erals' of the rebellion. Although the political
struggle in Lower Canada before 1837 was largely racial, it was not
exclusively so, for there were some English in the Patriots party and
some French who declined to support it.

In 1832 and 1833 Papineau suffered rebuffs in the House that could not
have been pleasant to him. In 1833, for instance, his proposal to
refuse supply was defeated by a large majority. But the triumphant
passage of the famous Ninety-Two Resolutions in 1834 showed that, for
most purposes, he still had a majority behind him.

The Ninety-Two Resolutions were introduced by Elzear Bedard, the son of
Pierre Bedard, and are reputed to have been drawn up by A. N. Morin.
But there is no doubt that they were inspired by Papineau. The voice
was the voice of Jacob, but the hand was the hand of Esau. The
Resolutions constituted the political platform of the extreme wing of
the _Patriote_ party: they were a sort of Declaration of Right. A more
extraordinary political document has seldom seen the light. A writer
in the Quebec _Mercury_, said by Lord Aylmer to be John Neilson, {39}
undertook an analysis of the ninety-two articles: eleven, said this
writer, stood true; six contained both truth and falsehood; sixteen
stood wholly false; seventeen seemed doubtful and twelve ridiculous;
seven were repetitions; fourteen consisted only of abuse; four were
both false and seditious; and the remainder were indifferent.

It is not possible here to analyse the Resolutions in detail. They
called the attention of the home government to some real abuses. The
subservience of the Legislative Council to the Executive Council; the
partisanship of some of the judges; the maladministration of the wild
lands; grave irregularities in the receiver-general's office; the
concentration of a variety of public offices in the same persons; the
failure of the governor to issue a writ for the election of a
representative for the county of Montreal; and the expenditure of
public moneys without the consent of the Assembly--all these, and many
others, were enlarged upon. If the framers of the Resolutions had only
cared to make out a very strong case they might have done so. But the
language which they employed to present their case was almost certainly
calculated to injure it seriously in the eyes of the home government.
{40} 'We are in no wise disposed,' they told the king, 'to admit the
excellence of the present constitution of Can