CHAPTER IX THE EVE OF THE CRISIS SIR JAMES KEMPT, who took over the government on the departure of Dalhousie, described himself as seated on a barrel of gunpowder, not knowing how soon it would explode. Endeavouring to conciliate both parties, he was successful with neither. He was haunted with the idea that the Assembly would succeed in its aim, which was to grasp all power in its own hands. It recognized from the Report of the 1828 Committee the way in which the wind was blowing in England, and was determined to enforce its full claims. The conciliatory character of Kempt kept strife Pretensions in abeyance, but nothing was settled, and the elements of f discord remained, ready to burst at any moment into a flame. A premium was set on disaffection by large sums being voted by the Assembly for the payment of witnesses who should give evidence as to grievances. Mr. Robert Christie, the member for Gaspé, had, as Chairman of Quarter Sessions, become unpopular by advising as to the appointment of magistrates; he was promptly expelled the House, the Assembly seriously maintaining that it had a superintending control over the character of its members, thus claiming the rights of the constituent body. Assembly. Bill. Still, in some ways progress was made, and a needed Reform measure of electoral reform was passed in 1829. Under this Act a new division of the counties was made, and their total number was raised to forty. By these means the popu VOL. V. PT. II Irish im lation of the eastern townships at last received representation; and the establishment of registry offices for land transfers in the following year remedied another grievance. Apart from political troubles, Lower Canada at this time. migration. suffered from a serious evil. During 1830 and 1831 there was a great influx of emigrants, mainly from Ireland. But these people did not come to stay, merely passing through the province, leaving its inhabitants to provide for their sick and disabled, and to bury the dead. The absence of proper regulations on board ship caused the lot of the emigrants to be one of extreme misery. There were numerous deaths on the voyage and on arrival; and children were left without protection, and wholly dependent on the casual charity of the people of Quebec. In this state of things it was no matter for wonder that cholera was introduced in 1831, an imperial boon which added greatly to the natural bitterness of the French Canadians. Adminis tration of Aylmer. It was, however, political more than economic grievances which figured in the complaints of the Assembly. Kempt had, in 1830, been succeeded by Lord Aylmer, an enthusiastic advocate of conciliation. He believed that the fault lay with the British, who were aiming at the subversion of the French laws and institutions. The Assembly undoubtedly had just grounds for complaint. The towns and parishes suffered from the absence of local self-government; judges were connected with politics and took part in public affairs; the Executive was growing less and less representative of public opinion, and greater responsibility and accountability was sorely needed for public officials. It was vainly sought to strengthen the Executive Council. In 1830 it consisted of nine members, of whom only two were French Canadians and only one a Roman Catholic. Lord Aylmer's method of mending matters was to pitchfork into it, without power or responsibility, the most prominent members of the Opposition. He opposed the view that the members of the Executive He Council were the natural advisers of the Governor. maintained that, being himself above parties, he should look only to the home Government for support. he was confident that all would go well. Secure of that, ment. The home authorities were in the same conciliatory mood. ConciliaQuebec and Montreal were granted municipal government, tory action and Lord Goderich promised his assent to any measure Governputting an end to the doubt and confusion which prevailed as to the law. Parliament was prepared to leave to the Canadian Legislature the enactment of laws relating to real property. An Act removing the judges from the Legislature had already received the sanction of the Crown. Little now remained for debate, and that little, Lord Goderich was convinced, would be discussed with feelings of mutual kindness and goodwill. In 1831 the Crown divested itself of the permanent revenue of the province, without securing a permanent provision for the Governor or judges; while at the same time in Canada Aylmer was trying the effect of copious doses of blarney. Assembly. But neither acts nor words availed to propitiate the Obstinacy Assembly. The Governor's flattery fell on deaf ears, and of the only reply to the Colonial Secretary was the contemptuous ignoring of his request for a permanent Civil List. In the next session the attempt was made to tack on to the bill providing for the year's salary of the judges the provision that they should hold office during good behaviour. Goderich's patience was at the straining point; after all his efforts for conciliation he found himself met by new pretensions, urged in a form both unparliamentary and disrespectful. dema gogues. Meanwhile the ascendancy of a few violent men was Power of making the political danger serious. The keynote to Lower Canadian history at this time lies in the power wielded by the lawyers and doctors, who were the kith and kin of the simple habitants. Never were circumstances more favourable to the influence of demagogues; the leaders of Papineau. Character the people issuing from them and being part and parcel of of themselves. Of these men, Papineau was the chief. A master of fervid eloquence, of a rare personal charm, absolutely honest, he yet must be described as a demagogue; because he lived in a world not of facts but of words. Having raised the storm he proved wholly unable to control it; and when the crisis came found refuge in somewhat inglorious flight. The extreme party, however, had not things all their own way. A vigorous Scottish newspaper proprietor, Mr. Neilson of Quebec, who had previously been one of the leading reformers, now, with others, broke from the majority; but to no purpose. Claims of The loss of life at an election riot at Montreal in 1832 Assembly added fuel to the flames. The provisions of the Constitutional Act with regard to the constitution of the Legislative Council were declared to be incompatible with the principles of free government. A National Convention was demanded, which should consider and propose amendments to the constitution. Violence begets violence, and, in the face of such utterances, it was not strange to find the Legislative Council asserting that the effect of an elective Legislative Council would be to bring into collision the people of Upper and Lower Canada, and to drench the country with blood. Upper Canada would never quietly allow the interposition of a French Republic between it and the United States. Position of Aylmer's position had become impossible. He had begun Aylmer. by throwing the blame on the British, but the attitude of the Assembly could not but alienate him more and more. He attempted to draw distinctions between the people and the leaders, and to show that the very violence of the latter was due to their waning power. Late in the day the Government had set on foot the excellent plan of having its measures brought forward in the Assembly by a member who was made an Executive Councillor for this purpose. On the first holder of the office becoming a judge he was succeeded by a young French Canadian, M. Mondelet. Though no salary attached to the office the majority declared his seat vacant; so that even measures meant to be conciliatory ended in quarrels. Aylmer was unable to suggest a remedy. On the one hand the British party, grown bolder, showed a determination no longer to submit to the French party; on the other the unbounded pretensions of the Assembly had already deranged, and promised to destroy, the balance of the Constitution, home Govern resolutions. The home authorities were at a loss. The elective Attitude of principle, with regard to the Legislative Council, could not be conceded; and conciliation had only aroused new pre- ment. tensions. Another House of Commons Committee, which sat in 1834, threw no light on affairs. But the Canadian Assembly was in no mood to listen with deference to anything proceeding from British authorities; and already, in February, had been formulated the ninety-two resolutions which were the French Canadian declaration of rights. In these they The declared their attachment to the elective principle, pointing ninety-two to the United States as the political model. They reminded Parliament of the consequences of its efforts to overrule the wishes of the American colonies, whose population, at the time of the Declaration of Independence, was not much greater than that of Canada in 1834. With an amazing disregard of facts it was asserted that the great majority of the inhabitants of British origin were heartily in accord with the French Canadians; while at the same time the number of the British was ludicrously understated. The legality of 'tacking' was curtly maintained, on the simple ground that grants of supply should depend upon the redress of grievances. The Assembly claimed all the powers, privileges, and immunities enjoyed by the British House of Commons. Responsible government was not demanded, except so far as it might come under the complaint of the |