II, C. 83. It extends Quebec south
to the Ohio and west to the Mississippi; Shortt & Doughty, pp. 401
sqq.

[12] The division of the Province of Quebec into two provinces, _i.
e._, Upper Canada and Lower Canada, was effected by the Royal
Prerogative, Sec. 31 George III, c. 31, the celebrated Canada of
Constitutional Act. The Message sent to Parliament expressing the
Royal intention is to be found copied in the Ont. Arch. Reports for
1906, p. 158. After the passing of the Canada Act, an Order in Council
was passed August 24, 1791 (Ont. Arch. Rep., 1906, pp. 158 et seq.),
dividing the Province of Quebec into two provinces and under the
provisions of sec. 48 of the act directing a royal warrant to
authorize the Governor or Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of
Quebec or the person administering the government there, to fix and
declare such day as he shall judge most advisable for the commencement
of the effect of the legislation in the new provinces not later than
December 31, 1791. Lord Dorchester (Sir Guy Carleton) was appointed,
September 12, 1791, Captain General and Governor-in-Chief of both
provinces and he received a Royal warrant empowering him to fix a day
for the legislation becoming effective in the new provinces (Ont.
Arch. Rep., 1906, p. 168). In the absence of Dorchester, General
Alured Clarke, Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Quebec, issued
November 18, 1791, a proclamation fixing Monday, December 26, 1791, as
the day for the commencement of the said legislation (Ont. Arch. Rep.,
1906, pp. 169-171). Accordingly technically and in law, the new
province was formed by Order in Council, August 24, 1791, but there
was no change in administration until December 26, 1791.

[13] The first session of the First Parliament of Upper Canada was
held at Newark (now Niagara-on-the-Lake) September 17 to October 15,
1792; the statute referred to is (1792) 32 Geo. III, c. 1 (U. C.).

[14] Everyone will remember the words of the Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court of the United States in the celebrated Dred Scott case.
In Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1856 (19 How. 354, pp. 404, 405), Chief
Justice Roger B. Taney, speaking of the view taken of the Negro when
the Constitution was framed, says: "They were at that time considered
as a subordinate and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated
by the dominant race and whether emancipated or not, yet remained
subject to their authority and had no rights or privileges but s