Hon. Mr. KAULBACH

Last year the Opposition said it was worth nothing.

in alternate blocks in the North-West from the Government. There is another view to be taken of those land sales; it Hon. Mr. HAYTHORNE It does is this: The hon. Postmaster-General not matter what the Opposition said it stated, in his address in introducing this was worth last year. They are not measure, that the privileges contained in chargeable with the affairs of the coun- the charter were all, comparatively, of try, and I, for one, do not undertake to little value. I forget the exact amount defend what others may have said the he estimated them at, and amongst those land was worth. It is said that a wise he regarded as trifling was freedom from man will alter his opinion, but an un- taxation. I would ask hon. gentlemen wise man never. Supposing the Opposi- to consider the effect of that exemption have altered their opinion, they are tion on property belonging to the Synacting like wise men. But, though I dicate situated in or near these towns could confirm my opinion as to the value and villages to which I have just drawn of those lands by quoting prices obtained your attention. Consider what the effect in the vicinity of American lines, I on a village settlement would be of the perfer to bring before this House proof Syndicate being allowed to hold lands which is not easily contested for this free of taxation in the best and most elireason; the statement to which I am gible sites for business in the Northnow about to call the attention of the West. The effect must evidently be that House is a statement made as to lands their lands, being free from taxation, can within our own territory, and it is made be held by them for years for a rise, or by an authority which I think neither let them on lease, and they will thus inthe Secretary of State nor the hon. gen- terfere with the prospects of rising tleman opposite who has just interrupted towns and villages. To my mind, nothing me will undertake to challenge. The can be more clear than that the Comstatement is as to the sales of land belong-pany, in justice to the settlers in that ing to the Hudson's Bay Company in Man-new region, should not have their lands itoba, and the North-West Territories. or property exempted from taxation. It is made by the Governor of the Company, at a meeting of the Company held at their Chambers in London so recently as the month of November last. I will read the words of Sir Eden Colville, in addressing the members of the Company at that meeting, and I think the state-ritory as the one to which I have just ment cannot be questioned. He said alluded, but still one of importance, that they had sold 443 lots in Winnipeg, because it shows what the bona fide value covering 88 acres, and realized £5,500 of lands situated in countries similar to sterling. They had also sold lots at West our own is. Now, so lately as the comLynne and other sections, which realized mencement of the present year, January £2,300 sterling. Now, what do you sup-2, 1881, I find it stated by the New York pose these lands were purchased for? correspondent of the London Times that presume they were purchased by men the United States Government had comof business for purposes of business-pleted its negotiations with the Sioux purchased by men who evidently regarded Indians, whereby the Indians granted the prospects of the North-West as favor-right of way through their reservation able. But I come to the rate at which for two railways-the Chicago and farm lands had been sold by the Com- North-Western, and the Chicago, pany during the past year. He (the Gov- Milwaukee and Central lines, and ernor of the Company) said that of farm- the Indians for that right of way ing lands they had disposed of 27,500 are to receive five dollars for every acres, realizing £30,000 sterling. That acre of land taken by the railways. may be assumed as a fair estimate of the Now, I think those two quotations of the value of our lands such as the Syndicate value of land similar to our own in charwill be allowed to select for themselves in acter- in fact, in the Hudson's Bay Comthe North-West-such as they will receive pany's case, their lands being intermixed

But I have another recent instance of the value of lands not in our own country but over the border. This, also, is from an independent source- from a source which, perhaps, is not so decisive as regards the value of lands in our own ter

subsequently the Legislature made good highways and cross roads so that few parts of the Dominion are better accommodated with roads than the Province of Prince Edward Island. But those farms occupy the whole area and are rendered accessible by the roads passing in front of them. But if I understand the scheme of the Government, it is intended that these even numbered 640 acre blocks be devoted to free grants and pre-emption settlers, whether the Company have succeeded in disposing of their own lands or not. I observe that the figuring of the alternate blocks can be conducted in two or three different ways. My impression is that, according to the Government plan, the even numbered alternate blocks are to meet at the angles. There is, however, a system of numbering those blocks, which will cause them to lie in parallel lines, and the objection would be rather less in the latter than in the former case. In the former they would have the effect of separating the cleared farms from each other, supposing that the company's blocks remained unoccupied. I take it that a farm of 160 acres in one of those blocks would be 20 chains frontage by 80 chains deep, and it would abut front and back on the Company's lands. The side lines of the out

with our own, are very conclusive as to the real present value of lands in the North-West. It does not, of course, follow that lands at a distance from the railway would be worth as high a price as that, but it does follow that a large portion of the lands we are about to alienate to this Company are really worth five dollars per acre at the present time. But let us now consider the manner in which these lands are to be alienated. It is, of course, a far less important question, but still it is one which, I think, ought to receive attention; it is one which affects the prosperity of new settlers very particularly, and anyone who, like myself, has spent a large portion of his life in the reclaiming of lands and knows what it is to be surrounded by a settlement of kindly neighbors, must thoroughly appreciate the advantage of having settled lands on each side of him. I know very well that the hon. the Postmaster General anticipates that those lands belonging to the Company will be settled probably as soon as the Government lands. That may be his impression. He is quite right in entertaining it and expressing it if he thinks so, but others may entertain a different view. My view is that if this Bill should pass this House and become law, that the Company will act pretty much as sug-side farms in each even numbered block gested by my hon. friend the ex-Secretary of State, in his speech this afternoon that they will operate financially in the way he suggested, and that they may probably hold their land for an increase of value. If I have understood properly the system on which the lands are to be alienated, it is open to many grave objections. The alternate blocks of one square mile seem to me to be incompatible with convenient settlement. In the province from which I come, we were for many years grievously distressed by a land monopoly, I was going to say even worse than this we are proposing to establish by this Bill, but there were one or two redeeming features connected with that system. One was that our proprietors took very good care to lay off their settlements for the convenience of the inhabitants. The farms were laid out in parallel lines, and access was generally given to them by convenient roads. In the first place the proprietors had to make main roads themselves, but

would also run alongside of the Company's lands, and the consequence would be great inconvenience as to fences. I have heard it stated that the settler would gain by such an arrangement, that pasturage on the unoccupied Company's lots would be exceedingly valuable. But those who speak in that way probably forget that the use of those vacant lands as pasturage implies the necessity of fencing those side lines, or herding the cattle, an expensive and dangerous arrangement an unfavorable one in any case to the settler. It seems to me the arrangement under the Allan contract, and that proposed under the Act of 1874, are both of them preferable to the one that is now adopted by the Government, in the interest of the settlers. However, like everything else connected with this Bill, I suppose the arrangement is past re-calling.

Hon. Mr. MILLER Would not the duty of fencing devolve on the Com. pany, who own the lots?

196

Pacific

[SENATE.]

That is Hon. Mr. HAYTHORNE a question of means. The Company are not liable to taxes, and a settler has a poor chance in defending his rights against a powerful company. That point to which the hon. gentleman has called attention, illustrates the dangers of a vast How is an isolated monopoly like this. settler, or a few isolated settlers to contend with a wealthy company like this? In NeHon Mr. MACDONALD braska and Dakota there are no fences. For hundreds of miles, you will see fields of grain and no fences.

Hon. Mr. HAYTHORNE - Supposing a man has land under the plough, and next to him is a company's lot overrun by cattle. If these lands were owned proby a farmer like himself they would bably have a mutual arrangement, or a local law would compel each man to perIt is a form his share of the line fence. very common and natural arrangement, and if cattle are allowed to run at large, it must be clear that the land under cultivation must be fenced or the cattle must Another point connected be herded. with this question of land is the great advantage it gives the Company over set tlers. We may fairly assume that many of the occupiers of these 160 acres lots are farmers whose lots have been acquired by pre-emption, and in the course of time as they prosper by their industry, and as their families grow up about them they may desire to enlarge their bounds. The Company sits by with ap. parent indifference, but not really disinterested. They own the adjoining land and they know very well that, as the farmer's prosperity increases, he must have their land at their own price. It is impossible to anticipate all the evils that the monopoly may give rise to, but this is one that we may reasonably expect to occur, and it might be met by rendering the lands of the Company subject to taxation. That was the other point to - the second which I alluded just now redeeming feature in the land monopoly Here the unoccuof our own province. pied lands were taxed at a higher rate than the cultivated lands of the tenants, and, where a man held a large area to speculate on the enhanced value it would acquire by the enterprise and industry of his neighbors, he was obliged to sub

even

of

mit to such taxation as rendered his same result would occur in the Northspeculation one of doubtful profit. The West if the Government had not rendered the land exempt from taxation there. But so it is, hon. gentlemen, and, when you establish a company of such vast resources and influence as this Syndicate must, in all probability, posof the constitution at defiance sess, they will set all the ordinary powers the very Government that establishes 66 we hold the them they will soon learn to treat with contempt. They will say fate of this Government in our hands." Perhaps at some future election they will give the Government to understand that if they trouble the Syndicate with any remarks as to the non-performance of their engagements, the influence the Company will be thrown into the opposite scale at the coming election, and in that way the influence of this great corporation may be brought to bear upon Governments, and, perhaps, to some extent, upon Parliament. The task, which would be easy for us now, of rejecting this proposal or causing it to be brought come one of enormous difficulty hereafter. forward in a qualified shape, would, beOnly the united expression of public opinion against such a body, from one end of the Dominion to the other, would enable Parliament to take hold of such a grievance as that and abolish it by force, of course giving the Company remuneraI hope yet that this House may tion for their outlay and for their interests. be induced to adopt a resolution affirming that principle, and that some means may be taken which will render them in the future amenable to Parliament. There are many points of this measure which I might allude to, but I find that my voice fails me; I shall, therefore, be brief. There are some things connected with the future of our North-West of so much importance that I cannot refrain from offering a few remarks. For instance, there is one important event that is soon cannot fail to affect the interests of to take place on this continent which I allude to the British Columbia particularly in the most important manner. We have seen the enorprospect of the construction of the Panama Canal. mous results in Europe that have followed the successful opening by De

it is our duty to step in upon an important crisis like this, and by resisting the progress of hasty, ill-judged, and imprudent legislation to give one more opportunity to the people of passing an opinion upon it. This, I take it, is the proper

Lesseps of the Suez Canal. By that canal the distance between the English Channel and Calcutta was reduced by five thousand miles; and in like manner the distance from New York to Calcutta was reduced by a similar distance. In my opinion still greater results will fol- role of the Senate of Canada. Much of low the construction of the proposed our time, hon. gentlemen, is occupied in, canal across the Isthmus of Panama. I was going to say, unprofitable routine; We know that the scheme has been suc-it may be so. There may be many things cessfully floated, the capital has been which if we keep on our premises found, and the difficulties which existed may not be of daily use, but may with the United States have been over- at times prove to be of enormous come. One can hardly conceive the value. Such is the case with this body; great advantages which western America | we seldom resist legislation coming from will reap from the completion of that the other House; but I think occasions bold undertaking. I have been accus- may arise, and on this occasion one has tomed to think of the Pacific Railway as arisen, when it is necessary for the Senate a road which would bring its traffic to exercise its privilege without fear and from the North-West eastward, and in without favor. I appeal to this House the opposite direction its freight would now; I pray and beseech this House to be comparatively light; but I can take time on this occasion, and to give imagine when this canal is constructed it the people an opportunity of further will prove to be the route that will be expressing their opinion upon this contaken by the produce of the western tract. It may be, hon. gentlemen, that prairies and eastern slopes of the Rocky those parties who have thus rushed forMountains to Europe. I think this ward this measure, without the knowcanal will exercise a most important in- ledge and approval of the people, may fluence for good on the future of British yet repent of their rashness and the Columbia and upon our Pacific Railway. time that ever they forced this great It is one of the features which ought to measure so hastily through the Canadian convince us of the improved prospects of Parliament. our undertaking, and should add additional value to the lands we possess in that region. I have said before I have never despaired of the future of our new territories. It seems to me that in advance of the plough we shall find pastoral pursuits will occupy the attention of the people who may settle on the well watered region at the foot of the Rocky Mountains, and

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN moved the adjournment of the debate.

The motion was agreed to.

MONTREAL BOARD OF TRADE AND
EXCHANGE BILL.

that fine grazing SECOND READING. country SO recently covered with Hon. Mr. RYAN moved the second herds of buffalos will, in the near reading of Bill (J) "An Act to Incorfuture, be occupied by herds of porate the Montreal Board of Trade and cattle. I think it is quite within the Corn Exchange." He said: The object of prospect of those who may live ten or this Bill is to amalgamate two mercantile fifteen years longer to see those plains institutions existing in the City of Monoccupied by the short-horned descendants treal. The Montreal Board of Trade of the celebrated herd of the hon. mem-has been before this House and ber from Compton. Looking at the the Legislature very frequently, and whole features of this contract; looking its position is known. The Montreal at the vast interests present and future which are indentified with it, I think it becomes this House to consider its position-its immunity from the influences that affect other legislative bodies-possessed as we are of irresponsible power,

Corn Exchange is an association which has also made itself very useful in carrying on the grain trade of this country. I think there is nothing in this Bill really to explain beyond what I have said; the object is to unite those two