Baldwin, thirty years earlier, " that an Assembly was
not a Parliament," and with the opinion expressed by
Mr. CuvilUer, fourteen years earlier, that proceedings
"that were not obligadonsof law" could not be enforced
ss matters of custom. Such views apparently harmon-
ized with, and seemed to control, Lord Sydenham's con-
duct. " If," {we may imagine His Excellency to have
said), " the Legislature of Upper Canada was only the
' creation of a statute, and if the Legislature of Lower



nigtijetJi-vGoOgle



A Study and Seview. 113

"Canada was only the creation of a statute,' then the
" Legislature of reunited Canada could claim no higher
" rank and rest on no other basis than the Act which
"authorized, and called it into existence. Consequently
" the members of such Legislature collectively and indi-'
" vidually may not claim, nor may I bestow, any privi-
" leges, any immunities, or any powers, that are not
" plainly found in the written constitution as it is dis-
" tinctly set forth in the law entitled ' An Aa to Mamits
" the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada and for
"the Government of Canada,' because they have no
"prescriptive, but only statutory rights."

Having noted what was done at the opening sessions
of the Legislatures of Upper and Lower Canada in 1792,
and also what was done by the Legislative Assembly of
re-united Canada in i84i, it remains onlyto direct atten-
tion to the proceedings at the first.session of the Parlia-
ment of Canada in 1:867, when the newly-elected Speaker
of the Commons, accompanied by the members of that
House, in obedience to the command of the Governor
General, attended at the bar of the Senate.
