general defcription of all his Majesty's dominions now belonging to the crown of Great Britain, or that fall hereafter belong unto the fame.

These are the advantages and disadvantages with which, as we conceive, this first method of fettling the laws of this province, by compofing a code of laws for that purpose, would be attended.

The fecond method of fettling the laws of this province, by Advantages and reviving at once the whole French law, and introducing by an of the fecond difadvantages ordinance only a few of the laws of England that are most eminently method. beneficial to the fubject, is evidently the fhorteft and eafieft method that can be taken for this purpose; but it would be attended with the following inconveniencies.

In the first place it would have a tendency to keep up in the minds of the Canadians that respect for the laws of France, and the wisdom of the parliament of Paris, and the excellence of the French government, which has been above described, and which it would be one of the principal advantages resulting from the former measure, of compiling a code of laws, to extinguish.

In the fecond place it would give disgust to the English inhabitants of this province, who are fond of the laws of England and defirous of having the greatest part of them continued, and think they have a right to the enjoyment of them upon two distinct grounds.

In the first place, they think that every country that becomes fubject to the crown of Great Britain (whether by conqueft, exchange, or otherwife) becomes immediately subject to the laws of England, and that the laws by which it was formerly governed become immediately and ipfo facto void and of no effect, being fuperfeded by the laws of England without the aid of any act of parliament or royal proclamation for that purpose. In this we presume they are mistaken; fince both the express declarations of the law-books, and those of your Majesty's attorney and follicitor general in their report concerning this province, made in the year 1766, and the dictates of natural reafon inculcate a quite contrary doctrine, to wit, that the laws of the conquered people fubfift in their full vigour till the will of the conquerour fhall

expressly

Advantages and difadvantages of the third method.

exprefsly change them. However this opinion, though not well grounded, is pretty general among the English inhabitants of this province.

And in the second place, they fay, that, fuppofing that the laws of England were not of course introduced into this province by the very conqueft itself. and the fubjection of the country to the crown of Great Britain, yet that they have been exprefly introduced by your Majefty's proclamation of the 7th of October 1763, in the words that have been mentioned in the former part of this report; in which your Majefty affures them, that they may confide in your Majefty's royal protection for the enjoyment of the benefit of the laws of England.

The third method of fettling the laws of this province, by making the laws of England the general bafis of them, and per mitting the Canadian cuftoms to continue with refpect only to fome particular excepted fubjects, and this by a general reference to the French law-books in which those customs are contained, without attempting to enumerate and express them anew, would also be a very fhort and easy one to your Majefty's minifters and fervants both in England and in this province; and will be very agreeable and fatiffactory to your Majefty's British fubjects in this province. Yet it will be attended with the following inconveniencies.

By preferving a confiderable part of the French law in the lump, or by a general reference to the French law-books that contain it, it will in fome degree keep up in the minds of the Canadians that reverence for the laws and lawyers of Paris, and that confequential opinion of the happinefs of being fubject to the French government (as being that under which thofe laws may be most ably administered) which all perfons that are zealously attached to your Majesty's government would naturally with to fee extinguished. But this objection will take place in a much less degree against this method, than against the last-mentioned, or fecond method, by which almoft the whole body of the French laws would be revived.

Further, if this third method of fettling the laws is purfued, fome of the Canadians will probably make the two following objections to it. They will fay, in the first place, that the whole body

of

of their laws ought to have been left intire, as there is a strong and well-contrived connexion between all its parts, which makes it dangerous and detrimental to the welfare of the province to alter any of it. And, fecondly, they will fay, that, if any of the laws of England must be introduced here, they ought not to be introduced by general words, but by fpecial ordinances, enumerating them, and fetting them forth at full length, and in the French language, fo that the Canadians may know and obferve them. But these are objections which we believe will be made only by a few perfons, and not by the generality of your Majefty's Canadian subjects.

difadvantages of

method.

The fourth method of fettling the laws of this province, by Advantages and making the law of England become the general law of it, with an the fourth exception of fome particular fubjects, or heads of law; and concerning those subjects to revive the ancient customs of the country by an ordinance or proclamation that should particularly fet them forth and describe them in all the extent in which your Majesty should think fit to let them continue, without any reference to the law-books in which they were formerly contained, would be preferable to the third method in this refpect, that by enumerating and defcribing, or reciting particularly, the feveral French laws and cuftoms that were intended to be continued, it would cut off all connection, in the minds of the Canadians, with the French laws, lawyers, and judges, and the government under which they were maintained. The parliament of Paris, and the custom of Paris, and the French king's edicts would be no longer heard of, as being no longer of any authority; but the laws that were permitted to fubfift must be cited in the words made ufe of by your Majesty to express them in the ordinance or proclamation which permitted their continuance. This would be a confiderable advantage which this fourth method of fettling the laws of this province would have over the third method; but it would be certainly somewhat more troublesome to your Majesty's minifters than that third method, and it would likewife be liable to many imperfections from the inaccurate manner in which the French laws and customs that were intended to be continued would probably be set forth; and it would be further liable to the two latter objections which might be made to the third measure, to wit, that it would give but an imperfect degree of fatisfaction to fome of the, Canadians, by leaving them only a part of their ancient laws and cuftoms, and that it would

further

Conclufion.

further cause them to complain of the general manner of introducing the laws of England without informing them exactly and particularly what those laws were, that they might know how to obey them. But these are objections which, as we before observed, would probably be made by a few perfons only, and not by the generality of your Majefty's new fubjects.

Thus we have set forth to your Majefty at confiderable length (but not greater, we hope, than the importance of the subject required) the different methods by which your Majefty's gracious intention of fettling the laws of this province upon a folid and permanent foundation for the time to come, and of leaving to your Majefty's new Canadian fubjects the enjoyment of fome of their ancient laws and cuftoms that are most neceffary to their tranquillity and fatisfaction, may be carried into execution, together with the feveral advantages and difadvantages with which we apprehend that each of them will be attended. To weigh these advantages and difadvantages against each other, and draw a final balance in favour of one of these methods in preference to the rest, or to find a new method preferable to them all, is a task to which we find ourselves unequal, and which we apprehend can be fucceffully performed only by the wisdom of your Majesty's counfels. By refiding in the province we may have been able perhaps, by our obfervation of the state of things here, to furnish your Majefty with neceffary information and materials for forming a decifive judgement upon the subject; and that, in obedience to your Majefty's commands, we have endeavoured to do faithfully and fully, and to the best of our abilties, in this report. That our endeavours may be acceptable to your Majefty, and may be esteemed rather according to the zeal and integrity by which they have been directed, than according to the degree in which they may be found to answer the high purposes to which they were intended to be fubfervient, is the earneft with of,

Your MAJESTY'S

Moft loyal and devoted

Subjects and Servants.

N. B. The

N. B. The foregoing draught of a report, which was prepared by Francis Maferes, Efquire, his Majefty's attorney general of the province of Quebec, by order of Guy Carleton, Efquire, the governour of the faid province, was delivered in to the faid governour on the 27th day of February 1769, but had not the good fortune to be approved by his excellency. Another report was thereupon drawn up by other hands agreeable to the governour's fentiments, in which his excellency has omitted the confideration of all the public acts and inflruments whereby the English law has been introduced, or attempted to be introduced, into that province, together with fome other matters contained in the foregoing report; and instead of mentioning feveral different methods of fettling the laws of that province for the future, with the feveral advantages and disadvantages that would probably attend each of the propofed methods, and leaving it wholly to his Majefty's wifdom to chufe one of the methods in preference to the others, as is done in the foregoing report, his excellency has thought fit to mention only one method of fettling the laws of the province, which he ftrongly recommends to his Majefty, as the only way of doing justice and giving fatisfaction to the Canadians, which is, to continue the laws of England with refpect to criminal matters, but to revive the whole body of the French laws that were in ufe there before the conqueft with refpect to civil matters. The chief justice, William Hey, Esquire, and attorney general of the province, not thinking it either neceffary or expedient to revive the whole body of the French laws in civil matters, but only those parts of them (which indeed are very confiderable) which related to the tenure, alienation, dower, and inheritance of landed property, and the diftribution of the effects of perfons who die inteftate, delivered in to the governour two additional papers, or leffer reports, containing their reasons for not wholly agreeing to the report made by his excellency. And these three reports were delivered to Maurice Morgan, Efquire, about the 12th of September 1769, to be by him carried to England, and delivered to his Majefty's fecretary of state for America. The additional paper, or leffer report, of the attorney general was intitled his opinion concerning the governour's report, and was as follows.