example of a judge, sitting in his own cause, was not even afforded by Scraggs or Jefferies. Mr. Sherwood had been falsely imprisoned, arbitrarily held to excessive bail, his liberties, as a British subject, violated, and his privileges as a member of the Assembly had been set at nought. The petition was referred to a select committee, and no more heard of. Yet it had an effect. Chief Justice Monk was compelled to explain and to defend himself. There was yet another similar matter to be proceeded with. There was the revival of the impeachments to be taken in hand. The House had been clumsily baulked in their attempt to remonstrate with the Regent concerning his will and pleasure, as far as his royal will and pleasure related to the impeachments of Chief Justices Sewell and Monk, and there seemed to be a _sub rosa_ disposition to get rid of the disagreeable affair by management. Mr. Stuart, keen-sighted as he was, both saw and felt that the tools, with which he worked, required sharpening up. They had been handled. They had been in other hands than his. They had apparently been rendered almost unfit for use. He would, however, move for a call of the House, on the 21st of February. The cards had been admirably shuffled. The Panets, Vanfelsons, Gugys, Ogdens, Vezinas, Taschereaus, Malhiots, Cherriers, were all wonderfully intermingled in an adverse vote. The motion was rejected by a vote of 23 nays to 10 yeas. Mr. Stuart tried the 20th of February. Still it would not do. The Assembly had become suddenly tired of impeachments. Again, the matter was tried on the following day, when the House consented not to revive the impeachments but to reconsider the message addressed to the Assembly on the 2nd of February last, by the late Administrator-in-Chief. Mr. Stuart had some business to transact in Montreal, and he left Quebec to attend to it. During his absence the impeachments were forgotten; his measures were paralysed by _sub rosa_ negociation; Mr. Sewell was recompensed for the ill-treatment he had experienced, and the government was relieved of anxiety. The Speaker of the Assembly was informed that for this parliament as well as for the last parliament he would be permitted to receive L1,000 a year, and that Mr. Sewell, who, as Chief Justice, was Speaker of the Upper House, might be recompensed for his ill-treatment, by the attachment of a salary of L1,000 to an office which it was designed he should hold for life. The Assembly, accordingly, applied to His Excellency to _allow_ their Speaker L1,000 a year, and to confer some signal mark of the Royal favor on Dame Louise Philippe Badelard, widow of Mr. Speaker Panet. His Excellency, the Governor, unhesitatingly complied with the request of the Assembly, the more especially as on the request of the Council he had consented to a similar salary being paid to their Speaker, and he had further pleasure in authorising the payment of a pension of L300 a year, to Dame Louise Philippe Badelard. The whole was