A.D. 1774. the Roman Catholic clergy, except regulars, the legal enjoyment of their eftates, and of their tythes, from Thefe were the all that are of their own religion. chief objects of this act. vernment. The arguments which were used for the support of this bill were,-That the French, who were a very great majority of the inhabitants of that country, haying been used to live under an abfolute government, were not anxious for the forms of a free one, which That they even they little understood, or valued. abhorred the idea of a popular representation, obferving the mischiefs which it introduced in their neighbouring countries. Befides, it would be unreasonable to have a representative body out of which all the natives fhould be excluded; and perhaps it would be dangerous to trust such an inftrument in the hands of a people but newly taken into the British empire. They were not yet ripe, it was faid, for English goThat their landed property had been all granted, and their family fettlements made on the ideas of French laws: that the laws concerning contracts and perfonal property were nearly the fame in France as in England; that a trial by jury was ftrange and difgufting to them. That with regard to religion, it had been stipulated to allow them perfect freedom in that refpect by the treaty of Paris, as far as the laws of England permitted. The penal laws of England, with respect to religion, they said, did not extend beyond the kingdom; and though the king's fupremacy extended farther, a provifion was made in the act to oblige the Canadians to be fubject to it; and an oath prescribed as a teft against fuch papal claims as might endanger the allegiance of the fubjects. That it was against all equity to perfecute thofe people for their religion, and that people have not the privileges of re ligion : ligion who have not their own priesthood. And as for the payment of tythes, it was at beft only fetting down their clergy, where they were found at the conqueft. In one refpect, it was faid, they were worfe, as no perfon profeffing the Proteftant religion was to be fubject to them, which would be a great encouragement to converfions. There is great reafon to conclude, that none of these were the true reafons for preferring the bill; but the main reafon, though not what is now called the oftenfible one, was, to bring over the French colonifts to the defigns of the miniftry, and to perfuade them, by pretended favours, to fall upon the back fettlements of the English colonies. The minifter feems to have been totally ignorant of the difpofition of the French Catholics in Canada; for we do not find that ever thefe papists have been fo dutiful as to thank government for the new favours that were granted them; and it has appeared fince that they were not defiring any fuch change. A few tools of government were perfuaded to fend a petition to parliament for the French laws, but it was far from the minds of the generality to folicit any fuch favour. With regard to the promise made in the king's declaration, it extended no farther than a free toleration; whereas the bill gives a legal establishment to popery in Canada, and pledges the faith of king and parliament for the fupport of the popifh religion. The religion of popery in that part of his Majefty's dominions is established upon the fame footing as that of the Church of England; upon papists acknowledging the king's fupremacy, as appointed by the first of Queen Elizabeth. Whereas the proteftants have no other fecurity than the pleasure of the king, nor any right to demand any thing, except what he shall pleafe to grant them. But this law the papifts 71 papifts are, fecured in all their religious privileges, and provided for by an act of the British parliament, with a legal fecurity for a maintenance for their clergy. The only favour which is fhewn to proteftants is that they are freed from paying tythes, which the minifter thought would be a powerful means of converfion, to bring over papifts to the proteftant religion; but though this may appear to be a very ftrong incentitive to a minifter of fate, or others who pay little regard to any, religion, yet to fuch as have any principles of confcience, fome ftronger means of converfion are neceffary. It appears from the minifterial arguments that the minifter wanted only fuch converts from popery as were fwayed by the motives of worldly rewards, which are those most prevalent with many in his ftation. The giving the Canadian colonists the trial by jury in criminal caufes, and the French method of trial in civil caufes has a very whimfical appearance; for certainly a man would chufe to trust his property where he would chufe to truft his life. And it is certainly neceffary, that people have as good a chance for fecuring their property as they poffibly can. But although government intended to grant a lavour to the papifts; this was no reafon why the proteftant fubjects of the empire fhould be ftripped of their rights to oblige Roman papifts; the proteftants in Canada ought to have had the enjoyment of what the law fecures to English fubjects, whatever the government might be pleafed to grant to papists. But by this law they have deprived the proteftant fubjects of Britain of their juft, natural rights, fecured to them by the conftitution, upon the faith of enjoying which, they fettled in that part of the world. The paffing of this bill, whereby fuch favour was fhewn to the church of Rome, created more fufHhh picion picion on account of the legiflature refufing a petition which had been prefented fome time before by the Proteftant diffenters for relief from fome penal laws that were standing again't them. It was concluded that government fhewed this favour to the Catholics, from a perfuafion that they were fuitable inftruments to promote their arbitrary defigns, and that they wanted to difcourage the the diffenters, because they were friends to liberty, and roes to all fort of tyranny and defpotifm. Whatever were the motives which dete: mined the legislature to pafs this law, it is manifeft that it is an infraction of the conftitution, by establishing popery in the British empire, which the revolution fettlement guarded against. It is a fpecial part of the prefent infelicity of thefe nations at prefent, that there are a number of modern ftatutes that clash with ancient and conftitutional laws, whereby men in defending the one, may be punished for tranfgreffing the others. It is not in the power of the far greater part of British fubjects to know and understand the large body of laws that are contained in the ftatutes, and through ignorance are ready to expofe themselves to the fanctions of fome ftanding law of the land; efpecially as it has been for fo many ages an established idea, that all the fubjects of the British empire have the fame privileges of the laws, and may all be their own legiflators, when they become freeholders of the empire. But though it was formerly thought that the fubjects of the colonies were freemen, like others at home, yet it has been determined that colonist and freeman have different fignifications; and that there can be no legal freedom out of Great Britain. Fot this is the import of the reafoning upon the fubject of colonization in the prefent times. CHAP. |