1766]

AMOUNTS UNPAID.

181

Murray reported that the total amount of the paper money in circulation was nearly seventeen millions of livres.*

An attempt to depreciate the value of this paper was made by the court of France, in which it was pointed out that from the discredit into which it had fallen, it had been purchased at 80 and 90 per cent. discount; that it did not represent the value of what had been received, owing to the high price paid for the articles obtained; that the bills of exchange of 1759 were paid in part, and the bills that remained were only such as had been issued after this payment. The British reply was that the court of France, having been the

* The following return gives the precise amount [Can. Arch., Q., 2., p. 168]. Recapitulation General of the Paper Money, in the province of Quebec.

cause of the discredit alleged, had no right to profit by it; that the prices paid for supplies had been established by the intendant; that the date of the ordinances could not constitute a reason why they should not be paid; that such paper money was the currency of the colony issued by France, consequently the country was responsible for it. The final settlement having been described, it is unnecessary again to allude to it.*

From the narrative which has been given of the two years of Murray's government, the chaos of difficulty against which he had constantly to contend can be easily understood. He laboured under many disadvantages; his limited powers withheld control over the military force at Three Rivers and Montreal, and what influence could be exercised by the commandant at Montreal, to use the mildest phrase, was not on the side of peace and order. 'It was a period of transition, when the rulers had the right to look in all directions for assistance and support, and in no quarter more than in the newly appointed law officers. But both the chief-justice and the attorney-general proved so incompetent that they were immediately removed. Throughout Murray's letters we can likewise read, that he suffered from the want of money to meet the charges of the public service. The cost of government could not be paid by the duties imposed, and even these could only be imperfectly collected. No opposition could be more factious than that he experienced from the small English speaking minority; those constituting it shewed no sense of justice or right. Their failure to impose their rule upon the French Canadians led to disappointment and bad feeling. There is ground for belief that they received support in London: Walker was certainly enabled to obtain his re-appointment as a magistrate. Their number always remained weak and unimportant, but the consciousness of the fact imposed no limit on their arrogance. This knot of men finally asked for Murray's recall. Their petition, described in high-sounding language as that of the British merchants and traders, Ante, vol. IV., p. 460-61.

*

1766]

OPPOSITION TO MURRAY.

183

was signed by only twenty-one persons. It was undated, but it was evidently written in 1765, about a year after Murray assumed office, shortly after the peace made by sir William Johnson with the Delawares on the 8th of July, 1764. It had only been in the previous November that Bouquet had dictated his terms at the forks of the Muskingum. The petition states. that the greater part of them had arrived in Canada on the surrender of the colony, suggesting that they came from New England. They had submitted, they said, without a murmur to" the military government, however oppressive and severely felt," a complaint on their part certainly strange, as their presence was the consequence of the success of a military expedition. They had hoped that time with a civil establishment would remedy the evil, and with peace they trusted to enjoy the blessings of British liberty. We have seen in their proposed treatment of the French Canadian population the true character of the liberty they would grant to others.

The charges against Murray of the deprivation of an open Indian trade was unwarrantable, as, owing to the Indian war, there was no post accessible until the summer of 1765, and even then, it was a matter of danger to ascend the rivers unless in numbers and armed. Murray is accused of enacting vexatious, oppressive, and unconstitutional ordinances, injurious to civil liberty and the protestant cause; of discountenancing the protestant religion by neglecting to attend church; and of failing to provide the protestants with a place of worship, as if they themselves had no duty and responsibility in this respect; that he had suppressed the remonstrances of the king's subjects in silence and contempt, and, on the other hand had treated those addressing him with rage and rudeness of language; that he had fomented difficulties between the old and new subjects, and had encouraged the French Canadians to apply for the appointment of judges speaking their language; that he had endeavoured to quash an indictment against Paul Panet, accused of inflaming his countrymen against the British. They asked the appointment of a governor acquainted with other maxims than those furnished by

military life; for the establishment of a house of representatives to be chosen as in the other provinces; that is to say composed of protestants only, as the petitioners put it, "without burthening with such oaths as in their present mode of thinking they cannot conscientiously take." The petition was sustained in London by a second petition of twenty-five firms of city merchants trading to Quebec, stating that their letters confirmed the truth of the Canadian petition, and asking that Canada should be placed on the footing of the other provinces.

A petition was also sent to London signed by twenty-one seigneurs defending Murray, expressing their esteem for his personal qualities, and their regret at his departure, praying that he might be retained in the country, further stating that he was the victim of a cabal, many having signed the charges not knowing their spirit and meaning.

The letter which I have mentioned as sent by Conway, directing Murray to hold himself in readiness to leave for England, may to some extent have been influenced by this petition; but Murray's own account of the disorders must have established the necessity of steps being taken to obtain less troublesome times. On April the 1st, Conway wrote to him, requesting his immediate return. The letter probably reached him early in June, for on the 28th he took his departure, leaving the senior councillor, lieutenant colonel Emilius Irving, to perform the duty of lieutenant governor. I can find no record that tells us in what manner Murray was received in England; there are, however, some few facts to aid us in the estimate of what took place. The policy inaugurated by him of treating the French Canadians with justice and consideration was accepted by the British government. It became the established policy of his successor, Carleton, and was the leading principle on which the Quebec act was framed. Moreover he was retained in his government as governor general till April, 1768, for eighteen months of the government of his successor, who remained lieutenant

1766]

LETTER OF VINDICATION.

185

governor.* * If these facts have weight, Murray could not have been received with disfavour.

Viewed by the light of the documents we can refer to, and by the principles of government which are accepted in modern times, Murray's administration can only be regarded as honest and enlightened. He was guided by the one desire of performing his duty. He was truthful aud straightforward and raised above all thought of personal interest. He laid down a broad line of policy not to permit wrong under any form, to which he faithfully adhered; he was never guilty of mean subterfuge, never practised the cunning, tricky deception so frequently met in modern politics and too often adduced as evidence of ability. His theory of a good government was that it should be administered with strict justice, and his opponents were hard pushed when they included among his striking demerits that he failed to attend church. There is no record against his memory of personal ill-doing or of any disregard of social morality or decency. He exacts our respect for entertaining true theories of colonial government when they were by no means generally entertained, which he endeavoured on all occasions to carry out.

When Murray reached London, the excitement regarding the stamp act had somewhat subsided, for it had been repealed by the Rockingham administration. That ministry, however, had ceased to be, and the deplorable Chatham-Grafton ministry was in power. It was to lord Shelburne as secretary for America that Murray addressed his celebrated letter of the 20th of August, 1766, in which he vindicated the character of his own government, and described the nature of the opposition he had met, and the character of those who had been prominent in assailing him. †

Murray did not return to Canada, but he retained his rank

* I form this opinion from Hillsborough's letter to Carleton, 6th of March, 1768, [Can. Arch., Q., 5, p. 356,] congratulating Carleton on his appointment as Governor the emolument was £1200 per annum.

+ This letter is given in full at the end of this chapter. Independently of having been written by Murray in his own justification, it contains much statistical information concerning the province at that period.