On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    604 THE LEADER. [Saturday,

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Parliament Of The Week. Lord Aberdeen Is...

    rot retracted or explained away anything—he had listened most attentively . But he protested strongl y against entering into negotiations should Austria demand it , supposing Russia makes some concession ; it will never do to be drawn into the game of protocols played with all the resources and skill of Russian diplomacy . Here ended the matter . On the following night , Mr . Layard withdrew his notice of motion in these words :-

    —" On Friday last , sir , I gave notice that I should , on Thursday next , submit a resolution to the notice of the House . At that time I did not pledge myself to any particular words for that resolution , but in order that there should be no misunderstanding , I stated that my intention was to elicit the opinions of the-Hease- ^ witu reference to certain language held by the noble earl at the head of the Government with regard to our present relations with Russia . I understand that , in consequence of that notice , the noble earl stated his intention to make some explanations of that language , and that that explanation has been since given ; and I trust that it will have the effect of removing from the public mind a very general ( what f hope may be called )

    misapprehension , and of affirming that policy which has been so ably , and in such an English spirit , shadowed forth by the noble lord the President of the Council and t > y the noble earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs . I therefore think that 1 shall be acting most in conformity with the feelings of the House if I withdraw my notice , as it was directed against the speech which was the subject of that explanation . But in doing so I hope the House will allow me to express my conviction , looking to the present critical aspect of public affairs , and especially if the news received

    yesterday should be true , that before we separate for the recess some discussion should take place in this House on the state of our foreign relations . 1 do not wish to obtrude myself upon the House by undertaking such a duty ; but if nobody else in this House will do « Oj I shall myself bring the subject forward . I shall proceed an no hostile spirit towards her Majesty ' Government ; but it is my conviction , I repeat , that there ought to be some expression of opinion on the part of this House before Parliament prorogues ; and I will leave the naming of the day for that purpose to the noble lord the Member for London . "

    So the matter stands for the present . LEGISLATIVE eOtTNCUi ( CANADA ) BILL . Upon the motion in the House of Lords for going into committee upon this bill , the Earl of Derby moved that the committee be postponed for three months . Complaining that no statement of the provisions of the bill had been made upon the first reading , and that at the second reading the papers relating to the proposed changes in the Legislative Council had not been laid before Parliament , though the Government had had them in their possession since the 11 th of July , 1853 , hecontended that Parliament had not had sufficient opportunity to consider a

    question of so much importance . Alluding to the merits of the bill he said that it would convert the constitution of Canada practically , whatever it may do nominally , into a republic infinitely more democratic in its character , and guarded by infinitely fewer safeguards and infinitely fewer securities than are to he found in the constitution of the United States , which from the wisdom its authors , and the prudence of those who live under it , lias protected itself against hasty legislation , and against the preponderating influence of a single legislative body , by precautions which are not found in this bill , and some of whjeh , actually existing at present , this bill professes to do away with .

    It enabled the colony to legislate upon a particular question which the Imperial Parliament had hitherto deliberately reserved to itself ; and lie urged that this was a concession destructive to imperial authority . The question of an elective council had been one of the demands of the Radical party in Canada before the rebellion ; but in 1837 Lord John Russell voted in favour of a nominated council . On that occasion the House" of Commons divided , when 56 members voted in favour of an elective council and 318 against it . In 1840 , when the act passed for the reunion of the two provinces , the same principle was deliberately affirmed , and Lord John Russell repeated his objections to an elective chamber . Lord

    Melbourne and Lord Durham both held the same views , and wore strongly in favour of having somebody to interpose as a barrier against democratic influence . Having read the language used by those statesmen on several occasions , he said the papers laid before the House did not shenv the slightest necessity for thus altering the constitution of Canada . Reporting to the bill he proceeded to show that it was democratic in ita character , and wanting in provisions ogwinst hasty and imprudent legislation . Both chambers wore to be elected by the same constituency . True , the Legislative Council were to bo

    elected for six years , and the Legislative Assembly for only four ; but during these six years the council was certainly not a free and independent body like the Senate of the United Sfcntofl , because the bill uaid that if for two years the council rejected , or so amended any measure passed by the House of Assombly that tho assembly could not accept it . tho council , upon tho advico ot tho executive minister of tho Crown , might bo cnflnolved and eont back to tho same constituency " ** assembly for 10-olection . No man could legislate independently vudw euch » eyetom . It

    was , in fact , the system of a republic , while the safeguards of age and property qualification for members of the council were inadequate and illusory . Lord Elgin , in his despatch -of July 1 , had pointed out the difficulties and dangers of any attempt to combine two elective chambers * with a system of government conducted on the rules of British constitutional practice ; and on the authority of the Governor-G eneral himself , he asked how the government of Canada was to he carried on , under such circumstances , in a spirit and manner consistent with the monarchical principle ? He denied that the veto of the Crown would be sufficient in such

    a system to operate as a safeguard against rash and ill-considered legislation . Having stated several minor objections to the proposal , he asked how it was intended to be put into execution ? Hair was it to be carried ? He did not imagine that the Legislative Assembly alone were to adopt this change in the constitution of Canada . Then they must obtain the assent of the Legislative Council . But the Legislative Council had recorded , in plain terms , their determination not to agree to the measure ; and he called attention to the fact that the Legislative Council had existing rights which could only be got "ffiTof by some act of comparative violence . But if this measure were applied to

    Canada , how could it be refused to the other North American- colonies , to the total extinction of the monarchical principle ? I have dreamed , said Ma lordship—perhaps it Was only a dream—that the time would come when , exercising a perfect control over their own internal affairs . Parliament abandoning its right to interfere in their legislation , these great and important colonies , combined together , should form a monarchical government , presided over either by a permanent viceroy , of , as an independent soVereign , by one nearly and closely allied to the present royal family in this country . I have believed that in such a government it wo uld be possible to uphold the monarchical principle , to establish upon

    that great continent a monarchy free as that in this country , even freer still with regard to the popular influence exercised , but yet a monarchy worthy of the name , and not a mere empty shadow . Under such a system , I feel convinced that nothing would result for years and ages to come but mutual harmony and friendship between the colonies and the mother country , increased and cemented by mutual appreciation of the great and valuable benefits conferred by a free and regulated monarchy . But pass this bill and that dream is gone for ever . ^ Nothing like a free and regulated monarchy could exist for a single moment under such , a constitution as that

    which is now proposed for Canada . From the time that you pass this constitution the tendency of Canada must l ) e perpetually toward republicanism , if anything could be more really republican than this bill . The next step is an elective governor , and , after you have passed this bill , I do not know that an elective governor would not be perfectly and absolutely unexceptionable . In that case it would matter not whether you had a governor sent out from this country , and bound to act upon the advice of his responsible councillors , or whether , as in the United States , you had a governor elected by the free suffrages of the people over whom he had to rule .

    In conclusion , Lord Derby said he did not ask for the rejection of the bill , but only for more time for its mature consideration . The Duke of Newcastle denied that more time was required in Canada for the consideration of the question ; and contended thab tho powers which the Imperial Parliament had transferred to the Legislature of Canada had been attend ed with the greatest advantage in producing a spirit of conciliation and respect . Speaking of tho constitution of the Legislative Council , he admittod that a nominated chamber possessed , apparently , something of the form of a House of Lords ; but he was prepared to maintain that nominee chambers , in whatever colonies they

    were found , wore gradually losing the respect of tho people , from the impression that they were the mere tools of the Government of the day . Tho only alternative then was an elective chamber , and he contended that in this respect the qualifications required from the members of the council to be elected under the bill would ensure tho permanence of the Conservative principle , It was asked how tho act was to bo earned into effect . Ho replied that it was permissive , and it would only bo adopted if tho people of Canada desired it . If their opinion was against the bill , the Legislative Council would properly resist it ; but , if their opinion was faable

    vour , tine council would give effect to It . But , after all , the principle of the moasuro was not now , for it hud been extended by thia country among othors to tho Capo of Good Hope and t o tho colony of Victoria . Tho opinions of distinguished statesmen had been quotod uguinat an elective chamber . To this he replied that the opinions of public men had greatly progressed on these subjects ; and that tho apprehensions felt in 1837 and 1840 had been proved to bo entirely groundless , Ho was , however , surprised to hear jtlio opinion of Lord Durham quoted in favour of n nominee body ) and ho read several jpaoaagoa from reports written by that

    statesman , to show that his convictions were of a totally opposite character . Taking a larger view of the question , he urged the advantage of placing confidence in the people of Canada . All the measures hitherto passed by the British Parliaments with this view had been eminently successful ; for , instead of rancorous hatred against the mother country as before , there was now a wholesome party spirit , without which representative institutions could not be worked ; and the legislature in Canada was devoting its attention to practical measures of public utility .

    Lord St . Leonards agreed with Lord Derb y in his opinion as to the republican character of the bill , and further objected to it because it ctanged the disposition of power over the reserves of the Canadian clergy provided in the last act of session . The Earl of Habuowby was strongly of opinion that the nominated council should be changed for an elective one ; but the election should be given not to the popular vote but to property . He should vote for the postponement of the bill . A division then took place . The numbers were , for going into committee , 63 ; against it , 39 ; majority , 24 . Their lordships consequently went into committee upon the hill , and all the clauses were agreed to without amendment .

    TREATT BETWEEN AUSTRIA AND TURKEY . On Thursday , in reply to questions put by Lord Dudle y Stttabt , Lord John Russell said , her Majesty ' s Government have received information that a convention has been signed between Austria and the Sublime Porte for the occupation of the Danubian principalities by Austrian troops in any case , either whether the Russian troops shall have quitted the principalities or whether they shall seek to remain there—that is to say , if the Russians have voluntarily left the principalities , the Austrian troops will occupy them _ ; and if the Russians should refuse to quit the principalities , the Austrian troops will enter those principalities for the purpose of driving

    them out . QLoud cries of " hear , hear , " and a laugh . ) That is the effect of the * treaty ; but we have not at present an official copy of the convention which lias been signed , and therefore I cannot promise yet to lay it upon the table of this House . 'With regard to my noble friend ' s second question , which relates to any intelligence that has been received by her Majesty ' s Government with respect to the Emperor of Russia having consented to the ultimatum of Austria , I have to state that no official information of that nature has been received by the Government . The last time that I saw the Austrian minister he informed me that no answer had yet been received at Vienna ; and I suppose , unless subsequent information has arrived , that no answer lias yet been

    received . In reply to another Member , Lord John said that England is not a party to the convention .

    THE OXFORD BILL . The third reading of the Oxford University Bill stood for Monday , but on a question that it be read a third time , Mr . Heywood repeated the motion upon which he was defeated on Thursday week , with this difference that the relaxation as to oaths on taking degrees should apply only to bachelors in arts , law , and medicine , and not to masters of arts . He would be satisfied with this as an instalment Mr . Gaskell seconded the resolution , deeming the concession at once just and politic . Mr . Newdeoate rejoiced at the previous decision , and hoped the same verdict would be repeated much more

    emphatically now than before . The resolution was the same in substance as the previous one . Should it be deemed advisable to alter the system of education for the benefit of Dissenters , let it be done , and let new distinctions apply to the new studies ; but do not let confusion bo introduced in the way proposed . Lord John Russell repeated his objections to tho clause in its original shape , but in its modified form he had no objections to it , taking into account the decision of the House upon tho clause which admitted Dissenters . Ho did not think that in ita modified form the proposed clauso would allow Dissenters to become part of tho governing body .

    Sir John Pakinqton thought ho had reason to complain of the course talcen by Mr . Hoy wood . Ho protested against Parliament boing called upon within an hour ' s notice to consent to an altorcd resolution . As a matter of Parliamentary practice , ho called upon Lord John Russell not to countenance such an unfair course of action . For all that Sir John Pakington knew tho clauso muy allow Dissenters to become part of tho governing body . Mr . DnuMMoNi > deduced tho necessity of university reform from tho fact that tho mass of tho pooplo had ceased to belong to tho Church of

    Enirland . Under euch a state of things it wns absolutely necossary that tho university should be ro-modolletl to enable her to fulfil her functions . Mr . Napirji was desirous that provision should bo mudo for tho entrance of all persona who could conscientiously partake of tho advantages of tho university . Ilia conviction , howover , was , that tho crude interference of Parliament in tho way proposed wns tho most likely moana of retarding tho right carrying out of the object . Sir Eiisiunii : Pjoitnv , in supporting tho clauae , expressed Inn astonishment at Kindling ho much intolerance in religious matters displayed in en-

    604 The Leader. [Saturday,

    604 THE LEADER . [ Saturday ,

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), July 1, 1854, page 4, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_01071854/page/4/