ence to the exercise of the pardoning | he would have given some attention to power he took to refer to pardon after certain portions of the hon. gentleman's conviction, which was very different from the case now before the House. The offence was regarded by some as political and by others as not so, but at any rate it had connected with it such political elements as to justify this House in dealing with the whole question by asking the Imperial Government, under whose control the country was where the offences were committed, to grant some measures of relief to the parties implicated. He spoke thus, not as presuming on a constitutional question to differ from those who had such long parliamentary experience, but he took this practical ground that if it was unconstitutional to send up an Address based upon the resolutions, it was equally unconstitutional to pass an Address based upon the amendment. He would support the resolutions submitted by the Government as he would have supported them had they been submitted by the late Government, because he believed they offered a practical solution of the question. It was the duty of them all to endeavor by mutual concession and conciliation to allay the irritation and excitement which had been aroused in connection with this matter.

speech not at all relevant to matters before the House, and in which matters had been introduced not at all in accordance with the facts of the case. He would take another opportunity in referring to them and also to the contrast which the hon. gentleman had drawn between his (Sir JOHN's) course at present and that of the present Government when they were in Opposition. He would show that the hon. gentleman was entirely wrong in saying that he and his friends were alone instrumental in bringing the North-West Territory into the Dominion, and he would also take occasion to show that, so far from that being the case, it was the work almost exclusively of his (Sir JOHN'S) opponents. After the hon. gentleman's accession to power as chief of the Government that was formed at the time of Confederation he knew right well that he received the best assistance in his (Mr. MACKENZIE'S) power in the acquisition and settlement of that country. The hon. gentleman had not the generosity to admit those services now which he (Mr. MACKENZIE) was able to render to his country more than to him and his party, though at the time the hon. member was willing to acknowledge those services from the seat which he (Mr. MACKENZIE) now occupied. He would not follow the hon. gentleman through all the course of his argument, for two-thirds of it was entirely irrelevant, and he could only conclude, from the great length of the speech, that the hon. member believed, like those of old, that he would be heard for his much speaking. But two or three matters were referred to which he (Mr. MACKENZIE) was bound to say would have a serious effect on this discussion if the hon. member's argument were correct, One was the assumption that the course pursued by the Government was entirely wrong. unconstitutional he believed the hon. gentleman said, though the phrase was used somewhat guardedly. The hon. member was good enough to say that he agreed in the conclusion arrived at by the Government that they proposed the right thing, but proposed it in the wrong way. Well, he (Mr. MACKENZIE) was prepared to show that it was proposed in precisely the same way as in a former Parliament, and he hoped the hon. gentleman would feel him

that nothing was more common under our system of Parliamentary Government than to pass acts of grace and resolutions having reference to rebellious proceedings, and the hon. member for Kingston, in his argument, could only cite the trial of the Chartist rioters in Wales some years ago, as a parallel case to the insurrection in the North-West. There was no parallel in the case at all. There was no similarity. There was nothing that could be said to approach the position of affairs in the North-West. But during the rebellion in this country it was well known that a very large number of people were sentenced to terms of banishment, others were proclaimed as outlaws and were banished as such from the country, and excluded from the benefits of residence in this country and all the advantages of British subjects in Canada. In 1841, three years after the close of the rebellion, the House of Assembly in its first session passed the following resolution :

self relieved of the difficulty of supporting | member for South Bruce had pointed out the Government in this matter. He could understand the hon. member's difficulty in the extreme difference of opinion which prevailed among those who surrounded him, and appreciate the tender manner in which they treated their leader, though he was somewhat surprised that the hon. member for North Hastings should pour out the vials of his wrath on the heads of the Government, instead of upon his own chief. However, that was a matter to be settled among themselves, but it could not fail to produce the impression in this House that the Opposition, like the Irishman who landed at New York and was asked to vote, being ignorant of the politics of the country, but carrying his old country convictions with him, said he was "agin the Government at all events.' That seemed to be the only binding principle which prevailed on the other side of the House. The leader of the Opposition said the Government showed something like cowardice by proceeding to move a resolution in the House-that they should themselves have assumed the responsibility and passed an Order in Council carrying out practically the same views embodied in their resolutions. The hon. member for South Bruce had dealt with that matter somewhat last night, but he (Mr. MACKENZIE) had something more to say on the subject. He could assume no higher responsibility than, as head of the Government, bringing down the resolutions which he had submitted to the ordeal of a discussion in this House. After what had passed last session they would not be treating the House with proper respect if they undertook to settle the matter without having a free expression of opinion from the House on the subject. They took the only proper and constitutional manner of doing this by bringing down, as the responsible Ministers of the Crown, a resolution on which they staked their existence as a Government. If the House thought it was wrong, they should vote it wrong and the Government would take the responsibility on their "The GOVERNOR GENERAL will not fail to heads. They would not shelter them- of Assembly, as conveyed in this address, under bring the expression of the wishes of the House selves behind an Order-in-Council, passed the notice of HER MAJESTY'S Government.” in secret, but come to the House, and plac- In 1844, on the motion of Mr. LAFONing their resolution on the table, challenge | TAINE, seconded by Mr. LESLIE, the followthe House on its reception as such. Now, ing address was carried

"Resolved-That it is the opinion of this Committee that an humble address be presented to HIS EXCELLENCY the GOVERNOR GENERAL, as representing the Crown in this Province, praying the exercise of the Royal prerogative for granting a free pardon, indemnity and oblivion of all crimes, offences and misdemeanours; that the Royal mercy be extended to such of HER patible with the safety of the Crown and this MAJESTY'S misguided subjects as may be comProvince, connected with the late unhappy troubles in the late Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, committed or supposed to have been committed within the last four years.

This resolution was carried by a vote of 40 to 25, and very shortly afterwards the reply of the GOVERNOR was presented as

follows:

"In reply to their address of the 30th August, Assembly that both in the advice he may be the GOVERNOR GENERAL assures the House of called upon to tender to the QUEEN and in the exercise of the prerogative of the Crown. where that power is entrusted to himself, within the colony, it is and will continue to be his anxious desire to treat all cases connected with the late unhappy disturbances with the utmost indulgence which may be compatible with the safety of the Crown and security of the Province.

what had been the course in our own "Resolved-That an humble address be precountry on former occasions? The hon.sented to HER MAJESTY praying that she will Hon. Mr. Mackenzie.

be graciously pleased to exercise the Royal pre- | been in an Administration very shortly rogative by granting to HER MAJESTY'S mis- before, guided subjects free pardon, indemnity and oblivion ôf all crimes, offences and misdemeanors connected with the unhappy troubles referred to in an humble address to this House on the 30th day of August, 1841, on the same subject, and of all attainders and ontlawries during the period therein mentioned; most humbly assuring HER MOST GRACIOUS MAJESTY that whenever it may please HER MAJESTY through her representative and out of her own free will, pleasure and mere motion to transmit a Bill to that effect to the Provincial Assembly, the same will be received with humble gratitude and will tend still more to confirm HER MAJESTY'S faithful subjects in this Province in their affection to their Sovereign, and to

offered that reward, he stultifies himself well as his English fellow-countrymen, now by moving the resolutions in the SPEAKER'S hands.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he had laid down in his resolutions everything that had led him to take the action he now proposed to do. He did not suppose there was a single member in this House who, after having read the evidence produced before the Committee, could say that the circumstances were not entirely changed. | It was not fair; it was disingenuous for the hon. gentleman from North Hastings to state that the circumstances were the same

as they were a year ago. The hon. gentleman did not appear to recollect that it had been dragged from the lips of his own leader that he had given RIEL and LEPINE money to induce them to go out of the country. The position the hon. gentleman held in those days was a very humble one indeed in regard to this matter. He (Mr. MACKENZIE) had not been able so far to change his opinion of the transactions of 1869-70; what he asked the House to do was to consider the changed circumstances in which the Government found themselves placed by the necessity there was for disposing of this question finally. He also asked the House to consider the unfairness of the hon. member for North

had all manifested the same generous spirit and the same desire to have a settlement of this question, so that the cause of discord and irritation might be removed from our political discussions. He desired in conclusion to say that throughout that whole matter he had endeavored, as he had stated in his opening remarks, and he had no doubt that other gentlemen also, including many members on the Opposition side of the House, had endeavored to give effect to their own honest views. He had no fault to find with any one expressing his honest convictions, however strongly, but he did protest against any one imputing evil motives to him or his colleagues in the discharge of their duty as Ministers of the Crown in this country.

At 1:40 a.m. the members were called in, and the House divided on Mr. MousSEAU'S amendment with the following result :-

Baby,
Bunster,

Caron,
Cimon,
Coupal,
Currier,
Desjardins,

YEAS:

Messieurs

Lanthier,
Masson,

McDougall (Thre:Rivers)
Montplaisir,

Mousseau,
Quimet,

Pinsonneault,

Archibald,

Appleby,

Hastings, who based his argument on a Dugas,
mere assumption that the circumstances | Gaudet,
had not been changed by the evidence pro- | Gill,
duced before the North-West Committee. Harwood,
Hurteau,
He was gratified to know that every
moderate man in the House, whether a
follower of the Government or not,
expressed himself in favour of the resolu-
tions, and that there was a general dis-
position among members from all the Pro-
vinces to accept this as a final and reason-
able and just settlement of the whole diffi-
culty. He believed that there would be
no cause for irritation hereafter, but that
the settlement which the House was
now
about to ratify would be accepted as a
final and complete settlement by the House
and the country. He rejoiced to know
that they now had an opportunity of
settling a question which threatened at Bowman,
one time most serious consequences-

Aylmer,
Bain,
Barthe,
Béchard.
Bertram,
Biggar,
Blackburn,

Laird,
Lajoie,
Landerkin,
Langlois,
Laurier,

Little,

Macdonald (Cornwall),
Macdonald (Glengarry),

MacDonnell (Inverness),

Macdougall (Elgin),

Blain,
Blake,
Bordon,

Mackenzie (Lambton),
Mackenzie (Montreal),

Borron,

Maclennan,

Burassa,
Bowell,

Boyer,
Brooks,

Buell,
Burk,

something like a war of opinion Brouse,
between different races that might Brown,
have led to serious misunderstandings in
future. He had reason to be proud
as a Canadian to find that his
French-Canadian fellow countrymen,

Burpee (St. John),
Burpee (Sunbury),

Mills,
Mitchell,

as

Cameron (Ontario),

Monteith,

Ar. Bowell