assure them that we do not mean to dissolve the union which
has so long and so liappily subsisted between us, and which we
sincerely wish to see restored. We have not raised arnnes with
ambitious designs of separating from Great Britain." As late
as January, 1770, the As.sembly of New Hampshire disavowed
any intention of " aiming at independence." Suddenly the
majority of the Whigs turned around, threw off the mask and
declared for Separation, which up to that time they had
vehemently repudiated.

I need not follow what happened. Suffice it for my argu-
ment to say that the cause of separation was purely political,
and that the separation could readily have been avoided had
Congress adopted Galloway's plan of Home Rule or Confedera-
tion. It is startling to learn that it was only defeated by a
vote of six colonies to fi .e, and even more astonishing to learn
tnat although Galloway's plan was regularly introduced into
Congress, debated and voted on, yet all reference to it has been
swept from the Journals of Congress. "Could it have been
adopted in Congress and outside," says Tyler, " the disrup-

tion of till' Hritisli ICnipiri' would certainly have liccn avortt'd,
wliilo tlio thirtt't'M KM;^liHh colonics would have remaiiitMl Knj;-
lisli colonio.s without ccasinj; to bo free." But a xi^'orous and
iiuscrupuloUH iniuority of the Aniurican people preferred to
settle a political (pie.stioii by an appeal to arni.s. The Ri^jht oi'
Rebellion was deciarod and enforceil. The nuijority were driven
into a position from which they could not retire but with
which they did not syinpathize.

In the lanifuai^e of the lime the Secessionists were " patriots,"
the Loyalists unpatriotic " o])structioiiists." The <loctrine of
the Rif^dit of Re'bellion of the subject a^'ainst the State and of
the individual ai^^ainst the law was triunii)hantly asserted. We
will examine a little later what the fruits of t'm^ kind of
philosophy are in our own day in the American Hrpublic and
whither this doctrine is tendini;. J^ut before pi 'ceedlng to tlna
inipiiry let us brin^ back to our ;'iemories a recollection ^i the
immediate rrV'cts of this frati'icidal and patricidal \'i'r upon
our forefathers. It was followed liy wholesnle expatriation,
coiiil-ication of property, mental and physical suffering' almost
impossible to realize to-day. Picture to yourselves fathers and
brothers and sons torn from their families, lucky if they Wi-re
not murdered under their own roof ; families tlriven into exile
subjected to the insults of a fanatic mob, deprived even of
clothing and the bare necessari(>s of life, unable to obtain em-
ployment or to hire help, harassed in every way that the
malignant vengeance of a successful and ungenerous enemy
could suggest, ostracized and forced to make a long, painful,
weary and heart-breaking joiu'ney of weeks' or months' duration
to what was then a great unknown wilderness to the north-
ward, for Upper Canada was entirely uninhabited by white
men at tliat time, while through the unbroken forests roamed
the scalp-hunting Indian and countless wild animals. Is it any
wonder that many died of hardship and exposure ? Is it
remarkable that their descendants should treasure as their
deai'est possessions their relics of those" tlays, and that they
should teach their children's children to love the grand old flag
for which their forefathers suffered so much, and beneath whose

folds thoy preferrer; liberty and suffering rather than ignoble
comfort beneath the shade of a flag which was to them the
emblem of rebellion and injustice ? If there is a British power
to-day on this North American continent, it is because of the
harshness, the cruelty, the fanaticism of the Secessionists of
1775. Had the moderation and conciliatory methods adcjpted
in l(S()o been \ised in 1783 there might have been no Loyalist
out-wandering, no British Canada; as it is, owing to the short-
sightedness of the fathers of the American Republic and the
deeply rooted love of British institutions by the Loyalists,
Canada is here and will remain as an integi'al portion of the
British Empire. We have abundant reason to thank God for it.

If further evidence in justification of the personal character
and argumentative position of the Loyalists were w^anted,
nothing could be written more conclusive than Mr. Tyler s own
conclusions. He says: ''First, it is an error to represent the
Tories of the American Revolution as a mere party of negation
and obstruction. They did not deny, they did not obstruct ;
but they had positive political ideas, as well as precise measures
of creative statesmanship, to offer their fellow-colonists in the
place of tlieir ideas and measures to which they madeobjection^
and which they would have kept from prevailing if they
could,

" Secondly, it is an error to represent the Tories of the
American Revolution as a party opposed to any reform in the
relations of the colonists witii the Mother Country, or the exten-
sion of human rights and liberties elsewhere. . . . They
frankly declared that the constitutional relations of the colonies
with the Motlier Country were in a crude state, were unsatis-
factory, were in need of being carefulb/ revised and recon-
structed. There was a substantial agreement among all
Americans that thei'e was a wrong, that there was a danger,
that there should be a reform. ... It was as to the
method and the process that the Americans broke asunder.

" Thirdly, it is an error to represent the Tories of our Revolu-
tion as composed of Americans lacking in love for their native
country or zeal for its liberty, or in willingness to labor or

fight, or even die, for wliat they conceived to be its interests.
Those Americans who failed in their honest and
sacrificial championship of measures which would have given
us political reform and political safety, but without civil war
and without an angry disruption of the English-speaking
race, cannot be justly regarded as having been, either in
doctrine or in purpose or in act, an unpatriotic party."

Can a inore complete refutation of the slanders on the
Loyalists be possible ?

Having thus shortly noticed what were the immediate effects
of the Revolutionary war upon the fortunes of the Loyalists, let
us consider from facts adduced by the United States census
and congressional and other State papers, what is to-day the
effect of the doctrine of force and the resort to arms in the
settlement of private and public controversies.

The tenth annual report of the Connnissioner of Labor of the
United States (1 894) throws much light on the relations of capital
and labor in that country. It shows that the huge trusts, com-
bines and monopolies are making a mockery of Republican insti-
tutions. Men may be born equal in the United States, but they
don't stay so. A painful feature of the strikes and lockouts
is the resort to force, attended in many instances by serious
loss of life and destruction of property. But did not the Revo-
lution teach Americans that if your neighbor does not agree
with you, you may shoot him, confiscate his property, and injure
him to the utmost of your ability ? Why then should Ameri-
cans complain of the latter-day application of their own theories
and practices ? Now as to the strikes. From January 1st,.
1881, to June 80th, 1894, there were 14,889 strikes, involving
G9,l()6 establishments, while 3,714,231 employees were thrown
out of work: add to the.se 0,067 lockouts. The number of
strikes has gradually risen from 2,928 in 1881, to 5,1.54 for the
first six montiw of 1894, and the number of emjiloyees from
129,521 to 482,003 for the same period. The bill of loss to
employees and employers is as follows : wage lo.ss of employees,
$1(53,807,057; assistance to employees by labor organizations,
S10,914,406; loss of employers, 882,589,780: lockouts, wage
loss of employees, 820,085,510 ; assistance to employees by

other labor organizations, $2,524,298; loss of employers, $12,-
235,451. So that there has been lost directly as the result of
strikes and lockouts, not to mention the indirect losses, in the
United States in thirteen and a half years, the enormous sum of
$298,757,112, a loss which exceeds the net debt of the Dominion
of Canada by $50,000,000. I do not propose to weary you with
the details of these strikes, but it will contribute to the
understanding of the social situation in the United States if I
refer to a few facts relating to the Chicago strike of 1894. The
loss to the railroads in property destroyed and incidental
expenses was $685,308, in earnings $4,678,916 ; loss of wages of
employees, $1,339,143; number shot and fatally wounded, 12;
troops and police required to suppress riot, 14,186. I might
also refer to the Homestead, Brooklyn and Buffalo riots, but time
will not permit. From the facts adduced, it will be seen that
the relations of capital and labor are of the most unsatisfactory
character across the line, and that the right of rebellion is
being asserted. Now, contrast the relations of capital and
labor in Canada. In five years, to 1893, there were but 35
strikes, involving less than 5,000 persons. There have been no
armed strikes and no bloodshed. The Canadian workingman
is, in general, a sober, law-abiding, industrious person, who,
while firmly holding to what he considers to be his just
riglits, is not minded to burn, kill and destroy those who
do not see as he does, but is willing to submit his grievances to
a properly constituted board of arbitration and conciliation,
believing rightly that his fellow-citizens and fellow-subjects
will do him justice.

It may possibly be that the American is not as law-abiding
as the Canadian because he is not really prosperous. I find it
stated in the Areyya, page 49, 1892 : " In 1890 the figures for
New York were twenty-three thousand eight hundred and
ninety-five evictions, while the grand total for Ireland was
only a little in excess of five thousand . . . Evictions in
New York City simply mean that there is in the heart of
America's money-centre a poverty as appalling, as hopeless, as
degrading, as exists in any civilized community on earth.

From September 1st, 1891, to August 31st, 1892, the evictions
had increased to twenty-nine thousand seven hundred and
twenty." There were one hundred and forty-eight thousand
outcasts, yet within a few blocks on or near Fifth Avenue no
less than two hundred millionaires reside whose aggregate
wealth reaches the astounding total of $30,000,000,000. We
have thus the contrast of the very rich and the wretchedly
poor. But the country population is very little better otf.
Extra Census Bulletin No. 3 states, " We have now on file in
Washington, as the result of their labor (2,500 clerks), the
abstracts of about nine million mortgages." There are a little
over twelve million families in the Republic. Comment is unne-
ceh,oary. " These figures are not pleasant to contemplate," says
the Arena. " They are disquieting as they are suggestive, and
the apprehensions of those who study them will not be lessened
because they are taken from sources which are official and con-
servative." (Page 207.) The census does nothing with chattel
mortgages. On page 204 we read : " Let us now look at some
suggestive figures published in Census Bulletins Nos. 3, 16, 20,
22. The number of mortgages on real estate in five States in
force, January 1st, 1890, are given as follows :

"Illinois 297,247 mortgages, aggregating $384,299,150 00

Iowa 252,539 " " 199,774,17100

Missouri 192,028 " " 214,609,772 00

Kansas 298,880 " " 243,141,826 00

Nebraska 155,377 " " 132,902,322 00

1,196,071

§1,174,732,241 00"

Do you wonder that repudiation is seriously proposed and
that political charlatans have millions of followers ?

The Arena (New York) says : "The rich and the poor are
further apart than ever. Labor to-day is poorer paid than
ever before ; more discontent exists, more men in despair. If
a chanjie is not soon devised trouble must come." There has
recently been fought a great battle across the line which was
largely a social or class fight. It ended in the defeat of the
west and south. They will be heard from again, for the late

! I

election Is but the first round of the struggle against the
monopolies and combines. "The fight of the people of the
United States will some day be against the money lords, and,
while tlie time has been deferred, the revolution has not been
averted."

Every voter for Bryan was a discontented and dissatisfied man.
The Revolution taught the people that it is right to assert with
arms in hand principles which cannot otherwise be maintained.
If it is right for bodies of men to murder, wliy should not
individuals commit murder also ? It would seem to be so, for
according to the Chicago Tribune, they murdered, in the
United States, 3,567 in 1889, 4,290 in 1890, o,906 in 1891, and
6,792 in 1892. In 1890, of the 4,290 murders only 102 were
brought to legal execution, while 126 were lynched. In 1891
there were 195 lynchings, and in 1892, 236. There has never
been a case of lynching in the Dominion of Canada. We are a
law-abiding people, and leave the administration of justice to
the officials charged with its execution, well knowing that
justice will be done, for our judges are not elected.

But the great exemplar of the Right of Rebellion was shown
to the world in 1861, when certain of the Southern States
believing in States' Rights determined to separate from the
North because they could not agree upon a great question of
public policy. It was then held by the New England and
some other States that these rights did not extend so far as
separation, and we were treated to the interesting sight of the
descendants of the secessionists of 1775 opposing the seces-
sionists of 1861. The "patriots" were the Unionists, the
Secessionists were the " rebels," whereas formerly the Seces-
sionists were the patriots, and the Unionists were the rebels.
It mattei's so unich whose ox is gored.

The Unionists were this time successful and their leaders
have become deified; the Unionists of 1775 were unsuccessful,
and they, their leadei's, and their families have been cast into
outer darkness for all generations to come by the rebels of
1775. The .seed sown in 1775 has yielded a bloody crop.
How long before the next after-crop will be mown ?

ist the

of the

is, and,

)t been

}d man.
rt with
itained.
iild not
so, for
in the
91, and
)2 were
[n 1891
,8 never
Je are a
istice to
ng that

s shown
States
om the
tion of
nd and
far as
of the
seces-
ts, the
Seces-
rebels.

leaders
jscessful,
Lst into
ibels of
IV crop.

We, safe under the British flag, removed from the coming
strife, can regard with cahnness, if not with indifl'erence, the
working of tlie yeast. Will the coming rebellion dissolve the
Union, for or against which a million of men lost their lives \
Is not a disruption of the South and West probable ? How
long will their people endure the tyranny of combines and trusts
while hemmed in beyond hope of escape by an impassable
tariff wall ?

From the facts adduced my conclusions are :

1. That the American War of the Revolution was a war
between political parties.

2. That it could have been settled without bloodshed by the
adoption of Galloway's plan of Home Rule, which was in sub-
stance the plan upon which the Canadian provinces were con-
federated nearly a century later.

3. That the majorit}' was driven l)y an active and un; crupu-
lous minority into a position from which it could not retire, and
with which it did not sympathize.

4. That the American Revolution taught the doctrine of the
Right of ReVjellion of the subject against the State, and of the
individual against the law.

5. That the logical consequences of this pernicious doctrine
have been the great rebellion of 1861, the Homestead riots, the
Chicago riots, the Buffalo and Brooklyn riots, and other armed
strikes -in which citizens were shot down, and individually, the
carrying of arms, numberless murders and lynch ings.

6. That application of the principle of the Right of Rebellion
of political parties, and of resistance to law by force of arms,
will eventually disrupt this North American republic, as it
has those of South America.

In conclusion, let me say that it is difficult to overestimate the
influence upo.i public sentiment of the Canadian people of the
example of unswerving loj'alty, of steadfast devotion to jirinciple,
of tenacity of purpose, of the fathers of British Canada. To
them is due the fact that we have a British power on this con-
tinent ; from us is required that we preserve inviolate the prin-
ciples for which they suffered. We should aspire not merely to

record their deeds, their sufferinfjs and their loyalty, but we
should hold their example ev^er before the youth of the country
as a practical lesson in patriotism and eniluiviuce under trial,
and thence derive from a (fjorious and honorable past, lessons for
the upbuililinf,' of a great and prosperous future. It is no incon-
sidei'ableherita<;e we, in common with all Canadians, have received.
A fair and smiiint; land stretchini^ from ocean to ocean, fertile
plain and valley alternatin<.j with ru<.j(,fed mountain rich with
earth's hidden ti'easures, lakes and streams of vast extent alive
with finny wealth — these and other sources of national strength
havj come to us as the result of the faithfulness of our fore-
fathers. But beyond and besides these physical advantages we
have inherited the precious privilege of citizenship in the
British Empire, a share in Britain's glorious past, a fellowship
in her literature, a kinship with her i)eo[)ie, and a riglit to call
the true and royal lady who sits upon her throne. Our Queen.
We, the descendants of the men and women who risked and
lost their all that they might live under the broad folds of the
Union Jack, that they might enjoy civil and religious liberty
and the blessings of British citizenship, humbly return thanks
to Almighty God that He has been pleased to spare that
great and good woman to her subjects to reign over them in
righteousness, truth and justice for sixty years. May God save
the Queen.