once their hostile decrees were repealed. Things looked more favourable now.

Mr. Erskine, son of the celebrated advocate, was sent out with express instructions from Mr. Canning, which he somewhat exceeded, in consenting to consider the suspension of the non-intercourse Act a fair equivalent for the lapse of the Orders in Council, and thus failing to insist that so long as the French decrees were in force, the United States should renounce all pretensions to carry on any trade with the colonies of belligerents not allowed in times of peace, and that British ships of war should be allowed to enforce, by capture, the American non-intercourse with France and her allies. There was great rejoicing among the moderate party at the settlement, which had, it was supposed, been effected by Mr. Erskine and Mr. Madison. The federal press had articles headed " Triumph of Federal Policy;" "No Embargo;" "No French Party;" "A Return to Peace, Prosperity and Commerce," and the like.

All this exultation was destined to receive a rude shock. Depression and indignation followed joy, when on the 20th July, more than a month after it was thought the obnoxious measures had become dead letters, news came that Mr. Canning had declared in the House of Commons, that the arrangement made by Mr. Erskine was wholly unauthorised by his instructions. Mr. Erskine was wrong to have gone beyond his instructions. Mr. Canning was more of a bureaucrat than a statesman, however, in refusing to ratify his arrangement. The non-intercourse was soon re-established, and the situation was more unsatisfactory than before. Every hour made it more tense. Mr. Jackson, who succeeded Mr. Esrkine was studiously insulted. In the spring of 1811, the American minister took formal leave of the Prince Regent. A rupture was felt to be inevitable. Intercourse with France was resumed. The French flag flew in American harbours and from French vessels, many of which were fitted out as privateers, to prey on British commerce. The train was all ready. The match was applied by the collision between the Little Belt and the President, the former an English sloop of war of eighteen guns, the latter an American frigate of forty-four guns. The following January, by an overwhelming majority, Congress passed resolutions

PROJECTED CONQUEST OF CANADA.

199

to increase the regular troops to 25,000, and raising an immediate loan of $10,000,000.

How the Americans hastened hostilities in order to capture the British homeward bound West India fleet; how Madison sought to work on the warlike feeling by placing before Congress worthless papers sold him by Henley for the enormous sum of $50,000; how, on the 19th of June, Congress passed an Act declaring war against Great Britain; how shortly afterwards the Orders in Council were repealed; how notwithstanding Congress did not recede from its hostile position, need only be referred to. Madison was anxious to distinguish his presidency by the conquest of Canada. The great mass of the American people hungered for more territory, and they longed to humiliate England by driving her from the Valley of the St. Lawrence, and raising the stars and stripes over every stronghold from Fort Malden to Quebec. The United States acted at this time, as they have frequently done, as if they did not believe in justice or honour, and only cared about profit and expediency. But there have always been thousands who would not bow the knee to Baal, and the most influential and reflecting raised protests against the war as unjust, unnecessary, and impolitic, as indeed hardly decent, seeing that it meant having for an ally a man, whose whole career showed him to be the enemy of freedom.

Not only was the war objected to in itself. The method by which Canada was to be conquered was placed in its true light. One Virginian gentleman said the plan was to make the Canadians traitors as a preliminary step to their becoming American citizens. Honourable men shrank from the tactics of tricksters. But unfortunately the sinister policy prevailed, as it has often prevailed since, not to the advantage of the world at large or the American people themselves. The men of New England would have nothing to do with the invasion of a people who had given no provocation. In Boston on the day war was declared, the flags were hoisted half-mast high, as though some great national calamity had occurred. On the other hand, extreme men from Germany, French enthusiasts, with no political experience save what they had gained during the reign of terror, Irish sympathisers with, and refugees from the Irish rebellion, swelled the cry of war. These last had

been, in most cases, deprived by bad laws of that education which would have enabled them to make just distinctions, or they would have turned with disgust from an attack on a peaceable population for a cause of quarrel which had occurred on the other side of the world. I do not find, however, that on this occasion the American army was in any great proportion Irish, and amongst the Generals we look in vain for a Montgomery.

But in truth the Americans thought taking Canada would be an easy task. With an ignorance and a vanity which provoke a smile, it was believed that the Canadians themselves, would gladly exchange the union jack for the stars and stripes,* and if they were not so wise in their election, they must be taught wisdom. How could they resist indeed? The odds were overwhelming. Apart from the vast population they had to draw on, they had twenty-five thousand regular troops and one hundred thousand militia, against five thousand eight hundred men in the two Canadas, and a small militia badly equipped.

In Lower Canada parliament had passed a liberal Militia Act, and voted considerable sums. A regiment of French-Canadian voltigeurs was raised. I cannot but pause here to think how different things might have been in Ireland if the people had had privileges such as those wisely accorded to French Canadians in 1775, and had been trusted. In Upper Canada an effective Militia Bill was passed, and Brock, fully aware of the danger, was exerting all his energy and ability to meet it. There were few troops in the province and not sufficient arms for half the militia. From England, where it was thought the repeal of the Orders in Council would settle everything, no aid could be expected for months

There are two prominent heroes in the war of 1812-14. To one ample justice has been done. Neither alive nor dead has the other been properly rewarded. Both were intimately associated in their lives. Perhaps it was well for the one he fell in battle urging on the brave York volunteers, or he might have experienced the fickleness of popular favour, and the dire ingratitude

*Even to-day we sometimes hear Americans talk in a strange way on this head. When coming back from the Centennial, I fell into conversation with an intelligent American, who said to me "I guess over in Canada you feel at times that you ar not free enough, and that old mother England keeps you down a little too much."

FIRST ACQUAINTANCE OF BROCK AND FITZGIBBON.

201

which seems inseparable from free communities. Both were genuine heroes. The less fortunate was the more romantic of the two. We must go a little back in time in order to trace the early acquaintance of two remarkable men.

Isaac Brock was born in Guernsey in 1769, the same year in which Napoleon and Wellington were born. His family was one of some local importance. He was tall, robust, and though a gymnast, remarkable for his extreme gentleness. He entered the 8th regiment as an ensign in 1785. Five years afterwards he was promoted to a lieutenancy. At the close of 1790 he obtained an independent company by raising the requisite number of men. He soon after exchanged into the 49th, and joined his regiment at Barbadoes. There was in the regiment a confirmed duellist, who took advantage of his being a dead shot. Brock soon proved to his brother captain that he was not to be bullied nor intimidated. He was challenged as a matter of course. On the ground Brock pointed out that it was not fair, he being so large a man, to stand at twelve paces, and producing a handkerchief, insisted on firing across it. This the duellist declined, and the consequence was,. the regiment got rid of him. On the 24th of June, Brock purchased his majority. In 1797 he purchased his lieutenant-coloneley, and soon after became senior lieutenant-colonel of the 49th.. He was then in his twenty-eighth year.

On the 6th of August, a young Irishman enlisted in the 49th, on Barham Downs, near Canterbury. In less than two months he was fighting under Brock at Egmont-op-Zee, where his colonel was wounded, and had his holsters shot through. The merits of James Fitzgibbon were soon discovered by General Brock, who, a few years afterwards, made him sergeant-major, and in 1806 procured him an ensigncy. After the deployment of the 49th on the sand hills, Fitzgibbon separated from Colonel Brock with that part of the regiment detached under Lieutenant-Colonel Sheaffe. Soon after they commenced firing, the soldiers covering themselves behind the sand hills and firing over the summit. While thus engaged he noticed the paymaster, Savery Brock, passing from the top of one sand hill to another, directing and encouraging the men. He watched every moment to see him fall. But two hours passed away and the paymaster remained untouched.

"Being at this time," says Fitzgibbon, "only eighteen years of age, and not nine months from my parents' fire-side, in a remote village in Ireland, I did not venture, although a sergeant, to give any orders or instructions, lest I should do wrong. But after witnessing Savery Brock's conduct, I determined to be the first to advance every time at the head of those around me, and I soon saw that of those who were most prompt to follow me, fewer fell than of those more in the rear." He then, this raw lad of eighteen, made up his mind to think no more of his own life, but leave the care of it to Divine Providence, and to strain every nerve to do his duty. At five o'clock on that day, while in his eagerness pressing forward, he went too far ahead of his men, was cut off and taken prisoner.

On the 27th February, 1801, the 49th embarked on board Nelson's squadron at Portsmouth. On the 30th of March the fleet proceeded through the Sound, with a topsail breeze from N. W. Fitzgibbon was in the Monarch, the 49th acting as marines. This ship had 210 men killed and wounded. The next year the regiment was ordered to Canada. In the fall, at Montreal, an educated soldier named Carr was observed by Colonel Brock to salute him with less manliness than usual, and he suspected that he would desert as the ice bridge was on the river. Brock ordered Fitzgibbon, now a sergeant-major, to bring the man before him. The Colonel directly charged Carr with intending to desert. "Manfully tell me the truth!" roared Brock. Carr stammered out a denial. Brock stepped up to him, and putting his clenched fist forward, cried in a firm voice: "Don't prevaricate. Tell me the truth like a man. You know I have always treated you kindly!" The awed wretch confessed that he and others had determined to desert. "Go then," rejoined the Colonel, "and tell those deluded men all that has passed here, and that notwithstanding what you have told me, I will still treat every one of you with kindness, and you may then all desert from me if you please."

In the following summer, when the 49th were at York (Toronto), the sergeant of the guard informed the sergeant-major (Fitzgibbon), that three of his men were missing, and that a boat had been taken from a shed in charge of a sentry, who had likewise disappeared. Fitzgibbon instantly reported this to the Col