| THE portrait at the 
		head of these pages tallies well with our mental conception of Papineau. 
		What energy in the lines of the expressive face! What manly beauty in 
		the contour of the head! And do not the eyes seem to bid defiance to all 
		comers? Everything in his attitude reveals the obstinate fighter he 
		showed himself to be throughout the whole of his long career. To the psychologist, 
		Papineau's character presents but little complexity; his mental attitude 
		inclined to a singleness of purpose which well suited the unity of his 
		life, devoted, as it was, wholly to one great cause, towards which the 
		efforts of his intellectual faculties unceasingly tended. A man such as Papineau 
		is not to be judged merely by the events with which he was connected, 
		notwithstanding that they may have very greatly influenced his career. 
		His ideas were the outcome of certain antecedents and early associations 
		and influences. The son of an important political personage who had seen 
		the early days of English rule, he of necessity inherited his father's 
		hardened feelings and prejudices resulting from the arbitrary spirit 
		which characterized the new regime in its early days. No man was more 
		conversant with its gloomy annals than Papineau. His antipathy for the 
		authors of the real or fancied wrongs of his country was augmented by 
		the reversion of the accumulated antipathy cherished by his father and 
		his close friends. His childhood was spent in an atmosphere impregnated 
		with the most violent passions, and thus it was that he became such a 
		lover of strife. His life-long struggle with the government was anything 
		but calculated to subdue his leaning towards harsh criticism; and when 
		brighter days dawned for the country, the sunlight did not fall 
		soothingly for him as it did for LaFontaine and his friends. Were we not 
		aware that his course of action on his return to Canada was inspired by 
		motives deserving of respect, though manifestly erroneous, we should 
		feel constrained to say that the habit of opposition had so warped his 
		mind that nothing could remove the bias. His career is divisible 
		into two parts very differently filled, and the errors of the one should 
		not be allowed to efface the merits of the other. What a man was the 
		Papineau of 1822! He embodied in himself and voiced, at that moment, all 
		the aspirations and demands of the Canadian people, at a time when their 
		national existence was in imminent peril. It was in truth the voice of 
		his country that burst forth in his fierce denunciations of con-186 
		spiracies hatched against the liberties of his people. From 1820 to 
		1837, he stood forth the grandest figure in our history. His was a life 
		of glory during that period, a glory purchased by endless sacrifices, —a 
		life immolated to a great cause which he upheld unflinchingly with small 
		hope of final victory. His public career 
		should have closed with the catastrophe of 1837. What a pity that he did 
		not grasp the position of the province and his own, in 1845! It was a 
		great mistake on his part not to have given himself up to a fife of 
		study and reflection, and a greater still to have encouraged division in 
		the ranks of the little Canadian army. He has been held responsible for 
		the establishment of the Radical party and of Le club d&mocratique; but 
		we nowhere find evidence of his connection with the latter organization, 
		though many of his ideas are included in the celebrated programme of the 
		club, drafted, if we are not mistaken, by one Blan-chet (surnamed Le 
		citoyen Blanchet), and some other advanced spirits of the period. But 
		was the connection between Papineau and the Democratic Club such as 
		would justify the statement that he was its founder? Let us bear in mind 
		that anti-religious ideas were for a time the fashion, especially among 
		the educated class, prior to 1837 and under the union. Disciples of 
		Voltaire, encyclopaedists, deists like Papineau, and partisans of free 
		morals, were to be found here and there. It is well to point out 
		that his opposition to LaFontaine was but an incident in his struggle 
		with the English government, which he carried on over the heads of his 
		adversaries in Canada. His laudations of democracy, his sarcasms and his 
		assaults on aristocracy, as found in the ninety-two resolutions, show 
		the drift of his mind in 1834. His stay in Paris, where he consorted 
		with La-mennais, Beranger, and Louis Blanc, left its imprint on his mind 
		and thrust him. into the very focus of radicalism, which was 
		concentrated to a white flame by the revolution of 1848. His fixed idea 
		on return to Canada was this: "We must get rid of aristocracy in every 
		shape and form, for it keeps us under a shameful vassalage." This was 
		his view of the colonial condition and status. His antipathy makes him 
		see the dark side of everything. "But let us be patient," he writes to 
		Aubin, the editor of Le Canadien, in 1848, "emancipation [for which he 
		constantly prayed] will come, and meantime we shall be rendering good 
		service by making our people revert to the policy followed from 1791 to 
		1835. We must love democracy now, during our period of servitude, so as 
		to put it in practice after our emancipation." Was Papineau merely an 
		irrepressible agitator, a democrat dreaming of nothing but the triumph 
		of his own ideas, and without any plan or system denoting grasp of mind? 
		Of course circumstances often determine the scope of man's conceptions, 
		and it is evident that Papineau, acting on the limited field of 
		provincial politics, had no opportunity to evolve schemes such as 
		Richelieu conceived. Still there was nothing of the particularist in the 
		plan he conceived, prior to 1837, of forming alliances with our 
		neighbours of the east and of the west. He maintained a lengthy 
		correspondence with William Lyon Mackenzie of Toronto and with certain 
		Liberals in the maritime provinces, with the manifest intention of 
		uniting with them with a view to bringing about a combined effort 
		against England. He was at one time confident of the success of his 
		scheme. In the broad outlines of his plan, which never went beyond the 
		incipient stage, one can perceive the leading idea: a confederation of 
		colonies independent of England, the reverse of that which was 
		subsequently carried out. Pushing even beyond the frontiers his efforts 
		to secure allies, he managed to find ardent helpers in the United 
		States. These were the American sympathizers who came to the assistance 
		of Mackenzie in 1837, and of Robert Nelson in the days of the second 
		uprising in 1838. The influence of the 
		authorities successfully checked Papineau's manoeuvres. But the results 
		would appear to show that this early blending of the Liberals of Lower 
		Canada with those of the western province, initiated by Papineau, was 
		the first step towards the subsequent momentous alliance between Baldwin 
		and LaFontaine. After having said 
		farewell to politics in 1854, Papineau retired to his manor house of La 
		Rivi&re de la Petite Nation, and there remained until death closed his 
		career in 1871. Here it is that, during the period of his life 
		subsequent to his return to Canada, we find his character most 
		attractive. In the midst of his books, in communion with his favourite 
		authors, he shows himself with the captivating countenance which was 
		natural to him, but which the struggles incident to his active political 
		life in the earlier years of his home-coming, had many a time shrouded 
		in gloom. In friendly intercourse, he was, in his day, one of the most 
		amiable of men. An accomplished man of the world, he exhibited in social 
		life all the grace and ease of manner of a grand seigneur. His 
		condescension towards his inferiors, his respectful affability and 
		courtesy in conversing with women, and his many other social qualities 
		made him a most fascinating companion. He cultivated successfully that 
		exquisite grace of perfect courtesy, so rare in our day, and which can 
		hardly be expected to flourish at its best in our democratic atmosphere. 
		He was like a survival of a former age. From his father, who had 
		associated with the Canadians of the old regime, and was reared amidst 
		the traditions of Versailles, he had imbibed the grace of manner and 
		refinement which lent such a charm to social intercourse in the days of 
		old. All Papineau's letters, except, of course those treating on 
		politics, breathe this fragrance of good society and are, moreover, 
		imbued with a cor-190 dial spirit of warm friendship. Our readers will 
		not be sorry to behold side by side with the tribune armed for the fray, 
		a Papineau clad in the peaceful garb of home-life in the midst of his 
		family and friends, revelling in the thousand details of domestic and 
		social intercourse. On returning from a trip to Quebec where he had been 
		the guest of Christie—a former adversary, who had since become his 
		friend— he wrote as follows from Montebello, on July 13th, 1856: "My Dear Christie:—Ever 
		since our return from Quebec we have talked of nothing but the many 
		friendly attentions paid to us, all the festal gatherings held expressly 
		for us, and the many other demonstrations of kindness showered upon us, 
		at your hospitable home, in the first place, and, as a consequence of 
		your kindly initiative, at the hands also of many other obliging and 
		courteous friends. For my wife, my children and myself, those delightful 
		holidays will ever be remembered, as days of perfect happiness, which we 
		shall recall in our gayest hours in order to enhance their brightness, 
		and in times of depression and sorrow in order to sustain our drooping 
		spirits. . . . Our young girls had their first taste of the delights of 
		your charming social life and enjoyed to the full those many enchanting 
		gatherings, which Quebec has the wonderful knack of organizing at a few 
		hours' notice. In Montreal the mixture of various races has introduced a 
		little too much etiquette and restraint. Social gatherings are rarer and 
		more formal, and consequently less enjoyable and pleasant. I ought to 
		have told you all this as soon as we got home, but the fact is my 
		absence had retarded much of the work on my improvements which had been 
		begun, and for the last few days, I have spent a great part of my time 
		with the workmen, and devoted the remainder to the company of our 
		fellow-travellers, whom I cannot sufficiently thank for having 
		accompanied us home. If, on our return, we had found ourselves alone in 
		our rustic solitude, the transition would have been too sudden; but with 
		Miss Doucet to chat with anent the days of our youth, and Miss Trudeau 
		to speak of her early days and those of her charming friends of her own 
		age, time glides pleasantly along. Kindly say to Monsieur and Madame 
		Trudeau that I thank them every hour of the day for entrusting to me 
		such gentle and charming companions for my daughters as well as for 
		their old parents. There is not very much variety in our store of 
		amusements, but the young ladies are good enough to say that they are 
		happy with us. Nevertheless, they will be still better pleased when you 
		yourself and Madame Christie come to us; for the joy of having you with 
		us will brighten our lives and make us more pleasant companions than 
		when we miss you and are longing for your presence amongst us. Ezilda is 
		never tired telling of the wonderful party Madame Christie improvised at 
		such short notice, for so large a gathering. She quite admits that she 
		met more than her match; 'but,' she said, when offering this as a model 
		to me, 'I shall improve now, for I have made a beginning.' "It would be useless to 
		attempt to parcel out compliments and praise when we owe them to so 
		large a circle of friends. Nevertheless, I feel that for a good part of 
		the most friendly disposition manifested by them all, we are indebted to 
		the fervour of our old mutual friendship, which induced you to speak of 
		us in terms of praise far beyond our deserts. I beg to offer my 
		heartfelt thanks to each and all, but more especially to those who 
		organized our delightful trip to the Saguenay; to M. Buteau, who took so 
		much trouble in the matter, and to all the ladies and gentlemen who took 
		part in it with us. Three young ladies absolutely perfect and 
		accomplished in all respects, and three men well above the average of 
		our sex, then two little girls and myself made up a party of nine, 
		always a lucky number and which proved to be so at least during our 
		three days' trip. Shall that happy trip ever be repeated? Who knows? 
		Should it not be so in very truth and reality, it will at least be many 
		a time renewed in the vivid pictures of living memory. To behold the 
		grandest scenery in the world, in the best possible company, is 
		something to be long remembered; something never to be forgotten." We have just seen 
		Papineau enjoying peace and happiness in the bosom of friendship—the joy 
		of living; but such is not the normal condition of human life, which is 
		only too often clouded by sorrow and misfortune. The early death of his 
		grandson plunged him into deepest grief, and in a letter to Christie, 
		dated March 15th, 1855, he opened in the following terms the floodgates 
		of his heartfelt sorrow: "When your letter 
		reached me, I was in deep affliction, owing to the death of my dear and 
		only grandson, a splendid child of about eleven months, carried off by 
		his first sickness. Knowing the extreme sensibility of my son and 
		daughter-in-law, and their delicate health, which nothing but the 
		greatest and unceasing care and medical skill had hitherto preserved, I 
		have so wept and been so torn by anxiety and trouble on this account, 
		and from our great loss, that the burden has overtaxed my strength. 
		Amedde [his son, the recently deceased Seigneur of Montebello] had 
		written saying that he himself would come and bring the remains of the 
		dear child with him. I attempted through the medium of a friend, to 
		divert him from undertaking a task which would be dangerous for him, and 
		suggested to a good friend and relative to come in his place. But the 
		dear mother fancied that it would be an act of culpable indifference to 
		entrust the sacred and precious remains to any other hands but those of 
		the father himself. My dear son discharged his sad task with real 
		courage, and together we laid the relics of the sweet little angel in 
		the family chapel, 194 erected in a grove a couple of acres distant from 
		the house. On the death of my Gustave, whom I caused to be buried in the 
		parish church, my son Amedde was the first to suggest the building of 
		this family chapel, a matter which I myself had under consideration, 
		though I had not mentioned it, with a view to depositing therein the 
		remains of my father and Gustave, to be followed some day by my own, 
		should I be spared to finish it. And now it was in order to receive the 
		mortal remains of Amed^e's own child that the first grave was to be 
		opened therein! Such is life with its disappointments and its forecasts. 
		One must, nevertheless, do his duty while he is able to stand, and then 
		lie down without regret." This, it must be said, 
		is an admirably written and most touching letter. The group formed by 
		the old man depositing the remains of the little grandson in the grave 
		opened for himself, stands out before us in bold relief, and it is 
		impossible to behold it unmoved. We share the anguish of this venerable 
		parent struggling in the grasp of a two-fold sorrow; grief for the loss 
		of the child and for the affliction which has befallen his son. It would be an 
		injustice to his memory to conclude from Papineau's attitude as depicted 
		in accordance with the facts herein stated, that he was a man imbued 
		with race prejudice. His hostility had never been directed against the 
		English people, but solely against the ministers who refused to grant us 
		in their full integrity the rights as British subjects which we were 
		entitled to claim. It would be impossible to point out in any of his 
		speeches a single aggressive expression applied to the English people. 
		The natural drift of his mind was rather towards a cosmopolitanism in 
		conformity with the aspirations of the democracy. In that respect he was 
		in advance of many of his contemporaries whose national and religious 
		prejudices too often, even in our own day, remind one of the unlightened 
		and backward races of former ages. On one occasion when Colonel Gugy, a 
		Swiss by origin, and a tool of the English party, declared in the House 
		at Quebec, that he preferred to see in office a ministry composed of 
		citizens born in the country, Papineau answered him thus: "For my part, 
		what I desire is a government consisting of friends of the law of 
		liberty and of justice, men who will protect all citizens without 
		distinction, and give to each and all the same privileges. I hold such 
		men as these in high esteem, whatsoever their origin may be; but I 
		detest those haughty descendants of conquerors who come to our country 
		to deny us our political rights. . . . You say to us: 'Let us be 
		brothers I' I answer, yes, let us be brothers; but you want to grasp 
		everything—power, place and money I This is the injustice we cannot 
		endure." Note further that, on 
		several occasions, Papineau was supported in the House by a majority of 
		the English speaking members, and that he numbered amongst his followers 
		such important men as Neil-son, Leslie, Chapman and Andrew Stuart But we 
		shall be asked: What say you of his angry outbursts of 1837? Our answer 
		is that they in no way contradict our assertion. All that occurred at 
		that period was an outbreak provoked by the resolutions of Lord John 
		Russell depriving us of the control of the finances, which was 
		equivalent to a suspension of the constitution of the country, an act of 
		high treason against the nation. Is it surprising to find that excess in 
		the exercise of arbitrary power on the one hand, should cause an 
		out-pouring of extravagant language from indignant hearts on the other? 
		So great was this provocation on the part of Lord John Russell, that 
		Roebuck declared that "in order to make the province accept the 
		resolutions, it would be well to send out at the same time a few 
		regiments of soldiers." Papineau, like many of 
		his contemporaries, wrote much and at great length. His letters, written 
		in a large and most legible hand, generally covered from four to eight 
		pages. His style is not always very clear, and his phrases, like the 
		periods of his speeches, are often laboured. Correspondence took up a 
		great part of his leisure time at La Petite Nation, where boundless 
		hospitality ever awaited his friends. One felt at home at once under the 
		roof of the charming Manor House of Montebello, with its vast 
		apartments, affording through noble bay-windows, widely extended views 
		of the beautiful waters of the Ottawa. There was nothing surely here to 
		suggest the ruder elements of democracy! Papineau was evidently a Pierre 
		Leroux in theory only, his tastes and manners were rather those of an 
		aristocrat. His splendid 
		constitution and robust health enabled him to live an active life up to 
		1870, when he seemed to collapse all of a sudden beneath the weight of 
		his years, while still retaining the full strength of his intellect, and 
		died on September 23rd, when just about to enter on his eighty-fifth 
		year. His fellow-countrymen, nearly all of them men of faith and deeply 
		imbued with the principles and practices of religion, regretted to 
		notice the absence from his bedside, at the supreme moment, of the 
		minister of divine mercy. But in these delicate and sacred matters of 
		conscience man is accountable only to his God, whose supreme judgment 
		may greatly differ from ours. Papineau was, it is true, a philosophe, a 
		spiritualist, and a deist, but while opposed to the intervention of the 
		priest in politics, he was never an anti-clerical. On several occasions, 
		in fact throughout his career, he was to be found claiming religious 
		liberty for the church in Canada with the same zeal and ardour with 
		which he fought for political freedom for all. When, in 1837, the 
		ecclesiastical authorities rightly deemed it necessary to warn the 
		Canadian people against Papineau's revolutionary course, he Conceived a 
		bitterness towards the clergy which the lapse of time only served to 
		exasperate. He was rarely seen to 
		leave Montebello after his retirement from public life. On one occasion, 
		however, as we have already stated, he consented to gratify the wishes 
		of his admirers in Montreal, who desired to meet him. He attended for 
		that purpose a meeting of the Institut Canadien, and delivered an 
		address. He showed himself throughout this lecture an impenitent 
		radical, with all the ideas of his long life crystallized in his 
		intellect. And this consistency and unity of his career was the result 
		of so many sacrifices on his part that some allowance must surely be 
		made for it Had Papineau fallen into line under the new order of things, 
		why might he not also have aspired to high position in the land? But to 
		return to the lecture—after a rapid glance at the history of Canada from 
		the Treaty of Paris (1763), he depicted in broad outline the phases of 
		our colonial system up to 1867—"Confederation, the most culpable of all, 
		now for three months in operation." In this lecture his old antipathies 
		reappear in full vigour, in spite of his advanced age, which usually 
		softens them. His arch enemy, the English aristocracy, could hardly 
		escape without a blow, and in truth he hits it unmercifully. Nor does he 
		spare the authors of confederation, "those ill-famed, self-interested 
		men." His wrath had not aged. But let us not scrutinize this indictment; 
		it was not the death song of the gentle swan, but the last defiance of 
		the Indian warrior, shouted out with his death rattle. Let us cull from 
		this lecture, ere we close, but this pathetic profession of love for his 
		country: "You will believe me, I trust, when I say to you, I love my 
		country. 1 have loved her wisely, I have loved her madly! . . . . 
		Opinions outside may differ. But looking into my heart and my mind in 
		all sincerity, I feel I can say that I have loved her as she should be 
		loved. The sentiment of love of my country I imbibed from the breasts of 
		my nurse—my saintly mother. The brief expression in which it is best 
		enunciated: 'My country first!' I learned to lisp at my father's knee." With these burning 
		words of love for his country, words which atone for many an excess of 
		language, we deem it well to close these pages devoted to the memory of 
		one who gave the best part of his life to defending his people against 
		the assaults of their enemies, and raised the French Canadian race in 
		its own estimation, in the face of the powerful men who sought to 
		humiliate and annihilate it. Obstacles of many kinds prevented his work 
		from reaching the perfection he had pictured to himself, but it is 
		manifest to all that the struggles during which his high-spirited 
		eloquence was heard above the fray for a quarter of a century, scattered 
		broadcast those life-giving principles which have borne fruit and flower 
		in our free political institutions. On this ground, as well as for his 
		great fame as an orator, of which we are all justly proud, he is 
		entitled to the homage of posterity, in common with all who unselfishly 
		devote their lives to the triumph of a great cause. |