170 ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 



the equivocal and hybrid relation of Colonists, unless their ovm standing shall 

 become elevated, and shall grive them en acknowledged name and at least 

 a quasi nationality. This the United Provinces of British North America, 

 by whatever name denominated, are able to do. 



This leads to a different branch of the subject— the influence which the 

 Union of the North American Colonies would have in their connection with 

 the parent State. 



I cannot perceive that the form which the inhabitants of a Colony may 

 prefer as best suited for the management of their own affairs can of itself 

 affect their relations with the Imperial State ; still less than ever now that the 

 principle of Colonial self-government is clearly acknowledged and practically 

 adopted. 



The mode in which the Colonies expand and advance towards maturity, 

 leaves untouched the principle on which the Colonial relation depends, and in 

 proportion to their happiness and prosperity would naturally be their reluc- 

 tance to dissolve a connection fruitful of results so desirable, while their 

 increasing strength and importance ^^•^ould give them a weight and consid- 

 eration in t'he Councils of the Empire, that would render improbable any 

 unhappy and injudicious interferences with their rights ; and .=o avert the 

 causes of dissatisfaction. 



It is interesting in this view to look back upon the past. Some of the 

 Colonies in their early history received constitutions so independent as to be 

 quite startling, in contrast with the policy in after years advanced by the 

 British Government. The American historian tells us that " in Pennsylvania 

 human rights were resipected. The fundamental law of Wm. Penn, even his 

 detractors concede, was in harmony with universal reason, and true to the 

 ancient and just liberties of the people." 



But Connecticut, as early as 1662, presents the most peculiar spectacle in 

 this respect. The charter of that State created a simple democracy, and gave 

 the people, without reference to, or control by the Imperial Government, the 

 unmodified power to elect all officers, enact laws, administer justice, intlict 

 punishments and pardon offences ; and " in a word to exercise every power 

 deliberative and executive " ; and yet this charter was granted by Charles 

 II. It is true it emanaited from no just principle on his i)art ; but from the 

 usual coincidence that the favourite (a Winthrop) whom he desired to reward, 

 was a man of nohle nature, who, unlike the ordinary recipients of Royal 

 bounty, sought not the advancement of his own fortunes, but the benefit of 

 his country. Still the fact that nearly two centuries ago such powers of 

 Colonial self-government were not imagined to infringe Colonial dependence 

 may make those pause, who in the present advanced state of political science, 

 see in the Union of the North American Colonies dangeir to British connection. 



It may be .'aid that tihese instances are not happy illustrations of my 

 argument, seeing that revolt and separation followed. Long previously, how- 

 e\'er, the early charters had been violated, and practices introduced and claims 

 advanced Inconsistent with tiheir principles. 



Who that regards the earnest desire to avert separation, which at first 

 animated many of the most distinguisihed actors in the American revolution, 

 will venture to declare that revolt and separation would have ensued had the 

 principles of early charters never been interfered with ? 



Suppose again, that the Albany Union had been effected, under the sanc- 

 tion of the Britisih Government, may it not be questioned whether capricious, 

 and inoiiruviderate and oljstinabe statesmen would have urged the same claims 

 — acknowledged now to have been arbitrary and unconstitutional— upon the 

 thirteen Colonies compact and strong in union, which it was 111-advisedly 

 thought mig-ht safely be ventured upon with separate Colonies, weak in them- 

 selves, and apparently without the elements of consolidated power. This 

 revolt and separation that union might— humanly speaking it probably would— 

 have been averted. 



