a @O UG Mates 
 
 ON THE 
 
 Cees Dp A BEG 
 NOW DEPENDING IN 
 Poh ae Le foe M ee! Sale be 
 2 
 
 Pra NBO? 
 PRINTED FOR Je DEBR 
 
 EDT, PLC CADDIE Fe 
 
 M,DCC.XCL 
 
rar | 
 
 the liberality cf its principle in fome degree 
 
 depends the character of the State. ‘The 
 Minifter who introduced this meafure for 
 the confideration of Parliament, has in 
 terms the moft explicit recognized its im- 
 portance, and with diftinguifhed candor 
 courted the moft minute difcuffion of it. 
 To him therefore we cannot impute the 
 want of that attention which is due to the 
 magnitude of its object, however we may 
 differ with him in opinion as to the found- 
 nefs of the principle upon which the Bill 
 proceeds, or.as to the fufficiency of the 
 means which it provides for the attainment 
 of fuch objeQ. But whilft we admit the 
 candor of the authors of the Bill, we feel 
 ourfelves bound to acknowledge with grati- 
 tude that,.timely interpofition, which has 
 obftructed.the progrefs of a meafure in our 
 opinion. fo .exceptionable in its principle, 
 and fo ferioufly mifchievous in its detail, 
 
 7 It 
 
 = - 
 
 | 
 4 
 ! 
 
($e) 
 
 It is not our intention to-enumerate the 
 etievances which this unfortunate Province 
 has'laboured under for upwards of twenty 
 years ; neither fhall we attempt to draw any 
 argument in fupport of its claims, from the 
 meeknefs and forbearance with which it has 
 ehdured them 3 but fhall folely rely on that 
 principle of reafont and: juftice, recognized 
 by. our Conftitution, which entitles every 
 dependent part of the Britifo Empire to as 
 large a portion of bhappinefs, and to as am- 
 ple fecurity for tts: enjoyment, as the cir= 
 cumplances and fituation of fuch part will 
 permit. Protefting againft every conclu- 
 fion drawn from practice, however general, 
 which breaks in upon this fundamental 
 right,:we fhall reft upon it in full confidence 
 that bad precedents will not be allowed to 
 operate as found principles, or miftaken or 
 merely temporary policy to be drawn out and 
 applied as: approved and eftablithed fyftem. 
 
 B 2 To 
 
( 4) 
 
 To improve and fecure the happi- 
 
 nefs of mankind, is the moft diftinguith- 
 ed privilege of Legiflation, and is cer 
 tainly that to which the Britith Legifla~ 
 ture is the moft attached: from the Bri- 
 tith Legiflature, therefore, the Province 
 of Quebec: has every thing to hope. It 
 need not refort to auxiliary arguments: it 
 need not refer to the royal affurance af- 
 forded by His Majefty’s Proclamation of 
 17633 but, flating itfelf to be a part of the 
 Britifo Empire, it may confidently bring for- 
 ward its claims to the enjoyment of Britifh 
 rights. 
 
 Whether the Bill now depending does 
 extend to the Province of Quebec the fecure 
 enjoyment of Britifh rights, is the queftion 
 to which we propofe to addrefs ourfelves 
 with that refpe& which is due to the opi- 
 nions of thofe who have fanétioned the Bill 
 with their approbation, and with that frank- 
 
 nels 
 
3 
 
 nefs which is due to the importance of the 
 meafure. For it is a cireumftance which 
 muft deeply affect the mind of every man, 
 that if the meafure be in its principle defec- 
 tive, it is a defeQ) which hereafter the Bri- 
 tith Legiflature will not have a right to 
 correct : if its provifions are’ infufficient, it 
 is an infufficiency which the Britifh Le- 
 giflature will not hereafter have @ right to 
 fupply. 
 
 The Bill begins with referring to the 
 Quebec A& pafled in the fourteenth year 
 of His prefent Majefty’s reign, which it 
 obferves .is *¢ in many refpects inapplicable 
 “to the prefent condition and circum- 
 ‘6 ftances. of the Province.” 
 
 The moft ftriking features of the Bill of 
 1774 are, the introdudtion of the laws of 
 Canada, and the appointment of a Legifla- 
 tive Council for the affairs of the Province. 
 From both thefe fources many ‘grievances 
 
 have 
 
| 
 
 have certainly flowed. But the Bill-now 
 
 depending repeals only that part of the Bill 
 of 1794 which appoints a Legiflative Coun- 
 cil; from which it might be inferred, that 
 the Bill of 1774 has proved in many re- 
 {pets inapplicable to’ the condition and cir- 
 cumftances of the faid Province, merely 
 from its appointment of the Legiflative Coun- 
 cil thereby eftablifhed. This Council was 
 by the Bill invefted with full powers to 
 legiflate for the Province, with the fingle 
 exception of impofing taxes. It. is’ not 
 therefore unreafonable to conclude, that 
 thofe powers have either not been exer- 
 cifed with fufficient judgment or with fufhi- 
 cient authority. If a.want of judgment 
 were imputable, a new choice of Coun- 
 cillors might have fupplied it; if a want of 
 
 authority, the eftablifhing of an Houfe of 
 
 Aflembly might have afforded it: nothing 
 
 was more eafy than to trace the evil, if it 
 
 proceeded 
 
 ye 
 
 tPeeduis 2 
 
 ve 
 1 eee 5 
 
€ 2 ) 
 
 proceeded from either of thefe caufes ; no- 
 thing more obvious than the remedy, 
 
 The words in many refpecis mutt. theres 
 fore be confidered as having been inferted 
 in the preamble of the Bill without refe- 
 rence to its provifions ; as they encourage 
 the hope that the Bill would arrange what 
 indeed is in many refpedts inapplicable to 
 the condition of the Province, namely, the 
 fuppofed Canadian laws, which on the con- 
 trary are by the Bill confirmed. 
 
 The Bill next proceeds to ftate, that. His 
 Majefty had been pleafed to fignify, by his 
 meflage to both Houfes of Parliament, his 
 royal intention to divide his Province of 
 Quebec into two feparate provinces—to be 
 called the Province of Upper Canada, and 
 the Province of Lower Canada. 
 
 The divifion of the Province can operate 
 no very great inconvenience, unlefs it be fanc- 
 tioned by the approbation of Parliament; 
 
 and 
 
ed Jee. 
 
 and its expediency feems by the royal mef- 
 
 fage to be fubmitted to the judgment of Par- 
 liament. 
 
 Many confiderations feem to oppofe the 
 meafure ; and none has yet been ftated of 
 fufficient force to juftify it. It may be true 
 that the new fubjeéts are influenced, on 
 many occafions, by very different motives 
 from thofe which regulate the opinions 
 and condué of the ancient fubjects. But 
 it has not yet been faid, or even infi- 
 nuated, that thofe motives are fo re- 
 fpeGtable as to give to the new fubjects 
 claims on the Britifh Legiflature which 
 ought to be preferred to the claims of the 
 ancient fubje&ts. The prejudices (as they 
 are termed) of the new fubjeéts have indeed 
 never been examined by the Britifh Parlia- 
 ment. They may be deferving of a different 
 appellation; they may be opinions honour- 
 able to the individual, and ufeful to the 
 
 State : 
 
C 29) 
 Btate: but till found to be fo, they muft be 
 
 treated as prejudices which found policy 
 would endeavour to abate, or, if poflible, to 
 remove. The fociety of perfons entertain- 
 ing oppofite opinions muft gradually .de- 
 ftroy fuch as are merely indifferent, and 
 weaken the influence even of the moft excep- 
 tionable. And the hiftory of mankind will 
 juftify the policy of attempting to aflimilate 
 the manners and opinions of perfons con- 
 neéted not more clofely by fituation, than 
 by a common intereft. But to divide a 
 country for the purpofe of uniting the 
 people; to give new power to prejudice, 
 and to furnith it with new opportunities of 
 indulgence, with a view to weaken its force 
 or to abate its virulence, is a policy as new 
 as it is extraordinary: it is a policy which 
 is contradidted: by the principles and good 
 effects of the Union of England and Scot- 
 Jand ; and by the whole hiftory of Europe, 
 
 C which 
 
( to ) 
 
 which has been refcued from the horrors of 
 
 a conftant warfare by extending the focial 
 influence by every poffible contrivance, and 
 by giving to perfons of the moft oppofite 
 opinions that intereft which might incline 
 them to fuch mutual facrifices as were ne- 
 ceflary for their common happinefs, The 
 great extent of the Province, if it were 
 well populated, might perhaps render 
 fome arrangement neceflary to its gene- 
 ral intereft: but, even under fuch cir- 
 cumftances, fome refpect would ftill be 
 due to‘local fituation, as well as to local 
 prejudice. It might be neceflary to con- 
 fult the latter; but it certainly would be 
 unpardonable to overlook the former: and 
 if, upon furveying the fituation of the Pro- 
 vince; it were found that only a particular 
 part of it allowed of the unmolefted en- 
 joyment of commerce; fuch circumftance 
 would probably weigh, even under the moft 
 
 prefling 
 
eS 
 
 prefling occafions, as an infurmountable 
 obftacle to any divifion of the Province. 
 It might be reafonably urged, that by 
 fuch divifion the whole trade of the Pro- 
 vince would be thrown into the poflef- 
 fion of a fingle part of it; and the other 
 parts left at the mercy of a difcretion that 
 might be actuated by indifference which 
 might negle&t, prejudice which might de- 
 {fpife, or a feparate intereft which might 
 control, their claims. But it has not yet 
 been affigned, in juftification of the meafure 
 of dividing the Province, that it is fo well 
 populated as to render a divifion necef- 
 fary ; nor that its interefts are fo harmo- 
 nifed, as to render fuch divifion at leaft harm- 
 lefs. On the contrary, the friends of the mea- 
 fare admit that the Province is not popu- 
 lated, and that its interefts are diftratted by 
 prejudice. Under fuch circumftances, that a 
 divifion fhould be planned by which one 
 
 C2 part 
 
( 32 ) 
 
 part of the Province, having no direat com-~ 
 
 munication with the fea, muft be left at the 
 mercy of the other, is, in our opinion, one 
 of thofe unaccountable {chemes which no- 
 thing but the wildnefs of imagination could 
 fugeeft, or credulity adopt. That the Bri- 
 tith Legiflature, with the map of Canada for 
 its guide, fhould force the Upper Province 
 to draw its fupplies from Great Britain, 
 through a country whofe prejudices and in- 
 tereft may incline her to charge fuch fupplies 
 with heavy duties, is hardly credible: but 
 that they fhould fubje& the furplus produce 
 of the Upper Province, from which alone 
 this country is to be benefited by the poflef- 
 fion of that, to all the charges and obftacles 
 which a rivalry in trade or unfounded pre- 
 judice may expofe it, is a confequence of the 
 Bill which no man will credit who has not 
 previoufly confulted the propofed plan of 
 divifion, and found that the Upper Province 
 will 
 
weet sl 
 
 ( 2335.9 
 
 will thereby be excluded from all commu~ 
 nication with the fea, unlefs by the concur- 
 rence of the Lower Province. 
 
 We mean not to deny the indulgence 
 due to the prejudices of a people, but we 
 think more refpe& is due to: their interefts. 
 To wean them from the former, and to at- 
 tach them to the latter, may perhaps be dif. 
 ficult; but it may be effected by degrees. 
 We fubmit, however, that even the indul- 
 gence due to prejudice has its bounds; for, 
 if prejudice endangers the rights of third 
 perfons, the indulgence of it becomes cri- 
 minal. There may be perfons in the 
 Lower Province who entertain prejudices 
 (we mean not to admit that there are) hof- 
 tile to their own interefts; and fo far as 
 their interefts only are concerned, thofe pre- 
 judices may bé more or lefs favoured. But 
 if fuch prejudices threaten the interefts of 
 others, we fubmit that they ought not to be 
 
 armed 
 
(-ta ) 
 
 armed with powers which may render fuch 
 prejudices too active and effective. Good 
 policy would endeavour to wéed them out. 
 The moft profligate would hardly endea- 
 vour to give them a deeper root and greater 
 firength. ‘The Bill feems to proceed upon 
 the exiftence of prejudices, They ought to 
 be well confidered, that Parliament may be 
 able to determine the quality and extent of 
 their tendency. If they can be foftened 
 down, and the whole people be affimilated 
 in manners and general opinion, their unit- 
 ed energies will certainly promote the inter- 
 efts of the Province and of all its connec- 
 tions; for, from the principle of fuch an 
 union, their wants and refources will be 
 quickly underftood, and their beft interefts 
 purfued by the beft and moft effectual 
 means. But from the principle of divifion 
 feparate interefts mutt arife; and the oppor- 
 
 tunity of profecuting feparate interefts is 
 
 furnifhed 
 
 # 
 . 
 
 eis ee 
 
(qs ) 
 
 furnifhed by the Bill, A fate of continued 
 diffenfion, if not of warfare, may be rea- 
 fonably apprehended ; and the Legiflature 
 of Great Britain may too foon difcover that, 
 inftead of the bleflings of a well digefted 
 fyftem of severmment, they have fubjeGed 
 this unfortunate Province to new miferies, 
 without leaving them that refource which 
 they now have in the more than parental 
 protection of Great Britain. 
 
 We have forborne obferving upon the in- 
 creafe of expence which the propofed divifion 
 muft occafion in point of civil eftablifhment, 
 becaufe we are convinced that, if the claims 
 of juftice do not prevail, thofe of economy 
 are not to be relied on. We have likewife 
 refrained from urging thofe objeCtions to the 
 meafure which might be drawn from the 
 probability of its dwindling thofe who 
 might contribute to our commerce and nax 
 vigation into a mere yeomanry, anxious but 
 
 to 
 
( 16 ) 
 
 to provide for their daily wants, and wholly 
 indifferent to the concerns oF welfare of the 
 empire .——confiderations important in them- 
 felves, but merely fecondary in the view 
 which we have taken of the meafure 
 through the medium of fubftantial juftice 
 and conftitutional policy. 
 
 ‘The provifions which the Bill proceeds to 
 make for the eftablifhment of a Legiflative 
 Council:and an Houfe of Affembly for each 
 of the propofed Provinces, next challenge 
 confideration. The Legiflative Council for 
 the Upper Province is propofed to contift of 
 at leaft feven perfons; and the Legiflative 
 Council for the Lower, of at leaft fifteen: 
 which perfons are to hold their feats either 
 for life, or in right of hereditary honours to 
 be conferred by His Majefty. 
 
 The creation of ranks may be neceflary; 
 and the rendering fuch diftin@tion heredi- 
 
 under fome circumftances be 
 
 tary, may 
 y] wile 
 
 ae 
 
 Sistas s,s Mise hese 
 
ee eee ae ree 
 
 f oF 
 
 Wife and falutary, But we hall refrain 
 from difcufling the abftraa quettion, as its 
 difcuffion is not neceflary, in order to des 
 cide upen the propriety of introducing he- 
 reditary honours into the Province of Que- 
 bec: for nothing feems to be more evident 
 than, as the principal advantage to be derived 
 from our conne@ion with that Province 
 muft be derived through the medium of 
 commerce, that every inftitution which di- 
 verts from the purfuits of commerce mutt lef= 
 fen the probability or quantity of advantage; 
 and that the introduction of hereditary dif- 
 tinctions into a country purely commercial 
 has a tendency to encourage the views of 
 ambition at the expence of ufeful induftry, 
 will hardly be denied. But if it thould be 
 denied, the hiftory of Canada, whilit a part 
 of the French empire, might bear out our 
 affertion that it has fuch tendency. 
 
 We are at a lofs to conjeture what ex- 
 
 D perience 
 
c - 8=9 
 
 perience or motive has fuggefted this expe- 
 
 riment; for an experiment it certainly is. 
 If it be faid that an hereditary ariftocracy is 
 a diftinguifhing feature of the Britifh confti- 
 tution, let it be recolleéted that there are in 
 Great Britain perfons of fufficient wealth, on 
 whom fuch honours may be conferred with- 
 out drawing upon the exertions of induftry. 
 It is alfo obfervable, that the propofed infti- 
 tution differs from a regular hereditary arif- 
 tocracy by letting into the Council an inde- 
 finite number of perfons whofe feats are not 
 hereditary. ‘This is a fource of confiderable 
 influence, and can hardly be confidered as a 
 politic meafure when the eftablifhment of a 
 free conftitution is the object. 
 
 We will now proceed to the mode in which 
 the Bill preferibes the Houfes of Affembly 
 to be conftituted ; always bearing in mind 
 that a free conftitution is the propofed ob- 
 jeat of the Bill. 
 
 3 The 
 
( 319 ) 
 
 The’ Bill authorizes the Governor of 
 each of the provinces refpedtively, by pro= 
 clamation, to divide the Province into dit 
 tricts, or counties, or circles, and towns or 
 townfhips; and to declare and appoint the 
 number of reprefentatives to be chofen by 
 each of fuch diftri&s, or counties, or cir- 
 cles, and towns or townfhips re{pectively. 
 This is indeed an important truft ; and no= 
 thing but the moft urgent neceffity can, in 
 our opinion, juftify the delegation of it. 
 But we deny that fuch neceflity exifts; for 
 furely the Parliament of Great Britain might 
 enact, that every county and’ town fhould 
 fend a certain number of members to the 
 Affembly ; and it would not be a very dif- 
 ficult meafure to appoint Commiffioners for 
 the purpofe of planning a divifion of the 
 Province, and to require that fuch plan of 
 divifionfhould be fubmitted to the ratification 
 of Parliament. But the Bill, not content with 
 
 D2 having 
 
( 2 ) 
 
 having armed the Governor with thefe 
 
 powers, proceeds to inveft him with that of 
 appointing from time to time proper perfons 
 to execute the office of returning officer in 
 each of the faid diftri€ts and towns. Wedo 
 not recolleé& that this power makes a part 
 of His Majefty’s prerogative ; and we do not 
 feel the claims of any Governor to fuperior 
 confidence. 
 
 The words from time to time may however 
 have been inadvertently inferted; and as 
 their being expunged will do away the ob- 
 jection, we fhall dwell no longer upon it. 
 The power by which the Governor may 
 appoint the place of meeting of the Legifla- 
 ture likewife merits confideration. It cer 
 tainly does not appear abfolutely neceflary 
 to any good purpofe ; and it is a confidence 
 which in its abufe may be applied to many 
 bad purpofes. It enables him to  harrafs 
 the members without ferving the State; and 
 
 {e 
 
€ a 3 
 to fubje& public bufinefS to many impedl. 
 
 ments, which a fixed place of meeting would 
 effe€tually prevent. ‘To appoint the place 
 of their firft meeting is neceflary; and to 
 leave it to the Legiflature itfelf to. determine 
 upon the moft convenient place to meet 
 in future cannot, we fubmit, be reafonably 
 objected to. 
 The principle upon which every well di- 
 gefted fyftem of popular reprefentation pro- 
 ceeds is, that, as every individual is fubje& 
 to the laws, he ought, in fome mode or 
 other, to be affenting to their wifdom and’ 
 propriety. That fyftem of reprefentation 
 is therefore the moft perfect, which lets in 
 the greateft number of electors ; and if, for 
 public convenience or policy, the exclufion 
 of any men or fet of men be neceflary, fuch 
 exclufion, though it be fanétioned by fuch 
 confiderations, muft however be confidered 
 as a departure from that principle, which 
 
 would 
 
( 22 ) 
 
 would in its fair operation comprehend all. 
 Few fubjeéts have been more fully difcuffed 
 than this which refpe€ts the reprefentation 
 of a free people; and there are few upon 
 which the beft informed and moft enlight- 
 ened part of fociety are more divided. It 
 is not our intention to inveftigate the argu- 
 ments by which this contrariety of opinion 
 has been maintained ; conceiving it to be 
 fufficient for our prefent purpofe that both 
 fides agree in this point, that no individual 
 ought to be unneceflarily excluded from a 
 voice in the choice of a reprefentative. 
 
 But every qualification which is higher 
 than the circumftances of the country render 
 neceflary, operates an unneceflary exclu- 
 fion: and we fubmit, that the laws of this 
 country, where money is more plentiful, 
 confidering a freehold of forty fhillings per 
 annum a fufficient qualification, do ftrongly 
 decide againft the claufe of this Bill which 
 
 requires 
 
iin 
 
 requires a freehold of five pounds per ans 
 num as a qualification in a country where 
 money is lefs plentiful, the price of labour 
 much higher, and the beft directed induftry 
 lefs. productive. 
 
 By the Petitions prefented to Parliament, 
 the uncertain and diftracted ftate of the Law 
 is pointed out to its attention, as one of 
 the principal caufes of the various grievances 
 which have oppreffled the Province: and 
 with that fpirit of moderation which has 
 throughout diftinguithed the condu& of the 
 Petitioners, they have contented themfelves 
 
 ith foliciting as a gi/f that, which every 
 diGtate of found policy and every principle 
 of fubftantial juftice would have extended 
 to them as aright. We refer to fuch parts 
 of the Law of England as are applicable to 
 the ¢ircumftances, and neceffary to the in 
 terefts, of the Province. 
 
 Groaning under that fpecies of oppref- 
 
 fion 
 
{ 44 } 
 
 fion which is the inevitable confequence of 
 
 uncertain Laws (et miferrima of fervitus ubi 
 Lex ef vaga et incognita), and anxioufly 
 cafting about for a fyftem founded on prin- 
 ciple, and directed to the énds of publie 
 and private fecurity, they felt the preference 
 due to the Law of England; a fyftem the 
 moft perfect that ever graced and protected 
 fociety : they approached the Parliament of 
 Great Britain with humility, communicated 
 their fufferings, and diftin@lly fpecified the 
 means of relieving them. That the Bri- 
 tifh Parliament fhould be infenfible of their 
 fufferings, or indifferent to their continu- 
 ance, is one of thofe apprehenfions which 
 no mind converfant with the principles by 
 which the opinions and conduc of Parlia- 
 ment are regulated can entertain. That the 
 Petitioners fhould look forward with con4- 
 dence to that period when their complaints 
 were to be difcuffed, as to the period when 
 
 . their 
 
( 25) 
 their fufferings would end, thdr wants be 
 fupplied, and their various interefts pro™ 
 tected and fecured, was a confidence jufti- 
 fied by that liberality which inclines men 
 pofleffed of the moft honourable privileges 
 in truft for the moft important purpofes, to 
 avail themfelves of the firft moment that 
 offers, to give to thofe privileges: their 
 deflined operation and effe&. The Peti- 
 tioners confidering the interefts of Great 
 Britain in a material egree connected with 
 their own, and well affured that every ad- 
 vantage to be derived to Great Britain from 
 its pofleffion of the Province muft be de- 
 rived through the medium of commerce, to 
 the interefts of which confidence was eflen= 
 tial; and being convinced, by fatal experi- 
 ence, that .certain and approved laws were 
 the only means by which confidence could 
 be infpired and juftified, they prayed that _ 
 the Commercial Law of England might be 
 
 E declared 
 
( 26 ) 
 declared'to be the Commercial Law of the 
 Province. If the meafure be practicable, 
 the requeft is certainly not unreafonable ; 
 and that it be practicable cannot admit of a 
 doubt. 
 
 We are aware that it will be objeéted, 
 that though the Petition does diftinaly 
 pray for the introdudtion of the Commer- 
 cial Law of England; yet that there are 
 perfons well acquainted with the real with 
 and interefts of the Province, who are not 
 prepared to define what is intended by the 
 
 Commercial Law; and who, when told it 
 
 comprehends the Bankrupt Law, the Law 
 
 of Infurance, and many other branches, will 
 candidly admit that the Province does not 
 with for thofe branches of it. 
 
 That Merchants, though moft interefled 
 in the Commercial Law, fhould not be pre- 
 pared to define its extent, or to enumerate 
 its particulars; that, feeling the fecurity 
 
 which 
 
 es ie eee Ce 
 
 ~ eae 
 
which flows from it, they fhould not have 
 examined its fources, or followed the vas 
 rious ftreams which fall into or branch out 
 of it, is in our apprehenfion by no means 
 extraordinary. The fa&. would perhaps 
 have rendered..a minute invefligation of 
 the ftate and wants of the Province more 
 particularly - neceflary ;. but it certainly 
 could never furnifh an apology for.defift- 
 ige¢ from all inveftigation, and foregoing 
 the opportunity of giving to the-Commerce 
 of the Province thofe additional. fecurities 
 of which its condition and circumftances 
 would allow. If we. are correct in thefe 
 fentiments, one of thefe confequences mutt 
 ow: either that the condition and cir- 
 cumftances of the Province do not.demand 
 or allow of any alteration in its Laws; or 
 that the Bill does make every alteration that 
 the condition and circumftances of the Pros 
 
 vince demand and allow of; or that the 
 E 2 Bill 
 
C58". }, 
 
 Bill calls upon the Britifh Parliament to 
 
 forego the opportunity of giving fuch addi- 
 tional fecurities to the Commerce of the 
 Province, as the condition and circumftances 
 of the Province demand and allow of. The 
 claufe of the Bill is as follows: “ And be it 
 “ further enacted by the authority aforefaid, 
 “ That all Laws, Statutes, and Ordinances 
 ‘now in force in the faid Provinces, or 
 ‘either of them, or in any part thereof 
 ** refpectively, fhall remain and continue 
 “to be of the Jame foree, authority, and 
 “ effet, in each of the faid Provinces re- 
 
 7 A ofp ao bf Hae ee 
 * fpedtively, as before the paling of this AG, 
 
 * except in fo far as the fame are exprefily 
 * repealed or varied by this AG ; or in fo 
 ** far as the fame fhall or may hereafter, by 
 * virtue of or under the authority of this 
 * AQ, be repealed or varied, by His Ma- 
 * jeflty, his heirs or fucceffors, by and wit 
 
 the advice and confent of the Legiflative 
 
 «© Councils 
 
€ 29 ) 
 
 ** Councils and Affemblies of the faid Pro~ 
 “-wvinces refpetively; or in fo far as the 
 ‘fame may be repealed or varied by fuch 
 “temporary Laws and Ordinances as may 
 “be made in the manner hereinafter {peci- 
 ** fied.” 
 
 The Merchant may be unable to define 
 what is the Commercial Law of England ; 
 but are the Framers of this Bill prepared to 
 define what is the Law of Canada? Are 
 the Lawyers of the Province agreed upon 
 the fubje@t? Aré the Judges of the Pro- 
 vince, who are fworn to adminifter the 
 Laws, agreed upon the fubje@? Is the 
 Court of the laft refort prepared with any 
 Opinion upon the fubje& ? If information 
 “can be obtained from either of thefe fources, 
 fuch information ought to be produced ; 
 and thofe Laws which have hitherto been 
 charged with uncertainty may be found to 
 have incurred the imputation by the indo- 
 
 lence 
 
 D 
 
(} 
 
 lence of thofe whofe profeffion required the 
 fiudy of them, or by the depravity of thofe 
 whofe judicial {tations required the correct, 
 faithful, and uniform adminiftration -of 
 them. But until that inform .: a be pro- 
 duced, we fhall not feel ourfeives juftified 
 in charging on the Judge the cenfure which 
 is now faftened on the Law. 
 
 But it may be expe&ted that we fhould, 
 from motives of candor, admit that this 
 complicated mafs, which is termed the Law 
 of Canada, was not forced upon the Pro~ 
 vince by the exertions of power, but was 
 rather conceded to it as the profefled object 
 of its with. It is certainly true, that from 
 the year 1764 to 1774 the Laws of Eng- 
 land were in force in the Province of Que- 
 bec, in confequence of His Majefty’s Pro- 
 clamation. .And if ever a meafure of pure 
 benevolence was peculiarly juftified by the 
 didates of found policy, it was upon this 
 
 occafion. 
 
C38 4 
 
 occafion. Juftice was adminiftered, with 
 few exceptions, by the approved Laws of 
 England ; the interefts of Commerce were 
 protected, and the rights of Liberty every 
 where fecure. The Judges indeed were de- 
 pendant; but they had few temptations to 
 corruption, and no apology for ignorance. 
 The Law was certain ;-and.they were inter- 
 efted in their decifions being correct and 
 uniform. 
 
 That under fuch a fyftem of Law dif- 
 content fhould arife, is hardly credible. 
 We muft however admit that fome of the 
 new fubje&s did complain. The fudden 
 
 rays of Liberty were too po werful for thofe 
 
 The tranfition was too fudden for the feel- 
 ings of fome, and fatal to the interefts of 
 others. The Seigneur demanded the refti- 
 tution of his power; and, wonderful in- 
 deed! the Vaflal demanded his chains. 
 
 5 . ‘© Reftore 
 
C # } 
 
 “ Reftore us the Laws of Canada. The 
 
 “ Frial by Jury we don’t value: the Habeas 
 “ Corpus we don’t want. We have been 
 *‘ trained to obedience, and never felt a 
 “ claim to protection.” This may be fup- 
 pofed to have been the language of thofe 
 few, whofe Petitions fupplanted the Law of 
 England. But from the period when the 
 Law of Canada was, in compliance with 
 their with, reftored, what has been their 
 flate?. We will not affert it to have been 
 wretchednefs ; but we may fafely deny it to 
 have been that of perfect liberty. The lan- 
 guage of their prefent Petitions difcovers a 
 very different fpirit: and though it were 
 poflible to draw an objection to the prefent 
 claims of the Province from the circum- 
 ftance of axfew individuals retaining their 
 former prejudices, Parliament would pro- 
 bably feel itfelf bound to examine the 
 grounds of thofe prejudices before it pro- 
 
 ceeded. 
 
C28 
 
 ceeded upon them: but whatever reprefen- 
 tations may have gone forth, we believe it 
 will be found to be the with of every part 
 of the Province, that fo much of the Com- 
 mercial Law of England as will apply to 
 the condition and circumftances of the Pro 
 vince, fhould be fubftituted for the Law of 
 Canada, which, in fuch of its provifions as 
 are intelligible, is grofsly inapplicable and 
 moft ferioufly mifchievous to its commer- 
 cial interefts. What part of the Commer- 
 cial Law of England is applicable, may by 
 fome be confidered as a queftion of diffi- 
 culty; to us it feems to involve little or 
 none: but if it fhould, the difficulty is 
 eafily furmounted. Give them the whole, 
 and leave it to themfelves to alter or @epeal 
 fuch parts as in their prefent ftate do not 
 apply ; by which they will have a fyftem 
 clear in its provifions, and defined in its 
 
 extent; and which may ferve them as a 
 
 F bafis 
 >) 
 
( 34) 
 
 bafis for future legiflation ; inftead of that in- 
 definite fyftem called the Laws of Canada. 
 
 But not to dwell longer upon this objec- 
 tion, we fhall proceed to our next with re- 
 peating what we have endeavoured to im- 
 prefs as a truly important confideration ; 
 That it is the duty of the Britith Parlia- 
 ment to fecure to this Province as large a 
 portion of happinefs as its condition and 
 circumftances will allow of; and that they 
 ought not to entruft to others the difcharge 
 of any part of a duty which they can them~ 
 felves as well, if not more effectually, dif- 
 charge. 
 
 It has been ftated in very explicit terms 
 that this Bill does fecure to the Province 
 the fall benefit of the Habeas Corpus and 
 Trial by “fury and we are convinced that 
 the intention of thofe who framed the Bill 
 Js, that it fhould fecure to the Province 
 
 thefe ineftimable objeats. But as the Ha- 
 beas 
 
Se 
 
 beas Corpus and Trial by Jury are the moft 
 impregnable bulwarks that human wifdom 
 ever erected for the protection of civil and 
 political liberty, we are perfuaded that we 
 fhall not be thought unreafonable in ex-/ 
 pecting to find in a bill like the prefent, 
 the moft diftin@ provifion for their efta- 
 blifhment. We fubmit however that the 
 claufe which is faid to-comprehend thele 
 objects does not diftinétly fecure them as 
 fundamental rights. 
 
 The Habeas Corpus is now in force 
 sn the Province by virtue of a Perpetual 
 Ordinance ; and the Bill confirms fuch 
 Ordinance: but, does it enact that fuch Or- 
 dinance fhall never be repealed? No.—On 
 the contrary, it fubjeéts that and every 
 other Ordinance to be repealed by the cope 
 fent.of the Governor and Legiflative Coun- 
 cil, and. Affembly. The Petitioners wifb 
 the Bill to protect them again themfelves, 
 
 F 2 and 
 
C3} 
 
 and to have the Habeas Corpus placed bes 
 yond the reach of even their own Legifla~ 
 ture, for every other purpofe but that of 
 its accafional fufpenfion. But, is it only by 
 the Legiflature conftituted by this Bill that 
 the Habeas Corpus can be repealed? No; it 
 is, together with the other Ordinances now 
 in force, liable to be repealed by any tempo- 
 rary Law or Ordinance which may be made 
 by the Governor and Legiflative Council 
 after the commencement of the A@, and 
 previous to the meeting of the new Legif- 
 lature. But it will be obferved that fuch 
 temporary Law or Ordinance will be in 
 force only fix months after the meeting of 
 the new Legiflature. 
 
 We are aware that the repeal of a repeal- 
 ing Statute revives the firft Statute. The rule 
 is founded on a fair inference of intention ; 
 and its principle may perhaps extend to the 
 cafe of a temporary law expiring: but we 
 
 6 fubmit 
 
t.277 3 
 
 fubmit that Parliament ought to be well 
 affured that it does extend to fuch cafe, bet 
 fore they give powers which may defeat 
 their intention to fecure this invaluable pro- 
 tection to the Province. 
 
 We have faid that the principle of the 
 above Rule may perhaps extend to the cafe 
 of a Temporary Ordinance: we beg how- 
 ever to obferve that, if it does, the*term 
 Jufpend is more appropriate than repeal. 
 
 The Trial by Jury is now in force by virtue 
 of a merely Temporary Ordinance ; and we 
 do fubmit that the language of the claufe is 
 not fufficiently indicative of the intention to 
 make it perpetual, 
 
 The phrafe which raifes our difficulty is, 
 ** fame force, authority, and effeét, as before 
 ** the paffing of this Aé&t.”. The fentence is 
 clearly relative, and refers to perpetual and 
 Temporary Laws, in force before the paffing 
 of this A&. Omit the word “ fame,” and 
 
 the 
 
 ~ 
 
& 38) 
 
 the conftru¢tion is clear, that Parliament in- 
 tended all: Laws then in force fhould con- 
 tinue'in force until a certain period, But, 
 fuppofing Parliament to have intended all 
 ‘Temporary Laws to expire at the time pre- 
 feribed. by the Ordinance introducing fuch 
 Laws; will not the infertion of the word 
 * fame” carry. the mind a confiderable way 
 towards the difcovery of fuch intention? 
 Where however there is no difference in 
 opinion as to the intent, it were unbecom- 
 ing us to-do more than fubmit our doubt as 
 to the fufficiency of the terms employed to 
 denote it. But, fappofing the expreflion of 
 the bill to be fufficiently ftrong to perpetuate 
 this Ordinance, »it is material to obferve that 
 the Ordinance is not confidered to allow of 
 the Trial by Jury in all cafes whatever ; but 
 merely in thofe which it fpecifies: whereas 
 the Petition prays, ‘‘ that Optional Juries 
 At may be granted on ai/ trials in Courts of 
 
 “ Original 
 
( 39 ) 
 
 © Original Jurifdiction, &e.” Tt is obviots 
 that the objections which we have already 
 ftated with ‘refpe&t to the Habeas Corpus 
 being repealed, do likewife apply to the 
 Trial by Jury in thofe cafes in which’ the 
 Province wifhes fuch form of tfial to be 
 a fundamental, facred, conftitutional and in 
 defeafible right. 
 
 The next obfervation that occurs on 
 this Bill is one to which it will be fufficient 
 merely to glance in order to fecure to it full 
 effe&t. Whence the neceflity of two Courts 
 of Appeal in this country ? Why muft the 
 fuitor, haraffed by all thofe delays and ex- 
 pences which are incident to litigation, be 
 fubje&ed to the neceflity of appealing to 
 His Majefty in Council, before he appeals 
 to His Majefty in his Parliament. ‘The 
 multiplying of Courts of Appeal will require 
 a ftrong neceflity for its juftification ; it arms 
 
 the vexatious with new means of vexation, 
 
 by 
 
( 4° ) 
 by fubjeCting the injured and oppreffed to 
 
 new obftacles in the purfuit of juftice. 
 When our attention was firft called to 
 this Bill, we found fome difficulty in form- 
 ing a judgment on that part of it which re- 
 fpects a provifion for the Proteftant Clergy. 
 The principle of the meafure was too juft 
 to allow of any objection. That the efta- 
 blifhing of an enlightened Clergy in the 
 Province would materially contribute to its 
 real interefts, appeared to us an expectation 
 which the Authors of the Bill were well 
 entitled to indulge: and that a decent pro- 
 vifion is abfolutely neceffary to induce an 
 enlightened Clergy to fettle in the Province, 
 is a pofition which cannot be difputed. 
 But whether the provifion propofed by the 
 Bill is more than fufficient for fuch purpofe, 
 or whether the means of producing it are 
 the moft eligible, are points well deferving 
 confideration: for one feventh of the land 
 
 of 
 
( 41 ) 
 of a country to us feems a very large pro- 
 portion. It may indeed be lefs in point of 
 benefit to the Clergy than one tenth of the 
 produce; but it does appear to be more than 
 found policy would allow to be thrown into 
 mortmain. The prefent uncultivated ftate 
 of the Province of. Canada may bea reafon 
 for not confidering the meafurein that point 
 of view, from the extreme remotenefs of 
 the period when the inconvenience of lands 
 being in mortmain is likely to be felt in fo 
 extended a Province: we fhall therefore not 
 enter more particularly into this confidera- 
 tion; but fubmit, that whatever provifion 
 be made for the Clergy, or in whatever 
 manner that provifion may be raifed, the 
 mode of diftribution ought to be weighed 
 with attention, and prefcribed with exact 
 nefs. Whereas the Bill feems to be fatif- 
 fied that the fund is to be raifed ; and leaves 
 it to fome future arrangement to regulate 
 
 G its 
 
C 42 ) 
 its -diftribution. His Majefty is indeed 
 
 empowered to aithorife the Governor to 
 ere& Re€torics, &c. and to endow them 
 with thefe lands; but how are the rents and 
 profits to be applied in the meantime? if 
 they are to accumulate? The queftion is; 
 How is the accuntulation’to be difpofed of? 
 If it is to make a part of the fund confti- 
 tuted of the tithes now paid by Proteftants, 
 and which are intended ‘to encourage the 
 Proteftant Religion, and to fuppert the Pro- 
 teftant Clergy; the queftion recurs—In what 
 proportions, or by what rule, is that fund 
 to be diftributed ? If at the difcretion’ of the 
 Governor, we:much apprehend that-a fup- 
 port tobe drawn from fuch difcretion wilt 
 mot operate as a very powerful temptation 
 to an enlightened Proteftant Clergy. We 
 did expec that the Bill, contemplating. the 
 great extent of the Province, would exempt 
 
 fands and perfons from the payment of tithes; 
 whofe 
 
 a i ae ee be 
 
( 43 ) 
 
 whofe diftant fituation may notallow of their 
 receiving that benefit in refpect of whichthey 
 can be reafonably demanded. We did like- 
 wife hope that lands only would have been 
 fubjeed to, the payment. of tithes, left 
 perfonal, property being liable. might dit 
 courage that kind of induftry which beft 
 improves. it, But the-Bill makes no fuch 
 diftin@ion—perhaps. from the perfuafion 
 that the neceflary provifions will come 
 much better from the Provincial Legiflature 
 than from the. Britifh Parliament. 
 _.As there is no truft which man can 
 delegate of equal magnitude with that 
 which is conferred for the purpofe of le- 
 giflation, there can be none which in. its 
 exercife demands fo fcrupulous an adhe- 
 rence to the real interefts of thofe from 
 whom it is derived, ..To fearch for that 
 information which is neceflary to a corre& 
 knowledge of the wants of the contftitu- 
 
 G 2 ent, 
 
( 44 ) 
 
 ent, and to call forth thofe refources 
 
 which are beft calculated to remove or 
 alleviate thofe wants, is aduty fo inherent 
 in the character of a legiflator, that we 
 may venture to affirm, not even the con- 
 fent of the conftituent ‘can releafe from 
 its performance. That the Britifh Legif- 
 lature, feeling a ftrong fenfe of this duty, 
 and feeling at the fame moment the ex- 
 treme difficulty of difcharging it, fhould 
 cheerfully yield to the claims of the Pro- 
 vince of Quebec, to be placed in the con- 
 dition of governing themfelves, is a mea- 
 fure which does equal honour to their 
 fenfe of juftice and fcruples of integrity : 
 but in divefting themfelves of their fair- 
 eft privileges, they will not mark more 
 anxiety to throw a burthen off them- 
 felves than to confer a bleffing on their 
 fellow fubjects; they will indulge the 
 workings of an anxious regard for the 
 
 Province ; 
 
( 45 ) 
 
 Province; and having invefted them with 
 all the neceflary powers to improve their 
 happinefs, they will retire. with the en- 
 viable reflection, that they have not put 
 that happinefs in hazard by claims which 
 by their nature may alarm, or by terms 
 which by. their ambiguity may miflead. 
 We have been drawn into this train of re- 
 fle&tion by the Bill not having, in our 
 opinion, with fufficient clearnefs defcribed 
 the quantity of power which it propofes 
 to referye to the Britith Legiflature. That 
 fome referyation of power is neceflary 
 will not be difputed by any man, who 
 feels the ftri€&t connection of interefts be- 
 tween this country and that; for whilft 
 Canada is a part of the Britifh Empire, 
 we f{cruple not to affirm, that it ought to 
 confide in the wifdom of the Britith Le- 
 giflature in framing provifions, or deciding 
 upon meafures neceflary to the géneral 
 
 welfare, 
 
( @ ) 
 
 welfare. And>for fuch purpofe;-the ex= 
 ternal commerce ‘and navigation -of the 
 Provitice ought to be fubje& ‘to the ‘con- 
 trol of Britifh Laws: but we are not 
 aware that the fame principle of common 
 benefit requires: 'thefe powers to be ex- 
 tendedto the “ternal commerce of the 
 Province, ‘Phere: may be ‘reafons to fa- 
 vour ‘fuch a meafure; to us they have 
 not occurred: but “if there be no-reafon 
 that’ can juftify fuch meafure, we fubmit 
 that the fpecies of commerce’ fo to be ‘af- 
 fe&ted ought tobe diftin&ly fated to be 
 the external commerce of the Province. 
 The Bill, adopting the fpirit of the A& 
 pafled in’the 18th year of his prefent Ma- 
 jefty, ena&ed, that ‘the produce of all du~ 
 “ ties, impofed bythe Britith Parliament, 
 sé fhall at all times hereafter be applied 
 “:to..and for the ufe of each of the faid 
 ‘+ Provinces refpeciively, and in fuch man- 
 
 2 {eer 
 
( 47 ) 
 ** ner only as fhall be directed by any law 
 ** or laws which may be made by his Mas 
 “ jefty, with the advice and confent of the 
 ‘* Legiflative Council and Affembly of 
 *¢ fuch Province.” 
 
 Conftruing this provifion by the provi- 
 fion of the 18th of his prefent Majefty; 
 we are inclined to apprehend-that the Bill 
 not referring to the fituation of the pro- 
 pofed Provinces would, by this provifion; 
 fow the feeds of diflenfion between the 
 Provinces: “By the A& of the year 1778, 
 “the duties are to be always paid, and 
 ‘* applied to and forthe ufe of the Colony, 
 “¢ &c, in which the fame fhall be levied.” 
 But by this Bill all thefe duties muft, from 
 the plan of divifion, be levied in the 
 Lower Province; and if they are to be 
 applied to the w/e of the Lower Province 
 exclufively, it will follow, that, though 
 the trade and induftry of the Upper Pro- 
 
 vince 
 
( 48 ) 
 vince will materially contribute to thefeé 
 duties, yet the Upper Province will derive 
 no benefit from them.—This feems to be 
 an additional objection to the plan of divi- 
 fion of the Province. 
 
 The laf obfervation which we fhall 
 ftate arifes upon the claufe which deter- 
 mines the effect of the Temporary Laws 
 and Ordinances; or, in other words, fuch 
 Laws and Ordinances as may be made 
 during fuch interval as may happen be- 
 tween the commencement of the Act in 
 the faid Province and the firft meeting of 
 the Legiflative Council and Affembly : but 
 as the Act may perhaps not commence till 
 the aift of December 1791, it may be 
 material to determine what fhall be the 
 effec of Laws and Ordinances that may 
 be made between the pafling of this A& 
 and the commencement of it in the Pro- 
 
 vince. 
 
 We 
 
( 49 ) 
 
 We have now fubmitted to confideras 
 tion the feveral obfervations which have 
 occurred to us upon this Bill: we truft 
 that they are not frivolous in themfelves, 
 nor harfh in their communication. We 
 feel the difficulties which muft obftru& 
 the framing of a Conftitution, and we 
 much lament that thefe difficulties have 
 been increafed by the plan of dividing 
 the Province; a meafure which appears 
 to us to be at once unwife, impolitic, dan- 
 gerous, and expenfive ; and thinking that 
 a more clofe attention to the objects {tated 
 in the Petition would have anfwered 
 every purpofe. 
 
 A Houfe of Affembly, for the purpofe 
 of reprefenting the wants, and furthering 
 the interefts of the Province: 
 
 The Habeas Corpus and Trial by Jury 
 to guard their liberties; certain Laws to 
 protect their property ; and independent 
 
 H Judges 
 
( @ 7 
 
 Judges to adminifter and prote& the 
 Laws,—were the principal objects that 
 they folicited by their petitions. Of-thefe 
 objets which is exceptionable ? 
 
 Do they not feverally contribute, and is, 
 not their union eflential to the ‘full enjoy= 
 ment of thofe fecurities which flow: from, 
 our own Conftitution *—If-fuch bleffings 
 can be conferred-on a Britith Province, 
 alarming indeed muft be. the fophittry 
 which can perfuade the Britith Legiflature 
 to withhold from Britith fubjegts, though 
 refident in a remote corner of the Britith 
 Empire, the full enjoyment of  Britith 
 
 Rights. 
 
 YiN iS 
 
McGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 = STO 
 
 \ 
 
 » 
 
 380566