14
No evidence has been produced before their Lordships to establish the very grave proposition that Her Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects in Lower Canada have consented, since the cession, to be bound by such a rule as it is now sought to enforce, which, in truth, involves the recognition of the authority of the Inquisition, an authority never admitted but always repudiated by the old law of France. It is not, therefore, necessary to enquire whether since the passing of the 14 Geo. III, c, 83, which incorporates (s. 5) the 1st of Elizabeth, already mentioned, the Roman Catholic subjects of the Queen could or could not legally consent to be bound by such a rule.
From the foregoing citations from the Judgment of the Privy Council, it is clear that the status of Her Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects in Lower Canada is that enjoyed by them under the old law of France prior to the cession. It is under that condition of law that the Church, as a body politic, exists; and while, as in the Guibord case, it cannot be doubted that the civil rights of members of that communion will be maintained by our Courts of Law, the question may well arise, whether serious innovations upon the law and practice of the Church under old France, may not produce a virtual forfeiture of the special privileges conferred upon the Church, as a body politic. It is a widely different thing to guarantee the peaceful enjoyment of their "culte" and "dimes," from pledging the faith and power of the Crown to the enforcement of the decrees of a foreign power, even though that power acts under the insidious guise of only dealing with "faith and morals."
Yet there is one point already indicated in the elaborate Judgment of the Privy Council, which, to my mind, renders my appeal to Roman Catholics in Canada at this moment justifiable, and even imperative.
My Lords, in the foregoing extract, say:—
"No evidence has been produced before their Lordships to
