ct. Thus the reiterated prophecy of the Bishop of Toronto was not
uttered without abundant foreknowledge. It proved too true. Knowing
this, he no doubt felt free to deal in strong language, both against the
Legislature of Upper Canada, and the members of the Church of England in
both Houses, who were too patriotic, just and reasonable, as well as
far-seeing, to second his efforts to aggrandize the Church at the
expense, and against the strongly-expressed and oft-repeated wishes, of
the majority of the people, of Upper Canada. He said:

On the bill being sent to England (accompanied by a most energetic
despatch from the Governor-General, imploring Her Majesty's
Government not to disallow, but to sanction it), the Bishop of
Exeter moved in the House of Lords, that the question of the right
to the clergy reserve property in Canada should be referred to the
twelve Judges of England; but the decision of the Judges having
proved adverse to the exclusive pretensions of the Bishop of Exeter
and his party in England and Canada, the English Bishops then
conferred with Lord John Russell, in order to set aside Lord
Sydenham's Canadian bill, and introduce one into the Imperial
Parliament which would accomplish as far as possible the objects
aimed at by referring the question to the Judges. Lord John Russell
became a consenting party and agent in this unconstitutional act of
injustice and spoliation against the rights and feelings of a large
majority of the people of Upper Canada. It was against this act
that Messrs. W. and E. Ryerson (then in England), on behalf of the
Wesleyan Church in Canada, remonstrated in an elaborate and
strongly-worded letter to Lord John Russell--the only communication
of the kind made by any religious body in Canada against the bill
while it was before the British Parliament, or for several years
afterwards.

Knowing the strong influences which had been brought to bear upon Mr.
Poulett Thompson against Dr. Ryerson, by Sir George Arthur (page 193),
and against the Methodist body generally by interested parties in this
discussion, Dr. Ryerson addressed a letter to the Governor-General on
the 25th March, 1840, in which he reviewed the course of the _Guardian_
and his own attitude on public questions during the preceding ten years.
The letter was evidently written with deep feeling, and under a keen
sense