long the loyalists began to plead their own cause and petitioned for a separate government distinct from the province of Quebec.1 In the legislative council, their position added force to the old faction fights which broke out once more over proposals to give the loyalists some independent petty jurisdictions, and 'to render the British constitution desirable as well as venerable'. For the moment everything was held up with the announcement that nothing would be done until Carleton had come to the province once more and had reported on the new conditions.2

A pathetic interest gathers round this period of Carleton's rule in Canada. A quiet process of change had been taking place in his mind. He saw even before he arrived the necessity of removing voluntarily every burden which might render the constitutional position of the inhabitants of Canada inferior to that of the United States and lead to changes of allegiance.3 Perhaps no one better could have been selected, and he showed wisdom when he made his acceptance of the appointment conditional on the help of William Smith as chief justice, who had had wide legal and judicial experience in New York. Quite apart from the altered circumstances, the first thing that must have struck the new Baron Dorchester was the fact that his pet constitution, so carefully guarded by Haldimand and Hope, had proved a failure. The council was no longer tractable. He succeeded, however, in getting committees appointed to inquire into the state of the province. The records of the investigation leave the impression that, with the best of goodwill, no one could either have succeeded in carrying out the principles of law and equity or have failed to escape charges of injustice and favouritism.5 It gradually dawned

2

1 Petition, April 11, 1785, Shortt and Doughty, op. cit., pp. 773 ff. Sydney to Hope, April 6, 1786, ibid., pp. 805 ff.

3 Memorandum of February 20, 1786, State Papers, Q. 26. 1, p. 53.

on

Dorchester to Sydney, June 13, 1787, Shortt and Doughty, op. cit., pp. 865 ff.

* Ibid., pp. 874 ff.

Dorchester that the régime under the Quebec Act was over. For the moment he was not sure of his mind. He could only advise that the system of land tenure be changed, reserving in every township five thousand acres as crown lands. In the cabinet a plan had begun to crystallize. At the close of 1787 it was hinted to Dorchester that the province might be divided, and his opinion was asked. The path was made no easier when private members of the house of commons began to urge action and to introduce bills. It was an extraordinary picture. After thirty years of British rule nothing was stable, no one secure. Faction, race, privileges, and counter privileges trip over one another in the records against a sad enough background of hardship, and often of actual struggles for existence. Where material conditions were better, passion was always prepared to break out, and the pens of ready writers never seemed to dry as attack and defence continued their petitions to the governor or to the crown.

Dorchester had scarcely created and organized new districts,3 when Adam Lymburner appeared before the house of commons on behalf of those who desired a house of assembly. In a singularly calm manner he advanced reasonable arguments in favour of representative institutions and English commercial law.4 The debate which followed was insincere, partisan, and illinformed; but Pitt took the situation in hand and promised official action during next session, while Dorchester once more was urged to reconsider a problem which must long ago have become a perfect nightmare to him. The division of the province seems to have been the cabinet's most constant plan, and to the idea the governor's attention was specially drawn.5

2

i Dorchester to Sydney, June 13, 1787, ibid., pp. 946 ff.

Sydney to Dorchester, September 20, 1787, ibid., pp. 863 ff.

3 Ibid., pp. 953 ff. and 963 ff.

4 The Paper read at the Bar of the House of Commons by Mr. Lymburner, State Papers, Q. 62-A. 1, pp. 1 ff. (Canadian Archives).

5

Sydney to Dorchester, September 3, 1788, Shortt and Doughty, op. cit., pp. 954 ff.

In reply Dorchester opposed division: A division of the province, I am of an opinion, is by no means advisable at present, either for the interests of the new or the ancient districts, nor do I see an immediate call for other regulations than such as are involved in the subject of the general jurisprudence of the country. Indeed, it appears to me that the western settlements are as yet unprepared for any organization superior to that of a county. This has lately been given to them. . . . But though I hold a division of the province at present inexpedient, yet I am of opinion that no time should be lost in appointing a person of fidelity and ability, in the confidence of the loyalists, to superintend and lead them, and to bring their concerns with dispatch to the knowledge of government under the title of lieutenant-governor of the four western districts above named. Should a division of the province notwithstanding be determined by the wisdom of his majesty's councils, I see no reason why the inhabitants of those western districts should not have an assembly.'1

In October 1789 the British government had made up its mind, and William Grenville forwarded to Dorchester the earliest draft of the new constitution, providing for the division of the province with an executive council and assembly in each division and an hereditary legislative council, distinguished by some mark of honour'. The covering dispatches throw light on the conception. The aim was to assimilate the constitution to that of Great Britain, while at the same time to grant concessions as favours before they were extorted by necessity. The creation of a titled colonial aristocracy was destined to give the Upper House a greater degree of

1 Dorchester to Sydney, November 8, 1788, Shortt and Doughty, op. cit., pp. 958 ff.

2 William Knox seems to have been the first to suggest a special colonial aristocracy. On the eve of the American revolution he drew up a memorandum for the cabinet in which he referred to the plan: My second object was to amend the colonial constitutions by creating an aristocratic estate in them.' Extra Official State Papers, p. 30.

6

weight and consequence than was possessed by the councils in the old colonial governments, and to establish in the provinces a body of men having that motive of attachment to the existing form of government which arises from the possession of personal or hereditary distinction'. The distinct racial groupings in the upper and lower divisions of the province suggested 'separate legislatures, rather than that these two bodies of people should be blended together in the first formation of the new constitution'. The state of France is such as gives us little to fear from that quarter in the present moment. The opportunity is therefore most favourable for the adoption of such measures as may tend to consolidate our strength and increase our resources, so as to enable ourselves to meet any efforts that the most favourable event in the present troubles can ever enable her to make.'1 Once again, as in 1774, external policy helps to govern the situation. The lesson from the revolutionary war was to make the British constitution a reality in Canada, and the French-Canadians must be considered and consolidated in order to cut off any disadvantages in case of war with France.

Dorchester replied enclosing a draft drawn up in co-operation with Chief Justice Smith. There was no discussion of the wisdom of the policy. A few details called for attention. The boundary must be made vague owing to outstanding difficulties with the United States. Honours and titles would ill suit conditions and were better omitted. A wider vision breaks momentarily across the history. Dorchester began to think of a united British North America and enclosed the plan of an embryo federal system drawn up by the chief justice." Dorchester's draft did not arrive in time to allow for the introduction of legislation in the session of 1790; but in the following

1 Grenville to Dorchester (two dispatches), October 20, 1789, Shortt and Doughty, op. cit., pp. 969 ff. and 987 ff.

2 Dorchester to Grenville, February 8, 1790, ibid., pp. 1002 ff.

1

session the king's message 1 drew attention to the policy, and early in March 1791 William Pitt introduced the bill in the house of commons, in a short speech which outlined the royal purpose. During the progress of the bill Lymburner was heard against any division of the province and several unimportant changes were made. On May 18 the bill passed through the house of commons and was assented to on June 19, 1791.

British North America thus acquired representative institutions in all its governments. For a period, Nova Scotia had been administered by a governor or lieutenant-governor with the aid of a council, which acted in an executive and legislative capacity. Attention, however, was called to the fact that the governor's instructions contemplated an assembly. Governor Lawrence put off summoning it, pleading the scattered population, but more than likely being influenced by the coming shadow of the Seven Years War. Finally, the imperial government informed him that, as the settlers had been promised an assembly, it must be called. This peremptory command was founded on the fact that the law officers of the crown had given an opinion that legislative power in the province was probably exercised in an illegal manner apart from an elected chamber. As a consequence, the first popularly elected parliament ever summoned in what is now British North America met at Halifax, October 7, 1758.2 Prince Edward Island, which had been placed under the government of Nova Scotia in 1763, was created a separate colony in 1769 under a lieutenant-governor and council acting as executive and legislature. For similar reasons to those which affected Nova Scotia an assembly was organized and met in 1773. In 1784, owing to the influx of United Empire loyalists, New Brunswick State Papers,' February 25, 1795, Annual Register for 1791 (London, 1795), p. 124*.

1 6

2 Selections from the Public Documents relating to Nova Scotia (Halifax,