THE mental equipment of Cartier, combined with his moral qualities, served to fit him admirably for power. What men lack most in our age is that sterling endowment called character. Eloquent speakers and clever debaters are found in large numbers in the ranks of our talented politicians, but where is that firmness of mind, that unswerving integrity so necessary to those entrusted with great public functions? These requisite qualities had developed in Cartier to no ordinary degree, and enabled him to see his way clear and to hold the helm with no wavering hand. His earnestness of purpose, resting on the best information derived from conscientious examination of the matter to be acted upon, made him sure that the direction he gave to the ship was the best. Of this all his supporters were persuaded as well as himself.

He was also a man of quick resolves—procrastination did not suit his temper. It was a general belief at the time in Montreal that if it had been his task to lead the Conservative party during the Canadian Pacific Railway scandal, he would have forced a decision during the session in which the charge had been made when the government had a majority of thirty-five votes. His friends put off the investigation for months, with the result that, under influences not counteracted by the presence of ministers, that majority dwindled to naught. Tactics and manoeuvring were within his aptitudes, as was shown in 1862. Seeing that he had lost his hold on a large number of his supporters, he chose to be defeated on the Militia Bill, well knowing that his opponents would have to come before parliament with a plan for the reorganization of the militia, and a plan probably more open to criticism than the one they had condemned. His generalship and foresight in that crisis were both remarkable, for everything turned out as he had expected. As to his leadership in Lower Canada, his ideas were formulated to conserve the special interests of the French Canadians. It was his conviction that they would be endangered if his countrymen were about evenly divided between the two political parties. So it was his constant aim to concentrate their forces in a compact body. Fearing at one time that these would scatter, he tried the extreme, the desperate means of re-uniting under his command the Liberals and Conservatives. With this object in view, he offered Dorion a seat in the cabinet when he was called to form the administration of 1858. His proposal was declined, as Dorion would not forego his democratic principles. It is said that the Liberal leader was inclined to form a coalition, but that his lieutenants, Papin, Doutre, Dessaules, and Laflamme, raised such a storm of protest that Dorion did not dare to follow his own inclination. It was also hinted at the time that Cartier's offer lacked sincerity—that he made it simply because he knew that it could not be accepted, for the purpose of throwing on Dorion the responsibility and odium of the French Canadian disunion. This is, however, only an hypothesis and a surmise wholly out of harmony with Cartier's mode of dealing with political affairs. Seeing the impossibility of uniting his countrymen through an alliance with his opponents, he made up his mind to achieve his end by destroying the Liberal party. In this he succeeded to a great extent.

A leader's qualifications are not made up alone of high intellectual powers. He must at times descend to the level of the average mortal, and exhibit qualities of a meaner order though of the utmost importance in the management of a party. Within the home circle, Cartier was genial and amiable. Brillat-Savarin, the great philosopher of gastronomy, remarks that when a man entertains a guest, he must never forget that he has the responsibility of making him happy as long as he is under his roof. Cartier's action was shaped after this doctrine. In his usual vocations his temper would at times break out in a storm of violent words, but the storm soon passed away. He affected a certain brusqueness in receiving persons who he feared would trespass on his time; he adopted these tactics to ward off bores and to avoid the worries of solicitors. His frankness would at first displease those unacquainted with his peculiarities. For instance, if a young man requested his influence for a civil service appointment, the invariable answer would be this: "I have no situation to give. Besides, you should not ask for a favour of this kind. Do as I have done—work hard and you will succeed. Turn your attention towards another field. If you enter the civil service, in a few years dissatisfaction will be your lot." Still, if the applicant was better fitted for a public office than a law office or any other employment, he would send for him when vacancies in his department came under his disposal. It was not his policy to hold out promises which he was not sure to keep. True to his motto, he was always and everywhere franc et sans dol.

He was no orator, in the academic sense of the word, but a very effective debater, always convincing, drawing and retaining the attention of his hearers by the splendid array of his arguments. Of middle size, but of a strong frame, with an intelligent face and eyes full of fire, he gave the impression of a man of untiring energy and courage. Always in motion, pivoting on himself, gazing at his friends to infuse them with his burning enthusiasm, and then in turn at his opponents to challenge them to contradiction, he never failed to make a mark in debate. What gave his speeches an extraordinary effect over his supporters was the overflowing optimism which he seemed to possess. To soar above his audience was never one of his characteristics. Facts and nothing but facts, well bound together and cemented with overpowering logic, constituted the bones, sinews, and flesh of Cartier's oratory. Figures of speech, all rhetorical ornaments, he despised, but pointed repartees formed part of his defense. He had little of what the French called esprit, but he appeared at times brim full of humour. The over-confidence in himself which he often displayed—his optimism—would at times amaze his audience or draw a smile to the lips of the sceptics in the House. Whilst he was delivering his speech on the confederation scheme, C. Dunkin, a member of the opposition, interrupted him to express his doubts as to the possibility of successfully carrying on the future government. "The man," he said, "who under such a system will succeed in leading the Commons for six different provinces, and also to keep up as many legislative councils and Houses of Assembly, would deserve to be sent to England to teach the political alphabet to Palmerston and Derby." Upon this remark the following dialogue ensued: Cartier.—"This could easily be done." Dunkin.—"The honourable minister never sees any difficulty in all he undertakes to do."

Cartier.—"And I have seldom failed. I have generally got the success I had desired."

Dunkin.—"Yes, under favourable circumstances, but the honourable gentleman has also met with reverses. I believe in the omniscience of no one. It will be no easy task to meet the exigencies of race and religion with three provincial ministers."

Cartier.—"Hear! hear!"

Dunkin.—"The attorney-general thinks he would be able to overcome that difficulty."

Cartier.—" Certainly." (Laughter.)

Dunkin.—"Well, if the honourable gentleman succeeds in meeting the requests of Lower Canada with only three ministers of that province in the cabinet, he will prove that he is the cleverest man in the country."

On another occasion, after a very bold argument from Cartier in a certain debate, Mr. Wright, of the county of Ottawa, exclaimed: "Semper audaoc," and Cartier answered: "Audaces for tuna juvat"

Speaking in 1872 in the House, on the Fenian invasion of Canada, he referred to certain criticisms that had been directed against the militia. Sir R. Cartwright, thinking the allusion referred to him, said that his remarks had only been pointed against some chiefs. Cartier replied: "Let the honourable gentleman attack me, and he will see how I can defend myself."

Cartwright.—"The honourable gentleman is plucky enough to undertake anything."

With this humour and these witty retorts was coupled an immense amount of general information on all matters pertaining to politics. His ambition urged him to be always the best posted man in any discussion. Before confederation, when John A. Macdonald was not so thorough nor laborious in his methods as he became afterwards, it was Cartier's task to supply the deficiencies of his friend and of his other colleagues at all times. That knowledge he had acquired through incessant labour at the rate of fourteen hours a day during forty years of his life. His mind never had the brilliancy of Sir John's, but his industry and diligence, in the days referred to, were greater.

As to the peculiar tendency of his ideas, it can be said that they smacked of old style conservatism in principles, with great liberalism in action, when the material interests of the country were concerned. A man's ideas are more or less influenced or biased by his surroundings, by events occurring under his eyes. Cartier's conservatism was derived from his undisguised hatred of the French radicalism of 1848, which some of his opponents tried to transplant to Canada. His intense devotion to British connection, in which he saw the only means of maintaining the French nationality intact in North America, also contributed to turn his mind against all new fangled notions. At the noon-tide of his life he was also very much impressed by the great conflict going on in the sixties, south of Canada, which then threatened the unity of the great Republic.

It was the fault of the American constitution, according to his views, that the war of secession had taken place; and that struggle supplied him with arguments demonstrating the superiority of the English institutions over those of our neighbours.

His speeches were replete with advice to his countrymen, which he repeated until it became tame and commonplace. They must, he told them, concentrate all their energies to rise to the requirements of the British constitution; they must be satisfied to live under the Union Jack and enjoy the great liberty it secures to their ambition to constitute a distinct nationality.

Another condition to their separate existence he was also fond of propounding: the importance of acquiring property. Speaking on the grave of Duvernay, the patriot agitator of 1837, he said: "Let us never forget that if we desire to maintain our national existence, we must cling to the soil. One and all of us must strive to hold our patrimonial territory. Number alone does not constitute a nation. Race, language, education and manners form what I would call the personal national _ element, which is doomed to perish if it is not supported by the territorial element. Experience shows that in order to ensure permanency and a lasting existence to any nation, the union of the individual with the land is absolutely required. ... If in the future an attempt was made to destroy our nationality, what strength would not the French Canadians gather if they were firmly planted in the soil?

The giant Antaeus of the fable used to draw a new supply of vitality whenever he touched the earth; the same result would happen with us." After referring to the peaceful rivalry which must exist between the different races in Canada, he added, "If the majestic maple tree is the king of our forest and is always to be found on the best soil, the French Canadians who place its emblematic leaf on their breasts must, like that tree, plant themselves in the best and most fertile land."

Property always inspired him with great respect. In his eyes it should be like a column in the state to prop up the constitution. It was his aim to place it as the first requisite for the right of suffrage, and as the basis of qualification for membership in the Upper House. In 1853 the legislative council was made an elective body.. It had been up to that year composed of crown nominees. Cartier made a strong plea in favour of property qualifications for the members of that House. "A man," he said, "who acquires property by his labour and energy will take better care of public moneys than one who has spent his time dabbling in politics. Besides all constitutions which draw the youth of a country away from acquiring property and from industry are dangerous. Rising generations must be taught to earn money at home before taking part in politics." These pleas in favour of the possession of land were uttered when France was still trembling under the violent diatribes of the famous and powerful communist writer, Proudhon, who said that "Property was robbery."

In politics, as in love and in war, for some people, everything is fair against an opponent or a rival. According to this convenient but immoral principle of conduct, some of Cartier's foes were pleased to represent him as afflicted with anglomania, to , the extent of aiming at the' anglification of his countrymen. Nothing could have been further from the truth than this remark. He, for a certain time, overlooked it, thinking it was beneath contempt, but when one day it was hurled at him in the House, he resented it bitterly, and turning to the member who had dared to make this charge, he said: "The honourable gentleman has even stated that it was my object to anglicize my countrymen. Well, if he ever occupies my present seat I hope he will place upon the statute book measures as favourable to them as those of which I am proud of being the author. Does he not know what a long struggle I had to bear in order to obtain the construction through Lower Canada of the Grand Trunk Railway, which now affords to my countrymen new facilities to increase their wealth, adds value to their land and opens fresh fields to colonization? Have I not, in 1855, given normal schools to Lower Canada, and opened 3,000 new common schools ? Have I not restored the Jesuits' property to its primitive destination—education? Have I not introduced the French laws in the Eastern Townships? Did anyone think before me of consolidating the Coutume de Paris into a civil code, which places within easy reach both of the English and French population, the laws of our province? Is not the law dividing the province into a large number of judiciary districts extremely beneficial both to the lawyers and the people? Was not the Seigniorial Act which suppressed the lods et ventes dues a desirable measure?"

To face such charges as those brought against Cartier is the common lot of all public men in a community like ours. They are in turn, and at the same time, charged with being too French or too English, too friendly to the Catholics or to the Protestants. When a statesman has nothing but these conflicting charges to combat, one may be sure that he is governing according to the general interests of the country. Methods of criticizing and making opposition are numerous and varied, whilst there is but one way to govern.

Cartier's ideas on political economy as bearing on Canada were not fixed; he does not seem to have inclined markedly to either free trade or protection, but stood midway between the extremes of the two economic creeds. On this ground, and on this only, he was an opportunist. "The manufacturers often ask," he said, one day, "to be protected to the utmost. This is an absurd demand, as absurd as the claims of the free traders. If we were to comply with the demands of the latter we would be compelled to pay to the government through direct taxation the same amount that protection would give ih an indirect manner. With unlimited protection, you would strike a terrible blow at our foreign trade. We shall not go in for such a suicidal policy. The government has decided to impose duties which will bring into the exchequer the revenue required for public service and afford to our industries a reasonable protection."

Political economy, that uncertain science containing so many high sounding doctrines at variance with their results in cold experience; political economy which one hundred years after Adam Smith has not yet formulated any accepted law for the development of wealth, could not suit an absolute mind like Cartier's. It is not, therefore, to be wondered at that his ideas wavered between protection and free trade. In this only, did they show a tendency to oscillate. In other matters, he was absolute to an extreme; the principles of the British constitution, for example, as it has already been shown, were to him like dogmas. He never doubted for one moment that these institutions, in their ensemble, were the masterpiece of human ingenuity.

To quote Sir Wilfrid Laurier's opinion of Cartier: "What strikes one most in this complex nature, is that he takes hold of every question from the highest point of view. He has never been seen to shun any responsibility by appealing to popular prejudices which always offer an easy retreat. In whatever situation he is placed he faces it boldly and nobly. It is curious to note here that however high and brave the conclusion he comes to, the grandeur of the subject never draws any inspiration from him. He always remains exclusively a man of action and a business man, without any bright thoughts or clever sentences. It is impossible to read his speeches, with their dullness of expression, without arriving at the conclusion that they come from a person whose political intelligence is of the highest order. Very few men have understood as well, as he did the situation of the French race. Very few have had a clearer conception of the duties connected with that situation."

This firmness of conviction which characterized his views in politics followed him in the higher field of religion. Here he rose above the average men of his day and especially of his youth when rationalism had taken hold of not a few of his contemporaries. Voltaire, d'Alembert and Diderot were then much read and thought of in Lower Canada, Car-tier never went out of his way to court the clergy, never made a show of his religious belief, but from boyhood, under family and afterwards school influence, he closely adhered to the tenets of that faith which seeks to elevate and offers cheering hopes beyond death.

Early influences often follow a man in after life, and explain, in many cases, his temperament and general demeanour. It is noticeable in Cartier's career that the associations of his youth left their mark in his mind. The surroundings in which he was brought up were peculiar enough to impress him strongly. In those days, prior to the uprising of 1837, the country along the Richelieu river and in the more progressive parts of Lower Canada offered scenes of patriarchal life quite unknown anywhere else. It is stiU usual in the province to refer to that period as le bon vieux temps (the good old times). Then Lower Canada was a land of plenty, of cakes and honey, of constant merriment and enjoyment of the good things of life. If the habitants worked hard in summer from dawn until sunset, or, as one of them said to me in a poetical sentence, if he toiled d'une etoile a Vautre, that is, from the disappearance of the morning star to the rising of the evening star, his labours were amply rewarded at harvest time. He then saw his granaries full to overflowing of heavy sheaves and of all the products of the garden and farm. As soon as his rich crops lay secure in the barn, the bell would give the signal for feasts and amusement; and winter, the thoughts of whose hardships send a chill through foreigners, saw merry scenes. All Lower Canada was alive with a long succession of entertainments, dinners, parties and dances. The dinners—-fricots as they were called—went the round of a parish, every guest at the first one given in the beginning of the winter being in duty 118 bound to return the compliment. And in the profusion of eatables they recalled the Rabelaisian feasts. The golden, roasted turkey kept company with the huge roast of pork, or porcfrais a Vail, which the late chief justice of Quebec (Sir W. Johnston) looked upon as the masterpiece of the Canadian cuisine, and ragotits of all descriptions loaded the table. It was the ambition of every housekeeper, who had a true sense of hospitality, to hide the table-cloth with all the delicacies which the country and her skill could supply. To that end every space between the plates and dishes was crowded with smaller plates, saucers filled with jellies, bon-bons, creme brtilee, and the like.

It was the writer's good luck to be present, in his younger days, at one of these repasts, and not since has he witnessed such joy, such open heartedness, and also such appetites. As the evening passed away in pleasure a demand for songs arose, and the local artists sang those which every one in the room knew to the last line. They were the rhymes called chanson de ronde, which the soldiers of the king of France sang through their campaigns from the east to the west of Canada, from the shores of Lake George to the banks of the Ohio, at Fort Duquesne and .Ticonderoga. They are still familiar all over Quebec. The chorus of one of them lingers yet in my memory just as I heard it from the mouth of the singer, who after each stanza would turn to mine host and shout:

Bonhomme, bonhomme,
Tu n'es pas maxtre dans ta maison
Quand nous y sommes.

Such festivities were not confined to the limits of the parish. These Canadians of old would exchange amenities with all the villages along the Richelieu river, from St. Ours to Chambly. Many and many gay drives did this river see after having witnessed in earlier days the plodding of Montcalm's soldiers on their way to the glorious battlefield of Carillon. The Richelieu was in olden times the highway between New France and the English colonies; and the route was also followed by the invaders of 1775 and 1812. Fortunately the Lenten season came at last to put a stop to these agreeable but rather expensive pastimes. It is true that in order not to break off too suddenly from this pleasure-making there was still the gathering in the woods around the cauldron of boiling maple sap, which afforded another great source of amusement.

St. Antoine, Cartier's birthplace, enjoyed great prosperity during the first half of the nineteenth century. Cartier stated in a speech at Quebec that his grandfather exported annually 500,000 bushels of wheat bought in that section of the country. He was a merchant, and the house in which he carried on his trade is still extant. It is well known about the country on account of its size, for it extends three times the length of the other dwellings. It goes by the name of the maison aux sept chemindes, the house with seven chimneys. An explanation as to the necessity for such a large establishment affords details of some interest to persons not familiar with all the peculiarities of Lower Canada. One section of this long house was set apart for the family, another contained the storehouse and the remainder was intended to lodge rentiers. According to a long-standing custom, farmers or trades people who are growing old, enter into an agreement with a neighbour of some means in the parish, under which they give all their property to the latter in exchange for a life annuity (hence the title of rentiers). I have before me one of those contrats de donation, which enumerates all that the rentier is entitled to, from tobacco and snuff to an everlasting cow (une vache qui ne meurt pasJ, and a merchantable hog (un cochon marcliand). These annuities cause trouble whenever the rentier succeeds in lingering beyond the day he is expected to die. The Cartiers seem to have made it a part of their business to enter upon these risks, to judge by the appointments of their house.

After reading the above sketchy description of the state of Lower Canada, the question naturally occurs: How can you account for the uprising of 1837, if the people were so happy in the "good old time"? The query is quite natural and must be answered. The troubles had an aristocratic, not a popular origin. It was the best people of the country that rose in rebellion against the Chateau St. Louis: Papineau, Panet, Bddard, Bourdages and their friends, men of high culture, the real aristocracy, became exasperated in time at the contemptuous manner in which they were constantly treated. As to the habitant, he enjoyed religious liberty and exemption from taxation; he was satisfied with his lot and would not have moved if the red hot tirades of Papineau had not persuaded him that he had a grievance. Still this discontent was far from being general and deep-rooted, as the uprising confined to the region of Montreal has shown.

The surroundings in which Cartier's youth was spent, as already observed, had their influence on his mind, and contributed with the genial nature of his race to keep alive in his soul that high spirit which was so remarkable in his conduct all through life. Never was he found despondent; no situation, however dark, saw him without an outburst of wit or humour.

In social functions at home he was most entertaining. No guest ever left his house but happy and satisfied with his host. He was what the French call a boute-en-train, a person who will get out of every one the best that is in him. A lady musician —the wife of a Liberal senator—once told me that whenever she met Cartier at social functions, he would insist upon having her give a specimen of her talent, and if reluctant, he would end his entreaties by saying: "Please play, not for my sake, but to show these English folks that if the French Canadians have not their talent for money-making, they are more artistically gifted. Do that for patriotism!" In Ottawa, his receptions at that very modest house at the corner of Maria and Metcalfe streets are still remembered by many. There, on Saturday evenings during the session, congregated members of parliament, journalists, civil servants, and not a few local artists, and, under the guidance of his cheerful spirit, the evening wore on merrily. One feature of these entertainments was unique, a sort of active representation of choruses as sung by the North-West voyageurs. Commandant Fortin, of the famous schooner La Canadienne, and Simpson, of Algoma, would set a row of a dozen chairs facing in the same direction. All those present, able to sing, would be seated on these chairs, and, taking the lead from Fortin, with his deep, full notes, would sing a voyageur's song. To give gusto to the performance, each improvised voyageur would swing his arms as though he were paddling a canoe, and this chorus would come again and again:

V'la le bon vent, V'la le joli vent

Ma mie m'appelle, V'la le bon vent, V'la le joli vent Ma mie m'attend!

How few now remain of the gay performers who welcomed the breeze that was bringing them to their lady love (ma mie)! These entertainments offered a happy relaxation to Cartier, one of the most active of men; one who thought nothing of spending throughout the year fourteen hours a day in a field of labour much more exhausting than the one where eight hours is considered the limit of human strength. He valued time above all things, and anyone trespassing uselessly on it would become his enemy. In order to save it, he would assume with some visitors an air of brusqucrie and bad humour quite discouraging to bores and place hunters. It was his habit to walk the streets of Montreal or Ottawa at a rapid gait, so that as few people as possible could waylay him to indulge in gossip or town talk.

I have made frequent references to his courage in the face of adverse circumstances, and in again referring to that great quality, it seems only right to refer to the characteristically bold stand which he felt compelled to take when a personal matter arose which, as is frequently the case, had a wider than individual interest.

After confederation, the imperial government distributed honours to reward those colonial statesmen who had taken a prominent part in the work of uniting the British North American provinces. The distinction of knighthood was conferred on John A. Macdonald, whilst Cartier, who had in 1858, while premier of Canada, initiated the union scheme, only received a C.B.

He at once notified Lord Monck that he could not accept the proffered honour, alleging as a motive for declining it, that, as the representative of the French in Canada, he could not consent to see them placed in a position inferior to that occupied by the other element of our population. The stand taken by Cartier, which was then generally approved, greatly embarrassed the colonial office, and a rather unpleasant correspondence ensued.

Edward Watkin, then president of the Grand Trunk Railway, a warm friend of Cartier and one who had taken a great interest in the confederation scheme, had also declined a C.B., because he thought an injustice had been done to the minister of militia. What complicated that delicate matter was the fact that such a refusal is disrespectful to the Crown, and therefore some way out of the trouble had to be looked for that would save appearances. The colonial secretary informed Lord Monck of the tangle and Cartier in turn explained it to Watkin in a letter dated, Ottawa, February 15th, 1868.

"With regard to my matter, would you imagine that the Duke of Buckingham has written a confidential note to Lord Monck, telling to this latter that there being no precedent for a resignation of the C.B., the only way to have my wishes carried out would be by the Queen directing by order in the Gazette my name to be struck out from the Order, which proceeding, the Duke adds, would be construed by outsiders and the uninitiated as the outcome of misconduct. Lord Monck having communicated to me the substance of the Duke's communication, I have asked Lord Monck to obtain from the Duke leave to communicate to me the substance of his note in no confidential manner, in order that I may reply to it. I do not really think that the intention is to frighten me, in order to induce me to withdraw my letter asking leave to resign the C.B. That I will not do, and when the Duke's communication is under my eyes in no confidential manner, I will send such a reply that will make people understand the injury done to me, and the slight so absurdly offered to a million of good and loyal French Canadians. As a matter of course all that I say to you in this letter is strictly in confidence to you."

The matter was brought up in the Canadian House of Commons and during the debate general sympathy was expressed for Cartier, whose temper was still more aroused when he read in the London Gazette that the way out of the trouble which the Duke of Buckingham deprecated, had just been followed. So in great indignation he again wrote to Watkin:

"You very likely must have seen or heard of the notification published in the London Gazette at the end of the month of December last about the honours distributed in Canada in connection with the confederation. In that notification you must have seen that the names of myself and Gait are omitted, and it was stated in that notification that it must be substituted for the one published on July 9th last, in which Gait's name and mine were inserted as C.B. Now you must recollect that some months ago I wrote you about a confidential communication of the Duke, of Buckingham to Lord Monck, in order that it should be intimated to me and Gait, that there was no precedent of a resignation of the Order of the Bath, and that the only way left for the carrying out of Gait's wishes and mine would be by an order of Her Majesty ordering our names to be struck off the roll. The communication of the Duke having been made to me in a confidential manner, I had no opportunity to answer it. I had written to Lord Monck to ask the Duke's leave for communicating to me in no confidential manner the despatch of the Duke, in order to give me an opportunity to answer it. I never had any answer from Lord Monck to that request. To my great surprise, at the end of December last, I received from Lord Monck a note, accompanied by the copy of a despatch from the Duke, informing me that a mode had been found to meet my wishes and those of Gait, which consisted in the publication in the London Gazette of a notification omitting our names, and such notification to be substituted for the former one of July last.

"The reading of this last despatch more than astonished me, and my astonishment was greater when I saw by the London Gazette that it was carried into effect by the notification above alluded to. I have had no more opportunity to answer the second despatch of the Duke than the first one, which was marked confidential. Allow me to add that the Duke expressed in his first communication that he did not like to suggest that my name should be struck off the roll, because an ungenerous construction now and hereafter might be made against me by those not acquainted with the fact. Now, by the course followed, as explained in his second despatch, I feel as badly treated as if the first course had been adopted. In one case my name would have been ordered to be struck off the roll, and by the second course followed, my name was ordered to be omitted in the second notification. There is not much difference between these two courses. I have written a letter to Lord Monck to complain of the second course followed, inasmuch as there being no reason assigned for the omission of my name in the second notification, a construction ungenerous to myself and my children after me could now and hereafter be made."

This matter might have been left where the London Gazette notice had placed it, but Sir Charles Tupper, who was then in London, interfered, and with great tact had it settled. It was owing to his timely intervention that justice was done and Cartier became a baronet of the United Kingdom. This squabble over a title would look very small were it not that it involved a question of 128 national feeling which raised it to more importance than it really deserved.

I insert here Sir Charles Tupper's letter, which has not before been published:

Westminster Palace Hotel, March 31st, 1868.

My Lord Duke :

Deeply impressed with the importance which attaches to everything calculated to strengthen the loyal devotion to the Crown which I am proud to know pervades every portion of the Dominion of Canada, and well knowing the warm interest which your Grace feels toward that portion of the empire, I venture to solicit an official interview for the purpose of communicating my views upon the desirability of submitting to Her Majesty the propriety of conferring upon the Hon. Mr. Cartier, the Minister of Militia, as high a mark of the royal favour as that bestowed upon Sir John A. Macdonald. Although I had the honour of proposing the latter gentleman as Chairman of the Conference of British North America delegates, held here in 1866, I think it but right to inform your Grace that but for the patriotic devotion of Mr. Cartier to the great project of confederation, and the courage with which, in the face of great difficulties and dangers he pursued that policy to the end, the union could not have been accomplished. I rejoice that it was the royal pleasure to confer deservedly a distinction so high upon Mr. Macdonald, but I regard it as a great misfortune that a million of Catholic Frenchmen, than whom Her Majesty has no subjects more loyally devoted to Her throne and person in any portion of Her empire, should feel that one of their own race and religion, whose standing was equally high in Canada, and whose claim to royal favour was as great, should not have been deemed worthy of the same gracious consideration. It is also right that I should say to your Grace that Mr. Cartier's acceptance of an inferior distinction would undoubtedly have destroyed the great influence which he wields among his countrymen, and impaired the power he is now able to exert so beneficially in the service of his Sovereign. I may also add that the liberty I have taken in bringing this matter under the notice of your Grace is inspired by no personal consideration, and is entirely without the knowledge of Mr. Cartier.

I have the honour to remain, To His Grace Your Grace's most obedient servant,

The Duke-op Buckingham. (Signed) Charles Tupper.

In social intercourse Cartier always gave evidence of that sincerity and frankness which was one of the chief traits of his character. This he would show even at the risk of incurring personal displeasure. It was his frankness that once drew upon him the wrath of General Wolseley. Meeting Sir John A. Macdonald at dinner, I asked him if he could tell me why this officer had gone out of his way to signal out Cartier for adverse criticism from among all his colleagues. "For speaking his mind too openly," answered Sir John. "While I was at Washington, General Wolseley called upon Cartier to solicit the position of first lieutenant governor of Manitoba. My friend told him that this could not be done. By the way, the government had then decided to appoint Archibald to that important position. General Wolseley assumed from Cartier's answer that he disliked him, and hence his uncalled-for attack on the then minister of militia. But," added Sir John, " the general must have found out afterwards that, had Cartier and the government granted his request, they would have cut short his career. Returning to England after five years' absence he would have found himself a forgotten man, no more in touch with court influence, and would probably have been sent to some inferior command."

Cartier gave every one who saw him in parliament or in society the impression of being a quick and daring man, without any timidity. I was astonished when his nearest relative, now alive, and another member of his family assured me last summer in Paris that he was the victim of a sort of uneasiness whenever he had to perform public duties. "He must have conquered that feeling afterwards," said I, "for he always looked to me as one full of assurance." "No," was the reply, "he fought against a native timidity all his life." If this be true the fact of the matter is that his very existence was but one long struggle, first against timidity, then against his natural defect, a rather disagreeable voice—a very bad English accent, and against the last but not the least, strong political opponents. No wonder that he broke down so early in life—no wonder that the blade wore out the scabbard so soon! He was not fifty-nine at his demise, and had spent twenty-five years in public life.

The session of 1872 marked Cartier's last appearance in parliament. It was a laborious session, and he had, as was his wont, taken a prominent part in its labours, conducting the debate on the Canadian Pacific Railway bill and the New Brunswick school question. Shortly after prorogation, his health, which had never given him anxiety, seemed suddenly to break down, and when he arrived in Montreal to seek re-election, he was a very sick, nay, more than that, a dying man. His great energy would keep him up on his feet a few hours a day. It is a fact that on July 21st he left his bed to be present at the nomination of candidates for Montreal East, and that all through the campaign the fatal disease told on him more and more. Would to heaven that he had not faced the howling mob who at several meetings, forgetting that he had turned the tide of prosperity towards the commercial metropolis of Canada, hooted their old idol, and pelted him with stones and missiles! He would have been spared an ugly sight which added humiliation to his defeat.

It has often been the lot of successful politicians during the greater part of their career, to witness the tide of popular favour receding from them at its close. Cartier experienced the bitterness of such a situation with a pang which his illness, in its depressing effect, prevented him from concealing, although he did his best to put on a brave face. But when received at Ottawa with almost royal honours, he recalled the circumstances which induced Baldwin and La Fontaine to retire from politics, on account of the ingratitude of persons whom they had so long served, it was his own case he had in mind. He left Canada in September, 1872, never to return alive. Science did nothing for the man who had not known rest and was to know it only in death. He died in London on May 23rd, having had time to prepare for the great voyage and to ponder over the want of satisfaction which a life of agitation affords. Well might he have said like the great man of ancient times: "I have had everything that my country could give and it is worth nothing!"

After his death his fellow-countrymen duly appreciated his labours and recognized his sterling merit. Still not a square, not a street of Montreal bears his name. It might have been expected that before thirty years had elapsed, his friends would have gathered up the stones which were hurled at him one day, to form the pedestal of a monument recalling his public services and his devotion to his country. Perhaps, after all, they have thought that the best way in which to honour the memory of a man whose soul had the ring of pure metal, whose valuable actions appear in the lasting pages of history, is to follow in his footsteps and emulate his example.