d
soldier, who laid information against one civilian, three
British officers, and the celebrated French-Canadian
leader, La Corne de St Luc. All the accused were arrested
in their beds in Montreal and thrown into the common
gaol. Walker objected to bail on the plea that his life
would be in danger if they were allowed at large. He also
sought to postpone the trial in order to punish the
accused as much as possible, guilty or innocent. But
William Hey, the chief justice, an able and upright man,
would consent to postponement only on condition that bail
should be allowed; so the trial proceeded. When the grand
jury threw out the case against one of the prisoners
Walker let loose such a flood of virulent abuse that
moderate men were turned against him. In the end all the
accused were honourably acquitted, while McGovoch, who
was proved to have been a false witness from the first,
was convicted of perjury. Carleton remained absolutely
impartial all through, and even dismissed Colonel Irving
and another member of the Council for heading a petition
on behalf of the military prisoners.

The Walker affair was an instance of a bad case in which
the law at last worked well. But there were many others
in which it did not. What with the _Coutume de Paris_,
which is still quoted in the province of Quebec; the
other complexities of the old French law; the doubtful
meanings drawn from the capitulation, the treaty, the
proclamation, and the various ordinances; the instinctive
opposition between the French Canadians and the
English-speaking civilians; and, finally, what with the
portents of subversive change that were already beginning
to overshadow all America,--what with all this and more,
Carleton found himself faced with a problem which no man
could have solved to the satisfaction of every one
concerned. Each side in a lawsuit took whatever amalgam
of French and English codes was best for its own argument.
But, generally speaking, the ingrained feeling of the
French Canadians was against any change of their own laws
that was not visibly and immediately beneficial to their
own particular interests. Moreover, the use of the unknown
English language, the worthlessness of the rapacious
English-speaking magistrates, and the detested innovation
of imprisonment for debt, all combined to make every part
of English civil law hated simply because it happened to
be English and not French. The home authorities were
anxious to find some