then has Mr. Mackenzie the merit of a new
discovery of vindictive cruelty, and with his own definition of liberty,
and his own example of liberality, will he adopt his own honourable
means to attain it, and breathe out death and destruction against all
who do not incorporate themselves into a strait-jacket battalion under
his political sword, and vow allegiance and responsibility to everything
done by his "press, types, and all?"

Mr. Mackenzie did not reply to Dr. Ryerson in the spirit of his
rejoinder. He was a master of personal invective, and he indulged in it
in this instance, rather than discuss the questions raised on their
merits. He, therefore, turned on Dr. Ryerson, and, over his shoulders,
struck a blow at his venerable Father and his eldest Brother. He said:--

The Father of the Editor of the _Guardian_ lifted his sword against
the throats of his own countrymen struggling for freedom from
established churches, stamp acts, military domination, Scotch
governors, and Irish government; and his brother George figured on
the frontier in the war of 1812, and got wounded and pensioned for
fighting to preserve crown and clergy reserves, and all the other
strongholds of corruption, in the hands of the locusts who infest
and disturb this Province.

Dr. Ryerson's simple rejoinder to this attack on his Father and Brother
was as follows:--

The man who could hold up the brave defenders of our homes and firesides
to the scorn and contempt of their countrymen, must be lost to all
patriotic and loyal feelings of humanity for those who took their lives
in their hands in perilous times.

_Nov. 14th._--As to the effect of the "impressions" upon the country
generally, the following letter from Hallowell (Picton) written to Dr.
Ryerson by his brother John, may be safely taken as an example of the
feeling which they at first evoked. It is characterized by strong and
vigorous language, indicative of the state of public opinion at the
time. It is valuable from the fact that while it is outspoken in its
criticism of Dr. Ryerson's views, it touches upon the point to which I
have already referred, viz: the separation into two sections of the
powerful party which was then noted as the champion of popular rights.
Mr. Ryerson says:--

Your article on the Political Parties of England has created much
excitement throughout these parts. The only good that can result
from it is, th