IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

I.I

^ ftiii 122
l£& 12.0

Photographic

Sciences

Corporatioii

23 WEST MAIN STREET

VtfEBSTSR,N.Y. 145M

(/16) 872-4S03

.^<sf

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICIVIH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductlons / Instltut Canadian de microreproductlons historlques

Technical and Bibliographic Notoa/Notaa techniques et bibiiogrephiquee

The inetitute has attempted to obtain the best
originai 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

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommagte

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurte et/ou pellicula

I I Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

I I Coloured maps/

Cartes gAographiquen 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/
Relii avec dautres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La re liure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intArioure

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 ajout^es
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
tnais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6tA filmtes.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires supp^Amentaires:

L'Institut a microfilm* le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 4tA possible de s« procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modifirsation dans la mAthode normale de filmage
sont indiquAs ci-dessous.

Tl
Hi

I I Coloured pages/

Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommagtes

Pages restored and/oi

Pages restaur^es et/ou peilicul6es

Pages discoloured, stained or foxe«
Pages dicolortes, tachet^es ou piqudes

I — I Pages damaged/

I I Pages restored and/or laminated/

I ji Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/

□Pagps detached/
Pages ddtach^es

Showthrough/
Transparence

I I Quality of print varies/

Quality inigaie de I'impression

Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel supplimentaire

Only edition available/
Seule 6d!tion disponible

P<
o1
fil

O
bt
th
si<
01
fil

Si(

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been ref limed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont M filmtos A nouveau de fapon it
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film* au taux de rMuction indiqu* ci-dessous.

10X

14X

18X

22X

26X

30X

12X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

Tf
sh
Tl

Ml
dil
en
bfl
ri{
re
mi

Thtt copy film«d h«r« ha» b««n raproduetd thanks
tu th« 9«n«ro«ity of:

Library of the Public
Archives of Canada

L'axamplaira film* fut raproduit grAca h la
OAnAroait* da:

La bibliothique da* Archivas
publiquas du Canada

Tha Imagas appaaring hara ara tha bast quality
possibia consldaring tha condition and lagibility
of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha
filming contract spacifications.

Las Imagas suivantas ont 4t4 raproduitas avac lo
plus grand soin, compta tanu da la condition at
da la nattatt da raxamplaira fiimA, at an
conformity avac las conditions du contrat da
fllmaga.

Original copias in printad papar covars ara fllmad
beginning with tha front covar 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.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est Imprimte sont filmte en commen^ant
par la premier plat at en termlnant soit par la
darnlAre page qui comporte une emprefnte
d'Impression ou d'illustration, soit par la second
plat, salon la cas. Tous ler autres exemplaires
originaux sont filmte en commen9ant par la
pramlAre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'Impression ou d'illustration et en termlnant par
la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

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

Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la
dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon ie
cas: la symbols — »• signifle "A SUIVRE", ie
symbols ▼ signifle "FIN".

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed aic
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely Included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper l^ft 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 Atre
filmAs d des taux de rMuction dlff^rents.
Lorsque Ie document est trop grand pour Atre
reproduit en un seul clichA, II est fllm6 A partir
de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droits,
et de haut en bas, en prenant la nombre
d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mAthode.

■1

GOVERNMENT

COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY

T. K. KAMSAY,

ADVOOATB.

PRINTED BY JOHN LOVELL, ST. NICHOLAS STREET.

1863.

COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY.

Has tJte Crown the right to issue commissions for the pur-
pose of obtaining irformation only ?
And if so, within what limits f

THiese are two questions which cannot have failed to have
presented themselves of late to the minds of many. When
the exercise of authority is in the hands of those who are using
it for the general good, it is not easy to induce the public to
be very critical as to its limits ; but when the power of the
state is evidently being employed oppressively and for per-
sonal and private ends, it becomes necessary, as well aa
interesting, to inquire what those limits are, and to see that
they are not wantonly over-stepped .

Such a moment is the present, for it would be useless to
deny the existence of a well-founded belief that the recent
appointments of commissions have been made 3olely with the
view of unearthing pretexts for the vacating of offices, in the
interests of the administration, and of its friends — ambitious of
the spoils of power. Taking advantage of the attention occa-
sioned by the circumstances giving rise to this belief, I pro-
pose to examine, and shall endeavour to answer, these two
questions.

If such a light exists, it must be either by the common law
or by statute.

At first sight it seems hardily to suffer any question that
the Crown should have, at common law, the same power to
obtain information as to all matters of public interest by coiih

mission, that the other two branches of the Legislature
undoubtedly have by committee. This power in the two
Houses of Parliament is founded on the very necessities of
their cxfetonce ; and it is difficult to imagine any inconve-
nience or impropriety which should arise from the Crown
possessing a similar authority, without which it would seem to
be impossible for any administration to carry on intelligently
the affairs of the country. There must be, or at all events
there may at any time arise, matters on which it is neces-
sary for the Government to possess information, and which
cannot be provided for hy statute ; and to forbid the Govern-
ment to make such inquiry by commission, would be very
much like condemning it to a state of helpless ignorance.

Nevertheless this right has been denied, and on a dictum
of Lord Coke, mutilated and misinterpreted as I contend, the
universities of Oxford and Cambridge* questioned the legality
of a commission for inquiry into and reporting upon the state,
discipline, studies and revenues, &c., of these universities.
Now, without attempting to decide whether the universities
are liable to such an inquiry or not (and they may very well
be exempt from it without seeking protection from the author-
ity of Lord Coke), I think they have totally failed to make
out the position they assume, that " all commissions for inqui-
ry only" (i. e. for obtaining information) ^' not authorized by
statute, are void."

But although admitting to the fullest extent the right of the
Crown to appoint commissions of inquiry, it would seem that
this power must be so exercised as not to trespass on the
rights of individuals, or to enter upon any investigation other-
wise provided for by law. The power must be exercised in
good faith for the purposes of obtaining information, and not
with a view of dividing the responsibility of the executive

* I hare taken the facta of this case from the London Law ReyiQW^.
TOl. 16.

with persons independent of the direct censure of Parliament.
But so understood, this power is a common law right of the
Crown, and perfectly independent of the IBth chapter of the
Consolidated Statutes of Canada.

That act may be taken as an exposition of the scope of thid
common law right, Avhen it enumerates * the causes for which
commissions of inquiry may be appointed, with power to ex-
amine witnesses under oath ; but it certainly did not originate
the right, which, the counsel for the universities admitted,
without hesitation, had been frecpiently exercised. The only
effect then of that statute was to give the Governor power
to appoint Commissioners, having power to send for persons
and papers, to examine witnesses under oath, and to compel
them to attend and give evidence. This right of examining
under oath, it is hardly necessary to add, the Crown did not
possess at common law, more than a committee of the Lords
or Commons.

The true doctrine, therefore, appears to be : 1st, that at
common law the Crown has the right to appohit commis-
sioners to inquire into, and concerning any matter connected
with the good government of the state, or the conduct of any
part of the public business thereof, or the administration of
justice therein, when such inquiry is not regulated by any
special law.

2nd. That here the Governor has the further power, under
the 13th chapter of the Consolidated Statutes of Canada, to
authorize the commissioners so appointed in any of the above
mentioned cases, to summon before them " any party or
witnessess, and of requiring them to give evidence on oath

* Whenever the Governor in Counsel deems it expedient to cause in-
quiry to be made into and concerning any matter connected with tho
good government of this province, or the conduct of any part of the pub-
lic business thereof, or the administration of justice therein, and such in-
quiry is not regulated by any special law, &c.

orally, or in writing, and to produce such documents and
things, as such Commissioners deem requisite to the full
investigation of the matters into which they are appointed to
examine."*

If this exposition of doctrine be correct, it would seem to
result, 3dly, that neither by common law, nor by tho
general statute, docs any such power extend to the investiga-
tion into anything purely of a private nature, or into the con-
duct of any person named, or to any accusation of any crimes
or oflfenccs alleged against any particular person.

Fortunately we are not obliged to have recourse to abstract
reasoning in support of this proposition. In the 12 Coke 31,
under the heading of Trin. 5 Jac. 1, we find the following :
" Note ; commissioners in English under the Great Seal
directed to divers commissioners within the counties of
Bedford, Bucks, Huntington, Northampton, Leicester, and
Warwick to enquire of divers articles annexed to it rf and
the articles wore also in English, to enquire of depopulation

• And for carrying out these powers the Comraissionera have " tho
same power to enforce the attendance of such witnesses and to compel them
to give evidence as is vested in any Court of Law, in civil matters."
Sect. 1, S.S. 2.

t The articles annexed (which I have copied from the Law Review
mentioned above,) were instructions to the Commissioners to inquire :—

1. Of towns, villages, churches, houses, farms, &c., wasted or depo-
pulated since 20 Eliz., and the x>ersons in default.

2. Of lands converted from tillage to pasture by unlawful enclosure,
and by whom.

3. Of lands severed from farmhouses, so as to leave insufficient for the
use of the occupants, and by whom.

4. Of barns and outhouses pulled down, decayed or deserted, and by
whom.

5. Of those who keep on hand several farms, and let the farmhouses
stand void or occupied by the poor.

6. Of farmers removed from their houses liy their landlords, and the
houses left vacant, and by whom.

*l. Of obstruction of highways by unlawful enclosures and by wjiom,
&0."

of houses, converting of arable land into pasture, &c.
But the commissioners should not have any power to
hear and determine the said offonces, but only to enquire
of them : and by colour of the said commissions the said
commissioners took many presentments in English, and
did return them into the chancery and after, soil Trin. 5
Jac. it was resolved by the two chief Justices, and by
Walmsley, Fenner, Yelverton, Williams, Snigg, Altham,
and Foster^ that the said commissions were against the law
for three* causes :

1. For this, that they were in English.f

2. For that the offences cnquirable were not certain with-
in the commission itself, but in a schedule annexed to it. J

3. For this, that it was only to enquire, which is against
law, for by this a man may be unjustly accused by perjury.f
and he shall not have any remedy.

4. For this, that it is not within the statute of 5 Eliz , ka.
Also tho party may be defamed, and shall not have any

traverse to it.

Such a commission may be only to enquire of Treason^
Felony committed, &c. And no such commission ever was
seen to enquire only (i. e. of crimes)."

This dictum then of Lord Coke fully supports our 3rd
proposition. The commissions to the persons in these different
counties, were commissions of inquiry only, as to offences, and

• In the edilion of the report before me there are four paragraphs
numbered; but the causes are of three kinds.

t No record could be in English before the 4 of Geo. 11 cap. 26.

X Curious to say this same irregularity occurs in the clerk of the
Peace Commission, and it was a great snare on the hearing of the quo
uarranto, for the Court did not seem to know whether to read the charges
as part of the commission or to treat them as a separate matter.

§ Our statute to some extent does away with that difficulty, for it
attaches tlie pains of perjury to all false swearing before Commission-
ers, i. e. those lawfully appointed.

as to the persoHH " ])y v.hom" tlicy were committed, and as
Lord Coko says, '* no snoh commission over was scon." And
this dictum is confirmed hy Hale* rf* ITaivkin8.-\

But commissions for more than inquiry, that is to hear
and determine, could not bo addressed to commissioners, but
to the judges of assize, for in Magna Cliarta^ cap. xii., we
find, " We, or if we be out of the realm, our Chief Justiccr,
shall send our Justices through every county once in the
year, who, with the knights of the shires, shall take the
aforesaid assizes in the counties." And the famous chap,
xxix, declares : " No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or
be disseised of his freehold, or his liberties, or free customs,
or be out-lawed, or exiled, or hi anj other wise destroyed, nor
will wo pass upon him nor condemn him unless by the lawful
judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land." And
Coke interprets this to mean, " no man shall be condemned
at the King's suit, cither before the King in his Bench,
where the pleas arc coram rege (and so arc the words ncG
super eum ibimus to be understood) nor before any othor
commissioner or judge whatever (and so are the words nee
super eum mittemus to be understood.) J And so the 16 Car. 1,
cap. 10, which abolished the Star Chamber, declares " that
from henceforth no Court, council, or place of judicature,
shall be erected, ordained, constituted, or appointed within
this realm or dominion of Wales, which shall have, use or
exercise the same or the like juiisdiction§ as is or hath been

* Special commissions to hear and not to determine offenses : Tho' by
force of some particular statutes such commissions of inquiry may issue
as upon the statute of 23 H. 6, cap. 10, of sheriffs and some others,
yet regularly as to matters of misdemeanour, especially such as are capital,
as felony or treason, no such inquiry only is warrantable : 2 Hale's ". C.
p. 21, fo.

t Book 2, chap. 5, p. 25.

X Inst. 46.

§ It was ordained by the 3 lien. 7, c. 1. and by the 21 Hen. 8, c. 2,

that the chancellor n.- isted by others there named, should have power

used, [iractisod or exoreiscMl in tlio said Court of Star Cham-
ber." And Lhe Hill of Ui^^lits (',stal)liMhos that all commiH.sioni?
and CourtH,of a like uatui'e lo the late (.-ourt of Commission-
ers for ecelesiastieal purposes, are " illegal and pernieious"

It is therefore not only the positive law, 1)ut the very hasis
of all that poliey, of which British suhjeets are so justly
proud, that no one shall be affected in his liberty, or in his
goods, or in his character, but in the regular course of law.

This proposition will bo readily admitted. Indeed it would
bo no easy task to find any one bold enough openly to con-
trovert it ; and yet wo find the prineif)lc it involves flagrant-
ly contravened, without almost attracting a passing remark.
As an example we propose, in conclusion, to examine the
commission addressed to Messrs. Lafrenaye & Dohorty, in the
early part of the present year ;* and in order that there may be
no cavil as to the narrative, 'I propose to give the substance
of the documents.

On the 18th of February, 1803, a Commission was issued
setting forth, that " certain charges of malversation of
office had been made agiiinst the late joint Clerk of the Peace
and Clerk of the Crown at Montreal, Messrs. Deiisle & Bre-
haut, and their Deputy also,Charles Schiller." The Commission
went on to state that it ^^ had been deemed advisable that the
charges so made should be thoroughly investigated, and that
full enquiry should be made into the organization of those of-
fices ;" therefore the Governor, " under and pursuant to the

to punish routs, riota, forgeries, maiatenances, embra'"rie3 or perjuries,
and other such misdemeanours as were not sufficient!} provided for by
the common law, and for which the inferior judges were not so proper
to give correction. V. Tomlins Diet. Vo. Star-Chamber.

* This Commission is by no means exceptional, except perhaps in the
spirit and motive of those by whom, and at whose instigation, it waa
issued. The commissions against Mr. Archambault and into the Corrigan
murder and many others, are in law quite as objectionable as those
against Menfnrs. Deiisle & Brehaut, and against Mr. Tass^.

Provisions of the 13th chapter of tlic Consolidated Statutes
of Canada, " nominated, constituted, and appointed" Pierre
Richard Lafrenayo and Marcus Doherty, to be Cor^missioners
to investigate the charge'^ so brought against the above officers ,
and to* inquire into the organization of those offices." The
Commission further empowered the said Crmmissioners " to
summon before them any party or witnesses, and to require
them to give evidence on oath, orally or in writing, and to
produce * such documents and things as they, the said Pierre
Richard Lafrenaye and Marcus Doherty, may deem requisite
to the full investigation of the matters and things aforesaid."

Under this Commission MM. Lafrenaye & Doherty met, and
addressed to the parties accused, summonses to appear before
them " to answer f and explain suJi charges as may then
and there, and/rom day to day^ during the sitting of said
Commissioners, J be preferred against you as such, late
joint Clerk of the Peace, and Clerk of the Crown as afore-
said." MM. Delisle and Brehaut f^nd Mr Schiller appeared in
obedience to this fiat, on the 9th of March, when a list of
charges as communicated to them to the following effect :§

*'lst. That by false returns, false names, signatures, and
false pretences, the late joint Clerk of the Peace and Clerk of
the Crown at Montreal, Messrs. Dehsle & Brehaut, and their

*In the words of the statute, but the statute is badly drawn.

t And yet one of the Commissioners had the hardihood to declare,
subsequent to the proceedings on the quo warranto, that " thej did not
ask Mr Delisle to bring forward witnesses," and that " They were not a
tribunal to decide." Why then was h% called upon to answer, and how
was he to doit but by bringing up evidence ?

X If the Commission goes beyond the law ; this summons as far exceeds
the Commission, which only authorizes the commissioner' to investigate
"certain charges," i. e. charges certain at the date of the commission.

§ Query. — ^Were those the charges of malversation of office " made"
against MM. Delisle and Brehaut and Schiller, or is it a schedule drawn
up by the Commissioners on their authority. The question might be
important even though the Commission were legal.

)

Deputy? also, Charles E. Schiller,* have tVatidukMitly ob-
tained a considerable amount of money from the govern-
ment.

2nd. That one of them has embezzled i<omi' of tlio Gov-
ernment moneys, t

3rd. That laige frauds have been carried on in the way
of postage.

4th. That some of the gov^crnment stationery in their of-
fice has been sold to a second party. J

5th. That some unclaimed stolen go3ds have been taken,
carried away and unlawfully appropriated to the use of one
of those officers, the Deputy.

6th. . That a quantity of stationery belonging to the Gov-
ernment, such as blank books, paper, ink, &c., was used for
the schooling and education of children.

7th. That they speculated on Government moneys by
drawing a sum of jS125 a year allowed for a clerk, and paying
that clerk only <£60 a year, and pocketing the balance.

8th. That Charles E. Schiller, in his capacity of Super-
intendent of Crown witnesses, has for many years past falsely
and fraudulently obtained large sums of money from Gov-

• The Commission says Charles Schiller; but nowadays identity
is looked upon as a trifle.

t Which of them, or how much money, is an unimportant detail.

t Did it never strike the authors of this Commission to ask who the
mysterious second party was, or did they purposely conceal their infor-
mation ? In the ordinary criminal courts they are more ingenuous ; the
accused are given communication of, and are allowed to take copies of
all the affidavits of circumstances. What would be thought of arresting
a man for larceny without telling him to whom the article said to be
stolen belonged ? Warren Hastings was accused of having been " guilty
of a high offence, contrary to the fundamental principles of justice, in
the said mode of charging misdemeanors without any specification of
person, or place, or time, or act, or any offer of specification of proofs,
by which the party charged may be enabled to refute the same, in order to
unjustly load his reputation, and to prejudice him with regard to the articles
more clearly specified."

ernment by overcharging the actual costs of the services of
subpoenas.

9th. That the said Charles E. Schiller, every time he sworo
to the correctness of his accounts, committed perjury.

10th. That the said Charles E. Schiller has, at the very
least, defrauded Government of £125 to XI 50 a year for
many years past.

11th. That the said Charles E. Schiller has been in the
habit of making a profit upon the fees charged by constables
for the services of documents emanating from the office.

12th. That the said Charles E. Schiller has also been ac-
customed to take credit for the payment of mileage upon the
service of subpoenas when such subpoenas had been, sent by
post, and no mileage had occurred."*

Now if we apply the dictum of Lord Coke, and the other
judges, and the principles involved in the statutes and au-
thorities cited, is it not perfectly plain that this Commission
is ** illegal ?" • It is specially and particularly a commission
to investigate crimes and offences alleged to have been com-
mitted, and so were the commissions f set aside by Coke and
his brother judges.

* These articles of accusation are signed " P. R. Lafrenaye, Com."
"M. Doherty, Com." It would therefore appear that they are the au-
thors of (he aecnsations. Will it be pretended that their commissions au-
thorized them to accuse as well as to hear evidence ? On the trial of the
qtto toarrantOf • Mr. Lafiarame admitted they did not ; but added, " they
(the Gommissioners) did no more than hear evidence. Mr. Doherty
said they were " neither prosecutors nor persecutors." Is the statement
of fttctcorreet? Idbubtit. '

.'t The matters to be inquired of by these commissions were called
(iffetwes^ vide stipm, p. 7, and no commission was ever seen to inquire
only of CTJmtt, vide supra, p. 7. Tlie writer too of the article in the
(Law Retiew quoted above, also says :—^* It is plain, therefore, that the
offBiioe» enumerated in the articles attached to* the above Commissions
otlnq^tj were surmised to be of an indictable quality, either at oommoo
law, or under some act, and that the Commissions' themselves were de-

■i

But it has been attempted to argue that the Crown has at
all events a right to make such an inquiry into the conduct
of its own servants. On the hearing of the merits of the
quo warranto,* both the counsel for the Crown argued so.
Mr. Laflamme said : " They (the accused) were public
servants, and the Government had acted the part of a master,
who, when he hears that his servant has made away with some
of his property, calls him and inquires of him whether such is
the case or not." And Mr. Stuart said : ''It (the Commission)
issued as from a master to his servant. ^^

The comparison is most unfortunate, as no analogy exists
between the two cases. In the first place, masters do not
issue commissions to hold courts of inquiry to investigate
whether their servants have made away with their property ;
and, in the second place, a commissioned officer of the Crown,
or, as Mr. Laflamme calls him, " a public servant," is not at
all in the position of a private servant. The latter retains
his employment according to the terms of his agreement ; but
the former has a tenure of office equal to a freehold, and
from which he cannot, or at least ought not, to be dispossessed
without just cause. To establish such just cause, a commission
like that addressed to MM. Lafrenaye and Doherty would be
useless, for a reason which Mr. Monk put very well at the
argument in a question to Counsel. He said : " Suppose
these gentlemen were tried before the ordinary tribunals for
perjury, forgery, larceny, and embezzlement, and acquitted,

signed to put the Crown in possession of the authentic presentment of
a jury, made upon oath with all the form of a Court of Oyer and Termi-
ner, or other court of criminal jurisdiction."

* A writ of qiio warranto was sued out by Mr. Schiller ; but I hare
avoided any special examination of that proceeding, as it does not appear
to assist one in arriving at any conclusion as to the principles involved
in the present inquiry. At most the judgment declares the form of the
commission under consideration legal and conformable to the Statute ;
but I hardly think it will ever have weight as a leading case.

the government could not afterwards find them guilty, and
dismiss them. Suppose again, that the commission considered
them guilty, and the government said all they had to do was
to dismiss tliem, it would be impossible for them to do so,
till they had been disposed of by the ordinary tribunals. This
view of the case presents a serious difficulty." And it appears
to me to be a difficulty which has not been overcome, and can-
not be, unless we are to admit that in accepting office under
the Crown one loses the rights of a British subject, a principle
which T am not disposed to admit on the simple dicta of the
two Queen's Counsel.

But Mr. Laflamme contends that the Crown used the lesser
having the greater power, — ^he remembered the hrocard " qui
pent le plus, pent U moina.'^ He says " The government in
fact, had power to discharge these public officers without
assigning any cause ; but instead of this rigorous proceeding
they issued a commission, &c." Even the use of the word
Government hardly reconciles one to so arbitrary a doctrine
from the mouth of a democrat of so long standing as Mr.
Laflamme. The Government has, in fact, the power to dis-
charge, just as a jury has the power to decide, on the law.
They have legally the power ; but they have not constitution-
ally the right. Our constitution has no irresponsible powers ;
and the responsibility of the executive, in matters of office, is
to Parliament. But this direct responsibility is exactly what,
it is supposed, the present administration seeks to avoid by
the appointment of such commissions* as the one now under
investigation, and others equally reprehensible.

Another argument, but little less untenable than the last,
has been used in favor of the Commission. It has been said
that the Commission is not wholly bad ; that it is at all events

* The finance commission is doubtless bad under the 13th chapter of
the Consolidated Statutes of Canada, because " such inquiry'' is fully
regulated by " special laws."

good, in so far as regards the inquiry into the organization
of the Crown and Peace Offices ;* but this pretension will
hardly bear a moment's consideration. A commission is to
do a certain thing or certaiQ things, and it is not competent for
the Commissioners to do a part and leave part undone. An
omission to do, might in practice amount to doing that which
the Commission in no way authorized. Besides, were not
the Commissioners sworn ?t In addition to this, there is an
objection to the partial execution of a commission under the
statute, J namely, that the witness is sworn to tell the whole
truth, under the authority of the Commission, and it would
be impossible for him to divide the legal from the illegal part ;
and the Commissioners have no power to administer to a wit-
ness an oath to give evidence as to so much of the inquiry
as they, the Commissioners, consider legal.

If, however, any doubt could exist as to the illegality of
this Commission, it must necessarily be destroyed by the
attitude of the Commissioners, on the refusal of Mr. Justice
Aylwin to be sworn. If they were acting under the authori-
ty of a commission which authorized their proceedings, it was
not only their right, but their duty to compel the witness to
give evidence. § When Mr. Delisle asked for compul-
sory process, one of the Commissioners is reported to have said
that they " could not compel the witness to give evidence ;§
but next day the same Commissioner shifted his ground,and tried
to soften the bluntness of the previously expressed opinion.
The excuse then was, that there was no subpoena. But the
witness was there, and to their face refused to be sworn, or

• It would seem from the report of the judgment on the quo warranto,
that the Court suffered from some such impression.

t If 80, the oath would be to perform faithfully the whole duties of the
office, and not a part of them.

t Cap. 13, C. Sts. C.

§ Vide supra note on page 6. Also the terms of the Commission.

in any way to give evidence ! Yet the Commissioners affected
not to proceed because there was no afl&davit of circumstances
of a direct contempt ! and no subpoena ! !

The other Commissioner also declared tuat he wished it to
be distinctly understood that they never gave a form of any
kind, or consented that such should he used. Now I have seen
a subpoena signed hy both Commissioners, in the following
form, the words in italics being struck out by hand, when
issued for the defence, or rather, I should say, to keep up
the distinction the Commissioners are now so eager to esta-
blish, the witnesses called at the suggestion of one of the
accused :

Provinob of Canada, )
Pistrict of Jilontrtal. >

• Y VIRTUE of a Commission of His Excellency The Right
Honorable Charles Stanley Viscount Monck, Baron Monck of
Ballytrammon in the County of Wexford, Governor-General of
British North America, and Captain-General and Governor-in-
Chief in and over the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia, New
Brunswick, and the Island of Prince Edward, and Vice-Admiral
of the same, &c., &c., &c.

Appointing Pierre Richard Lafrenaye and Marcus Doherty>
Esquires, Commissioners to investigate certain charges of Mai'
versation of Office, which have been made against the late Joint
Clerk of the Peace, and Clerk of the Crown at Montreal,
Messieurs Delisle and Brehaut, and their Deputy also, Charles
Schiller, and to enquire into the organization of those offices.
€a

of the City of Montreal,

You and each 0/ YOU are hereby summoned and required in Her

MJJESTyS namcj personally to be and appear before us, the

said Commissioners, on the

day of at the hour of

o'clock, in the noon, in the Special Jury Room, in

the Court House in the City of Montreal, then and there to give
EVIDENCE touching the matters referred to in the said Commis-
sion, and herein neither you nor either of you are to fail at your
peril.

(

{

6ifam «ntJ« our jjanlia, at the City of Montreal, th'n

day of in the year of Our Lord one thou-

aand eight hundred and sixty-three.

Commissioner.

Commirsioner.

I, the undersigned Bailiff, do hereby certify and return, under ray

oath of office, that on the day of I did

serve in the within named a duplicate of this Subpcpna

by speaking to and leaving the same with

Dated at Montreal, this day of 1862.

A trick of a similar nature was attempted after the deci-
Bion of the quo warranto^ when the form of summons was
changed to a mere notification, dated 30th August ; that the
Commissioners " would resume and proceed with such inves-
tigation and inquiry upon such charges as form the proper f
matter of the inquiry and investigation to be made, by and
in virtue of the Commission issued by His Excellency, bearing
date the 18th of February, 1863, for that purpose.^

Is it possible to avoid the conclusion that the Commission-
ers were persuaded of the utter illegality of their acts ?

A feeble attempt has been made in one of the daily papers
to question the propriety of Mr. Justice Aylwin's conduct in
going before the Commissioners and refusing to be sworn.
To non-professional persons this may appear tr» have some
weight, but his doing so was perfectly in accordance with
the practice in such matters. Where there is a semblance
of authority, the proper way is to inquire if it is real or
usurped, and this is what Mr. Justice Aylwin did. But the
Commissioners and their friends are indignant that he did
not treat them and their proceedings with the contempt which,
no one is more fully convinced than the Commissioners them-
•elves, they so richly deserved.

It may be that a virtuous Executive will pay no attention
to all these irregularities, in so far as regards this particular

• Vid9 supra f p. 10.

t What purpose ?

18-

Oommission ; but it is probable that we have seen the last
of commissions to inquire of felonies and misdemeanours for
some time to come. If another makes its appearance, it is
to be hoped it will be met with a resistance of a formidable
deBcriT>tion.