CORRESPONDENCE.

The following letters are given because of the interest they possess, in a political or personal sense, as illustrative of Mr. Brown's life. The greater portion of them were written to the late Mr. Holton, in whom Mr. Brown placed unlimited confidence, though occasionally obliged to differ with him in his view of public affairs. To many of Mr. Brown's old associates the incidents mentioned in this correspondence will doubtless be of much interest, as they necessarily recall many of the old battles preceding the constitutional changes effected during his active political life.

Their chief value, however, consists in their autobiographical character. Mr. Brown's outspoken, frank manner will at once be recognized, while his manifest disinterestedness will be apparent where he deals with the position of political friends, and especially with reference to his own position in the liberal party.

As the correspondence is fragmentary, it has not been considered wise or necessary to arrange it so as to connect certain periods and events. It is therefore printed in chronological order.

LETTER TO THE HON. JOHN SANDFIELD MACDONALD.

GLOBE OFFICE, TORONTO, August 16, 1854.

MY DEAR MACDONALD,-I congratulate you most heartily on the result of the elections. I had intended writing you for a fortnight past, but have been prevented by various causes from doing so. The loss of Cicero lessens your strength; but you must admit that he deserved richly to lose his election. Moreover, your tail will, I imagine, be much longer in this parliament than it was in the last, and the orator will hardly be missed from it. From what I have heard there is no doubt of this. Many independent reformers look to you as leader, and if you take your stand firmly and wisely, and without delay, the game is in your own hands. You will have seen that the Leader endeavours to make had blood between you and me by ranging you among my followers. I have not noticed the thing in the Globe for two reasons. First, it would be attracting additional attention to it; and second, because I could not do so without defining my true position, which it would be inexpedient at this moment to do publicly. To you, however, I mean to speak plainly. Our long friendship entitles you to it, and your conduct to me in the Speaker's chair, and our compact at the breaking up of the House, also

demand it. I tell you frankly then that, far from having any ambition to be the head of the party, I would not take office under any circumstances were it offered me. All I desire is the success of the principles to which I have attached myself; and if you can form a government pledged to separation of church and state, representation by population, and nonsectarian schools, I will not only aid you in doing so, but will support your government with all my heart and vigour. I wish you to understand this, and to act upon it, as, with this knowledge, you may feel more at liberty to use my aid in carrying out your views. It is of course of much importance that an immediate understanding should be arrived at among independent reformers. If we go to the discussion on the address without previous concert, Hincks may frighten some reformers into voting for the government by the threat that they will lose their preserves. To meet this you must have it previously ascertained and shown that you can form a better and more thoroughgoing government, in which case nothing can save the government from defeat. If I were in your position, I would write to all the reformers I was on terms with, urging them to go down to Quebec by the Saturday evening boat, in order that the caucus might be held on the Monday before the meeting of parliament. In the meantime you should see Sicotte, Young, Dorion, and the other Lower Canadians you expect to act with, and to have matters thoroughly understood. They too should hold a meeting. I say nothing as to the speakership, taking it for granted that you will aim at higher game. One advantage of the course I suggest would be that you would thereby have an opportunity of judging beforehand as to the best mode of working the speakership vote. Of course, I think that in any case we must put you in as Speaker in order to show our approval of your closing speech last session. Your being in the chair would not, I suppose, interfere with your accepting the attorney-generalship, and forming a ministry in the event of a hostile reply to the address being carried. It is very clear that the present ministry are used up, even if they get over the hitch at the address. The new House will be far in advance of them. If Hincks, to please the Upper Canada members, should even change his position and liberalize his policy, he would thereby throw from hin Moreau and the conservative section of the Lower Canadians. If, on the other hand, he plays as heretofore into the hands of his French friends, he will drive off from him the Upper Canada Radicals. It is clear that the natural allies of the reformers of Upper Canada are the Rouges, so called. Let me impress this on you in forming your alliance, that at this moment you can make any terms. Once your government is formed, there will be many difficulties found in the way of progressive measures. Let, then, the conditions of your accepting office be broad, and such as will secure credit to your government, if no more were done by it.

Yours ever truly,

HON. J. S. MACDONALD.

GEORGE BROWN,

LETTER TO MR. HOLTON.

GLOBE OFFICE, Jan. 29, 1858.

MY DEAR HOLTON, -I have to apologize for not sooner answering your note of last week, but absence from town and a crowd of engagements have prevented me from doing so before now.

I have since received yours of the 26th, which considerably relieved the disquiet produced by the other. I am very sorry our friends cannot feel themselves at liberty to take your clear view of our position, and resolve

to cut their way out of it. No honest man can desire that we should remain as we are; and what other way out of our difficulties can be suggested but a genuine legislative union, with representation by population-a federal union-or a dissolution of the present union? I am sure that a dissolution cry would be as ruinous to any party as (in my opinion) it would be wrong. A federal union, it appears to me, cannot be entertained for Canada alone, but when agitated must include all British America. We will be past caring for politics when that measure is finally achieved. I can hardly conceive of a federal union for Canada alone. What powers should be given to the provincial legislatures, and what to the federal? Would you abolish county councils? And yet if you did not, what would the local parliaments have to control? Would Montreal like to be put under the generous rule of the Quebec politicians? Our friends here are prepared to consider dispassionately any scheme that may issue from your party in Lower Canada. They all feel keenly that something must be done. Their plan is representation by population and a fair trial for the present union in its integrity; failing this, they are prepared to go in for dissolution, I believe, but if you can suggest a federal or any other scheme that could be worked, it will have our most anxious examination. Can you sketch a plan of federation such as our friends below would agree to, and could carry? If so, pray let us have it as soon as you conveniently can. I perfectly agree with you in all you say about Sandfield. He has assuredly put his foot in it. I had a letter from his brother to say that whatever Sandfield did, he would be found right side up.

and

The Hastings dinner has had a good effect. The ministerialists calculated confidently on and were surprised to find they had made such a mistake. The truth is, I might say I feel alarmed at finding myself among so extreme a set of people!

Another day, and no government! We have strong rumours to-night that a government is formed, but I don't believe a word of it. Sidney Smith, Malcolm Cameron, and Cayley are the names of the hour, but very certainly neither of the first two can be returned, and where Cayley is to find a seat puzzles everyone. My own impression is that Mr. John A. Macdonald sees no further through the woods this night than he did a month ago, but I may be mistaken. John Hillyard Cameron says they will meet parliament with the offices unfilled so as to embarrass the opposition, and throw on us the responsibility of losing a session to the country. No doubt it would be much more difficult to arrange a new government with parliament in session than during a recess.

What say you to Bytown as the seat of government? I think it the second worst place in all Canada, and would a million times prefer. Montreal.

Will it be possible to upset the decision? In our present position, with representation by population unsettled, I think the best move would be Toronto and Montreal alternately. With that conceded, I don't care much where the seat of government goes, provided Quebec and Bytown are not the places.

That was indeed a most amusing paragraph in the Gazette. How it got there I cannot conceive, but I am informed it has done me some good in Lower Canada, as people begin to hope that I am not so savage as I was supposed to be. No doubt the Starnes' conversation was the origin of the mitter, but how that reached the proportions of a "proposal for political alliance" I cannot think. We were exercised here as to the best mode of opening communications with our friends in Lower Canada. Mr. Dorion and his friends have so frequently repudiated our policy, that we were unwilling to go direct to the mark by opening correspondence; your

arrival here ended all difficulty as to communicating with the Rouges. While at Belleville I got a telegram from John Simpson, to say Starnes was with him, and he would like that I would wait over a night as I returned; this I had to decline. As the train came up Starnes and Simpson came to the station and went to the junction with us. Starnes said he and his friends (Sicotte, I suppose) were prepared to adopt the full anti-state church ticket, and admitted representation by population must come, and they were prepared to concede it, but how to do that and be returned for Lower Canadian constituencies they could not see. 1 endeavoured to put the measure in the most favourable light, and said that so long as we had the principle admitted, we were willing to have reasons concerning details. We parted before much had passed; the idea of forming any alliance was not even spoken of for a moment. So far as I was concerned, my effort was to make Starnes a convert to our views, and the folly of resisting them; I was not thinking of the men to carry them, but of the thing to be carried.

He

The only remark that went beyond this was an observation by Starnes that if I supposed he and his friends thought any more of the Upper Canada side of the government than I did it was a great mistake. added that our views on the ad valorem duties were much more to their minds than the others' views. Thus you have the whole of this famous 'negotiation." If Starnes had not mentioned it to you I would not have felt at liberty to repeat what passed, though the affair was not worth secrecy or publication, in itself.

MY DEAR HOLTON,-I am afraid you will never pardon my apparent carelessness-for it is only apparent.

I am out of health, worn out, driven to death, and cannot bring my mind to the most ordinary exertion. I ought to give up all business for a month at least, but it is very difficult to do so.

I entirely agree with you as to the necessity of sending a memorandum to the colonial office, and as to the propriety of the policy shadowed forth in your letter. I had arranged to go down to Montreal to discuss this matter; but I got so ill that I had to give it up and go to the St. Catharines baths.

I propose that we meet here before or after the great Hamilton demonstration, on Thursday next, to settle what we are to do. Dorion, McGee, and yourself, will of course be there, but it would be very desirable that Drummond and Lemieux should also be present. Drummond's defeat was very provoking, but cannot be helped. It is very important to have him returned. If you have not seen your way to a seat, I will talk with you when you come about one here. Your splendid victory in Montreal has greatly strengthened us, and will help much in the House.

We are in trouble here about the Upper House election. Our friends are much divided on personal grounds; for myself, I shall vote for Romaine. The run will be close, as neither candidate carries much enthusiasm with

him.

You can have no idea how earnest and general the enthusiasm is for the Brown-Dorion government all over Western Canada, west of Kingston. I have never seen anything like it. Head and his fellow conspirators are proportionately condemned.

McGee's course has made him eminently popular. He is received like a prince in every direction.

Be sure and bring our friends to the Thursday dinner.

Yours faithfully,

HON. L. H. HOLTON, Montreal.

GEORGE BROWN.

LETTER TO MR. HOLTON.

GLOBE OFFICE, TORONTO, July 8, 1859.

MY DEAR HOLTON, --I trust the Laberge affair did us no harm in Lower Canada, and especially that it did not affect Dorion injuriously, for that would indeed grieve me. He has always acted so manfully and generously that it would pain me deeply to know that I should have been the means of compromising him. I could not help coming out on that unfortunate tenure business. The ill-advised speeches of some friends on the back benches rendered it absolutely necessary. I should have been greatly damaged had I not spoken as I did. Between ourselves, Laberge did me the best service in attacking me as he did. People were beginning to believe that I had sold Western Canada to Lower Canada for the sake of party success. I think some of the actors rue it already. They thought that I had committed a grand error in coming out for the constitutional changes, and some of them freely denounced me and the whole scheme. But already the wonderful success the movement has met with from all parties has effected a change. I had a letter from Foley on Tuesday, in which he refers to the whole affair at the close of the session and since, and winds up thus: "You may rely upon it, that henceforth you will not have the shadow of a cause of complaint.'

My firm conviction is that we should merge all our questions in the one great issue of a change of constitution. It will elevate the tone of politics, cast aside petty vexatious issues, and be a tremendous card at next election, come when it may. 1 cannot see why it should be less successful below than here.

We propose having a Convention here in the fall, and if representatives from Lower Canada could attend it, the effect would be admirable.

There is an impression among ministerialists that Sir E. Head has had notice he will be retired, but how the change will now affect matters remains to be seen. The ministry was nearly finished on Lake Huron without the aid of the Clear Grits. Little as I owe them, I would not like them to go off in that way.

Will the Whig government last? Have not the Rads been cruelly sold? If Bright and Cobden work their hands well I really think Pam. has done them a service. Did you see much of Cobden? I hope he will not accept. It is the case of Rolph and Cameron precisely.

The crops are looking on the whole well. Frost has done much damage, but as there was a greater breadth sown the yield will be an average one. There is an unusual anxiety about the crops this year; we are made to feel our dependence on the farm very directly in such times as these. Business