WHEN Cartier returned to Canada, after his unfortunate experience in the ill-advised rebellion, the country was living its darkest days, and for several years it seemed as though the French Canadian race was doomed to political servitude. If a storm bursts on the ocean the billows keep up their motions a long time after its fury has abated. Likewise in the political order, when a country has been convulsed by a rebellion, the consequences of the outbreak are felt after its suppression. In Lower Canada it was not until 1846 that the province finally regained its equilibrium, after ministerial responsibility had duly been accepted by all concerned.

The first outcome of the political trouble of 1837 was the suspension by the British parliament of the constitution of 1791, under which Lower Canada had been ruled for forty-six years. It was replaced by the Special Council, a body composed of crown nominees entrusted with the pro tempore government of the country. In 1838, Lord Durham made an inquiry into the state of the province, and reported to the home government the causes, from his standpoint, of the past troubles, and proposed as a prevention of their recurrence the union of Lower with Upper Canada, so as to place in power an overwhelming English majority, which would annihilate French influence altogether, and bring about in time the complete anglification of the population. Mr. Poulett Thomson was sent out to Canada to carry out in part Lord Durham's suggestion, and set the new political machine in motion.

The new governor-general, a self-made man of very high attainments, had made his mark in the House of Commons, where he was looked upon as a most clever parliamentarian. His published correspondence bears evidence to the brilliancy of his mind, which was tinged by gleams of sceptical humour. He would have been well fitted for his high office, had he not allowed himself to be influenced on his arrival here against the population of Lower Canada, and it might be said, against Canadians in general, if we may judge from the off-hand manner in which he spoke privately of his ministers. The task of obtaining the Special Council's approval of the union scheme was an easy one. It was voted almost unanimously, although the French population of Lower Canada registered their protest against it. How could they assume another attitude? Their death-warrant was asked for in Lord Durham's report, wherein he pointed out that it was in the interest of the British Empire that they should be merged into the Anglo-Saxon race. Lord Durham had exposed the faults of the constitution of 1791, which had fostered the grievances long complained of, and which were the cause of the recent outbreak. Was it reasonable that the faults of that instrument should be visited upon them?

After his success with the Special Council, Thomson directed his efforts towards Upper Canada, where the population was not averse to the union. At its session of 1839, the Upper Canada legislative assembly accepted the proposal on the following terms:

1. That the seat of government of the united provinces should be in Upper Canada.

2. That the members returned to the assembly from each province should be, from Lower Canada fifty, from Upper Canada sixty-two, with a faculty of increase with increase of population.

3. That after a time, not later than 1845, the elective franchise in counties should be restricted to those holding their lands in free and common socage.

4. That the English language alone should be spoken and used in the legislature and in courts of justice, and in all other public proceedings.

These resolutions, had they been put in force, would have stripped the French Canadians of all political power, disfranchised them, and finally made them strangers not only in parliament but also in their courts of justice. The corporation of Toronto was in perfect harmony with the House, for it had sent an address to Thomson embodying sentiments very hostile to Lower Canada. Thomson lectured the Upper Canadians mildly, and made them understand that their demands could not be entertained. He disliked, it is true, the eastern province, where, according to his notion, "the climate, the soil, and the population are below par," but he felt that such an act of proscription as was asked for would be worthy only of an eastern despot, although the ultimatum of the Upper Canadians seemed in harmony with Lord Durham's recommendations. His plan was, therefore, to place the union scheme on a more acceptable basis, and to substitute as a motive power self-interest for national prejudice. This was not brought about without a prodigious deal of management, in which, as he said, "My House of Commons tactics stood me in good stead." He drew the legislative council's and assembly's attention to the straits in which the province was then placed for want of money. The fact of the matter is that it was on the verge of bankruptcy. With an annual revenue of not more than £78,000, the charge for interest on its debt was £65,000, and the permanent expenses of government £55,000, leaving an annual deficiency of £42,000. On the other hand Lower Canada had no debt, but had a surplus of £300,000. Thomson's appeal succeeded, and the legislature, foregoing its first conditions, accepted rescue from bankruptcy by the compelled help of Lower Canada. Lord Metcalfe was justified when he said a few years later: "The union was effected without the consent of Lower Canada, and with the hesitating but purchased assent of Upper Canada." The writer does not recall the above facts to indulge in retrospective recrimination, but to depict the situation in which Cartier stood in his early days, and also to indicate how greatly public opinion has been elevated since 1840; then the proscription of a whole race was asked for, and now Canadians from all parts do not look upon the presence of a French Canadian at the head of the state as an abnormal fact.

The machinery of union was put in motion by Thomson (now Lord Sydenham). With the utmost boldness he threw himself into the electoral battle in Lower Canada, using all the government influence against French candidates, and finally won the day. His majority in the new House was enormous, and from his own point of view he could well boast of having the French Canadians at his feet. There seemed but little hope for the latter to get even a small share in the government of the country. Through their representative men, the clergy and the best citizens of Quebec and Montreal, they had protested against the union without avail. What was next to be done? A certain number of them, giving up all hopes of getting justice, proposed to continue the battle of former days, and to become irreconcilable opponents of British rule; the larger number were disposed to wait and take advantage of circumstances. It occurred to them that the English majority would not long remain compact under the pressure of divergent interests, and that an alliance might be formed with one faction or the other. Such was the view that La Fontaine and Cartier took of the situation. Cartier was not to sulk under his tent and remain in constant opposition. But his buoyant courage led him to expect a day of reckoning for his enemies. His foresight did not fail him on this occasion, and he hoped to turn the compulsory marriage into un mariage de raison.

Although the Union Act conceded responsible government to Canada, it was not the governor's intention to allow his ministers full scope in the matter of ruling the country. The elections had returned to parliament a body of men bound to execute the absolute will of the governor. This would not meet the views of Robert Baldwin, who seeing that the governor was determined to give his cabinet the appearance of power but to keep the reality in his hands, resigned his portfolio to form an alliance with Mr. La Fontaine, the head of the French Canadian party. It is through the exertions and courage of these two men, great and noble characters, that Canada finally secured ministerial responsibility. After Lord Sydenham's death, Sir Charles Bagot called the Liberal leaders to his council, giving them full power to put the Union Act into operation according to its spirit and to English precedents. Unfortunately, Bagot's term of office was cut short by his demise, and Sir Charles Metcalfe, who had played the part of a pro-consul in India, and who thought that colonials were not mentally equipped for self-government, attempted to rule according to his own ideas, which were those of Sydenham. This brought on a crisis, resulting in the resignation of La Fontaine and Baldwin, who were superseded by the Draper ministry, composed of English Canadians, with the exception of D. B. Viger. The latter was an old-time Liberal, one of Papineau's lieutenants during the late trouble, and his acceptance of office was a surprise to his countrymen, and considered almost as a betrayal of the national cause* He sought re-election in St. Hyacinthe, where he met a determined opposition. Cartier took the field against him, a circumstance to be noted, for it was then (1844) that he made the first political speech of which we have a record. The future minister took occasion to condemn his past career, and to criticize the methods used to bring about a desirable end. He laid the blame on the older men, whom he thought responsible for the outbreak of 1837, and was very outspoken in his denunciation of Viger. "The responsibility of the unfortunate events of 1837," said he, "rests on the leaders of the public opinion of that time. Mr. Viger was one of them. He should have used the influence which he then wielded to give better advice to his countrymen. He and his friends, as politicians, should have had more foresight and more wisdom. Now Mr. Viger is striving to divide Lower Canadians by giving a helping hand to the schemes of Sir Charles Metcalfe; but Lower Canada will let them know in a few days by an almost unanimous voice, that it remains attached to ministerial responsibility, on which depends, in the present and in the future, the salvation of Lower Canada." Viger was defeated, chiefly through Cartier's vigorous effort in favour of constitutional government, and the victory was but the forerunner of the triumph of Baldwin and La Fontaine, who were returned to power in 1846. With them finally triumphed responsible government in its entirety.

As far as Cartier is concerned, this election is interesting because it gave him an opportunity to express his opinion on the troubles which had supplied him with experience dearly bought— a narrow escape from the gallows, proscription, and exile with its accompanying hardships. The past methods of dealing with political grievances then appeared to the sobered enthusiast as dangerous. In after life he never forgave Papineau for taking advantage of his want of experience to enroll him under the flag of rebellion, and has seldom a kind word to say for the famous tribune. Although Car-tier, in the speech just quoted, was very severe on his past conduct, he cuts the figure of a half-repentant rebel, when, in addressing his former companions in arms, he extols their bravery: "Electors of St. Denis, you showed your pluck and daring bravery, when, on November 22nd, 1837, with a few muskets, hay-forks, and sticks as weapons, you conquered Gore's troops. I was with you, and I have not been found, I think, wanting in courage. To-day I call upon you to give a greater and more sensible proof of patriotic intelligence; I entreat you to fight with your votes—a more formidable weapon—those men bent upon keeping up the oppression of the past by robbing the country of the advantages of responsible government. Yes, voters of this noble parish, do your duty, set a salutary example, and all Lower Canada will be proud of you." As he appeared in this, his first important political campaign, outspoken, fearless of the political consequences of his speech, so we shall find him throughout his career. His great success in life was in part due to his sincerity and uprightness, which stamped him as one to be trusted under all circumstances. In his declining years, he prided himself upon never having broken his promise; his word in all things was a word of honour. When the Queen conferred a baronetcy upon him he chose as his motto Franc et sans dol (Honest and without deceit). This motto seems a natural outgrowth of his qualities, the true expression of his life, characterized as it was by his loyalty to Canada and devotion to his friends.