Preamble. Judges of His 4 GEORGE V., A. 1914 AN ACT DISQUALIFYING JUDGES FROM SITTING IN ANNO QUINQUAGESIMO PRIMO GEORGII III. AN ACT for declaring Judges to be disabled and disqualifying them, from being elected, or from Sitting and Voting in the House of Assembly. (21st March, 1811.) WHEREAS it is expedient to make effectual provision for excluding Judges of His Majesty's Courts of King's Bench within this Province from being elected or sitting and voting in the House of Assembly of this Province, Be it therefore enacted by the King's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Council and Assembly of the Province of Lower Canada, constituted and assembled by virtue of and under the authority of An Act of the Parliament of Great Britain passed in the thirty first year of His Majesty's Reign, intituled, "An Act to repeal certain parts of An Act passed in the fourteenth year of His "Majesty's Reign," intituled "An Act for making more effectual "provision for the Government of the Province of Quebec in North "America" and to make further provision for the Government of "the said Province" And it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same that from and after the passing of this act, no person who shall be a Judge of either of His Majesty's Courts of King's Bench within this Province, shall be capable of being elected or of sitting, or voting, as a Member of Assembly in any Provincial Parliament. RESOLUTIONS OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ON THE IMPRISONMENT OF PIERRE BEDARD.2 The order of the day, for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, on the Message from His Excellency the Governor in Chief to this House, the thirteenth instant, intimating that Pierre Bedard, Esquire, elected to serve as a Member for the County of Surrey, was apprehended and committed for treasonable practices, being read; 3 The House resolved itself into the said Committee. Mr. Speaker left the Chair. Mr. Debartzch took the Chair of the Committee. Mr. Speaker resumed the Chair; And Mr. Debartzch reported, that the Committee had come to several resolutions, which he was directed to submit to the House, whenever it shall be pleased to receive the same. ORDERED, that the Report be now received. And he read the Report in his place, and afterwards delivered it in at the Table, where the Resolutions were again read by the Clerk. 1. From the Provincial Statutes of Lower-Canada, 1811. 2. From the Journals of the House of Assembly of Lower-Canada, 1810-11. 3. For the Address of Sir James Craig see the Journals of the House of Assembly, 1810-11, page 36. SESSIONAL PAPER No. 29c The said Resolutions are as followeth: videlicet; RESOLVED, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that Pierre Bedard, Esquire, was one of the Representatives for the Lower Town of Quebec, in the last Provincial Parliament, at the time of its prorogation, on the twenty-sixth February last. RESOLVED, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that the same Pierre Bedard, Esquire, was one of the Members of the last Parliament, as Representative of the Lower Town of Quebec, at the time of its dissolution, on the first of March last. RESOLVED, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that by a Warrant1 issued from the Executive Council of this Province, signed by three Members of the said Executive Council, the nineteenth day of March last, by virtue of the temporary Act, intituled, "An Act for the better preservation of His "Majesty's Government, as by law happily established in this Province,2 the said Pierre Bedard, Esquire, was, on the said nineteenth day of March, apprehended and committed for treasonable practices; and has always been, and still continues to be, detained in the Common Gaol of the District of Quebec, by virtue of the said Warrant. RESOLVED, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that the same Pierre Bedard, Esquire, was elected on the twenty-seventh of March last, and returned as one of the Knights Representatives for the County of Surrey, to serve in the present Provincial Parliament. RESOLVED, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that the same Pierre Bedard, Esquire, is now one of the Members of this House for the present Parliament. RESOLVED, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that the simple arrest and detention of any one of His Majesty's Subjects, under and by virtue of the authority of the temporary Act of the Provincial Parliament, intituled, "An Act for the better preservation of His Majesty's Government, as by "law happily established in this Province," does not bring him under the description of those who are declared incapable of being elected to serve in the House of Assembly, by the 23d Clause of the Act of the Parliament of Great Britain of the 31st year of His present Majesty, Chap. 31.3 RESOLVED, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that the provisions of the temporary Act, intituled, "An Act for the better preservation of His Majesty's Government, as by law happily established in this Province," guarantees to the said Pierre Bedard, Esquire, the right of sitting in this House. RESOLVED, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that an Humble Address be presented to His Excellency the Governor in Chief, to acquaint His Excellency that this House have taken into serious consideration His Excellency's Message of the thirteenth instant, and have accordingly passed several Resolutions, which they conceive to be their duty to submit to His Excellency; and that it is the wish of this House, should His Excellency not deem it proper to lay before them any further communication on this 1. See page 379. 2. See page 215. 3. Clause 23 of the Constitutional Act of 1701 disqualified from election to the Assembly all persons "who shall have been attainted for Treason or Felony in any Court of Law within any of His Majesty's Dominions, or who shall be within any Description of Persons disqualified by any Act of the Legislative Council and Assembly of the Province, assented to by His Majesty, His Heirs or Successors." 4 GEORGE V., A. 1914 subject, that Pierre Bedard, Esquire, Knight Representative for the County of Surrey, may take his seat in this House.1 REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL ON THE IMPRISONMENT OF PIERRE BEDARD.2 Thursday, 4th April 1811. At the Council Chamber in the Castle of St. Lewis Present His Excellency General Sir James Henry Craig K.B. Governor in Chief The Honble The Chief Justice Thomas Dunn His Excellency addressed the Board in the following mannerGentlemen, In calling your attention to the Imprisonment of Mr Bedard, I am desirous of taking the Opportunity of offering a brief recapitulation of the several Circumstances that have attended it, with a View of leaving upon the proceedings of this Board, a Record of the Motives by which I have been actuated in the transaction. It is not necessary that I should advert to the occasion of this Gentlemen's confinement, it must be perfectly in your recollection"; and I believe no Circumstance has since taken place to cast a doubt on the expediency of the Measure. In the unanimity of the opinions by which it was effected, I felt confirmed in that which I had already formed, as to the necessity of Steps being immediately adopted, to check the Mischief with which we were threatened, for it must always be kept in view, that Mr Bedard's detention was a Measure of precaution not of punishment to which he could be subjected only by a decision of the Laws of his Country. Upon this principle, the other persons who were imprisoned at the same time with Mr Bedard, having expressed their Conviction of their error, I did not hesitate to consider their having done so as a sufficient Security for their not reverting to the same Conduct, and it appearing that the healths of both of them were in danger of being affected by their Confinement, I was from that Circumstance the more readily induced to propose, and you concurred in their being released, upon giving Security for their forth coming, had it been judged necessary to call upon them. Upon the same principle I have no doubt you would as readily have agreed with Ime in as early a liberation of Mr Bedard, but having laid before you a Petition them before the Governor. to be 1. These resolutions were adopted by the House and a Committee was appointed to lay dent see Craig to Liverpool, March 28th, 1811. For a discussion of the political situation created by this inciThe Canadian Archives, Q. 114, page 12. 2. From the Minutes of the Executive Council, State Book G, Lawer-Canada, page 3. 3. See page 379, note 1, and also the Minutes of the Executive Council for March 19th, 1810, State Book F, Lower Canada, page 140. 4. Jean Thomas' Taschereau and François Blanchet, both of Quebec were arrested at the On June 23rd, 1810, an order was given for the release of Blanchet on account of the condition of his health. For the same reason, Taschereau was released on July 28th. In each case the prisoners were required to give surety for their good behaviour same time as Bedard. to the extent of £500. See State Book F, Lower Canada, page 248 and 250. Ryland, September 10, 1810, quoted in Christie's History of the late Province of Lower Canada, 5. For an account of the negotiations relating to the release of Bedard see Craig to Volume VI, page 154. SESSIONAL PAPER No. 29c of a nature to hold out the same expectation of his abstaining from the Conduct against which precaution was held to be necessary. As I did not think it proper to return any Answer to his Petition, my not doing so produced a sort of communication between him and Mr Foy,1 to which it does not seem necessary to advert any further, than as regards the mode in which it concluded. It appearing to me that he was desirous of knowing what was expected from him, I sent for his Brother a Curé who I understood was in Town, and in the presence of one of the Members of the Board now present, I authorized him to acquaint his Brother with the motives that had induced his Confinement, and that looking only to the Security of His Majesty's Government, and the Public tranquility, I had no wish that it should continue one moment beyond what was required by those objects, that the moment he expressed a sense of his error in what he had done, I should consider that as a sufficient Security for his not returning to the same dangerous course, and would immediately. propose his enlargement to you. His reply thro' the same Channel was couched in respectful terms, but declined admitting an error of which he did not feel that he had been guilty. Mr Bedard having been re-elected into the Provincial Parliament, it was not difficult to foresee that his imprisonment would become a subject of discussion when that Assembly met, it therefore became also a subject of serious consideration on my part, the result of which was, a determination to pursue a line of Conduct, to the particulars of which it is not necessary here to advert, as it would be only anticipating an Account of them which I shall have occasion shortly to give, and in which I can only use the very words which I should otherwise now employ. You are all aware of the part taken by the House of Assembly on the occasion, I had already been furnished with a Copy of the Resolutions2 into which they had entered, and was in the daily expectation of their being presented, when I received an Application from one of the leading Members, that I would admit him to a Conference; this was the Elder Mr Papineau, Member for Montreal, and the subject was these very Resolutions. It would be irrelevant to my present object to refer to our Conversation, any otherwise than as it drew from me my final determination, and the motives on which that determination was founded; which I gave to him in the following Words, no consideration Sir, shall induce me to consent to the liberation of Mr Bedard at the instance of the House of Assembly, either as matter of Right, or of favor, nor will I now consent to his being enlarged on any terms, during the sitting of the present Session; and I will not hesitate to inform you of the motives by which I have been induced to come to this Resolution; I know that the general language of the Members has encouraged the Idea which universally prevails, that the House of Assembly will release Mr Bedard, an Idea so firmly established that it may be said to be universal in the Province; the time is therefore come, when I feel that the Security, as well as the dignity of the King's Government, imperiously require that the People should be made to understand the true limits of the rights of the respective parts of the Government, and that it is not that of the House of Assembly to Rule the Country. In rendering this account of my conversation with Mr Papineau, in so far as relates to the subject in question, I have laid before this Board, the true grounds on which I have hitherto acted in it, to which I may add, that I have thought it necessary further to abstain from taking any Measures towards the enlargement of Mr Bedard, till the several Members should have reached their respective homes," when it should appear to be impossible by any misrepresentation of theirs, for them to ascribe it to the interference of the Assembly. These objects being now perfectly accomplished, and a pretty general tranquility 1. Mr. Lewis Foy held the position of Assistant Secretary to the Governor-in-Chief and was acting as Chief Secretary during the absence of Mr. Ryland. 2. See page 420. 3. The Assembly was prorogued on March 21st, 1811. 4 GEORGE V., A. 1914 reigning in the Province, I submit to your consideration, whether the time be not arrived, at which it is proper to put an End to the Confinement of Mr Bedard. After deliberation it was unanimously agreed by the Board that Mr Bedard should be enlarged, and that the following Warrant' should be issued for his release. And also that the Bonds given by Frs Blanchet, I. T. Taschereau2 and Charles Lefrançois, for their appearance at the City of Quebec to answer to the charges for which they stood confined, and to all and every Information and Indictment which by reason of the Matters for which they so stood confined or any of them should on the part of Our Sovereign Lord the King be exhibited against them whenever they should be called upon & required so to do, and in the mean time to keep the Peace and be of good behaviour to all His Majesty's liege Subjects should be Cancelled. OPINION OF THE LAW OFFICERS OF THE CROWN ON THE RIGHT OF PRESENTATION TO ROMAN CATHOLIC LIVINGS, May it please Your Lordship. LOWER CANADA.3 We are honored with Your Lordship's Commands of the 16th of May 1811 transmitting the Dispatches received from Sir Robert Milnes, Lieutenant Governor, and Sir James Craig, Governor of the Province of Lower Canada, with their respective Inclosures, together with several other Documents, in reference to the subjects of those Dispatches. And Your Lordship is pleased to request that we would take the same into our immediate consideration, and report to Your Lordship our opinion upon the points arising out of them. First, whether the Right of Presentation to vacant Roman Catholic Livings, in the Province of Lower Canada be in the Crown"? And secondly, "whether the Crown has not the Right of Property in the Estates of the St. Sulpicians commonly called the Seminary Estates of Montreal? In obedience to Your Lordships directions, we have considered the several Papers submitted to us, and cannot but observe with regret that questions of so much importance should have been left so long in a state of doubt and uncertainty, and that for so many years, a sort of possessory Title should seem to have been tolerated, which if not consistent with the legal right, it may now be difficult from long continuance to disturb. Confining ourselves however to the mere Question of Right, we are of opinion on the first point, that so much of the Patronage of Roman Catholic Benefices, as was exercised by the Bishop of Quebec, under the French Government has of Right devolved to His Majesty. In forming this opinion, we have endeavoured to trace the nature of that Patron age, and it's dependence on the Sovereign Power, to which His Majesty has succeeded by right of Conquest and by Treaty. It appears from the Acts and Edicts of the French Government relative to Canada, that the Patronage of Cures in general was left to the Bishop. But out of this general condition was excepted by Royal Edict the Patronage of Founders of Churches (a) and the right of nominating to particular Benefices which were vested in certain Communities. Such Patronage may still belong to Individuals, who retain a Capacity to exercise it under the Capitulation and Treaty. (a) Edict 1667 recited in the Edict of 1669 Vol. 1, Pa 293. 1. For the warrant see State Book G, Lower Canada, page 10. 2. See page 422, note 4. 3. From the copy in the Canadian Archives, Q. 115, page 176. |