r
whom legislation was necessary, and there was so much sameness about
the business transacted in parliament that comment was barely needful.
At first sight it seems that all went smoothly. There could not have
been factionists where there were no French people entertaining
seditious ideas and cherishing revolutionary projects. But red-tapism
is every where the same. In Upper as in Lower Canada, there were only
two legislative branches, a Lower, or People's House, a Crown, or Upper
House. There was also a certain amount of Crown influence in the Lower
House, which made constitutional government a sham. The freedom of
speech was not even permitted to some members of the Assembly; and it
was quite impossible to hint at corruption in those times, far less to
insist upon the nomination of a corruption committee. There was a
continued interruption of harmonious intercourse between the
Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly. As the Assembly of
Lower Canada had done and had been treated with regard to an offer to
defray the expenses of the civil list, so precisely had the Assembly of
Upper Canada acted, and so had they been treated, when an exactly
similar offer was made. And why? Because the legislative and executive
functions were united in the same persons. His Majesty's Executive
Council was almost wholly composed of the members of the Legislative
Council. Both Councils then consisted of the Deputy Superintendent
General of the Indian Department, the Receiver General, the Inspector
General, the Chief Justice, the Speaker of the Legislative Council, and
the Honorable and Reverend Chaplain of the Legislative Council. The
Upper House was the mere instrument of some designing confidential
secretary to a weak-minded or, at least, credulous governor. Nay, it
was said that "ruffian magistrates" abounded in those days along the
banks of the St. Lawrence, from Brockville to Cornwall, inclusive, the
Lieutenant-Governor being held in leading strings, by the Honorable and
Reverend Chaplain of the Legislative Council of Upper Canada and one of
His Majesty's Executive Councillors for that province.[31] It is indeed
asserted that after the passage of the Sedition Act of 1804, the
misrule of Upper Canada came to a pitch so extraordinary, that it was
exclaimed against from the Bench, while a jury applauded. Governor Gore
appeared to have been creating at the same time, and with the same
effect, those treasonable practices which we