men in Canada; who, I believe, were very unequal to the work. The compilation is published, and has been printed : it is generally thought to be a faithful one.

In adopting that compilation, and establishing trial by jury in civil causes, might not such trial be obtained without any burthensome expense to the inhabitants ?—I do apprehend it might, if the courts of justice would regulate the fees.

Would it not be difficult, in some cases, for the courts to regulate the expenses?-I should think not, in material matters; but in the fees of counsel, for example, no court can, or perhaps ought, to interfere.

Do you conceive that, at present, the Canadians are much attached to France, and would wish to be under that government again? I do not apprehend that the body of them would. No doubt the noblesse and the military have been great sufferers, from the loss of their employments and commissions; and it is natural enough to suppose that they would incline to their old employments, under their own government. But I should hope that they, if proper indulgence were paid to them, might be made to withdraw from every idea of returning to their old government, and become good British subjects.

Do you conceive the Canadians would have any great objection to a provincial assembly, into which Roman Catholics would be admitted, under certain restrictions, such as taking the oaths ?—I believe they have no idea of advantage from it. They look upon the house of assembly as a house of riot, calculated for nothing but to disturb the government, and obstruct public servants.

Do they understand that there is a resemblance between the house of assembly and the House of Commons in this country? -They do not understand the principles of either.

Have there not been conferences in that country, relative to the form of government, and arrangement of laws, that may best suit them? I know of no particular conferences in that country relative to a form of government and arrangement of laws.

Has it never been agitated with them, what would make them happy? I know of no conference among them upon that subject. Their ideas are a perfect submission to the Crown, and to any authority the Crown chooses to erect. They have a high confidence in his Majesty. If he chooses to call a house of assembly,

I have no doubt they will compose it; but they would not know what to do when they came there, nor have they any idea of the advantages of such an assembly.

They never, then, have been made to understand, by any of the King's servants, that it would be of advantage to them? No pains have been taken to tell them that, by means of an assembly, they would have a power of internal regulation; but they have been taught to put the amplest confidence in the Crown ?-They require no instruction; it is their natural habit. I have harrangued the juries upon the advantages of the British constitution; but, whether it was my fault in not delivering my ideas upon the subject clearly, or that they were not interpreted to them in the French language, I do not believe any Canadian took notice of what I said. I mean, my ideas with regard to trial by jury and the criminal law of England. I never mentioned any advantage of an assembly.

Have you ever understood that there was an absolute dislike to assemblies among the Canadians, or only a dislike in part?They do not understand them; and what they do not understand, they cannot be said to dislike.

Were they ever informed that assemblies could be managed so as to be extremely obsequious to government? They do not at all understand the method of making themselves so. To the English merchants, who are desirous of establishing the English laws, it would, of course, be an encouragement.

The witness withdrew.

EXAMINATION OF M. LOTBINIÈRE.(1)

M. Lotbinière was then examined by Mr. Thomas Townshend, jun. The questions were read to him in English, and then in French. He informed the committee, that he was a native of Canada, and of the corps of noblesse; that he has read the bill, and has paid attention to that part which contains the institution of the legislative council, and that he would state his opinion upon that institution.

Sir Thomas Frankland.-Parlez un peu plus haut, s'il vous plait.

(1) Mr. Maseres describes M. Lotbinière as being a very sensible and reflecting man, and a great proprietor of land in Canada.

M

That he has been informed, that such an institution would be proposed; that he is, in his own opinion, much against it; that the natural inclinations of the Canadians would be to be governed by a legislature like that in this country, provided they were allowed to be a part of it themselves. That if they had not expressed any desire for a legislative assembly, it was from having been informed, that, in that assembly, they would not be allowed as Roman Catholics, to sit. That he has apprehended one thing may have deterred them: they may have been persuaded, that in ease they had an assembly, they would have to pay the expenses of the government; and in its actual situation, the province is not rich enough. That he does not speak positively of their present thoughts, but that this was their opinion when he was there. That this mixed assembly would please them, provided they had not been under the idea, that the expense would fall upon themselves. That he understands the persons who are possessors of land are, in every country, thought the proper persons to compose an assembly, and the project he had seen was upon this idea; and that it was upon this idea that he was for an assembly. That he is of opinion, that an assembly is calculated for that country; nor should he object, if trading persons, or if an inferior order, were admitted into such assembly. That in the plan of assembly he refers to, there seems to be no distinction between those persons who had their noblesse, and those who held the other sort of land. He thinks, if there was an equal balance of power, the noblesse could not reasonably oppose it.

Did you ever hear any material objections to the establishment of a legislative council?—I never heard it particularly debated, nor any objections.

Do you think the Canadians are not desirous of a more free government, than a governor with a council, the members of which are appointed, removed, and suspended by him?-They would certainly desire a freer government.

Would the people approve of the legislative council, if composed of persons interested in the province ?—If there were some of the noblesse admitted into the council, the best effect would result from it.

Under the present plan, do you not think such a council a despotism?--I consider it in no other light. I believe they would

wish to choose their own council, and not leave it in the hands of the Crown.

Do you not think the English laws the best for the Canadians in general?—I make no doubt but your laws are wise and good, and make you a happy people, but my countrymen prefer their old laws and customs.

The witness withdrew, and Dr. Marriott was called in.

EXAMINATION Of Dr. Marriott,(1) the King's ADVOCATEGENERAL.

Mr. Mackworth.-I desire to know what, in your opinion, would be the best establishment of laws in the province of Quebec?-It is difficult to say, upon any subject in this world, what is best for any men or set of men on speculation: that which succeeds best in public and private life is best; and therefore I cannot tell what will be best for the Canadians.

Do you think that the Canadians would choose the system of English law, or the French law?-I do not know a single Canadian. I never was in Canada.

Do you think that the commerce of this country and of the province would be hurt by a revival of the French laws, in cases of property?—I cannot tell.

Do you know anything of the state of Canada ? —What I know is from such papers as have been laid before me, by order of the King in council, and by information of other persons.

Captain Phipps.-Do you understand the French law?-I find it very difficult to understand any law.

Do you know the power of the French King under the constitution of the French laws?-I do not well understand the constitution of France. I never was in France. It is a very hard thing for a foreigner to obtain an adequate idea of the constitution of another country. The constitution of one's own requires a great deal of close application and study. I wish I understood it better; and that many other people would study it more, and understand it better than I fear they do.

(') This eminent civilian was appointed the King's advocate-general in 1764, and judge of the admiralty court in 1778. He twice represented the borough of Sudbury in parliament, and died in 1803. The answers, in the above examination, are understood to have been revised by himself.

1

Do you understand the constitution of Ireland?—No; I never was in Ireland.

Mr. Dempster.-Do you think it expedient to give the province of Quebec any part of the French constitution?-The question is upon the word 'expedient.'

I mean, will it be wise and prudent?-By the words 'expedient, wise, and prudent,' I understand the question to mean, whether it will be politically wise and prudent. Expediency is ministerial language. It is a word of state state expediency. It means that high policy, that great arcanum, the sublime of government, extended almost beyond the reach of human wisdom. Few can pry into this sort of knowledge: fewer can comprehend it. I am sure I do not.

By the nature of your office, and greatly informed as you are from your connections with government and your own reading, you must know much concerning the actual state of the province of Quebec. I desire you will answer, what sort of government you would give to it? The giving laws to mankind is the perfection of all knowledge, human and divine. It is not the work of days, of months, of years, but of ages. For me to answer the question, what sort of government I would give to the province, I must be the vainest of men.

From such papers and informations as have been laid before you for your consideration, I desire to know, in general, what is your idea of a civil establishment for the province of Quebec? what is the properest to be given it by the legislature of this country?— It depends upon a most extensive knowledge, infinite indeed, of the relations of men and things, times and circumstances; the positions of both countries; the manners and genius of the people; the wants of the province; the views of the mother country; the conduct of the neighbouring colonies; the state of the nation vis à vis, or respecting them and the designs of the rest of Europe. These relations change every moment: this vast political prospect is for ever doubtful and floating; it contains too many objects for my short vision and poor comprehension. My answer therefore to the question, What is the properest establishment for the province of Quebec, to be given by the legislature of this country is-I cannot tell.

Mr. William Burke.-There is an absurdity in this answer.