CHAPTER XX._"The story of my life"

1837.

The Coming Crisis.--Rebellion of 1837.

As Dr. Ryerson had anticipated, the combined effects of the publication

of his "impressions," in 1833; his letters exposing the designs of

Messrs. Hume, Roebuck, and Mackenzie in 1837; the secession of a section

of the Methodist Church, and the disputes consequent thereon

(culminating in the Waterloo and Belleville Chapel suits)--in which he

took a leading part--provoked the parties concerned to active hostility

against him. He had, however, many warm friends, especially among his

ministerial brethren. One of these was Rev. John Black, in the Bay of

Quinte District,--a quaint, but true and warm-hearted man. In inviting

him to take part in the Quarterly Meeting services, at Napanee, Mr.

Black indulges in a little playful satire, as follows:--

It appears that there are some amongst us here whom we dare not

number amongst your friends, and who prophesied that you would

never return from England--that you dare not, etc. Now we wish to

afford them living proof of their vanity in prophesying, by your

presence amongst them. Besides, on the other hand, the good-hearted

brethren amongst us greatly rejoiced on hearing of your successful

mission to England, and they wish to see and hear you once more.

Somewhat in Rev. John Black's spirit of kindly raillery, Rev. John C.

Davidson, of Hallowell, in inviting Dr. Ryerson to take part in a

Camp-meeting (and after mentioning several inducements), said:--

I would mention another inducement for you to come, viz.: the

multiplicity of warm friends and virulent enemies you have on this

circuit. Your presence and preaching will afford pleasure and

profit to your friends, and will very much tend, in my opinion, to

disarm the groundless prejudice entertained by many others against

you.

In a more serious letter to Dr. Ryerson, dated Cobourg, 16th November,

1837, Rev. Anson Green gives expression to a general feeling of

uneasiness and distrust which prevailed everywhere in the country at

that time:--

I pity you most sincerely. You have a storm about your ears that

you must bear, if you do not bow before it. In these perilous times

a man scarcely knows what to advise. I fear that destruction

awaits us on either hand. With the Radicals we are Tories; and with

the Tories we are Rebels. It is said by the Rebels here that they

have money enough, and men enough, and guns enough, and that the

plans are so laid that there can be no mistake. The Government

appears to be in possession of these facts. Thus far the

proceedings of the Rebels do not show much wisdom, or skill, in

laying plans, or in executing them. I am mistaken if they stop

short of a civil war.

I very much regret that you should be under the necessity of coming

in contact with Governor Head in any one thing. I could not be a

rebel; my conscience and religion forbid it; and, on the other

hand, I could not fight for the Rectories and Church domination. I

think them both to be great evils, and I have resolved to choose

neither. I believe that in Haldimand and Cramahe townships there

are twenty rebels to one sincere loyalist. Brother Wilson, (son of

old Father Wilson), says that his life has been threatened for

circulating the petition which you sent down, and others are in a

similar condition. What will be the effect of all this I cannot

say, but I have thought from the beginning that either the

Rectories must be abolished, and a suitable disposition made of the

Reserves, or a change of Government will ensue. And if the Church

party have it all in their own hands to make peace, by allowing

other Churches to enjoy equal privileges with themselves, and do

not do so, they must bear the responsibility of all the bloodshed

and carnage that may ensue. I fear that they are so perfectly

infatuated that they will suffer utter destruction, and choose it

rather than equal and impartial justice.

On the 5th December, 1837, Dr. Ryerson reached Cobourg on his way to

Toronto. When he arrived there, Elders Case and Green, and other

friends, thought that as his life had been threatened it would be unsafe

for him to proceed to Toronto.[54] He, therefore, waited there for

further news, and, in the meantime, wrote to a friend in Kingston, on

the 6th, as follows:--

You will recollect my mentioning that I pressed upon Sir Francis the

propriety and importance of making some prudent provision for the

defence of the city, in case any party should be urged on in the madness

of rebellion so far as to attack it. He is much blamed here on account

of his overweening confidence, and foolish and culpable negligence in

this respect. There was great excitement in this town and neighbourhood

last night. To-day all is anxiety and hurry. The militia is called out

to put down the rebellion of the very man whose seditious paper many of

them have supported, and whom they have countenanced.

The precepts of the Bible and the example of the early Christians, leave

me no occasion for second thoughts as to my duty, namely, to pray for

and support the "powers that be," whether I admire them or not, and to

implore the defeat of "fiery conspiracy and rebellion." And I doubt not

that the sequel will in this, as in other cases, show that the path of

duty is that of wisdom, if not of safety. I am aware that my head would

be regarded as something of a prize by the rebels; but I feel not in the

least degree agitated. I trust implicitly in that God whom I have

endeavoured--though imperfectly and unfaithfully--to serve; being

assured nothing will harm us, but that all things, whether life or

death, will work together for our good if we be followers of that which

is good. Let us trust in the Lord, and do good, and He will never leave

nor forsake us!

About 700 armed men have left this district to-day for Toronto, in order

to put down the rebels. There is an unanimity and determination among

the people to quash rebellion and support the law that I hardly

expected. The country is safe, but it is a "gone day with the rebel

party."

In a graphic letter to Dr. Ryerson, written on the 5th December, by his

brother William, at Toronto, the scenes at the _emeute_ in that city are

thus described:--

Last night, about 12 or 1 o'clock, the bells rang with great

violence; we all thought it was an alarm of fire, but being unable

to see any light, we thought it was a false alarm, and we remained

quiet until this morning, when, on visiting the market-place, I

found a large number of persons serving out arms to others as fast

as they possibly could. Among many others we saw the

Lieutenant-Governor, in his every-day suit, with one

double-barrelled gun in his hand, another leaning against his

breast, and a brace of pistols in his leather belt. Also, Chief

Justice Robinson, Judges Macaulay, Jones, and McLean, the

Attorney-General, and Solicitor-General, with their muskets,

cartridge boxes and bayonets, all standing in the ranks as private

soldiers, under the command of Colonel Fitzgibbon. I assure you it

is impossible for me to describe my feelings. I enquired of Judge

McLean, who informed me that an express had arrived at the

Government House late last night, giving intelligence that the

Radicals had assembled in great force at Montgomery's, on Yonge

Street, and were in full march for the city; that the Governor had

sent out two persons, Mr. A. McDonell and Ald. J. Powell, to obtain

information (both of whom had been made prisoners, but escaped).

Dr. Horne's house is now in flames. I feel very calm and composed

in my own mind. Brother John thinks it will not be wise for you to

come through all the way from Kingston. You would not be safe in

visiting this wretched part of the country at the present. You know

the feelings that are entertained against you. Your life would

doubtless be industriously sought. My dear brother, farewell. May

God mercifully bless and keep you from all the difficulties and

dangers we are in!

Rev. William Ryerson further writes, on the 8th December:

About 10 o'clock to-day about 2,000 men, headed by the

Lieut.-Governor, with Judge Jones, the Attorney-General and Capt.

Halkett, as his aides-de-camp, and commanded by Cols. Fitzgibbon

and Allan N. Macnab, Speaker of the House, left the city to attack

the rebels at Montgomery's. After a little skirmishing in which we

had three men wounded but none killed, the main body commenced a

very spirited attack on their headquarters at Montgomery's large

house. After a few shots from two six-pounders, and a few volleys

of musketry, the most of the party fled and made their escape. The

rest of them were taken prisoners. There were also three or four

killed and several wounded. After which His Excellency ordered the

buildings to be burnt to the ground, and the whole force returned

to the city. All the leaders succeeded in making their escape. A

royal proclamation has just been issued offering £1,000 for the

apprehension of Mackenzie, and £500 for that of Samuel Lount, David

Gibson, Silas Fletcher, and Jesse Lloyd; so that now, through the

mercy of God, we have peace, and feel safe again, for which we

desire to feel sincerely thankful.

Dr. Ryerson, having reached Toronto safely, and knowing how anxious his

parents would be to know something definite as to the state of affairs,

wrote a letter to his Father on the 18th December, as follows:--

I have been trying to get time to make you and Mother a visit of at

least one night; but I find it quite out of my power to secure the

enjoyment of so precious a privilege.

It is remarkable that every man, with very few exceptions, who has left

our Church and joined in the unprincipled crusade which has been made

against us, has either been an active promoter of this plot, or so far

connected with it as to be ruined in his character and prospects by the

timely discovery and defeat of it! I have been deeply affected at

hearing of some unhappy examples, among old acquaintances, of this

description. I feel thankful that I have been enabled to do my duty from

the beginning in this matter. Four years ago, I perceived and began to

warn the public of the revolutionary tendency and spirit of Mackenzie's

proceedings. Perhaps you may recollect that in a long article in the

_Guardian_, four years ago this winter, headed "Revolutionary Symptoms,"

I pointed out, to the great displeasure of even some of my friends, what

has come to pass.

It is also a matter of thankfulness that every one of our family and

marriage connections, near and remote, is on the side of law, reason,

and religion in this affair. Such indications of the Divine goodness are

a fresh encouragement to me to renew my covenant engagement with my

gracious Redeemer, to serve Him and His cause with greater zeal and

faithfulness.

I hope, my dear Father, you are employing your last days in preparing

for your approaching change, and for standing before the bar of God. My

poor prayers are daily offered up in your behalf. Much travelling and

other engagements have hitherto prevented me from writing to you as I

would; but, hereafter, the first Monday in each month shall be

considered as belonging to my dear aged Parents, in praying for or

writing to them. My dutiful respects and love to my dear Mother. I would

esteem it a great favour and privilege to receive a few lines from you

or her.

FOOTNOTES:

[54] Dr. Ryerson in his "Epochs of Canadian Methodism," page 314,

says:--It had been agreed by W. L. Mackenzie and his fellow rebels, in

1837, to hang Egerton Ryerson on the first tree they met with, could

they apprehend him.

CHAPTER XXI.

1837-1838.

Sir F. B. Head and the Upper Canada Academy.

Lord Glenelg, as agreed, when Dr. Ryerson was in England, (page 165,)

directed Lieutenant-Governor Sir F. B. Head to bring the pecuniary

claims of the Upper Canada Academy before the Legislature. This he did

in February, 1837. A committee (of which Hon. W. H. Draper was

chairman)[55] brought in an excellent report on the subject. The House

of Assembly by a vote of 31 to 10 agreed to advance $16,400 to the

Academy. The Legislative Council, on motion of Hon. J. Elmsley, made

such onerous conditions as virtually defeated the bill, and no relief

was granted.[56] Dr. Ryerson, then in England, pressed the matter most

urgently upon Lord Glenelg, who in April 1837, sent directions to Sir F.

B. Head to advance the money without delay. This, on various pretexts,

he refused to do; but when the Legislature opened in January, 1838, he

sent a message to the House, which Dr. Ryerson, then in Toronto, thus

describes, in a letter to a friend at Kingston, dated February 3rd,

1838. He said:--

Instead of giving us the promised money for the Upper Canada

Academy, Sir Francis Head has sent a part of the correspondence

with Lord Glenelg and with me down to the House of Assembly, with a

message in which he implicates me, as also a letter to Lord

Glenelg, written a few weeks after my return from England, in which

he impeaches me. I have, in consequence, drawn up a petition to the

House, filling six large sheets, exposing the whole of his conduct

towards us, vindicating myself from the charges contained in his

despatches, and proposing to establish every fact which I have

stated before a select Committee of the House of Assembly. My

petition was presented this morning. According to rule, a petition

has to lie on the table for twenty-four hours before it is read.

But a motion was made and agreed to, to dispense with the rule, and

read my petition. It was then read, and created a great sensation.

It was then moved that 200 copies of it be printed, together with

all the documents sent down by the Governor, to which the petition

referred. After discussion the motion was carried by a vote of 33

to 4. This was, of course, very gratifying to my feelings, as it

must be extremely mortifying to the Governor. This is the first

petition that has been ordered to be printed by the present--Sir

Francis' own--Parliament. The dispensing with the rule, and giving

such a petition the preference, was the highest mark of respect

which the House could have shown me. I have not felt so much

agitated with anything for years, as with this matter. I am now

greatly relieved. I feel as if the Lord God of Hosts was on our

side. The Governor clearly thought that as he was so greatly lauded

and had become so famous a conqueror, we would not dare to come out

against him before the public, or meet him face to face before the

Assembly.

On the 16th, Dr. Ryerson again writes to Kingston:--

This Academy business is a most painful one to me. The Legislative

Council and the House of Assembly have each appointed a select

Committee on the subject. But I am afraid we will get nothing until

we hear from Lord Glenelg.

My mind has been, and is, in a great degree depressed beyond

expression, in regard to our circumstances. My only trust is in Him

who has thus far brought us through, and turned the designs of our

enemies to our account. For the last two days I have been as low as

I was at my lowest in London.

In addition to Dr. Ryerson's petition to both Houses, he made a separate

Appeal to members of the Assembly. In it he stated in substance that Sir

Francis Head--

Had already issued his warrant for $8,200; that he was informed in

December, 1837, not merely verbally, but in writing, by Hon. J. H.

Dunn, Receiver-General, that he had funds with which to pay the

balance ($8,200), yet the Governor refused to issue the requisite

warrant for it, on the plea of much business; but said that Mr.

Dunn had all the warrant that was necessary. In January he again

declined to issue the warrant, and excused himself by saying that

Mr. Dunn required no further authority. When, later in the month,

Dr. Ryerson had not only removed every variety of objection and

excuse, but sent a note from Mr. Dunn saying that he had the

necessary funds, Sir F. B. Head stated that he "must see one or two

of his councillors." After he had done so, he wrote a note to Dr.

Ryerson to say that he had misled him, as to the advance being a

grant instead of a loan, etc.

On 21st February, the House of Assembly recommended that the

balance be paid over at once. It pointed out that Dr. Ryerson had

become personally liable to the banks for $3,400, and Revs. John

Ryerson and E. Evans for $2,000 of the balance due; that although

grants were constantly being made by the House, yet there was no

precedent for a loan; and that as to whether the advance was to be

a grant or a loan they would abstain from offering an opinion. This

report had the desired effect. The money was paid.

On the 22nd February, Dr. Ryerson was, therefore, enabled to write to

his friend in Kingston, to say that

The prayer of my petition has been this day complied with by a

unanimous vote of the House of Assembly; and the Hon. Mr. Draper

told Brother Evans that His Excellency would issue his warrant for

the money as soon as the Address of the Assembly is presented. Not

a man in the Assembly would risk his reputation in defence of the

conduct of the Governor in this affair. The Report of the Committee

was received, and the Address passed two readings last night and

one this morning, and without one word from any member of the

Assembly in the way of comment or remark. The Committee of the

Legislative Council has actually declined entering into the

investigation of the subject at all, as had been desired by His

Excellency. Thus has Sir Francis Head not only disgraced himself,

but helped us.

I thank the Lord for His blessing thus far. We will still trust in

Him, and not be afraid. Tories, Radicals, and the Governor, have

each had their turn at us. I hope we may now be allowed to live in

peace. The result of this affair has in some measure compensated me

for the anxiety of mind I have endured.

After this unpleasant controversy with Sir F. B. Head was over, Rev.

Anson Green wrote to Dr. Ryerson as follows:--

How do you feel after your brush with Sir Francis? You need not

feel very downcast, having attained so triumphant a victory. I

doubt not but Sir Francis would willingly pay double the amount

claimed by us, if he could have prevented the result which has

happened. It is too late, however, to recall it now. I hope he will

learn wisdom from the past, and not be so self-willed and

headstrong in future. No one seems pleased with him but those whose

praise is a reproach.

Rev. W. H. Harvard, in a letter from Kingston, said:--

I am truly pained at the conduct of the Lieutenant-Governor, and

sympathize with you in thus being brought into such an unavoidable

collision with him. I am more than grieved that he should use us so

ungenerously.

I am glad that you are the warrior, for you will combine caution

and courage, and will come off more than conqueror. You are at

present the centre of our solicitude. I pray that your heart may be

comforted and controlled from above. We are the Lord's covenanted,

consecrated servants. In His work we are employed. By His Holy

Spirit may we ever be actuated and aided!

FOOTNOTES:

[55] At the Conference of this year resolutions of thanks were passed to

Mr. Draper, and were sent to him by Dr. Ryerson, the Secretary. Mr.

Draper's reply was as follows:--

I feel deeply indebted to the Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist

Church for the honour conferred upon me in deeming my humble exertions

in the cause of Christian education worthy of their approbation, and I

trust I shall never forget their good opinion. I cannot, at the same

time, pass by the opportunity of thanking you for the terms in which you

have communicated that resolution to me, and of expressing my

satisfaction that I have in any degree contributed to the success of

your unwearied exertions in behalf of the Upper Canada Academy in

England. I sincerely rejoice that you were enabled to obtain that aid

for its completion, which was so necessary and so well deserved.

[56] In a letter to Dr. Ryerson, his brother William thus accounts for

the failure to get the grant: To the miserable Missionary grant of £900

to the English Conference we are chiefly indebted for the loss of the

Bill for the relief of the Upper Canada Academy, as we are positively

informed by our best friends in the House of Assembly. It has also been

the means of depriving many of the preachers of a considerable part of

their small salary, and in one or two instances, of the whole of it. It

has, and still does more to weaken our hands, and to embarrass our

labours, and also to strengthen the hands and to increase the number of

our enemies, than almost any or all other causes put together.

CHAPTER XXII.

1838.

Victims of the Rebellion.--State of the Country.

Early in 1838 the trials for treason took place. Messrs. Lount and

Matthews were found guilty and sentenced to death. Other parties were

also tried: among them was Dr. Thomas D. Morrison, a prominent Methodist

in Toronto.[57] In a letter to Dr. Ryerson, at Kingston, his brother

John mentions that Dr. Morrison was triumphantly acquitted. He also

mentions (as an amusing incident at the trial) the success of the two

counsel for Dr. Morrison, in showing that statements entirely

contradictory to each other could be fully proved from Sir F. B. Head's

own speeches and dispatches. He said:--

Mr. Macdonald, of St. Catharines, stated that Sir Francis had

declared in his speech at the opening of the Parliament, that he

knew of the rebellion long before it occurred, and that he was the

cause of it. Mr. Boswell, of Cobourg, admitted that Sir Francis had

said he knew a good deal. But the Governor was very fond of a fine

style; he liked rounded periods, or, as Lord Melbourne had

expressed it, "epigrammic" flights, so well, that he could hardly

make his pen write the words of truth and soberness on such

occasions. Mr. Boswell read several extracts from Sir Francis'

despatches to Lord Glenelg, which were in direct opposition to the

extracts read by Mr. Macdonald. A gentleman whispered to me that

anything (no matter what) could be proved from Sir Francis'

writings and sayings. In reply to the Attorney-General, Mr.

Macdonald said:--That if the suspicion of treasonable motives and

doings in others, and not informing or using prompt measures to

correct or prevent what might follow, was treason, then Sir Francis

was the greatest traitor in the country, for he said he knew all

about the proposed outbreak. Mr. Boswell said, that after Sir

Francis had seen the "Declaration," and had taken the advice of the

Attorney-General, he had sent a despatch to the Colonial Secretary

declaring that there was nothing treasonable in the country; that

everything was as it should be! To demonstrate this, he had sent

away all the troops. Thus, you see, the two lawyers made poor Sir

Francis prove everything.

The jury returned with a verdict of "not guilty," which caused

great cheering, and which could not be suppressed for some time.

Several of the jury were warm Tories, but they acquitted the

Doctor.

In another letter to Dr. Ryerson, his brother John gives an account of

the efforts made to induce Sir George Arthur, the new Governor, to

commute the sentence of Lount and Mathews. He says:--

I have signed a petition for the mitigation of Lount and Mathews'

punishment, as did Brother William. I have just seen Rev. James

Richardson, who has been with Lount and Mathews. Mathews professed

to have found peace. Lount is earnestly seeking. A good deal of

feeling has been excited respecting the execution of these

unfortunate men. A petition signed by 4,000 persons in their behalf

was presented to His Excellency. It was agreed that Rev. Mr. Brough

(Church of England minister from Newmarket) and I should go and

present the Toronto petition, and that we should seek a private

interview with him. Instead of having a private interview, we were

called into the Council Chamber in the presence of the Executive

Council. This was rather embarrassing to me, as I did not wish to

say what I had intended to say in the presence of Sir Francis' old

Executive Council. After presenting the petition, Mr. Brough

introduced the conversation and referred Sir George to me. I told

him that I was extensively acquainted with the country,--that I had

travelled lately through the Niagara, Gore, Home, Newcastle, Prince

Edward, and part of the Midland Districts,--had conversed with a

great many persons, many of whom, even persons of high

respectability, and were strongly attached to the interests of His

Majesty's Government, and the pervading feeling was that the severe

penalty of the law should not be executed on those victims of

deception and sin. I also read an extract of your last letter to

His Excellency [p. 188]--relating to the inexpediency of inflicting

severe punishment "in opposition to public sentiment and policy,

for political offences," etc. After having listened to me very

attentively, His Excellency said, that after the fullest

consultation with his Executive, and the most serious and prayerful

consideration of this painful matter, he had come to the conclusion

that Lount and Mathews must be executed.

I also mentioned to the Governor that you and Rev. J. Stinson had

waited on Sir Francis about four weeks previous to the

insurrection,--that you informed him of insurrectionary movements

about Lloydtown and other places, which you had learned from

me,--that you had strongly urged Sir Francis to raise volunteers,

and put the city and other places in a state of defence,--that you

and I had waited on the Attorney-General next day, and that we had

urged these things on him in a similar manner;--but that these

statements and advice had been disregarded, if not disbelieved.

In a subsequent letter he thus related the closing scene:--

At eight o'clock to-day, Thursday, 12th April, Lount and Mathews

were executed. The general feeling is in total opposition to the

execution of those men. Sheriff Jarvis burst into tears when he

entered the room to prepare them for execution. They said to him

very calmly, "Mr. Jarvis, do your duty; we are prepared to meet

death and our Judge." They then, both of them, put their arms

around his neck and kissed him. They were then prepared for

execution. They walked to the gallows with entire composure and

firmness of step. Rev. J. Richardson walked alongside of Lount, and

Rev. J. Beatty alongside of Mathews. They ascended the scaffold

and knelt down on the drop. The ropes were adjusted while they were

on their knees. Mr. Richardson engaged in prayer; and when he came

to that part of the Lord's Prayer, "Forgive us our trespasses, as

we forgive those that trespass against us," the drop fell!

In a letter written to Dr. Ryerson the next day, his brother John

mentioned a sad incident connected with Lount's trial:

Lount's daughter, a young woman, was present when her father was

condemned. It had such an effect on her, that she went home and

died almost immediately afterwards. These are indeed melancholy

times!

The evil effects upon the country of the arbitrary conduct of Sir F. B.

Head, are thus described in a letter to Dr. Ryerson from his brother

William, dated Toronto, 22nd April:--

The very painful excitement caused by the execution of Lount and

Matthews has in some degree subsided, but dissatisfaction with the

state of things is, I fear, increasing from day to day. Emigration

to the States is the fear of the hour. It is indeed going on to an

extent truly alarming and astonishing. A deputation has been sent

from this city to Washington to negotiate with the American

Government for a tract of land on which to form a settlement or

colony. They have returned, and say that they met with a most

gracious reception, encouragement and success beyond their most

sanguine expectations. An emigration society has been formed,

embracing some of the leading citizens. Its object is to commence a

colony in the Iowa Territory, on the Mississippi River.[58] A very

large class are becoming uneasy, and many of the best inhabitants

of the country, as to industry and enterprise, are preparing to

leave. My own spirit is almost broken down. I feel, I assure you,

like leaving Canada too, and I am not alone in those feelings; some

of our friends whom you would not suspect, often feel quite as much

down in the throat as I do. If ever I felt the need of faith, and

wisdom, and patience, it is at the present. I have just returned

from visiting the prisoners. After all, we know but little of the

calamities and miseries with which our once happy land is now

afflicted, and yet Sir Francis, the most guilty author of this

misery, escapes without punishment; yes, with honour and praise!

How mysterious are the ways of Providence--how dark, crooked, and

perverse the ways of man.

FOOTNOTES:

[57] Dr. Morrison had been a clerk in the Surveyor-General's

office,--had, indeed, while there, collected materials for Dr.

Strachan's Ecclesiastical Chart,--but, without any charge, or the

slightest deficiency in faithfulness and efficiency, was dismissed, for

the simple reason that he had become a Methodist! He then devoted

himself to the medical profession. He was once elected to the House of

Assembly for York, defeating the Attorney-General. He was also once

elected Mayor of Toronto. He was the writer's [and the editor's]

physician during life; died in great peace, strong in faith, giving

glory to God.--"Epochs of Canadian Methodism," pages 188, 189.--H.

[58] This disposition to remove from Upper Canada to Iowa was not

confined to Toronto and its vicinity. In the following chapter the case

of a Mr. John Campbell, M.P.P. for Frontenac county, is mentioned. He

was on his way to Iowa when he saw and read Dr. Ryerson's defence of Mr.

Bidwell. The reading of that defence changed his plans, and he remained

in Canada. (See page 192.)

CHAPTER XXIII.

1795-1861.

Sketch of Mr. William Lyon Mackenzie.

The story of Dr. Ryerson's life would scarcely be complete without

giving some information in regard to the chief opponents whom he

encountered in the earlier part of his career--men well known at the

time, but whose names and memories are now passing away.

With the exception of Bishop Strachan, no man came so immediately in

contact with Dr. Ryerson in the first years of his public life as did

Mr. W. L. Mackenzie.

Mr. Mackenzie was born in Scotland, in March, 1795. He died in Toronto,

on the 28th August, 1861, in the 67th year of his age. He came to Canada

in 1820, and until 1824 was engaged in mercantile pursuits. In May of

that year he entered public life, and commenced the publication of the

_Colonial Advocate_ at Queenston. From that time until near the close of

his life, he maintained his connection, more or less, with the press;

but he was always on the stormy sea of politics, even when not a

journalist. The reasons which induced him to enter public life are thus

given in Mr. Charles Lindsey's "Life and Times of Mackenzie," page 40.

They are in Mr. Mackenzie's own words, and were written some time after

the rebellion of 1837-8:--

I had long seen the country in the hands of a few shrewd, crafty,

covetous men, under whose management one of the most lovely,

desirable sections of America remained a comparative desert. The

most obvious public improvements were stayed; dissension was

created among classes; citizens were banished and imprisoned

[Gourley, Beardsley, etc.] in defiance of all law; the people had

been forbidden, under severe pains and penalties, from meeting

anywhere to petition for justice; large estates were wrested from

their owners in utter contempt of even the forms of the courts; the

Church of England, the adherents of which were few, monopolized as

much of the lands of the Colony as all the religious houses and

dignitaries of the Roman Catholic Church had had the control of in

Scotland at the era of the Reformation. Other sects were treated

with contempt, and scarcely tolerated; a sordid band of

land-jobbers grasped the soil as their patrimony, and with a few

leading officials, who divided the public revenue among themselves,

formed "the family compact," and were the avowed enemies of common

schools, of civil and religious liberty, of all legislative or

other checks to their own will. Other men had opposed and been

converted by them. At nine-and-twenty I might have united with

them, but chose rather to join the oppressed; nor have I ever

regretted that choice, or wavered from the object of my early

pursuit. So far as I, or any other professed reformer, was

concerned in inviting citizens of [the United States] to interfere

in Canadian affairs, there was culpable error. So far as any of us,

at any time, may have supposed that the cause of freedom would be

advanced by adding the Canadas to [that] confederation, we were

under the merest delusion. Mr. Lindsey adds:--In some respects the

condition of the Province was worse than Mr. Mackenzie described

it. He dealt only with its political condition.

With a Scotchman's idea of justice and freedom, he felt a longing desire

to right the wrongs which he saw everywhere around him. This, therefore,

constituted, as he believed, his mission as a public man in Canada, and

it furnishes the key to his life and character.

Mr. Mackenzie was a political pessimist. He looked upon every abuse

which he attacked, with a somewhat severe, if not a jaundiced, eye.

Every evil which he discovered was, in his estimation, truly an evil;

and all evils were about of equal magnitude. Besides, in attacking an

evil or an abuse, he did not fail to attack the perpetrator or upholder

of it also, and that, too, with a strength of invective, or of cutting

sarcasm, which brought every foible, and weakness of his, and even those

of his father before him, vividly into view. This was the baleful secret

of his strength as an assailant; but this, too, caused him to be

regarded by his victims with intense dislike, bordering on hatred. This

style of attack, on the part of Mr. Mackenzie, did not necessarily arise

from anything like vindictiveness, but rather from a keen sense of

dislike to what he conceived to be wrong in the thing he was attacking.

In 1849 (12 years after the rebellion), Mr. Mackenzie, in a letter to

Earl Grey, used the following remarkable language:--

A course of careful observation during the last eleven years has

fully satisfied me that, had the violent movements in which I and

many others were engaged on both sides of the Niagara proved

successful, that success would have deeply injured the people of

Canada, whom I then believed I was serving at great risks.... I

have long been sensible of the errors committed during that

period.... No punishment that power could inflict or nature

sustain, would have equalled the regrets I have felt on account of

much that I did, said, wrote, and published; but the past cannot be

recalled.... There is not a living man on the continent who more

sincerely desires that British Government in Canada may long

continue, etc. Page 291, 292.

No man was more unselfish than Mr. Mackenzie. He would rather suffer

extreme hardship than accept a doubtful favour. Even in regard to kindly

and reasonable offers of help, he was morbidly sensitive (as mentioned

on page 298 of his "Life and Times"); and yet, looking at the conduct of

many men in like circumstances, he deserved commendation rather than

censure for his extreme conscientiousness.

Mr. Mackenzie did the State good service in many things. His

investigations into the affairs of the Welland Canal were highly

valuable to the country, greatly aided as he was by Mr. (now, Sir)

Francis Hincks as chief accountant. His inquiries in regard to the Post

Office and Prison management were also useful. Besides, he advocated

many important reforms which were afterwards carried out. Mr. Mackenzie

was the first Mayor of Toronto.

Towards the close of his life he and Dr. Ryerson were not on unfriendly

terms; and when in 1852, as a member of the Legislature he instituted an

inquiry into the management of the Educational Depository, he expressed

himself satisfied with its usefulness.[59] At a later period when Mr.

John C. Geikie[60]--then a bookseller in Toronto--commenced his attack

upon the Depository in 1858, Mr. Mackenzie thus rebuked him in his

_Weekly Message_ of April 9th, of that year:--

At one time we thought with the redoubtable Geikie that Dr.

Ryerson's book concern was a monopoly, but a more thorough inquiry

induced us to change that opinion. We found that great benefits

were obtained for the townships, the country schools, and general

education through Dr. Ryerson's plan which could in no other way be

conferred upon them, etc.

Dr. Ryerson, on his part, felt kindly towards Mr. Mackenzie. He

mentioned to the Editor of this book near the close of the year 1860,

that on the ensuing New Year's day he (Dr. Ryerson) would call upon and

shake hands with his old antagonist, and wish him a "Happy New Year."

FOOTNOTES:

[59] Mr. Mackenzie frequently visited the Educational Depository to make

inquiries, etc. The Editor of this book had frequent conversations with

him on the subject, and explained to him the details of management. He

was pleased to know that through the agency of the Depository thousands

of volumes of good books were being yearly sent out to the schools.

[60] Now the Rev. Dr. Cunningham Geikie, of England, and author of the

"Life and Words of Christ," and other valuable books. He declined the

use of the title of reverend in his controversy with Dr. Ryerson.

CHAPTER XXIV.

1838.

Defence of the Hon. Marshall Spring Bidwell.

From various papers and letters left by Dr. Ryerson, I have compiled the

following statement in regard to his memorable defence of the Hon. M. S.

Bidwell, in 1838. I have used Dr. Ryerson's own words throughout, only

varying them when the sense, or the construction, or condensation of a

sentence, required it. He said:--

On Dr. Duncombe's return to Canada, I believe the conspiracy was

commenced by him, Mr. Wm. Lyon Mackenzie, and others, sought to

accomplish their objects by rebellion; but in this the great body of

Reformers took no part except to surpress it. I had warned them that Mr.

Mackenzie's proceedings would result in rebellion. I afterwards received

the thanks of great numbers of Reformers for having by my warnings and

counsels saved them and their families from being involved in the

consequences of the rebellion. I was so odious to Mr. Mackenzie and his

fellow rebels, that they determined to hang me on the first tree could

they get hold of me. Of this, I had proof from one of themselves; yet I

afterwards succeeded by my representations and appeals, to get several

of them out of prison. My brother John, who was then in Toronto,

presented to Governor Arthur and advocated a largely signed petition

against the execution of Lount and Matthews. He also read a letter from

me (then a stationed minister in Kingston) against their execution, and

on the impolicy of capital punishment for political offences.

After the suppression of the rebellion--in the putting down of which the

great body of the Reformers joined--the leaders of the dominant party

sought, nevertheless, to hold the entire party of the Reformers

responsible for that rebellion, and to proscribe and put them down

accordingly. The first step in this process of proscription was the

ostracism of Mr. M. S. Bidwell, an able and prudent politician, and a

gentleman who took a high place in the legal profession.[61] and

completed them in the office of Mr. Daniel Hagerman, of Ernestown. He

was admitted as a barrister-at-law in April, 1821.

Mr. Bidwell was first elected to the House of Assembly in 1824;

re-elected and chosen Speaker in 1828. On the death of George IV., in

1830, a new general election took place, when the Reform party were

reduced to a minority, and Mr. Bidwell was not re-elected Speaker; but

he greatly distinguished himself in the debates of the House. In 1834, a

new general election took place; a large majority of Reformers were

returned, and Mr. Bidwell was again elected Speaker. In May, 1836, Sir

F. B. Head dissolved the House of Assembly, and Mr. Bidwell and his

colleague, the late Peter Perry, were defeated in the united counties of

Lennox and Addington, which Mr. Bidwell had represented in Parliament

during twelve years. From that time (May, 1836) Mr. Bidwell never

attended a political meeting, or took any part in politics.

During my stay in England, from December, 1835, to April, 1837, I had

many conversations with Lord Glenelg, Sir George Grey, and Sir James

Stephen (Under Secretaries), on the Government of Canada, shewing them

that the foundation of our Government was too narrow, like an inverted

pyramid, conferring the appointments to all offices, civil, military,

judicial, to one party--excluding all others, however respectable and

competent, as if they were enemies, and even aliens. I mentioned that

not one member of the Reform party, (which had commanded for years a

majority in the House of Assembly) had ever been appointed to the Bench,

though there were several of them able lawyers, such as Bidwell, Rolph,

etc. (Page 169.)

Lord Glenelg, in a despatch, directed Sir F. B. Head to appoint Mr.

Bidwell to a judgeship on the first vacancy. Sir F. Head refused to do

so, for which he was recalled, and Sir George Arthur was appointed in

his place. In the meantime the House of Assembly was dissolved by Sir

Francis, and a general election ordered. I had warned the public against

Mr. Mackenzie's doings in converting constitutional reform into

republican revolution, in consequence of which he attacked me furiously.

Peter Perry, in the parliamentary session of 1836, attacked me also, and

defended Mr. Mackenzie in a long speech. This speech reached me in

England. I sat down and wrote a letter in reply, which reached Canada,

and was published there on the eve of the elections, of which I then

knew nothing. The constitutional party in Lennox and Addington had my

letter printed by thousands, in the form of a large hand-bill headed:

"Peter Perry Picked to Pieces by Egerton Ryerson." Although Mr. Bidwell

took no part in the controversy, he was on the same electoral ticket

with Mr. Perry, and both were defeated.[62]

The Radical party being defeated at the polls, its leaders: Mr. Wm. L.

Mackenzie, Dr. Charles Duncombe, and many others, sought to accomplish

by force of arms what they had failed to accomplish by popular

elections; the rebellion of 1836-7 was the result. As Mr. Bidwell was

known to be the intimate friend of Dr. Rolph, and as Dr. Rolph was

thought to be implicated in the rebellion, it was assumed by Sir F. Head

that Mr. Bidwell was concerned in it also. But this was perfectly

untrue. Besides, Mr. Bidwell entertained the strongest views that not a

drop of blood should be shed to obtain the civil freedom of a

country--that only moral suasion and public opinion should be employed

for such purposes.

Sir F. Head thought that now was the opportunity to revenge himself

alike upon Lord Glenelg and the Whig Government, which had ordered him

to appoint Mr. Bidwell to a judgeship, and also upon Mr. Bidwell as a

former leader of the Reform party who had opposed him. Mr. Bidwell's

letters having reached the Governor, he sent for that gentleman. What

transpired is thus related by Mr. Bidwell, in a letter written to me

some time afterwards:--

Sir Francis assured me that the letters had been sent to him

without his orders, and that he never would allow my letters to be

opened. I asked him to open them, as I did not wish to have any

suspicions about them indulged afterwards; but he refused to do it,

and said he had too much respect for me to allow it. Indeed, on the

Wednesday previously, I expressly informed the Attorney-General of

my own anxiety, (and that I was willing) to undergo the most full

and unreserved examination, and to let all my papers be examined.

The terms of my note of the 8th December--the evening of the day of

the interview--were dictated, or at least, suggested to me by Sir

Francis, and referred particularly to his expressions of personal

regard. The object of drawing such a note from me is now

apparent--but I was not then aware that he had received orders from

Lord Glenelg to make me a Judge.

Before leaving Toronto (as he intimates), and after his arrival at

Lewiston, Mr. Bidwell wrote to Sir F. Head (December 11th, 1837),

protesting his innocence and against the injustice of the means used to

compel him to leave his country.

The conclusion of Mr. Bidwell's note from Toronto is as follows:

I am confident ... that the investigations, which will now of

course be made, will fully remove those suspicions from the mind of

your Excellency, and will prove that I had also no knowledge or

expectation that any such attempt [_i.e._ insurrectionary movement]

was in contemplation.

To accomplish his revengeful purpose, however, Sir F. Head wrote or

inspired an editorial to the Toronto _Patriot_ newspaper (then the organ

of his Government) stating that as Mr. Bidwell had left the country,

under circumstances that proved his consciousness of guilt, it was

therefore the duty of the Benchers of the Law Society to erase his name

from their rolls.

I was then stationed at Kingston. When I saw the editorial in the

_Patriot_, I at once recognized Sir F. Head's hand in it, and was

horror-struck at the idea of a man being exiled from his country, and

then deprived of his professional character and privileges without a

trial! I passed a sleepless night.

The late Mr. Henry Cassidy was then mayor of Kingston; a staunch

Churchman and Conservative. His wife was a relative of mine, so a sort

of family intimacy existed between us. Mr. Cassidy had been a student in

Mr. Bidwell's law-office and was now his law agent. Mr. Bidwell enclosed

to Mr. Cassidy the correspondence which had taken place between himself

and Sir F. Head and Attorney-General Hagerman, and Mr. Cassidy had shown

it to me. The morning after I saw the article in the _Patriot_,

proposing the erasure of Mr. Bidwell's name from the books of the Law

Society, I went to Mr. Cassidy, saying that I had not closed my eyes all

night, in consequence of Sir F. Head's article in the _Patriot_; that I

was the only person besides himself who knew the facts of the case, and

though I had been assailed by the newspapers of the party with which Mr.

Bidwell had been connected, I felt it in my heart to prevent a gross act

of injustice and cruelty being inflicted upon a man, in his absence and

helplessness, who had introduced and carried through our Legislature the

laws by which the different religious denominations held their Church

property, and their ministers solemnized matrimony. I asked Mr. Cassidy

if he would allow me the use of the letters which Mr. Bidwell had

enclosed to him, justifying his own innocence, and showing the injustice

done him by the misstatements of Sir F. Head. After some hours of

deliberation, Mr. Cassidy consented. I sat down, and over the signature

of "A United Empire Loyalist," I detailed the case, introducing as

proofs of Mr. Bidwell's innocence the injustice proposed to be inflicted

upon him, referring to Mr. Attorney-General Hagerman's own letter, and

appealing to the Law Society, and the country at large, against such

injustice and against such violation of the rights of a British subject.

I got a friend to copy my communication, so as not to excite

suspicion.[63] It was the first article that had appeared in the public

press after the rebellion, breathing the spirit of freedom, and

advocating British constitutional rights against illegal oppression.[64]

The effect of this article upon the public mind was very remarkable. As

an example, Mr. John Campbell, member of the Legislative Assembly for

the County of Frontenac, despairing of the liberties of the country

under the "tory" oppression of the day, determined to sell his property

for whatever it might bring, and remove to the States. He was on a

steamboat on Lake Ontario, on his way to the Territory of Iowa to buy

land and settle there, when the newspaper containing my communication

fell into his hands; he read it, rose up and said that as long as there

was a man in Canada who could write in that way there was hope for the

country. He returned home, resumed his business, and lived and died in

Canada.

The Attorney-General was annoyed at the publication of his letter to Mr.

Bidwell, and attempted a justification of his conduct. At the conclusion

of a letter to me, he said that I had concealed my name for fear of the

legal consequences of my seditious paper. I at once sat down and wrote

the most argumentative paper that I ever penned (and for the recovery

of which I afterwards offered five pounds, but without success),

reducing the questions to a series of mathematical propositions, and

demonstrating in each case from the Attorney-General's own data, that my

conclusions were true, and his absurd. I concluded by defying his legal

threat of prosecution, and signed my name to the letter.

The effect of my reply to Mr. Attorney-General Hagerman was marvellous

in weakening the influence of the first law adviser of the Crown, and in

reviving the confidence of the friends of liberal constitutional

government.[65]

Subsequently, (in June, 1838), I received a letter from Mr. Hagerman, in

which he stated that in my observations on Mr. Bidwell's case I had made

assertions that impeached his character, and desired me to inform him on

what evidence I had based my statements. He said:--

The first assertion is that I was the author of certain remarks

published under the editorial head of the _Patriot_ newspaper of

this city, injurious to the reputation of Mr. Bidwell.... The

second statement is that I desired to procure his expulsion from

the Province, because he had been preferred to me for the office of

judge.

My reply to Mr. Hagerman was brief and to the point:

I beg to say, in reply to your letter, that I am not conscious of

having made either of the assertions which you have been pleased to

attribute to me.

I think it only just to the late Mr. Hagerman to add, that the sharp

discussions between him and me did not chill the friendliness, and even

pleasantness, of our personal intercourse afterwards; and I believe few

men would have more heartily welcomed Mr. Bidwell's return to Canada

than Mr. Justice Hagerman himself. Mr. Hagerman was a man of generous

impulses. He was a variable speaker, but at times his every gesture was

eloquent, his intonations of voice were truly musical, and almost every

sentence was a gem of beauty.

The discussion ended there; but no proposal was ever made to, much less

entertained by, the Law Society to erase Mr. Bidwell's name from its

rolls.

Mr. Bidwell's case did not, however, end here. In 1842, on the

recommendation of Hon. Robert Baldwin, any promise given by Mr. Bidwell

not to return to Canada--of which no record was found in any of the

Government offices--was revoked, in 1843, by the Governor-General (Lord

Metcalfe). Mr. Bidwell was also strongly urged to come back, and a

promise was given to him by the authority of the Governor-General that

all of his former rights and privileges would be restored to him, with a

view to his elevation to the Bench. He, however, declined to return.

Again, some years afterwards, when Sir W. B. Richards was

Attorney-General, he was authorized to offer Mr. Bidwell the position of

Commissioner to revise our Statute Law. He declined that offer also.

In conversation, in 1872, with Sir John Macdonald in relation to Mr.

Bidwell's early life, Sir John informed me that some years before, he

himself had, while in New York, solicited Mr. Bidwell to return to

Canada, but without success. Sir John said that he had done so, not

merely on his own account (as he had always loved Mr. Bidwell, and did

not believe that he had any connection whatever with the rebellion), but

because he believed that he represented the wishes of his political

friends, as well as those of the people of Canada generally.

Mr. Bidwell was an earnest Christian. He was also a charming companion.

A few weeks before his lamented decease, he visited his relatives and

friends in Canada, spent a Sabbath in Toronto, occupying a seat in my

pew in the Metropolitan Church. While here he presented me with a

beautiful likeness of himself on ivory. I have placed it in the Canadian

room of our Departmental Museum. I little thought it was my last meeting

with him, as I had long anticipated and often intended to visit him in

New York, where he promised to narrate to me many incidents of men and

things in the Canada of former years, which had not come to my

knowledge, or which I had forgotten. A suitable monument would be an

appropriate tribute to his memory by our Legislature and country.

* * * * *

The following are extracts of letters written to Dr. Ryerson, by Mr.

Bidwell, at the dates mentioned:

_May 21st, 1828--Kingston._--I admire and fully approved of your

plan (as I advised Mr. H. C. Thompson) of striking off a large

number of copies, in pamphlet form, of your Review of Archdeacon

Strachan's Sermon. (See page 68.) I have no doubt it will be really

a great service to the country to do so. Indeed, I sincerely think

that you could not in any other way be instrumental in promoting so

much the cause of Christ, as in the labours which you have

undertaken. The concerns of this Colony, as you see in the

newspapers, are attracting the attention of the British Parliament;

and the decided expression of public opinion here at present will

outweigh all that Dr. Strachan and his junto can say and do. My

father and I will shortly give the subject of Church Establishment

in this Province, contended for by Dr. Strachan, a full and careful

examination, and communicate to you the result.

_January 19th, 1829--York._--I rejoice once more to receive a

letter from you.... I sincerely thank you for your congratulations

on my elevation to the Speakership. I am sensible how much I need

the prayers and counsels of my friends in discharging the duties of

my station. I wish Christians would reflect what important

consequences may follow from every step taken by those in public

life, and especially in the Legislature.... I send you a copy of

Wilbur's Reference Bible, which I beg you will accept as a

testimony of my respect and friendship.

_March 10th, 1829--York._--The Marriage Bill has been passed, with

amendments made by the Legislative Council. The House is about

equally divided on trying questions, so that we often forbear

attempting measures which we would wish to pass. This unpleasant

state of things produces anxiety, uncertainty, and (worst of all)

violent party spirit. I can with great truth declare that I have

received but little satisfaction in my public life.

To you and your brother the Province owes a large debt of

gratitude. For one, I feel it sensibly, and wish most sincerely

that we could have the benefit of your counsel in our House. Two or

three such men would be a comfort, a relief, a support, and an

assistance, beyond what you have any idea of.

_April 6th, 1831--Kingston._--I am very glad to see your

commendations of the Attorney-General.[A] I think they are just.

They are certainly politic and seasonable. Indeed, I had thought of

hinting to you the propriety of some such notice of his liberality,

etc. I was afraid otherwise the coldness of the courtiers towards

him might make him repent of such liberality. But I think that your

remarks have come at the right time, and are exactly of the right

sort.[66]

_June 14th, 1833--York._--We have heard with pleasure of your safe

arrival in England: and pleasing indeed this has been to your many

friends in the Province, whose prayers, good wishes, and friendly

recollections, have accompanied you across the Atlantic.... Mr.

John Willson, M.P.P., of Saltfleet, has, within a day or two,

obtained from the Receiver-General, on the warrant of the

Lieutenant-Governor, £600 of the public money, to aid in building

chapels, I suppose, for the Ryanites. (See page 87). The fact was

mentioned to me privately this morning, but I deem it so important

as to justify and require me to inform you confidentially of it,

leaving it to your judgment to use the intelligence in the most

discreet manner that may be consistent with the duty you owe to

liberty and religion.

It excites surprise, pain, mortification, indignation, and

contempt, to see the Executive Government here making unjust and

invidious distinctions between His Majesty's subjects in the

appropriations of the Clergy Reserves, thereby endeavouring to

secure an unconstitutional and corrupt influence, especially after

Lord Goderich's declaration in his despatch (which he directed to

be published), that if any preference was shown to one denomination

of Christians more than another, it was contrary to the policy of

His Majesty's Government, and against repeated instructions sent to

the Government here.

As a Presbyterian I lament the grant to the Presbytery, and will do

all I can to get it repealed, for I am convinced it will do injury

to liberty and religion, and to the very persons who may wish, or

wicked enough, to receive it. I suppose the Province is indebted to

Sir John Colborne for these grants. If it is the Government at

home, it ought to be known: if it is not, they ought not only to

remove Sir John, but also reform this abuse. Have the Government

ever given your Society sixpence, or even a foot of land for your

chapels?--although it is the oldest and most numerous body of the

kind in the Province; is not wealthy, and has rendered the most

valuable services, and at a time when no other Church evinced the

least interest for the religious instruction or the welfare of the

people.

_April 12th, 1838--New York._--Your letter of the 23rd ult. and its

enclosure [the defence], I need not say, have effected me deeply,

too much, indeed, for me to describe my feelings. I thank you from

the bottom of my heart for this instance of your kindness; not less

valued, certainly, because it was unexpected, not to say

undeserved. If my misfortunes shall be the means of recovering a

friendship which I formerly enjoyed and always prized, I shall feel

not a little reconciled.[67]

I took the precaution some time ago, to send to England a plain,

distinct statement of all that had occurred between Sir Francis

Head and myself. This was transmitted to a friend to show to Lord

Glenelg. My only object was the vindication of my character. I have

never had the least expectation of obtaining justice or redress

from the Colonial office. There seems in that department utter

incapacity. The very persons they select for the Government of

Upper Canada are enough to prove this. And yet I believe that Lord

Glenelg is an able, as well as amiable, devout, good man.

_May 15th, 1838--New York._--I have received a letter from the

gentleman in England, to whom I had written. He had seen Lord

Durham, and shown him my letter. He expressed no opinion; but the

gentleman thinks that the matter stands favourably before him. He

has not yet seen Lord Glenelg.

_August 10th, 1839--New York._--Mr. Christopher Dunkin[68] is very

anxious to have the honour of an introduction to you. I am very

happy to be the means of gratifying him. Mr. Dunkin was editor of

the Montreal _Courier_, in the latter part of 1837, and beginning

of 1838. He was afterwards appointed by Lord Durham on the

Commission relating to education, and has latterly resided in the

United States.

About the time of Mr. Bidwell's defence, Dr. Ryerson also wrote an

explanatory letter to the Colonial Office in regard to his excellent

friend, Hon. John H. Dunn, the Receiver-General, whose generous conduct

towards the Upper Canada Academy is mentioned on page 166[69]. In a

letter of acknowledgment from Mr. Dunn to Dr. Ryerson, he said:--

I am very glad to learn from your letter that you have written to

Lord Glenelg. It is but just to put His Lordship in possession of

facts which may counteract the influence of misrepresentation, and

enable His Lordship to exercise his own humane disposition in

putting matters right, which have been so wrong and arbitrary

towards the individual Mr. Bidwell, whom you have taken the

interest in, and trouble, to restore to his position and his

country.

I feel exceedingly obliged for the kind feeling which you entertain

towards me. Believe me, that you have only done me justice by

mentioning my name to Lord Glenelg. I have laboured hard since I

have been in the Province to discharge my duty to my God and my

Government. I have entertained different opinions at times of the

"Powers here," but they have been the dictates of an honest heart.

I cannot guide my opinions to the service of any party. Whatever

they may be, I shall lament if they should result in any other than

for the best interests and welfare of the Province of Upper Canada.

You were so good as to read me your letter to Lord Glenelg, on the

subject of the late execution of Lount and Matthews. Your version

too, of the real meaning of the representation which caused Sir

Francis Head to compel us to retire from the Executive Council, is

so correct, that I cannot suggest any amendment; besides, I am

bound by my oath not to divulge any transaction arising at the

Council Board. I shall be very happy to see the letter published.

(See page 170.)

You have seen my name kindly mentioned in the public prints. What

has been said has been the spontaneous expressions of other

persons, quite unknown to me. I am grateful to those persons who

have vindicated me against a party, eager to destroy me, and my

family. I leave them to a Judge who knows the secrets of all

hearts, and before whom we all shall soon appear. I have had my

share of afflictions and troubles in this world, and to which I

feel little or no attachment whatever. When the heart is sick, the

whole body is faint.

Dr. Ryerson (in the _Guardian_ of 22nd January, 1840) thus referred to

Mr. Dunn as one of the speakers in the Legislative Council on the

popular side of the clergy reserve question:--

I was glad to hear Mr. Dunn speak so well and so

forcibly,--universally and affectionately esteemed as he is beyond

any other public functionary in Upper Canada.

* * * * *

Some months after the exile of Mr. Bidwell, Mr. James S. Howard was

dismissed by Sir F. B. Head from the office of Postmaster of Toronto.

The alleged ground of dismissal was that he was a Radical, and had not

taken up arms in defence of the country. Dr. Ryerson, with his usual

generous sympathy for persons who in those days were made the victims of

Governor Head's caprice, at once espoused Mr. Howard's cause. In his

first letter in the Defence of Sir Charles Metcalfe, he said:--

After the insurrection of 1837-8, unfavourable impressions were

made far and wide against the late Postmaster of Toronto, and Mr.

Bidwell. But subsequent investigations corrected these impressions.

The former has been appointed to office, and Sir F. B. Head's

proceedings against the latter have been cancelled by Sir Charles

Metcalfe. (Page 16.)

Again, in the "Prefatory Address" to the Metcalfe Defence, he said:--

While God gives me a heart to feel, a head to think, and a pen to

write, I will not passively see honourable integrity murdered by

grasping faction.... I would not do so in 1838, when an attempt was

made to degrade and proscribe, and drive out of the country all

naturalized subjects from the United States, and to stigmatize all

Reformers with the brand of rebellion.... I relieved the name of an

injured James S. Howard from the obloquy that hung over it, and

rescued the character and rights of an exiled Bidwell from ruthless

invasion, and the still further effort to cover him with perpetual

infamy by expelling him from the Law Society. (Page 7.)

FOOTNOTES:

[61] According to the books of the Law Society, Mr. Bidwell commenced

his legal studies in Kingston, the 14th March, 1816, in the office of

Mr. Daniel Washburn, and completed them in the office of Mr. Daniel

Hagerman, of Ernestown. He was admitted as a barrister-at-law in April,

1821.