Department in Parliament, too little time to acquire
even an elementary knowledge of the condition of those numerous and
heterogeneous communities for which they have had both to administer and
legislate. The persons with whom the real management of these affairs
has or ought to have rested, have been the permanent but utterly
irresponsible members of the office. Thus the real government of the
colony has been entirely dissevered from the slight nominal
responsibility which exists. Apart even from this great and primary
evil of the system, the presence of multifarious business thus thrown on
the Colonial Office, and the repeated changes of its ostensible
directors, have produced disorders in the management of public business
which have occasioned serious mischief, and very great irritation. This
is not my own opinion merely; for I do but repeat that of a select
committee of the House of Assembly in Upper Canada, who, in a Report
dated February 8, 1838, say, `It appears to your committee, that one of
the chief causes of dissatisfaction with the administration of colonial
affairs arises from the frequent changes in the office of secretary of
state, to whom the Colonial department is intrusted. Since the time the
late Lord Bathurst retired from that charge, in 1827, your committee
believe there has not been less than eight colonial ministers, and that
the policy of each successive statesman has been more or less marked by
a difference from that of his predecessor. This frequency of change in
itself almost necessarily entails two evils; _first_, an imperfect
knowledge of the affairs of the colonies on the part of the chief
secretary, and the consequent necessity of submitting important details
to the subordinate officers of the department; and, _second_, the want
of stability and firmness in the general policy of the Government, and
which, of course, creates much uneasiness on the part of the Governors,
and other officers of the colonies, as to what measures may be approved.

"`But undoubtedly (continues the Report) by far the greatest objection
to the system is the impossibility it occasions of any colonial
minister, unaided by persons possessing local knowledge, becoming
acquainted with the wants, wishes, feelings, and prejudices of the
inhabitants of the colonies, during his temporary continuance in office,
and of deciding satisfactorily upon the conflicting statements and
claims that are brought before him. A firm