the aristocratic and official class rather
than that of the people--an impression which existed for many years
after the fall of the "family compact."

The public grievances connected with the disposition of the public
lands were clearly exposed by one Robert Gourlay, a somewhat meddlesome
Scotchman, who had addressed a circular, soon after his arrival in
Canada, to a number of townships with regard to the causes which
retarded improvement and the best means of developing the resources of
the province. An answer from Sandwich virtually set forth the feeling of
the rural districts generally on these points. It stated that the
reasons for the existing depression were the reserves of land for the
crown and clergy, "which must for a long time keep the country a
wilderness, a harbour for wolves, and a hindrance to compact and good
neighbourhood; defects in the system of colonisation; too great a
quantity of lands in the hands of individuals who do not reside in the
province, and are not assessed for their property." Mr. Gourlay's
questions were certainly asked in the public interest, but they excited
the indignation of the official class who resented any interference with
a state of things which favoured themselves and their friends, and were
not desirous of an investigation into the management of public affairs.
The subsequent treatment of Mr. Gourlay was shameful in the extreme. He
was declared a most dangerous character when he followed up his circular
by a pamphlet, attacking the methods by which public affairs generally
were conducted, and contrasting them with the energetic and progressive
system on the other side of the border. The indignation of the officials
became a positive fever when he suggested the calling of public meetings
to elect delegates to a provincial convention--a term which recalled the
days of the American revolution, and was cleverly used by Gourlay's
enemies to excite the ire and fear of the descendants of the Loyalists.
Sir Peregrine Maitland succeeded in obtaining from the legislature an
opinion against conventions as "repugnant to the constitution," and
declaring the holding of such public meetings a misdemeanour, while
admitting the constitutional right of the people to petition. These
proceedings evoked a satirical reply from Gourlay, who was arrested for
seditious libel, but the prosecutions failed. It was then decided to
resort to the provisions of a practically obsolete statute passed in
1