THE life of Robert Baldwin forms so important an ingredient in the political history of this country that we deem it unnecessary to offer any apology for dealing with it at considerable length. More especially is this the case, inasmuch as, unlike most of the personages included in the present series, his career is ended, and we can contemplate it, not only with perfect impartiality, but even with some approach to completeness. The twenty and odd years which have elapsed since he was laid in his grave have witnessed many and important changes in our Constitution, as well as in our habits of thought; but his name is still regarded by the great mass of the Canadian people with feelings of respect and veneration. We can still point to him with the admiration due to a man who, during a time of the grossest political corruption, took a foremost part in our public affairs, and who yet preserved his integrity untarnished. We can point to him as the man who, if not the actual author of Responsible Government in Canada, yet spent the best years of his life in contending for it, and who contributed more than any other person to make that project an accomplished fact. We can point to him as one who, though a politician by predilection and by profession, never stooped to disreputable practices, either to win votes or to maintain himself in office. Robert Baldwin was a man who was not only incapable of falsehood or meanness to gain his ends, but who was to the last degree intolerant of such practices on the part of his warmest supporters. If intellectual greatness cannot be claimed for him, moral greatness was most indisputably his. Every action of his life was marked by sincerity and good faith, alike towards friend and foe. He was not only true to others, but was from first to last true to himself. His useful career, and the high reputation which he left behind him, furnish an apt commentary upon the advice which Polonius gives to his son Laertes:—

“This above all: to thine own self be true;
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.”

To our thinking there is something august in the life of Robert Baldwin. So chary was he of his personal honour that it was next to impossible to induce him to pledge himself beforehand, even upon the plainest question. Once, when addressing the electors at Sharon, some one in the crowd asked him if he would pledge himself to oppose the retention of the Clergy Reserves. “I am not here,” was his reply, “to pledge myself on any question. I go to the House as a free man, or I go not at all. I am here to declare to you my opinions. If you approve of my opinions, and elect me, I will carry them out in Parliament. If I should alter those opinions I will come back and surrender my trust, when you will have an opportunity of re-electing me or of choosing another candidate; but I shall pledge myself at the bidding of no man.” A gentleman still living in Toronto once accompanied him on an electioneering tour into his constituency of North York. There were many burning questions on the carpet at the time, on some of which Mr. Baldwin’s opinion did not entirely coincide with that of the majority of his constituents. His companion remembers hearing it suggested to him that his wisest course would be to maintain a discreet silence during the canvass as to the points at issue. His reply to the suggestion was eminently characteristic of the man. “To maintain silence under such circumstances,” said he, “would be tantamount to deceiving the electors. It would be as culpable as to tell them a direct lie. Sooner than follow such a course I will cheerfully accept defeat.” He could not even be induced to adopt the suppressio veri. So tender and exacting was his conscience that he would not consent to be elected except upon the clearest understanding between himself and his constituents, even to serve a cause which he felt to be a just one. Defeat might annoy, but would not humiliate him. To be elected under false colours would humiliate him in his own esteem; a state of things which, to a high-minded man, is a burden intolerable to be borne.

It has of late years become the fashion with many well-informed persons in this country to think and speak of Robert Baldwin as a greatly over-estimated man. It is on all hands admitted that he was a man of excellent intentions, of spotless integrity, and of blameless life. It is not disputed, even by those whose political views are at variance with those of the party to which he belonged, that the great measures for which he contended were in themselves conducive to the public weal, nor is it denied that he contributed greatly to the cause of political freedom in Canada. But, it is said, Robert Baldwin was merely the exponent of principles which, long before his time, had found general acceptance among the statesmen of every land where constitutional government prevails. Responsible Government, it is said, would have become an accomplished fact, even if Robert Baldwin had never lived. Other much-needed reforms with which his name is inseparably associated would have come, it is contended, all in good time, and this present year, 1880, would have found us pretty much where we are. To argue after this fashion is simply to beg the whole question at issue. It is true that there is no occult power in a mere name. Ship-money, doubtless, was a doomed impost, even if there had been no particular individual called John Hampden. The practical despotism of the Stuart dynasty would doubtless have come to an end long before the present day, even if Oliver Cromwell and William of Orange had never existed. In the United States, slavery was a fated institution, even if there had been no or real rebellion, and if Abraham Lincoln had never occupied the Presidential chair. But it would be a manifest injustice to withhold from those illustrious personages the tribute due to their great and, on the whole, glorious lives. They were the media whereby human progress delivered its message to the world, and their names are deservedly held in honour and reverence by a grateful posterity. Performing on a more contracted stage, and before a less numerous audience, Robert Baldwin fought his good fight — and won. Surrounded by inducements to prove false to his innate convictions, he nevertheless chose to encounter obloquy and persecution for what he knew to be the cause of truth and justice.

“Once to every man and nation
Comes the moment to decide,”

says Professor Lowell. The moment came to Robert Baldwin early in life. It is not easy to believe that he ever hesitated as to his decision; and to that decision he remained true to the latest hour of his existence. If it cannot in strictness be said of him that he knew no variableness or shadow of turning, it is at least indisputable that his convictions never varied upon any question of paramount importance. What Mr. Goldwin Smith has said of Cromwell might with equal truth be applied to Robert Baldwin: “He bore himself, not as one who gambled for a stake, but as one who struggled for a cause.” These are a few among the many claims which Robert Baldwin has upon the sympathies and remembrances of the Canadian people; and they are claims which we believe posterity will show no disposition to ignore.

In order to obtain a clear comprehension of the public career of Robert Baldwin it is necessary to glance briefly at the history of one or two of his immediate ancestors. In compiling the present sketch the writer deems it proper to say that he some time since wrote an account of Robert Baldwin’s life for the columns of an influential newspaper published in Toronto. That account embodied the result of much careful and original investigation. It contained, indeed, every important fact readily ascertainable with reference to Mr. Baldwin’s early life. So far as that portion of it is concerned there is little to be added at the present time, and the writer has drawn largely upon it for the purposes of this memoir. The former account being the product of his own conscientious labour and investigation, he has not deemed it necessary to reconstruct sentences and paragraphs where they already clearly expressed his meaning. With reference to Mr. Baldwin’s political life, however, the present sketch embodies the result of fuller and more accurate information, and is conceived in a spirit which the exigencies of a newspaper do not admit of.

At the close of the Revolution which ended in the independence of the United States, there resided near the city of Cork, Ireland, a gentleman named William Willcocks. He belonged to an old family which had once been wealthy, and which was still in comfortable circumstances. About this time a strong tide of emigration set in from various parts of Europe to the New World. The student of history does not need to be informed that there was at this period a good deal of suffering and discontent in Ireland. The more radical and uncompromising among the malcontents staid at home, hoping for better times, and many of them eventually took part in the troubles of ’98. Others sought a peaceful remedy for the evils under which they groaned, and, bidding adieu to their native land, sought an asylum for themselves and their families in the western wilderness. The success of the American Revolution combined with the hard times at home to make the United States “the chosen land” of many thousands of these self-expatriated ones. The revolutionary struggle was then a comparatively recent affair. The thirteen revolted colonies had become an independent nation, had started on their national career under favourable auspices, and had already become a thriving and prosperous community. The Province of Quebec, which then included the whole of what afterwards became Upper and Lower Canada, had to contend with many disadvantages, and its condition was in many important respects far behind that of the American Republic. Its climate was much more rigorous than was that of its southern neighbour, and its territory was much more sparsely settled. The western part of the Province, now forming part of the Province of Ontario, was especially thinly peopled, and except at a few points along the frontier, was little better than a wilderness. It was manifestly desirable, to offer strong incentives to immigration, with a view to the speedy settlement of the country. To effect such a settlement was the imperative duty of the Government of the day; and to this end, large tracts of land were allotted to persons whose settlement here was deemed likely to influence colonization. Whole townships were in some cases conferred, upon condition that the grantees would settle the same with a certain number of colonists within a reasonable time. One of these grantees was the William Willcocks above-mentioned, who was a man of much enterprise and philanthropy. He conceived the idea of obtaining a grant of a large tract of land, and of settling it with emigrants of his own choosing, with himself as a sort of feudal proprietor at their head. With this object in view he came out to Canada in or about the year 1790, to spy out the land, and to judge from personal inspection which would be the most advantageous site for his projected colony. In setting out upon this quest he enjoyed an advantage greater even than was conferred by his social position. A cousin of his, Mr. Peter Russell, a member of the Irish branch of the Bedfordshire family of Russell, had already been out to Canada, and had brought home glowing accounts of the prospects held out there to persons of capital and enterprise. Mr. Russell had originally gone to America during the progress of the Revolutionary War, in the capacity of Secretary to Sir Henry Clinton, Commander-in-chief of the British forces on this continent. He had seen and heard enough to convince him that the acquisition of land in Canada was certain to prove a royal road to wealth. After the close of the war he returned to the old country, and gave his relatives the benefit of his experience. Mr. Russell also came out to Canada with Governor Simcoe in 1792, in the capacity of Inspector-General. He subsequently held several important offices of trust in Upper Canada. He became a member of the Executive Council, and as senior member of that body the administration of the Government devolved upon him during the three years (1796-1799) intervening between Governor Simcoe’s departure from Canada and the appointment of Major-General Peter Hunter as Lieutenant-Governor. His residence in Canada, as will presently be seen, was destined to have an important bearing on the fortunes of the Baldwin family. Meanwhile, it is sufficient to note the fact that it was largely in consequence of the valuable topographical and statistical information furnished by him to his cousin William Willcocks that the latter was induced to set out on his preliminary tour of observation.

The result of this preliminary tour was to convince Mr. Willcocks that his cousin had not overstated the capabilities of the country, as to the future of which he formed the most sanguine expectations. The next step to be taken was to obtain his grant, and, as his political influence in and around his native city was considerable, he conceived that this would be easily managed. He returned home, and almost immediately afterwards crossed over to England, where he opened negotiations with the Government. After some delay he succeeded in obtaining a grant of a large tract of land forming part of the present township of Whitchurch, in the county of York. In consideration of this liberal grant he on his part agreed to settle not fewer than sixty colonists on the land so granted within a certain specified time. An Order in Council confirmatory of this arrangement seems to have been passed. The rest of the transaction is involved in some obscurity. Mr. Willcocks returned to Ireland, and was soon afterwards elected Mayor of Cork, an office which he had held at least once before his American tour. Municipal and other affairs occupied so much of his time that he neglected to take steps for settling his trans-Atlantic domain until the period allowed him by Government for that purpose had nearly expired. However, in course of time, probably in the summer of 1797 he embarked with the full complement of emigrants for New York, whither they arrived after a long and stormy voyage. They pushed on without unnecessary delay, and in due course arrived at Oswego, where Mr. Willcocks received the disastrous intelligence that the Order in Council embodying his arrangement with the Government had been revoked. Why the revocation took place does not appear, as there had been no change of Government, and the circumstances had not materially changed. Whatever the reason may have been, the consequences to Mr. Willcocks and his emigrants were very serious. The poor Irish families who had accompanied him to the New World — travel-worn and helpless, in a strange land, without means, and without experience in the hard lines of pioneer life were dismayed at the prospect before them. Mr. Willcocks, a kind and honourable man, naturally felt himself to be in a manner responsible for their forlorn situation. He at once professed his readiness to bear the expense of their return to their native land. Most of them availed themselves of this offer, and made the best of their way back to Ireland — some of them, doubtless, to take part in the rising of ’98. A few of them elected to remain in America, and scattered themselves here and there throughout the State of New York. Mr. Willcocks himself, accompanied by one or two families, continued his journey to Canada, where he soon succeeded in securing a considerable allotment of land in Whitchurch and elsewhere. It is probable that he was treated liberally by the Government, as his generosity to the emigrants had greatly impoverished him, and it is certain that a few years later he was the possessor of large means. Almost immediately after his arrival in Canada he took up his abode at York, where he continned to reside down to the time of his death. Being a man of education and business capacity he was appointed Judge of the Home District Court, where we shall soon meet him again in tracing the fortunes of the Baldwin family. He had not been long in Canada before he wrote home flattering reports about the land of his adoption to his old friend Robert Baldwin, the grandfather of the subject of this sketch. Mr. Baldwin was a gentleman of good family and some means, who owned and resided on a small property called Summer Hill, or Knockmore, near Carragoline, in the county of Cork. Influenced by the prospects held out to him by Mr. Willcocks, he emigrated to Canada with his family in the summer of 1798, and settled on a block of land on the north shore of Lake Ontario, in what is now the township of Clarke, in the county of Durham. He named his newly-acquired estate An-narva (Ann’s Field), and set about clearing and cultivating it. The western boundary of his farm was a small stream which until then was nameless, but which has ever since been known in local parlance as Baldwin’s Creek. Here he resided for a period of fourteen years, when he removed to York, where he died in the year 1816. He had brought with him from Ireland two sons and four daughters. The eldest son, William Warren Baldwin, was destined to achieve considerable local renown as a lawyer and a politician. He was a man of versatile talents, and of much firmness and energy of character. He had studied medicine at the University of Edinburgh, and had graduated there two years before his emigration, but had never practised his profession as a means of livelihood. He had not been many weeks in this country before he perceived that his shortest way to wealth and influence was by way of the legal rather than the medical profession. In those remote times, men of education and mental ability were by no means numerous in Upper Canada. Every man was called upon to play several parts, and there was no such organization of labour as exists in older and more advanced communities. Dr. Baldwin resolved to practise both professions, and, in order to fit himself for the one by which he hoped to rise most speedily to eminence, he bade adieu to the farm on Baldwin’s Creek and came up to York. He took up his quarters with his father’s friend and his own, Mr. Willcocks, who lived on Duke street, near the present site of the La Salle Institute. In order to support himself while prosecuting his legal studies, he determined to take in a few pupils. In several successive numbers of the Gazette and Oracle, the one newspaper published in the Province at that time, we find in the months of December, 1802, and January, 1803, the following advertisement:— “Dr. Baldwin, understanding that some of the gentlemen of this town have expressed some anxiety for the establishment of a Classical School, begs leave to inform them and the public, that he intends, on Monday the 1st day of January next, to open a school, in which he will instruct Twelve Boys in Writing, Reading, Classics and Arithmetic. The terms are, for each boy, eight guineas per annum, to be paid quarterly or half-yearly; one guinea entrance and one cord of wood to be supplied by each of the boys on opening the School. N.B. Mr. Baldwin will meet his pupils at Mr. Willcocks’ house on Duke street. York, December 18th, 1802.” This advertisement produced the desired effect. The Doctor got all the pupils he wanted, and several youths who in after life rose to high eminence in the colony received their earliest classical teaching from him.

It was not necessary at that early day that a youth should spend a fixed term in an office under articles as a preliminary for practice, either at the Bar or as an attorney. On the 9th of July, 1794, during the regime of Governor Simcoe, an Act had been passed authorizing the Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, or person administering the Government of the Province, to issue licenses to practise as advocates and attorneys to such persons, not exceeding sixteen in number, as he might deem fit. We have no means of ascertaining how many persons availed themselves of this statute, as no complete record of their names or number is in existence. The original record is presumed to have been burned when the Houses of Parliament were destroyed during the American invasion in 1813. It is sufficient for oiir present purpose to know that Dr. Baldwin was one of the persons so licensed. By reference to the Journals of the Law Society at Osgoode Hall, we find that this license was granted on the 6th of April, 1803, by Lieutenant-Governor Peter Hunter. We further find that on the same day similar licenses were granted to four other gentlemen, all of whom were destined to become well-known citizens of Canada, viz., William Dickson, D’Arcy Boulton, John Powell, and William Elliott. Dr. Baldwin, having undergone an examination before Chief Justice Henry Alcock, and having received his license, authorizing him to practise in all branches of the legal profession, married Miss Phoebe Willcocks, the dauMiter of his friend and patron, and settled down to active practice as a barrister and attorney. He took up his abode in a house which had just been erected by his father-in-law, on what is now the north-west comer of Front and Frederick streets. [It may here be noted that Front street was then known as Palace street, from the circumstance that it led down to the Parliament buildings at the east end of the town, and because it was believed that the official residence or “ palace ” of the Governor would be built there.] Here on the 12th of May, 1804, was born Dr. Baldwin’s eldest son, known to Canadian history as Robert Baldwin.

The plain, unpretending structure in which Robert Baldwin first saw light has a history of its own. Dr. Baldwin resided in it only about three years, when he removed to a small house, long since demolished, on the corner of Bay and Front streets. Thenceforward the house at the foot of Frederick street was occupied by several tenants whose names are famous in local annals. About 1825 it was first occupied by Mr. William Lyon Mackenzie, who continued to reside in it for several years. It was here that the Colonial Advocate was published by that gentleman, at the time when his office was wrecked and the type thrown into the bay by a “genteel mob,” a further account of which lawless transaction will be found in the sketch of the life of Mackenzie, included in the present series. The building subsequently came into the possession of the Cawthra family—called by Dr. Scadding “ the Astors of Upper Canada”—who carried on a large and marvellously successful mercantile business within its walls. It was finally burned down in the winter of 1854-5.

Dr. Baldwin applied himself to the practice of his several professions with an energy and assiduity which deserved and secured a full measure of success. His legal business was the most profitable of his pursuits, but in the early years of his residence at York he seems to have also had a fair share of medical practice. It might not unreasonably have been supposed that the labour arising from these two sources of employment would have been sufficient for the energies and ambition of any man ; but we find that for at least two years subsequent to his marriage he continued to take in pupils. Half a century later than the period at which we have arrived, Sir John Beverley Robinson, then a baronet, and Chief Justice of the Province, was wont to pleasantly remind the subject of this sketch that their mutual acquaintance dated from a very early period in the latter’s career. At the time of Robert Baldwin’s birth, John Robinson, then a boy in his thirteenth year, was one of a class of seven pupils who attended daily at Dr. Baldwin’s house for classical instruction. Two or three days after the Doctor’s first-born came into the world, Master Robinson was taken into the nursery to see “ the new baby.” Differences of political opinion in after years separated them far as the poles asunder on most public questions, but they never ceased to regard each other with personal respect. The late Chief Justice Maclean was another pupil of Dr. Baldwin’s, and distinctly remembered that a holiday was granted to himself and his fellow students on the day of the embryo statesman’s birth. Doctor Baldwin seems to have been fully equal to the multifarious calls upon his energies, and to have exercised his various callings with satisfaction alike to clients, patients, and pupils. It was no uncommon occurrence in those early days, when surgeons were scarce in our young capital, for him to be compelled to leave court in the middle of a trial, and to hurry away to splice a broken arm or bind up a fractured limb. Years afterwards, when he had retired from the active practice of all his professions, he used to cite a somewhat ludicrous instance of his professipnal versatility. It occurred soon after his marriage. He was engaged in arguing a case of some importance before his father-in-law, Judge Willcocks, in the Home District Court, when a messenger hurriedly arrived to summon him to attend at the advent of a little stranger into the world. The circumstances were explained to the Judge, and—it appearing that no other surgical aid was to be had at the moment—that functionary readily consented to adjourn the further consideration of the argument until Dr. Baldwin’s return. The latter hurriedly left the court-room with the messenger, and after the lapse of somewhat more than an hour, again presented himself and prepared to resume his interrupted argument. The Judge ventured to express a hope that matters had gone well with the patient; whereupon the Doctor replied, “ Quite well. I have much pleasure in informing your Honour that a man-child has been born into the world during my absence, and that both he and his mother are doing well.” The worthy Doctor received the congratulations of the Court, and was permitted to conclude his argument without any further demands upon his surgical skill.

Almost from the outset of his professional career, Dr. Baldwin took a strong interest in political matters. The fact that he was compelled to earn his living by honest labour excluded him from a certain narrow section of the society of Little York. The society from which he was excluded, however, was by no means of an intellectual cast, and it is not likely that he sustained much loss thereby. By intellectual society in Toronto he was regarded as a decided acquisition. He could well afford to despise the petty littleness of the would-be aristocrats of the Provincial capital. Still, it is probable that his political convictions were intensified by observing that, among the members of the clique above referred to, mere merit was regarded as a commodity of little account. He became known for a man of advanced ideas, and whenever a more than ordinarily flagrant instance of injustice occurred, was not slow in expressing his disapprobation of the way in which government was carried on. In 1812 he became treasurer of the Law Society of Upper Canada, and while filling that position he projected a scheme for constructing a suitable building for the Society’s occupation. The times, however, were unpropitious for such a scheme, which fell through in consequence of the impending war with the United States.

His son was meanwhile quietly pursuing his studies at school, and unconsciously fitting himself for the battle of life that was before him. The boyhood of Robert Baldwin was remarkably free from incident. There is absolutely nothing to tell about this portion of his life, except that he attended the Home District Grammar School in “College Square,” as it was called, where he received all the education he ever acquired. This seat of learning was situated a short distance to the north-east of the present site of St. James’s Cathedral, and was presided over by Dr., afterwards Bishop Strachan. We find Robert Baldwin’s name in a class list of that institution published in 1816. Three years later (in 1819) we find that he was the “head boy,” and that he delivered the “prologue” at a public examination held at the school on the 11th of August. The prologue bears internal evidence of having been composed by Dr. Strachan himself. Among other scholars who attended the school and took part in the exercises at this date wc find several whose names have since become well known in Toronto and its neighbourhood. Glancing down the leaf at random, we read the names of Thomas Ridout, Wm. McMurray, Saltern Givens, William Boulton, Richard Oates, Francis Heward, Abraham Nelles, James Baby, Allan Macaulay, and Warren Claus. The testimony of Robert Baldwin’s school-fellows goes to show that he was even in those early days a rather shy, retiring youth, little addicted to boyish sports, and never known to take part in freaks of mischief. His thoughts seemed to come to him slowly, and his perceptive faculties were not very acute. His mind seems to have matured late. Dr. Strachan pronounced him the most diligent pupil in the establishment, and prophesied that if he ever made his mark in the world it would be rather by reason of his industry and close application than from the natural quickness of his parts. As is generally the case, the boy in this instance was father to the man. His industrious habits clung to him throughout | his life, and his triumphs were won by means of persistent and untiring exertion, rather than by natural aptitude for public life. In this same year (1819) he entered upon the study of the law in his father’s office, and was called to the Bar in Trinity Term, 1825. He immediately entered into partnership with his father, the style of the firm being “ W. W. Baldwin & Son.”
Meanwhile a great change had taken place in the pecuniary circumstances of Dr. Baldwin. He had, as we have already seen, been more than moderately successful in his professional pursuits, and had steadily accumulated wealth. From another source, however, his means received an accession which made him probably the wealthiest professional man in Upper Canada. The Hon. Peter Russell, already referred to, was never married, and by consequence he left no direct heirs. Upon his death, in the year 1808, his large landed and other possessions devolved upon his maiden sister, Miss Elizabeth Russell. This lady survived until 1822. She was a distant connection of the Baldwins, and a very warm friendship had always subsisted between the two families. She 1 resided with the Doctor’s family—or, rather, the Doctor’s family resided with her—during the last eight or nine years of her life. Upon her death she bequeathed all her possessions to Dr. Baldwin, who thus acquired a handsome fortune. He had in 1813, immediately after the American invasion of York, removed to Russell Abbey, on Front street, a mansion which had previously belonged to the Hon. Peter Russell, and which at this date belonged to his sister. After Miss Russell’s death Dr. Baldwin began to entertain projects to which his mind had theretofore been a stranger. He designed to subject the large estate to a strict entail, and to found an opulent Canadian family. The Doctor, as we have seen, was a sincere and pronounced Liberal in his political views. He was a man of high principles, honestly desirous of promoting the welfare of his fellow-men; but he was nevertheless strongly influenced by the notions of social caste which were all but universal among educated persons of British stock in those days. He purchased a block of land on the summit of the acclivity which rises to the northward of Toronto, a short distance beyond the city limits. Here, on one of the most imposing sites in the neighbourhood, he built a cosy-looking white house of comfortable proportions, which he intended to be merely the nucleus of a much more stately structure. He called his new estate “ Spadina,” which is an Italianized form of an Indian word signifying a pleasant hill. The greater part of the land intervening between the base of Spadina Hill and Queen street—covering a distance of nearly two miles—had formerly belonged to the Russells, and was now the property of Dr. Baldwin. He laid out through this property a broad and stately highway a hundred and twenty feet in width, which has ever since been known as Spadina Avenue. He removed to his new home, and soon came to be known as “Baldwin of Spadina” an honorary title which he hoped to transmit to his posterity in future ages. “There was to be for ever,” says Dr. Scadding, “a Baldwin of Spadina. It is singular that the first inheritor of the newly-established patrimony should have been the statesman whose lot it was to carry through the Legislature the abolition of the right of primogeniture. The son grasped more readily than the father what the genius of the North American continent will endure, and what it will not.” Dr. Baldwin, however, did not live to see this measure carried through Parliament. He died on the 8th of January, 1844, and/ the Act abolishing primogeniture did not! become law until 1851. As, in the course^ of this sketch, we shall not again have occasion to make any extended reference to Dr. Baldwin, we may here state that he subsequently entered Parliament as member for Norfolk, and did good service to the cause of Reform in Upper Canada. He continued to take an active part in politics down to a short time before his death in 1844. In 1843, only a few months before his death, he was called to a seat in the Legislative Council. He was devotedly loyal to the Crown, but spoke manfully for the rights of the people whenever those rights were invaded—and they were very often invaded in those days. It was from him that his son inherited those principles which wrought such important changes in our Constitution, and which have so effectually served the cause of free thought, free speech, and free deeds in our land. The reverence which all Canadians justly feel for the name of Robert Baldwin is also due in no slight degree to the father, who early instilled into his son’s mind the “one idea” which is inseparably associated with his name.

Meanwhile the legal business continued to be carried on under the style of “W. W. Baldwin & Son,” the son being the active member of the firm. The business was large and remunerative, and included the prosecution of some of the most important causes before the courts in those days. On the 31st of May, 1827, when Robert Baldwin had just completed his twenty-third year, he married his cousin, Miss Augusta Elizabeth Sullivan, a daughter of Mr. Daniel Sullivan, and a sister of Mr. Robert Baldwin Sullivan, a young lawyer who afterwards attained eminence in his profession, and was raised to the judicial bench. On the 1st of March, 1829, young Sullivan formed a legal partnership with the Baldwins, and the style of the firm became “ Baldwin & Sullivan.”

Robert Baldwin had already begun to take an active interest in political affairs. Liberal principles had legitimately descended to him from his father, but he was also a constitutional Reformer from mature deliberation and conviction. It is impossible to estimate his character rightly, however, unless it is borne in mind that his views were very far removed from those of extreme Radicals. In some respects, indeed, he had many of the qualities of a Conservative. Change, considered merely as change, was distasteful to him, and he was disposed to look favourably upon existing institutions until they were proved to be prejudicial to the public welfare. But he had already pondered seriously, and with a conscientious desire to arrive at a just opinion, as to the reciprocal obligations of the governing classes and the governed. His high sense of justice convinced him that there were many things in our colonial polity which it was the imperative duty of every well-wisher of the country to do his utmost to remove. He bad made no secret of his views, and his high personal character, social position, and acknowledged abilities were such as to give those views additional weight. He had already proved himself a wise and prudent adviser on one or two election committees, and had come to be looked upon as “the coming man” of the Reform party. That party was then in its infancy in this Province, and may be said to have c'ome into existence about the year 1820. It grew rapidly, and soon began to occasion uneasiness to the faction which swayed the destinies of the Province with so high a hand. It was not difficult for far-sighted men to perceive that momentous changes were imminent. The idea of a responsible Executive had already presented itself to the minds of the thoughtful, and the Baldwins, both father and son, had expressed strong opinions on the subject. The result of the general elections of 1824 was a Reform majority in the House of Assembly, and several important Government measures were defeated. The Legislative Council, however, was of course still in the hands of the oligarchy. The Lieutenant-Governor, Sir Peregrine Maitland, began to entertain gloomy forebodings of disaster. “The long shadows of Canadian Radicalism,” says a Canadian writer, “were already settling down on his administration, and the Colonial Advocate, controlled by William Lyon Mackenzie, sadly disturbed his prospects of dignified repose with pungent diatribes on packed juries and Government abuses. Even then the clouds were gathering for the storm of 1838.” As yet, however, there was little in common between Mr. Mackenzie and the Baldwins except hatred of oppression and a desire to see the Government of the country in the hands of capable and disinterested men. Even Mackenzie at this time entertained no thought of rebellion, 1 and was a loyal subject to the Crown. It is, of course, unnecessary to say that none of the Baldwins ever sympathized with or countenanced the rebellion at any time.

In 1828 there was a general election, and Robert Baldwin, in conjunction with Mr. James E. Small, afterwards Judge of the County Court of the county of Middlesex, offered himself as a candidate for the county of York. Both these gentlemen were defeated by their opponents, Messrs. William Lyon Mackenzie and Jesse Ketchum. In July of the following year, however, Mr. John Beverley Robinson, member for the town of York and Attorney-General of the Province, was promoted to the dignity of Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench. Robert Baldwin once more presented himself as a candidate for legislative honours, this time as Mr. Robinson’s successor in the representation of York. He was returned by a majority of forty-one votes. His opponent was the same Mr. Small who had been his coadjutor of the previous year. Mr. Mackenzie, who had opposed them both in 1828, threw all his personal and journalistic influence into the scale in favour of Mr. Baldwin, and probably contributed not a little to the result. At the close of the poll the votes stood 92 for Baldwin and 51 for Small. A petition, praying that the election might be declared void, was presented by Mr. Small, upon the ground that the writ had been irregularly issued. The petition was successful, for the irregularity was fatal, the writ having been issued by the Lieutenant-Governor instead of by the Speaker of the House. Mr. Baldwin was unseated, but immediately presented himself for re-election. This time he was opposed by Mr. William Botsford Jarvis, Sheriff of the county. Mr. Jarvis was defeated, and upon the opening of the session, on the 8th of January, 1830, Robert Baldwin, then in his twenty-sixth year, for the first time took his seat in Parliament.

It was about this time that the scheme of Responsible Government may be said to have first taken something like definite shape in Upper Canada. This great project is inseparably associated with Robert Baldwin’s name, though it is absurd to say, as has been said more than once, that he was the first to conceive the idea. There exists indisputable evidence that before Robert Baldwin had emerged from schoolboy life, his father, Peter Perry, and other leading Reformers had laid down most of the general principles upon which Responsible Government is founded. It may be said, indeed, that those principles were a necessary product of the political situation of affairs in Canada in those days, and that no particular individual can lay claim to having been their sole originator. The scheme of Responsible Government in Can-| ada simply contemplated the application to , this country of the principles which underlie the Constitution of Great Britain. It claimed that the acts of the Executive should be approved of by a majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly. Those who contended for it claimed nothing which was not clearly their right. They sought to engraft no foreign or radical change upon the Constitution. This was clearly understood a few years later by Lord Durham, as witness the following extract from his celebrated Report:—“ It needs no change in the principles of government, no invention of a new constitutional theory, to supply the remedy which would, in my opinion, completely remove the existing political disorders. It needs but to follow out consistently the principles of the British Constitution, and introduce into the government of these great colonies those wise provisions by which alone the working of the representative system can in any country be rendered harmonious and efficient.

But the Crown must, on the other hand, submit to the necessary consequences of representative institutions, and if it has to carry on the government in unison with a representative body, it must consent to carry it on by means of those in whom that representative body has confidence... This change might be effected by a single despatch containing such instructions, or, if any legal enactment were requisite, it would only be one that would render it necessary that the official acts of the Governor should be countersigned by some public functionary. This would induce responsibility for every act of the Government, and as a natural consequence it would necessitate the substitution of a system of administration by means of competent heads of departments for the present rude machinery of an executive council..... I admit that the system which I propose would in fact place the internal government of the colony in the hands of the colonists themselves, and that we should thus leave to them the execution of the laws of which we have lono-o entrusted the making solely to them.” This was precisely the stand taken by the advocates of Responsible Government. This, in a word, was Responsible Government, and it was principally with a view to bring about such a state of things that Robert Baldwin determined to enter political life, in the autumn of 1829. A signal example of the necessity for Responsible Government had just occurred. In the autumn of the year 1827, John Walpole Willis, an English barrister, had been appointed to the position of a puisne judge in Upper Canada. Mr. Willis was a gentleman of spotless character, kind and amiable manners, and wide and various learning. He was beyond comparison the ablest jurist who, up to that time, had sat on the judicial bench in this Province. Having a high and proper idea of the dignity of the judicial character, he observed the strictest impartiality of conduct, both on the bench and elsewhere, and refused to ally himself with either of the political parties in the Province. This line of procedure, which in our days would be regarded as a matter of course in a man in such a position, was then an honourable distinction, for too many of Judge Willis’s predecessors had been mere tools in the hands of the ruling faction. That faction, with Sir Peregrine Maitland, the Lieutenant-Governor, at its head, determined that Willis should either identify himselfl with them or lose his place. They were soon made to understand in the most unmistakable manner that he was a judge, and not a mere self-seeking partisan. It was accordingly determined that he should be got rid of. In the month of June, 1829, a pretext offered itself for his dismissal. He refused to sit in Term by himself, in the absence of Sir William Campbell, the Chief Justice (who was then in England), and of the other associate judge. Sir Peregrine promptly dismissed him, and appointed Mr. Christopher Hagerman to the vacant position. Judge Willis appealed to the Home authorities, who sustained him in his conduct, and dismissed the newly-appointed judge. It was not deemed advisable, however, to reinstate Mr. Willis in his Upper Canadian judgeship, as it was evident that he would be subjected to perpetual annoyance from the Executive, and that his usefulness would be seriously interfered with. He was appointed to a judicial position in another colony, where his honour and integrity were fully appreciated, and where he won golden opinions from all classes of the community. But he had none the less been dismissed by Sir Peregrine Maitland, and a large and in-fluential class among the people of Upper Canada were righteously indignant. Robert Baldwin, himself a lawyer, with a high sense of the august character which ought to appertain to the judicial bench, felt and spoke strongly on the subject. The leading members of the Reform Party were unanimous in their condemnation of the Lieutenant-Governor’s arbitrary conduct. Public meetings were held, and strong language, though hardly stronger than the occasion called for, was the order of the day. Finally, an address, signed by nearly all the prominent Reformers in the Province, was presented to Judge Willis, in which the subscribers expressed their esteem for his character, and their high appreciation of his conduct as a judge. A petition, which is believed to have been drawn by Robert Baldwin himself, was also forwarded to the King. Whether entirely drawn by Mr. Baldwin himself or not, there is no doubt that he had a share in its compilation, and that its contents were fully in accord with his views, as, apart from his being one of the signatories, a copy of it, initialed and annotated by him, was found among his papers after his death. This petition is important, as showing that the constitutional changes of a later date had already been carefully considered and outlined by the Reformers of this Province. It sets out by humbly thanking His Majesty for having sent Mr. Willis among them in the capacity of a judge, and extols his virtues, both judicial and personal. It then represents I
1 that the country had been deprived of one of its greatest blessings, in the arbitrary removal of a judge who, by the impartial discharge of his duties, had become endeared to the Canadian people. Then comes the following recital“ It has long been the source of many grievances, and of their continuance, that the Legislative Council is formed not of an independent gentry, taken from the country at large, but of executive councillors and placemen, the great majority of whom are under the immediate, active, and undue influence of the person administering Your Majesty’s Provincial Government, holding their offices at his mere will and pleasure. Hence arises, in a great measure, the practical irresponsibility of executive councillors and other official advisers of Your Majesty’s representative, who have hitherto, with impunity, both disregarded the laws of the land and despised the opinions of the public.”

In entering active political life for the first time, Mr. Baldwin enjoyed the advantage of having been carefully trained in sound liberal principles by his father. He had the further advantage of possessing the esteem and respect even of those most bitterly opposed to his views on political matters, and his wealth and social position exalted him far above the petty ambitions of meaner men. With the modesty becoming in a young member, he spoke little during his first Parliamentary session, and as events turned out he had no future opportunity of addressing the House until after the lapse of some years, during which interval the political situation of the country had undergone many and important changes. By the death of George IV. a dissolution of Parliament took place, and a new election was ordered. Mr. Baldwin once more presented himself to the electors of the town of York, and was again opposed by Mr. W. B. Jarvis, who was this time successful, and his opponent was left without a seat in the Assembly. That he was not free from a feeling of disappointment at this result is very probable, but it is certain that he was less so than were many of his supporters, for he had been irresistibly led to the conclusion that his presence in the House at that time would be of little service to the country. He clearly perceived that a Reform House of Assembly could make little headway in the direction of constitutional progress so long as that House was hampered by an irresponsible Executive. Many of the leaders of the Reform Party of that day, both in Upper and Lower Canada, contended for an elective Legislative Council, believing that such a reform would, to some extent at least, remedy the evils by which the country was beset. In the views of these persons Mr. Baldwin could not coincide. He maintained that the only effectual cure was to make the Executive, as in England, directly dependent upon the will of the people, and that until such a change should be brought about it was a matter of secondary importance whether the Legislative Councillors were elected by the people or not. To establish a Responsible Executive had now become the great object of his life, and he availed himself of every opportunity which presented itself of urging his views. All the members of his party were agreed as to the desirability of bringing about such a state of things, but many of them despaired of being able to accomplish it, and regarded the project as practically unattainable. Others thought that Mr. Baldwin attached too much importance to it, and were wont to speak of him as “ the man of one idea.” The history of the next few years affords the best refutation to such opinions. Upon the successful carrying out of this “ one idea” depended the liberties of the Canadian people, and Mr. Baldwin continued to strive for the desired end until it became an accomplished fact. Meanwhile he accepted his defeat with the best grace he could. He retired to private life, and although he still continued largely to direct the policy of the Reform Party in the Upper Province he devoted most of his time to the practice of his profession.

On the 11th of January, 1836, he sustained a serious loss in the death of his wife. He was a man of domestic habits, devotedly attached to his family, and felt the blow very keenly. Only a few weeks after sustaining this bereavement he was for a short time called upon to act as a constitutional adviser to Sir Francis Bond Head. The extraordinary circumstances under which Sir Francis became Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada, and the disastrous consequences of his administration, will be fully detailed in the sketch of his life to be included in this series. It must be admitted that his position was one of much difficulty, and would have tried the powers of a much abler and wiser man. The new Governor was soon engaged in bickerings with some of the members of the House on important constitutional questions. His predecessor, Sir John Colborne, had recommended Robert Baldwin to the Home Office as a proper person to be called to a seat in the Legislative Council. Such a step was certain to be favourably regarded by a majority in the Assembly, and Sir Francis, acting probably under instructions from Lord Glenelg, the Colonial Secretary, sent for Mr. Baldwin, sought his advice, and finally requested him to become one of the Executive. There were then three vacancies in that body, three of the old members having recently been dismissed. The vacancies were offered respectively to Robert Baldwin, John Rolph, and John Henry Dunn, all of whom stood high in the confidence of the Reform Party. Sir Francis was especially desirous that Mr. Baldwin should accept office, not merely because the latter was a man of good judgment who knew the country’s needs, but because his character and social position were such that his name would in itself lend great weight to any administration. This is sufficiently proved by the tenor of Sir Francis’s own despatch to Lord Glenelg, dated February 22nd, 1836, the full text of which is to be found in the fourth chapter of his extraordinary “ Narrative.” “ After making every inquiry in my power,” says Sir Francis, “I became of opinion that Robert Baldwin, advocate, a gentleman already recommended to your Lordship by Sir John Colborne for. a seat in the Legislative Council, was the first individual I should select, being highly respected for his moral character, moderate in his politics, and possessing the esteem and confidence of all parties.” It is to be borne in mind, too, that the Governor’s estimate of Mr. Baldwin’s character and position before the country had been formed from the reports of his bitterest political opponents. Sir Francis himself had only been a few weeks in the country, and had had but slight opportunities for forming an independent personal estimate. The fact that Mr. Baldwin’s opponents should have given such a report of him affords incontrovertible proof of two thino-s : first, that even the bitter animos-ities of the times had not extinguished all sense of truth and justice ; and second, that Robert Baldwin, notwithstanding his pronounced opinions, was esteemed and respected as no other man in Canadian political life has ever been, either before his time or since.

While in conference with Mr. Baldwin, the Governor learned that, according to that gentleman’s interpretation of the Constitutional Act of 1791, the Council was already legally responsible to the people. Sir Francis himself had probably never considered the matter, and did not commit himself to a positive opinion. He, however, made use of several expressions from which Mr. Baldwin not unreasonably inferred that there was no great difference of opinion between them on the point, and that the Government would thenceforth be conducted on that assumption. An important discussion also took place between them as to the position of a Lieutenant-Governor in the colony, and as to the true relation existing between him, his constitutional advisers, and the Parliament. On these matters Sir Francis was disposed to retain his own opinions, and yielded little to the reasoning of his interlocutor. The final result of the discussion was that Sir Francis made some concessions, and that Mr. Baldwin agreed to enter, and did actually enter, the administration, as did also Dr. Rolph and Mr. Dunn. They had not held office many days ere they discovered that they were in a false position. They found that the Governor had merely prevailed upon them to accept office in order to strengthen his Government, and to set himself in a favourable light before the country. He had no intention of permitting them to have any voice in the real administration of public affairs. Without consulting them, he appointed several members of the Family Compact to office. The members of the Council found that they were kept in total ignorance of the Government’s policy, and that their functions were restricted to insignificant matters of detail. Much to the general surprise, this line of conduct on the part of the Governor was opposed by the old members of the Council, as well as by the three gentlemen who had recently entered it. They repeatedly remonstrated against his course of procedure, but their remonstrances were quietly ignored. There was, consequently, but one course open to them—to resign office. This course they accordingly adopted on the 4th of March, when Mr. Baldwin and his two colleagues had held office about three weeks. More obsequious councillors were soon found to fill their places, in the persons of Robert Baldwin Sullivan, Augustus Baldwin, John Elmsley, and William Allan. Robert Baldwin, mortified and disgusted with Sir Francis’s double-dealing, shook the dust of the Council Chamber from his feet and once more retired to private life. The House of Assembly passed a vote of want of confidence, and stopped the supplies. Then followed the dissolution of Parliament, a new general election, and a new House of Assembly packed by the Governor to support the old Family Compact policy. The next thing that followed, as every one knows, was the Rebellion of 1837-8.

Within a few weeks after resigning office, Mr. Baldwin, despairing of being able to effect anything for the public good, and still suffering from grief for the loss of his wife, determined to pay a visit to the home of his ancestors, in Ireland, and to spend a season abroad. He was absent nearly a year, the greater part of which was spent in London and in the neighbourhood of Cork. During his stay in London he received intelligence of the success of the Tories at the recent elections in Upper Canada. Knowing, as he did, by what corrupt means that success had been achieved, he deemed it his duty to acquaint the Colonial Office with the inevitable result which would follow the Governor’s machinations. Tory influence was predominant there, and he was not admitted to an interview with Lord Glenelg, but his views, elaborated into a series of papers, were placed before the Secretary, by whom they, were submitted to the Imperial Cabinet. In these papers the project of Responsible Government was strongly urged as the only effectual remedy for the troubles in Canada. It was also urged that the policy which had theretofore been pursued by successive Lieutenant-Governors was steadily alienating the affections of the Canadian people from the mother country. These views, temperately but firmly expressed, were not without effect at the Home Office. Upon Mr. Baldwin’s return to his native land he found that matters had not stood still during his absence, and that the Governor’s policy had produced its legitimate fruit. The word “ rebellion ” was now frequently in the mouths of men who had always been regarded as loyal subjects. The Governor, as though bent upon precipitating matters, was more despotic than ever, and was engaged in daily squabbles with the Assembly. Mr. Baldwin, to whom even the tyranny of Sir Francis Head was preferable to actual rebellion, kept aloof from the extreme sections of both parties, and continued quietly to perforin his duties as a citizen. He had lived with his father ever since his marriage. Doctor Baldwin, finding that Spadina at certain seasons of the year was an inconvenient place of abode, and that it would be advisable for him to have a town residence, had erected a building on the comer of King and Yonge streets, in what is now the commercial heart of the city. This building stood almost intact until about two years ago, when it was pulled down to make way for the magnificent new structure of the Dominion Bank. The family had removed thither during the autumn of 1831, and had resided there nearly four years. Dr. Baldwin, who was fond of building operations, had meanwhile erected a fine brick mansion on the site of the small house occupied by him many years before on the corner of Bay and Front streets. This mansion is the one now used for the offices of the Toronto, Grey & Bruce Railway Company. In 1835 the family removed hither from the corner of Yonge and King streets, and it was here that Mrs. Robert Baldwin breathed her last. The family continued to reside here until .the proximity of railways and other causes combined to make it an undesirable place of abode, when they removed back to Spadina.

Early in December the rebellion became a reality. William Lyon Mackenzie and his adherents encamped themselves on the northern outskirts of Toronto, and threatened to advance upon the city. Sir Francis, old soldier though he was, was panic-stricken. He knew the detestation in which he was held by those who were in arms against his Government, and deemed it probable that if he were captured by the rebels his life would be sacrificed. Meanwhile the militia were pouring into the capital from all quarters, and the forces at the Governor’s command would soon be sufficiently numerous to enable him to laugh at the insurrection. It was manifestly important to gain time, as additions to the militia were coming in hour by hour. In this extremity Sir Francis had recourse to Robert Baldwin. The Sheriff was despatched in hot haste to the house on the corner of Bay and Front streets, and on the Governor’s behalf he begged Mr. Baldwin to be the bearer of a flag of truce to the insurgents. “ Demand from them,” urged Sir Francis, “ why they appear in arms in hostility to their lawful Governor, and call on them in my name to avoid the effusion of human blood.” The Sheriff* and his orderly seem to have been kept tolerably busy for some time, carrying messages to and fro between Mr. Baldwin and the Governor. Mr. Baldwin did not feel justified in declining a request urged under such circumstances, but stipulated that some other trustworthy person should accompany him. The errand on which he was about to be despatched was an important one. Negotiations might perhaps be proposed by the insurgent chief, and it was highly desirable that the majesty of Upper Canada should be represented by more than one man. To this view Sir Francis acceded, and asked Mr. Baldwin to choose his coadjutor. Mr. Baldwin at once mentioned Marshall Spring Bidwell, in whose integrity and prudence he had entire confidence. An orderly was accordingly despatched for Mr. Bidwell, who was asked to join his friend Mr. Baldwin in the expedition. Mr. Bidwell had no heart for such an undertaking. He had no sympathy with the insurrection, which he moreover knew must prove utterly futile. He was essentially a man of peace, and did not believe in righting’ wrongs by the strong hand. While sympathizing deeply with the grievances to which the people of Upper Canada were subjected, he was in favour of redressing these grievances by constitutional means, and not by open rebellion. He begged to be excused from undertaking the mission. He suggested that Dr. Rolph would be a very suitable messenger, and that he would probably undertake the mission without reluctance. Mr. Baldwin could assign no valid objection to Dr. Rolph, who was accordingly sent for. He accepted the mission with alacrity, and he and Mr. Baldwin set out on horseback for Gallows Hill. Upon their arrival they explained their errand to Mr. Mackenzie, who asked to see their authority. Mr. Baldwin was compelled to reply that his authority was oral only. “Then,” said Mr. Mackenzie, “go back to Sir Francis Head, and tell him that we want independence, and nothing but independence; and he must give us his answer in writing within an hour.” The rest of this episode is not a pleasant one to tell, but it has already appeared in print, and our narrative would be incomplete without it. Dr. Rolph rode up to two of the insurgents, and said something to them in so low a voice that Mr. Baldwin could not hear it. The latter did not approve of this secret conference, and rode back to town alone. He delivered Mr. Mackenzie’s message to the Sheriff, by whom it was conveyed to the Governor. By this time Sir Francis felt safe, and refused to ratify his embassy. Mr. Baldwin was therefore compelled to return to Mr. Mackenzie with an admission that the Governor had declined to furnish any written authority. This transaction is not the least scandalous of Sir Francis Head’s achievements. By refusing to accredit his ambassador he placed Mr. Baldwin in an equivocal light before the country, and furnished the political enemies of the latter with a pretext for repeated insults. Everybody knows the rest of the story. Next day Dr. Rolph lost no time in making the best of his way across the Niagara River, where he admitted his complicity in the rebellion. Both Mr. Mackenzie and the unhappy men who suffered on the gallows for their share in that day’s work gave the same account of the message delivered by Dr. Rolph to the insurgents, which, as they declared, enjoined the latter to wait until nightfall, and then not to lose a moment in advancing on the eity, as the Governor was only pretending to negotiate in order to gain time.' Assuming this message to have been really delivered by Dr. Rolph, it must be admitted that it places him in an unenviable light, for in that case he was guilty not merely of treason to his country, but of treachery to his friend. Mr. Baldwin never forgave him, and was never again on speaking terms with him.

The rebellion was, for a time, a serious blow to the Reform Party in Upper Canada. The ruling faction and their adherents saw their opportunity, and used it without stint. A ery of disloyalty was raised, and everything was done to create a false idea in the public mind as to what really constitutes Reform principles. Disloyalty and rebellion were represented as the inevitable outcome of the principles of Upper Canadian Reformers. Every man who professed liberal opinions was declared to be a rebel. Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Bidwell were placed in the same category as Mackenzie and Rolph. Those who were instrumental in promulgating this doctrine were morally guilty of a great crime, for none knew better than they that the leading spirits among the Reformers of Upper Canada were patriots, in the truest and best sense of that word. For some time Mr. Baldwin treated these calumnies with silent eontempt. By some, his silence was construed into inability to defend himself, and more than four years afterwards one gentleman—the late Sir Allan MacNabb—presumed so far upon Mi’. Baldwin’s forbearance as to taunt him in a speeeh delivered in the House of Assembly. This was on the 13th of October, 1842. Mr. Baldwin rose to his feet and replied to the member for Hamilton in words whieh, so far as he was concerned, effectually silenced all further insinuations of disloyalty. He detailed the circumstances under which he had been induced to ride out with the flag of truce, and how the Governor had not had sufficient magnanimity to avow his own act. When the speaker resumed his seat the house resounded with eheers, and Sir Allan MaeNabb subsequently apologized for his language.

The unmerited reproach which had been brought upon the Reform Party was not the only disadvantage under which it laboured at this period. Not only was it subjected to public obloquy, and to the bitter taunts of its foes, but it contained discordant and irreconcilable elements within itself. It was for a time threatened with utter ruin. During the progress of the year 1838, Robert Baldwin set himself diligently to work to reconcile sueh discordant elements as were capable of assimilation, and to reconstruct the party on a consistent and definite basis of constitutional reform. The watchword of the reconstructed party was “Responsible Government.” In May of the same year, Lord Durham arrived in Canada, in the double capacity of Governor-General and of Her Majesty’s Commissioner for the purpose of inquiring into and reporting upon our political institutions. After spending nearly six months in the country, he returned home and compiled his elaborate report, in whieh he recommended the establishment of Responsible Government, and the legislative union of the two Provinces. The subsequent history of these recommendations belongs more appropriately to the life of Lord Durham than to that of Robert Baldwin. At present it will be sufficient to record the fact that most of Lord Durham’s recommendations with reference to Canadian affairs were adopted by the Home Government, and that during the session of 1839 a Bill providing for the union of Upper and Lower Canada was introduced into the Imperial Parliament. It was found, however, when the details of the measure came up for discussion in the Commons, that the House had not sufficient facts before them to enable them to deal with it satisfactorily. It became necessary to shelve the matter until the following ses-sion, and to send out to Canada some capable man to obtain the required information. The man fixed upon for this mission was Mr. Charles Poulett Thomson, afterwards Lord Sydenham, who held the post of President of the Imperial Board of Trade. Mr. Thomson accordingly came over to this' country as Governor-General, armed with the same full powers which had previously been conferred upon Lord Durham. How he discharged his difficult task will be related at length in the sketch particularly devoted to his life. It may meanwhile be remarked that in the Upper Province the bulk of the Tories arrayed themselves in hostility to the policy of the Home Government. In their organ, the Toronto Patriot, they denounced Lord Durham and his Report in unmeasured terms. The new Governor-General also came in for a full share of censure. That gentleman soon discovered that the Legislature of the Upper Province would not easily be prevailed upon to consent to the proposed measures. The difficulty arose from the opposition of the Legislative Council. He put forth a message, in which he appealed strongly to the loyalty of the House, and urged the necessity of their cooperation. He also published a despatch from Lord John Russell, in which a similar appeal was embodied. The Family Compact, members whereof composed a large majority in the Council, saw that their reign, which had long'been insecure, would cease at once and forever upon the advent of Responsible Government. The Governor, however, had appealed to their loyalty, and ever since the Rebellion they had been proclaiming their devotion to the Crown in fulsome terms which left them no choice but to comply with what was asked of them, or else to admit that they had been preaching doctrines which they were not disposed to practise. The proposed measures, moreover, originated with the Government, and the members of the Council were thus compelled either to support them or to resign their places. By adopting the former course they would at least postpone the evil day. They accordingly supported the Government. The Assembly had all along approved of the proposed changes, and resolutions were passed in accordance with the policy outlined in the Governor’s message. A Union Bill was framed and transmitted to England, where, with some slight modifications, it soon re-ceived the assent of both Houses. On the 23rd of. July, 1840, it received the Royal sanction. A clause in the Bill provided that it should come into operation by royal proclamation. A protracted session of the Special Council in the Lower Province delayed the issue of the proclamation, and the Act of Union did not take effect until the 10th of February, 1841.

Robert Baldwin had meanwhile remained in the retirement of private life. A time had arrived, however, when he was once more to take an active part in the politics of his country. At the urgent request of the Governor-General, and upon the assumption that Government was to be carried on in accordance with the principles for which he had all along contended, he accepted the office of Solicitor-General, as successor to Mr., afterwards Chief-Justice Draper, who had been annointed Attornev-General in place of Mr. Hagerman. Mr. Baldwin’s acceptance of office did more than anything else could have done to strengthen the hands of the Governor, and to gain confidence for the Administration. This office he subsequently resigned under circumstances which occasioned not a little embarrassment to the Governor ; and as he has been censured for this step, it is very desirable that we should clearly understand the motives by which he was actuated. We are fortunately able to arrive at such an understanding. Shortly after his appointment to office, in the month of February, 1840, being determined that there should be no misapprehension as to his actions, he wrote and published a letter in which occur the following words:— “In accepting office I consider myself to have given a public pledge that I have a reasonably well-grounded confidence that the Government of my country is to be carried on in accordance with the principles of Responsible Government, which I have ever held. It is therefore right that it should be distinctly understood that I have not come into, office by means of any coalition with the Attorney-General, or with any others now in the public service, but have done so under the Governor-General, and expressly from my confidence in him.”

So far all is clear enough. A year later— that is to say, on the 13th of February, 1841—the Governor, having determined to constitute the principal officers of Government the Executive Council, wrote to Mr. Baldwin as follows:

“I am called upon to name an Executive Council for this Province without delay, which at present will be composed exclusively of the chief officers of the Government, and I have therefore included your name in the list.”

Now, the members of the Cabinet, with three exceptions, were persons with whom Mr. Baldwin had never acted, and with whom he had very little political affinity. He moreover had good reason for believing that a Cabinet so composed would not find favour when the House should meet. He was desirous to make the Union a success, and was loth to embarrass the Governor at such a time by refusing to accede to his request, but he again resolved that there should be no misunderstanding as to his position. He accordingly, on the 19th of the month, replied to Lord Sydenham’s letter as follows:

“With respect to those gentlemen,”—referring to the members of the Council,—“Mr. Baldwin has himself an entire want of political confidence in all of them except Mr. Dunn, Mr. Harrison and Mr. Daly. He deems it a duty which he owes to the Governor-General, at once to communicate his opinion that such arrangement of the Administration will not command the support of Parliament.”

By writing a letter couched in such language, Mr. Baldwin must certainly have meant to reserve to himself perfect freedom of action. He believed that the proper time for action would be when he was in possession of the facts as to the political situation, and this he could not possibly be until the assembling of Parliament. Here again, however, his perfect good faith towards all men was signally displayed. It would manifestly be disingenuous were he to accept a seat in the Council without acquainting his colleagues with his opinions. To Lord Sydenham he had, as we have seen, been sufficiently explicit already. He now wrote to each individual member, with the exception of the three gentlemen already named, acquainting them straightforwardly of his utter want of confidence in them politically.

The course pursued by him in this often-debated matter was thoroughly consistent throughout. When the members of the Parliament of the United Provinces met at Kingston, on the 13th of June, 1841, and previous to the opening of the session, Mr. Baldwin called together a meeting of the Liberal members from both sections. The summoning of such a meeting was a political necessity, for many of the members from the different Provinces were totally unacquainted with each other, and were very imperfectly acquainted with each other’s views on the questions of the day. One of Mr. Baldwin’s principal objects was to ascertain how lax the Government possessed the confidence of the Liberal party of the United Provinces. It was soon apparent that very few of the members felt any confidence whatever in the Government as a whole, although even the members from the Lower Province were almost unanimous in expressing confidence in Mr. Baldwin himself. Here again his course seemed perfectly clear. He must cease to hold office in a Government which had not the confidence of the people. Either there must be a reconstruction of the Cabinet or he must resign. He proposed the former alternative to Lord Sydenham, but his proposal was rejected. Accordingly, on the day when the session opened, he resigned his office. There can be no doubt that this was an embarrassing state of affairs for the Governor, but Mr. Baldwin was compelled to choose between two evils, and he chose what seemed to him to be the less. It was better that the Governor should be embarrassed than that a high-minded statesman should prove false to his convictions. He was assailed with coarse vituperation in the House for his resignation. He replied in moderate, but forcible language, explaining his position at considerable length. His opponents were not accessible to argument, but outside the House his conduct met with the full approbation of his constituents, and of the Reform party generally. At the next elections, as if to show how fully his course was approved of, he was returned for two constituencies—the County of Hastings and the North Riding of York. He chose to sit for the former, and recommended his friend Mr. Lafontaine to North York. The latter was triumphantly returned for that Riding. All his former colleagues retaining their places, Mr. Baldwin found himself in Opposition. He took part in several warm debates during the session, and moved some important amendments to the Municipal Bill, which was the most hotly-contested measure before the House, and which, after repeated divisions, was finally passed. He also strenuously advocated a policy of conciliation towards the Lower Canadians. Early in September he moved and passed a series of resolutions in support of his “ one idea” of Responsible Government. Almost immediately afterwards Lord Sydenham’s death took place, and the session was brought to a close.

Sir Charles Bagot having succeeded Lord Sydenham as Governor-General, entered upon his duties early in January, 1842. He wisely resolved not to directly identify himself with either of the political parties in the country, but to carry on the Government in accordance with the popular will. After spending a few months in making himself acquainted with the condition of affairs, he discovered that no ministry could expect to command the public sympathy unless it favoured Responsible Government. The existing Ministry was evidently doomed as it stood, and needed reconstruction. Soon after the opening of the following session, the new Governor accordingly made overtures to Robert Baldwin and Mr. Lafontaine, and a Government, with them at its head, was soon formed; several of the old members, including Sir Francis Hincks, retaining their seats. The new members returned to their constituents for re-election, and found themselves warmly supported. Thus was formed the Hincks-Baldwin Administration, as it was called in Upper Canada, in which Mr. Hincks held office as Inspector-General and Robert Baldwin as Attorney-General West. It came into existence on the 16th of September, 1842, when this, the first Responsible Ministry under the Union was sworn in, and Mr. Baldwin’s “one idea” was realized. The ensuing session was a short but indus-trious one, and was signalized by the passing of several important measures, one of which was an Act authorizing- the raising of a large loan for public works. The House was prorogued on the 22nd of October, and almost immediately afterwards the state of the Governor’s health compelled his resignation.

Then followed the memorable contest with Sir Charles Metcalfe. Upon Sir Charles Bagot’s death a good deal of anxiety was felt in Canada as to who would be his successor. The late Lord Stanley, afterwards Earl of Derby—father of the present representative of the title—was at this time Secretary of State for the Colonies in the Imperial Government. This nobleman disapproved of the recent changes in the Constitution of this country, and was vehemently opposed to the system of Responsible Government which had been introduced here. His selection of Sir Charles Metcalfe (afterwards Lord Metcalfe) as Bagot’s successor, and his subsequent instructions to that gentleman, lead to the conclusion that he had resolved upon the overthrow of our newly-acquired constitutional system. Sir Charles Metcalfe was a man of ability, who had spent a great part of his life in the service of the East India Company. He had had some experience in administering the despotic governments of Indian Provinces, but had no knowledge of Parliamentary Government, and was about as unfit a man as could have been sent out to fill such a position as that of Governor-General of Canada. He remained here nearly three years, during which period he, with the best intentions, contrived to bring the country to the verge of ruin. The training and experience of a lifetime had totally unfitted him for constitutional rule. Responsible Government in a colony where Party Government prevailed was to him an anomaly, and he could never be brought to understand it. He saw, however, that it had a firm hold upon the popular sympathies, and without meaning to be absolutely dishonest he was guilty of some dissimulation. While professing to approve of Responsible Government he was constantly showing his hostility to it. He had no sympathies in common with its advocates, and chose his associates and advisers from among the members of the defunct Compact. He endeavoured to exalt his own office by circumscribing the power of the Cabinet. He was wont to sneer at the pretensions of his Ministers, and in one of his letters he compares his position to that of an Indian Governor compelled to rule by means of a Mahommedan Ministry and a Mahommedan Parliament. It will readily be believed that there could be little unanimity of sentiment between such a man and Robert Baldwin. Their natures were thoroughly antagonistic, and this began to be apparent ere the new Governor-General had been many weeks in the country.- They had several warm discussions as to the right of patronage. Mr. Baldwin, on behalf of himself and his colleagues, urged—what one would have thought must be sufficiently obvious in a country boasting of Responsible Government —that public appointments should be made in accordance with the will of the people. Sir Charles utterly scouted such a doctrine. He claimed that, as the representative of the Crown, the right of patronage was vested in himself alone. He was defective in perception, and surrendering himself to evil counsellors, formed most erroneous ideas as to the character and aims of the members of the Government. How erroneous those ideas were is sufficiently apparent from the language of his biographer, Mr., afterwards Sir John William—Kaye. The latter gentleman never was in Canada, and knew nothing of Mr. Baldwin except what he gathered from the papers of Lord Metcalfe. His estimate of Mr. Baldwin may therefore fairly be taken to have been that of Lord Metcalfe himself. People who arc well-informed as to his life and character may well open their eyes when they read that Robert Baldwin was “ the son of a gentleman of Toronto, of American de-scent, who had formerly been a member of what was called the ‘ Family Compact;’ ”— that “ the elder Baldwin had quarrelled with his party, and with the characteristic bitterness of a renegade had brought up his son in extremest hatred of his old associates ; ”—that “ the son grew up to be an enthusiast—almost a fanatic;”—that “he was to the last degree uncompromising and intolerant;”—that “ he seemed to delight in strife ;”—that “ the might of mildness he laughed to scorn;”—that “ he was not satisfied with h victory unless it was gained by violence;”—that “ concessions were valueless to him unless he wrenched them with a strong hand from his opponent;”—that being “ of an unbounded arrogance and self-conceit, he made no allowances for others, and sought none for himself;”—that “there was a sort of sublime egotism about him—a magnificent self-esteem, which caused him to look upon himself as a patriot whilst he was serving his own ends by the promotion of his ambition, the gratification of his vanity or his spite.” Those of us “to the manner born” do not need to be informed that the proportion of truth to error in the foregoing extract is even less than the proportion of bread to sack in Falstaff’s tavern-score. It is difficult, indeed, to understand how any one could have read the character of Robert Baldwin so utterly awry. The above passages are quoted from the early edition of Kaye’s “ Life of Charles Lord Metcalfe.” In the later edition he modifies a few of the details, but the general portraiture of the man remains unchanged. All the assertions are so far the reverse of fact that it is hard to believe them to have been honestly made. The “gentleman of American descent ” was Dr. Baldwin, who, as has already been seen, was an Irishman, and a native of the county of Cork. His journey from Ireland to Canada was made by way of Quebec, and he probably never spent ten consecutive days in the United States, with the republican institutions whereof he had little sympathy. So far from his ever having been a member of the Family Compact, he had always been a pronounced Liberal, whose character and political opinions were so well known from the time of his first settlement in this country that it was deemed hopeless to attempt to allure him to the side of the oligarchy. Even Sir Francis Bond Head refers to him as “more ultra in his theory of reform than his son.” The delineation of the son’s character and principles is equally at variance with fact. It is not going too far to say that no man occupying an equally pronounced position in the arena of political life was ever less swayed by animosity or spite than Robert Baldwin. Sir Francis Hincks, a thoroughly competent and trustworthy authority, in his pamphlet on “The Political History of Canada between 1840 and 1855,” published at Montreal several years ago, says, in speaking of the Baldwins:—“Neither the Doctor nor his son entertained bitter feelings against their opponents, and although firm in their adherence to cherished political opinions, they were both highly and universally respected.” Sir Francis Head’s early impressions of the son were chiefly derived from the leaders of the Family Compact—notably from its head and front, Sir John Beverley Robinson. Yet we find the Governor referring to that son, in a communication to Lord Glenelg, written in February, 1836, as “a gentleman highly respected for his moral character, being moderate in his politics, and possessing the esteem and confidence of all parties.” It would be easy enough to fill page after page with extracts from books equally well known, and equally contradictory of each other. Even Lord Sydenham’s biographer fails to do justice to the motives which swayed Robert Baldwin. The fact that we encounter such contradictions in books to be found on the shelves of all large libraries is an additional reason why it is desirable that a true account of Robert Baldwin’s life should be written.

The difference between the Governor and Mr. Baldwin involved, of course, differences between the Governor and the Ministry. The Ministry was composed of the following members: Attorney-General West, Robert Baldwin; Attorney-General East, Louis H. Lafontaine; Solicitor-General West, James Edward Small; Solicitor-General East, T. C. Aylwin; Receiver-General, J. H. Dunn ; Inspector-General, Francis Hincks; Commissioner of Crown Lands, A. N. Morin; President of the Council, Robert Baldwin Sullivan; Provincial Secretary for Upper Canada, Dominick Daly; President of Board of Works, H. H. Killaly. The Surveyor-General, Mr. Thomas Parke, and the Commissioner of Customs, Mr. Malcolm Cameron, were not members of the Cabinet. The breach between Governor and Ministry gradually became wider and wider, for the former would not give way in the smallest particular, and had the Ministry given way they would have been false to the trust reposed in them by the public. Legislation was interfered with, and the general business of the country obstructed. A strong feeling arose throughout the land that the Governor-General was a tyrant and an aristocrat who had no sympathies in common with the people he had been sent out to govern. Some of Mr. Baldwin’s colleagues advocated resignation, but he himself was loath to imperil Responsible Government by such a step, and clung to the hope that calmer thoughts would ere long prevail.

It may justly enough be concluded that the Governor’s position was not a particularly enviable one, but we are led unavoidably to the conclusion that for the most disagreeable features of it he was personally responsible. He was stubborn, fond of having his own way, and unable to recede with a good grace. “He was called upon,” says his biographer, “to govern, or to submit to the government of Canada by a party; and the party by which he was to .govern was one with which he had no sympathy.” The answer to this is sufficiently obvious. He was not sent out to Canada to indulge his personal sympathy for any party, but to administer a Constitutional Government according to its constitution. A contemporary writer puts this matter very clearly. “How had he (Lord Metcalfe) seen the Queen, his Sovereign, act within the period of his return to England and his departure for Canada? Had he not seen her transfer her confidence from Lord Melbourne, for whom she had a filial attachment, to Sir Robert Peel, whom she never really liked? And why? Because she knew, as a Constitutional Sovereign, that her business was to give her confidence to, and call to her councils, those men who had the support of the representatives of the people.”

Finally, towards the close of November, 1843, the Governor, as though wilfully to defy and provoke his Council, made an appointment without reference to them, and when remonstrated with by Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Lafontaine he declared that he had acted within the legitimate scope of his power. He positively declined to pledge himself not to make any further appointments without the sanction of his Ministers. Mr. Baldwin, still peacefully inclined, left the matter open for two days, at the expiration of which he and his colleague, Mr. Lafontaine, once more pressed their views upon the Governor. The latter was adamant. “You, Mr. Baldwin,” said he, “are not so fond of giving pledges yourself that you should demand them from others.” “ I trust, your Excellency,” was Mr. Baldwin’s reply, “that I shall always be willing to pledge myself on matters as to which my sentiments cannot possibly undergo any change.” And thus, with mutual courtesies, the two Ministers withdrew. A conference was held that same night, and the result was that all the members of the Ministry except Mr. Dominick Daly resigned their seats. Several days afterwards—on the 2nd of December—the Assembly passed a vote approving of the conduct of the retired Ministers.

A good deal of difficulty was experienced in forming a new Ministry. In about a fortnight, however, a Provisional Government was formed under the leadership of Mr. Draper and the Hon. D. B. Viger. Then followed the dissolution of the House, and an appeal to the country. It is simply a. matter of fact that the Governor-General interfered with the elections for his own purposes, and used every influence within his reach to secure the return of members hostile to the late Ministry. He succeeded in securing a small majority favourable to his policy. Mr. Baldwin was returned for North York, and from that time until the month of March, 1848, he remained in Opposition. His services to his party during this interval were invaluable. His conduct was then, as always, marked by prudence and moderation, and won respect even from his political opponents. It is possible enough that had he been less moderate; had he been a man of greater energy and determination; had he resorted to crooked measures to accomplish his ends; he might have proved himself more than a match for Metcalfe, and might have compelled that Governor’s resignation at an earlier period of his career in this country. But it may be doubted whether such a policy would in the end have proved beneficial to the permanent interests of our land, for Metcalfe’s three years’ tenure of power furnished the best possible evidence of the desirability of establishing Responsible Government on a firm basis.

After Metcalfe’s departure from our shores the Earl of Cathcart administered affairs for a little more than a year. In 1846 there was a change in the Imperial Government, and the new Colonial Minister, Earl Grey, appointed Lord Elgin to the office of Governor-General of Canada. Lord Elgin reached Canada early in 1847. A general election took place at the close of the year, which resulted in a sweeping Reform victory both in the Upper and Lower Provinces. The old Ministry resigned, and Lord Elgin called on Mr. Lafontaine to form a Ministry. The call was responded to. Mr. Lafontaine conferred with Mr. Baldwin, and thus was formed what is known as the Baldwin-Lafontaine Administration, one of the ablest Administrations known to Canadian political history. Its original composition , was as follows:— Robert Baldwin, Louis H. Lafontaine, the Hon. William Hume Blake, Robert Baldwin Sullivan, T. C. Ay 1 win, F ran cis Hincks, J ames Lesslie, D. B. Viger, James Hervey Price, Etienne P. Tache, R. E. Caron, and Malcolm Cameron. It subsequently underwent several modifications, but as a Government it continued in power until the session of 1851, when Mr. Baldwin resigned his position. The ostensible ground of his resignation was a vote on a resolution moved by Mr.William Lyon Mackenzie to abolish the Court of Chancery. This resolution, though hostile to the views of the Ministry, was supported by a majority of Upper Canadian votes, several of the hostile voters being members of the legal profession. Mr. Baldwin was surprised as well as mortified, and promptly resigned office. At the election which followed he offered himself as a candidate for his old constituency of North York. He was opposed by Mr. Joseph Hartman, who was returned by a considerable majority. This was also a surprise and a disappointment to Mr. Baldwin, who forthwith retired from active political life. His friend and ally, Mr. Lafontaine, retired soon afterwards, and the political career of both these distinguished men may be said to have closed with the year 1851.

The Baldwin-Lafontaine Administration was signalized by many public measures of the greatest importance. Early in its history came the furious debate on the Rebellion Losses Bill, a legacy left by the preceding Administration. The account of this Bill belongs more properly to the life of Lord Elgin, and will be given at length there. We have referred to the vote on the resolution for the abolition of the Court of Chancery as being Mr. Baldwin’s ostensible reason for resigning office. There were, however, other causes which doubtless actuated him in taking that step. His health had already begun visibly to decline, and his physicians informed him that his official labours were rapidly shortening his life. He was sensitive—almost morbidly sensitive—on the subject of his personal popularity. The vote on Mr. Mackenzie’s resolution was no fair test of that popularity, and many members who had supported it begged Mr. Baldwin to reconsider his determination, alleging that they would without hesitation have opposed the resolution if they had believed he would take the matter so much to heart. But he was also aware that many prominent members of the Reform Party were not fully in accord with his views on other important public questions. He was too conservative for them. The demand for the secularization of the Clergy Reserves had become imperative, and though Mr. Baldwin approved of the principles of that measure, and had previously voted in favour of it, he was not disposed to go so far as public opinion required. He was a sincere and zealous Churchman, and had a high respect for vested rights. His zeal for Episcopacy did not blind him to the public weal, and he had given adequate testimony of his high and disinterested sense of justice by rescuing our University from Episcopal control. At the same time, he could not see his way to dealing with the Clergy Reserves in such a manner as at once to satisfy his conscience and the country’s imperative demands. Mr. Mackenzie, the late Premier of the Dominion, in a speech delivered several years since, referred to Robert Baldwin as a pure-minded but timid statesman. True, he was, in a certain sense, timid; but the sense is one in which he has had few imitators. He was afraid to do wrong. In the sense of being true to his conscience, and ready in expressing his sincere convictions at all times and in all places, no Canadian statesman has ever been more fearless than Robert Baldwin.

His speech to the electors of North York in 1851, after the poll had been closed, and when his defeat was made known, was his last public utterance. As his remarks on that occasion were eminently characteristic of the man, and fully explanatory of his sentiments, we subjoin the following epitome of them. He began by saying that the audience had just heard the declaration of a fact that severed the political tie which had for the last eleven years connected him with the North Riding of York. It might be said, and no doubt was said by many, that he ought to have withdrawn from the representation of the Riding, rather than contest it under the circumstances which led to the result just announced. He did not view the matter in that light. He felt that a strong sense of duty required him to take a different course, and not to take on himself the responsibility of originating the disruption of a bond which had been formed, and repeatedly renewed, between him and the electors of the North Riding. So far as he was able impartially to review the course he had hitherto, and especially for the Iasi four years, pursued, he could see no change in himself; nothing which should have induced them to withdraw a confidence repeatedly expressed at former elections. All circumstances duly considered, he could not recall any act of importance which he had performed, or for which he was responsible, that his sense of duty to his country did not require, or, at least, did not justify. In the course of the canvass just ended, he had had frequent opportunities of explaining his views to those who sustained, and occasionally to those who opposed him. It was unnecessary for him then to repeat those views ; but he felt it due to his own sense of right, and to the opinions of his friends, to say that under present circumstances he saw no reason to withhold a sincere re-assertion of them. In his own mind he could find nothing that would justify him, under all the circumstances, in pursuing a different course from that which he had taken. He had the satisfaction of knowing that there were intelligent men of a noble spirit in the Riding who concurred with him— staunch friends of former days, who had on the recent occasion given him their assis-tance and votes, in the face of, as the result showed, very discouraging circumstances. Principles so approved in his own mind, and so supported by such friends, he could not abandon. Until constitutionally advised to the contrary by the votes of the majority, he felt bound to believe that what he had always supported—what his constituents had frequently affirmed at former elections—what he still believed to be right —what he knew to be still sustained by men of valuable character, was also concurred in by a majority, at least, of his constituents. He believed, indeed, that his successful opponent did not differ from him in his view of his (Mr. Baldwin’s) position. Under these circumstances he felt he would not be justified in accepting any evidencf of a change in the minds of his constituents less doubtful than that of their own recorded votes. It could not now be said of hin in leaving that he had abandoned them These considerations had impelled him noi to shrink from the ordeal of a contest, noi from the announcement now made of its result, however discouraging that resuli might be considered. It only remained foi him now to return his cordial thanks first and most especially to the staunch friends who in the face of disheartening circumstances had manfully recorded their votes for him, and actively assisted him at the polls and otherwise. To these he felt he could not adequately express his obligations. He would also say that his acknowledgments were due to those who had been his supporters on former occasions, not excepting out of this number his successful rival, for the kindness he had met with among them, and for the courteous manner to himself personally, in which the opposition to him had been conducted. They would part, but part in friendship. They had withdrawn their political confidence from him, and he was now free from responsibility to them. There were, among the points of difference between him and their member elect, some not unimportant principles, but although he could not without some alarm observe a tendency which he considered evil, still, to all of them personally he wished the utmost prosperity and happiness they could desire. To his friends, then, of the North Riding, gratefully, and not without regret; to his opponents with-jut any feeling of unkindness, he would row say—Farewell!

During. his tenure of office Mr. Baldwin laboured with might and main in the direc-aon of law reform. If some of his meas-ires were less practicable in their working ;han might have been desired, there were )thers which must be regarded in the light of national blessings. He contributed very materially towards the establishing of our excellent municipal system, and while Attorney-General extended and codified that system into a complete and harmonious whole. He remodelled the Courts of law, and extended the scope of those of inferior jurisdiction. His successful efforts at University Reform have already been referred to. From the time of his defeat in North York down to the day of his death he never emerged from the seclusion of private life. He continued to reside at Spadina, spending his time chiefly in study, and preparing himself for the end which he knew was not far distant. His close application to his official labours had undermined his constitution, and for several years his system had shown unmistakable symptoms of decay. He lingered on for seven years longer, but declined perceptibly from year to year. He attended to no business, but continued to receive visits from his friends, and occasionally drove into town. In December, 1854, the dignity of Companion of the Bath was conferred upon him by Her Majesty—a very inadequate requital for all his valuable public services to his country and the Empire. In the autumn of 1858 it was evident that he was rapidly sinking. Early in December he had an attack of angina pectoris, and on the 9th of the month he breathed his last. His mortal remains were interred in the private family sepulchre called St. Martin’s Rood, at Spadina, where his wife and father and other members of his family had previously been laid to rest. The sepulchre remained undisturbed until the month of September, 1874, when—Spadina having meanwhile passed out of the possession of the Baldwin family—the remains were removed to St. James’s Cemetery, where they now repose.

Ever since his call to the Bar, Mr. Baldwin had been a prominent member of the Law Society. He had been elected to the dignity of a Bencher as early as 1830, and had been Treasurer of the Society since 1850. Two days after his death a meeting of the members of the Bar was held in the Convocation Room at Osgoode Hall, for the purpose of paying a tribute to his memory. Appropriate resolutions were passed, and the members agreed to attend the funeral in their professional robes, and to wear mourning for a period of one month. The funeral was one of the largest ever seen in this Province. Among those assembled were the Judges of the Superior Courts, a large array of members of the Bar, the Bishop of Toronto, and a numerous body of the Clergy, most of the members of the Government, many members of both branches of the Legislature, a large number of prominent non-professional residents of the city, and a considerable representation of the country districts. The burial service of the Church of England was read by the Rev. Mr. Grasett. During the afternoon business was suspended in most of the stores on the principal streets of the city, and, pursuant to a recommendation of the City Council, a similar mark of respect was paid to Mr. Baldwin’s memory in Hamilton. His death, indeed, was felt from one end of the Province to the other. Of all the long array of Canadian statesmen who have passed away, not one has been more widely regretted, and not one has left behind him a more spotless name.

Mr. Baldwin’s personal appearance was not remarkably striking, and was suggestive of the quiet, subdued,, prosperous, portly, and withal rather delicate professional man. He was above the medium height— about five feet ten inches—but did not look so tall, owing, more especially during his later years, to his stoutness of physique. He was broad in the shoulders, and stooped perceptibly. Even in youth his features were rather pale and stolid, and his eyes, which were gray, were wanting in sharpness and brilliance. His hair was dark brown, of fine texture, and, during the last few years of his life, inclined to iron gray. In manner he was reserved, and not given to unnecessary self-assertion. He had little imagination, and, as a public speaker, was not fluent or brilliant. He could, however, rise with an occasion, and was sometimes eloquent. At times, too, he was not wanting in a ready humour, which was all the more expressive coming from a quarter where such a quality was not looked for. Once, while in Opposition, in the course of a speech in the Assembly, he compared the Hon. Dominick Daly to the lily of the valley—“for,” said he, “the honourable gentleman toils not, neither does he spin,”—and quoted the rest of the passage. The quality of this jeu, d’esprit will be materially enhanced to those who remember the character and appearance of the gentleman referred to. Such attempts as these, however, were the exception, and by no means the rule, with Robert Baldwin, who was of too kindly and amiable a nature to take pleasure in saying severe things. There was little of that personal magnetism about him which attracts a numerous circle of warm friends, and by many he was—though unjustly—considered cold and repellent. The great secret of his success was his unbending honesty, and his adherence to the convictions which he arrived at by the exercise of a well-trained, though not extraordinarily powerful, intellect. One of his contemporaries has justly said of him that his whole career supplies a pregnant example of the homage which even bad men pay to virtue, and a brighter star could not be set up for the guidance of Canadian politicians. The truth is that Mr. Baldwin contended during his whole political life for the simplest rights of the people of Canada—rights of which, as British subjects, no man should ever have thought of depriving them. His keen sense of justice induced him to take the part he did; and in pursuing his course he was not actuated by any love of change for its own sake. No unprejudiced man can doubt that he was a sincere patriot, or that he was induced to enter public life chiefly by a desire to promote the general good. His frequent sacrifices of personal advantages when required by adherence to his principles arc sufficient proof of this; and he will long be remembered in Canada as possessing singular purity of motive, and freedom from the lower influences which operate upon politicians. Our country has perhaps produced greater men, but she has produced none better, and there is no name in our annals to which we can point with more unfeigned respect and admiration than his.

Mr. Baldwin left four children. Eva Maria, the eldest, died unmarried in Toronto in 1866. The other three still survive. William Willcocks Baldwin, called after his maternal grandfather, lived for some years at Larchmere, a fine property in the township of Whitchurch, in the county of York, originally settled by his maternal grandfather, Mr. William Willcocks. He now resides in Toronto, and is Distributor of Stamps to the Law Society at Osgoode Hall. Eliza, the third child, is the widow of the late Hon. John Ross, of Toronto, and now resides at Brighton, England. Robert, the youngest, named after his father, also resides in Toronto, and is Secretary of the Upper Canada Bible Society. William Augustus Baldwin, a younger brother of the deceased statesman, and the only surviving child of Dr. Baldwin, resides at Mashquoteh, an estate a short distance north of Toronto.

But little has been said as to the religious side of Mr. Baldwin’s life. It will readily be inferred, however, that a man with such tenderness of conscience, and with such a high sense of duty to his country and to his fellow-men, would not be unmindful of his responsibility to his Maker. Robert Baldwin was neither a bigot nor a fanatic, but he was in the best and truest sense of the word a Christian. He was strict in his observance of religious duties, and brought up his children to seek those things which make for righteousness rather than the things of this world. His piety was an ever-present influence in his life, and was practically manifested in his daily walk and conversation. As we contemplate the fifty-four years which made up the measure of his earthly span, we cannot fail to be impressed by its uniform consistency, its thorough conscientiousness, its devotion to high and noble objects. It is a grand thing to acquire a famous name, but it is a much grander thing to live a pure and noble life ; and in estimating the character of Robert Baldwin it should be remembered that he was not merely a statesman and a lawyer, but was, over and above all else, a man and a Christian.

The compilation of the foregoing sketch has been a grateful, but withal a somewhat laborious task. Mr. Baldwin was not in the habit of keeping a journal, and he.left behind him few manuscripts or papers bearing upon the most important epochs in his career. He was not a man who wore his heart upon his sleeve. He was of a singularly retiring, self-contained disposition, and was not accustomed to unbosom himself unreservedly, either to his most intimate friends, or even to the members of his own family. Finally, many of his contemporaries who knew him well, and who fought by his side in the struggle to which a great part of his life was devoted, have passed away. These are a few among the difficulties to be encountered by the .biographer of Robert Baldwin. In the foregoing pages, however, the principal events of his life have been outlined somewhat more in detail than has been done heretofore, and there has been an honest attempt to pourtray his character and idiosyncrasies with some approach to historic truthfulness.