(whose sister he had married) to England on his behalf. Jussome's ship was wrecked on the coast but he escaped with four others (out of about fifty): he went to London in December and represented Du Calvet's case to Germain who promised to instruct Haldimand to try the prisoner or discharge him at once he also promised to have Livius proceed to Canada by the Spring Fleet of 1782. But Germain had other matters to think of much more important to him-he had been the evil genius of the North Administration for years14 and was perhaps more than any other subject responsible for the successful revolution of the American Colonies; he constantly urged the most vigorous measures against the Americans and was generally the storm centre of the House of Commons; he was now disagreeing with the remainder of the Cabinet on the future conduct of the war and resigned his office of Secretary of State (February, 1782). He was succeeded by Welbore Ellis (afterwards Lord Mendip) and to him Jussome made application and from him received the same assurances as from Germain. Ellis also informed him that Livius had received instructions to proceed to Canada-this was corroborated by Livius himself. With these assurances, Jussome sailed for Quebec, arriving in May, 1782.

But Ellis shared the fate of Lord North's Ministry which went down in disgrace in March giving way to the short lived Rockingham Administration-and no instructions to release Du Calvet arrived at Quebec.

Jussome tried in vain to see Haldimand, he sent in Memorials, as did Du Calvet, but in vain. Jussome sailed a second time for England in August, 1782, but was taken prisoner by the French and kept at Nantes until the following year. Du Calvet was now almost in despair, but some intimation reached him or his legal advisers that the Governor would now look with favour on an application for a Writ of Habeas Corpusand that course was decided on. Livius had, for some reason, not come out to the Colony--he never did as a fact—and the same three Commissioners were exercising the office of Chief Justice of the King's Bench: but the former decision was not binding and the influence of the Governor over the temporary Judges was thought to be very great-accordingly the application did not seem hopeless but rather the reverse.

Powell was living and practising in Montreal, many miles and days away: he had an agent in Quebec to whom the brief would in an ordinary case be entrusted, but that agent was James Monk the Attorney General who could not accept a

retainer against the Crown. It was accordingly decided to retain Robert Russell,15 a prominent English-speaking Barrister of Quebec who had been acting for Du Calvet in an important civil suit in the Court of Appeal. A very unpleasant conception of the Court at that time is given by the fact that Russell feared for his licence to practise if he should venture to move for the Writ in the manner in which the motion was made in England every day. He had Du Calvet present a petition to the Court to allow him to bring before them his case and to employ Russell to speak before the Court on his behalf-this was granted and Russell moved the Court for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. The Court reserved judgment for six days and, November 27, were of opinion "that nothing be taken by the said motion.”16

On the Preliminaries of Peace being signed between Great Britain and France and the prisoners on either side released in April, 1783, Jussome went over to England and interviewed Lord North who in that month had succeeded Lord Grantham as Secretary of State for the Home Department then in charge of Colonial Affairs. The whole situation had changed: the preliminary Articles of Peace between Britain and her revolted Colonies had been signed in January and the Definitive Treaty was on the way-there was no longer anything to be feared from treason in Canada and nothing to be gained by continuing Du Calvet's imprisonment. It does not appear that Jussome's mission was at all useful-all the prisoners were to be released.

It would seem that the speedy discharge of Du Calvet was at least in part due to the exertions of the wife of Charles Hay, a Quebec Cooper, already mentioned-a woman of much perseverance and force of character, apparently also of some social standing. Her husband as has been said was imprisoned on a charge of High Treason; and when in November, 1780, the writ of Habeas Corpus on his behalf was refused, Mrs. Hay made repeated representation to the Home Authorities. They did not expressly interfere; but suggested to the Governor that prisoners should not be kept without trial for any extended period; and finally whether through her persistence or not, in May 1783, both Hay and Du Calvet were set free.

It may not be amiss to tell here the remainder of Du Calvet's story.

On his release he at once applied for a passport to England but the news of the Preliminaries of Peace being signed arriving about the middle of May, he determined to ask for a pass

port to the United States to obtain payment of a large claim (something over £1000 sterling) he had against the American Government for goods their army had obtained in Montreal. This passport was refused and he went to England arriving there in September, 1783. He applied to North and Fox, afterwards also to Lord Sydney to have Haldimand recalled that he might sue him for damages-of course the Governor-General as Head of the State could not be sued in the Colonial Courtthis was not done but when Haldimand ceased in 1784 to be Governor and arrived in London, he had him arrested in an action for false imprisonment, etc. Haldimand was held to bail in the sum of £20,000: the action proceeded, a Commission was issued to examine witnesses in Canada, and Du Calvet came out to Quebec to execute this Commission. Sailing on his return voyage from New York for London, March 15, 1786, on an old Spanish prize then called the "Sherburne", neither passengers nor ship were afterwards heard of: but in a violent storm such as had never occurred in the memory of man, the ship foundered and ship, crew, freight and passengers were lost.17

TH

CHAPTER V

AFTER THE PEACE

HE years 1780-1783, were probably the happiest of Powell's life. He was reunited with a dearly beloved wife, he was esteemed by all and his financial means were sufficient for every call. He tells us that "in that period no creditor ever called upon me a second time", and "in the course of those years, I have reason to suppose I acquired the confidence and esteem of my fellow citizens."

The birth of a daughter promised to complete the happiness of the young couple; but the little one named after the grandmother, the wife and the favorite sister, vivacious, saucy and loving Anne, lived but a few weeks, happier in her fate, perhaps, than the future Anne Powell whose tragic story will be told in a later chapter.1

No one of intelligence could fail to see the danger of the methods of Government in the Province. In the Legislature, there was but the one House, the Legislative Council of nominated members only; the people, French and English, had no voice in nominating them, and they were responsible to the Governor or to his masters, the Home Administration. In the administration there were to be found many abuses, amongst them the arrest and imprisonment upon the order of the Governor and at his sole discretion of anyone whomsoever without charge or complaint from any source, and, as was seen in such cases as those of Hay and Du Calvet, without chances of deliverance by legal action. Moreover the justice of the Courts was not above suspicion in many instances.

Powell all his life had the lawyer's instinct, personal obedience to the existing law, advice to clients to obey the law implicitly so long as it was law, but endeavoring by constitutional and peaceful means to have a vicious law changed. While he was never a Radical, he was not blind to the injustice of some of the acts of the Government. He says: "However I might revolt against the avowed principles on which the justice of the Province was administered, I was silent . . . and inculcated silence and subordination in others." He was wise. So long as the Revolutionary War continued here was no hope

of diminishing the arbitrary power of imprisonment. Canada was too near the revolted colonies; and their emissaries were too numerous, cunning and active, to allow of taking chances. Inter arma silent leges; and it not seldom becomes a military necessity to imprison those against whom there is only suspicion and nothing that would be accepted as evidence in a Court of Law. Under existing circumstances in Canada had the Courts held that the Habeas Corpus Act was in force, it would have been suspended immediately. But when peace was proclaimed, this necessity disappeared; arbitrary acts of authority became plain tyranny.

In addition to the other causes of disquiet was the objection by the English-speaking Colonists to the French laws. The Quebec Act was never acquiesced in by what were called the "Old Subjects"; and the "New Subjects", the French Canadians, objected to the English civil law. The Quebec Act gave effect to the wishes of the latter but it outraged the former. Even during the war, the English part of the population had made protest against the French law; and when it became obvious from the terms of peace that a great many loyal Americans must seek other homes, a determined effort was made to re-introduce the English law, substantially that to which the Colonists had been accustomed.

The absence of a Legislative Assembly had been a grievance for several years; at first only the Older Subjects expressed any desire for such a chamber, the New Subjects were rather indifferent. But in the course of time they-or at least many of them-also desired it; and in the summer of 1783, there was considerable agitation in that direction. The great fear of the French Canadians was that Roman Catholics might be prevented from being members of the proposed House or from being voters at the election of such members, according to the existing principles in England.*

All sections of the community which gave expression to their desire, wished to take away the arbitrary power of the Governor and to have the Writ of Habeas Corpus or its equivalent introduced into the Colony.

As regards the law in civil matters, there was considerable difference of opinion: (speaking generally), the Old Subjects wished the English law reintroduced or at least trial by jury of questions of fact, the New Subjects were content with their law and were divided as to jury trials.

The French Canadians were anxious about their priesthood -they wished that a Bishop should be provided for Montreal