He thought it would be equally monstrous to strip the Roman
Catholic clergy of their rights and dues, and to set up an Anglican
establishment where the followers of our church were but few in number.
To assimilate the constitution of the province to that of England
he deemed neither practicable nor desirable, and asserted, that the
constitution now proposed was on the side of liberality, and the
best that could be given under existing circumstances. He concluded
thus:--"If any English resort to that country, they do not carry with
them the laws that are to prevail the moment they get there. It would be
just as wise to say, if an Englishman goes to Guernsey, the laws of the
city of London are carried over with him. To take the laws as they stand
in Canada has been allowed--to act according to those laws, and to be
bound by their coercion, is a natural consequence. In this view I think
the bill has done nothing obnoxious. I have no speculative opinions. I
would have consulted the French customs to a much greater extent, if
it had been for me to have framed the law." Colonel Barre, Lord John
Cavendish, and Sergeant Glynn next warmly opposed the bill, and they
were followed by the Solicitor-general, Wedderburne, who defended
it with greater ability and more knowledge of history than had been
displayed by any of the preceding speakers. Sergeant Glynn had asserted,
that in conquering the Irish and Welsh our laws had been imposed upon
them; but Wedderburne clearly showed that this was only effected in the
lapse of ages; English laws not being introduced into Ireland till the
time of James I.
Pages:
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339