
* A Project Gutenberg Canada Ebook *

This ebook is made available at no cost and with very few
restrictions. These restrictions apply only if (1) you make
a change in the ebook (other than alteration for different
display devices), or (2) you are making commercial use of
the ebook. If either of these conditions applies, please
check gutenberg.ca/links/licence.html before proceeding.

This work is in the Canadian public domain, but may be
under copyright in some countries. If you live outside Canada,
check your country's copyright laws. IF THE BOOK IS UNDER
COPYRIGHT IN YOUR COUNTRY, DO NOT DOWNLOAD
OR REDISTRIBUTE THIS FILE.

Title: The Life and Times of Wm. Lyon Mackenzie,
   with an account of the Canadian rebellion of 1837,
   and the subsequent frontier disturbances, chiefly
   from unpublished documents. Vol. I [of 2]
Author: Lindsey, Charles (1820-1908)
Date of first publication: 1862
Edition used as base for this ebook:
   Toronto: P. R. Randall, 1862
   (first edition)
Date first posted: 29 June 2009
Date last updated: 29 June 2009
Project Gutenberg Canada ebook #340

This ebook was produced by:
Marcia Brooks, David T. Jones, Roland Schlenker
& the Online Distributed Proofreading Team
at http://www.pgdpcanada.net

This file was produced from images generously made available
by Canadiana.org (Early Canadiana Online)




[Illustration: W. L. Mackenzie.]


THE

LIFE AND TIMES

OF

WM. LYON MACKENZIE.

WITH AN ACCOUNT OF THE CANADIAN REBELLION
OF 1837, AND THE SUBSEQUENT FRONTIER
DISTURBANCES, CHIEFLY FROM UNPUBLISHED
DOCUMENTS.

BY

CHARLES LINDSEY.

VOL. I

TORONTO, C.W.:

P. R. RANDALL, No. 12 TORONTO STREET.
1862.



Entered according to Act of the Provincial Legislature, in the year 1862,
by CHARLES LINDSEY,
In the Office of the Registrar of the Province of Canada.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1862, by
J. W. BRADLEY,
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania.




INTRODUCTION.


A very general impression prevails throughout Canada that the late
William Lyon Mackenzie had, for some years, been engaged in writing
his autobiography; and that, at the time of his death, the work was
nearly completed. An examination of his papers showed that such was
not the case. He had indeed projected such a work, and arranged much
of the material necessary for its construction. The foundation had
been dug; but the first stone of the superstructure had not been laid.
About his intention, or rather his desire, there can be no doubt. He
had made known to all his friends that he had laid out this work for
himself; and even his own family were under the impression that he had
made considerable progress in its execution. But on examining his
papers, I soon discovered that, except detached and scattered
memoranda, he had written nothing. Of autobiography, not previously
written when some momentary exigency seemed to demand it, or fancy
spurred him to put down some striking passage in his life, there was
nothing. Beyond this, every thing had to be done by his biographer, if
his life was to be written; and such was the public curiosity to learn
the connected story of his eventful life, that I was pressed, on all
hands, to undertake the work. At great inconvenience, and under a
pressure of other exacting literary engagements, I consented.

A vast mass of materials was put into my hands. Although it had been
subjected to a certain system of arrangement, I did not always readily
discover the key to the connection. The general plan of reference was
very simple. Take fifty common-place books numbered, by pages, up to
seven thousand, with an index of subjects, and you are furnished the
same facility of reference as to a ledger. It is required to find all
the available information on any particular subject. Under the proper
head in the index, we are directed, let us suppose, to page 6,059. We
find a book numbered "6,001 to 6,062." It will therefore contain the
intermediate number required. On opening at the page indicated, we
find a number of manuscripts, letters, leaves from pamphlets, and
cuttings from periodicals, intermingled with written notes on slips of
paper, cut to the exact size necessary to contain the observations
noted. All these papers are left loose for facility of removal.

So far all is plain sailing. Deficiencies, I soon found, had to be
supplied; and I was sometimes puzzled to see the connection of
documents lying entombed between the same pages. One subject runs into
another; and to exhaust the available information on any one point, an
endless number of references and comparisons had to be made. Some
twenty years of newspaper files had to be carefully read. To give an
idea of the mass of materials with which I had to deal, it will
suffice to say that the Navy Island correspondence alone, occupying a
single page of one of fifty-five common-place books--and there is a
second series with a second index--would make a large printed volume.

These facts are characteristic of the methodical habits of the man
whose life is, however imperfectly, delineated in this work.

Full of the fiery energy of the Celtic race; impetuous and daring;
standing in the front rank of party combatants, in times and in a
country where hard knocks were given and taken, it was the fate of Mr.
Mackenzie to have many relentless enemies. If I had undertaken to
refute all the calumnies of which he was the subject, and to correct
all the false statements made to his injury, this biography would
have taken a controversial form, which must have rendered it less
acceptable to a large class of readers. The plan I have followed has
been to tell the story of his life as I find it, without much
reference to what friends or enemies, biased one way or the other, may
have said under the excitement of events that have now passed into the
great ocean of history. There were some few cases in which it was
necessary to clear up disputed questions, over which men still
continue to differ.

The striking want of moral courage in many who were engaged with
Mackenzie in the unfortunate and ill-advised insurrection, in Upper
Canada, in 1837, led them to attempt to throw the odium of an
enterprise that had failed in its direct object entirely upon him.
Men, of whose complicity in that affair the clearest evidence exists,
cravenly deny all knowledge of it. Mackenzie never shrank from his
share of the responsibility. He lived to see and admit the error of
the movement, and to express deep regret for the part he had taken.
But an enterprise which cannot be justified, and the engaging in which
involved him in ruin, was in the end advantageous to the country. Much
of the liberty Canada has enjoyed, since 1840, and more of the
wonderful progress she has made, are due to the changes which the
insurrection was the chief agent in producing. Unless those changes
had been made--unless a responsible government especially had been
established--Canada would ere now either have been lost to the British
Crown; or, ruled by the sword, it would have been stunted in its
growth, its population poor, discontented, and ready to seek the
protection of another power. The amelioration which the political
institutions of Canada have undergone would probably have come in
time, if there had been no insurrection; but it would not have come so
soon; and there is no reason to suppose that the Province would yet
have reached its present stage of advancement.

Being several thousands of miles distant when the insurrection and the
frontier troubles took place, and having never been in Canada till
several years after, I lay under the disadvantage of not having any
personal recollection of what occurred in those stirring times. But
considering the stores of materials and the sources of information at
my command, perhaps this is no great loss; certainly it will be more
than compensated by the impartiality with which an unconcerned
spectator can pass in review the events of that troubled period.

In the private documents in my possession, containing the secret
history of the frontier movements, I found much that had never seen
the light; including projects of invasion and insurrection, of which
the public has never had more than the vaguest notions. The use I have
made of these documents will, I presume, not be regarded as
unwarranted.

I first saw Mr. Mackenzie, in 1849, when he came from New York to
Canada, on a visit. Our differences of opinion on the politics of
Canada during the last ten years have been notorious. Still I knew his
real views perhaps better than any one else. In private he never
concealed his hand to me, during the whole of that time. By the hour,
when no third person was present, he would speak with great
earnestness and animation on the claims of justice, the odiousness of
oppression, and the foulness of corruption. The offer of office under
the Government was more than once obliquely--once, I think,
directly--made to him after his return to Canada, and it always threw
him into a fit of passion. He received it as an attempt to destroy his
independence or to shackle his freedom of action. A thousand times I
have heard him protest that he would rather die of starvation than
descend to any meanness, or be guilty of any act that would deprive
him of that title to an unpurchasable Patriot, which he deemed the
best heritage he could bequeath to his children.


CONTENTS.


CHAPTER I.
                                                                       PAGE

General Remarks--Mackenzie's Parents--Birth--School Days--Characteristic
Incidents--Religious Instruction--Books he read                          11

CHAPTER II.

Mackenzie first Employed in a Draper's Shop, then in the Counting House
of Gray of Dundee--Dr. Chalmers--Starts business at Alyth, and
fails--Clerk to Kennett and Avon Canal Co., in England--London--Resolution
to go to Canada--France                                                  28

CHAPTER III.

Sails for Canada in the Psyche--Personal Appearance--Lachine Canal
Surrey--Book and Drug Business in York and Dundas--Dissolves partnership
with Lesslie--Removes to Queenstown--Politics--School Trustee            34

CHAPTER IV.

Reasons for going into Politics--Canada in 1820--Moderation of his
Political Principles--Press in Upper Canada in 1826--Union of the North
American Provinces--General Election--Scene in Court                     39

CHAPTER V.

Removes to York--Reports and Publishes Debates--Newspapers and
Postage--Government in a minority in New House--Journey to
Kingston--Abandons Politics for Literature--Ideal of a Patriot           63

CHAPTER VI.

_The Colonial Advocate_ destroyed by an Official Mob--Rioters cast
in Damages--Amount collected by Officials--Criminal Proceedings against
Rioters by Francis Collins--Conviction--Presentment against Mackenzie
for Libel by Official Party                                              73

CHAPTER VII.

Judge Willis removed by Executive--The cause--Collins convicted of
Libel--Fine paid by Subscription--Judge Sherwood's Direction
denounced--Prosecution against Mackenzie abandoned--Execution of
Charles French                                                          108

CHAPTER VIII.

Pecuniary embarrassments--Fever--Sickness and Death in the
Family--Robert Randall--Alien Question--Letters to Earl
Dalhousie--Difficulty and Final Settlement of the Question--Faith
in the Colonial Office                                                  121

CHAPTER IX.

Printer to House of Assembly--Not a Sure Partisan--Irresponsible
Government--Union of Legislative and Judicial Functions--Colonial
Representation in Imperial Parliament                                   137

CHAPTER X.

Candidate for Legislative Assembly--Elected--Allen McNab sent to Jail,
Boulton Reprimanded--Chaplain of House--Government Independent of
Assembly--Sir J. Colborne--Specimen of Mackenzie's Oratorical Powers    143

CHAPTER XI.

Visit to United States--Cameronian Preaching and Scottish
Psalmody--States and Canada Compared--Charge of Disloyalty met--Action
for Libel--Session of 1830--Change of Administration
demanded--Contemptuous Reply--Reforms proposed                          160

CHAPTER XII.

Small Libel Suit--Mackenzie pleads his own Cause and Succeeds--
Responsible Government--Opposition to his Re-election--Successful
Appeal to the People--Success of the Official Party                     173

CHAPTER XIII.

McLean Speaker in New House--State Church--Cause of the Party
Revolution--State of the Representation--Permanent Civil List--An
Attempt to Expel Mackenzie--Journey to Quebec--Shipwreck                187

CHAPTER XIV.

Expulsion of Mackenzie--Defence Voted an Aggravation of his
Offence--Feeling excited--Military Preparations--Public
Meeting--Re-election--Gold Medal and Chain Presented                    209

CHAPTER XV.

Triumphal Entry--Commotion in the House--Second Expulsion--Defence
cut short--Impassioned Appeal to Electors--Re-election                  224

CHAPTER XVI.

Popular Excitement and Sympathy--Attempt to Assassinate
Mackenzie--Conviction of Kerr--Journey to England--Procures the
Dismissal of the Crown Officers--Tories threaten to Revolt--Revisits
Scotland--Returns to Canada                                             244

CHAPTER XVII.

Third Expulsion--Re-elected--House refuses to receive him--Another
election--Forcibly ejected--New writ refused--Proceedings expunged
from the Journals                                                       288

CHAPTER XVIII.

York changed to Toronto--Mackenzie First Mayor--Cholera of
1834--Braves Disease and Death--Canadian Alliance Society--Loss of
his Eldest Son--Mackenzie as a Journalist                               312

CHAPTER XIX.

Meeting of the New House--Hume's Letters--Grievance Committee--Read
by the King--Mackenzie appointed Director of the Welland
Canal--Disclosures--Hinck's Career--Visit to Papineau--Letter to Hume   324

CHAPTER XX.

Sir Francis Bond Head arrives--His Speech--Censured--Troubles--Separation
from England--Stoppage of Supplies and Reservation of Money
Bills--Dissolution of the House--Violent means to carry
Elections--Mackenzie loses his Election--Dangerous Illness              355

CHAPTER XXI.

_The Constitution_--Mock Trial of Sir F. B. Head--Samuel
Lount--Fatal Resolutions--Session of 1836, 7--Its turbulent
Close--Mackenzie goes to New York--Purchases at Trade Sales of Books    390


LIFE
OF
WILLIAM LION MACKENZIE.
    *    *    *    *    *




CHAPTER I.

     General Remarks--Mackenzie's Parents--His Birth--School
     Days--Youth--Characteristic Incidents--Religious
     Instruction imposed by his Mother--The Books he read.


Few men who have led a life of great mental activity long survive the
abandonment of their accustomed habit of labor. Nor was it different
with Mr. Mackenzie. When he resigned his seat in the Legislative
Assembly, in 1858, few of his colleagues were equal to the endurance
he underwent. It was no uncommon thing for him to burn the midnight
oil till streaks of gray were visible in the eastern horizon. He would
do this three or four nights in the week. He could jump as high, and
run as fast, as the youngest and the most athletic member of the
House. Every one thought there were still left many years of wear in
his slender but wiry frame; but the seeds of mortality had been
already sown in his system. As a steam engine of disproportionate size
shakes to pieces the too frail vessel in which it is placed, his
ponderous brain, overworked with long years of mental toil, wore out
the bodily frame. Nor did the brain itself escape the penalty of
over-exertion. Loss of memory was the first symptom of the
brain-softening thus superinduced. Violent pains in the head,
accompanied by the refusal of the stomach to perform its accustomed
functions, followed. For the last two years of his life, he failed
more rapidly than his most intimate friends were able to realize. In
his declining health, pecuniary embarrassments threw a gloom over the
latter days of his existence. Whether he was himself aware of the
extent to which his health had failed, that the iron frame was so far
shaken and debilitated as it was, it is impossible to say. His
tenacity of life would probably prevent him from admitting to himself
the true state of the case; and though he often spoke of the decline
of his strength, he generally did so by way of inquiry and with a view
of eliciting the opinion of others on the subject. It was a point on
which he was morbidly sensitive; and the last time he was out, before
being confined to his death-bed, he inquired anxiously of one of his
daughters whether people remarked that he was failing. When he did so,
he drew himself up in a more erect posture and walked with a show of
unwonted firmness, as if desirous to disprove an impression that he
dreaded. Relying on the extraordinary strength of his constitution, he
promised himself, in his moments of flickering hope, many years of
life. But at length he became weary of battling the world, and was
anxious to lie down to rest.

The public probably fancied that the Homestead subscription had given
him some degree of ease in his worldly circumstances; but the truth
was that beyond the house in which he lived and died, the product was
very little, and when that little was exhausted, he found himself
without an income. It is doubtful whether the paper he published, _The
Weekly Message_, ever yielded any profit; and he was finally compelled
to abandon its publication. After this, he lived on borrowed money,
obtained at usurious rates, upon the endorsement of political friends.
When at last, he had to battle with despair, he ceased to desire to
prolong the painful endurance of life. One day he remarked to some
members of his family, that though he would not destroy the life that
God had given him--that he had no right to do so--he cared not how
soon it might please the Author of existence to take back the life
that he had given. He died heart-broken with disappointment, as much
as of brain-softening; died because he no longer knew where to find
the means of existence, and because his proud spirit forbade him to
beg. From his most intimate friends, who might have helped him, he
concealed the embarrassments of his pecuniary position.

Such were the causes of the death of this extraordinary man, whose
powers of agitation, at one period of his life, gave him an almost
absolute command over the masses in his adopted country. When he had
ceased to be able to speak or write, he seemed much concerned for his
family; and placed the hand of the mother of his children in mine, as
if to commend her to my protection. It seemed his last hope and his
last wish.

In writing his biography, it will be my duty, as far as convenient, to
allow him to tell his own tale; and where opinions must be expressed,
it will be my aim to make them judicial and just, though I may not
conceive that he was always right, either in act or opinion. In this
spirit and with these feelings, I begin this tale of shipwrecked hopes
and overwhelming disappointments.

Under the head "Mackenzie,"[1] I find among Mr. Mackenzie's papers
several slips of memoranda, going over a long story of pedigrees. On
reading them my curiosity was excited to see whether he was going to
give point to the recital by tracing his own descent from some of the
ennobled members of his family name; but the conclusion somewhat
brusquely excluded any claim of this kind. According to what was long
the orthodox method of writing history, he derived the Mackenzies from
Noah; but with this difference, that, instead of pretending to
complete the chain, he made a safe assumption of the fact.

Mr. Mackenzie's parents were married at Dundee on the 8th of May,
1794, by the Rev. Mr. Macewen.[2]

[Footnote 1: "This ancient family," writes Mr. Mackenzie, "traces its
descent from the House of Gerald, Ireland, (whence sprung some of the
noble families of Leinster, Desmond, etc.,) a member of which and his
followers settled in Scotland about 1261, and was created Baron of
Kintail. His name was Carlinus Fitzgerald, First Baron of Kintail. He
married a daughter of Walter, High Steward of Scotland; was succeeded
by his son Kenneth; who again was succeeded by a son of the same name,
Third Baron of Kintail, called in Gaelic, Kenneth Mackenneth, which in
English was pronounced Mackenzie Mackainzie; and hence (says Burke's
peerage) arose all the families of Mackenzie, in Scotland."]

[Footnote 2: The following entry is copied from an old family Bible:

Daniel Mackenzie and Elizabeth Mackenzie, both natives of
Kirkmichael, Perthshire, Scotland, were married at Dundee, by the Rev.
Mr. Macewen, on the 8th of May, 1794.]

Of this marriage William Lyon Mackenzie, the object of this biography,
was the sole issue. He was born at Springfield, Dundee, Scotland, on
the 12th of March, 1795;[3] and his father died when the child was
only twenty-seven days old.[4] His death was brought on by a cold
contracted at a dancing party; and during his illness, which lasted
only a few days, he suffered severely from a violent pain in the head.
The knowledge of this circumstance caused the son, throughout his
life, to dread the severe pains in the head with which he was
occasionally afflicted, at long intervals, and generally after great
and long continued mental exertion. What he had dreaded all his life
came upon him before his death. For several weeks he complained of
increasing and almost constant pains in the head. At all times, when
they occurred, they had been extremely violent; and in his last
illness, but chiefly before he took to his bed, or had ceased to
struggle against the disease, they were the cause of intense
suffering. The discrepancy between the ages of his parents was great;
his father being only twenty-eight years old when he died; while his
mother had seen forty-five summers when her only child was born.

[Footnote 3: William Lyon Mackenzie, born at Springfield, Dundee,
Forfarshire, Scotland, March 12th, 1795. Baptized on the 29th by the
Rev. Mr. Macewen, Seceder Minister.--_Entry in Family Bible._]

[Footnote 4: Daniel Mackenzie died at Dundee on the 9th of April,
1795, leaving only one child, William Lyon, then twenty-seven days
old.--_Entry in Family Bible._]

His mother, by the death of her husband, who left behind him no
property of any account, became to a great extent dependent upon her
relatives, of whom she had several in the Highlands; and she sometimes
lived with one and sometimes with another. Some of them were poor,
others well to do; and if it be presumed that she gave the largest
share of her patronage to the latter, the former were probably not
missed in their turn. At the same time she always managed, by some
ingenuity of industry, to keep a humble home over the heads of herself
and her boy. Her constitutional temperament always kept her busy, let
her be where she might; her high nervous organization rendering
inaction difficult to her, except towards the close of her life. In
this respect, there was a remarkable resemblance between herself and
her son; and from her, it may safely be affirmed, he derived the
leading mental characteristics that distinguished him through life.

She was so small in stature as to be considerably below the average
size of her sex. In complexion she was a brunette; her hair was
dark-brown, till whitened by age, and at ninety it was as abundant as
ever, and always long. Her dark eyes were sharp and piercing, though
generally quiet; but when she was in anger, which did not often occur,
they flashed out such gleams of fire as might well appall an
antagonist. Her features, corresponding with her size, were small; and
the prominence of her cheek-bones gave unmistakable indications of her
Celtic origin. The small mouth and the thin, compressed lips, in
harmony with the whole features, told of that unconquerable will which
she transmitted to her son. The forehead was broad and high, and the
face seldom relaxed into perfect placidity; there were always on the
surface indications of the working of the volcanic feelings within.
The subduing influences of religion kept her strong nature under
control, and gave her features whatever degree of repose they
ordinarily wore.

Her strong religious bias made her an incessant reader of the
Scriptures and such religious books as were current among the
Seceders. With this kind of literature she early imbued the mind of
her son; and, it would not be difficult to show, the impressions thus
formed were never wholly effaced. Though of Highland origin, she spoke
Gaelic but rarely, it would seem, for she never imparted more than a
very slight knowledge of it to her son. She cherished some plausible
superstitions, firmly believing that a Mackenzie never died without
warning of the coming event being given by some invisible messenger in
a strange, unearthly sound, and had a strong suspicion that fairies
were something more than myths. The strongest reciprocal affection
existed between her and her son, at whose house she spent the last
seventeen years of her life, having followed him to Canada, in company
with Mr. J. Lesslie, in 1822, and died at Rochester, N. Y., in 1839,
while her son was a state prisoner, in Monroe county jail, under
sentence for a breach of the neutrality laws of the United States. She
had attained the mature age of ninety years, a fact which goes to show
that it was through her that Mr. Mackenzie inherited a physical frame
capable of extraordinary endurance, as well as his natural mental
endowments.

Daniel Mackenzie, father of the subject of this biography, is
described as a man of dark complexion; and his grandfather Colin
Mackenzie, used to bear the cognomon of "Colin Dhu," or black Colin.
Daniel learned weaving in all its branches; but entering into an
unprofitable commercial speculation, he was reduced to keeping a few
looms for the manufacture of "green cloth."

But Mr. Mackenzie may here be allowed to tell his own tale of his
ancestry. In June, 1824, just when he had entered on his editorial
career, he was called upon to meet the charge of disloyalty; and his
defence, which is in his happiest mood, shows how much better were his
early compositions when youth was fresh and hope beat high, than those
of his later days, when the pangs of disappointment had fastened upon
his soul, and the great aims of his life had miscarried.

"My ancestors too stuck fast to the legitimate race of kings, and
though professing a different religion, joined Charles Stuart, whom
(barring his faith) almost all Scotland considered as its rightful
sovereign. Colin Mackenzie, my paternal grandsire, was a farmer under
the Earl of Airly in Glenshee, in the highlands of Perthshire; he, at
the command of his chieftain, willingly joined the Stuart standard, in
the famous 1745, as a volunteer. My mother's father, also named Colin
Mackenzie, and from the same glen, had the honor to bear a commission
from the Prince, and served as an officer in the Highland army. Both
my ancestors fought for the royal descendant of their native kings;
and after the fatal battle of Culloden, my grandfather accompanied his
unfortunate prince to the low countries, and was abroad with him on
the continent, following his adverse fortunes for years. He returned
at length; married, in his native glen, my grandmother, Elizabeth
Spalding, a daughter of Mr. Spalding, of Ashintully castle, and my
aged mother was the youngest but two of ten children, the fruit of
that marriage. The marriage of my parents was not productive of
lasting happiness; my father, Daniel Mackenzie, returned to Scotland
from Carlisle, where he had been to learn the craft of Rob Roy's
cousin, Deacon Jarvie of the Saltmarket, Glasgow, or in other words,
the weaving business, took sickness, became blind, and in the second
year of his marriage with my mother died, being in his twenty-eighth
or twenty-ninth year. I was only three weeks old at his death; my
mother took upon herself those vows which our Church prescribes as
needful at baptism, and was left to struggle with misfortune, a poor
widow, in want and in distress. It is among the earliest of my
recollections, that I lay in bed one morning during the grievous
famine in Britain, in 1800-1, while my poor mother took from our large
Kist (which is an article of furniture of a sort only to be found
among the Scotch and Irish) the handsome plaid of the tartan of our
clan, which in early life her own hands had spun, and went and sold it
for a trifle, to obtain for us a little coarse barley meal, whereof to
make our scanty breakfast; and of another time during the same famine,
that she left me at home crying from want and hunger, and for (I
think) _8s._ sold a handsome and hitherto carefully preserved
priest-gray coat of my father's to get us a little food. How the
mechanics and laborers contrived to exist during these times, is what
I cannot tell; my recollections of this period are faint and
indistinct. Well may I love the poor, greatly may I esteem the humble
and the lowly, for poverty and adversity were my nurses, and in youth
were want and misery my familiar friends; even now it yields a sweet
satisfaction to my soul, that I can claim kindred with the obscure
cottar, and the humble laborer, of my native, ever honored, ever loved
Scotland.

     "Long may thy hardy sons of rustic toil
      Be blest with health, and peace, and sweet content!"

"My mother feared God, and he did not forget nor forsake her: never in
my early years can I recollect that divine worship was neglected in
our little family, when health permitted; never did she in family
prayer forget to implore that He, who doeth all things well, would
establish in righteousness the throne of our monarch, setting wise and
able counsellors around it. A few of my relations were well to do, but
many of them were poor farmers and mechanics, (it is true my mother
could claim kindred with some of the first families in Scotland; but
who that is great and wealthy, can sit down to count kindred with the
poor?) yet amongst these poor husbandmen, as well as among their
ministers, were religion and loyalty held in as due regard, as they
had been by their ancestors in the olden time. Was it from the
precept--was it from the example of such a mother and such relations,
that I was to imbibe that disloyalty, democracy, falsehood, and
deception, with which my writings are by the government editor[5]
charged? Surely not. If I had followed the example shown me by my
surviving parent, I had done well; but as I grew up I became careless,
and neglected public and private devotion. Plainly can I trace from
this period, the commencement of these errors of the head, and of the
heart, which have since embittered my cup, and strewed my path with
thorns, where at my age I might naturally have expected to pluck
roses.

"Earnestly did my mother desire me to honor my heavenly King, to
remember my Creator in the days of my youth, and I at this distant day
have much greater cause to regret the little attention I then paid to
her well meant admonitions in that respect, than to take blame to
myself for either thinking or speaking disrespectfully of our anointed
sovereign. The celebrated traveller, my namesake, Sir Alexander
Mackenzie, died on the same month on which I was born, and just a
quarter of a century thereafter. I came into existence the 12th of
March, 1795; he left the world the same date, 1820; he was no kinsman
of mine, but he was a Mackenzie, and if I can spread the fame of _The
Advocate_[6] to regions as far west as to where he travelled, I shall
be very well satisfied, whether Sir Thomas gets his copy or not."

His first school-teacher was Mr. Kinnear, of Dundee, who was master of
a parish school. One of his school-mates,[7] from whom I have sought
information, describes him as a "bright boy, with yellow hair,
wearing a blue short coat with yellow buttons." The school-house,
large and well lighted, had previously been a Catholic chapel. The
stone basin, placed in a niche in the wall, which had formerly been a
repository of "holy water," was now converted into a seat of
punishment, called the "holy cup." Though very small when he first
entered, Willie, as he was called, was generally at the head of his
class. His progress in arithmetic, particularly, was very rapid. He
was often asked to assist other boys in the solution of problems which
baffled their skill; and while he rendered this service, he would pin
papers or draw grotesque faces, with chalk, on their coat backs. "He
was ever ready," says my informant, "to help the girls, particularly
if they were good looking." Even then his power of declamation was
considerable, and on one occasion the school was made a scene of
uproar and confusion, on his account; the scholars shouting at the top
of their voices and hissing at the master. The thing happened in this
wise.

[Footnote 5: Mr. Charles Fothergill, editor of the Upper Canada
_Gazette_, then published in Toronto, and King's Printer. The
_Gazette_, like the _Moniteur_ of Paris, had an official and a
non-official side.]

[Footnote 6: The name of the first newspaper he published.]

[Footnote 7: Mrs. Reid, of Rochester, N. Y.]

One day he went into the master's closet, donned the fool's cap, and
with the long leather taws tied a canvass sack round his shoulders,
and then, with birch in hand, he took his seat on the "holy cup," to
the great amusement both of the boys and girls. While thus seated,
making grotesque faces and speechifying, in walked the dominie, a man
six feet eight and proportionably stout, just when the mirth was at
its height. Though boiling over with rage, Mr. Kinnear could hardly
escape the contagion of the general laughter. When angry, his face was
any thing but prepossessing. Little Willie saw the danger and
attempted to escape; but he came back at the demand of the angry voice
of the excited dominie. The crime of going into the sacred apartment
of the master must be visited with condign punishment. Willie's hand
being held out was touched with a small brush, dipped in whitening,
made from "calmstone," and then struck with the taws twelve times,
till his face was all spotted over. Then he was conducted back to the
holy cup. This exhibition excited the indignation of the larger boys,
who hissed and shouted, till a scene of perfect confusion was created,
in the midst of which some, who were particularly conspicuous in their
demonstrations, were seized by the indignant dominie, and imprisoned
in a small room; by which means peace was restored. Willie was ordered
to go to the master's house next day; whence, after being detained a
few minutes, he returned with his face as radiant as ever. When the
dominie's back was turned, he made such grimaces as he alone could
make. Young Mackenzie's overpowering sense of the ridiculous, which on
this occasion he tried to excite in others, adhered to him through
life. After leaving Mr. Kinnear's school, he went to that of Mr. Adie;
but how long he spent there cannot be ascertained.

At the age of ten years, some difficulty occurring between him and his
mother, he resolved to leave home, and set up on his own account. For
this purpose he induced some other boys, of about his own age, to
accompany him to the Grampian Hills, among which he had often been
taken, and where, in a small castle which was visible from Dundee, and
of which they intended to take possession, they made the romantic
resolve of leading the life of hermits. They never reached the length
of the castle, however, and after strolling about a few days, during
part of which they were terribly frightened at the supposed proximity
of fairies, they were glad to trudge their way back to the town, half
famished. This incident is characteristic, and might have been
regarded as prophetic; for the juvenile brain that planned such
enterprises would not be likely to be restrained, in after life, where
daring is required. In it we see the same impatience of restraint that
impelled Captain John Smith, best known by his association with
Pocahontas, to sell his books and satchel, when a mere urchin, with a
determination to steal away to sea.

It is probable that the difficulty between young Lyon and his mother,
which led to this escapade, arose out of the long reading tasks which
it was her custom to impose upon him. He was in this way thoroughly
drilled in the Westminster Catechism and Confession of Faith; he got
the Psalms and large portions of the Bible by rote, and was early
initiated into "Baxter's Call to the Unconverted," and several similar
works. When one of these tasks had been given him, his mother used to
confine him closely till it had been mastered. That he sometimes felt
these reading tasks to be irksome is known from his own statements;
and his idea, in mature life, was that the thing had been overdone.
This early exercise of the memory, it may be reasonably assumed,
tended to give to that faculty the strength which in after life was a
source of astonishment to many. Perhaps, however, those who did not
know Mr. Mackenzie's personal habits often attributed to his unaided
memory much that was the result of reference to those stores of
information which he never ceased to collect, and which were so
arranged as to admit of easy access at any moment. It would be a
mistake to suppose that the large amount of religious reading he was
compelled, at an early age, to go through gave him a distaste for that
kind of literature. On the contrary, what had been imposed as a task
seems to have become, in time, a pleasure, if we may judge by the list
of theological works which he voluntarily read between the ages of
eleven and twenty-four years. He has left in his own hand-writing a
list of "some of the books read, between the years 1806 and 1819, by
W. L. Mackenzie,"[8] in which are fifty-four works under the head of
"Divinity," one hundred and sixty-eight on History and Biography,
fifty-two of Travels and Voyages, thirty-eight on Geography and
Topography, eighty-five on Poetical and Dramatic Literature, forty-one
on Education, fifty-one on Arts, Science, and Agriculture, one hundred
and sixteen Miscellaneous, and three hundred and fifty-two Novels;
making, in all, nine hundred and fifty-eight volumes, in thirteen
years. One year he read over two hundred volumes. Here the list ends,
and it may be taken for granted Mr. Mackenzie's reading of books
became less after 1824, when he got immersed in politics, and had a
newspaper to conduct. It is not often that the world is enabled to
see, at a glance, the stores of information by which the mind of a
remarkable man has been enriched and modified; and it is peculiarly
fortunate that a catalogue has been preserved, in this case. With his
tenacious memory, Mr. Mackenzie must have been enabled to draw, from
time to time, upon these stores, during the rest of his life. The
works are confined almost exclusively to the English language; and the
truth is, that he had only an imperfect knowledge of any other.
Otherwise there is little reason to object to the want of variety, and
there does not appear to be any reason why they should have given any
undue bias to the mind. Of a tendency to scepticism, of which he was
accused in the latter part of his life--with what justice will
hereafter be seen--there is, in the works which must have tended to
give a cast to his mind, an almost entire absence.

[Footnote 8: See Appendix A. The number of books read was thus
distributed over the different years:--In 1806-7, 89 vols.; 1808-9,
204 vols.; 1810, 79 vols.; 1811, 52 vols.; 1812-13, 61 vols.; 1814-15,
198 vols.; 1816, 48 vols.; 1817, 63 vols.; 1818, 49 vols.; 1819, 88
vols.; 1820, 27 vols.]

In whatever occupations young Mackenzie was engaged, from the period
of his leaving school to his coming to Canada, the facts already
stated show that he was constantly storing his mind with varied
information. His mother used to tell how, when a little boy, he would
read till after midnight--different books it may be presumed from
those in which his daily tasks were set--till she thought "the laddie
would read himsel' out o' his judgment."

In early youth, politics already possessed a charm for him; the
Dundee, Perth, and Cupar _Advertiser_, the first newspaper he ever
read, serving to gratify this inclination. But he was soon admitted to
a wider range of political literature; for he was introduced to the
Dundee news-room, at so early a period of life that he was for years
after its youngest member.

The adventurous life of a sailor had, at one time, strong fascinations
for him. His own account of this boyish fancy runs: "When a little
fellow at school, I had at one time a strong inclination for the sea,
and used after school-hours, or between them, to accompany some of my
playmates to the pier, and wager marbles which of us could soonest
double the cap, pass the double cross-trees, and turn this vessel's
vane. I well remember that I won more marbles than I lost in this way;
and when I went on board the venerable ship, tight and in good
condition as she still remains, and had fairly recognized my old
acquaintance, I felt a mingled sensation of pain and pleasure, at the
recollection of the past."[9] His venturesome habits, when a boy, once
nearly lost him his life. With a courage above his skill, he plunged
into the waters of the Tay, making an effort to swim, and sank twice
before he was rescued.

[Footnote 9: This was in 1833, when he revisited his native town.]




CHAPTER II.

     Young Mackenzie is employed in a Draper's shop--Then in
     the Counting House of Mr. Gray, of Dundee--Meets Dr.
     Chalmers before he had emerged from obscurity--Starts
     business at Alyth, near Dundee, when under age, and
     fails--Goes to England--Certificate of the Minister and
     Session Clerk of Alyth--Becomes Clerk to the Kennett
     and Avon Canal Company in England--Seeks employment in
     London--The resolution to go to Canada--First visits
     France.


For a short time after leaving school, and when he must have been a
mere boy, he was put into Mr. Henry Tulloch's draper's shop, High
Street, Dundee; but disliking the situation, he did not long remain
there; probably only a few months.

He afterwards became an indentured clerk in the counting house of
Gray, a wood merchant, in a large way of business, in Dundee. Mr.
Mackenzie's papers relating to the early part of his life were, with
others, placed with some friend in the country, at the time of the
rebellion; but the custodians, of might be dangerous documents, got
alarmed on the execution of Lount and Matthews for high treason, and
they committed the papers to the flames. It becomes more difficult,
for this reason, to fix dates with precision at this period of his
life. Of Mr. Gray, Mr. Mackenzie was in the habit of speaking in the
highest terms. In a letter, dated Dundas, March 16, 1850, he said:
"Mr. Gray, an excellent man, was one of my earliest and best friends.
I was then a clerk in his counting room, under indenture for a term of
years, and well remember going over occasionally to his
brother-in-law's, at Kilmany, in Fife, where I first saw Dr. Chalmers,
then about thirty years old, and living in comparative obscurity. He
appears to have been deeply impressed, while at Kilmany, with the
benefits conferred upon society by the religious instruction of youth
at Sunday Schools. Chalmers was no ordinary man, but truly great and
good." It was probably while in the counting house of Mr. Gray that
Mr. Mackenzie acquired that knowledge of the mysteries of accounts,
which afterwards made his services of considerable value as Chairman
of the Committee of Public Accounts, in the Legislative Assembly of
Canada, and which has enabled him to render important service in the
Welland Canal investigation, and on other occasions, when financial
mysteries had to be solved.

At an early age, apparently when he was about nineteen, he went into
business for himself at Alyth, some twenty miles from Dundee, setting
up a general store, such as is kept in country places, in connection
with a circulating library. He remained here for three years, when the
result of inexperience assumed the shape of a business failure. His
creditors were all honorably paid after he had acquired the necessary
means in Canada, at the distance of some years.

It was about the middle of May, 1817, when he left Alyth; and he soon
afterwards went to England. The time when he went to Alyth and when he
left is fixed by a certificate, signed by the minister and the clerk
of session at that place, written shortly before his departure for
Canada:

     "ALYTH, _March 30, 1820_.

     "That the bearer, Lyon Mackenzie, resided in this
     Parish about three years preceding Whitsunday, eighteen
     hundred and seventeen, when he removed from this
     Parish, without anything known to us, at his removal
     hence, to prevent him from being admitted into any
     Christian Society, or partaking of Church privileges,
     is attested by

     "WM. RAMSAY, Minister. "EDW. PATERSON, Session Clerk."

Young Mackenzie afterwards, leaving his native Scotland, crossed to
the South of the Tweed; where at one time we find him filling the
situation of Clerk to the Kennett and Avon Canal Company,[10] at
another time in London; and he used to relate that he was for a short
time in the employ of Earl Lonsdale, as a clerk.

[Footnote 10: The following summons proves him to have been in the
employment of this Company in October, 1818; which was eighteen months
before he sailed for Canada.

WILTSHIRE, } _To all Constables, Tythingmen, and others. His_
 to wit.   } _Majesty's Officers of the Peace in and for the_
           } _said County, whom these may concern, any or_
           } _either of them_.

These are in His Majesty's Name, to will and require you, on Sight
hereof, to summon David Slowly, Captain of the boat No. 6, Euclid
Shaw, of Bath, owner, personally to be and appear before me, and such
other of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the said County of
Wilts as shall be present at the Town Hall in Devizes, in the said
County, on Tuesday, the Tenth day of November next, at eleven of the
clock in the forenoon, to answer to what is and shall be on His
Majesty's Behalf objected against him by _William Lyon Mackenzie_,
Clerk to the Kennett and Avon Canal Company, for having, on the third
of October instant, offended against the eleventh article of the said
Company's Bye-Laws, by carrying shafts and poles constructed contrary
to the same. And you are to attend at the time and place above
appointed for the appearance of the said parties, and to make return
of this precept and of the execution hereof.

Herein fail not at your perils. Given under my Hand and Seal, the
tenth day of October, in the fifty-eighth year of the reign of our
Sovereign Lord GEORGE the Third, by the Grace of God of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland King, and in the year of our
Lord, 1818.

HENRY BAYNSTON.]

In the autumn before he left for Canada, our future emigrant was in
London, where he appears to have been either without employment or not
to have been so satisfactorily engaged as to preclude the desire of a
change. A correspondence took place between him and a Mr. Wm.
Dunsford, who held an office in a Canal Company's office, at Swindon,
Wiltshire. There was a question of the Company establishing a Gauging
Dock; and if this was done, Mr. Mackenzie was to be recommended for an
office in connection with it. The Committee of Directors, with whom
the decision would rest, was not to meet till December, 1819; and
whatever was the result at which they arrived, Mr. Mackenzie was
destined to cross the Atlantic and become a resident of Canada next
Spring. Mr. Dunsford, in October, writes in a friendly, if not very
encouraging tone,[11] and adds a postscript, asking to borrow the
formula of certain gauging tables belonging to Mr. Mackenzie.

[Footnote 11:

Canal Office, Swindon, October 18, 1819.

SIR:--I received your letter of the 15th yesterday, and am sorry you
have not succeeded in making an arrangement with the K. & A. Co., to
allow us the use of their Tables. I do not expect that Mr. Thomas will
communicate with me on the subject. The very _liberal_ ideas of that
gentleman as to the neighboring Canals, as you represented them to me,
forbid the hope of such an accommodation.

I therefore look forward to the time when the Companies for whom I am
concerned will be able to set on foot an establishment of their own
for the purpose, and it shall not be my fault if this is delayed a
moment after the necessary means can be procured; but you are aware
that such a thing cannot be effected in a moment, and that before the
expenditure of at least 700 or 800 can be resolved upon, the
Committee will require time for deliberation. Their next meeting is
not till the middle of December, and until that time, all that I can
say is, that in the event of their determining on a Gauging
establishment, I should not hesitate to recommend you to their notice,
being perfectly satisfied of your competency for the business, and not
doubting the testimonials you could bring to your character. I will
further add that the salary you expect would not be objected to,
together with a comfortable house for your residence. Under these
circumstances, it appears to me that you had better not omit any
favorable appointment that may offer for your settlement; but should
you not be better provided, in the event of our building a Gauging
Dock, upon your favoring me with your future address when convenient,
I will not fail to remember you; and wishing you the success you
appear to deserve, and better usage than you say you have had,

I remain your obedient servant,
WILLIAM DUNSFORD.

If you feel no objection to sending me the formula of your Gauging
Tables, I should be obliged, as it would assist me in explaining the
system to our Committees better than my memory will serve.]

That he was probably without employment, and was certainly in search
of an occupation, in October, 1819, appears from Mr. Dunsford's
letter; and as he conceived he had not met with fair usage, it is
probable that it was not long after this time when he resolved to sail
for Canada the next Spring. He appears then to have only just left
Swindon and the Kennett and Avon Canal Company; for Mr. Dunsford, at
that date, mentions the failure of Mr. Mackenzie's attempt to effect a
certain arrangement with his employers to allow their Gauging Tables
to be used by another Company. This occurrence must have been of
recent date; and it is probable that Mr. Dunsford replied as soon as
he learned from Mr. Mackenzie the result of the application, which may
be presumed to have been made before the latter left the service of
the Canal Company.

The idea of going to Canada is said to have been first suggested to
Mr. Mackenzie by Mr. Edward Lesslie, of Dundee. He was elated at the
prospect which the New World held out to him, and gave expression to
his hilarity in a demonstrative manner.

Before starting for Canada, he visited France. The date of this visit
cannot now be fixed with certainty; but it was probably in November or
December, 1819.

He confesses to having, a little before this time, plunged into the
vortex of dissipation and contracted a fondness for play. But all at
once, he abandoned the dangerous path on which he had entered, and
after the age of twenty-one never played a game at cards. A more
temperate man than he was, for the rest of his life, it would have
been impossible to find.




CHAPTER III.

     Sails for Canada in the Psyche--Personal Appearance--Is
     connected with the Lachine Canal Survey--Enters into
     the Book and Drug Business in York--Afterwards in
     Dundas--The Partnership with Lesslie Dissolved--Starts
     a separate business in Dundas--Removes to
     Queenstown--Abandons Mercantile Business for
     Politics--The First Office that he is Elected to is
     that of School Trustee.


In April, 1820, there was among the passengers of the Psyche, bound
for Canada, and commanded by Captain Thomas Erskine, a young man just
turned twenty-five years of age, born of poor Scottish parents; whose
mother, widowed in his infancy, had sometimes been at a loss to find
the plainest food for his nourishment; a young man who had been a
clerk in a counting house, at Dundee; who had tried mercantile
business on his own account, in a small Scottish market town, and
failed; who had held a clerkship under a company and a nobleman in
England; who, without having enjoyed any other advantage of education
than the parochial and secondary schools of Dundee offered, had a mind
well stored with varied information which he had devoured with the
appetite of a literary glutton; who was so little known that his
departure from his dear native soil excited no public interest or
attention. Yet was it fated that this young man should change the
destiny of the country to which the good ship Psyche was bearing him.
He was of slight build and scarcely of medium height, being only five
feet six inches in stature. His massive head, high and broad in the
frontal region and well rounded, looked too large for the slight wiry
frame it surmounted. He was already bald from the effects of a fever.
His keen, restless, piercing blue eye, which threatened to read your
most interior thoughts, and the ceaseless and expressive activity of
his fingers, which unconsciously opened and closed, betrayed a
temperament that could not brook inaction. The chin was long and
rather broad; and the firm-set mouth indicated a will which, however
it might be baffled and thwarted, could not be subdued. The lips,
firmly pressed together, constantly undulated in a mass, moving all
that part of the face which lies below the nostrils; with this motion
the twinkling of the eyes seemed to keep time, and gave an appearance
of unrest to the whole countenance. The deep dimples in the cheeks,
exaggerating the protuberance of the cheek bones, were connected by a
strongly marked sunken line which shot up to about half the height of
the nose, and left a slight ridge which ran at right angles with the
upper part of the cheek bone. The centre of the nose at the base
protruded a rounded point below the orifice of the nostrils. The
deep-set eyes were overarched by massive brows, which threw the
forehead a little out of its perpendicularity, and which alone gave it
the least receding angle. This assemblage of features will at once be
seen to have been striking and characteristic. They were almost
constantly animated by a flow of spirit which put the rest of the
passengers in good humor; for the hope of youth deceptively painted
with its roseate views that future which, to the young Dundee
emigrant, was to be beset with so many difficulties, bestrewed with
thorns, and watered with tears of blood.

After his arrival in Canada, Mr. Mackenzie was for a short time
employed in connection with the survey of the Lachine Canal; but it
could only have been a few weeks, for in the course of the summer he
entered into business in York, as the present city of Toronto was then
called. "My first occupation," he has left it on record, "in York was
mercantile. I had the profits of one part of the establishment in this
town, which was resigned when I went into partnership in trade,"[12]
in Dundas. In York, Mr. John Lesslie and he were in the book and drug
business; the profits of the books going to Mr. Lesslie, and that of
the drugs to Mr. Mackenzie. It was found, I believe, that physic for
the body was in greater demand than garniture for the mind; and the
question arose of finding another place at which to establish a second
business, in which Mr. Mackenzie and Mr. John Lesslie were to be
partners. The business in York was afterwards conducted for the
exclusive benefit of the remaining partner. Kingston was thought of,
but Mr. Mackenzie did not like the place, and Dundas was selected.
Here he conducted the business of the partnership for fifteen or
sixteen months; during which time, I have heard him say, a clear cash
profit of 100 a month was made. In a printed poster, I find the firm
styled "Mackenzie and Lesslie, Druggists, and Dealers in Hardware,
Cutlery, Jewelry; Toys, Carpenter's Tools, Nails, Groceries,
Confections, Dye-Stuffs, Paints, &c., at the Circulating Library,
Dundas." The partnership was dissolved, by mutual consent, in the
early part of 1823. A division of the partnership effects was made;
and, in papers which have been preserved, Mr. Mackenzie appears as a
purchaser from the firm of Mackenzie & Lesslie to the amount of 686
19_s_ 3_d_. The goods included in this purchase were as miscellaneous
as can well be imagined; and they were destined to form the nucleus of
a separate business to be carried on by Mr. Mackenzie. The invoice is
headed, "Dundas, U. C., 24th February, 1823. William Lyon Mackenzie
bought of Mackenzie & Lesslie;" and its completion bears date,
"Dundas, March 20th, 1823." Below this date, at the bottom of the
figures, is a memorandum of agreement of purchase and sale:

     "We agree that the above is a correct, true, and proper
     invoice, in the items and in the amount; the same being
     six hundred and eighty-six pounds nineteen shillings
     and three pence  curr'y.

     "WM. L. MACKENZIE, JOHN LESSLIE."

[Footnote 12: _Colonial Advocate_, January 21, 1828.]

With this stock a separate business was commenced; but it was not long
continued, for in the autumn of the same year Mr. Mackenzie removed to
Queenstown, and there opened a general store. Before leaving Dundas,
he sold to Mr. Lesslie one of the buildings he had erected at that
place, but retained a store-house. At Queenstown, he resided only a
year; and before the expiration of that time, he had abandoned
commerce for politics; and as a journalist, made the first step in the
eventful career which opens with this period of his life. The stock
of miscellaneous goods was disposed of to a store-keeper in the
country; and thus the business was closed without resorting to the
tedious practice of selling off in detail.

While living in Dundas, Mr. Mackenzie was married. This event took
place on the 1st of July, 1822, at Montreal. Miss Isabel Baxter, his
bride, may be said to have been a native of the same town as himself;
for she was born at Dundee and he at Springfield, a suburb of the same
place. Though they both were at the same school together, when young,
they had ceased to be able to recognize one another when they met at
Quebec. The marriage took place within three weeks from the first
interview: a circumstance that accords with the general impulsive
nature of his character. Of this union the issue was thirteen
children: three boys and ten girls; six of whom are now living: four
daughters and two sons. Five died in infancy: one at thirteen years,
and one at thirty-two.

Up to this time, Mr. Mackenzie had not held any other office in Canada
than that of School Trustee; and he confessed that even that mark of
public confidence inspired him with pride. He and Mr. Thorburn were
elected to that office, at the same time, at Queenstown. Speaking of
this occurrence, he says: "The first newspaper I ever issued was a
protest against binding down our projected university to the dogmas of
any sect: whether of Oxford, Edinburgh, Rome, or Moscow." Never was
prophecy more literally fulfilled than that of his regarding the
effects of giving a sectarian character to a university which had not
yet come into existence.




CHAPTER IV.

     Mr. Mackenzie's Reasons for going into
     Politics--Condition of Canada in 1820--Moderation of
     the Political Principles with which he set out--Most of
     the Reforms he advocated Carried--On some subjects
     Public Opinion went far beyond his Starting
     Point--State of the Press in Upper Canada, in 1826--A
     Union of all the North American Provinces--General
     Election, of which the Result was Unfavorable to the
     Executive--A Scene in Court--Mackenzie on Judge
     Boulton.


When Mr. Mackenzie abandoned trade for politics, he was doing well,
and had done well ever since he commenced business. A perseverance in
the career on which he had entered four years before would have led to
wealth. In the first number of _The Colonial Advocate_, published at
Queenstown, on the 18th May, 1824, he describes himself as being "as
independent as editors can well be;" and this evidently had reference
to his pecuniary position, for he adds, "We are not in want, neither
are we rich." The step which he had now taken was one of the most
important in his whole career, since it involved every thing that
followed. Why did he take it? Fortunately the answer can be given in
his own words. In a letter written to a friend while he was in the
United States, he says:--

     "When you and your father knew me first, in 1820, I was
     a young man connected with trade in York and Dundas.
     The prudent, judicious, and very profitable manner in
     which I conducted, alone, the partnership concerns of a
     large trading establishment, at the head of Lake
     Ontario, surely afforded satisfactory evidence that I
     had no occasion to leave my private pursuits for the
     stormy sea of politics, with a view to the improvement
     of my pecuniary prospects. When I did so, and assumed,
     as the westernmost journalist in the British dominions
     on the continent of America, the office of a public
     censor, I had no personal enemies, but was on friendly
     terms with many of the men whom since then I have
     steadily opposed. I never interfered in the public
     concerns of the colony, in the most remote degree,
     until the day in which I issued twelve hundred copies
     of a newspaper, without having asked or received a
     single subscriber. In that number I stated my
     sentiments, and the objects I had in view fully and
     frankly. I had long seen the country in the hands of a
     few shrewd, crafty, covetous men, under whose
     management one of the most lovely and desirable
     sections of America remained a comparative desert. The
     most obvious public improvements were stayed;
     dissension was created among classes; citizens were
     banished and imprisoned in defiance of all law; the
     people had been long forbidden, under severe pains and
     penalties, from meeting anywhere to petition for
     justice; large estates were wrested from their owners
     in utter contempt of even the forms of the courts; the
     Church of England, the adherents of which were few,
     monopolized as much of the lands of the colony as all
     the religious houses and dignitaries of the Roman
     Catholic Church had had the control of in Scotland at
     the era of the Reformation; other sects were treated
     with contempt and scarcely tolerated; a sordid band of
     land-jobbers grasped the soil as their patrimony, and
     with a few leading officials, who divided the public
     revenue among themselves, formed 'the family compact,'
     and were the avowed enemies of common schools, of civil
     and religious liberty, of all legislative or other
     checks to their own will. Other men had opposed, and
     been converted by them. At nine-and-twenty I might have
     united with them, but chose rather to join the
     oppressed, nor have I ever regretted that choice, or
     wavered from the object of my early pursuit. So far as
     I or any other professed reformer was concerned in
     inviting citizens of this Union to interfere in
     Canadian affairs, there was culpable error. So far as
     any of us, at any time, may have supposed that the
     cause of freedom would be advanced by adding the
     Canadas to this Confederation, we were under the merest
     delusion."

This picture of Upper Canada, in 1820, may be highly colored; but in
the general outlines, repulsive as they are, there is too much truth.
The limner lived to see a change of system in Canada; and after he had
had a more than theoretical experience of Democracy in the United
States--having resided there for several years--he warns Canadians not
to be misled by the delusion that the cause of liberty would be
advanced by uniting these Provinces to the American Republic. When we
come to see at what price he purchased the experience, which entitled
him to express such an opinion, the value of this admonition cannot
fail to be enhanced in the estimation of all unprejudiced judges.

In some respects, the condition of the Province, in 1820, was worse
than Mr. Mackenzie described it. He dealt only with its political
condition; but the absence of demand for employment made wretched
those who depended solely upon their labor for subsistence. When Lord
A. Hamilton suggested, in the House of Commons, April 28th, 1820, that
an emigration to the North American colonies would be the most
effectual means of relieving distress at home, the Chancellor of the
Exchequer replied, that the emigrants who had recently gone there, "so
far from finding increased means of subsistence, had experienced a
want of employment fully equal to that which existed in the most
distressed manufacturing districts of this country. The North American
Provinces of Great Britain had been so overloaded with emigrants, that
the government of Canada had made the strongest remonstrances to the
government of this country on the subject."

Public meetings, the actors in which had been deputed to represent any
portion of the elections, were illegal; and every thing in the shape
of a convention was held to be seditious. Any new comer, who had not
been six months in the Province, was liable to be banished, not for
any thing he had done, but upon a mere suspicion that he was "about to
endeavor to alienate the minds of his Majesty's subjects of this
Province from his person or government." Under the sedition act of
1804, which armed the government with this authority, Mr. Robert
Gourlay, a Scotchman of respectable antecedents and shattered nerves,
was sentenced to banishment, and afterwards imprisoned for refusing
to obey the order. The shock was too much for his acute organization;
and the imprisonment before trial--the fourth he had to
undergo--deprived him of his reason. On the verdict being
pronounced--guilty of refusing to leave the country--he asked one of
the jurymen whether it was for sedition that he had been tried. The
object of the convention, which was held at York in 1818, was to
arrange for sending commissioners to England, to bring before the
Imperial authorities the condition of the Province, with a view to its
amelioration. Col. Beardsley of Hamilton, the chairman, was tried by
court martial, and deprived of his commission. Among the delegates,
there were many who had shown their attachment to their sovereign
during the war of 1812. The lands to which they were entitled, as
bounty, were withheld from them, on account of their presence at that
assemblage. A very difficult and irritating question arose, of the
state of the naturalization laws, as they affected persons of British
birth, who had remained in the United States till after 1783, and then
came to settle in the Province. Of the Post-office revenue, no account
was given; and in return for high rates of postage the service was
very indifferently performed.

With what opinions did the future leader of an insurrection, which it
cost so many millions of dollars to quell, set out? Was he a fierce
Democrat, who had resolved with malice prepense to do all in his power
to overthrow those monarchical institutions which had suffered gross
abuse at the hands of those to whom their working had been confided?
No prospectus having gone forth as an _avant courrier of The Colonial
Advocate_, the first number of the journal, which was in 8vo. form,
was devoted chiefly to an exposition of the principles of the editor.
The range of topics embraced was wide, and the tone of discussion,
free from the bitterness that marked his later writings, was frank. A
Calvinist in religion, proclaiming his belief in the Westminster
Confession of Faith, and a Liberal in politics, yet was Mr. Mackenzie,
at that time, no advocate of the voluntary principle. On the contrary,
he lauded the British government for making a landed endowment of the
Protestant Clergy, in the Provinces, and was shocked at the report
that, in 1812, voluntaryism had robbed three millions of people of all
means of religious ordinances. "In no part of the Constitution of the
Canadas," he said, "is the wisdom of the British Legislature more
apparent than in its setting apart a portion of the country, while yet
it remained a wilderness, for the support of religion." Mr. Mackenzie
credited Lord Melville, when Mr. Dundas, with having been the first
adviser of this measure; but this is a mistake, for the Archbishop of
Canterbury had previously interested himself in the matter, and Col.
Simcoe had pronounced in favor of a church establishment, in Canada,
as a means of upholding a distinction of ranks, and lessening the
weight of democratic influence. Mr. Mackenzie compared the setting
apart of one seventh of the public lands for religious purposes to a
like dedication in the time of the Christians. But he objected that
the revenues were monopolized by one church, to which only a fraction
of the population belonged. The envy of the non-recipient
denominations made the favored church of England unpopular. Though
this distribution of the revenues was manifestly in accordance with
the law creating the Reserves, the alteration of that law, if it
should not meet the wishes of the people, had been contemplated and
provided for by its framers. By this argument, Mr. Mackenzie was
easily conducted to the conclusion, "that Catholic and Protestant,
Episcopalian and Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist, Quaker and
Tunker, deserve to share alike in the income of these lands;" and he
expressed a hope that a law would be enacted, "by which the ministers
of every body of professing Christians, being British subjects, shall
receive equal benefits from these Clergy Reserves." But this was not
to be; for agitation, or the question, was to be directed to the
abrogation, not the equal division, of these reservations.

On this question, the conservative character of Mr. Mackenzie's
opinions was found to be out of harmony with the general sentiment, as
it gradually unfolded itself, and his own opinions changed. He could
not have retained these views, and maintained his popularity. Besides,
as the subject was more discussed, he saw reason to change them. On
another question--that of establishing a Provincial University--he
contended for a principle, the adoption of which would have caused a
great deal of subsequent difficulty. Cordially seconding the proposal
of Dr. Strachan, to establish such an institution, he predicted that
it would attract but few students, and not answer the purpose for
which it was required, "if tied down by tests and oaths to support
particular dogmas." This warning was unheeded, and for the reasons he
had given, the university had to be turned upside down a quarter of a
century afterwards, having in the meantime produced a minimum quantity
of good fruit.

The Executive Government, the Legislative Council, the Bench, the Bar,
the Church, all came in for a a share of attention. Governor Maitland
was disadvantageously compared to De Witt Clinton, of the State of New
York. The members of the Executive, apparently for no sound reason,
were described as "foreigners." The Legislative Council, a majority of
whose members held offices under the crown, and were even pluralists
in a small way, were represented as being "always selected from the
tools of servile power." The dependent position of the Judges, being
removable at the pleasure of the Executive, was lamented. As for the
Church, which claimed to be the established religion of the country,
its ministers were declared to be not of that class who endure
persecution for conscience' sake. The Bar was admitted to have four
righteous members, and might, therefore, be considered to be in a
hopeful condition. But the standard to which its members were expected
to attain was no common one. Lawyers were expected at all times to be
ready, without fee or other reward than the approval of a good
conscience, to plead the cause of the unfortunate poor.

In so many words, the young journalist volunteered a disclaimer, by
way of anticipation, of being a Radical Reformer. He had joined no
Spafield mobs. He had never benefited by the harangues of Hunt,
Cobbett, or Watson. He was not even chargeable with being a follower
of Gourlay, who had already rendered himself odious to the ruling
faction. With none of these sins was Mr. Mackenzie chargeable. And
though he was a warm reformer, he "never wished to see British America
an appendage of the American Union." American liberty was good, but
British liberty was better. From the Americans we might learn
something of the art of agriculture; but of government nothing. Yet
our own system of cross-purposes required reformation. The proposed
Union Bill of 1818 had been rightly rejected, and the only desirable
union was one of all the British American colonies. The first existing
law against which Mr. Mackenzie directed his pen, after that which
gave the Church of England the entire proceeds of the Clergy Reserves,
was that upholding the right of primogeniture.

Such are the views promulgated by the young journalist at the outset
of his career. Yet, moderate and even conservative as they were, on
many points, an organ of the official party suggested that he should
be banished the Province, and the whole edition--which it would not
have been easy to collect after it had once been distributed through
the country--seized. We look upon them now as being for the most part
moderate and rational; and where the majority of the present
generation of Canadians will differ from him is that, on the Clergy
Reserves question, he did not hold the voluntary view. At that time,
he would have denounced secularization as a monstrous piece of
sacrilege. The views which he expressed in reference to a Provincial
University, before it had been brought into existence, afterwards came
in the shape of a reform, the fruit of a long and bitter controversy.
Members of the Legislature no longer hold subordinate offices, much
less are they pluralists. The judges hold their offices for life, and
are not removable at the pleasure of the Executive. The Executive
Council can only be composed of such men as can obtain the favor of a
legislative majority. The Church of England, having no exclusive
privileges, and making no pretensions to dominancy, no longer excite
jealousy, envy, or hatred. All the Provinces of British America have
not yet been united under one government, it is true; but the question
of uniting them never before occupied the same degree of attention.
The right of primogeniture has been abolished, and intestate estates
are equally distributed among the children. The mode of administering
the government has been so revolutionized as to be equivalent to a
complete change of system. The game of cross-purposes, of which Mr.
Mackenzie complained, is no longer played between the two branches of
the Legislature, or between the popular branch and the Executive. In
making the Legislative Council elective--saving the rights of
life-members already appointed--we have gone a step beyond what Mr.
Mackenzie dreamed of in 1824, and which he would probably, at that
time, have opposed as a radical departure from the British system of
government.

Something new under the sun had appeared in the newspaper world of
Upper Canada. To official gazettes containing a little news, and
semi-official sheets, which had an intense admiration of the ruling
oligarchy, little York had previously been accustomed. To newspaper
criticism the Executive had not been inured; and it was determined
that the audacity of the new journal should be rebuked. In spite of
all his protestations, Mr. Mackenzie was called upon to defend himself
against an imputation of disloyalty; and, judging from his reply, he
appears to have felt this as one of the most galling and at the same
time one of the most untrue accusations that could have been made
against him. A Mackenzie disloyal! In the annals of the whole clan no
record of so unnatural a monster could be found. On the 10th of June,
Mr. Mackenzie replied at great length. A part of this reply has
already been given, in the way of family history; and the more
material parts of the remainder must not be omitted:

"Had Mr. Fothergill not been pleased to accuse me in plain terms of
democracy, disloyalty, and foul play, I should not have devoted so
much of this number to party argument. It is necessary for me,
however, when my good name is so unexpectedly and rudely assailed, in
the first place, to deny, in plain and positive terms, such a charge;
it will then accord with my duty, as well as with my inclination, to
inquire how far he or any man is entitled, from any observations of
mine to advance such statements as appear in the official papers of
the 27th ult. and 3d instant.

"I consider it the bounden duty of every man who conducts a public
newspaper, to endeavor to regulate his own conduct in private life, so
as that the observations he may publicly make on the words and
actions of others, may not lose their weight and influence on being
contrasted with his own behavior, whether as the head of a family or
as an individual member of society. Were I a native of the village in
which I now write, or of the district in which it is situated, the
whole of my past life could be fairly referred to, as a refutation, or
as a corroboration of what he has urged against me; but as that is not
the case, this being only the fifth year of my residence in Canada, I
must refer to that residence, and to such other circumstances as I may
consider best calculated to do away the injurious impression that will
be raised in the minds of those that do not know me, and who may
therefore be unjustly biassed by his erroneous statements. I will, in
the first instance, refer to every page of the four numbers of _The
Advocate_, now before the public; I may ask every impartial reader,
nay, I may even ask Mr. Robinson[13] himself, (that is, if he has any
judgment in such matters,) whether they do not, in every line, speak
the language of a free and independent British subject? I may ask
whether I have not endeavored, by every just means, to discourage the
unprofitable, unsocial system of the local governments, so detrimental
to British and Colonial interests, and which has been productive of so
much misery to these Colonies? Whether I have not endeavored to
inculcate in all my readers, that godlike maxim of the illustrious
British patriot, Charles James Fox, that 'that government alone is
strong that has the hearts of the people.' It is true, my loyalty has
not descended so low as to degenerate into a base, fawning, cringing
servility. I may honor my sovereign surely, and remember the ruler of
my people with the respect that is due unto his name and rank, without
allowing my deportment to be equally respectful and humble to His
Majesty's butcher or his baker, his barber or his tailor! If I were
reduced to poverty and distress, and were unable to work for my bread,
I would cheerfully submit without repining at the Divine Providence,
and ask an alms from my fellow-creatures, as a temporary sustenance to
this tabernacle of clay, until in due time I were called home; but I
feel that not to gain the wealth of the Indies, could I now cringe to
the funguses that I have beheld in this country, and who are more
numerous and more pestilential in the town of York, than the marshes
and quagmires with which it is environed.

[Footnote 13: Then Attorney General, now Chief Justice of the Court of
Queen's Bench.]

"It may be proper that I should for this once add a few other reasons,
why disloyalty can never enter my breast; even the name I bear has in
all ages proved talismanic, an insurmountable barrier. There are many
persons in this very colony who have known me from infancy, so that
what I may say can there or here easily be proved or disproved if it
should ever become of consequence enough to deserve investigation. If
Mr. Fothergill can find that any one who bears the name which from
both parents I inherit, if he can find only one Mackenzie, and they
are a very extensive clan, whether a relation of mine or otherwise,
whether of patrician, or (as he terms me) of plebeian birth, who has
ever deserted or proved disloyal to his Sovereign in the hour of
danger, even I will allow that he had the shadow of a reason for his
false and slanderous imputations; but if in this research he fails, I
hope, that for the sake of truth and justice, for the honor of the
Canadian press, for the sake of the respectability of that official
journal of which he has the management, if not for mine who never
wronged him, that he will instantly retract a charge, which, to say
the least of it, is as foolish and groundless, as the observations he
has connected with it are vain and futile. Only think of the
consequences which might result from owing allegiance to a foreign
government; think that in a few short weeks, or it may be years, one
might be called on, upon the sanctity of an oath, to wage war against
all that from childhood upwards he had held most dear: to go forth in
battle array against the heritage of his ancestors, his kindred, his
friends, and his acquaintances; to become instrumental in the
subjugation by fire and sword to foreigners, of the fields, the
cities, the mausoleums of his forefathers--aye perhaps in the heat of
battle it might be his lot to plunge the deadly blade into the breast
of a father, or a brother, or an only child. Surely this picture is
not overcharged. In our days it stands on record as having been
verified."

There is no reason, not even in the subsequent history of Mr.
Mackenzie, to doubt the sincerity with which those protestations were
made. Years after he went so far, in a letter to Lord Dalhousie,
Governor-in-Chief, as to suggest the possible return to their
allegiance to England of the United States, if it were once understood
that the full rights of British subjects were to be conferred upon the
colonies. And he constantly raised a warning voice to show the danger
of a persistent refusal to give to colonists the full enjoyment of
those rights. His nature had evidently to undergo a great change
before he could become a leader of insurrection. Mr. Fothergill[14]
does not appear to have shown any disposition to prolong the personal
contest he had provoked; and he afterwards became an advocate in the
Legislature of the man he had at first made a personal antagonist. In
December, 1826, we find him moving--any member then had the initiation
of the money votes--in the Legislative Assembly, that a small sum be
paid Mr. Mackenzie for the reports of the debates he had published. As
affording a picture of the state of the press of Upper Canada, at that
time, and as throwing light on this period of the life of the subject
of this biography, an extract from the speech is worth reading:

"Mr. Fothergill intended to move for a sum to be paid to the editor of
_The Advocate_. That paper had during the session endeavored to give
an accurate account of their proceedings. Many of their resolutions,
bills, reports of committees, and petitions of a public nature, had
been first printed in _The Advocate_, for the advantage of their
constituents, as also the speeches pro and con on several important
questions; Mr. Mackenzie had made great exertions--established the
only newspaper on an imperial sheet, and that too without any increase
in the price of his journal, ever printed or published within the
colony. He had last fall, in addition to his former establishment,
purchased, at great expense, a new patent cast iron press--the first
ever seen here, also new founts of types. He had been led to believe
that this additional supply of materials would be free by virtue of
the bill of last session passed both houses, but was disappointed; and
instead of relief, found that new and heavy duties were laid on
another material article in his trade--paper. His extended circulation
subjects him to a more than ordinary share of that tax felt by all
printers in some degree, namely, the payment of newspaper postages
quarterly in advance, rigidly enforced from those who send the papers
away, and irrecoverable whether they arrive at their destination or
not. And if they do arrive there, he (Mr. F.) could tell, for he had
had experience as a printer, that in proportion as a paper became
popular, and therefore more extensively ordered for the country, in
like proportion did the proprietor become embarrassed. The readers
were scattered over a vast country, thinly populated, and the returns
were very long in coming back--often never; this should induce the
house to pay a better price for the papers they saw fit to receive
from printers; and no one in the colony suffered more from extensive
credits than Mr. Mackenzie, whose impression of six or seven hundred
went chiefly to the country by various conveyances. He (Mr. F.) was
credibly informed that, in order to induce inquiry in England as well
as here, _The Advocate_ had been sent free to persons in Canada since
its commencement, as many as nine or ten thousand copies, and that
since the session opened, eighty or ninety copies had been weekly
forwarded free, to British members of parliament, by the mail. This
would help to draw attention in the proper quarter to our country. It
was plain that newspapers which assumed anything like independence in
their principles or feelings were, in Upper Canada, totally excluded
from benefiting by any advertising over which the government had
control. He thought the newspapers furnished, and bills, resolutions,
&c., reported by the editor of _The Advocate_, were fully as useful to
the country, and as deserving of payment from the funds of the people,
as were the proclamations for which the Kingston _Chronicle_ received
45 last year from the casual revenues of the crown."

[Footnote 14: Mr. Fothergill was an English gentleman, born in
Yorkshire, and well educated. He brought considerable means with him
to Canada; but they were all dissipated many years before his death.]

The motion for granting Mr. Mackenzie 37 16_s._ was carried; but the
Lieutenant Governor struck the item out of the contingencies, and it
was not paid. Mr. Fothergill, having had experience of newspaper
publishing, was no indifferent judge of the difficulties he described.
The payment in advance, by the publishers, of postage on all the
papers they sent out in a year for every weekly paper, must have been
next to a prohibition of newspapers altogether; and we may be sure
that they were regarded with no friendly eye by the government. While
postage was exacted on Canadian newspapers in advance of their
transmission, United States papers were allowed to come into the
Province without being prepaid; an anomaly characterized by Mr.
Mackenzie as a premium upon democratic principles, and a not
ineffectual method of revolutionizing opinion in the Canadas.

A union of all the British-American colonies had few earlier advocates
than Mr. Mackenzie. In a letter to Mr. Canning, dated June 10, 1824,
he touches on this question.

     Queenstown, U. C., _June_ 10, 1824.

     ...A union of all the colonies, with a government
     suitably poised and modelled, so as to have under its
     eye the resources of our whole territory, and having
     the means in its power to administer impartial justice
     in all its bounds, to no one part at the expense of
     another, would require few boons from Britain, and
     would advance her interests much more in a few years,
     than the bare right of possession of a barren,
     uncultivated wilderness of lake and forest, with some
     three or four inhabitants to the square mile, can do in
     centuries. A colonial marine can only be created by a
     foreign trade, aided by free and beneficial
     institutions; these indeed would create it, as if by
     the wand of an enchanter. If that marine is not brought
     into being; if that trade, foreign and domestic,
     continues much longer shackled by supreme neglect, and
     by seven inferior sets of legislative bodies, reigning
     like so many petty kings during the Saxon heptarchy,
     England may yet have cause to rue the day, when she
     neglected to raise that only barrier, or counterpoise
     to republican power, which could in the end have best
     guarded and maintained her interests....

     British members of parliament and political writers,
     who talk of giving the Colonies complete independence
     now, either know not that our population and resources
     would prove very insufficient to preserve our freedom,
     were it menaced, or else they desire to see the sway of
     England's most formidable rival extended over the
     whole of the vast regions of the North American
     continent. I have the honor to remain, Sir, Your
     obedient, humble servant,

     W. L. MACKENZIE.

     TO THE RIGHT HON. GEORGE CANNING.

Nor was this a mere casual expression of opinion. On the 14th
December, 1826, we find in his journal the following testimony to his
continued advocacy of this measure, under the head of "A Confederation
of the British North American Colonies:"

"Right glad should we be, indeed, if the confidential information
received by _The Albion_ should prove correct. We have written much
and often, advocating an effective united government for the colonies,
in the bonds of amity and relationship with England, we have sent
hundreds of copies of our journal to Europe to distinguished persons,
with that project specially marked and noted, but were always afraid
that the idea would be treated as 'an idle chimera,' even by the
wisest and ablest of British statesmen. It would, however, be the best
and safest policy; for England can continue to hold Cabotia[15] only
by the ties of friendship, amity, and mutual advantages--ties which,
with the divine blessing, would be greatly strengthened, were the
talent, the resources, the enterprise of all the colonies fully
brought into action in a liberal, enlightened, and united general
government."

[Footnote 15: A word derived from the discoverer Cabot, and one which
has been regarded as the best designation for the whole of British
North America. While Nova Scotia, or New Brunswick, would not like to
sink her individuality as part of Canada, she would not object to be
part of Cabotia. Canadians, however, would object to change the name
of their country.]

The mode in which Mr. Mackenzie proposed to bring about this change
was this:

"Let an Act be passed in the British Parliament calling a convention
of all the colonies, and let a British nobleman or gentleman of
competent knowledge preside, as representing His Majesty, at that
convention; let representatives from each section of British America,
chosen by the people and in proportion to the population, compose that
convention; let the outlines of a constitution be drawn up by this
confederation of the talents and wisdom of His Majesty's American
subjects, and sent home for the consideration of the Imperial
Parliament; let the convention be dissolved, and Great Britain will
then know what her colonies want, what they require, and it will be
for the British Legislature to alter or amend such constitution, so
that justice may be done to all parties, and the interests of neither
sacrificed."[16]

Some years before the colonial department had had this union under
consideration, and, in 1822, Mr. Robinson, afterwards Chief Justice of
the Court of Queen's Bench, at the request of the Imperial
authorities, gave his opinions at length on a plan of union that had
been proposed.[17] He thought he saw many advantages in such a union;
but the Imperial government appear to have entertained a fear that it
would lead to the colonies combining against the mother country. Mr.
(afterwards Sir John) Robinson did not share those fears. The question
attracted some attention in Nova Scotia about the same time, and Mr.
Halliburton wrote a pamphlet in which it was advocated.

[Footnote 16: _Colonial Advocate_, June 24, 1824.]

[Footnote 17: _Canada and the Canada Bill_, by John Beverly Robinson,
Esq., 1840.]

Soon after Mr. Mackenzie had entered on the career of a journalist a
general election came on. It was held in July. The poll was kept open
a week in those times. The result, a majority opposed to the
Executive, might have been contributed to by Mr. Mackenzie's efforts,
though there is no reason to believe that it was much affected by his
writings, since he had issued only a few numbers of his paper. There
had been a great change in the _personnel_ of the House. Only sixteen
members of the previous Assembly had been re-elected; there were
twenty-six new members; from Essex the return was short by one member;
the whole number being forty-five.[18] In the new House the government
was destined to be confronted by large majorities, even on their own
measures--the Alien Bill, for instance--but the principle of executive
responsibility was not acknowledged, and no question of ministerial
resignation ever followed a defeat.

[Footnote 18: In the following list of members, those whose names are
in italics, held seats in the previous House:--

RETURN OF MEMBERS FOR THE NINTH PROVINCIAL PARLIAMENT OF UPPER
CANADA.--Grenville--_Jonas Jones_ and Hamilton Walker.
Glengary--Alexander McDonnell and Duncan Cameron. Stormont--_Archibald
McLean_ and _Philip Vankoughnet_. Norfolk--_Francis L. Walsh_ and
Duncan McCall. Prince Edward--_James Wilson_ and _Paul Peterson_.
Hastings--_Reuben White_ and Thomas Coleman. Kent--_James Gordon_.
Northumberland--Zaccheus Burnham and James Lyons. [Mr. Lyons was
unseated by a committee and Mr. Ewengo declared the sitting member.]
Frontenac--Hugh C. Thomson and James Atkinson. Middlesex--John Rolph
and John Matthews. Prescott and Russel--Donald McDonald.
Lanark--_William Morris_. Oxford--_Thomas Hornor_ and Charles
Ingersoll. Lincoln--Bartholomew C. Beardsley, _John Clark_, John J.
Lefferty, and _Robert Randall_. Leeds--_Charles Jones_ and David
Jones. Essex--Alexander Wilkins. Wentworth--_John Willson_ and _George
Hamilton_. Carlton--George Thew Borke. Halton--Richard Beasley and
William Scollick. Lennox and Addington--Marshall S. Bidwell and Peter
Perry. Durham--George Strange Boulton. York and Simcoe--William
Thompson and Ely Playter. Dundas--John Chrysler. Town of York--_John
Beverly Robinson_. Town of Niagara--Edward McBride. Town of
Kingston--John Cumming.]

Prior to the meeting of the new Legislature, there arose a government
prosecution, on which much popular feeling was excited; and when the
case had come for a jury, Mr. Mackenzie showed more feeling at the
demeanor of the judge than, from his writings, he appears to have
previously displayed. Mr. Whitehead, the customs collector, at Port
Hope, had commenced a prosecution against Mr. Wm. Mackintosh, the
owner of the _Minerva Ann_, for an infraction of the revenue laws, in
neglecting to report her arrival. The fact was admitted, but the
public feeling ran strongly in favor of the defendant, the offence
being looked upon as merely nominal. The jury, probably sharing the
common feeling, found a verdict for the defendant; and they were about
to give their reasons for doing so, when the court interposed an
objection to the irregularity of such a course. Mr. Justice Boulton
told the jury that their verdict was "contrary alike to the law and
the evidence." The Solicitor-General, (son of the judge,) who was
conducting the case for the crown, proposed that the record should be
read to the jury, whom he wished to reconsider their verdict. Mr.
Washburn, on behalf of the defendant, attempted to reply, when a
scene, the reverse of creditable, occurred. The judge having
peremptorily ordered Mr. Washburn to sit down,

"Mr. Washburn said, I wish to know from your Lordship, whether I am
to be allowed to reply to Mr. Solicitor General's arguments or not?

"Mr. Justice Boulton--Sit down! Sir, I, say--sit down! It is indecent
for you to interrupt the Court.

"Mr. Washburn again attempted to speak.

"Mr. Justice Boulton--Sit down! Sir,--Sit down! or I'll--I'll--Mr.
Sheriff, take this fellow out of Court!

"Mr. Washburn--My Lord! I must and will be heard. Your Lordship
informed me that I should have liberty to reply. I am standing here in
defence of a client who has committed his case to my hands. I have a
duty to perform to him, which is paramount to every other
consideration. I will not desert him now; nor can I be driven to
abandon him by any man. I therefore request once more to know, before
I sit down, whether I shall be allowed to reply?

"Mr. Justice Boulton--Sit down! Sir. Mr. Sheriff--Mr. Sheriff, take
this man out of Court!"[19]

The sheriff, probably making allowance for the warmth of the judge,
did not attempt to obey the order. After the judge had again addressed
the jury at great length, they retired a second time, and brought in a
special verdict in writing, amounting, in effect, to precisely the
same as the first. Again the judge remonstrated; but the foreman of
the jury cut the matter short by informing his lordship, that he
should prefer to starve to death rather than alter his verdict.

[Footnote 19: The _Report_ is taken from the York _Observer_, a
government paper.]

On this proceeding, Mr. Mackenzie commented with greater indignation
than he had shown on any previous occasion:

"Were I at this moment immured in a dungeon, and denied the privileges
of the lowest hind that breathes the vital air, and crawls along, I
would not exchange places with our high born ruler, surrounded by such
men as he now delights to honor; no! I would spurn--I would loathe the
very idea of such a prostration. I am the son of an humble, obscure
mechanic, bred in the lap of poverty; but not to inherit the noble
blood which flows in his veins--not to possess the ancestral grandeur
that surrounds his name--not to wear the star that adorns his breast,
nor the honorable orders that mark his valor--no! not for worlds would
I exchange situations with him, surrounded by men whose whole career
is like 'vanity tossed to and fro of them that seek death.'

"If a judge can bully a jury into submission to his dictation, though
expressly contrary to their own solemn verdict; if a Solicitor for the
Crown can trample under foot the dearest rights of Britons; if a
government, emanating from England, can cherish such a corrupt, such a
detestable star-chamber crew--then the days of the infamous Scroggs
and Jeffries are returned upon us; and we may lament for ourselves,
for our wives and for our children, that the British Constitution is,
in Canada, a phantom to delude to destruction, instead of being the
day-star of our dearest liberties."

This was followed by an appeal to the new Legislature, to address the
Governor General to dismiss from his presence and counsels the
politicians by whom be was then advised, including "the whole of the
Boulton race, root and branch."




CHAPTER V.

     Removal to York, the Seat of the Upper Canada
     Government--Reporting and Publishing Legislative
     Debates--Newspapers and Postage--The Foundation of
     Brock's Monument raised to fish up an obnoxious
     Newspaper--Parliament House at York Burnt--A Hospital
     turned into a Legislative Building--Meeting of the New
     House--The Government in a Minority--An Irresponsible
     Government--Temporary Resolve (not carried out) to
     return to Dundas--Kissing and Government Printing go by
     Favor--Journey to Kingston--A Singular
     Character--Feeling towards the "Yankees"--The Perils of
     Plain Speaking--Dismissal of a King's Printer--Mr.
     Mackenzie resolves to abandon Politics and publish a
     Literary Journal--His Ideal of a Patriot.


As the Legislative session approached, Mr. Mackenzie saw reasons for
removing his establishment to York, then the seat of the government
for Upper Canada. A paper published at Queenstown must necessarily
reproduce stale accounts of the Legislative proceedings. It was
doubtful whether any newspaper, which had then been published in Upper
Canada, had repaid the proprietor the cost of its production. Any
publisher who sent a thousand sheets through the post-office must pay
$800 a year postage, quarterly in advance. Though some of the other
settlements were well supplied with post-offices, there were none at
all on the South-western frontier, from Chippewa, by Fort Erie, to the
mouth of the Grand River. The three thousand settlers in Dumfries and
Waterloo had to travel from sixteen to forty miles before they
reached a post-office. Postmasters received nothing for distributing
newspapers, and were accordingly careless about their delivery. Other
modes of distribution were occasionally resorted to by publishers to
avoid the heavy postal tax. Mr. Mackenzie, at one time, thought of
publishing the Legislative debates in a quarto sheet, without comment;
but he must have left his own impulsive temperament out of the account
if he fancied he could become a silent recorder of other men's
opinions.

Since 1821, Francis Collins had furnished the principal reports of the
Legislative debates; but it is in evidence that, up to 1827, the
operation of publishing them had never been remunerative. Mr.
Mackenzie's political enemies and rivals in the press, maliciously
circulated the story, that he had removed to York under a promise from
a majority of the members of the new House, that he should be
guaranteed the printing of the bills and the laws; to which he replied
that he would feel much more obliged if they would speedily improve an
important department of internal economy of the Province--the
post-office--than if they gave him all the jobs in their gift for a
century to come. The new House paid a reporter 100 for reporting
during the session; the reports to be delivered to the papers for
publication, unless the Committee on Printing should exercise the
arbitrary discretion of refusing to allow any particular report to be
printed. While these reports were permitted to be published in _The
Observer_, they refused to allow them to appear in _The Advocate_.
After this, Mr. Rolph and Mr. Beardsley asked to have their names
struck from off the Printing Committee. Beardsley is reported to have
voted for the exclusion of _The Advocate_. Mr. C. Jones, Mr. A.
McLean, and Mr. Beardsley must divide the honor of the act among them.
It was they who assumed the power of suppressing the reports
altogether at pleasure. The question came up in the House, and
although there was no decision upon it, the exclusion was not long
maintained. The spite against that journal was carried to great
lengths. After the ceremony of re-interring the remains of General
Brock, at Queenstown Heights, on the thirteenth of September, 1824,
some person, in the absence of Mr. Mackenzie, put into a hole in the
rock, at the foundation of the monument, a bottle which he had filled
with coins and newspapers, and among which was a single number of _The
Advocate_. When the fact became known to the authorities, the
foundation was ordered to be torn up and the obnoxious paper taken
out, that the ghost of the immortal warrior might not be disturbed by
its presence, and the structure not be rendered insecure.

Combining a book store with publishing, Mr. Mackenzie once entertained
the idea of relying principally on the printing of books, and issuing
a political sheet occasionally. _The Advocate_ had not indeed appeared
with strict regularity; only twenty numbers having been published in
six calendar months. Some numbers had, after several weeks, been
reprinted, and others continued to be asked for after they could be
supplied. The last number of _The Advocate_, published in Queenstown,
bears date, November 18, 1824; and the first number printed in York
appeared on the twenty-fifth of the same month. In January, 1825, its
circulation was stated at eight hundred and thirty.

At Christmas, 1824, the northern wing of the Legislative buildings,
situated on the site of the present Toronto jail, was accidentally
burnt down; and as the new House was to meet on the 11th of January,
1825, there was not much time to find new quarters for the
Legislature. No time was lost in putting the new, now the old and
abandoned, hospital, into order for that purpose.

The first trial of party strength, if such the election of Speaker
could be considered, seemed to indicate a pretty well balanced House,
the vote being twenty-one against nineteen;[20] but upon other
questions the government minority shrunk to much smaller dimensions.
Mr. Willson of Wentworth had become the successor of Mr. Sherwood in
the Speaker's chair. The Liberals were in ecstasies. "The result of
this election," said Mr. Mackenzie, "will gladden the heart and
sweeten the cup of many a Canadian peasant in the midst of his toil."
The advantage of such a victory must, however, be very small, under a
condition of things which permitted the advisers of the sovereign's
representative to keep their places in spite of a permanently hostile
legislative majority. Not only were ministers not responsible to the
House; they did not admit that they had any collective responsibility
at all. The Attorney General (Robinson) said, in his place in the
House, "he was at a loss to know what the learned member from
Middlesex (Mr. Rolph) meant by a prime minister and a cabinet; there
was no cabinet: he sat in that house to deliver his opinions on his
own responsibility: he was under no out-door influence whatever." All
eyes were turned towards the Lieutenant Governor; and as there was no
responsible ministry to stand between him and public censure, the
authority of the crown which he represented could not fail to be
weakened by the criticism of executive acts. The new House was
described by Mr. Mackenzie as being chiefly composed of men who
appeared to act from principle, and were indefatigable in the
discharge of their duties. In committee of the whole, the Speaker
entered into the debates with as much freedom as any other member.

[Footnote 20: Vote of the House of Assembly, at the election of Mr.
John Willson, as Speaker:

_Yeas_.--Messrs. Rolph, Ingersoll, Matthews, McCall, Horner, Beasley,
Beardsley, McBride, Clark, Randall, Lefferty, Scollick, Hamilton,
Playter, Thompson, Thomson, Lyons, Peterson, Perry, Bidwell, and
Walsh--21.

_Nays_.--Messrs. Att'y General, Atkinson, White, Coleman, Burnham,
Boulton, Gordon, Wilkinson, 3 Jones's, McDonell, Macdonald,
Vankoughnett, McLean, Morris, Chrysler, Cameron, and Walker.--19.]

Before he had been in York five months, Mr. Mackenzie formed a
fleeting resolution to leave it, and return to Dundas. He had, while
there, become much attached to the people. If his paper found a less
number of readers there than at York, the prospect was rather
consolatory than otherwise, since he would have fared better if the
number of his patrons had been diminished by five hundred.[21] Mr.
Mackenzie's friends had urged him not to carry this resolution into
effect; but it was taken, and was not, as he persuaded himself, to be
shaken. His friends--we are not told who they were--rejoined: "If you
remain, you may next year get the Legislative printing." He had
offered to print of the laws one thousand copies for less than
100--the King's printer having received over 900 for the same work
in the previous year--and failed to obtain the contract. "Business
shall be dull with me," he said, "if at any future day I condescend to
take those measures to obtain the work of a legislative body, which I
find to be the sure means of success in York." For whatever reason, he
changed his resolution to return to Dundas, and remained at the seat
of government.

[Footnote 21: A collector whom he had sent into the country with
$1,400 of newspaper accounts, collected in eleven weeks only 42 13_s_
10_d_, from which 15 was deducted for personal expenses. To obtain
this much the collector walked 1200 miles.]

In March, Mr. Mackenzie went to Kingston, where some of his wife's
relatives lived; "a journey of nearly four hundred miles, on some of
the worst roads that human foot ever trod, and in an inclement season
of the year." The villages of Port Hope and Cobourg, which, five years
before, had contained some half a dozen houses each, were now rapidly
increasing post-towns. At Kingston, he found that foreigners were not
allowed to visit the Royal Navy Yard, the English Dock Yard customs
being observed. He obtained a visiting pass from Captain Barrie, the
acting Commissioner. He could not help expressing a hope that the
boastful Yankees might be taught civility.

"I went on board the great ship St. Lawrence, and although none of
your warlike sort of people, except in a quiet way and upon paper, I
do hope that if she is ever again put in commission, she will give
these noisy brethren of ours on the other side the lake such a
broadside as they may remember; so that at the peace which will be
thereafter, I may hear less of their glorious and uninterrupted line
of victories by sea and land--General Hull's campaign to the contrary
notwithstanding."

Near Port Hope, he met an innkeeper, whose description is singular
enough to deserve preservation:

"An innkeeper of eccentric manners resides at the 'Bull Tavern,' near
Port Hope. I never miss calling on him when I go that way; indeed our
acquaintance is of five years' standing, for I remember when he first
pitched his tent where now stands the hospitable caravansary of 'John
Bull.'

"The name of mine host is Mr. Thomas Turner Orton, and he is far above
the ordinary cast of innkeepers, inasmuch as he is a linguist, a
polemic, and a political economist of no mean celebrity. When the
stage stopped at the 'John Bull,' Mr. Orton was busily engaged reading
the Hebrew Bible, with the aid of a Lexicon, and he, much to my
edification, condescended to instruct me in the difference between a
Lexicon with and without points. I believe the learned Parkhurst
himself could not have given a clearer definition. While we rested, I
learnt from him, that Mrs. Thomas Turner Orton, his lady, had been
bred along with the royal family of France. As also that the Lieut.
Governor had made him an offer of the U. C. _Gazette_, that he is an
adept at the French language, that he had long been intimate with his
late Majesty of Sweden, (Gustavus,) and on the most familiar terms
with the King of Denmark. Mr. Orton was formerly, as we are informed
by the London Directory for 1814, a 'Ship-owner and General
Commission Agent, Orton's Terrace, Commercial Road,' London; and it
was, when a prisoner of war, that this intimacy with the predecessor
of Bernadotte had its commencement."

At the end of a year after its commencement, forty-three numbers of
the newspaper had appeared. The subscribers, who were accounted with
at the rate of fifty-two numbers for a year, were warned that they
must not expect any greater regularity in future. The attention which
even a weekly newspaper required, put an end to the devouring of large
numbers of books, to which, Mr. Mackenzie was previously addicted.
"Much of my past life," he said, "has been spent in reading; to this
the last twelve months form an exception, as in that time I have
scarcely had an opportunity to open a volume." One year's experience
had taught him that "the editor in Canada, who, in the state the
Province was then in, will attempt freely to hazard an opinion on the
merits and demerits of public men, woe be to him! By the implied
consent of king, lords, and commons he is doomed to speedy shipwreck,
unless a merciful providence should open his eyes in time, and his
good genius prompt him 'to hurl press and types to the bottom of Lake
Ontario.'"

The time was rapidly approaching, when, in his own case, the evil
genius of his enemies was to perform this service for him, and
literally throw his types into a bay of Lake Ontario.

From the 16th June to the 18th December, 1825, there was a cessation
of the publication of _The Advocate_. In about eleven months,
fifty-one numbers had been issued; but the intermissions, of which no
notice was given, did not conduce to the success of the journal. The
readers desired to receive it regularly every week, and the
preparation requisite for a compliance with their desire necessitated
a breathing spell. After that was over, Little York was promised a
newspaper equal in dimensions to the more noted of the New York
sheets. Unexpected delays, however, prevented its appearance till more
than a month after the legislative session had commenced. The
experiment must have been a hazardous one in a country where the
population was scattered over a very wide extent of territory, and
numbered only 157,541; not much more than the united populations of
Montreal and Toronto at present.

The one paper circulating among this population, which yielded a
certain profit, was the _Upper Canada Gazette_. It became necessary
for Mr. Mackenzie to notice a story that he had been offered the
editorship of the official paper in reversion. He showed the absurdity
of the supposition that such an offer could be made to him who had
opposed nearly all the measures of the government. At the same time,
he thought he could make it very interesting, in a few weeks, if it
were under his control; and while he should certainly accept the
offer, if made, he should regard him that made it with the greatest
possible contempt. Mr. Fothergill, the editor of the official paper,
had a perverse habit of speaking his mind very bluntly in his capacity
as legislator; and when there was a rumor of his intended removal, Mr.
Mackenzie said he had too good an opinion of the Lieutenant Governor
to think that he would attempt to injure Mr. Fothergill for having
spoken in the Legislature as became the scion of an ancient and
honorable family and a free-born Englishman. Mr. Fothergill had joined
the extreme Liberals, on the Alien question, contending that all
Americans then in the country ought to have the full rights of British
subjects conferred upon them by statute; and he had moved strong
resolutions on the back of an inquiry into the mysteries of the
Post-office revenue, taking the ground that it was contrary to the
Constitutional Act to withhold from the Legislature an account of this
revenue, or to deprive it of the right of appropriating it. He had
also moved an address on the Land-granting Department--always a tender
subject; and in those days persons who obtained free grants of land
thought it a monstrous hardship to be obliged to pay the official
fees, making more contortions of feature over the transaction than a
settler makes now in paying his two dollars per acre. By taking this
course, he had assisted to produce those numerous defeats which had
fallen, one after another, with such irritating effect upon the
government. A man who did this could not long continue a special
favorite of the government in those times; but that Mr. Mackenzie was
ever thought of in connection with the editorship of the non-official
part of the official _Gazette_ is out of the question. The ink of Mr.
Fothergill's reported speech on the Post-office question was scarcely
dry when he was dismissed from the situation of King's Printer. He had
not abused his trust by turning the paper with the conduct of which he
was charged against the government, but he had ventured to confront a
gross abuse in the Legislative Assembly. That was his crime, and of
that crime he paid the penalty. The office of King's Printer, in Lower
as well as in Upper Canada, was held at the pleasure of the Governor,
and the incumbent might be dismissed without any cause being assigned.
None was assigned in this case. Mr. Fothergill had no warning, and the
event appears to have come somewhat unexpectedly upon him, though he
could not have been ignorant of rumors that were in everybody's mouth.
It was no doubt inconvenient to have a King's Printer, who, even in
his legislative capacity, opposed himself to the government; but the
fault lay in the system which permitted the incumbent of such an
office to hold a seat in the Legislature. The union of judicial and
legislative powers in the hands of one person was a still greater
evil; and though it might have been productive of far worse results,
it was permitted to exist long after the period of which we are now
writing.[22]

Free speech met small encouragement at the hands of the Executive.
Francis Collins, who had been the official reporter of the Legislature
for five years, in an evil hour, in 1825, commenced the publication of
a newspaper, the _Canadian Freeman_, and in that year the Lieutenant
Governor cut off his remuneration. He exhausted his means in the vain
effort to report the debates at his own cost, and found himself
embarrassed with debt; Mr. Mackenzie seldom or never printed Collins'
reports, in the sessions of 1825-6; sometimes he dropped into the
House and took a few notes on his own account, but generally this
service was performed by some one else.

[Footnote 22: There still were reasons why the government and their
dismissed servant should deal somewhat tenderly with one another. Mr.
Fothergill explained the matter of his dismissal in an address to his
constituents; and though he hinted that there were men in the public
service who had built palaces without any visible means of
accomplishing such a feat, he could not assert, he remarked, that
undue influence had been exercised in the administration of justice,
or that "improper persons had been exalted into guardians of the
prerogative, Legislative councillors, arbitrers between the King and
the people." The sarcasm was well calculated to produce effect in
vulnerable places; and it was of no consequence if the general public
did not understand it. A bond for 360, to cover the amount of his
overdrafts on the treasury, was not taken into account in his
settlement with the government. If he was a patriot, his persecutors
were not without a spark of generosity.]

About six weeks before his printing office was destroyed by a mob, Mr.
Mackenzie drew a contrast between the life of an editor, in those
days, and that of a farmer; in which a vast balance of advantages
appeared in favor of the latter. The perpetuity of taskwork involved
in the conduct of even a weekly paper was felt to be such a drag that
he became appalled at it; and for the moment he resolved to have done
with politics and political newspapers. He would by this means release
himself from a galling dependence on sottish printers, reduce his
expenses with the size of his paper, and manage to have at least the
Sundays to himself. Having drawn a dreary picture of editorial
existence, in 1826, on six-sevenths of the week, he added:

"Such is his life for six days in the week all the year round; and how
think you is the seventh disposed of? If I would speak for myself I
might truly say, that I am often so wearied and fatigued with the
toils of the working days as to be perfectly unable to enjoy the rest
provided by a kind Providence on the Christian Sabbath. That instead
of being fit to attend church, read the Scriptures, or in any way
engage in the duties of divine appointment, I am glad to lay me down
on my bed or on a sofa, as a temporary relief from the effects of
incessant toil."

Henceforth his paper should be a Journal of Agriculture, Manufactures,
and Commerce; politics should have no place in it:

"I will carry it on as a literary and scientific work, will enrich its
pages with the discoveries of eminent men, and the improvements of
distinguished artists; but from thenceforth nothing of a political or
controversial character shall be allowed to appear in the Journal of
Agriculture, Manufactures, and Commerce. By diminishing its size the
expense and trouble attending it will be greatly lessened, and truly I
shall be as well satisfied to employ my people generally at book work,
which is a more easy employment, and can be increased or let alone at
pleasure. I shall then be freed from a toilsome and irksome
dependence, and if I lose thereby all political influence over the
minds of the people, I shall gain in exchange, what is to me of far
greater importance, a more extensive command of my own time. I must
endeavor to set apart a day and a paper wherein to review my past
labors; it is good to take a look at the past, as well as to endeavor
to rend asunder the veil which enshrouds futurity.

     "'Till youth's delirious dream is o'er,
       Sanguine with hope we look before,
                   The future good to find.
       In age, when error charms no more,
                   For bliss we look behind.'"

How long this resolution was kept--whether one or two days--cannot be
determined; but the next number of his journal, which took the folio
shape, was chiefly filled with a long review of the politics of the
Upper Province. He gave an account of the effect of his two years'
journalistic campaign; claiming to have largely assisted in producing
a party revolution. Men were astonished at the temerity of his plain
speaking; for, since Gourlay's banishment, the prudent had learned to
put a bridle on their tongues. Timid lookers-on predicted, in their
astonishment and with bated breath, that the fate of Gourlay would
soon fall on Mackenzie and silence his criticisms. Nearly the whole
press of the country was on his back; but in spite of the rushing
torrent of abuse he kept the even tenor of his way, avoiding
personalities as much as possible. In the number of the 4th of May,
1826, he drew an excellent picture of a patriot;[23] and there is no
doubt that he had tried to realize the description in his own person.

After the issue of two numbers, the quarto form was abandoned, and the
broad sheet resumed. But the resolution to abandon political
disquisitions--probably the impulse of temporary dejection or
despair--was, like the proposed removal to Dundas, given up,
apparently almost as soon as formed. At all times, during his life,
Mr. Mackenzie was subject to great elation at a brightening prospect,
and to corresponding depression in other circumstances. Two weeks
after the contemplated change in his journal, he announced that it
would be placed under the editorial direction of some one else; and
there was an attempt to carry out the idea that this had been done,
but it appears to have been only an excusable devise for keeping the
personality of the editor out of view.

[Footnote 23: A patriot is none of your raving railing, ranting,
accusing radicals--nor is he one of your idle, stall-fed, greasy, good
for nothing sinecurists, or pluralists; he is in deed and in truth a
friend to his country. He studies the laws and institutions of his
nation, that he may improve others; endeavors rather to cultivate the
acquaintance of, and shew a correct example to the better informed
classes; he associates only with those whose private conduct is in
unison with their public professions. Is not a mob hunter, nor a
lecturer of the multitude; desires rather the secret approbation of
the enlightened few than the ephemeral popularity of the many. If he
is a member of Parliament he looks carefully into the merits of the
question and votes consistently with his conscience, whether with or
against the ministry. He is neither a place hunter, nor a sinecure
hunter. He promises his constituents very little, but tries to perform
a great deal. Finally he is among the last of men who would
countenance political 'gamblers and black legs;' but a wise, manly,
and vigilant administration is his delight."]




CHAPTER VI.

     Destruction of _The Colonial Advocate_ Printing Office
     by an Official Mob--Who threw the First Stone--Mr.
     (afterwards Chief Justice) Macaulay publishes Mr.
     Mackenzie's Private Correspondence with him--The Type
     Rioters cast in Civil Damages--Illness of some of the
     Jurors while locked up--Mr. Fitzgibbon collects the
     Amount of the Damages among the Officials and their
     Friends--Whether the Damages were Exemplary or
     Excessive--Sparring between a Judge and the
     Attorney-General--Francis Collins Indicted for Four
     Libels--He Retaliates and causes the Type Riotors to be
     Proceeded against Criminally--Their Conviction--Henry
     John Boulton and James E. Small tried for Murder,
     arising out of a Fatal Duel--The Official Party procure
     a Presentment against Mr. Mackenzie for Libel.


One fine summer evening, to wit, the 8th June, 1826, a genteel mob,
composed of persons closely connected with the ruling faction, walked
into the office of _The Colonial Advocate_, at York, and in accordance
with a preconcerted plan set about the destruction of types and press.
Three pages of the paper in type on the composing-stones, with a
"form" of the Journals of the House, were broken up, and the face of
the letter battered. Some of the type was then thrown into the bay, to
which the printing-office was contiguous; some of it was scattered on
the floor of the office; more of it in the yard and in the adjacent
garden of Mr. George Munro. The composing-stone was thrown on the
floor. A new cast-iron patent lever-press was broken. "Nothing was
left standing," said an eyewitness, "not a thing." This scene took
place in broad daylight, and it was said that one or two magistrates,
who could not help witnessing it, never made the least attempt to put
a stop to the outrage. The valiant type destroyers, who chose for the
execution of their enterprise a day when Mr. Mackenzie was absent from
the city, were most of them closely connected with the official party,
which was then in a hopeless minority in the Legislature, and had
recently been exasperated by a succession of defeats.

Mr. Baby, Inspector-General, was represented on the occasion by two
sons, Charles and Raymond, students-at-law. Mr. Henry Sherwood, son of
Mr. Justice Sherwood, gave his personal assistance. Mr. Sherwood,
while yet a law student, held the office of Clerk of Assize. Mr.
Lyons, confidential secretary of Lieutenant-Governor Maitland, was
there to perform his part. To save appearances, Sir Perigrine found it
necessary to dismiss Lyons from his confidential situation; but he
soon afterwards rewarded him with the more lucrative office of
Register of the Niagara District. Mr. Samuel Peters Jarvis, son-in-law
of a late Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench, performed his
part, and found his reward in the appointment to an Indian
Commissionership, where he became a defaulter to a large amount.
Charles Richardson, a student-at-law in the office of the Attorney
General and Commissioner for taking affidavits, showed his zeal for
the cause of his official friends, and received in requital the office
of Clerk of the Peace for the Niagara District. James King, another
Clerk of Assize and student-at-law in Solicitor General Boulton's
office, did not hesitate to give his active assistance. Mr. Charles
Heward, son of Colonel Heward, Auditor General of Land Patents, and
Clerk of the Peace, and Peter Macdougall, a merchant or shopkeeper in
York and an intimate friend of Inspector General Baby, complete the
list of eight against whom the evidence was sufficiently strong for
conviction. The whole number of persons concerned in the destruction
of _The Advocate_ office was fifteen.

The accompanying plan will assist in the comprehension of the affair.
The original names of the streets have been retained on the plan; but
it should he explained that what is there set down as Post-office is
now Caroline Street; and that the block between Caroline and George
Streets is divided by Frederick Street, which runs north and south.
Mr. Mackenzie's house and printing office, which were joined together,
stood on the corner of what are now Caroline and Palace Streets. The
house had been the residence of one of the early governors of the
Province; and was accidentally destroyed by fire four or five years
ago. The audacity of the rioters and the open connivance of leading
officials, who witnessed the scene with satisfaction, form an
instructive comment on the state of society in the Family Compact of
the little town of York, in the year of grace, 1826.

[Illustration: map of the destruction of the Printing Office]

Mr. Hamilton's course[24]

1. Col. Allan's first position.
2. Col. Allan's second position.
3. Col. Heward's first position.
4. Col. Heward'S second position.
5. Col. Allan's House.
6. Mr. Mackenzie's House and Office.
7. Col. Heward's House.
8. Attorney-General's Office, (Rendezvous.)
9. Mr. Murray's position.
10. Bank of Upper Canada.
11. Mr. Hamilton's first position.
12. Allan's Wharf.
13. Hon. J. B. Macaulay's position.
14. Post-Office street.
15. George or Queen street.
16. Post-Office.

[Footnote 24: Part of the type was thrown Into Bay from Mr. Allan's
wharf. Mr. Thomas Hamilton, who was going on Palace street at the
time, did not think it possible that Mr. Allan, the Police Magistrate,
could help seeing what was going on from the position in which he
stood; and Mr. Murray was of the same opinion. Several witnesses
stated it was a fact, about which there could be no doubt. Colonel
Heward was in a similar position, and the Hon. Mr. Macaulay must have
witnessed the spectacle. At the "bank in front of the town," the
surface lowered several feet near the water.]

It is difficult to believe that a band of young men, subordinate
officials and sons and relatives of the official party, planned the
destruction of the printing office of an obnoxious journal in secret,
and executed it without the knowledge of any of their superiors. Lyons
miscalculated, it is true, if he thought he had adopted the road to
immediate promotion; for whatever secret pleasure the members of the
government might derive from the outrage, a British governor could not
protect in a confidential, one who had been directly concerned in it.
But what he could do, and did do, with indecent haste, was afterwards
to reward with lucrative official positions not only Lyons, but also
others who had taken part in the outrage. After it became certain that
a conviction would be obtained, and a criminal prosecution might be
instituted, a very business-like offer was made to pay the actual
damages, much in the same way as one who had accidentally broken a
sheet of plate glass while passing by a shop on a public street, might
do:

     "MY DEAR SIR:--The gentlemen prosecuted for a trespass
     upon _The Advocate_ Press, so far from entertaining a
     desire to do an irreparable injury to the property of
     the concern, went openly to the office without any
     attempt at concealment, and aware at the time of the
     responsibility they would incur. An offer of indemnity
     to the actual extent of the injury would have been
     tendered immediately, had less clamor been raised and
     less exertion been used to prejudice the public mind.

     "The real cause of the step is well known to all; it
     is not to be ascribed to any malice--political
     feeling--or private animosity; the personal calumnies
     of the latter _Advocates_ point out sufficiently the
     true and only motives that prompted it; and I have now
     to offer to pay at once the full value of the damage
     occasioned to the press and types, to be determined by
     indifferent and competent judges selected for that
     purpose. Will you inform me how far your client is
     disposed to meet this proposal?

     "This advance is in conformity with the original
     intention, and must not be attributed to any desire to
     withdraw the matter from the consideration of a Jury of
     the country, should your client prefer that course; but
     in that event, it is to be hoped no further attempts
     will be used by him or his friends to prejudice the
     cause now pending, nor any future complaints be made of
     a reluctance or hesitation to compensate, voluntarily,
     a damage merely pecuniary, although provoked by
     repeated assaults upon private character and feeling
     not susceptible of any adequate redress.

     "I am, very truly yours,

     "J. B. MACAULAY."

     "J. E. SMALL, Esq."

If the party who committed the violence had from the first intended to
pay the damage they had done, in the deliberate business-like way
indicated by Mr. Macaulay, it is surprising that some of them--not
perhaps any of those finally cast in damages--should have absconded,
to evade the consequences of their crime; but it is possible that they
feared a criminal prosecution, and left their solicitor and friend,
who had himself offered more provocation to criticism than any of
them, to make a bargain that would save them from the jail. It seems
possible that a criminal prosecution was at one time thought of; for I
find that the Bidwells advised Mr. Mackenzie not to proceed in that
way. The press-destroying mob were probably surprised at the
indignation their achievement excited in the public mind; and in the
beginning they endeavored to stem the torrent by issuing two placards
in justification. But Mr. Mackenzie had been guilty of no aggression
to turn the tide of public feeling against him, and the experiment
failed. It was not till after this that the above offer was made. The
first proposal not being listened to, a second was made through the
same medium:

     "6th _July_, 1826.

     "MY DEAR SIR:--My friends do not seem inclined to make
     any higher proposals than follows, and which are
     dictated in a conviction that they fully meet the
     justice of Mr. Mackenzie's claim--the real extent of
     which they are by no means ignorant of, or unable to
     prove:

     "They will (receiving the press and appurtenances) be
     willing to pay 200 for them. This sum is considered
     not only the value of the whole material of the
     establishment, but amply sufficient to cover any
     contingencies also; with respect to further
     compensation there would be no objection to add 100
     more; in all 300 to end the matter.

     "Or they will agree to 200 as above stated, and leave
     any excess to the decision of indifferent persons--or
     they will leave the whole to indifferent and competent
     referees as at first suggested. "If your client can
     meet this in any way so as to terminate the
     controversy, I shall be very glad; if not, I fear the
     law must take its course.

     "I am, very truly yours, "J. B. MACAULAY."

     "J. E. SMALL, Esq."

This second proposal met the same fate as the first; and indeed, if
there had been no object in making an example of the perpetrators of
an outrage that reflected disgrace on all concerned, the amount
offered as compensation was ridiculously inadequate. But Mr. Mackenzie
refused any amicable settlement with Mr. Macaulay's clients and
friends; and there was nothing left but to send the case to trial, and
let a jury, upon the hearing of the evidence, award equitable, and, if
they thought fit, exemplary damages.

Mr. Macaulay, in the first letter, in which he proposed a settlement
of the matter, assumes that the outrage was caused by "the personal
calumnies of the latter _Advocates_;" and it becomes necessary to see
where the aggression commenced, and what degree of provocation the
independent journalist had given to the official party, by whose
satellites the work of destruction had been done. Nothing is plainer,
on an examination of the facts, than that, until violently provoked,
Mr. Mackenzie had been exceedingly sparing of personalities, and from
the first he had been anxious to avoid them altogether. In one of the
earliest numbers of his journal, he said: "When I am reduced to
personalities, I will bring _The Advocate_ to a close." To the
personal abuse of the government papers he made no personal reply;
confining himself to complaining, in the spirit of injury, of the
wrong he suffered. Of these Mr. Carey's _Observer_ appears to have
been, up to this time, the greatest offender. Between the personal and
political character of the actors with whom he had to deal, Mr.
Mackenzie observed a proper distinction. Of Governor Maitland he said,
"that he was religious, humane, and peaceable; and if his
administration had hitherto produced little good to the country, it
may not be his fault, but the fault of those about him who abused his
confidence." Mr. J. B. Macaulay (afterwards Chief Justice of the Court
of Common Pleas) he described--and he did it from a sense of duty--as
a gentleman evincing "so much honor, probity, just feeling, and
disinterested good will," as generated in the publicist's mind, "a
greater degree of respect and esteem for the profession in general
than we had before entertained." He expressed a desire to see his
friend replace Mr. Justice Boulton on the Bench. Upon this latter
functionary he had been, at first, playfully sarcastic, comparing him
to Sir Matthew Hale, and latterly severe, as we have seen in the case
of the Minerva Ann trial; but it will not be denied that the judge had
fairly laid himself open to criticism. While opposing the Attorney
General of the day, (afterwards Chief Justice Sir J. B. Robinson,) he
did ample justice to his talents and his personal character:

"Mr. Robinson has risen in my estimation, in regard to abilities, from
what I have seen of him during this session; indeed, there are not a
few of his remarks which I have listened to with pleasure; and some of
the propositions he has made in Parliament, the road bill especially,
(with a few modifications,) have my entire approbation. As a private
gentleman, as a lawyer, and as a law officer, he stands as high in the
estimation of the country as any professional man in it. As a
counsellor of state to the Emperor of Russia, or Napoleon Bonaparte,
he might have figured to advantage; but his principles will, if not
softened down, for ever unfit him for a transatlantic popular
assembly. He advocates those doctrines with singular force, the
repugnance to which un-colonized the thirteen United States; and every
taunt which he utters against our republican neighbors, tells in
account against the interests of Great Britain, so far as they are
united with this colony. It is evident that Mr. Robinson has not been
long enough in the school of adversity to learn wisdom and discretion.
He is a very young man, and I do hope and trust, that when the heat
and violence of party spirit abate within him, he will yet prove a
bright and lasting ornament to the land which gave him birth, and that
the powers of his mind will be exerted to promote the happiness and
welfare of all classes of his fellow subjects."

And again: "I would wish Mr. Robinson out of Parliament or out of
place; and his former political career none condemned more boldly than
I did. I have seen him this session without disguise; I have watched
his movements, his looks, his language, and his actions; and, I will
confess it, I reproached myself for having used him at one time too
harshly."

Mr. Mackenzie had been severe upon Mr. Jonas Jones, but that gentleman
had first set the example of using harsh terms. He had said in reply
to a very able speech in the House of Assembly, on the Alien
question, that the member, (Dr. Rolph,) who made it, had a "vile
democratic heart, and ought to be sent out of the Province." If an
appeal to the Sedition Act could silence an opponent, why take the
trouble to refute his arguments? He had, moreover, used threats of
personal violence against Mr. Mackenzie, and was, of course, open to
severe retaliation. In the Legislative Assembly he had called Mr.
Hamilton, the member for Wentworth, a "fellow," when a scene followed
on which it was necessary to drop the curtain to hide it from the
vulgar gaze of the public. Considering these circumstances in
mitigation, it must be confessed that the criticisms upon Mr. Jones
scarcely exceeded the bounds of merited and justifiable severity. To
Mr. Henry John Boulton, Mr. Mackenzie had declared an absence of
personal dislike in criticizing his public acts. Considering Dr. Rolph
too severe in his strictures on the government, he had opposed him on
that account, and a personal estrangement had been the consequence.

Such is the manner in which Mr. Mackenzie had treated his political
opponents during the two years he had controlled a political journal;
and it may easily be conceived how slender was the pretext, on the
ground of provocation, for the destruction of his printing-office. I
do not say that he had never applied to his opponents language of
severity, but I do say that he was not the aggressor; that under the
greatest provocations he had avoided personalities; and that, at the
worst, he had not proceeded to any thing like the extremity to which
his assailants had gone; and this not for the want of materials[25]
to work upon.

In the meanwhile, how were his political adversaries bearing
themselves towards Mr. Mackenzie? The Hon. J. B. Macaulay had gone to
the unwarrantable length of violating the seal of secresy, and
publishing private letters addressed to him by Mr. Mackenzie; though
there was not in the conduct of the latter the shadow of excuse for
this outrage. Mr. Macaulay was now a member of the Executive Council,
and Mr. Mackenzie, who had previously praised him, had hinted that he
was not an independent as formerly; but this was in a private letter.
The cause of the quarrel was utterly contemptible, and Mr. Macaulay
showed to great disadvantage in it. A disagreement had taken place
between the Rev. Dr. Strachan, then Rector of York, and one John
Fenton, who had officiated as clerk under the rector. Mr. Mackenzie,
being in Niagara, learned that Mr. Radcliffe had received a letter
from Mr. Fenton, in which the latter stated his intention to publish a
pamphlet on the state of the congregation in York. Meanwhile Mr.
Fenton was reinstated in his position. Accordingly, a paragraph was
inserted in _The Advocate_, which certainly left the impression that a
fear of the threatened pamphlet had led to the reinstatement of
Fenton,[26] with an increased salary. It is possible that the
insinuation was not just; and yet this could not be said, if there
were no mistake about the alleged facts on which it was founded. It
was not denied that Mr. Fenton had been reinstated, but it was alleged
that his salary was increased; and Mr. Mackenzie certainly had what
seemed to be good authority for stating that the publication of a
pamphlet had been announced. This was the only statement in dispute,
and if it was not proved, it certainly was not disproved. Mr.
Radcliffe might have been asked to write a note, stating that he had
not received such a letter from Mr. Fenton, and that would have
settled the matter. Mr. Macaulay was one of the church-wardens, and
after the lapse of three weeks he wrote to deny the statement that a
pamphlet had been threatened, and that Mr. Fenton's reinstatement
carried with it any increase of salary. Mr. Macaulay's letter was sent
to _The Advocate_ for publication, and after it was in type he wrote
to recall it, not because the matter had assumed a new shape, but
because Mr. Fenton had written a denial of that part of the paragraph
which related to the pamphlet. Mr. Mackenzie refused to cancel the
letter to which Mr. Macaulay had appended, not his own signature, but
the _nomme de plume_ of "A Church-warden," on account of the offensive
attitude the writer had assumed towards the editor;[27] and the few
lines in which Mr. Mackenzie explained his refusal to comply with the
request of a person, who he thought had forfeited all claim to his
indulgence, contains the whole extent of the provocation he gave to
Mr. Macaulay. Clever men often do very foolish things in a passion;
and Mr. Macaulay must have been in an uncontrollable rage before he
brought himself to publish the private letters addressed to him by Mr.
Mackenzie, on the subject of the Fenton affair, and to make jeering
remarks in reference to Mr. Mackenzie's mother, an aged woman of
seventy-five years. But he did not stop here; he sent the manuscript
into which he had condensed his rage to Mr. Mackenzie, with an offer
to pay him for its publication in _The Advocate_; a paper which he
declared his intention to do all in his power to crush. One of his
advertisements, a little less libellous than the rest, would have been
published; but the money being demanded in advance, Mr. Macaulay
refused to redeem his promise, and pretended to have a right to insist
on its publication without the payment he had at first offered. He
taunted Mr. Mackenzie with his poverty, and with what he called
"changing his trade," and advised him to "try to deserve the charity"
of the public a little better than previously, if he expected to
support his mother and his family by the publication of a newspaper;
as if it were asking charity to publish a public journal, at the
usual price, and a crime for a man to support a mother,[28] who was
too aged and too helpless to support herself. Without even mentioning
him by name, Mackenzie had described Mr. Macaulay as a man whom he had
ceased to look upon as possessing manly independence; and in return
this member of the government claimed as a right to have published in
_The Advocate_ letters containing gross personal abuse of its editor
and ridicule of his aged mother. To these letters he had not the
manliness to append his name; if he had, he was aware that their
virulence would not have prevented their publication, for in that case
the writer would have placed himself, as well as his antagonist, upon
trial before the public; and every one who read them, in connection
with the comments they must have provoked, would have been able to
judge of the spirit in which they were conceived and the justice of
their contents. The right to compel the editor to publish anonymous
communications, which Mr. Macaulay had claimed, was wholly without
foundation; and as for courtesy to such a correspondent it was out of
the question. But it is useless to reason upon the acts of a man who
had permitted passion so completely to get the mastery over his
judgment.

[Footnote 25: In _The Advocate_ of May 4, 1826, he said:--"What a
place Little York is for scandal! Nothing can equal it! Had we set
apart but one number, and used our usual diligence to embody the tales
current of the vulgar great, with whose residence this place is
honored, we could have set the good people, our neighbors and friends,
at pulling caps; aye, even in time of church service. But we left the
quartering of the arms of our York nobility to more friendly hands,
pursuing the even tenor of our way."]

[Footnote 26: The paragraph was in these words:--"CLERK OF THE
CHURCH--_A New Era!_--Mr. Fenton, as it is said, having announced a
forthcoming pamphlet upon the state of the York congregation, the
doctor made him new advances, and he has actually been reinstated as
clerk of our Episcopal Church, with an additional salary. 'Tis a good
thing to be in the secret!"]

[Footnote 27: The paragraph is in these words:--"Had the church-warden
confined his remarks to his fellow functionary 'the clerk,' we would
most readily have distributed the types of his letter yesterday, as he
requested. But the tone he has seen fit to assume towards ourselves is
not to be borne. There was a time when we looked upon _that
church-warden_ as one that would become the most open, manly, and
independent of his class, but it has gone by. We prized his talents,
his abilities, and his judgment by far too high; and the tenor of his
railing accusation against us will show the Province that he has not
improved the style of his compositions since he left off studying
Byron. The church-warden, who is not one of our subscribers, will find
to-morrow that even to him we shall not meanly truckle, nor shall we
to any man, although the blackest poverty should be, on earth, our
reward."]

[Footnote 28: This piece of insolence was founded on the following
passage in a private letter addressed by Mr. Mackenzie to Mr.
Macaulay:--"As to the motives and character of my journal, let its
unexampled circulation among the better classes in the colony speak
for me. As to the result--I feel that I mean to do right--I am well
satisfied that I am doing good, and though I have to struggle with a
slender capital and a government who make the public advertising
subservient to other purposes than that of giving general information
of the thing advertised, I am as well pleased and as contented to
struggle along through life as free as the air on the Scottish
mountains; yea, and more so than the most voluptuous courtier can be,
even in his most joyous hours. If I am enabled to maintain my old
mother, my wife and family, and keep out of the hands of the law for
debt, I care not for wealth, and should as willingly leave this
earthly scene not worth a groat as if I were worth thousands. I one
day thought I should have wished to have seen you member of the
Legislature for York, and that you would have become a useful and
truly independent representative of the people. It was not to be,
however. I greatly mistook your views, which, situated as you now are,
are not likely to become more liberal."

Mr. Macaulay, in commenting on this, sneered at what he called the
"printing business," and asked why Mr. Mackenzie left his "former
honest calling," as if a profession in which a man speaks his own free
thoughts is not just as respectable as that of the man who hires out
his wits and his eloquence in defence of every species of criminal who
can pay his fee.]

It is far from my desire to rekindle animosities that have long since
died out, and the recollection of which is only preserved from
oblivion by a few scattered documents and the shadowy memory of the
observing men of those times who still survive; but in this biography
it is necessary that the history of an act of gross violence be
faithfully given. I have gone into the provocation offered by Mr.
Macaulay at length, because it was in reply to a pamphlet, in which he
embodied all this venom, that Mr. Mackenzie told some stories about
certain members of the Family Compact that he never would have put
into print if he had not been provoked beyond endurance. If in
striking back, a few blows fell upon Mr. Macaulay's official
associates, who had not joined openly in the provocation, Mr.
Mackenzie exceeded the bounds of strict retaliatory justice; it must
be remembered that the connection between all the sections of the
Family Compact was very close, and that when the last word of defiance
has been hurled at a man he is not to be bound by a very rigid
etiquette, if he finds it necessary to "carry the war into Africa."
But the reply, calmly viewed at this distant day, so far as it
affected Macaulay, appears mild and playful beside the savagery of the
unprovoked attack; I say unprovoked, because it does not exceed the
bounds of fair or ordinary criticism to tell a political opponent that
you have ceased to see in him a person possessed of manly
independence. At the same time it must be confessed that some of
Macaulay's friends came in for knocks which there is no public
evidence of their having merited at Mr. Mackenzie's hands; and it
would have been better if he had confined the punishment, he was well
entitled to inflict, to the man who alone had raised a hand (except
through the medium of the convenient instruments of their will) to
strike him down.

Macaulay's libel did not produce the effect intended. The object, it
is plain enough, was to provoke Mr. Mackenzie into the use of language
for which he might be prosecuted, and either banished, like Gourlay,
or shut up in a prison. But Mackenzie was too wary to be caught in
this clumsy trap; and his reply, instead of retorting rage for rage,
was playfully sarcastic and keenly incisive. The dialogue form was
adopted; the speakers being a congress of fifteen contributors to _The
Advocate_, who purported to have assembled in the Blue Parlor of Mr.
McDonnell, of Glengary, at York. Patrick Swift, nephew of the immortal
Dean, who had inherited a share of his uncle's sarcasm, was a
prominent actor, and infused his playful spirit into the other
contributors. Over a huge bowl of punch, toasts are drunk, tales told,
songs sung, and polities discussed. Judging from the spirit of these
proceedings, Mr. Patrick Swift and his coadjutors were intent on
copying the style of his uncle and their prototype:

     "From the planet of my birth,
     I encounter vice with mirth;
     Wicked ministers of state
     I can easier scorn than hate;
     And I find it answers right:
     Scorn torments them more than spite."

"Lawyer Macaulay" was "the knight of the rueful countenance;" and it
was hinted by one of the wits that even he had family reasons for not
scoffing at persons for "changing their trade." When one of the
company was asked for a song, he excused himself by saying,
"Macaulay's screech-owl notes are the music of the spheres compared to
my singing;" and so he claimed the privilege of telling a story
instead. Among the stories told was one of a person who got a grant of
land for his mother, many years after her death, and twelve hundred
acres for an unborn child; and a document, apparently genuine, was
produced, showing that an honorable personage desired to locate two
hundred acres on Burlington Bay, and the surveyor was instructed that
the distinguished name must not appear on the plan. One of the
speakers added, by way of explanation, that the two hundred acre limit
produced a block of some thousands, which the honorable recipient sold
to great advantage. By virtue of his official position, this personage
made large grants of land to himself, and appointed himself puisne
judge, receiving an additional salary of 500 for the performance of
scarcely any duties. This had no reference to Macaulay, though about
half the ten-columns' dialogue was devoted to him, much of which
consists of a sharp refutation of statements published in the Macaulay
pamphlet, most of which were either too absurd or too malignant to
deserve an answer at all. Mr. Macaulay could not have made a worse
selection of the time he chose for attempting to strike Mr. Mackenzie
down. The latter seriously contemplated retiring from political
discussions, and prudence might have suggested that he should be
allowed to depart in peace.

Mr. Mackenzie's enemies were furious. He had stung them to the quick;
but he had dealt with matters to which it would not be desirable to
give additional notoriety by making them subjects of prosecution.
Truth might, legally speaking, be a libel, but there are unpleasant
truths, which, though it be illegal to tell, cannot well be made a
ground of action. Juries might be obstinate and refuse to convict a
writer, who, after unbearable provocation, had been stung into telling
unpleasant facts, a little dressed up, or exaggerated though they may
have been, to give effect to their narration. It was clear that
Mackenzie could not be banished for sedition. He could not even be
tried under the Sedition Act, having been some years in the Province;
and he had neither spoken nor published any thing of a seditious
nature. What then remained? The sole resource of violence; and
violence was used: the office of _The Advocate_ was destroyed by a
mob, consisting of persons who bore suspiciously close relations to
the government.

The trial came off at York, in the then new but now disused
Court-house, in 1826. The defendants had elected to have a special
jury; and on the ninth of October, it had been struck at the office
of the Deputy Sheriff, in presence of Messrs. Small and Macaulay,
attorneys for the plaintiff and defendant respectively. On the day of
trial, only eleven of the special jurors appearing, the deficiency was
made up from the petty jury list. Of the twelve jurors[29] who were to
try the case, nine resided in the country, and only three in York.
Chief Justice Campbell was the presiding judge; and by his side sat,
as associate judges, the Hon. William Allan and Mr. Alexander
McDonnell. Both sides were well provided with able counsel. For the
plaintiff appeared the younger Bidwell and Messrs. Stewart and Small;
for the defendants, Macaulay and Hagerman. Every inch of standing room
in the Court-house was occupied by spectators, eager to witness a
trial which had prospectively excited universal public interest. Many
witnesses testified to the destruction of the printing office, and
proved that the eight defendants were engaged in it. It was shown that
the Hon. Mr. Allan, who played the part of associate judge on the
trial, had been in conversation with Col. Heward, whose son was among
the desperadoes, at a point where they must have witnessed the whole
scene. Though they were both magistrates, neither of them attempted to
remonstrate with the defendants, nor to induce them to desist. The
defendants called no witnesses; and Mr. Hagerman, in addressing the
jury on their behalf, assailed _The Advocate_; but he did not venture
to read the objectionable matter to the jury. Without a tittle of
evidence to support his assertion, and in the teeth of well known
facts, he stated that Mr. Mackenzie had left York at the time his
printing materials were destroyed, to evade the payment of his debts.
The trial lasted two days, which were days of great anxiety for the
plaintiff; "because," as he himself stated, "great expense had been
incurred, and I knew that if by any means a verdict should be delayed,
or no verdict returned, the consequences would to me be ruinous in the
extreme."

[Footnote 29: Their names were:--Robert Rutherford, of York, foreman;
Ezra Annis, of Whitby; James Hogg, Milford Mills; David Boyer,
Markham; Valentine Fisher, Vaughan; Robert Johnson, Scarboro; Joseph
Tomlinson, Markham; Peter Secor, Markham; Edward Wright, York; Joel
Beman, George street; George Shaw, York.]

For a long time, it seemed very unlikely that the jury would agree. At
an inclement season of the year, they were put between the sweating
walls of a newly plastered room, the air of which was raw and
unpleasant, where they remained for thirty-two hours. Some of them
were far advanced in years, and three were ill. Mr. Jacob Boyer, a
German by birth, was so bad as to require medical assistance; and Dr.
McCague being sent for, bled the enduring juror. Boyer said he was
prepared to make a pillow of his great coat, and endure another day of
that close cold room, if necessary. The, evidence was clear to his
mind, and he would not be starved into giving a verdict against his
convictions. During all this time, various amounts of damages had been
discussed. Sums varying from 2,000 to 150 had found favor with
different jurors; but the real difficulty was with one man--a George
Shaw--who tried to starve his fellow jurors into compliance with a
verdict, giving 150 damages; but finding this impracticable, he at
last gave way. Mr. Rutherford, the foreman, named 625 and costs, and
the amount was agreed to by all the jurors. Referring to the result of
the trial, soon after, Mr. Mackenzie said: "That verdict
re-established on a permanent footing _The Advocate_ Press, because it
enabled me to perform my engagements without disposing of my real
property; and although it has several times been my wish to retire
from the active duties of the press into the quiet paths of private
life, I have had a presentiment that I should yet be able to evince my
gratitude to the country which, in my utmost need, rescued me from
utter ruin and destruction."

Shortly after the trial, the amount of the verdict was paid by Mr.
Macaulay to Mr. Mackenzie's attorney. The money was raised by
subscription; the political friends of the press-destroyers feeling in
duty bound to bear harmless the eight volunteers who had performed the
rough task of attempting to silence, by an act of violence, an
obnoxious newspaper. Col. Fitzgibbon, laboring under an irrepressible
sense of duty towards the kid-gloved "roughs," took round the hat.
Unhappily, no list of the contributors is obtainable; though it is
believed the officials of the day were not backward in assisting to
indemnify the defendants in the type riot trial, for the adverse
verdict of an impartial jury. No mark of approbation could well be
more sincere than this; and it is a question whether the voluntary
accomplices after the fact were wholly ignorant that the outrage had
been planned before they knew that it was put into execution. Col.
Fitzgibbon was already a Colonel of Militia, Deputy Adjutant General,
and Justice of the Peace. But such services as his were not deemed to
be requited by such paltry appointments, and he was therefore
appointed Chief Clerk to the Legislative Assembly.

There remained the question of a criminal prosecution. Mr. Mackenzie,
being called before the grand jury, declined to make any complaint;
and the question was raised by some of the journals, whether it was
not the duty of the Attorney General to take proceedings criminally
against the press rioters. The counsel for the defendants gave as the
reason why the Attorney General had not proceeded by criminal
information, that it would have brought on him the censure of having
desired to prevent the plaintiff obtaining damages in a civil action;
as if the one proceeding in any way precluded the other. When
afterwards, in April, 1828, the Attorney General prosecuted Francis
Collins of the _Freeman_ criminally for libels upon himself, he
appeared to be considerably embarrassed at the novelty of the
proceeding he had initiated; and a remark he made led to a singular
piece of fencing between himself and Judge Willis, between whom there
was very little good feeling. On the Attorney General remarking that,
during the ten years he had had the office of Crown Lawyer, he had
uniformly abstained from instituting criminal proceedings unless upon
complaint made; the judge remarked that this was proof that his
practice had been uniformly wrong. The Attorney General, nettled at
the reproof, said he believed he knew his duty as well as any judge on
the Bench; an assertion which drew from the judge the caustic
rejoinder: "That may be; but you have neglected it." The Attorney
General then assured his lordship that he should continue to follow
the practice he had hitherto pursued; when the latter informed him
that, in that case, it would be his duty to report such conduct to the
British Government, and that while he sat in the Chief Justice's seat,
it was his place to state to the Crown officers their duty, and theirs
to perform it.

It became afterwards a common complaint with Mr. Mackenzie's political
friends and business rivals, that the damages obtained were in excess
of the actual loss. It is possible that this may have been the case;
for he himself became convinced, after the office was re-established,
that he had at first overestimated the loss. But it was not upon his
representations that the amount of the verdict was determined; and as
Mr. Bidwell had insisted strongly on the necessity of exemplary
damages being given, it is possible that the jury did not altogether
overlook this hint. But such pretences, as afterwards found persons to
utter them, that "the loss was not fifty dollars," were too evidently
charged with malice to be entitled to the least consideration.

But though Mr. Mackenzie refused to ask the grand jury to initiate
criminal proceedings against the rioters, the matter was not allowed
to rest. Francis Collins, having been proceeded against criminally, by
the Attorney General, for four libels,[30] in April 1828, retaliated
upon the party of his accusers. On information laid by him, seven of
the defendants who had been cast in civil damages for the destruction
of _The Advocate_ office, were tried for riot. Raymond Baby was not
among them. This proceeding being of a retaliatory nature, and taken
against the wishes of Mr. Mackenzie, was not looked on with much
favor; and though the defendants were found guilty, they were let off
with nominal damages.

[Footnote 30: Mr. Mackenzie, objecting, in his journal, to the
composition of the grand jury as unfair, showed himself possessed of
that sort of power which moves the masses into action. A short extract
will serve as a sample:

"Wherever the seat of justice is open to corruption, there ought the
sentinel of liberty, 'a free press,' to alarm the country; it should
'cry aloud and spare not.' And if the day should ever come upon us in
this favored land, when men in power, forgetful of the public good,
and mindful only of their private gain, shall desire to intimidate the
public journals and to harass their proprietors on frivolous or
imaginary charges of libel and sedition--let the people look to it.
Their last, their best, their sure, and only safeguard from dark
oppression and misrule is about to be butchered in the public streets.
Their lives, their fortunes, their religion, and the quiet of their
domestic hearths, are menaced. The walls of the citadel begin to
crumble, the strong tower of freedom totters at its base. Again we
say, danger is at hand, LET THE PEOPLE LOOK TO IT."]

But Collins did not stop here. He procured informations against Henry
John Boulton and Jas. E. Small, for murder, arising out of their
connection with a duel, in which Mr. John Ridout, son of the Surveyor
General, had been shot by Mr. Samuel Peters Jarvis. Mr. Jarvis was not
included in the indictment, having been previously tried and
acquitted. When on the 12th of April, the grand jury brought the "true
bill" into court, Col. Adamson, the foreman, was greatly embarrassed.
Mr. Justice Willis, though he could have had no personal sympathy for
one of the accused,[31] shed tears. Mr. Boulton, who filled the high
position of Solicitor General, lost his usual sprightliness of
manner, and sat silent and thoughtful beside Attorney General
Robinson. A pin might have been heard fall in the crowded court-room.
When the thirteen jurors had made their presentment, the colleague of
the accused Solicitor General rose by his side, and said he should
frame the indictment against Messrs. Boulton and Small, as accessories
of Jarvis in the fatal duel. The Court made no remark. Judge Sherwood
had been sent for; but when he came, he retired into the grand jury
room instead of taking his seat on the bench beside the Chief Justice.

[Footnote 31: Judge Willis afterwards expressed a contemptible opinion
of the Solicitor General's legal qualifications; referring to a
statute, "in order," as he said, "that it may be seen what reliance is
to be placed on the opinion of Mr. Solicitor General Boulton." Dr.
Baldwin stated before a Committee of the House of Assembly, June 28th,
1828, "I cannot help thinking that he (Judge Willis) was rather more
lenient in his charge upon the indictments of Mr. Boulton, Mr. Jarvis,
and the type rioters, than the occasion required."]

Mr. George Ridout, the advocate of Collins, came into court, and moved
that the name of Col. Fitzgibbon be struck off the list of grand
jurors, on the ground that, having protected the type rioters, he was
not a proper person to be on the grand jury. Had he not been there,
Mr. Ridout contended, the true bills against Collins would not have
been presented. He read a letter written by Col. Fitzgibbon, on the
type riot, to show that his objection was well founded. The Attorney
General objected, and the court reserved its decision.

The trial for murder lasted two days, and was protracted the first
night two and a half hours beyond midnight. "The candles, untrimmed,"
wrote Mackenzie, "yielded a faint and glimmering light upon the
judgment seat; the presiding minister of justice in his long black
robe, was supported by the associate judges and surrounded by the
officers of the court." There was a dense mass of human beings in the
court, all still and attentive listeners "to a tale of misery, of
horrors and of woe, such as mortal man has seldom heard." The
defendants were acquitted; and the judge expressed a desire that the
proceedings might not be published at length, but only the result
stated; a wish that seems to have met a general compliance on the part
of the press.

Though the trial of Collins was not proceeded with, the government
paper announced that it had not been abandoned; and it came on at the
next assizes.

Nor had the end of judicial retaliations yet been reached. Mr.
Mackenzie was not to escape. And yet he deserved some consideration at
the hands of the official party. When called as a witness in the type
riot prosecution, which he had refused to originate, he said he had no
desire to prosecute the rioters against whom civil damages had been
obtained; and he expressed a hope that they would receive only nominal
punishment. His suggestion had been acted upon. But all this did not
avail, at a time when Collins was proceeded against for four libels in
Upper Canada, and Mr. Neilson for an equal number in Lower Canada. It
was not Mr. Mackenzie's fault that the old duel case had been raked
up; but one of the crown officers had been put upon his trial at the
instance of another editor; and why should Mr. Mackenzie escape when
crown officers were in question? Accordingly, on the 17th of April,
the grand jury made a presentment against the editor of _The Colonial
Advocate_, for an alleged libel[32] published in that paper on the 3d
of that month.

[Footnote 32: The following is the paragraph charged as libellous:
"VALUABLE REPORT ON THE CONDUCT OF THE CROWN LAWYERS.--Always anxious
to inform our readers of the most important proceedings of the
Colonial Legislature, we hasten to direct their attention to the
report of a select committee of the House of Assembly on the petition
of Mr. Forsyth, of Niagara Falls, loudly complaining of the conduct of
the crown officers, and of a defective and partial administration of
justice. The report speaks a language not to be misunderstood, and we
trust that a perusal of it will serve to stir up the dormant energies
of the wholesome part of the population, and induce them to exert
themselves manfully to clear the House of Assembly next election, of
the Attorney General, Speaker Willson Jonas, David and Charles Jones,
Messrs. Burnham, Coleman, Scollick, Gordon, McDonell, Beasley, Clark,
McLean, Vankoughnet, and the whole of that ominous nest of unclean
birds which have so long lain close under the wings of a spendthrift
Executive, and (politically to speak) actually preyed upon the very
vitals of the country they ought to have loved, cherished, and
protected. No wonder it is that Parliament should find its energies
all but paralyzed, when such an accumulation of corrupt materials is
left UNSWEPT WITH THE BESOM OF THE PEOPLE'S WRATH from out of these
halls they have so long and so shamefully 'defiled with their
abominations.'"]

Being in Court when the presentment was made, Mr. Mackenzie went to
the Attorney General, and told him that he should be ready to proceed
with his defence next day. The zeal of the grand jury appears not to
have been readily seconded; for when Mr. Mackenzie applied personally
to the Court to recommend the crown lawyers to bring the charges to
trial, the Attorney General refused to proceed with an indictment. On
the night after the presentment was made, the defendant collected a
long list of very miscellaneous authorities,[33] by the aid of which
he felt confident he should be able to make out his case. His own
account of his preparation for a forensic display, in self-defence,
may here be given:

"I carried into Court, tied up in a large bundle [of books] with
striped tape, and having placed them before me on the barristers'
table, began to arrange them after a very imposing legal fashion,
having by me my memoranda of references, by which, as to an index, I
could refer to the newspaper, book, or paper wanted, and bring forward
the proofs or arguments on any subject connected with the matters set
forth in the alleged libel, in a moment of time. By a little exertion
over night, but far more by anticipation at former periods, I had
before me a collection of materials fit and relevant for my purpose;
and had I been allowed to go into the merits of the case, it would
have defied all the Attorney Generals in British America to have
furnished an opposing argument equally solid, strong, and convincing.
I had carefully consulted both the law and the practice. I had, in
fact, done all that man could do to give the judges and crown lawyers
such a dose as would have cured their itching for state prosecutions
on alleged political libels for a long time to come."

[Footnote 33: "Blackstone's Commentaries; A file of the Advocate,
from 1 to 150; A few choice selections from the U. E. Loyalist;
Journals of Assembly, 1820, 1825, 1826, and 1827; Burnett's History of
his own Times; A speech of John Horne Tooke; The Bible; The Book of
Common Prayer; Edinburgh Review, 1811, article on 'The Liberty of the
Press;' Gourlay's Statistics, 3 vols.; Simpson's Plea for Religion;
Swift's Works, a volume containing 'The Drapier,' &c.; The Roman
Missal; The Alien Question Unmasked; Earl Stanhope's Rights of Juries;
A volume of Erskine's Speeches; Dr. Towers on Libel; Hone's three
Trials; The Black Book, or Corruption Unmasked; Selections cut out of
files of the Times, Globe and Traveller, and Courier, London daily
papers, by myself, and reserved for a case of libel, as fair specimens
of the style of political discussion in use by the respectable London
periodical press; Babylon the Great; Junius; Peter Watson's Trial; Dr.
Strachan's Pamphlet and Chart; Trial of J. A. Williams for a libel on
the Durham Clergy; and selections cut out of Parliamentary speeches,
published in the U. E. Loyalist. These with Mr. Stanton's 'Yankee
Doodle Committee Report on Captain Mathews;' 'The Rejected Addresses;'
Cobbett on the Freedom of the Press; The Freeman, containing Peter
McPhail's effort at the York Independence meeting, and several other
documents.']

Instead of being put upon his trial for the alleged political libel,
Mr. Mackenzie had to give security to the amount of 200, that he
would answer the charge at the next assizes; a delay of which he
thought himself well entitled to complain.




CHAPTER VII.

     An Event that lessens the Popular Faith in the
     Impartial Administration of Justice--Removal of Judge
     Willis by the Local Executive--The Cause of the
     Difficulty--He is falsely accused of Displaying Temper
     in Court--A wordy Duello between Judges Sherwood and
     Willis--Leading Members of the Bar side with Judge
     Willis in the Legal Dispute--Decision of the Privy
     Council Unfavorable to Judge Willis--Collins convicted
     of Libel on the Attorney General, fined 50, and
     sentenced to a year's imprisonment--Worse Offenders of
     another Political Stripe overlooked--The Fine paid by
     Subscription--A Committee of the House desire to
     interrogate Judge Sherwood about his Direction in the
     Collins' Case--He refuses to have his Judicial Conduct
     inquired into, but gives the Information to the
     Executive--The Assembly denounce his Direction; but the
     Privy Council pronounce it all right--The Libel
     Prosecution against Mr. Mackenzie abandoned--Murder of
     one Knowlan, a Powerful Bully, by Charles French--The
     latter, a Witness in the Type Riot, is Executed.


Before the trials for libel could come on, an event occurred, in the
removal of Judge Willis, which was not calculated to inspire the
defendants with confidence in the impartial administration of justice.
If the local Executive suspended a judge, because his interpretation
of the law did not accord with their views, the power of the Executive
in political prosecutions could not but be regarded as a source of
danger to public liberty. Mr. Willis had only received his appointment
on the eleventh of October, 1827; and on the sixth of the following
June, he was suspended until the pleasure of His Majesty's Imperial
Government should be known. We have seen that, far from bending to
the influence of power, he had undertaken to teach the Attorney
General his duty. In the Hilary term of Michaelmas, then past, Mr.
Justice Willis had taken his seat on the bench beside Chief Justice
Campbell and Mr. Justice Sherwood; and differences of opinion on
points of great legal importance had arisen among them. Before the
following Easter term, the Chief Justice had obtained leave of
absence; and the differences of opinion between the two remaining
judges, Willis and Sherwood, were carried to such a length as to
excite public attention. Under these circumstances, Judge Willis
directed his special attention to the Constitution of the Court; and
he found that the statute creating this tribunal provided "that His
Majesty's Chief Justice, together with two puisne judges, shall
preside in the said Court." Considering the Court illegally
constituted without three judges, he refused to sit with Mr. Justice
Sherwood for his only colleague, when, according to his reading of the
law, there ought to be another. Sometime before Trinity term, it came
to the knowledge of the Provincial Government that Mr. Justice Willis
had come to this conclusion. When the opportunity presented itself, he
delivered his opinion at length on the subject. Having dealt with the
question of what was required, under the Provincial statute, to
constitute a legal Court of King's Bench, he touched upon the cause of
the legal inefficiency of that tribunal. The Chief Justice had
obtained leave of absence; but he had obtained it from the
Lieutenant-Governor alone, while Mr. Willis contended that the
consent of the Governor in Council was necessary.

The opponents of Mr. Justice Willis accused him of showing temper in
the delivery of his opinion; but the accusation, when sifted, was
found to be groundless. A Committee of the House of Assembly, of which
Dr. Baldwin was Chairman, reported that they had "particularly
inquired into this matter," and came to the conclusion, "that to the
public eye and ear, the manner and language of Mr. Justice Willis, on
the occasion of so expressing his opinion on the Bench, relative to
the defective state of the Court, in no respect departed from the
gravity and dignity becoming him as a judge; and peculiar malevolence
alone could represent it otherwise." The evidence fully bore out this
statement. "When Mr. Justice Willis delivered his opinion," Mr.
Carey[34] told the Committee, "his conduct was dignified and
honorable."

When Mr. Justice Willis had concluded his opinion, an unseemly
spectacle took place. Mr. Justice Sherwood ordered the clerk to
adjourn the Court. Mr. Willis replied that it was impossible to
adjourn what did not exist. There was no legal Court. Mr. Sherwood
rejoined: "You have given your opinion; I have a right to mine, and I
shall order the Court to be adjourned." "He spoke," says Mr. Carey,
"apparently under great irritation." Mr. Willis bowed and withdrew,
the clerk obeying the order of the remaining judge.

The difficulty that had occurred between Mr. Justice Willis and
Attorney General Robinson, on a previous occasion, was also made a
subject of inquiry before the Parliamentary Committee; and Mr. Carey,
in his evidence, stated that so far as manner was concerned, the only
thing to complain of in the judge, was his too great lenity in
presence of the treatment he received.

[Footnote 34: Mr. Carey was editor of the York Observer, and had long
been a firm supporter of the government; but at this time he was
wavering in his allegiance.]

Dr. Baldwin, Mr. Robert Baldwin, and Mr. John Rolph, practising
barristers, entered a protest against the legality of the Court, when
it had been constituted with two judges; giving at length their
reasons for agreeing with Judge Willis, that in order to a legal
constitution of the Court, there must be three judges. A petition,
which the Duke of Wellington thought deserved no particular notice,
bearing the signatures of thousands of Upper Canadians, in favor of
the independence of the judiciary, and sustaining the position of
Judge Willis, was sent to the King and the two Houses of Parliament.
The law point was finally decided by the Privy Council adversely to
the views of Mr. Justice Willis, whose removal was thereupon ratified
by the Imperial Government.

It was now certain that the juries who might try the libel cases,
would not be directed by Mr. Justice Willis, but by some one whose
affinity to the prosecutors was undoubted. Soon after this time, Mr.
James Stephens, then counsel to the Colonial Office, told a Committee
of the House of Commons, that "throughout the colonies a body of
gentlemen are acting as judges, who, however accomplished in other
respects, are totally destitute of legal education." If, in addition
to this they were also mere dependents of the Executive, the case
must be much worse. Soon after the commencement of the York assizes,
which opened on the 12th October, 1828, the libel prosecutions against
Collins came on. Of that upon the Attorney General, he was found
guilty, and sentenced by Mr. Hagerman--who had temporarily gone upon
the Bench, leaving the Kingston collectorship of customs to take care
of itself--to be imprisoned for twelve months in the York jail, and
pay a fine of 50. The libel consisted of imputing "native malignancy"
to the Attorney General, and stigmatizing, as "an open and palpable
falsehood," a statement made by that functionary in open court.[35]

It is not necessary to raise the question whether such libels as this
ought to have been met by a criminal prosecution. But if it was the
duty of the Attorney General to prosecute Collins, it was also his
duty to prosecute others, connected with the government press, who
had used fully as great a latitude of expression. One of these
writers[36] had signalized several members of the Legislative Assembly
as "besotted fools," actuated by no other feeling than malice, to
gratify which they pay no regard to truth or decency. Addressing a
single member, the same writer informed him, "There are no bounds to
your malice;" and the whole House was described as an "intolerable
nuisance." "The poison of your malignant disposition," also made use
of, was an expression fully as offensive as "native malignancy." If it
was the duty of the Attorney General to prosecute for the use of such
language, he was bound to perform that duty impartially, and was not
entitled, in fairness, to single out opponents for victims, while the
offences of political friends were overlooked.

[Footnote 35: Collins was a man of uncouth exterior, but was possessed
of considerable ability. When Dr. Horne, in whose office he was a
printer, gave up the publication of the _Upper Canada Gazette_,
Collins applied for the post of King's Printer, and was told in reply,
that the office "would be given to none but a gentleman." Being
disappointed in the attempt to dispose of his services to the
government, he some time afterwards commenced the publication of an
opposition paper, a very slight acquaintance with which will convince
any one that in spite of his natural ability he sometimes mistook
coarseness for strength of language. He was an excellent reporter, and
for several years acted officially in that capacity, as the servant of
the House. It was not his habit to write his articles. He put them
into type as he composed them. He had the strange vanity of boasting
his descent from royal personages, and was naturally laughed at for
his pains. When he was incarcerated for libel, Mr. Mackenzie did all
he could to secure his release, a service which he repaid with the
blackest ingratitude and the coarsest abuse. From sheer business
jealousy the _Freeman_ had at all times been excessively abusive of
Mr. Mackenzie a coin in which the latter never stooped to repay him.
But, with all his faults--and who is faultless?--Collins must be
admitted to have done good in his day. He died of cholera, in 1834,
when Mr. Mackenzie held the position of first Mayor of Toronto.]

[Footnote 36: _Kingston Chronicle_.]

A public subscription was raised to pay the amount of the fine; public
meetings were held and committees formed to take the case of Collins
into consideration. To a petition for his release, the
Lieutenant-Governor, Sir John Colborne, who had but recently arrived
in the Province, replied, through Assistant-Secretary McMahon, that he
respected the liberty of the press very much, but that he had an equal
respect for trial by jury; and that the danger of interfering with
their decisions must be very great, unless when they are clearly
illegal. This was on the 8th November, and ten days later Mr.
Collins's petition for a remission of the sentence elicited a direct
negative, through Mr. Secretary Mudge, who was instructed to add, that
at the expiration of his term of imprisonment, "any application you
may decide to make will be taken into consideration upon the facts
alleged in your statement," which, at this distant day, reads very
much like a mockery of the prisoner's misery. At a later period the
House of Assembly interposed in behalf of Collins, but they failed to
change the determination of the Executive to keep him in close
confinement for the whole of the prescribed term of his sentence. Sir
John thought himself entitled to snub the House for their
interference, by expressing extreme regret at the course they had
taken. He forgot that the Sovereign whom he represented is the
fountain of mercy, and thought only of his obligation to carry a
rigorous and cruel sentence into effect.

The Assembly's committee called upon Mr. Justice Sherwood to give
evidence in the case on which he had presided, but he refused, rightly
most persons will now think, to have his judicial conduct inquired
into by a committee of the House, and did not answer the questions put
to him. A judge is necessarily liable to impeachment for improper
conduct, but not to account either to the Sovereign or to Parliament
for any particular judgment he may have given. But if the House of
Assembly was wrong in demanding to know from Judge Sherwood the
grounds on which his judgment was based, and he was right in refusing
to answer, he was wrong in giving to the Executive government, as he
afterwards did, the information he had refused to the House.[37] Mr.
Hagerman, who was acting as judge at this time, was also called
before the committee, but he refused to answer the questions put to
him, on the ground that they impeached the conduct of a brother judge.
The Legislative Assembly having denounced the conduct of the judges,
and the matter having been made a subject of complaint in a petition
to the Imperial authorities, the case came before the law-officers of
the crown, in England, for their opinion thereon. They reported that
they saw nothing objectionable in the direction of the judge or the
verdict of the jury.

[Footnote 37: The Legislative Assembly pronounced Mr. Justice
Sherwood's charge "an unwarrantable deviation from the matter of
record, and a forced construction of language, contrary to the ends of
fair and dispassionate justice." They also resolved that "Mr. Justice
Hagerman one of the persons alleged on the record to be libelled,
refused to receive the verdict first tendered by the jury, viz:
'Guilty of libel against the Attorney General only,' with which
direction the jury complied, whereby the defendant was made to appear
on record guilty of charges of which the jury had acquitted him, and
whereby false grounds were afforded upon the record for an oppressive
or unwarrantable sentence." "Mr. Hagerman," it was further declared,
"did concern himself with Mr. Justice Sherwood in measuring the
punishment of defendant; thereby, without necessity for it, violating
the rule that a man shall not be judge in his own case."]

The threatened prosecution of Mr. Mackenzie for an alleged political
libel had been kept suspended over his head for nearly a whole year,
when a day was fixed by the Attorney General to strike a special jury,
which had been demanded by Mr. Mackenzie, when he found that the list
of petty jurors had not been returned to the crown office as usual.
Mr. Sullivan having unsuccessfully applied for the list, on behalf of
Mr. Mackenzie, went to Sheriff Jarvis to inquire the cause; when he
was informed that Mr. Justice Sherwood had directed him not to return
the list as usual. For some reason, however, the Executive resolved
to abandon the prosecution, and two days before the date fixed for the
striking of the special jury, the Attorney General addressed a note to
Mr. Sullivan stating the conclusion that had been arrived at.

The alleged libel, of which the prosecution was thus abandoned, was
purely political. It was neither more nor less than a recommendation
to certain constituencies to change their representatives at the then
next ensuing general election; and expressed in language that must be
admitted to have been very strong, but also very general, why this
should be done. "The besom of the people's wrath" may be an alarming
figure of speech; but after all it is only a figure. Connected with a
general election, it ceases to wear a terrific aspect, and becomes a
mere question of defeating certain supporters in the Legislative
Assembly of the ruling minority. The report of a committee of the
House, on which the paragraph was founded, contained more serious
accusations than the alleged libel itself. The committee, of which Mr.
Beardsley was chairman, reported, among other things, "that some of
the most daring outrages against the peace of the community have
passed unprosecuted, and that the persons guilty have, from their
connections in high life, been promoted to the most important offices
of honor, trust, and emolument, in the local government." Surely this
more than justified a recommendation, however strong the language in
which it was conveyed, that the supporters of such a state of things
should be rejected by the people, at the next general election. It was
certainly a wise resolution to abandon the prosecution, whatever may
have been the cause[38] that led the government to its adoption.

[Footnote 38: Mr. Mackenzie, writing of the result at the time,
says:--"We can only conjecture the cause for this new and judicious
procedure. 1st. We should think that Sir John Colborne would be ill
inclined to administer to the legacy of prosecutions bequeathed to him
by his predecessor. 2d. That there were very poor hopes of success, in
the present state of public opinion, as must have been evident from
the facts that the alleged libeller had, after giving the libel the
greatest possible circulation, after presentment, been returned to the
Assembly for the county where he resided, and where the offensive
libellous matter had been previously published. 3d. That the country
is disgusted with the cruel and vindictive punishment awarded to the
editor of the _Freeman_. 4th. That the libel is _true_ and not
_false_, as stated in the indictment. 5th. That the committee of the
Commons of England had deprecated this sort of prosecutions. 6th. That
the people's representatives, in Parliament assembled, had addressed
the throne on the injustice and the partiality hitherto pursued in
libel cases, and pointed out to His Majesty its bad effects."]

About two years after the type riot, a tragical event, which bore some
relation to it, took place. Charles French, who was in Mr. Mackenzie's
employ, as printer in 1826, and was one of the principal witnesses on
the trial, became a marked man. He tried to keep the rioters out of
the office, and was a principal agent in their conviction. At this
time, there lived in York an Irish laborer, of the name of Knowlan, a
stalwart and pestiferous bully, standing considerably over six feet
high, and possessing great muscular power. Accustomed to carry a pair
of short iron tongs concealed about his clothes, to attack persons in
the street, and insult them at the door of the theatre, he was the
terror of the place. As savage as a gorilla and twice as vicious,
Knowlan was the man who undertook to execute vengeance upon Charles
French. During the winter of 1827-8, French had fallen into habits of
dissipation, and got accustomed to divide the late hours of the night
between the dramshop--of which there were sixty in a town of less than
two thousand inhabitants--and the theatre. He occasionally took a
subordinate part among the actors. Remaining out very late one
evening, and returning flushed with liquor, French met Mr. Mackenzie's
remonstrance with abuse, and was dismissed, in consequence, from his
employment, an the 6th of May, 1828. About a fortnight after, He was
seized upon one night by the bully Knowlan, who, in answer to an
inquiry from Mr. Charles Baker, said he was going to carry him to the
river and drown him. In releasing his victim, whom he had hoisted upon
his shoulder, Knowlan threatened, with an oath, that he "would settle
him yet." On the 4th of June, Knowlan was at the militia training,
where he assaulted a constable, and was to have been brought up next
day for the offence. But death intervened. Knowlan was at the theatre
that night, with his tongs, as usual. When the play was about half
over, in an insulting manner he went up to French, and taking out his
tongs, he was heard to swear that he would measure them over the head
of French and those of two or three other persons, if he only had them
outside the theatre. French, who was of a naturally mild disposition
when sane and sober, was subject to violent fits of insanity; and
liquor, when too freely taken, produced the most terrible effect upon
him. He had been drinking, and became excited by the menace of
Knowlan, aggravated as it was, by a hideous contortion of his brows,
and recalling, as it must, the threat which Knowlan had made against
his life, a fortnight before. Besides, French was suffering from a
pain in the breast, occasioned by a blow from the ruffian, some time
before. It was while listening to "Tom and Jerry, or Life in London,"
that French became alarmed at Knowlan's threats. He mentioned the
circumstance to one William Gedd, saying he felt his life in danger,
and was without any means of defence. A person named Gosling, a boon
companion of French, hearing of this, went to one Wm. D. Forest, and
asked to borrow from him a pistol that was in his possession. French,
being called out of the theatre, was informed by Forest, that, though
he had but one pistol, and that a borrowed one, he would let him have
it. It was loaded with ball. French returned to the theatre, but left
before the farce was over, and took more drink. About midnight, when
he and three companions were returning from drinking at Howard's, they
met Knowlan walking a little behind some of his associates. French
having spoken to him, Knowlan asked with an oath, why he was standing
there? He approached towards French, and raised his hand, as French
supposed, to fulfil his threat, when the latter fired the pistol, and
shot Knowlan through the liver. Knowlan died eighteen hours after he
received the wound; and French was found guilty of murder and
sentenced to be hanged. The trial took place on the 17th of October,
and the execution was to follow in three days. In a few hours, a
petition for the mitigation of punishment, was signed by eleven
hundred persons; it was taken to the Lieutenant-Governor, at Stamford;
but the only result was a respite till the 23d, six days after the
trial, when the sentence of death was carried into effect.

In a statement made by French, in his last moments, he reproached
himself with the reflection, that, "had I attended to the oft-repeated
advice of my friends, especially my dear mother and Mr. Mackenzie, and
avoided bad company and drinking, I should not now be here; but I
would not attend, and now I have to suffer."




CHAPTER VIII.

     Effect of the Destruction of the Advocate Printing
     Office contrary to the Expectations of its
     Perpetrators--Pecuniary Embarrassments--Fever brought
     on by Anxiety and Vexation--Herculean Feats by the
     Midnight Lamp--Tableau of an overworked Newspaper
     Editor--Haunted by Ague--Sickness and Death in the
     Family--Robert Randall; his Influence on Mr.
     Mackenzie--Acting in Concert with Mackenzie and others,
     Randall goes to England with Petitions on the Alien
     Question--The Pocket Test of Patriotism--Letters to
     Earl Dalhousie--Statement of the Alien
     Question--British Subjects made Aliens by the mere Act
     of Passing through a Foreign Country--Difficulty of the
     Question; Its final Settlement--Mr. Mackenzie's Faith
     in Appeals to the Colonial Office.


Violence is a blindfolded demon, more likely to defeat its own objects
than to attain them. The means taken to crush a public journal,
obnoxious to the ruling faction, proved the cause of its resuscitation
and firm establishment. At the very time when the press was broken and
the type thrown into the bay, the last number of _The Advocate_ had
been issued. The fact was not known to Mr. Mackenzie's enemies, or
they might not have smote the lion that was supposed by its own keeper
to be dead, and thus recalled its suspended energies to life and
action. The publication, burthened as it was with a postal tax payable
in advance, and addressing itself to a small scattered community, had
never repaid the expenditure necessary to sustain it. What means its
proprietor had made in trade were soon dissipated on the literary
speculation. Between _matriel_, and debts, and losses, the publisher
had been brought to a dead stand, and was unable to make further way.
In winding up the mercantile business, many debts had been left
uncollected and were still unpaid. What between purchasing land and
building, buying printing materials and carrying on an unprofitable
publication, he had gone beyond the compass of his available capital.
He was threatened with prosecution for debt. In May, 1826, he was
offered a loan of money that would have relieved him; but it was only
for three months, and he could not assure himself of his ability to
repay it in that time. His property, real and personal, was worth
twice the amount of his debts; but he was embarrassed for ready money;
threatened with _capias_ by one creditor, and thoroughly disheartened.
From these embarrassments he resolved to free himself. With the
consent of Mr. Tannahill, his principal creditor, Mr. Mackenzie went
to Lewiston, in order to prevent the accumulation of law costs, till
his affairs could be settled. To have continued the paper another
year, even if money could have been raised, would have been absolute
ruin. From Lewiston he wrote, on the 27th of May, to Mr. Cawthra, at
York, proposing to place the whole of his property into the hands of
three trustees to be sold; and after the claims of his creditors had
been satisfied, the balance to be handed over to him. "The place at
Dundas," he wrote, "you could quickly dispose of; and that place is
the one I am least willing to give away; but let it go for what it may
fetch." His enemies afterwards pretended that he had gone to Lewiston
for the purpose of defrauding his creditors; but this calumny is
sufficiently disproved by his letter to Mr. Cawthra, and by the fact
that, while there, he voluntarily granted a cognovit covering the
amount of the whole of the claims against him by his creditors. This
was done three days before the destruction of the printing office; and
consequently before any new reason had arisen for his immediate return
to York. After it was all over, the creditor, by whom he had been
threatened with _capias_, confessed, in writing, "I have not done by
you as I would have wished."

Besides, his health was broken; and he had some time before been
thrown into a fever by the vexation he had suffered. His eldest
daughter had died, and another member of his family was ill. Under
these circumstances, it is not surprising that he should have sighed
for that repose which journalism had interrupted in the first
instance, and of which it still continued to prevent the return. But
while he loved repose, he had not been able to resist the excitement
of the semi-public life of the journalist, who already dreamed of the
overthrow of an administration and the reform of the oligarchical
system then in operation. He who repiningly compared his own toils to
the quiet life of the farmer would sit up whole nights, laboring
assiduously to accomplish political ends. Though he could be a child
among his children, and was never so happy as when he joined in their
play, he would frequently sit up for two consecutive nights, at the
patient but exhausting labor of the pen. And if the pen be more
powerful than the sword, it is also, in the hands of the overworked
journalist, more dangerous to himself than is the active use of the
sword to the soldier. A fevered pulse, an aching head, and all the
long train of horrors resulting from a disordered stomach, are his
portion. With him life is little else than endurance. The strongest
nerves become unstrung, and the most powerful frame gives way. Mr.
Mackenzie was blessed with a constitution, such as not one man in ten
thousand possesses. It has been said of Lord Brougham, that he has
been known to work for six days and six nights without ever going to
bed. At a later period of his life, this extraordinary feat Mr.
Mackenzie actually performed. On the occasion of these long vigils,
when drowsiness came on, he would have water poured upon his head,
and, thus roused up, take a fresh start. When overtaxed nature could
no longer be resisted he would sleep a few minutes in his chair, then,
waking, would walk round his room a few times and recommence his
never-ending task. It is, or used to be, thought a great feat for a
man to walk a thousand miles in a thousand hours. The overworked
journalist has his mile to walk every hour of his life, and when he
comes to the end he is in his grave! He goes there, too, much before
his appointed time; or, if all things be appointed, it is his lot, by
a violent wear of the constitution, to carve out for himself an early
sepulchre. The sixty-seven years that he lived carried Mr. Mackenzie
almost to the allotted limit of human existence, but if his
marvelously strong constitution had had fair-play, there must have
been fully twenty years more wear in it. But after all, the wonder is
that he lived so long, when his mode of life and what he was called
upon to endure are considered. Soon after his arrival in Canada, he
took ague in Kingston; it went with him to Dundas, and appeared with
greater intensity after his arrival in Toronto, then called York. To
the last, he was subject to that modification of it which is known as
"dumb ague." He was subject, at infrequent intervals, to terrible
pains in the head--one of the well-known symptoms of over-mental
exertion. Of the time previous to the destruction of his printing
office, he has left it on record: "My health had for three or four
months been in the most precarious state, and much sickness in my
family had depressed my spirits beyond any thing I had ever felt or
endured before." In Queenstown he lost his eldest daughter, born at
Dundas, at the age of eleven months; and in York, near the close of
1824, his second child, born at Queenstown; also a daughter, died of
smallpox. One of the competing newspapers showed its sympathy by
hinting that the infected neighborhood of the rival's house and office
had better be avoided. And the suggestion was not unheeded; for such
was the terror of smallpox in those days, that while it was in the
house the only stranger or neighbor who crossed the threshold was the
elder Mr. David Patteson, an ironmonger at York, whose deeply scarred
face was his best security against the danger of infection. The
condition of his own health, as well as domestic and pecuniary
reasons, made Mr. Mackenzie desirous that his connection with the
press should cease.

At the time of the destruction of his type and press, Mr. Mackenzie
had a contract for printing the journals of the Legislative Assembly,
at the rate of about six dollars a page; but whatever profits were
made out of other printing were swallowed up by the newspaper, or
scattered over the country in the shape of doubtful debts. Besides, he
was constantly printing for gratuitous distribution political squibs,
in various shapes and forms; an operation which did not tend to
improve the state of his exchequer.

It often happens that the influence of one individual upon another, at
a critical period of his life, shapes and moulds his destiny. Was Mr.
Mackenzie subject to any such influence? Perhaps this question cannot
be satisfactorily answered. While living at Queenstown, he became
acquainted with Mr. Robert Randall, a Virginian by birth, (and a near
relative of John Randolph, of Roanoke,) who had come to this Province
as a permanent settler, and was then living at Chippewa. Randall was a
politician, and it is probable that his influence on Mr. Mackenzie
first led him into politics. The proof is not clear; but Mrs.
Mackenzie is of that opinion. Randal was a man who, with a keen eye to
the future, selected land at different places where future towns were
certain to spring up. He was entangled in law suits, involving
property to a very large amount; and in one way or another was cruelly
victimized. His lawyers played him false, and the officers of the law
conspired to defraud him. He became involved in pecuniary
embarrassments, and was charged with perjury for swearing to a
qualification which, based on a long list of properties the ownership
of some of which litigation had rendered doubtful, was declared to be
bad. Mr. Mackenzie took his part; they continued to be firm friends,
and when Randall died he bequeathed a share of his property to the man
who had in some sort been his protector. The connection produced its
effect upon Mr. Mackenzie for life. Long before Randall's death,
Mackenzie had embraced his quarrels, and made them his own. They were
afterwards to become his inheritance; and they were well calculated to
assist in embittering the existence of one of his keen susceptibility.

In the spring of 1827, Mackenzie raised the question of sending to
England an agent to plead with the British Government the cause of the
American-born aliens, in Canada. A petition, said to have been signed
by fifteen thousand persons, was ready to be carried to England. A
central committee, charged with the protection of the rights of the
aliens, met at Mr. Mackenzie's house, and he acted as its confidential
secretary. Mr. Fothergill, who had taken the popular side on the Alien
question, and been dismissed from the office of King's printer,
desired the mission. The central committee offered it to Dr. Rolph,
who declined acceptance. The question was then between Fothergill and
Randall; Mackenzie, favoring the appointment of the latter, carried
his point. Randall was in the position of the persons whose cause he
had to plead. On behalf of the committee, the delegate's instructions
were drawn up by Mr. Mackenzie; and the committee having advanced a
sum for his expenses,[39] part of which had been raised by
subscription, Randall set off for London, in the month of March.

[Footnote 39: Mackenzie makes "Tom Moore, jr.," say:--"Among the
numerous petitions against the Alien Bill, we observed one from the
head of the lake, signed at Flambro' west, by upwards of 100
individuals, owning property equal to at least $200,000 value. Among
this opulent portion of the people we are credibly informed that a sum
equal to $20 was raised in aid of a mission to England.

That is to say, they gave a shilling apiece, or a ten-thousandth part
to save the rest!

     "To keep the cause of liberty
       In Italy afloat,
     Illustrious Bennet's generous hand
       Subscribed a one pound note!

     To keep the cause of liberty
       In Canada from failing,
     The patriots about Dundas
       Gave each a Dublin shilling!"

In order to smooth the way for the delegate in England, Mr. Mackenzie
addressed letters to the Earl of Dalhousie, Governor-in-chief,
surcharged with expressions of loyalty, and recommending colonial
representation in the Imperial Parliament. It is worthy of note that
the first of these letters contains several extracts from American
authorities predicting a dissolution of the Federal Union. After
giving these extracts, the writer asks: "And is this the government,
and are these the people whose alliance and intimacy we ought to court
instead of those of England? No, my lord; their constitutional theory
is defective, and their practice necessarily inconsistent. Their
government wants consolidation; let us take warning by their example."
Mr. Mackenzie afterwards expressed the opinion that these letters,
taken as a guarantee for the loyalty of the opposition, materially
assisted Randall's exertions in England. A few weeks later, he was
writing about the "glorious opportunity of England to recover her most
ancient and valuable colonies by simply giving the remaining Provinces
a voice in her national councils."

There were in the Province a large number of persons, who, though
born in British Colonies, had, by the progress of events, and the
effect of laws resulting from those events, lost the legal quality and
privileges of British subjects. All who were born in the old American
Colonies, and had continued to live there till after the peace of
1783, became, on the 3d of September of that year, by the Treaty of
Independence, citizens of the United States. They, therefore, by that
fact, ceased to be British subjects. Both American and English law
courts agreed as to the effect of the treaty upon the nationality of
those who resided in the United States, at the peace of 1783. Of those
who came to Canada, after that date, many had adhered to the British
standard through the revolutionary war; but among these immigrants
there were doubtless many others who had not.

The laws relating to aliens were stretched so as to cover a class of
persons they could never have been intended to affect. A person born
in England, or Ireland, or Scotland, who came to Canada through the
United States, was held to have lost the character of a British
subject on the way, and to be incapable of exercising the elective
franchise till he had been seven years in the country; as if the mere
touch of United States soil had the magic power to divest an
Englishman of his nationality, the reintegration of which was only to
be obtained by a seven years' probation. Robert Gourlay, a Scotchman
by birth, was charged under the Sedition Act with not having been six
months in the country, nor taken the oath of allegiance.

Persons who had made immense sacrifices by adhering to the British
standard during the revolutionary war, lost, in some cases, large
amounts of property, in consequence of their inability to inherit as
British subjects. The case of Elizabeth Ludlow, niece of a Chief
Justice of New Brunswick, had just been decided adversely in the
English courts, on the ground that her father had resided in the
United States, after the Treaty of Independence was ratified; and
though the whole family had made great sacrifices for the British
cause, she was declared incapable of inheriting the property in
dispute. A large number of Americans, whose ancestors had taken
sides--some one, some the other--in that contest, were then residents
in the Province. Most of them were possessors of land; and their
rights were never challenged or brought in question till after the
close of the war of 1812, when, under the presidency of Sir Gordon
Drummond, a proclamation was issued with the view of putting a stop to
the immigration of American citizens into Canada. The effect of a
possible political propagandism, exercised through the medium of these
immigrants, appears to have been feared. It is doubtful, however,
whether this proclamation had legal ground to rest upon. Lieutenant
Governor Gore, who succeeded Sir Gordon, thought it had not, and that
Americans were entitled still, not only to come and settle in Canada,
but also to receive such modified naturalization as the English laws
had sanctioned. By a British statute passed in 1790, a seven years'
residence, the taking of the oath of allegiance and the sacrament of
the Lord's Supper, according to the usages of the Protestant Church,
and observing other formalities, all aliens who came to the colonies
could acquire the rights of British subjects, with certain
reservations. But they could not become members of the Privy Council
or of Parliament;[40] they were incapacitated from holding any
position of trust, civil or military, in the United Kingdom or
Ireland; and they could not accept of any grant of land from the
crown. The provisions of this statute were hardly ever complied with
by alien emigrants from the United States. No distinction was made or
could be made between the absconding debtor who had fled from the
United States to defraud his creditors, and the loyalist, who,
adhering to the fortunes of the British crown during the revolutionary
war, had not left that country till after the peace of 1783, when, in
spite of himself, the treaty made him an American citizen. Men whose
industry had cleared the country of forests, who had carried
civilization into the wilds of the west, and assisted to repel
invasion, found themselves aliens, without any legal security for
their property.

[Footnote 40: In May, 1826, an Imperial Act was passed to render
naturalized foreigners capable of sitting in the Legislature of Upper
Canada.]

Whatever might be the effect of a narrow or rigid construction of the
Alien Law upon these persons, they had not hitherto received the
treatment of aliens. They had received grants of land from the crown
and devised real property; some of them had held offices of trust in
the militia, and spilt their blood in defence of the country, in which
they were now to be denied the rights of citizens, except upon
conditions which they regarded as degrading. It was not to be expected
that a man who had fought beside the gallant Brock would feel
complimented if asked to take the oath of allegiance. The recent
decision of the Court of King's Bench, in England, in the Ludlow case,
created uneasiness, alarm, and indignation. After much correspondence
with the Lieutenant Governors on the subject, the Imperial Government
sent instructions to Sir Perigrine Maitland to cause a bill to be
introduced into the Legislature, by which all the rights of British
subjects could be conferred upon the aliens in the Province. The bill
passed the Legislative Council, whose members owed their nomination to
the crown, in the session of 1826; and when it was sent down to the
Assembly, it met an equal amount of opposition and support, on two
several divisions. The House was equally divided for a whole week; and
the bill, after being five times negatived by the casting vote of the
Speaker, was at length irregularly passed. Though the division of
numbers was so long equal, the majority of the members who spoke
opposed those provisions which required all persons, placed in the
category of aliens by the recent judicial decision, to remedy their
former neglect by complying with certain prescribed formalities; a
residence of seven years and the taking of the oath of allegiance
being necessary to confer on them those rights which many of them had
from the first, exercised without question. Whatever may have been the
merits or demerits of this measure, it is proper to quote the
declaration of Mr. Wilmot Horton, then under-Secretary of State for
the Colonies, that the "Lieutenant Governor and Legislative Council of
Upper Canada cannot be considered responsible for those parts of the
present bill which have excited the most earnest opposition. Lord
Bathurst's instructions to the Lieutenant-Governor, founded, as they
were, upon his Lordship's impression that the measure proposed would
be satisfactory, were peremptory, and left the local Governor no
discretion on the subject." At the same time, it is pretty certain
that Lord Bathurst's impression must have been derived from the
official information he received from Canada. The Imperial Government
showed by their subsequent action that they were anxious to do what
would give full satisfaction to the people, whose rights were in
question.

Mr. Bidwell, whose father when elected for Lennox and Addington, in
1822, had been declared ineligible to take his seat in the Legislative
Assembly, on account of his being an alien, proposed as an alternative
measure to declare all Americans then in the Province entitled to all
the rights of British subjects. The real hardship was in confounding
two distinct classes: persons who were born British subjects, or whose
fathers had been born British subjects, and who, so far from having
done any thing to forfeit that character, had throughout been true to
their allegiance, with others who had come to the Province not from
political choice, but because they found emigration convenient, or
thought it would be profitable. Among the latter there were some who
were anxious to enjoy all the rights of British subjects without
taking the oath of allegiance; and who considered it a glorious
diversion to cross the frontier line to enjoy the demonstrations that
take place on the anniversary of American independence. If it was
desirable that these persons should submit to a formal act of
naturalization, it was impossible to distinguish between them and
others, who, having been born British subjects, had never desired to
relinquish their allegiance. And here arose the real difficulty of the
case.

The bill passed by the Legislature was of that nature which rendered
necessary its reservation for the signification of the Royal pleasure.
To prevent the Royal assent being given to it, Randal had been
selected to bear the petition of some thousands of the persons whom it
affected. His success was complete. The committee from whom he
received his instructions consisted of Messrs. Jesse Ketchum,
Alexander Burnside, Joseph Shepherd, and Thomas Stoyell. Messrs. Hume
and Warburton rendered him every assistance in their power, and Lord
Goderich showed the most anxious desire to meet the wishes of the
petitioners. Another bill, framed in conformity with the Royal
instructions, which Mr. Randal's exertions had procured, was
introduced, into the Upper Canada Assembly, by Mr. Bidwell, a
prominent member of the opposition. It invested with the quality of
British subjects all residents of the Province who had received grants
of land from the crown, or held public office, as well as their
children and remote descendants; all settled residents who had taken
up their abode before the year 1820, their descendants to have the
right to inherit in case the parents were dead; all persons resident
in the Province on the 1st March, 1828, on taking the oath of
allegiance after seven years' residence in some part of His Majesty's
dominions. If these persons had resided seven years in the Province,
they would at the age of nineteen be entitled to take the oath of
allegiance at any time within three years. It was also provided that
no person of the age of sixteen, on the 26th of May, 1826, should be
debarred from inheriting property on account of its descent from an
alien, and any person claiming to hold property on account of those
nearer akin, being aliens, must have had actual possession and made
improvements on the property before that date; a contract for the sale
of property so held to be valid, if there had been no adverse
possession.

The bill passed the Assembly with only such feeble opposition as the
official party and their friends ventured to offer in the way of
amendments. Their chagrin appears to have been shared by the
Lieutenant Governor, who, in his reply to the Assembly's address
informing him that they had passed the bill, petulantly threatened to
tell the Colonial Secretary that it was precisely such a measure as
the House had rejected in the second session of that Parliament. The
House, without any such direct reference to the Lieutenant Governor as
would have been unparliamentary, flatly denied this statement in the
first of a series of resolutions, in which reasons for rejecting the
Alien Bill in the second session were given. These resolutions, eight
in number, were severally carried against the government by about two
to one; and it became the duty of the Lieutenant Governor to transmit
them to England. It was, no doubt, true that the bill passed was some
modification of the simple declaratory measure with which the
opposition had proposed to cover the whole case in the preceding
session. The compromise, for such it must be called, was probably the
best that could have been devised. It shared the fate of all
compromises, in meeting the opposition of a few extreme persons. The
Legislative Councils altered the preamble, and amended the bill so as
to prevent it repealing any statute then in force. The Legislative
Assembly, after a little grumbling on the part of two or three
members, accepted the amendments unanimously.

The appeal so successfully made to the Imperial Government, was
suggested by Mr. Mackenzie; and it was he who got up the Committee,
which decided to send an agent. He drew up Randal's instructions, and
caused him to be selected in preference to another.

It often happens that some particular event produces upon the minds of
even clever men impressions which, though not altogether well
grounded, they never get rid of as long as they live. The success of
Randal's mission to England had this effect upon Mr. Mackenzie; for,
ever after, except a few years about the period of the rebellion, he
believed in the specific of an appeal to the Imperial Government. His
own subsequent visit to the Colonial office, and the success he met,
confirmed an opinion which he cherished to the day of his death.
Appeal from the oligarchy to the justice of the Imperial Government
seemed at one time the only hope of the colonists, until the local
Executive could be made responsible to the popular branch of the
Legislature; but after the change wrought by the introduction of
responsible government, Mr. Mackenzie failed to make sufficient
allowance for the new state of things.




CHAPTER IX.

     Mr. Mackenzie conceives the idea of Publishing a Daily
     Paper in Montreal--"Printer to the Hon. House of
     Assembly"--Not a Sure Partisan--His Estimate of the
     Intelligence of the Assembly in 1827--Irresponsible
     Government--Union of Legislative and Judicial
     Functions--Colonial Representation in the Imperial
     Parliament.


In May, 1827, Mr. Mackenzie visited Montreal, with a view of
ascertaining, from the information he could collect on the spot,
whether it would be advisable to commence the publication of a daily
paper there. An examination of the ground convinced him that the
speculation would not answer commercially; and he returned to York,
resolving not to enter on the doubtful experiment.[41] From the 25th
of January, 1827, to the 10th of January, 1828, the imprint of _The
Colonial_ _Advocate_ described the paper as being "Printed and
Published by W. L. Mackenzie, Printer to the Hon., the House of
Assembly of Upper Canada." The contract was for the whole of the
printing required by the House; and so low was the price that it does
not appear to have been profitable. He preferred a claim for 25
extra, on account of the unusual expedition required by the House;[42]
and although the extra sum he had paid to printers was larger than
this, the claim was refused.

[Footnote 41: A few months afterwards--November, 1827--he gave an
account of the Periodical Press of Montreal. The _Herald_ printing
office was then the most considerable in the British Colonies. There
were, besides, the Montreal _Gazette and Herald_, the _Courant_, the
_Canadian Spectator_, _La Minerve_, with very limited
circulations--many farmers both in Upper and Lower Canada then
receiving their intelligence of current events from oral
information--the _Christian Sentinel_, a church of England journal,
circulating six hundred copies a week. The _Quarterly Review_ had
recently died for want of support; and a new Colonial Magazine had
obtained twenty-one subscribers. The Quebec _Gazette_ was the only
paper in Lower Canada distinguished for the attention it paid to
commercial affairs. Mr. Mackenzie described it as occupying, in
Canada, the position that the _Times_ occupied in England, as the
organ of the most respectable class of the population. A wonderful
revolution in journalism has taken place since then.]

[Footnote 42: In a letter to Mr. H. C. Thompson, of the Printing
Committee, dated January 15, 1828, Mr. Mackenzie said:

"Last session, Mr. Carey received for work done to the Legislative
Council nearly at the rate of 3_s._ 3_d._, and for work done for the
Assembly 3_s._; Mr. Stanton received 3_s._ for some, and 4_s._ from
the government for the rest, and offered to do more for 2_s._ I had
some at 3s., some at 1_s_. 8_d_., and some at 1_s_. per one thousand
ems. Such a system is surely absurd and unjust. It is not my intention
to ask for one farthing more than my one shilling contract; if the
House are anxious to get their work done at an **fair price, and to
give nobody but your brother-in-law (Mr. Stanton, the King's Printer)
even journeyman's wages, I will not selfishly complain--but I wish
very much their "saving fit" would become more general in its
operation. There is a law maxim which runs thus: '_Lex neminem cogit
ad impossibilia_'--the law compels no man to perform
impossibilities;--and upon this principle I claimed the other 25
only, not of additional price, but for double allowance made and
promised my people to get forward expeditiously with the accumulated
printing of the House, at hours when they should have been in bed.
This claim was supported by three affidavits, setting forth the fact
that such extra work had been done, and that without working almost
continually, all the hands in the office (ten or eleven) could not
have done the printing in time--for we were often obliged to leave off
one job and begin a second, or even a third, in order to meet the new
orders of the clerk." The letter concluded with an offer to do the
sessional work of the House for 1828, at twenty cents per one thousand
ems composition. He also suggested a division of the work at fair
prices; and this suggestion was acted upon, three printers being
included.]

At no time does Mr. Mackenzie appear to have been a very strong
partisan. Not that his views and position were not decided. He was
strongly opposed to the ruling minority; but he was very far from
having unbounded confidence in the majority of the Assembly. Of the
leaders of the opposition, Messrs. Rolph and Bidwell, he sometimes
spoke in sharp terms of condemnation; showing that he was under no
sort of party control or leadership. When reminded by one of his own
political friends in the House that certain petitions laid before the
Legislature were not privileged communications; that an action for
libel would lie, if they contained what the law regarded as libellous
matter, and were reprinted in a newspaper; his reply was, that he
intended to publish both the petitions in question in the next number
of his paper, a promise which was faithfully kept.

Before the commencement of 1828, Mr. Mackenzie was a declared
candidate for a seat in the next House of Assembly; and it is not
impossible that he already aimed at attaining to the leadership
himself. Speaking of this House as a body, in a letter to Earl
Dalhousie, he said: "Many of these Legislators are qualified to sign
their names; but as to framing and carrying through a bill on any
subject whatever, the half of them wisely never attempted such a
herculean task." And in the same letter, he expressed undisguised
contempt for the whole sham of Colonial Legislatures then in vogue. "I
have long been satisfied," he said, "that if the North American
Colonies were rid of these inferior and subordinate Legislatures,
which are and must ever be insufficient for the purposes for which
they were intended; and allowed, instead, a due weight in both
branches of the British Parliament, it would prove the foundation of
their permanent and true happiness." The difficulty was that these
representative assemblies were mocked with a semblance of that
legislative power, with the substantial possession of which they were
never endowed. Even the Reformers had only an imperfect conception of
the true remedy. The ministry might be subjected to a succession of
defeats in the Legislative Assembly without raising a question of
resignation; and the liberal journals very seldom undertook to deal
with the question of ministerial responsibility. Mr. Mackenzie was the
"advocate of such a change in the mode of administering the government
as would give the people an effectual control over the actions of
their representatives, and through them over the actions of the
Executive."[43] Most of those who essayed to effect reforms, contented
themselves with encountering abuses in detail; a mode of warfare which
left untouched a radically defective system of administration.

[Footnote 43: _Advocate_, January 10, 1828.--These sentiments he
claimed to have enunciated in the first number of his paper; but if
so, the utterance was not very distinct.]

When we look back upon the system that existed, the mind is filled
with astonishment that it should have enjoyed such comparative
immunity from attack. A party triumph at the polls carried hardly any
of the advantages of victory into the Legislature. The members of the
Executive belonged to the minority. The majority might pass bills in
the Assembly; but, unless they pleased the ruling party, they were
rejected by the crown-nominated chamber. There was no general
separation of legislative and judicial functions; and when the
Assembly, in 1826, addressed the Imperial Government to remove the
Chief Justice from the sphere of politics, the answer was that the
Lieutenant-Governor had profited greatly by his advice, and that there
was nothing in the circumstances of the colony to render a change of
system desirable. The Judiciary and the members of the Executive
received their appointments and the greater part of their pay from
revenues belonging to England, on which they were largely dependent.
When the House presented an address to the King, praying that the
bounty lands which had been withheld from those officers of the
militia who attended a convention on the grievances of the colony in
1818, Governor Maitland, by the command of His Majesty, replied, that
when they expressed "deep contrition" for presuming to ask for a
redress of grievances, the lands would be granted to these erring
militia-men of 1812. The system reacted upon itself; the bad advice
sent by irresponsible ministers from this side came back across the
Atlantic matured into the commands of the Sovereign; and the name and
the authority of England suffered, while the real culprits escaped the
merited punishment of ejection from office by the votes of a majority
of the people's representatives.

It is not surprising, under these circumstances, that a scheme so
impracticable as Colonial representation in the Imperial Parliament
should have been turned to, in despair, by Mr. Mackenzie. A union of
the colonies, which he had often advocated, would have necessitated a
change of system if it was to be an effective remedy for the glaring
defects of administration which then existed.

In the commencement of 1828, while advocating a responsible Executive,
Mr. Mackenzie disclaimed all "intention or desire to assist in cutting
any colony adrift from its parent state." He confesses, however, that
his proposal for representation in the Imperial Parliament had not met
universal reprobation. The ruling faction desired to have things their
own way; and so comfortable were existing arrangements that they were
afraid of the effects of a change. The people were unfortunately
becoming suspicious of the external influence that sustained the
oligarchy; and were wisely disinclined to listen to a scheme of
representation in a distant Parliament, where their feeble voice must
have been drowned in the clangor of over six hundred representatives.




CHAPTER X.

     Mackenzie becomes a Candidate for the Legislative
     Assembly--"Parliamentary Black List"--Improvement in
     his Pecuniary Circumstances--His Election--Complexion
     of the New House--Mr. (afterwards Sir) Allan McNab is
     declared Guilty of a Breach of Privilege, and on motion
     of Mackenzie sent to Jail--Mr. J. H. Boulton
     Reprimanded for a like offence--Mr. Mackenzie, as
     Chairman of a Committee on the Post-office, recommends
     that the Department be placed under Provincial
     Control--His action as Chairman on Privileges--The
     Chaplain of the House--The Government Pecuniarily
     Independent of the Assembly--The Public Debt and
     overdue Debentures unpaid--Mackenzie contends that all
     the Provincial Revenues should be placed under the
     Control of the Legislature--Resolutions on the State of
     the Province--Sir J. Colborne does not meet the
     Expectations formed by him--Specimen of Mackenzie's
     Oratorical Powers.


Having once resolved to seek a seat in the Legislature of his adopted
country, Mr. Mackenzie waited for no deputations to solicit him to
become a candidate; he submitted his claims to no clique of election
managers, and heeded not their voluntary resolves. Months before the
election was to take place, he issued an address[44] to the electors
of the County of York, not very prolific in promises; containing
nothing that would make more than a very meagre modern "platform"; yet
it was sufficient to satisfy the people to whom it was addressed.

[Footnote 44: "TO THE ELECTORS OF THE COUNTY OF YORK.--_Gentlemen_:--I
have the honor to inform you that it is my intention to come forward
as a candidate at the next Election of Members to serve for your
County in the Provincial Parliament; and I most respectfully solicit
your votes and support.

"I have no end in view but the well being of the people at large--no
ambition to serve but that of contributing to the happiness and
prosperity of our common country. The influence and authority with
which you may invest me, shall always be directed, according to the
best of my judgment, for the general good; and it will be my care to
uphold your rights to the utmost of my power, with that firmness,
moderation, and perseverance, which become the representative of a
free people.

"If honored with your suffrages, it will be alike my duty and my
pleasure to watch over the local interests of this great county, and
to promote every public improvement and useful undertaking, which
shall be found conducive to your prosperity and the general welfare.

"I have ever been opposed to ecclesiastical domination; it is at
enmity with the free spirit of Christianity; and nations which have
bowed to its yoke, are become the dark abodes of ignorance and
superstition, oppression, and misery.

"That corrupt, powerful, and long endured influence which has hitherto
interfered with your rights and liberties, can only be overthrown by
your unanimity and zeal. An independent House of Assembly, to Upper
Canada, would be inestimable.

"I have been a careful observer of the conduct of the people's
representatives in the Colonial Assemblies; I have seen men in whom
was placed the utmost confidence, fall from their integrity and betray
their sacred trust; men, too, who had entered upon their legislative
duties with the best intentions towards the people, and who evinced
for a time a firm determination to support their rights. But there are
others who continue to maintain and uphold the interests of their
country, unshaken and undismayed; who consider it their highest honor
to persevere in a faithful discharge of their public duties, and
eagerly strive to deserve the good will, the affection, and the
confidence of their fellow subjects.

"Among this latter class I am desirous of being numbered; and, unless
I shall be found deserting the cause of the people, I trust that the
people will never desert me.

"Accept my sincere thanks for the abundant proofs of kindness and
confidence, and for the liberal assurance of support, with which you
have honored me, and believe me,

"Gentlemen, Your faithful and humble servant,

"W. L. MACKENZIE."

YORK, _December 17th, 1827_.]

Mr. James E. Small was not connected with the government; but he
belonged to one of the "old families" of York. He had been Mr.
Mackenzie's solicitor, in the famous type case; but be was astonished
at the temerity of his late client in venturing unasked to declare
himself a candidate for the representation of the most populous county
in Upper Canada. It so happened that Mr. Small was to be a candidate
for the same county. He called upon the presumptuous editor of _The
Advocate_, to give him some advice about this York election. He dwelt
on the folly of a person in Mr. Mackenzie's position attempting to
oppose one whose long residence and family influence would be more
than sufficient to secure his return. These arguments neither
convinced Mr. Mackenzie nor changed his determination. He had declared
himself a candidate, and a candidate he would be.

The election managers took the case of the county of York into their
keeping. On the 4th of February, 1828, a committee, delegated by a
public meeting held at Newmarket, tried to ballot Mr. Mackenzie out of
the field. Nine votes were cast for Mr. Small, and only three for
Mackenzie; while of the other candidates Mr. William Roe got
fifty-seven, and Mr. Jessie Ketchum forty-one. Had not Mr. Small told
him how it would be? But he was not to be got rid of in this
scientific manner, and he announced:

"I have attended two public meetings, but it is not my intention to go
to any more until I meet the people at the hustings--it is a needless
waste of time,--and benefits nobody but the tavern-keeper. If I go
into the Legislature, it must be in my own way, or not at all. For I
mean to break through all the old established usages, to keep no open
houses, administer to the wants of no publican, hire no vehicles to
trundle freemen to the hustings to serve themselves, nor to court the
favor of those leading men who have so powerfully influenced former
elections. I will not lessen my own resources for maintaining
independence, by spending at the outset, as was done by others four
years ago, a sum sufficient to maintain my large household for a
twelvemonth; but if I shall become one of the stewards of the
Province, I hope I shall be found not only faithful, but also fully
competent to discharge the duties of a representative in such a way as
ought to secure for me the confidence of an intelligent community."

Virtuous resolves are good; but election expenses are not easily
brought under control, and no power on earth is strong enough to put
them down entirely. Mr. Mackenzie's first election cost 500.

Opposed by the administration and its organs, from political reasons,
Mr. Mackenzie's candidature was contested even by professed liberal
journals, from a business jealousy that derived its venom from the
circumstance of his own paper having a circulation larger than any
rival in Upper Canada. Assailed by every newspaper in York, except his
own; libelled in pamphlets, and slandered in posters, he pursued the
even tenor of his way, and managed to find time for the preparation of
electioneering documents, calculated to influence not merely the
county of York, but the whole Province. His "Legislative Black List,"
early commenced and assiduously kept up, contained a short commentary
on the divisions that had taken place during the two previous
Provincial Parliaments, on prominent and important questions. The
publication was commenced on the 29th May, and the Provincial
Parliament was not dissolved till the 24th July. Compared with
electioneering documents of the present day, whether in Canada or the
States, "The Black List" was mild and moderate. In republishing Mr.
Small's election address, he simply appended to it, within brackets,
"Printed at the Government office."

The effect of this new mode of election warfare was visible when the
time for counting votes came. Mr. Jonas Jones, whose public career and
conduct probably presented as few points on which admiration could
find a resting place as any other Colonial politician of his time, was
defeated by Mr. Buell, in Leeds. The Attorney General was re-elected
by a majority of only seventeen. Mr. G. S. Boulton, brother of the
Solicitor General, was rejected by the county of Durham; and several
other similar results were visible at the close of the contest.

By this time, Mr. Mackenzie's pecuniary circumstances had greatly
improved. In a letter, written previous to the election, he gives us
some information on this point:

"By an unwearied application to business, I am now again an
unincumbered freeholder of Upper Canada, to more than thrice the
amount required by law, as a parliamentary qualification, besides
being possessed of nearly as much more lands, with good bonds for
deeds. I have also a valuable personal property, including a business
which nothing but the actual knowledge of the election of a bad
parliament, in aid of the present corrupt administration, would induce
me to quit. Being therefore easy in my circumstances, entirely freed
from the terrors of litigation, prosperous in my business, in good
health, and owing very few debts, I have applied to the people of the
most populous county in Upper Canada, for the highest honor in their
gift, the surest token of their esteem and confidence."

The result showed that Mr. Small had miscalculated the relative
influence of himself and his opponent.

The first session, in which Mr. Mackenzie had a seat in the
Legislative Assembly, opened inauspiciously for the advisers by whom
Sir John Colborne was surrounded. Having been convened on the 8th
January, 1829, it soon gave proof of its hostility to the
administration. The vote on the speakership, which stood twenty-one
for Mr. Willson, the late Speaker, and twenty-four for Mr. Bidwell,
did not at all indicate the strength of parties; for, while Mr.
Willson received the support of the Government, the division showed
that he still retained many friends among the opposition. The address
in reply to the speech from the throne, founded on resolutions framed
by Dr. Rolph, and containing the strongest expressions of a want of
confidence in the advisers of the Lieutenant Governor,[45] was carried
with the nearest possible approach to unanimity: thirty-seven against
one.[46] In these days an unanimous vote of censure on the Governor's
advisers produced no change of ministry. The Assembly complained of
the Government, when they ought to have struck a blow at the system
which rendered it possible for a party, who could command only a small
minority in the popular branch of the Legislature to continue their
grasp upon the reins of power.

[Footnote 45: "For the insurance of those most important objects, we,
His Majesty's most faithful Commons, confiding in the candor of your
Excellency, and in your readiness to recognize us as constitutional
advisers of the crown, do humbly pray your Excellency against the
injurious policy hitherto pursued by the Provincial administration;
and although we at present see _your Excellency unhappily surrounded
by the same advisers as have so deeply wounded the feelings and
injured the best interests of the country_, yet in the interval of any
necessary change, we entertain an anxious belief that, under the
auspices of your Excellency, the administration of justice will rise
above suspicion; the wishes and interests of the people be properly
respected; the constitutional rights and independence of the
Legislature be held inviolable; the prerogative and patronage of His
Most Gracious Majesty be exercised for the happiness of his people and
the honor of his crown, and the revenues of the colony be, hereafter,
sacredly devoted to the many and urgent objects of public improvement,
after making provision for the public service upon the basis of that
economy which is suited to the exigencies of the country and the
condition of its inhabitants."]

[Footnote 46: The following is the list of members:--Messrs. McDonald,
Fraser, McLean, Blacklock, Shaver, Brouse, Longley, Henderson,
Kilborn, Buell, Morris, Thomson, Dalton, Bethune, Radenhurst, Bidwell,
Perry, Lockwood, Samson, Peterson, James Wilson, Lyons, Ewings, Smith,
Ketchum, Mackenzie, Cawthra, Matthews, John Rolph, Robinson, George
Rolph, Hopkins, Randal, Lefferry, Terry, Woodruff, John Willson,
Hamilton, Dickson, McCall, Baldwin, Hornor, Malcolm, Wilkinson, Baby,
McMartin, Berczy, and Fothergill.]

Such was the House in which Mr. Mackenzie first held a seat; such the
practice of the Government, when he first entered public life.

During this session an event occurred that brought him into collision
with two members of the Legislature, who were afterwards active in his
expulsion from the House, upon pretexts that were wholly inadequate to
form anything like a justification. The new Governor, Sir John
Colborne, had been exhibited in effigy at Hamilton, and a rumor had
found currency that there was a conspiracy to liberate Collins from
jail by force. Whatever connection these two subjects may have had,
they were jointly referred to a special committee of inquiry. Mr.
Gurnett had stated in his newspaper[47] that the intention of certain
petitioners for the release of Collins was to liberate him by force,
if necessary. On the 29th January, Dr. Rolph moved that Mr. Gurnett be
brought to the bar of the House to be interrogated touching this
statement. When he came he refused to answer, on the ground that his
evidence would implicate himself. Mr. (now Sir) Allan McNab was also
among the witnesses called. He was then young and not indisposed to
have the House take some action against him that might give him a
chance of becoming a member of the next Assembly; so he refused to
answer the questions put to him. On motion of Dr. Baldwin, he was
declared guilty of a high breach and contempt of the privileges of the
House. Being taken into the custody of the Sergeant-at-arms, and
brought a prisoner to the bar of the House, he complained of having
been tried and convicted without a hearing. His defence was not
satisfactory to the House, and he was, on motion of Mr. Mackenzie,
committed to York jail, under the warrant of the Speaker, during the
pleasure of the House. Mr. McNab is said not to have looked upon this
inconvenience as a disservice; but he would hardly consider himself
bound to be grateful for it. Mr. Solicitor General Boulton was also
called as a witness. He, too, thought himself entitled to refuse to
answer the questions of the committee, and for this contempt and
breach of privilege was let off with a reprimand from Mr. Speaker
Bidwell.[48] Mr. Mackenzie would not have been more lenient to him
than to Mr. McNab, and the Solicitor General was not of a nature to
forget or forgive. Besides, he harbored contempt, not knowing that it
produces its like, and afterwards failed to find in the vocabulary
words to express the strength of that feeling towards Mr. Mackenzie.

[Footnote 47: _The Gore Gazette._]

[Footnote 48: The history of England does not furnish a single
instance of a witness persisting in refusing, like Mr. McNab and
Solicitor General Boulton, to answer questions put by a committee of
the House of Commons. There is, therefore, no precedent for the
punishment that should be accorded for this contempt and novel species
of breach of privilege.]

No sooner had Mr. Mackenzie got into the Legislative Assembly than he
became one of its most active members. He commenced as he ended, by
asking for information, and probing to the bottom questions of great
public interest. In the committee room he made his mark, during the
first session, not less distinctly than in the House. As chairman of
the select committee to inquire into the state of the Post-office
department, in Upper Canada, he drew up a comprehensive report,
replete with the most valuable information and suggestions. The mail
service was miserably performed; and matters were so managed as to
leave a considerable surplus profit which failed to find its way into
the Provincial exchequer. Not a mile of new post road could be opened,
or a single Post-office established, without the authority of the
Postmaster General, in England, who was necessarily destitute of the
minute local information necessary for the correct determination of
such questions. The postage on a letter between England and Canada
ranged from five shillings to seven shillings and six pence. The
tri-weekly mail between Montreal and the present city of Toronto was
slowly dragged over roads that were all but impassable; and it was a
standing wonder how the mail carriers were enabled to perform their
duties westward. Mr. Mackenzie recommended, as the beginning of all
efficient reform, that the department should be placed under the
control of the local authorities. He also laid it down as a principle
that no attempt should be made to draw a revenue from the Post-office;
but that the entire receipts should be devoted to the securing of
additional postal facilities. In case the department came under local
control, he recommended the retention of Mr. Stayner, then Deputy
Postmaster General, on the ground that he had shown himself fully
equal to the discharge of the duties. Complaints had been made, in
previous sessions, that the colonists were taxed without their
consent, through the Post-office department, and that the surplus
revenue was never accounted for; a complaint which had been met by
Attorney General Robinson by a reference to Dr. Franklin, who was said
not to have regarded postage in the light of taxation. Inquiries had
been made; but until now no bold and comprehensive remedy was
proposed. Here, as on so many other questions, Mr. Mackenzie was in
advance of his cotemporaries and of the times. The remedy he
suggested, of placing the department under local control, came before
the end of another generation; but if it had come sooner, the Province
would have been the gainer.

Nor was this the only committee of which Mr. Mackenzie was chairman.
In that capacity he made a report on the privileges of the House and
the conduct of returning officers at the recent election. Dr. Powell,
a previous clerk of the House, had been dismissed by the government,
without reference to that branch of the Legislature whose servant he
was, and his successor had been appointed in the same way. The House
had silently acquiesced in the appointment of Mr. Fitzgibbon thus
made, some years before; but Mr. Mackenzie was not willing to
consecrate a principle that entrenched on the privileges of the body
of which he had become a member. At the previous election, some
returning officers had made charges of doubtful legality against the
candidates. Of that nature was the item for their own services; while
the cost of stationery and printing incident to the election was
legally charged against candidates. So was the remuneration of the
poll clerk. Mr. Mackenzie reported these facts to the House, without
indicating a specific remedy; but he afterwards carried, on a vote of
twenty-seven against five, a resolution that the chief clerk, with the
approbation of the Speaker, should appoint the subordinate officers of
the House, except the Sergeant-at-arms and any others appointed under
the existing law.

He endeavored to bring the clerks of the Crown up to their duty; and
for this purpose carried an address calling the attention of the
government to the fact that the census returns, required to be made
annually under the Assessment Act, were frequently neglected by these
functionaries, and making suggestions for preventing the omission.

During this session Mr. Mackenzie carried various other motions and
addresses to the government. On nearly every vote he was sustained by
immense majorities. When certain powerful interests were interfered
with, his success was not so marked; and on a few occasions he failed
to obtain a majority. In those days, the Legislative Assembly counted
a chaplain among its servants; and in accordance with the attempt,
which had not yet been abandoned, to give the Church of England a
position of ascendancy in Upper Canada, he was a member of that
Church. On a vote of eighteen against fourteen, Mr. Mackenzie carried
a resolution which struck at this exclusiveness, by declaring that,
during the remainder of the session, the clergy of the town,
generally, be invited to officiate, in turn, as chaplain, and their
service be paid out of the contingent fund. But the bill repealing the
clause of a statute, then existing, which provided for the payment of
a fixed salary to the chaplain, was rejected by the Legislative
Council. When he asked the members to pay the postage of their own
letters, if they exceeded a certain weight, he failed of success.

Upon most of the propositions he offered to the acceptance of the
House, Mr. Mackenzie carried overwhelming majorities with him. But the
Government was so fenced in that it could exist in the face of any
amount of opposition. This session it was entirely independent of the
House for the means of carrying on the government. No money grant was
asked; and the House was officially informed that it would not be
expected to trouble itself with the matter. The Crown revenue, which
came into its hands, under an Imperial statute of 1774 (Geo. III. cap.
88), sufficed to defray the expenses of the government and of the
administration of justice.[49] And any bills passed by the House,
which did not meet the sanction of the government, could be easily
disposed of in the Legislative Council. The public debt, amounting to
112,166 13_s._ 4_d._,[50] might have been supposed to require special
attention, for there were 32,000 of overdue debentures unpaid.

[Footnote 49: This was generally the case--the government was
financially independent of the House; and the money votes for public
improvements were, under the vicious system then in vogue, just as
liable to be initiated by members of the opposition as by the
government. In Lower Canada, the Legislature contested the right of
the government to appropriate the Crown revenue. The Crown revenue, in
that Province, was not sufficient to defray the expense of the
government; and when application was made to the House to supply the
deficiency, the whole question of revenue and expenditure was brought
into discussion. There had previously been complaints that the
Post-office revenue was not under the control of the House; and Mr.
Mackenzie was among the first to suggest that all the revenue raised
in the Province ought to be appropriated by the local Legislature.]

[Footnote 50: The public debt had been contracted for the following
purposes: Militia pensions, 11,666 13_s._ 4_d._; Kettle Creek Harbor,
3,000; Burlington Canal, 12,500; Welland Canal, _75,000; public
service for the year 1824, 10,000.]

With this responsibility, the Province was spoken of as being
"overwhelmed with a great public debt;" and if its embarrassment is to
be held as a criterion, it must be admitted that this debt was a
greater burthen than some $60,000,000 is at present; though we now
look at the amount of the debt in 1829 as utterly contemptible. Mr.
Mackenzie's idea was, that a rigid course of economy should be pursued
till the whole of the debt was paid off. In the course of this
session, he brought before the House a series of thirty-one
resolutions--a moderate number compared with the celebrated ninety-two
of Lower Canada--on the state of the Province. He therein took a
position far in advance of the times. Contending for that right of
local self-government, of which the constitution--substantially the
same which united Canada now possesses--contained the guarantee, he
asserted the right of the House to control the entire revenue arising
within the Province; complained that money voted for the civil service
had been applied to the pensioning of individuals in sums of from
1,000 to 500 a year; denounced the favors shown to a particular
church, pensions--in a rather wholesale way it must be
admitted,--monopolies, and _ex-officio_ and criminal prosecutions, at
the instance of the Crown, for political libels. The necessity of
making the Canadian judges independent was asserted, in opposition to
opinions expressed in high quarters in England. The unlimited power of
sheriffs, holding office during pleasure, was declared to be dangerous
to public liberty; especially as the office was often filled by
persons of neither weight nor responsibility. The patronage exercised
by the Crown or its agent, the Lieutenant Governor, in the Province,
was asserted to be at variance with sound policy and good government.
Though the importance of Canada to England, as a nursery for her
seamen, and as a country consuming a larger quantity of British goods
in proportion to the population, was insisted on, it was alleged that
the discontents arising from the abuse of power were among the causes
that led to the invasion of the Province in the war of 1812; the
losses suffered from the war, by the most active friends of the
British power, falling most heavily on the Niagara District, ought, it
was contended, to be made good out of the territorial revenue of the
Crown,[51] instead of being left unliquidated or allowed to fall on a
poor province. The appointment of an accredited agent at the seat of
the Imperial Government, was declared to be desirable. The resolutions
constituted a budget of grievances, most of which have not only been
redressed, but forgotten. The resolutions were not without blemishes;
the chief of which consisted of the advocacy of the protective system;
a fault very common in those times, when free trade had not become
fashionable, and when the chief organs of English opinion asserted
that sufficient favor was not shown to the productions of Canada. So
little does even the popular branch of the Legislature appear to have
been conscious of the justice and necessity of many of the principles
asserted in several of these resolutions, that they were not pressed
on the House for adoption. So far was Mr. Mackenzie in advance of his
contemporaries.

[Footnote 51: The war losses compensation was a constant subject of
discussion for some twenty years after the war was over. In many cases
exorbitant claims were probably made; and this was one cause of the
delay in settling them. Another difficulty was about the funds out of
which they were to be paid.]

The arrival in the Province of Sir John Colborne, in the capacity of
Lieutenant Governor, had been hailed as the sure promise of a new era.
Before the close of the session, during which an Executive Council,
which found itself in a permanent minority in the popular branch of
the Legislature, had been kept in office,[52] the illusion had
vanished. Mr. Mackenzie, who had been elated by hopes which were
destined not to be realized, now uttered complaints where he had
before been disposed to bestow praise.

[Footnote 52: The following is a correct list of the names of those
members who formed the Executive Council, the dates of the mandamuses,
and the time when each of them were sworn into office; one of whom
had held office for a period of thirty-seven years:
+-------------------+-------------------------+----------------------+
|                   |                         |                      |
| NAMES.            | DATES OF MANDAMUSES.    | WHEN SWORN IN.       |
+-------------------+-------------------------+----------------------+
| James Baby        |   5th May, 1794.        | 9th July, 1792.      |
| John Strachan     |   25th July, 1817.      | 12th February, 1818. |
| William Campbell  |                         | 26th October, 1825.  |
| James B. Macaulay |   5th May, 1825.        | 27th June, 1826.     |
| Peter Robinson    |   5th July, 1827.       | 6th February, 1828.  |
| George H. Markland|   6th July, 1827.       | 6th February, 1828.  |
+-------------------+-------------------------+----------------------+]

He had gone into the Legislature with a desire to point out and, if
possible, remedy what he believed to be great abuses in the
Government. Of his speeches during the first session, he took the
trouble to preserve but few. The first speech he publicly delivered,
of which I find any record, was made before the "Constitutional
Society of Upper Canada," in March, 1828. It gave a premonition of
that power of swaying the masses, which he was afterwards to wield
with so much effect.[53] The speech was made in opposition to a
proposal to elect Francis Collins a member of the Society.

[Footnote 53: This speech was made in opposition to a proposal to
elect Francis Collins a member of the Society; and as it is the first
of his I find on record, it may not be amiss to give an extract: "I
have been accused, sir, of enmity and disaffection to this government;
but the charge was as unjust as it was foolish. I have lent my feeble
energies to the cause of truth; and would desire to see men at the
helm of affairs who would call out and foster the latent genius of our
people; who would patronize, protect, cherish, and multiply among us
seminaries of useful learning, and become the distinguished friends of
science, the arts, domestic manufactures, and great public
improvements, whose ambition would be to add to the sum of human
happiness, to enlighten the mind of the benighted peasant, and call
even from the recesses of the forest and the wilderness of Canada to
Senate and Assembly men whose patent of nobility would bear the
impress of their Maker's image, and who would forget personal
aggrandizement in the nobler and better purpose of promoting the
public good...Sir, I wish to live in peace with all men, before God
and the world. I envy no man, nor have I any revenge to gratify. The
tomb will soon, very soon, cover these limbs of mine; and the dust of
death will bury in oblivion the recollection of political triumphs
and political reverses.... I have suffered years to elapse before I
undertook even to defend myself against the sweeping denunciations of
a being who delighted to trample upon truth and justice, and to hold
me up to the people as a traitor to the true interests, happiness, and
glory of my adopted country. I come at length to the facts on which my
objection rests." Mr. Mackenzie seldom replied to personal abuse; and
he refused to receive or read the productions of the "Kennel Presses,"
as he called the journals that pursued him with slander. Speaking of
them towards the close of 1829, he said: "These vehicles continue,
week after week, to vomit up calumny with the force and effect of so
many forty shrew-power steam engines. It is of no use to try to shame
them, they have no sense of shame." And a week or two later, he again
noticed the "Kennel Presses," in these words: "We stated lately the
titles of some six or seven provincial vehicles of news, which we had
declined to receive, read, or exchange with. To that list has been
since added, _the York Observer_. We positively do not want to have
served up to us, almost daily, an endless farrago of nonsensical
jargon and abuse. Those who admire the eloquence of a scolding woman
will stay and hear her hold forth; those who do not, will maintain a
proper distance from her bell-clapper. Although desirous to take rank
among the latter class, we must concede the fact, that a female shrew
or a male scold will, each of them, have their own way; there is no
stopping them."]




CHAPTER XI.

     Visit to the United States--Admires Cameronian
     Preaching and Scottish Psalmody--Letter to the
     _National Gazette_--Comparisons between the States and
     Canada--A Charge of Disloyalty met--Mr. K. Baldwin
     elected to the Assembly, but does not take his
     Seat--Action for Libel, growing out of this Election,
     brought by Mr. Small against Mr. Mackenzie--The
     Legislative Session of 1830--The House Unanimous in
     demanding a Change of Administration--The Lieutenant
     Governor sends a Contemptuous Reply--Mackenzie proposes
     to send a Commissioner to England to lay the state of
     the Province before the Imperial Government--Is
     Chairman of the Committee on Banking--The Government
     hold one-fourth of the Shares in a Bank--The Chaplain
     Question--Revenue--Libel Laws--Disgraceful State of
     Prisons--Placemen in the Legislative Council--The Canal
     Era--Financial Jugglery--Effect of the Canals on the
     Price of Produce.


Englishmen travelling in the United States may be divided into two
classes: enthusiastic admirers or critical objectors. British subjects
of all ranks and conditions have been found in each class. Young and
inexperienced persons, who are willing to accept appearance for
reality, were most likely to become the admirers of American
institutions. Nothing short of a fixed residence in the States, for
some years, would cure these persons of their predilections. The
ardent temperament of Mr. Mackenzie was well calculated to betray him
into admiration with specious appearance, the real value of which
could only be detected by years of observation.

In the spring of 1829 he visited New York, Washington, Philadelphia,
and other places in the United States, with a disposition to view
every thing he saw there in _couleur de rose_; adding brilliancy to
the hues and tints by hideous contrasts. The alarming sound of a
threatened dissolution of the Union even then fell upon his ears; he
could detect in them nothing but the complaints of disappointed
faction. He, however, learned something of the American character
which he did not know before, and his mind was taken back to the Alien
question. In one of his letters, written on the 14th May, he
confessed: "I have never yet seen an American who would prefer another
system of government to his own: local circumstances may cause him to
emigrate, but an American is, in his heart, an American still;[54] and
the more I see of this country the better I can account for the
objections made by persons in office, in Canada, to the admission of
its citizens to naturalization among us." A Scotsman "in feeling and
principle," he looked upon the United States as an asylum for the
oppressed of all countries, in spite of that slavery which was "the
worst and darkest blot on its escutcheon."

[Footnote 54: It was evidently not Mr. Mackenzie's intention to say
this in dispraise of the Americans, for he noticed with disapprobation
the following versified and offensive expression of the same idea in
_The Upper Canada Courier_:--

     "I turn my lay, a feeble lay, I fear,
     To those small men who've just departed here,
     And meet for legislation once a-year.
     But let me say, before my bark I launch,
     I sing the lower, not the higher branch.
     First--who's their head? A man of solid sense,
     A _Mr. Bidwell_, saving of his pence.
     By birth a Yankee--what can you expect
     From Democrats with British honors decked?
     Though they may crouch and cringe to you, and pray,
     Their natal feeling ne'er will wear away.
     And e'en when cherished far above the rest,
     Still rankling venom works within their breast.
     Still they'll contend, that happiness or bliss
     _It not_ 'beneath a Government like this.'"

Two things, mentioned in his letters from New York, serve to show that
the influence of the principles which had been instilled into him from
his earliest days had not been effaced in the rude collision with the
outer world. "In the afternoon," he writes, "I went to hear Dr.
McLeod, a steadfast Presbyterian of the old school; the genuine
Cameronian, and a good preacher. There the old and solemn tunes of our
fathers have not yet made way for ballad rhymes; there the single line
of old Scottish Psalmody is given out by the preacher in truly
national style; there the discourse is divided and subdivided into
heads and observes in true covenanting fashion. I felt more at home in
this church, the members of which are either Scotch, or generally from
the north of Ireland, than I have often done while listening to the
splendid eloquence of much more popular orators." The other instance
is to be found in a reference to Tom Paine, of whom he says: "Had he
had sense enough to remain contented with his ample share of fame as
the author of 'The Rights of Man,' and 'Common Sense,' without
interfering with revealed religion, he would at this day have probably
stood next to Washington and Franklin, as a promoter of the glorious
revolution which gave freedom to America."

When Mackenzie re-published some of Paine's political works, political
malice ascribed to him a participation in the skeptical opinions
expressed by the author in some other works. On the injustice of an
imputation made on such grounds, and upon such a pretext, there cannot
be two opinions.

While on his visit to the United States, Mr. Mackenzie wrote a long
letter, on the political condition of Canada, to the editor of the
_National Gazette_. The authorship was not avowed, and though various
conjectures were hazarded on the subject, it is difficult to see how
it could have been a question at all. The letter bore the strongest
internal evidence of its authorship, and was besides little more than
an amplification of the thirty-one resolutions he had brought before
the Legislature in the previous session. The principal points in the
letter, that were not urged in the resolutions, were an elective
Legislative Council, which, like so many other changes which found in
him an early advocate, has since been effected, and an elective
Governor, which nobody now ask for. He regarded the Legislative
Council as serving in some sort as a shield to the Lieutenant
Governor, by relieving the Executive of a responsibility which it must
otherwise often have assumed. But as its members owed their
appointment to the Crown, and most of them were office-holders of one
grade or another, the instrument did not conceal the hand that had
used it.

The contrasts made between the government of Canada, as then
administered, and that of Washington, could hardly be otherwise than
of dangerous tendency. An English statesman might make them with
impunity; but if a Canadian followed his example, his motives would
not fail to be impugned. So it was with Mr. Mackenzie, who claimed to
be, in English politics, neither more nor less than a Whig. These
contrasts obtruded themselves by the propinquity of the two countries;
and there is no reason to suppose that in Mr. Mackenzie's case, they,
at this time, implied any disloyalty to England.[55]

[Footnote 55: Attached to one of the letters which Mr. Mackenzie
addressed to the Earl of Dalhousie, in May, 1827, is a manuscript
note: "I was for England in 1820, 1824, 1827, 1833, 1834; but 1836-7
choked off my loyalty." As the general election of 1831 approached,
the misrepresentations of the object of Mr. Mackenzie's mission to the
United States continued to be repeated with increased virulence and
rancor. He met them by the publication of the following letter:

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,         }
WASHINGTON, _July_ 28, 1830. }

"SIR:--Your letter of the first of this month to the Secretary, on the
subject of an article which appeared some time ago in the columns of
the _New York Courier and Enquirer_, and has since been re-published
in other public journals, both of Canada and the United States, with
additional innuendoes and particulars, was received on the 19th inst.
at this office, during his absence; but I lost no time in
communicating its contents to him. The object of the article or
articles referred to, is, to indicate a visit to the United States and
to its capital during the last summer, as connected with some
revolutionary movement in the Canadas, in relation to which your
agency was employed with the Federal Government; and you call upon the
Secretary, in his official capacity, positively and decidedly to
contradict it.

"I have, accordingly, just received a letter from Mr. Van Buren, the
Secretary, dated at Albany, the 23d of this month, expressly
authorizing me to deny all knowledge of or belief, on his part, in the
designs imputed to you, as I now have the honor of doing, and to
state, moreover, that he has not the smallest ground for believing
that your visit had anything political for its object. He directs me
also to add, that if the President were not likewise absent from the
seat of Government, he is well persuaded he would readily concur in
the declaration which I have thus had the honor of making in his
behalf.

"I am, Sir, respectfully,
"Your obedient servant,
"DANIEL BRENT, _Chief Clerk_.

"WILLIAM L. MACKENZIE, ESQ., _York, Upper Canada_."

The narrative would be incomplete if it were not added that the late
Mr. George Gurnett, as publisher of the _Upper Canada Courier_, was
active in circulating these accusations. Of the latter, Mr. William
Wallace, formerly a partner of Mr. Gurnett, wrote from Richmond,
Virginia, September 1, 1830, that while living there, "he (Mr.
Gurnett) renounced his allegiance to all potentates, and particularly
to the King of Great Britain, as is recorded in our Court." Mr.
Gurnett afterwards became Clerk of the Peace for the county of York,
and Police Magistrate of Toronto. He died in the fall of last year.]

During the parliamentary recess, a vacancy having occurred in the
representation of York, by the appointment of Attorney General
Robinson to the Chief Justiceship of the Court of King's Bench, the
vacant seat was contested between Mr. Robert Baldwin, whose father was
then a member of the House, and Mr. James E. Small. Mr. Mackenzie
supported the former, who obtained ninety-two votes against fifty-one
given to his opponent;[56] and after the election was over, the
journalist felt himself entitled to counsel the successful candidate
not to carry into the Legislature the habits of the advocate.

The day before the election commenced, Mr. Mackenzie printed charges
against Mr. Small, that were afterwards made the subject of an action
for libel. The matter complained of as libellous, consisted of
statements made by Mr. James Hogg, of Milford Mills, and Mr. Daniel
McDougal, affecting the reputation of Mr. Small, as Solicitor, in a
case in which they were concerned, one as plaintiff, the other as
defendant.

[Footnote 56: The House declared the election null and void upon a
point of privilege. The Governor had assumed the responsibility of
issuing the writ, contrary, it was said, to the privileges of the
House, who had the right to adjudge the seat vacant, and order the
speaker to issue a writ for a new election. The Governor yielded the
point; causing the great seal to be affixed to the writ issued by the
House. Mr. Baldwin was re-elected.]

Taking the House of Assembly for our guide, it would be difficult to
imagine a government administered in more direct defiance of the
public will than that of Canada, in 1830. The Legislative session
opened on the 8th of January; and in the address in reply to the
speech of the Lieutenant Governor, the House was unanimous in
demanding the dismissal of the Executive Council. "We feel unabated
solicitude," said the representatives of the people, "about the
administration of public justice, and entertain a settled conviction
that the continuance about your Excellency of those advisers, who,
from the unhappy policy they have pursued in the late administration,
have long, deservedly, lost the confidence of the country, is highly
inexpedient, and calculated seriously to weaken the expectations of
the people from the impartial and disinterested justice of His
Majesty's Government." The House was unanimous in desiring the removal
of the advisers of the Lieutenant Governor; but a discussion arose
upon the proper method of accomplishing that object. Mr. Fothergill
suggested impeachment; but there were two objections to such a
procedure. Impeachment must proceed upon a specific crime; but here it
was a question of non-confidence. And before whom could the
impeachment be tried? The Legislative Council might be asked to
adjudicate upon the case; but, as Dr. Rolph remarked, that would be to
ask the son to try the father. Mr. Mackenzie hit upon the true remedy.
"I would," he said, "candidly inform His Majesty's ministers that they
do wrong to encourage and support in authority an organized body of
men in direct opposition to the wishes of the people of the country."
If there was any hope of making the wishes of the House prevail, it
was by an appeal to England. The Lieutenant Governor had, in the
previous session, been appealed to by an almost unanimous vote of the
House, to remove his advisers; but he had felt himself at liberty to
ignore the wishes of the people's representatives. On a direct vote of
a want of confidence, the government had, in the previous session,
been able to muster one vote out of thirty-eight; now their solitary
supporter had deserted them. By the personal favor of the Governor,
they were still retained in office. Mr. Mackenzie's proposition to
send a commissioner or commissioners to England, to lay before the
Imperial authorities the state of the colony, looked to an efficient
remedy, and if acted upon, might have led to the result which the
whole House desired to produce.

The Lieutenant Governor received the address of the House with a
curtness that reveals a petulant sullenness bordering on insult: "I
return you my thanks for your address," was all he condescended to
say. That it might not appear invidious, he used the same formula in
receiving the echo address of the Legislative Council.

No member of the House had the same knowledge of financial matters,
revenue, banking, and currency, as Mr. Mackenzie. There were more
finished scholars and more brilliant, though not more powerful,
orators than he; but in his knowledge of the mysteries of accounts he
was unrivalled. At the commencement of the session, he concluded an
able speech on the currency, by moving for a committee of inquiry. Of
this committee he was chairman; and in that capacity made an
elaborate report[57] on banking and currency. One of the results of
the inquiry was the passage of an Act (Geo. IV. cap. 6) introduced by
Mr. Mackenzie, declaring that such British coins as were depreciated
more than one twenty-fifth of their weight, should not be a legal
tender. There was much room for amendment in the principles on which
the banks were established. One fourth of the stock of the Bank of
Upper Canada was held by the government, and the stockholders were
only responsible for the amount of their shares.

[Footnote 57: "The system of banking," said the report, "in most
general use in the United States, and which may with propriety be
termed 'the American Banking system,' is carried on by Joint Stock
Companies, in which the stockholders are authorized to issue notes to
a certain extent beyond the amount of their capital; while their
persons are privileged from paying the debts of the institution, in
the event of a failure of its funds to meet its engagements." On this
system, which had found its way into Canada, Mr. Mackenzie was anxious
that no more banks should be chartered; but in case the House resolved
upon that course, he recommended the following precautions, as likely
to afford some security to the bill-holders: "First, That a refusal to
redeem their paper should amount to a dissolution of their charter.
Second, That the dividends be made out of the actual _bona fide_
profits only. Third, That stock should not be received in pledge for
discounts. Fourth, That stockholders, resident within the district in
which any bank is situated, should not vote by proxy. Fifth, That
either branch of the Legislature should have the power to appoint
proper persons to ascertain the solvency of the bank, or detect
mismanagement, if they should see fit to institute an inquiry. Sixth,
And it should be stipulated, that any act of the Legislature,
prohibiting the circulation of bills under five dollars, shall not be
considered an infringement of the charter. Seventh, The book or books
of the company, in which the transfer of stock shall be registered,
and the books containing the names of the stockholders, shall be open
to the examination of every stockholder in business hours, for thirty
days previous to any election of directors. Eighth, Full, true, and
particular statements should be periodically required, after a form to
be determined on, and which will exhibit to the country the actual
condition of the bank to be chartered." To fourteen different
questions put to them by Mr. Mackenzie, the officers of the Bank of
Upper Canada refused to reply; but it does not appear that any of them
were committed for contempt. Such a thing had never occurred in the
Parliamentary history of England; but the bank officers here had the
bad precedent of the Solicitor General, who was also their solicitor,
for their guide.]

The Provincial government had, as we have seen, assumed the
appointment of a chaplain to the Legislative Assembly. Mr. Mackenzie
took up the question as one of privilege; and proposed to resolve that
the House refuse to receive the Rev. Dr. Phillips as its chaplain; but
that, instead, the ministers of the different denominations of York be
requested to officiate during the session as chaplains, under such
arrangements as may be made by the Speaker. But Mr. Mackenzie treated
the question as something more than one of privilege; as a part of a
system which gave a positive dominancy to a particular denomination.
Resolutions embodying these views received the assent of the House.

He moved an address for detailed accounts of the different branches of
the public revenue; introduced a bill--which passed unanimously at its
final stage--providing that the publication of truth, unless with
malicious intent, should not be a libel; and that the defendant in an
action for libel should be entitled to plead truth in justification
and produce his proofs. Another bill he introduced for the support of
the poor, lame, blind, and persons deprived of their reason. The libel
bill was rejected by the Legislative Council, in company with over
forty others.

As chairman of a committee, Mr. Mackenzie brought to light some
disgraceful facts bearing upon the conditions of the Provincial
prisons. Into an underground cell of the York jail, three female
lunatics were stowed; one of whom had become deranged by the
desertion of her husband. They were lodged in lock-up cribs, on straw;
two in one crib, and the third in another. The stench of their
insalubrious dungeon, where they were confined in strait jackets, was
complained of by the prisoners above. The bed clothes of some of the
prisoners were not washed for six or eight months together. The
atmosphere was in the last degree pestilential, and the food
insufficient. An idle apprentice and a person charged with murder
associated in the same room; which necessarily became a school of vice
for the less hardened.

As in the previous session of 1829, Mr. Mackenzie brought forward
resolutions, directed against the practice of filling the Legislative
Council with dependent placemen; but they were not pressed on either
occasion. If this point had been pressed by the House, which showed an
inexplicable backwardness in dealing with it, there is reason to
believe that it would have been conceded by the Imperial
Government.[58]

[Footnote 58: In a dispatch, addressed by Sir George Murray, then
Colonial Secretary, to Sir James Kemp, Governor of Lower Canada, Sept.
29, 1829, and also "virtually" addressed to Sir John Colborne, as he
was officially advised, the following passage on the subject of the
Legislative and Executive Councils occurs:

"The constitution of the Legislative and Executive Councils is
another subject which has undergone considerable discussion, but upon
which His Majesty's Government must suspend their opinion until I
shall have received some authentic information from your Excellency.
You will, therefore, have the goodness to report to me, whether it
would be expedient to make any alteration in the general constitution
of those bodies, and especially how far it would be desirable to
introduce a larger proportion of members not holding offices at the
pleasure of the Crown; and if it should be considered desirable, how
far it may be practicable to find a sufficient number of persons of
respectability of this description." Under these circumstances an
immense power was placed in the hands of the Governors.]

The canal era preceded that of railroads. In 1824, not a single effort
of a practical nature had been made to improve the inland navigation
of the Province. In 1830, the Rideau had been completed. A vessel of
eighty-four tons burthen had, in the previous November, passed through
the Welland. The Burlington and the Desjardins canals were far
advanced towards completion. Mr. Mackenzie, who had been a warm
advocate of internal improvements, obtained a committee, in the
session of 1830, to inquire into the management and expenditure of the
Welland Canal Company. The whole thing had so much the appearance of a
financial juggle--the original estimates of 15,000 to 23,000 having
been followed by an expenditure of over 273,000[59]--that curiosity
must have been much excited to know by what legerdemain the different
steps in the financial scheme had succeeded one another.[60] Mr.
Mackenzie fully appreciated the effects of these internal improvements
upon the price of produce. "Instead of 1s. 10_d._ to 2_s._ 6_d._ a
bushel for the superior wheat of this fertile Province," he said, in
May 1830, "paid too often to the farmer in goods at double their
value, we now find the miller and the merchant eagerly purchasing
grain at 5s., and, in some places, even at 6s. currency per sixty
pounds." As a commercial speculation the work was not destined to pay
the stockholders; but the Province, which became the proprietor of the
canal, has been amply repaid by the increased value given to its
produce. A more striking example of this fact than that given by Mr.
Mackenzie need not be desired. So well satisfied was he with the
result of the internal improvements, so far made, that he declared, "I
would cheerfully consent to involve the Province in debt, in
conjunction with Lower Canada, in order to improve the St. Lawrence to
the ocean." Lower Canada had taken the lead by making an appropriation
for the survey of the St. Lawrence above Montreal.

[Footnote 59: This canal has now cost 1,727,922 5_s._ 3_d._]

[Footnote 60: The original estimates were only for a canal that would
pass vessels of forty tons burthen. The company's capital was
originally limited to 40,000. The government was empowered to take
the work at the end of thirty years, on paying the company twenty-five
per cent premium on the outlay. The estimates were made in 1824; and
in April, 1828, an act was passed increasing the capital stock to
200,000. The Province subscribed for 25,000 of the stock, in 1825;
and next year it loaned to the company 25,000, at interest, for three
years. In 1827, this loan was converted into stocks, by a very close
vote, twenty against eighteen. In 1826, the Legislature had been told
that the work would be completed by the spring of 1827, at a cost of
20,000 less than the company's capital. When 1827 came, the usual
story about unforeseen circumstances was told; and by 1830, it was
admitted that the whole expenditure would be 300,000. Although Lower
Canada had only a remote interest in the work, her Legislature came
forward, in 1827, with a subscription of 25,000 to the stock. Next
year, Mr. Merritt visited England, and obtained from the British
Government a loan of 50,000, in security for which authority was
afterwards given to assign the whole work. He also sold some shares
elsewhere. In 1830, stockholders in New York had paid in 72,000; in
Lower Canada, 12,825; and in Upper Canada only 2,462, exclusive of
the Legislative subscription.]




CHAPTER XII.

     The Small Libel Suit--Mackenzie Pleads his own Cause
     and Succeeds--Din of the Electoral Battle--Responsible
     Government--Canada compared with other Countries--Rules
     for Elections--A subdued Black List--The Opposition to
     Mackenzie's Re-election--The Principles on which he
     Successfully Appealed to the People--The Politics of
     Bank Discounts--Success of the Official Party in the
     Election.


In writing the biography of one who had many enemies in the public
period of his life, while some of his cotemporaries are still living,
it is impossible to avoid the revival of recollections that will give
pain, or cause offence. But the duty of the impartial biographer is
plain. While it should be his study not to inflict needless wounds
upon the feelings of the living, the author is not at liberty to omit
prominent facts which are essential to the elucidation of his subject.
It is my aim, in dealing with events that may revive unpleasant
recollections in the minds of some of the actors, to present the facts
in the spirit of impartial history, free from rancor or animosity.

When Mr. James Edward Small appealed to the electors of York, in 1828,
to select him instead of Mr. Mackenzie, a story affecting his
professional reputation was circulated to his disadvantage. Every one
loves to find some other cause for his want of success than the
relative merits of himself and his opponent; and Mr. Small alleged
that he had lost the election by the circulation of a statement
affecting his professional integrity. He stated, on the hustings, his
intention to prosecute. Mr. Mackenzie was not the author or retailer
of the alleged slander. Mr. George Ridout, Mr. Small's brother-in-law,
canvassed Mr. James Hogg, of Milford Mills, for his vote. The miller
replied that he could not vote for a man who had cheated or defrauded
him out of forty or fifty dollars. Mr. Hogg was prosecuted for
slander. He was not permitted to justify, or produce evidence in
support of the accusation. The jury gave Mr. Small fifty pounds
damages. The costs swelled the amount to 78 19_s._

The story had been told by Hogg for Mr. Mackenzie's benefit--at least
that was the effect, though it was probably not the intention--and he,
in turn, repeated it, on the strength of the evidence in the Hogg
trial, for the benefit of Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Mackenzie was prosecuted,
too, but with a very different result. The alleged libel bore date
November 25, 1829. The evidence in the former trial, which formed the
staple of the second alleged libel, showed that one Daniel McDougal
held a note against Hogg for 3 13_s._, "payable in liquor at the
market price." The liquor had not been taken, and the question was
whether the note could be collected. Mr. McDougal called to consult
Mr. Small on the matter. The lawyer gave an opinion that the note, if
sued in the Court of King's Bench, could be collected. Mr. McDougal
left the note with Mr. Small, but alleged that he ordered him not to
sue or make costs upon it, and that he made a second visit to the
lawyer to repeat these instructions. The note was sued, and the costs
reached 12. Mr. McDougal further stated that he brought Mr. Small
before the Court of Requests to compel him to pay over the amount of
the verdict, but that defendant pleading his privilege as a barrister,
McDougal had to pay the costs, and was kept out of his money still
longer. Mr. Mackenzie, in publishing this statement, reflected upon
Mr. Small for taking advantage of the monstrous maxim, "the greater
the truth the greater the libel," arguing that the proper way for a
man to wipe a stain from his reputation was "not by 50 verdicts, but
by producing and admitting all the facts, but utterly disproving the
charge made against him."[61] The alleged libel was an argument upon
statements sworn to in a suit for slander, and so far from being
charged with malignity, it contained such admissions as this: "I
myself have had some dealings with Mr. Small, and although I looked
carefully into his conduct towards me, I am happy to testify that I
found him just and honorable in his dealings." It must be confessed
that, if the evidence of Daniel McDougal could be relied upon, Mr.
Small had taken advantage of a legal maxim that has since ceased to
disgrace the laws of England.

[Footnote 61: Judge Hagerman told the jury that if they believed that
Hogg had used the words complained of, they must find a verdict for
Small; that great scandal had been occasioned to the detriment of
Small, by the unwarrantable conduct of Mr. Hogg; that a lawyer's
reputation was of the utmost importance to him in his profession; that
the jury must discard McDougal's evidence, showing the cause of Hogg's
using these expressions, since it was inadmissible; that McDougal
ought to have been stopped sooner; and he concluded by directing them
to give a verdict for the plaintiff.]

Such was the alleged libel, which came to trial on the 8th of April,
1830. A special jury had been struck, at the instance of Mr. Small.
Messrs. Baldwin and Sullivan were solicitors for Mr. Mackenzie; and at
one time it was his intention that they should act as his advocates,
at the trial; but he finally resolved to be his own advocate. Mr.
Draper appeared for Small. The trial lasted from half past nine in the
morning to the same hour at night. Four hours out of the twelve were
taken up by Mr. Mackenzie's address to the jury. During the whole
time, the court-house was densely crowded. Mr. Justice Sherwood
presided; and Mr. Mackenzie has commended his impartiality on the
occasion. The Chief Justice and the Hon. Mr. Allan took seats beside
the presiding judge. The jury,[62] who remained out all night, gave a
verdict for the defendant; and they are said to have debated among
themselves whether it was not competent for them to award damages to
Mr. Mackenzie for the annoyance of a frivolous prosecution.

The verdict was set aside by the Court above, on the ground that the
witnesses had been permitted to say too much in the way of
justification. But Mr. Small, far from thinking it desirable to push
this seeming advantage, was willing to let the matter rest where it
was--the costs having been thrown on the defendant--but Mr. Mackenzie
desired to fight the contest to its natural close. With that view, he
offered a special plea in justification; but the judges, on
application of Mr. Small, put off the new trial till the spring of
1831. A general election was to take place in the interim; and it was
destined that the new trial was to be indefinitely postponed, Mr.
Small remaining satisfied with his first defeat.

[Footnote 62: Their names, Messrs. Joseph Wixon, Pickering; Jas.
Pearson, Whitchurch; Stilwell Wilson, John Chew, and Thos. Bell, of
York; Wm. Cornell, Scarboro'; John Dalziel, Vaughan; Christian Reesor;
Markham; Joseph Sylvester, Vaughan, and John Austin, of Toronto.]

After the close of the session of 1830, the belief seems to have
generally prevailed that the Executive government would dissolve a
House which had been unanimous in asking the Lieutenant Governor to
dismiss his advisers. The death of the King, George IV., settled all
doubts that might have existed on this head. But before the
intelligence of this event reached Upper Canada, the battle cry of
party had been raised, in anticipation of a dissolution of the new
House. In the month of July, Mr. Mackenzie addressed a series of very
long letters to Sir John Colborne, Lieutenant Governor, apparently
intended to influence the constituencies. Several columns of the first
letter were devoted to a complaint founded on the accusations brought
by the government press against the loyalty of the Legislative
Assembly, and abuse of its members.[63] These attacks followed closely
upon the publication of a despatch from Sir George Murray, Colonial
Secretary, to Sir James Kemp, Lieutenant Governor of Lower Canada, in
which the Imperial Minister inculcated "the necessity of cultivating a
spirit of conciliation towards the House of Assembly;" plainly showing
the feelings of the British government on the subject. After
collecting a long list of accusations against the dominant party in
the Assembly, Mr. Mackenzie met them by quoting the remark of a
"celebrated politician," that, "by this means, like the husband who
uses his wife ill from suspicion, you may in time convert your
suspicions into reality." But before he had completed the series, he
met the charge of disloyalty brought against the Legislative Assembly
and the party it more particularly represented, in direct terms. "The
people of this Province," he said, "neither desire to break up their
ancient connection with Great Britain, nor are they anxious to become
members of the North American Confederation; all they want is a cheap,
frugal, domestic government, to be exercised for their benefit and
controlled by their own fixed land-marks; they seek a system by which
to insure justice, protect property, establish domestic tranquillity,
and afford a reasonable prospect that civil and religious liberty will
be perpetuated, and the safety and happiness of society effected." It
was one of Mr. Mackenzie's complaints, that the members of the
Executive government were not responsible to the people of Canada,
through their representatives; and that there was no way of bringing
them to account for their conduct. When the election contest
approached more nearly he put forward responsible government as a
principal of vital importance. As a needful reform, he placed it on a
level with the necessity of purging the Legislative Council of the
sworn creatures and dependents of the Executive, who comprised the
great majority. Of Upper Canada politicians, we are entitled to place
Mr. Mackenzie among the very earliest advocates of responsible
government.[64] It is doubtless true that others afterwards made the
attainment of this principle of administration more of a specialty
than he did; for where abuses grew up with rank luxuriance, he could
not help pausing to cut them down in detail. The independence of the
judiciary, for which he persistently contended, has, like responsible
government, long since been attained; and indeed, the somewhat
fanciful idea of making judges only of persons who have never dabbled
in the muddy waters of colonial politics is the only change which he
put prominently forward, in 1830, that has not now been long in the
enjoyment of Canadians.

[Footnote 63: The Upper Canada _Courier_, published by the late Mr.
Gurnett, described the House, as a "tyrant gang whose hatred is
levelled at all loyal subjects;" the Speaker, as "a treacherous
plotter," whose face and form were "spiteful and bitter as the venomed
asp;" whose heart was "the home of every evil passion," and whose
"looks betray the mawkish hypocrite."

     "----Mouthpiece of a tyrant gang, (the House of Assembly,)
     Whose hatred is levelled at all loyal subjects.
     Poor abject creature, of a rebel race,
     I scorn thy brief and undeserved authority."

And again:

     "A thing like him (the Speaker) will only breed contempt,
     And cause our House to prove a scene of riot,
     Uproar, and noise. A theatre for spouting
     Disgusting trash and scurvy billingsgate,
     The scoff and scorn of all who witness it.

     "Devoid of dignity, address, and manners,
     He seems a thing unworthy to preside
     O'er doating fools who loiter at camp meetings,
     To hear old women prate in mawkish phrases.

     "Out upon them (the House of Assembly); shouldst thou choose him (Mr. Bidwell) Speaker,
     Thou'lt prove thyselves a base and shameless faction,
     Disgraceful both to government and people."

[Footnote 64: In September, 1830, he put forth the following
programme, and afterwards frequently repeated its publication:

"To insure good government, with the aid of a faithful people, the
following five things are essential:

"1. The entire control of the whole Provincial revenues are required
to be vested in the Legislature--the territorial and hereditary
revenues excepted.

"2. The independence of the judges; or their removal to take place,
only upon a joint address of the two Houses, and their appointment
from among men who have not embarked in the political business of the
Province.

"3. A reform in the Legislative Council, which is now an assembly
chiefly composed of persons wholly or partly dependent upon the
Executive government for their support.

"4. An administration or Executive government responsible to the
Province for its conduct.

"5. Equal rights to each religious denomination, and an exclusion of
every sect from a participation in temporal power."]

His letters to Sir John Colborne are not free from remarks to which a
general consent would not now be given. In drawing up an indictment,
containing a hundred counts against the administration, the
constitution was not always spared; but the system of administration,
then pursued, would now find no supporters in this Province; and if we
were obliged to believe that it was constitutional to sustain in power
a ministry condemned by the unanimous voice of the people's
representatives, the necessity for constitutional reform would be
universally insisted on. If the British government and even the
British constitution came in for a share of condemnation, it must be
remembered that the oligarchical system, which reduced the popular
branch of the Legislature to a nullity, was sustained by the Imperial
Government; and that the Reform Bill of Lord John Russell had not yet
been passed.

The letters to the Lieutenant Governor were immediately followed by
"_An appeal to the people of Upper Canada from the judgments of
British and Colonial Governments._" This "Appeal" was one of the
mildest productions Mr. Mackenzie ever wrote. Free from
personalities, it consisted entirely of an appeal to the reason and
the better feelings of the people. But no description would convey so
good an idea of it as a few extracts; and for that reason I resort to
the latter method. Addressing the farmers of the country, he shows his
love for Canada by comparing it with other countries:

"A kind Providence hath cast your lot in a highly favored land, where,
blessed with luxuriant harvests and a healthful climate, you are
enabled to look back without regret upon the opulent nations of
Europe, where the unbounded wealth of one class, and the degrading
poverty of another, afford melancholy proofs of the tyranny which
prevails in their governments. Compare your situation with that of
Russia, an empire embracing one half of the habitable globe, the
population of which are slaves attached to the soil, and transferable
to any purchaser; or with Germany, Italy, Portugal, and Spain, where
human beings are born and die under the same degrading vassalage.
Traverse the wide world and what will you find? In one place, a
privation of liberty; in another, incapacity to make use of its
possession; here, ignorance, vice, and political misrule; there, an
immense number of your fellow men, forced from their peaceful homes
and occupations 'to fight battles in the issue of which they have no
interest, to increase a domain in the possession of which they can
have no share.' Contrast their situation with yours, and let the
peaceful plains, the fertile valleys of Canada, your homes, the homes
of your wives and children, be still more dear to you. Agriculture,
the most innocent, happy, and important of all human pursuits, is
your chief employment; your farms are your own; you have obtained a
competence, seek therewith to be content.

     "'Contentment, rosy, dimpled maid,
       Thou brightest daughter of the sky,
     Why dost thou to the hut repair,
       And from the gilded palace fly?
     I've traced thee on the peasant's cheek;
       I've marked thee in the milkmaid's smile;
     I've heard thee loudly laugh and speak,
       Amid the sons of noonday toil;
     Yet in the circles of the great,
       Where fortune's gifts are all combined,
     I've sought thee early, sought thee late,
       And ne'er thy lovely form could find.
     Since then from wealth and pomp you flee,
     I ask but competence and thee!'"

The plea of poverty--which is very liable to lead to corruption--as an
excuse for not attending the poll, he met by saying:--"Poor, indeed,
in soul or in substance must that farmer or mechanic be, who, being in
health, cannot, in two or four years, spare time for one day's journey
to the hustings to express an opinion by his vote, concerning the
persons chosen to watch over the public welfare." Far from having any
desire to change the monarchical for a republican form of government,
he said:--"It is not a change in the form of government which will
remove any difficulties or grievances under which you labor;" and so
little did he flatter the people, that he told them "The grand panacea
is self-reformation." He went further: "Beware," he said, "of
electioneering sycophants! for if they flatter you, they will
assuredly flatter power after you elect them." Never were truer words
spoken, or more necessary advice given. Of the further rules he gave
for the selection of representatives, the following are not worthless
specimens:

"If you find a lawyer who has tried to fill his neighborhood with
litigation--who is more famed for gaining causes than for scrupulous
virtue in accepting their management, he is 'a minister of municipal
litigation, and the fomenter of village vexation,'--avoid him. But
wherever a lawyer can be found among you, worthy of the high vocation
whereto he has been called--learned, industrious, and faithful--less
anxious for the fees of office than for the peace of society--always
willing to embark in the most perilous duties of his profession, the
protection of property, personal rights, domestic peace, and parental
authority, entreat him to come forward as a candidate; elect him with
acclamation; he will surely maintain your rights, and stand as a
sentinel upon the watch-tower of Freedom, to warn you of approaching
danger.[65] Men whose conduct, in their private dealings with their
fellows, has been found to be regulated by covetous, unchristian,
selfish principles, will be sure to make dishonest and unprincipled
legislators; for how can he who takes daily advantage of the
necessities or the follies of his brother, be a lover of mankind,
benevolent, and kind? Mind not his boasted patriotism, nor his
exclamations against existing abuses; for there is guile in his heart
and deceit on his lips."

[Footnote 65: There is reason to believe that, in giving this
description, Mr. Mackenzie had Dr. Rolph in his mind; for he had
previously spoken of him in nearly equivalent terms.]

Against the votes of members during the late Parliament, there was
much less to be said, from Mr. Mackenzie's point of view than against
those of their immediate predecessors. The _Black List_--a running
commentary upon prominent votes--was therefore meagre and
comparatively feeble.

Mr. Mackenzie's re-election for York was opposed by nearly every
newspaper in the country; and the few that did not oppose, remained
silent. Some carried the virulence of personal abuse to an extent that
caused him to complain of injustice; but he would neither condescend
to reply nor to meet his assailants with their own weapons. He would
not reply, "because," as he said, "he thinks that his conduct, during
his political career of seven years, has sufficiently enabled the
people to judge of the value which ought to be attached to such
productions." The county of York returned two members; and of the four
candidates on this occasion, two represented the opposition, and two
the official party. On the liberal interest stood Mr. Mackenzie and
Mr. Jesse Ketchum; opposed to them were Mr. Simon Washburn and Mr.
Thorne. So far did Mr. Mackenzie carry his sense of fairness that he
publicly announced that he would "abstain from using the press as a
medium of injuring, in the public estimation," whoever might be
opposed to him as candidates; an English-like love of honor and
fair-play that might be copied to advantage in the present day. "He
was," he said, "anxious to gain his election, more as a triumph of
principle, than as a personal gratification. He will, therefore,
neither keep open houses, bring voters to the hustings, nor in any way
treat, entertain, or recompense any electors, either before, at, or
after the polling. His return (should he be elected) must be the
deliberate result of public opinion alone, opposed, as it would be, to
the powerful influence of the local government, the dominant
priesthood, the provincial bank, and every human being who profits by
the present irresponsible system."[66] On this ground he put the
contest; and the result[67] justified his confident anticipations.

The new House[68] met on the 7th of January, 1831.

[Footnote 66: Shortly before the election came on, Mr. Mackenzie had
given "Reasons," occupying four newspaper columns, "why the farmers
and mechanics should keep a sharp look-out upon the Bank [of Upper
Canada] and its managers." These reasons were based upon the refusal
of the officers of the Bank, in the previous session, to answer the
inquiries on numerous points of a parliamentary committee; on the
statement, in evidence of Mr. R. Baldwin, that notes had been
discounted and refused discount from political reasons; on the
palpable defects which then existed in the charter, defects which were
such as even then no economist or good business man in Europe would
have thought of defending. In order to exclude Mr. Mackenzie from the
last annual meeting proxies had been refused.]

[Footnote 67: The result of the polling was: For Ketchum, 616;
Mackenzie, 570; Washburn, 425; Thorne, 243.]

[Footnote 68: The following are members returned with the places they
represented:

_Glengary._--Alex. McMartin and Alexander Fraser.
_Stormont._--Archd. McLean and P. Vankoughnet.
_Dundas._--John Cook and Peter Shaver.
_Grenville._--Richard D. Fraser and Edward Jessup.
_Leeds._--William Buell, jr. and Matt. M. Howard.
_Brockville._--Henry Jones.
_Carleton._--John Bower Lewis.
_Lanark._--William Morris.
_Frontenac._--Hugh C. Thomson and John Campbell.
_Kingston, (Town)._--Christopher A. Hagerman.
_Hastings._--Reuben White and Jas. H. Samson.
_Lennox and Addington._--Marshall S. Bidwell and Peter Perry.
_Northumberland._--James Lyon and Archibald McDonald.
_Durham._--John Brown and George S. Boulton.
_York, (Town)._--William Botsford Jarvis.
_York, (County)._--Jesse Ketchum and William L. Mackenzie.
_Simcoe._--William B. Robinson.
_Middlesex._--Mahlon Burwell and Roswell Mount.
_Norfolk._--Duncan McCall and Wm. Willson.
_Oxford._--Chas. Ingersoll and Chas. Duncombe.
_Kent._--William Berczy.
_Essex._--William Elliott and Jean B. Maon.
_Wentworth._--John Willson and Allan N. McNab.
_Halton._--Wm. Chisholm and James Crooks.
_Niagara, (Town)._--Henry J. Boulton
_Lincoln._--Robt. Randal, John Clark, William Crooks, and
 Bartholomew C. Beardsley.
_Haldimand._--John Brant.]

No previous Assembly had committed half as many
follies as the one that now met for the first time was to perpetrate.




CHAPTER XIII.

     Meeting of the New House--The Official Party elect Mr.
     McLean Speaker--The Chaplain and State Church
     Question--Cause of the Party Revolution--Power of the
     Purse--State of the Representation--Mackenzie obtains a
     Committee upon it--Officials and Dependants on the
     Executive in the House--Grants of Public Lands to
     Members of the House--Cheering in the Galleries of the
     Assembly--Permanent Civil List first Granted--Mackenzie
     inquires into the Public Expenditure, and becomes a
     Thorn in the Side at the Official Party--Bank Mysteries
     made Public--Unsuccessful Attempt to expel Mackenzie
     for distributing Copies of the Journals of the House at
     his own expense--Mr. McNab tries to pay off the Grudge
     of his previous Imprisonment--Scheme of Representative
     Reform--Undue Influence of the Executive on the
     Legislative Council--Mackenzie starts an Agitation for
     Responsible Government and other Reforms--Petitions to
     the Imperial Authorities--Journey to
     Quebec--Shipwrecked in the Ice of the St. Lawrence.


The first trial of party strength, in the new House, showed that the
majority had passed to the official side. It was then the habit of the
Upper Canada Assembly, as it is now that of United Canada, to change
the Speaker with every revolution of party. The re-election of Mr.
Bidwell, by the new House, was out of the question; and Mr. Archibald
McLean became his successor, on a vote of twenty-six against fourteen.
He was the first native Canadian elected to the chair of the Upper
Canada Assembly. His father had emigrated from Argyleshire, Scotland;
and the son had, in previous local parliaments, allied himself with
the Official or Family Compact party. Personally, he was not
obnoxious, even to the opposition; and his pleasing address was much
in his favor. But his election indicated a complete change in the
politics of the House; and the party now dominant in both branches of
the Legislature, as well as in the government, was subject to no check
whatever. The way in which it abused its power, will hereafter be
seen.

Early in the session, Mr. Mackenzie brought forward a resolution
re-affirming the right of the House to appoint its own Chaplain, and
denying that the Executive government had been entrusted with the
power to prescribe the religious duties, exercises, or ceremonies of
the House, or to incorporate with the tenets of any particular sect
the institutions of the country. In Lower Canada, where the majority
of the population, and of the Legislative Assembly, was Roman
Catholic, the House had no chaplain. But this was not necessarily the
result of the denominational complexion of the population; for Upper
Canada was the only British American Province where the government
undertook to appoint a chaplain to the Legislative Assembly. Even in
Nova Scotia, where the Church of England was fully established, the
popular branch of the Legislature claimed and exercised the right of
appointing its own chaplain. The legal establishment of the Church of
England in Canada was contested; and it was chiefly as a protest
against the assumption that it occupied such a position, that Mr.
Mackenzie brought up this question, session after session. If the
Church of England was not securely established, as a State Church, it
had made some not unsuccessful efforts at dominancy. It claimed a
seventh of all the granted lands in the Province. It had obtained
control of the University of King's College, at York; and it had
obtruded a chaplain on an unwilling House of Assembly. In the temper
of the new House, no decision could be got upon the question raised by
Mr. Mackenzie. It was superseded by a motion, brought forward by
ex-Speaker Willson, "that the question be not now put." Mr. Mackenzie
then moved that a request be presented to the ministers of the
different denominations, in York, to say prayers in the House, during
the session, under such arrangements as the Speaker might make; but a
large majority of the members--about three-fourths--refused to
entertain the question, and the subject was referred to a committee,
consisting of Messrs. McNab, Willson, and Samson. In the course of the
debate, Solicitor General Hagerman threatened the House with
"confusion," and that "an end would be put to their proceedings," if
they ventured to oppose the wishes of the Lieutenant Governor.
Attorney General Boulton compared the assumption of the House, of the
right to appoint its own chaplain, with the right of the assassin who
shoots down a man in the street--the exercise of mere brute force. And
the House accepted the argument, and bowed before the menace.

It was already evident that Mr. Mackenzie had lost in the new House
the influence he had exercised in that which the Executive--unable to
find in it a single friend in need--had caused to be dissolved.
Instead of praying for a removal of the ministry, as on the previous
occasion, the Address of the House was a mere echo of the speech with
which the Lieutenant Governor had opened the session.

It is impossible to note the change in the character of the House
produced by the election of 1830, without inquiring to what possible
causes so extraordinary a party revolution was attributable. The
enigma seems to be not wholly incapable of solution. The opposition to
the Executive, in the previous House, had gone far to abolish all
party lines. Very few members, who served from 1828 to 1830, had any
serious political sins to answer for, in respect to that period. The
purse-strings were held by the Executive. Holding the crown revenues
independent of the Legislature, it could wield the influence which
money gives; and, in a young colony, poor and struggling, this was
necessarily considerable. The state of the representation was, in some
respects, worse than that in the unreformed House of Commons. The
session was not very old when Mr. Mackenzie moved for a committee of
inquiry on the subject. When he rose to address the House, a collector
of customs sat at his elbow, and another of these officers was
contesting the election of a member who held office under the
Executive during pleasure; while the Speaker whom he addressed held
the office of Clerk of the Crown in the district where he lived. In
England, a postmaster could not vote for a candidate seeking a seat in
the unreformed Parliament; half a dozen postmasters held seats in the
Upper Canada Assembly. There were, besides, office-holders of almost
every grade; a Sheriff, Inspectors of still and tavern licenses,
County Registers, and Commissioners of Customs. If any one is
innocent enough to suppose that this crowd of officials could make
independent representatives, a recollection of the fate of Mr.
Fothergill will serve to undeceive him. Mr. Fothergill had been
dismissed from the office of King's Printer, on account of the
independent position he had taken in the House. Capt. Matthews, of the
Royal Navy, had been temporarily deprived of his pension, through the
complaints of spies, who made it a subject of serious complaint
against him that, when he had indulged too freely in wine at dinner,
he had thoughtlessly or imprudently called on the orchestra to give
"Yankee Doodle," in the little theatre of York. Mr. Mackenzie, with
his colleague for York and the member for Lanark, represented a larger
number of people than fifteen other members. There was more than one
member whose whole constituency did not number over twenty or thirty
votes. The county of York, which had two representatives, contained
more people than Hastings, Dundas, Haldimand, Niagara, and Brockville.
A majority of the whole House represented less than a third of the
population; and if property were taken into account as a basis of
representation, the matter would be still worse. Members of this House
and its predecessor had obtained grants of crown lands, over which the
Executive and not the Legislature held control, to the extent of from
five hundred to two thousand acres,[69] on simply paying the fees
exacted by the officials. With great force Mr. Mackenzie urged these
facts, for the most part discreditable, as a reason for inquiring
into the state of the representation. On a vote of twenty-eight
against eleven the House granted the committee; and after two attempts
on the part of the officials and their friends to break the force of
the conclusion arrived at, Mr. Mackenzie got a committee of his own
nomination, consisting of Messrs. Shaver, Howard, Buell, Lyons, and
himself.

[Footnote 69: These grants were probably legal. The objection was to
the system which permitted of abuse.]

Even when his speeches did not move the House, they sometimes caused
the galleries to respond with involuntary cheers. One instance of his
forcible way of putting things will show the secret power that brought
these dangerous responses from beyond the bar. Mr. Burwell had
proposed to grant a life pension to the widow of one of the leading
public officers, when Mr. Mackenzie opposed the proposition in these
terms:--

"He objected to the introduction of a pension list of this kind,
because if it were admitted that the lady of one public functionary
had a right to a pension, it would follow that others had the same
right, and gentlemen holding lucrative situations would depend on the
public and squander more profusely their ample incomes. A man came
from Scotland with a most excellent character, expended all he had to
bring himself, a wife, and large family to these shores; had Lord
Bathurst's letter in his pocket deluding him with the hopes of a grant
of land, found it a deception, and went back into the bush upon a
reserve to combat ill health, poverty, and disappointment. The
Lieutenant Governor and Council would do nothing for this poor man;
his wife, separated from her friends, pined and died; her husband had
a few hours before come to inform him, with tears in his eyes, that
she had been that very day coffined. Was it to be borne that while
respectable emigrants were thus made the sport of a faction in the
colony as pitiless as death itself, that the rich, the wealthy, the
opulent, they who had obtained and doubtless well deserved thousands
of acres of public lands and thousands of pounds of public money,
should now, at the eleventh hour, come forward and seek pensions out
of the hard earnings of British emigrants?--and that where British
settlers with empty pockets were told to buy land at its highest price
and pay with interest for leave to live in a wilderness, ladies of
fortune and high connection should receive pensions out of the public
bounty? It might be fashionable in Britain, but was quite unfit for
Canada."

The utterance of these words was followed by clapping of hands and
cheering in the galleries, which produced a motion ordering that
strangers should be required to withdraw. The ebullition of feeling
appeared to have been uncontrollable, and after a discussion on the
subject, in secret session, the public was re-admitted.

During this occasion a permanent Civil List of 6,500 was granted.
8,000 had been asked from the House, by the Imperial Government,
which, at this time, surrendered its interest in certain duties,
estimated at 11,500 a year, levied under Imperial statute, and which
had previously been applied to the support of the civil government.
The Civil List granted in return for these revenues provided for the
salaries of the Governor, the Judges of the Court of Queen's Bench,
the Attorney and the Solicitor General, five Executive Councillors,
and the Clerk of the Executive Council.[70] The revenue now ceded had
recently made the Executive independent, in money matters, of the
House; and as there was no other means of making the advisers of the
representative of the Crown responsible to the Legislature, the
granting of a permanent Civil List was looked upon, by the Reform
party, as another means of perpetuating that immunity from control,
which the Executive enjoyed, and which was the source of so many
evils. There was no reason to expect that the Legislature would long
have remained satisfied to permit these revenues to be disposed of
without its sanction; for, though they were raised under Imperial
statute, they were paid by the Province, and were in their nature
essentially local. The Legislative Assembly, if armed with the power
of annually voting the salaries of the members of the government,
might, Mr. Mackenzie and those who acted with him thought, have some
control over them. If the government had been responsible to the
Legislature, this ground of opposition to what received the name of
the "Everlasting Salaries Bill," would, in all probability, not have
been taken, because the object which the opposition sought to
accomplish would have been more effectually obtained by other means.
The vote upon the question was a strictly party vote, and it is very
certain that, under the conditions of government which then obtained,
no permanent Civil List would have been granted either by the
preceding or the subsequent House of Assembly. Under other
circumstances--in the presence of a responsible government--the
Liberals would probably not have opposed the granting of a permanent
Civil List; but under a system which deprived the Assembly of all
control over the advisers of the Lieutenant Governor, they can hardly
be blamed for seeking to enforce Executive responsibility by the only
means that seemed to be in their power.

[Footnote 70: The salaries were: Lieutenant Governor, 2,000 sterling;
Judges of the Court of King's Bench, altogether, 3,300 sterling;
Attorney and Solicitor General, 500 sterling, each; Five Executive
Councillors, 500 sterling, each; Clerk of the Executive Council, 200
sterling.]

It had already become evident that, even in the present House, Mr.
Mackenzie would frequently get his own way, and that he would give no
end of trouble to the official party. He brought forward motions which
the House, in spite of its adverse composition, did not venture to
reject, and they were sometimes accepted without opposition. He had
carried a motion of inquiry into the fees, salaries, pensions, and
rewards paid out of that portion of the revenue which was not at the
disposal of the Legislature, as well as a motion for a return of all
sums, paid out of the same source, to religious denominations. He had
made strong efforts to effect a reform in the very defective system of
banking which then prevailed. The friends of bank mystery had been
obliged to give way, and allow regular returns of the state of the
Bank of Upper Canada to be made. Attorney General Boulton, who was
solicitor for the bank, held out against the requirement of publicity
as long as he could, but he had to give way. On this subject Mr.
Mackenzie did not carry his motion, but he compelled those who
opposed him to yield much of what he contended for.

If a member, who gave the official party so much trouble could be got
rid of, how smoothly things might be expected to glide along in the
House, as at present constituted! Could a vote of expulsion not be
carried? To this question an attempt was made to give a practical
answer. Previous to the general election, Mr. Mackenzie had
distributed, at his own expense, several copies of the journals of the
House, unaccompanied by comment, and precisely in the shape in which
they were printed by the House. The declared object of the
distribution was to give the voters, in different places, the means of
referring to the official record of the votes and proceedings of the
House, in order that they might be able to trace every vote, motion,
and resolution of their late representatives, and to ascertain when
they were absent and when present; whether their votes were acceptable
or not. It appears that it had been decided at a private party
meeting, at which several of the leading officials are said to have
been present, that this should be treated as a breach of privilege,
and be made the ground of a motion to expel the member guilty of it.
For this purpose, the aid of a committee of inquiry was obtained:
consisting of Attorney General Boulton, Messrs. McNab, Willson,
Samson, and Wm. Robinson. Mr. McNab was selected as the minister of
vengeance; and it may be presumed that he performed his task _con
amore_, since he had an old grudge to settle with the member, on whose
motion he had, in a previous session, been sent to prison for refusing
to answer the inquiries of a committee of the House. Mr. McNab based
his complaint chiefly upon the fact that the journals had been
distributed without the appendix. If the appendix had gone too, he
owned "that he should not so readily have made up his mind on the
question of privilege." The idea he attempted to convey was, that the
journals alone gave a partial view of the proceedings of the House;
but this pretence was wholly groundless. All the votes and proceedings
of the House are contained in the journals. The motion was in these
words: "That it having appeared upon the report of the select
committee, to whom was referred the resolution of this House, and the
report of the Clerk on the subject of printing the journals, that
William Lyon Mackenzie, Printer, of this town, who was employed to
print the said journals, had abused the trust reposed in him by
publishing portions of the said journals, and distributing the same
for political purposes, among individuals not entitled to copies
thereof; thereby committing a breach of the privileges of this House."
The Solicitor General made no hesitation in denouncing the circulation
of the journals as "altogether disgraceful, and a high breach of the
privileges of the House." He deemed it monstrous to circulate them,
"without the consent or approbation of the House," and for the
shameful purpose of letting the constituencies know how their members
had voted. The Attorney General said the question was whether, for
this "bad purpose, any portion of the journals of the House could be
published;" and he answered it by unhesitatingly declaring his
"opinion, as a lawyer, that such a publication was a breach of
Parliamentary privileges, whether done with an evil intent, or for a
praiseworthy purpose." He attempted to make the British constitution
responsible for the folly his party were attempting to perpetrate. "He
had been suffering much from indisposition all day; but he felt it to
be his duty to stop in his place and vindicate those privileges which
ought to be dear to every man who loved, as he did, the British
constitution." The spirit of the dominant party of the day is fairly
shown by this style of pleading. Technically speaking, there may be
little doubt of the correctness of Mr. Boulton's Parliamentary law;
but nobody knew better than he, that the rule which forbids any one to
publish the proceedings of the House, without authority, was violated
every day; and that its violation was looked upon, not as a crime to
be punished, but a public benefit and a general convenience. Mr.
Dalton had, in the previous session, published portions of the
proceedings of the House in his journal;[71] and if Mr. Mackenzie was
liable to be punished, so was he. Every newspaper publisher was
equally guilty.

[Footnote 71: _The Patriot._]

Mr. Mackenzie had a clear appreciation of the effect which such an
ill-advised movement would produce on the public mind. "If," he said,
"the object of this resolution is to do me injury, it is but another
proof of the incapacity and folly of the advisers of this government,
who could not have better displayed their weakness of intellect and
unfitness for office, than by bringing me before the public as a
guilty person, on an accusation, against which the whole country, from
one end to the other, will cry out, 'Shame!' Of what am I accused?
Why, Mr. Speaker, I have committed the high crime and misdemeanor of
distributing, before a general election, at my own private expense,
one hundred and sixty-eight copies of the public official journals of
this House, without note or comment, and after the Clerk had corrected
the proofs, in order (as the circular letter I sent with them
declares) that the freeholders in every district might have in their
own hands the best possible means of judging of the fitness or
unfitness of honorable members again to represent their feelings and
interests; and in order that means might be at hand to refute the
slanders of those who would desire to mislead the public by anonymous
placards, handbills, and idle gossip, in favor of one candidate to the
prejudice of another." "Were this motion to carry," he said in another
part of his defence, "we should find that we had privileges contrary
to precedent, contrary to usage; privileges, of which no popular
legislative body, until now, ever heard or dreamed; privileges, which
set common sense and human reason at defiance. If I have done wrong,
every newspaper editor in London, in Lower Canada, and in this
Province, is deserving of punishment."

Nothing could be plainer than that the charge on which it was sought
to justify the motion for expulsion was a mere pretext. For if the
publication of the proceedings of the House, and worse still, as was
alleged, of a portion of those proceedings, was an offence which that
body, in vindication of its privileges, was bound to punish,
proceedings ought to have been taken against every newspaper
publisher. It was not the member but the publisher of the journals
who was alleged to have offended in this instance; and why should the
member be punished for what the publisher had done, while every other
newspaper proprietor, who was obnoxious to the same charge, was to go
scot free? These considerations must have flashed upon the House; and
in spite of its subserviency to the administration, and in spite of
the desire to get rid of Mr. Mackenzie's active opposition by removing
his presence from the House, a majority, fearing the effect of the
proceeding upon the constituencies, shrank from sustaining Mr. McNab's
motion. The vote stood fifteen against twenty; the names of the
Attorney General and the Solicitor General figuring in the minority.

Baffled for the time, but resolved not to forego their purpose of
getting rid of a troublesome opponent, a new pretext was soon
invented. It was pretended that Mr. Mackenzie, the journalist, had
printed a libel upon the House. But for libel the law had provided
severe remedies, and placed the accused at the great disadvantage of
not being able to plead in justification that the alleged libel was
true. To the law of the land, the accused journalist was amenable; and
might have been put upon his trial, either civilly or criminally.[72]
But this would not have answered the purpose of Mr. Mackenzie's
assailants; which was to rid the House of his presence and his
opposition.

[Footnote 72: I do not, of course, intend to deny the constitutional
right of the House to punish for libels upon itself. But the power is
one that requires to be exercised with great caution; and assuredly it
should not be abused by making it a pretext for the expulsion of a
member, who is found troublesome to the dominant party.]

Before the time came for the second motion for expulsion, the House
had entered on another session; and in the interval Mr. Mackenzie was
far from having done any thing to conciliate the dominant faction. On
the 16th of March, 1831, the committee on the state of the
representation, of which he was chairman, reported. It condemned the
practice of crowding the House with placemen; showed that the
Legislative Council had repeatedly thrown out bills for allowing the
same indemnity to members for towns as was paid to those for country
counties--ten shillings a day, without any allowance for travelling
expenses--recommended the modification of that provision of the law
which gave a representative to every town having one thousand
inhabitants, so as to include a portion of the adjoining country
sufficient to give the constituency four thousand inhabitants; an
approach to the equalization of constituencies, in other cases, was
recommended in detail. Some of the suggestions have since been carried
into effect. The report is entirely free from that quackery which
consists of the iteration of what is readily accepted as a principle,
but which without some modification does not admit of practical
application. It was shown that the Executive had exerted undue
influence on placemen who held seats in the Legislative Council; and
compelled them to change their tone and vote in direct opposition to
their convictions previously expressed in their places. A few had had
spirit enough to protest; but submission had been the rule.

The Legislative recess was of less than ordinary length; the
Provincial Parliament, prorogued on the 16th of March, having been
again convened on the 17th of November, 1831. But the period had been
long enough for Mr. Mackenzie to arouse an agitation which shook Upper
Canada throughout its whole extent. Nothing like it had ever before
been witnessed in the Upper Province. In the middle of July, he
issued, in temperate language, a call for public meetings, to appeal
to the King and the Imperial Parliament against the abuses of power by
the local authorities. He did not mistrust the justice or the good
intentions of the Sovereign. On the contrary, he showed the people
that there were substantial reasons for believing in the good
intentions of the King towards the Province. "If," he said, in a
public address, "you can agree upon general principles to be
maintained by the agents you may appoint in London, I am well
satisfied that his Majesty's government will exert its utmost powers
to fulfil your just and reasonable requests; your King's noble efforts
on behalf of your brethren in England, Ireland, and Scotland, are an
earnest that you have in him a firm and powerful friend." In these
public meetings, York led off; and was followed by responsive
movements throughout the Province. Mr. Mackenzie was personally
present at many of the meetings, and even in such places as Brockville
and Cornwall he carried every thing as he wished. Each petition
adopted by those meetings was an echo of the other; and many appear to
have been exact copies of one another. To produce a certified copy of
the proceedings of the York meeting was sure to obtain assent to what
it had done. A demand for a responsible government found a place in
these petitions. The King was asked "to cause the same constitutional
principle which has called your present ministers to office to be
fully recognized and uniformly acted upon in Upper Canada; so that we
may see only those who possess the confidence of the people composing
the Executive Council of your Majesty's representative."
Representative reform--which then occupied so much attention in
England--was demanded. The control of all the revenue raised in the
Province was asked to be placed in the Legislative Assembly;[73] the
disposal of the public lands to be regulated by law; the
secularization of the Clergy Reserves; the establishment of municipal
councils which should have the control of local assessments; the
abolition of exclusive privileges conferred upon particular religious
denominations; law reform; provision for impeaching public servants
who betray their trust; the exclusion of judges and ministers of the
gospel from the Executive Council and the Legislature; the abolition
of the right of primogeniture: these items completed the list of those
grievances, of which redress was asked. Some of the copies varied a
little from the original formula; in substance the different petitions
presented but little variation.

[Footnote 73: In respect to Lower Canada this principle had already
been conceded. Lord Howick had stated in the Imperial Parliament, on
the 11th of April previous, that "the government of Canada would be
asked to surrender to the Provincial Assembly, the whole of the
disputed revenue; but at the same time he would ask of them a moderate
provision for the salaries of the governor and judges;" a civil list,
in fact, to be granted every seven years.]

Of these petitions Mr. Mackenzie afterwards became the bearer to
England. The aggregate number of signatures appended to them was over
twenty-four thousand, five hundred. In spite of counter petitions
numerously signed, Mr. Mackenzie's mission, as we shall see, was far
from being barren of results.

During the spring of 1831, Mr. Mackenzie made a journey to Quebec, to
pay a visit to some of the leading politicians of Lower Canada. He
took passage at Montreal, in the steamer Waterloo, for Quebec. While
on her way down, the vessel was wrecked, early on the morning of the
13th April, opposite St. Nicholas, and the passengers had a narrow
escape for their lives. The vessel went down in deep water. The
accident arose from the supposition that the ice-bridge at Cap Rouge
had given way, and left the channel clear. It was the general wish of
the passengers that the vessel should proceed, and the captain acted
upon it. Mr. Mackenzie wrote an account of the occurrence,
dated--"Malhot's Hotel, Quebec, April 13, 1831.

"When off Dechambault, one of the company's pilots came on board and
said he had certain information that the ice at Cap Rouge had gone
down and left the channel clear. Towards night, Mr. Lyman, of the
house of Hedge & Lyman, Montreal, expressed to me some doubts as to
the danger of our situation, but I confess I had no fears whatever,
but believed that by midnight, at least, we would be off the wharf
here. About twenty miles above this city, however, we came near to the
great body of ice with which the channel is choked up, and the master
and pilot judged it prudent to turn about and anchor in what was
considered a safe place several miles up the river. Late in the night
we cast anchor in clear, smooth water; the Lady having previously
anchored not far above us. We neither saw nor dreamt of the bay of ice
that afterwards bore down upon us with the ebb of the tide. The
passengers and the crew numbered, perhaps, upwards of fifty persons,
five or six being women, one with a child only nine weeks old. There
were about fourteen in the upper cabin with me, and the wife of Mr.
Collins, an Englishman, from Oxford, occupied the ladies' cabin below
ours. By eleven the passengers were all in bed, except Mr. Lalanne, of
Montreal, and myself. At midnight Mr. L---- also retired, and I sat
above another hour reading a book that interested me. Mr. Lyman had
only lain down with his clothes on, such were his just apprehensions.
I took the candle about one in the morning, went round the vessel;
found all well; no appearance of storm or danger; I then stripped,
went to bed, and fell fast asleep. At two o'clock Mr. Lyman and other
passengers awaked me, said we were in danger, that the ice had come
down upon us and was driving us among the ice above Cap Rouge, where
in all probability, we should be lost. The ice made a dreadful din,
but I confess I apprehended nothing, so went asleep again, and was
again awaked. We had dragged one anchor, and lost the other, and had
drifted into the midst of the ice. The vessel had become unmanageable.
The efforts of the crew to back her out were useless, the cables being
in the ice. For three hours before the wreck several passengers had
declared their conviction that we would all go to the bottom, but I
lay still in my berth and listened to their arguments _pro_ and _con_
until half-past five. In a moment, as it were, a vast mass of ice
came down upon her with a tremendous force; the engine instantly
stopped, and in less than a minute she filled. I jumped up in my
shirt, caught hold of my trowsers and overshoes, and was soon on a
large cake of ice on which they had hauled the ship's boat and a bark
canoe. The passengers had all previously gone upon the ice, and were
stepping from island to island, or rather from hill to hill, and from
valley to valley of ice, endeavoring to make the shore, which was
about a mile distant. Capt. Perry, his mate, and some of his people
remained with the boat, near to the wreck, which at that time had been
left by all, it being supposed that she would suddenly be engulphed by
reason of the very heavy cargo and the weight of her engine. After
helping to haul the boat a little farther on the ice, I went close to
the steamer, observed that the water ceased to make as at first, and
returning to Capt. Perry took his advice as to the chance I had of
going down if I returned for my clothes and baggage. He thought I
might venture, and in a moment I was on board; got my watch and
pocket-book from under my pillow; seized hold of my saddle-bags,
valise, great coat, and other clothes, and without hat or boots made
for the land. It was a difficult task, but I was last, and the track
of the feet of others often guided me when I could see no one. The
tide was then making, and the water in several places gushed up
through the rent and rotten ice as if it would forever stop my
progress. In one hole I was nearly up to the neck in water, and as my
overshoes would not stay on my feet, I added them to my luggage, of
which I was heartily tired. At length I came up with Mr. Lyman and a
poor woman who had almost given in and was weeping bitterly. Mr.
L----'s leg had been broken during the Montreal Tailors' Riot of last
summer, by a stone thrown by a tailor, and he found walking very
difficult. I kept company with him and the woman until by the good
providence of God and the wonderful bridge of ice he had that morning
provided for us his humble creatures, we all got safe to land at the
village of St. Nicholas, the property of Sir John Caldwell, about
sixteen miles above this city. I was quite hoarse with cold, and very
much fatigued, for no other passenger had ventured to stop for his
baggage. Seeing, however, from the shore that the vessel was still
above water, and correctly judging that she was supported by the ice
that had got under her wings, the passengers offered rewards to the
Canadian peasants to bring baggage ashore. With their efficient aid,
the assistance of Mr. Sutton, a most hospitable and friendly man who
resides in the seigniorial house at St. Nicholas; the advice of the
parish priest, Mr. Dufresne, who took an active, lively interest on
behalf of the wrecked; and of the captain, mate, and seamen, (all of
whom I admired for their coolness and deliberation,) nearly all of the
upper cabin furniture, and bedding, the most of the passengers'
baggage, and the boat's books and papers were saved. Among the rest of
the odds and ends my hat and boots made their appearance, the latter
well soaked in water. * * *

"I must not omit to state that the sterling honesty of the Canadians
in humble life never appeared to me in a fairer light than in their
transactions of the morning of the shipwreck. Not one pin's value of
property did the humblest of their peasants or peasants' boys attempt
to secrete or claim. No! It was delightful to see the little fellows
one by one come up to Mr. Sutton's with their loads and lay them down
among the baggage, without even claiming praise for their exertions.
Had some of our legislators, who made invidious comparisons between
the Upper and Lower Canadas last winter in the Assembly been with me
to see the benevolent creatures exert themselves on our behalf, they
would certainly have felt ashamed of their censures."

There is one incident connected with the landing of the passengers,
not mentioned in this letter, which Mr. Mackenzie often related. The
poor woman whom he overtook, in company with Mr. Lyman, was unable to
jump from one piece of ice to another, or was afraid to venture. Mr.
Mackenzie threw himself across the breach, and she walked over upon
his body!

[Illustration: Fac simile of a Gold Medal presented to Mr. William
Lyon Mackenzie by his constituents, on his re-election, after his
first expulsion from the Legislative Assembly of Upper Canada.]




CHAPTER XIV.

     First Expulsion of Mr. Mackenzie from the House for an
     alleged Libel and Breach of Privilege--His
     Defence--Partial Character of the Proceedings against
     him--Libels on the previous House complimented by the
     Lieutenant Governor--Mackenzie's Defence voted an
     Aggravation of his Offence--The House refuses to
     inquire whether any one else has Libelled them during
     the Session--Libellous Language of the Crown
     Officers--The Feeling excited by these
     Proceedings--Petitioners go in a body to the Government
     House--Fears of the Government shown by Military
     Preparations--The Expelled Member carried triumphantly
     through the Streets, amid the Acclamations of the
     Populace--Public Meeting resolve to present the
     Expelled Member with a Gold Medal in Approbation of his
     Political Career--His Re-election--His Opponent gets
     One Vote--Gold Medal and Chain Presented.


In the last session, the attempted expulsion of Mr. Mackenzie had
failed. The pretext adduced to excuse the proposal was so flimsy and
untenable that a majority of the House shrank from committing
themselves to it. A new crime had been invented, and a new pretext
found. Before it was a breach of privilege, for distributing the
journals of the House; now it was a libel, constituting a breach of
privilege. The House met on the 17th November, 1831, and on the 6th
December Mr. Mackenzie's first expulsion was proposed. The proceedings
were initiated by a flourish about the privileges of Parliament; the
intention being to justify an outrage which it was proposed to
perpetrate in their name. The ball was opened by Mr. John Wilson, a
late Speaker of the House, supported by Mr. Burwell, against whose
motion to create a pension, in the previous session, Mr. Mackenzie had
roused an uncontrollable feeling in the galleries. This preliminary
motion affirmed, "that the privileges of Parliament were established
for the support and maintenance of the independent and fearless
discharge of its high functions, and that it is to the uncompromising
assertion and maintenance of these privileges in the earliest periods
of English history, that we are chiefly indebted for the free
institutions which have been transmitted to us by our ancestors." Mr.
Bidwell, seconded by Mr. Perry, with a view of showing the animus of
the proceedings, moved in amendment that so much of the journals as
related to the previous attempt at expulsion be read; but in a House
of forty members he was beaten by a majority of ten. Mr. Bidwell
returned to the charge, proposing to amend the resolution so as to
give credit to "a free press, in modern and enlightened times,
notwithstanding the many different attempts to destroy its liberty," a
share in the preservation of the free institutions transmitted to us
by our ancestors. This amendment being rejected, on a vote of
twenty-four against sixteen, another amendment, embodying an extract
from the _Colonial Advocate_ of the 24th November, 1831, and another
of the 1st December, was moved. It had for sponsors Mr. Samson and Mr.
Thomson, the latter of whom was proprietor of the Kingston _Herald_, a
paper opposed in politics to Mr. Mackenzie.[74] The first of these
articles was a mere summary of the proceedings of the" House on the
subject of certain petitions, praying for a redress of grievances, and
the second certainly did not exceed the latitude of political
criticism, at that time constantly taken by the English press. It
would be easy to quote from leading London journals numerous examples
of greater severity of denunciation. At the distance of less than a
quarter of a century, we look back with amazement at the paltry
passions and narrow judgment that could construe these articles into
libels on the House, constituting a breach of privilege, for which
nothing less than ignominious expulsion of the author would be a
fitting or adequate punishment.

[Footnote 74: The amendment was as follows:--"That an article
published in the newspaper called the _Colonial Advocate_, of date the
24th of November, 1831, in the following words:

"'STATE OF THE COLONY.--The people of this Province will probably be
able to form a tolerably fair estimate of the manner in which their
petitions on public affairs are likely to be treated in the
Representative branch of the Legislature, when they learn the manner
in which the first of the series has been disposed of. The petition of
the people of Vaughan, unanimously agreed upon at their town-meeting,
and signed by the chairman, secretary, and from two to three hundred
freeholders and other inhabitants, was the first presented to the
House; and after it had been read and had lain two days on the table,
Mr. Mackenzie, a representative of the people from whom it came, moved
that it should be referred to a committee of five members, viz: Mr.
Ketchum, the other member for the county in which the petition was
voted, and Messrs. Buell, Perry, and Shaver, with the mover, as a
matter of course. Mr. Thomson, of Frontenac, the editor of the
Kingston _Herald_, who had previously expressed great bitterness
against the petitioners and their petition, in the public journals,
immediately rose and objected to referring the petition to its
friends, and allowing them to consider of and introduce any measures
desired by the petitioners, and which they might consider expedient,
to the notice of the Legislature. We told the people of York last
July, that this would be the result of any application to the
Assembly; and therefore the more earnestly requesting them to unite in
addressing the King's Government, as by this means distinct
propositions could be submitted to a new Assembly, called, as in
England, on the Reform Bill. We now urge all those entrusted with the
general petitions to the King and House of Assembly, to send them to
York, by mail, on the earliest possible day, in order that the former
be forwarded to London, and the latter submitted to the Assembly, now
in session. We learn that Chief Justice Robinson's successor in the
law business, Mr. Draper, either has gone off this week to London, or
is now about to set off, to oppose the general petitions, and advocate
the interests of the Executive faction here, with His Majesty's
Government. They take the utmost pains to conceal their weakness in
the estimation of the country, and one of their ablest assistants
leaves his own private business and prospects, to watch the signs of
the times at home. Mr. Thomson's amendment, already spoken of, was a
resolution, 'that the petition of the people of Vaughan, with all
other petitions relating to the same subject, be referred to a select
committee of seven members, to be chosen at twelve o'clock to-morrow.'
The Attorney General characterized the petitions as, 'the expression
of a few people,' 'a few individuals,' 'mere casual meetings,' 'he
happened to have seen some of these meetings, but a few respectable
farmers met together, did not at all understand the subject;' and
termed the committee 'a one-sided committee.' 'The petitions he had
never seen till that day--they had been got up by somebody or other.'
The Solicitor General wished the petitions to be referred to a
committee of the whole House, and thus be got rid of at once, and not
referred to the committee named by Mr. Mackenzie, who would call
witnesses where none were wanted, and thus increase the expenses of
the session. He asserted this, although there was nothing in the
motion that gave the committee any power to call a single witness.
Messrs. Burwell, Jarvis, and others opposed to the rights of the
people, were, of course, in favor of Mr. Thomson's amendment; the
votes in favor of which were as follows:--Messrs. Shade, Henry J. and
George Boulton, Burwell, Elliott, A. Fraser, R. D. Fraser, Sheriff
Jarvis, Lewis, McNab, McMartin, Solicitor General, Maon, Mount,
Samson, Thomson, Warren, and W. Willson.

"'The members opposed to Mr. Thomson's amendment, (introducing a
species of vote, in which the constituents of members could not learn
how they had acted,) and who would have entrusted the petitions to a
committee of persons favorable to the prayer of the petitioners, were
Messrs. Buell, Campbell, Cook, Duncombe, Howard, Ketchum, McCall,
Mackenzie, Perry, Roblin, Shaver, and White. The Executive faction
carried their measure by a majority of six.

"And also a certain article in the said paper, called the _Colonial
Advocate_, of the date of 1st December, 1831, in the following words:

"'EXCELLENT, EXAMPLE OF LOWER CANADA.--The harmony which subsists
between the Governor-in-Chief, the House of Assembly, and the Colonial
Secretary, Lord Viscount Goderich, must be pleasing and gratifying to
every true friend of representative government; for it is evidently
the consequence of a just and honorable course of procedure in these
high parties towards the people of Lower Canada. We are glad to
perceive, by Lord Goderich's despatch in answer to the Assembly's
petition sent home last spring by Mr. Viger, that all the Judges are
to be dismissed both from the Executive and Legislative Council; that
the revenues from the Jesuits' Estates are to be applied by the
Province to educate the Canadians; that the power of regulating trade
is to be exercised in future with great attention to the interests of
the colony; that provincial bills for giving corporate powers and
making local regulations will be sanctioned; that the right of the
colonists to regulate their internal affairs is fully admitted; that
offices of trust and profit are to be more equally distributed in
future; that officers who have lost the confidence of the country are
to be dismissed, if the complaints made against them are proved; that
all the proper influence of government is to be given to the
satisfaction of the colony, and that any colonial law increasing the
responsibility and accountability of public officers will be
sanctioned by England. In the Assembly we see noble and patriotic
efforts made to increase the happiness of the people, enlighten their
understandings, and watch diligently over their rights and privileges;
and on the part of the Governor-in-Chief there does really appear to
be a willingness to act with the House of Assembly, and faithfully to
assist them in securing for the country the inestimable advantage of
good laws and free institutions.

"'The contrast between their Executive and ours, betwixt the materiel
of our Assembly and theirs, and between the use they make of an
invaluable constitution and our abuse of it, is anything but
satisfactory to the friends of freedom and social order in Upper
Canada. Our representative body has degenerated into a sycophantic
office for registering the decrees of as mean and mercenary an
Executive as ever was given as a punishment for the sins of any part
of North America in the nineteenth century. We boast of our superior
intelligence, of our love of liberty; but where are the fruits? Has
not the subservience of our Legislature to a worthless Executive
become a bye-word and a reproach throughout the Colonies? Are we not
now, even during the present week, about to give to the municipal
officers of the Government, as a banking monopoly, a power over the
people, which, added to their already overgrown influence, must render
their sway nearly as arbitrary and despotic as the iron rule of the
Czar of Muscovy? Last winter, the majority of our Assembly, with our
Speaker at their head, felt inclined to make contemptuous comparisons
between the French inhabitants of a sister colony and the enlightened
constituents who had returned them, the said majority. In our
estimation, and judging of the tree by its fruits, the Lower Canadians
are by far the most deserving population of the constitution they
enjoy; for they show themselves aware of its value. While judging the
people here by the representatives they return, it might be reasonably
inferred that the constituents of the McLeans, Vankoughnetts,
Jarvises, Robinsons, Burwells, Willsons, Boultons, McNabs, McMartins,
Frasers, Chisholms, Crookes, Elliotts, Browns, Joneses, Maons,
Samsons, and Hagermans, had immigrated from Grand Tartary, Russia, or
Algiers the week preceding the last general election; for, although in
the turgid veins of their members, there may be British blood, there
certainly is not the appearance of much British feeling"

"Are gross, scandalous, and malicious libels; intended and
calculated to bring this House and the government of this Province
into contempt, and to excite groundless suspicion and distrust in the
minds of the inhabitants of this Province, as to the proceedings and
motives of their representatives; and is, therefore, a breach of the
privileges of this House. And W. L. Mackenzie, having avowed the
authorship of the said articles, he now called upon for his defence."]

When the charge had been put into a tangible shape, the accused member
was asked to avow or disavow the authorship of the alleged libels. He
promptly accepted the responsibility of the articles, both as author
and publisher. The Speaker, being appealed to, decided that Mr.
Mackenzie had a right to be heard in his own defence. The latter then
proceeded to address the House; but before he had concluded, an
adjournment took place. Next day, Mr. Bidwell moved for a committee to
inquire whether any libels had been published on the House during the
session. The motion was declared to be out of order. The Speaker also
announced that he had given an erroneous decision, on the previous
day, in giving the accused the right of self-defence. But Mr.
Mackenzie was allowed to proceed. He denied the jurisdiction of the
House, in prosecutions for libel; they could not, he argued, be a fit
tribunal in a case where they would occupy the impossible position of
complainant, judge, and jury. If they complained of libel, they could
address the Lieutenant Governor to order the crown officers to
institute legal proceedings.[75] Upon the charge brought against him,
he was entitled to, and he demanded, a legal trial before a jury of
his country.

So much did Mr. Mackenzie urge against the judicial fairness of the
proceeding. It must be admitted, however, the strongest point he made
was not by the use of arguments which tended to question the
competency of the tribunal; but in demonstrating the partial and
one-sided nature of the proceedings.[76] He was not the only member of
the House who published a newspaper; and others had, in speaking of
the proceedings of the Assembly, used much harsher language than he
had. But the truth was, one party was permitted any latitude of
language, in dealing with their opponents. This had been apparent in
the prosecution of Collins, and the menaced proceedings against
Mackenzie, while the newspaper organs of the official party were left
undisturbed in their carnival of unmeasured abuse of opponents. It was
the policy of tying the hands of your antagonist, and then setting
your fiercest hounds upon him.

The Lieutenant Governor, whose nod would have been sufficient to quash
these proceedings in a House swarming with placemen and dependents on
the Executive, had received "with much pleasure," a petition from
certain "gentlemen," residing in the county of Durham, in which the
previous House was spoken of as "a band of factious demagogues, whose
acts perceptibly tend to disorganize society, to subvert legitimate
authority, and to alienate men's minds from constitutional
government." And in another part of the document thus graciously
received, the Assembly was described as being composed of
"unprincipled and designing men;" deluders "under the dark mantle of
specious patriotism."

[Footnote 75: This was done in the case of Wilkes, whose expulsion was
not pronounced until it was found that he had absconded.]

[Footnote 76: See Appendix B.]

So far as related to the decision of the House, it was to no purpose
that Mr. Mackenzie exposed the gross partiality of these discreditable
proceedings. The majority had marked their victim, and no argument
that could be used would induce them to forego the sacrifice.

At half past five o'clock on the evening of the 9th of December, Mr.
Mackenzie, having closed his defence, retired from the House, leaving
the majority to act unembarrassed by his presence. No vote was taken
that night. Next day, Mr. Perry, seconded by Mr. Cook, moved that the
order of the day on the question of privilege be discharged. He
obtained but fifteen votes against twenty-seven. This was the third
division on the proceedings, and it was in complete harmony with the
two which had taken place before Mr. Mackenzie had made his defence.
Attorney General Boulton, who seems to have feared that Mr. Mackenzie
would renew his defence, moved to amend Mr. Samson's resolution by
striking out the order for hearing the accused in his defence; and it
was carried by the same party majority that had voted down Mr. Perry's
amendment. On the same day, the House acting as accuser, judge, and
jury, declared Mr. Mackenzie guilty of libel. The vote was precisely
the same as on the two previous divisions--twenty-seven against
fifteen--a fact which shows, in the strongest light, how incapable was
this partisan tribunal of deciding fairly upon a question of libel. By
a party vote Mr. Mackenzie's guilt had been pronounced; by a party
vote he was to be expelled.

On the 12th December--Sunday having intervened since the last
proceedings on the subject--on motion of Mr. Samson, seconded by Mr.
McNab, the House declared the defence of Mr. Mackenzie to be a gross
aggravation of the charge brought against him, and that "he was guilty
of a high breach of the privileges of this House."[77] They refused to
strike a committee to inquire whether any other libels upon them had
been published since the commencement of the session.

[Footnote 77:

"Monday, _December_ 12, 1831.

"Mr. Samson, seconded by Mr. McNab, moves, That it be resolved that
William Lyon Mackenzie, Esq., a member of this House, having avowed
himself the author of the articles published in the newspaper, called
the _Colonial Advocate_, mentioned in the resolution of this House on
Saturday last--which articles are grossly false, scandalous, and
defamatory--and having been heard in his place in defence of the same,
has by the whole tenor of such defence flagrantly aggravated the
charge brought against him, and is therefore guilty of a high breach
of the privileges of this House. [The word 'therefore' was afterwards
struck out.]

"In amendment, Mr. Perry, seconded by Mr. Lyons, moves, that after the
word Resolved, in the original, the whole be expunged, and the
following words inserted: 'That as this House has allowed many other
publications to pass without punishment or censure, reflecting on the
character and motives of its members for many years past, and as
addresses to the head of the Provincial government for the time being
have been published in the _Official Gazette_, containing such
reflections with answers of His Excellency, the then Lieutenant
Governor, expressing his thanks for such addresses, and as this House
has, by the resolution adopted on Saturday last, asserted its
privileges, and shown its determination hereafter to take notice of
such offensive publications, it is not expedient to take any further
notice of the said libels published in the _Colonial Advocate_."

"On which the House divided.

"YEAS--Messrs. Beardsley, Bidwell, Buell, Campbell, Clark, Cook,
Howard, Ketchum, Lyons, McCall, Perry, Randal, Roblin, and
Shaver--14.]

"NAYS--Messrs. Attorney General, Berczy, Burwell, Boulton, Brown,
Duncombe, Elliott, Fraser A., Fraser R., Ingersoll, Jones, Lewis,
McNab, McMartin, Maon, Morris, Mount, Robinson, Samson, Shade,
Solicitor General, Thomson, Vankoughnet, Warren, Werden, and Wilson
W.--26.

Then the question was taken on that resolution, whether Mr.
Mackenzie's defence was an additional offence; and the twenty-six
members who had voted against Messrs. Perry and Lyons' amendment, as
above stated, voted that it was. The fourteen who had voted for
Messrs. P. & L.'s amendment voted that it was not. Question
carried--found guilty of the defence by a majority of twelve.

"Mr. Samson, seconded by Mr. Asa Werden, moved that it be resolved,
that William Lyon Mackenzie, Esq., be expelled this House.

"In amendment, Mr. Perry, seconded by Mr. Lyons, moves, that after the
word 'moves,' in the original, the whole be expunged, and the
following inserted: 'That this House having fully asserted its
privileges by resolving some particular remarks contained in the
_Colonial Advocate_ of the 24th of November and of the 1st of
December, reflecting on the proceedings of this Assembly, and some of
its members, to be a libel, and a high breach of the privileges of
this House, it is expedient to appoint a Committee of Privilege to
inquire and report to this House what other, if any, libels have been
published against the proceedings of this House, or any of its
members, since the commencement of this present session, and that
Messrs. Attorney General, Berczy, Duncombe, Beardsley, and Ketchum do
compose said committee.'

"On which the House divided.

"YEAS--Beardsley, Bidwell, Buell, Campbell, Clark, Cook, Howard,
Ketchum, Lyons, McCall, Perry, Randal, Roblin, Shaver--14.

"NAYS--Attorney General, Berczy, Boulton, Brown, Burwell, Duncombe,
Elliott, Fraser A., Fraser R., Ingersoll, Jones, Lewis, McMartin,
McNab, Maon, Morris, Mount, Robinson, Samson, Shade, Solicitor
General, Thomson, Vankoughnet, Werden--24.

"The amendment was lost by a majority of ten.

"In amendment to Mr. Samson's motion for the expulsion of W. L.
Mackenzie, Esq., Mr. Duncombe moves, that after the word 'moves' in
the original motion, the whole be expunged, and the following be
inserted, '_Resolved_, That William Lyon Mackenzie, Esq., be called to
the bar of this House, and that he be reprimanded by the Speaker.
Yeas, 7. Nays, 31.

"On the original question the House divided, and the yeas and nays
were as follows:--

"FOR EXPELLING MR. MACKENZIE.--Messrs. Attorney General, Berczy,
Boulton, Brown, Burwell, Elliott, Fraser A., Fraser R., Ingersoll,
Jones, Lewis, McMartin, McNab, Maon, Morris, Mount, Robinson,
Samson, Shade, Solicitor General, Thomson, Vankoughnet, Warren,
Werden--24.

"AGAINST THE EXPULSION.--Messrs. Beardsley, Bidwell, Buell, Campbell,
Clark, Cook, Duncombe, Howard, Ketchum, Lyons, McCall, Perry, Randal,
Roblin, Shaver--15."

The _Courier_, an organ of the official party, announced that Messrs.
Wilson, Cook, Chisholm, and Jarvis, who were absent, would, if
present, have voted for the expulsion.]

The majority had no idea of exercising their tyranny in an impartial
manner. Their object was to sacrifice their opponents; not to deal out
the same measure of punishment to their friends. Among those who would
have been found guilty, if the inquiry had been pushed, were some of
Mr. Mackenzie's accusers and judges. The vote for expulsion stood
twenty-four against fifteen, and there were four absent members
belonging to the official party, all of whom would, if present, have
borne true allegiance on this occasion.

Attorney General Boulton, acting as prosecuting counsel on behalf of
the majority, described the accused as a "reptile;" and Solicitor
General Hagerman varied the description to "a spaniel dog." His
accusers and judges affected to regard his censure as equivalent to
praise; while taking the most extraordinary pains to prove by their
acts that they believed precisely the contrary.

The Imperial Parliament has, times innumerable, punished individuals
for libels upon either House. A libel upon an individual member has
always been treated as a libel upon the whole body to which he
belonged. Admitting the force of English precedent, Mr. Mackenzie, if
guilty of libel upon the House, was liable to punishment. But the
articles complained of as libellous, in his case, can hardly be said
to have exceeded the legitimate bounds of discussion; and they were
not nearly so bad as many others which the House thought it proper to
overlook; and of which, indeed, some of the majority concerned in his
condemnation had been guilty. It is this gross partiality, this want
of even-handed justice, which renders the proceedings against him so
odious. Some of the libels which, in his defence, he showed had been
levelled at particular members of the House, through the press,
against other members, reflected upon a previous Parliament; but if
English precedent be worth any thing, no right is clearer than that of
one House to punish for libels upon a previous House. If the Assembly
could punish for libel at all, it could punish for libels upon a
previous Assembly. The punishment in Mr. Mackenzie's case, was
altogether unusual. Deprivation of his seat was wholly unjustifiable.

The feeling excited in the unbiassed reader's own mind, as he goes
over this recital, will be no safe indication of the degree of public
indignation aroused by this atrocious mockery of justice. During the
week of the sham trial, petitions to the Lieutenant Governor were
numerously signed, praying him to dismiss a House tainted with the
worst vices of judicial partiality. For the result had been foreseen
by the preliminary divisions. On the day of the expulsion, a
deputation from the petitioners waited upon the Governor's private
secretary, and informed him that next day, at two o'clock, a number of
the petitioners would go to Government House in a body, to receive his
Excellency's reply. At the appointed hour, nine hundred and thirty
persons proceeded to fulfil their mission. They were received in the
audience chamber; and the petition having been presented, they were
dismissed with the studiously curt reply: "Gentlemen, I have received
the petition of the inhabitants."

But the precautions taken betrayed the fears of the Government. "The
Government House," says Mr. Mackenzie, in a fragment of manuscript
relating to the event, "was protected with cannon, loaded, served, and
ready to be fired on the people; the regiment in garrison was supplied
with a double allowance of ball cartridges, and a telegraph placed on
the viceroyal residence to command the services of the soldiers if
necessary." There were even then some who urged an appeal to force;
and the strange supposition seems to have been entertained that the
Scotch soldiers would not fire upon them.[78] Mackenzie checked the
impetuosity of the more ardent spirits, who advised violent measures.
He had strong confidence in the disposition of the new Reform ministry
in England, to do justice to the Province; and he inculcated the
necessity of patience.

[Footnote 78: I find that even now some of the active men of those
times are still of this opinion; and speak in a tone of the greatest
confidence.]

What his enemies intended to make the day of his humiliation and ruin,
proved the day of his triumph. The violence exercised toward him by
the dominant faction won for him the sympathies of the people. After
the return of the petitioners from the Government House, they
proceeded to the residence of Mr. Mackenzie, in Richmond street,
largely reinforced. The man rejected by the Assembly, as a libeller,
was carried through the streets amidst the acclamations of the
populace, who took this emphatic way of testifying their approbation
of his conduct, and of their determination to uphold the rights of a
free press, which they felt had been outraged in his person. Among
other places, the procession stopped at the Parliament House and
cheered. They were cheers of triumph and defiance; telling how quickly
the decision of the Assembly had been reversed by that public opinion,
to which all elective bodies are ultimately accountable. At the office
of the _Guardian_ newspaper, then edited by the Rev. Egerton Ryerson,
who had warmly espoused the cause of Mr. Mackenzie, the procession
halted to give three cheers. From a window of the Sun Hotel, Mr.
Mackenzie addressed the people; and cheers were given for the "Sailor
King," and for Earl Grey and the Reform ministry. When Mr. Mackenzie
had retired, the meeting was reorganized, and resolutions were passed,
sustaining the course he had taken as a politician and a journalist;
complaining of the reply of the Lieutenant Governor to the petitioners
as unsatisfactory and insulting; asserting the propriety of
petitioning the Sovereign to send to the Province, in future, civil
instead of military Governors; and pledging the meeting, as a mark of
their approbation of his conduct, to present Mr. Mackenzie with "a
gold medal accompanied by an appropriate inscription and address."

At the same sitting at which the expulsion of Mr. Mackenzie had been
decreed, the House had ordered the issue of a new writ for the
election of a member in his place. The election was held at the Red
Lion Inn, Yonge street, on the 2nd of January. By what accident it is
not necessary to determine, the election took place on the same day on
which the town meetings were held throughout the county; but in spite
of this coincidence over two thousand persons were present. There was
a show of opposition made to the re-election of Mr. Mackenzie; but any
thing so pitiful had seldom been witnessed. Mr. Street was nominated
by Mr. Edward Thomson, and supported by the influence of Mr. Washburn,
a candidate at the previous election. Forty sleighs had come into town
in the morning to escort Mr. Mackenzie to the polling place. An hour
and a half after the poll opened, Mr. Street, having received only one
vote, against one hundred and nineteen cast for Mr. Mackenzie,
abandoned the hopeless contest.

After the close of the poll, came the presentation of the gold medal.
It cost $250, and was accounted "a superb piece of workmanship." The
medal and chain weighed one hundred and eighty-two dwts., or over nine
ounces. On one side were the rose, the thistle, and the shamrock,
encircled by the words, "His Majesty King William IV., the people's
friend." On the reverse was the inscription: "Presented to William L.
Mackenzie, Esq., by his constituents of the county of York, U. C., as
a token of their approbation of his political career, January 2,
1832." The massive cable chain, attached to the medal, contained forty
links of about one inch each in length.




CHAPTER XV.

     Triumphal Entry into York--A Body of Electors force
     through the outer door of the Legislative
     Building--Commotion in the Galleries, on a motion for
     Re-expulsion being made--Solicitor General Hagerman
     prevails upon the House to declare a Disability unknown
     to the Law--One hour for the Accused to make his
     Defence--The Abuse of Privilege--Specimen of a
     Solicitor General's powers of Vituperation--Mackenzie's
     Defence cut short by the Speaker and the House--The
     Legislative Council call on the House to afford it
     Reparation for an alleged Libel--Impassioned Appeal to
     the Electors of York--Re-election after the Second
     Expulsion--Proposed Address for Dissolution--Bank Bills
     carried in Mackenzie's absence.


The return to York was a triumphal procession. An immense sleigh,
belonging to Mr. Montgomery, constructed with an upper story, carried,
besides the members elect, over twenty others, with a couple of
Scottish pipers. Over fifty sleighs joined the procession, which
numbered over a thousand persons. A small printing press, emblematic
of the instrument of victory, kept in order by the warmth of a
furnace, was throwing off impressions as the monster sleigh moved
along. Among the numerous flags that surmounted the sleigh carrying
the re-elected member, one bore the device, "The Liberty of the
Press;" another, "Mackenzie and the People." As Government House and
the Parliament Building were passed, the deafening cheers of the
throng announced the reversal of the decision of the House of
Assembly, by the freeholders of the county of York. Several soldiers
of the 79th regiment went to the election, and rode back on the
sleighs. They appear to have gone for the purpose of enjoying the
excitement; and as their presence was contrary to law, the government
papers strongly censured the commanding officer for permitting them to
attend.

When Mr. Mackenzie returned to the House, with the unanimous
approbation of his constituents, the question of re-expulsion was
immediately brought up.[79]

[Footnote 79:

"HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY. Tuesday, _January 3rd_, 1832.

"On the Speaker announcing to the House the return of WILLIAM LYON
MACKENZIE, Esquire, a member for the county of York--

"Mr. Vankoughnet, seconded by Mr. McNab, moved 'That it be resolved,
that the entries on the Journals of the 12th December last, relating
to the expulsion of William Lyon Mackenzie, Esq., be now read.'

"Mr. Vankoughnet also read to the House the two following resolutions,
which he declared to contain the object he had in view by moving the
above resolve:

"Mr. Vankoughnet, seconded by Mr. McNab, moves that William Lyon
Mackenzie, Esq., returned a member to represent the county of York in
Provincial Parliament, having been expelled this House during this
present session for the publication of certain gross, scandalous, and
malicious libels, intended and calculated to bring this House and the
Government of the Province into contempt, and excite groundless
suspicion and distrust in the minds of the inhabitants of the
Province, as to the proceedings and motives of their Representatives;
and having made no reparation or atonement for his said offence, but
on the contrary, in the interval between his said expulsion and
subsequent re-election, having, in a certain newspaper called the
_Colonial Advocate_, of which he, the said William Lyon Mackenzie, has
avowed himself the proprietor, and responsible for the matter therein
published, endeavored to justify and maintain the said gross,
scandalous, and malicious libels, in high contempt of this House and
its privileges; he, the said William Lyon Mackenzie, is unfit and
unworthy to be a member of this House, and that his seat therein be
therefore declared vacant.

"Mr. Vankoughnet, seconded by Mr. McNab, moves that it be resolved,
That the Speaker of this House do issue his Warrant to the Clerk of
the Crown in Chancery, for a new writ for the election of a member to
serve in the present Parliament as Representative of the county of
York, in the stead of the said William Lyon Mackenzie, who has been
declared unfit and unworthy to be a member of this House.'

"In amendment to Messrs. Vankoughnet and McNab's first resolution, Mr.
Perry moved, in substance, that the House should proceed to the other
ordinary business of the day, and drop all farther proceedings in the
libel case.

"In favor of dropping the proceedings, and against Mr. Vankoughnet's
resolutions, voted Messrs. Attorney General, Beardsley, Bidwell,
Buell, Campbell, Clark, Cook, Duncombe, Howard, Ingersoll, Ketchum,
Lyons, McCall, McDonald, A., McDonald, D., Morris, Norton, Perry,
Randal, Roblin, Samson, Shaver, Willson, W., and Warren--24.

"For proceeding with Mr. Vankoughnet's resolutions for re-expelling
Mr. Mackenzie, or rather of preventing him from taking his seat, and
ordering a new election, (he having declared that step to be the
object of his first resolve,) voted Messrs. Berczy, G. Boulton, Brown,
Burwell, Crooks, Elliott, Fraser, A., Jarvis, Jones, McMartin, McNab,
Maon, Mount, Robinson, Shade, Solicitor General, Thomson, Chisholm,
Vankoughnet, and Werden--20.]

While he stood at the bar of the House, waiting to be sworn in,
Messrs. Vankoughnet and McNab raised the question, but the majority of
the House seemed disinclined to incur the odium of a second expulsion;
an amendment to proceed to the order of the day being carried by a
vote of twenty-four against twenty. The motion was met by hisses below
the bar, which were only suppressed by a threat to clear the House of
strangers. The crowd of voters who had accompanied their re-elected
representative to York, pushed their way into the House. An attempt
was made to prevent their entering the lobby; but they forced through
the outer door and got in.

The movers in the business had not put the case very skilfully. They
had complained of alleged libels, as calculated to bring the
government as well as the House into contempt; as if the House, in
addition to being the guardian of its own privileges, had also been a
constitutional screen for the protection of the government from
censure. No new libel was charged; and the only offence that
concerned the House consisted of an attempt to justify what the
majority had previously voted a libel and a breach of privilege. The
question raised was rather one of disability than of any new offence.
It was probably owing to the fact that the majority saw this ground to
be untenable that they refused to sanction the motion. The House had
an undoubted right to expel any member for adequate cause; but it had
no right to create a disability unknown to the law.

Solicitor General Hagerman, who appears to have known more of
Parliamentary law than either Mr. Vankoughnet or Mr. McNab, felt that
it was necessary, in bringing up the question of the re-expulsion, to
go upon the ground of a new libel upon the House. He therefore moved,
January 6th, a resolution declaring certain matter which had appeared
in the _Colonial Advocate_ of the previous day,[80] and of which Mr.
Mackenzie admitted himself to be the author, to be a false,
scandalous, and malicious libel upon the House of Assembly, and a high
breach of its privileges; that the author be expelled the House, and
declared unworthy to hold a seat therein.[81] Mr. Hagerman had the
prudence to leave out of view the general censures on the Executive
Council, and the demand for the dismissal of himself and Attorney
General Boulton, which were to be found in the article, part of which
he brought forward as a ground for expelling the author from the
House. It is not to be supposed, however, that he was insensible to
these reflections; and the Imperial Government afterwards took the
advice of Mr. Mackenzie to dismiss both these functionaries. One of
the principal grounds of that dismissal was the part they took in the
expulsion of a political opponent from the House, upon pretexts that
were deemed to be constitutionally untenable.

[Footnote 80: The following are the only passages that reflect upon
the House:--

"I have charged the present House of Assembly with sycophancy, in my
capacity of a public journalist; I here before you and in the face of
the world reiterate that charge, as applied to the majority of its
members.

"They have passed, at the request of the local Executive, and contrary
to British Constitutional principle, the everlasting salary bill;
refusing at the same time to limit its operation to the present reign;
refusing to provide for the independence of the judges on the
Executive, while they secured to them for ever the most extravagant
incomes; refusing also to inquire into the wasteful and dangerous
system of applying the greater part of the revenue by a power unknown
to the constitution; refusing to exclude the judges from seats in the
Legislative and Executive Council; refusing to exclude bishops,
archdeacons, and gospel preachers from seats in the Executive Council;
and refusing to curtail the extravagance of the Council clerk, and the
unjust charges of the Crown officers, before these officers had voted
themselves and their successors, and the said clerk and his
successors, incomes out of the taxes for ever.

"They have imitated the Legislative Council in squandering your
revenues under the head of contingencies; they double and treble the
incomes of some of their servants, grant the most extraordinary
demands for services, carelessly examine accounts, and openly vote
down, session after session, ordinary motions of inquiry into the
items of expense which compose the thousands of pounds demanded in a
lump from time to time as contingencies by the Legislative Council.
Adding together the probable incidental charges of the two Houses,
from March last until March next, we shall have about 9,000. And as
the whole expense of their sittings, 25,000. The Legislature of
Vermont costs annually about half as many dollars, including the
salary of Governor, judges, and all other charges; yet the population
of Vermont exceeds ours.

"They allowed the St. Lawrence to remain unimproved, although its
being made navigable would have benefitted everybody; and neglected
further to encourage education, although the people cried out for it;
they put a negative in their first session upon the bill for
distribution of intestate estate, although Upper Canada had but one
voice in its favor; they delayed and refused to pass the Clergy
Reserve address in the same session, lest (as they said) the
petitioners by Mr. Ryerson should profit by it; and found,
nevertheless, 50,000 to expend on Welland Canal, an unprofitable
undertaking, a job prematurely gone into for the advantage of a few
officers of this government, legislative counsellors, and speculators
in waste lands.

"They neglected your numerous petitions, presented by myself and other
friendly members, praying for the passage of many salutary enactments,
or delivered them into the custody and safe keeping of placemen, by
whom I had been personally insulted and defamed as a rebel and
traitor; and by this means prevented several useful bills being
introduced into the House on your petitions.

"They passed the obnoxious York Market Bill in opposition to your
petitions; and in defiance of the protestations of your members, they
negatived and condemned the principle of voting by ballot; they
disapproved by their votes of the excellent principle of regulating by
law the sales of all public or Crown lands, and preferred the present
secret or corrupt system; they refused to censure the Lieutenant
Governor for keeping back this election twenty-one days instead of
eight, in order that it might interfere with your town-meetings and
delay my return; they refused to inquire into the Tea Monopoly, by
which you are so heavily taxed; they refused to remonstrate against
the principle of the trade act of last April, so deeply affecting your
interests; they allow the important statements respecting extravagant
pensions, salaries, fees, and law charges to slumber on their shelves,
and thereby increase the incomes of attorneys, bailiffs, sheriffs, and
other public functionaries at the expense of justice and good
government; they neglect to inquire into the details of the many
thousands of pounds granted for road and bridge improvements; they
neglect to inquire into the whole provincial expenditure, and to
provide due checks on the revenue officers; they propose to double the
power of the political bank at this place, and they get rid of motions
for inquiring into the state of its affairs by motions for
adjournment.

"They appoint committees on the state of the representation of the
people in their own House, and refuse to allow said committees to
report.

"They get rid of bills for the general regulation of Banking; revenue
inquiries; bank inquiries; inquiries into salaries, incomes, fees, and
perquisites; bills to amend the representation; inquiries into fines,
forfeitures, seizures, and the application of the same, and of your
opposition to destructive monopolies, by summarily expelling a member
you sent to attend to these matters.

"They (the said majority) are chiefly placemen, during pleasure, such
as sheriffs, crown lawyers, postmasters, judges, registrars,
custom-house officers, military men on half pay or retired allowances,
collectors of the customs elect, &c., &c., who receive from the
government six if not ten times the amount they obtained from the
people as legislators. They are the enemies of free discussion through
the press, although such free discussion of the conduct of public men
is your best guarantee for the preservation of the rights of
freemen."]

[Footnote 81: "January 6, 1832.--Mr. Solicitor General, seconded by
Mr. Elliott, moves that it be resolved, That William Lyon Mackenzie,
Esq., a member returned to represent the county of York, in Provincial
Parliament, has been expelled this House during the present session
for the publication of certain gross, scandalous, and malicious
libels, intended and calculated to bring this House and the Government
of this Province into contempt, and to excite groundless suspicion and
distrust in the minds of the inhabitants of the Province as to the
proceedings and motives of their representatives.

"That since his re-election, in a certain newspaper called the
_Colonial Advocate_, dated 5th January, instant, in an article therein
published, entitled, 'Articles of Impeachment, or public accusations
read and submitted to the consideration of the electors of the county
of York, in County Court assembled, on Monday, January 2, 1832, by Mr.
Mackenzie, their late member, against the Lieutenant Governor and the
advisers of the Crown,' of which he has avowed himself the author,
has, in high contempt of this House and its privileges, not only
re-asserted the said gross, scandalous, and malicious libel, for which
he, the said William Lyon Mackenzie, had been expelled; but hath also
in the said articles endeavored, by false, scandalous, and malicious
representations, to cause His Majesty's subjects of this Province to
believe that the majority of their Representatives should be held in
execration and abhorrence by posterity, as enemies to the liberties of
the people they represent--as persons who would, by violent and
unconstitutional means, destroy the liberty of the press, and convert
the fifty members of which the House is composed into tyrants in close
and unholy alliance with trained bands of public robbers:--Wherefore,
It is resolved that the said William Lyon Mackenzie be expelled this
House, and declared unfit and unworthy to hold a seat therein.

"In amendment, Mr. McNab, seconded by Mr. Vankoughnet, moves, that
after the word 'therein,' the following be added, 'during the present
session of Parliament.'

"Debates ensued, and the House adjourned."

"Saturday, January 7, 1832.--Mr. Perry, seconded by Mr. Shaver, moves
that so much of the order of the day as relates to the question of
privilege be discharged. Lost--Yeas 17, Nays 22.

"Mr. McNab's amendment (see above, Jan. 6,) was then carried. Nays 19,
Yeas 27.

"The final question, as thus amended, was then carried. Yeas 27, Nays
19.]

Only one hour was given to Mr. Mackenzie to prepare his defence,
during which the House adjourned. On its re-assembling, the clerk, at
the request of the accused, read the whole of the article--part of
which was complained of as a libel upon the House--extending to more
than five newspaper columns.

Such an article would not now arrest the attention of the House; much
less cause its author to be punished for libel, in any shape. Whether,
technically speaking, it was libellous or not, it was far less so than
many articles in other newspapers, some of them written by members of
the Assembly, and of which the writers were neither prosecuted in the
courts, nor expelled from the House.

Solicitor General Hagerman showed a disposition to carry the abuse of
privilege as far as the most despotic sovereign had ever carried the
abuse of prerogative. That he had no natural dislike of libels he
clearly proved, by the profuse use he made of them under cover of that
very privilege in the name of which he asked the expulsion of a fellow
member.[82] He described Mr. Mackenzie as "the worst of slanderers,"
who "would govern by means of the knife, and walk over the bleeding
bodies of his victims." Of the minority of the House, he said, if they
continued there, they "would continue as slanderers, or supporters of
slanderers." "Mr. Mackenzie," he said, when he had closed his defence,
"cast a malignant and wicked glare across the House;" and that "at
that moment, he left what was most virtuous within the walls, and took
away what was the most vile and debased." When, in the course of his
defence, Mr. Mackenzie read extracts from the speeches of Sir Francis
Burdett, Earl Grey, Lord Brougham, Mr. Macaulay, and others, the
Solicitor General exclaimed that they were "base and diabolical." Here
were libels a hundred times worse than that against which they were
uttered. The difference was, that the Solicitor General, as a member
of the House, was treated as a privileged libeller; though assuredly
the use of language which from its violence strikes at the very
existence of deliberative assemblies, by tending to render all
discussion impossible, could hardly be in order.

[Footnote 82: When the question of Mr. Mackenzie's first expulsion was
before the House, Mr. Hagerman, after disclaiming all personal feeling
in the premises, said, "he would now vote for Mr. Mackenzie's
expulsion; but if he should be re-elected, he would be the first to
receive him; he would not interfere with the elective franchise; he
would leave to the people the free choice of their representatives."]

Mr. Mackenzie attempted to convince the House of its error, by showing
that it was setting itself in opposition to public opinion; and
pointing in proof to the approbation of his constituents, as shown
both by his re-election, and the gold medal that had been presented to
him. He then took out of his pocket the massive gold medal, and by
means of the enormous chain of the same material suspended it round
his neck; declaring that he would wear it while he held his seat, if
it were only for an hour. The alleged libel had been read by him at
the hustings; and after the electors had heard it, only one person
could be found to vote against him. This was pretty strong proof of
public opinion, in the metropolitan county of the Province; and no
doubt the result would have been the same if the appeal had been to
any other populous county in the Province. The county of York had an
unequal representation in the House; and the matter would be made
worse by depriving it of one of its members. The constituency that had
approved his conduct and sent him back was on its trial; and if he
were expelled, the electors "would feel it their duty to come to the
bar and defend their rights." The Solicitor General objected to the
latitude taken by the accused; and the Speaker, being appealed to,
declined to interfere; but he expressed a hope that "too great
latitude would not be taken." After two or three other attempts on the
part of the Solicitor General to stop the defence, on such grounds as
that the reading of extracts from the English press to show the degree
of liberty allowed there to criticisms upon Parliament, the Speaker
declared Mr. Mackenzie out of order. Having appealed against the
decision of the Speaker, whom the House sustained by a large majority,
Mr. Mackenzie resolved to attempt no more. It was, he said, a farce
and a mockery for the House to call on him to make his defence, and
then prevent his proceeding. He disdained to attempt any further
defence before such a tribunal. He then, according to the report of a
journal violently opposed to him, tied up his papers, "after giving
them a kick or two to put them in order, and walked out of the House
amidst loud cries of 'order' from all sides."

The question was soon settled; the House voting the re-expulsion, by
nine o'clock, the second day of the discussion, on a division of
twenty-seven against nineteen.[83]

[Footnote 83: YEAS--Messrs. Attorney General, Berczy, G. Boulton,
Brown, Burwell, Chisholm, Crooks, Elliott, A. Frazer, Jarvis, Jones,
Lewis, Maon, McMartin, McNab, Morris, Mount, Robinson, Samson, Shade,
Solicitor General, Thomson, Vankoughnet, Warren, John Willson, W.
Wilson, and Werden--27.

NAYS--Messrs. Beardsley, Bidwell, Buell, Campbell, Clark, Cook,
Duncombe, Howard, Ketchum, Lyons, McCall, A. McDonald, D. McDonald,
Norton, Perry, Randal, Roblin, Shaver, and White--19. Mr. Ingersoll,
who was out of the House, would have voted with the majority.]

The resolution, forged in the mint of the Solicitor General, went much
beyond a mere expulsion. It declared the expelled member incapable of
holding a seat in the House during that Parliament; thus assuming that
a mere resolution of the House could create a disability to which
nothing short of a specific law could give legal force.[84] If the
object of Mr. Hagerman had been to place the House in the wrong, he
could not have succeeded more effectually.

On the day that this second expulsion was proposed, the Legislative
Council came to the aid of the Assembly. It complained of being
libelled in the same article that had been arraigned in the other
branch of the Legislature; and instead of addressing the Governor to
order a prosecution of the publisher for libel, it sent to the
Assembly resolutions, containing a "confident reliance" that the House
"will view with just indignation the efforts made by one of their
members for impairing the independence of the Legislative Council, and
diminishing the respect which is due to them as a part of the
constitution of this Province, and that they will desire to afford
reparation to the Legislative Council for so unwarrantable a breach of
their privileges."[85] Supposing this complaint of libel to have been
well-founded, the proper course would have been for the Council to
address the Governor to order a prosecution, as was done by the House
of Commons, in the case of Wilkes, who was only expelled after he had
absconded to France. But there was a very substantial reason for
avoiding this course. No conviction could have been obtained.

[Footnote 84: "If," says May, in his _Constitutional History of
England_, "by a vote of the House a disability, unknown to the law,
could be created, any man who became obnoxious might, on some ground
or other, be declared incapable. Incapacity would then be declared,
not by the law of the land, but by the arbitrary will of the
Commons."]

[Footnote 85: On the 9th January the House resolved to send a message
to the Legislative Council, in answer to its resolutions. "The
Solicitor General, seconded by Mr. Thomson, moves, That it be resolved
that the Honorable the Legislative Council be informed that the
resolutions of that honorable body of the 6th instant were received
at the time this House was engaged in the investigation of charges
against the member named in those resolutions for an alleged breach of
the privileges of the House of Assembly, which investigation has
resulted in the expulsion of the said member as unfit and unworthy to
hold a seat in this House, and therefore no further proceedings can be
had on the complaint of the Honorable the Legislative Council. On
which the House divided, as follows:--

"YEAS--Messrs. Berczy, Boulton, Brown, Burwell, Chisholm, Crooks,
Duncombe, Elliott, Fraser A., Ingersoll, Jarvis, Jones, Lewis,
McMartin, McNab, Maon, Morris, Mount, Robinson, Samson, Shade,
Solicitor General, Thomson, Warren, Werden, Wilson W.--26.

"NAYS--Messrs. Beardsley, Bidwell, Buell, Campbell, Clark, Cook,
Howard, Ketchum, Lyons, McCall, McDonald A., McDonald D., Norton,
Perry, Randal, Roblin, Shaver, and White--18.

"Question carried; majority eight."]

The alleged libel on the Legislative Council contained some plain
truths which could not but grate harshly upon the ears of that
Assembly. It also expressed some opinions, regarding which people
differed at the time, and a few about which people still differ; but
the number is less now than it was then. It was unhappily true that
the Legislative Council was crowded with placemen and Executive
dependents, and Mr. Mackenzie had the faculty of stating such
unpleasant facts in a way calculated to create unpleasant sensations
in those whom they affected; but in this case the greater part of the
alleged libel consisted of a mere recital of bills rejected by the
Second Chamber.[86] Whether these measures were good or bad was a
matter of opinion. Mr. Mackenzie thought they were good, and the
expression of that opinion could hardly be considered libellous by any
disinterested person in possession of his reason.

[Footnote 86: Here is the alleged libel:--"The Legislative Council is
chiefly composed of persons dependent on the Executive government for
their salaries, pensions, and fees of office, or who have been
selected by that government, upon the principle on which the English
Tories have selected peers and bishops for the last forty years,
absolute and unlimited servility. It also contains naval and military
half-pay officers, Roman Catholic and Protestant bishops, venerable
archdeacons, excise officers, and bank directors, and its official
organ is the chief criminal judge of the colony. From its very nature
and composition it has scarce one feeling or sentiment in common with
the country, being the mere breath of the Executive, and an expensive
and cumbrous screen to shield that Executive from deserved odium.

"The Legislative Council rarely, if ever, originates any bills of
general interest for the advancement of the public prosperity.

"It has, on innumerable occasions, rejected the most wise, salutary
laws--laws earnestly desired by the people, and calculated to promote
their welfare. Among the measures thus wantonly rejected by the
Council since my entrance into the Legislature, I shall particularly
enumerate bills for abolishing the law of primogeniture and dividing
real estate more equally among the sons and daughters of land-owners
who die intestate; for selling a part of the Clergy Reserves for the
benefit of the country; for rendering sheriffs and their deputies
ineligible to seats in Parliament for places within their
jurisdiction: for appointing commissioners to meet commissioners
already appointed by Lower Canada, to consider of the regulation of
trade, customs' duties, and other matters of mutual interest; for
appointing, first, the Hon. J. W. Willis, and, secondly, Mr. Speaker
Papineau, to act as a judge in equity and reconsider the case of Mr.
Randal's Chaudiere estate; for assigning yards to debtors incarcerated
in prison; for facilitating the administration of justice, by removing
the grounds on which frequent charges of partiality and corruption, or
deep suspicion of corruption, have often been made against sheriffs
and coroners for arbitrarily returning and impanelling juries; for
excluding the judges from the Legislative and Executive Councils; for
relieving Quakers, Mennonists, and Tunkards from the payment of fines
for non-performance of militia duty in time of peace; for
establishing, on a just and liberal principle, Upper Canada College in
this town; for authorizing creditors to sue for debts against the
Canada Company; for allowing persons who may be charged with felony,
and unable to defend themselves, the benefit of full defence by
counsel; for the better regulation of township meetings and the duties
of town and township officers; for more fully securing the
independence of town members, by granting them the same wages as
county members; for stopping the payment of an Episcopalian chaplain
when the Assembly no longer required his services; for allowing the
people of Kingston to elect municipal officers instead of having
their local affairs regulated by a few irresponsible individuals
arbitrarily selected by the Executive government; for granting a small
aid for a few years to the Academy incorporated in Grantham; for
incorporating a number of you as an association to hold your public
store-house in York and store your grain; for repealing the 2,500, or
pension-fund act; for amending the law of evidence and contracts; for
amending the law of libel; for granting in 1829 13,650 in aid of the
roads; and for authorizing the appointment of commissioners of roads
and other officers for the management of highways by the township
meetings. Also, for lessening the number of lawsuits and authorizing
the appointment of arbitrators in certain cases, &c., &c.

"The Legislative Council is the cause of much waste of time and money
in the House of Assembly, by continually rejecting bills much called
for by the people, which causes great delay in the business of the
Assembly each year, in again going through and discussing the same
measures. The Gourlay Banishment Repeal Bill, the Prince Edward
Division Bill, and several other bills of a general or local
character, were often passed in the Lower House at a great expense to
the colony, and finally assented to.

"The Legislative Council is opposed to a liberal system of banking,
because its members are almost all deeply interested in the political
and exclusive bank already established, as well from their profits as
stockholders as from the influence they derive as placemen from the
secret control of this dangerous institution.

"The Legislative Council have passed addresses in favor of particular
church establishments, and are as much opposed to the independence of
the judges on the Crown, as they were anxious to secure their
independence of the people. They have no fear of the present judges
lacking in pliability towards any administration.

"The Legislative Council grant the money arising from the taxes levied
on you to their door-keepers and favorites for pretended extra
services, and last spring grossly imposed upon the House of Assembly
by representing a demand made to pay a door-keeper a douceur for some
pretended service some years before, as being to pay contingencies of
the then existing session."]

The appeal which Mr. Mackenzie now made to the electors of York was in
his most impassioned style, and may be taken as a very fair sample of
his powers of agitation. As such I subjoin a few extracts from a
somewhat unequal, and what lawyers would probably call a seditious,
document:--

"Canadians! You have seen a Gourlay unlawfully banished; a Thorpe
persecuted and degraded; a Randal cruelly oppressed; a Matthews hunted
down even to the gates of death; a Willis dragged from the bench of
justice, slandered, pursued even across the Atlantic by envy and
malice, and finally ruined in his fame, fortune, and domestic
happiness; you have seen a thousand other less noted victims offered
upon the altar of political hatred and party revenge; sacrificed for
their adherence to the principles of the constitution; their love of
liberty and justice; their ardent desire to promote the happiness of
your domestic fire-sides. How many more sacrifices the shrine of
unlawful power may require, none can tell. The destroyer is made bold
by your timidity, and the base and unprincipled triumph over your
truest friends, because they believe you will show a craven spirit,
and put up with every possible insult, however aggravated. The hired
presses style you the tag-rag and bob-tail who assemble at town
meetings, and in the Legislature your most faithful members are daily
insulted and abused as rebels in heart, and the factious abettors of
the libeller, the disaffected, and the disloyal. * * * Had Charles X.
profited by experience as did his brother Louis XVIII., the elder
branch of the Bourbons had yet reigned in France. Louis was
illuminated by his journey to Ghent, and stuck by the charter ever
after. But it is said that our great men put their trust and
confidence in the troops at Kingston and in this garrison. Do they
expect to make butchers of British soldiers, the soldiers of liberty,
the friends of freedom, the conquerors of the tyrant of France, the
gallant followers of the noble-hearted Colonel Douglas? Are these the
men they expect to protect them should continued misrule bring upon
them the indignation of an injured, outraged, and long-suffering
community? Do they suppose that men of honor would violate their
obligation to their country and their God, and imbrue their hands in
the blood of their kind and confiding brothers, to gratify the bitter
enemies of their noble King? Surely, the champions of British liberty
are unfit to perform the drudgery of menial slaves! Surely, the men
whom our beloved Sovereign has sent here to protect us from foreign
aggression cannot desire to abridge our privileges. Their rights are
ours--their history our history--their earliest recollections ours
also! We acknowledge one common origin; our fathers worshipped
together in one temple. Does the infatuated junto, who are now acting
so foolishly, expect the bravest of Scotland's sons to sabre their
countrymen merely because they do not conform to the doctrines of
prelacy and follow the example of Archdeacon Strachan to apostacy and
worldly wealth? Do they believe there is a soldier in Canada whose
youthful heart ever bounded with joy in days of yore, on old
Scotland's hills, while he sang the national air of 'Scots wha hae wi'
Wallace bled,' and whose manhood has been employed in repelling
foreign aggression, who would disgrace his name and the regiment he
belongs to by increasing the widows and orphans of Canada? And yet, if
such are not the expectations of our rulers, why do they trifle with
the feelings of the people? What would a handful of troops be to the
natural aristocracy of Canada, the hardy yeomanry who own the soil,
even if the former were of the most ferocious class of human beings,
instead of the manly and accomplished defenders of their country,
covered with immortal honor and unstained laurels on many a victorious
battle field? I disdain to hold out threats, but it is time to speak
with plainness. * * *

"We come, at last, to the leading question, What is to be done? Meet
together from all sections of the country, at York, on Thursday next,
the nineteenth instant, in this town, on the area in front of the
court house; let the farmer leave his husbandry, the mechanic his
tools, and pour forth your gallant population animated by the pure
spirit of liberty; be firm and collected--be determined--be
united--never trifle with your rights; show by your conduct that you
are fit for the management of your domestic affairs, ripe for freedom,
the enlightened subjects of a constitutional Sovereign, and not the
serfs of a Muscovite, or the counterpart of a European mob! Strive to
strike corruption at its roots; to encourage a system calculated to
promote peace and happiness; to secure as our inheritance the tranquil
advantages of civil and religious freedom, general content, and easy
independence. Such a connection as this with our parent state would
prove long and mutually beneficial; but if the officials go much
further they will drive the people mad."

To a certain extent, the majority of the Assembly had, by the
injustice of which they had been guilty, gained their point. They had
goaded their victim into the use of expressions which in his cooler
moments he had never used. It must not be overlooked, however, that
whatever there was of menace in his impassioned language, it was
directed against the Provincial oligarchy. A marked distinction was
made between them and the "noble King," whose "soldiers of freedom"
were the "champions of British liberty". If he was indiscreet, we must
not forget the galling provocation to which he had been subjected: in
being not only expelled the Legislature for libels that others might
print with impunity; but, with a view of preventing his re-election,
the organs of the official party had represented that he was loaded
with a disability unknown to the law, the creation of the arbitrary
will of the House of Assembly. We shall see, as we proceed, that some
members of the Family Compact shortly afterwards threatened to throw
off their allegiance upon infinitely less provocation.

The election of a member, to represent the county of York, in the
place of the expelled representative, commenced on the 30th January;
Mr. Mackenzie being proposed, for the fourth time, by Mr. Joseph
Shepherd. Two other candidates, besides Mr. Mackenzie--Mr. James E.
Small, and Mr. Simon Washburn--presented themselves. Mr. Small stated
from the hustings that "he did not come before the freeholders as
approving of the conduct of the Assembly, in their repeated expulsions
of Mr. Mackenzie; he considered their proceedings, in these cases,
arbitrary and unconstitutional. But as they had declared Mr. Mackenzie
disqualified, he had come forward, presuming that the electors would
see the expediency of not electing a member who could not take his
seat. He opposed Mr. Washburn, not Mr. Mackenzie, who, he was
satisfied, would have a majority of votes." Mr. Washburn, on the
contrary, expressed his approval of the proceedings of the Assembly,
in the expulsion of Mr. Mackenzie, of whom he spoke in terms of
harshness, similar to those used by the more violent of the majority
of the House. Mr. Washburn retired, on the second day of polling, much
disgusted at having received only twenty-three votes. Mr. Mackenzie
received six hundred and twenty-eight votes, and Mr. Small ninety-six.

Such a result might have been expected to convince the Assembly of the
folly of their proceedings; but the truth is, the majority was
entirely inaccessible to reason.

In the meantime, the Legislative session had been closed. Before the
prorogation, Mr. Peter Perry moved to address the Lieutenant Governor
to dissolve the House, in consequence of the excitement created in the
country by the two expulsions of Mr. Mackenzie; for which motion he
obtained eighteen votes against twenty-seven. The House, as if proud
of its achievements, ordered two thousand copies of the proceedings on
the privilege question to be printed.

In the absence of Mr. Mackenzie from the Assembly, the Bank of Upper
Canada had been authorized to increase its stock to a very large
extent, in spite of the refusal of its managers, on a previous
occasion, to give to a committee of the House information on points of
the first importance. The Bank was unpopular from the circumstance of
the government holding stock in it, and appointing representatives of
that stock at the Board of Direction. A large amount of stock was
held by members of the Legislative Council; who, in enlarging the
powers conferred by the charter, were legislating for their own
individual interests. Under the rules to which the Assembly is now
obliged to conform, members similarly situated would not be permitted
to vote at all on the question. No other member of the House
understood so well as Mr. Mackenzie the checks necessary to impose on
banking corporations, for the security of the public; and his
expulsion caused the suspicion to be expressed that the interested
members of the House were not uninfluenced by the consideration that,
in his absence, any bank scheme they might bring forward would be sure
to succeed.[87] The bill was, however, vetoed in England, at the
instance of Mr. Mackenzie, as based on unsound principles.

Frazer, a man of coarse manners and violent language, publicly
threatened to horsewhip Mr. Mackenzie from his place in the Assembly
during the mock trial; and it is said that within twenty-four hours he
received from Sir John Colborne a promise of the collectorship of
Brockville. The promise was faithfully fulfilled.

[Footnote 87: It is proper to say that very few shares were held by
members of the House. Mr. H. J. Boulton was interested as Solicitor to
the Bank, and doubtless many other members expected favors from it. A
Bank of U. C. return for 1831 showed that only fifty-seven shares were
held by members of the House. 1,629 shares were held by members of the
Legislative Council, and 1,402 by officers of the government; the
government itself holding, on behalf of the Province, 2,000 shares.
Other Provincial Banks were, at that time, conducted upon anything but
correct principles. The whole capital stock of the Bank of Montreal,
on the 15th November, 1830, was 250,000; and at the same time the
Directors had borrowed from the bank 120,473, and were endorsers for
others for 60,570 more! In short they had borrowed nearly
three-fourths of the whole capital of the bank.]




CHAPTER XVI.

     Popular Excitement and Sympathy for
     Mackenzie--Grievance Petitions--Attempt to Assassinate
     Mackenzie--Trial and Conviction of Kerr for the
     Outrage--Mackenzie Denounced by a Catholic
     Bishop--Disturbances in York, and another Assassination
     Plot--Journey to England--Witnesses the final reading
     of the Reform Bill--His Impressions of Earl Grey,
     O'Connell, Rev. Mr. Irving, and Cobbett--Hume forwards
     his Objects--Interview with Lord Goderich, Colonial
     Minister--Refuses the Postmaster Generalship of Upper
     Canada--Lord Goderich's Dispatch and Concessions--The
     Legislative Council and Assembly on the
     Dispatch--Mackenzie procures the Dismissal of the Crown
     Officers in Upper Canada--The Tories threaten to
     revolt--Hagerman restored to the Solicitor Generalship,
     and Boulton appointed Chief Justice of
     Newfoundland--Post-office Policy and
     Revelations--Disallowance of Bank Charters--Other
     Colonial Agents--Mackenzie's "Sketches of Canada and
     the United States"--Revisits Scotland--Returns to
     Canada--Declines public Dinners.


Sir Walter Scott has stated somewhere that mankind feel more interest
in the fortunes of two lovers than in the fate of a nation. An
interest scarcely inferior attaches to the career of an individual
whom the public regards as the victim of injustice, whose crime
consists of his having defended a popular right or contended for a
principle. The majority of the Assembly, in attempting to crush an
opponent, had made a martyr. The natural result followed. The expelled
member had crowds of sympathizers, in all parts of the Province.
Public meetings were held to denounce this arbitrary stretch of
privilege. Petitions to the King and the Imperial Parliament for a
redress of grievances, of which the expulsion of Mr. Mackenzie was
one, were numerously signed. Of these petitions, it was already known,
Mr. Mackenzie was to be the bearer to the Colonial office; where he
would personally advocate the reforms for which they prayed.

A counter movement was set on foot by the official party. With the
Reform ministry, in England, this party was not very sure of its
standing. The petitions that had already been sent to the Colonial
office, from Upper Canada, complaining of grievance and praying that
they might be redressed, had produced an impression adverse to the
official party in the Province. What might be the result of Mr.
Mackenzie's visit, armed with numerous petitions, unless some antidote
were applied, it would be impossible to tell. The prospect which this
state of things held out enraged the official faction; and in more
than one instance they resorted to violence, from which Mr. Mackenzie
only escaped, by something little short of a miracle, with his life.

On the 19th of March, 1832, one of the meetings called by the
government party was held at Hamilton. Mr. Mackenzie attended by
special invitation. The meeting was a public one; and the opposition
had determined to measure numbers with their opponents. Mr. Wm. B.
Sheldon, of Barton, was proposed to be voted into the chair; and the
Tories, fearing a defeat, assumed a tone of menace. Wm. J. Kerr,
showing a more violent disposition than the rest, swore that no one
but the Sheriff should preside. As too often happens where two
political parties attempt to outnumber one another, at a public
meeting, great confusion occurred. On a show of hands both parties
claimed the victory; but the Sheriff took the chair. The other
party--represented by a local paper as being much the more
numerous--retired to the Court House Green; where an address to the
King was adopted.

After the meeting, Mr. Mackenzie had retired to the house of a friend,
Mr. Matthew Bailey, where he dined, a few other friends being present.
A rumor had been circulated, in whispers, that a plan had been formed,
during the day, to take Mr. Mackenzie's life, or at least to do him
such bodily injury as would render it impossible for him to make his
contemplated journey to England. Several of his friends apprised him
of this, and urged him strongly to leave town before dark. Mr. Davis
three several times attempted to persuade him to go in his carriage to
Wellington Square. He declined all this advice, and all offers of
conveyance that would take him out of town before dark; saying that he
should prefer to start by the stage at eleven o'clock. About nine
o'clock that night, when he was sitting in a parlor up stairs, with a
friend, writing, the door was suddenly opened without any premonition,
and in stepped Kerr and one George Petit. When asked to take seats,
one of them, Kerr, at first refused, but almost immediately after sat
down. He almost instantly rose again, and walking up to the table and
turning over the sheets Mr. Mackenzie had been writing, remarked with
much apparent good humor: "Well, Mr. Mackenzie, have you got all our
grievances redressed at last?" Something more was said, when Kerr,
asking Mr. Mackenzie to speak with him in private, was at once lighted
down stairs by the unsuspecting victim, by whom he was followed. Kerr
opened the street door; and, while standing on the steps in front,
introduced Mr. Mackenzie to two or three accomplices,[88] remarking,
"This is your man," or "This is our man." All at once, one of them
seized him by one side of the coat collar, while Kerr seized the
other. The candle was dashed to the ground, and they attempted to drag
their victim, in the dark, into an open space in front of the house.
Mr. Mackenzie, on whose mind the terrible truth now flashed--the
warnings he had received that a plan had been made to murder him, and
a threat made by Kerr some months before to take his life, instantly
coming to his recollection--grasped the door, and struggling in the
hands of the assassins, shrieked, "Murder." One of the party now
struck him a terrible blow with a bludgeon, felling him down upon the
stone steps, whence he was dragged into the square in front of the
house; where he received repeated kicks and blows, and his life was
only saved by the opportune arrival of some neighbors, with Mr.
Bailey's brother; one of whom, named Peck, an Irish laborer, caused
Kerr to desist by approaching him with an uplifted billet of wood. The
villains took to their heels, except Kerr who was upon the ground; and
when he rose, he resorted to the stratagem of assuming not only the
innocent man but the protector, saying, "Don't be afraid, Mr.
Mackenzie; you shan't be hurt, you shan't be hurt." He then scampered
off as well as he could--for he was permanently lame--after his
accomplices; and next morning he was heard boasting at the Burlington
canal--a government work of which he was manager--that he had saved
Mackenzie's life from the attempt of a band of ruffians! The victim
was found to be bleeding profusely, disfigured in the face, injured in
the head, and hurt in the chest. "I was very unwell all next day," he
said, "but able to sit up. I was a ghastly spectacle to look upon; and
for months after I felt the effects of the blows and bruises."

[Footnote 88: It was stated in a local paper, at the time, the editor
of which was present with Mr. Mackenzie, in the House, that two of
these were James Dennis and Oliver Richie; and the statement was
afterwards repeated in a work published by Mr. Mackenzie, in London.
There is, however, no judicial evidence of the identity of Kerr's
accomplices; as he was the only one brought to trial for the
outrage.]

Mrs. Bailey was so alarmed at the outrage enacted in front of her
husband's house, that she was seized with convulsions, and was in such
an alarming condition, during the greater part of the night, that it
was at one time feared she would lose her life or her reason. She
gradually recovered towards morning.

It has been stated that Kerr and his friends met next day, vowing to
complete, at night, the work they had begun; but, however this might
be, Mr. Bailey's house was too well guarded to render such an attempt
at all prudent, and it was not made.

Kerr was a magistrate, and had charge of a public work. He was a man
who might safely be looked to to take his share of rough work, without
any disappointment of expectations, as this outrage is sufficient
guarantee. He was brought to trial, for the part he played in it, in
August, 1832, at the Gore District Assizes; some person, unknown to
Mr. Mackenzie, having laid the information. Mr. Macaulay was the
presiding judge; and, considering the relations of all the parties, it
is proper to say that he showed the greatest impartiality on the
trial, though there might be a question about the adequacy of the
punishment awarded. A fine of $100 is hardly felt by a man said to be
worth 5,000 or 6,000. And the assault was of that aggravated nature
which irresistibly carries with it the idea of serious premeditated
injury, if not something more. The first blow would probably have
proved fatal, had not the bludgeon come in contact with the lintel of
the door. Solicitor General Hagerman appeared as prosecutor on the
part of the Crown.

The name of Mr. McNab, as probable adviser of the outrage, has been
freely used, both at the time and since; but as there is no evidence,
beyond the fact that some of his friends were engaged in it, he must
be acquitted. As the facts clearly show a conspiracy, it is strange
that Kerr was the only one convicted. On what ground Petit could have
been allowed to go scot-free, it is difficult to imagine; but he was
admitted as a witness on the part of the defence, and he was permitted
to evade answering the question whether he knew anything about a
premeditated attack, by saying he himself had not gone to Bailey's to
assault Mr. Mackenzie. His numerous evasions of the question, put in
various shapes, could only lead to one conclusion, and that conclusion
pointed to a conspiracy which no attempt was made to unravel.

The example of Hamilton was to be followed in York. Parties were
pretty equally balanced at the capital; and the official magnates
were not always inclined to make a display of their tolerance at
public meetings. On the 6th of July, 1830, they had refused to allow
Mr. Mackenzie to be heard, at a public meeting called to organize an
Agricultural Society, and now they were emboldened by the measurable
success of the Hamilton venture. The meeting having been called for
the 23d of March, the semi-official organ[89] of the Government
undertook to "caution the faction against any attempt at deception,"
at the meeting, and threatening that, if the caution were not heeded,
"we most assuredly would not ensure the leading revolutionary
tools[90] a whole skin, or a whole bone in their skins, for the space
of fifteen minutes." A sufficiently audacious threat! At the present
time Ave look back with astonishment at the insolent tone of the
semi-official journals of those days; but when we scan the conduct,
and read the language of Solicitor General Hagerman, in the Assembly,
we cannot doubt that they faithfully reflected the feelings of the
official party. No special constables were sworn in, or any other
precautions taken to preserve the peace. The meeting having assembled
at the Court House, Dr. Dunlop, of the Canada Company, and Mr.
Ketchum, member for York county, were respectively proposed as
chairman. As is usual, in such cases, both parties claimed the
victory; but Dr. Dunlop took the chair, when the Reformers withdrew
and organized an open air meeting, in front of the Court House, making
use of a farmer's wagon for a platform. Mr. Ketchum being made
chairman, Mr. Mackenzie, suffering considerably from the injuries he
had received at Hamilton, began to address the meeting; stones and
other missiles were thrown by the opposite party; close connections of
some of the officials being engaged in the work. The riot soon assumed
a serious aspect. A ruffian in the crowd drew a knife, with which he
threatened the speaker. The wagon in which Mr. Ketchum and the speaker
were standing was seized and drawn for some distance, amidst threats
and imprecations. The Sheriff told Mr. Ketchum he was unable to
preserve the peace, and begged him to bring the meeting to a close.
Some one hit upon the expedient of advising the "friends of the
Governor" to go up to Government House and cheer His Excellency. This
being done, peace was restored, a new chairman appointed, and an
address to the King resolved upon. After Mr. Mackenzie had addressed
the meeting for about twenty minutes, those who had not signed the
address went to his residence, at the corner of Church and Richmond
streets, where, upon tables in the street, four hundred and
thirty-eight names were added. While on his way, Mr. Mackenzie was
seized hold of by Captain Fitzgibbon. On being questioned as to his
intentions, Captain Fitzgibbon said he was going to take him to jail,
to secure his protection from the mob. Mr. Mackenzie's friends, to
whom his answer was given, replied that there was no necessity for
this, as they would undertake to guarantee his safety; upon which Mr.
Mackenzie went to his own residence. The disorderly mob, who had been
to cheer the Governor, returned, bearing an effigy of Mackenzie, which
they burnt, and then made an attack upon the office of _The Colonial
Advocate_. They broke the windows and destroyed some of the type, and
were only prevented from doing further mischief by the exertions of a
few individuals, among whom was an apprentice in the printing office,
named Falls, who fired a gun loaded with type,[91] over-awing the
rioters. Captain Fitzgibbon did everything in his power to restore
peace; and the Lieutenant Governor gave orders for seventy-five
soldiers to be ready at a moment's notice, if required. Three or four
magistrates remained at the police office all night, swearing in
special constables; and a guard of citizens volunteered to protect Mr.
Mackenzie's house and printing office. At midnight a mob surrounded
the office, when Captain Fitzgerald ordered them to disperse, and
threatened, if they did not obey, to call out the troops, which were
kept under arms all night. This admonition had the desired effect, and
the crowd, headed by a son of one of the Executive Councillors, moved
off without venturing to execute the violence they had meditated. The
house had to be guarded for three weeks, during which time Mr.
Mackenzie remained in the country for safety; and the young man, who
fired on the rioters, had to leave the city in consequence of his life
being threatened.

[Footnote 89: _The Upper Canada Courier._]

[Footnote 90: The same paper, after the meeting, spoke of the farmers
of Yonge street as a herd of swine: "Every wheel of their well
organized political machine was set in motion to transmute country
farmers into citizens of York. Accordingly, about nine in the morning,
groups of tall, broad-shouldered, hulking fellows were seen arriving
from Whitby, Pickering, and Scarborough, some crowded in wagons, and
others on horseback; and Hogg, the miller, headed a herd of the swine
of Yonge street, who made just as good votes at the meeting as the
best shop-keepers in York."]

[Footnote 91: _Christian Guardian._]

A novel division of parties took place at this meeting; the Roman
Catholics going with the Family Compact. Mr. Mackenzie, who at all
times made it a point of respecting every man's honest religious
convictions, and quarreling with none on account of their particular
views, had somehow managed to get at loggerheads with Bishop
McDonnell. It was stated on clerical evidence that the latter had
denounced him from the altar.[92] The bishop received an annuity of
some 500 sterling, and the Church something more, from the
government; and these grants were objected to as invidious and unjust
to other denominations. From one party came the emolument; from the
other the objections; a condition of things that might well be
supposed to influence the political preference even of a bishop, not
otherwise burthened with wealth. But, however it may be explained, the
Roman Catholics were, contrary to their usual habit, found in alliance
with the Family Compact, on this occasion. At the same time there
appears to have been a good deal of political division among them; a
meeting having immediately after been held in York, at which no
decision was come to on the relative merits of the two political
parties.

[Footnote 92: Dr. O'Grady, a Roman Catholic Priest, in his evidence
before the Grievance Committee, in 1835, stated that Bishop McDonnell
"got up a petition against Mr. Mackenzie, attended a public meeting in
Mrs. Jordan's inn, and harrangued the people; and by the use of the
most inexcusable misrepresentations, obtained signatures to the said
petition, inducing the signers to believe, from altars dedicated to
the service of religion, that the document to which he invited them to
affix their names was intended solely for the advancement of the
Catholic Church. Shortly after he left here (York) for
Penetanguishine, accompanied by the Rev. Messrs. Gordon and Crevier;
and Mr. Gordon told me that he stopped on his way to perform divine
service in the Catholic Church of the township of Toronto, and that he
did, on that solemn occasion, instead of preaching the morality of the
gospel, inveigh in the most violent and unbecoming manner against
William Lyon Mackenzie. He went from that [place] to Adjula, where he
parted from the Rev. Mr. Gordon, having given him previous
instructions to obtain signatures in the best manner he could to a
blank paper, which he left with him for that purpose. The Rev. Mr.
Gordon told me that he was shocked and scandalized at the manner in
which this political crusade was conducted."]

In April, 1832, Mr. Mackenzie started on his journey to England, as
the bearer to the Imperial Government of petitions, which had, for the
most part, been born of the excitement arising out of his expulsion
from the Legislative Assembly. He expected to return in six months;
but was delayed nearly a year and a half. During his absence, Mr.
Randal Wixon took charge of _The Colonial Advocate_. The packet
Ontario,[93] on which Mr. Mackenzie sailed, with his wife, had on
board sixteen cabin and six steerage passengers. He described her as
"a sort of Noah's ark," having on board pigs, poultry, turkeys, geese,
and a milch cow." The passage from New York to Portsmouth was made in
twenty-nine days, commencing on the first of May. Writing to Toronto,
after he had got on board at New York, he said: "I trust that the good
providence of that merciful Power who has protected and watched over
your humble correspondent until now, will continue to preserve him,
direct all his steps, and promote the object of his mission, in as far
as that object would be for the good of Canada and of the English
people."

[Footnote 93: The following song, wishing God-speed to the agent, is
one of several of the same kind, published about this time. It was
dated Markham, April 10, 1832, and signed DIOGENES:

     Now Willie's awa' frae the field o' contention,
     Frae' the Land o' misrule, and the friends o' dissension;
     He's gane owre the waves, as an agent befittin';
     Our claims to support, in the councils o' Britain.

     Nae mair shall the _Soup-kitchen beggars_[94] annoy him,
     Nor the _Hamilton murd'rers_ attempt to destroy him;
     Nae dark deed o' bluid shall he dread their committin';
     He's safe frae their fangs, on his voyage to Britain.

     Blaw saftly ye breezes! nae turbulent motion
     Disturb, wi' rude billow, the breast o' the ocean;
     But zephyrs propitious, wi' breath unremittin',
     May waft him wi' speed, and wi' safety to Britain.

     There, there, the REFORMERS shall cordially meet him,
     An' there his great namesake, KING WILLIE, shall greet him;
     Our PATRIOT MONARCH, whase name shall be written,
     Wi' letters o' gowd in the Records o' Britain.

     Gae, Canada's Patriot, gae, strang in your mission,
     Gae bear to our Sov'reign, his subjects' Petition;
     Our Despots unmask--shaw the deeds they're committin',
     Pervertin' the blest Institutions o' Britain.

     An' dread na the Tories--they're toss'd frae their station,
     Thae tools that degraded and plundered the nation,
     The Bigots--the mitred, the titled are smitten
     To earth--and the Whigs are triumphant in Britain.

     Tho' here, we've a brood o' the Reptiles remainin',
     Like Vampyres, the vitals o' Canada drainin';
     Yet lax is their tenure, unstable their fittin',
     An' they'll soon be extinct like the Vermin o' Britain.

     Gae, Champion o' Freedom! fulfil your great mission;
     The cause you're engaged in defies opposition;
     An' Liberty's laurels, new glories emittin',
     Shall garland your brows when returnin' frae Britain.

[Footnote 94: This refers to some of the persons engaged in the York
riot; on the 23d of March.]

The number of letters he wrote on board the vessel attests that
constitutional activity which always prevented his remaining idle; an
activity which sometimes took strange freaks, and of which an example
may be given in his going up to the mast-head, the first night in a
storm, and only descending just before one of the sails was blown
away.

The organs of the official party affected to be merry at the idea of a
man who had twice been expelled from the Legislature, and declared
incapable of sitting during that Parliament, taking a budget of
grievances to Downing street, and expecting to obtain a hearing. But
they had reckoned without their host, as the event proved.

He arrived in London in time to witness the third reading of the
Reform Bill in the House of Lords:

"Having obtained the order of a member of the House of Lords for
admission to the gallery on the eventful night of the third reading of
the Reform Bill, I went as early as four o'clock, and obtained an
excellent seat both for seeing and hearing in the front tier of seats
immediately opposite the throne. It was well that I did so. Had I been
a few minutes later, the order would have been of no avail, as the
gallery holds only eighty persons, and each nobleman being entitled to
give an order for the admission of one person, it was filled to
overflowing almost immediately. At half past four but few of the peers
had arrived; and perhaps a dozen members of the Commons' House were
standing at the bar. They have either to stand or sit down on the
matting, there being neither chairs nor benches placed for their
accommodation."

With the appearance and bearing of Earl Grey he was in raptures:--

"Well does Earl Grey merit the high station and distinguished rank to
which he has been called; truth and sincerity are stamped on his open,
manly, English countenance; intelligence and uprightness inscribed on
all his actions. You may read his speech in _The Times_ or
_Chronicle_; you may imagine to yourself the noblest, happiest manner
in which such sentiments might be delivered by a sincere and highly
gifted patriot; still your conception will fall far short of the
reality of the admirable address and manner of the prime minister of
Britain. His Lordship had need of neither the peerage nor the post he
fills to point him out as one of the first among men; he was--he is
one of that aristocracy of nature which in any free country are found
among the pillars of its liberties, and in any despotism among the
foremost to break the tyrant's yoke, or perish in attempting it."
There was every thing to hope, Mr. Mackenzie wrote, from the justice
of Earl Grey. Upper Canada affairs, he felt assured, would "be put to
rights." He was naturally of a sanguine disposition, and was also
subject to severe fits of despondency.

His impression of O'Connell was also very favorable:--

"I have heard Mr. O'Connell, the great Irish agitator and champion of
emancipation, address a meeting of one of these [Trades' Political]
Unions, not less than eight hundred or one thousand members being
present. He has the most perfect self-command, and an inexhaustible
fund of genuine wit and broad humor; is one of those speakers you can
listen to for hours, and yet regret when you cease to hear the sound
of his voice. There is a quaintness in his manner of expression which
gives double effect to his jokes and witticisms. Yet he can be lofty
and majestic when he pleases; and I rejoiced to perceive that his
original and flowing eloquence, as he told in strong and emphatic
language of the wrongs of Ireland, drew from an English audience the
most enthusiastic, sympathetic cheers. I rarely ever witnessed a more
successful speaker, in his popular character of an agitator, than Mr.
O'Connell."

After he had been introduced to Mr. O'Connell, he writes under date,
"19 Wakefret Street, Brunswick Square, London, July 28, 1832.

"Mr. O'Connell is a man of whom all Irishmen ought to be proud. In
their cause, in Ireland's cause, in the cause of civil and religious
freedom all over the globe, he is a powerful and consistent champion,
and likely to be a successful one. He has also manifested the warmest
attachment to the Canadas; and the kind manner in which he spoke to me
of our affairs, and the interest he manifested on our behalf, entitles
him to my lasting gratitude."

Having frequently gone to hear the celebrated Mr. Irving, who was then
making a great sensation in London as a preacher, Mr. Mackenzie
wrote:--

"Although I do not like the interruption from persons speaking, as if
inspired, in an unknown tongue, yet there is something so noble, so
honest, so captivating about this eloquent divine that I always leave
the church more firmly determined to go back next Sunday, and always
do so. There is such a power and energy in his discourses, such a
simplicity in his manner, such convincing proofs of great judgment and
sincere good-will towards men in his language and actions, that I
cannot but feel the greatest regard for him as a minister. He preaches
seventeen times a week, in doors and out, and his audiences frequently
include the first families in the land."

Canadian affairs were accorded attention in social circles, where Mr.
Mackenzie moved.[95] His estimate of Cobbett, formed from a personal
acquaintance, does not exclude the defects of that remarkable man. In
a letter, dated "September 20, 1832," he writes:--

"I am not sure that I mentioned to you that I dined on Sunday, last
July, with the celebrated Mr. Cobbett, at his country-seat,
Kensington. I was glad to accept an invitation which enabled me to see
a man who has filled a large space in the public annals of Britain for
the last forty years, at home. Mr. Cobbett is the centre of a party,
formidable in numbers and not deficient in talent. He is a keen and
unsparing critic, reviewing and animadverting upon the plans of other
men with great severity and unquestioned skill. He is likely to
succeed in being returned for the two hundred thousand inhabitants of
Manchester to the new Parliament, which will give him great weight.
His plans then will be exposed to the test of Legislative
investigation, and we shall see how far he will be able to carry into
practice his theory of an equitable adjustment of the national
grievances, debts, bonds, and obligations. Mr. Cobbett I consider a
happy man.

[Footnote 95: In his letter of the 28th July, from which an extract
has already been made, he says:--"I was lately an invited guest at a
dinner given in the White Conduit House, Pentonville, to the memory of
Major Cartwright, an old and constant Reformer. Many distinguished
friends of reform were present; Mr. Hume was chairman, supported by
Sir John Scott Lillie, Deputy Lieutenant of Middlesex, the Editor of
the _Westminster Review_, Colonel Evans, Mr. Babbage, etc. In the
course of the evening, Mr. Hume gave as a toast, 'Reform in the
Colonies,' and spoke at some length on the state of the Canadas. Of
course, I returned thanks in a short speech. A Polish Professor from
Warsaw spoke next, and gave a very interesting but melancholy account
of the present state of Poland."]

With the experience of threescore he possesses the vivacity of
eighteen. He is pleased with himself, with his plans, and his
prospects. Has a fine family, a comfortable fireside, and enjoys
excellent health. He talks as much of trees, and flowers, and
gardening, and agriculture, as of matters of government; and has
evidently made farming his study to a great extent. I should not be at
all surprised if we find him not so great a democrat in the House of
Commons as he is in the _Weekly Register_. Mr. Cobbett is tall and
well made, ruddy complexion and good-looking; his hair is as white as
snow, and no sign of baldness. He is evidently a man of an ardent
temperament, of strong and powerful passions, and I believe his object
is to increase the comforts and lessen the misery of the great body of
the people; but it is evident he is not very scrupulous as to the
means of bringing about this great good. Mr. Noah, of New York, in his
_Advocate_, and more recently in his _Enquirer_, and Mr. Cobbett, of
Bolt Court, in his _Register_, appear to me to have adopted the maxim
that 'all's fair in polities'--they both put forth, in a powerful
strain of sarcasm or invective against political opponents, statements
not always so correct as they might be. Indeed, Mr. Cobbett has
evidently acted towards both Whigs and Tories for many years as though
he considered them an organized band of public plunderers, legalized
by unjust statutes to oppress mankind, and of whom nothing could be
said that would be 'too bad.' Mr. Cobbett's manner is kind and
prepossessing, but I think he does not bear contradiction so well as
some men of less genius and power of mind."

Cobbett noted down the heads of an article which he intended to write
on Canada, but he does not appear to have carried his intention into
effect.

Mr. Mackenzie made the acquaintance of Mr. Rintoul, editor of the
_Spectator_, and Mr. Black, editor of the _Morning Chronicle_, which
then held almost as important a position as _The Times_; and he was
enabled to address to the British public, through these journals, any
observations he had to make on the subject of Canada.

Of all the members of the House of Commons, Mr. Hume rendered the
greatest assistance to Mr. Mackenzie. He was on the best terms of
friendship with the Ministry, though he kept his seat on the
opposition benches, and pursued that independent course which seemed
to be the only one possible to him. When he laid before the House of
Commons the petitions of which Mr. Mackenzie was bearer, he did so not
only with the knowledge and consent of the government, but "he was
happy to have the assurance of Viscount Goderich, [Secretary of State
for the Colonies,] that his Lordship was busy inquiring into the
grievances complained of with a view of affording relief." Mr.
Mackenzie had, by this time, already had an interview with the
Colonial minister, and, in company with Mr. Hume, Mr. Viger--who had
gone to England on a similar mission, on behalf of Lower Canada--and
Mr. George Ryerson--who had gone to England on behalf of the
Methodist Conference--he was to have another interview, in a few days.

This first interview, at which all the four gentlemen named met Lord
Goderich, took place on the 2nd of July, 1832, at two o'clock, and
lasted between two and three hours. The attempts made to lessen Mr.
Mackenzie's influence, in the shape of attacks by political opponents
in Canada, in the various forms they had taken, appeared to go for
nothing with Viscount Goderich. Mr. Mackenzie could not trace the
effect of such influence. "The conduct of the Colonial minister," he
found to be "friendly and conciliatory; his language free from
asperity; and I left him," adds Mr. Mackenzie, "with the impression
strongly imprinted on my mind that he sincerely desired our happiness
as a colony, and that it was his wish to act an impartial part." The
agent of the Upper Canada petitioners explained at length his views of
the state of Upper Canada. Viscount Goderich encouraged the deputation
to lay the petitions before the House of Commons; and he appears to
have recognized, from the first, the substantial nature of many of the
grievances which were subject of complaint. If the ministry had shown
a disposition to treat the petitions as of no great importance, Mr.
Hume would have brought the whole subject of the political condition
of Upper Canada before the House of Commons; and as he would have been
warmly seconded by O'Connell and others, an effective demonstration
would have been made. Although Mr. George Ryerson was present at this
interview, he took no part in any of the questions discussed except
those relating to religion and education, with which he had been
specially charged.

On the 3d of August, Mr. Mackenzie, in company with Mr. Hume and Mr.
Viger, had a second interview with Viscount Goderich, at the Colonial
office, commencing at two o'clock and lasting about an hour and a
half. "We left the Colonial office," Mr. Mackenzie wrote, "well
satisfied that measures are about to be taken that will go a great way
towards neutralizing the existing discontents."

These interviews were not obtained through the intercession of Mr.
Hume, by whom the agent had first been introduced to members of the
ministry, but at the request of Mr. Mackenzie, who desired that the
three other gentlemen might be included with himself. He afterwards
had several interviews with Lord Goderich, at which no third person
was present. The Colonial Minister listened to Mr. Mackenzie's
statements with the greatest attention, though he observed a decorous
reticence as to his own views; and even when he had come to
conclusions, he did not generally announce them till he put them into
an official shape. In one of those interviews, Mr. Mackenzie
complained that the revenue of the Post-office Department, in Upper
Canada, was not accounted for, when Lord Goderich proposed to divide
the management of the department in Canada, and give Mr. Mackenzie
control of the western section, with all the accruing emoluments. Mr.
Mackenzie replied by saying: "So far as I am concerned, the
arrangement would be a very beneficial one, as I could not fail to be
personally much benefited by it; but your Lordship must see," he
added, "that the evil I complain of would be perpetuated instead of
being remedied. I must therefore decline the offer." Mr. Mackenzie
estimated the value of the office, undivided, at $15,000 a year; one
half of which he would have obtained if he had accepted Lord
Goderich's offer. This was in strict accordance with the whole
practice of his life. With every opportunity of acquiring competence,
and even wealth, he lived a large portion of his life in poverty, and
died under the pressure of pecuniary embarrassment.

Mr. Mackenzie was not received at the Colonial office in a
representative character--he was delegated by the York "Central
Committee of the Friends of Civil and Religious Liberty"--but as an
individual having an interest in the affairs of the Province, and a
member of the Legislature of Upper Canada. It was agreed that he
should address what complaints he had to make to the Colonial
Secretary in writing;[96] and he addressed, among other documents, a
lengthy "Memoir" on the state of the Province, embracing a variety of
topics. To this and some other documents Lord Goderich replied at
great length, on the 8th of November, 1832, and in a tone and temper
very different from those in which the local officials were accustomed
to indulge.

[Footnote 96: He made the fullest use of this privilege; writing long
documents on a great number of subjects in which Canadians were then
interested. It was in the preparation of these papers that he
performed the extraordinary feat referred to in a previous part of
this work, of continuing to write six days and six nights, without
ever going to bed, and only falling asleep occasionally, for a few
minutes, at the desk. He ventured to predict that, unless the system
of government, in Upper Canada, were ameliorated, the result must be
civil war. "Against gloomy prophecies of this nature," Lord Glenelg
replied, "every man conversant with public business must learn to
fortify his mind," adding, that he regarded them as the usual resource
of those who wish to extort from the fears of governments conclusions
in favor of which no adequate reasons can be offered. Mr. Mackenzie
often afterwards referred to this prediction; and so far from having
intended it as a threat, took credit for it as a warning of the
inevitable results of the policy pursued, contending that, if it had
been heeded, all the disasters that followed would have been
averted.]

Lord Goderich at first stated the number of names to the petitions of
which Mr. Mackenzie was the bearer at twelve thousand and
seventy-five; while he added that there were other petitions signed by
twenty-six thousand eight hundred and fifty-four persons, "who concur
in expressing their cordial satisfaction in those laws and
institutions which the other sort of petitioners have impugned." At
the instance of Mr. Mackenzie, Lord Goderich afterwards caused the
names to be counted again, and it was found that instead of twelve
thousand the number "far exceeded twenty thousand."[97] While
combating a great many of the arguments adduced by Mr. Mackenzie, Lord
Goderich yielded to his views upon several points. Hitherto no
indemnity had been paid to members of the Assembly representing town
constituencies. The effect, it was argued, was to confine the people
in their choice of town representatives to persons who could afford to
spend their time at the seat of the government during the legislative
session, without a reimbursement of their expenses. Lord Goderich
directed the Governor not to oppose objection to any measure that
might be presented to his acceptance, "for placing the town and
county representatives on the same footing in this respect." He agreed
to place upon the same footing as Quakers other religious bodies who
had a like objection to taking an oath. Another complaint Lord
Goderich had anticipated. It was alleged that the local Executive
distributed the public lands among their favorites without the
authority of law; and His Majesty, upon the advice of the Colonial
minister, interdicted the gratuitous disposal of public lands, and
requested that they should be made subject to public competition, with
a view "to the utter exclusion of any such favoritism as is thus
deprecated." He instructed the Lieutenant Governor to adopt all
constitutional means to procure a repeal of the law which disqualified
British subjects from voting at elections, after their return from
foreign countries; also that "His Majesty expects and requires of you
neither to practice, nor to allow on the part of those who are
officially subordinate to you, any interference with the right of His
Majesty's subjects to the free and unbiassed choice of their
representatives." In the name of His Majesty's Government, Lord
Glenelg disclaimed all responsibility for the opinion attributed to
Mr. Robinson, that the children of the yeomanry ought to be consigned
to ignorance lest knowledge should render them independent in thought
and action; and he enlarged on the advantages of popular education.
"In the same spirit," he added, "His Majesty now directs me to
instruct you to forward to the utmost extent of your lawful authority
and influence, every scheme for the extension of education amongst the
youth of the Province, and especially the poorest and most destitute
among their number, which may be suggested from any quarter, with a
reasonable prospect of promoting that design." It had been the custom
of the Lieutenant Governors to excuse themselves from laying a full
statement of the revenue and expenditure before the Legislature, by
pleading the restrictions imposed by their instructions. But Lord
Goderich rendered this excuse impossible in future, by the averment
that "if the Royal instructions are supposed to forbid the most
unreserved communication with the House of Assembly of the manner in
which the public money, from whatever source derived, is expended,
such a construction is foreign to His Majesty's design." "Nothing," it
was added, "is to be gained by concealment upon questions of this
nature, and a degree of suspicion and prejudice is naturally excited,
which, however ill-founded, often appears in the result to be
incurable." Coming to the question of ecclesiastics holding seats in
the Legislative Council, Lord Goderich said it was expected of the
Bishop and the Archdeacon, "that they should abstain from interference
in any secular matter that may be agitated at that Board." But even
under this restriction, Lord Goderich added, "I have no solicitude for
retaining either the Bishop or the Archdeacon on the list of
Legislative Councillors; but, on the contrary, rather predisposed to
the opinion that, by resigning their seats, they would best consult
their own personal comfort, and the success of their designs for the
spiritual good of the people." But as their seats were held for life,
their resignations must be voluntary; since, it was argued, there
would be no justification for degrading them from their positions,
when no specific violation of duty had been imputed to them. If the
expense of elections was so inordinate as represented, the Lieutenant
Governor was instructed to "signify to the Legislative bodies that it
is the earnest desire of His Majesty, that every practical method
should be taken for correcting what would be so great an evil, by
reducing the cost within the narrowest possible limit." In reference
to an independent judiciary, so strongly opposed by Mr. Stephens,
counsel to the Colonial office in 1828, Lord Goderich, anticipating
the complaints now addressed to him, had directed the Lieutenant
Governor to suggest the enactment of a bill for that purpose. Thus
another point, urged by Mr. Mackenzie and those who acted with him,
when they conceived that Judge Willis was offered up a sacrifice to
the displeasure of the local Executive, had been gained.

[Footnote 97: Letter of Lord Howick to Mr. Mackenzie, January 22,
1833. Mr. Mackenzie (_Seventh Report on Grievances_) stated the number
of signatures at about 24,500. Earl Ripon afterwards stated the number
at 24,500.]

Such are some of the concessions obtained by Mr. Mackenzie, during his
visit to England, from the Imperial Government. The dispatch of Lord
Goderich was intended for the public eye, and its style was eminently
diplomatic. On several points he differed from Mr. Mackenzie; and
sometimes he succeeded in putting his correspondent in the wrong.
Unfortunately, there were reasons, as afterwards appeared, for
doubting the sincerity of some of Lord Goderich's professions. In this
very dispatch, he said: "With respect to the charge of showing an
undue preference to preachers of religion belonging to the established
churches of this country, it is so utterly at variance with the whole
course of policy which it has been the object of my dispatches to
yourself to prescribe, that I cannot pause to repel it in any formal
manner." On the 5th of April of the same year, he had written in reply
to a private dispatch of Sir John Colborne: "I quite concur with you
in thinking that the greatest benefit to the Church of England would
be derived from applying a portion of the [Clergy Reserves] funds at
least under the control of the Executive Government, in the building
of rectories and churches; and I would add, in preparing as far as may
be for profitable occupation, that moderate portion of land which you
propose to assign in each township or parish for increasing the future
comfort, if not the complete maintenance, of the rectors." This
dispatch appears to have been marked "private," when it was written;
but the seal of privacy was taken from it when it was published by
order of the House of Commons, some years after.

The reception which the dispatch of Lord Goderich met at the hands of
the Family Compact, shows better than almost any thing else the
lengths to which a Provincial faction, spoiled by a long course of
unchecked and irresponsible power, carried its insolence. The
Legislative Council, instead of placing it on their journals, took the
unusual course of returning it to the Governor. Mr. Mackenzie's
correspondence, to which the Colonial Secretary had taken so much
trouble to reply, they assured the Lieutenant Governor they viewed
"with the most unqualified contempt;" and the dispatch of Lord
Goderich, so far as it was a reply to that correspondence, they could
not "regard as calling for the serious attention of the Legislative
Council." This branch of the Legislature felt a presentiment of its
impending doom. Its equanimity was seriously disturbed by the question
of its being made elective having been raised. We can now look back
with perfect composure upon the party quarrels of those days; but it
is impossible for any impartial observer not to be struck with the
fact that the Tories of those times were the real revolutionists. A
Crown-nominated chamber, crowded with placemen and dependents upon the
government, pursued a course of conduct that caused a demand to be
made for an Elective Council; and to this circumstance we owe a
revolution in that branch of the Legislature. Whether that change will
eventually prove to be for evil or for good, it is impossible yet to
say.

The Legislative Assembly discussed, at great length, the question of
sending back this dispatch. Attorney General Boulton thought it ill
became the Colonial Secretary to "sit down and answer all this
rigmarole trash;" and that "it would much less become the House to
interfere with it," by giving it publicity. His whole speech was in a
characteristic tone of supreme contempt. Solicitor General Hagerman
objected to the printing of the papers.[98] Mr. Vankoughnet, though
belonging to the majority of the House, met such speakers as the
Attorney and the Solicitor General by their own arguments. "If," he
said, "you are opposed to Mr. Mackenzie, there can be no better mode,
if his papers [sent with the dispatch] contain such falsehood and
fallacy as it is pretended they do, to expose him than by publishing
them." The House, by a vote of twenty-one against twelve, resolved not
to allow the documents accompanying the dispatch, and on which it was
founded, to go upon the journals. A subsequent House gave such
portions of these documents as Mr. Mackenzie selected an enduring
record, in the famous _Seventh Report of the Committee on Grievances_.

[Footnote 98: After his reinstatement in office, from which his
dismissal will shortly be described, Mr. Hagerman found it necessary
to declare his concurrence in the principles laid down in this
dispatch. On the 5th of February, 1836, he voted for a resolution
pledging the House to "advance and maintain the principles of
government set forth in the dispatch," "of the Right Hon. the Earl of
Ripon (previously Lord Goderich) of the 8th of November, 1832."]

The newspaper advocates of the official party went a little beyond the
officials themselves. The principal of them[99] described the dispatch
of Lord Goderich as "an elegant piece of fiddle-faddle," "full of
clever stupidity and condescending impertinence."

But the end was not yet. The repeated expulsions of Mr. Mackenzie from
the Legislative Assembly, in which Crown officers had borne a
conspicuous and discreditable part, had attracted the attention of the
Imperial Government. The constitutional objections to the proceeding
had been brought before the attention of the Lieutenant Governor, for
the information of the Crown law officers. The objections which the
Colonial Secretary entertained to these expulsions were early
communicated to Sir John Colborne; and they were fully explained, in
the summer of 1832, to the Crown officers, Messrs. Hagerman and
Boulton, and to others "whose official situation placed them in a
confidential relation to the government."[100] The matter was first
brought before the attention of the Colonial office by Mr. Hume; and
the authorities sent instructions to Sir John Colborne to desire the
officials by whom he was surrounded not to be concerned in the
repetition of so objectionable a procedure. But notwithstanding this
warning, they remained contumacious. While absent, in England, Mr.
Mackenzie had again been expelled from the Legislative Assembly; and
the Attorney General, opposing his constitutional law to that of the
Imperial Government, argued for the legality of the course pursued by
the House. Both the Crown officers voted for a motion to return the
dispatch and accompanying documents, and found themselves in a
minority.

[Footnote 99: _The Courier_.]

[Footnote 100: Letter of General Rowan to Mr. Mackenzie, November 30,
1833.]

The Solicitor General, who had obtained an odious distinction for the
virulence of his language, in urging the previous expulsion of a
political opponent, had attempted to preserve his consistency by
inducing a majority of the Assembly to read Lord Goderich a lecture
for having, in his dispatch, noticed allegations that "rested on no
better testimony than that of an individual who had been twice
expelled this House, and who, in consequence of his having fabricated
and reiterated libels of the grossest description, had been declared
unfit and unworthy of a seat in the Assembly during the present
Parliament." Of what these "libels" consisted we have already seen.
The resolution of the House, that pretended to create an arbitrary
disability unknown to the law, was the production of the Solicitor
General, and to sustain his own act he found it necessary to undertake
to snub his superiors. The dismissal of Attorney General Boulton and
Solicitor General Hagerman,[101] resolved upon in March, 1833, was the
result of the discreditable part they had taken in the repeated
expulsion of Mr. Mackenzie from the Legislature, as well as for
having, upon other questions, opposed the policy of the Imperial
Government, and thus cast doubts upon the sincerity of its motives.
Mr. Mackenzie had described them to Lord Goderich as "the most active
men in the Province in their opposition to measures to which your
Lordship and the people are friendly;" and as being backed in the
Executive Council by their relatives, who, it was said, formed a
majority of its members. "Without some change of men," added Mr.
Mackenzie, "what are considered good measures cannot be carried into
effect. A Governor would stand alone if he was to declare himself of
your Lordship's opinion. All his legal advisers would be found his
uncompromising opponents;" for which inconvenience, one would suppose,
a remedy would be found in their dismissal. Mr. Mackenzie enumerated a
long list of questions, on which he assured Lord Goderich the Crown
officers had opposed the wishes of the King's government. Among them
were: A reform of the exclusive charter of King's College; the
monopoly by the Church of England of the Clergy Reserves; eligibility
of Quakers for election to the Legislature; the disfranchising of
British subjects for seven years after their return to Canada; the
indemnity of members of the Assembly representing town constituencies;
the expulsion, contrary to law, of a member of the Legislature, a
second time for the same offence; the independence of the judges; and
the naturalization of aliens.

[Footnote 101: The subjoined correspondence, which took place at York,
explains the cause of these dismissals:--

"GOVERNMENT HOUSE, _April_ 29, 1833.

"SIR:--I have the honor, by the direction of the Lieutenant Governor,
to transmit to you the accompanying copy of a dispatch from the
Secretary of State for the Colonies, in which His Excellency is
interested, to inform you and the Solicitor General, that His Majesty
regrets he can no longer avail himself of your services, and that you
are to be relieved from the duties of your respective offices.

I have, &c.,

"[Signed] WILLIAM ROWAN.

"Henry John Boulton, Esq., &c., &c., &c.

"No. 118. [COPY.]


"Downing Street, _March_ 6, 1833.

"SIR:--By the accounts I have lately received of the proceedings of
the Legislature of Upper Canada, I have learned that the Attorney and
Solicitor General of that Province have, in their places in the
Assembly, taken a part directly opposed to the avowed policy of His
Majesty's Government. As members of the Provincial Parliament, Mr.
Boulton and Mr. Hagerman are, of course, bound to act upon their own
view of what is most for the interest of their constituents, and of
the Colony at large; but if, upon questions of great political
importance, they unfortunately differ in opinion from His Majesty's
Government, it is obvious that they cannot continue to hold
confidential situations in His Majesty's service, without either
betraying their duty as members of the Legislature, or bringing the
sincerity of the Government into question, by their opposition to the
policy which His Majesty has been advised to pursue.

"His Majesty can have no wish that Mr. Boulton and Mr. Hagerman should
adopt the first of these alternatives; but, on the other hand, he
cannot allow the measures of his Government to be impeded by the
opposition of the Law Officers of the Crown. In order, therefore, that
these gentlemen may be at full liberty, as members of the Legislature,
to follow the dictates of their own judgment, I have received His
Majesty's commands to inform you that he regrets that be can no longer
avail himself of their services, and that from the time of your
receiving this dispatch, they are to be relieved from the duties
imposed upon them in their respective offices.

"You will transmit copies of this dispatch to Mr. Boulton and Mr.
Hagerman.

I have the honor, &c., &c.,

"[Signed] GODERICH.

"M. G. Sir John Colborne, K. C. B., &c., &c., &c.


"York, _April_ 29, 1833.

"SIR:--Under the circumstances in which I find myself suddenly placed,
without any previous intimation from His Majesty's Government, and
more especially in the absence of the Solicitor General, who is
equally affected by the measure with myself, I feel it due to him, as
well as to myself, and to our respective friends, to request, that His
Excellency will have the kindness to inform me for what breach of
public duty His Majesty has been advised to remove us from office?

I have the honor, &c.,

"[Signed] H. J. BOULTON.


"To Lieutenant Colonel Rowan,

"_Private Secretary to the Lieutenant Governor_."

"Government House, _April_ 29, 1833.

"SIR:--I have the honor to acquaint you in reply to your letter of
this day, that the Lieutenant Governor understands, that the part of
your political proceedings to which the dispatch of the Secretary of
State particularly adverts, is that you and the Solicitor General
promoted the repeated expulsion of a member of the Assembly, although
the constitutional objections to that course had been conveyed to His
Excellency by His Majesty's Government, and were, it is concluded,
communicated by him to you.

"I have the honor, &c., &c.,

"[Signed] WILLIAM ROWAN.

"To H. J. Boulton, Esq., &c., &c., &c."]

The removal of Messrs. Boulton and Hagerman was made before these
statements were reduced to writing. On the 7th of March, Mr. Mackenzie
had a long interview with Lord Howick, under-Secretary of State for
the Colonies, at the Colonial office; and it was at the request of
that official that he put his complaint against the Crown officers
into writing. Next day, March 8, they assumed the required form; and
on the 10th, he had another interview with Lord Goderich, when, in
reference to the Crown officers, the under-Secretary remarked: "They
are removed." But it appears, by the date of Lord Goderich's letter,
that their removal had been determined on four days before.

Mr. Jameson was appointed Attorney General, and Mr. Mackenzie said he
had good reasons for believing that Dr. Rolph, whom he recommended,
was made Solicitor General, but that Sir John Colborne and Chief
Justice Robinson prevented the appointment taking effect.

When the dispatch of Lord Goderich, ordering the removal of the Crown
Law officers, reached Upper Canada, Mr. Hagerman had started for
England, where, on the 6th of May, while going into the Colonial
office, he met Mr. Mackenzie coming out. Mr. Boulton was at York, but
soon followed. It is interesting to see how the official party, which
had long claimed a monopoly of loyalty, bore this reverse. An article
appeared in the _Upper Canada Courier_, attributed to the pen of the
deprived Attorney General, containing direct threats of rebellion. The
removal of these two functionaries was described as being "as high
handed and arbitrary a stretch of power as has been enacted before the
face of high heaven, in any of the four quarters of this nether world,
for many and many a long day." "The united factions of Mackenzie,
Goderich, and the Yankee Methodists" were spoken of in the most
contemptuous terms. The friends of Messrs. Boulton and Hagerman it was
confessed, "instead of dwelling with delight and confidence upon their
connection with the glorious empire of their sires, with a
determination to support that connection, as many of them have already
supported it, with their fortunes or their blood, their affections are
already more than half alienated from the government of that country;
and in the apprehension that the same insulting and degrading course
of policy towards them is likely to be continued, they already begin
to 'cast about' in 'their mind's eye,' for some new state of political
existence, which shall effectually put the colony beyond the reach of
injury and insult from any and every ignoramus whom the political
lottery of the day may chance to elevate to the chair of the Colonial
office." The Colonial Secretary, it was added, by his course of
liberality, had not only "alienated the affections" of the
Boulton-Hagerman school of politicians; but had "produced the feelings
of resentment, and views with regard to the future," which caused them
to look for "some new state of political existence."

When Mr. Mackenzie came into possession of Lord Goderich's dispatch,
he at once desired Mr. Hume to withdraw his intended petition to the
House of Commons; and he wrote to Canada, expressing a hope that no
more petitions would be sent to England; since the Imperial Government
had shown its anxiety to redress all the grievances that had been a
subject of complaint. The dismissal of the Crown officers completed
his satisfaction.

But affairs were soon to take another turn. Mr. Hagerman arrived in
England about the time the dispatch ordering his removal reached
Canada; and Mr. Boulton followed immediately on learning of his
dismissal. Mr. Stanley, who succeeded Lord Goderich as Secretary for
the Colonies, restored Mr. Hagerman to his official position, in the
June following; within three months after his dismissal. It was
afterwards officially stated that his restoration was the consequence
of exculpatory evidence offered by Mr. Hagerman. Mr. Boulton at the
same time obtained the office of Chief Justice of Newfoundland, where
he soon embroiled himself with a large and influential section of the
population. The Imperial Government, conceiving his usefulness to be
destroyed, relieved him of that charge also.[102] He besieged the
Colonial office for a pension or other compensation; but the Imperial
Government, not feeling that he was entitled to the one or the other,
turned a deaf ear to his demands. He never afterwards obtained any
position to wipe out the stain of that dismissal.

Mr. Mackenzie, recently overjoyed at the success he had met, in
obtaining the concessions contained in Lord Goderich's dispatch, and
the dismissal of law officers of the Crown in Upper Canada,[103] was
now plunged into despair by finding a portion of that success already
neutralized. He addressed to Mr. Stanley a memorial, the object of
which was to procure the cancelling of Mr. Hagerman's re-appointment.
It was of course not successful; and it may well be questioned whether
it was judicious to tell the Colonial Secretary that the
re-appointment "would be a spoke in the wheel of another violent
revolution in America." After recently expressing the greatest
confidence in the justice of the Imperial Government, he now bitterly
exclaimed: "I am disappointed. The prospect before us is indeed dark
and gloomy."

[Footnote 102: In the report of the Privy Council, deciding upon Mr.
Boulton's removal from the Chief Justiceship of Newfoundland, July 5,
1838, we find the members expressing regret "to be under the necessity
of reporting that we have found, in some of the transactions brought
under our consideration, so much of indiscretion in the conduct of the
Chief Justice, and that he has permitted himself so much to
participate in the strong feelings which appear unfortunately to have
influenced the different parties in the Colony, (although we do not
find that his judicial decisions have been affected thereby,) that we
feel it our duty to state that we think it will be inexpedient that he
should be continued in the office of Chief Justice of Newfoundland."]

[Footnote 103: On the 6th of May, he wrote: "Nothing can exceed the
willingness I have of late found on the part of the government here,
to do the people justice, in the North American Provinces."]

The restoration of Mr. Hagerman seems to have been due as much, if not
more, to the change that had taken place in the administration of the
Colonial office,[104] as to the exculpatory evidence he had offered.
Lord Goderich, so long as he retained the seals, continued to court
interviews with Mr. Mackenzie, and to solicit information from him on
the affairs of Canada. Thus on the 27th of March, 1833, Lord Howick
wrote him: "I am desired by his Lordship to acquaint you that he is
disposed to think that much advantage might be derived from a personal
communication from yourself and Mr. Viger, either to this place, the
Postmaster General, or the Secretary of the Post-office, on the
questions which have been agitated in Upper and Lower Canada,
respecting the Post-office, in those Provinces." If his known
intention to leave London, in a few days, would prevent a personal
interview, Mr. Mackenzie was requested to put any suggestions he might
have to make into writing. He thereupon drew up a scheme of
Post-office reform for the Province; supporting his recommendation by
a number of documents, including several reports on the subject by
committees of the Houses of Assembly, in Upper and Lower Canada. The
request for an interview, on the part of Lord Goderich, was repeated;
but when that gentleman was about resigning the administration of the
Colonial office, he directed that the whole matter be left over for
the determination of Mr. Stanley. The new Colonial minister decided to
send for Mr. Stayner, Deputy Postmaster General at Quebec, to hear his
explanation, before arriving at any conclusion; and Mr. Mackenzie left
London the day on which Mr. Stayner arrived there. The result of these
movements of Mr. Mackenzie was to bring out information regarding the
Post-office revenue, which had been persistently refused to the
demands of the House of Assembly. A return,[105] which Mr. Stayner was
requested to make for the information of the House of Commons, showed
him to be in possession of perquisites to several times the amount of
his salary. With allowances, his salary was 811 a year; and he
received in addition the whole of the postage of Colonial newspapers,
amounting to 1,508, and a further sum derived from postage on United
States papers, a percentage on United States letters, and other
perquisites not stated in the return, but estimated altogether by Mr.
Mackenzie--perhaps too highly--at 2,000.

[Footnote 104: "I am sorry to observe," wrote Mr. Hume to Mr.
Mackenzie, under date, 'Bryanston Square, June 24, 1833,' "by some of
the proceedings of Mr. Stanley, that he is rather disposed to promote
than to punish the men who have been removed from Upper Canada for
improper conduct, and thereby to encourage misgovernment on the part
of the public officers of that Province which Lord Goderich's late
proceedings were calculated to prevent." "Indeed," Mr. Hume added,
"the promotion of Mr. Boulton to a high judicial office in
Newfoundland, after the declaration of Lord Goderich of his conduct
and unfitness for office, I consider as an insult to the people of
Upper Canada, and to every lover of good government; and it may be
taken as an earnest that he will support the misgovernment which Lord
Goderich had set himself against." Lord Stanley consulted Earl Ripon
(previously Lord Goderich) on the appointment of Mr. Boulton to the
Chief Justiceship of Newfoundland; and the latter, though he had
dismissed him from the Attorney Generalship of Upper Canada, gave his
entire concurrence in the new appointment. "I am bound to add," says
Earl Ripon, in a letter to Mr. Boulton, dated August 20, 1835, "that
though the explanations which you gave on your return to England did
not, in my judgment, alter the facts upon which I had advised a change
in your situation, they did affect the inference which had been drawn
from those facts."]

[Footnote 105: This return formed a gauge of the circulation of the
Canadian journals; though of course the entire edition did not go by
mail. The amount of postage paid on the different papers in Canada, in
1830, was:

UPPER CANADA.--Christian Guardian (Sterling Money), 228; Colonial
Advocate, 57; Courier, 45; Watchman, 24; Upper Canada Gazette, 18;
Canadian Wesleyan, (commenced, 1831,) 18; Brockville Recorder, 16;
Hamilton Free Press, (commenced, 1831,) 11; Catholic, O; Patriot, 6;
Star, O; York Observer, 3; Kingston Chronicle, 10; Kingston Herald,
11; Brockville Gazette, 6; Niagara Gleaner, and the Herald
(together), 17; St. Catharines Journal, 6; Perth Examiner, 10.

LOWER CANADA.--Quebec Gazette (thrice a week), 66; Montreal Gazette
(thrice a week), 57; Montreal Herald (twice a week), and New Gazette
(weekly), 75; Montreal Vindicator (twice a week), 40; Montreal
Minerve (twice a week), 50; Official Quebec Gazette, 56; Canadian
Courant (twice a week), 46; Quebec Mercury (twice a week), 21.

Mr. Thomas Dalton, proprietor of the _Patriot_ newspaper, being
examined before the Grievance Committee of the House of Assembly, in
1835, stated that the official return of postage paid by him on that
journal, in 1829, 1830, and 1831, was not correct. The whole amount
given for the three years was 6; whereas the real amount paid was 70
or 80.]

In course of a long interview had with Mr. Stanley, at the Colonial
office, in the month of May, during half an hour of which an
archbishop was kept waiting, Mr. Mackenzie strongly urged the
necessity of giving the Canadians the control of the Post-office
revenue, as well as every other arising in the Province; as
mismanagement must lead to discontent and estrange the colonist from
the mother country. Mr. Stanley was "exceedingly kind and friendly;"
and when Mr. Mackenzie was going away asked if there were any other
matter about which he wished to speak; but he made no "admission that
he was favorable to a change of the system condemned."

As has been already stated, Mr. Mackenzie successfully invoked the
Royal veto against the bill, passed in his absence from the House
occasioned by his second expulsion, for increasing the capital stock
of the Bank of Upper Canada. This result was obtained after the
objections to the measure had been stated at length to Lord Goderich,
and much correspondence with the Board of Trade. Among other things,
the objections stated that the bank was in the habit of lending on the
security of landed property; that the act contained no provision for
winding up the affairs of the corporation, in case it became bankrupt;
that only one-tenth of the proposed additional stock of 100,000 was
required to be paid down, and that the act did not define what would
constitute a fraudulent failure. At the same time, and for similar
reasons, the Kingston Bank Act was disallowed.

It may strike the reader, at this time of day, as singular that an
agent and leader of a Colonial party, which claimed to be the
exponents of a liberal creed and the interpreters of popular opinion,
should be so ready to invoke the interference of the Imperial
Government, and the Royal veto, in the local affairs of the Province.
To a certain extent the seeming anomaly admits of explanation. On many
questions, the local Executive, acting through the Crown-nominated and
dependent Legislative Council, thwarted the wishes of the people's
representatives; and, under an irresponsible local administration,
there was no effective appeal possible but to the Imperial Government.
But, in some cases, interference against the decisions of the popular
branch of the Legislature was invoked. Appeals of this nature, unless
some plain and obvious principle were violated, could hardly be
justified.

The Rev. Egerton Ryerson, arriving in England while Mr. Mackenzie was
there, was through him introduced to the Colonial office. Mr. Ryerson
was delegated by the Canada Conference to submit a proposition for a
union between the body it represented and the English Methodists.
Without entering into the merits of the case, it will be sufficient to
say that the course pursued by Mr. Ryerson, while in England and after
his return to Canada, gave Mr. Mackenzie great offence, and he used
often, to the last years of his life, to express regret that he had
done any thing to secure Mr. Ryerson admittance to the Colonial
office, which, in spite of the access which Mr. Mackenzie obtained,
had for nearly eighteen months shut its doors in the face of Mr.
Viger, who went as the delegate of the Lower Canada Assembly. And Mr.
Baldwin, who afterwards visited London, was never able to obtain an
audience of the Colonial minister. Mr. Viger was in London long before
Mr. Mackenzie, whom he had vainly solicited to accompany him, offering
to bear the charge of his expenses.

Early in 1833, Mr. Mackenzie published in London, an octavo volume of
five hundred pages, under the title of _Sketches of Canada and the
United States_. It treated of a great variety of subjects, having no
necessary connection with one another, and little regard was paid to
method in the arrangement. The greater part of the book consisted of
notes taken by the author while travelling, at different times, in the
United States and Canada; and if this had been explained, the
intermingling of topics would not have appeared incongruous, as it did
under the arrangement adopted. Political topics were not forgotten;
and there was an agreeable seasoning of racy and remarkable
anecdotes. Illinois, we learn from this source, had a model Governor,
named Gilmer, whose salary was $500 a year; and who, uniting the
business of tavern-keeper to the position of chief magistrate, boarded
the members of the Legislature at the rate of $2 a week. A Brantford
clergyman marries a couple in a stable; and when the ceremony is over,
the bridegroom breaks the clergyman's table in revenge for the
indignity put upon him. Politics form the serious part of the book.
Any thing but an inviting picture is drawn of the irresponsible
government with which Canada was then blessed. "The government of
Upper Canada," we read, "is a despotism; a government legally existing
independent of the will of the governed. Responsibility to the people
from their rulers is in law," and practice too it might have been
added, "merely nominal." The book is gossiping, disjointed, pleasant
or censorious, according to the nature of the multiform subjects
treated.

Before returning to Canada, Mr. Mackenzie revisited his native
Scotland, in company with Mrs. Mackenzie, after making a tour of a
large part of England. When he arrived in his native city of Dundee,
he was struck with the changes that time had wrought. In a letter
dated "Dundee, April 15, 1833," he says:

"After a long absence from a country, one of the most striking changes
is that in the age of the people. I have been introduced to cousins I
left in the cradle, who are now grown men and women--some of them
married, some studying law, some at college, some clerks in banks,
some learning mechanical occupations, and others farming. Many
persons I knew as heedless youths are heads of large families, sober,
staid, and prudent. Not a few I knew in active life are now sunk into
the vale of years and helplessness. I have taken much pains to find
out some of my old school-fellows, but how altered they are! One of
the most active, spirited, intelligent youths I ever knew, is married,
has a large family, and toils in poverty as laborer on a farm!"

In the churches the same changes are visible:--

"In the two Sundays spent here and in Strathmore we have regularly
gone to the Kirk, sometimes to the Seceders, and sometimes to hear the
established clergy. The walls of the kirks, the seats, the pulpits,
many in the congregation I could remember from infancy, but the
ministers were, some of them, new to me. There were enough, however,
of old recollections to make these last visits to Scottish places of
worship deeply interesting."

The reference to last visits was prophetic. About two years before he
died, he earnestly desired to revisit Scotland, but was unable to
gratify that wish.

"Here," he says in another place, still speaking of Dundee, "I was
partly educated, and here I passed some of my happiest days--the days
of joyous youth unencumbered with care." This was the bright side of
the picture, for he had elsewhere said: "Poverty and adversity were my
nurses, and in youth were want and misery my familiar friends." But it
is in the nature of buoyant youth to enjoy gleams of happiness under
the most discouraging circumstances. "In the midst of our relations,
friends, and acquaintances of other years," he wrote from Dundee, "we
are passing the time very agreeably."

There was one thing in Dundee that he did not like--the misery of its
manufacturing population--and as his idea about large manufactories is
opposed to the idea now prevalent in Canada, it may as well be
given:--

"The number of mills for spinning flax into yarn in Dundee is now very
numerous. The smoke of their steam-engines darkens the face of the
heavens, and many a poor and miserable boy and girl eke out a wretched
existence by long and incessant toil in these ever-to-be detested
establishments--the graves of morality, and the parents of vice,
deformity, pauperism, and crime. Long may Canada be free of all such
pests! Let our domestic manufactures be those which our children can
easily carry on under the eyes and in the houses and homes of their
fathers and mothers."

While in Dundee Mr. Mackenzie made a settlement with such of his
creditors as he had been unable to pay, when he left Scotland for
Canada, in 1820, with their consent. Mr. Edward Lesslie, who was
perhaps his largest Scottish creditor, had long since emigrated to
Canada, where his claim, amounting to about 70, was paid.

Partly satisfied with his success, though somewhat discouraged by the
restoration of Solicitor General Hagerman to office, Mr. Mackenzie
left England for Canada. The impression created on his mind by the
latter act was that there was little reason to hope for a favorable
change in the administration of the government of Upper Canada. He
left London on the 25th of June, 1833, taking passage in the
_Jordeson_, and arrived at Quebec on the 18th August, accompanied by
Mrs. Mackenzie. Both in Quebec and Montreal he was pressed to accept
of public dinners, but in both cases he declined, excusing himself on
the ground of his long absence from Canada, and his desire to arrive
at York as soon as possible.

To the last years of his life, Mr. Mackenzie was proud of the reforms
which his journey to England was the means of effecting in the
government of Upper Canada; and he ever continued to cherish a
grateful remembrance of the aid rendered him by Mr. Ellice, Mr. Hume,
and others, from whom he received assistance in the execution of his
mission. Considering that he went to England in no official capacity;
that he was probably opposed in the private communications of the
military Governor; that attempts had been made by his enemies to
disgrace him by thrice expelling him from the Legislative Assembly, it
must be confessed that the success which he achieved was greater than
that of any other man who ever went from Canada, in a non-official
capacity, on a similar errand.

Of this journey, the people's agent was left to bear the greater part
of the expense. The actual disbursements were 676, of which he
received 150. The balance remained unpaid all his life, and the
country he had served with such disinterested devotion allowed him to
go down to the grave in poverty. He despised the means by which many
of his cotemporaries sought to obtain wealth, and held of greater
value than stores of gold and silver a reputation unsullied by any
stain of corruption.




CHAPTER XVII.

     Mr. Mackenzie's Third Expulsion from the Legislative
     Assembly--Is re-elected by Acclamation--Refusal of the
     Commissioners to administer the usual Oath--The House
     pretends that the Unanimous Election is no
     Election--Refuses to receive the Member Elect--Another
     Election by Acclamation--A Large Crowd of Electors
     accompany Mackenzie to the House--Excitement in the
     crowded Galleries--The House cleared of
     Strangers--Mackenzie Forcibly Ejected, while waiting to
     be Sworn in--A Stalwart Highlander
     interposes--Mackenzie declared Expelled, without being
     permitted to take the Oath as a Member--The Attorney
     General decides that the Oath must be Administered--The
     Commissioners apologize for not Administering it--Mr.
     Hume's "Baneful Domination" Letter--Produces great
     Excitement--The Oath taken--Mackenzie walks into the
     House and takes his Seat--Is Forcibly Ejected by the
     Sergeant-at-arms--Hissing in the Galleries--The House
     refuse to issue a Writ for a New Election--Mr. Stanley
     on the Constitutionality of one Branch of the
     Legislature pretending to create a Disability--Review
     of the Expulsions--The Proceedings Expunged from the
     Journals of the House--Mr. McNab votes for the Erasure.


It has already been stated that Mr. Mackenzie was expelled, for the
third time, from the House of Assembly, while he was absent in
England. Some detail of this proceeding, which was clearly
unconstitutional, must now be given. The third session of the eleventh
Provincial Parliament, of Upper Canada, commenced on the 31st October,
1833. On the 2d November, Mr. McNab, without waiting till the
Governor's speech was answered, having found a seconder in Mr. J. S.
Boulton, whom Mr. Mackenzie had offended by giving him in the list of
pages of the Legislative Council, moved that the entries in the
journals relative to the previous expulsion be read. Solicitor General
Hagerman, who was then in possession of the constitutional objections
urged by the Imperial Government against these proceedings, contended
that though the county of York could elect whom they pleased, the
House had the right, by a simple resolution, to determine the
eligibility of whomsoever they might send; and thus, in fact, to
create a disability not sanctioned by law. Very little argument was
required to convince the majority that this monstrous stretch of
privilege was equally proper and expedient. The resolution having been
carried, on a division of fifteen against eight, all that remained to
be done was to prove or assert the identity of the William Lyon
Mackenzie, elected for York, with the William Lyon Mackenzie
previously expelled by the House, and to declare him ineligible to sit
or vote in the House. Mr. McNab and his faithful seconder thought it
sufficient to assert the fact and the disability. They moved a second
resolution to this effect.[106] Mr. Boulton assured the House that the
fact was "notorious, and constituted a sufficient reason for the
proposed re-expulsion." The second resolution having been carried, on
the same division as the first, the third expulsion was decreed, for
no other reason than that there had been two others--a ground which
Mr. McNab himself afterwards admitted to be untenable.[107]

[Footnote 106: The resolution read: "That William Lyon Mackenzie,
Esq., returned to serve in this Assembly as Knight Representative for
the county of York, is the same William Lyon Mackenzie mentioned in
the said entries, and twice expelled this House, and declared unworthy
and unfit to hold a seat therein, during the present Parliament; that
by reason thereof the said William Lyon Mackenzie cannot sit or vote
in this House as a member thereof." For which voted: Messrs. Attorney
General, (Boulton,) G. S. Boulton, Burwell, Chisholm, D. Frazer,
Jarvis, McNab, Mount, Piney, Samson, Shade, Solicitor General
Hagerman, Werden, J. Willson, W. Wilson. Against it voted: Messrs.
Bidwell, Buell, Howard, Ketchum, McCall, Norton, Perry, Shaver.]

[Footnote 107: When the question of expunging these proceedings from
the Journals came before the House, on the 16th February, 1835, Mr.
McNab admitted his error, and voted for the motion. "He was willing to
admit," he said, "that the last words which went on to say that Mr.
Mackenzie was expelled by reason of a former resolution were wrong,
and we had no right to expel him on account of a former expulsion."
Mr. McLean, in noticing this remark, "saw nothing in it which should
influence the minds of honorable gentlemen."]

Already the question of visiting the county of York with partial
disfranchisement, for its persistence in sending back a member whom
the House had repeatedly expelled, was raised. Mr. Samson, who had
taken so prominent a part in the first expulsion, expressed the
opinion, that no writ for a new election ought to issue, till an act
should be passed to divide the county. But the Attorney General, not
wholly unmindful of the admonition of the Imperial Government,
hesitated to go to this length. Still he argued that it would be the
duty of the Returning Officer to refuse any votes that might be
offered for Mr. Mackenzie.[108] Mr. Perry attempted to obtain from the
House a reconsideration of the expulsion, on the ground that it had
been affirmed when a large number of the members were absent; but his
proposition was supported by only ten votes, in a House of twenty-nine
members.

[Footnote 108: He said, "he would endeavor to show, that the causes of
the disqualification of Wilkes and Mackenzie were the same. They were
both expelled for insults against the House of which they had been
constituted members--the difference being in their punishment, not
their crime. Wilkes being declared for ever unfit to become a
candidate for the seat, the other only for the present Parliament.
Unless a candidate be ineligible, he cannot be prevented from sitting
in that House; but being ineligible, it is the duty of the Returning
Officer to refuse his votes and not receive any for him. He justified
the proceedings of the House in this case, on the grounds of custom
and expediency, and would run the risk of any abuse of such precedent,
whether the case should happen on the side which he espoused or on the
other."]

In the absence of Mr. Mackenzie, his friends brought his claims before
the electors. The electors considered their privileges invaded; and so
strong was the feeling that no one ventured to come forward and
declare himself the candidate of the official party. Mr. Mackenzie was
therefore unanimously re-elected.

The Returning Officer had not acted upon the hint of the Attorney
General, and assumed that Mr. Mackenzie was incapable of being
elected. There was no opportunity of refusing votes, for the election
took place by acclamation; but if the Attorney General was right in
assuming that any votes given to Mr. Mackenzie would be thrown away,
he was incapable of being returned by acclamation, because he would
have been incapable of election; and, on this view of the matter, the
Returning Officer should have reported that no election had taken
place. Mr. Fitzgibbon refused to administer to the member elect the
usual oaths. This time there was to be no expulsion. The matter had
assumed a new shape. It was contended that there had been no election.
Mr. Bidwell brought the question to a vote. He moved, in substance,
that Mr. Mackenzie had been duly elected for the county of York; that
he was under no legal disability, and was by the law and constitution
a member of the House; and that, upon taking the oath, which the law
made it the duty of the commissioner to administer, he would have a
right to sit and vote in the House. The motion was rejected on a vote
of eighteen against seven.[109] The effect of this vote was to punish
and disfranchise the county of York for having presumed to elect a
candidate who was under no legal disability. Mr. McNab admitted Mr.
Mackenzie's eligibility for election; but contended that, though the
county of York might elect, the House had the right to refuse to
receive the member elected. Mr. McNab had taken up an impossible
position. He had voted that Mr. Mackenzie was incapable of holding a
seat in the House during that Parliament; though he held that the
electors had a right to elect him. When it was notorious that they
would elect nobody else, the resolution of the House not to receive
him could only keep up a perpetual contest, the practical effect of
which was to disfranchise the county. Mr. Perry asked the House to
affirm a principle, which is now held by the best authorities to
embody sound constitutional law: that the House had no right without
the concurrence of the other branches of the government, to
disfranchise any elector, or to disqualify any person from being
elected, when such elector or person elected is under no legal
disability; but he was able to command only thirteen votes in a House
of thirty-two members. On a vote of eighteen against fifteen, the
House then repeated its resolution, that Mr. Mackenzie should not be
permitted to take a seat or vote as a member during the session; after
which, a motion ordering a writ for a new election was carried by a
bare majority of one; the minority being of opinion that Mr.
Mackenzie, having been duly elected, was qualified to serve, and that
in reality there was no vacancy.

[Footnote 109: The division was: Yeas--Messrs. Bidwell, Campbell,
Duncombe, Hornor, Howard, Ketchum, Shaver. Nays--Berczy, Boulton,
Burwell, Chisholm, Elliott, A. Frazer, D. Frazer, Jarvis, Jones,
McNab, McNeilledge, Morris, Robinson, Shade, Thompson, Werden, John
Willson, W. Wilson.]

Mr. Mackenzie went back to his constituents on the 16th of December,
1833, and was once more re-elected without opposition. It deserves to
be noticed that, in his address to the electors, he declared "the
grand defect in the Colonial Constitution" to be "the want of
responsible government." The election being over, a series of
resolutions were put to the meeting and carried unanimously. Among
other things, they called for an inquiry into the conduct of
Lieutenant Governor Sir John Colborne, whom it charged with
interfering with the constitutional rights of the people. The
intention of a large body of the electors to accompany Mr. Mackenzie
to the House of Assembly, at York, being known, he entreated them to
abstain from any acts of violence. They reached the House of Assembly
soon after midday. The galleries were soon filled; some were admitted
below the bar, and others remained in the lobbies, for want of room
inside. The result was awaited with great anxiety by the large body of
electors, who were becoming indignant at being defrauded of the
franchise, by the repeated expulsion of one of their members from the
House, or the refusal of the majority to receive him. Mr. Perry rose
to present a petition against a repetition of the proceedings by which
the county of York had been deprived of half its legal representation.
Several members spoke against receiving it. Mr. McNab, in opposing
its reception, was hissed from the gallery. It was now proposed to
clear the gallery of the crowd of strangers with which it was packed;
and when the operation had been partially completed, the
Sergeant-at-arms went up to Mr. Mackenzie, who was waiting below the
bar to be sworn in, and ordered him to leave. He replied that, as had
been stated by Mr. Perry, he had been unanimously elected by the
county of York; and that the writ had been returned to the Clerk of
the Crown in Chancery, who was present in the House. If leave were
given, he would prove that he had a right there. The
Sergeant-at-arms--Mr. McNab, father of the member--then seized him by
the collar, in a violent manner, saying, while he dragged him towards
the door, "You shall go out." A brawny Highlander, one of the four or
five who still remained with Mr. Mackenzie, interposed either with a
blow at the officer of the House, or held him back. As soon as the
door was opened, the crowd, who had descended from the gallery to the
lobby, rushed forward; but before they could get in, the door was
bolted and barricaded with benches, members and officers pressing
towards the door to prevent it being forced. The galleries, which had
only been partially cleared, were the scene of great confusion. The
excitement was extreme, and the business of the House was brought to a
stand. Many of the members were in a state of violent agitation.
Several of them went out, and harangued the people. The question of
sending to prison the stalwart Highlander, who had interfered with the
Sergeant-at-arms, was raised; but a bystander remarked that "he feared
it would be no easy matter to find the jail, on such an errand." That
official now returned to Mr. Mackenzie, asking him to give proof of
his election. This having been done, the officer of the House informed
the Speaker, from whom he received orders to clear the space below the
bar of strangers, that Mr. Mackenzie claimed to remain as a member.
The Speaker urged the commissioners to refuse to administer the oaths,
and afterwards decided that Mr. Mackenzie was a stranger because he
had not taken them. Mr. McNab (the member) said that to allow Mr.
Mackenzie to remain below the bar would be a proof of pusillanimity in
the House, in issuing an order which they had not the courage to
enforce. Mr. Burwell said the scene recalled the tumult of the French
National Convention. It was not till after a long debate, that the
Speaker decided that Mr. Mackenzie was a stranger, and not entitled to
remain below the bar.

The hissing that took place in the gallery was unjustifiable; it could
but tend to put a stop to deliberation. Such a procedure is almost
invariably the precursor of a revolutionary movement. But let us
apportion the degree of censure due to the various parties. The
electors of York had been defrauded of their elective rights, by the
proceedings of the House, some of which were clearly unconstitutional.
The endurance of the electors was well nigh exhausted; and while we
cannot justify their interference with the deliberations of the House,
by expressing their disapprobation in hisses, we must take into
account the repeated provocations they had received. The conduct of
the majority was revolutionary.

This will be a memorable day in Canada. There were among the electors
some who argued that, if their member was forcibly ejected from the
House, they too would be justified in resorting to force in defence of
their violated rights. They had, they said to one another, some old
rusty muskets which they might furbish up for future use, if this sort
of thing was to be continued.

Next day, Mr. Morris, seconded by Mr. Donald Fraser, moved that Mr.
Mackenzie having libelled the House on the 14th of December,
1831--more than two years before--and made no reparation, a previous
resolution declaring him unworthy of a seat therein ought to be
adhered to; to which Mr. McNab added, by way of amendment, "and
therefore the said William Lyon Mackenzie, again elected and returned
to represent the county of York in this present Parliament, is hereby
expelled."[110] The resolution, as amended, was carried by a very
narrow majority, the vote being twenty-two against eighteen. How a
person, who was not a member, and who was not permitted to take the
oaths or his seat, or even to be heard in his defence, could be
expelled, is an enigma which it would have puzzled the actors in the
affair to explain.

[Footnote 110: Here is the official record: "Mr. Morris, seconded by
Mr. Donald Fraser, moves that it be _Resolved_, That this House on the
14th day of December, 1831, in consequence of a false and scandalous
libel published against a majority of its members by William Lyon
Mackenzie, Esq., one of the members then representing the county of
York, of which he avowed himself the author and publisher, was induced
to expel him, the said William Lyon Mackenzie, from this House; that
notwithstanding the gross and scandalous nature of the said libel,
this House, in the hope that the said William Lyon Mackenzie would
abstain from a continuance of the offensive conduct for which he had
been expelled, permitted him to take his seat on the 3rd day of
January following as a member for the county of York, after being
re-elected; that, in this hope, so important to the deliberate
transaction of public business, so essential to the respectability of
the Legislature and peace of the country, a few days' experience
convinced this House there was so little reason to rely, that on the
7th day of the same month of January it was by a large majority again
deemed necessary to expel the said William Lyon Mackenzie for a
repetition and aggravated reiteration of the aforesaid false and
scandalous libel; and in doing so, this House, in order to support the
dignity which ought to belong to a Legislative body, considered it
just and proper to declare the said William Lyon Mackenzie unfit and
unworthy to hold a seat in this House during the continuance of the
present Parliament; that as the said William Lyon Mackenzie has never
made reparation to this House for the gross injuries he has attempted
to inflict on its character and proceedings, there is no reason to
depart from the Resolution of the said 7th day of January, 1832. Mr.
McNab, seconded by Mr. Robinson (brother to the Chief Justice), moves
in amendment, That the following words be added to the original
resolution, 'and therefore he, the said William Lyon Mackenzie, again
elected and returned to represent the county of York in this present
Parliament, is hereby expelled.' Several motions to adjourn the debate
were negatived, the House refusing to give Mr. Ketchum an opportunity
to reserve his objections till the following day, although it was then
near eleven o'clock at night. The House then divided, and Mr. Morris's
resolution, with McNab's amendment, was adopted by the following vote:

"YEAS--Messrs. Berczy, Boulton, Brown, Burwell, Chisholm, Crooks,
Elliott, Fraser, A., Fraser, R. D., Jarvis, Jones, McNab, McNeilledge,
Merrit, Morris, Robinson, Samson, Thomson, Vankoughnet, Werden,
Willson, J., and Wilson, W.--22.

"NAYS--Messrs. Bidwell, Buell, Campbell, Clark, Cook, Duncombe,
Fraser, D., Hornor, Howard, Ketchum, Lyon, McDonald, A., Norton,
Perry, Randal, Roblin, Shaver and White--18."]

On the evening of the 17th December, Mr. Mackenzie addressed a
communication to the Lieutenant Governor, stating what had occurred,
and requesting to be permitted to take the oath before His Excellency,
according to a provision of the constitutional Act; or that some other
prompt and immediate relief might be afforded to him and his
constituents. The question was referred to Attorney General Jameson,
who reported that Mr. Mackenzie was entitled to take the oath, and
that no person commissioned by the Governor had a right to refuse,
since his office was ministerial and not judicial. The Governor
therefore directed Mr. Beikie, Clerk of the Executive Council, to
administer the oath. Mr. Mackenzie did not go before the commissioner,
Mr. Beikie, for this purpose till the 11th February; feeling no doubt
that, as the House had declared him expelled, he would not be allowed
to take his seat. He finally made the trial at the urgent request of
his friends. But we must here pause to notice some events, and their
consequence, that occurred in the interval.

The majority of the House were more than half afraid of the possible
consequence of their own act. They were disturbed by a rumor that the
Governor was in possession of instructions that would compel him to
remonstrate with the House; and unless they changed their course, to
resort to a dissolution. But the Governor was completely under the
control of his irresponsible advisers. He firmly believed that the
official party was the sole depositary of loyalty in the Province; and
that the opposition, whose only object had been the reform of abuses,
wished to deprive England of her remaining American possessions. The
course he pursued tended to the realization of his fears, unfounded as
they were when first entertained. In reply to representations made to
him at a personal interview, by Messrs. Mackenzie, Mackintosh,
Ketchum, and Shepard, the Lieutenant Governor, through Mr. Secretary
Rowan, under date, December 27, 1833, recommended "that Mr. Mackenzie
may offer to make the reparation which the House, by their late
resolution seem to expect from him." A piece of advice that was very
unlikely to be taken. From the position taken by the Imperial
Government, Sir John Colborne felt it necessary to say, that on these
questions of privilege, the House had decided "uninfluenced by the
Executive Government;" an assurance the value of which could best be
determined by an observation of the course taken by such of the
irresponsible advisers of the Governor as had seats in the House. In
their interview with Sir John Colborne, Mr. Mackenzie and the three
gentlemen who accompanied him, had complained of the refusal of Mr. S.
P. Jarvis and Mr. Joseph Fitzgibbon, commissioners appointed to
administer the oaths to members of the Assembly; and along with Mr.
Secretary Rowan's letter their apology was sent. Mr. Jarvis pretended
that he was at first prevented from reporting Mr. Mackenzie's return,
by the question of order that arose; and that when he did so, "the
Speaker declined leaving the chair till the question of order had
terminated;" that he "did not leave the House till a few minutes
before six o'clock," and that no second application was made to him on
the subject. Mr. Mackenzie had been forcibly ejected from below the
bar, in the meantime. Fitzgibbon said he would have administered the
oath, if he had been asked, before the expulsion took place.

Petitions breathing defiance began to reach the Lieutenant Governor.
"Loyal as the inhabitants of this country unquestionably are," said a
petition from Whitby, "your petitioners will not disguise from your
Excellency, that they consider longer endurance under their present
oppressions, neither a virtue nor a duty. For though all mankind admit
the claims of good government to the respect and support of the
governed, yet very different considerations are due to that which is
regardless of public interests, wars with public inclinations and
feelings, and only aids or connives at oppression." From Newmarket
came a petition praying the House, since they would not allow the
member so often elected to sit, in its wisdom to "nominate four fit,
proper, competent and discreet persons,[111] to represent the county
of York, who may be elected, pursuant to your choice, next general
election." When Mr. Ketchum discovered that this petition was a
burlesque upon the House, he withdrew it. The Governor's reply to the
deputation, already noticed, was criticized in petitions presented to
him; the electors complained that laws were passed without their
consent, and a dissolution of the Legislature was prayed for. A town
meeting, in King, refused to appoint an assessor and collector of
taxes, on the ground that they had no right to pay taxes, when the
Assembly robbed them of half their representation.

Mr. Hume, removed from the influence of local feelings and prejudices,
wrote from London to Mr. Mackenzie, giving his opinion that the events
of the 16th and 17th of December--Mr. Mackenzie's unanimous
re-election and his forcible ejection and re-expulsion--would hasten
the crisis that would terminate in the independence of Canada.[112]
But he was smarting under a sense of injury, in consequence of some
attack made upon him by the Rev. Egerton Ryerson; and his letter is at
once intemperate and indiscreet.[113] In speaking of the "baneful
domination" of the mother country as a thing for Canada to rid itself
of as soon as possible, he failed to make the proper distinction
between the Colonial Oligarchy and the Imperial Government; though the
latter, with every desire to do justice, upheld a false system, and
was not unfrequently misled by the prejudiced and interested
statements of the knot of permanent and irresponsible officials by
whom the Lieutenant Governor was surrounded.

[Footnote 111: An act had been passed dividing the county of York into
four Ridings, each of which was, at the next general election, to send
a member.]

[Footnote 112: This letter is dated "Bryanston Square, 29th of March,
1834," and contains some very strong language, "Your triumphant
election," Mr. Hume says, "on the 16th, and ejection from the Assembly
on the 17th, must hasten the crisis which is fast approaching in the
affairs of Canada, and which will terminate in independence and
freedom from the baneful domination of the mother country, and the
tyrannical conduct of a small and despicable faction in the colony."
"I confidently trust," he added, "that the high-minded people of
Canada will not, in these days, be overawed or cheated of their rights
and liberties by such men as Mr. Stanley and the Colonial compact.
Your cause is _their_ cause; your defeat would be _their_ subjugation.
Go on, therefore, I beseech you, and success--glorious success--must
crown your joint efforts." The subject of this letter was brought up
in the City Council of Toronto, (late York,) when Dr. Morrison moved
an amendment to a resolution proposed by Alderman Dennison: "That Mr.
Hume justly regards such conduct [the repeated expulsions of Mr.
Mackenzie from the House] on the part of the Legislature, countenanced
as it was by the Crown officers, and other Executive functionaries in
the Assembly, and unredressed by the Royal prerogative, as evidence of
baneful and tyrannical domination, in which conduct it is both painful
and injurious to find the Provincial officials systematically upheld
by the minister at home against the people." Mr. Hume accepted this as
the true explanation of his views. Proceeding to another topic, Mr.
Hume said: "I have lately seen, with mingled feelings of pity and
contempt, the attacks made by Mr. [Rev. Egerton] Ryerson against my
public and private conduct." "I never," he said, "knew a more
worthless hypocrite or so base a man as Mr. Ryerson has proved himself
to be. I feel pity for him, for the sake of our common nature, to
think that such human depravity should exist in an enlightened
society; and I fear the pangs of a guilty and self-condemning
conscience must make his venal and corrupt breast a second hell, and
ere long render his existence truly miserable." Mr. Hume must have
been severely stung by the attacks made upon him or he could not have
brought himself to employ such terms of censure as these. Mr. Hume
felt the more hurt because he said he had paid a great deal of
attention to Mr. Ryerson when the latter was in England; regarding him
as the "representative of a good cause and a distant people," who were
much in need of some influence being exerted in their favor in London.
After this letter had been made a subject of discussion in the City
Council, Mr. Hume wrote another letter to Mr. Mackenzie, bearing date
14th of June, 1834, in which he says of the oligarchical system that
then existed in Upper Canada: "To submit quietly to such domination
would be an acknowledgment of servitude of the most odious nature, as
unworthy of the people of Canada, as disgraceful and injurious to
Great Britain." Congratulating Mr. Mackenzie on his election as first
Mayor of Toronto, he said: "It is cheering to see the five times
rejected by the selfish faction, elected the first Justice of the
Peace by the people, and placed in the post of authority and honor."]

[Footnote 113: The language at which Mr. Hume took offence stated
that he had "no influence as a religious man; has never been known to
promote any religious measure, or object, as such, and has opposed
every measure for the better observance of the Sabbath, and even
introduced a motion to defeat the bill for the abolition of Colonial
slavery."]

The Methodist Conference, probably moved by Mr. Hume's attack on Mr.
Ryerson, on the 20th of June, 1834, while in session at Kingston,
unanimously adopted an address to Sir John Colborne, in which they
"disclaim, with strong feelings of indignation, the recent avowal of
revolutionary principles and purposes."[114]

[Footnote 114: This address was signed by Gordon Grindrod, President,
and James Richardson, Secretary. In September, 1831, Lieutenant
Governor Maitland had replied in the most offensive terms to an
address of this same body of Methodists. He told them that their
preachers, whether from the United States or any other foreign
country, would, "_while they act honestly_, and respect British
institutions," enjoy the same protection as other Americans who had
sought an asylum in the country. "But," he added, "you will readily
admit, that the sober-minded of the Province are disgusted with the
accounts of the disgraceful dissensions of the Episcopal Methodist
Church and its separatists, recriminating memorials, and the warfare
of one church upon another." With regard to the system of public
education, of which the Methodists had complained, Sir John told them
that it "would not be abandoned to suit the limited views of leaders
of societies, who perhaps have neither experience nor judgment to
appreciate the value or advantages of a liberal education."]

The Colonial oligarchs, and their supporters in the Assembly, were
just as ready to complain of the domination exercised by Downing
Street over the local affairs of the Province as Mr. Hume himself,
when their interests were interfered with. The disallowance of the
bank charter acts, to which reference had already been made, almost
created a rebellion among the Tories of Upper Canada. In March, 1834,
the House of Assembly passed an address to the King, protesting, in
the most energetic terms, against the exercise of the Royal veto[115]
in this case; laying down the general principle that, in all local
affairs, the Provincial Legislature ought to be supreme. To have
extorted assent to such a declaration from a section of the
Tories,[116] was no small gain. There seems to be no question that
they did not comprehend the full force of a declaration that was to
make the Legislature supreme in local matters. The truth is, the
popular branch of the Legislature was a complete nullity. It had no
control over the Executive Council; and the second Chamber constantly
interposed between the representatives of the people and the Family
Compact of officials, to whose recommendations its members owed their
Legislative position. The Tories in the House went the length of
complaining of the interference of the ministry, in England, with its
resolves, on the ground that it was not responsible to that Chamber;
though they steadfastly supported a local ministry that could, at any
time, set the Assembly at defiance, with impunity. Without intending
it, the upholders of the oligarchy proved the necessity of having a
responsible government in the Province.

[Footnote 115: The following, which contains the substance of the
address, will sufficiently show its spirit:--"We, Your Majesty's most
dutiful and loyal subjects, the Commons House of Assembly of Upper
Canada in Provincial Parliament assembled, in full assurance of Your
Majesty's earnest desire to promote the welfare of your people, beg
leave humbly to address ourselves to Your Majesty upon a matter of the
deepest interest to your faithful subjects in this Province. * * * We
humbly represent, that, although the disallowance of these acts may
appear to be authorized by the letter of the statute of the British
Parliament, * * * yet it is contrary to its spirit and meaning, and to
the principles of a free government. We believe that this provision
was made to remedy the evil which might be occasioned by the Royal
assent being given in the Colony to a Provincial Act that should be
found incompatible with the rights and interests of other portions of
the Empire, but we cannot think it was intended to give a power of
interference with our internal affairs. Against such an interference
we respectfully, but plainly and solemnly protest, as inconsistent
with those sacred constitutional principles which are essential to a
free government; since it is manifest, that if Your Majesty's
ministers, at a distance of more than four thousand miles, and not at
all controllable by, or accountable to, Your Majesty's subjects here,
and possessing necessarily a slight and imperfect knowledge of the
circumstances of this country, the wants, and habits, and feelings of
the inhabitants, and the mode of transacting business among us, can
dictate a different course, in relation to measures affecting
ourselves only, from that which the people by their representatives,
and with the concurrence of the other branches of the Provincial
Legislature, have chosen, we are reduced to a state of mere dependence
upon the will and pleasure of a ministry that are irresponsible to us,
and beyond the reach and operation of the public opinion of the
Province; and no one can rely upon our Provincial laws, although they
may be constitutionally and deliberately formed, but the most unhappy
uncertainty and want of confidence will prevail and extend their
disastrous influence over all our business transactions. We
respectfully claim the same right, in behalf of Your Majesty's
subjects in this Province, to be consulted in the making of laws for
their peace, welfare, and good government, which our fellow subjects
in Great Britain enjoy, in respect to laws to which their obedience is
required; and although, from the necessity of the case, power must be
granted to the Head of the Empire of preventing Colonial laws being
adopted and enforced which are incompatible with treaties between Your
Majesty's Government and foreign States, or with the just rights of
any other of Your Majesty's Colonies; yet, with these exceptions, we
humbly submit that no laws ought to be, or rightfully can be, dictated
to, or imposed upon, the people of this Province, to which they do not
freely give their consent, through the constitutional medium of
representatives chosen by and accountable to themselves. The force of
our humble and dutiful remonstrance against the principle of an
interference of Your Majesty's ministers with our internal affairs, we
are not willing to diminish, by insisting upon the inconveniences and
evils likely to follow from the exercise of power which, &c. * * *

"We, therefore, respectfully and humbly pray that Your Majesty, taking
these matters into your favorable consideration, will be graciously
pleased not to disallow these Provincial Acts, and not to permit Your
Majesty's ministers to interfere with our internal affairs; but to
leave the same entirely to the discretion and control of the
Legislature of this Province."]

[Footnote 116: In a House of thirty members, six voted against that
part of the Address given in the previous note, five of whom were
Tories. It was moved by Mr. Bidwell, and seconded by Mr. Perry, in the
shape of an amendment to another address that had been proposed. Nine
Tories voted for the amendment; and thus affirmed principles mainly
sound in themselves, but with which the whole practice of their lives
was in contradiction.]

The House, as we have seen, passed a resolution expelling Mr.
Mackenzie, on the 17th of December, 1833. On the 11th of February, no
new writ had been issued for a new election; and Mr. Mackenzie, at the
request of his friends, went before the Clerk of the Executive Council
and took the oath prescribed for members of the Legislature. The Clerk
acted on the authority of the Governor's instructions, backed by the
opinion of Attorney General Jameson. At three o'clock on the same day,
Mr. Mackenzie walked into the House of Assembly, and took his seat
among the members. The House was in Committee of the whole, Mr. Donald
Macdonald in the Chair. He had not been long there when he received a
visit from Mr. McNab, Sergeant-at-arms, who informed him that he was a
stranger, and must retire. Mr. Mackenzie replied that he was a member
of the House, legally elected and duly sworn; and he produced an
attested copy of the oath. He was, he said, charged with no offence or
irregularity that could disqualify him for sitting and voting. Before
going to the House, he had given public notice that he should not
leave his seat unless violence were used; and he now told the
Sergeant-at-arms that, if he interfered, it would be at his peril.
This officer replied that he must use force. Mr. Mackenzie was three
times forcibly taken from his seat; and when he appealed to the
Speaker for protection, that functionary replied that it was not
possible for the Sergeant-at-arms to have mistaken his duty. Mr.
McNab, the member, said he was ready to vote to send Mr. Mackenzie to
jail. Mr. Merritt, in a passion, said he ought to be put out of the
House, and two men stationed at the door to prevent his return. A
resolution in favor of his taking his seat was lost on a vote of
twenty-one against fifteen. Mr. McNab attacked the Lieutenant Governor
for having instructed the Clerk of the Executive Council to administer
the oath to Mr. Mackenzie; saying he "had interfered very improperly,
and in a manner no way creditable to himself; and that he might find,
like the Vicar of Bray, by taking both sides of the question, he might
fall through between." Mr. W. Robinson said Mr. Mackenzie would not
have gone to the House, if he had not had the Governor's sanction in
his pocket; and that the conduct of the head of the government was
entirely unjustifiable.

While these proceedings were going on, there was a dense crowd in the
gallery, whose general conduct was orderly and decorous; Mr. Mackenzie
having previously cautioned them to remain "quiet and passive
spectators." Once there was a hiss from the gallery. It was in
response to a remark of Mr. Robinson that Mr. Mackenzie ought to be
punished with imprisonment and without being heard in his defence. In
giving his reasons for again making an attempt to take his seat, Mr.
Mackenzie says he did so because he believed it to be his duty. In
reference to the threats of imprisonment, he said: "I greatly desire
personal liberty; but the fear of a prison, or of poverty, or of
danger to life or limb, will not, I trust, make a coward of me in a
good cause."

A few days after these arbitrary proceedings, on the part of the
majority of the House, had taken place, Mr. Duncombe made a motion
which was intended to bring about a new election for the county of
York, by a side wind. Mr. Mackenzie's friends did not admit that his
seat was legally vacant; and therefore they could not vote for the
issuing of a writ for a new election. Mr. Duncombe's resolution
instructed the Speaker to take the necessary steps to have any vacancy
in the House forthwith supplied; but it was rejected, as was also a
motion proposed by Mr. McNab for issuing a writ for the election of a
member for York, in the place of Mr. Mackenzie expelled.[117]

[Footnote 117: The vote for the issue of a writ for a new election
would have been to assume that the expulsion had been legal, and had
created a vacancy. A case in point occurred about this time, in Lower
Canada. The Lower Canada House of Assembly had assumed to disqualify
Mr. Mondelet by resolution, on the occasion of his having taken
office. The Governor-in-Chief, Lord Aylmer, refused to affix his name
to a new writ for the election of a member for the county of Montreal,
in the place of Mr. Mondelet. Mr. Stanley in a dispatch, communicated
to the House on the 13th of January, 1834, expresses his entire
approval of the conduct of the Governor. In that dispatch, the
Colonial Secretary said the House of Commons, by their knowledge of
the British constitution, and of what was due to the privileges of the
other branch of the Legislature, had been preserved "from the fatal
error of arrogating to themselves the monstrous right of giving to
their resolutions the force of law." He added that the House of
Commons "neither possesses, nor has ever claimed to possess, any
right, authority, or power without the consent of the Crown and the
House of Peers, to make laws relating either to the qualification or
disqualification of electors or candidates, or rather to effect their
object by resolutions only." And should the Speaker be called upon, in
the exercise of his ministerial capacity, to issue a warrant for a new
election, "in consequence of a member being unseated by an illegal
resolution, the duty would devolve upon the Lord Chancellor to take
notice of the cause of vacancy, as recited in the warrant, and on the
ground of illegality to refuse to affix the great seal to the new
writ."]

To have ordered a new election would only have been to prepare the way
for a fresh outrage in the shape of another expulsion. One result of
these various proceedings against Mr. Mackenzie, was to deprive the
county of York of one of its two members, during the term of nearly a
whole Parliament.

Though some of the actors in this drama are still living, we are
sufficiently removed from the time in which the events occurred, to be
able to take a view of them unclouded by passion or prejudice. The
recital of the facts will often create a feeling of honest
indignation; but this feeling will be quite as strong in the mind of
the reader fifty years hence. A brief review of the whole proceedings
will give the best idea of the spirit in which they were conducted. At
first, an attempt was made to expel the obnoxious member, because he
had, at his own cost, distributed copies of the Journals of the House,
without note or comment, unaccompanied by the appendix. A majority was
ashamed to act upon so flimsy a pretext; but one object was gained:
Mr. Mackenzie did not again tender for the printing of the Journals,
and the work was a godsend to the partisans of the government. Next, a
pretended libel, published in a newspaper, was made a ground of
expulsion, and acted upon. Neither of the articles complained of was
half so severe as articles that are now daily published without
exciting attention. Then a new libel was discovered, and made the
cause of a second expulsion. This time the House stretched the power
of privilege to the monstrous extent of creating a disqualification
unknown to the law. The third time, the House contented itself with
giving force to this declared disability. Next time, a unanimous
re-election was declared to be no election at all; though the
Returning Officer had returned Mr. Mackenzie as duly elected, and no
candidate had appeared to oppose him. The fifth time, he was declared
expelled, though not allowed by the House to take the oaths or his
seat; and the same majority that now expelled him had declared, a
short time before, that he was not and could not be elected; they
having assumed that he was incapable of being elected during that
Parliament. This last time he was, at first, forcibly ejected from the
space below the bar, on a motion to clear the House of strangers;
because not having taken the oaths, which the Speaker urged the
commissioners not to administer, he must be treated as a stranger; and
then, after he had taken the oath, before a commissioner, instructed
by the Lieutenant Governor, on the advice of the Attorney General, to
administer it, he was again forcibly dragged from his seat by the
Sergeant-at-arms, condemned to silence under the outrage, and
threatened with imprisonment. The frequency and the facility with
which the majority shifted their ground, showed that all they wanted
was a colorable pretext for carrying out a foregone conclusion, to rid
themselves of the presence of an opponent who gave them so much
trouble.

As in the case of Wilkes, who was expelled from the House of Commons,
the whole of the proceedings relating to these expulsions, were
expunged from the Journals of the Assembly; being declared subversive
of the rights of the whole body of electors of Upper Canada.[118] This
was done in the first session of the next Provincial Parliament, on
the 16th of July, 1835. Mr. McNab voted to expunge his own
resolutions, and frankly admitted that the House was wrong in
grounding its third expulsion on the fact of the second. He had copied
the formula of the resolution, on that occasion, from one framed for
the case of Mr. Christie, from the Journals of the Lower Canada
Assembly. Among Mr. Mackenzie's notes I find a statement that Mr.
Hagerman confessed, on this occasion, that he had, from the first,
thought the whole of these expulsions inexpedient; but that, having
been overruled by those with whom he acted, he had publicly supported
them. But I find nothing of the kind in Mr. Hagerman's published
speech. He did not defend the expulsions, it is true; he declared he
would not stoop to inquire whether this act was right or wrong; it was
sufficient for him that the House had done it. He objected to one
Assembly, acting judicially, reversing the decision of a previous
Assembly. From first to last, the proceedings against Mr. Mackenzie
were conceived in a party spirit, and carried by party votes. No worse
description or condemnation of them could be given; seeing that they
were in their nature judicial.

[Footnote 118: Here is the resolution: "Mr. Mackenzie, seconded by Mr.
McIntosh, moves, That it be resolved, that all the declarations,
orders, and resolutions of this House, respecting the several
elections of William Lyon Mackenzie, Esq., into Parliament for the
county of York, as void elections, and the incapacity of William Lyon
Mackenzie, Esq., to serve in the said Parliament, and for his
expulsions therefrom, and disqualification by the mere force of a
former vote or votes of expulsion, as also all orders, declarations,
and resolutions, denying that the elections of William Lyon Mackenzie,
Esq., were good, true, and valid, or affirming that the House having
expelled and declared him unfit and unworthy to take a seat therein
during the said Parliament, and that being convinced of the propriety
of such expulsion and declaration, would not allow him to sit and
vote, be expunged from the Journals of this House, as being subversive
of the rights of the whole body of electors of this Province. Which
was carried on a vote of twenty-eight against seven."

Mr. Mackenzie was not the first member of the Upper Canada Assembly
who had been expelled for breach of privilege consisting of alleged
libel. On the 4th of March, 1817, Mr. Durand, member for Wentworth,
was declared guilty of a false, scandalous, and malicious libel, and
ordered to be sent to the York jail during the session. Having placed
himself out of the reach of the officer of that House; and for this
"high contempt" of the authority of the House, and "flagrant breach"
of its privileges, he was expelled. The libel arose out of an
irregular suspension of the _Habeas Corpus_ Act, by Sir Gordon
Drummond, administrator of the Government of Upper Canada, during the
latter part of the war of 1812. This act had been suspended during the
former part of the war; and the House having refused to renew the
suspension, Sir Gordon Drummond took it upon himself to declare the
suspension by proclamation. In a newspaper called the _St. David's
Spectator_, Mr. Durand alleged that great atrocities had been
committed both by the regular troops and the militia, at the time when
the administrator of the government assumed the exercise of a disputed
power. The Assembly, in 1815, asked Sir Gordon Drummond for any papers
he might have explaining the act; when he replied, in a style too much
in fashion in those days among persons having authority in Colonial
governments: "All measures of that nature were adopted by me, as
commanding His Majesty's forces, and resulted from the exercise of my
discretion." Mr. Durand's libel on the House appears to have consisted
of a statement of the alleged condition of things in the House, when
the renewal of the _Habeas Corpus_ suspension was proposed. "The House
at this time," he said, "seemed agitated by prospects before them
according to their various feelings--the tide of temptation, at this
crisis, ran high--the terrors of the bill were on one hand, good
contracts were on the other; and of course the man who opposed the
President's will was for ever shut out."]




CHAPTER XVIII.

     York changed to Toronto--Was it the Site of the Indian
     Toronto?--Mr. Mackenzie elected First Mayor of the
     City--Mayor and Corporation borrow 1000 for Municipal
     Purposes on their Individual Responsibility--3d. in the
     1 considered a monstrously oppressive Tax--Public
     Meeting called by the Mayor to justify the 3_d._
     Tax--Is adjourned and a Frightful Accident occurs by
     the giving way of a Balcony--The Cholera of 1834--How
     the Mayor braved Disease and Death--Is attacked with
     Cholera--Formation of the Canadian Alliance
     Society--Loss of his Infant Son--Resolution to abandon
     the Press--Mackenzie as a Journalist.


On the 6th March, 1834, the town of York had its limits extended, and
it was erected into an incorporated city, under the name of
Toronto.[119] On the 15th March, a proclamation was issued calling an
election of Aldermen and Common Councilmen, for the 27th of that
month. The Reformers in the new city were opposed to the act of
incorporation on the ground of expense, because the assessment law was
deemed objectionable, and Mr. Mackenzie expressed the opinion that it
would not work well. The Reformers resolved, however, to profit by the
circumstance, and having carried the elections, they selected Mr.
Mackenzie for Mayor: the first Mayor not only of Toronto but in the
Province. The event was looked upon as possessing some political
significance, for Toronto was the seat of government and the
head-quarters of the Family Compact. And, as the sequel proved, it was
prophetic of the result of the next Parliamentary election in the
city.

[Footnote 119: Toronto is an Indian name, but that the Indians gave
that name to the place now called Toronto is more than doubtful. All
the evidence I have seen is against the supposition. Upon the early
French maps the present site of Toronto was designated Teiaigon or
Teiaiagon. In a _Carte du Canada ou de la Nouvelle France_, by Del
Isle, of the French Academy of Sciences, and first Geographer of the
King, published at Paris, in 1803, it is called Teiaiagon. In the
_Carte Generale du Canada_, of Baron Lahonton, in his _Nouveau Voyage
dans L'Amerique Septentrionale_, written at different times from 1683
to 1692, and published at the Hague, Penetanguishine Bay [mouth of the
Severn] is set down as _Baye de Toronto_; and in another work,
_Memoires de L'Amerique Septentrionale_, the same traveller says of
Lake Huron: "On voit au nord-est de cette Rivire la Baye de Toronto
qui a vingt ou vingt cinq lieues de longneur et quinze d'ouverture, il
se dcharge une Rivire que sort du petit lac du mme nom, [Lake
Simcoe,] formant plusieurs cataractes impracticables, tout en
descendant qu' en montant. De sa source on peut aller dans le lac de
Frontenac [Ontario] en faisant un portage jusqu'a la Rivire de
Tonaouat [the Don at the present city of Toronto] que s'y dcharge.
Vous pouvez remarquer au ct Meridional de la Baye de Toronto le Fort
suppos, dont je vous a fait mention dans ma vingt troisime lettre."
The English pronunciation of the name of the Don River at Toronto
would be something like _Tonawatah_, from which Toronto could not have
come as a corruption. Nor is it necessary to resort to any such
hypothesis, since Toronto is certainly an Indian name. It is clear
enough, from all the evidence, that the site of the city of Toronto
was not known to the Indians by that name, but that there were a Bay,
a Lake, and a River to the north called Toronto.]

Mr. Mackenzie gave his time gratuitously to the interests of the city;
and discharged the duties of Mayor with the same vigor that he carried
into every thing he undertook. Every thing had to be done. The whole
frame-work of municipal government had to be constructed and set in
motion. There was not a side-walk in the city; and those of planks
were introduced by the first corporation. The city finances were in a
condition that much increased the difficulty of the task. The value of
all the rateable property in the city was only 121,519; and there
was a debt of 9,240, contracted on account of the market buildings,
on which the interest was 550 a year. In anticipation of the taxes,
it was necessary to borrow 1,000. The Bank of Upper Canada refused to
advance the money; its president, the late Dr. Widmer, having
unsuccessfully opposed Mr. Mackenzie in the ward election for
Alderman. The advertisements of the bank were, at the same time,
withdrawn from The _Colonial Advocate_. Application was next made to
Truscotte of the Farmers' Bank. He asked what security would be given.
The city charter was liable to be vetoed in England; and in this state
of uncertainty personal security became necessary. The Mayor and other
members of the corporation signed the note. To meet the demands on the
city treasury, it was necessary to levy a rate of 3d. on the pound.
This was regarded as a monstrous piece of fiscal oppression; almost
sufficient to justify a small rebellion.[120] Fifteen times as much is
now paid without a murmur. To such an extent was the public
dissatisfaction carried at what was considered the exorbitant taxes,
that the Mayor found it necessary to call a public meeting, to make an
explanation.[121] This was felt to be the more necessary because a
small meeting, composed chiefly of officials and their immediate
friends and dependents, had already passed a censure upon the Mayor
for having, as a journalist, published Mr. Hume's celebrated "baneful
domination" letter. The meeting, called by the Mayor, took place on
the 29th of July. After Mr. Mackenzie had explained, at some length,
the necessity for the three penny tax, Mr. Sheriff Jarvis interrupted,
saying it was his intention to move a censure on the conduct of the
Mayor. There were some two thousand persons present; and as the
majority were the friends of the Mayor, he met this menace by a
resolution pledging the citizens not to support, at the next
Parliamentary election, a candidate whose position as an office-holder
made him dependent on the government. The Sheriff felt the force of
the retort; and showing signs of impatience by taking out his watch,
his friends in the crowd raised a storm of disapprobation, intended to
drown the voice of the Mayor. The confusion of voices, on both sides,
rendered it impossible for any one to obtain a further hearing; and
the meeting was adjourned till next day. The meeting had commenced at
six o'clock in the evening; and on the morning of the second day, the
opponents of the Mayor issued placards calling the adjourned meeting
at three o'clock in the afternoon--an hour at which it would be very
inconvenient for the mechanics and business men to attend. The Mayor,
regarding this as a breach of faith, forbade the city bellman to cry
the meeting for that hour, and resolved not to attend it himself. The
market in which the meeting was held, was a parallelogram; and over
the butchers' stalls was a balcony to accommodate spectators. While
the Sheriff was addressing the meeting he said: "I care no more for
Mackenzie than"--here he looked up and saw a crow flying over--"that
crow," he added. This was deemed a great oratorical stroke, and it
elicited a cheer. The crowd above, in stamping their feet, broke down
the balcony; and in the descent some were impaled on the butchers'
hooks, others broke their limbs or received some other injury. Seven
or eight died of the injuries they received, and others were crippled
for life.

[Footnote 120: "There was," Mr. Mackenzie said, "a wonderful outcry
raised in Toronto that the inequality of the taxes, and the
burthensome extent to which they had been laid upon the citizens, were
the acts of the corporation, and still more especially the doings of
the Mayor. This unfounded statement induced many persons, not only to
manifest an unwillingness to pay, but also to urge others to withhold
payment, and gave the collectors a great deal of trouble; while some
of the members of the council were daily met by complaints, to each of
whom a long detail of facts had to be gone into, the whole appearing
interminable."]

[Footnote 121: At this meeting, the Mayor proceeded to explain the
system of assessments; the nature of the loan made for roads; the
1,000 assessed from the citizens to be expended by the district
magistrates: the legacy of 400l. of city debt left by the justices,
and of 9,400 more for the market building; the "dreadful and
unbearable" condition of the streets; the complaints of the prisoners
in jail; the presentment of the grand jury, and the absolute refusal
of the justices to co-operate with the city council for a remedy; the
expenses likely to be incurred in case the cholera were to spread, and
the licence moneys withheld by government.]

The arms of the city of Toronto, with the motto "Industry,
Intelligence, Integrity," were designed by Mr. Mackenzie.

During the term of Mr. Mackenzie's mayoralty, the cholera revisited
the city, and swept away every twentieth inhabitant. During the whole
of the time that it raged, the Mayor was at the post of duty and of
danger. He sought out the helpless victims of the disease, and
administered to their wants. He was constant in his attendance on the
cholera hospital. In the height of the panic, occasioned by this
terrible disease, when nobody else could be induced to take the
cholera patients to the hospital, he visited the abodes of the
victims, and placing them in the cholera cart, with whatever
assistance he could get from the families of the plague-stricken,
drove them to the hospital. On some days he made several visits of
this kind to the pest-house. Day and night he gave himself no rest. At
length worn out by fatigue, the disease, from which he had done so
much to save others, overtook himself. The attack was not of an
aggravated nature; and he was fortunate in obtaining the timely
assistance of Dr. Widmer; for medical men were difficult to be
obtained, and many persons without medical education or experience
practised on the unfortunate sufferers.

The Mayor was assiduous in his attention at the Police Court, where he
constantly sat to decide the cases that came up. He was frequently
accompanied by Alderman Lesslie. At the Mayor's court, too, he
presided. Here he had the assistance of juries. His magisterial
decisions generally gave satisfaction; but he was much censured for
putting into the stocks an abandoned creature, who had frequently been
sent to jail without any beneficial effect, and who was, on this
occasion, excessively abusive to the Mayor. But this species of
punishment was not new. The stocks had till then formed a regular
means of punishment. The error belonged to the times quite as much as
to the individual. A little before that time, no criminal was allowed
to have a counsel for his defence; and when this privilege was
accorded, the Chief Justice expressed his doubts of the wisdom of the
change. Mr. Bidwell, one day, made an eloquent speech in behalf of a
negro charged with theft; and the Chief Justice thought the dangerous
influence of such appeals was the best proof that could be given of
the doubtful character of the new privilege accorded to persons
accused of crime.

In the beginning of the year, before Toronto was incorporated, Mr.
Mackenzie had been elected Town Warden, and, by a strange perversity
of accidents, Church Warden also, Presbyterian as he was. Before the
close of his mayoralty, he issued a circular, stating his
determination to decline to come forward again for the City Council;
but when his friends complained that he had no right to desert the
Reform cause, he, at the eleventh hour, permitted his name to be used
by the parties who had insisted on nominating him for re-election. The
Reformers--for the election was made a party question--were defeated;
Mr. Mackenzie being put out on a national cry raised by the friends of
Mr. (afterwards Judge) Sullivan, the second Mayor of Toronto. The
grounds of this cry consisted of a judicial investigation, arising out
of an unpleasant occurrence at the dinner of the St. Patrick's
Society, in which the Mayor unnecessarily, Mr. Sullivan contended,
required the evidence of certain ladies.

On the 5th January, 1835, he received the unanimous thanks of a public
meeting, "for the faithful discharge of his arduous duties during the
period of his office."

While Mayor of Toronto, Mr. Mackenzie was elected to the Assembly by
the Second Riding of York, this being the first election since the
division of the county into four Ridings. His opponent, Mr. Edward
Thomson, obtained one hundred and seventy eight votes against three
hundred and thirty-four. The general election took place in October,
1834; and in addition to the personal success of Mr. Mackenzie, the
party with whom he acted secured a majority in the new House. Mr.
Bidwell was elected Speaker, for the second time.

On the 9th December, 1834, the "Canadian Alliance Society" was formed
at York. Mr. James Lesslie was President, and Mr. Mackenzie
Corresponding Secretary. In the declaration of objects, formed upon
resolutions drawn up and submitted by Mr. Mackenzie, for the
attainment of which the society was formed, there were eighteen
subjects of legislation, twelve of which have been acted upon.[122] In
most cases these questions have been disposed of in the way
recommended by the Alliance, and in others the deviation therefrom is
more or less marked. The objects of the Society were denounced by the
partisans of the government as revolutionary. Their tendency was
certainly democratic; and the carrying out of many of the objects of
the Alliance shows how far we have advanced in that direction. In
making the Legislative Council elective, we have declared the
impossibility of realizing Pitt's idea of building up a Colonial
aristocracy. By the abolition of the laws of primogeniture, we have
taken away the only foundation on which a landed aristocracy could
rest. And, in severing the connection of Church and State, we have
placed all denominations on a common level. But we have stopped short
of the aims of the Alliance. We have not set up a written
constitution, "embodying and declaring the original principles of
government," nor applied the ballot to the election of Justices of the
Peace. We do not select such officers by popular election at all,
except as an incident of municipal dignity. For the time, the tide of
democracy has been arrested by the civil war in the neighboring
Republic; and we may possibly remain at the point of democratic
advancement at which we have arrived.

[Footnote 122: These are: Responsible Government; Abolition of the
Crown-nominated Legislative Council; A more equal Taxation of
Property; Abolition of the law of Primogeniture; Disunion of Church
and State; Secularization of the Clergy Reserves; Provision for the
gradual liquidation of the Public Debt; Discontinuance of undue
interference of the Colonial Office in the local affairs of the
Province; Cheap Postage; Amendment of the Libel Law; Amendment of Jury
Laws; The Control of all the Provincial Revenue to be in the
Representatives of the people. The other objects sought for, but which
did not recommend themselves to the public reason, were: The
prevention of a Legislative Union of Upper and Lower Canada, a Written
Constitution, and the Ballot. The abolition of all licensed
monopolies, and of all monopolizing land companies, is not
accomplished; some may question how far our law system has been
simplified and cheapened: two objects of the Alliance, in the latter
of which much progress has been made. "To lessen the taxation on
labor," and "increase the security of property," are such general
propositions that different persons would dispute as to how far they
had been carried into effect. The Alliance was to exercise the duties
of a political vigilance committee, by watching the proceedings of the
Legislature, and enforcing economy and retrenchment. The members were
also to devote themselves to the political education of the people, by
the "diffusion of sound political information by pamphlets and
tracts." And they were to look beyond Upper Canada by "entering into
close alliance with any similar association that may be formed in
Lower Canada or the other colonies."]

On his return from England, Mr. Mackenzie had announced his intention
of giving up the publication of a newspaper. The death of his infant,
Joseph Hume Mackenzie, occurring on the 26th of October, 1833, had
deeply affected him, and had much to do in bringing him to this
determination. He seems to have acted on the impulse of grief; for two
days after that on which the child died, this announcement was made.
He would issue one or two irregular papers, and then stop the
publication. He had commenced when Reform was less fashionable; and
now there were other liberal journals, so that his own could be better
spared. But the few fugitive sheets counted up to forty-eight, from
October 28, when the announcement was made, to November 4, 1834, when
the last number of _The Colonial Advocate_ was published.

When he commenced the arduous, and in those days perilous, task of a
Reform journalist, Mr. Mackenzie had no enemies among the official
party. Setting out with Whig principles, he was driven by the course
of events into the advocacy of Radical Reform. "I entered," he says,
"the lists of opposition to the Executive, because I believed the
system of government to be wretchedly bad, and was uninfluenced by any
private feeling, or ill-will, or anger towards any human being
whatever." He threw away much of the profits of his business by
circulating, at his own expense, an immense number of political
documents, intended to bring about an amelioration of the wretched
system of government then in existence. "Gain," he truly says, "was
with me a matter of comparatively small moment; nor do I regret my
determination to risk all in the cause of Reform; I would do it
again." He did afterwards risk all on the issue of Revolution, and
lost the game. He had, he thought, in 1834, done with the Press for
ever. The _Advocate_ was incorporated with the _Correspondent_, a
paper published by Dr. O'Grady, a Roman Catholic priest, who was at
loggerheads with his bishop, under the name of the _Correspondent and
Advocate_; and Mr. Mackenzie expressed a wish that no one would
withhold subscriptions from any other paper, on the expectation that
he would ever again connect himself with the Press.

This will be a convenient place to make an estimate of the subject of
this biography as a journalist. His writings show an uneven temper;
but taking them in the mass, and considering the abuses he had to
assail, and the virulence of opposition he met--foul slanders,
personal abuse, and even attempted assassination--we have reason to be
surprised with the moderation of his tone. In mere personal invective
he never dealt. He built all his opposition on hard facts, collected
with industry, and subject to the usual amount of error in the
narration. Latterly, he had entirely abandoned the practice of
replying to the abusive tirades of business competitors or political
opponents.

"I part company," he said, "with the corps editorial in the best
possible humor." With papers that pursued him with abuse, he ceased to
hold any communication; refusing either to read or receive them. He
borrowed this metaphor to show how he might have failed to come up to
his original intentions: "We begin to cross a strong river, with our
eyes and our resolution fixed on the point of the opposite shore on
which we propose to land; but gradually giving way to the torrent, we
are glad by the aid perhaps of branch and bush to extricate ourselves
at some distant and perhaps dangerous landing place, much farther down
the stream than that on which we had fixed our intentions." He
generally wrote in the first person; and his productions sometimes
took the shape of letters to important political personages. His
articles were of every possible length, from the terse, compact
paragraph to a full newspaper page. On whatever objects exerted, his
industry was untiring; and the unceasing labors of the pen, consuming
nights as well as days, prematurely wore out a naturally durable
frame. Though possessed of a rich fund of humor, his work was too
earnest and too serious to admit of his drawing largely upon it as a
journalist. Of Robt. Randal, when his constituents had given him a new
suit of clothes, he said: "He now moves among us literally clothed
from head to foot with the approbation of his constituents." He
sometimes kept note of time by printing at the head of his labors:
"Midnight Selections and Reflections (half asleep)." Whatever he did,
he did with an honest intention; and though freedom from errors cannot
be claimed for him, it may truly be said that his very faults were the
results of generous impulses, acted upon with insufficient reflection.




CHAPTER XIX.

     Meeting of the new House--Discussion of Mr. Hume's
     "Baneful Domination" Letter--Solicitor General Hagerman
     charged with threatening Physical Force Resistance--The
     Grievance Committee--Epitome and Analysis of its
     Contents--Read by the King--Meeting of the Legislature
     delayed till a Reply to Grievance Report could be
     sent--Total Dependence of the Local Government on
     Downing Street proscribed--Mr. Mackenzie appointed
     Director of the Welland Canal--The Disclosures he
     makes--Career of Mr. Hincks--Mackenzie visits Papineau
     and the other Popular Leaders of Lower Canada--Letter
     to Mr. Hume.


The new House met on the 15th of July, 1835. On the first vote--that
on the Speakership--the government was left in a minority of
four.[123] The Solicitor General branded Mr. Bidwell as a disloyal
man, who "wished to overturn the government and institutions of the
country." Mr. Mackenzie thought it necessary to acquit Mr. Bidwell of
the charge of being a member of the Canadian Alliance Society.

[Footnote 123: The vote was thirty-one against twenty-seven.]

The taunt of the Solicitor General was not forgotten when the
Lieutenant Governor's speech came up to be answered. The resolutions
on which the Address was founded were moved by Mr. Perry, a member of
the opposition. The letters of Mr. Hume to Mr. Mackenzie had been
denounced by the official party as rank treason. Referring to this
circumstance, the Address in reply to the Lieutenant Governor's
speech expressed satisfaction that "His Majesty has received, through
your Excellency, from the people of this Province, fresh proofs of
their devoted loyalty and of their sincere and earnest desire to
maintain and perpetuate the connection with the great Empire of which
they form so important a part;" proofs which would "serve to correct
any misrepresentations intended to impress His Majesty with the belief
that those who desire the reform of many public abuses in the Province
are not well affected towards His Majesty's person and government." It
also deprecated the spirit in which honest differences of opinion had
been treated by persons in office, who, on that account, had impeached
the loyalty, integrity, and patriotism of their opponents, as
calculated "to alienate the affections of His Majesty's loyal people
and render them dissatisfied with the administration." "But," the
Address concluded, "should the government be administered agreeably to
the intent, meaning, and spirit of our glorious constitution, the just
wishes and constitutional rights of the people duly respected, the
honors and patronage of His Majesty indiscriminately bestowed on
persons of worth and talent, who enjoy the confidence of the people,
without regard to their political or religious opinions, and your
Excellency's councils filled with moderate, wise, and discreet
individuals, who are understood to respect, and to be influenced by,
the public voice; we have not the slightest apprehension but the
connection between this Province and the Parent State may long
continue to exist, and be a blessing mutually advantageous to both."

A majority of the House--the vote was twenty-nine against
twenty-four--rejected an amendment indirectly censuring Mr. Hume's
"baneful domination" letter; on which the Solicitor General remarked
that the majority avoided the opportunity of "condemning treasonable
sentiments." "If," he added in allusion to Mr. Hume's letter, "there
be an honorable member of this House who is bound to identify himself
with treason; who will stand up and sustain him[124] who says you are
to keep in continual view the revolution of the United States and its
results; and that a crisis is fast approaching in the affairs of
Canada which will terminate in its independence from the baneful
domination of the mother country, I would pronounce such a man to be
deeply disloyal indeed." At the same time, Mr. Hagerman found it
necessary to defend himself from an insinuation that he was the author
of a declaration which, on behalf of the Tories, had threatened to
look out for a new state of political existence.

During this debate, Mr. Mackenzie sat silent; though it was against
him, as the correspondent of Mr. Hume, that the thunder of the
Solicitor General was launched. But the aim, not being direct, left
nothing to be parried.

[Footnote 124: Mr. Hume.]

But the matter was not to rest here. On a future day--January
30th--Mr. Gowan brought up the question of Mr. Hume's letter, but
without naming it. Having no love for the Family Compact, he included
in his resolution of censure the "public declaration of Christopher
Alexander Hagerman, Esq., His Majesty's Solicitor General for Upper
Canada, that he would resist, by physical force, a law passed by the
constituted authorities of the land, and upon, the especial
recommendation of the King's Government." The Solicitor General's
explanation was that he had said he would not pay a capitation tax on
emigrants--though it was very clear he could not be asked, since he
was not an immigrant--but would rather be sent to prison. Mr.
Mackenzie saw that "this proceeding was intended as a shot at him over
the head of Mr. Hume;" as the publisher of the letter, the resolution
must affect him even more than the writer. "Mr. Hume had said the
affairs of the Canadas were coming to a crisis; and had he not the
best authority for saying so? The Governor-in-chief had said, in one
of his dispatches, that Lower Canada was fast going into a state of
confusion." "As for himself," Mr. Mackenzie added, "his loyalty was
not suspected either in this country or in England."

In the early part of the session, (January 26,) Mr. Mackenzie moved
for and obtained the since celebrated Select Committee on Grievances,
whose report, Lord Glenelg stated, was carefully examined by the King,
was replied to at great length by the Colonial minister, and was taken
by Sir Francis Bond Head--so he said--for his guide, but was certainly
not followed by him. As we approach the threshold of an armed
insurrection, it is necessary to obtain from those engaged in it their
view of the grievances which existed. For this purpose an analysis of
the famous Seventh Report of the Committee on Grievances will be
necessary.

Soon after, in addressing the Assembly, Mr. Mackenzie said:--"I would
impress upon the House the importance of two things: the necessity of
getting control of the revenue raised in this country, and a control
over the men sent out here to govern us, by placing them under the
direction of responsible advisers." The House, about the same time,
addressed the Lieutenant Governor for information "in respect to the
powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Executive Council; how far
that body is responsible for the acts of the Executive Government, and
how far the Lieutenant Governor is authorized by His Majesty to act
with or against their advice." The Lieutenant Governor replied that
the Executive Council had no powers but such as were conferred on them
by "the express provisions of British or Colonial statutes," about
which the House knows as much as he knew. However, he condescended to
proceed to particulars. "It was necessary," he said, "that they should
concur with the Lieutenant Governor, in deciding upon applications for
lands, and making regulations relative to the Crown Lands Department."
And as if there was a peculiar necessity for contradicting his first
statement, he said these duties were additional to those imposed by
statute. "It was, also," His Excellency proceeded to state, "the duty
of the Executive Council to afford their advice to the Lieutenant
Governor upon all public matters referred to them for their
consideration." He himself, as well as his council, was responsible to
the Imperial Government and removable at the pleasure of the King.
Where by statute the concurrence of the Executive Council was
required to any act of the government it could not be dispensed with,
and in such case the Executive Council must share the responsibility
of the particular act. But the Lieutenant Governor claimed the right
to exercise "his judgment in regard to demanding the assistance and
advice of the Executive Council, except he is confined to a certain
course by the instructions of His Majesty."

The Lieutenant Governor fairly expressed the official view of
ministerial responsibility, as was afterwards shown by Sir Francis
Bond Head's instructions, on his appointment to the Lieutenant
Governorship of Upper Canada.

In order to understand what were, at this time, the subjects of
complaint by the popular party in Upper Canada, the contents of the
Grievance Report must be examined. And to discover the spirit in which
these complaints were met in England, the reply of Lord Glenelg, then
Secretary of State for the Colonies, must be consulted. We are not
entitled to pass over, as of no interest, these complaints which
proved to be the seeds of insurrection, and the prompt response to
which would have prevented the catastrophe that followed, in less than
three years after.

To the Select Committee on Grievances was referred a number of
documents, including the celebrated dispatch of Lord Goderich, and the
accompanying documents, written by Mr. Mackenzie while in England; the
answer of the Lieutenant Governor in reply to an address of the House
of Assembly for information regarding the dismissal of the Crown
officers, the re-appointment of one of them, and the selection of Mr.
Jameson as Attorney General; together with petitions, vice-regal
messages, and other documents. The committee examined witnesses as
well as documents, and their Report, with documents and evidence,
makes a thick octavo volume.

"The almost unlimited extent of the patronage of the Crown, or rather
of the Colonial minister for the time being," the Report declared, was
the chief source of Colonial discontent. "Such," it added, "is the
patronage of the Colonial office, that the granting or the withholding
of supplies is of no political importance, unless as an indication of
the opinion of the country concerning the character of the
government." Mr. Stanley, while in communication with Dr. Baldwin, as
chairman of a public meeting in York, some years before, had pointed
to the constitutional remedies of "addressing for the removal of the
advisers of the Crown, and refusing supplies." The former remedy had
been twice tried, but without producing any good effect, and almost
without eliciting a civil reply. The second was hereafter to be
resorted to. When the Province first came under the dominion of the
British Crown, certain taxes were imposed by Imperial statute for the
support of the local government. In time, as the House of Assembly
acquired some importance and had attracted some able men, the control
of these revenues became an object of jealousy and desire. Before
there had been any serious agitation on the subject, in Upper Canada,
these revenues were surrendered in exchange for a permanent Civil
List. An opportune moment was chosen for effecting this change.
Neither of the two previous Houses would have assented to the
arrangement, nor would that which had now come into existence, so long
as there were no other constitutional means of bringing the
administration to account than that which might have been obtained by
a control of the purse-strings. The granting of a permanent Civil List
had looked to the Reformers like throwing away the only means of
control over the administration. Indirectly the Executive controlled
what was, properly speaking, the municipal expenditure. Magistrates
appointed by the Crown met in Quarter Session to dispose of the local
taxes. The bench of Magistrates in the Eastern District had, that very
session, refused to render the House an account of their expenditure.
This was, somewhat illogically, held to be proof that the mode of
their appointment was vicious. Considered as dispensers of local
taxes, the objection was good; but if it extended to their magisterial
duties, it was bad. This distinction was overlooked by the committee.
The old objections to the Post-office being under the control of the
Imperial Government were reiterated. The patronage of the Crown was
stated to cover 50,000 a year, in the shape of salaries and other
payments, exclusive of the Clergy Reserve revenue; the whole of the
money being raised within the Province. The 4,472, which had annually
come from England for the Church of England, had been withdrawn in
1834. Considering the poverty of the Province, the scale of salaries
were relatively much higher than at present. Ten persons were in
receipt of $4,000 a year each for their public services. The mode of
treating the salaries received by the public functionaries, pursued
in this report, is not free from objection. The bare statement that
"the Hon. John H. Dunn has received 11,534 of public money since
1827," proved nothing; yet the aggregate sum was calculated to create
the impression that there was something wrong about it. Some salaries
and fees were undoubtedly excessive. Mr. Ruttan received, in fees, as
Sheriff of the Newcastle District, in 1834, 1,040, and in the
previous year, 1,180. Pensions had been pretty freely dispensed out
of the Crown revenue.

Under the head of pensions, 30,500 is set down as having been paid to
eleven individuals, within eight years; but we hardly think the
payment to Bishop McDonnell should have come under that designation.
While the Church of England received the proceeds of the Clergy
Reserves, annual payments were made by the government to several other
denominations.[125] Profuse professions of loyalty sometimes
accompanied applications for such payments; and there seemed to be no
shame in confessing something like an equivalent in political support.
The Church of England managed to get the lion's share; and this
naturally brought down on her the envy and jealousy of other
denominations. Of twenty-three thousand nine hundred and five acres of
public lands set apart as glebes, between 1789 and 1833, the Church
of England had obtained twenty-two thousand three hundred and
forty-five acres.

[Footnote 125: Archdeacon (afterwards Bishop) Strachan, when called
before the committee, said: "There should be, in every Christian
country, an established religion; otherwise it is not a Christian, but
an infidel country." The Roman Catholics, under the treaty between
England and France, by which they were guaranteed all their accustomed
rights and dues, at the conquest of the country, collected tithes from
their own people in Glengary and Essex, the two parts of the Upper
Province where the Catholics were numerous. The tithe, as it was
called, extended to only a twenty-sixth part of the tithable produce.]

It was complained that much of the money granted for general purposes
was very imperfectly accounted for. "The remedy," said the Report,
"would be a Board of Audit, the proceedings of which should be
regulated by a well considered statute, under a responsible
government." In due time, both these things came; Mr. Mackenzie
having, in these as in numberless other instances, been in advance of
the times.

Justices of the Peace, it was complained, had been selected almost
entirely from one political party.

The necessity of a responsible administration to any effectual reform
of abuse had been frequently insisted on by Mr. Mackenzie. "One great
excellence of the English Constitution," says this Report, "consists
in the limits it imposes on the will of a King, by requiring
responsible men to give effect to it. In Upper Canada no such
responsibility can exist. The Lieutenant Governor and the British
ministry hold in their hands the whole patronage of the Province; they
hold the sole dominion of the country, and leave the representative
branch of the Legislature powerless and dependent." English statesmen
were far from realizing the necessity of making the Colonial
government responsible; and for some years after the official idea
continued to be that such a system was incompatible with Colonial
independence. Mr. Stanley had been one of the few who thought that
"something might be done, with great advantage, to give a really
responsible character to the Executive Council, which at present is a
perfectly anomalous body, hardly recognized by the Constitution, and
chiefly effective as a source of patronage." Only a few years before,
Attorney General Robinson had denied the existence of a ministry in
Upper Canada, and claimed the right to act solely upon his own
individual responsibility in the House, and without reference to any
supposed necessity for agreement with his colleagues. And Lord
Goderich held that the Colonial Governors were alone responsible. He
complained that the Legislative Councils had been used "as instruments
for relieving Governors from the responsibility they ought to have
borne for the rejection of measures which have been proposed by the
other branch of the Legislature, and have not seldom involved them in
dissensions which it would have been more prudent to decline. The
effect of the institution therefore," he added, "is too often to
induce a collision between the different branches of the Legislature,
to exempt the Governor from a due sense of responsibility, and to
deprive the representative body of some of its most useful members."
The Executive Council had scarcely any recognized duties beyond those
which were merely ministerial. The Lieutenant Governor did not at all
feel bound to ask the advice of his councillors, or to act upon it
when given. In appointments to office, they were, as a rule, not
consulted. The giving or withholding of the Royal assent to bills
passed by the Legislature was a matter entirely in the hands of the
Lieutenant Governor. Yet the Executive Council was recognized by the
Constitutional Act; and cases were specially mentioned in which the
Governor was required to act upon their advice. The Lieutenant
Governor, coming a stranger to the Province, could not act without
advice; and he was lucky if he escaped the toils of some designing
favorite, who had access to his presence, and could determine his
general course. The vicious habit of sending out military governors,
who were wholly unsuited for civil administration, was in vogue. The
only excuse for pursuing this course was that a Lieutenant
Governorship was not a sufficient prize to attract men of first rate
abilities. There was great diversity of opinion as to the possible
success of responsible government. It had never been tried in any of
the old colonies. Mr. Mackenzie had, while in England, endeavored to
convince Lord Goderich that, with some modifications, it might be made
the means of improving the Colonial Government. The sum of the whole
matter is that the system made the Lieutenant Governor responsible, in
the absence of responsible advisers by whom he might have been
personally relieved; and he, in turn, was only too glad to make the
Legislative Council perform the functions which, on questions of
legislation, naturally belonged to a responsible administration. He
had them under his control.

The Committee, insisting on the necessity of entire confidence between
the Executive and the House of Assembly, tracing it to the material
progress of the Province; thereby admitting by implication that, in
the early states of colonial existence, the want of a responsible
administration had not been recognized. "This confidence," it was
truly added, "cannot exist while those who have long and deservedly
lost the esteem of the country are continued in the public offices
and councils. Under such a state of things," it was added, "distrust
is unavoidable; however much it is to be deplored as incompatible with
the satisfactory discharge of the public business." Sir John Colborne
had admitted[126] that, "composed as the Legislative Council is at
present, the Province had a right to complain of the great influence
of the Executive Government in it." In 1829, it comprised seventeen
members, exclusive of the Bishop of Quebec, not more than fifteen of
whom ever attended; and of these six were members of the Executive
Council, and four more held offices under the government. It was no
easy matter, in the then state of the Province, to find persons
qualified to fill the situation of Legislative Councillor; and that
circumstance had doubtless something to do in determining its
character. In 1834, the Council contained an additional member;[127]
but he drew an annual salary from the government, and did not
therefore, by his presence, tend to increase its independence of the
Executive. While Sir John Colborne professed to be desirous of seeing
the Legislative Council rendered less dependent upon the Crown, it was
in evidence that the Executive was in the habit of coercing the
members whom it could control. Instances of remarkably sudden changes
of opinion, effected by this means, were given. A disseverance of
judicial and legislative functions had been frequently asked by the
Legislative Assembly; but the Chief Justice still continued Speaker of
the Legislative Council. From the facts before them, the committee
concluded that the second branch of the Legislature had failed to
answer the purpose of its institution, and could "never be made to
answer the end for which it was created;" and that "the restoration of
Legislative harmony and good government requires its reconstruction on
the elective principle."

[Footnote 126: Dispatch to Sir George Murray, February 16, 1829.]

[Footnote 127: Bishop McDonnell.]

Although many may think this an erroneous opinion, it cannot be matter
of surprise that it should have found expression. The Legislative
Council, owing its creation to the Crown, and its members being
appointed for life, found itself in constant collision with the
Representative Chamber. This collision created irritation; and the
people naturally took the part of their representatives in the
contest. If there had been an Executive Council to bear the
responsibility that was thrown on this branch of the Legislature, a
change of ministry would have obviated the desire for a change of
system. The Legislative Council would have been modified by having
additions made to its numbers, as was done after the inauguration of
responsible government; and the second Chamber, being kept in harmony
with the popular will, would not have been attacked in its
constitution. The opinion that the Council ought to be made elective
was not confined to Canada; it had been shared by several English
statesmen, including Sir James Mackintosh, Mr. Stanley, and Mr.
Labouchere.

Instances were adverted to by the committee, in which the members of
the local Executive had prevented the good intentions of the Imperial
Government being carried into effect. Three members of the Executive
Council, Messrs. Markland, Strachan, and P. Robinson, refused to
answer several of the questions put to them by the committee. This
un-English habit had been encouraged by Lieutenant Governor Maitland,
who, in 1828, in a dispatch to the Secretary of State for the
Colonies, said: "If the Assembly can, without communicating with the
Lieutenant Governor, summon the Receiver General or the Inspector
General of Public Accounts, or any of their clerks, to attend a Select
Committee, and compel their attendance at the peril of imprisonment,
the government here has no longer any discretion to exercise."

Such was the famous Report of the Committee of Grievances.[128] It
elicited from the Secretary of State for the Colonies a reply, which
we must now proceed to consider. But before the reply came, Lord
Glenelg, October 20, 1835, conveyed to Canada the assurance that the
King, having had the Report before him, had "been pleased to devote as
much of his time and attention, as has been compatible with the
shortness of the period which has elapsed since the arrival in this
country" of the dispatch enclosing the document.

[Footnote 128: Whether from oversight or whatever cause, the Grievance
Report had not been adopted by the House; though two thousand copies
had been ordered to be printed in an unusual form, and had been
distributed. On the 6th of February, 1836, however, the Assembly
resolved, by a vote of twenty-four against fifteen, "that the facts
and opinions embodied in that report continue to receive the full and
deliberate sanction and confirmation of the House and the people whom
it represents; and that it is our earnest desire that the many
important measures of reform recommended in that report may be
speedily carried into effect by an administration deservedly
possessing the public confidence." A copy of this resolution was
ordered to be sent to the Secretary of State for the Colonies. It was
passed a week after Lord Glenelg's dispatch had been laid before the
Legislature.]

In the ordinary course of things, the Upper Canada Legislature would
have met in November; but so important was it deemed that the report
should be responded to, that Major-General Colborne was directed to
delay the calling of the House till the ensuing January--a delay of
three months. At the same time, an assurance was conveyed that the
House would find, in the promised communications, "conclusive proof of
the desire and fixed purpose of the King to redress every real
grievance, affecting any class of His Majesty's subjects in Upper
Canada, which has been brought to His Majesty's notice by their
representatives in Provincial Parliament assembled." A belief was at
the same time expressed, that the Assembly "would not propose any
measure incompatible with the great fundamental principles of the
constitution," which, in point of fact, had been systematically
violated by the ruling party.

The promised reply of Lord Glenelg was dated December 15, 1835. It
took the shape of instructions to Sir Francis Bond Head,[129] on his
appointment to the Lieutenant Governorship of Upper Canada. The hope
was expressed that, unless in an extreme emergency, the House would
not carry out the menaced refusal of supplies. But Lord Glenelg must
have seen that the House must be the judge of what constituted such
an emergency as would justify a resort to this extreme measure. The
patronage at the disposal of the Crown, which had been so much
complained of, had been swelled by the practice of confiding to the
government or its officers the prosecution of all offences. But this
circumstance was declared to be no proof of any peculiar avidity on
the part of the Executive for the exercise of such power. The transfer
of the patronage to any popular body was objected to as tending to
make public officers virtually irresponsible, and to the destruction
of the "discipline and subordination which connect together, in one
unbroken chain, the King and his Representative, in the Province, down
to the lowest functionary to whom any portion of the powers of the
state may be confided." The selection of public officers, it was laid
down, must for the most part be entrusted to the head of the local
government; but there were cases in which the analogy of English
practice would permit a transference of patronage from the Lieutenant
Governor to others. Whatever was necessary to ensure subordination to
the head of the government was to be retained; every thing beyond this
was at once to be abandoned. Subordinate public functionaries were to
continue to hold their offices at the pleasure of the Crown. They
incurred no danger of dismissal except for misconduct; and great evils
would result from making them independent of their superior. The new
Lieutenant Governor was instructed to enter upon a review of the
offices in the gift of the Crown, with a view of ascertaining to what
extent it would be possible to reduce them without impairing the
efficiency of the public service, and to report the result of his
investigation to the Colonial Secretary. He might make a reduction of
offices either by abolition or consolidation; but any appointment made
under those circumstances would be provisional and subject to the
final decision of the Imperial Government. In case of abolition, the
deprived official was to receive a reasonable compensation. What share
of the patronage of the Crown or the local government could be
transferred to other hands was to be reported. A comparison of claims
or personal qualifications was to be the sole rule for appointments to
office. As a general rule no person not a native or settled resident
was to be selected for public employment. In case of any peculiar art
or science, of which no local candidate had a competent knowledge, an
exception was to be made. In selecting the officers attached to his
own person, the Lieutenant Governor was to be under no restriction.
Appointments to all offices of the value of over 200 a year were to
be only provisionally made by the Lieutenant Governor, with a distinct
intimation to the persons accepting them that their confirmation must
depend upon the approbation of the Imperial Government, which required
to be furnished with the grounds and motives on which each appointment
had been made.

[Footnote 129: Sir F. B. Head, who had been instructed to communicate
the substance of these instructions to the Legislature, laid the
entire dispatch before the two Houses; a proceeding for which he
incurred the disapprobation of the Colonial office, and of the British
public. He admitted that he was aware the proceeding would embarrass
Lord Glenelg; but he excused himself by alleging that the original
draft of the dispatch authorized him to communicate a copy of it; and
the King had made the alteration with his own hand; as if the original
intention of the Colonial minister ought to supersede the final
decision of the minister and the Sovereign.]

If this shows a disposition to treat the colonists with consideration,
it was the sort of consideration which we bestow upon infants, and
persons wholly incapable of managing their own affairs.

To any measure of retrenchment, compatible with the just claims of the
public officers and the efficient performance of the public duties,
the King would cheerfully assent. The Assembly might appoint a
commission to fix a scale of public salaries. The pensions already
granted and made payable out of the Crown revenues were held to
constitute a debt, to the payment of which the honor of the King was
pledged; and on no consideration would His Majesty "assent to the
violation of any engagement lawfully and advisedly entered into by
himself or any of his Royal predecessors." At the same time, the law
might fix, at a reasonable limit, the amount of future pensions; and
to any such measure the Lieutenant Governor was instructed to give the
assent of the Crown. The Assembly was anxious to dispose of the Clergy
Reserves, and place the proceeds at the control of the Legislature.
The other chamber objected; and Lord Glenelg urged strong
constitutional reasons against the Imperial Parliament exercising the
interference which the Assembly had invoked. And it must he confessed
that, in this respect, the Assembly was not consistent with its
general principles or with those contended for by the popular party.
It was easy to put the Assembly in the wrong; and Lord Glenelg made
the most of the opportunity. But with strange inconsistency, the
Imperial Government, in 1840, assumed, at the dictation of the
Bishops, a trust which five years before they had refused to accept at
the solicitation of the Canadian Assembly, on the ground of its
unconstitutionality. Lord Glenelg admitted that the time might arrive,
if the two branches of the Canadian Legislature continued to disagree
on the subject, when the interposition of the Imperial Parliament
might become necessary; but the time selected for interference was
when the two branches of the local Legislature had for the first time
come to an agreement, and sent to England a bill for the settlement of
the question.

On the question of King's College and the principles on which it
should be conducted, the two Houses displayed an obstinate difference
of opinion, and the Lieutenant Governor was instructed, on behalf of
the King, to mediate between them. The basis of the mediation included
a study of Theology; and it was impossible satisfactorily, in a mixed
community, to do this with a hope of giving general satisfaction. This
college question having once been placed under the control of the
local Legislature, Lord Glenelg could not recommend its withdrawal at
the instance of one of the two Houses.

The suggestion for establishing a Board of Audit was concurred in. As
a fear had been expressed that the Legislative Council would oppose a
bill for such a purpose, the Lieutenant Governor was authorized to
establish a Board of Audit provisionally, till the two Houses could
agree upon a law for the regulation of the Board. Lord Glenelg
objected to the enactment of a statute requiring that the accounts of
the public revenue should be laid before the Legislature, at a
particular time, and by persons to be named; since this would confer
on them the right to "exercise a control over all the functions of the
Executive Government," and give them a right of inspecting the records
of all public offices to such an extent as would leave "His Majesty's
representative and all other public functionaries little more than a
dependent and subordinate authority." Besides, it was assumed they
would be virtually irresponsible and independent. At the same time,
the Lieutenant Governor was to be prepared at all times to give such
information as the House might require respecting the public revenue,
except in some extreme case where a great public interest would be
endangered by compliance.

Rules were even laid down for the regulation of the personal
intercourse of the Lieutenant Governor with the House. He was to
receive their addresses with the most studious courtesy and attention,
and frankly and cheerfully to concede to their wishes, as far as his
duty to the King would permit. Should he ever find it necessary to
differ from them, he was to explain the reasons for his conduct in the
most conciliatory terms. The celebrated dispatch of Lord Goderich,
written in consequence of the representations made by Mr. Mackenzie,
while in England, was to be a rule for the guidance of the conduct of
Sir Francis Bond Head. Magistrates who might be appointed were to be
selected from persons of undoubted loyalty, without reference to
political considerations.

On the great question of Executive responsibility Lord Glenelg totally
failed to meet the expectations expressed in the Grievance Report to
which he was replying. He did more; he assumed that "the
administration of public affairs, in Canada, is by no means exempt
from the control of a sufficient practical responsibility. To His
Majesty and to Parliament," it was added, "the Governor of Upper
Canada is at all times most fully responsible for his official acts."
Under this system the Lieutenant Governor might wield all the powers
of the government, and was even bound to do so, since he was the only
one who could be called to account. The House of Assembly, if they had
any grounds of complaint against the Executive, were told that they
must seek redress, not by demanding a removal of the Executive
Council, but by addressing the Sovereign against the acts of his
representative. Every Executive councillor was to depend for the
tenure of his office, not on the will of the Legislative Assembly, but
on the pleasure of the Crown. And in this way responsibility to the
central authority in Downing street, of all the public affairs in the
Province, was to be enforced. The members of the local government
might or might not have seats in the Legislature. Any member holding a
seat in the Legislature was required blindly to obey the behests of
the Lieutenant Governor, on pain of instant dismissal. By this means
it was hoped to preserve the head of the government from the
imputation of insincerity, and conduct the administration with
firmness and decision.

These instructions embody principles which might have been
successfully worked out by a Governor and Council. But they were
inapplicable in the presence of a Legislature. There was no pretence
that the system was constitutional, and the elective chamber must be a
nullity when the Crown-nominated Legislative Council could at any time
be successfully played off against it. As for responsibility to the
Canadian people, through their representatives, there was none. All
the powers of the government were centralized in Downing street, and
all the Colonial officers, from the highest to the lowest, were
puppets in the hands of the Secretary of State for the Colonies. At
the same time, the outward trappings of a constitutional system,
intended to amuse the colonists, served no other end than to irritate
and exasperate men who had penetration enough to detect the mockery
and whose self-respect made them abhor the sham.

On the 6th of March, 1835, Mr. Mackenzie was appointed by the House of
Assembly Director of the Welland Canal Company, in respect of the
stock owned by the Province. He entered into a searching investigation
of the manner in which the affairs of the company had been conducted;
and if he showed a somewhat too eager anxiety to discover faults, and
made some charges against the officers and managers of the company
that might be deemed frivolous, he also made startling disclosures of
worse than mismanagement. With the impatience of an enthusiast, he
published his discoveries before the time came for making his official
report; sending them forth in a newspaper-looking sheet, entitled _The
Welland Canal_, three numbers of which were printed. A libel suit, in
which he was cast in damages to the amount of two shillings, resulted
from this publication; and Mr. Merritt, President of the company, in
the ensuing session of the Legislature, moved for a committee to
investigate the charge brought against directors and officers of this
company. It was a bold stroke on the part of the President; but,
unfortunately for the canal management, the committee attested the
discovery of large defalcations on the part of the company's
officers. Accounts sworn to by the Secretary of the company, and laid
before the Legislature, were proved to be incorrect.[130] Large
sums--one amount was 2,500--of the company's money had been borrowed
by its own officers, without the authority of the Board. Improvident
contracts were shamefully performed. The president, directors, and
agents of the company leased water powers to themselves. The company
sold, on a credit of ten years, over fifteen thousand acres of lands,
together with water privileges, for 25,000, to Mr. Alexander
McDonnell, in trust for an alien of the name of Yates; allowing him to
keep two hundred acres, forming the town plots of Port Colborne and
Allanburg. A quarter acre sold at the latter place for $100. They
repurchased the remainder, for which the company's bonds for 17,000
were given to Yates; though all they had received from him was
eighteen months' interest, the greater part of which he had got back
in bonuses and alleged damages said to have arisen from the absence of
water power. If such a transaction were to occur in private life, the
committee averred that it "would not only be deemed ruinous, but the
result of insanity." Mr. George Keefer, while a director, became
connected with a contract for the locks. A large number of original
estimates, receipts, and other important documents were missing; and
no satisfactory account of what had become of them could be obtained.
The books were kept in the most slovenly and discreditable manner,
being blurred with blunders, suspicious alterations, and erasures. The
length of the canal was unnecessarily extended; but if the company
suffered from this cause, individuals profited by the operation.
Improvident expenditures, all the worse in a company cramped for
means, were proved to have been made. One Oliver Phelps owed the
company a debt of $30,000 covered by mortgage, which was released by
the Board without other satisfaction than a deed of some land worth
about $2,000. It was not a case of writing off a bad debt, because the
property covered by the mortgage was good for the amount. Over $5,000
worth of timber purchased by the company and not used was parted with
without equivalent. Some of it was stolen, some used by Phelps who was
not charged with it, and some purchased by a member of the Assembly,
Mr. Gilbert M'Micking, in such, a way that the company derived no
advantage from the sale.

[Footnote 130: In a letter to Mr. Mackenzie, dated Toronto, September
16th, 1836, Mr. Francis Hincks, than whom there was no better judge of
accounts, said: "As to the Welland Canal books, I have already said,
and I now publicly repeat and am willing to stake my character on the
truth of it, that for several years they are full of false and
fictitious entries, so much so that if I was on oath I could hardly
say whether I believe there are more true or false ones. I am
persuaded it is impossible for an accountant who desires to arrive at
truth to investigate them with any satisfaction, particularly as the
vouchers are of such a character as to be of little or no service.
With respect to the charges against the Welland Canal officers, the
press and the public seem to have predetermined that unless Mr.
Merritt and others were proved guilty of an extent of fraud that would
have justly subjected them to a criminal prosecution, they were to be
absolved from all blame, and to escape censure for the numerous
charges which have been clearly proved. The conduct of the press, and
indeed, the House of Assembly, on this subject, has been such as to
encourage a similar system of managing the money of the people, and,
most assuredly, to deter any individual from even attempting to expose
similar abuses. It has been clearly proved that large sums of money
have been lost to the Company, and, of course, to the Province, which,
if the present directors do their duty, can, in great part, be
recovered; yet you, the person who have discovered these losses, and
what is still better, have exposed the system, have been abused in the
most virulent manner from one end of the Province to the other, and
have not obtained the slightest remuneration for your services. At the
same time it is never asked, in any of the public prints, whether Mr.
Merritt, who was twice paid, (as is admitted even by himself, although
as he states, 'by mistake,') about $1,000 of salary several years ago,
has refunded this money, or whether any steps have been taken to
rectify errors already proved."

Mr. Mackenzie met a shower of abuse from the men whose misconduct he
had exposed. On the floor of the Legislative Assembly they and their
partisans treated him as an enemy to the canal and to the country;
deserving, for what he had done, only the worst epithets they could
heap upon him.]

The difference between Mr. Mackenzie and the Committee of the House
was this: he suspected the worst, in every case of unfavorable
appearances; they were willing to make many allowances for
irregularities, where positive fraud could not be proved. The
committee carried their leniency further than they were warranted by
the facts. In the same sentence in which they acquitted the directors
of any intentional abuse of the powers vested in them, they confessed
themselves unable to explain the Phelps transaction.

The ludicrous part of this investigation consists of numerous items
charged to the contingent account by Mr. Merritt, President of the
Company. A few samples may be given. "Play, 3_s._ 9_d._;" "Barber,
7-1/2_s._;" "Repairing my watch, 7_s._ 6_d_;" "Segars and Snack."
"Club for gin, 3_s._ 1-1/2_d._ Club for segars, 1_s._;" "Paid doctor
for attendance, 10_s._" There were whole columns of such figures as
these, amounting to about $400, duly audited and passed by the Board.
But it must be admitted that even this petty larceny showed method and
exactness; and if the amount had been charged as travelling expenses,
without a ridiculous detail, it would probably not have been
challenged. Certainly it would not have excited ridicule.

In this investigation, there was employed as accountant, a young man
of whose abilities Mr. Mackenzie conceived a very high opinion; so
much so that he remarked to him, that he should be glad to see him
Inspector General of Public Accounts for Upper Canada. But he added
with sleepless suspicion, "The only question with me is, whether you
would be proof against the temptations of the position." That
accountant was Francis Hincks. He was afterwards Inspector General for
United Canada, and leader of the government; then Governor of the
Windward Islands, and is now Governor of British Guiana, with a salary
of 5,000 a year, and 2,000 for contingencies. He has fully justified
the prevision of Mr. Mackenzie, and risen by the force of his talents
to a higher position than the latter had ventured to assign to him.

Mr. Mackenzie spent several months in this investigation at St.
Catharine's, the head-quarters of the company. In 1836, a committee of
the House recommended a compensation of $1,000 for his services; but,
as the regular supplies were not granted that year, the money was not
paid. The Canadian insurrection, occurring towards the close of 1837,
led to his exile for several years, in the United States; and as he
was the last of the exiles to whom the Royal clemency was extended, he
was not paid the $1,000 till 1851, and then without interest.

In November, 1835, Mr. Mackenzie visited Quebec, in company with Dr.
O'Grady. They went as a deputation from leading and influential
Reformers, in Upper Canada, to bring about a closer alliance between
the Reformers in the two Provinces. In the Lower Province affairs were
more rapidly approaching a crisis than in the West. The difficulties
arising out of the control of the revenue had led to the refusal of
the supplies by the Lower Canada Assembly; and in 1834, 31,000
sterling had been taken out of the military chest, by the orders of
the Imperial Government, to pay the salaries and contingencies of the
judges and the other public officers of the Crown, under the hope
that, when the difficulties were accommodated, the Assembly would
reimburse the amount. But the difficulties, instead of meeting a
solution, continued to increase. As the grievances of which the
majority in the two Provinces complained had much in common, the
respective leaders began to make common cause. The Provinces had had
their causes of differences, arising out of the distribution of the
revenue collected at Quebec. But the political sympathies of the
popular party, in each Province, were becoming stronger than the
prejudices engendered by the fiscal difficulties, and which had acted
as a mutual repulsion. Mr. Mackenzie and his co-delegate met a cordial
and affectionate welcome. "All the liberal members" of the Lower
Canada Assembly "flocked around them to testify the sincere interest
they took in the progress of good government in Upper Canada, and to
tender them their hearty co-operation."[131] This expression of
sympathy, extending to all classes of Reformers, was expected to prove
to the authorities, both in Canada and England, "that the tide is
setting in with such irresistible force against bad government, that
if they do not yield to it before long, it will shortly overwhelm them
in its rapid and onward progress." Mr. Mackenzie was on good terms
with Papineau, whose word was law in the Assembly of Lower Canada, of
which he was Speaker, but who, in Committee of the Whole, used the
greatest freedom of debate. This visit resulted in establishing a
better understanding between the Reformers of the two Provinces.[132]
Mr. Mackenzie has left it on record that "changes were then in
contemplation, which would in a certain degree have affected
individuals," if generally known; but as this statement was shortly
afterwards published, it cannot be taken to have reference to that
armed insurrection which ultimately followed. To a very late period,
Mackenzie and those who acted with him continued to hope that the
reforms for which they contended would be peaceably granted.

[Footnote 131: _Montreal Vindicator._]

[Footnote 132: In the session of the Upper Canada Legislature for
1836, Mr. Mackenzie carried the following resolution by a large
majority:--"That it is the desire of this House to cultivate a good
understanding with Lower Canada, and that a select committee be
appointed to draft a bill to this House, for the appointment of
commissioners to meet any commissioners that may be appointed by the
Legislature of Lower Canada, to consider of matters of mutual
importance to both Provinces, especially the questions of boundaries,
trade, emigration, customs' duties, and revenue." This resolution was
in the spirit of one of the declared objects of the "Canadian Alliance
Society." This year, Mr. Papineau, the Speaker of the Lower Canada
Assembly, sent a long letter to Mr. Speaker Bidwell, of the Upper
Canada Assembly; in which the principles of Colonial Government laid
down in Lord Glenelg's dispatch in reply to the "Grievance Report"
were denounced, and a responsible government and an elective
Legislative Council declared to be necessary.]

In December, 1835, he addressed a long letter to Mr. Hume--which was
published just before the elections of the next year took place--on
the condition of the Province. Its principal complaints were: that
jury trials were in the hands of sheriffs, who held office during the
pleasure of the King; that an extensive domain had been improvidently
ceded to the Canada Company; that the Legislative Council continued
to reject the bills passed by the Assembly; that the administration of
justice was in the hands of a party forming among themselves a Family
Compact; that, owing to these circumstances, property and liberty were
held by a very precarious tenure; that the administration of the
government was in the hands of men, in whom neither the people nor
their representatives had any confidence; that, as a consequence of
this state of things, there was little immigration,[133] and many
residents were thinking of quitting the Province; that the idea of
successive Colonial Secretaries had been to govern the Province by
orders sent from Downing Street, to be executed by agents selected
there; that there was no means of exacting strict accountability for
the public moneys; that the Reformers of both Provinces directed their
exertions mainly to the accomplishment of four objects: an elective
Legislative Council, an Executive Council responsible to public
opinion, the control of the whole Provincial revenues, and a cessation
of interference on the part of the Colonial office--"not one of
which," he said, "I believe will be conceded till it is too
late."[134] The prediction proved correct; but all these changes have
been effected since the insurrection of 1837. He tendered his thanks
to Mr. Hume for his exertions on behalf of Canada in these words:

"On behalf of thousands whom you have benefited, on behalf of the
country so far as it has had confidence in me, I do most sincerely
thank you for the kind and considerate interest you have taken in the
welfare of a distant people. To your generous exertions it is owing
that tens of thousands of our citizens are not at this day branded as
rebels and aliens; and to you alone it is owing that our petitions
have sometimes been treated with ordinary courtesy at the Colonial
office.

[Footnote 133: In 1835, the immigration to Upper Canada had fallen off
two-thirds as compared with the average of former years.]

[Footnote 134: Though all these objects have now been carried into
effect, Sir Francis Bond Head regarded their advocacy as proof of
treasonable designs. In a dispatch to Lord Glenelg, dated June 22,
1836, after quoting the above passage, he says: "As the Republicans in
the Canadas generally mask their designs by professions of attachment
to the mother country, I think it important to record this admission
on the part of Mackenzie of the traitorous object which the Reformers
in this Province have in view."]

"We have wearied you with our complaints, and occupied many of those
valuable hours which you would have otherwise given to the people of
England. But the time may come when Canada, relieved from her
shackles, will be in a situation to prove that her children are not
ungrateful to those who are now, in time of need, their disinterested
benefactors."

A shadowy idea of independence appears already to have been floating
in men's minds; and it found expression in such terms as are employed
in his letter about Canada being relieved of her shackles.




CHAPTER XX.

     Sir Francis Bond Head arrives in Upper Canada--His
     Speech on opening the Legislature--Mackenzie tries to
     remove the Restrictions on the Trade of the
     Province--The House snub the Lieutenant Governor in
     their Reply to the Address--Why were Members of the
     Government supported in a Departure from Lord
     Goderich's Dispatch?--Sir F. B. Head affects a
     Readiness to redress all Grievances--He appoints three
     new Executive Councillors from the Liberal
     Party--Resignation of the new Council because they were
     not consulted on the Affairs of the Province--They are
     sustained by the House, and the Lieutenant Governor
     sharply censured--Responsible Government and Separation
     from England--The Lieutenant Governor and the
     "Industrious Classes"--Four new Executive
     Councillors--The House of Assembly address the
     Lieutenant Governor to dismiss them--He
     refuses--Question of Popular Colonial Councils--Sir F.
     B. Head boasts of having provoked a Disturbance at a
     Public Meeting--Stoppage of Supplies and Reservation of
     Money Bills--Dissolution of the House--Unconstitutional
     and violent Means resorted to by the Lieutenant
     Governor for carrying the Elections--He instructs the
     Colonial Office how to act--Opposes the Surrender of
     the Crown Revenues and denounces the Project of a
     Responsible Administration--"Let them come if they
     dare"--Practical Joke on the Lieutenant Governor--His
     strange Doings and his Contumacy--Mackenzie, Bidwell,
     and Perry lose their Elections--Excitement at
     Mackenzie's Election--The Influences arrayed against
     him--He weeps over his Defeat--Is attacked with a
     dangerous Illness--His Protest not allowed to go to an
     Election Committee--Proof of the Lieutenant Governor's
     Unconstitutional Interference in the Elections--He was
     required to put in his Defence.


On the 14th January, 1836, Sir Francis Bond Head, who had just arrived
in the Province as Lieutenant Governor,[135] opened the session of the
Upper Canada Legislature. The Royal speech, in referring to the
dissensions that had taken place in Lower Canada, and to the labors of
the Imperial commissioners appointed to inquire into the grievances
complained of, assured the House that, whatever recommendations might
be made, as the result of this inquiry, the constitution of the
Provinces would be firmly maintained. As the constitution of the
Legislative Council was one of the subjects of inquiry, this
information could not be very consolatory to the Reformers.

[Footnote 135: Sir Francis Bond Head afterwards admitted, with
admirable candor, that he "was really grossly ignorant of every thing
that in any way related to the government of our colonies." He was
somehow connected with paupers and poor laws in England when he was
appointed; and was totally unfitted by experience and temperament to
be Lieutenant Governor of an important dependency of the British
Crown. How Lord Glenelg could have stumbled upon so much incapacity is
as great a mystery to the Canadians, at this day, as it was to Sir
Francis when, at his lodgings at Romney, in the County of Kent, his
servant, with a tallow candle in one hand, and a letter brought by a
King's officer in the other, enabled him to make the discovery that he
had been offered the Lieutenant Governorship of Upper Canada. He was
in a sound sleep when the servant arrived; and if other men have found
themselves famous when they woke of a morning, Sir Francis Bond Head
found himself suddenly roused up to be informed that he was on the way
to enforced greatness.]

During the session, Mr. Mackenzie carried an Address to the King on
the subject of the restraints imposed upon the Province by the
commercial legislation of the mother country. British goods could not
pass through the United States, on their way to Canada, without being
subjected to the American duty; and the Address prayed that the
Sovereign would negotiate with the Washington Government, for the free
passage of such goods. The facility of transport thus asked for was
fully secured by the United States Bonding Act passed ten years after.
For the purpose of upholding the monopoly of the East India Company,
not an ounce of tea could be imported into Canada by way of the United
States. The abolition of this monopoly was demanded. Canadian lumber
and wheat were heavily taxed--25 cents a bushel on the latter--on
their admission into the United States: the same articles coming
thence into the Province were free of duty. Mr. Mackenzie anticipated
by eighteen years the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854. The Address prayed
"that His Majesty would cause such representations to be made to the
Government of the United States as might have a tendency to place this
interesting branch of Canadian commerce on a footing of reciprocity
between the two countries." Nor did he stop here. He thought it right
that this principle of reciprocity should be extended to all articles
admitted by Canada free of duty from the United States.

In those days, the Address in answer to the Royal Speech was no mere
echo of the statements and recommendations contained in that document.
The occasion was frequently seized upon as a favorable one for an
exposition of public grievances. On a number of points, the Address,
on this occasion, differed from the Speech to which it was an answer.
It went so far as directly to rebuke the Lieutenant Governor for the
reference he had made to Lower Canada. "We deeply regret," said the
Address, "that your Excellency has been advised to animadvert upon the
affairs of the sister Province, which has been engaged in a long and
arduous struggle for an indispensable amelioration in their
institutions and the manner of their administration. We respectfully,
but firmly, express our respect for their patriotic exertions; and we
do acquit them of being the cause of any embarrassment and
dissensions in the country."

It was a subject of frequent complaint, in both the Canadas, that the
good intentions of the Imperial Government were thwarted by the agents
selected to execute the Royal wishes. Mr. Mackenzie introduced a
series of resolutions making a complaint of this nature; and after it
had been verbally amended, on motion of Mr. Perry, acting, no doubt,
under the suggestion of Mr. Speaker Bidwell, an Address to the
Lieutenant Governor was founded upon it. The Address asked for any
dispatches that might serve to explain the contradiction between the
Royal instructions relative to the dismissal of public officers when
they cease to give a conscientious support to the measures of the
government, and the retention of persons--Mr. Hagerman was mentioned
in the original resolution--as legal advisers of the Crown and members
of the Executive Council, in spite of their opposition to many of the
Reforms sanctioned by the Earl of Ripon, as Colonial Secretary. The
case of Mr. Hagerman, whose name was not mentioned, was described as
glaring in the extreme; since he had desired to send back the famous
dispatch of Lord Goderich, afterwards Earl Ripon. The Solicitor
General, during the debate, denied that he had gone to this length;
but the House, by a majority of ten, refused to accept his statement
as correct. "We cannot reconcile with the principles of our
Constitution," the Address reads, "the appointment and continuance in
office of persons, as counsellors and advisers of the government, who
are known to stand opposed to the wishes of the people and the
recommendations of His Majesty, on great leading questions of Reform,
and who do not possess the confidence of the people, and acquiesce in
their general political views and policy, as expressed through their
representatives." The appointment of Mr. William Morris, whose name
was struck out of the amended resolutions, to a seat in the
Legislative Council, after he had, as a member of the other branch of
the Legislature, violently denounced the dispatch of Lord Goderich,
was condemned as contrary to the recommendations of the Canada
Committee, of the House of Commons, in 1828, and the declared
principles of the Imperial Government; and as calculated to increase
the obstacles to Reform. The union of legislative and judicial powers
in the Chief Justice, who continued to be Speaker of the Legislative
Council, and the presence in that branch of the Legislature of the
Bishop of Regiopolis and the Archdeacon of York, were spoken of in
terms of censure. Mr. Mackenzie accepted the amendment, and declared
it preferable to his own resolution.

In the course of the debate on this Address, Solicitor General
Hagerman professed to give a cordial assent to the principles of Lord
Goderich's dispatch, which, when laid before the House he had
denounced in unmeasured terms; and he still charged his opponents with
revolutionary designs because they demanded the application of the
principles laid down in that state document.

Sir Francis Bond Head, unused to government, had been instructed by
the Colonial Secretary in the rules of official etiquette and courtesy
which he was to observe. And in answering this Address he did not
assume that objectionable tone which shortly afterwards marked his
utter unfitness for the position to which he had been appointed. In
regard to the removal of the Crown officers there was a dispatch
marked "confidential," and which for that reason he did not produce.
He had no means of explaining the continuance in office of Solicitor
General Hagerman, further than that his reinstatement was the result
of exculpatory evidence offered by that person, while in England. The
Lieutenant Governor could require, and, if necessary, insist on the
resignation of officials who might openly or covertly oppose the
measures of his government; but he would not take a retrospective view
of their conduct, or question the wisdom of what had been done by his
predecessors, in this respect. The same rule he applied to
appointments made to the Legislative Council; as he could not
undertake to judge of the principles that guided his predecessor. Lord
Ripon, he considered, in giving his opinion of the presence of the
Roman Catholic Bishop and the Anglican Archdeacon in the Legislative
Council, had expressed no intention in reference to them. Sir Francis
confessed, with maladroitness, to the existence of dispatches which he
did not feel at liberty to communicate; besides that already
mentioned, another dated Sept. 12, 1835, and containing observations
on the Grievance Report. He asked from the House the consideration due
to a stranger to the Province, unconnected with the differences of
party, entrusted by his Sovereign with instructions "to correct,
cautiously, yet effectually, all real grievances," while maintaining
the Constitution inviolate.

During this session an event occurred which, though Mr. Mackenzie was
not directly connected with it, had an important bearing on the
general course of affairs that was to lead to the armed insurrection,
in which he was a prominent actor. It is necessary to a clear
comprehension of all the circumstances which produced this crisis,
that the event should be briefly related.

On the 20th of February, 1836, Sir F. Bond Head called three new
members to the Executive Council;[136] Messrs. John Henry Dunn, Robert
Baldwin, and John Rolph.[137] The two latter were prominent members of
the Liberal party, and Mr. Dunn had long held the office of Receiver
General. Their appointment was hailed as the dawn of a new and better
order of things, and the Lieutenant Governor professed, with what
sincerity will hereafter appear, a desire to reform all real abuses.
But it was not long before this hope was disappointed. On the 4th
March these gentlemen, with the other three members of the Executive
Council,[138] resigned. They complained that they had incurred the
odium of being held accountable for measures they had never advised,
and for a policy to which they were strangers. It shows the
irresistible force which the popular demand put forward by Mr.
Mackenzie and others for a responsible administration carried with it,
that the three Tory members of the Council should have joined in the
resignation. The current was too strong to leave a reasonable hope of
their being able to make way against it. But what they shrunk from
undertaking, Sir Francis Bond Head was to try, by the aid of more
supple instruments, to accomplish. The six councillors, on tendering
their resignations, insisted on the constitutional right of being
consulted on the affairs of the Province generally, and resorted to
some elaboration of argument to prove that their claim had an
immovable foundation in the Provincial charter.

[Footnote 136: Sir F. B. Head was pressed by one of the old members of
the Council to appoint some additional members. The number, as it
stood, was only sufficient for a quorum, and if one fell sick no
business could be done. Besides, Mr. Peter Robinson had charge of the
public lands, and, as an Executive Councillor, was placed in the
invidious position of having to audit his own accounts. When Sir F. B.
Head arrived, it was believed that he was going to reform the abuses
complained of, and effect the desired changes in the government.
Hand-bills, on his arrival, were foolishly placed on the walls of the
city, describing the new Lieutenant Governor as a "tried Reformer."
The Tories were shy and distrustful. They petitioned the King against
the first act of his administration. Had they not taken up this
hostile position, he afterwards declared, he never would have gone to
the other party for material to enlarge his Council; and he would have
appointed neither Mr. Baldwin nor Dr. Rolph. But he soon threw himself
completely into the arms of the Family Compact; adopted their designs,
echoed their opinions of their opponents, and repeated their worst
calumnies, in official dispatches and other state documents.]

[Footnote 137: Sir Francis Bond Head, in _An Address to the House of
Lords against the Bill before Parliament for the Union of the
Canadas_, in 1840, says that when he offered office to Mr. Baldwin,
the latter replied that "he considered as absolutely necessary the
assistance of Dr. Rolph and of Mr. Bidwell;" and if this statement be
correct, the matter was compromised by one being taken and the other
left. Rolph became a member of the Executive Council, and Bidwell was
left out.]

[Footnote 138: Messrs. Peter Robinson, George H. Markland, and Joseph
Wells.]

The Lieutenant Governor, on the other hand, contended that he alone
was responsible, being liable to removal and impeachment for
misconduct, and that he was at liberty to have recourse to their
advice only when he required it; but that to consult them on all the
questions that he was called upon to decide would be "utterly
impossible." He, too, attempted to establish his position by reference
to the constitutional charter and other instruments; but the House
charged him with garbling and misquoting. His political theory was
very simple. "The Lieutenant Governor maintains," he said, "that
responsibility to the people, who are already represented in the House
of Assembly, is unconstitutional; that it is the duty of the Council
to serve him, not them." A doctrine that was soon to meet a practical
rebuke from his official superiors in England.

The answer of His Excellency was sent to a select committee of the
House, who made an elaborate Report, in which the Lieutenant
Governor's treatment of his Council was censured in no measured terms.
The increasing dissatisfaction which had been produced by the
maladministration of Lieutenant Governors Gore, Maitland, and
Colborne, was said to have become general. The new appointments to the
Executive Council of liberal men, made by Sir Francis Bond Head, were
stigmatized as "a deceitful manoeuvre to gain credit with the country
for liberal feelings and intentions when none existed;" and it was
declared to be matter of notoriety that His Excellency had "given his
confidence to, and was acting under, the influence of secret and
unsworn advisers." "If," they said, "all the odium which has been
poured upon the old Executive Council had been charged, as His
Excellency proposes, upon the Lieutenant Governors, their residence
[in the Province] would not have been very tolerable, and their
authority would become weakened or destroyed." The authority of
Lieutenant Governor Simcoe, whose appointment followed close after the
passing of the constitutional Act of 1791, was adduced to show that
"the very image and transcript" of the British constitution had been
given to Canada. The Lieutenant Governor was charged with having
"assumed the government with most unhappy prejudices against the
country," and with acting "with the temerity of a stranger and the
assurance of an old inhabitant." Much warmth of feeling was shown
throughout the entire Report, and the committee gave it as their
opinion that the House had no alternative left "but to abandon their
privileges and honor, and to betray their duties and the rights of the
people, or to withhold the supplies."[139] "All we have done will
otherwise," it was added, "be deemed idle bravado, contemptible in
itself, and disgraceful to the House."

The House adopted the Report of the committee, on a vote of thirty-two
against twenty-one; and thus committed itself to the extreme measure
of a refusal of the supplies. To the resolution adopting the Report a
declaration was added that a responsible government was
constitutionally established in the Province.

[Footnote 139: The object of the Assembly, in stopping, or rather
restricting, the supplies, was to embarrass the government. They did
not go to the extent of refusing all money votes, but granted
different sums for roads, war losses, the Post-office, schools, and
the improvement of navigation. Twelve of these bills Sir Francis B.
Head reserved, in the hope that he would be enabled to embarrass the
machinery of the Legislature, if they were vetoed in England. But,
much to his disgust, they were assented to by his Sovereign. When he
received the dispatch containing the assent to these bills, he at
first thought of suppressing it, but on sober second thought he
transmitted it to the Legislature.]

In the debate on question of adopting the Report, the Tories took the
ground that responsible government meant separation from England.
"The moment," said Mr. McLean, "we establish the doctrine in practice,
we are free from the mother country." Assuming that the Imperial
Government would take this view of the matter, Solicitor General
Hagerman covertly threatened the majority of the House with the
vengeance of "more than one hundred and fifty thousand men, loyal and
true." The temper of both parties was violent, for already were
generating those turbulent passions of which civil war was to be the
final expression.

In times of excitement the slightest incident may add fuel to the
flames; and men, rendered keenly sensitive by the endurance of wrongs,
readily resent the most distant approach to insult. Sir Francis B.
Head, having received an Address, adopted at a public meeting of the
citizens of Toronto, assured them that he should feel it his duty to
reply with as much attention as if it had proceeded from either branch
of the Legislature; but that he should express himself "in plainer and
more homely language." This was regarded as a slight to the inferior
capacity of the "many-headed monster," and was resented with a
bitterness which twenty years were too short to eradicate. The manner
of the Lieutenant Governor gave as much offence as his words. He met
the deputation, surrounded by a crowd of military officers; and the
members fancied that he pried impudently into their faces, as if he
regarded them with the sort of curiosity that one would look upon a
collection of orang outangs.

They left the Vice-regal residence, inspired by a common feeling of
indignation, at what they conceived to be intentional slights put upon
them. It was soon resolved to repay the official insolence with a
rejoinder. Drs. Rolph and O'Grady prepared the document. Instead of
being drawn up in the slip-shod style of the Report of the House
Committee, its biting sarcasm betrayed a master hand. "We thank Your
Excellency," said the opening sentence, "for replying to our Address,
'principally from the industrious classes of the city,' with as much
attention as if it had proceeded from either branch of the
Legislature; and we are duly sensible in receiving Your Excellency's
reply, of your great condescension, in endeavoring to express yourself
in plainer and more homely language, presumed by Your Excellency to be
thereby brought down to the lower level of our plainer and more homely
understandings." They then pretended to explain the deplorable neglect
of their education by the maladministration of former governments of
the endowment of King's College University, and the many attempts of
the Representative Chamber, baffled by the Crown-nominated Legislative
Council, to apply three millions of acres of Clergy Reserves to the
purposes of general education. "It is," they added, "because we have
been thus maltreated, neglected, and despised, in our education and
interests, under the system of government that has hitherto prevailed,
that we are now driven to insist upon a change that cannot be for the
worse." The change they desired to bring about was "cheap, honest, and
responsible government." The responsibility of the Lieutenant Governor
to a government four thousand miles distant, "and guarded by a system
of secret dispatches, like a system of espionage," which kept in
"utter darkness the very guilt, the disclosure of which could alone
consummate real and practical responsibility," had never, they
declared, "saved a single martyr to Executive displeasure." Robert
Gourlay still lived in the public sympathy, "ruined in his fortune,
and overwhelmed in his mind, by official injustice and persecution;
and the late Capt. Matthews, a faithful servant of the public, broken
down in spirit, narrowly escaped being another victim. The learned Mr.
Justice Willis struggled in vain to vindicate himself and the wounded
justice of the country; and the ashes of Francis Collins and Robert
Randal lie entombed in a country in whose service they suffered
heart-rending persecution and accelerated death. And even Your
Excellency has disclosed a secret dispatch to the minister, in Downing
Street (the very alleged tribunal of justice), containing most
libellous matter against William Lyon Mackenzie, Esq., M. P. P., a
gentleman known chiefly for his untiring services for his adopted and
grateful country. We will not wait," they plainly told the Lieutenant
Governor, "for the immolation of any other of our public men,
sacrificed to a nominal responsibility, which we blush we have so long
endured to the ruin of so many of His Majesty's dutiful and loyal
subjects." After an elaborate argument, to prove the necessity of a
responsible administration, the rejoinder concluded by what Mr.
Mackenzie, in a manuscript note he has left, calls the first low
murmur of insurrection. "If Your Excellency," the menace ran, "will
not govern us upon these principles, you will exercise arbitrary
sway, you will violate our charter, virtually abrogate our law, and
justly forfeit our submission to your authority." There was not yet,
however, the most distant idea that the final issue would be open
insurrection.

The rejoinder being ready,[140] the next question was how it was to be
delivered. Such a document was quite irregular in official
correspondence, and a violation of official etiquette. It was arranged
that Mr. James Lesslie and Mr. Ketchum should drive in a carriage
drawn by a noble Arabian horse to Government House, deliver the
document, and retire before there was time for any questions to be
asked. They did so, simply saying they came from the deputation of
citizens.

Sir F. Bond Head did not even know who were the bearers of the
unwelcome missile. He sent it, in a passion, to Mr. George Ridout, on
the speculation that he had been concerned in the delivery. Mr. Ridout
sent it back. It was in type before being dispatched, and scarcely had
it reached the Governor when a printed copy of it was in the hands of
every member of the House. The Lieutenant Governor was puzzled, half
stupefied, and well nigh distracted.

[Footnote 140: It was signed by Jesse Ketchum, James H. Price, James
Lesslie, Andrew McGlashan, James Shannon, Robert McKay, M. McLellan,
Timothy Parsons, William Lesslie, John Mills, E. T. Henderson, John
Doel, John E. Tims, William J. O'Grady.]

On the 14th March, four new Executive Councillors were appointed,
consisting of Messrs. Robert Baldwin Sullivan, William Allan, Augustus
Baldwin, and John Elmsley. The latter had resigned his seat in the
Executive Council some years before, on the ground that he could not
continue to hold it and act independently as a Legislative Councillor,
though the principle of dependence had never before been pushed to the
same extent as now. Three days after these appointments were
announced, the House declared its "entire want of confidence," in the
men whom Sir Francis had called to council.[141] The vote was
thirty-two against eighteen. An Address to the Lieutenant Governor
embodying this declaration of non-confidence, and expressing regret
that His Excellency should have caused the previous Council to tender
their resignation, while he declared his continued esteem for their
talents and integrity, was subsequently passed on a division of
thirty-two against nineteen. The Address requested His Excellency to
take immediate steps to remove the obnoxious Council. In reply he said
he felt guiltless of having caused the excited state of public feeling
in the Province, and was not at all disposed to listen to the advice
of the House, on whose good sense he, at the same time, affected to be
ready to rely.

[Footnote 141: While these proceedings were going on, the people were
not idle spectators. A petition came from Pickering township,
complaining that the Lieutenant Governor had "resolved to hold the
powers entrusted to him by his Sovereign, to reduce British subjects
to a state of vassalage," and praying the House to address His
Excellency to remove his councillors. As soon as the Executive Council
resigned, Sir Francis Bond Head wrote to Lord Glenelg, under date,
Toronto, 22d March, 1836, "Mr. Mackenzie and his party, at an immense
expense, forwarded to every part of the Province" copies of a
circular, to which was annexed "a printed petition to the House of
Assembly, which only required the insertion of the name of the
township and of the subscribers." This is probably correct, but the
authority of Sir Francis Bond Head is never reliable when he is
speaking of persons whom he considered it his sacred duty to revile.
It is certain a number of petitions of the same purport as that from
Pickering were presented to the House.]

The popular party had unintentionally given an incidental sanction to
the assumptions of the Lieutenant Governor, founded on the dispatch of
Lord Glenelg, on the dismissal of the Crown officers, in 1833. Their
removal was the result of their opposition, in the Legislature, to the
expressed wishes of the Imperial Government. In procuring the
annulment of the bank charters, Mr. Mackenzie was not sustained by the
party with whom he acted, and by whom the dismissal of the Crown
officers was gratefully accepted. It was the misfortune of Sir Francis
Bond Head to be required to carry out the principle of complete
subordination of all the officers of the local government to the
Downing Street authorities, at a time when the disposition of the
colonists to repudiate that system and to insist on the responsibility
of the Executive Council to the Legislative Assembly, had become
irresistible. But he showed the greatest reluctance to deviate from
this course after he received a confidential dispatch from Lord
Glenelg,[142] laying it down as a principle that in the British
American Provinces the Executive Councils should be composed of
individuals possessing the confidence of the people. Every Canadian
who had advocated this principle had been set down by Sir Francis as a
republican and a traitor, and the principle itself he had denounced as
unconstitutional.

[Footnote 142: Dated September 30, 1836.]

Sir Francis Bond Head conceived his mission to be to fight and conquer
what he called the "low-bred antagonist democracy." He thought the
battle was to be won by steadily opposing "the fatal policy of
concession," keeping the Tories in office, and putting down the party
which he indifferently designated Reformers, Radicals, and
Republicans. He thought himself entitled to claim credit for having by
his reply to "the industrial classes of Toronto," caused a scene of
violence at a public meeting, at which, he relates to Lord Glenelg
with much satisfaction, "Mr. Mackenzie totally failed in gaining
attention," and Dr. Morrison, who was then Mayor of Toronto, "was
collared and severely shaken." "The whole affair," be adds, "was so
completely stifled by the indignation of the people, that the meeting
was dissolved without the passing of a single resolution."

The Lieutenant Governor, who had completely thrown himself into the
hands of the Family Compact, had other schemes for influencing the
constituencies in favor of one party and against another; for he was
not long in resolving to dissolve a House that voted only such
supplies as would subserve the purposes of the majority, while it
withheld others of which the want tended to embarrass the machinery of
the government.[143] The avowed object of reserving the twelve money
bills was to deprive the majority of the House of what might be so
distributed as to conduce to their re-election. On motion of Mr. Perry
the House had adopted the vicious principle of making the members of
the Legislature a committee for expending the 50,000 road money
granted; and there was some point in the observation of Sir F. B. Head
that this member's name appeared too often in connection with such
expenditures. But although the reservation of these money bills did
not lead to their being vetoed, the effect on the constituencies was
the same. The elections were over before it was known that the Royal
assent had been given, in opposition to the recommendation of the
Lieutenant Governor, who takes care to make it understood that, on
this question, he had the concurrence of his Council. Before the
elections were announced, steps, of which Sir Francis B. Head appears
to have been cognizant, were taken for procuring petitions in favor of
a dissolution of the House. Perhaps they were suggested by himself or
his Council. Certain it is that he had timely warning of petitions in
process of being signed, some time before they were presented. The
Tory press divided the country into two parties: one of whom was
represented to be in favor of maintaining the supremacy of the British
Crown in the Province, and the other as being composed of traitors and
republicans. This representation was transferred from partisan
newspapers to official dispatches and replies to admiring addresses.
Timid persons were awed into inactivity; not thinking it prudent to
appear at the polls, where their presence would have caused them to be
branded as revolutionists. The Tories subscribed largely for election
purposes; votes were manufactured and violence resorted to.[144]

[Footnote 143: The dissolution took place on the 28th May, 1836.]

[Footnote 144: "The circumstances under which they (the members of the
House) were elected, were such as to render them peculiarly objects of
suspicion and reproach to a large number of their countrymen. They are
accused of having violated their pledges at the election." "In a
number of instances, too, the elections were carried by the
unscrupulous exercise of the influence of the government, and by a
display of violence on the part of the Tories, who were emboldened by
the countenance afforded to them by the government; that such facts
and such impressions produced in the country an exasperation and a
despair of good government, which extended far beyond those who had
actually been defeated at the poll."--_Earl Durham's Report on the
Affairs of British North America._]

By such means was Sir F. B. Head enabled to boast of the perilous
success he had achieved. He had done everything upon his own
responsibility; having never consulted the Imperial Government, to
whose directions he professed to feel it his duty to pay implicit
obedience. He had written to Lord Glenelg, informing him that it was
his intention to dissolve the House; and instructing him--as if he
were the superior--to send him no orders on the subject. Nor was this
the only occasion on which he undertook to transmit his orders to
Downing Street. When, in the spring of 1836, Mr. Robert Baldwin, one
of his late councillors, started for England, Sir F. B. Head described
him to Lord Glenelg as an agent of the revolutionary party, and
expressed a wish that he might not be received at the Colonial Office;
adding a suggestion that if he should make any application he should
be effectually snubbed in a letter in reply, which should be
transmitted to Canada for publication. He denounced to the Colonial
Minister the project of surrendering to the control of the Canadian
Legislature the casual and territorial revenues; being desirous of
keeping the Executive, as far as possible, financially independent of
the popular branch of the Legislature. He quarrelled with the
Commission of Inquiry, which had been sent to Canada, headed by Lord
Gosford, for recommending that the Executive Council should be made
accountable to public opinion; and assured the Imperial Government
that the project was pregnant with every species of danger. When he
received a confidential dispatch from Lord Glenelg, acquainting him
that this course had been determined on, he became half frantic; and
on the publication of a dispatch from Sir Archibald Campbell,
Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick, directing him to increase the
number of his councillors, and to select them from persons possessing
the confidence of the people, he vented his disappointment by
declaring that "the triumph which the loyal inhabitants of our North
American colonies had gained over the demands of the Republicans was
not only proved to be temporary, but was completely destroyed." He
carried his indiscretion to an inconceivable extent. The Province, he
openly declared, was threatened with invasion from a foreign enemy;
and he proceeded to throw out a defiant challenge to this imaginary
foe. "In the name of every regiment of militia in Upper Canada," he
said, "I publicly promulgate, let them come if they dare." This piece
of audacious folly made him the subject of a remarkable practical
joke. A deputation, headed by Mr. Hincks, waited on him to inquire
from what point the attack was expected; the inference being that they
desired to know in order that they might be prepared to repel the
invaders.[145] If the Lieutenant Governor did not see that he was
quizzed, he felt thrust into a corner; and his face crimsoned with
indignation at the impertinent inconvenience of the inquiry. His
dispatches contain a mixture of insolent dictation, intended for
advice, and a craven fear of the disapproval of his superiors.

[Footnote 145: "We, the undersigned electors of the City of Toronto,"
the address ran, "having read in your Excellency's answer to the
address of certain electors of the Home District the following
language:--'They (the people of Toronto) are perfectly aware that
there exist in the Lower Province, one or two individuals who
inculcate the idea that this Province is about to be disturbed by the
interference of foreigners whose powers and whose numbers will prove
invincible. In the name of every Regiment of Militia in Upper Canada,
I publicly promulgate, '_Let them come if they dare._' We do not doubt
the readiness with which would be answered upon any emergency your
appeal to the Militia, which appeal we are satisfied would not have
been made without adequate cause. In a matter so seriously affecting
the peace and tranquillity of the country and the security of its
commerce, we beg to learn from your Excellency from what quarter the
invasion is alleged to be threatened."]

The fate of British dominion in America, he assured the Colonial
Minister, depended upon his ruinous advice being taken, and his mad
acts sustained. Several times it was necessary to curb him; and once
he made an inferential rather than a direct tender of his resignation.
He dismissed Mr. George Ridout from the offices of Colonel of the
Militia, Judge of the District Court of Niagara, and Justice of the
Peace, on the pretence that he was an active member of the Alliance
Society, who had issued an address on the subject of the resignation
of the late Executive Council, which contained words personally
offensive to the Lieutenant Governor;[146] and when this charge was
proved to the satisfaction of Lord Glenelg to be groundless, he
refused to obey the order of the Colonial Minister to restore Mr.
Ridout to office. When the only charge made against Mr. Ridout had
been disproved, he trumped up seven others--none of which had been
communicated to Mr. Ridout for explanation--taking the ground that he
neither deemed an inquiry necessary, nor that the person dismissed
should be made acquainted with the grounds of his dismissal. On both
these points the Lieutenant Governor met the opposition of Lord
Glenelg.[147] He refused to obey the instructions of the Colonial
Secretary to appoint Mr. Marshall Spring Bidwell to a judgeship in the
Court of Queen's Bench; and when he had done his best to drive men
into rebellion he claimed credit for his foresight in having pointed
out their traitorous intentions.

[Footnote 146: The document, to which exception was taken, is
subjoined; the particular words deemed most offensive being in those
in italics:--"The difference between Sir Francis Bond Head and the
House of Assembly, growing out of the resignation of the late
Executive Council, has led to a dissolution of Parliament. The
unanimous representation of the late Executive Council, severally
signed by the Hon. Peter Robinson, Hon. G. H. Markland, Hon. Joseph
Wells, Hon. J. H. Dunn, and Robert Baldwin and John Rolph, Esquires,
we declare to be moderate, just, and constitutional. The refusal of
Sir F. B. Head to allow the Executive Council to discharge the duties
obviously belonging to their office, and imposed by their oath, of
advising the Lieutenant Governor upon our public affairs, preparatory
to his final and discretionary action upon those affairs, betrays a
disposition as a stranger to conduct the government in an arbitrary,
unsafe, and unconstitutional manner, which the House of Assembly,
unless traitors to us, could not sanction or grant supplies to uphold.
The fifty-seven Rectories could not by law have been established
without the advice and consent of the Executive Council of the
Province; and their recent establishment and endowment with their
exclusive ecclesiastical and spiritual rights and privileges, is a
practical and melancholy proof of the indispensable necessity of a
good and honest Executive Council, alike possessing the confidence of
the King and the people. _It it our duty solemnly to assure you, that
the conduct of Sir Francis Bond Head has been alike a disregard of
constitutional government and of candor and truth in his statements to
you._ We therefore appeal to you most earnestly not to abandon your
faithful Representatives at the approaching contest, but by your manly
conduct prove yourselves worthy of good government and honest public
servants." So far from Mr. Ridout being a member of the Alliance
Society, he had opposed its establishment, when Mr. Mackenzie proposed
the resolutions on which it was based.]

[Footnote 147: "I am unaware," wrote Lord Glenelg to Sir F. B. Head,
April 5, 1837, "of so much as a single instance in which a public
officer has been dismissed as a punishment, and on the ground of
misconduct, without the most explicit disclosure to him of the reasons
by which his superior vindicated such an exercise of authority."]

Messrs. Mackenzie, Bidwell, and Perry, were among the members of the
popular party who failed to secure a re-election. It was the first
election at which the county of York had been divided into Ridings.
Mr. Mackenzie stood for the Second Riding, having for opponent, Mr.
Edward Thompson, a negative sort of man, without decision enough to
make him a very decided partisan.[148] As he had not energy enough to
be bitter, many timid voters, alarmed by the cries of revolution
raised by the Lieutenant Governor and the Family Compact, thought that
if they voted at all, it would be safest, if not best, to vote for
him. He obtained four hundred and eighty-nine votes; Mackenzie, three
hundred and eighty-nine. Just before the election, there had been a
sale of lots by the Government, at the mouth of the River Credit. They
were mostly divided into quarter acres, and were sold for $32 each.
Some of the patents were issued during the election; others only a few
days before. But this did not turn the scale of the election; for in
the list of voters, I find only four who voted for Mr. Thompson on
lots at Port Credit. About an equal number of votes offered for Mr.
Mackenzie were turned away on what appear to be frivolous grounds. If
such great pains had not been taken by Mr. Thompson's friends to
prevent a scrutiny, there might, looking at the disparity in the
number of votes received by the two candidates, have been some reason
for concluding that Mr. Mackenzie was beaten by a majority of legal
votes. Nothing but a scrutiny could have settled the point in dispute.
There was said to have been a suspiciously large increase in the
number of voters.

[Footnote 148: He passed for a modified Liberal at the election, which
was a great advantage to him; and acted with the Family Compact when
he got into the House.]

The unscrupulous influence of the Government in the election, attested
by the Earl of Durham's Report, is beyond question. Streetsville was
the polling place for the Second Riding of York; and violence was
apprehended on the day of nomination. A procession of Orangemen, an
organization with whom Mr. Mackenzie was on ill terms, took place; the
"Boyne Water," "Protestant Boys," and "Croppies Lie Down," being
played by the band. They afterwards drew up in line at a point where
it was necessary for Mackenzie to pass. Several were provided with
loaded fire-arms, on both sides. One Switzer, a man of enormous
muscular power, led the way through the lines; and Mr. Mackenzie
followed unharmed. He delivered a speech much more calculated to
excite than to soothe the hostile crowd, and which shows that the idea
of the possibility of England losing the Province by misgovernment was
floating in his mind.[149]

[Footnote 149: From this speech, delivered on the 27th June, I give an
extract: "When I last met you here I told you the causes of our
difficulties, and showed you how far they might be removed by the
concessions or interposition of the British Government. I regret to
say that all the efforts of the Reformers during the last two years
have only gone to show that the Government is above all law; that a
person, living in one of the streets of London is the autocrat of
Upper Canada; and that the people's representatives have neither power
nor influence to promote education, encourage trade, redress
grievances, secure economy, or amend your laws and institutions. I
have been diligent in the Legislature; every proposition calculated to
make you happier I have supported; and whatever appeared to me to be
against popular government and the permanent interests of the many I
have opposed, please or offend whom it might. The result is against
you. You are nearer having saddled on you a dominant priesthood; your
public and private debt is greater; the public improvements made by
Government are of small moment; the chartered Banks and the Canada
Company have you more and more under their control; the priests of the
leading denominations have swallowed bribes like a sweet morsel; the
revenues of your country are applied without your consent; the
principle that the Executive should be responsible to public opinion
and acceptable to the people is denied to your use, both by the
Governor here, and by his employers elsewhere; the means to corrupt
our elections are in the hands of the adversaries of popular
institutions, and they are using them; and although an agent has been
sent with the petitions of the House of Assembly to the King and House
of Commons, I dare not conceal from you my fears that the power that
has oppressed Ireland for centuries will never extend its sympathies
to you. It will seek to elevate the few, who are suitable instruments
for your subjugation, in order that (like the Canada Company, Thomas
Clark's 100,000 estate, John McGill's 50,000, and I might add,
Colonel Talbot's vast accumulation) such men may will, or take their
wealth elsewhere, to impoverish you. Look into the history of our
race:--'Ages pass, and leave the poor herd, the mass of men, eternally
the same--hewers of wood and drawers of water.' I have taken less
pains to be elected by you this time than I ever did before, and the
reason is, I do not feel that lively hope to be able to be useful to
you which I once felt. On this subject I spoke my mind with great
frankness at Cooksville, when I told you that the country was
beginning to lose all hope from Reform majorities under this
government, and that I feared the result of the elections would show
that it was so. We are, of course, to wait for the answer to our
petitions to England. If it be favorable, it will be our duty to
uphold the system of monarchical government, modified, of course, by
the removal of that wretched playhouse, the Legislative Council,
together with the mountebanks who exhibit on its boards. If the reply
be unfavorable, as I am apprehensive it will, for the Whigs and Tories
are alike dishonest, contending factions of men who wish to live in
idleness upon the labors of honest industry, then the Crown will have
forfeited one claim upon British freemen in Upper Canada, and the
result it is not difficult to foresee."]

It was said that he was opposed by Bank as well as Government
influence; and this seems not improbable, since he had procured the
disallowance of two bank charter bills, when he was in England.[150]
Complaints of bribery were also made; and if they were well founded,
it is reasonable to suppose that the money formed part of the official
election fund subscribed in Toronto. After the desperate policy
resorted to for the purpose of ejecting Mr. Mackenzie from a previous
Legislature, it is not to be supposed that any effort would be spared
to prevent his return. There can be no doubt that the improper use of
official influence was the main cause of the election resulting as it
did. Besides the intimidation so generally practised, at these
elections, the sheriff of the county, Mr. Jarvis, was at Streetsville,
interfering in a manner that had been strongly condemned years before
by Lord Goderich. He insisted on swearing Mr. Mackenzie to his
qualification, a second time, till the Returning Officer, Mr. Hepburn,
who was a strong partisan of the Family Compact, was obliged to
interfere, and declare that the qualification had already been
sufficiently attested. I do not wish to repeat a possible calumny; and
I should not have ventured to give new currency to the statement that
the Lieutenant Governor had thrown out hints that a worse thing than a
riot might happen, had he not, in his official communications with the
Colonial Office, already taken credit for having aroused a feeling
that produced violence at a public meeting.

[Footnote 150: One of these related to the Commercial Bank of the
Midland District; and the story told is that, about a month previous
to the election, the managers of the branch of this bank, at Toronto,
sent for Attorney General Hagerman, took him into the bank parlor, and
Mr. John Ross the cashier, in presence of the others, handed him a
large number of notes due to the bank by persons living in this
constituency, and gave him distinct and positive instructions to be
very lenient with every debtor who would pledge himself to vote
against Mackenzie, but "to put the screws on" every one of them who
refused to pledge himself. It was said that a like policy was pursued
by the Bank of Upper Canada, whose amended charter Mr. Mackenzie had
caused to be vetoed in England. But stories of this kind must always
be received with some degree of allowance.]

He himself rode out to the polling place during the election. A
clergymen offered a vote, to the validity of which he refused to make
oath;[151] and the voters were sharply questioned on both sides.

[Footnote 151: The following scene occurred: The Reverend Thomas
Phillips, D.D., Rector of Etobicoke, Chaplain to the House of
Assembly, late Professor in King's College, Toronto, presented himself
and offered to vote. After his property had been described and entered
on the poll-book, the following inquiry was made:

_Mr. Mackenzie._--"I think I saw your reverence standing in the rain
the other day, up to the ankles in mud, waiting to edge in a
non-resident vote for Mr. Draper, I dare say you have been going the
rounds of the county, since, to uphold 'the Constitution,' and as it
is probable you have your deed about you, I wish you would produce it.

_Dr. Phillips._--(Producing his deed.)--"I have a good title, or I
would not have taken the pains to come here.

_Mr. Mackenzie._--"I find that you have bought this half or quarter
acre of a sand bank for 8, a year's interest on which is eight
shillings. Are there any buildings?

_Dr. Phillips._-"There are none.

_Mr. Mackenzie._-"No buildings! How then is your income obtained?

_Dr. Phillips._--"I rented the property last year for a dollar; but,
this year, the times are so bad that I have left the woman have it for
nothing.

_Mr. Mackenzie._--"You have been paid for teaching others what the
English Constitution is for a number of years; you have known what a
40s. freeholder means for these forty years back at least; you belong
to an order who live sumptuously at the expense of the community, and
enjoy fat rectories, the value of which is enhanced by the farmer's
labor, and you are here to-day to uphold your order by voting me out
of the House. I shall make your own conscience the umpire between
us--the inward monitor shall decide. Did you, when you came here, for
one moment believe you had a right to vote? Did you not rather hope to
edge in a bad vote on account of the respectability of your personal
appearance? If you think you are an elector of this Riding, take the
constitutional oath as such, and then you may vote; but remember I'll
look carefully into the matter next session.

_Returning Officer._--"The oath is as follows:--

_Dr. Phillips._--"Stop, stop, I won't swear to my freehold. Really,
Mr. Mackenzie, you are too sharp upon me." And the reverend gentleman,
who was brother-in-law of the Sheriff of the Home District, gathered
up his papers, slunk down stairs, and deferred the oath and his vote
till another occasion.]

Mr. Mackenzie's mortification at a result which he believed to have
been brought about by improper means, was extreme. He retired with a
few of his supporters to the house of Mr. Graham, in Streetsville, and
wept like a child. Such was the power of sympathy, that several of the
friends who were present, wept with him.

About the time of the commencement of the first Legislative session,
which took place on the eighth of November, 1836, after the House had
been elected, Mr. Mackenzie was taken dangerously ill of inflammatory
fever, followed by inflammation of the lungs and pleura, brought on by
his taking cold. It says much for his constitution that he was enabled
to escape with his life from the hands of four doctors, Barclay, of
the garrison, Widmer, Rolph, and Telfer, who dosed him with seventy or
eighty grains of calomel; but it must be admitted that they were all
men of repute in their profession. On the 23d of November, he was
pronounced convalescent; but his ultimate recovery was slow.

Petitions against the return of any member, whose seat it is intended
to contest, are required to be presented within fourteen days of the
commencement of the session. On the 13th December--one month and five
days after the session had commenced--Dr. Morrison, on producing
medical certificates of Mr. Mackenzie's illness, obtained an extension
of the time for presenting a petition against Mr. Thompson's return.
Seven days were allowed. The regulation set aside was not one of law,
but was simply a rule of the House. When the allegations in the
petition had become known to the House, the majority evinced extreme
anxiety to avoid inquiry. Mr. Mackenzie, continuing to collect
evidence and increase his list of witnesses, refrained from completing
his recognizances as security for costs, till nearly the expiration of
the time required: fourteen days after the presentation of the
petition. New facts continued to come in, and, before handing in his
list of witnesses, he wished to make it as complete as possible. But,
by an entirely new construction of the law, he was held to have
exceeded the time. Dr. Rolph showed the untenableness of the position
which a partisan majority was ready to assume; but without avail. The
petition was introduced on the 20th of December. It then, as required
by law, lay on the table two days before being read; which last act,
it was contended, completed the series which made up the
presentation.[152] The House had always acted on this construction;
and it could not have one rule for itself and another for petitioners.
The petition must therefore be considered as having been presented on
the 22nd; and the fourteen days for completing the recognizances would
not end till the 5th of January, though the order had improperly been
discharged on the 4th; by which the time allowed by law had illegally
been abridged. The Speaker was required, on the 22nd, to have given
notice to the petitioner of the day fixed for taking the petition into
consideration; but he failed to give it till the 30th, and for his
default, the House, not the petitioner, was responsible. This argument
was conclusive; but the vote was hostile, being thirty-two against
fifteen.

[Footnote 152: On the 20th of January, 1837, a motion having been made
for allowing one week to petition against the return of Mr. Charles
Richardson from the town of Niagara, Dr. Rolph, seconded by Dr.
Morrison, moved to add the following words:--"And that the above
relief be also extended in like manner to such freeholders of the
Second Riding of the county of York, as may within the same time
desire to make their complaint of any wrongs to their elective
franchise at the late general election; because, as the late petition
of W. L. Mackenzie, complaining of the undue election and return of
the sitting member for that Riding (Edward W. Thompson, Esq.) was in
the terms of the forty-first rule of this House only 'brought in' on
the 20th, and not 'read' till the 22nd of December, it could not till
then be considered as fully presented; and because the Provincial Act,
4th Geo. IV., ch. 4, copied from the English Act 25th, George III.,
requires that whenever a petition complaining of an undue election or
return of a member or members to serve in Parliament shall be
presented to the House of Assembly, a day and hour shall, by the said
House of Assembly, be appointed for taking the same into
consideration, and notice thereof in writing shall be forthwith given
by the Speaker to the petitioner or his agent; according to which Act,
in the invariable practice of the British House of Commons, the
bringing up readily, and acting on such petition, and the giving of
the said notice forthwith by the Speaker to the petitioner, are
always immediately consecutive; and as this House have by their own
practice put such a construction on the said Act, as not to consider
such a petition presented, so as to require them to appoint a day and
hour for taking the same into consideration, and giving forthwith the
said notice to the petitioner, till the reading thereof on the second
day after it is brought up, so the exigency of the said statute ought
to be considered as satisfied by the said petitioner, by his computing
his fourteen days from the said reading of the petition, as properly
the time of the full Parliamentary presentation thereof; for the same
construction by which the House is governed should, in justice and
good faith, be applied to the petitioner, and not one construction be
adopted for the House, and another construction for the people praying
them for relief; from which it follows, that as the petition of Mr.
Mackenzie was brought up on the 20th, and not read and acted on by the
House till the 22nd, the petitioner's fourteen days reckoned from the
22nd, for entering into recognizances as security for costs, did not
elapse till the 5th of January inclusive, although this House
discharged the matter from the order of the day on the fourth, thereby
giving the petitioner only twelve instead of fourteen days: and
because the Speaker, in behalf of the House, did not, according to the
exigency of the said Statute, give notice to the petitioner
'forthwith' on the 22nd, but omitted to do so till the 30th of
December thereby abridging the time of the notice, which would
otherwise have put the petitioner and his attorney on their guard; and
this House having themselves been therein guilty of laches, ought not
rigidly to hold the said petitioner unexcused, even had he been guilty
of laches too: and because this House adjourned from the 22nd of
December till the 2nd of January, which interval, as the Speaker was
not in attendance in his room at the House, ought not to be counted
against the petitioner, who should have the benefit of fourteen
sitting days, and not pursue the Speaker, as possibly might be needed
in a future case, to his country seat, a distance of several hundred
miles: and because Mr. Mackenzie had gathered from William Patrick,
Esq., the Senior Clerk of this House, an officer of eighteen years'
experience, that the computation of his fourteen days would be from
the reading of the said petition: and because an investigation into
grave charges affecting the freedom of election, and the invasion
thereof by the Executive Government, and consequently affecting the
constitution and character of this House, ought not to be lightly
arrested, when the injured parties are willing and anxious to
prosecute it, but should, on the contrary, be openly, fully, and
honorably facilitated."]

It may seem strange that the presentation of a petition should include
its reading--fixed by law at two days after its introduction--but the
House must be judged by its own practice; and this is stated to have
been uniformly different, on all previous occasions, from the course
now taken. Mr. Jonas Jones, by whom the act relating to contested
elections was brought in, did Mr. Mackenzie full justice on this
occasion; and the fact deserves to be noted the more, since he was a
political opponent of the petitioner. "He considered that Mr.
Mackenzie, had a right to count fourteen, days from the time his
memorial was read, and that he had neglected no requirement of the
law;" and, on this ground, Mr. Jones voted against an amendment
declaring that the order relating to the petition had been legally
discharged, and that therefore it ought not to be restored. And Mr.
Gowan, another political opponent of the petitioner, showed that, in
the previous Parliament, he had been placed in precisely the same
position as Mr. Mackenzie with respect to time; and that not a single
member of the House, a large majority of whom were opposed to him in
politics, raised an objection. One thing is very clear--and it must be
regarded as a circumstance of suspicion--the Government party was
seriously anxious to avoid an investigation. If they had nothing to
fear from a scrutiny, it is difficult to conceive what motive they
could have had for departing from the uniform practice in order to
avoid an investigation. The delay on the part of the petitioner arose
entirely from the supposition that the time would not expire till the
5th of January.

He had the authority of the senior clerk of the House for believing
that this was the uniform practice, and on the 22d December, the day
on which it was contended the presentation of the petition was
completed, Mr. McNab obtained fourteen days for the sitting member to
prepare his list of witnesses--an implied confession that the fourteen
days after which the petition would be acted upon commenced on that
day. An amendment was added to this motion giving Mr. Mackenzie the
same time to prepare the list of his witnesses, and yet the majority
afterwards refused to give, for completing his recognizances, the time
they had thus agreed upon. The motion to discharge the order for
taking the petition into consideration was made by Mr. J. S. Boulton,
who had taken an active part in the expulsion of Mackenzie from a
former House, and of whose brother the petitioner had some years
before obtained the dismissal from the Attorney Generalship.

There was the more reason for the inquiry, because the allegations in
the petition included even the head of the government in charges of
undue interference; by making inflammatory replies to addresses, with
a view of influencing the election;[153] by the issue of land-patents
to persons known to be hostile to the petitioner, without exacting a
compliance with the conditions of purchase; besides, gross partiality
on the part of the Returning Officer, and bribery on the part of the
sitting member.[154] It would have been far better that these grave
charges had been subjected to the test of a rigid scrutiny; because,
if they were not well-founded, their refutation could most easily and
most effectually have been made in this way. But this is the strongest
evidence that many of them were true.

[Footnote 153: Here are a few specimens of the partisan and
inflammatory replies given by Sir Francis Bond Head to addresses, and
published with a view of influencing the elections generally. The
following language was used in his reply to the Electors of Toronto:--

"GENTLEMEN:--No one can be more sensible than I am, that the stoppage
of the supplies has caused a general stagnation of business, which
will probably end in the ruin of many of the inhabitants of this city;
and in proportion as the Metropolis of the Province is impoverished,
the farmers' market must be lowered; for how can he possibly receive
money, when those who should consume his produce are seen flying in
all directions from a land from which industry has been publicly
repelled?

"In the flourishing Continent of North America, the Province of Upper
Canada now stands like a healthy young tree that has been girdled, its
drooping branches mournfully betraying that its natural nourishment
has been deliberately cut off."

Still dwelling with affected lamentation over the universal
devastation caused by the withholding of his supplies, (the whole
amount of which was less than 10,000,) he thus attempts to work the
electors up to the highest pitch:--

"GENTLEMEN:--I have no hesitation in saying that another such a
victory would ruin this country. But this opinion is hourly gaining
ground; the good sense of the country has been aroused; the yeoman has
caught a glimpse of his real enemy; the farmer begins to see who is
his best friend: in short, people of all denominations, of all
religions, and of different politics, rallying round the British Flag,
are now loudly calling upon me to grant them constitutional redress.

""When the verdict of the country shall have been sufficiently
declared, I will promptly communicate my decision."

Denouncing the Reformers as agitators, he says:--

"GENTLEMEN:--My plans and projects are all contained and published in
the instructions which I received from the King. They desire me to
correct, without partiality, the grievances of this country; and it is
because the agitators see I am determined to do so, that they are
endeavoring to obstruct me by every artifice in their power. They
declare me to be their enemy, and the truth is, I really am."

But his Address to the Electors of Newcastle District, if possible,
transcends the rest, and would alone, Dr. Rolph declared on the floor
of the Legislature, have formed a solid foundation for his
impeachment:--

"As your district has now the important duty to perform of electing
representatives for a new Parliament, I think it may practically
assist, if I clearly lay before you what is the conduct I intend
inflexibly to pursue, in order that by the choice of your new
members, you may resolve either to support me or oppose me, as you may
think proper.

"I consider that my character and your interests are embarked in one
and the same boat. If by my administration I increase your wealth, I
shall claim for myself credit, which it will be totally out of your
power to withhold from me; if I diminish your wealth, I feel it would
be hopeless for any one to shield me from blame.

"As we have, therefore, one common object in view, the plain question
for us to consider is, which of us has the greatest power to do good
to Upper Canada? or, in other words, can you do as much good for
yourselves as I can do for you?

"It is my opinion that you cannot! It is my opinion that if you choose
to dispute with me, and live on bad terms with the Mother Country, you
will, to use a homely phrase, only quarrel with your own 'bread and
butter.' If you like to try the experiment by electing members, who
will, again stop the supplies, do so, for I can have no objection
whatever; on the other hand, if you choose fearlessly to embark your
interests with my character, depend upon it I will take paternal care
of them both.

"If I am allowed I will, by reason and mild conduct, begin first of
all by tranquilizing the country, and as soon as that object shall be
gained, I will use all my influence with His Majesty's Government to
make such alteration in the land granting departments, as shall
attract into Upper Canada the redundant wealth and population of the
Mother Country. Men! women, and money are what you want, and if you
will send to Parliament members of moderate politics, who will
cordially and devoid of self-interest assist me, depend upon it you
will gain more than you possibly can do by hopelessly trying to insult
me; for let your conduct be what it may, I am quite determined, so
long as I may occupy the station I now do, neither to give offence,
nor to take it."

The reference to "bread and butter," in this Address, caused the
House, elected in 1836, to be called the "Bread and Butter
Parliament."]

[Footnote 154: See Appendix C.]

The decision of the House can scarcely excite surprise; for in a case
of that peculiar nature, where either side of the case could be
sustained by plausible arguments, a partisan majority, so violently
opposed as they were to the petitioner, were not likely to be very
scrupulous in their decision. Rightly or wrongly the petitioner was
firmly convinced that he had been defrauded of his seat, and unfairly
and illegally denied the liberty of proving how it had been done, and
recovering what had been unwarrantably taken from him. He had a keen
sense of personal injury, and when wrong done to him was also done to
the public, he was slow to forget, and not too ready to forgive.

Dr. Duncombe, a member of the Liberal party in Upper Canada, who had
held a seat in the Legislative Assembly, brought to the notice of the
Colonial Secretary, Lord Glenelg, the complaints made against the
Lieutenant Governor, in connection with this election, as well as
against his general policy, and Sir Francis Bond Head was required to
put in his defence.




CHAPTER XXI.

     Mackenzie commences the Publication of _The
     Constitution_ newspaper--Revolutionary Literature--Mock
     Trial of Sir Francis Bond Head, by a Committee of the
     House of Assembly--A Verdict of Acquittal did not allay
     the Public Discontent--Samuel Lount--The Fatal
     Resolution--Personal Insult added to Political
     Wrong--The Session of 1836-7--The House shows its Fear
     of an Appeal to the People by repealing the Act by
     which the Death of the King effected a
     Dissolution--Recklessness in Money Votes--The House
     sanctions the Creation of the Rectories--Turbulent
     Close of the Session--A Trade Appeal to Washington--Mr.
     Mackenzie goes to New York and purchases largely at the
     Trade Sales of Books.


On the 4th July--a significant date--Mr. Mackenzie published the first
number of _The Constitution_ newspaper, the last issue of which
appeared on the 29th November, 1837. The first and fourth page of the
number for December 6th were printed, when at this stage it was
brought to a violent close by the breaking out of the insurrection.
The forms of type were broken up by the loyalist mob. When he brought
_The Colonial Advocate_ to a close, he was anxious to bid adieu to the
harassing cares of Canadian journalism forever; but his political
friends had, by their urgent entreaties, succeeded in inducing him to
re-enter a career to which he had previously bid a final adieu. As
editor of _The Constitution_, he became the organ of increasing
discontent, and might easily be mistaken for the promoter of it. But,
as always happens, the press reflected public opinion with more or
less accuracy, and already the Liberal portion of it had begun to
speak in no muffled or ambiguous accents.[155]

We are entering upon the period of revolutionary ideas, expressed in
speeches and rhymes, in newspapers and more solemn documents. Sir
Francis Bond Head may be said to have produced the first specimens in
inflammatory replies to addresses. What nearly always happens, on such
occasions, happened on this. People found themselves committed to
revolutionary ideas without the least suspicion of the extent to which
they had gone, much less of what was to follow. Dr. Duncombe's letter
to Lord Glenelg, charging the head of the Provincial Government with
crimes which deserve impeachment, was referred to a committee of the
House of Assembly. Everyone knew in advance what the decision would
be; but the proceeding was in the nature of an impeachment against Sir
Francis Bond Head. For if he were found guilty, what was to be done? A
Colonial Governor who misconducts himself, can only be tried in
England; and unless there were a foregone conclusion to exculpate him
from the charges made against him there could be no object in
referring them to a committee. Dr. Rolph, assuming a serio-comic air,
ridiculed the proceeding in a speech that will ever be memorable in
Canadian history.[156]

[Footnote 155: As an example, the following verse from "Rhymes for the
People," which appeared in the St. Thomas _Liberal_, in August, may be
cited:--

     "Up then! for Liberty--for Right,
       Strike home! the tyrants falter;
     Be firm--be brave, let all unite,
       And despots' schemes must alter.
     Our King--our Government and laws,
       While just, we aye shall love them,
     But Freedom's Heaven-born, holier cause
       We hold supreme above them."

[Footnote 156: Dr. Rolph thus opened his battery on the miscalled
treasury benches: "Perhaps never did a day, wearing a more towering
aspect than this, dawn upon a British Colony! The glory of Provincial
Monarchy, subjected ignominiously to these proceedings, is sullied
beyond the power of your acquittal to redeem. Kings are sometimes
tried. But nations are their judges. And when a people, goaded by
injury, rise in their majesty to occupy the judgment seat, grand is
the spectacle and vast the result! Popular sympathy generally mingles
with the royal fate, and interest is transmitted with the very block
which is dyed with their blood. But Kings even in Europe would dwindle
into shadows, were they arraigned and tried before subordinate
tribunals. Only imagine it; King William the Fourth tried by a select
committee of the House of Commons! The proposition, Sir, shocks you. * *
Impeachment, did I say? Oh no. They have doomed their illustrious
personage to drink the cup of humiliation to the very dregs. The trial
has not been conducted even before the Legislative Council, our
Provincial House of Peers, who would, perhaps, regard a guilty
participation little less than petit treason! It has not even been
conducted before this honorable House, while the chair, Sir, was
occupied by the Speaker, in whom is embodied, besides his
Parliamentary phylacteries, the aggregate dignity of the Assembly,
with the Mace, surmounted with a Crown, lying massively on the table,
and defended by the Sergeant-at-Arms, girded with a sword and glowing
with a chivalrous spirit. Such inquisitorial proceedings even over
Royalty have, when clothed with stateliness and wrapt up in form, an
imposing effect upon the eyes of the multitude, who are therefore the
less likely to have their habitual reverence seriously impaired. But
as if there were a conspiracy to bring His Excellency to the very
dust, to shadow his dignity, mortify his pride, and republicanize the
people, the investigation was repudiated by the House, and insultingly
transferred to an ordinary committee! * * What will the British
Government say to this impolitic proceeding? You who ought to be the
first to keep within, at least, the bounds of impeachment in the
Mother Country, have assumed to try, and either condemn or acquit the
representative of the King! The Governor has been charged with
interfering, to an alarming degree, with the purity and freedom of the
late general elections. It is a charge of treason against the people.
You are this day teaching them a lesson they will not easily forget.
They find themselves, through the persons of their representatives,
bringing under the ordeal of this inquiry the head of the Executive
Government. If it is thought expedient to exempt him from civil and
criminal responsibilities in the courts of justice, by what law do you
now assume a jurisdiction, of which even the King's Bench is ousted?
If found guilty, will you put him into the custody of the
Sergeant-at-Arms? Will you as it were dethrone him--or bring him to
the block? You may have an authority from the British Ministry to
exercise this inquisitorial function; but I cannot even then
acknowledge its wisdom. When you familiarize the people with these
summary proceedings against Kingly functionaries, you make them
compare their own strength and importance with that of their rulers * *
By the adoption of this report you acquit, and by the rejection of
it, you convict Sir Francis Bond Head of the high crimes and
misdemeanors brought against him."]

The report, as every body had foreseen, was a verdict of acquittal;
and a special verdict, it must be remarked, since it declared that the
country owed the Vice Regal defendant a debt of gratitude for his
patriotism and other inestimable qualities. But if Sir Francis Bond
Head was pronounced a model Governor, by a partisan committee,[157]
the public was not convinced, and the discontents were not allayed.

A considerable portion of Dr. Duncombe's letter, containing the charge
against the Lieutenant Governor, on which the committee had
pronounced, related to the Second Riding of York election, on which a
committee had illegally been refused to Mr. Mackenzie. Nor was he
allowed to produce before the committee, that pretended to inquire
into these charges, the evidence which he was prepared to produce in
support of them.

[Footnote 157: The committee first sat on the 25th of November,
composed of Messrs. McNab, Draper, Parke, Sherwood, and Woodruff. On
the first of December Messrs. Jones and Norton were added. And on the
22d, Mr. Draper retired and was succeeded by Messrs. Prince and
Burwell.]

The case of Mr. Mackenzie, though perhaps not exactly like any other,
cannot be regarded as having stood alone. The improper means taken by
the Executive to influence the elections, did not affect him alone.
Sir Francis Bond Head openly proclaimed himself the enemy of the
Reformers; and he brought all the weight of his position to bear
against them as a party. It was the general conviction of the popular
party, that if Mr. Mackenzie's complaints of the undue return of Mr.
Thompson had gone before a committee of the House, he could not have
hoped to obtain justice; a conviction which prevented others from
seeking to reclaim seats out of which they believed they had been
fraudulently cajoled. This was the case of Mr. Samuel Lount, who was
goaded into rebellion and hanged for high treason.[158]

The sense of injustice engendered by these means rankled in men's
minds; and it tended to beget a fatal resolution to seek redress by a
resort to physical force.

[Footnote 158: "On the 15th of February, 1837," Mr. Mackenzie related,
"Mr. Samuel Lount, the late upright and patriotic member for Simcoe,
called at my house, accompanied by Mr. Thrift Meldrum, Merchant and
Innkeeper in Barrie, and I mentioned to them that I was collecting
evidence for a pamphlet to expose the Government, as the Executive
influence had cheated me out of my right to do so through an election
contest for the Second Riding. Mr. Lount took out his pocket
memorandum book, and stated that Mr. Meldrum had been requested to
open his tavern for Robinson and Wickens, at the time of the late
election, and that he did so; that since the election he (Meldrum) had
informed him (Lount) that on one occasion, he (Meldrum) accompanied
Mr. Wellesley Ritchey, the Government Agent, from Toronto to the Upper
Settlement; that Mr. Ritchey called him (Meldrum) to one side at
Crew's tavern, where the stage stopped, and told him that Sir Francis
had employed him (Ritchey) to give the deeds to the settlers in
Simcoe, and that he (Ritchey) wanted him (Meldrum) to assist in
turning Lount out. Meldrum agreed to do his best, opened his house,
and says that Wickens paid him faithfully for his liquor, &c. When Mr.
Lount had read the above from his memorandum, I asked Mr. Meldrum if
he could swear to these facts, he said he could, for they were
perfectly correct. I then asked Mr. Lount, who gave me a number of
important facts, why he did not contest the election, and he told me
it would have been throwing 100 away, and losing time, for that no
one who knew who the members were, could for a moment expect justice
from them."]

This resolution, which did not assume a positive shape for some time
afterwards, was a capital error, and one which some were to expiate
with their lives, others with sufferings and privations and contumely
scarcely preferable to death.

It was not sufficient for Sir F. B. Head and his friends to pursue one
of the two parties into which the country was divided with injustice;
they were not less ready to assail them with personal calumny. The
Tory press asked, "Who is Wm. Lyon Mackenzie?" And then they proceeded
to give their own answer. The Celtic blood boiling in his veins, at
the personal insults offered, Mr. Mackenzie replied in terms that
cannot be characterized as either temperate or discreet.[159] The
fiery words, he used under the excitement, can hardly be held to
express more than the exasperation of the moment; and if they did not
fall harmless, it was because the government of Sir F. B. Head had
inclined the people to listen to desperate counsels.

[Footnote 159: "Small cause indeed," he said, "have Highlanders and
the descendants of Highlanders to feel a friendship for the Guelphic
family. If the Stuarts had their faults, they never enforced loyalty
in the glens and valleys of the north by banishing and extirpating the
people; it was reserved for the Brunswickers to give, as a sequel to
the massacre of Glencoe, the cruel order for depopulation. I am proud
of my descent from a rebel race; who held borrowed chieftains, a scrip
nobility, rag money, and national debt in abomination. And
notwithstanding the doctors' late operations with the lancet, this
rebel blood of mine will always be uppermost. Words cannot express my
contempt at witnessing the servile, crouching attitude of the country
of my choice. If the people felt as I feel, there is never a Grant or
Glenelg who crossed the Tay and Tweed to exchange high-born Highland
poverty for substantial Lowland wealth, who would dare to insult Upper
Canada with the official presence, as its ruler, of such an equivocal
character as this Mr. what do they call him----Francis Bond Head."]

In the session of 1836-7, which closed on the 4th of March, Sir F. B.
Head's "Bread and Butter" Assembly was very far from realizing his
election promises of Reform.[160] But it is not probable that any
section of the public was disappointed, for they were not promises
that any one expected to see fulfilled. The fear of a legal and
inevitable dissolution, which seemed to be impending, weighed heavily
upon the "Bread and Butter" Parliament. King William IV. would
probably not live four years; and on the demise of the Sovereign the
Legislative Assembly legally ceased to exist. Sir F. B. Head was not
likely to fare so well in a second election as he had in the first. A
bill was therefore passed, taking away the effect of the Sovereign's
death, of dissolving the House. Of the majority, who passed this act,
Mr. Mackenzie said, "They tremble and shake for fear of the just
retribution their covetousness has provoked; and at Head's nod vote
themselves fit to outlive kings and emperors, though utterly unfit to
face their injured country." The Lieutenant Governor was greatly
scandalized at a vote of 50,000 for roads, in the previous session;
but now ten times that amount was voted for the same purpose. The bill
authorized the government to appoint commissioners to expend the
money. If there were grave objections to allowing members of the House
to perform this duty, the matter was not likely to be made much better
by investing an irresponsible administration with the entire control
of the expenditure, through agents of its selection. The money bills,
passed this session, show an extraordinary degree of recklessness, on
the part of the House, in incurring debt. The Welland Canal debt was
increased to nearly a million of dollars. Authority was given to
borrow on the credit of the Province over three quarters of a million
(300,000) more, on account of a projected railroad from Hamilton to
Sandwich; to lend $400,000 to the Toronto and Lake Huron Railway
Company; for a loan of 77,000 for the improvement of the Trent
Navigation. A large number of other loans to companies connected with
harbors, canals, and navigation, was authorized. The entire amount
voted must have been about five millions of dollars; bearing a larger
proportion to the revenue than a hundred millions would at present.
The establishment of fifty-seven Rectories by Sir J. Colborne, before
he left the government, which had given great offence to a large
majority of the population,[161] received the approval of the
Assembly.

[Footnote 160: In one of his electioneering replies to addresses, Sir
F. B. Head said: "Upper Canada has been so cruelly deceived by false
statements, that the farmers' interests are neglected, while the
agitators of the Province have been reaping a rich harvest.

"Gentlemen, I was sent here by His Majesty on purpose to correct the
grievances of the country. I see quite clearly who are its enemies;
and I declare to you, that if the farmers will assist me, I will
assist them.

"It is quite certain that I can render this Province powerful
assistance; and it is equally certain that I have been ordered by His
Majesty so to do."

And in another: "Gentlemen, I need hardly assure you that I myself am
an advocate for reform, because if you will but take the trouble to
read my instructions, they will show you, that I was sent to Upper
Canada by our Gracious Sovereign for the express purpose of carrying
reform into effect."]

[Footnote 161: When Sir F. B. Head undertook to manage the elections,
he found the Rectory question one of his difficulties. "The feeling
which the endowment of these Rectories created through the Province,"
he admitted in a dispatch to the Colonial Secretary, "was one of the
many difficulties I had to contend against, during the late
elections."]

The session closed in one of those hurricanes of passion which often
precede a violent revolutionary movement. The question of a Union of
Upper and Lower Canada had been before the House during the session,
and resolutions had been passed condemning the project. At twelve
o'clock on the last day of the session--the prorogation was to take
place at three--Messrs. Sherwood and Jones asked the concurrence of
the House in an address to the Crown founded on the resolutions. Dr.
Rolph moved an amendment, the object of which was to prevent a
decision on the question in the absence of many members who had
already gone home. He was followed by two other speakers on the same
side, and as time was running rapidly against them, and Black Rod
would soon make his appearance, the Tories began to show signs of
impatience--moving about, whispering in little knots together, and
calling "question" and "order." Then, at the instance of Messrs. Jones
and Draper, the Speaker called Dr. Rolph to order, laying down the
rule that the question of Union could not be discussed on the
amendment, but that it was only permissible to argue from the absence
of members. Trying what he could do within these narrow limits, Dr.
Rolph proceeded:--

"Our geographical situation," he said, "is singular. To the South we
are barred from the Atlantic coast by the American Republics; to the
North and North-West you pass through barren lands to mountains
covered with everlasting snows; and among Indian tribes unknown; and
to the East we are intercepted by the sister Province, the very
Province with which it is proposed to unite us." Here he paused
amidst a scene of wild confusion. Three members were conferring with
the Speaker, and others of the majority were consulting together in
clusters, when the Speaker, addressing Dr. Rolph, told him he must
confine himself to the question. "Most logically, sir," was the reply,
"nothing but the gossipping about you prevented you from comprehending
the bearing of my remarks," Mr. Jones, in an undertone: "This is
indecent." Dr. Rolph: "The honorable and learned member says, 'This is
indecent.'" Mr. Jones: "I only said so to you, not to the House." Dr.
Rolph: "What is said to me is said to the House. Indecent to discuss
the question of Union introduced by himself!" The Speaker interposes:
"That, sir, is beside the question." Dr. Rolph: "Do, sir, then your
duty by protecting the minority against the majority," There was now a
scene of complete confusion and disorder; members moving about,
whistling and talking, amid cries of "Chair." The Speaker again
interposed: "Really the time must not be thus consumed; we shall soon
have to wait upon the Lieutenant Governor with some joint address,"
Dr. Rolph: "Then postpone the discussion till next session; surely
want of time is attributable to those who now bring on the question at
the eleventh-hour, not to this side of the House, who are forced into
it." After a further altercation, the amendment was put and lost, and
just as the Speaker was about to put the main motion, Dr. Rolph rose,
saying: "Mr. Speaker, I have another amendment to propose,
notwithstanding your high-handed method of putting me down." Mr.
Sherwood: "Order! order! chair." Several voices: "Protect the chair."
The Speaker made some remark that was not audible below the bar. Dr.
Rolph: "Bear it; yes, it is but little of what is deserved." He then
moved that the sense of the country on the subject of a Union of the
Province would be best ascertained by dissolution, as a means of
appealing to the country. Having thus obtained the right to enter on a
wider range of discussion, he went on amid the same confusion as
before, and when he was uttering the words, "The evil of our inland
situation is admitted; what is the remedy?"--the Speaker announced:
"The time has arrived--half-past one--to wait on the Lieutenant
Governor with some joint address." And the scene was abruptly brought
to a close.

Thus ended the last regular session of the Upper Canada Legislature
preceding the outbreak of 1837, though an extraordinary session was to
intervene. Several such scenes had occurred during the first session
of the "Bread and Butter" Parliament.[162]

[Footnote 162: The Montreal _Gazette_, a Tory paper, was greatly
scandalized at the "scenes of an unseemly character that have lately
been enacted in the Commons House of Assembly of our sister Province
of Upper Canada. "We particularly allude," it said, "to the
disorderly, and, we must add, disgraceful manner in which important
questions were discussed during the late session. Why, we ask, on any
question, however much it may involve the interests of the public, or
excite the feelings of contending and opposite parties, should the
present House of Assembly of Upper Canada, of all others, so far
forget what was due to itself, to the dignity of its deliberations, to
the welfare of its constituency, to the prosperity of the Province,
and the fair fame and honor of its character, as to permit itself for
an instant to break loose like so many Bedlamites into those scenes of
riotous disorder to which we have alluded, and which, it is admitted
on all hands, reflect but little credit on the best and wisest among
them."]

In the last session of the previous Parliament, Mr. Mackenzie, as has
already been noticed, had carried an address to the King, praying that
the Imperial Government would, by the use of its diplomatic
instrumentalities, endeavor to procure for Canadians transit of goods
through the United States free from import duties. But as it had not
brought about the desired result, a large number of Canadians
petitioned the Federal authorities, at Washington, to grant a drawback
of duties on Canadian imports passing _in transitu_ through the United
States. And it was alleged that the petition received more attention
than was paid to the address sent to England, though it appears to me
that the facts hardly bore out the statement.

This spring Mr. Mackenzie went to New York, arriving there about the
end of March. At the trade sales, then going on, he purchased several
thousand volumes of books, and made large additions to his printing
establishment. About two years before he had added a large book-store
to his other business, and his present purchases furnished decisive
proof that, at this time, the idea of risking every thing upon an
armed insurrection had not entered into his calculations.


Transcriber's Notes:

Small changes in punctuation and corrections in spelling have been made
without comment. Otherwise, the text has been maintained as in the
original, except:

1. page 66--footnote 20--typo 'VanKoughnett' corrected to 'Vankoughnett'

2. page 126--typo 'Randal' changed to 'Randall'

3. page 136--typo 'Excutive' changed to 'Executive'




[End of _The Life and Times of Wm. Lyon Mackenzie, Vol. 1 of 2_ by Charles Lindsey]
