agitation, and it passed. It was otherwise, however, with the annexation movement, and not until reciprocity brought to the Canadian merchant the prosperity he looked for, did annexation pass from among the irritating issues in Canadian politics. A great commercial revolution had been accomplished, not without haltings and inconsistencies; revolutions, no matter how beneficent, always claim their victims, and Canada was paying for the policy that Peel had introduced for the benefit of England. 'I care not,' wrote Elgin, 'whether you be a Protectionist or a Free Trader; it is the inconsistency of the imperial legislation, and not the adoption of one policy rather than another, which is the bane of the colonies.'

And so a fateful year in the world's history drew to its close with little real political discontent in the province; with a government promising great things for the future; and with a governor-general, not merely soundly constitutionalist, but sure that if one thing had guaranteed Canadian peace more than another, it was the unreserved confidence which he had given to a ministry approved alike by French and British.

With 1849 it might seem as though Canada had passed at last into smooth water. The La Fontaine-Baldwin ministry had now settled to their work. In his speech at the opening of parliament Lord Elgin promised a year fruitful in reform. The last fragments of former discontent were to be lost in an act of mercy towards all who were still suffering from penal consequences of the Rebellion. The houses were recommended to consider legislation on the judicature of the province and its municipal institutions. Immigration was to be regulated, a university bill introduced to rectify previous mistakes, and a financial provision made in support of the common schools. When prorogation came in June the deputy-governor could congratulate parliament on the many important measures which you have been able to perfect,' and even a visionary grumbler like William Hamilton Merritt could record in his journal that parliament had been prorogued after a session of unusual and singular productiveness of new acts.' Among the measures to which the

royal assent was given were a University Bill, a Municipal Corporations Bill for Upper Canada, and one for the more effectual administration of justice in the Court of Chancery in Upper Canada.

THE REBELLION LOSSES BILL

But, by a freakish irony of fate, this year of solid government-the most notable since the great session of 1841-is known chiefly as the year of the Rebellion Losses Bill.1 The matter is important, not in itself, but in its consequences, and as an illustration of the political conditions of the day. It was natural that there should have been destruction of property during the Rebellion; natural, too, that some attempt at compensation should be made; and according to the varieties of loss, so would the justice of the several claims also vary. The simplest came with the wanton destruction by rebels of loyalist property. But what was to be said where, as at the village of St Benoit, property seized, but guaranteed, by the British commander, was destroyed by volunteers as soon as Colborne left the place. The problem was laid before the imperial government early in 1838. In the same year an ordinance authorized the appointment of commissioners to investigate the claims of certain loyal inhabitants of Lower Canada-a phrase altered, in the month of March 1838, to certain inhabitants. The government in Upper Canada, following suit, sought to compensate its loyal subjects. Even when Russell intimated the unwillingness of the British government to pay any indemnity to the provincial treasury, the provincial governments still persisted. Sydenham found, on his arrival in Lower Canada, that Colborne had already awarded £21,000 to claimants; and in Upper Canada new acts not merely set apart £40,000 from the provincial funds, but recognized that claims might arise through 'violence on the part of persons in Her Majesty's service.'

1 A measure, according to Elgin,' to which an importance so disproportionate has been attached in the recent history of our affairs, only because the British public bestows no attention upon us, except at seasons of agitation.' Elgin to Grey, October 5, 1852.

The first chapter of events closed when Sydenham ended the operations of the commission, since provincial credit could not face the strain of paying claims. Up to this point the only criticism which suggests itself is that war and revolt bring their necessary consequences with them, and that it is not easy, in restoration, to keep pace with the earlier work of destruction.

The second stage was reached when Metcalfe, in answer to certain claims from Huntingdon, Lower Canada, suggested a general review of the situation followed by final settlement. This his parliament planned to accomplish in a series of acts, appropriating the duties on tavern licences to the purpose of compensation in Lower Canada, and the proceeds of the Marriage Licence Fund to those in Upper Canada. The commissioners entrusted with the inquiry were first instructed to classify carefully the cases of those who were, and of those who were not, engaged in the Rebellion; and then, in a sentence which became notorious, they were told, 'It is not His Excellency's intention that you should be guided by any other description of evidence than that furnished by the sentences of the courts of law.' In their report the commissioners included 2176 claims, in all amounting to £241,965, 10s. 5d.; but they were of opinion that £100,000 would meet all real losses.

Then came the crisis under Elgin. Metcalfe had, for practical purposes, pledged his successor's support to the project; and even if he had not, La Fontaine made it plain that refusal to support some measure of compensation would probably break up a ministry which had been the choice of the people and of their representatives. Yet the compensation about to be secured to French Canadians, many of whom had been actively or passively in revolt against England, roused afresh the old loyalty cry, and irritated racial prejudice into vigorous life. The tory 'die-hards' in Canada and in Britain, politicians who regarded concessions to the French as a kind of treason, at once became vocal. But, in spite of criticism from the party of British ascendancy in Canada, and from statesmen in Britain, who were ignorant of the actual facts, it is difficult to see how Elgin could have acted