ment" became the war-cry of the party. Lord Sydenham, on his arrival in Upper Canada, had to encounter or submit to this demand. One of his objects was to win the Reform party, the name assumed by the party in question, and they could only be won by the belief on their part that Responsible Government was to be conceded. In fact, Lord Sydenham, whether intending it or not, did concede it practically by the arrangements which he adopted, although the full extent of the concession was not so glaringly manifested during his administration as in that of his successor.'

There appears to me to have been a great difference between the sort of Responsible Government intended by Lord Durham and that carried into effect by Lord Sydenham. On examining Lord Durham's report in search of what may be supposed to have been his plan, I find that he proposes that all officers of the Government except the Governor and his secretary should be responsible to the United Legislature; and that the Governor should carry on his government by heads of departments, in whom the United Legislature repose confidence. All this might be done without impairing the powers of usefulness of the Governor. If the secretary who issued the Governor's orders were not responsible to the Legislature, there would be a great difference from the present arrangement under which the provincial administration generally is carried on through secretaries professedly so responsible. The general responsibility of heads of departments, acting under the orders of the Governor, each distinctly in his own department, might exist without the destruction of the former authority of her Majesty's Government. In this scheme there is no mention of the combination of these officers in a Council, to act bodily with the character of a Cabinet, so as manifestly to impair the powers of the responsible head of the Government. Lord Durham's general conception does not seem to have been formed into a distinct plan, and when he says that the responsibility to the Legislature of "all officers of the Government except the Governor and his secretary should be secured by every means known to the British constitution," he does not explain by what means this should be done; and it is by the means of doing it that the plan must be most materially affected.

Lord Sydenham realised the conception in the way most calculated to weaken the authority of the Governor, and render the responsibility of the officers of the Government to the popular branch of the Legislature complete, by transacting the business of the province through the provincial secretaries, and making them and all the heads of departments a Council responsible to the Legislature, and holding their seats by the voice of the majority. As far as Lord Sydenham's despatches show, this was an optional and spontaneous arrangement on his part, although clearly opposed in its natural consequences to the sentiments which he had previously expressed.

Lord Sydenham's policy in Upper Canada was to win the party calling themselves Reformers, to crush the party called the Family Compact, and to form a Council of the moderate men of the Reform and Conservative parties. In the two former of these objects he succeeded. In the latter he must be said to have failed, for, although the Council so formed struggled through one short session of the Legislature, it could not meet, or was afraid to meet, the threatened storm in the next, and was broken up, the Conservative portion retiring to make way for the French party, and what was considered the extreme Democratic, or Reform party.

Lord Sydenham's policy in Lower Canada had been to subdue the French party. In this he failed. They remained compact and exceedingly embittered against Lord Sydenham. They united themselves with the extreme Democratic party; these were strangely joined by the extreme Conservative party; and this combination overthrew Lord Sydenham's Council, which had been previously recruited by Sir Charles Bagot, with accessions from both the Conservative and the Reform parties.

By these manoevres the French and Reform parties became united, the Conservatives were thrown into a minority, and the ultra-Conservatives, 1 Sir Charles Bagot.

who had aided in bringing about this change, were dropped by their recent allies, in accordance with the terms of their alliance, which was only for offensive war against the Council.

The result of this struggle naturally increased the conviction that Responsible Government was effectually established. New councillors were forced on the Governor-General, to at least one of whom he had a decided antipathy. The Council was no longer selected by the Governor. It was thrust on him by the Assembly of the people. Some of the new members of the Council had entered it with extreme notions of the supremacy of the Council over the Governor-that is, of the necessity of his conforming to their advice on all matters, great or small; and the illness of Sir Charles Bagot after this change threw the current business of administration almost entirely into their hands, which tended to confirm these notions. Subsequent experience has, I hope, modified these impressions, and produced a more correct estimate of the relative position of the Governor and the Council; but it is obvious that the existence of a Council, in reality appointed and maintained by a majority in the popular branch of the Legislature, must tend to impair the power and influence of the Governor. Whether this, in the end, will operate advantageously for the colony and the mother country, time alone can positively show. I am disposed to think that its immediate effects are injurious, presuming, as I do, that whatever good it may seem to effect might have been produced in another way.

One evil of this kind of Responsible Government is, that it tends to produce the government of a party. The Governor may oppose himself to this, but will hardly be able to do so effectually. The Council will be apt to think more of securing their own position than of cordially co-operating in the accomplishment of his wishes. Their recommendations in matters of patronage, which in the relations existing between them and the Governor are likely to be often attended to, even without admitting their claim to a monopoly, will be almost always in favour of partisans. Their supporters look to them for the exclusive bestowal of places of emoluments, and threaten openly to withdraw their support from them if they do not favour their views. To maintain the majority by which they hold office will be with them a primary concern; such, at least, is the tendency of the circumstances of their position, without supposing the total absence of higher and better motives.

Without a Council so circumstanced, a Governor, acknowledging the propriety and necessity of conducting his government according to the interests and wishes of the people, and of conciliating and winning the Legislature and this might have been made a rule for the guidance of Governors never to be departed from-might render his administration of the government satisfactory to all parties, and obtain an influence conducive to the preservation of affectionate relations between the mother country and the colony, and to the welfare and interests of both. Under the existing system, the Governor, it appears to me, is not likely to obtain influence. If he and his Council are cordially united, he becomes, either in reality or to appearance, a partisan, without any reason for his being so. The credit of all the good that he may do will be assumed by them, or ascribed to them, by their party. All that may be considered evil by the other party he will have the discredit of allowing. If he evinces any disposition to conciliate the other party, he becomes an object of distrust to his Council and their party. Their interests and his, and with his those of her Majesty's Government, are always distinct; for they have their interests as a party to guard, which must be distinct from those of her Majesty's Government, as well as from any which the Governor may personally feel with respect to the credit of his administration.

I will endeavour to describe my own position. I am not perfectly satisfied with my Council, chiefly because they are under the influence of party views, and would, if they could, drag me on with them in the same course. The only effectual remedy would be to dismiss them, or such of them as are most in the extreme on this point, and form another Council.

But the consequence to be expected would be, that a cry would be raised accusing me of hostility to Responsible Government. The new Council would not be able to stand against a majority in the popular branch of the Legislature, and I should either be obliged to take back those whom I had dismissed, with a sort of disgrace to myself injurious to the efficiency of my government, or be in a continual warfare with a majority in the House of Assembly that would render my presence here of no benefit to her Majesty's service. Such a contest I would neither shrink from nor yield to, if it became my duty to encounter it; but it is so desirable to avoid it, that it would require strong grounds to justify its being wilfully incurred.

My objects are to govern the country for its own welfare, and to engage its attachment to the parent State. For these purposes it is my wish to conciliate all parties; and although this might be difficult, I do not perceive that it would be impracticable, if the Governor were free to aut thoroughly in that spirit; but the accomplishment of that wish seems almost impossible when the Governor is trammelled with a Council deeming it necessary for their existence that their own party alone should be considered. Sooner than abandon myself as a partisan to such a course, I would dismiss the Council and take the consequences; but it is scarcely possible to avoid the influence of party spirit in an administration in which every adviser and every executive officer is guided by it; and the chief difficulty of my position, I conceive, is to act according to my own sense of what is right, and in opposition to this party spirit, without thereby breaking with the Council and the majority that at present support them. The form of administration adopted by Lord Sydenham appears to me to have put heavy shackles on any Governor who means to act with prudence, and would not recklessly incur the consequences of a rupture with the majority in the popular Assembly. The meeting of the Legislature will probably enable me to see my position more clearly. It is at present far from certain that a change of councillors would produce any beneficial alteration in respect to the difficulty noticed, for any Council appointed on the principle of Canada Responsible Government would most probably have similar party views, and the same pressure on them from their partisans.

It becomes a question whether Party Government can be avoided The experiment of Responsible Government in this colony hitherto would indicate that it cannot. It seems to be inevitable in free and independent States where Responsible Government exists; and the same causes are likely to produce similar effects everywhere; but there is a wide difference between an independent State and a colony. In an independent State all parties must generally desire the welfare of the State. In a colony subordinate to an Imperial Government, it may happen that the predominant party is hostile in its feelings to the mother country, or has ulterior views inconsistent with her interests. In such a case, to be obliged to co-operate with that party, and to permit party government to crush those who are best affected, would be a strange position for the mother country to be placed in, and a strange part for her to act. This ought to have been well considered before the particular system which has obtained the name of Responsible Government was established. It is now, perhaps, too late to remedy the evil. I have supposed an extreme and possible case without intending to apply the description to the state of parties in this colony. I trust that it is in a great degree inapplicable. It is nevertheless so far applicable, that the party always known as the British Party in this province is now in the minority. It will be my study to make all parties contented and happy; but that part of my task, I fear, is hopeless. It will also be my study to promote loyalty to our gracious Sovereign, and attachment to the British Empire. These feelings will be most successfully confirmed by an administration of the government satisfactory to the people, and by a conviction on their minds that their interests are promoted by British connexion. The acts of her Majesty's Government in guaranteeing the loan for public works, and in facilitating the importation of Canada wheat and flour into the United Kingdom, ought to have in this respect a

very beneficial tendency, as evincing a fostering care for the colony which can hardly fail to be highly appreciated.

I have to apologise for some repetition in this despatch of sentiments nearly the same as those expressed on former occasions on which I have noticed the same subject. It is one which has unavoidably occupied much of my attention, and is brought before me continually by daily occurrences. I feel that the little power of usefulness that I might have had under different circumstances is obstructed by the plan of administration introduced into this colony; but that any attempt to remove the impediment would most probably be still more injurious. I have therefore dilated on the peculiarity of my position more frequently than may seem necessary; and I trust that I shall not again trouble your Lordship on this topic.

[The anticipations shadowed forth in the preceding despatch were soon fulfilled. Sir Charles Metcalfe said truly that "the chief difficulty of his position was to act according to his sense of what was right without breaking with his Council." In a preceding despatch he had spoken of the requirements of his Council, and the impossibility of submitting to them consistently with the duty that he owed to the Imperial Government. "I am required," he said, "to give myself up entirely to the Council; to submit absolutely to their dictation; to have no judgment of my own; to bestow the patronage of the Government exclusively on their partisans; to proscribe their opponents; and to make some public and unequivocal declaration of my adhesion to these conditions, including the complete nullification of her Majesty's Government." But he was not disposed to purchase peace on such terms as these. As the autumn advanced, the prospect of a rupture with the Executive Council seemed more and more imminent: "At the end of November the crisis came. The question which precipitated it at last was a question of patronage. Metcalfe had appointed to his personal Staff a French-Canadian officer who was distasteful to Mr. Lafontaine. The appointment was intended to conciliate the French-Canadian_community, but it offended their chief. The leaders of both parties in the Council then waited on the Governor-General, intent on advancing the pretensions of the Executive. They demanded that the Governor-General should make no appointment without the sanction of his Ministers. During two long sittings, on the 24th and 25th of November, Baldwin and Lafontaine pressed their demands with energy and resolution; but Metcalfe, in his own placid way, was equally energetic and resolute. . . . . On the 26th of November, all the members of the Council, with the exception of Mr. Daly, finding that they could not shake the firmness of the Governor-General, resigned their offices, and prepared to justify their conduct to Parliament and the colony at large."]

CLXI

EARL GREY TO LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR SIR JOHN HAVREY,

K.C.B.1

[Trans. Imperial Blue Books relating to Canada, 1844-48, Vol. XV.]

Extracts from a Despatch from Earl Grey to Lieutenant-Governor Sir John Harvey, K.C.B., dated

Downing Street, 3 November, 1846.

I have received your Despatch of the 15th September, marked "Private and Confidential," in which you communicate to me your views upon the state of affairs which you have found on arriving in Nova Scotia.

This and the despatch which follows contain the scheme of "full responsible government" as worked out in Nova Scotia by the Lieutenant-Governor, Sir John Harvey, and in Canada by Lord Elgin.

Circumstances prevented me from answering your Despatch, as you wished me to have done, by the packet which left England on the 3d instant; but the interval which has since elapsed has enabled me to devote more time to the consideration of the questions which you have brought under my notice than the brief space between the arrival and the departure of the North American packet would have allowed me to do.

I perceive, from your representation of the position of affairs in Nova Scotia, that there are questions to be determined in respect to the government of that province of no ordinary difficulty, and that it is of the utmost importance that the first measures of your administration should be preceded by the most careful deliberation. The knowledge which I possess of the local politics of Nova Scotia is at present too limited to enable me, with confidence in my own judgment, to give you any positive and detailed directions as to the course which circumstances may require you to adopt in the present conjuncture; but though it is out of my power to give you such instructions, there are certain general principles which ought, as I conceive, to govern your conduct in this and in similar cases; and which, as they admit of being stated, ought, I think, to be communicated to you for your guidance.

I shall advert first to the important topic of the composition of the Legislative Council. In making appointments to this body, it ought undoubtedly to be the object of the administrator of the Government so to compose it as to make it fairly represent the opinion of the majority of the intelligent members of the community; but supposing the selection of the present members to have been ill-advised, and that the Council in consequence is not in harmony with public opinion, the question arises, what is then the proper course to be adopted? Under such circumstances there are two considerations to which it is necessary to advert. First, that it is impossible to allow the Legislative Council to obstruct permanently the passing of measures called for by public opinion, and sent up by the popular branch of the Legislature. Secondly, that it is a serious evil to be compelled to make an addition to the members of this body for the purpose of changing the character of the majority; since each such addition creates both a precedent and a necessity for a similar and perhaps larger addition whenever a change in public feeling gives the ascendancy to a new party in the assembly. It is difficult to reconcile these almost conflicting considerations, but this, in my opinion, may be attempted with the greatest hopes of success, by adopting as a rule that an addition is not to be made to the Legislative Council with a view to changing the character of the majority, except under circumstances of clear and obvious necessity. An anticipation that public business will be impeded because there is a majority in the Legislative Council attached to the political party which has not the confidence of the colony is insufficient to justify the appointment of additional members. Practical inconvenience must have actually arisen, and to a serious extent, before resort can with propriety be had to any measure for increasing the number of the Council. If that body be found obstructing pertinaciously the progress of public business, and the passing of laws which public opinion demands, an addition to it would then be felt to be a just and necessary measure, and would not excite the same indignation, on the part even of those against whom it might be directed, as would be the case if adopted on lighter grounds; while the probability is that the members of the Legislative Council, knowing that if it should become necessary this measure must ultimately be resorted to, will shrink from creating the necessity by obstinately opposing themselves to the real opinion of the intelligent classes of the community.

I come now to the second question which you have submitted to me in your Despatch, namely, the propriety of dissolving the present House of Assembly.

I am of opinion that under all the circumstances of the case, the best course for you to adopt is to call upon the members of your present Execu