BBITISH, COLONIAL AND OTHEB COBBESPONDENCE, ETC. 465 



Very rarely has the press of Great Britain and of His Majesty's 

 Dominions beyond the Seas shown greater unanimity than in its 

 support of the action of this government in relation to the modus 

 vivendi. The extraordinary nature of the arrangement, and the ex 

 traordinary manner of its accomplishment, has occasioned a feeling 

 of indignation and alarm from one end of the Empire to the other. 

 The leading journals of the Canadian Dominion, of the Common- 

 wealth of Australia, of New Zealand, of South Africa, and of India 

 have given forth no uncertain expression of interest in the question 

 that the modus vivendi has raised, an expression of interest in which 

 indignation and alarm has been blended with genuine sympathy for 

 the people of this colony. 



Some one has said that the press is the great judiciary of these 

 modern times. The press referred to of course are those journals the 

 wide world over whose columns are untarnished by prejudice or pas- 

 sion, by personalities or partizanship, and which stand for truth and 

 justice alone. I rejoice exceedingly that the decision of this great 

 tribunal has been in favour of the position that this government has 

 taken upon the question. 



The question that the modus vivendi has raised is not one of mere 

 local concern. This colony is primarily affected thereby, but not by 

 any means solely affected; hence the interest that has been taken in 

 the matter throughout His Majesty's dominions. Principles of the 

 highest importance are involved therein, principles which form the 

 substratum upon which the liberties of the colonies under responsible 

 government are based. 



The real question at issue is, how far, according to the principles of 

 the constitution, His Majesty's Ministers have the power to set aside 

 or limit the operation of local laws which have received the royal 

 assent, and dispose of the resources of the colonies without their inter- 

 ests being consulted or their sanction obtained. 



Let us briefly consider the subject of responsible government before 

 we proceed to analyze the arrangement that we regard as in conflict 

 with its principles. 



In the year 1838 Canada was in a state of insurrection. From 

 Prince Edward Island away west to Toronto there was discontent 

 which found expression in deeds of violence. This was consequent 

 upon political grievances that had for several years existed. It was 

 at this juncture that the Imperial Government despatched the Earl 

 of Durham to proceed there as Governor-General and Lord High 

 Commissioner to investigate the affairs of the whole British North 

 American Provinces. In the year 1839 that following his appoint- 

 ment Lord Durham presented to the Queen an elaborate report on 

 the result of his enquiries, in which he attributed all colonial evils 

 to the absence of responsibility of their rulers to those whom they 

 were called upon to govern, and he recommended as a panacea for all 

 existing political complaints the introduction into the several British 

 North American colonies of the principle of local self-government. 

 Two years later in 1841 responsible government was introduced 

 into Canada, and its success in Canada, under the presidency of Lord 

 Elgin, father of the distinguished gentleman who is now Secretary 

 of State for the Colonies, led to its introduction into the maritime 

 provinces of British North America, and subsequently into the 



