binet system, which no constitutionalist could have allowed
to pass in silence. Egerton Ryerson, to whom in this instance the
maxim about the cobbler sticking to his last is applicable, erected a
ridiculous defence for Metcalfe, holding that "according to British
practice, the councillors ought to have resigned on what Metcalfe had
done, and not on what he would not promise to do. If the Crown
intended to do just as they desired the governor-general to do, still
the promise ought not to be given, nor ought it to have been asked.
The moment a man promises to do a thing he ceases to be as free as he
was before he made the promise."[15] The actual struggle lay between
two schools directly opposed in their interpretation of responsible
government; and since Sir Charles Metcalfe definitely and avowedly set
himself against cabinet government, the party system, and the place of
party in allocating patronage, the ministers were not free to allow him
to {175} appoint men at his own discretion. For the sake of a theory
of government for which many of them had already sacrificed much, they
were bound to defend what their opponents called the discreditable
cause of party patronage.

The line of action which the members of council followed had already
been sketched out by Robert Baldwin in his encounter with Sydenham. In
the debate of June 18th, 1841, Baldwin had admitted that should the
representative of the Crown be unwilling to accept the advice offered
to him by his council, it would be impossible by any direct means to
force that advice upon him. But he also held that this did not relieve
the members of council for a moment from the fulfilment of an
imperative duty. "If their advice," he said, "were accepted--well and
good. If not, their course would be to tender their resignations."[16]

This indeed was battle _a outrance_ between two conflicting theories of
government. Russell, Sydenham, and Metcalfe, had refused to admit
self-government beyond a certain limit, and Metcalfe, in accepting the
situation created by the resignation of his ministers, was battling
very directly for his view. On the other side, Baldwin and the {176}
colonial politicians had claimed autonomy as far as it might be granted
within the empire. By resigning their offices, they called on their
opponents to make the alternative system work. For two years Metcalfe
occupied himself with the task they set him.

It is not necessary to enter into a