Chapter XXVIII: Section 4 (4)

"But the most serious mischief in the administration of criminal justice, arises from the entire perversion of the institution of juries, by the political and national prejudices of the people. The trial by jury was introduced with the rest of the English criminal law. For a long time the composition of both grand and petit juries was settled by the governor, and they were at first taken from the cities, which were the _chefs lieux_ of the district. Complaints were made that this gave an undue preponderance to the British in those cities; though, from the proportions of the population, it is not very obvious how they could thereby obtain more than an equal share. In consequence, however, of these complaints, an order was issued under the government of Sir James Kempt, directing the sheriffs to take the juries not only from the cities, but from the adjacent country, for fifteen leagues in every direction. An Act was subsequently passed, commonly called `Mr Viger's Jury Act,' extending these limits to those of the district. The principle of taking the jury from the whole district to which the jurisdiction of the court extended, is, undoubtedly, in conformity with the principles of English law; and Mr Viger's Act, adopting the other regulations of the English jury law, provided a fair selection of juries. But if we consider the hostility and proportions of the two races, the practical effect of this law was to give the French an entire preponderance in the juries. This Act was one of the temporary Acts of the Assembly, and, having expired in 1836, the Legislative Council refused to renew it. Since that period, there has been no jury law whatever. The composition of the juries has been altogether in the hands of the Government: private instructions, however, have been given to the sheriff to act in conformity with Sir James Kempt's ordinance; but though he has always done so, the public have had no security for any fairness in the selection of the juries. There was no visible check on the sheriff; the public knew that he could pack a jury whenever he pleased, and supposed, as a matter of course, that an officer, holding a lucrative appointment at the pleasure of Government, would be ready to carry into effect those unfair designs which they were always ready to attribute to the Government. When I arrived in the Province, the public were expecting the trials of the persons accused of participation in the late insurrection. I was, on the one hand, informed by the law officers of the Crown, and the highest judicial authorities, that not the slightest chance existed, under any fair system of getting a jury, that would convict any of these men, however clear the evidence of their guilt might be; and, on the other side, I was given to understand, that the prisoners and their friends supposed that, as a matter of course, they would be tried by packed juries, and that even the most clearly innocent of them would be convicted.

"It is, indeed, a lamentable fact which must not be concealed, that there does not exist in the minds of the people of this Province the slightest confidence in the administration of criminal justice; nor were the complaints, or the apparent grounds for them, confined to one party.

"The trial by jury is, therefore, at the present moment, not only productive in Lower Canada of no confidence in the honest administration of the laws, but also provides impunity for every political offence."

I have made these long quotations from Lord Durham's Report as his lordship's authority, he having been sent out as Lord High Commissioner to the Province, to make the necessary inquiries, must carry more weight with the public than any observations of mine. All I can do is to assert that his lordship is very accurate; and, having made this assertion, I ask, what chance, therefore, is there of good government, if the power, or any portion of the power, be left in the hands of those who have in every way proved themselves so adverse to good government, and who have wound up such conduct by open rebellion.

The position of the Executive in Canada has, for a long while, been just what our position in this country would be if the House of Commons were composed of Chartist leaders. Every act brought forward by them would tend to revolution, and be an infringement of the Constitution, and all that the House of Lords would have to do, would be firmly to reject every bill carried to the Upper House. If our House of Commons were filled with rebels and traitors, the Government must stand still, and such has been for these ten years the situation of the Canadian government; and, fortunate it is, that the outbreak has now put us in a position that will enable us to retrieve our error, and re-model the constitution of these Provinces. The questions which must therefore be settled previous to any fresh attempts at legislation for these Canadians, are,--are, or are not, the French population to have any share in it? Can they be trusted? Are they in any way deserving of it? In few words, are the Canadas to be hereafter considered as a French or an English colony?

When we legislate, unless we intend to change, we must look to futurity. The question, then, is not, who are the majority of to-day, but who will hereafter be the majority in the Canadian Provinces; for all agree upon one point, which is, that we must legislate for the majority. At present, the population is nearly equal, but every year increases the preponderance of the English; and it is to be trusted that, by good management, and the encouragement of emigration, in half a century the French population will be so swallowed up by the English, as to be remembered but on record. If, again, we put the claims of British loyalty against the treason of the French--the English energy, activity, and capital, in opposition to the supineness, ignorance, and incapacity of the French population,--it is evident, that not only in justice and gratitude, but with a due regard to our own interests, the French Canadians must now be _wholly deprived_ of any share of that power which they have abused, and that confidence of which they have proved themselves so unworthy. I am much pleased to find that Lord Durham has expressed the same opinion, in the following remarks; and I trust their importance will excuse to the reader the length of the quotation.

"The English have already in their hands the majority of the larger masses of property in the country; they have the decided superiority of intelligence on their side; they have the certainty that colonisation must swell their numbers to a majority; and they belong to the race which wields the Imperial Government, and predominates on the American continent. If we now leave them in a minority, they will never abandon the assurance of being a majority hereafter, and never cease to continue the present contest with all the fierceness with which it now rages. In such a contest, they will rely on the sympathy of their countrymen at home; and if that is denied them, they feel very confident of being able to awaken the sympathy of their neighbours of kindred origin. They feel that if the British Government intends to maintain its hold of the Canadas, it can rely on the English population alone; that if it abandons its colonial possessions, they must become a portion of that great Union which will speedily send forth its swarms of settlers, and, by force of numbers and activity, quickly master every other race. The French Canadians, on the other hand, are but the remains of an ancient colonisation, and are and ever must be isolated in the midst of an Anglo-Saxon world. Whatever may happen, whatever government shall be established over them, British or American, they can see no hope for their nationality. They can only sever themselves from the British empire by waiting till some general cause of dissatisfaction alienates them, together with the surrounding colonies, and leaves them part of an English confederacy; or, if they are able, by effecting a separation singly, and so either merging in the American Union, or keeping up for a few years a wretched semblance of feeble independence, which would expose them more than ever to the intrusion of the surrounding population. I am far from wishing to encourage, indiscriminately, these pretensions to superiority on the part of any particular race; but while the greater part of every portion of the American continent is still uncleared and unoccupied, and while the English exhibit such constant and marked activity in colonisation, so long will it be idle to imagine that there is any portion of that continent into which that race will not penetrate, or in which, when it has penetrated, it will not predominate. It is but a question of time and mode; it is but to determine whether the small number of French who now inhabit Lower Canada shall be made English, under a government which can protect them, or whether the process shall be delayed until a much larger number shall have to undergo, at the rude hands of its uncontrolled rivals, the extinction of a nationality strengthened and embittered by continuance.

"And is this French Canadian nationality one which, for the good merely of that people, we ought to strive to perpetuate, even if it were possible? I know of no national distinctions marking and continuing a more hopeless inferiority. The language, the laws, the character of the North American Continent are English; and every race but the English (I apply this to all who speak the English language) appears there in a condition of inferiority. It is to elevate them from that inferiority that I desire to give to the Canadians our English character. I desire it for the sake of the educated classes, whom the distinction of language and manners keeps apart from the great empire to which they belong. At the best, the fate of the educated and aspiring colonist is, at present, one of little hope, and little activity; but the French Canadian is cast still further into the shade, by a language and habits foreign to those of the Imperial Government. A spirit of exclusion has closed the higher professions on the educated classes of the French Canadians, more, perhaps, than was absolutely necessary; but it is impossible for the utmost liberality on the part of the British Government to give an equal position in the general competition of its vast population to those who speak a foreign language. I desire the amalgamation still more for the sake of the humbler classes. Their present state of rude and equal plenty is fast deteriorating under the pressure of population in the narrow limits to which they are confined. If they attempt to better their condition, by extending themselves over the neighbouring country, they will necessarily get more and more mingled with an English population; if they prefer remaining stationary, the greater part of them must be labourers in the employ of English capitalists. In either case it would appear, that the great mass of the French Canadians are doomed, in some measure, to occupy an inferior position, and to be dependent on the English for employment. The evils of poverty and dependence would merely be aggravated in a ten-fold degree, by a spirit of jealous and resentful nationality, which should separate the working class of the community from the possessors of wealth and employers of labour.

"I will not here enter into the question of the effect of the mode of life and division of property among the French Canadians, on the happiness of the people. I will admit, for the moment, that it is as productive of well-being as its admirers assert. But, be it good or bad, the period in which it is practicable, is past; for there is not enough unoccupied land left in that portion of the country in which English are not already settled, to admit of the present French population possessing farms sufficient to supply them with their present means of comfort, under their present system of husbandry. No population has increased by mere births so rapidly as that of the French Canadians has since the conquest. At that period their number was estimated at 60,000: it is now supposed to amount to more than seven times as many. There has been no proportional increase of cultivation, or of produce from the land already under cultivation; and the increased population has been in a great measure provided for by mere continued subdivision of estates. In a Report from a Committee of the Assembly in 1826, of which Mr Andrew Steuart was chairman, it is stated, that since 1784 the population of the seignories had quadrupled, while the number of cattle had only doubled, and the quantity of land in cultivation had only increased one-third. Complaints of distress are constant, and the deterioration of the condition of a great part of the population admitted on all hands. A people so circumstanced must alter their mode of life. If they wish to maintain the same kind of rude, but well-provided agricultural existence, it must be by removing into those parts of the country in which the English are settled; or if they cling to their present residence, they can only obtain a livelihood by deserting their present employment, and working for wages on farms, or on commercial occupations under English capitalists. But their present proprietary and inactive condition is one which no political arrangements can perpetuate. Were the French Canadians to be guarded from the influx of any other population, their condition in a few years would be similar to that of the poorest of the Irish peasantry.

"There can hardly be conceived a nationality more destitute of all that can invigorate and elevate a people, than that which is exhibited by the descendants of the French in Lower Canada, owing to their retaining their peculiar language and manners. They are a people with no history, and no literature. The literature of England is written in a language which is not theirs; and the only literature which their language renders familiar to them, is that of a nation from which they have been separated by eighty years of a foreign rule, and still more by those changes which the Revolution and its consequences have wrought in the whole political, moral, and social state of France. Yet it is on a people whom recent history, manners, and modes of thought, so entirely separate from them, that the French Canadians are wholly dependent for almost all the instruction and amusement derived from books: it is on this essentially foreign literature, which is conversant about events, opinions and habits of life, perfectly strange and unintelligible to them, that they are compelled to be dependent. Their newspapers are mostly written by natives of France, who have either come to try their fortunes in the province, or been brought into it by the party leaders, in order to supply the dearth of literary talent available for the political press. In the same way their nationality operates to deprive them of the enjoyments and civilising influence of the arts. Though descended from the people in the world that most generally love, and have most successfully cultivated the drama--though living on a continent, in which almost every town, great or small, has an English theatre, the French population of Lower Canada, cut off from every people that speak its own language, can support no national stage.

"In these circumstances, I should be indeed surprised if the more reflecting part of the French Canadians entertained at present any hope of continuing to preserve their nationality. Much as they struggle against it, it is obvious that the process of assimilation to English habits is already commencing. The English language is gaining ground, as the language of the rich and of the employers of labour naturally will. It appeared by some of the few returns, which had been received by the Commissioner of Inquiry into the state of education, that there are about ten times the number of French children in Quebec learning English, as compared with the English children who learn French. A considerable time must, of course, elapse before the change of a language can spread over a whole people; and justice and policy alike require, that while the people continue to use the French language, their government should take no such means to force the English language upon them as would, in fact, deprive the great mass of the community of the protection of the laws. But, I repeat, that the alteration of the character of the province ought to be immediately entered on, and firmly, though cautiously, followed up; that in any plan, which may be adopted for the future management of Lower Canada, the first object ought to be that of making it an English province; and that, with this end in view, the ascendancy should never again be placed in any hands but those of an English population. Indeed, at the present moment, this is obviously necessary: in the state of mind in which I have described the French Canadian population, as not only now being, but as likely for a long while to remain, the trusting them with an entire control over this province would be, in fact, only facilitating a rebellion. Lower Canada must be governed now, as it must be hereafter, by an English population; and thus the policy, which the necessities of the moment force on us, is in accordance with that suggested by a comprehensive view of the future and permanent improvement of the province."

VOLUME THREE, CHAPTER SIX.

THE CANADAS, CONTINUED.

I have quoted largely from Lord Durham's Report, as in most points relative to _Lower Canada_, especially as to the causes which produced the rebellion, the unwarrantable conduct of the Legislative Assembly, and his opinions as to the character of the French Canadians, I consider that the remarks are correct: they are corroborated by my own opinions and observations: but I think that the information he has received relative to _Upper Canada_ is not only very imperfect, but certainly derived from parties who were not to be trusted: take one simple instance. His lordship says in his Report, that the petitioners in favour of Mathews and Lount, who were executed, amounted to 30,000, whereas it is established, that the whole number of six natures only amounted to 4,574. Those who deceive his lordship in one point would deceive him in another; indeed his lordship had a task of peculiar difficulty, going out as he did, vested with such powers, and the intents of his mission being so well known. It is not those who are in high office that are likely to ascertain the truth, which is much more likely to be communicated to a humble individual like myself, who travels through a country and hears what is said on both sides. The causes stated by his lordship for discontent in Upper Canada are not correct. I have before said, and I repeat it, that they may almost be reduced to the following: the check put upon their enterprise and industry by the acts of the Lower Canadian Assembly; and the favour shewn to the French by the Colonial Office, aided by the machinations of the American party, who fomented any appearance of discontent.

There is in his lordship's Report, an apparent leaning towards the United States, and its institutions, at which I confess that I am surprised. Why his lordship, after shewing that the representative government did all they possibly could to overthrow the constitution, should propose an increase of power to that representative government, unless, indeed, he would establish a democracy in the provinces, I am at a loss to imagine.

That a representative body similar to that which attempted to overturn the constitution in Lower Canada can work well, and even usefully reform when in the hands of loyal English subjects, is acknowledged by his lordship, who says, "the course of the Parliamentary contest in Upper Canada has not been marked by that singular neglect of the great duties of a legislative body, which I have remarked in the proceedings of the Parliament of Lower Canada. The statute book of the Upper Province abounds with useful and well-constructed measures of reform, and presents an honourable contrast to that of the Lower Province."

Indeed, unless I have misunderstood his lordship he appears to be inconsistent, for in one portion he claims the extension of the power of the representative, and in another he complains of the want of vigorous administration of the royal prerogative, for he says:--

"The defective system of administration in Lower Canada, commences at the very _source_ of power; and the efficiency of the public service is impaired throughout by the entire want in the colony of any vigorous administration of the prerogative of the crown."

To increase the power of the representative is to increase the power of the people, in fact to make them the _source_ of power; and yet his lordship in this sentence acknowledges that the crown is the _source_ of power, and that a more vigorous administration of its prerogative is required.

There are other points commented upon in his lordship's Report, which claim earnest consideration: one is, that of the propriety of municipal institutions. Local improvements, when left in the hands of representative assemblies, are seldom judicious or impartial, and should therefore be made over either to the inhabitants or executive. The system of townships has certainly been one great cause of the prosperity of the United States, each township taxing itself for its own improvement. Although the great roads extending through the whole of the Union are in the hands of the Federal Government, and the States Government take up the improvement on an extensive scale in the States themselves, the townships, knowing exactly what they require, tax themselves for their minor advantages. The system in England is much the same, although perhaps not so well regulated as in America. Are not, however, municipal institutions valuable in another point of view? Do they not prepare the people for legislating? are they not the rudiments of legislation by which a free people learn to tax themselves? And indeed, it may also be asked, would not the petty influence and authority confided to those who are ambitious by their townsmen satisfy their ambition, and prevent them from becoming demagogues and disturbing the country?

Whatever may be the future arrangements for ruling these provinces, it appears to me that there are two great evils in the present system; one is, that the governors of the provinces have not sufficient discretionary power, and the other, that they are so often removed. The evils arising from the first cause have been pointed out in Lord Durham's Report:--

"The complete and unavoidable ignorance in which the British public, and even the great body of its legislators, are with respect to the real interests of distant communities, so entirely different from their own, produces a general indifference, which nothing but so me great colonial crisis ever dispels; and responsibility to Parliament, or to the public opinion of Great Britain, would, except on these great and rare occasions, be positively mischievous, if it were not impossible. The repeated changes caused by political events at home having no connexion with colonial affairs, have left, to most of the various representatives of the Colonial Department in Parliament, too little time to acquire even an elementary knowledge of the condition of those numerous and heterogeneous communities for which they have had both to administer and legislate. The persons with whom the real management of these affairs has or ought to have rested, have been the permanent but utterly irresponsible members of the office. Thus the real government of the colony has been entirely dissevered from the slight nominal responsibility which exists. Apart even from this great and primary evil of the system, the presence of multifarious business thus thrown on the Colonial Office, and the repeated changes of its ostensible directors, have produced disorders in the management of public business which have occasioned serious mischief, and very great irritation. This is not my own opinion merely; for I do but repeat that of a select committee of the House of Assembly in Upper Canada, who, in a Report dated February 8, 1838, say, `It appears to your committee, that one of the chief causes of dissatisfaction with the administration of colonial affairs arises from the frequent changes in the office of secretary of state, to whom the Colonial department is intrusted. Since the time the late Lord Bathurst retired from that charge, in 1827, your committee believe there has not been less than eight colonial ministers, and that the policy of each successive statesman has been more or less marked by a difference from that of his predecessor. This frequency of change in itself almost necessarily entails two evils; _first_, an imperfect knowledge of the affairs of the colonies on the part of the chief secretary, and the consequent necessity of submitting important details to the subordinate officers of the department; and, _second_, the want of stability and firmness in the general policy of the Government, and which, of course, creates much uneasiness on the part of the Governors, and other officers of the colonies, as to what measures may be approved.

"`But undoubtedly (continues the Report) by far the greatest objection to the system is the impossibility it occasions of any colonial minister, unaided by persons possessing local knowledge, becoming acquainted with the wants, wishes, feelings, and prejudices of the inhabitants of the colonies, during his temporary continuance in office, and of deciding satisfactorily upon the conflicting statements and claims that are brought before him. A firm, unflinching resolution to adhere to the principles of the constitution, and to maintain the just and necessary powers of the crown, would do much towards supplying the want of local information. But it would be performing more than can be reasonably expected from human sagacity, if any man, or set of men, should always decide in an unexceptionable manner on subjects that have their origin thousands of miles from the seat of the Imperial Government, where they reside, and of which they have no personal knowledge whatever; and therefore wrong may be often done to individuals, or a false view taken of some important political question, that in the end may throw a whole community into difficulty and dissension, not from the absence of the most anxious desire to do right, but from an imperfect knowledge of facts upon which to form an opinion.'"

This is all very true. There is nothing so difficult as to legislate for a colony from home. The very best theory is useless; it requires that you should be on the spot, and adapt your measures to the circumstances and the growing wants of the country. I may add that it is wrong for the Home Government to consider the government given to the colony as permanent. All that the mother-country can do is to give it one which, in theory, appears best adapted to secure the true freedom and happiness of the people; but leaving that form of government to be occasionally modified, so as to meet the changes which the colony may require, and to conform with its wants and its rising interests: all of which being unforeseen could not be provided for by the prescience of man. The governor, therefore, of a colony should be invested with more discretionary power.

The constant removal of the governor from the colony is also much to be deprecated. On his first arrival, he can only have formed theoretical views, which, in all probability, he will have to discard in a few months. He finds himself surrounded by people in office, interested in their own peculiar policy, and viewing things through their own medium. In all colonies you will usually find an oligarchy, cemented by mutual interest and family connection, and so bound up together as to become formidable if opposed to the Government. Into the hands of these people a governor must, to a certain degree, fall; and must remain in them until he has had time to see clearly and to judge for himself. But by the time that he has just disenthralled himself, he is removed, and another appointed in his place, and the work has to commence _de novo_.

Lord Durham has proposed that the Canadas should be united, and there certainly are some benefits which would arise _could_ their union take place. He asserts most positively that the French party must be annihilated. He says:--"It must henceforth be the first and steady purpose of the British Government to establish an English population, with English laws and language in this province, and to trust its government to none but a decidedly English legislature." This is plain and clear; but how is it to be effected? The land of Lower Canada is still in the hands of the French, and nearly five hundred thousand out of six hundred thousand of the population are French.

How, then, are we to make the Lower Canadas English? We may buy up the seigneuries; we may insist upon the English language being used in the Assembly and courts of law, in public documents, etcetera; we may alter the laws to correspond with those of the mother-country; but will that make the province English? We may even insist that none but English-born subjects, or Canadian-born English, shall be elected to the House of Assembly, or hold any public office; but will that make the province English? Certainly not. There is no want of English-born demagogues, as well as French, in the province. The elections of the Lower province are decided by the Canadian French, who are in the majority, and they would find no difficulty in obtaining representatives who would continue the former system of controlling the executive and advocating rebellion. Is it, then, by altogether taking away from the Canadian French the elective franchise and giving it entirely into the hands of the English, that the province is to be made English? If so, although I admit the French have proved themselves undeserving, and have by their rebellion forfeited their birth-right, you then place them in the situation of an injured, oppressed, and sacrificed people; reducing them to a state of slavery which, notwithstanding their offences, would still be odious to the present age. By what means, therefore, does his lordship intend that the province shall become English--by immigration? That requires time; and before the immigration necessary can take place the Canadas may be again thrown into a rebellion by the French machinations. In our future legislation for the Canadas, we must always bear in mind that the French population will be opposed to the Government and to the mother-country; and that there is no chance of a better state of feeling in the Lower province until they shall become amalgamated and swallowed up by British immigration. Until that takes place, the union of the Canadas will only create a conflict between the two races, as opposed to each other as fire and water, and nearly equal in numbers. It will be an immense cauldron, bubbling, steaming, and boiling over--an incessant scene of strife and irritation--a source of anxiety and expense to the mother-country, and, so far from going a-head, I should not be surprised if, in twenty years hence, the English population should be found to be smaller than it now is. Political dissensions would paralyse enterprise, frighten away capital, and, in all probability, involve us in a conflict with the United States. Until, therefore, I understand how the Lower Province is to become British, I cannot think a union between the Canadas advisable.

Whether his lordship is aware of it or not, I cannot say; but there appears to me to be a strong inclination to democracy in all his proposed plans, and an evident leaning towards the institutions of the United States. He wishes to make the Executive Government responsible to the people; he would make one Federal Union of all our provinces, and institute the Supreme Court of Appeal which they have in the United States. In short, change but the word governor for president, and we should have the American constitution, and a "free and enlightened people;"--that is to say, the French Canadians, who can _neither read nor write_, governing themselves.

So far from a Federal union between all our transatlantic possessions being advisable, I should think, from their contiguity with the Americans, that it would be advisable to keep them separate. I am of the same opinion respecting the Canadas. I consider that, even as two provinces, they are too vast in territory already. Whether it be a woman looking after her servants and household affairs, or a captain commanding a ship, or a governor ruling over a province, large or small as may be the scale of operation, one of the most important points in good legislation, is the _eye_. A governor of a vast province cannot possibly be aware of the wants of the various portions of the province. He is obliged to take the reports of others, and consequently very often legislates unadvisedly.

That the two provinces cannot remain in their present state is acknowledged by all. The question therefore is, can we rationally expect any improvement from their union? Perhaps it may appear presumptuous in me to venture to differ from Lord Durham, who is a statesman born and bred--for this is not a party question in which a difference of politics may bias one: it is a question as to the well-governing of a most important colony, and no one will for a moment doubt that his lordship is as anxious as the Duke of Wellington, and every other well-wisher to his country, to decide upon that which he considers honestly and honourably to be the best. It is really, therefore, with great deference that I submit to him, whether another arrangement should not be well considered, before the union of the two provinces is finally decided upon.

His lordship has very truly observed, that in legislating, we are to legislate for futurity; if not, we must be prepared for change. Acting upon this sound principle, we are to legislate upon the supposition that the whole country of Upper and Lower Canada _is_ well peopled. We are not to legislate for the present population, but for the future. And how is this to be done in the present condition of the provinces? Most assuredly by legislating for territory--for the amount of square acres which will eventually be filled up by emigration. I perfectly agree with his lordship in the remark that, "if the Canadians are to be deprived of their representative government, it would be better to do it in a straightforward way;" but I submit that it would be done in a straightforward way by the plan I am about to submit to him, and I consider it more advisable than that of convulsing the two provinces by bringing together two races so inveterate against each other. Instead of a union of the two provinces, I should think it more advisable to separate the Canadas into three: Upper, Lower, and Middle Canada,--the line of demarcation, and the capitals of each Province appearing already to be marked out. The Lower province would have Quebec, and be separated from the Middle province by the Ottawa river. The Middle province would have Montreal, and would extend to a line drawn from Lake Simcoe to Lake Ontario, throwing into it _all the townships on the American side of the St Lawrence_, which would do away with the great objection of the Upper province being dependent upon the Lower for the transport of goods up the river, and the necessity of dividing between the provinces the custom-house revenues. Under any circumstances, it would be very advantageous to have sport of entry and a custom-house, in or nearer to the Gulf of St Lawrence, as ships would then be able to make an extra voyage every year. I should say that about Gaspe would be the spot. This bay being on the American side of the river St Lawrence would become the entry port for the Upper and Middle provinces, rendering them wholly independent of the Lower. The Upper province would comprehend all the rest of the territory west of the line, drawn from Lake Superior, and have Toronto for its capital. This would be a pretty fair division of territory, and each province would be more than sufficient for the eye of the most active governor. Let each province have its separate sub-governor and House of Assembly; but let the Upper House, or Senate, be selected of _equal numbers_ from _each_ province, and assemble at Quebec, to decide, with the _Governor-in-chief of the provinces_, upon the passing or rejecting of the bills of the three respective Lower Houses. This, although perfectly fair, would at once give in the _Senate_ the preponderance to the English of the Upper and Middle provinces. It would still leave to the Lower Canadians their franchise; and their House of Assembly would be a species of safety-valve for the demagogues to give vent to their opinions, (without their being capable of injuring the interests of the provinces,) until they gradually amalgamated with the British immigration. I merely offer this plan as a suggestion to his lordship, and, of course, enter into no further detail.

There are, however, one or two other points which appear to me to be worthy of consideration. If the Canadas are of that importance which I think them, there are no means which we should not use to attach them to the mother country--to make them partial to monarchical institutions-- and to _identify_ them with the British empire. We should make sacrifices for them that we would not for other colonies; and therefore it is that I venture my opinion, that it would not only be politic, but just, to such an extensive territory--and what will eventually be, such an extensive population--to permit each of the three provinces, (provided they are ever divided into three,) to select one of their senate to represent them in the British House of Commons. I consider it but an act of justice as well as of policy. This step would, as I said before, _identify_ these valuable provinces with ourselves. They then would feel that they were not merely ruled by, but that they were part and portion of, and assisted in, the government of the British empire. And to draw the line as strictly as possible between them and their democratic neighbours, and to attach them still closer to monarchical institutions, it should be proposed to the Sovereign of these realms that an Order of knighthood and an Order of merit expressly Canadian should be instituted. These last may be considered by many to be, and perhaps in themselves are, trifles; but they are no trifles when you consider that they must militate against those democratic feelings of equality which have been so industriously and so injuriously circulated in the provinces by our transatlantic descendants. I cannot better conclude these observations than by quoting the opinion of so intelligent a nobleman as Lord Durham, who asserts most positively that, "England, if she loses her North American colonies, must sink into a second-rate power."

VOLUME THREE, CHAPTER SEVEN.

INDIANS.

There was no subject of higher interest to me during my travels in North America, than the past and present condition of the Indian tribes. Were I to enter into the history of the past, I could easily fill three or four volumes with matter which I think would be found very well worth perusing. It is to be lamented that there has been no correct history of the Indian tribes yet published. There are many authors in America well calculated to undertake the task; and the only reason which I can give for its not having been already done, is that, probably, the American Government are not very willing to open the archives of the Indian department even to their own countrymen; and, at the same that time, an American author, who would adhere to the truth, would not become very popular by exposing the system of rapine and injustice which was commenced by the English who first landed, and has been continued up to the present day by the Federal Government of the United States. Nevertheless, it is to be lamented, now that the race is so fast disappearing, that a good historical account of them is not published. There is no want of material for the purpose, even if the Government refuse their aid; but at present, it is either scattered in various works, or when attempted to be collected together, the author has not been equal to the task.

There is a question which has been raised by almost every traveller in America, and that is--from whom are the American Indians descended? and I think, from the many works I have consulted, that the general opinion is, that they are descended from the lost tribes of Israel. We have never discovered any other nation of savages, if we may apply such a term to the American Indians, who have not been idolators; the American Indian is the only one who worships the one living God. In a discourse, which was delivered by Mr Noah, one of the most intelligent of the Jewish nation that I ever had the pleasure of being acquainted with, there is much deep research, and a collection of the various opinions upon this subject. To quote from it would not do it justice, and I have therefore preferred, as it is not long, giving the whole of it in the

Appendix, as it is not (though should be more) generally known. In the second volume I have given a map of North America, in which I have laid down, as correctly as I can, and sufficiently so for the purpose, the supposed locations of the various tribes, at the period that the white man first put his foot on shore in America. I have said "as correctly as I can," for it would be as difficult to trace the outer edges of a shifting sand-bank under water, as to lay down the exact portion of territory occupied by tribes who were continually at war, and who advanced or retreated according as they were victorious or vanquished. Indeed, many tribes were totally annihilated, or their remnants incorporated into others, living far away from their original territories: the Tuscororas, for instance, were driven out of Carolina and admitted into the Mohawk confederacy, which originally came down from the upper shores of the river St Lawrence. The Winnebagoes, also, were driven from the south and settled on the river Wisconsin. The Sacs and Foxes fought their way from the river St Lawrence to the Fox river, in Wisconsin, and were driven from thence, by the Menomonies and Chippewas, to the territory of Rock river, on the river Mississippi, where they remained, until deprived of their territory by the Federal Government, and sent away to the west of the river. I make these observations that the map may not be cavilled at by some hyper critic, who has thought that he has discovered a mare's nest; it is as accurate as I can make it, and I profess to do no more.

Notwithstanding the vicissitudes which continually occurred, the tribes of North American Indians may be classed as follows:--

The Algonquin stock of the North--under which are comprehended the Chippewas, Ottawas, Menomonies, Hurons, etcetera.

The Southern tribes, who are also descended from one stock, and comprise Creeks, Cherokees, Choctaws, Catawbaws, Chickasaws, etcetera.

The _Horse_ Indians of the West, as the Pawnees, Osages, Sioux, Kansas, Comanches, etcetera.

The Indians of the Rocky Mountains, as Crows, Snakes, and Blackfeet.

All the above races were composed of numerous tribes, who acknowledged themselves as blood relations, but did not enter into any confederacy for mutual support; on the contrary, often warred they with each other. There were other powerful tribes, which resided between the lakes and the Ohio, bordering on the hunting grounds of Kentucky and Tenessee, which portion appeared to be set aside, by general consent, not only for hunting but for war. There were Delawares, or Lenni-Lenape, the Shawnees, Wyandots, Illinois, Peoria, and some others.

The _confederate_ tribes, and with which the early settlers had to contend, were as follows:--

The Powhatan confederacy, comprising the Monacans, Monahoacs, and Powhatans, occupying the present state of Virginia from the sea-coast to the Alleghany mountains.

The New England confederacy, who resided in the present States of New England, composed of the Pequots, Narangassets, Pawtuckets, Pokanokets, and Massachusetts tribes.

And lastly, the confederacy of the five nations, or Mohawks, called Mingos by the other Indians, and Iroquois by the French. This confederacy was composed of the Mohawks, Oneidas, Caguyas, Onandagas, and Senecas. The Tuscaroras were afterwards admitted as a sixth.

I will make a few brief observations upon the various tribes, in the order I have set them down.

The Algonquin stock has suffered less than any other, simply because they have been located so far north, and their lands have not been required. The Chippewas are at present the most numerous tribe of Indians. The most celebrated chief of this stock was Pontiac, an Ottawa. After the Canadas were given up to the English, he proved a most formidable enemy; he attempted and, to a certain degree, succeeded, in uniting the tribes against us, and had not his plot been discovered, would, in all probability, have wrested from us Detroit, and every other post in our possession on the lakes. But Pontiac could not keep up a standing army, which was so contrary to the habits of the Indians; one by one the tribes deserted him, and sued for peace. Pontiac would not listen to any negotiations: he retired to Illinois, and was murdered by a Peoria Indian. The Ottawas, Chippewas, and Pottawatamies, who fought under him, avenged his death by the extermination of nearly the whole tribe of Peorias. Pontiac was one of the greatest Indians in history.

Of the Southern tribes there are not any records sufficiently prominent for so short a notice.

The Horse Indians of the West and those of the Rocky Mountains are scarcely known.

The Midland tribes produced some great men. The Delawares were at one period the most celebrated. The Shawanees, or Shawnees, do not appear to have been opposed to the Whites, until Boone and his adventurers crossed the Alleghanies, and took possession of the valley of Kentucky. But the Shawnees have to boast of Tecumseh, a chief, as great in renown as Pontiac; he also attempted to confederate all the tribes and drive away the Whites; his history is highly interesting. He fell in battle fighting for the English, in the war of 1814.

The _confederate tribes_ on the eastern coast, were those with which the first settlers were embroiled. The history of Virginia is remarkable for one of the most singular romances in real life which ever occurred: I allude to Pocahontas, the daughter of the king of the Powhatans, who saved the life of the enterprising Captain Smith, at the imminent risk of her own. The romance was not, however, wound up by their marriage, Captain Smith not being a marrying man; but she afterwards married a young Englishman, of the name of Randolph, was brought to England, received at court, and paid much attention to by Queen Anne. Some of the first families in Virginia proudly and justly claim their descent from this noble girl.

The New England Confederacy was opposed to the pilgrim fathers and their descendants. The chief tribe, the Wampanoags, have to boast of the third great chief among the Indian tribes--King Philip. His history is well known; I have already referred to it in my Diary.

If the reader will consult the histories of Philip, Pontiac and Tecumseh, who may fairly be said to have been "great men," he will perceive that in each case, these chiefs were the life and soul of enterprise and action, and that it was by their talents, bravery, and activity, that the tribes were confederated and led against the Whites. As soon as they were gone, there were none who could succeed them or fill up their places, and the confederacies were immediately broken up. But this was not the case with the celebrated five nations, or Mohawks, who, like the Romans of former days, spread their conquests until their name was a terror wherever it was mentioned. Philip, Pontiac and Tecumseh were great men, but the Mohawks' confederacy was a nation of great men. When the French settled in Canada in 1603, the Mohawks, or Iroquois as they called them, were living near to where Montreal now stands. They were at war with the Adirondacks, a very numerous and powerful nation, and were beaten down towards the Lakes; but they recovered themselves, and their opponents were in their turn beaten down to Quebec. The war between the Adirondacks and the Iroquois is full of the most interesting details of courage on both sides. The Iroquois having subdued, and, indeed, exterminated the Adirondacks, turned their arms against several other tribes, whom they vanquished; they then attacked the Ottawas and Hurons, and drove them to the other side of the Mississippi. The Illinois were next subdued, then the Miamies and Shawnees were driven back for the time. Finally, they conquered the Virginian tribes, and warred against the Cherokees, Catawbas, and other nations of the South. Although it was impossible for them to hold the vast extent of country which they had overrun, still it is certain that their very name was so terrible that, from New England to the Mississippi, every town and village would be deserted at their approach.

The chief portion of the Mohawks, under their celebrated leader Brandt, served on the British side in the war of Independence, and at the close of the war, they settled in lands given them by the English, on the banks of Grand river in Canada in the year 1783. At the time they took possession of their land, their numbers amounted to nearly 8,000; but, as is every where the case where the Indians are settled and confined on reserved lands, they have now decreased to about 2,500. A portion of the tribe of Senecas, one of the Mohawk confederacy, joined the Americans; the remnants of them are still located a few miles from Buffalo, in the State of New York. Their chief, Red-jacket, died lately; he was a great warrior and still greater orator.

The most formidable opponents to the five nations were the Delawares, or Lenni Lenape, who lived in Pennsylvania. The Delawares joined the British in the war of Independence.

In the succeeding chapter, I shall give the reader a census of the American Indian tribes which still remain. It will be perceived that they are chiefly comprised of tribes which inhabited the Far-West, and were until lately, almost unknown. Of the New England and Virginian confederacies, once so powerful, not a vestige remains; of the Delawares, 826 still exist west of the Mississippi; of the Shawanees, or Shawnees, once so terrible on the banks of the Ohio, 1,272. In fact, all those Indians whose territory bounded the coast first taken possession of by the white men, have been annihilated. I have often heard it argued, when I was in the United States, that the Indians could not be considered as having any claim to the land, as they did not settle or cultivate it, and it is a general opinion that they lived almost entirely by the proceeds of the chase: but this is not a fact; indeed it is disproved by the early settlers themselves, who acknowledge that if they had not been supplied with corn by the Indians they must have starved. That the Indians did not grow more than was sufficient for their own consumption is very probable, but that they did cultivate the land is most certain; indeed, when the country and soil were favourable, they appear to have cultivated to a great extent. When General Wayne destroyed the settlements of the Miamies and Wyandots, on the Miami river, in 1794, he says in his despatch, "never have I beheld such immense fields of corn in any part of America as possessed by these Indians." The chase was considered by the Indians as a preparatory school for warriors, and was followed accordingly; indeed, a hunting party and a war party were often one and the same thing, as the hunting grounds were common, and when tribes who were at variance fell in with each other, a conflict invariably ensued. My limits will not permit me to enter into the subject more fully; my object has been, in as few pages as possible, to assist the map in giving the reader some idea of the location of the Aborigines of America. If he would know more of this interesting people, there are many very excellent works concerning them written by Americans, which, were they collected together, would form a most valuable and important history.

VOLUME THREE, CHAPTER EIGHT.

INDIANS.