Pierre, a man of color v. Gabrial Chouteau
View original image: Page  091
[missing figure]

but expressly declared that none who should
afterwards come or be brought or born in Upper
CanadaCanada should be subject to such service. The
provisions of this act of Upper CanadaCanada (33 Geo. III. c. J.)
were indispersable, as I conceive, to render legal the
servitude for life of the negroes, or others, bought or
brought under license into Upper CanadaCanada- but did
not extend to the other division of the former ProvinceProvince of Quebec
of QuebecProvince of Quebec or CanadaCanada, called the Province of Lower CanadaCanada.

To Cross question 8th. In your examination in chief you state that
slavery was never recognized by the law of CanadaCanada
subsequent to the capitulation of September 1760,-
Is the provincial act of the 33rd GeorgeGeorge III. Chap. 7, passed
in Upper CanadaCanada in 1793, a part of the law of CanadaCanada,
or is it not?

Answers.- When I spoke in my examination in chief of the
law of CanadaCanada, I spoke of the law of the Province ofProvince of Canada
CanadaProvince of Canada or QuebecQuebec, not of the law of what was a
different Province called Upper CanadaCanada, altho formed
out of a portion of what had been the territory of
CanadaCanada. I should not call a statute of the state
of Maine since its separation from MassachusettsMassachusetts,
a law of MassachusettsMassachusetts, altho it be a law of what once
formed part of the territory of MassachusettsMassachusetts. The
provincial act, 33 GeorgeGeorge III. chap: 7, passed in the
Province of Upper CanadaCanada, after its division from the
Province of CanadaProvince of Canada, was never a part of the law of
the Province of CanadaProvince of Canada or QuebecQuebec. The last named
Province had then ceased to exist, - nor was any law of
similar import or effect to the last mentioned Upper
CanadianCanadian statute ever passed in what constituted the
other and larger division of the Province of CanadaProvince of Canada, namely
the Province of Lower CanadaCanada. The similarity or partial
identity of the names of the Provinces does however
occasion some danger of apparent ambiguity or confusion,
unless prevented by much case and precision. The two
Provinces of Lower & Upper CanadaCanada have again been

View original image: Page  092
[missing figure]
reunited, under the name of the Province of CanadaProvince of Canada, by
the statute of the Imperial Parliament, 304 Victoria,
chapter 35
, and once more form one government.

To Cross questin 9th. Was not the Province of Upper CanadaCanada a part of the
original Province of QuebecProvince of Quebec, which comprised also Lower
CanadaCanada, and does not the Upper CanadaCanada act, 33 GeorgeGeorge III.
chaps. 7
, legislate for a state of things or institutions that
must have been co-extensive with the Province of QuebecProvince of Quebec,
and therefore existing in Lower, as well as Upper CanadaCanada?

Answers,- The Province of Upper CanadaCanada, as appears by my
preceding answers, was a part of the former Province ofProvince of Quebec
QuebecProvince of Quebec, whose territory comprised also Lower CanadaCanada
and the Provincial act 33 GeorgeGeorge II. chap. 7, in this
cross-interrogatory referred to legislated for a state of
things or institutions-not indeed co-extensive with the
former Province of QuebecProvince of Quebec, (for upper CanadaCanada had
already abrogated the French laws, and substituted the
English laws as the rule of decision,) but for a state of
things or institutions under which, as I believe, the
negroes and panis were entitled to the same rights as
they were in the rest of the former Province of QuebecProvince of Quebec,
namely, Lower CanadaCanada. And by this Provincial
act of Upper CanadaCanada certain negores and others
previously bought and imported under license were
deprived of rights during their own lives, as I have
before stated, whereas no such act was ever passed
by Lower CanadaCanada:

To Cross. question 10th. - Have you any personal knowledge - and what
knowledge of the particulars of the case of RobinRobin
alias RobertRobert , or of any other case which you believe
exists of the like description, and of the grounds of
the Judgment?

Answers,- I have no personal knowledge of the particu-
lars of the case of RobinRobin alias RobertRobert , other than
having seen the record of the proceedings and Judgment
I knew two or three individuals when a child who