The Canadian Portrait Gallery - Volume 3 (of 4)

With regard to the prompt transmission to England of the Oaths Bill, His Excellency simply complied with his official instructions, and with the Union Act, which requires the Governor-General to transmit "by the earliest convenient opportunity" all Acts of Parliament to which he has assented on Her Majesty's behalf. His Excellency's despatch to the Imperial Secretary of State for the Colonies, dated 15th August, 1873, puts this matter very clearly. It shows that he understood and was prepared to do his duty, no matter what might be said by Opposition members, and no matter how scurrilous might be the attacks of hostile newspapers. "Amongst other respects," says the despatch, "in which my conduct has been criticised, the fact of my having communicated to you by the first opportunity a certified copy of the Oaths Bill, has been a very general point of attack. I apprehend it will not be necessary to justify myself to your Lordship in this particular. My law-adviser had called my attention to the possibility of the Bill being illegal. Had perjured testimony been tendered under it, no proceedings could have been taken against the delinquent, and if, under these circumstances, I had wilfully withheld from the Home Government all cognizance of the Act, it would have been a gross dereliction of duty. To those in this country who have questioned my procedure it would be sufficient to reply that I recognize no authority on this side of the Atlantic competent to instruct the Governor-General as to the nature of his correspondence with Her Majesty's Secretary of State." The assertion so often made, to the effect that the Law Officers of the Crown in England were improperly influenced to advise a disallowance of the Bill, is in itself utterly preposterous, and no attempt, so far as we know, has ever been made to bring forward any proof of it.

There remains for consideration the prorogation of Parliament on the 13th of August.

Before the adjournment on the 23rd of May, as we have seen, it had been understood that Parliament should meet only to receive the committee's report, and not for the despatch of ordinary business. It had not even been considered necessary that His Excellency should attend. During his absence in the Maritime Provinces, however, the famous McMullen correspondence had appeared in print, and this, together with other circumstances which had come to his knowledge, had made him resolve to be present at the reassembling of Parliament. The attendance of Government supporters was not large, very few, if any, being present from outlying constituencies. The Opposition on the other hand, was fully represented, and was eager for the battle, which was regarded as inevitable. It soon appeared that there was nothing to be done. Owing to the disallowance of the Oaths Bill there was no report from the committee. In the estimation of His Excellency, to proceed with the investigation, as the Opposition members were desirous of doing, would under these circumstances have been to place the Ministry at an unfair disadvantage. A considerable number of its supporters were absent, whereas the Opposition was in full force. It has been charged upon the Ministry that this was part of their tactics, and that the absentees were acting under the orders of their Chief in remaining at home. This is another of those loose, sweeping assertions which may be true, but the truth of which has not been proved. That unhappy Ministry has enough to answer for at the Bar of History, without being called upon to refute charges which have never been substantiated by evidence. In any case, no fair-minded person will wish to hold the Governor-General responsible for such tactics. His position was one of no ordinary difficulty. Very damnatory correspondence had been given to the world, but it was not in such a shape that the House could possibly regard it as free from suspicion. The most serious charges seemed to point rather to the guilt of Sir Hugh Allan and McMullen than to that of the Members of the Government. The charges directly affecting the Government were solemnly and emphatically repudiated by the Premier, who pledged himself to explain the matter under oath to the satisfaction of the whole world, as soon as a properly constituted tribunal should be appointed, with authority to take evidence under oath. Sir Hugh Allan published a sworn affidavit, negativing McMullen's charges, and McMullen himself had subsequently admitted that his charges had been hasty and inaccurate. The latter, moreover, was evidently a man whose character was not such as to inspire respect. The Government could still command a majority of votes in the House. Under such circumstances, can His Excellency be blamed if he continued to act upon the advice of his constitutional advisers by proroguing Parliament? He was determined, however, that there should be no unnecessary delay, and exacted as a condition of adopting that course that parliament should be convened with all imaginable expedition. His reply to the memorial presented by the Opposition is so much to the point that we cannot do better than abridge a portion of it. "You urge me," says His Excellency, "on grounds which are very fully and forcibly stated, to decline the advice which has been unanimously tendered me by my responsible ministers, and to refuse to prorogue Parliament. In other words, you require me to dismiss them from my councils; for you must be aware that this would be the necessary result of my assenting to your recommendation. Upon what grounds would I be justified in taking so grave a step? What guarantee can you afford me that the Parliament of the Dominion would endorse such an act of personal interference on my part? You yourselves do not form an actual moiety of the House of Commons, and I have no means of ascertaining that the majority of that body subscribe to the opinion you have enounced.. It is true, grave charges have been preferred.. but the truth of these remains untested.. Is the Governor-General, upon such evidence as this, to drive from his presence gentlemen who for years have filled the highest offices of State, and in whom, during the recent session, Parliament has repeatedly declared its continued confidence?.. Certain documents of grave significance have lately been published in the newspapers, but no proof has been adduced which necessarily connects them with the culpable transactions of which it is asserted they formed a part.. Under these circumstances, what right has the Governor-General, on his personal responsibility, to proclaim.. that he believes his ministers guilty of the crimes alleged against them?"

Such were the circumstances under which the prorogation of the 13th of August, 1873, took place. Looking back on it, in the light of the seven years which have since elapsed, it will be hard to arrive at any other conclusion than that Lord Dufferin did not deserve the animadversions which were heaped upon him. As he himself observed in his despatch to the Colonial Secretary two days after the prorogation: "It is a favourite theory at this moment with many persons that when once grave charges of this nature have been preferred against the Ministry they become ipso facto unfit to counsel the Crown. The practical application of this principle would prove very inconvenient, and would leave not only the Governor-General, but every Lieutenant-Governor in the Dominion very thinly provided with responsible advisers; for, as far as I have been able to seize the spirit of political controversy in Canada, there is scarcely an eminent man in the country on either side whose character or integrity has not been, at one time or another, the subject of reckless attack by his opponents in the press." In a word, he acted on the well-established principle that every man is to be adjudged innocent until he has been proved guilty; and in so acting he showed that he understood the responsibilities of his position. That his Ministers were culpable, as well as unwise, in advising the prorogation, is certain; and when the next elections came on they paid the penalty of their disingenuousness.

The events of Lord Dufferin's residence in Canada subsequent to the fall of the Macdonald Ministry, which has already been reviewed, must be given in few words. The political events by which his administration was characterized have been given at sufficient length in sketches to which they more properly belong. The Mackenzie Administration had not been long in power before each individual member of it was on friendly terms with the Governor-General, and there seems to have been a tacit understanding that all past differences of opinion should be forgotten. In the summer of 1874 His Excellency and suite made a tour through the Muskoka District, and thence westward by steamer over lakes Huron, Superior and Michigan. The tourists called at most of the interesting points on the route, including Chicago, where they disembarked, and returned overland by way of Detroit. All the most important towns in Ontario were then visited, and the party returned home to Ottawa in September, after an absence of about two months. It was during his sojourn in Toronto, while on his return from this expedition, that Lord Dufferin made his famous speech at the Toronto Club, which aroused the enthusiasm of the press on both sides of the Atlantic. A part of the summer and autumn of each succeeding year was spent by His Excellency in making other tours through the various Provinces of the Dominion. The last important one was made in 1877, and consisted of a pilgrimage through Manitoba and part of the District of Keewatin. In 1875 he also visited Ireland, and in 1876 attended the Centennial Exhibition at Philadelphia. Wherever he went, his visits were marked by a continual round of ovations. Lady Dufferin generally accompanied him on his excursions, and contributed not a little by her personal graces and accomplishments to the popularity of her lord. Perhaps the most marvellous thing about him is his ability to make an eloquent speech on any given topic, without ever repeating himself, and without descending to platitudes or commonplaces. He has always something to say which is appropriate to the particular occasion, and the special circumstances in which he happens to be placed. The quick perception and ready wit begotten of his Irish blood never fail him. Each of his replies to the thousand-and-one addresses which at one time and another have been presented to him has a merit of its own, has an application purely local, and is unlike all the others. His more serious utterances are marked not less by maturity of statesmanship than by brilliancy of imagination. It would be faint praise to say of him that as an orator he stands alone on the long roll of Canadian Governors. There has been no other who is even worthy of being named as second to him. It has been truly said of his speeches that they are "warm with the light of hope, brimful of sympathy for the toiling and the struggling, sparkling with humour, and moving with pathos."

As the term of his residence among us drew towards its close the Canadian people began to realize how much they liked him. Addresses poured in upon him from every corner of the Dominion, many of which, at least, could only have had their origin in sincere esteem and hearty good-will. When, on the 19th of October, 1878, he took his final departure from among us, for it was felt that, if his life and health were spared the record of his future would not belie the record of his past. It was predicted that the man whose consummate tact, noble courtesy and largeness of heart had done so much to strengthen the ties between Great Britain and her Colonies would render further important services to his Sovereign and to the nation. That prediction has already been fulfilled. The effects of his mission to Russia have been made apparent in improved relations between the courts of St. Petersburg and St. James. In truth, no better antidote to the "spirited Foreign policy" of the late British Government could have been devised than the enrolment of Lord Dufferin in the diplomatic service.

“High hopes pursued him from the shore,

And prophesyings brave,”

Since his departure for Russia it is said that the Vice-royalty of Ireland and of India have both been tendered to and declined by him.

THE REV. ROBERT FERRIER BURNS

Dr. Burns was born at Paisley, Scotland, on the 23rd of December, 1826. After spending a term of four years at the Public Grammar School of that town, he was entered as a student at the University of Glasgow in the month of November, 1840, before he had quite completed his fourteenth year. He remained at that seat of learning four sessions, during which he achieved high standing in his classes, and carried off several prizes, including two in Latin. He stood third in Greek, second in Logic, and first in Moral Philosophy. While attending the University he had for associates Principal McKnight, of Halifax, the Rev. William Maclaren, of Blairlogie, and the late Rev. John Maclaren, of Glasgow. In 1844-5 he attended New College, Edinburgh, during the second session of its existence, and sat at the feet of Drs. Chalmers, Cunningham and Duncan. He had meanwhile resolved on emigrating to Canada, and on the 29th of March, 1845, he sailed from Greenock for Quebec. He made his way to Toronto, where he attended two sessions at Knox College, having for his contemporaries there Dr. Black, of Manitoba, and the late Rev. James Nisbet, of the Prince Albert Mission. During his collegiate career he acted as Student Catechist, and preached as a volunteer at Proudfoot's Mills, and also at Oakville. During the summer of 1846 he laboured to good purpose at Niagara. In April, 1847, he was licensed to preach by the Presbytery of Toronto, and on the first of July following he was ordained as first pastor of Chalmers Church, Kingston. During his residence at Kingston he officiated for a year as Chaplain to the Forty-first Regiment of Highland Infantry.

On the 1st of July, 1852, he married Miss Elizabeth Holden, a daughter of Dr. Rufus Holden, of Belleville, and a sister of the wife of Professor Gregg, of Toronto. By this lady he now has a family of eight children, consisting of four sons and four daughters. After a pastorate of exactly eight years he left Kingston on the 5th of July, 1855, and settled at St. Catharines as first pastor of the United Church. He remained there nearly twelve years, during eight of which he also had charge of a congregation at Port Dalhousie, four miles distant. During his ministry at St. Catharines the new church now known as Knox Church was erected, and his congregation subsequently worshipped there. In 1862 he took a conspicuous part in starting Sabbath School Conventions in this country, which have since been attended by many blessings to the young. In the month of July, 1866, the degree of Doctor of Divinity was conferred upon him by Hamilton College, near Utica, in the State of New York, the leading literary institution of the New School of Presbyterians in that State. On the 20th of March, 1867, he became first pastor of the First Scotch Presbyterian Church in Chicago, which then and for some years thereafter belonged to the Canadian Church. During his incumbency of this charge he received several calls from various churches, all of which were declined. His Chicago pastorate lasted three years, during which the membership of his church trebled in number, and a fine new church was erected by the congregation on the corner of Adams and Sagamore Streets. In October, 1867, he accompanied the Rev. D. L. Moody, the Evangelist, from Chicago to Toronto, on the occasion of the first sitting of the Young Men's Christian Association Convention in the latter city. In the beginning of May, 1870, he returned to Canada, and was inducted into the pastorate of Cote Street Church, Montreal, where Dr. Fraser and the present Principal McVicar had previously ministered. Here he remained five years.

On the 18th of March, 1875, he was settled over Fort Massey Church, Halifax, of which the Rev. J. K. Smith, of Galt, had been for two years pastor. Here Dr. Burns has ever since remained. The congregation has since its commencement discarded pew rents, and has been conducted on the weekly free-will-offering system, the offertory being collected at the church door. Their annual givings to church purposes are said to exceed $100 for each family. He was Moderator of the Synod of Montreal in 1873, and also Chairman of the Montreal College Board; and on his removal to Halifax he was elected to the same post there, which he still fills. During the session of 1877 he delivered special courses of lectures before the Montreal and Halifax students, and in 1878 these were followed up by a second special course in the Halifax College. In 1877 he was associated with Principal Grant and others in pushing forward the $100,00 °College Endowment Fund.

Dr. Burns is also known as an author. As early as 1854 he contributed to the Anglo-American Magazine, published in Toronto; and several years later to the Presbyterian Magazine. In 1857 he published "The Progress and Principles of Temperance Reform;" and in 1865, in conjunction with the Rev. Mr. Norton, of St. Catharines, "Maple Leaves for the Grave of Abraham Lincoln." In 1872 he wrote and published his most voluminous work, "The Life and Times of Dr. Robert Burns, of Toronto." This work passed through three editions, and was a decided success. His other works are chiefly pamphlets, sermons, and short fugitive pieces.

At the meeting of the General Assembly held at Ottawa in 1879 Dr. Burns was one of the eight clerical delegates elected to attend the General Presbyterian Council, to be held in Philadelphia during the present year. Last summer he attended the Sunday School Celebration held in London, England, to commemorate the founding of Sunday Schools by Robert Raikes, in Gloucester, a century ago.

THE HON. ALBERT NORTON RICHARDS,

LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

Mr. Richards is the youngest son of the late Mr. Stephen Richards, of Brockville, and a brother of the Hon. William Buell Richards, ex-Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Dominion, a sketch of whose life appeared in the first volume of this series. Some account of the family history is contained in the sketch alluded to. Albert Norton Richards was born at Brockville, Upper Canada, on the 8th of December, 1822. Like his elder brothers, William and Stephen, he received his early education at the famous Johnstown District Grammar School, and embraced the legal profession as his calling in life. He studied law in the office of his brother William, with whom he entered into partnership after his call to the Bar in Michaelmas Term, 1848. Though perhaps somewhat less conspicuous at the Bar than his partner, he took a high position, and was distinguished for the acumen and soundness of judgment which seem to be inherent in every member of his family. After his brother's elevation to the Bench, he himself continued to practise at Brockville. His business was large and profitable. He took a keen interest in politics, and was identified with the Reform Party. He did not seek Parliamentary distinction, however, until the year 1861, when he was an unsuccessful candidate for the representation of South Leeds in the Legislative Assembly of Canada — his successful opponent being Mr. Benjamin Tett. At the general election of 1863 he again offered himself in opposition to the same candidate, and on this occasion was returned at the head of the poll. In the month of December following he accepted office in the Sandfield Macdonald-Dorion Administration, as Solicitor-General for the Upper Province. He was at the same time created a Queen's Counsel. Upon returning to his constituents for reëlection, after accepting office, he was compelled to encounter the full strength of the Conservative Party. The Government of the day existed by a mere thread, their majority averaging one, two and three, and it was felt that if Mr. Richards could be defeated the Government must resign. The constituency of South Leeds was invaded by all the principal speakers and agents of the Conservative Party, headed by the Hon. John A. Macdonald and the late Mr. D'Arcy McGee, and no stone was left unturned to defeat the new Solicitor-General. The result was the defeat of the latter by Mr. D. Ford Jones, the Conservative candidate, by a majority of five votes. Mr. Richards, after the resignation of the Government, remained out of public life until 1867, when he unsuccessfully contested his old seat for the House of Commons with the late Lieutenant-Governor Crawford, the latter being elected by a majority of thirty-nine. In 1869 Mr. Richards was offered by the Government of Sir John Macdonald the office of Attorney-General in the Provincial Government which Mr. Macdougall, as Lieutenant-Governor of the Northwest Territories, was about to establish at Fort Garry. Mr. Richards accepted the office, and accompanied Mr. Macdougall on his well-known journey, until stopped by Louis Riel at Stinking River. In the following year he visited British Columbia on public business, and in 1871 he again visited that Province, this time for the benefit of the health of his children, eight of whom he had lost by death during his residence at Brockville. At the general election of 1872, Mr. Richards made another and a successful appeal to the electors of South Leeds, and was returned to the House of Commons. He held his seat until January, 1874; when, being absent from the country, on a visit to British Columbia, he was unable to return in time to be nominated for his old constituency, and South Leeds became lost to the Reform Party. Mr. Richards continued to reside in British Columbia, and for several years was the official Legal Agent of the Dominion Government in that Province. He took an active part in endeavouring to bring about various much-needed law reforms, as to several of which he was ultimately successful. On the 29th of July, 1875, he was appointed Lieutenant-Governor of the Province, a position which he has ever since held. His sterling qualities have obtained recognition, and he has won great popularity.

He has been twice married. His first wife, whom he married on the 17th of October, 1849, was Frances, daughter of the late Benjamin Chaffey, formerly of Staffordshire, England. This lady died in April, 1853. On the 12th of August, 1854, he married Ellen, daughter of the late John Cheslett, also of Staffordshire. His second wife still survives.