The Catholic Bishop, though his character and influence well entitled him to that distinction, was _not_ honoured with a seat in the Legislative Council during the government of Sir George Prevost, nor did he receive during that period a pension of 1,500_l._ per annum. In 1775, the British Government granted to the then Catholic Bishop a pension of 200_l._ per annum. In the year 1778, a further sum of 150_l._ per annum, was given to the same Bishop for the hire of the Episcopal Palace at Quebec, for public offices. These two sums were continued to the subsequent Bishops, and constituted the only income received by them from Government, until the arrival of Sir George Prevost in Canada. During his administration, His Majesty's Government was pleased to _increase_ that salary to the sum of 1,000_l._ per annum, in favour of M. de Plessis, the present Catholic Bishop, "as a testimony," to use the words of Lord Bathurst, in his despatch upon the subject, "of the sense which His Royal Highness the Prince Regent entertained of the loyalty, and good conduct of M. de Plessis, and of the other Catholic clergy of the Province." The charge that Sir George Prevost either tacitly or overtly confirmed the Catholic bishop in all the usurpations of power and of government property, upon which he had ventured, is so obscurely worded, that it is difficult to give it a distinct answer. The privileges and possessions of the Catholic clergy were assured to them at the period when Canada became a British province, and the present Catholic bishop is not in possession of any property, nor does he exercise any power which his predecessors have not enjoyed since that period with the knowledge and concurrence of all former governors of the Province, and of His Majesty's Government. The "accustomed dues and rights" of the Catholic clergy of Canada, are formally secured to them by the act of 14 Geo. 3. c. 83, §. 5. To the assertion, positive in proportion to its want of proof, that the Protestant Bishop and his clergy, and the loyal members of both Houses, were treated with insult, it will be merely necessary to answer, that Sir George Prevost was incapable of treating any person, much less those of a sacred character and profession, with indignity or insult--and a confident appeal is made to the Protestant clergy of Canada, and to the loyal members of both Houses, against an insinuation as base as it is groundless. To the critic's charge of general mismanagement in the affairs of the Colony, a reply, if any were wanting, will, it is trusted, be found, in the foregoing pages; in the approbation of His Majesty's Government of the very policy which this writer so acrimoniously condemns, and in the highly flattering testimonials to the merits of Sir George Prevost's civil administration, which he received not only from the Canadians, but from the most respectable of the English inhabitants.