THE war which broke out between France and England, at this time, and which finally involved nearly every European nation, excited a good deal of alarm in New Brunswick. The Province was almost wholly without defences, and the regular troops in it were needed elsewhere. We have become so accustomed to live in security, that we can hardly realize there ever was a time when New Pre us wick was thought to be in danger of an invasion, but, when the war broke out, not much more than thirty years had elapsed since the French Hag was hauled down in Canada, and less than forty years before the whole of New Brunswick had been claimed as French territory. The war of the Revolution, which ended only ten years before, had been very injurious to the prestige of British arms, and there seemed to be no certainty that Great Britain would be able to protect her colonies in the contest that was now-beginning. They might not be attacked by the armies and fleets of the enemy, but there was always danger from the predatory visits of privateers, such as had infested the coast during the revolutionary war. St. John was absolutely without defences, for Fort Howe was in the rear of the town, and therefore, of no value as a means of compelling an enemy's ship to keep at a distance.

Naturally, there was much alarm in that young commercial community, for the recollection of the raids made on the coast, in the first years of the American war, had not faded away. There was fortunately, plenty of courage and public spirit in St. John, and the people speedily enrolled themselves in companies for the defence of the place. New batteries were erected at the southern end of the city, and armed with 18 pounders so that it was thought no enemy's ship could enter the harbour. All this work was done by the people under the direction of the Governor, without cost to the Government. The volunteer companies were ready to stand to their arms at any time, and turned out on numerous occasions when there was an alarm that the enemy's ships were cruising in the Bay.

The regulars were all withdrawn from the up river posts when the British regiments left the province, but their places were supplied by small detachments of the King's New Brunswick Regiment, one under Lieutenant Jenkins at Presque Isle, and another under Lieutenant Chew at Grand Falls. The remainder of the regiment was stationed at Fredericton, St. John and Passamaquoddv. There were frequent reports of attacks that were to be made on the province, but they ail proved to be groundless. Occasionally a suspicious looking vessel appeared in the Bay, but they all disappeared as quickly as they came. Indeed the St. John people were quite prepared for offensive Warfare, for letters of marque were issued by the Governor to merchants of that city, and privateers were fitted out there to prey on the commerce of the enemy.

The session of 1794 began on the 4th of February with a good attendance of members. In his speech the Governor, after referring to the war with France, pointed out the necessity of placing the province in a condition of defence, and recommended the passing of a militia bill. The House lost no time in complying with the Governor's wishes, and a committee was at once appointed to prepare a bill. This measure, which was drafted by Mr. Chipman, passed both houses and became law. It provided that every male inhabitant of the Province, between the ages of sixteen and sixty, should be enrolled in some independent company or regiment of foot. Regiments were to be called out twice every year, and independent companies four times for the purpose of being trained. Every militia man called out was required to appear with a good musket, bayonet and belt, cartridge and Hints. The only persons excepted from the operation of the law with respect to enrollment were members of the Council and Assembly, Justices of the Peace, Sheriffs, Coroners, all persons who have held any civil or military commission under His Majesty, the Surveyor-General, the Treasurer of the province, officers of His Majesty's Customs, revenue and naval officers, gentlemen of the learned professions and one ferryman to each ferry. Nevertheless all those exempted persons, except the ferrymen, were required to appear in arms four times a year with such regimental or independent company as they might select. Clergymen and physicians might appear on such occasions without arms. The Governor was authorized to call out the militia for service in case of invasion or threatened attack on the province. This Act continued in force until 1802.

The appropriation hill of 1793, having been thrown out hy the Council, it became necessary at this session to pass an act providing for the services of both years. The clause, which provided a grant of money for each parish in aid of education, which had been objected to by the Council, was omitted, and the grant for the Fredericton Academy was also left out, so that both the Council and the House might claim a victory. An appropriation of £100 was made to defray the expenses of the adjutants of militia. The session was marked by its harmony ; the only division, which indicated the existence of party spirit being that with regard to the appointment of an agent for the Province in London. Brook Watson, who had been agent for several years, had removed from London, so that it became necessary to appoint another agent in his place. The person selected was William Knox, the father of Thomas Knox, who had been Deputy Muster Master of the Loyalists and disbanded troops on the St. John in 1784. Many of the members desired that Mr. Knox should be the Agent of the House of Assembly merely, and that the Council should have no share in his appointment. A motion to that effect was defeated by a vote of 12 to 10. At a later period, when the House and the Council were at a dead lock, Mr. Knox found his position one of much difficulty and sharp letters passed between him and the Committee of Correspondence of the House.

In 1794, we have the first indications of the long drawn out boundary controversy between Great Britain and the United States -with regard to the north west angle of Nova Scotia. The Treaty of 1783, which fixed the boundary between the territories of the two nations drew the line "from the north west angle of Nova Scotia, viz., that angle which is formed by a line drawn from the sources, of the St. Croix River to the Highlands; along the said Highlands winch divide the waters that empty themselves into the River St. Lawrence from those that fall into the Atlantic ocean, to the north westernmost head of Connecticut River." It will be seen later that a dispute was in progress in regard to the identity of the St. Croix River, but in the meantime our American neighbors thought they might as well take possession of the territory north of the source of the St. Croix:. Accordingly in the spring of 1794, a surveyor was employed by the government of Massachusetts to run the boundary line according to the Treaty. He decided that Skiff Lake near the present Canterbury Station was the source of the St. Croix and, running due north from that point, he came out on the St. John River just below the old Indian fort at Meductic. Here he planted a stake and announced that this was the boundary, informing the settlers who lived north of this, and west of the River St. John, that they were under the jurisdiction of the United States. Information of this Surveyor's operations, was conveyed to Governor Carleton by Lieut. Allan, who was stationed at Presque Isle, and the home authorities were at once apprised of the fact. In a despatch written a few months later, Governor Carleton informs the Secretary of State, that surveyors from Massachusetts were engaged in marking the boundary, which they traced across the St. John, a little above the Madawaska, which avoided the lands settled, but interrupted communication between New Brunswick and Canada. Evidently these two parties of surveyors, although employed by the same Government, were working on very different theories, for if Skiff Lake was the source of the St. Croix, and a line north from that, touched the St. John at Meductic, it should have crossed the river at that point and not above the Madawaska. Evidently the Government of Massachusetts was going on the principle, that by making extreme claims, more might be obtained than by a moderate statement of their case. The logical result of their claims if successful would have been that New Brunswick would have been entirely cut off from Canada, which would have made the Confederation of 1867, impossible.

In the summer of 1794, New Brunswick was visited by Prince Edward, Duke of Kent, the father of Queen Victoria. This Prince, then in his twenty-seventh year, had embraced the profession of a soldier, and was extremely active and zeaious in the discharge of his duties. He lived for several years in Halifax and was commander-in-chief of the forces in North America, but he never had any opportunity of distinguishing himself in any of the wars in which Great Britain was engaged. Probably the British people would not have tolerated the entrusting of a high military command in the field to any member of the Royal family after the total failure of the Duke of York.

But the Duke of Kent was a better man than any of his brothers, and might have served his country with credit if he had been given the opportunity. He arrived at St. John from Annapolis on the 16th June, in the Zebra, sloop of war, and wTas received by Governor Carleton, who conveyed him to Fredericton where he arrived on the 21st. The next day was Sunday, but as His Royal Highness was in a great hurry he held a levee, received addresses from the Council and the inhabitants of York, and inspected the New Brunswick Regiment. Early on Monday morning he embarked for St. John where he arrived the same day. On Tuesday he inspected the battery and ordinance stores at St. John, and held a levee at the house of Mr. Chipman, the Solicitor General, the same house in which his grandson, now King Edward VII, was accommodated when in St. John sixty-six years later. The Duke left St. John the same evening for Annapolis, in the same vessel that had brought him to New Brunswick.

The legislative session of 1795, was a great contrast to its predecessor, and during it, the differences between the House and the Council assumed an acute form. Mr. Glenie who had been absent for two sessions, now took his place in the House, and began to make it unpleasant for those who were wedded to the old order of things. His great achievement at this session was the carrying of a bill through the House " eclaratory of what acts of Parliament are binding in this province." Under the terms of this measure no acts of the British Parliament passed subsequent to 1750, were to be held binding on this province unless it was so expressed in the Act. No laws passed prior to 1750, were to be binding in New Brunswick, without express words to that effect, except acts for the purpose of imposing taxes, for the maintenance of an established clergy or for the regulation of Commerce. It was further declared that no part of the canon law, nor any act of parliament regulating the jurisdiction of spiritual Courts, shall be held to extend to this province and that neither the act of uniformity, nor any penal statute respecting recusants and non-conformists, except so far as they respect supremacy and allegiance, shall be in force in New Brunswick. This bill was so far in advance of the times that it is surprising the House passed it, but the journals show that it was carried by a vote of 15 to 10. Every member of the House was in his place when this important vote was taken. The bill caused a decided sensation among the friends of the Governor. Capt. Lyman wrote to the authorities at Whitehall, denouncing the bill in strong terms and attacking Glenie and those who voted with him. He described 'it as a measure practically to declare independence of the Mother Country. Yet everything in that bill has been long since recognized as right and the constitution of every self-governing British Colony is based on the principles there set forth. The bill was rejected by the Council the moment it was introduced, those friends of high prerogative and penal laws refusing to allow it to be even read, but it nevertheless stands in the records of the province as a proof that in -Tames Glenie, New Brunswick had, more than a century ago, a reformer of a very advanced type whose enlightened views, although denounced at the time by a set of bigots, are now universally recognized as sound and necessary to the peace and well being of the country.

A few days after the session opened, a message was received by the House from the Governor, asking that provision be made for the payment- of £74. 7s. 7d. for the defence of St. Andrews, and of £50 for the purchase of a lot upon which to erect a battery in St. John. The House declined to vote any appropriation for these objects, and in an address to the Governor expressed the opinion that these items were expenditures for the general defence, and therefore not liable to be paid by the province. This address seems to have been passed in the House without a division, but it deeply offended the Governor and his friends in the Council. When the appropriation bill was sent to the Council the latter requested a conference with the Assembly. This was agreed to by the House, and Messrs. Winslow and Leonard, on behalf of the Council stated the objections of that body to the appropriation bill as follows:

1. That it provides for services not recommended, which the Council conceive to be unparliamentary.

2. That some of the services specially recommended by His Excellency in this session, remain unprovided for, although these services are acknowledged to be for the general defence, and ought therefore to have been among the first objects of provision, while on the contrary, greater sums are appropriated for other objects.

3. That the appropriating of sums of money, as in this hill, to the several members for their attendance in. General Assembly, does not accord with parliamentary usage.

The representatives of the Assembly traversed all three of these propositions, and treated the third one as instilling to that body. The conferences ended in nothing, and the appropriation was thrown out by the Council. There can be no doubt that the stand taken by the House of Assembly in this matter was perfectly correct. The proposition that the House could not vote for services not recommended by the Governor, was ridiculous, in view of the fact that the Governor had no advisors who were responsible to the people. The statement that New Brunswick was bound to pay for the erection of forts at St. John and St. Andrews was incorrect, because the British government at Halifax and everywhere else had undertaken that work. The objection to the payment of members was equally invalid, because the Council in 1788, 1789, 1791, 1792 and 1794, had passed appropriation bills providing for the payment of members. The house having yielded the previous year in regard to the grant for education in the parishes, the Council hoped to force them to surrender the initiation of money grants, and make the Governor dictator as to what appropriations they should vote for the public services.

Another controversy arose between the Assembly and the Council during the session, in regard to the bill for fixing the terms of the Supreme Court. This was an annual offering, the vote on which may "be taken as a fair test of the strength of the Governor's personal following in the House. It did not ask much, only that for the convenience of suitors, one of the four terms of the Supreme Court should he held in St. John. On this occasion the bill was carried in the House by a vote of 10 to 5, which was a sufficiently strong indication of the current of public amnion on this question. But public, opinion had no weight with the Council of New Brunswick, so that the very instant this bill was presented to the Council, it was thrown out. Three days after this rejection of their bill, the House resolved that a message be sent to the Council "to put them in mind of the bill for fixing the times and places of holding the sittings of the Supreme Court which tends so much to promote the happiness and convenience of His Majesty's subjects in this Province." The answer to this was a message from the Council stating that they did not concur in passing this bill. The House then passed a new bill which was similar in its terms to the first one for "Altering the sittings of the Supreme Court." It was sent up to the Council with a request for a conference. This conference was agreed to, but it came to nothing apparently, the only reason the Council granted it being that they desired to lecture the Assembly on constitutional points. They refused to go into their reasons for rejecting the bill or to discuss the question of public convenience involved in it. This might have been wise from their own point of view, but it was rather hard on the people for whom they were supposed to legislate.

The war interfered considerably with the trade of the Province and representations had been made to the Home Government by the province agent, in regard to its defenceless condition. The British authorities promised to give protection to St. John and the other Bay of Fundy ports by means of the fleet, but this protection did not prove adequate, for during 1795, several vessels were captured by a privateer cruising in Passamaquoddy Bay. To put a stop to the depredations of this vessel the Governor fitted up the armed brig Union and employed her for the defence of the coast. This was a more effective measure than the use of a regular man of war which could not follow small privateers to their numerous hiding places among the islands, the tides being too swift and the navigation too intricate for any but those to the manner born. These small privateers, although with French Commissions, were manned by the sons and grandsons of the same men who robbed and harried the settlements on the Bay of Fundy during the revolutionary war. When Americans complain of the Alabama being built and fitted out in England, they forget that they set the example, by fitting out privateers against British commerce in the closing years of the eighteenth century.

In the summer of 1795, Governor Carleton received a despatch from the Secretary of State informing him that the act of the Legislature for regulating the election of representatives to the General Assembly had been ratified by the King in Council. The Governor was well pleased to be in a position to dissolve the Assembly which had given him so much trouble and this was done at once. The elections took place in August and were vigorously contested, and the result was not favorable to the friends of the Governor. Only fourteen members of the former house were returned, but among those who failed of election were Pilias Hardy and Ward Chipman. Northumberland which had returned the latter in the previous election was now represented by two residents of that County, one of whom, James Fraser, a prominent business man, continued to represent it for a quarter of a century. In Sunbury a new man appeared as the colleague of Mr. Glenie, Samuel Denny Street, a man of force and ability and the founder of a family that has taken a prominent position in this Province. The Attorney General, Jonathan Bliss, who had been defeated at the previous election, was again returned for St. John, but he had now become a friend of the people and the Governor could not always count on his support. The new House was, if possible, less tractable than the old one had been. There was no disposition among its members to embarass the Governor, but there was a strong determination among the majority of the House, to resist the encroachments of the Council and uphold the rights o£ the people.

The House met on the 9th February, 1796, only one of the twenty-six members being absent. In his opening speech the Governor again referred to expenses that had been incurred for the defence of the Province and asked for an appropriation for that purpose. In its reply to the address, the House evaded any reference to this recommendation and it soon became evident that there was 110 disposition to carry it out. A bill to provide for the payment of the services of the previous year was passed by the Assembly and sent up to the Council, but it was rejected by the latter. This, however, was not done without a division and three members of the Council, Mr. G. G. Ludlow, Air. Daniel Bliss, and Judge Upham voted for the bill. The appropriation bill thus rejected provided for the payment of members but not of the bills for defence urged by the Governor. This vote was taken on the 2nd March, and on the following day, a bill was introduced in the Assembly for raising a revenue and appropriating the same together with the monies in the Treasury. This bill reached the Council on the 4th March, and on the following day the Council requested a conference upon it. The conference was agreed to by the Assembly and the objections of the Council to the bill were presented. They were seven in number but the principal ones were that different objects and services were mixed up in the bill and that it provided for the wages of the members of the House of Asssembly in an unconstitutional manner, taking out of the public treasury those wages which acts of parliament have directed to be levied on their respective constituents. The representatives of the Assembly answered these, objections and pointed out the inconsistency of the position taken by the Council with regard to the payment of members after it had, in former years, passed appropriation bills providing for such payment. Several conferences were held and the differences between the two Houses argued at great length, but no progress was made towards reaching an agreement. The real objection of the Council to the bill was shown by a resolution moved by Judge Allen, when the result of the Conference was reported to the Council, that it be an indispensable condition to the passing of the bill that the item relating to the pay of members be taken out. Strange to say this was not carried unanimously, but only by a vote of five to four. Four members of the Council seem to have come to the conclusion that it was rather a serious matter to reject the revenue bill, and leave the province without any money to pay for its public services. The members of the Council who thus honorably distinguished themselves, were the Chief Justice, Judge Upham and Messrs. Bliss and Robinson, while the men who voted on the other side were Judges Allen and Saunders and Messrs. Odell, Winslow and Leonard. As the House refused to be dictated to by the Council, in accordance with this resolution, the revenue hill was rejected by the same vote as that by which the resolution had been carried. Thus the province in 1796, was left without either a revenue or an appropriation bill, Governor Carleton In reporting this fact to the Secretary of State, dwelt on the hardship that this imposed on the officials whose salaries were then two years in arrears. Yet, if his feelings of sympathy had been as strong as he pretended they were, it lay within His power to force the Council to pass the revenue and appropriation hills, for the rejection of these hills was with his consent if not by his orders.

In the same communication to the Secretary of State, the Governor referred to the efforts of the Assembly to have one of the four terms of the Supreme Court held at St. John. He took great credit to himself for having fixed the capital at Fredericton, and claimed that it had had a good effect in promoting settlement, a statement for which there was no justification whatever. How could settlement have been promoted by fixing the capital at Fredericton when there was not a mile of road north of Fredericton for the use of the settler:? He informed the Secretary of State that a bill had been brought forward by the Assembly with regard to the sittings of the Supreme Court, although 110 real grievance was shown by holding all the terms at Fredericton. Yet the Governor knew that all the Judges of the Supreme Court resided at Fredericton, so that no proceeding of any description could be carried on before a Judge without going to Fredericton, which at certain seasons of the year was almost inaccessible. Even in the summer when the river, then the only highway to Fredericton, was open, it might take a week for a sloop to sail from St. John to the Capital. The House of Assembly had begged the Governor to use his influence to induce one of the four judges of the Supreme Court to reside at St. John, and had offered to pay any additional expense that the removal might cause. To all this the Governor had given a cold refusal, stating that the want of resident judges in many large cities and towns in Great Britain had never been the subject of complaint. He ignored the fact that there were roads and means of conveyance between London and these cities and towns, but neither roads nor conveyances to Fredericton, and also the fact that St. John was the only commercial community of any size in the Province, so that to make the Governor's analogy good, the capital of Great Britain would have to be removed to Durham or York. At the present time there are six Judges of the Supreme Court, of whom only one lives in Fredericton, while three reside in St. John, one in Sussex and one in Dorchester. To have all six judges hived in Fredericton would now be regarded as an outrage, although that city can now be readied from St. John in two hours by rail. And the government by which our judicial appointments are now made, has on more than one occasion made stipulations with persons about to be appointed judges, as to where they were to reside.

The House of Assembly, unable to move the Council or obtain any satisfaction from the Governor, resolved to appeal to the Home authorities through the Province agent, and the following paragraph which embodies the grievances complained of, was inserted in the letter to the agent:

"In all endeavors to obtain a due and equal administration of justice we have studiously avoided every course of dispute with the Council, and it is with infinite regret that we feel ourselves under the necessity of observing to you, that in His Majesty's Council in this province the legislative and judical powers are more united than they have usually been in other colonies; that, exclusive of several justices of the Courts of Common pleas who have seats there, the Judges of the Supreme Court constitute one third of the Council when full, and frequently form a majority of that board when sitting in their legislative capacity; and that after the repeated attempts which have been unsuccessfully made, by successive Houses of Assembly, to have a bill passed in the Council for regulating the times and places of holding the terms and sittings of the Supreme Court, we despair of seeing justice duly and equally administered in this province without the aid and interposition of our most gracious Sovereign in this behalf.

A vote was taken in the House on this paragraph, and it was adopted by seventeen to live, the only persons who voted against it being three of the representatives of York, Murray, Ellegood and McLean, Colonel Fanning of Kings and Mr. Yeomans of Queens. Attorney-General Bliss voted for the paragraph, as did also Captain Agnew- of York, and Messrs. Glenie and Street of Sunbury. Among those who voted for the paragraph were several persons who usually were with the Governor in their views, but who on ibis occasion were impelled by a strong public opinion to oppose him.