Vol. XU.

eekly *ournal

rc

of Politics,

“This is truc Liberty, when Freeborn Men, having to advise the Public, may speak free.”’=--Enuripides.

Charlottetewn, Prince Edward Island, Monday, May 4, 1863.

Hiterature, and Blews,

—

New Series.---No, 17.

COLOWIAL LEGISLATURE.

LOO ey LOLOL COUNCIL CHAMBER,

Tuxspay Arrernoon, March 31.

Hon. Mr. Beer presented a petition of the Sons of Tem-

perance, praying for an Act to amend the spirituous liquor

Licence Act. Laid on the table.

On motion of Hon. Mr. Beer the Bill to incorporate the |

Marine Insurance Company was read the third time and } assed.

lon. Mr. Yeo obtained leave of absence for one week ; Hon. Mr. Lord till Thursday next; and Hon. Mr. Goff till Thursday the 9:h of April. Adjourned till to-morrow at 10 o'clock. |

Wepwnespay, April Ist.

On motion of the Hon. Mr. McLaren, the joint Address to Her Majesty the Queen, prayirg that the Acts passed last session to give effect to the Award of the Commissioners on

the Land Question may be allowed to go iuto operation un- |

less cause to the contrary can be showo before a judicial tribunal, was read the third. time and passed.

Hon. Mr. Dingwell obtained leave of abseuce til] Thurs- day the 9:h instant.

House adjourned. Tuvasvay, April 2.

A Bill to incorporate the Minister and Trustees of the | Presbyteriau Chureff, St. Peter's Bay, was read the second |

time, passed through Committee, and agreed to without any amendment.

A message was brought from the House of Assembly by the Hon. Mr. Hensley with a Bill to incorporate the Minis- ter and Trustees of the Presbyterian Church, Bay Fortune.

On motion of the Hon. Attyrney General the Bill to |

authorize the Legislative Council and House of Assembly to commit persons for contempt to the common Jail of Queen County, as amended, was read the third time and passed.

Hen Attorney General called the attention of the House | to the state of the Legislative Library, and stated that a |

large number of American and other works had been pur- chased from time to time which were now of little value, but were rather an incumberance.

Library should be at liberty to dispose of such books as they

thought proper, and to apply the proceeds in procuring |

others. The question having been put thereon it passed in the affirmative.

. ati , The House adjourned till Tuesday next, to give the coun- |

try members an opportunity to visit their homes during the | 7 ' eae Ppo 3 | behalf of Mr. McGowan, and he said he could not tell.

| says he objected to 23 or 24 votes; but a general objection | | will not do,

Haster holidays. Twespay, April 7.

On motion of Hon. Mr. Henderson, the Bill to incor- porate the Minister and Trustees of the Presbyterian Church, Bay Fortuze, was read the second time. The said Bill was then committed to a committee of the whole House, read clause by clause, and agreed to without any amendment.

On motion of Hon. Mr. Beer the Biil to incorporate the Minister and Trustees of the Presbyterian Chureh, St. Peter’s Ray, was read the third time and passed.

Adjourned till to-morrow at 10 o'clock.

Wepnespay, April 8.

His honor submitted a reso- | lution to the effect that the Committee having charge of the |

—— eat

. a. = , ae i Mr. Beers’ “ J think” as evidence. We must have some- ||

thing positive. McPherson could easily have shown how he bought the land, and he could have defined it in more posi- tive terms.

| vote differs from the last we had under consideration.

Hon Mr, BEER.—The most substantial proof we could |

have is that the occupation of the land is traced back to William Gordon. :

Hon. ATTORNEY GENERAM.—What witness traced it to Gordon ?

Hon. Mr. BEER.—The voter himself says so.

Hon. ATTORNEY GENERAL.—It is necessary to re- miod his honor that the law says positively that po man shall give evidence upon bis own vote.

Hon. Mr. HENDERSON.—Lt does not appear to me that those two witnesses have raised a reasonable doubt on this | vote. Their evidence is as much ia favour of the vote as | against it.

lion. the PRESIDENT.—The doubt is raised by the

voters name not appearing on the plan. We want to know | how he came in possession of the land. | Ton. Mr. BEER.—The property is deseribed in the poll book as freehold, and the oceupation of it is traced back to Gordon. I am therefore confident that no reasonable doubt | bas been raised on this vote. | Hon. ATTORNEY GENERAL.—I think all the evi- | dence shows that the title is in Mr. Hensley, not in Me- | Pherson, and when a doubt is raised upna a vote we cannot sustain it till it is substantiated by evidence.

His honor the Attorney General thea submitted the follow- ing resolution.

Resolved, That there is not sufficient evidence before this |

Committee to substantiate the vote of Donald McPherson.

The Committee divided,

Conrents.—Hon. Messrs. Attorney General, President, Ramsay, Walker, Dingwell and Lord—6

Non Conrenrs.—Hlon. Messrs. Yeo, Anderson, Beer, Mo- Laren and Henderson—5d

So it passed in the affirmative.

The vote of Murdock Nicholson, polled for Mr. McGowan,

}

was then considered. The same evidence applied to this vote as to the preceeding, and was fouud insufiicicat. Division the same as above.

The evidence of the Hon. W. H. Pope, relating to the

voters o nLot 66, was then read.

Hon. Mr. McDONALD.—I object to scrutinizing those votes, on the ground that they were uot marked objected by Mr. MeGowan in the poll book. It was decided by this Committee in other cases that votes marked “ objected by Melaren” could not be scrutinized by Mr. McGowan. Mr. | Pope was asked if he objected to the vote of Richard Gillon He

Till it is shown that those votes were objected

| said that he might have bought lund from the Government

| boagkt his land from O’Holoran, and that may be the case

| slightest inclination to depart frou it.

| scrutiny, and the parties could have easily produced their | titles or their receipts to show that they held their land

to by Mr. McGowan, or on his behalf, 1 contend that it is |

not competent for this Committee to scrutinize them. Mr. Pope had no authority to object to votes on behalf of Mr.

| McLaren, and his doing so would not entitle Me. MeLaren |

| to serutinize them.

He says he objected to the vote of one |

of the Gill’s, but there is no evidence to show that he objected |

to the vote of Richard Gill. Lion. ATTORNEY GENERAL.—The examination of

Mr. Pope was agreed to, your honors, in consequence of a |

t

| doubt being entertained of the legal effect of the omission of |

Hon. Mr. Beer presented a petition of the President and |

Directors of the Bank of Pricce Edward is'and, praying for an Act to continue aud amend tho Act for the incorpor- ation of the said Bank.

On motion of the Hon. Mr. Henderson, the Bill to incor- porate the Minister and Trustees of the Presbyterian Church, Lay Fortune, was read the third time and passed.

A message was brought from the House of Assembly by the Hon. Mr. Pope, with a Bill to alter and amend the Act for the preservation of the Alewives fisheries of this Lsland.

Adjourned till to-morrow at 10 o’clock.

Tavrspay, April 9. A message was brought from the House of Assembly by

the Act to incorporate tho Bank of Prince Edward Isiand.

The Bill to alter and amend the Act for the preservation of the Alewives fisheries was read the second time, passed through Committee, and agreed to with one amendment. The amendment was merely a verbal one.

His honor the PRESIDENT called the attention of the House to the circumstarice that, by the “ Act to change the constitution of the Legi.iative Council, by rendering the same elective,” six members are to go out at the end of four

years—that it was to be determined by lot during this session | His honor thought that as |

who should go out at that time. the Session was advanced, and as the members were all present at that time, it was advisable not to delay the mat- ter any longer.

Whereupon his honor the Attorney General proposed the following resolution :

Resolved, That this House do now proceed to determine by lot the names of the six members thereof who shall be deemed to have been elected to this House for four years, in pursuance

of the 1th section of the Act passed in the twenty-fifth year |

of Her Majesty's reign, intituled “* An Act to change the Con- stitution of the Legislative Council, by rendering the same elective,’’ and that the said lot be drawn as follows, viz: The names of the twelve members, subject by the Act to be drawn, shall be written on separate slips of paper, and each slip rolled up closely. The slips containing the names of the two members representing a District shall be put together in one ballot-box, and after being shaken, one of these slips shall be drawn therefrom by the Clerk of this [louse and imme- diately deposited in a seperate ballot-hox, conveniently placed for the reeeption of the same,—the like mode to be adopted for cach of the six Districts aforesaid. When completed, the members whose names shall be found written on the six slips or rolls of ree so drawn and placed in the said seperate ballot-box (being one for cach District) shall be deemed and taken to be the members elected for four years, in conformity witk the provisions of the J 8th section of the said recited Act.

Their honors then proceeded to draw. lots, and it was de- cided that the following members should go out at the end of four years:—Ilon. Messrs. Yco, Ramsay, Henderson, Goff. McDonald and Dingwell.

Adjourned till to-morrow at 10 o'clock.

Fripay, April 10.

The Committee of privileges and elections resumed.

Evidence relating to the vote of Donald McPherson read Alleged to be a squatter, Lot 66.

flon. Mr. McDONALD.-—Manoah Row states that he knows the voter, and that his name is not on the plan. It is said that McPherson occupies the farm marked on the plan as William Gordon's. It has not been shown whether he has a deed or not, whether he parchased from Gordor or merely squatted on it after Gordon left it. The entry in the poll book only shows that he occupied the land for 6 or 8 years. There is nothiug to show that he does not occupy a part of the land which was sold for land tax.

Hon. the PRESIDENT. —If MePherson bought Gor- don's possession his vote is probably goqd; but if he only squatted after Gordon left it, be can have no vote. The question turns on this point.

Hon. Mr. BEER. — The voter says he bought the land from Gordon; and on referring to the deed we see that it Was not sold for land tax. It is therefore a freehold.

flor. ATTORNEY GENERAL. —The Sheriff's deed,

her with the attached plan, were taken as prima facie evidence on the other objected votes on Lot 66. We con- sidered the farms not colored green on the plan to have been sold by the Sheriff for non-payment of land tax. Donald McPherson's name does not appear on the colored part of the plan; therefore a doubt is thrown on the vote, and it is for the petitioning candidate to prove that it is good. Tae evidence of Phillip Beers does not, in my opinion, come up to the required standard. He says McPherson voted on the land marked on the plan as William Gordon's ; but even if we admit that his land is colored green on the plan, there is not sufficient evidence to show that he is either &@ frechoider or leascholder. We cannot take McPherson's own evidence in supnort of his own yote. He says in the poll boo that he belieyes it to have been oceupied for 25 years, bat there is no proof that it was. We cannot take

the name of the Candidate who'objected to those votes. But though I agreed to the examination of Mr. Pope, I did not

agree that it was indispensably necessary that the name of | I | | deal of harm, and I do not see any benefit that can result

the objecting Candidate should be entered in the poll book. To come to the conclusion that we bad not power to examine evidence at the Bar of the [louse might be a bad precedent, and I thought it was the safest way to bave him examined, The law says it is only necessary to have the vote marked objected. I consider that when two or three Candidates are

| rupuing an election in the same interest and one of them

objects to a vote, it is competent for any of the others who were in the same interest to scrutinize it. Whoever scruti- nizes a vote renders himself liable for the costs if the vote is sustained. Mr. Pope says, ‘* 1 object to those votes, I think

, : : : y : b the . Col. Se y, wi i ¢ and amend | all of them, on the ggound that the voters had no titles, by ee ee eee Se ee | reason of the lands in respect to which they claimed to yote

| having been sold by the Sheriff in 1850 for non-payment of

land tax.”’ Again he says, ‘* all the votes marked objected were, as well as I can recollect, so marked by my direction, and on behalf of Messrs. McGowan and McLaren.” There appears to have been that understanding that when a vote was polled against the interest of Messrs. McGowan and Mclaren, and objected to by one of them it was intended for the benefit of both. It is not likely that Mr. Pope or apy other person, when questioned, could indentify every voter whose vote he had objected to, unless there were some re- markable circumstances connected with them. I therefore consider it is reasonable to admit that the direction to mark those votes objected was general. I do not see how we can say that the direction to mark them objected was not intend- ed for the benefit of both Candidates. Therefore I thiok it is competent for the Committee to take those votes into con- sideration. It would be doing a great injustice to the

petitioning Candidate to refuse to do so. 1 have taken a geod deal of trouble to look through all the authorities within my reach, and I cannot find anything exactly applic- able'to this case; but I have found enough to satisfy my mind that it was competent for this Committee to call for evidence, and we were therefore justifiable in hearing Mr. Pope at the Bar of the House.

Hon. Mr. MeDONALD.—I am not yet satisfied that it is competent for this Committee, or for Mr. McGowan, to scrutinize those votes which were not marked objected by him; but if the Committee have decided otherwise it is useless for me to say any more about it. I may say some- thing however respecting the qualifications of those voters. Richard Gill voted on 100 acres of land on Lot 66—in possession for 5 or 6 years. He obtained his possession from O’Holoran, whose land was excepted in the Sheriff's sale. Therefore the ownership of the land was not changed by the Sheriff's deed. While I was home a few days ago 1 was informed that several of the men whose votes were scrutinized and condemued by this Committee, thought it advisuble to sell their farms, One man sold for £150, another for £155, anothér for £200, another is in treaty for the sale of his farm for £240 and auother asks £250, That shows that their farms were more valuable than they were

considered to be by your honors. There would be no

| difficulty in proving this vote as the man holds legal docu- ments, and [ would like to be allowed to bring evidence before this Committee for that purpose. ’

Hon. Mr. BEER —Tue description of this vote as given in the poll book is very similar to the description of Murdock Nicholson’s vote.

The President then resumed the chair and the House ad- journed for 14 hour.

Arternoon Sirrina.

Commitice of privileges and elections resumed—vote of Richard Gill again under consideration.

Hon. Mr. MecDONALD,—The land on which Jobn Gill voted was purchased by the Government. There has been no evidence produced by Mr. McGowan except Mr. Pope. In other cases there was evidence to show that those votes on Lot 66 were on the part that was colored green on the plan, and consequently on that part of the Lot which was sold by the sheriff. In this case there is no evidence to show that the yoter has not a good qualification. “a | Hon. Mr. BEER.—It was decided this morning in the ease of Murdock Nicholson, that the fact of his name not being on the plan threw a doubt upon his vote. Now this voter’s name is not on the plan, and I do not know how your honors can support the vote unless you shift your ground,

ground. Perhaps his bouor who spoke last will doso. if the vote is in the same position as the one previously under congideration, I will vote as 1 did on that occasion. We will see who will shift his ground.

Hon. Mr. YEO.—1 think this vote stands ia exactly the came position as the two we disposed of this morping.

Hon. Mr. DINGWELL —Well, his honor voted to sus- tain the two votes which were disposed of this morning, and as he says this vote is in the same position 1 suppose be will

vole for it.

Hon. the PRSIDENT.—I am not prepared to shift my —

in

_in the face in order to arrive at a just conclusion as to the

Hon. ATTORNEY GENERAL.—I do not see that this The evidence of Mr. Pope shows that certain parts of Lot 66 were sold for non-payment of land tax. Then here is the Sheriff’s deed with the plan attached and the name of the voter does not appear on the excepted parts. It bas been

since Lot 66 came into their bands, but if so it was easy to | have shown such was the caso. It hasalso been said that he

but there is no evideace to prove it,

The following resolution was then proposed and it passed it the affirmative :

Resolved, That it is the opinion of this Committee that there does not appear any evidence in support of the vote of Richard Gill.

The vote of Jchn Gill then came under consideration.

Hon. Messrs, Dingwell, President, and Lord were of opinion that as he had voted on Government land under a conveyance from his father that no doubt was thrown on his vote, either by tue Sheriff's deed or by the evidence of Mr. Pope.

Hoa. Messrs. Yeo, Beer, aud Henderson thought a reason- able doubt had been raised by the evidence of Mr. Pope, as he had sworn that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, John Gill was a squatter.

Hon. ATTORNEY GENERAL —T mast say that I cannot distinguish between this vote and others which we pronounced bad for want of evidence. True, Mr. Pope qualifies bis oath by saying “ to the best of his knowledge and belief,” but still there is prima facie evidence when he says it was sold for land tax. That is sufficient to call for evidence to prove the vote good. We have acted upon that rule all through this scrutiny and I have never had the We cannot take the oath of the voter himself as evidence; the law will not per- mit it; it is merely descriptive of his property. Neither ean we take the return of the Commissioner of the Govern- ment lands as evidence. In some cases we did take up that book, but it was merely when a question arose whether the instalments had been paid or pot. Mr. Popo swears that he believes him to be a squatter. Now those votes were object- | ed to in consequence of this deed, at an early day of the

legally. They did not choose to do so, and the presumption in law is that they had none, or were afraid to produce them.

Hon. Mr. Yeo submitted the following resolution and it passed in the affirmative.

' Resolved, That it is the opinion of this Committee that there appears no evidence in proof of the vote of John Gill.

The votes otf Thomas Connolly, Patrick Power, Hugh Rooney, John Evans and James Wickham, all polled for Mr. McDonald, were considered and found insufficient.

The House was then resumed and progress reported.

lon. Mr. Goff moved, seconded by the Hon. Mr. Hender- | son, that the ‘** Bill to incorporate the Grand Orange Lodge of Prince Edward Island and the subordinate Lodges ia con- nection therewith’’ be now read the third time.

Hon. Mr. Walker moved an amendment that it be read a third time this day three months,

Hon. Mr. DINGWELL.—I second the amendment. I am sorry that the Orangemen should have pressed this measure. I believe it is calculated to disturb the peace and prosperity of this community. It is calculated to do a great

from it. If er become law we willso0n be called upon to repeal it, bat I hope it will never go into operation. I believe no christian man can consistently introduce anything to give offence to his fellow men. Since this Bill was intro- duced I have been ia the country and have couversed with a number of Protestants and Catholics a!l of whom condemn this Bill. I do not think Protestants need be afraid of Ca- tholies. They have their Presbyterics and Sessions in good working order, and I do not think there is any necessity for this Bills Ido not think any country can prosper unless there is peace, and we should pausébefore we pass a measuze that is likely to be the means of disturbing the peace.

Hon. ATTORNEY GENERAL.—I expressed my sen- timents on this Bill at the second reading, and 1 do not deem it necessary to make any further observations at the present time.

Hon. Mr. HENDERSON.—LI hope, your honors, that I will be excused for mentioning what relates tomyscif. And it is thls, that though I have been in the Army for nearly 22 years, I never struck a blow in my own defence except- ing once. This fact would certainly imply that I am a lover of peace; but I am not troubled with timidity when the path of duty is clear. I am one of the Jast that would wigh to indulge in suspicious feelings concerning the motives or actions of my fellow men; but when a succession of facts compels us to trace a series of actions, on the part of a cer- tain class or classes of cur fellow men, to principles that are pretty clearly sect forth on the pages of History, is it not right that we should open our eyes aud look the subject fully

path of duty ? The last mail has brought us news of the

gross breaches of the peace committed in Ireland on the oc-

sasion of the marriage of the Prince of Wales. Now, I

would ask, to what principles are these gross outrages to be

attributed ? The only fair answer that can be given is, that

they are to be attributed to the black principles of disloyalty

to, and hatred of, our beloved Sovereign the Queen, and our

noble British Constitution. Therefore, 1 am, if possible

more thoroughly prepared to support the third, than I was

the second reading of the Bill, because I believe that, in our

capacity of Legislators, we are solemnly bound to countenance

true loyalty and to frown upow disloyalty among all classes

of our fellow subjects. And despite all that can be said to

the coutrary, I am satisfied that Orangemen are the con-

stant supporters of true liberty in ail circamstances. It has

been said by oue of your honors that this measure is calcu-

lated to give great offence to the Catholics. and to lead to

strife. That offence will be taken if this Jill ehould become

Law is quite evident, for it should ever be borne in mind by

Protestants, that their very existence as such is no small

offence to many Catholics; and if so the difference of their

rights, or the cerrying out of their prin:iy'es cannot be any - other than offensive to the same parties. Trae Protestants

are always desirous to take God's word as their rule, and that teaches them to “ do to their neighbours as they would wish their neighbours to do them.” J$ut when they know that the neighbours in question cherish and bold the same principles, that are held by those who are making every possible effort to undermine and supersede protestantism on British soil, it becomes them to know who the men are that they can depend upon—who will stand to defend the right in any emergency. It is worthy of remark that any little occurrence which takes place and affects Catholic interests in this Island, is communicated to even the humblest members of that communion at its cxtreme points in an exceedingly short space of time. This is not mere hear say, bata lucid

fact. And the natural inference is, that they have their organizations in sufficient operation for all purposes, It has been frequently affirmed in convection with the late clections that orangemen bad excited no small infuence on their de- tails. If that be true, and 1 am not prepared to deny it,

the results are certainly no discredit to them; for peace, good order, and general success have crowned their efforts.

L am willing to secure their just rights to every class avd to defend my own against fraud or force—I{ would not surrender a fragment of my protestant rights while | have a tongue to epeak or an arm to defend them.

Hon. Mr McDONALD.—Uis honor is determined not to give up any rigbt. 1 would be sorry to ask him, or any other man, to give up a right which is conferred upon bim by the British Constitution. We are not asking any man to give up a right by opposing this Bill. I oppose it on the good and sound principle that the Orange Society on this Island is"a seeret institution got up for political purposes. (No! No! No! from several member). His honor says that the peace, good order, and general success, which attend the late elections, are to be attributed to Orangemen. That

oes to show that they so far take part in elections,

Hou. Mr. GOFF.—Yes, to pre-erye the peace.

| Roman Catholics—we want none.

( show their disloyalty whenever an occasion offered.

Protestants ?

Hon. : Mr. McDONALD.—I cannot agree with his | honor that thoy preserved the peace at the late elections for |

at the polling division where I stood, there was no disposition to break the peace shown except by one person, and he is said to be a leading member of an Urange Lodge. He had a very ug!y looking weapon under his coat and down into his boot.

Hon. Mr. GOFF,.—Will hig honor give tho name ?

Hon. Mr. McDONALD.—I could give the name, but he would probably deny being an Orangeman, though it is well known that he attends their mectings. rise from the Orange Institution in Canada, which has been

| said by the last speaker to be the very essence of loyalty ; | but when the Prince of Wales was there they showed a dis-

position to ride above the law. Why should we pass an Act here to incorporate a society that is not recognised in Fagland, or in any-of the British Colonies. His honor said that Roman Catholics know things that happeved 100 miles away ina very short time. Well, that is a very strange argument, I do not understand what his honor means by it. His honor also speaks about being prepared for am emergen- cy, and I am at a loss to know what he means by thet. 1] consider this Bill an insult to a large portion of the people of this Colony. Orangemen are so well and so unfavourably known—they have led to so many breaches ef the peace, particularly in Ireland—tgat 1 do not wish to see them re- cognised by lawin this Colony. If they are recognised here [ fear the samo results will follow that have been produced ia other countries. I hope this will not be the case, but it will have that tendency. His honor thinks that Roman Catholics are going to infringo on the rights of Protestants, but I have not heard any proof that they are doing so. If it were their intention, [ would be as desirous to preserve the constitu- tional rights of Protestants as any person in the community. I will support the amendment.

Hfon. Mr. GOSF.—Some of your honors make a great ado about this Bill, but L cannot see why you should do so. The most numerous part of the inbabitants are Protestants, and this Bill is of great Importance to them. They have organized themselves into lodges, and they have shown their object to be good, and that no man who is not a christian and a good member of society, can be admitted into their assoviation, They are swora to be loyal—to support the constitution, and to maintaia the law. They ask foran Act of incorporation to enable them to hold property. They merely wish to be put om the same footing as other socities which are obtaining similar Acts every day, and I cannot see on what grounds your honors can refuse their Pequest. It is said that that the name of ‘“ Orange,” by which thie society is known, is offensive to Roman Catholics, but that is no cause for altering the name, for it has, to al] true Protes- tants, a happy association with that of King William the Third, the defender of the rights and liberties of a Protest- ant nation, and we, as Protestants, are bound to uphold the rights and liberties we enjoy. Weask for no favour from It is true they are our fellow subjects, and they call themselves loyal, but it is a mockery on ihe term. ‘T'aey cannot be loyal to a Protestant nation, or to a Protesant Queen, They have never failed to What was their conduct during the Crimean war? Did not their press exult when England was in difficulty? Did they not mourn when England rejoiced 2 Had they pity or compas- sion for the wives or children murdered in ¢he Indian Mutiny? No! The British army in the Crimea was, by one’of them oa'the floor of the House of Assembly designated as “‘ midnight assassins.’? The sympathy of the many has been with the Russian and with the Schoy, and why should we be called upon to consult their feeliggs in this respect ? How did the Roman Catholic party act so recently in Hyde Park and in Berkenhead? What has been their conduct in Ireland on the cecasion of the marriage of His Royal Highness the Priace of Wales? Did they not show their disloyalty by their riots ia Cork and Dublin, and in their refusing to joiu with the nation in the general rejoicing? If they have thus shown themselves disloyal to the head of the

ritish nation, what right have they to our confidence as Some of your honors seem to be alarmed that this Orange society will be the cause of discord and strife, but I think it will bave the contrary effect, It will insure the peace of the country and the maintenance of law and good order.

The question was then put on the amendment, and the House divided :

Contents — Hon. Messrs. Walker, Dingwell, Lord and MecDonald—4.

Nox—contents—Hon. Messrs, Attorney General, Ander- son, Yeo, Ramsey, McLaren, Goff, Beer and Henderson—8,

So it passed in the negative.

Hlon. Mr. McDONALD. — His honor who spoke last brought a general charge of disloyalty against Roman Ca- tholics. I deny that they are disloyal. Wherever the British arms have been carried, there Roman Catholies were found fighting side by side with Pratesiauts for their Sove- reign and their country. If one or tsvo were disloyal, should that be a ground to bring a geveral charge of disloyalty against the whole Catholic body? Persons professing the Roman Catholic faith have been as Joyal and true to their Sovereign as any others, and it is a direct insult to say that they are not. I am just as loyal to my Queen and country as I could be if I were a Protestant. [| have sworn as sin- cerely to be faithful and true to my Sovereign as I could do if I were a Protestant. Lt is unjust and ungencrous to make such aseertions,

Hon. Mr. GOFF. —I only stated facts which can be proved,

Hon. Mr. McDONALI®--If one or two Roman Catholic meubers opposed the grant to the patriotic fund there were other Catholics who supported it, and should that be any reason fur bringing a general charge of disloyalty against the whole kody? Or should the circumstance of a riot being created in [reland on the occasion of the Prince’s marriage be the ground for e charge against the whole Ua- tholic Church ? There are as many Rowan Catholics in the Army and Navy of Great Britain, in proportion to their nntwbers, as of any other Church. I feel eure that Roman Catholics are just as loyal as any other body of men. No doubt there are exceptions amoug oman Catholics, and among Protestants as well. I must protest against this general charge of disloyalty.

The question was thea put on the original motion, and the louse divided :

Coxtents—Ilon. Messrs. Attorney General, Yeo, Auder- son, McLaren, Ramsay, Beer, Goff and Henderson —8.

Non—conrents—Hon, Messrs. Walker, McDonald, Ding- well and Lord—4,

So it passed in the affirmative.

The Bill was thea read the third time and passed.

House adjourned.

Sarunpay, April 11.

The Committee of privileges and elections was resumed, and the principal part of the forenoon was occupied in sum- ing up the votes that were scrutinized and considered by the Committee. It was found that 43 votes polled for Mr. Me- Douald were insufficicnt in law, or otherwise illegally cu- tered on the pol! books, which number subtracted from 490, the whole number polled for Mr. McDonald, would leave 447. Of Mr. McGowan's votes 19 were found to be illegal, which number substracted from 466, the mumber polled for Mr. McGowan, leaves 447; thus leaving the numoer for each candidate the same.

The House was then resumed and progress reported.

Hon. Mr. Beer presented a petition of the Shareholders of the Bank of Prince Eiward Island, praying the House to assent to the Biil to continue and amend the Act to iucor- porate the said Bank.

House adjourued.

Arrernoon Srirrrve.

A message was brought from the House of Assembly by the Hon. Mr. Hensley with a Bil to incorporate the Uuion Bank of Prince Kdward Island,

The Bill to continue and amend the Act to incorporate the Bink of Prince Kiward Island was read the second time and committed to a committee of the whole Louse. Hon. Mr. Beer in the chair.

Hon. Mr. McDONALD, — It coun share- holders of the Bank had power under the Gone to increase their stock from £30,000 to £60,000 at any time within seven years from the passing of the Act, but thoy neglected to do so, And it appears somewhat singular that just at the time when a new Bank is about being established they should ask for the privilege of extending their etock, It appears to me that their object is to prevent the othar

| Bank from going into operation. The Directors deny thet | such is their object, and I sce a large number of the share-

This Act takes its |

holders have signed the petition to have the privilege ex- tended.. I am a shareholder myself to a small extent, bat I do not know that this Bill is necessary. 1 do not know that they have ever yet used the amount of their funds, or had the amount of notes they wero allowed to issue, in cireula- tion at any one time. do not think it would be any ad- vantago to the shareholders to have their capital increased, but rather a disadvantage, though the petitioners take a dif- ferent view of tho matter. I am of opinion that by inereas- ing the capital, and therchy throwing # large number cf shares into the market, the profits to the present shareholders will be lessened. If sach a Pill should be reqaired at some ~ time, and ae the honor of a ceat in this House,

will support it, do not feeldisposed to do 20 at present.

IIoa, the PRESIDENT—I do not sce how this Bill is to be a disadvantage to the stockholders generally, though it is possible that by giving greater competition to the country it might not be an advantage to the small stockholders. petition is numerously signed by the stockholders, and surely they would not ask for a Bill that would be a disadvan to them. Neither do I see how the passing of this Bill will interfere with the establishment of another Bank,

Hon. Mr. LORD.— I do not rise to oppose the Bill, though I must say that [ am not exactly favorable to it. It is my belief that we would not see this Bill, or a petition for it, if it were not in contemplation to establish another Bank. And what is their reason for applying for this Act ? Thoy have never been straitened for want of means. Nor bad they ever, I believe, more than 50 per eont of the amount in circulation which they are allowed to havo by the pre» sent Act, I have heard a reason stated, and I believe there is some foundation for it, which is, that they want to keep a monopoly, aud have tho whole management of the monetary affairs of this Colony. It is ouly a short time sinee the Annual meeting of the Directors took place, and wo hoard nothing about an increase of their stock then. Before they could increase their stock they mast have the consent of a majority of the shareholders; bat here is petition with the names of persons who are on the other side of the Atlantic, and who hold a large namher of shares. Of course it was competent for their Proxies to sign the petition on their behalf, but still it is not tho same as if they signed it themselves. I sma shareholder in the pre- sent Bank te a small extent, and I will also take some shares in tho new Bank, for I think there is a necessity for another Bank in this Island. We know that some thou- sands of pounds worth of good paper has been refused at the present Bank, not because the scourity wae not good, but because they did not wish to have iarger amount of mone in circulation. I do not say that they are blamable for that, but the public should have accommodation when they require it,

ifon. Mr. YEO.—I am a shareholder in the Bank to some extent, andI think their business requires an extension of their capital. His honor who spoke last objected to the peti- tion on the ground that some of the petitioners were not here, but what signifies that; their proxica have power to act for them, and that is sufficient.

Hon. Mr. ANDERSON. —TI am not @ shareholder, and therefore am not personally interested in the matter; but as those persons holding a majority of the shares have petitioned

for an Act to enable them to extend their business, 1 do not know why we should refune it.

Hon. ATTORNEY GENERAL.—Tho only thing we should consider is, whether it is an advan to the public. It is the ie interest that wo should view. No doubt the Bill would bo an advantage to the shareholders, or they would not ask forit. The Act of 1855 gaye the Bank a obarter for 20 years, and during the first seven years they had the power of doubling their capital. That time hasaow el , and they have not availed themselves of the privilege. It now becomes @ question whether it is politic to enabie this particular Bank to double its capital, or stock, and extend the durationjof its charter, when it may interfere with other Banks. If neral interests of the community require the establishment of another Bank, we should not give privileges to any one com- pany which would prevent another Bank from Going into operation, It is true, there may not be anything in this Bill itself to prevent another Bank from being organized; but still I am confident that if we grant the privi to the pre- sent Bank which are contemplated by this Bill, it will post- pone the operations of another for many years. At tho time the present Bank went into operation it was sufficient for the requirements of the community, bat owing to the increase of mercantile business since that time, second Bank is required to afford thet necessary accommodation which may be called for. And is it just or reasonable that we should all tho power in the hands of one Company? Would it not be taki more a and liberal views of lecislation to keep the fiel open for another? TWe present Bank has been a great advan- tage to the community. They have always conducted them- selves, a8 far as | am aware, ina very accommodating manner and ane anon 7 we facilities that were in their power to give. 0 not think any person is disposed to with them. But we know teas Banks, by al iaasaae af their powers, become very influential ; and if, by illiberal or narrow-minded legislation, we prevent moet hae coming into existence, it is equal to granting a monopoly to one which may afterwards be found to operate with great incon venience and prove injarious to the general interests of the community. I have no shares in the one Bank, nor do I in- tend to take any in the other. J am, therefore, in « position to give an impartial vote, and I do not feel inclined at present to support this Bill. 1 would like to see two Banks in oper- ation in this Island, and when one Banking Com is call- ing for power to doubie their eapital it shows that there isa field for another, and I would be disposed to divide the privi- leges between them. That is the only way to secure fair and reasonable accommmodation. If the present Bank ean geta monopoly, and — others from coming into operation, it will be likely always to remain so. Looking at the petitions I wee they are signed by a large proportion of the share- holders; but they sec that it is vastly for their interest to have power to double their capital, an they wish to seize the opportunity to have a monopoly, and that is the point which we, as guardians of the public interests, should weigh care- fully, seeing that we ought to hold the ecales even. Toone is no immediate necessity for this Bill, ae they are yet a way from the end of their term granted ; and I do not f disposed to sanction it till I sce if the other Bank go into operation. heir capital was found snflicient for the last year, and I presume that it will for the mext. If in the mean time the other Bank should go into operation good and well; if not, I will be prepared to support this Bul at @ fu- ture time, if I have a seat in this House.