country fo differently circumftanced as Canada, why not make the elections annual, or triennial at moft? A feptennial bill indeed was peculiarly ill calculated for that country, where many of the molt refpectable perfons might be perfons in trade, and, if chofen reprefentatives for feven years, might not be in a fituation to attend during the whole of that period; though they might be able to give their attendance for one or even three years, without danger or inconvenience to their commercial concerns and thus, by a feptennial bill, the country of Canada might be deprived of more than half of the few representatives which were allowed it by the prefent arrange

ment.

The legiflative councils were con fidered as peculiarly liable to objec tion. In the firit place, they were unlimited as to numbers by any thing but the will of the government. Instead of being, as in fome of the Welt India colonies, hereditary councils, or councils chofen by electors, they were compounded of both. As to the points of hereditary honours and hereditary powers, Mr. Fox oblerved, to fay that they were good, or they were not good, as a general propofition, was not eafy to decide; but he faw nothing fo good in them as to warrant their introduction into a country where they were not known, and by fuch means to distinguish Canada froin all the colonies in the Weft Indies. In countries where they made a part of the conflitution, he did not think it wife to deftroy them; but to create them where they did not exift, he confidered as exceedingly unwife. He could not account for it, unless it was, that Canada having been formerly a French colony, there might be an opportunity of reviving thofe titles of honour, the extinction

of which fome gentlemen fo much deplored, and to revive in the Welt that fpirit of chivalry, which had fallen into fo much difgrace in a neighbouring country.

The provifion for the clergy' was confidered as being too large, par ticularly in thofe parts where the inhabitants were almost all Roman ca, tholics. The bill was also excep. tionable fo far as related to the regulation of appeals at law. Suitors were first to apply to the courts in Canada, thence to appeal to the governor and council, thence to the king in council, and laly to the houfe of lords. Now if the houfe of lords was a better court, than the king in council, why not apply to the houfe of lords at once! The trial by jury, as well as the habeas corpus act, it was urged, ought to have been made integrant parts of the prefent bill, and not left to an ordinance of the province.

>

The bill was defended by Mr. Pitt on the principle of expediency. He alleged that the reprefentation bore a proportion to the population of the country, as that of the upper province amounted to only 10,000 inhabitants, and of the lower to not more than Ico,ood. The affemblies undoubtedly ought to extend with the growing population of Canada. A feptennial legiflature appeared the molt convenient; but if found to be otherwife, there was nothing to hinder the legiflature of Great Britain from correcting at a future period any part of the prefent bill. Mr. Pitt defended the hereditary part of the legislative council by faying, that an ariftocratical principle being one part of our mixed government, he thought it proper there fhould be fuch a council as that provided for in the bill. As to the provifion for the clergy, one tenth of the pro duce was evidently a much greater

provifion than one feventh of the land Dividing the province he confidered as the best means of conciliating the French inhabitants, as they would by this meafure be made fenfible that there was no intention to force the British laws upon them. It would alfo, in elections, prevent that contest between the two parties which would be likely to take place if there were but one houfe of affembly. 1 bas Leinsterqertim noud ni During the difcuffion of this bill, moft extraordinary difpute took place between two of the most difLinguished members of the oppofition. In our preceding volume we noticed a difference between Mr. Burke and Mr. Sheridan, fimilar to that which now occurred between the former of those gentlemen and Mr. Fox. Though, however, the difcuffionofw the Quebec bill was the apparent occafion which pro duced this clash of fentiment, yet there is much reafon to believe that the feeds of difunton had long hex ifted. The well-known tirritability of Mr. Burke upon the fubject of thedFrench politics had beftranged from him in fome degree his former friends who differed from him on that fubject; and even in the de bate to which we allude, he complained that Mr Fox's vifits had been lefs frequent than they had formerly been. Poffibly the allufion of Mr. Foxy which we noticed in the preceding page, to the times of chivalry, might ferve in fome de gree to irritate Mr. Burke, and to call forth his animadverfion on the prefent occafion. But as fome ac countsof the difference between thefe illuftrious characters may be more interesting as a point of hif tory than conjectures concerning its motives, we shall proceed to lay a fhort fiatement of the facts before our readers.

9

By On the recommitment of the Quebec bill, on the 6th of May, ás foon as the chairman had put the queftion 5 thath the claufes of the bill be read paragraph by partgraph," Mr. Burke rofe, he said, to speak to the general principle of the bill. He enlarged upon the importance of the act which they were now about to perform, viz. to ap point a legiflature for a distant peo pleasThe firft confideration was the competency of the house to fuch air act.Abody of rights, commonly called the rights of man, had been lately imported from amcighbouring kingdom The principle of this new code was; That all men are by nature free, and equal in refpe&t to rights, &If this code therefore were admitted, the power of the house could extend no farther than to call together the inhabitants of Canada to choose a conftitution for themselves, Rejecting this code, however, which was never preached any where without mischief he would affume the principle, that this country had acquired the right of legiflating for Canada by right of conqueft. The next queftion then was, what model was to be followed in inftituting a government for Ca nada. He proceeded to notice the three great modern examples, the conftitutions of America, of France, and of Great Britain With refpect to America, as acconfiderable portion of the inhabitants of Canada had emigrated from that country, as they had fled from the bluffings of American government, there was no danger of their being fo much shocked with the introduction of the Britifh conftitution as" to return; He next noticed the French conftitution, which he condemned in the ftrongeft terms. He faid the pract tical effects of this conftitution might be feen in St. Domingo, and the

other

other French siflands they were fourishing and happy, till they heard of the rights of man. As foon as this tofyftems arrived among them, Pandora's boxy repletes with every mortali evil feemed to fly open; hell itfelf to yawn and every demon of mischief to overspread the face of the country.lvOught this example to induce us to fend to our colonies a cargo of the rights of man? As foon would helfend them a bale of infected cotton from y Marseilles. The ftate of France, in confequence of this conftitution, he reprefented as most deplorable. They had gotá king who was every thing in name, and nothing in reality over whom M. la Fayette, the chief jailor of Paris, mounted guard, as agitate prifoner; and who, being defirous of a little fresh air, obtained a day rule to go five miles from Paris, but was floppeds by cone of his faithful grenadiers prefenting a bayonet to his breaft

5 At this part of this fpeech, Mr. Baker called Mr. Burke to order; and a long altercation enfued, concerning the decency and propriety of canvaffing and abufing foreign governments, when the queftion before the houfe merely refpected the governments of Quebec. In the 1 Inthe courfe of the difpute, Mr. Burke intimated that there was a defign formed in this country, by certain perfona, against the conftitution.?? Atadength lords Sheffield moved, "that differtations on the French conflitution are not bregular and or derly when the question is that the relaufes of the Quebec bill be read oar decond time, paragraph by paragraph "as counos manů Mr Fox Teconded the motion. In thebcourfenof his ofpeech, Mr. Fox obferved, that if Mr. Burke's intention had been to debate the

',

T

Quebec bill, he would have debated it, claufe by laufe, according to the established practice of the house. If his object had been to prevent the apprehended danger,oto y the British conftitution, he would have given notice of a particular day for that particular purposes or would have taken any other occafion for doing it, rather than this, on which his neared and dearest friend, had been mifreprefented and traduced But that the courfe which his right honourable friend had taken, was fuch as deemed to confirm the infinuation against him, of having maintained republican principles, as applicable to the British conftitution, in a former debates on the bill He defended his former fenti ments, relative to the French revo lutiqnav He repeated that, hẹ thought it, on the whole, one of the moft glorious events in the hil tory of mankind." In this affertion however, he spoke of the revolution and not of the conflitution; the latter, remained to be improved by exper rience, and accommodated to cir cumftances. Mr. Fox faid, that if the committee fhould decide that his right honourable friend fhould pure fue his argument on the French conftitution, he would leave the houfe till it was finished. He faid however, that on a proper occafion he fhould have no objection to maintain his fentiments and would uns dertake to prove, that the rights of man, which his right honourable friend: had ridiculed as vifionary were the bafis of the British confti tution, as our ftatute book evinced, in recognizing the original inhes rent rights of the people as men, which no prefeription could fuper fede, nasaccident remove non oblie terate." If fuch principles were dangerous to the conftitution they

3

屁

have experienced the fame treatment as how. He obferved, that he had differed on many occafions from Mr. Fox, but there had been no lofs of friendship between them; but there was fomething in the curfed French conftitution that envenomed every thing. Mr. Fox whispered that there was no lofs of friendship. Mr. Burke replied: There was-he knew the price of his conduct; he had done his duty, and their friendfhip was at an end. Mr. Burke earneftly urged the right honourable gentlemen, who were the great rivals in that houfe, that whether they thould move in the political hemifphere, as two blazing stars in oppofite orbits, or walk together as brethren, they would preferve the British conftitution, and guard it against innovation. He concluded with moving an amendment on lord Sheffield's motion-That the words of the motion, after "differtations on the French conftitution," be omitted, and the following inferted in their room-tending to fhew that examples may be drawn there from; and to prove that they are infufficient for any good purpofes, and that they may lead to anarchy and confufion, and are confequently anfit to be introduced into fchemes of government, are improper to be referred to, &c.”

Mr. Fox rofe to reply; but the agitation of his mind was fo great, as to deprive him for fome time of utterance.He faid, however events might have altered the mind of his fight honourable friend, till he muft fo call him, becaufe, grating as it was to any man to be unkindly treated by thofe on whom he had bellowed obligations, it was ftill more grating to meet with fuch treatment from thofe by whom he had been highly obliged, and whom, notwithflanding their harfhnefs and

feverity, he must still love and esteem. Almoft from a boy he had been in the habit of receiving favours from his right honourable friend, and they had lived on the most intimate terms for twenty-five years. He hoped, therefore, that notwithstanding what had happened, the right honourable gentleman would think on past times; and, whatever imprudent or intemperate expreffions of his might have offended him, would at leaft believe that fuch was not his intention. He repeated his reafons why Mr. Burke's introducing the French revolution, in a debate on which he had been charged with republican principles, appeared to be done with an intention to injure him. It was the first time, he faid, that he had ever heard from a philo? fopher, that the best way of praifing the British conftitution, was by abufing every other. For his part, he had ever thought that the British conftitution, in theory, was imperfeet and defective; but that in practice it was excellently adapted to this country. He had often faid, that becaufe he admired the British conftitution, was it to be concluded that there was no other part of the conftitution of other countries worth praifing, or that the British conftitution was not ftill capable of improvement? As a proof that it had not been thought quite perfect, he reminded the houfe of the two late projects of reform; that propofed by Mr. Pitt for the reform of parlia ment, and that of his right honourable friend for the reform of the civil lift. Mr. Fox alluded to the expreffion Mr. Burke had made use of, difciplined troops; and added, that if this was meant to convey an infinuation that any improper influence was exercised on the minds of gentlemen, fuch an imputation he utterly difclaimed. To fhew further

that