would have been under the French régime everyone present must have felt. At this meeting Messrs. Meriers and Adhémar were deputed to proceed to Quebec to wait upon the governor and ask his countenance for the retention of the ecclesiastics. In order to carry his point, Meriers sent circulars to the captains of militia, at that date the medium by which public communications were made known. They were called upon to appeal to their parishes to sustain the application. The proceeding attracted the attention of the government. The circular was recalled, and instructions given to captains of militia to attend to no orders but such as were issued by their own superior officers. Mr. Brassier, the homme d'affaires of the seminary, accompanied the deputation. He did not fail to dwell upon the dissatisfaction which would be felt by the old subjects from this interference with their religion. He argued that if the province had been ceded to congress the permission to introduce French priests would have been granted. Haldimand replied that his objection was not to the introduction of ministers of religion, but of men who were political incendiaries; he desired to save the seminary and the citizens of Montreal from following a course hurtful to themselves. Sicard, one of the priests, was sent to Malbaie, where he performed mass and prevailed on some of the inhabitants to aid in his escape. Haldimand sent his aide-de-camp, St. Ours, to Montgolfier, who caused Sicard to return. The two priests, in June, 1783,* were sent back to England by the "Bull-dog." The consequence was that Adhémar and de Lisle proceeded to England, the bearers of a request that permission be given for priests to be admitted from Saint Sulpice. The proposition was in no way entertained. There was, however, no desire to interfere with any religious duty, for leave was given to engage any number of ecclesiastics from any country unconnected with the house of Bourbon. Arrangements were *[Can. Arch., B. 56, p. 80.] 1784] THE HABEAS CORPUS. 229 accordingly made for four priests to proceed from Savoy to Canada. The attempt, however, to obtain the priests from Saint Sulpice was continued, even to receiving them surreptitiously; and as a justification of this course the seminary complained that the Canadian priests were indifferently educated, and negligent in the performance of their duties.* After Haldimand's departure the seminary of Montreal, in August, 1785, addressed another petition to lord Sydney, praying for liberty to obtain ecclesiastics from the seminary in Paris for service in Canada. In March, Haldimand met the legislative council; it was the last occasion of his doing so. He stated that he had received no official information of the treaty of peace. Expressing his regret that the situation in which the province had been placed had not permitted the recommendation of an ordinance for the better security of personal liberty, he now submitted the consideration of such a law. He had at no time lost sight of it, as being an essential principle in a free government. At the same time he submitted to the council the necessity of a registry law, and also the consideration of official fees, which it was desirable should be made as moderate as possible. He alluded to the malady which had its origin in Saint Paul's bay, stating that the number infected in the province had not been so great as had been supposed. The habeas corpus was the subject of much discussion owing to the right it was supposed to exercise over such as had embraced a conventual life. It was early introduced into the council, and several amendments were moved, to assure that its provisions were in accordance with the common and statute law of England. The desire was expressed that all his majesty's subjects should be included within the ordinance; that the law, as it had been interpreted in England since the revolution of 1688, should be the rule to decide every case Affidavit I. F. Cugnet, 30th Oct., 1784. [Can. Arch., B. 75.2, p. 232.] “Les prêtres Canadiens étoient pour la plus part trop ignorants ou trop négligents pour en y admettre." unprovided for. As the discussion was taking the form that no exception to its operation would be admitted, La Corne de Saint Luc moved, that no judge's writ should apply to any who had taken religious vows. This vote was agreed to with the addition of a provision moved by Mabane, that nothing contained in the ordinance should alter the law as it then stood. The vote was unanimously passed, but six days later the subject came up by a motion being made, that, as those bound by religious vows were unwilling, special mention should be made of them in the act, and the clause be excised. The vote was carried in the affirmative by nine to eight. * The reply to the address was given on the 29th of April, the close of the session. After the expression of thanks for the protection which the province had received from the mother country, it concluded with a strong recommendation for the continuance of the act of 1774. The news of the definite treaty of peace reached Canada on the 18th of September, having been sent from London on the 6th of August. An attempt was made during the meetings of the council of this year to make them open to the public. On the 7th of April the door-keeper announced that some gentlemen requested permission to enter and hear the debates. On the question being put if permission should be granted, it was negatived by fifteen to one. At the next meeting the lieutenant-governor Hamilton explained that he had voted *M. de Saint Luc's motion finally ran: "Pour toujours que rien dans cette ordonnance ne s'étendre, et ne pourra s'étendre à autoriser à accorder une ordre d'habeas corpus sur la plainte ou demande de qui ce peut être qui auront pris ces vœux dans aucune des maisons religieuses en cette province." Upon which M. Mabane moved, the following day, the 16th April: "Provided always, that nothing in this ordinance contained shall extend, or be constructed to extend to alter the law in any respect, from what it is at present, with regard to the persons who have taken the vows in the convents of this province." The clause was incorporated in this form into the ordinance, but on the 22nd Mr. Levesque moved: "Pour répondre aux désirs et la répugnance qu'ont les communautés de religieux et religieuses de cette province à ce qu'il soit mention d'eux dans l'acte d'habeas corpus suivant qu'ils l'ont fait connaître hier au conseil leurs représentatives par écrit daté 19th courant, en conséquence je demande que l'article qui les concerne soit supprimé et biffé." [Can. Arch., Q. 23, p. 246.] par 1784] CHEVALIER DE LUZERNE. 231 in the negative, as no rules had been framed to meet the occasion. He would now move, that on the president taking the chair the doors should be thrown open, and that owing to the limited space of the chamber, each member should have the right of admitting two persons to be seated in the place allotted to them, and that the room could be cleared at any time when held to be expedient. During the day ten of the leading residents of Quebec attended with the request to be admitted. The application being put to the vote was negatived thirteen to four. On this resolution being made known to those interested, they desired to be informed if they could be admitted on a future occasion. The reply made was that the record of the vote should be communicated to them. To this view the lieutenant-governor and Finlay objected.* Early in 1784 chevalier de Luzerne, who, in September, 1779, had succeeded Gérard as minister from France, on the ground that there was danger in proceeding by the valley of the Mohawk, applied to Haldimand for permission to ascend the Saint Lawrence in order to visit the falls of Niagara. The letter was written with studied courtesy, and went to the extent of asking Haldimand's opinion on the subject. It was certainly not desirable to furnish an opportunity to an acute observer of obtaining correct information regarding Canada, especially under the circumstances that the British government were withholding the cession of the forts. Haldimand accordingly replied, that owing to the strong dissatisfaction felt by the Indians relative to the terms of the peace, it was not easy to soften their resentment against the United States, and that the route either by the Mohawk or by the Saint Lawrence might be Lawrence might be attended with disagreeable consequences; therefore, he must forego the pleasure of making the chevalier's acquaintance. M. de Luzerne shortly afterwards returned to France. + *[Can. Arch., Q. 23, p. 228.] + The letter of de Luzerne is dated the 22nd of February. Haldimand's reply the 12th of April. [Can. Arch., Q. 23, pp. 149-150.] In October of this year M. Saint Luc de La Corne died. His career had been noteworthy. He had taken part against the British in the French wars and had been present in de Lévis' attempt to retake Quebec in April, 1760. He had afterwards served in Burgoyne's expedition. At the time of his death he was legislative councillor. René Amable de Boucherville was recommended for the vacancy. There is a letter from Finlay, the postmaster-general, at the close of 1784, written to Nepean, then under secretary of state, giving some information regarding the province. His position furnished him with opportunities of judging the condition of public feeling. He wrote that on the part of the French Canadians there was an utter indifference regarding the house of assembly. They were without political education, and were opposed to taxation in any form. The attempt to introduce a system authorising it would have been regarded as oppression, so that an inimical feeling to the government could easily have been called forth, and a bad spirit created. In point of general education, the women in the parishes were superior to the men, owing to the schools of the religieuses, in which, as young girls, they learned to read, to write, and to sew. The legislative council had refused to grant juries in commercial cases, from the conviction that the attendance at court would be looked upon as a hardship, and in the condition of the people it was held that they were not qualified to enter into the intricate controversies often involved in commercial disputes. Accordingly, it was held for the public interest that the suits in which such points were involved should be decided by the judges alone. Should juries in commercial cases ever be introduced, the payment of those attending would be indispensable.* During the summer of 1784 Haldimand received permission to return to England, accompanied by the announcement + that his administration had received the approbation of the [Can. Arch., Q. 23, p. 438, 4th Oct., 1784.] + [Sydney to Haldimand, 10th of April. Can. Arch., B. 45, p. 138.] |