Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Landsettlement policy on the mainland of British Columbia, 1858-1874 Mikkelsen, Phyllis 1950

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1950_A8 M5 L2.pdf [ 11.58MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0106644.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0106644-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0106644-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0106644-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0106644-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0106644-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0106644-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0106644-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0106644.ris

Full Text

Li? J #7 Land Settlement Policy on the Mainland of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1858 - 1874 by PHYLLIS MIKKELSEN A thesis submitted in part i a l fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the department of HISTORY September 1950 THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Vancouver, Canada AN ABSTRACT LAND SETTLEMENT POLICY ON THE MAINLAND OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, 1858--1874. Like most young colonies,, B r i t i s h Columbia i n 1858 was economically undeveloped. Nevertheless,,the colony possessed aavaluable natural resource i n i t s public lands which might be sold to raiBe additional revenue, or given to immigrants in place of financial aid. Unfortunately, geography limited the immediate value of the Grown Lands and made settlement extraordinarily d i f f i c u l t 1 . While attempting to define a successful land-settlement policy for Br i t i s h Columbia,, the government could not ignore the instructions from Great Britain that the colony was to become self-supporting as soon as possible. Sales of land were therefore expected to be an important source of revenue. Unfortunately,,the unstable mining population cared l i t t l e for farming. The indifference of the miners and the i n a b i l i t y of the government to confine the mining population within the limits of surveyed land brought about a gradual reduction i n the price of land. Although i t was originally intended that the Wakefield system should be applied to B r i t i s h Columbia, the proximity of the United States made the adoption of the pre-emption system' inevitable. While intended as a-temporary measure the pre-emption system was adopted in 1860 and remained on the statute books throughout the colonial period. The question of free grants of land was widely discussed in B r i t i s h Columbia during the colonial period after the pas-sage of the Homestead Act of 1862 i n the United States. How-ever, the lack of surveyed land resulting from the financial and geographical problems of the colony made i t s adoption im--possible. The pre-emption system was therefore the. main feature of the colony 1s land-settlement policy fromal858 u n t i l Con> federation* . New Westminster was the only d i s t r i c t on the main-land in which country land, was sold at auction^ In that dis-t r i c t , by 1868, of the 83,440 acres of surveyed landoffered for sale,,27,797 acres had, been .bought. Of this amount not more than 250 acres had been brought under cultivation-. By 1868 a,total of 1696 pre-emption claims had been recorded of which 6000 acres had,been brought under cultivation.. Throughout the colonial period agriculture remained secon-dary to mining and i t i s probable that the discoveries of gold had much more influence upon farming: than the actual land-settle-ment policy of the government. The best Justification for the pre-emption system.is the fact that i t .allowed settlers in the vici n i t y of the mines and.beyond: the limits of surveyed land to produce for the local market. Although the absence of a free-grant system was blamed by some for the slow growth of set-tlement, .they failed to discern that settlers who pre-empted in many parts of the colony enjoyed the benefits of a free grant. For, since the government was financially unable .to survey their land, no payment was required. Yet to make agri-culture a parmanent and substantial industry, some confidence i n the prosperity of the colony, such as that promised hy Con-federation with i t s guarantee of railway connections, was needed to support the pre-emption system, -Farmers i n the upper country were the chief support of the colony in the depression of 1867, On. the other hand the lower Fraser Valley was s t i l l dependent upon imported food; for i n that d i s t r i c t uncertainty as.to the future of the colony had hindered the investment of capital which was needed to clear and drain.the land, In addition to a pre-emption claim, the settler i n Br i t i s h Columbia, after I 8 6 5 , was entitled to a pastoral lease. Although no uniform policy was adopted i n granting these leases, the average lease ran for a period of five years at the rate of 4jtf an.acre. The fine quality of the bunch grass i n the interior of the colony coupled with the government regulations concerning i t s use resulted i n a?decrease in the l i s t of imported meat. That the colony had to import meat at a l l can be blamed not upon the system of pastoral leases adopted by the Government but rather upon the ever-present d i f f i c u l t i e s of transportation. It was impossible to drive cattle down the Cariboo Road to the lower mainland markets because of the dangerous route and scar-city of food. During the colonial period the revenue gained from the sale of surveyed land and town lots was insignificant.compared with that received from custom duties and road t o l l s . In the year 1870, i t contributed only a . l i t t l e more than one-fortieth of the total revenue of the colony;,-After 1871 Confederation and the promise of a railway diverted the colonial government's point of view from the land policy of the United States to that of the Canadian Government. In 1873 Br i t i s h Columbia adopted the rectangular system of sur-veying as. used by the Dominion Government in. Manitoba, In the following year i t adopted.a system of free grants similar to that contained in the Dominion.Lands Act of 1872. Although nothing could.have been more liberal- than the free-grant system provided for by the Land Act of 187*, i t s influence upon the settlement of the province i n the period under consideration was negligible. In other words the charge often made during, the colonial period that the absence of a, free grant system hindered the settlement of the colony was erroneous. The rapid settlement of the province i n those early years was beyond the unaided power of any land^settlement policy. The transcontinental, railway was badly needed to overcome the isolation of the Pacific province. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Preface 1. The Physical Background....... ..pp. 1 - 9. 2. Special Problems Related to Land Policy i n B r i t i s h Columbia During the Colonial Period pp. 10- 46. 3. The Forming of aaLand .Policy. pp. 47- 64, 4. The Evolution of the Pre-emption System i n i860 pp. 65- 88. 5. The Pre-emption System, 1860 - 1870..pp. 89-121. 6. Pastoral Laws i n Br i t i s h Columbia.....pp. 122-140. 7. Land as a Source of Revenue pp. 141-163. 8. The Effects of Confederation upon the Land Settlement Policy of British Columbia, 1871 - 1874....pp. 164-202. Bibliography .pp. .203-207. PREFACE I have attempted to deal only w/ith the settle-ment problems which confronted the government on the mainland of British Columbia. The problem of the Indian lands has been omitted since the subject merits separate treatment.For the. same reason and because the material was not available, a discussion of. the land-settlement policies of the Hudson!.s Bay Company has been omitted. I am particularly indebted to Dr. G. N. Tucker of the University of Br i t i s h Columbia for his gener-ous help and patient supervision and to Mr. Willard Ireland, the Provincial Archivist,.for making the material for my work so readily available. 1 Chapter One The Physical Background Like most new colonies, B r i t i s h Columbia in 1858 was economically undeveloped. To carry on government the administration was therefore forced to collect import duties which provided an immediate source of revenue. Nevertheless, the colony possessed a valuable natural resource in i t s pub-l i c lands which might be sold to raise additional revenue, or given to immigrants in place of financial aid, or used as subsidies to promote railway construction. Unfortunately geography limited the immediate value of the Crown Lands. British Columbia was remote from the centres of population. To the northward there was nothing. Westward the widest ocean in the world separated the colony from Asia. A settler from Upper Canada was confronted by a journey of more than two thousand miles across B r i t i s h Ter-ritory uninhabited except by the Red River settlers. A set-t l e r from the Br i t i s h Isles faced a fifteen thousand mile journey by way of Cape Horn. Colonel Moody, the f i r s t Com-missioner of Lands and Works, travelling by the Panama route, completed the journey i n fifty-seven days. The main body of Royal Engineers, however, going by way of Cape Horn, were 2 184 days aboard ship. The physical peculiarities of the colony which re-tarded settlement i n i t s early years s t i l l present problems to the provincial land administrators. The topography of the province is such that only an exceedingly limited area, less than three percent, i s suitable for agriculture. B r i t i s h Columbia consists of a series of mountain ranges roughly par-a l l e l to one another and running in a northwesterley direc-tion. Between the Rockies on the east and the ©oast Range on the west l i e s the interior plateau, elevated from three to four thousand feet above sea-level and pierced by second-1 ary ranges. The three main chains, the Coast Range, the Selkirks and the Rockies, each rise to maximum elevations of over eleven thousand feet, in contrast to those of eastern 2 Canada which do not exceed f i f t y - f i v e hundred feet i n height. Squeezed between these ranges are the deep channels of numerous rivers and the long narrow valleys and lakes of the interior. In such a mountainous region i t i s not surprising that out of a total area of over 234,000,000 acres, the en-t i r e acreage in farmlands, as indicated in the 1941 census, 3 was only 4,033,570 acres or less than two percent. The mountains have helped to ensure to B r i t i s h 1 Currie, A. W., Economic Geography of Canada, Toronto, Macmillan Co., 1945, p. 245. 2 The Canada Year Book. 1950, p. 7. 3 MacGillivray, W., "Agriculture." i n the Transactions of  the Second Resources Conference; Victoria, Department of Lands and Forests, p. 7. 5 Columbia a bountiful r a i n f a l l , but the distribution of that r a i n f a l l has hindered farming. The province l i e s across the path of winds which have become f u l l y moistened during their crossing of the Pacific, but because of the uneven nature of the topography, that moisture i s dropped i n varying amounts across the province. "Due to the elevation and rugged nature of the mountain systems, the precipitation trend i s at i t s maximum on the West Coast and increases to some extent on the Western Selkirk and Purcell mountains, diminishes again on the eastward slopes and shows a f i n a l increase on the west 4 slope of the Rockies." Although the average annual precipi-tation of the Province can be quoted at approximately .Forty-two inches, this figure i s deceiving for agricultural purposes, since i t gives no indication of the wide variation at i n d i v i -dual points. For example, the average annual precipitation at Ocean Falls on the West Coast is 165.92 inches, hut at Ash-croft, in the interior, i t drops to 7.13 inches. In many parts of the province therefore, lack of moisture has made irrigation necessary. The irrigated lands total 150,000 acres, one third of which are under the control of public and private organizations, the remaining two thirds being individual ef-forts. There are, i n addition, 500,000 acres of land which could be brought under irrigation but at greater expense than 5 previously encountered. Fortunately, the mountain peaks with their high snow fields, and glaciers help to maintain the 4 Whyte, Col. G.E., "Water Resources of B.C." i n the Transac-tions of the Secong Resources Conference, Victoria, Depart-ment of Lands and Forests, p. 39. 5 Farrow, R.C.,"Water Rights of B r i t i s h Columbia," i n the Transaction^ of the Second Resonrnfts Honfgrpnog Victoria, Department.of Lands and Forests, p. 47. 4 flow of'streams down the steep slopes during the dry summer months, thereby aiding irrigation. The bench lands of the Okanagan are particularly adapted to irrigation from such a source. Farming in British Columbia is further complicated by wide variations i n climate and vegetation. At Vancouver the temperature ranges between twenty and eighty-five degrees. At some interior points the range is much greater, from below zero i n winter to over ninety in summer. Both Vancouver and Oliver have mean annual temperatures of f i f t y degrees; but Vancouver has .223 frost-free days, while Oliver has only 151. Moreover, Vancouver i s in an area characterized by dense for-est growing on al l u v i a l s o i l , while Oliver is i n a d i s t r i c t of bunch grass and desert shrubs. Fort Saint John has a frost-free period of 111 days, forty-six days longer than Pouce Coupe although both are situated i n the Peace River D i s t r i c t . In contrast to these northerly points, Cranbrook, in the east 6 Kootenay d i s t r i c t , has only eighty-tvro frost-free days. Experience has taught administrators that no agri-cultural policy can be applied to the province as a whole. Soil surveys which have been undertaken since 1931 have re-7 vealed great variation in type throughout the province. The soils of Brit i s h Columbia have been divided into two main 6 Rowles, Dr. C. A., "So i l , " in the Transactions of the Second Resources Conference. Victoria, Department of Lands and Forests, Table 2. 7 Ibid, pp. 7—26. 5 groups, the forest region and the grassland region. These regions are distinguished not because of their characteristic vegetation, hut because of certain properties such as the amount and distribution of nitrogen. The forest s o i l region is a very extensive one and can in turn be divided into two main s o i l zones, the brown podsolic and the grey wooded. The brown podsolic zone contains four sub-zones: the Pacific, mountain, intermountain and calcareous intermountain. The Pacific sub-zone ranges along the east coast of Vancouver Island and through the lower Fraser Valley and i s valuable for dairying and small f r u i t production. This is the s o i l of Agassiz, Vancouver, Duncan, and Nanaimo. The mountain sub-zone s o i l covers the western and central portions of Vancouver Island, and the higher parts of the mainland coast, but i s too coarse for agriculture. The intermountain sub-zone s o i l i s found i n the valleys of the southern interior, and i f i r r i -gated i s valuable for grazing and for f r u i t trees. The ca l -careous intermountain sub-zone extends through the Rocky Mountain Trench and is good for dryland grain farming and grazing. Cranbrook is i n this area. Again, irrigation i n -creases productivity of this s o i l sub-zone. Agriculture i s hindered throughout the brown podsolic zone hy the d i f f i c u l -ties of clearing. . The grey wooded zone of the forest region i s a very extensive one. "From the point of view.of agriculture i t i s an important one as the largest acreages of undeveloped araX-8 ble land occur within i t s boundaries." It too can be divided into sub-zones: the northern grey wooded, the central inter-ior and the southern interior. The northern grey wooded sub-zone includes the greater part of the Peace River D i s t r i c t . The soils beyond this area have been unexplored. Land clear-ing in this sub-zone again presents a problem. For success a settler i n the region needs a farm of not less than 160 acres and with the use of f e r t i l i z e r s crops of legumes and grass seeds may be produced profitably, but not wheat. Further south the central interior sub-zone covers a broader area from Hazelton to Clinton. In this sub-zone the land once cleared i s valuable for mixed farming. The last sub-zone of the grey wooded zone, the southern interior sub-zone, occupie a large portion of the central plateau from Clinton to the southern boundary and is useful for timber grazing. The grassland region i s divided into three main s o i l zones: the brown, the dark brown and the black. The brown s o i l zone extends from the forty-ninth parallel through the Similkameen Valley to Keremeos and through the Okanagan Valley as far as Summerland. It is also characteristic of the Thompson Valley between Ashcroft and Monte Creek. The s o i l is found in the driest area of B r i t i s h Columbia and that with the longest frost-free period of the grassland region. 8 Rowles, On. Cit.. p. 20. 7 In contrast to the s o i l of the northern grey wooded zone, a farm of from ten to fifteen acres, when irrigated, i s a suc-cessful unit. The s o i l i s useful for ranching and raising peaches, apricots, cherries, apples and cantelojipes. The dark crown s o i l zone i s distributed among the Okanagan, East Koot-enay, Similkameen and Thompson Valleys. Kelowna, Lillooet, Rock Creek and Grand Forks are representative centres in this s o i l zone, which is useful for growing hardy frui t s , a l f a l f a , vegetables and grapes, and for grazing. The black s o i l zone is represented in both the northern and southern parts of the province. Vernon, Princeton, Merritt and Kamloops are s i t u -ated i n what is known as the shallow black sub-zone, the s o i l of which i s the mainstay of the province's ranching industry. When irrigated i t also produces p r o l i f i c crops of a l f a l f a , hay and vegetables. Dawson Creek and Fort St. John are i n what i s called the northern degraded black sub-zone. Large farms of from 160 to 520 acres are necessary and the most suitable crops are grain, legumes and grasses. The Bulkley Valley, Francois Lake,aad Ootsa Lake and Vanderhoof are i n the last subdivision, the central degraded black sub-zone which i s useful chiefly for forage production. In addition to the.forest and grassland regions are the a l l u v i a l soils, found along -the various rivers. The best known area i s that along the Fraser, but a l l u v i a l soils are 9 MacGillivary, Op. Cit. p. 81. 10 Ibid..p. 75. 8 also found along the L i l l o o e t R iver , north of L i l l o o e t Lake, and i n the v i c i n i t y of Creston. The va r i e ty of s o i l s d i s -closed by the s o i l surveys have forced upon the Department of A g r i c u l t u r e the conclus ion that each region of the province "must be considered and developed i n the l i g h t of i t s own 9 p o t e n t i a l a g r i c u l t u r a l value . . . " As wel l as a s c i e n t i f i c c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the s o i l of B r i t i s h Columbia, the present administrators have the ass i s tance of modern c lear ing equipment, to further t h e i r land-settlement p o l i c i e s . Heavy crawler type t r ac tor s "push-ing a V-shaped cut ter are capable of shearing o f f from one to one and a ha l f acres of brush per hour. . . . The f a l l e n brush i s then p i l e d mechanically and burned. The stumps can be rooted out before the land i s prepared for crop, or heavy breaking ploughs, mould board or d i s c , can be used to plough 10 the l a n d . " The e a r l i e s t attempts to provide B r i t i s h Columbia with a successful land-settlement p o l i c y were unaided e i ther by mechanized land c lear ing equipment or by a s c i e n t i f i c knowledge of s o i l types. Nor was p o l i c y formulated upon the p o t e n t i a l a g r i c u l t u r a l value of each region which was I n those days unknown. The land laws d i s t ingui shed two regions only , one east and the other west of the Coast Mountains. 9: M a c G i l l i v r a y , op. c i t . p . 81. 10' I b i d . , p . 75. 9 Scientific knowledge today i s transforming B r i t i s h Columbia into a province of diversified and valuable agricult-ural production, while modern transportation f a c i l i t i e s have overcome the isolation of the province. Yet during the colon-i a l period topography and geography combined to thwart the plans of government o f f i c i a l s to raise large revenues from the public lands and made settlement extraordinarily d i f f i c u l t . 10. Chapter Two Special Problems Related to Land Policy i n B r i t i s h Columbia During the Colonial Period As a logical prelude to the establishment of a successful land policy for B r i t i s h Columbia, the Department of Lands and Works i n 1859 realized the importance of com-piling a map. B r i t i s h Columbia, bordering on the Pacific Ocean, was far away from Great Britain. Moreover, her emer-gence as a colony, resulting from the gold discoveries, rather than from a western movement of the Canadian frontier of settlement, aggravated her detached position. In a letter to the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works, Captain Parsons of the Royal Engineers, faced with the problem of determining latitudes and longitudes, explained the practical problems resulting from that isolation. "The most accurate method of establishing them i s by observing transits of the Moon, but as we are 1/3 of a revolution from Greenwich and the Moon1s proper motion varies considerably i n such an interval, a large number of observations would have to be made to obtain 1 satisfactory results i f referred to that place." 1.- Capt. R.M.Parsons to Col. R.C.Moody, Nov. 1, 1861, Parsons Correspondence, Manuscript in the Archives of B r i t i s h Col-umbia, hereafter referred to as M.A.B.C. In view of these d i f f i c u l t i e s Parsons proposed to refer his observations to the meridian of New Westminster, in order to 2 obtain better relative longitudes with fewer 1 observations. Because of the mountainous nature of Brit i s h Col-umbia, the determination of latitudes and longitudes was the only method of connecting widely separated points. It was so d i f f i c u l t , moreover, to carry the necessary instruments over the rough country that Captain Parsons f e l t that he must be content with determining just two or three absolute longi-tudes, in the central parts of the colony, to serve as i n i t i -3 a l meridians. Under these conditions progress was naturally slow. Four years later, Walter Moberl^y, i n charge of a party en-gaged i n closing the line from Kamloops, via Okanagan, Cherry Creek and Columbia and that by Shuswap Lake, found that neither his latitudes nor his longitudes agreed with those 4 of the office map. Nor had the position of the Columbia 5 River yet been fixed with regard to New Westminster. In 1866, J. W. Trutch, The Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works, reported that the exploration of the country could only be accomplished gradually because of the topographical d i f f i c u l t i e s . The greater part of the colony had been v i s i -ted only by trappers or prospecting parties, who furnished 2/ Ibid. 3/ Parsons to Moody, November 1, 1861, Parsons Carrespondence M-.A.B.C. 4/ W. Moberl^y to J.W.Trutch, September 10, 1865, Moberl^y Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 5/ Ibid. 12. no information from which a map of the d i s t r i c t visited could 6 be prepared. However, a sketch map reduced from the general office map to a scale of twenty-five miles to the inch was issued, which showed a l l reliable information obtained by the Department of Lands and Works from actual surveys and recon-7 naissances together with the different roads and pack t r a i l s . This map was distributed for the guidance of miners v i s i t i n g the newly discovered gold fields of the Columbia River Dis-t r i c t rather than .for the information of intending settlers. The d i f f i c u l t y i n compiling a satisfactory map resulted i n a lack of definite knowledge of the agricultural pros-pects of the colony. The Brit i s h Columbian reported i n 1861 that farming had been successful i n various parts of the colony, but that "the question as to the extent of our good land cannot be f u l l y answered u n t i l the country i s further 8 explored and surveyed." In 1864 Trutch urged the Governor to appropriate £5000 for the exploration of the interior d i s t r i c t s of the colony. "The objects of such explorations in a country like B r i t i s h Columbia—of which so l i t t l e i s known at present—are so obvious and attractive, and the results which may confidently be hoped to ensue from proper examination and reliable reports on the hitherto unknown 6/ Trutch to Col. Sec, October 29, 1866, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. ly Trutch to Col. Sec, October 29, 1866, Lands and Works Department to Governor. M.A.B.C. 8y B r i t i s h Columbian. October 10, 1861. -4r 13. resources of the country are so clear to a l l , that I do not consider any argument requisite to add force to my recommen-9 dation." The d i f f i c u l t i e s which confronted the map makers were also harriers to the speedy settlement of the colony. The heavy forests i n the v i c i n i t y of Queensborough impressed Colonel Moody with their beauty but slowed down the work of his surveyors. "I stand by and sometimes help a l i t t l e , as I see with my own eyes what a loss of time i t i s giving a wince and rubbing your hand when a thorn as big and strong as a shark's tooth tears across i t . The woods are magnificent, superb beyond description but most vexatious to a surveyor 10 and the f i r s t dwellers in a town." Lieutenant Palmer of the Royal Engineers, scratched and muddy, wrote from the Bella Coola River that before reaching the Fraser River he 11 would have outstripped the sufferings of St. Paul.5; The Governor, James Douglas, travelling along the lower Fraser, was enchanted by perfume from the wild apple blossoms as his boat swept beneath the canopy of overhanging bows, but he could not repress the wish that "those gorgeous forests might soon be swept away by the efforts of human industry and give place to cultivated fields and other accessories of c i v i l i -9y Trutch to Seymour, August 25, 1864, Land and Works Depar-tment to Governor, M.A.B.G. 10,.*-> Moody to Douglas^, March 17,; 1859, Lands and Works De-partment to Governor. M.A.B.C. 11/ Lieutenant Palmer to Moody, July 16, 1859, Palmer Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. -€r it 12 zation." Settlers exploring the banks of the lower Fraser for suitable land were blocked i n every direction by thick 13 brush and immense quantities of f a l l e n timber. Clearing such densely wooded land was not only d i f f i c u l t but also expensive because of a shortage of labour i n the colony. 14 Judge Begbie reported paying from £50 to £100 an acre. Governor Douglas estimated the cost more conservatively at 15 £15 to £30 an acre. Such high costs proved no attraction for the Investment of capital and l e f t the clearing to the 16 labour of the actual settlers. Settlers soon found that land which enticed them by i t s comparative lack of forest growth was l i k e l y subject to floods. "It i s already an established and well recognized fact, that, West of the Cascade Mountains, the greater portion of such lands as are capable of cultivation are either liable to inundation i n the summer of covered with a forest growth 17 so thick as to afford few inducements to emigrants." 12 Douglas to Newcastle, May 31, 1860, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 13 Ibid. 14 Judge Begbie to Douglas, April 30, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec, M.A.B.C. 15 Douglas to Newcastle, May 23, 1860, Papers Relative to the  Affairs of B r i t i s h Columbia, Part IV, Presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of Her Majesty, 1862, hereafter referred to as Cmd. 2952. 16 Ibid. 17 Palmer to Moody, November 23, 1859, Palmer Correspondence, M.A.B.C. -6-15. Governor Douglas estimated that about twenty thousand acres of good arable land requiring no clearing are available on the banks of the Pi t t River. However, many parts of i t were 18 exposed to overflow. Travelling from Langley to Hope, Douglas found the road through the flooded plains impassable 19 for horses and was compelled to continue by canoe. Very soon the settlers on the islands at the mouth of the Fraser 20 had to learn to embank their lands. In the Sumas area roads had to be constructed on the fern ridges i n order to be practicable. These raised roads were reported to be satis-factory except at the highest stages of the water, when roads were unnecessary as the settlers could travel a l l over the 21 country by canoe. The Fraser was not the only river which caused distress to settlers. In 1870 a petition was sent to the Lands and Works Department praying that a bridge might be constructed across the Nicola River which was impassable WAS during the summer months owing to the high water, andAconse-22 quently cutting the farmers off from their markets. In certain sections of the colony lack of water hindered successful farming. Yet numerous mountain streams 18 Douglas -to Newcastle, May 31, 1860, Despatches from Down-ing Street, M.A.B.C. 19 Ibid. w 20 H. R. Hoj2se to Seymour, August 16, 1865, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 21 E. Mohun to Trutch, October 12, 1870, Mohun Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 22 P. O'Reilly to B.W.Pearse, July 9, 1870, O'Reilly Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. -7-in certain sections alleviated this d i f f i c u l t y by providing a ready means of irrigation. Lieutenant Palmer reported the soils of the Similkameen Valley excellent for grazing and farming i f irrigated . hy the adjacent streams Miose sudden f a l l would greatly f a c i l i t a t e the process. As early as 1860, settlers at Cayoosh were/diverting water from the 24 neighbouring streams for agricultural purposes. Near the mouth of the Hat River, in 1861, a settler was also u t i l i z i n g 25 nearby streams to overcome the summer droughts. A simi-l a r solution was recommended as indispensible for settlers 26 in the vi c i n i t y of Pavilion. The efforts of the government to settle the colony were greatly hampered hy a lack of adequate communication with the interior. Douglas boasted that no part of the United States north of the Columbia River could r i v a l the country situated between Lytton and Rock Creek. Unfortuna-tely, however, owing to the state of communications, i t was 27 occupied exclusively by miners and. Indians. From observa-tions of the actions of the packers, who were accustomed to leave their animals to roam at large when work was suspended for the winter, he also recognized the excellent pasture 23 Palmer to Moody, November ,23, 1859, Palmer Corre pondence, M.A.B.C. 24 Douglas to Newcastle, October 9, 1860, Cmd. 2952. 25 Ibid.. July 16, 1861. 26 Ibid. 27 Douglas to Newcastle, October 25, 1860, Cmd. 2952. - 6 -17. land extending from Cayoosh to Pavilion. Yet this area also 28 was barely settled, because i t was so d i f f i c u l t to reach. Judge Begbie, reporting to the Governor after ci r c u i t , was struck by the "absence of a l l means of communication except 29 by foaming torrents i n canoe, or over goat track on foot." He estimated the cost of transporting one pound weight from 30 Douglas to Cayoosh, or from Yale to Lytton at eight pence. It was f u t i l e to attempt the settlement of the Similkameen and Okanagan Valleys in the then undeveloped state of the colony. Extensive crops could be raised "but the emigrant would have to depend for the other necessities of l i f e either on such few as might from time to time find their way into the country from Washington Territory or on such as might during four months of the year be obtained from Fort Hope and other points on the Fraser either of which could not be ob-tained but at prices too exhorbitant for the pocket of the 31 poor man." Accordingly i t was soon evident to Douglas that the construction of roads should be one of the f i r s t objectives 32 of the government. The topography of the colony, however, would immediately increase the engineering d i f f i c u l t i e s and the expense. Judge Begbie calculated that according to the 28 Ibid., July 16, 1861. 29 Begbie to Dou las, April 28, 1859, Begbie to Col. Sec.MAB.C. 30 Begbie to Douglas, April 30, 1860, Begbie to Col.S-.MA.B.C. 31 Palmer to Moody, Nov.23,1859,Palmer Corresp. M.A.B.C. 32/Douglas to Lytton, October 12, 1858, Papers Relative to ' the Affairs of British Columbia. Part II, Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty, 1859, hereafter referred to as Cmd. 2578. -9-'8. work accomplished hy the sappers under Captain Grant of the Royal Engineers, eight hundred days of labour were required 33 for one mile of road. Before actual construction commenced preliminary investigations had to be carried out to discover feasible routes. To save time and expense this had to be carried out "by the District Officers, assisted by Indian 34 Guides and white men inured to hardship and privation." The main waggon road ran through the Cariboo Di s t r i c t , but in the interior pack t r a i l s i n place of roads were the best that could be accomplished. By 1866, the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works was able to report that pack t r a i l s had been extended from Hope to Wild Horse Creek, and from Shus-35 wap Lake to the Columbia River. Economic as well as geographic d i f f i c u l t i e s added to the problems of Land and Works Department. Agriculture was -outstripped by mining as the most attractive means of making a l i v i n g . A l l the surveyed country at New Westminster was put up for sale on the f i f t h and sixth of October, 1859, but only four lots were sold; a l l at the upset price of ten 36 shillings an acre, there being no competition. Travelling through Lytton, Douglas was surprised to find that not a 33 Begbie to Douglas, November 15, 1859, Begbie to Col.Sec.MA-34 Douglas to Newcastle,January 28 1861, Despatches to (B.C. Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 35 Trutch to Col. Sec, October 29,1866, Lands and Works. Dep-artment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 36 Douglas to Newcastle, October 18, 1859, Papers Relative to  the Affairs of Br i t i s h Columbia. Part III, Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty, 1860, Hereafter referred to as Cwit.2724. single farm had been opened i n the d i s t r i c t , i n spite of there being plenty of good s o i l , and clear land. "The want of roads and the enormous cost of transport may in some meas-ure account for that circumstance, but i t strongly marks the character of a population diverted to other pursuits, and who 37 probably look to other countries for a permanent home." Douglas' only hope was that perhaps the scarcity of food and the high prices of imported food might induce settlers to give 38 up the mines for farming. The financial problems of the colony were enormous. The Imperial Government would lend i t s assistance in the early establishing of the colony, but expected that B r i t i s h 39 Columbia would become self-supporting as soon as possible. A party of Royal Engineers was despatched to the colony to survey those parts of the region considered suitable for settlement, but on the understanding that the force was to be maintained at the expense of the Imperial Government for only 40 a limited period. A separate account of a l l revenue derived from the sale of land was to be kept, and the f i r s t charge upon that revenue was to be the expense of the surveying party. For this reason Lytton objected to the employment of 37 Douglas to Newcastle, October 9, 1860, Cmd. .8952. 38 Douglas to Newcastle, February 3, 1863, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 39 Sir E.B.Lytton to Douglas, July 31, 1858, Papers Relative  to the Affairs of Br i t i s h Columbia. Part I,Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty, 1859, hereafter referred to as Cmd. ,2476. 40 Ibid. zo. / surve/ors other than the Royal Engineers, since i t would add 41 so much to the financial burden of the colony. As far as his c i v i l duties were concerned, Colonel Moody received his i n -structions from Downing'Street, and i n these much emphasis was placed upon the need for economy. The comprehensive sur-vey was to be the work of the Royal Engineers alone. The ordinary f i l l i n g i n of allotments for sale could be executed by contract, but to save expense, the cost of surveying a l l o t -ments was to be added to the purchase price of the land. " A l l augmentation of the expenses thus calculated should be 48 sedulously avoided." In accordance with these instructions Douglas reported i n December 1858, that the colony was unen-43 cumbered by any c i v i l corps of surveying officers. It was not long, however, before i t became evident that the Corps of Royal Engineers was inadequate for the long l i s t of duties assigned to them. By July 1858, the public were clamouring over the fact that no country land had been brought into the market. The necessity of laying out the site of Queensborough had so far f u l l y occupied the surveys 44 ing party. Colonel Moody had previously reported to Douglas that with the addition of a f i r s t rate draughtsman he would have a complete l i t t l e party valuable chiefly for laying out 41 Lytton to Douglas, October 16, 1858. Cmd. 2476. 42 Instructions'to Moody from Lytton, October 29, 1858, Folder 1149b, M.A.B.C.-43 Douglas to Lytton, Dec. 29, 1858, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 44 Douglas to Lytton, July 4, 1859, Cmd. 2724. - ± s -21 towns and surveying lines of communication, but too small i n number-, to execute rural surveys. The remainder of the de-tachment was composed of useful tradesmen such as carpenters, masons, brick-layers and smiths who, however, knew nothing of 45 surveying. Although the need was dire, the colonial revenue could not support any addition to the surveying party. Since Br i t i s h Columbia was remote and d i f f i c u l t to develop, large 46 revenues could not be expected immediately. There was thus no possibility of the colony providing the funds necessary for the upkeep of the Engineers. But the Imperial Government would make advances solely for services i n connection with 47 their military duties. Therefore, although admitting the value of further additions to the surveying party, Lytton could not sanction "any increase in the expenditure of Colonel Moody's department which might add to the sum which w i l l have 48 to be voted by Parliament. For this reason Governor Douglas had to refuse Colonel Moody's request that J.W. Trutch be 49 added to his staff of surveyors. Douglas could only urge 45 Moody to Douglas, January 31, 1859, Department of Land and Works to Governor, M.A.B.C. 46 Douglas to Newcastle, October 24, 1859, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 47 Douglas to Newcastle, October 24, 1859, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 48 Lytton to Douglas, April 12, 1859, Cmd. 2578. 49 Douglas to Moody, June 1, 1859, Douglas' Private Letter Book, Mo* Archivco of D. C. . M . A . B . C . Moody to carry on as best he could with his military staff. "We are now hard pressed for money, and find i t increasingly hard to meet our l i a b i l i t i e s . Under these circumstances I must beg of you to discharge the whole of the c i v i l surveyors and other officers, and hereafter to build and make a l l other improvements needed i n the country by means of troops alone . . . cut down on expenditures to the lowest point and get through the work of the department as well as you can with your military staff as Her Majesty's Government are resolved to pay no other charge, and I cannot raise the money i n the 50 Colony." Judge Begbie summed up the financial problem: "The pecuniary resources for establishing any land system, organiz-ing and paying a proper staff, creating roads, or paying a contractor for surveying and road making may be said to be at 51 present n i l . " Four months earlier Douglas had attempted to remove at least one of these items of expense. Because the expenses of moving surveying parties to the various parts of the colony where land was required would exceed the money value of the land sold, Douglas decided to inaugurate the pre-emption system. According to his Proclamation of January 4, I860, settlers were granted a pre-emptive right to a 50 Douglas to Moody June 27, 1859, Douglas' Private Letter Book, Ms. Archives of B. C. 51 Begbie to Douglas, April 30, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec, M.A.B.C. -44^  23 hundred and sixty acres each, on condition that they immedi-ately occupied and improved such land and agreed to pay the 52 Government not more than ten shillings an acre when surveyed. By postponing the surveys i n this manner, they could be car-ried out much more economically later on, when^.r-oads^had 53 been properly constructed. In spite of this r e l i e f , ^.complaints from the Gov-ernor over expenses s t i l l followed Colonel Moody's survey-ing parties. Judge Begbie lamented that the surveyors have "marked and trenched nothing but town lots and surburban lots in four l o c a l i t i e s of the colony: New Westminster, Douglas, 54 Fort Hope, and Fort Yale." Douglas threatened to terminate their duties, however, i f heavy b i l l s such as those from the surveying party employed at Fort Hope continued to come in^. "If the expenses be necessarily heavy, or i f i t exceeds the value of the work, or of the land surveyed, i t becomes a question whether the cost should be incurred, or whether i t would be in our power with the limited means of the colony 55 to employ the Royal Engineers i n distant survey service." With expenses so severely curtailed, the work of the Royal Engineers became more and more burdensome. Lisub-tenant Palmer, travelling from Bella Coola River to the 52 D ug as to N wcastle, January 12, 1860, Cmd. 2724. 53 Ibid. 54 Begbie to Douglas, April 30, 1860, Begbi  to Col. Sec, M.A.B.C. 55 Douglas to Moody, April 10, 1860, Col. Sec to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. -15-Fraser, requested Colonel Moody's instructions as to "whether I am to stop when the £350 i s finished or go on. I scarcely think I shall he able to do a l l the work that i s l a i d down, 56 either within the season or within the £350." Colonel Moody answered the Governor's complaints over expenses with demands for more instruments. If the engineers were to ex-ecute a l l the surveys without c i v i l assistance they must have more instruments. "It i s obvious that without sufficient instruments the progress of the Survey of allotments i n the wooded regions, so thickly entangled with underbrush must be 57 extremely slow." At this time, there were approximately sixteen Royal Engineers employed on survey duties. Of these, five i n the office were engaged i n the registration of land, taking meteorological observations, plotting, drawing, and fe l l i n g trees for the office f i r e s . Two were employed at Hope, assisted by two c i v i l i a n axe-men or chain-men. The remaining nine were divided into two groups engaged in laying out surburban and rural lands near New Westminster without 58 any c i v i l i a n assistance. As Captain Parsons pointed out, the training of these last mentioned was being completely wasted. "Each man of the nine would be able to conduct a 56 Palmer to Moody, July 16, 1859, Palmer Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 57 Moody to Douglas, May 1, 1860, Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 58 Parsons to Moody, May 3 , 1860, Parsons Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 25 simple survey were he assisted by untrained persons to clear 59 a passage for and to draw the chain." Since this small sur-veying party was also part of the military establishment, constant interruption was caused by the need for each man to take his turn at camp duty. This i s not merely the loss of the men's services for a definite period, hut i t entails a forgetfulness of loc a l i t y , of progress and design in the 60 surveys which greatly retard the accuracy of the work. " Under these conditions the failure of the surveyors to mark out anything.but town and suburban lots in four l o c a l i t i e s was not surprising. At Colonel Moody's suggestion, Captain Parsons offered his own ideas for improving the organization of the surveying party. For laying out actual townsites he f e l t that trained surveyors were necessary; but the minor details of lots and streets could be f i l l e d i n by men whose training was limited to laying off a right angle and accurate chain-ing. He recommended that the Royal Engineers should not be used to survey pre-empted lands. In their place he suggest-ed that Crown Surveyors of Districts or Sworn Surveyors should be appointed to correct the rude boundaries made by the pre-emptors themselves. They should he men of absolute integrity, since their work could not be checked u n t i l much 59. Ibid. 60 Parsons to Moody, May 3, 1860, Parsons Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 2t> later, "but they would not need to have anything approaching 61 the technical knowledge which the Royal Engineers possessed. In accordance with these suggestions, the Pre-emp-tion Amendment Act of January 19., 1861, granted c i v i l assis-tance to the surveying party of the Royal Engineers. Any person wishing to pay for the land acquired by him under the Pre-emption Act could apply to the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works to appoint a Sworn Surveyor; the cost of the 62 survey to be borne by the applicant himself. As a result Colonel Moody asked for the appointment of Walter Moberl/y, Edgar Dewdney, Joseph W. Trutch and John Cochrane as Sworn 63 Surveyors. A scale of fees was determined upon, and defin-i t e instructions were prepared for the guidance of the Sworn Surveyors throughout the colony. For eighty acres the charge was to be Is. 6d. for each acre and Is. for each additional acre. At every angle of the lot or section, a post was to be planted firmly i n the ground, projecting at least four feet above the ground and squared for at least one foot at the top. The post was to be marked with the number of the lo t , group or section, and block. Besides paying the cost of the sur-vey, the applicant was to meet the travelling expenses of the 64 surveyors. The Government was thus to be relieved of a l l 61 Ibid.. January 1, 1861. 62 British Columbia Ordinances. 1861, No. 1. 63 Moody to C. Bre^T February 23, 1861, Lands and Works Department, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 64 Moody to Douglas, April 10, 1861, Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M. Ac'B. C. .18-37 expense in connection with the employment of c i v i l surveyors. The r e l i e f so afforded to the Royal Engineers was not destined to last for long. On May 17, 1861, Colonel Moody requested that he he allowed to employ Edward Stephen as a Sworn Surveyor to help i n surveying of suburban lots i n New Westminster. Considering the extreme density of the brush-wood, Moody considered his fee of £220 for 145 lots 65 quite reasonable. Permission seems to have been granted, for in the following month Moody reported that Stephen had 66 been sworn i n as a surveyor. Douglas apparently feared that such an extension of the duties of Sworn Surveyors beyond pre-emption claims would prove too great a financial burden on the colony. On May 17, 1861, the Colonial Secretary sent Moody the draft of a proclamation to be issued as soon as completed. According to this proclamation, pre-emptors were to pay for their pre-emptions, and receive t i t l e to them when the government survey should have reached their land. It would therefore be unnecessary to employ sworn surveyors, and the clauses providing for them i n the Pre-emption Amend-67 ment Act of January 1861 were to be speedily repealed. This was done on September 10, 1861, with the enacting of the Pre-emption Consolidation Act. 65 Moody to Douglas, May 17, 1861, Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 66 Ibid.. June 26, 1861. 67 Col. Sec. to Moody, May 27, 1861, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. U2T %8 Deprived of c i v i l assistance the survey work of the Royal Engineers continued to he slow, with resulting i l l -feeling between Douglas and Moody. The Colonel explained to Douglas that the few surveyors of the Royal Engineers were employed on so many different services, and so frequently 68 changed their work, that the surveys had hitherto been slow. Instead of help, Moody received a reprimand from the Gover-nor for carrying out the surveys i n such a 'desultory' man-69 ner, and was urged to.make better use of the surveying party. Colonel Moody retorted that the surveying had been slow be-cause of frequent requests from the Governor for the use of 70 the engineers on other projects. The B r i t i s h Columbian complained that the scientific s k i l l of the Royal Engineers was being wasted, since they %ere employed a s common novices in making roads which were blunderingly located by inexperi-enced and irresponsible men . . . In this the end of 1861 we know very l i t t l e more about the interior of the country through the operations of the Royal Engineers than we did i n 71 1858." The same paper took up the cry for c i v i l assistance. On March 6, 1862, i t asserted that a c i v i l i a n paid by the acre could have done i n two months as much surveying as the Royal Engineers had done thus far. The complaint was 68 Moody to Douglas, July 4, 1861, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 69 Col. Sec. to Moody, September 12, 1861, Col. Sec. to Land and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 70 Moody to Douglas, October 31, 1861, Land and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 71 Bri t i s h Columbian, ffiiwember 7, 1861. 2& 2.9 just, but the problem was insoluble while the finances of the 72 colony remained so precarious. The nature of the population presented another prob-lem to the Lands and Works Department. The rush of miners to the Fraser River caused Douglas to fear that in their haste for land they might ignore the Government's authority over i t . He pressed Lord Stanley that the whole country should be immediately thrown open for settlement. "Otherwise the coun-try w i l l be f i l l e d with lawless crowds, the public lands un-lawfully occupied by squatters of every description, and the 73 authority of the Government w i l l ultimately be set at naught." To a certain extent his fears were substantiated. Because of an attempt of John Ray and other parties to s e l l Crown land, Douglas issued a proclamation at Fort Yale emphasizing the 74 Government's authority over the land. "I do hereby warn a l l persons whom i t may concern, that no lands at or near Langley, or elsewhere on Fraser River, have been encumbered or sold, and that the t i t l e to a l l such lands i s vested i n the Crown and that any person found occupying the same without due 75 authority from me w i l l be summarily ejected . . . ." The problem was not only the sudden rush of miners to the colony i n 1858, but also the constant moving of the population within B r i t i s h Columbia. Judge Begbie described 72 B r i t i s h Columbian. March 6, 1862. 73 Douglas to Stanley, June 10, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 74. Douglas to Lytton, October 12, 1858, Cmd. 2578. 75 Ibid., Enclosure No. 3. 3o the population thus: "The greater part of i t i s quite nomad in i t s propensities. A bar which i s covered with miners in April i s several fathoms under water on June 1. Miles of river are deserted by hundreds of rockers . . . bars and dry diggings are often deserted from no natural necessity but because better news comes from 'up the country' and the 76 miners are tired of the monotony." The Assistant Commis-sioner of Lands and Yforks at Yale reported in Ap r i l , 1861, that his d i s t r i c t was almost deserted. Within a month 270 white miners had departed for the Cariboo, the land of 77 promise. The resulting effect upon agriculture was ex-asperating. "Of the 575 acres of rural, land pre-empted i n 78 this d i s t r i c t only 57 are under cultivation. " For the same reason Douglas reported that the Similkameen, Rock Creek and 79 Thompson River d i s t r i c t s had been forsaken. With the ap-proach of- winter miners flocked out of the colony i n droves. Even i n the Cariboo, the remaining population at the begin-80 ning of 1863 numbered no more than 350. The problem was how to lure settlers from the mines onto farms so as to pro-vide a permanent population in the colony. "The annual ex-odus of miners from the Cariboo, causing the suspension of 76 Begbie to Douglas, April 30, 1858, Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. 77 Sanders to Col. Sec, April 1, 1861, Sanders Correspond-ence, M.A.B.C. 78 Ibid. 79 Douglas to Newcastle, October 27, 1862, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 80 Ibid..February 3, 1863. -ee— 31 work for nearly seven months i n the year and effecting the amount of Public Revenue to a most serious extent, i s an e v i l originating almost entirely i n the scarcity and high prices of the food and i t i s one of those evils which must continue to t e l l severely on the industry of the country, u n t i l the extensive tracts of arable land in the neighbouring D i s t r i - T S J C & S " now lying waste, are brought into cultivation and the 81 Colony i s supplied with home grown food." The numbers of such a population could not be de-termined accurately. Judge Begbie estimated that the popula-82 tion varied from 1200 to 6,000 or 7,000 i n 1859. Its char-acter was definitely American. He was struck by "the prepon-derance of the Californian or Californicized element of the 83. population and the paucity of B r i t i s h subjects." A year later the American element was s t i l l predominant. "The pop-ulation are nearly a l l aliens—one sixth probably are Br i t i s h subjects—either from the mother country or from the Br i t i s h provinces. The remaining 5/6 are citizens of the United 84 States or Germans, French and Italians. . ." The composi-tion of the population thus made i t additionally d i f f i c u l t to establish a successful land policy, for although the aliens were not inferior i n quality they constituted an un-stable element. They came seeking gold; not as immigrant 81 Ibid. 82 Begbie to Douglas, April 30, 1860, Begbie to Col.Sec. M.A.B.C. - 83 Ibid.. April 25, 18591 84 Ibid.. April 30, 1860. 3 3 settlers looking for land. For this reason Douglas looked to the B r i t i s h Isles as the source of the colony*s permanent population. In the spring of 1863 the annual mining migra-tion starred well but slackened alarmingly, being diverted by gold discoveries on the Salmon River.. This fact made Douglas f u l l y conscious how precarious i t was to depend upon these aliens as the main source of B r i t i s h Columbia's popula-tion. "It is not improbable that some causes may altogether change our present relations and that they may i n great measure cease to play the part of f r u i t f u l nurseries for re-cruiting the population i n Her Majesty's colonies on this coast a contingency that w i l l render direct immigration from 85 the Mother Country more than ever essential to our progress." These economic problems had definite influence upon the method of surveying. The sudden onrush of miners necessitated some temporary arrangement for hastily surveying land i n immediate demand. Before receiving instructions from London as to the disposal of the Crown Lands, Douglas was making rapid preparations. "I have communicated with Mr. Pemberton, the Surveyor-General of Vancouver Island, and desired him to make temporary arrangements with any qualified persons he may find i n this Colony, for the purpose of i n -creasing the staff of surveying officers, and of engaging actively.in an extended survey of the lands of Fraser's River, whenever your instructions to that effect are received from 85 Douglas to Newcastle, July 2, 1863, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. •&4-86 England . . . " Pemberton was appointed as provisional Sur-veyor-General of Fraser River with a large corps of surveying 87 officers under his management. He was sent immediately to 88 Fort Langley, Fort Hope and Fort Yale to lay out town sites. Fort Langley was quickly l a i d out into lots 641 x 120' for 89 immediate sale on October 20, 1858. For purposes of expedi-ency, trigonometrical surveying was to be omitted for the time being. Instead the country was to be divided into square miles, subdivided into 8 sections of 80 acres each or 6 sec-90 tions of 107 acres each. Mr. Pemberton's words expressed the need for haste. "I would recommend omitting trigonometrical surveying at f i r s t , on account of the delay i n bringing lands into market and allotting to purchasers, who may he expected to arrive i n great numbers, and who w i l l be put to much ex-pense and inconvenience i f not put i n immediate possession of 91 land." Colonel Moody favoured surveying preceding settle-ment as in the United States, but realized that i t was not pos-sible i f B r i t i s h Columbia were to be a self-supporting colony. "In the United States this is practicable, because the surveys are borne as the charge of the Nation (The Federal Government) which also receives the benefit; making however appropriations . . . to the 'States' in which the surveys and land sales are 86 Douglas to Stanley, June 10, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 87 Ibid. 88 Ibid..Douglas to Lytton, October 11, 1858. 89 Ibid. 90 Douglas to Lytton, October 27, 1858, Enclosure No. 8, Cmd. 2578. 91 Douglas to Lytton, October 27, 1858, Enclosure No. 8, Cmd. 2578. 34-made. In the early stages of a Colony, which i s to be se l f -supporting, this principle may not perhaps be practicable, and to make the two oases analogous i t would be necessary for the Home Government to defray a l l the cost of Survey, receiv-ing directly a l l the amounts by Sales of land accruing u n t i l 92 such cost with f a i r interest shall have been repaid." In spite of the B r i t i s h Government's refusal to grant financial aid, Colonel Moody hoped that the American method of survey-ing might be applied profitably i n B r i t i s h Columbia. In June 1859 he wrote to James Tilton, the Surveyor-General at Olympia, requesting copies of his books of instructions to deputy sur-veyors, and any further details which ¥rould be helpful i n car-rying out the American system as applied in Oregon and Wash-95 ington. Walter Moberl^y shared Moody's admiration of the American system, suggesting that the "lands be l a i d out i n square sections containing 640 acres and divided with road allowances similar to the system now adopted i n the lately 94 surveyed lands in the United States." In accordance with Lytton's instructions that the f i l l i n g i n of allotments could be executed by a contract, Moody came to an agreement with Southgate and Drag for survey-92 Moody to Douglas, November 7, 1860, Lands and Works Depar-tment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 93 Moody to J.E.Tilton,. June 18, 1859, Land and Works Depart-ment Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 94 Moberl^y to Moody, May 28, 1859, Moberley Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 26 35: ing rural lands i n the v i c i n i t y of Semiahmoo. • They were instructed to follow the American system. From the point near: Semiahmoo where the 48-th parallel intersected the ocean, the coast meridian was to he run northward. Parallel to i t , the exterior lines of the block were to be drawn, resting upon the -49- parallel as the base. "The blocks to be three miles square or thereabouts to be numbered East and West of said Meridian and north from the base line (49° L a t i -tude) and to contain 36 sections (except where made fraction-a l by local circumstances) each 40 chains square or there-abouts to be numbered from one to thirty-six commencing at the North East corner and running from East to West and from West to East alternately through the block. At each Block or Section corner posts to be set and established with four bear-ing trees where practicable . . . and these Posts and bearing trees to be established and marked i n a l l respects as i n the 95 United States land Survey." A similar agreement for surveying rural allotments was signed with J. W„ Trutch. The original contract failed to receive the sanction of Douglas because of the large amounts of land and money involved. The Governor pointed out to Colonel Moody that the colony could afford to have surveyed only such land as was required for immediate settlement, whereas Moody envisioned a considerable area be-ing l a i d out i n preparation for future settlers and as a means 95 Moody to Drag and Southgate, July 22, 1859, Lands and Works Correspondence Outward, M.A«.B«C. 96 of attracting them. . . . I never for one moment contemplated any trans-action of the magnitude to which this agreement ex-tends. - - - i t involves an amount of expenditure, which i t would he quite impossible for us to meet, and i t also throws upon our hands, an extent .of land that we probably could not s e l l for years to come. . . My most anxious desire.for months past has been to accomplish the Survey and allotment of a portion of the rich agricultural lands which are naturally ready for occupation, so that many individuals who have applied for lands and who are f u l l y prepared to settle in B r i t i s h Columbia might at once be able to take possession of their allotments. . . . i t i s under these considerations and from your representa-tion of the in a b i l i t y of the Royal Engineers to undertake such surveys at present that I have been induced to acquiesce in the employment of c i v i l labour. °A Instead of $40,000 Moody was limited to an expenditure of £1,000, a sum which Douglas considered would place at their 9? disposal an adequate amount of surveyed land. In addition, although leaving i t for Moody to decide, Douglas suggested 98 that he was not i n favour of the American method of surveying. In spite of financial restrictions and the Governor's disap-proval of American methods, the memorandum of the agreement between Trutch and Moody contained explicit instructions to follow the American pattern. "Such survey and allotments to be i n a l l respects (save as herein and in a letter of instru-ctions from the said Colonel Moody to the said Joseph William Trutch of—date herewith) of the same character and of the same quality as are accepted by the United States Government in the General Survey of the Public Lands i n the United States 96. Douglas to Moody, June 29, 1859, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department. M.A.B.C. 97 Douglas to Moody, June 29, 1859, Col. Sec. to Lands and Workd Department, M.A.B.C. 98 Ibid. •CO 37 99 land d i s t r i c t s of Oregon and Washington." . . , The Governor's order of June .27, 1859, to dismiss a l l c i v i l surveyors, and the subsequent adoption of the pre-emption system, ended Moody's plan for- surveys preceding set-tlement i n the American fashion. Nor was i t long before the B r i t i s h Columbian, was complaining of the consequent effect upon agriculture. On September 5, 1861, i t pointed out the lack of uniformity resulting from the absence of survey lines to guide the settler. " . . . If the base lines could be run and main roads located before the lands are pre-empted, as was the case i n Canada, i t would be a very great advantage both to the settler and the government; and without this we fear i t . w i l l be very d i f f i c u l t ever to attain that uniformity 100 and arrangement in our dis t r i c t s which i s so desirable." A similar complaint over the lack of uniformity appeared in the same newspaper the following year. "Under the Rre-emp-tion Consolidation Act the pre-emptor wanders through the woods u n t i l he hits upon a spot that suits his fancy, where he puts down stakes, locating the l o t broadside on a river or 101 a road as best suits his notion. . . . " In a colony like B r i t i s h Columbia, with so many varieties of land, the settlers experienced d i f f i c u l t y i n 99 Memorandum of an agreement between J. W. Trutch and B.C. Moody, July 25, 1859, Land and Works Department, Contra-cts and Agreements, 1859,. M.A.B.C. 100 B r i t i s h Columbian. September 5, 1861. 101-. Br i t i s h Columbian. April 24, 1861. 38 finding suitable locations without the aid of surveys. Hear-ing that quite a number of settlers were leaving the colony e-because of the failure to find land, the JEditor of the 108 Bri t i s h Columbian interviewed Colonel Moody. The result was the publication of a notice inviting immigrants to inquire 103 at Moody's office concerning the location of agricultural land. The B r i t i s h Columbian, however, had l i t t l e f a i t h i n the bene-f i t s of such inquiries. "A conversation with Colonel Moody w i l l , to the intending settler, be interesting and may be very profitable . . . . No information of a definite nature can be obtained as to what lots are pre-empted or claimed i n any way. To give a man . . . a glowing verbal description of the agricultural d i s t r i c t s and send him out to look up a home for himself, i s just about as unpractical a thing as 104 could be imagined." Yet, hampered as he was by his small staff of surveyors, there was l i t t l e definite or practical information that Colonel Moody could give to settlers. The economic and social problems influenced the sur-veying of town sites as well as that of rural land. With the sudden onrush of gold miners, the choice of townsites f o l -lowed the whims of the gold seekers rather than any precon-ceived government plan. In many cases settlers had erected 102 Br i t i s h Columbian, May 28, 1862 103 Ibid. 104 Br i t i s h Columbian. May 31, 1862. 3 9 buildings before a proper division of lots could be made by the government. Cayoosh sprang up as the centre of a mining d i s t r i c t and as a depot for goods being shipped to the i n -105 terior of the Colony. However, settlers were there before the surveyors and Governor Douglas had to* encourage the i n -habitants "to build and improve their lots, with the assur-ance that the improvements, would be added to the upset price and reserved for the benefit of the holder when the lots are 106 sold." A similar assurance was given to the settlers at 107 Lytton. Although i t was d i f f i c u l t to predict the future course of the settlers, the government made some attempt to precede and direct them. Colonel Moody was instructed from Downing Street "to regard with a military eye the best pos-i t i o n for such Towns and Cities as well as for the engineer-ing of roads and passes or the laying the foundations of any 108 public works." For this reason, he was particularly anxious about the proposed site of Princeton on the Similkameen River. Governor Douglas had requested P. O'Reilly, to mark out the site for a town to be used chiefly as a depot on the Similka-109 meen. Colonel Moody took objection to this delegation of 105 Douglas to Newcastle, October 9, 1860, Cmd. 2952. 106 Douglas to Newcastle, October 9, 1860, Cmd. 2952. 107 Ibid. 108 Instructions to Moody from Lytton, October 29, 1858, Folder 1149b, M.A.B.C. 109 Col. Sec. to O'Reilly, August 14, 1860, Col. Sec. Corres-pondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 40 authority, since he considered that the site of the proposed town was extremely important from a military point of view. "The site of a l l Towns, as well as a l l Roads, Trails or com-munications of whatsoever nature along our Continental Fron-ti e r possess a Military importance of the highest character and i n this instance the importance i s very great. It i s the f i r s t Town across the main range of Mountains, easier of approach from the United States Frontier than from hence and 110 directly on what would be the main line of 'Operations' . . .'J In addition the government attempted to reserve for Government purposes a l l sites of commercial importance. In a circular letter to the Assistant Commissioners of Lands and Works, Governor Douglas requested them, i n every d i s t r i c t where there might be a centre of trade, to reserve i t as a 111 town site. Instructions were also sent to Colonel Moody to mark out distinctly, as quickly as possible, a l l sites of 112 proposed towns throughout the colony. In this connection, the District Magistrates, acting as Assistant Commissioners of Lands and Works were to make the reserves under Colonel Moody's directions at whatever points and to whatever extent U S he considered necessary. Expensive surveys involving the subdivision of the sites into lots were to be postponed u n t i l 114. the prospects of sale became favourable. 110 Moody to Douglas, August 24, 1860, Lands and Works Dep-artment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 111 Douglas to Magistrates, October 1, 1859, Col. Sec. Cor-respondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 112 Col. Sec. to Moody, March 5, 1861, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department M.A.B.C. 113 Ibid. 114 Ibid. 2& In accordance with this policy, sites were chosen at strategic points along the wagon roads. For example, Sapper Duffy was instructed to lay out a few town lots at Anderson. "Mark a l o t round Chapman's house and make that the corner Lot to the l e f t hand of the Wagon road coming in 115 from Pemberton . . . ." At the upper Lillooet meadows, a Town site to be called Lillooet was to be lai d out where the 116 new wagon road commenced. Nind, the District Magistrate, reported William's Lake as a strategic commercial si t e . "Merchants from above have lately stopped here on the lookout to buy cargoes brought from Oregon on the lower Fraser— those who have the command of ready money find this more con-venient than proceding to Cayoosh or Lytton for goods. . . packers find i t unadvisable to go further have turned out their animals broken cargoes and sold them in tents on the 117 spot." Governor Douglas consequently gave his assent to 118 a town-site being marked out. A site for a town to be cal-led Cottonwood was reserved at the mouth of Lightning Creek. "It may be pronounced the limit of the Cariboo d i s t r i c t from which the mountain region i s immediately entered. Therefore i t i s probable that a different class of pack trains w i l l take the provisions from that point into the rough mountain-115 Moody to Palmer, October 1, 1860, Lands and Works De-partment Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 116 Ibid. 117 P.H.Nind to Douglas, May 4, 1861, Nind Correspondence M.A.B.C. 118 Ibid. -33-42 ous country above and hence the probability that i t w i l l be 119 a depot." Sergeant McColl was ordered to lay out town sites at Richfield and Quesnelmouth and elsewhere i n the Sariboo 120 "at any bifurcation of roads." "The Governor and nearly everyone with whom I have consulted appear to consider that Quesnelmouth and Richfield w i l l be the most important posi-tions and that everything points to Quesnelmouth as li k e l y to be the largest Depot-Town and Capital of the Upper Coun-121 try." In spite of these attempts to reserve strategic locations, considerable confusion was caused i n towns where settlers had arrived before the surveyors. Many mining towns were merely temporary stopping places which made i t problem-a t i c a l whether the government should incur the expense of surveying them. "Parties in the Mining Districts even group themselves hurriedly together i n what may be called Towns— as at Quesnel, Antler and other places—from circumstances 122 entirely impossible to be foreseen by the Government." Although people had congregated on the site of Fort Douglas, Judge Begbie did not feel that i t should be chosen as a perm-anent town. "This perhaps cannot, i n the social and finan-c i a l position of the Colony, be at present avoided. But I 119 Palmer to Moody, August 27, 1862, Palmer Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 120 Moody to Capt. Grant, May 6, 1863, Lands and Works De-partment Correspondence Outward. M.A.B.C. 121 Ibid. 122 Moody to Col. Sec. Dec. 31, 1861, Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M.A.B.C. .34-43 suggest that the sale ought to he prefaced with some observa-tions, . . . throwing the selection of this site on the i n -habitants themselves, so as to avoid the imputation of bad f a i t h i f the Government should hereafter, which I think prob-able, find i t absolutely necessary to change this terminus of 123 the Lillooet route." Colonel Moody recommended that the temporary occupations be sanctioned u n t i l the permanency of the so-called towns seemed sure. "A mining Town i s i n truth for a long while more the character of a prolonged 'Fair' . 124 than anything else." Once the st a b i l i t y of a town has been established, he f e l t i t could then be subdivided into lots attaching valuations, for any improvements which settlers had made, to the upset price. The adoption of the pre-emption system added to the d i f f i c u l t i e s of the government i n laying out towns. In many cases before prospective town sites could be reserved they had been occupied by pre-emptors. At Cayoosh settlers were afraid to take up land in case i t should be later included 125 in the town site. At Cottonwood, however, Lieutenant Pal-mer reported that the land had been deliberately pre-empted before government reservation could be made. "A small mining 123 Begbie to Douglas, May 7, 1859, Begbie to Col. Sec.M.A.B.C. 124 Moody to Col. Sec, December 31, 1861, Land and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 125 Begbie to Douglas, April 11, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec M.A.B.C. 44 settlement and store depot has [sic] already sprung up—of course, the whole of the land i s already pre-empted and Mas— 126 ter Begbie has his finger i n the pie, but I can't help that." The B r i t i s h Columbian chided the Government for i t s delay i n choosing Cottonwood for a town sit e . "Three shrewd Americans . . . have, we are informed, pre-empted three sections of one hundred and sixty acres each . . . and, having l a i d off a portion of i t i n town lots, are actually selling them at $250 127 a piece." Mry E l l i o t , the Di s t r i c t Magistrate at Lillooet reported that parts of the town sites of Lillooet and Clinton 128 were claimed by pre-emptors. Colonel Moody, however, was aware of the situation and pointed out to the Governor how the pre-emption system added to the already d i f f i c u l t prob-lem of choosing town sites. "The Pre-emption Proclamations giving right to individuals to take up locations freely a l l over the colony, debar the Government from making selections previously for town sites except at great cost and loss of time and which might practically i n the end prove, in many 129 instances to have been thrown away." With many of the towns occupied before being l a i d out, great d i f f i c u l t y was experienced i n attaining uniformity in the o f f i c i a l survey. Fort Langley and Lytton, two of the 126. Balmer to Moody, . August 27, 1862, Palmer Correspond-ence, M.A.B.C. 127 B r i t i s h Columbian. July 30, 1862. 128 A. C. E l l i o t to Moody, March 30, 1863 and October 27, 1863, E l l i o t Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 129 Moody to Col. Sec, December 31, 1861, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. «-5 earlier locations, were surveyed i n allotments 64 x 120 feet 130 and 50 x 100 feet respectively. For later sites such as Anderson, Lillooet, Cayoosh, Rock Creek and Quesnelmouth, 131 66' x 132' was the size adopted. However, since many people required temporary stopping places rather than permanent homes, frequent changes had to be made i n the o f f i c i a l survey. Lots at Port Douglas had to be reduced to 40' x 80'. Instead of occupying the whole of their l o t , settlers were dividing 132 them and selling the half for more than the government price. Great confusion resulted at Lillooet because of the delay in surveying. "The giving of certificates for town lots w i l l be a d i f f i c u l t task owing to the manner i n which the lots are cut up. It w i l l not appear by the certificate the parts of ; 133 the lot i n which the land is situated." At Quesnelmouth the government overestimated the future prosperity of the town and in 1864 orders were given to reduce the reserved land and 134 to throw the released land open to pre-emption. The government had therefore to adapt i t s land-set-tlement policy to the geographic, economic and social problems of the colony. Geography and the lack of money prevented 130 Douglas to Lytton, November 29, 1858, Cmd. 2578 and C. S. Nicol t  Mood , April 4, 1859, Nicol Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 131 Moody to Palmer, October 1, 1860, Moody to G. W. Cox, March 6, 1861 and Moody to Grant, July 1, 1863, Lands and a Works Department Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 132 Nicol to Col. Sec, April 22, 1859, Nicol Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 133 E l l i o t to Moody, March 27, 1863, E l l i o t Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 134 Trutch to Brew, June 11, 1868, Lands and Works Department, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 44> o f f i c i a l s from opening the whole colony to immediate orderly settlement. Yet, at the same time, the shifting population, whose main objective was to acquire gold, made i t impossible to confine settlement within the limits of surveyed land. +7 Chapter Three The Forming of a Land Policy While attempting to define a successful land-setr tlement policy for B r i t i s h Columbia, the Government had under consideration several specific objectives. At no time could i t ignore the unusual financial d i f f i c u l t i e s of the colony. One of the chief purposes of i t s land policy therefore, was the raising of revenue. Included i n Sir E. B. Lytton's despatch, informing Governor Douglas that the colony was expected to become self-supporting as soon as possible, was the explicit instruction that the Crown Lands' were to form one source of immediate revenue. "The disposal of public lands and especially of town lots, for which I am led to be-lieve there w i l l be a great demand, w i l l afford a rapid means of obtaining funds applicable to the general purposes 1 of the colony." The proposed price of town lots as sug-gested by Lytton, however, was vague and variable. On Aug-ust 14, 1858, he proposed that £1 an acre should be the 2 absolute minimum upset price. But on February 7, 1859, he pointed out that in most Br i t i s h colonies town lots seldom \/ Lytton to Douglas, July 31, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 2/ Ibid.. August 14, 1858. 4 6 sold at less than the rate of £100 an acre and often reached 3 that of £1000. Nevertheless the general purport of the despatches was quite clear; namely, that the government should not part with the land too cheaply. Before receiving these despatches from Lytton, Douglas had already anticipated using the land as an impor-tant source of revenue. He informed Lord Stanley that by AM selling country land at not more than 20s. acre, the pro-ceeds, in addition to customs duties and imports and fees from miners' licences, would form a large revenue for govern-4 ment purposes. Subsequently Lytton's suggestion of a higher price for town lots was adopted. Even before he had become certain of his authority to dispose of Crown Lands, Douglas had been securing revenue by granting leases, at the monthly rent of 41s. 8d., to settlers desiring town lots at 5 Fort Yale and Fort Hope. This payment was to be considered part of the purchase price when the lots were put up for actual sale. Town lots of 64' x 120' at Fort Langley were sold at an upset price of $100 or £20. 18s. 3d. The occasion 6 was considered rather unfavourable, yet i n the interests of the colonial revenue the f i r s t sale was held in Victoria on November 23, 1858. Although only ten percent was paid down, Douglas was pleased with the public response and 4,.^  Douglas to Stanley, June 10, 1858, Cmd. 2578 Cmd. 2578 Cmd. 2578 Cmd. 2476 H-9 particularly with the promised £13,000, "a needful supply of money for defraying the necessary expenses of the public service." Approximately 342 lots were sold i n two days; $725 being the highest bid for a single l o t . Slightly l a r -ger lots, 66' x 120', were quickly l a i d out at Fort Hope and 7 Fort Yale, to be sold at £20. 16s. 8d. By 1859, Douglas had adopted the general policy of selling town lots, 1201 x 60', 8 at the minumum price of £20. 10s. 8d. His Proclamation of February 14, 1859, however, l e f t the upset price to the Governor!s discretion. To further supplement the land revenue, suburban lots were la i d out in five-acre sections immediately beyond the town lots. "This is' found to be both a useful distinc-tion, and profitable to the Revenue inasmuch that the land 9 brings in a higher price than country land." Moreover, for the sake of revenue, by Section 7 of the Proclamation of February 14, 1859, t i t l e s to land were not to include deposits of gold and silver. To establish a permanent population was a further objective of the Government's land policy. For building up the permanent prosperity of the colony, Douglas had l i t t l e confidence in either the merchants or the migratory and un-settled miners. "The miner i s at best a producer, and leaves no traces but those of desolation behind; the merchant 7>- Douglas to Lytton, November 29, 1858.. Cmd. 2578. 8y Douglas to Lytton, May 8, 1859, Cmd. 2724. 9.f Douglas to Newcastle, August 24, 1860, Despatches to Downing Street, M. A. B.C. 5 0 i s allured by the hope of gain; but the durable prosperity and substantial wealth of states i s no doubt derived from the cultivation of the s o i l . Without the farmer's aid, B r i t i s h Columbia must ever remain a desert, be drained of i t s wealth, 10 and dependent on other countries for daily food. " Although instructed from London to view land as a source of revenue, Douglas realized the f u t i l i t y of attempt-ing to do so without an adequate population. A high price could not be maintained amid a population which cared l i t t l e for farming. "It i s evident that without population a rev-enue for the support of government i s unattainable, and un-productive land i s next to valueless both to the country and to the Crown. The sale of land affords a temporary revenue, but the settler indirectly, by the payment of duties on the foreign articles he consumes, and by means of a small direct tax which could be levied on the land he occupies, w i l l be-come a permanent contributor to the revenue, and, therefore, although the land may have been acquired for nothing, and brought no revenue in the f i r s t instance, yet i n such case, 11 the Crown in the end would become the gainer by his presence." The dismal report of land sales for 1860 corroborated his views. The land revenue for 1860 amounted to £10,962, £7,915 12 below that of the previous year. Nor could Douglas pre-10,. Douglas to Newcastle, October 18, 1859, Cmd. 2724. l l ' . , Douglas to Newcastle, May 23, 1860, Cmd. 2952. 12,*.- Douglas to Newcastle, January 26, 1861, Despatches to Downing Street, M. A. B.C. 51 diet much improvement with a population composed chiefly of miners "accustomed to excitement, fond of adventure and entertaining generally a thorough contempt for the quiet 13 pursuits of l i f e . " If mere farming remained unattractive, Walter Mob-erl^y suggested that the profits of cattle raising in the upper country might induce a larger proportion of the mining 14 population to become permanent settlers. To offset the feeling that the country was uninhabitable, an impression l i k e l y to arise from the annual exodus of miners, the Victo-r i a Gazette favoured gifts of land to settlers u n t i l a suf-15 f i c i e n t number had been lured into agriculture. Since foreigners could not obtain grants of waste land, Douglas was instructed that naturalization should be granted to a l l who desired i t , i n order to attract as many 16 permanent settlers as possible. Activated by the presence of Americans at the f i r s t sale of Fort Langley lots, he pro-ceeded to prepare a measure securing to aliens "the f u l l rights of possession and enjoyment of any lands they may pur-chase of the Crown for a space of three years when they w i l l be required to become British subjects or convey their rights to other parties who are permitted to enjoy that privilege 17 by birth or naturalization." The measure was later 13..- Ibid. 14^ Victoria Gazette, February 17, 1859. 15^ Victoria Gazette. May 12, 1859. 16s" Lytton to Douglass, August 14, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 17<r Douglas to Lytton,November 29, 1858, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A. B.C. -6-52. l i b e r a l i z e d , but i n i t s o r i g i n a l form i t i l l u s t r a t e d the Governor's anxiety to increase the permanent population. As an inducement to s e t t l e r s , Douglas issued a Proclamation on February 14, 1859, reducing the upset p r i c e 18 of surveyed country land from £1 to 10s. -pes*- acre. To give e f f e c t to the measure, surveys were extended as quickly 19 as possible to the cleared d i s t r i c t s along the Fraser River. The plains i n the v i c i n i t y of the P i t t , Sumas and Chilliwack Rivers were to be speedily divided into eighty-acre sections 20 fo r immediate occupancy. Closely related to the Government's desire to a t t r a c t a permanent population was the necessity of producing s u f f i c i e n t food f o r the mining d i s t r i c t s . In the early months of 1859, the pack trains along the Harrison - L i l l o o e t t r a i l , using some 260 mules, which were a l l that were a v a i l -able, were carrying up to 5000 pounds of supplies d a i l y , enough to supply only 1100 or 1200 men. "This, i n the event of immigration flowing into t h i s section of the country w i l l 21 be quite inadequate f o r i t s support." The c u l t i v a t i o n of land i n the mining d i s t r i c t s , therefore, became one of the 22 chief objectives of the Government. To help r e l i e v e the s i t u a t i o n i n the Cariboo, Captain Grant suggested that the < 18,.- Douglas/J to Lytton, February 19, 1859, Cmd. 2578. 19^- Douglas to Lytton, May 23, 1859, Cmd. 2724. 20..-- Ibid. May 8, 1859. 21^ V i c t o r i a Gazette. February 17, 1859. 22 S Douglas to Lytton, May 8, 1859, Cmd. 2724. 5 3 f e r t i l e land i n the L i l l o o e t Valley be sett l e d i n plots not 23 exceeding 40 acres to hasten the production of food. Nevertheless the shortage of food continued. Two years l a t e r the Col o n i a l Secretary wrote to the Magistrate of the Cariboo D i s t r i c t : "The great numbers of miners t r a v e l l i n g by the Fraser River to the Cariboo mines w i l l rapidly consume the small stock of food i n the country and great d i s t r e s s must necessarily ensue unless supplies of meat and breadstuffs 24 are brought into the colony with despatch and r e g u l a r i t y . " The discovery of gold i n is o l a t e d sections of the colony such as Rock Creek made the question of food supplies even £5 more vexatious. Douglas encouraged the production of food i n the colony, both i n order to feed the miners and to decrease the long l i s t of imported a r t i c l e s . "The regular settlement of the country by a class of industrious c u l t i v a t o r s i s an object of the utmost importance to the colony, which i s at present dependent f o r every necessity of l i f e , even to the 26 food of the people, on importation from abroad." The following l i s t of excerpts from the B r i t i s h Columbia Blue Book shows the extent to which the colony was dependent upon 27 imports for the support of i t s meagre population. 2 3 x Moody to Douglas, May 30, 1860, Land and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 2 4 ^ W..A..G.Young to Cox, May 16, 1862, M.A.B.C. 25,- Douglas to Newcastle, August 3, 1860, -Cmd. 2952. 26v" Douglas to Lytton, July 4, 1859, Cmd. 2724. 27^- Blue Books, f o r the years 1839 and 1862. -8-5+ Imports from Vancouver I s l a n d ( i n c l u d i n g m a t e r i a l s shipped from the United States and the B r i t i s h I s l e s . ) 1859 1862 Bacon £11,069. 13. 10. . . £23,748. 14. 1. Beef C a t t l e . . . 3,473. 0. 0. . . 8,158. 12. 0. Horses » 732. 0. 0. . . 27,424. 16. 0. Sheep 1,201. 16. 5. . . 3,933. 16. 0. Imports Overland from the United S t a t e s . 1859 1862 Bacon . . . . . . £ 419. 6. 7. . . £ 972. 10. 8. Barley 403. 11. 5. . . 3,204. 15. 5. Beans 215. 6. 11. . . 233. 19. 7. Horses, 240. 0. 0. . . 67,496. 12. 0. B e e f - C a t t l e . . . 7,984. 0. 0. . . 46,516. 0. 0. Oats 9. 0. 0. . . 167. 18. 0. Douglas reported that i n 1862, i n the Cariboo D i s t r i c t , hay s o l d at £46. 13. 4. a ton, and b a r l e y at 45s. to 75s. a 28 bushel. No exact p o p u l a t i o n f i g u r e s are a v a i l a b l e , but the h i g h p r i c e s of commodities i n d i c a t e d t h a t imports were not i n excess of demand. He was a l s o convinced that the w e l f a r e of the c o l -ony depended upon i n c r e a s i n g the B r i t i s h element of the pop-ulation. Determined to a t t r a c t as many B r i t i s h s e t t l e r s as p o s s i b l e , he accepted e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y Lytton's suggestion t h a t land grants should be made to the r e t i r e d o f f i c e r s of 29 the army and navy. " I t h i n k i t i s e s p e c i a l l y d e s i r a b l e 28.- Douglas to Newcastle, October 27, 1862, Despatches to Downing S t r e e t , M.A.B.C. 29y L y t t o n to Douglas, September 2, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 9-5 5 to introduce the remission system into B r i t i s h Columbia, for the purpose of adding a respectable Br i t i s h element to the population, and thereby infusing and encouraging sentiments 30 of attachment and loyalty to the Crown." In June, 1859, therefore, he received a copy of the usual regulations grant-ing remissions of the purchase price of land to retired 31 officers. Non-commissioned officers and men of the Royal Engineers were to receive thirty acres each after six years service i n B r i t i s h Columbia, on condition of residence and . 32 military service within the colony i f called upon. Brit i s h civilians were needed to supplement the military population. Moody was in favour of a pre-emptive right for B r i t i s h subjects only, so as to reduce the pro-33 portion of American settlers. "The evidence i s i r r e s i s t -able to one's plain common sense that i f B r i t i s h subjects do not early people these wastes, United States citizens i n increasing numbers, w i l l continue to occupy the country, t i l l the Y/hole becomes practically, and soon actually w i l l 34 be theirs." At the risk of delaying settlement, Douglas addressed a circular letter to the magistrates, instructing them that unsurveyed Crown lands could be held by a pre-emptive right, but by Bri t i s h subjects only. "The Government 30..- Douglas to Lytton, November 8, 1858, Cmd. 2578. 31^ Douglas to Lytton, June 30, 1859, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A. B.C. 32^ Lytton to Douglas,-September 2, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 33.-- Moody to Douglas, August 13, 1859, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 34^- Ibid. Sfe has at present the great object in view of attracting to Bri t i s h Columbia an industrious population, for the develop-ment of i t s agricultural as well as of i t s auriferous resour-ces, but that object i s sought to be obtained only by such means as w i l l induce a loyal population, attached to Br i t i s h Laws, Institutions and Rules to reside in the country, as i t is of far greater importance to the Empire, that the character of the population should be such, than that the Colony should 35 be rapidly f i l l e d by an alien population...." The government hoped to provide a cheap method of defence along the boundary by means of free grants to m i l i -tary settlers. Lord Carnarvon suggested to Moody that the non-commissioned officers and men of the Royal Engineers, when receiving their thirty-acre grants, might be located 36 along the frontier. When a voluntary force of Royal Mar-ines arrived during 1859, for service i n the colony, Douglas suggested that they receive land grants. "I....consider i t would be a beneficent'; measure on behalf of the colony—the more particular under the circumstances of the Colony border-ing as i t does on the possessions of a foreign power and i t i s 37 upon the frontier that we propose to make these free grants." The Proclamation of February 14, 1859, while f i x -ing the price of surveyed country land at 10s. an acre, l e f t the. disposal of particular l o c a l i t i e s to the Governor's 35,.*- Douglas to Moody, October 7, 1859, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department. M.A.B.C. 36..- Lytton to Douglas, September 2, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 37^ Douglas to Lytton, June 8, 1859, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 57 38 d i s c r e t i o n . Douglas explained to Lytton that, "the land fo r s p e c i a l settlement i s that bordering the f r o n t i e r of the United States and on t h i s we propose to make a m i l i t a r y reserve on behalf of the Royal Engineers, and i f possible also otherwise to s e t t l e i t with a population composed ex-39 c l u s i v e l y of English subjects." Moody admitted that the m i l i t a r y s e t t l e r s might not become successful farmers but he was favourably impres-sed by the cheap means of defence thereby provided. Like Douglas, he proposed to include B r i t i s h c i v i l i a n s i n his 'Frontier Corps.' "In embodying the C i v i l i a n s i t i s essen-t i a l they should be B r i t i s h subjects 'pur sang' and more especially Canadians, who know by past experience the neces-s i t y of Frontier organization for self-defence, and who, with t h e i r Forefathers have again and again, so g a l l a n t l y 40 proved t h e i r e f f i c i e n c y when ca l l e d upon." Quite optijrl-roistic as to the future immigration of B r i t i s h s e t t l e r s , he planned to locate them on the type of land to which they were accustomed. "The r i c h and valuable but timbered, lands of the lower Fraser f o r those accustomed to such countries—and the more open, but not more valuable (from i s o l a t e d p o s i t i o n and l i m i t e d quantity of water and fuel) D i s t r i c t s of the Frontierland i n the I n t e r i o r , for those not so well a c c u s t - m 38^ Douglas to Lytton, February 19, 1859, Cmd. 2578. 39„- I b i d . 40^" Moody to Douglas, November 10, 1859, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 58 ed to bush l i f e — C a n a d i a n s f o r the f i r s t , Australians and 41 Englishmen f o r the l a t t e r . " According to his plan, mem)5-£ers of the Corps would be provided with food, clothing and tools at cost price for two years i n addition to remunera-tio n for d r i l l i n g and active service i f c a l l e d upon. As one of i t s duties, the Corps was to be engaged i n forming roads to f a c i l i t a t e communications i n case of m i l i t a r y contingen-c i e s . Moody also hoped to include as o f f i c e r s of the Corps, men from the active ranks of the army as well as r e t i r e d 42 pensioners. He e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y compared hi s proposed organization to that of Gustavus Adolphus who "selected some of his best o f f i c e r s to lead the others i n the early work, and made i t a distinguished post to s t r i v e f o r . He remuner-a t e d them i n various ways, besides grants of land—they be-came i n his subsequent campaigns some of h i s best o f f i c e r s — f u l l of resources under d i f f i c u l t i e s , and although i t was a Local Corps, not to be c a l l e d on for service elsewhere, many of the men, and a very large proportion of t h e i r f a m i l i e s , were afterwards found amongst the ' e l i t e ' of the small, but 43 excellent armies, he led i n h i s subsequent campaigns. " Moody's scheme proved too grandiose for actual execution i n the colony, nevertheless m i l i t a r y considerations continued to influence the governments land p o l i c y . 41„- I b i d . 42^ Moody to Douglas, November 10, 1859. Lands and Works Department to Governor. M.A. B. C. 45> Ibid. 43-5 9 There were certain external forces which affected the achievement of these objectives. Governor Douglas could not ignore the l i b e r a l land p o l i c y applied to the neighbour-ing American t e r r i t o r y . P r i o r to the formation of the colony of B r i t i s h Columbia the United States government had awarded free grants to s e t t l e r s i n Oregon. Single men a r r i v i n g before 1850 received a h a l f - s e c t i o n of land, and 44 married men a whole section. In 1841 a pre-emption law was passed giving s e t t l e r s the r i g h t to buy, without compe-t i t i o n , the lands they selected at $1.25 per acre. Amend-ments followed on March 3, 1853, and March 27, 1852, permit-ting these pre-emptions to extend to the unsurveyed lands i n C a l i f o r n i a , Oregon, Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska and New 45 Mexico. Following the establishment of B r i t i s h Columbia, the gradual l i b e r a l i z a t i o n of the American land p o l i c y c u l -minated with the passage of the Homestead Act i n 1862. "Instead of the public lands being sold for cash, f o r p r o f i t , or being taken, f i r s t , under the pre-emption system, which eventuated i n cash purchases, they were to be given to actual s e t t l e r s who would occupy, improve and c u l t i v a t e them fo r a term of years, and then receive a patent free of acreage charges, with fees paid by the homesteader s u f f i c i e n t to 46 cover cost of survey and-transfer of t i t l e . " An American 44^ Morton, A.S. and Martin,C. History of P r a i r i e S e t t l e -ment and"Dominion Land Policy,nToronto, Macmillan Co. 1938, p. 363. 4:5y F l u g e l and Faulkner, Readings i n Economic and S o c i a l  History of the United States, New York, Harper Bros. 1921, p. 186. 4 6 / Ibid, p. 473. -14-60 s e t t l e r on the P a c i f i c coast could thus secure 160 acres for the nominal fee of $34. Nor could the lands acquired under the provisions of the Homestead Act be seized f o r pay-47 ment of debts p r i o r to the receipt of the patent. This American l i b e r a l i t y had p a r t i c u l a r e f f e c t upon the attempt of Governor Douglas to raise revenue from the sale of lands i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Lytton was aware of the problem to a cert a i n extent. "I believe that a r e l a t i v e l y high upset price has many advantages; but your course must, i n some degree, be guided by the price at which 48 such land i s s e l l i n g i n neighbouring American t e r r i t o r i e s . " The p r i c e , i n B r i t i s h Columbia, however, had gradually to be lowered u n t i l i t reached the American l e v e l . The Procla-mation of February 14, 1859, reduced the upset price of sur-veyed r u r a l land from £1 to 10s. an acre. Explaining h i s action, Douglas wrote to Lytton: "We....feared that by adopting a higher price for land, the sturdy yeomen expected t h i s year from Canada, A u s t r a l i a and other B r i t i s h Colonies might be driven i n hundreds across the f r o n t i e r to seek f o r homes i n the United States t e r r i t o r i e s , where i t i s the 49 custom to make free grants of land." The mere reduction i n p r i c e , however, was not a s u f f i c i e n t incentive to settlement. Only surveyed land was offered f o r purchase and s e t t l e r s had to compete f o r t h e i r 47x J b M">P- 475.3<l**ftJL dLJ*^' ^ 48^ Lytton to Douglas, August 14, 1858, Cmd.2476. 49^ Douglas to Lytton, February 19, 1859, Cmd. 2578. -15-lands at the auction sales. The pre-emption system was of necessity introduced into B r i t i s h Columbia on January 4, 1860, but the price of land remained at 10s. an acre. Begbie urged the adoption of a fixed price of 4s. an acre. "The comparison i s constantly, u n i v e r s a l l y made, to the disparage-ment of our l i b e r a l i t y , when we demand £1 or even as i n B r i t i s h Columbia 10s. per acre f o r land similar to that which the United States o f f e r s at 5s. when the land w i l l cost £20 per acre to bring into c u l t i v a t i o n . I f e e l sure that to lower our price below the United States price of 5s. would 50 tend to bring us permanent s e t t l e r s . " Douglas r e a l i z e d the l o g i c of his assertion and urged upon Newcastle Begbie's suggestion of a lower p r i c e . "I believe i t i s cheap land, coupled with the conditions of occupation, that has made the United States what they are; and that i s now clearing the wilderness and adding so larg e l y to the population and reve-nue of Canada. The settlement of B r i t i s h Columbia i s I be-l i e v e dependent on the same wise p o l i c y , and must be fostered and promoted by the same means, or immigrants w i l l be forced into the neighbouring T e r r i t o r i e s of the United States where they may f r e e l y select from m i l l i o n s of acres, equal to any land i n B r i t i s h Columbia at the low price of $1.25 per acre 51 payable only af t e r survey." Thus 4s. 2d. an acre was subse-quently adopted as the price of unsurveyed r u r a l land bring-50> Begbie to Douglas,- A p r i l 3 0 , 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. 51,.-- Douglas to Newcastle, August 24, 1860. Despatches to Downing Street. M.A. B.C. 4G-ing to an end any hopes of an immediate revenue from country land. The adoption of the pre-emption system and the con-comitant cheap price for land was accomplished not without opposition from the Colonial Office. According to Lytton, land was to be opened for settlement only gradually. Sur-veyed land alone was to be sold and squatting upon unsold 53 land was to be prevented as much as possible. Sale by auction and prompt payment were favoured for a l l country lands in accordance with Wakefield's doctrine of preventing 54 labourers with insufficient capital from becoming landowners. Simultaneously with the attempts of Douglas to compete with the popular American land policy Newcastle tried to maintain Lytton's policy of regarding land as an immediate source of revenue. To satisfy the demands of settlers in the areas where no country land had been surveyed, Douglas direct-ted the Assistant Commissioners to permit B r i t i s h Subjects to hold 160 acres of land to be paid for at the rate of 10s. an acre when surveyed. In explaining his action to Newcastle in October 1859, Douglas revealed that he was prepared to go even further by inaugurating a system of free grants to attract settlers. "If that plan should f a i l i n attracting a population I think i t would be advisable to resort to the 52,,- Country Lands Act, Bri t i s h Columbia Proclamations, 1861, No. 2. 53,* Lytton to Douglas, August 14, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 54^ Lytton' to::Douglas,.: February: 7, • 1859./ Cmd. 2578. -3^ 63 Canadian system of making free grants not exceeding 100 acres of rural land to actual settlers on condition of their making 55 certain specified improvements." In reply he received from Newcastle suggestions as to a possible land system to be applied in British Columbia. The suggestions embodied i n a letter from Captain Clarke, a former Surveyor General of the colony of Victoria, made no reference to either a pre-emption system or free grants. The details of the p.lan and the attitude to i t of the government o f f i c i a l s w i l l be d i s -cussed more fu l l y in a later chapter. Generally, the pro-posed scheme reflected the views earlier expressed by Lytton, and was in no way applicable as a solution to the problems which faced Douglas. A l l land was to be sold at auction after survey, with the additional proviso that unsurveyed 56 land might be held by license. Although professing no intention of imposing Clarke's scheme as such upon B r i t i s h Columbia without adapting i t to the requirements of the colo-ny, Newcastle withheld his assent to the introduction of the pre-emption system u n t i l he received a reply from Douglas as 57 to the merit of the proposed scheme. The reluctance of the Colonial Office to acknow-ledge the influence of American land policy was consistent with i t s desire that Br i t i s h Columbia become self-supporting 55,.- Douglas to Newcastle, October 18, 1859, Cmd. 2724. 56.- Newcastle to Douglas, January 7, 1860, Despatches from Downing Street, M. A. B. C. 57/ Ibid., February 18, 1860, and A. C. Lewis to Douglas, July 16, 1860. ^8-64 as soon as possible. Douglas and Begbie disliked American methods, but were converted to them by the special circum-stances of the colony. Begbie explained his attitude to the pre-emption system thus: "When I f i r s t came to the colony I was strongly of the .... opinion—'That no occupation of the s o i l t i l l after the survey and sale be allowed.' I have completely changed my opinion; and I don't believe any man could have gone around the country, even to the limited ex-tent to which my duties have led me, without coming to the same conclusion (viz) that to carry out the prohibition i s 58 fortunately impossible." Douglas was i n a d i f f i c u l t position. His objec-tives were clear but inherently irreconcilable. A policy aimed at the attainment of any one of these appeared preju-d i c i a l to a l l others. The adoption of a pre-emption would reduce the immediate revenue from land and decrease the value of the proposed military grants. On the other hand refusal to open unsurveyed land for settlement would mean a loss of settlers to the United States, and a shortage of home-grown produce in the remote mining d i s t r i c t s . 58,.-" Begbie to Douglas, April 30, 1860, Begbie to Col Sec, M.A.B.C. (>5 Chapter Four The Evolution of the Pre-emption System to 1860 Until 1863 Great Britain had absolute control over the disposal of the Crown Lands of Br i t i s h Columbia. The instructions to Douglas on September 2, 1858, authorized him to make laws by proclamation for the peace, order and good government of the colony, subject to instructions from Great 1 Britain. When the original act for the government of B r i t -ish Columbia expired in 1863, the question of the Crown Lands was discussed by Newcastle. Limited representative govern-ment was to be granted; in:the form of a partly elected l e g i s -lative council. After Douglas had proclaimed a permanent law establishing a c i v i l l i s t , the revenue from the Crown Lands was to be placed under the control of the new council. Great Britain's control over the lands was to be limited to her power of disallowance and to a retention of "such legal powers over the lands as are necessary for disposing of a l l questions ( i f any) which remain to be settled with the 2 Hudson's Bay Company. . ." 1 Instructions to Douglas from Lytton, September 2, 1859, Cmd. 2476. 2 Newcastle to Douglas, June 15, 1863, Papers Relative to  the Proposed Union of British Columbia and Vancouver  Island. Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majecty. 1866. In September 1863, Douglas issued a proclamation granting a c i v i l l i s t which guaranteed £8700 for the salar-ies of the chief (officials. This was followed on February 1 by the Confirmatory Ordinance of 1864 which embodied the 3 council's assent to Douglas' action. This grant of a c i v i l l i s t accompanied the transfer of the Crown Lands of the mainland and their revenue to the council. For this reason the Attorney General opposed the resolution moved by Dr. Helmcken on January 15, 1869, i n the Legislative Coun-c i l , to the effect that the Crown Salaries Ordinance be repealed in order that the c i v i l l i s t might be reduced. In his report to Seymour on the passage of the estimates dur-ing the session, Crease stated: "I explained to the Council that the f i r s t step proposed by this Resolution would be a Repeal of the Contract between the Home Government and the Colony whereby the Crown Lands and Revenue had been so long handed over to the Colony in return for their permanently quaranteeing by Law the payment of the Crown Officers Sala-ries . . . . the repeal of the Crown Salaries Act would throw the Crown Lands the Crown fees of a l l kinds, which now form a very large proportion of the revenue . . '. back into the hands of the Crown and retard the progress of the coun-3 Crown Officers' Salaries Act, B r i t i s h Columbia Proclama-ations. 1863, No. IS. B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1864, No. 2 . 67 4 try for many years." its Through -be*- power of disallowance, The Crown con-tinued to exert considerable influence over the land-settle-ment policy of the colony. The Land Ordinance of 1865 contained the f i r s t provision for free grants to c i v i l settlers. The grants were not to be made, however, before the Governor had received the Queen's consent. "It shall be lawful for the Governor upon receiving the assent of Her Majesty's Government thereto, and the publication thereof i n the Government Gazette, to make such free or partially free grants of the unoccupied Crown Lands of the Colony, for the 5 encouragement of Immigration . . Although the ordinance was not actually disallowed, Seymour received from the Col-e. onial Secretary s t r i c t Instructions regarding the implemen-tation of section f i f t y - f i v e . "You w i l l on no account make any such grant except under special circumstances and with my previous approval in each case, or i n virtue of some pub-lished Regulations, which I should similarly wish you to submit to me with a f u l l leport before bringing them into 6 operation." That the Legislative Council f e l t the influence of Great Britain over colonial land policy to be burdensome was 4 H.P.Crease to Seymour, Februarys?, 1869, Attorney/General Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 5 Bri t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1865, No. 27. 6 Cardwell to Seymour, October 7, 1865, Despatches from Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 68 apparent i n the report of the Select Committee appointed i n 1867 to inquire into the land laws. It stated that: " . . . in their opinion the fee simple of the Crown Lands of the Colony should as soon as possible be vested in i t s Legisla-ture, with a view to the adoption of a system of free grants to intending settlers. To such a disposition, the assent of Her Majesty's Government is under the present law an absolute necessity, entailing a delay which, for obvious reasons, 7 places the Colony at a great disadvantage." In his speech proroguing the Legislative Council in April 1867, Seymour announced that he had reserved the land ordinance passed during the session, and promised to transmit i t along with the resolution of the Council in 8 favour of a system of free grants. The report of the Attor-ney-General regarding the ordinance opposed i t s allowance for several reasons. With regard to the section concerning free grants, Crease wrote: "Much can be said for and against Free Grants, but though i t i s doubtless frequently useful for the Governor to have power for that purpose, i t throws upon him 9 an onerous responsibility." Seymour's report was equally unfavourable, recommending that no change be made in the land laws of the colony. "Englishmen or naturalized Englishmen 7 Report of the Select Committee Appointed to Enquire into the Land Laws, Journal of the Legislative Council of Briti s h Columbia. 1867, p. 65. 8 Ibid.. p. 71. 9 Crease to Seymour, November 2, 1867, Attorney/General Correspondence Outward., M.A.B.C can now vir t u a l l y get land for nothing provided that they improve that which they settle on—no payment i s required u n t i l the Government Survey has reached their land and that survey the government is not at present i n a position to 10 undertake." As a result the despatch from Buckingham, confirming Seymour's opinion that no change i n the land laws 11 was necessary, was not unexpected. The situation was confused hy the fact that the Crown Lands of Vancouver Island remained in the hands of the Crown since the legislative assembly refused to" pass a c i v i l 12. l i s t . The revenue therefore went into the Crown Fund of Vancouver Island, and continued to do so after 1866 although the c i v i l l i s t of Vancouver Island was provided for by the 13 union of the two colonies. It was not u n t i l the eve of Confederation when Brit i s h Columbia as a province would auto-matically assume control over the public lands that Great Britain transferred the Crown Lands of Vancouver Island to the colonial legislature. The Land Ordinance of 1870, which extended a uniform land system over the united colony, marked 14 the transfer of the Island's lands to the colonial government. The ordinance passed by the Legislative Council on Apri l 22, 1870 was not to come into effect u n t i l a proclamation em-10 Seymour to Buckingham, November 19, 1867, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 11 Buckingham to Seymour, December 1, 1868, Despatches from Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 12 Crease"to Musgrave, April 26, 1870, Attorney/General Cor-respondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 13 J.F.McCreight to Trutch, May 10, 1872, Attorney General Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 14 Ibid. "6. 70 bodying Her Majesty's consent was published. The proclama-15 tion was not issued u n t i l October 20, 1870. This was two months after the Imperial Order in Council had been passed constituting a Legislative Council with a majority of elected members to ra t i f y the Terras of Union with Canada, The Land Ordinance of 1870 further pleased the Legislative Council by authorizing the Governor i n Council to make free grants with-16 out reference to Great Britain i n each case. An administrative department to deal with the Crown Lands of B r i t i s h Columbia was established on January 4, 1859, when Colonel Moody was sworn i n as Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works. Nevertheless, Douglas continued to super-vise closely the actions of the Chief Commissioner, and i n so doing created i l l - f e e l i n g which at times retarded the work of the department. In a confidential report on the officers of Br i t i s h Columbia, Douglas described his relations with Moody thus: "The attainments, high moral worth and gentlemanly qualities of Colonel Moody are familiarly known to his friends. I am i n duty bound however to remark that as a pub-l i c administrator of this Colony, his management has not been satisfactory to me. I have i n fact found i t necessary to ex-ercise the utmost vigilance over his public acts; . . . . I found i t requisite to issue the most precise instructions for his guidance in matters of finance as well as of general 17 administration . . . " The B r i t i s h Columbian reported the 15 Appendix. Bri t i s h Columbia Statutes. 1871, No. 27. 16 Br i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1870, No. 18. 17 Confidential Report on the Officers of Br i t i s h Columbia by Douglas, M.A.B.C. 11 Chief Commissioner as having less discretionary power than a merchant's clerk unable to "go beyond the word of the 18 Czar to do good or bad." In addition to the central office, local land offices were gradually established throughout the colony under the control of the Di s t r i c t Magistrates. Before the arrival of Moody, Joseph Pemberton, whom Douglas had appoint-ed as Acting Colonial Surveyor, had proposed the formation of such branch offices at Langley, Hope and Yale, with an 19 assistant commissioner i n charge of each. But for the sake of economy, Douglas empowered the D i s t r i c t Magistrates to record applications for land and directed them to report 20 to the Chief Commissioner and to the Colonial Secretary. The land reports were sent much less regularly to the Chief Commissioner than to the Colonial Secretary* Moody accordingly urged upon Douglas the need of increasing the Chief Commissioner's control over his own department. He suggested that the D i s t r i c t Magistrates be entitled Acting Sub-Commissioners of Lands and be required to communicate regularly with the Chief Commissioner, from whom Douglas could receive a l l the information he desired concerning the 21 Crown Lands. Receiving no reply, Moody made more urgent 18 B r i t i s h Columbian. May 30, 1861. 19 Douglas to Lytton, October 27, 1858, Cmd. 2578. 20 Douglas to Lytton, January 12, 1860, Cmd. 2724. 21 Moody to Douglas, March 5, 1860, Lands and Works Depart-ment to ..Governor, M.A.BiC. 72 and specific demands eight months later. On this occasion he asked that the District Magistrates be known more simply as Assistant Commissioners of Lands, and that they be i n direct communication with the Chief Commissioner as previous-l y requested. In addition any money collected by the Assis-tant Commissioners should be accounted for, hot to the Treas-urer, but to the Chief Commissioner who would then account for i t to the Treasurer and to the Colonial Secretary. Finally, a l l land t i t l e s should be issued by the Chief Com-missioner and not by the Attorney General, who would be asked, however, to handle disputed cases when referred to him by the 22 Chief Commissioner. The following month he received from Douglas a schedule of regulations concerning the functioning 23 of his department embodying the above suggestions. The duties of Assistant Commissioners extended to pre-empted lands only. Although they were authorized to cause periodic auction sales of town and surveyed lands to 24 take place, they could not record applications for such 25 land or any land reserved for government purposes. With regard to pre-empted lands the Assistant Commissioners were empowered to issue the following documents: a Certificate of Record, a Certificate of Improvement, and a receipt for any 22Ibid. November 27, 1860. 23 W.A.O.Young to Moody, December 17, 1860, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 24 Ibid., April 10, 1860. 25 E l l i o t t to Col. See. November 10, 1863, E l l i o t t Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. 73 26 deposits. The purposes of these w i l l he discussed i n the following chapter. The withdrawal of the Royal Engineers from B r i t -ish Columbia decreased the number of men available for ex-ploring and surveying. During 1865, six men were employed permanently in the lands office at New Westminster. Trutch as Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works and Surveyor General, and Walter Moberl^y as Assistant Surveyor General, were as-sisted by a clerk of surveys, a clerk of correspondence, a draftsman and an accountant. In addition the Magistrates acted as Assistant Commissioners of Lands in their respect-ive d i s t r i c t s throughout the colony. A l l other work of the department, however, was carried out by temporary assistants. Dewdney and Spence were employed as provisional superintend-ents of construction and repair work. Leech was employed for OL. two and a half months to survey pre-emption claims. In Addi-tion a total of eighteen months of exploration and reconnais-27 sance work was distributed among Leech, Turnbull and Green. In spite of financial d i f f i c u l t i e s which in 1867 necessitated the dismissal of Moberl^y as Assistant Surveyor 28 General, Trutch made successful efforts to improve the efficiency of his department. In 1865 he received Seymour's 26 Douglas to Moody, May 27, 1861, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 27 Trutch to Col. Sec. October 29, 1866, Land and Works Department to Governor. M.A.B.C. 28 Birch to Moberl^y, January 10, 1867, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. consent to his suggestion that the Crown Titles for lands be issued to the original buyers, instead of to those who sub-29 sequently acquired the lands by private negotiations. Although Moody had received approval of his suggestion that he be i n direct communication with the District Magistrates acting as Assistant Commissioners of Lands, his recommenda-tion had never been given statutory authorization. Thus in the Land Ordinance of 1865 the Stipendiary Magistrates were authorized to record pre-emption claims, no mention being made of their connection with the Lands and Works Depart-30 ment. However, by Section 3 of the Pre-emption Ordinance of 1866, Trutch was enabled to correspond with the local Magistrates, acting as Assistant Commissioners of Lands and Works, on pre-emption matters without the intervention of 31 another department. From the f i r s t temporary measures taken by Douglas in August 1858, u n t i l the end of the colonial period, the land laws of the colony had to be liberalized gradually i n an attempt to attract settlers to the isolated province. Before any constitutional arrangement had been made concerning the separate colony of Br i t i s h Columbia, Douglas, as Governor of 29 Trutch to Col. Sec. September 8, 1865, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 30 B r i t i s h Columbia -Ordinances. 1865, No. 27. 31 Crease to Birch April 21, 1866, Attorney General Corres-pondence Outward,. M.A.B.C. . B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1866, No. 13. .. -±3^ 75 Vancouver Island, was forming plans for the regulation of the Crown Lands on the mainland. On June 10, 1858, he recommended to Stanley that " . . . the whole country be immediately thrown open for settlement . . . . the land be surveyed, and sold at 32 a fixed rate, not to exceed 20s. an acre." Before his legal power of granting t i t l e s to land on the mainland was complet-ed, Douglas adopted temporary measures to allow settlers to take lands. At Fort Hope, Fort Yale and Port Douglas, sett-lers were allowed to occupy town lots, "under a lease termin-able at the pleasure of the Crown and to be held at a monthly rental of 41/8 sterling payable i n advance, with the under-standing that the holder would be allowed a pre-emption right of purchase when the land is sold i n T/hich case the sum of 33 monthly rent would be considered as part of purchase money." This was a purely temporary measure, and in November 1858 Douglas ordered that no further leases were to be granted for 34 town lots, since he was prepared to issue legal t i t l e s . Accordingly, on December 2, 1858, he issued the proclamation 35 asserting his authority to grant such t i t l e s for Crown Lands. It was not u n t i l January 1859, nevertheless, that Douglas clearly understood the correct form of the t i t l e s which he was prepared to issue. In that month he received 32 Douglas to Stanley, June 10, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 33 Douglas to Lytton, October 12, 1858, Cmd. 2578. 54 Col.. Sec. to R, Bryant,. November 27, 1858/ Col. Sec. Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 35 Br i t i s h Columbia Proclamations. 1858. 76 a despatch correcting certain errors contained i n a sample grant which he had sent to Lytton. The corrections were made so as to bring the form of the grant i n line with those issued i n other B r i t i s h colonies. Land was to be issued i n the name of the Queen, not i n that of the Governor; a l l res-ervations of timber and minerals were to be omitted i n the grant but this did not entitle the grantee to any gold or silver found on his land, although he could have the baser 36 metals and coal. Lytton had previously sent to Douglas certain rules to guide him in dealing with the Crown Lands. These lands were to be opened only gradually for settlement; only surveyed land was to be sold; an upset price of £1 an acre was to be charged for town land, and a relatively high upset price for country land. The price could be modified to some extent, i f 37 necessary, by American policies. The f i r s t proclamation regulating the sale of country land was issued by Douglas on February 14, 1859. It followed closely the instructions from Lytton. According to the proclamation only surveyed land was to be sold, a l l sales to be by auction. The price of town land was to be fixed according to the value of the site, but country land was to be sold at an upset price of 10s. -p-ea? acre, one-half payable at the time of sale,-and the remainder within 36 Lytton to Douglas, January 20, 1859, Despatches from Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 37 Lytton to Douglas, August 14, 1858, Cmd. 2476. 77 two years. Country land which remained unsold after being offered at auction was to be made available at the upset 38 price. Two reasons were given by Douglas for adopting what he considered a relatively low upset price for country land: a desire to atttract B r i t i s h settlers and to offset the l i b -39 eral policies of the American Government. The proclamation was received unfavourably by both Lytton and the settler's of Br i t i s h Columbia. Lytton objected to the provision whereby country land could be paid for by instalments. In October 1858, Douglas had written to Lytton expressing his opinion that the instalment system should be applied to British Columbia i n the sales of a l l country lands exceeding f i f t y acres, chiefly because of the benefits ex-40 tended thereby to the poorer settlers. In his reply on February 7, 1859, Lytton upheld the merits of prompt payment. "It i s the best indication of a purchaser's being really possessed of means to cultivate his lot, i t avoids harassing the Government with the existence of a whole population of small debtors, from whom i t i s next to impossible to collect their dues, and above a l l i t maintains a sounder state of society by not encouraging the premature conversion into petty and impoverished landowners• of those who ought to be 41 labourers." The despatch containing this expression of 38 B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations t 1859. 39 Douglas to Lytton, February 19, 1859, Cmd. 2578. 40 Ibid.. October 27, 1858. 41 Lytton to Douglas, 'February 7, 1859, Cmd. 2578. -14— 7e Wakefield's doctrine arrived too late to be incorporated into the proclamation. After receiving a copy of the proclamation, Lytton wrote to Douglas again on the same matter. Upon this occa-sion he emphasized his previous arguments i n favour of prompt payment, and expressed his willingness to lower the price of 42 land to a point where immediate payment could be enforced. Nevertheless, !by emphasizing the poverty and scarcity of inten-ding settlers, Douglas was able to persuade Lytton to allow 43 the instalment system to continue. More important was the dissatisfaction f e l t in the colony i t s e l f regarding the proclamation. The chief objec-tion to i t was the fact that only surveyed country land was to be made available for purchase. The financial d i f f i c u l -ties of the colony and the small corps of surveyors meant that very l i t t l e agricultural land would be put up for sale. Although aware that Lytton favoured surveys to precede set-tlement, Douglas advised him that the system was not working in B r i t i s h Columbia and suggested that settlers be granted pre-emption privileges on unsurvfeyed lands. He reported that ". . .no country land has as yet been brought into market. There is-much popular clamour on that account, and should the pressure for land be great, I think i t w i l l be advisable to meet the emergency by establishing some tempor-42 Ibid.. May 7, 1859. 43 Douglas to Lytton, May 23, 1859, Cmd. 2724. 79 ary system of occupation, which would enable settlers to hold and improve certain specified tracts of land under a pre-emption right u n t i l the surveys are completed, when i t 44 might cease to be i n force." Struck by the scarcity of fresh vegetables, Begbie, while on c i r c u i t , had already authorized certain settlers to cultivate strips of land aver-aging about five acres per person, with the right to the crop but no pre-emption privileges. He reported to Douglas the need for some security of tenure for agricultural purposes. "There was a considerable degree of anxiety manifested every-where for the possession of land, i n some instances the mere right to take the crop was not s a t i s f a c t o r y — i n others i t 45 was acquiesed i n . " The newspapers were agitating for a pre-emption system similar to that i n the United States whereby settlers, after paying, a deposit on their purchase money, were allowed to settle on vacant unsurveyed lands. "In view of the natu-r a l drawbacks to settlement i n B r i t i s h Columbia as compared with adjacent American territory, a policy i s demanded which shall not only equal the American plan i n l i b e r a l i t y but ex-ceed i t . We hold then, i t is.the duty of the Home Govern-ment to admit the acquiring of Pre-emption rights by actual settlement, as well as to set apart, certain portions of the 44 Douglas to Lytton, July 4, 1859, Cmd. 2724. 45- Begbie to Douglas, April 25, 1859, Begbie to Col. Sec, M.A.B.C. - ± 6 ~ 80 public domain to be donated to those who shall become 'bona-46 fide' occupants." On July 30, 1859, The Victoria Gazette published the petition to the Governor and recommendations of the Reform League regarding the land laws of the colony. Bearing the signatures of 130 inhabitants of New Westminster, the petition urged the adoption of a pre-emption system, the want of which they considered the most important grievance of the colony. "If settlement has to depend upon actual survey, there w i l l be few in the country except a numerous staff of 47 o f f i c i a l to witness the completion." The following recom-mendations were made: no land except town lots should be sold at auction; single men and married men should be allowed to pre-empt 160 and 210 acres respectively; the price of land should not be more than $1 -pes acre with four or five years to pay. The B r i t i s h Colonist also urged the adoption of a pre-emption system to encourage those with l i t t l e •. capital to settle i n the colony. "The country would be bet-ter known and sooner settled; the public lands adjoining enhanced in value . . . the settler would not have to wait years on government for surveys which private enterprise would accomplish in days; and on the whole the bona fide settler, the hardy pioneer would be offered and inducement to settle i n the country, and justly receive' decided advan-46 Victoria Gazette. June 2, 1859. 47 Victoria Gazette, July 30, 1859. 81 48 tages over the many-acred monopolist." By September Douglas f e l t that some action was necessary to dispel the growing feeling that the government 49 was not disposed to s e l l land in B r i t i s h Columbia. Since the demand for surveyed land could not be met, he proposed authorizing applicants to occupy and improve the land they desired. In a registry he had had compiled of such appli-50 cants, there were.recorded approximately 1500 acres. A month later, Douglas informed Newcastle that he had instructed the Assistant Commissioners at Hope, Yale, Douglas, Lytton and Cayoosh to permit a l l B r i t i s h subjects to occupy 160 acres of land, to be paid for when surveyed at the rate of not more than 10s. per acre. "This i s i n fact the basis of a pre-emption law founded on occupation and improvement, the Government, agreeing on those conditions to convey the land at a fixed price; i t being moreover provided that the rights of actual settlers, of those persons only who are found in possession when the land i s surveyed w i l l be recognized and 51 allowed." To discourage speculation, those who wanted more than 160 acres were to pay a deposit of 5s. per acre. Yet the Colonial Office did not favour the adoption of a pre-emption system in British Columbia. Instead, Douglas 48 B r i t i s h Colonist. March 5, 1859. 49 Douglas to Moody, September 20, 1859, Governor's Private O f f i c i a l Letter Book, 1859 - 1864. 50 Ibid. • 51 Douglas to Newcastle, October 18, 1859, Cmd. 2724. 8* received from Newcastle a scheme proposed by Captain Clarke of the Royal Engineers and former Surveyor General of the 52 Colony of Victoria. The purpose of his plan was to encour-age immigration to B r i t i s h Columbia without "playing too much 53 into the hands of the Americans." According to Clarke's proposals, a l l land should be sold at auction. However, country land remaining unsold after auction might be pur-chased directly from the government. The colony should be divided into counties, hundreds and parishes and no land alienated before survey. Five shillings per acre was sug-gested as the lowest upset price for country land, 25% pay-able upon purchase, the remainder within sixty days. Country land beyond the limits of survey might be occupied upon re-ceipt of a license from the nearest magistrate. Clarke's scheme was not well received i n B r i t i s h Columbia since i t offered no solution of the problems caused by the shortage of surveyed land. The proposed licenses offered no more security of tenure than did the measures already adopted by Douglas for the occupation of unsurveyed land. Begbie, i n his report to Douglas on Clarke's scheme, emphasized the fact that the land laws of British Columbia must be adapted to the peculiar geographical, social and 54 financial problems of the colony. In his opinion, the div-52 Newcastle to Douglas, January 7, 1860, Cmd. 2724. 53 Ibid. 54 Begbie to Douglas, April 30, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec, M.A.B.C. -19-83 ^sion of the colony into" counties could he done only gradu--aily i n view of the inaccessibility of parts of the colony. Because of financial d i f f i c u l t i e s and the shortage of sur-veyors he opposed Clarke's suggestion that no land be aliena-ted u n t i l surveyed. "In this colony, there is no use, I conceive, in arguing an abstract question on the merits of pre-emption. The population are accustomed to pre-empt and 55 they w i l l pre-empt or else they w i l l stay away . . . " He would reduce Clarke's proposed price of 5s. per acre to 4s. so as to be less than that of the American Government. The objections of Douglas to Clarke's scheme were very similar to those of Begbie. Whereas Clarke assumed that B r i t i s h Columbia possessed a population eager and able tocpurchase land, Douglas pointed out to Newcastle that: ". . . no disposition has been manifested by monied men to invest capital in that way, and the labouring classes cannot 56 for want of means become land owners. . ." For this reason he took particular objection to Clarke's suggestion that a l l land be paid for at least sixty days after the date of sale. "Its effect would be to place the country in a false position, there being on the one hand no capitalists disposed to pur-chase land, while on the other hand the stringency of the terms would amount to a rejection to the only class who are 55 Begbie to Douglas, April 50, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. 56 Douglas to Newcastle, August 24, 1860, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. - 2 0 -8 4 57 desirous of settling in the country." Douglas had no par-ticular objection to the division of the colony into counties except that under existing conditions the suggestion was premature. He endorsed Clarke's price of 5s. an acre, which was one-half of the existing price i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Nevertheless, he was in favour of a further reduction. "The Crown Lands should, I think, be treated as a means of aiding the progress and development of the country and not merely as a source of revenue. If the increase of population is admit-ted to be the paramount object of consideration, then I con-ceive the settlement of the country should be encouraged through the only means i n our power, the cheap and easy acquisition of land . . . . that object I think would be cheaply attained were i t even to involve a free g i f t of a 58 great part of the waste land i n Bri t i s h Columbia. . ." To reinforce his argument Douglas referred to the pre-emption system of the United States, where the low price of $1.25 an acre was not demanded u n t i l after survey. Moody expressed his opinion of Clarke's scheme i n a very brief letter to Douglas. His attitude was simply that Clarke had not sufficient information about the local situa-tion i n Br i t i s h Columbia to attempt the framing of a land 59 scheme suitable for the colony. 57 Ibid. 58 Douglas to Newcastle, August 24, 1860, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C 59 Moody to Douglas, November 7, 1860, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C 8 5 One of the main reasons for the long report written by Douglas urging a more l i b e r a l system than that suggested by Clarke, was the fact that a pre-emption system had already been introduced into British Columbia. Newcastle had sent Clarke's scheme on January 7, 1860, whereas Douglas had issued the Pre-emption Act on January 4. The arguments of Moody were a prime factor i n caus-ing Douglas to adopt the pre-emption system. The Chief Com-missioner feared American aggression particularly after the San Juan c r i s i s of 1859, and considered a pre-emption system the only means of settling the colony with Bri t i s h Subjects. " A l l Theories of Colonization affecting Sales of Land I sub-mit must for the present yield to the more important point of practically and effectually beyond a l l p e r i l , securing to the British Crown, i n a legitimate and economical manner 60 these Colonies." Without a pre-emption system he f e l t i t was almost impossible for Canadians or other British subjects to take up land in the colony because of the high cost of travelling. Even i f settlers recorded their pre-emptions as the agents of land speculators, Moody f e l t that the Br i t i s h 61 subjects so gained were worth the risk involved. He favoured the adoption of a pre-emption system as a temporary measure for two or three years, after which 60 Moody to Douglas,- August 13, 1859, Land and Works Depart-ment to Governor. M.A.B.C. 61 Ibid.. August 15, 1859. 8i> the traditional B r i t i s h policy of selling only surveyed land at auction might once more tee adopted. "Elsewhere B r i t i s h subjects may come or may stay away so far as Great Britain or the ultimate advantage of the colony i s concerned. Here Great Britain urgently needs them now . . . and she, there-fore, for the time at a l l events must adopt the popular view as to obtaining land, though her own may be in truth the 62 wisest in the end as a permanent measure. On September 13, 1859, Moody wrote to Douglas asking his permission to allow Bri t i s h subjects to pre-empt unsurveyed lands. The Chief Commissioner suggested that British subjects be allowed to occupy not more than 160 acres, on condition that they erect a building not less than 14» x 20* and clear at least four acres every year. He proposed no definite price for the land, but suggested that i t should be paid for when surveyed. The expense of the survey he f e l t should be borne by the 63 pre-emptor. Douglas f u l l y agreed with Moody as to the need of attracting B r i t i s h settlers to the colony. Thus, on October 7, 1859, he informed the Chief Commissioner that he had addressed a circular letter to the Di s t r i c t Magistrates i n -structing them to allow the occupation of unsurveyed land. In accordance with Moody's suggestion the privilege was to be 62 Moody to Douglas, August 15, 1859, Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 63 Ibid.. September 13, 1859. -CD 87 restricted to those who were or who had recorded their inten-tion of becoming Br i t i s h subjects. The reason for the res-tr i c t i o n was stated thus by Douglas: "The Government has at present the great object i n view of attracting to B r i t i s h Columbia an industrious population, for the development of i t s agricultural as well as of i t s auriferous resources, but that object i s sought to be obtained by such means only as w i l l induce a loyal population, attached to British Laws, Institutions and Rule to reside in the country, as i t i s of far greater importance to the Empire, that the character of the population should be such, even though the progress of settlement be somewhat retarded, than that the colony should be rapidly f i l l e d by an alien population, expensive and d i f -f i c u l t to govern, and who would probably seize the f i r s t op-portunity of discarding their allegiance." A settler was to be allowed to occupy 160 acres of unsurveyed land to be paid an for at the rate of 10s. -per- acre upon survey. Town or subur-ban lands, and rural lands immediately surrounding suburban lots, were not open for pre-emption. To offset the resulting loss of revenue, and also to hinder speculation, settlers desiring more than 160 acres were to pay a deposit of 5s. an 64 acre on the additional land. Although intended by Moody to be only a temporary measure, the pre-emption system became a permanent feature of 64 Douglas to Moody, October 7, 1859, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. the colony's land policy. The subsequent land ordinances were concerned chiefly with liberalizing the policy l a i d down i n Douglas' instructions of October 1859, in order to enable the colony to compete with the United States for settlers. Chapter Five The Pre-emption System, 1860 - 1870 The instructions issued i n October 1859 to the Dis t r i c t Magistrates, were proclaimed as law on January 4, 1860, i n the form of the Pre-emption Act. The terms were the same as those previously outlined by Douglas, but the act contained additional details as to the actual function-ing of the system. The pre-emptor was to record his claim with the nearest magistrate upon the payment of 8s. A writ-ten description of the occupied land together with a rough plan was to be presented to the same magistrate. For con-venience, any identifying land marks on the claim were to be included i n the written description. For uniformity, each claim was to be rectangular, the shorter side at least two thirds as long as the other, and with each corner marked by a post. Upon receipt of a certificate of improvement, granted by the magistrate after completion of improvements to the extent of 10s. an acre, the pre-emptor might transfer his interests in the land. After survey, the certificates of improvement entitled the holder to receive t i t l e to the 1 land upon payment at a rate not exceeding 10s. an acre. 1 B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations. 1860. To offset Newcastle's expected objection to the settlement of the land without immediate payment, Douglas, in his report to London, emphasized particularly the future financial benefits which the colony would gain by the act. The newly attracted settlers as producers and consumers would contribute to the public revenue. The government survey could be carried out more economically later when roads had been built..' Meanwhile the rights of the Crown had been pro-2 tected, since no t i t l e s were to be issued u n t i l after payment As previously stated, the proclamation was issued by Douglas just a few days before Clarke's proposed land scheme had been forwarded by Newcastle. On February 18, 1860. Newcastle informed Douglas that he had no intention of forc-ing Clarke's scheme upon Bri t i s h Columbia, but was merely anxious that Douglas should become acquainted with Clarke's views. Hoping to receive Newcastle's assent to his pre-emp-tion act, Douglas had postponed his reply concerning Clarke's plan. Nevertheless, on May 7 and July 16, 1860, further des-patches were sent from London informing him that Newcastle was s t i l l awaiting his report, and u n t i l receiving i t was sus-3 pending his opinion of the pre-emption act. The Colonial Secretary's chief objection to the act was his fear that pre-emptors would become landowners prematurely, with no capital 4 to work the land to i t s best advantage. Finally on August .84, 2 D uglas to Newcastle, Janu ry 12, 1860, Cmd. 2784. 3 Lewis to Douglas, July 16, 1860, Despatches from Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 4 Lewis to Douglas, July 16, 1860, Despatches from Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 91 I860, Douglas forwarded to London his opinion of Clarke's suggestions together with the report of Begbie. In his reply Newcastle upheld the theoretical advantages of measures to compel prompt payment, but admitted that the system could not be practically enforced in Bri t i s h Columbia because of the peculiar circumstances of the colony i t s e l f and the influence of the United States. He therefore reluctantly consented to the continuance of the pre-emption system but hoped that i t would be a temporary measure only. "Upon the whole, there-fore, and looking moreover to the general prevalence of de/-ferred payments on the American continent, I am willing that for the present, the system which you consider essential to 5 the progress of the colony should be continued . . . " Contrary to Newcastle's wishes, the pre-emption system was not^retained as a permanent feature of colonial land policy, but was also gradually liberalized. Criticism of the pre-emption act was immediately voiced i n the Bri t i s h Colonist which demanded a reduction in the price of land from 10 to 5s. an acre. "Even now the iron hand has only loosened i t s grasp a l i t t l e . Pre-emptors run the risk of having to pay twice the amount required by the American government for 6 wild land." Government o f f i c i a l s also expressed dissatisfaction with the act. At Douglas' request both Moody and Begbie 5 Newcastle to Douglas, December 6, 1860, Despatches from Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 6 B r i t i s h Colonist. January 12, 1860. ^4-92 submitted their suggestions for i t s improvement. Moody argued that the production of food i n the mining d i s t r i c t s was the most urgent need. For this purpose the colony must look for immigrants either to Canada or the United States, since distance, for the time being, precluded settlement from the B r i t i s h Isles. He therefore f e l t that the colony must offer land at least as cheaply as i t s American competitor. To make land easier to obtain he proposed a complicated scheme whereby a settler might obtain land cheaper than under the existing pre-emption act. His plan involved three modes of pre-emption. By the f i r s t method a pre-emptor could receive t i t l e for his land at the end of two years after f u l -f i l l i n g conditions relative to residence and improvement. His expenses would include 10s. for recording his claim, plus the expense of survey, and 10s. on depositing the surveyor's plan in the land office. On the other hand, i f he waited for the government survey he would pay Is. an acre for the land. By the second method, the pre-emptor could receive t i t l e after three months, by paying 5s. an acre for the land and a. 20s. fee for the t i t l e . If he paid the expense of survey, Is. an acre would be returned to him. By the third method, surveyed land was to be sold at auction at the upset price of 5s. per acre. To fore s t a l l speculation, under modes two and three, after two years, 3s. an acre would be returned to settlers f u l f i l l i n g the "conditions concerning residence 7 and improvement. - -7 Moody to Douglas, November 7, 1860, Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 93 Begbie's suggestions were much less complicated, c h i e f l y because he f e l t that under the exist i n g conditions only the simplest system could be e f f e c t i v e l y administered. "The land system . . . which ought i n my opinion to recom-mend i t s e l f to the Government would he that which requires the l e a s t to be done by the Government . . . and allows the widest power of selection and the greatest share of respons-8 i b i l i t y to the public at large." He proposed continuing the present pre-emption system, but with a reduction i n price to 4s. an acre. "I f e e l sure that' to lower our price below the United States price of 5s. would tend to bring us perm-9 ^nent s e t t l e r s . " To s a t i s f y the complaints made to him by pre-emptors, he further advised the redress of two hardships caused by the adoption of the rectangular system. Since most pre-empted land i n the colony possessed a water frontage, a natural consequence of d i f f i c u l t communications, Begbie suggested that a pre-emption claim should be considered to have been s u f f i c i e n t l y marked out i f bounded by one or more straight l i n e s and the shore of a r i v e r or lake. I f , i n order to achieve a rectangular shape, a pre-emptor was forced to include rocky land within his claim, Begbie favoured a l -io lowing him to pay only f o r the suitable land af t e r survey. 8 Begbie to Douglas, A p r i l SO, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. 9 Ibid. 10 Begbie to Douglas, A p r i l 11, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. The B r i t i s h Colonist objected not only to the price of land but also to the simple administrative system so com-mended by Begbie. De Cosmos warned of the d i f f i c u l t i e s which might aris e i f two pre-emptors recorded the same claim with d i f f e r e n t magistrates. His warning, i n fa c t , underrated the dangers inherent i n the system. Even should two pre-emptors record the same claim with the same magistrate, i t was his duty merely to record, not to judge the v a l i d i t y of each claim. A l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y was to rest with the pre-emptors not with the magistrates. In a c i r c u l a r l e t t e r advising the magistrates of t h e i r duties, Douglas made thi s very c l e a r . " I t i s your duty to accept any record which may be tendered to you, even although you may at the time be pr i v a t e l y of opinion that the document i s valueless by reason of the mis-desc r i p t i o n of the land, or by reason of i t s being already recorded or occupied or for any other reason, because every applicant has a r i g h t to form his own opinion, and to make 11 his own claim and to support his own ri g h t s . . ." To en-able the applicants to judge f o r themselves, each magistrate was to produce a l l records made with him. Of these the pre-emptor might make pe n c i l notes but no pen or ink was to be allowed near them. Two remedial proclamations were issued by Douglas on January 19, 1861, concerning the pre-emption system. The 11 Col. Sec. to Magistrates, A p r i l 20, 1860, Col. Sec. Correspondence Outward. M.A.B.C. 95 12 Country Lands Act reduced the price of land from 10s. to 13 4s. 2d. an acre. The Pre-emption Amendment Act dealt c h i e f l y with the shape of land claims. In accordance with Begbie's suggestions, natural boundaries, such as mountains, rocks, lakes, swamps and r i v e r s might be adopted as the lim-i t s of a claim. Although the two proclamations i n the main embodied Begbie's recommendations, Moody's suggestion that pre-emptors be allowed to have t h e i r land surveyed at t h e i r own expense rather than wait f o r the government survey, was adopted. "Any person desirous of paying f o r any land acquir-ed by him or her may apply to the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works to appoint a 'Sworn Surveyor' to survey the said 14 land at the expense of the applicant." To ensure c u l t i v a t i o n of the land, the Pre-emption Purchase Act was issued by Douglas i n the same year f o r b i d -ding anyone, under penalty of f o r f e i t u r e , to hold more than 15 one pre-emption claim. However l i b e r a l i z i n g i n t h e i r e f f e c t s , the various amendments proved confusing to both administrators and s et* / l e r s . Although repeated warnings were sent to the magis-trates d i r e c t i n g them to record but not to judge applications, they were advised to adopt "a consistent and prudential course 16 of action" to prevent disputes. At the same time they 12 B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations. No.. .2. 13 Ib i d . . No. 1. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid., No. 6. 16 Col. Sec. to Magistrates, A p r i l 5, 1861, Col. Sec. Cor-respondence Outward. M.A.B.C. 96 received a t a c t f u l reminder that the pre-emption system was inaugurated f o r the benefit of actual s e t t l e r s , not f o r 17 government o f f i c i a l s . Only three s e t t l e r s , i n addition to Moody and Douglas, had purchased country land at the former price of 10s. an acre. When the f i r s t payment became due i n 1861, t h e i r request to be allowed the benefit of the new 18 price was refused by Douglas. The provisions of the Pre-emption Amendment Act whereby a s e t t l e r might apply to the government to have his land surveyed at hi s own expense, was 19 soon regretted by Douglas as being too confusing. The  B r i t i s h Columbian voiced the opinion of the perplexed s e t t -lers. "Our Land Proclamations are rapidl y multiplying, and must soon assume such a complicated and voluminous form, as to require the services of a lawyer to enable the intending SO s e t t l e r to comprehend them . . ." Accordingly, on September 10, 1861, Douglas issued the Pre-emption Consolidation Act repealing the Proclamation of January 4, 1860, The Pre-emption Amendment Act and the Pre-emption Purchase Act, substituting instead one compact set of pre-emption regulations.. In accordance with the re-duced pr i c e of land as effected by the Country Land Act, the deposit required f o r the purchase of an additional 160 17 Ibid . 18 Moody to Douglas, June 8, 1861, Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M.A.B.C. Good to Moody, June 21, 1861, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 19 Ibid., May 27, 1861. 20 B r i t i s h Columbian." June 20, 1861. 21 acres was reduced to 2s. Id. an acre. Since, f o r f i n a n c i a l reasons, i t had been decided to delay the government survey of pre-emption claims, the r i g h t of the pre-emptor, to have a "Sworn Surveyor" appointed to survey his claim, was omit-22 ted, i n the new act. In reporting to Newcastle, Douglas praised the f i n a n c i a l advantage to poorer s e t t l e r s which would r e s u l t . "In consequence of the great expense i n mov-ing surveying parties from place to place, the very l i m i t e d demand fo r surveying land, and the migratory character of the population of B r i t i s h Columbia which makes i t impossible to determine what course settlement w i l l take, or where surveyed land may be wanted, i t has been thought advisable to postpone the general survey. . . In the meantime the Pre-emption Consolidation Act enables bona f i d e s e t t l e r s . . . to make homesteads for themselves without waiting f o r the of-f i c i a l survey . . . . The s e t t l e r who from want of means i s only able to u t i l i z e a small piece of land w i l l not be har-rassed or distressed for the purchase money, and he i s sefi-25 cured i n the ultimate conveyance of the land at 4/2 per acre." Nevertheless, the confusion concerning pre-emption regulations continued. Much misunderstanding was caused by the magistrates receiving records f o r land not l e g a l l y open to pre-emption. New instructions to the magistrates forbade 21 B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations. 1861, No. 2. 22 Douglas to Newcastle, October 15, 1861, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 25. Ibid. iff 98 them to receive records for lands of the following classes: "lands occupied or surveyed, or reserved for the Crown or "being the site> or intended site, of a Town, or being aurif-erous and available for mining purposes, or an Indian Reserve 24 or settlement." Should the magistrate in error receive a record for such land, the unfortunate settler was to be re-25 fused a Certificate of Improvement. Although by 1861 government surveys of country land had been resumed in the New Westminster d i s t r i c t , pre-emptors caught unawares by the approach of surveyors were not pres-sed for payment. Two years were to be allowed after survey 26 for payment i n f u l l . Nevertheless, some pre-emptors beyond the New Westminster d i s t r i c t , anxious to receive t i t l e for the land, chafed at the delay of the o f f i c i a l survey. Trutch explained their predicament thus: "The Pre-emption Act af-fords to the pre-emptor or purchaser a perfectly good hold-ing but he cannot convey and consequently he cannot mortgage the lands held by him or the improvements made thereon u n t i l the 'Gov't. Survey' be extended to the d i s t r i c t in which his lands are situated—nor u n t i l such extension of the "Govern-ment Survey" takes place, can any disputes between neigh-bours as to boundaries or pre-emption or purchase claims be 27 o f f i c i a l l y determined." for these reasons, he was desirous 24 Col. Sec. to Magistrates, Nov mb r 30, 1863, Col. Sec. 0 Correspondence Outward. M.A.B.C. 25 Ibid. 26 Col. Sec. to Moody, October 26, 1863. Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 27 Trutch to Col. Sec. Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. of amending the land laws so as to allow pre-emption claims to be surveyed i n isolated regions and t i t l e s granted. As r for waiting for the government survey, he remarked, " . . . i f settlers are to a/rait this consummation, the period of their becoming possessed of their t i t l e s to their lands would ,28 be long deferred indeed." His anxiety to survey claims was increased by his fears of speculation, since according to the Pre-emption Consolidation Act no limit was placed upon the amount of land which a pre-emptor might purchase adjacent 29 to his claim. Accordingly a Circular Letter sent to the magistrates on October 22, 1864, advised them to reserve a l l the Crown Lands of the Colony from pre-emption u n t i l a re-30 vision of the land laws had been made. The Land Ordinance of 1865 passed by the Legislat-i v e Council made no radical change i n the pre-emption laws, but c l a r i f i e d the duties of the magistrates. Instead of permitting any number of persons to record the same land claim, the new ordinance compelled each pre-emptor to obtain a Record Certificate from the magistrate. If the desired land had been already recorded but abandoned, registration in the new claimant's name would be made only after one month's public notice. The magistrates were granted power to settle a l l disputes. The Record Certificate entitled the 28 Ibid. 29 Ibid. 30 Good to Magistrates, October 22, 1864, Col. Sec. Corres-pondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 100 claimant to a leave of absence not exceeding six months for the purpose of procuring seeds and equipment. In accordance with Trutch's recommendation, the amount of land which a pre-emptor could purchase contiguous to his pre-emption claim 31 was limited to 480 acres. To enable pre-emptors to obtain t i t l e s for their pre-emption claims, printed notices were posted throughout the colony explaining how settlers might have their land sur-veyed. Applications for survey, accompanied by a rough plan of the claim, were to be deposited with the nearest magis-trate, along with a $10 survey fee. The surveys were to be carried out as soon as sufficient applications were made i n 32 the respective d i s t r i c t s . As well as enabling settlers to obtain t i t l e s for their lands, the surveys were needed to furnish revenue for the government. Trutch hoped that i n this way £1550 might be collected as payment for pre-empted and purchased lands. For this reason he suggested that 33 £3000 be spent on surveys during 1866. Nevertheless, the results were disappointing. By October 1866, Trutch reported that only thirty claims, totalling 2598 acres, had been sur-34 veyed. The surveyors experienced great d i f f i c u l t y i n try-ing to ensure that claims were of the prescribed rectangular 31 B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1865. No. 27. 32 Trutch to Col. Sec, July 21, 1865, Lands and Works Dep-artment to Governor, M.A.B.C. i3,3 Ibid.,November 27, 1865. 34 Ibid..October 29, 1866. -±3-lol shape. The magistrates were urged to help hy insisting that applicants obey the requirements of the land ordinance res-35 pecting the shape of their claims. Trutch was also asked to instruct his surveyors to comply as closely as possible 36 to the rectangular system. The d i f f i c u l t i e s were well illustrated by Nind's l i s t of applications for survey. The farms were a l l of different sizes, varying as follows: 3, 1 0 , 37 12, 20, 27, 36, 80, 100, 160 and 640 acres. Accordingly, by section two of the Pre-emption Ordinance of 1866, the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works was authorized to 38 deviate where necessary from the rectangular system. Several problems continued to harass the government i n spite of the numerous enactments concerning the pre-emp-tion system. One which remained unsolved u n t i l 1870 was the problem of defining and enforcing the duties of occupation. To ensure cultivation Moody had suggested a land tax of 3d. 39 an acre, which should not he collected from settlers after 40 they had cleared and cultivated half of their claim. Such a tax was discussed by the Legislative Council in 1865, but as pointed out by the Attorney General, i t would be unfair 55 Col. Sec. to Magistrates, January 25, 1866, Col. Sec. Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 36 Col. Sec. to Trutch, February 15, 1866, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 37 Nind to Trutch, August 30, 1865, Nind Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 58 Br i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1866, No. 13. 39 Moody to Douglas, November 7, 1860, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 40 Ibid.. November 22, 1860. -i4r 41 to settlers living on heavily timbered lands. The efforts to ensure occupation and improvement were thus limited to the rules as stated in the various land laws. By the Pre-emption Act of January 4, 1860, the magistrate was to issue the c e r -t i f i c a t e of improvement only after the settler had permanently occupied and improved his land to the extent of 10s. an acre. Although these duties of occupation were intended to apply to a l l land purchased adjacent to the pre-emption claim, i t was not made clear i n the act. In the reply to his despatch ed blaming Moody for selling unsurvey/land before improvements 42 had been made, Douglas received a reprimand from Newcastle. "Although i t is doubtless very desirable that land disposed of before survey should be subject to the condition of con-tinuous occupation t i l l the Survey comes up to i t , that con-dition i s not imposed by the seventh art i c l e of the Procla-mation. Any confusion therefore which may. result from the omission of that condition i s in my opinion chargeable on the imperfect language of the Proclamation and not on the Chief 43 Commissioner." The Pre-emption Purchase Act of 1861, was consequently issued imposing the same occupation duties on land purchased under the provisions of the proclamation of 44 January 4, as upon pre-empted land. 41 B r i t i s h Columbian, January ,21, 1865. 42 Douglas to Newcastle, June 4, 1861, Despatches to Downing Street,. M.A.B.C. 43 Newcastle to Douglas, August 21, 1861, Despatches from Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 44 B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations. 1861, No. 6. 103 Although no change with regard to occupation and improvement was made by the Land Ordinance of 1865, both the Attorney General and Chief Commissioner agreed that Xoccupatf-t i o n should be defined as meaning actual residence upon the l a n d . T h e B r i t i s h Columbian asked ". . . . i f a pre-emptor should clear a small piece of ground and b u i l d a shanty f o r the express purpose of making good his claim to land upon which he was not a bona f i d e s e t t l e r , would that be consid-45 ered "occupation . . . .?" A clause requiring actual res-idence was sought to be included i n the Pre-emption Ordi-nance of 1866, by Crease and Trutch but was voted down ten 46 to four i n the Le g i s l a t i v e Council. Since the demand f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l land was not great, Seymour gave his consent to the ordinance, but f e l t that some such d e f i n i t i o n would 47 prove necessary when the value of land increased. Among the reasons given by Trutch and Crease f o r recommending that the Land Ordinance of 1867 be disallowed was the fac t that i t permitted land claims to be held by 48 agents. "Personal residence of the Slaimant on the land claimed by him by pre-emption r i g h t i s i n f a c t the es s e n t i a l requirement of the pre-emption system as i t i s p r a c t i c a l l y 45 B r i t i s h Columbian, September 5 , 1861. 46 Birch, to Cardwell, A p r i l 21, 1866, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 47 Ibid. 48 Trutch to Seymour, November 19, 1867, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. Crease to Seymour, November 2, 1867, Attorney General Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. I OH-carried out i n the neighbouring United States T e r r i t o r i e s from whence i t was adopted into t h i s Colony. His presence on the land . . . i s the equivalent required f o r the p r i v i -lege granted to the pre-emptor of s e t t l i n g on the land i n advance of survey without--payment and with the secured r i g h t 49 of eventual purchase at the upset p r i c e . " Of the 1696 claims recorded on the mainland, only 500, t o t a l l i n g 90,000 acres had' been settled upon either by pre-emptors or t h e i r agents. However, of this area 6000 acres at the most had 50 been actually c u l t i v a t e d . I t was not u n t i l the passage of the Land Ordinance of 1870 that both the Attorney General and Chief Commissioner were s a t i s f i e d with the regulations concerning occupation. By that act the D i s t r i c t Magistrates were empowered to cancel the pre-emption claims of the set-t l e r s who had not personally and continuously resided on thei r land f o r four years. Nevertheless the residence duties were mitigated by the s e t t l e r ' s r i g h t to an annual leave of absence of four months, two of which he could take at w i l l , while the other two required s p e c i a l permission from a magis-tra t e . The farmer might get s t i l l another two months i f he applied for a license enabling him to put another man on his 51 farm during the s i x months' period. 49 Trutch to Seymour, August 12, 1868, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 50 Trutch to Seymour, August 12, 1868, Lands and V/orks Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 51 B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances." No. 18. 1 0 5 The government found i t equally perplexing.to decide which s e t t l e r s should be allowed to pre-empt. With regard to B r i t i s h 'subjects the decision was ea s i l y made, but because of the large number of Americans, provision had to be made for aliens to hold land. O r i g i n a l l y Douglas had i n -tended to allow aliens t i t l e * to land which they had purchas-ed f^ or -(three years only)^ In order to r e t a i n t h e i r rights as landowners, they would then be required to become B r i t i s h 52 subjects. However, Lytton f e l t that the law could be made more favourable to aliens, i n the manner of the correspond-ing Canadian act. He pointed out that i n Canada an a l i e n could be naturalized a f t e r three years' residence upon a f f i r -ming on oath his length of residence and his allegiance to the Crown. Yet, alie n s who f a i l e d to become naturalized a f t e r three years were not l i a b l e to lose t i t l e to th e i r 53 land. Douglas accordingly revised his o r i g i n a l intention and issued the A l i e n Act on May 14, 1859. The provision of the act concerning land ownership was as follows: "Every a l i e n s h a l l have the same capacity to take, hold, enjoy, receive, convey and transmit t i t l e to lands and r e a l estate of every description, i n thi s Colony, as i f he were, at the time of passing of thi s Act, a natural born B r i t i s h subject; and no person s h a l l be disturbed i n the possession or pre-cluded from the recovery of any lands or r e a l estate i n t h i s 52 Douglas to Lytton, November 29, 1858, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 53 Lytton to Douglas, February 11, 1859, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. -ie-106 Colony by reason only that some person from or through whom 54 he may derive his t i t l e was an a l i e n . " Since the A l i e n Act was issued i n 1859 i t made no reference to the pre-emption system which was inaugurated i n B r i t i s h Columbia the following year. Nevertheless, the Pre-emption Act of January 4, 1860, allowed aliens who should take the oath of allegiance, to pre-empt land. I t was Begbie who f i r s t pointed out that Americans would have no incentive to swear allegiance i n view of Section 7 of the A l i e n Act 55 quoted above. His predictions proved correct, f o r i n 1864 Trutch complained that the majority of the pre-emptors i n the colony were aliens who had not taken the oath of alle«£2f-56 giance. The Land Ordinance of 1865, contained the provision requiring aliens to take the oath of allegiance before pre-empting, and also provided f o r the creation of a tr i b u n a l to 57 s e t t l e the land holdings of those who had neglected to do so. Trutch continued to be d i s s a t i s f i e d with the situ a t i o n , par-t i c u l a r l y when he received applications from aliens to have 58 t h e i r land surveyed. The f a c t that the proposed Land Ord-i n a n c e of 1867 allowed aliens the r i g h t to pre-empt without without taking the oath of allegiance as previously required caused both he and Crease to recommend i t s disallowance. 54 B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations. 1859. 55 Begbie to Col. S e c , June 29, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. 56 Trutch to Seymour, August 26, 1864. Lands and Works Department to Governor. M.A.B.C. 57 Crease to Col. S e c June 14, 1865, Attorney General Cor-respondence Outward, M.A.B.C. •%B Trutch to.Seymour, July 21, 1866, Lands and Works Depart-ment to.Governor, M.A.B.C. i t r -107 "I would favour by every legitimate means the settlement of foreigners among us and encourage them to purchase land whether from the government or from private i n d i v i d u a l s ; but i t appears to me that the right of pre-emption should be i n t h i s Colony—as i t i s i n the United S t a t e s — s p e c i a l l y re#-59 served f o r those who owe allegiance to the Government." The problem was not se t t l e d u n t i l the passage of the Land Ordinance of 1 8 7 0 , which r e s t r i c t e d the p r i v i l e g e of pre--empting to male B r i t i s h ^subjects over eighteen years of age. The government had also to decide whether or not Indians should be allowed to pre-empt. In 1 8 6 2 , Moody asked f o r instructions since Indians were pre-empting "to consider-60 able extent" along the Fraser River. The following year he reported that the Indians along, the Coquitlam River, urged on by the Roman Catholic P r i e s t s , wanted to pre-empt. They chose th i s method of enlarging t h e i r holdings since a mere extension of the boundaries of t h e i r reserve would have 61 given them only swampy ground. Douglas accordingly decided that Indians might pre-empt on condition that they reside continuously on t h e i r farms; they b u i l d houses of squared logs with shingled roofs not l e s s than 3 0 ' x 2 0 ' and sidewalls 1 0 ' high; they clear, "two enclose and c u l t i v a t e , i n the f i r s t year, *2x acres of wood 59 I b i d . . November 1 9 , 1 8 6 7 . 60 Moody to Douglas, June 1 1 , 1 8 6 2 , Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor,M.A.B.C. 6 1 Moody to Douglas, A p r i l 2 8 , 1 8 6 S , Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor. M.A.B.C. 108 land or f i v e acres of p r a i r i e land, i n the second year and ;. "three: afterwards t i l l the end of the f i f t h year, «S. acres of wood-land or *"& acres of p r a i r i e land. They were not to convey the 62 land without f i r s t obtaining the consent of the Governor. They were also to be allowed to purchase land on the same terms as B r i t i s h subjects. These regulations were set ^ f o r t h only i n the Governor's correspondence with Moody, but i n 1864 Douglas reasserted the p o l i c y i n his opening speech 64 to the L e g i s l a t i v e Council. Nevertheless, Governor Seymour upon his a r r i v a l i n B r i t i s h Columbia, informed the Attorney General that the Crown could not delegate i t s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l trust over Indian lands, and that therefore Indians could not he allowed to 65 pre-empt. Thus the Pre-emption Ordinance of 1866 was passed to prevent Indians from pre-empting unless they had f i r s t 66 obtained the Governor's written permission. A sim i l a r res-t r i c t i o n was included i n the Land Ordinance of 1870. Because s e t t l e r s were few the pre-emption system had been forced upon the colony. Nevertheless o f f i c i a l s had to consider seriously how the land laws might be l i b e r a l i z e d 62 W.F..G. Young to Moody, July 2, 1862, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 6.3 Ibid . .June 18, 1862. 64 B a l l to Trutch, November 19, 1869, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department. M.A.B.C. 6:5 B a l l to Trutch, November 19, 1869, Col. Sec. to Lands and works Department, M.A.B.C. 66 B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1866, No. 13. J09 even further so as to a t t r a c t immigrants. In 1866 the B r i t i s h Columbian proposed a homestead law sim i l a r to those i n the United States and on Vancouver Island. " I t i s not reasonable to expect that s e t t l e r s w i l l come here to run the r i s k of having t h e i r l a s t cow and t h e i r l a s t acre swept away by the S h e r i f f at every freak of f i c k l e fortune, when they can, on either side of us, be secured i n a comfortable 67 and permanent home against a l l reverses." A year l a t e r , The Homestead Ordinance of 1867 was passed by the L e g i s l a t i v e Council. According to i t s provisions, a homestead was de-fined as ". -. . the pieces or parcels of land, together with any erections or buildings thereon, whether Leasehold or 68 Freehold . . . " After r e g i s t r a t i o n , the homestead, i f worth less than $2500, was to be wholly protected from con-f i s c a t i o n . I f of greater value, only the amount exceeding 69 $2500 was to be l i a b l e to seizure. Although admitting that B r i t i s h Columbia was competing with the United States f o r s e t t l e r s and must therefore o f f e r greater inducements, the Attorney General opposed the act on the ground that i t would lead to fraud. "The honest i n estimating t h e i r f i n a n c i a l , debtor and creditor p o s i t i o n not unnaturally put an extra-vegant estimate on the i r riches and the i r assets and take a Couleur de Rose view of t h e i r solvency. The crafty and d i s -honest purposely misrepresent theirs to procure the desired 67 B r i t i s h Columbian. January 3, 1866. 68 B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1867, No. 16. 69 Ibid. 70 r e g i s t r a t i o n . " Upon Seymour's recommendation that the 71 measure was one which might tend to s e t t l e the country, the act was assented to. Nevertheless, impressed with the Attor-ney General's warning, Buckingham advised that care be taken i n carrying out the act, and requested a report on i t s ef-fects on settlement. Accordingly, Newcastle l a t e r reported that the act was being e f f i c i e n t l y administered, but admit-ted i t s comparative ineffectiveness as an a t t r a c t i o n f o r s e t t l e r s . "I do not know that the Homestead Ordinance has brought many people into the colony, but I am cer t a i n that 72 i t has had the eff e c t of retaining some." The question of free grants to att r a c t s e t t l e r s was widely discussed i n B r i t i s h Columbia a f t e r the passage of the Homestead Act of 1862 i n the United States. Accord-ing to thi s statute, American s e t t l e r s might occupy 160 acres of land for which they might receive t i t l e after f i v e years of residence. The only payment required was the amount suf-f i c i e n t to cover the cost of survey and transfer of t i t l e . On the P a c i f i c Coast t h i s amounted to $34.00. S e t t l e r s who paid f o r th e i r land at the rate of $1.2-5 or $2.50 an acre 73 could receive t i t l e at the end of s i x months. By December, 1862, the B r i t i s h Columbian began i t s a g i t a t i o n f o r s i m i l a r grants i n B r i t i s h Columbia. "We have no ri g h t to expect a 70 Crease to Seymour, June 21, 1867, Attorney General Cor-respondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 71 Seymour to Buckingham, September 23, 1867, Despatches to. Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 72 • Ibid., August 6,-1868. 73 Fl u g e l and Faulkner, on. c i t . , p. 475. 23" 111 rural population unless we hold out inducements equally l i b -eral with those offered by the adjacent States. It i s true that $160 may appear a very t r i f l i n g consideration; but small as i t i s , i t undoubtedly exercises a wonderful influence over 74 the minds of immigrants." "One object of agrarian l e g i s l a -tion should ever be to encourage the occupation of our agri-cultural lands by those who w i l l turn them at once to their legitimate use . . . Every Colonist now contributes something li k e $80 a year towards the revenue of the colony, which, in two years, would be just equal to the purchase price of 160 acres of land, and the man who settles upon and improves his farm w i l l contribute even more than that. As d i s t r i c t s are opened for settlement base lines must be defined, and a l l o t -75 ments marked out upon these lines, regularly numbered . . . ." That the settlers i n Bri t i s h Columbia expected free grants i s evident from d i f f i c u l t i e s experienced by the gov-ernment in attempting to enforce payment for pre-emption claims after survey. The reduction i n the price of land to-gether with the introduction of the pre-emption system had naturally decreased the revenue from land. The delay i n car-rying out the surveys aggravated the problem so that i n 1865 "the only receipts under the head of Land Sales were derived from the sale of a few town and suburban lots offered for 76 public competition during 1865 . . . ." Nevertheless, even 74 Bri t i s h Columbian.- December 20, 1862. T5 B r i t i s h Columbian. October 26, 1864. 76 Birch to Carnarvon, October 31, 1866, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. H7L after surveying had recommenced the government found the settlers reluctant to pay for their land. Some f e l t that 77 the survey fee should he applied to the purchase price. Others argued that they had had their claims surveyed only 78 because they misunderstood i t as being compulsory. The government o f f i c i a l s were embarrassed because the Land Ordinance of 1865 stated merely that settlers were entitled to pay for their lands after survey, but gave no power to the government to enforce payment. Crease proposed a circu-lar to be sent to settlers i n default, warning them that legal action would be taken. However, Trutch preferred that an ordinance should be passed f i r s t giving the government the 79 power to enforce payment. For this reason the Pre-emption Payment Ordinance was enacted by the Legislative Council on March 1, 1869. "The purchase money for Pre-emption Claims, held under any of the laws heretofore . . . shall be and are deemed to have been and to be due and payable . . . from the date of the service of an application, signed by the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works and Surveyor General, upon the person or persons to be affected thereby and notifying the completion of the Government Survey of the Land specified in such application, and calling upon such person or persons for the payment of the amount . . . due . . . in_jrespect to 80 such land." 77 Sanders to Trutch, September 25, 1866, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 78 P.J.Leech to Trutch, September 9, 1867, Leech Correspond-ence, M.A.B.C. 79 Trutch to Colonial Secretary, October 17, 1867, Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 80 Bri t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1869, No. 11. The ordinance did l i t t l e more than to state that the money was legally due after survey. That i t contained no threat of forfeiture upon failure to pay was merely because settlers were scarce and urgently needed. Although confirm-ing the ordinance, Granville forwarded the report of the Emigration Commissioners, advising that some methiod of en-81 forcingnpayment be included in the act. Granville allowed the matter to rest after receiving the following reply from Musgrave:". . . the provision for the summary remedy . . . was purposely omitted i n order to ensure the easy passage of the ordinance, and particularly to avoid the appearance i n a Colony where i t i s so much desired to encourage settlement of too urgent pressure on bona fide settlers perhaps unable to 82 pay up promptly." It seems that settlers usually paid within the three months allowed by the government after they had receiv-83 ed the applications mentioned in the above ordinance. How-ever, several warning letters threatening legal action appear in the Attorney General's correspondence for those who failed 34 to do so. In 1868 Trutch admitted that a system whereby cer-tain d i s t r i c t s might be surveyed and granted free of charge to settlers would be the most l i b e r a l measure as well as the 81 Granville to the Officer Administering the Government, June 28, 1869, Despatches from London, M.A.B.C. 82 Musgrave to Granville, February 5, 1870, Despatches to London, M.A.B.C. • - * 83 Trutch to O'Reilly, Lands and Workd Department, Corres-pondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 34 G. Phillippo to Sanders, October 25, 1870, Attorney Gen-eral, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B;C; Ii most b e n e f i c i a l to the Colony. Nevertheless, he s t i l l opposed the system as being impracticable i n B r i t i s h Columbia, his -reasons being that the colony lacked the money to make sur^ veys i n widespread, i s o l a t e d t r a c t s , and that even with money, the land f o r settlement was so scattered that years would pass before they could be l a i d out into sections. For these reasons he f e l t that the attempt to inaugurate such a system 85 would merely delay settlement. It- was not u n t i l the passage of the Land Ordinance of 1870, that the Governor, with the advice of his Council, was given authority to make free grants without reference i n each case to Great B r i t a i n . Since Her Majesty's assent to the ordinance was not proclaimed i n the colony u n t i l Octo-ber 20, 1870, the provision could have no e f f e c t upon land settlement before Confederation. Moreover, the sca r c i t y of surveyed land available f o r free grants made the system i n no way comparable to that of the United States, provided by the Homestead Act of 1862. The ordinance provided that: " I t s h a l l be lawful f o r the Governor i n Council to make such s p e c i a l Free or p a r t i a l l y Free Grants of the unoccupied and unappropriated Crown Lands of the Colony, f o r the encourage-ment of Immigration or other purposes of public advantage with and under such provisions, r e s t r i c t i o n s and p r i v i l e g e s , as to the Governor i n Council may seem most advisable f o r • • 86 the encouragement and permanent settlement of Immigrants . . I? 85 Trutch to Seymour, August 12, 1864, Lands and Works De-partment to Governor. M.A.B.C. 86 B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1870, No. 18. The ordinance i n f a c t merely l i b e r a l i z e d the pre-emption system instead of introducing a comprehensive f r e e -grant system. Thereafter s e t t l e r s l i v i n g i n the bunch grass country north and east of the Cascades could pre-empt 320 acres of land, a p r i v i l e g e which allowed those r a i s i n g cat-t l e on a small scale to escape from paying rent f o r pastoral 87 leases. I t i s impossible to judge accurately the e f f e c t of the pre-emption system upon the settlement of B r i t i s h Col-umbia during the c o l o n i a l period. Yet i t i s safe to say. that most of the land under c u l t i v a t i o n , except f o r areas which had been squatted upon i l l e g a l l y , was held under a pre-emption r i g h t . New Westminster was the only d i s t r i c t on the mainland i n which country land was sold at auction. In that d i s t r i c t , by 1868, of the 83,440 acres of surveyed land of-fered f o r sale, 27,797 acres had been bought. Of t h i s amount 88 not more than 250 acres had been brought under c u l t i v a t i o n . Agriculture was secondary .to mining, and i t i s probable that the discoveries of gold had much more influence upon farming than the actual land-settlement p o l i c y of the government.. Because transport i n B r i t i s h Columbia was so d i f f i c u l t , i t was necessary f o r the farmer to l i v e as close as possible to his market. Partly f o r this reason settlement followed the roads leading to the gold mines. In 1860, farm-ers near the mouth of the L i l l o o e t River, close to the H a r r i -89 son-Lillooet t r a i l , were making £240 an acre from potatoes. 87 I b i d . . . . . 88 Trutch to Seymour, August 12,1868, Lands and Y/orks Dep-artment to Governor,M.A.B.C. 89 Douglas to Newcastle, October 9,1860, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. -80-llfe Douglas reported that "continued accessions are being made to the general population of the Upper Country, the newly formed roads having given a prodigious impulse to settlement . . . Mr. Commissioner O ' R e i l l y w r i t i n g from W i l l i a m s Lake on A p r i l 29 . . . observed on h i s way up from L i l l o o e t l a r g e t r a c t s of land that were fenced i n , and at a l l the wayside houses great preparations f o r embarking l a r g e l y i n farming operations and moreover i n the D i s t r i c t of Bridge Creek and Williams.. L a k e—he s t a t e s t h a t 500 acres of land were a c t u a l l y 90 under crops . . . " I n 1865 the Cariboo S e n t i n e l reported that there was l i t t l e l i k e l i h o o d of an increase i n the p r i c e of f l o u r , s i n c e "more than a m i l l i o n pounds of f l o u r w i l l be 91 made i n the country t h i s year from home grown wheat." The same newspaper soon a f t e r announced th a t owing to the compe-t i t i o n of l o c a l l y grown vegetables, potatoes were s e l l i n g a t 92 l e s s than h a l f the proce of former seasons. The f o l l o w i n g charts show the t o t a l number of acres under c u l t i v a t i o n i n s e v e r a l d i s t r i c t s of the colony,-, as w e l l 93 as the acreage devoted to each of the most important crops. The apparent disappearance of c u l t i v a t e d land i n Douglas i n and a f t e r 1866 does not mean tha t a g r i c u l t u r e had disappeared e n t i r e l y , but r a t h e r t h a t the land r e c o r d i n g o f f i c e had been moved to L i l l o o e t . However, the marked d e c l i n e i n c u l t i v a t e d lands i n the Douglas d i s t r i c t between 1862 an# 1865 does i l l u s -90 Douglas to Newcastle, May 18, 1863, Despatches to Down-ing S t r e e t , M.A.B.C. 91 Cariboo S e n t i n e l , September 2, 1865. 92 I b i d . . September 16 1865. 93 Blue Books of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1862, 1865, 1866, 1867, and 1868. / t ra te the unset t led nature of much of the agr i cu l ture i n B r i t i s h Columbia, a problem with which no government land p o l i c y , of whatever nature, could have coped. Douglas had come in to sudden importance as the western terminus of the H a r r i s o n - L i l l o o e t t r a i l , but when that route gave way i n popular i ty to the Cariboo road, Douglas l o s t much of i t s former s ign i f i cance and of i t s farming population as w e l l . —50 • i'8 ACREAGE UNDER CROPS ON THE MAINLAND Location 1862 1865 1866 1867 1868 Rock Creek 160 0 0 0 0 Douglas 1432 451 0 0 0 L i l l o o e t 330 22 2710 3158 3479 Yale 190 147} ) ) Hope 60 ) 1044) 1797) 3550 Lytton 56 20) 5 5 New Westminster 599 432 1035 614 1137 Sooyoos 0 124 174 290 380 Quesnel and Williams Lake 2011 1276 1820 2989 Location Lillooet Yale, Hope & Lytton New West-minster Quesnel and Williams Lake Wheat 1862 1868 0 2016 2 930 0 173 0 566 ACRES IN EACH CROP Barley 1862 k1868 140 802 including oats 4 1366 including oats 8 63 including oats Oats 1862 1868 376 364 364 Potatoes 1862 1868 176 176 205 71 380 Garden Stuff 1862 1868 180 .50 25 530 0 86 0 705 0 1115 0 250 0 340 120 The best justification for the pre-emption system is the fact that i t allowed settlers i n the vi c i n i t y of the mines and beyond the limits of surveyed land to produce for system the local market. Although the absence of a free-grant -sya-was blamed by some for the slow growth of jttee'settlement, they failed to discern that settlers who had pre-empted land i n many parts of the colony enjoyed the benefits of a free grant. For since the government was financially unable to survey their land, no payment was required. Yet to make agriculture a permanent and a substantial industry, some con-fidence in the prosperity of the colony, such as that promis-ed by Confederation with i t s guarantee of railway connections, was needed to support the pre-emption system. Farmers i n the upper country could meet the demands of the local flour mar-94 ket after 1865, and were the chief support of the colony in the depression of 1867. On the other hand, the lower Fraser 95 Valley was s t i l l dependent upon imported food; for i n that d i s t r i c t , uncertainty as to the future of the colony had hin-dered the investment of capital which was needed to clear and drain the land. To those who urged that a free-grant system would solve the settlement problems of the colony, the Cariboo 96 Sentinel offered a sounder argument: 94 Birch to Carnarvon, October 31, 1866, Despatches to Down-ing Street, M.A.B.C. 95 Seymour to Buckingham, August 22, 1868, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 96 Cariboo Sentinel, November 12, 1869. U n t i l now,when Confederation promises to give us popular government and direct communication we have had few attractions to offer for permanent settlement. True, land i s cheap and produce dear, but the future has always been the decisive con-sideration and hence production f a l l s far short of the demands . . . . Something li k e 'a future' i s dawning on the colony, and land that can now be had for a dollar an acre, w i l l soon, by the magical influence of overland railways, popular government, and increased importance, as part of the Dominion, that w i l l attach to the colony, become doubly, trebly, a hundred times more valuable just as i t does in Canada and the United States. X 122. Chapter Six Pastoral Laws i n Br i t i s h Columbia The excellent quality of the bunch grass in the country east of the Cascades was noted by Begbie while on cir c u i t . He compared the entire country to "a vast park attached to a nobleman's mansion i n England—nothing but 1 grass and ornamental stumps of trees." Settlers assured him that "at one settlement near Lake Nicola . . . cows had remained out i n f u l l milk a l l through the severe winter: the calves however were put under cover . . . . a bullock pur-chased i n Oregon for a few pounds, can i n five or eight weeks be driven at no expense but grazing and fattening as he goes, 2 to the mines." Lieutenant Palmer reported that the grass 5 measured 9' [sic] i n height and jj" i n diameter. Similar reports were made by Dis t r i c t Magistrates in the various dis t r i c t s of the colony. The magistrate at Cayoosh described the grass as most fattening and agreeable 4 to stock of a l l descriptions. Another pictured the valleys 1 Begbie to Douglas, November 7, 1859. Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. 2 I b i d . ^ A p r i l 30, 1860. 3 Palmer to Moody,November 25,1859,Palmer Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 4 Elwyn to Douglas, July 50, 1859, Elwyn Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 123 of the Okanagan as "clothed with every description of herb 5 and plant that could possibly be desired by the stock farmer'.' A third magistrate noted that bunch grass covered the h i l l s 6 surrounding the Upper Thompson from head to foot. Douglas enthusiastically relayed their comments to London as well as his own eye-witness report that " . . . the peculiar feature of the country i s the profusion of grass that covers both woodland and meadows affording rich pasture for domestic animals . . . . horses and domestic cattle are l e f t out a l l winter to shift for themselves, and generally thrive without any care on the range . . . pastures being 7 already formed where thousands of cattle may find food." The newspapers of the colony were equally impressed. The Cariboo Sentinel was convinced that large fortunes await-8 ed those who went in for stock-raising. The editor of the Bri t i s h Columbian was willing to admit that as an a g r i c u l -tural country Br i t i s h Columbia was inferior to Upper Canada, 9 but as a pastoral colony he rated i t above California. Although the colony was a potential cattle producer, in the early years i t depended upon the United States for i t s meat supply. Cattle were driven up the Okanagan Valley to 5 Cox to Col. Sec, July 4, 1861, Cox Correspondence,M.A.B.C. 6 Nind to Col. Sec, July 11, 1865,Nind Correspondence,M.A.B.C. 7 Douglas to Newcastle, October 25, 1865, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 8 Cariboo Sentinel. October 15, 1866. 9 Br i t i s h Columbian. February 21 and March 18, 1863. 12,+ the Thompson River and from there to the Cariboo mines. The following figures showing the livestock on which duty was paid during 1861 and 1862 il l u s t r a t e the extent of these operations: 5396 horses, 4817 cattle, 778 mules and 1371 10 sheep. Magistrate Cox at Rock Creek expressed fear that a certain American would control the beef market in the upper country as a result of his large importations. Until beef production could be stimulated within the colony the govern-ment was unconcerned as to who actually controlled the mar-ket. Its chief purpose was to see that American herds reached the Cariboo since sufficient meat for the miners 12 could not be transported from the coast. At the same time cattle breeding was being encouraged within the colony by the remission of duties under the Southern Boundary Act, to 13 settlers importing cattle for stocking their farms. It soon became apparent that legislation to govern the use of the pasture land i n the colony was needed. A l -though the bunch grass was luxuriant i t was obvious that i t could not last it l e f t as free food for American herds. The activity of the packers caused concern i n several dis-t r i c t s . As early as 1860 the magistrate at Cayoosh advised. 10 Nor'ris, L., »W. G. Cox and His Times." Sixth Report of  the Okanagan Historical Society, 1935, p. 199. 11 Cox to Col. Sec; March 3, 1861, Cox Correspondence,MABC. 12 W.A.G.Young to Cox, May 16, 1862, Col. Sec. Outward, Corr-espondence, M.A.B.C. 15 J.J.Young to Cox, September 28, 1861, Col. Sec. Corres-pondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 4 125 that two hundred acres of land should he fenced i n for the use of government horses. The large number of animals col-14 lected there by the packers had caused a shortage of grass. In 1862 G. B. Wright and Company warned Douglas that pack animals were lik e l y to destroy the grass growing along the t r a i l s , a calamity-which, i t was pointed out, had already f a l -15 len upon certain portions of the Bonaparte Valley. Yet the colony i n those years was dependent upon imported meat, and could not restrict too closely the activity of the cattle drivers. The importers' point of view i s re-vealed i n a letter on behalf of the packers sent by H.-H. Ladner to the Governer i n 1863. "A Mr. Cornwall pre-empted a piece grass land on the line of Waggon Road forty miles beyond Lytton, he merely planted stakes at the corners of his pre-emption but did not put up any fence-—a man named Courtenay came along the road with 80 head of cattle—he stop-ped with his cattle where water was convenient—during the night his cattle as i t appeared in the morning had been gra-zing on the pre-emption claim of "Cornwall" and he claimed from Courtenay $1 per head for the c a t t l e — o r he would bring an action for trespass . . . . Your Excellency w i l l readily perceive the great inconvenience and injury that could be 14 Elwyn to Col. Sec, November 16, 1860, Elwyn Correspond-ence, M.A.B.C. 15 G. E. Wright to Douglas, February 5, 1862, Moberly Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. -5-126 i n f l i c t e d on the packing community i f such a law holds good, 16 ..." Another letter revealed the attitude of the farm-ers within the colony to the activity of the cattle drivers: '.' . . . i f we are not protected by Lease, or i n some other • way from those who travel from place to place, l i k e Gipsies, in Tents, eating up the Brovender which we.have nursed i n Summer for our Stock i n Winter we w i l l be compelled either t to adopt the same system, or leave the Sountry . . . . We would require to know, at least one or two years before the expiration of the Lease, the intention of the Government, whether the Lease, i s to be continuous or withdrawn, in order that, we can make preparations for our stock in some 17 other way." Captain Clarke's suggested land policy for B r i t -ish Columbia contained provisions for dealing with pasture land. "Without the boundaries of declared hundreds, land for depasturage of stock may be occupied under annual licence; amount of licence fee to be determined by capabil-i t y of land; or, when two or more applicants wish for same land, the amount of licence to be determined at auction, in which ease the highest bidder to have right of renewal of depasturing licence for—years. This licence, i t being 16 Crease to Col. Sec, July 11, 1863, Attorney General correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 17 Sanders to Col. Sec, June 15, 1870, Sanders Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. -6-127 distinctly understood, to lapse when a l l or portion of land occupied under i t be brought within a hundred, be applied for 18 purchase, or be occupied by miners." Douglas' only com-19 ment was that the plan was inapplicable to Bri t i s h Columbia. In this opinion he was supported by Judge Begbie, who f e l t that i t was hardly possible to prevent trespass i n the im-mense grazing d i s t r i c t s east of the Cascades. "It i s safer 20 and far easier to do nothing." Moody was not satisfied with the "do-nothing" p o l i -cy. In November, 1860, he advised Douglas that something would have to be done about the pasture lands in the Interior of the colony. He referred to the Australian system of l i -censing, and although realizing i t s disadvantages, f e l t that a somewhat similar system should be introduced into B r i t i s h Columbia. "With our comparatively limited area i t would not do to d r i f t into the same d i f f i c u l t i e s as exist in Australia by passing over enormous tracts of excellent land to a few individuals for nominal returns, and never being able to re-cover them. Whatever we do in the way of leasing, i t must be with our eyes open to the fact that leasing means i n the 21 end—real parting with the land forever." In spite of Moody's advice the land laws of the colony made no provision for regulating pasture lands u n t i l 18 Newc stle to Douglas, January 7, 1860, Cmd. 2724.19 Douglas to Newcastle, August '24, 'I860, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 20 Begbie to Douglas, April 50, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. 21 Moody to Douglas, November 7, 1860, Lands and Works Department to the Governor, M.A.B.C. 128 the passage of the Land Ordinance of 1865. Until that time cattle raisers simply pre-empted land or l e t their animals 22 roam at large. By section 51 of the Land Ordinance just mentioned, the Governor was empowered to grant leases of un-surveyed land. They were to be given only to pre-emptors or persons who had bought land. Settlers could lease land only on condition that they stock i t within six months with a proportion of animals to each hundred acres as specified by the Stipendiary Magistrates. The rent for each lease was to be decided by the Governor. To protect farmers, a l l land leased for pastoral purposes was to be liable to pre-emption 23 or purchase, without compensation. These regulations re-mained the same i n the Land Ordinance of 1870. The fact that the ordinance fixed no limit to the term of pastoral leases brought forth criticism from London. Seymour was ordered to limit a l l leases to seven years with no right of renewal. The reason given for such a re s t r i c -24 tion was the fear that long leases might obstruct settlement. vThe criticism from the Cariboo Sentinel was con-cerned not so much with the term as with the extent of the leases. A.notice posted by the Stipendiary Magistrate, not-i f y i n g people to keep their animals off a range of 15,000 22 Crease to Col. Sec, July 11, 1863, Attorney General Correspondence Outward, Iff.A.B.C. 23 Bri t i s h Columbia Ordinances.1865. No. 27.-24 Cardwell to Seymour, October 7, 1865, Despatches from Downing Street, M.A.B.C. - 8 -129 acres in Hat Valley which the Cornwall brothers 25 had applied to lease, caused a great furor. "We cannot conceive any benefit the Government would derive from allow-ing so much land to get into the hands of one or two persona We would be glad to see every inch of ground from Yale to Cariboo taken up and occupied by bona fide settlers, because that would be an evidence of the country's progress, but to parcel out the best lands of the colony among a few capital-ists would only be bringing upon us an incumbus [? t c] l i k e the Hudson's Bay Company to stop settlement and ruin the 26 country." The B r i t i s h Columbian objected to the same lease being granted because the packers were accustomed to use the valley for grazing purposes. However, a letter from Cornwall to the same paper explained that the land included in the lease was useless for agriculture and used only rare-27 ly by the pack trains. In order to obtain a pastoral lease the settler made his application through the D i s t r i c t Magistrate who forwarded i t to the Governor. The D i s t r i c t Magistrate ino each case attached to the application his estimate of a reasonable rent and the amount of cattle that the land could support. If there were several applicants for one range, the leases were not actually auctioned off, but the Di s t r i c t Magistrates were -requested to find out the highest rent 25 Cariboo Sentinel. August 12, 1865. 26 Ibid.. August 19, 1865. 27 B r i t i s h Columbian. August 24 and October 28, 1865. 130 28 which was being offered. At f i r s t no uniform policy was followed in grant-ing the leases. Those granted in the New Westminster area in 1869 show a variation in term from three to ten years and 29 i n rent from $20 per annum to $150 quarterly. Early in July 1870, B. W. Pearse, the Acting Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works, suggested that a uniform rate of rent and a uniform rate of cattle to be located on each area should be established. He f e l t that one rate could be applied to the upper country and the other to Vancouver Island. Accord-ingly, at the Governor's request, he submitted a schedule of rules. His suggestions for the mainland were as follows: no lease should exceed 5 square miles or 3200 acres; appli-cants to stock their land at the rate of one head of horned cattle or horses, or three head of sheep to every ten acres; rental for lands i f fenced 30 an acre, i f unfenced 70; terms of leases for unfenced lands, 7 years; for fenced land 14 years. In order to preserve the bunch grass he also re-quested that each applicant should be required to depasture his stock alternately on each half of his land or to plant 30 English Grasses or Mexican a l f a l f a on 20 acres each year. 28 Trutch to Sanders, October 26, 1869, Lands and Works Department Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 29 Statement of Pastoral Leases in the New Westminster District, September 16, 1869, Folder 952, M.A.B.C. 30 Pearse to Musgrave, July 4 and July 29, 1870, Lands and Works Department to the Governor, M.A.B.C. 131 In making this last suggestion he pointed out that for many-miles i n the upper country the grass had been so thoroughly eaten off and destroyed that i t could hardly be seen along the waggon road. Musgrave's opinion of this schedule was modified 31 by suggestions from the cattle raisers of Alkali Lake. Although no definite schedule was drawn up, a more or less uniform policy was being followed in 1871. Leases granted i n Sumas, Chilliwack and in the Bonaparte, Thompson and Okanagan Valleys i n that year were for a fiver-year period at the rate of 40 an acre. Although the expense of survey varied according to location and extent, $75 was the average 32 cost for a lease of one thousand acres. In the more remote parts of the colony, no limit appears to have been set to the extent of leases as suggested by Pearse. The records show leases of five thousand and six thousand acres i n the 33 Similkameen and Hat Creek d i s t r i c t s respectively. In most cases a maximum of one head of cattle to ten acres was 34 allowed. Although the provision for pastoral leases was the most important legislation passed during the colonial period 31 Sanders to Col. Sec, June 15, 1870, M.A.B.C. 32 Lands and Works Department Correspondence Outward,. October 25 and November 1, .1871, M.A.B.C. 33 Trutch to O'Reilly, August 26, 1869," and" Pearse to Bushby, October 25, 18711:, Lands and Works Department Correspondence Outward^, M.A.B.C. ' " " 34 Sanders to Col. Sec, April 24, 1869, Sanders Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. -±±-032 to encourage cattle raising there were several minor laws enacted for that purpose. The Fence Ordinance of 1869 made i t possible for any area in the colony to be designated as a fence d i s t r i c t i f so desired by two-thirds of the land-owners. After the request had been granted, no person livi n g within the area could claim damages for t r e s s p a s s becauselof cattle straying onto his land unless his property was protected by a "lawful fence." This fence was defined;in the act as a fence "at least 4'9" high throughout, above the general sur-face of the ground, and substantially constructed of either stone, brick, earth, wood or iron . . . . and i f made of horizontal bars . . . . of such dimensions so as not to leave more than 6" between the several bars or r a i l s respec-tively, up to the height of 3' from the surface'of the ground and for the remainder of the fence not more than 12" between the said bars or r a i l s . " If cattle broke into land protected by such a fence, the owner was to be liable for the damages. His cattle might be impounded or sold at pub-35 l i e auction. The ordinance was passed i n spite of the misgiv-ings of some o f f i c i a l s . Crease was not i n favour of i t , since fences had already been erected at great expense i n some dist r i c t s of the colony which he f e l t .were effective i n keeping out cattle although not constructed i n accordance 35 B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1869, No. 9. -±2 I33 with the definition of a lawful fence. He pointed out that the slightest deviation from the definition of a fence i n the act would preclude the owner from claiming damages for 36 trespasss Bushby, the Registrar General, had similar fears about the ordinance and predicted that settlers would re-gret the application of i t to themselves. In addition he objected to including the Indian reserves within a fence 37 d i s t r i c t . Another law passed to encourage stock raising was the Cattle Ordinance of 1869. Its purpose was to limit cattle stealing and shooting chiefly among the settlers on Vancouver Island. Sesws conditions on the mainland were more peaceful, only certain sections of the act applied to that area. The sections of the act applying to the mainland suthorized the Justices of the Peace to restore stolen cat-t l e . To prevent cattle from being shot and secretly skin-ned i n the woods, the act imposed a penalty on anyone pos-sessing the carcasses of stolen cattle. To prevent cattle from being stolen i t imposed a penalty on anyone fraudulent-ly branding them. It further required anyone using a brand 39 to register i t with the magistrate of the d i s t r i c t . To help settlers to get their beef to market the 36 Crease to Seymour, April 16, 1869, Attorney General, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 37 Bushby to Col. Sec, May 12, 1870, Bushby Correspondence, M.A.B.C... 38 Crease to Seymour, April 16, 1869, Attorney General, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 39 Br i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1869, No. 10. ~i3-Tolls Exemption Act of 1871 exempted from road and ferry 40 t o l l s a l l cattle coming from the interior of the colony. Although the transportation d i f f i c u l t i e s remained great i t was hoped that the r e l i e f thus offered might encourage set-41 tiers to send their cattle, wool and hides to the coast. Settlers with l i t t l e money to stock their farms were encouraged by the Cattle Exemption Act of 1871. A l -though they could easily acquire land in the colony, farmers found the rate of interest too high to borrow money for the purchase of stock. It thus became increasingly common for settlers to obtain cattle from persons wishing to invest money, i n return for providing fodder and a run for the stock. As explained by the Attorney-General, "both parties incur some risk of not having entered into a profitable speculation, but should i t prove successful they divide the 42 profits i n the manner agreed upon." The Cattle Exemption Act of 1871 encouraged this practice by assuring the owner who put his cattle out on shares that they could not be the seized and sold for/debt of the person on whose land they 43 might be. To prevent settlers from claiming the cattle as their personal property i n order to obtain cr.edit, the ordinance made i t necessary that the agreement, should be registered with the Stipendiary Magistrate. For the en-40 B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1871. No. 20. 41 G. Phillippo to Musgrave, March 29, 1871, Attorney Gen-eral Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 42 Phillippo to Musgrave, April 6, 1871, Attorney General Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.-C-43 Bri t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1871. No. 24. *±4-135 couragement thus provided to poorer settlers the Daily Stan-dard hailed the act as "one of those reforms that i s calculat-44 ed to give a great impetus to the settlement of the country. Although pastoral leases were available, i t i s evident that some cattle raisers used the land i l l e g a l l y . Magistrates throughout the interior of the colony cited i n -stances of Indian lands being used by white men for pasturing cattle. Before leases had been provided for, i t was reported that Chief Nisquaimlth had rented part of his land on the 45 Upper Thompson and Shuswap Lake area to a stock-raiser. The practice continued after the passage of the Land Ordin-ance of 1865. W. Moberl^y, who was sent out to reduce the reserves of the Shuswap Indians, told Trutch that Nisquaimlth objected to the reduction since the Indians received "con-siderable sums of money from white men for the use of their 46 grass lands." Similarly i n the Okanagan Lake area, J. Turnbull reported that the Indians were charging for the use 47 of their lands. The Br i t i s h Columbian stated that Chief St. Paul on the Thompson River had rented his entire tract from Fort Kamloops to the L i t t l e Shuswap Lake to Jerome Har-per as a stock range for $25 a month. "Thus one of the most valuable ranges in the country i s locked up, and anyone who 44 Daily Standard. April 18,. 1871. 45 Nind.to Col. Sec, July 17, 1865, Nind Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 46 Moberljgy to Trutch, December 22, 1865, Moberl^y Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. 47 Turnbull to Trutch, January 17, 1866, Turnbull Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. attempts to cut hay or otherwise make use of any portion of i t 48 i s hunted o f f by the Indians. " This practice became so common that Sanders suggested that the Magistrates should be l e g a l l y authorized, with the consent of the Indians, to lease portions of t h e i r reserves to white s e t t l e r s , the money to be 49 used to support the Indians during the winter months. His suggestion was not approved. Instead Trutch ordered that every precaution should be taken to keep white men o f f the 50 reserves. . In spite of the i l l e g a l use of Indian lands, the government regulations worked well.. Applications f o r leases increased, p a r t i c u l a r l y between 1869 and 1871. The demand became so great i n some d i s t r i c t s that Pearse suggested that the ranges might be auctioned o f f . During 1870 s e t t l e r s applied to lease 700 acres i n the New Westminster D i s t r i c t and 22,850 acres i n the L i l l o o e t D i s t r i c t . By the end of the year leases had been granted covering 13,430 acres i n the Hope, Yale and Lytton area and 3500 acres i n the L i l l o o e t 52 area. However, these figures do not accurately measure the number of leases that the government desired to grant. 48 B r i t i s h Columbian. August 4, 1866. 49 Sanders to Col. S e c , Feb. 2, 1868, Sanders Correspon^-dence^ M.A.B.C. 50 Trutch to.Sanders, March 11, 1868, Lands and Works Depart-ment Correspondence Outward,.M.A.B.C. 51 Pearse to Musgrave, July 7, 1870, Lands and Works Depart-ment to Governor, M.A.B.C. 52 Journals of the -Legislative Council of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1871. No. 54. I I r i i - ± 6 -«*7 From September 1870 to the end of the year leases were refus-ed because of negotiations with the Dominion Government for land along the proposed railway. By 1871 they were once more being granted with the condition attached that the government might terminate the lease "after s i x months notice should any such lands be included or be selected as part of the t r a c t of land to be granted by thi s Colony i n aid of the construction 54 of the proposed r a i l r o a d . " Accordingly there was a great increase i n the num-ber of leases granted i n 1871. On August .21, 1871, Pearse authorized Bushby to conclude leases amounting to 14,400 acres i n the Yale/Lytton d i s t r i c t . On October 5, 1871, the same Magistrate was instructed to grant an add i t i o n a l 3281 acres. On October'14 and 25 he leased a t o t a l of 2000 and 7000 acres^ In the Kootenay d i s t r i c t Haynes parted with a 55 t o t a l of 7500 acres between October 14 and November 1, 1871. The increase was also r e f l e c t e d i n the areas which requested to be made into fence d i s t r i c t s . Before granting such requests great care was taken by o f f i c i a l s to explain to s e t t l e r s the effects which the Fence Ordinance would have upon them. Thus, i n 1869 a meeting of the s e t t l e r s of the 53 Pearse to Sanders, September 3, 1870 and Pearse to 0»Reilly, September 3, 1870, Lands and Works Department, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 54 Trutch to Bushby, December 27, .1870, Lands and Works Department, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 55 Pearse to Bushby, August 21, October 5, 14, 25, and Nov-ember 1, 1871, & Holbrook to Bushby, November 18, 1871, and Pearse to Haynes, October 14 and November 11, 1871, Lands and Works Department, Correspondence Outward,M.A.B.C. 136 North Arm Dis t r i c t was called by Bushby to discuss their 56 application with the result that i t was unanimously withdrawn. In February 1870, permission was given to the settlers i n the Chilliwack area to organize their territory as a fence dis-t r i c t , the deciding factor being the large number of cattle 57 owners who signed the petition. Although the settlers on the south side of the Fraser opposite New Westminster made 58 a similar request in 1869 approval was not given u n t i l 1871. By that time population had so increased that o f f i c i a l s no longer feared that the original signers of the petition might be outnumbered by new cattle raisers who might object to the request. The growing importance of stock raising i n the t jStolony was remarked upon by Musgrave in a despatch to London. "Your Lordship w i l l observe the significance of the fact that attention is now directed to obtaining a market for produce which i s raised among ourselves,, instead of a l l our supplies being drawn from abroad. Probably next year there w i l l be l i t t l e or no beef imported i n Victoria. The Upper Country of the Fraser being already supplied as cheaply with 59 Meat and Breadstuffs as any other portion of the colony." 56 Bushby to Col. Sec, September 3, 1869, Bushby C rres-pondence, M.A.B.C. 57 Ba l l to Col. Sec. January S7, 1870, Ball Correspondence, M.A.B.C. . - -58 Bushby to Col. Sec, January 31, 1871, Bushby Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. 59 Musgrave to Granville, October 15, 1869, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 1 8 -»-39 The low cost of meat in the Upper Fraser was verified by the Cariboo Sentinel. "Our markets are well supplied with excel-lent beef and mutton from colonial stock and at very moderate prices—'from 100 to 150 per pound. There seems to be no longer any necessity for importing heaves and sheep for the interior and upper country, and we shall soon be independent 60 of foreign supplies i n respect of bacon and hams." O f f i c i a l statistics reveal that the colony's dependence upon imported meat was considerably less than in 1862. In 1870 only 1037 horses and mules, 182 cows, 136 calves, 1061 beef cattle, 5513 sheep and 972 hogs were brought in from the 61 United States. That the colony had to import meat at a l l can be blamed not upon the system of pastoral leases adopted by the Government but rather upon the ever-present d i f f i c u l t i e s of transportation. The Cariboo Sentinel was convinced that the whole of the lower mainland could be supplied with meat from the interior i f roads were bu i l t . "The pastoral lands of the colony, extending from Lytton to the base of the Rocky Moun^-tains are capable of affording sustenance to a thousand times the present number of cattle i n the colony. The market, however, i s a small one, and the efforts made to stock the country are limited; but i f road f a c i l i t i e s were available, - • 62 the market would be largely increased . . . " 60 Cariboo Sentinel. September 24, 1870. 61 Blue Book of 1870. 62 Cariboo Sentinel, November 20, 1869. -19-»40 In 1871 there were approximately 1300 beef cattle i n the Thompson and Okanagan Valleys ready for the lower mainland and Victoria markets. However, i t was impossible to drive them down the Cariboo Road because of the dangerous route and the scarcity of food. The settlers' only resource was to use the Similkameen-Hope route, but fa l l e n timber had 63 blocked the t r a i l and high water had washed away bridges. It i s evident that the defect lay i n the geographical and economic conditions of the colony, and to ensure the success of the Government's pastoral laws the proposed transcontinen-t a l railway was badly needed. 63 Dewdney to Pearse, December 19, 1871, Lands and Works Department, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. Chapter Seven LAND AS A SOURCE OF PUBLIC REVENUE The main purpose of the pre-emption and pastoral laws was to increase the population of the colony. However, there were other aspects of; the government's land policy the chief aims ^ of which were to raise revenue. As in most young colonies, land scrip was used in place of money to pay for public works. As early as May 1859, Walter Moberl^y suggested that 125 acres should be granted labourers for every mile of road they opened up pro-vided they could reside on the land and clear at least two 1 acres a year. Accordingly the contractors for the Harrison-Lillboet Road were paid 1/10 in money and 9/10 i n land e s t i -mated at the value of 10s. an acre. They were granted 1738 2/5 acres in a l l , valued at £869. 4s. A return prepared by Moody l i s t i n g the amount of land scrip issued from October 1859 to December 1862 revealed that 12,365 acres valued at 2 approximately £4000 had been granted during that period. 1 Moberl^y to Moody, May 28, 1859, Moberley Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 2 Moody to Douglas, December 3, 1859, Lands and Works Dep-artment to the Governor, M.A.B.C. Moody to Douglas, 1862, Return i n Folder 918, M.A.B.C. 14 2 The chief use made of scrip was in payment for road work. This was particularly true in the lower mainland area. Here land scrip paid for the construction of roads i n the P i t t Meadows, Coquitlam and Harrison-Lillooet areas, as 3 well as in the v i c i n i t y of New Westminster. The Contractor who erected the customs house at New Westminster received 556 acres of land as the equivalent of £178. A grant of £300 in scrip was issued to the Municipal Council of New West-4 minster for clearing the streets of the town. Although the weight of the colony's financial bur-den was eased by using land i n place of money, the use of scrip had an unfavourable result on the value of land. In 1860 when land was selling at 10s. an acre, Douglas informed Moody that no more scrip was to be issued. "In one case i n which a tender was sent i n for the execution of a public work, and where part payment was to be made i n land, I found 5 that the value of the land was estimated at 900 per acre." After the price of land was reduced i n 1861, land scrip was once more issued for the construction of roads. Alarmed at the reduction, however, contractors became increasingly re-luctant to accept scrip as payment. Those who lacked capital 3 Douglas to Moody, February 17, 1860, and August 18 1862, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 1 Moody to Douglas, September 4 and 17, and December 6, 1862 Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. 4 w; A."G. Young to Moody, August 15, 1860 and December 7, 1863, Colonial Secretary to Lands and Works Department.MABC. 5 Douglas to Moody, April 10, i860, M.A.B.C. Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 143 had to borrow money at the highest rates of i n t e r e s t . "Scrip i s rejected as security, i t s c o n v e r t i b i l i t y into cash being uncertain. Merchants w i l l not take Scrip i n payment f o r pro-vis i o n s and tools f o r working p a r t i e s — T h e Labourers cannot take Scrip as payment. The Scrip therefore has to be held oftentimes f o r many months, the contractor a l l the while pay-6 ing the high % for the cash he borrowed." Scrip became so d i f f i c u l t to negotiate that the contractors working on the P i t t Meadow Road requested that t h e i r remaining payments be 7 made i n cash at a 20% discount instead of i n s c r i p . The s c r i p became equally obnoxious to the government o f f i c i a l s 8 charged with keeping track of i t . For these reasons when Trutch became Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works land 9 sc r i p was completely discarded. The policy of the government with respect to sur-veyed country land had as i t s chief object the r a i s i n g of revenue. According to Douglas' proclamation of February 14, 1859, surveyed country land was to s e l l at an upset p r i c e of 10s. an acre, payable half i n cash at the time of the sale, and the other half i n two years- A l l surveyed country land was to be offered f i r s t at auction, but any that remained un-10 sold would be available at the upset price of 10s. The 6 Moody to Douglas,August 15 1860and December 7,1863,Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 7 W.A.C-.Young to Moody, May 22 1862, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department,M.A.B.C. 8 Moody to Douglas, May 26 1863. Lands and Works Department to Governor, M.A.B.C. Captain H.L.Luard to Moody, August 16 1861, Luard Correspondence,M.A.B.C. 9 Moberl^y to H.McRoberts, May 30, 1865, Lands and Works Dep-artment Correspondence Outward., M.A.B.C. 10 Proclamation of February 14, 1859. B r i t i s h Columbia Proc-lamations, 1858 - 1864. 14-4 price of such land was reduced to 4s. 2d. by the Country 11 Lands Act of 1861.' The price as stated i n decimal currency 12 by the Land Ordinance of 1870 was $1.00 an acre. The sale of surveyed country land was not a f i n a n -c i a l success. In 1868 Trutch informed the Governor that New Westminster was the only d i s t r i c t on the mainland i n which country land had been sold at auction. In that d i s t r i c t 83,440 acres had been surveyed and offered for sale. Of this area only 6,789 acres had been bought at auction, although an a d d i t i o n a l 21,008 acres, having f a i l e d to s e l l at auction, had been bought outright at the upset pri c e . Since the chief object of the government was to rais e revenue, no l i m i t was placed upon the amount of land sold to each i n d i v i d u a l at the auction sales, nor were any resident requirements imposed. The r e s u l t was that not more than 250 acres of the 27,797 acres sold i n New Westminster had been brought under c u l t i -13 vation, the rest being used f o r pasturage. The f a i l u r e to impose resident requirements upon the buyers of surveyed land brought f o r t h c r i t i c i s m from the B r i t i s h Columbian to the effect that New Westminster had been landlocked by speculators. The following i s an extract from a l e t t e r sent to that newspaper by a s e t t l e r who found 11 B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations. 1861, No. 2. 12 B r i t i s h Columbia . Ordinances,• 1870, No. 18. 13 Trutch to Seymour; August 12, 1868, Lands and Y/orks De-partment to the Governor, M.A.B.C. 14- 5 himself surrounded hy unimproved land. "Here I am on the south side of the Fraser—the solitary s e t t l e r — a l l the avail-able land on.either side of me has been taken up and secured by Deeds from the Crown . . . . I f this land on the bank of the river had been let alone by speculators, I would have had at least g dozen neighbours for the land is too valuable to have remained unoccupied; not a week passes without one or two parties v i s i t i n g this side of the river looking for land to pre-empt, and when they"find out that a l l this wilderness around me is taken up and secured by gentlemen of ease and 14 position, their curses are loud and long . . ." The editor advocated "such conditions of sale as would prevent persons purchasing and holding Crown lands without occupying or im-proving the same . . . . and a tax upon unimproved country 15 lands." Although no wild-land tax was imposed u n t i l afterr Confederation, justification for the B r i t i s h Columbian's objections can be found in Trutch^'s opinion of the same problem. He wrote that: ". . . i t appears very clear that the sale of Crown Lands at Auction i n unlimited extents i s unsuited to the circumstances of this young country: for the e v i l results of this system are strikingly exemplified i n the Districts around Victoria and New Westminster (and more par-ticularly in the' latter) i n which large tracts of land pur-14 Br i t i s h Columbian. October 11, 1862. 15 B r i t i s h Columbian, January 14, 1865. chased at auction for purely speculative purposes remain s t i l l i n the same primitive condition as when they were sold—not a tree felled—.not an acre ploughed u p — t o t a l l y unproductive to the owners—and retarding the general progress of the 16 country." The sale of town lots was another aspect of the government's land policy which had as i t s chief object the raising of revenue. The Proclamation of February 14, 1859, 17 established the policy of selling town lots at auction. The upset price was to be set by the governor according to 18 the value of the site. Previous to this, for the purpose of raising immediate revenue, lots had been leased at Fort 19 Hope and Fort Yale at a monthly rental of 41s. 8d. or $10. Notice was given in November 1858 that this system 20 of leasing was to cease. Considerable confusion was caused, however, by those leases which had already been granted. Begbie reported that the residents of Hope were willing to accept $100 as the price of their lots, but unwilling to pay 21 further rent u n t i l the t i t l e s had been issued to them. The town of Yale was found i n such confusion over disputed lots that Begbie suggested that the whole area should be l a i d out 16 Trutch to Seymour, August 12, 1868, Lands and Works De-partment to the Governor, M.A.B.C. 17 Proclamation of February 14, 1859, British.Columbia Proc-lamations . 1858 - 1864. 18 Douglas to Lytton, February 19, 1859, Cmd. 2578. 19 Douglas to Moody, May 4,.. 1859,. Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. "20 Douglas to R. D. Bryant and R. Hicks, November 27, 1858, Col. Sec. Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 21 Begbie to Douglas, March 18, 1859, Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. 147 again and the bidders allowed the rent they had already paid, for ". . . i f this general confiscation be not made, i t seems probable that a far larger amount of £.s.d. w i l l be shortly expended i n law cases . . . » At Port Douglas similar prob-lems developed owing to the fact that no o f f i c i a l l i s t was 22 kept of those receiving leases. Douglas was highly pleased with the f i r s t sale of Few Westminster town lots which took place i n Victoria on June 1 and 2, 1859, under the terms of the Proclamation of February 14, 1859. "The result has proved most satisfactory as a financial operation and indicates a general confidence in the future of the colony. The actual amount of sales was rather over $89,000 of which a deposit of twenty-five per cent was made on the purchase. The remaining balance to be paid i n three instalments on the f i r s t day of July, August, September next respectively. The average price of the lots sold was nearly $290, $1295 being the highest amount realized 23 for a single l o t . " For the other towns of the colony the following up-set prices were set by the Governor for town lots; Yale, Rich-f i e l d and Quesnelmouth, £60; Boston Bar, $75; Lillooet, $100; 2-2 Nicol to W.A.G.Young, May 28, 1859, Nicol Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 23 Douglas to Lytton, June 6, 1859, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. !4-8 Clinton, $200; Alexandria, $100; B a r k e r v i l l e and Cameron 24 Town, $200. Suburban l o t s , varying i n size from 2§ to 15 acres and marked o f f from r u r a l land by a belt of 5 chains 25 wide, sold at an upset price of £20. In spite of Douglas' enthusiasm over the f i r s t sale of town l o t s at New Westminster, complaints were soon receiv-ed about the high upset prices . C. S. Nicol noticed the f e e l i n g of d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n as early as June 1859 at Port Douglas. "I think i t w i l l be as well f o r the next sale to take place i n V i c t o r i a — t h e people here seem not at a l l i n -c l i n e d to buy now quite a reaction has taken place some 26 months ago they were eager to buy." Prospective buyers were unwilling to pay.the high prices asked because of the uncertain future of the towns i n the colony. A memorial sent by the residents of Clinton to the Governor asked for a 50$ rep_-reduction i n p r i c e . "We beg to/present that the price of 24 Col. Sec. to Nind, November 26, 1860, Col. Sec. Corres-pondence Outward, M.A.B.C. - ~i' Douglas to Moody, May 11, 1863, Col. Sec. to Land and Works Department, M.A.B.C. O'Reilly to Col. S e c , August 3, 1863, O'Reilly Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. Seymour to Trutch, November 27, 1865, Col. Sec. to Land and Works Department, M.A.B.C. Howae to Trutch, October 5, 1866, Folder 947, Lands and Works Department Correspondence, M.A.B.C. Sanders to Trutch, March 5, 1868, Sanders Correspondence, M.A.B.C. Pearse to Sanders, February 10, 1871, Lands and Works Department Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 25 Douglas to Moody, January 10, 1860 and September 28, 1863, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 26 N i c o l to Moody, June 10, 1859, N i c o l Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 149 $200 i s higher than is justified by the future prospects of the Town that more lots would be sold at a lower price and the interests of the Town better promoted and that we have 27 purchased lots solely to avoid the loss of our improvements." O'Reilly observed that the residents at Richfield attempted to boycott the auction sales. He reported that: " . . . owing to a combination entered into by some of the house-holders (the object of which was an endeavour to frustrate the sale, and to retain possession of the lots, by paying the usual Rental of 10s. per month) not more than half the amount 28 I had calculated on was realized. . ." The government was forced to respond to these com-plaints, unwilling to encourage leasing of lots which had created such confusion, Trutch ordered that the buyers of 29 town lots should not be pressed for their instalments. In addition notice was given to reduce the price of town lots at .30 Clinton from $200 to $100. The need for money did not blind the government to the dangers of selling town lots by auction and sincere ef-forts were made to prevent speculation. The District Magis-trates, auctioneers or any person connected with the conduct 31 of the auction sales were not allowed to buy lots. Lots 27 A.C.Elliott To Col. Sec, October 27, 1863, E l l i o t t Cor-respondence, M.A.B.C. 23 O'Reilly to Col. Sec, September 1, 1863, O'Reilly Corres-pondence, M.A.B.C. 29 Trutch to Cox, May 7, 1867, Lands and Works Department Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 30 Pearse to Sanders, February 10, 1871, Lands and Works Detriment Depatrnt* Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 31 W.A.G.Young to Moody, May 11, 1863, M.A.B.C. -±6-\5o of l i t t l e commercial value i n New Westminster were made available to the "Heads of Departments and to th e i r p r i n c i p a l assistants" at the upset price "to prevent thoisj© Gentlemen lBeing obliged to go into the market to bid against specula-tors f o r the purpose of obtaining a- s i t e f o r a residence, which i n the circumstances of the Country i t was indispehs-32 s i b l e they should procure. . ." These precautions therefore l i m i t e d public c r i t i -c cism ghiefly to the government's methods of s e l l i n g suburban l o t s . The B r i t i s h Columbian objected to the large area sur-rounding New Westminster which had been marked o f f into sub-urban l o t s with no conditions of settlement attached to th e i r 3 3 . sale. "Let the farmer come close to the town. The pros-pect of his land becoming valuable w i l l prompt him to carry 34 on his improvements with energy." I t i s d i f f i c u l t to give accurate figures showing the amount of money that the government raised by the sale of town l o t s , since the figures i n the Blue Books do not d i s -t i n g u i s h between revenue from town and country land. I t i s safe to say, however, that the amounts became increasingly disappointing i n comparison with those obtained at the f i r s t sale, of l o t s i n New Westminster. At that sale over $89,000 had b'een raised. In 1860 the t o t a l revenue from land was " 32 W.A.G.Young- to Moody, March 19, 1860, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, •M.A.B.C. 33 B r i t i s h Columbian. August- 1-5,- 1861. 34 B r i t i s h Columbian. September 5, 1861. -I 5*J 35 approximately £11,000. The estimated revenue from town 36 l o t s f o r 1866 dropped to £1500" and f o r 1867 was only $700. The policy of using land as a source of revenue created the problem of Government Reserves." The Proclamation of February 14, 1859, stated that one-quarter of the l o t s i n Ne?/ Westminster were to be reserved f o r purchase i n the United 37 Kingdom and the B r i t i s h Colonies. De Cosmos, the editor of the B r i t i s h Colonist, at once lashed out. "Advertise abroad i f you think i t w i l l bring immigrants to the country, but s e l l here. We want no absentee landlords to draw money out 38 of the country, and spend i t abroad." Because the same c r i t i c i s m was expressed by Lytton, the reservation was with-39 drawn. Before town l o t s could be sold, town s i t e s had to be chosen and marked as government reserves. S e t t l e r s com-plained that the government reserved much more land than was necessary. In 1859 when Douglas was s t i l l hoping that sur-veyed country land would be sold at auction throughout the colony, magistrates were advised to reserve a l l country land 40 immediately beyond the suburban-lots. The delay i n marking out these reserves was an inconvenience to s e t t l e r s since i t 41 caused confusion as to what land was open f o r pre-emption. 35 Blue Book of I860. 36 Trutch to Col. S e c , November 27, 1865 and January 23, 1867, Lands and Works Department to the Government, M.A.B.C. 37 Proclamation of February 14, 1859, B r i t i s h Columbia Pro-clamations . 1858 - 1864. 38 B r i t i s h Colonist. February 19, 1859. 39 Lytton to Douglas, May 7, 1859, Cmd. 2578. 40 Douglas, -Circular Letter to the Magistrates, October 1, 1859, Col. S e c Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 41 Douglas to Moody, A p r i l 10, 1860, Col. S e c to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. ^8-Begbie complained that at Cayoosh an i n d e f i n i t e space of two miles on each side of the Fraser was rumoured to be reserved for a town while s e t t l e r s anxious to pre-empt land there, but unable because of the vagueness of the area, paid 6d. each for potatoes. At Douglas the whole f l a t of over 1000 acres, including nearly a l l the arable land, was reserved f o r a town-site, whereas Begbie estimated that 40 to 50 acres would be s u f f i c i e n t . He maintained that the number of l o t s already sold and l a i d out i n New Westminster was almost double the inhabited area of "Victoria and would therefore 42 be l e f t unoccupied for many years. The newspapers echoed Begbie's c r i t i c i s m s . The Cariboo Sentinel complained of the extensive reserves annou-Xced weekly i n the Government Gazette and urged o f f i c i a l s to 43 look to s e t t l e r s and not to high priced lands f o r revenue." The B r i t i s h Columbian described the p l i g h t of s e t t l e r s look-ing f o r pre-emption s i t e s i n the v i c i n i t y of New Westminster. "Let f i v e or six men desirous of s e t t l i n g conceive that any part of the country would s u i t them, and down goes Reserva-t i o n on that spot as quickly as i f somebody stood over the map with a s t e n c i l , plate and brush ready f o r such contingen-44 c i e s . " As one solution Begbie suggested that the l i m i t of 42 Begbie to Douglas, A p r i l 11, 1860, Begbie to Col.. Sec. M.A.B.C. 43 Cariboo Sentinel. August 25, 1869. . 44 B r i t i s h Columbian. March 6., 1862. -±3-such reservations could be established by defining town s i t e s as including " a l l the land within Car. radius of one-hal f mile from a fi x e d post ( f i x i n g the post at once) and suburban lands a l l beyond that distance and within a radius 45 of one mile from such post." No such d e f i n i t e l i m i t a t i o n i n size was set'upon the reserves, but the magistrates were directed to mark out the boundaries by corner and intermedi-ate posts,.and to n o t i f y s e t t l e r s that the reserves were not to be encroached upon, without discouraging them from s e t t l -46 ing i n the neighbourhood. In areas where the government's hopes fo r revenue had been too optimistic the reserve signs were gradually re-47 moved and the land thrown open f o r pre-emption. Yet this"' was not accomplished without charges of corruption. A l e t -ter appearing i n the B r i t i s h Columbian charged that govern-ment favourites were receiving notice of the removal before -the public d i d . The writer demanded ". . . that a l l reserved lands, be duly advertised: that on any reserves being withr-drawn, the public be duly appraised of the same: thus preveht-48 ing secret, jobbery." A memorial to the Duke of Newcastle from delegates representing Hope, Douglas and New Westminster 45 Begbie to Douglas, A p r i l 30, 1860, Begbie to Col. Sec. M.A.B.C. 46 Douglas to Moody, Mar. 4, 1862, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 47 Moody to Douglas, July 5, 1860, Lands and Works Depart-ment to.the Governor, M.A.B.C. 48 B r i t i s h Columbian. March 28, 1861. 154-charged that ". . . lands have been declared public reserves, which have been afterwards claimed by parties connected with 49 the Colonial Government." Douglas considered the charges as 50 being without foundation and accepted Moody's explanation that the notices of withdrawal were announced at auction sales 51 and also published in the,, .Government Gazette. To solve i t s military problems the government hoped to use land as a means of providing a system of cheap defence. The fear of American aggression i s reflected in the military, reserves at strategic points along the boundary. The Justice of the Peace at New Westminster, was instructed to reserve "the whole of the opposite side of the river extending from two miles above the junction of the P i t t River with the Fraser to six miles below the city and a l l across to the fron-t i e r . The above is on account of Military considerations of 52 of grave importance." On the recommendation of Lieutenant Palmer additional military sites were reserved in the Similk-53 ameen Valley. In order to create additional revenue, Moody was instructed to lease the military reserves opposite New 54 Westminster at low rents and subject to military resumption. 49 Douglas to Newcastle, April 22, 1861, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 50 Ibid. 51 Moody to Douglas, July 5, 1860 and April 1, 1861, Lands and Works Department to the Governor, M.A.B.C. 52 Moody to Spayd.ding, January 20, 1860, Lands and Works Department Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 53 Palmer to Moody, November 23, 1859, Palmer Correspondence, M.A.B.C. Moody to O'Reilly, September 21, 1860, Lands and Works Department, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 54 W.A.G.Young to Moody February 17, 1860, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. -15-1^5 Complementary to the system of military reserves was the government's policy of attracting military settlers. Non-commissioned officers and men of the Royal Engineers were to receive grants not exceeding thirty acres after six years of service in Br i t i s h Columbia on condition that they-reside on the land and be available for military service i f called upon. It was suggested by Lord Carnarvon that the men should 55 be located at strategic points along the frontier. At Douglas* request a copy of the usual regulations granting remissions on the purchase price of land to officers of the army and navy were forwarded by Lytton. The Colonial Secretary doubted the success of such a scheme, but agreed with Douglas that, i f successful, the effect would be "to introduce a superior and a very loyal and attached class of settler and that . . . could not f a i l to be especially bene-56 f l c i a l in Br i t i s h Columbia." The regulations were embodied in a proclamation issued by Douglas March 18, 1861. Military and naval officers who had lived i n the colony for two years y/ould receive a location ticket allowing them remissions on the purchase price of their lands. The amounts allowed were 55 Carnarvon to Moody enclosed i n Lytton to Douglas, Septem-ber 2, 1858, Despatched from Downing Street, M.A.B.C. • 56 Lytton to Douglas, March 19, 1859^ Despatches from Down-ing Street, M.A.B.C. -16-I5& based upon the rank and length of service of the o f f i c e r s 57 as follows: F i e l d O f f i c e r s of 25 years' service £600 F i e l d O f f i c e r s of 20 years* service £500 F i e l d O f f i c e r s of 15 years' service £400 Captains of 20 years' service and upwards £500 Captains of 15 years' service and less £300 Subalterns of 20 years' service and upwards £300 Subalterns of 7 years' service and upwards £200 Circumstances within the colony caused the M i l i t a r y and Naval Settlers Act to be passed i n 1863 r e v i s i n g the system of remissions on the price of land. Since the o r i g i n -a l sums had been calculated on the assumption that the price of land would remain at £1 an acre, a change was necessary when i t f e l l to 4s. 2d. Thus, i n order to r e s t r i c t the acreage of m i l i t a r y grants, the new act provided f o r free grants i n place of cash c r e d i t s . A F i e l d o f f i c e r of 25 years' service or more, instead of receiving a remission of £600 would receive a free grant of s i x hundred acres. The acreage for the lesser o f f i c e r s was worked out according to t h e i r length of service i n the same r a t i o as i n the previous 58 act. Residence requirements were made more s p e c i f i c i n the new ordinance. Although few o f f i c e r s had taken advantage of the l e g i s l a t i o n , those who had had l e f t t h e i r lands unim-proved and had created the impression that they were being 59 held f o r p r o f i t a b l e resale. De/Cosmos had l a b e l l e d the 57 Remission of Purchase Money to M i l i t a r y and Naval Set-t l e r s , B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations.^1861. No. 3. 58 B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations. 1863, No. 2. 59 Douglas to Newcastle, May 15, 1863, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. •±¥-15/ o r i g i n a l act a piece of class legislation which allowed a fetired officer to "smoke his cigars, drink his brandy and water, eat his fine dinners, and never turn a furrow nor cut down a tree, nor set foot for two years on his free grant; and at the end of that period receive an absolute fee simple 60 t i t l e . . . " By the new act the officer was required to re-side on the land he selected for two years before receiving the t i t l e . He was also limited in his choice to unsurveyed country land. With these restrictions imposed, the act of-fered l i t t l e more than the pre-emption laws, a fact which caused Douglas to remark that i t could be l e f t off the stat-61 ute books without detriment to the colony. To ease these restrictions the Naval and Military Settlers Relief Ordinance, 1864 exempted officers who had re-signed from the services before August 31, 1863, thereby 62 allowing them to receive cash credit and a larger grant. To encourage non-commissioned officers the thirty acres, originally valued at £30, to which they were entitled, was 63 enlarged to 150 acres after the f a l l in price of land. This r e l i e f was necessitated by the disappointing response of the Royal Engineers as described by the Colonial Secretary. He wrote that ". . . a t the time the Detachment was broken 60 Br i t i s h Colonist. March 26, 1861. 61 W.A.G.Young to Moody, March 9, 1863, Col. Sec. to Landsand Works Department, M.A.B.C. 62 B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations. 1864, No. 15. 63 A. N. Birch to Trutch, April. 6, 1867, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. -18-158 up . . . a paper was handed to the men to which a l l those who wished to a v a i l themselves of the promise made by S i r E. B. Lytton were desired to sign t h e i r names. Out of the 100 men who selected to take t h e i r discharge only one was found w i l l i n g to undertake the obligations he would incur i n accepting the Free Grant . . . I t i s I consider very improb-able, that men who are making from $3 to $8 a day could be w i l l i n g to accept so small a grant as 30 acres on the terms sp e c i f i e d i n a colony where the a c q u i s i t i o n of land under the 64 pre-emption law i s so easy and inexpensive." The r e s u l t of the system of m i l i t a r y grants was disappointing c h i e f l y because of the competition from the pre-emption laws. The enlarged grants to the non-commissioned o f f i c e r s were e f f e c t i v e to a certa i n extent since by 1869 65 f i f t y of them has been made i n the New Westminster d i s t r i c t . The s i t u a t i o n with respect to the o f f i c e r s ' grants was equal-l y discouraging. In 1870 when a c i r c u l a r despatch arrived from London warning that specified improvements were to be required of o f f i c e r s who desired t i t l e to t h e i r land, Musgrave could only reply that stipulated improvements could hardly be expected since what was offered was so l i t t l e compared with 66 the pre-emption p r i v i l e g e s . Although the government found i t d i f f i c u l t to raise 64 B i r c h to Cardwell, October 2, 1865, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. 65 B a l l to Trutch, November 9, 1869, Col. Sec. to Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 66 Musgrave to Kimberley, August 25, 1870, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. -±9-159 money by the sale of land, special l e g i s l a t i o n had to be passed to prevent companies from attempting to do so. Because land companies had attempted to pre-empt land which they proposed to hold f o r sale at a l a t e r date, the Pre-emp-ti o n Ordinance of 1866 was passed at the advice of the 67 Attorney General. Thereafter companies of a l l d e s c r i p t i o n were prohibited from pre-empting land without s p e c i a l per-68 mission from the Governor. Throughout the c o l o n i a l period there was general d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n because the government i t s e l f f a i l e d to use land grants, since i t lacked revenue, to a s s i s t immigration. That Douglas c e r t a i n l y hoped f o r immigrants i s evident i n his optimistic assurance to Newcastle that H.a natural road exists leading to the Red River settlement by the Coutehnais pass through the Rocky Mountains and from thence following the v a l l e y of the Saskatchewan c h i e f l y over an open P r a i r i e Country—a settlement may then take his departure from Red River i n Spring with his c a t t l e and stock and reach B r i t i s h 69 Columbia by that road i n course of the Autumn following." I t was hoped that the pre-emption laws were s u f f i c i e n t l y l i b e r a l to a t t r a c t a considerable number of immigrants. j. . 67 Crease to Col. S e c , A p r i l 21, 1866, Attorney General Correspondence Outward, M.A.E.Ci 68 Pre-emption Ordinance, 1866, B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1866, No. 13. 69 Douglas to Newcastle, Ocpobdi; 18^(3.859, Despatches to Downing Street, M.A.B.C. '• "There i s no douht that the f a c i l i t i e s and inducements now held out to s e t t l e r s i n thi s colony by the pre-emption law and other enactments might enable thousands of the destitute of B r i t a i n , by a few years of steady industry to secure f o r themselves happy homes and a comfortable independence for 70 l i f e . " The B r i t i s h Columbian was convinced that a system of free grants alone would be s u f f i c i e n t to a t t r a c t s e t t l e r s . 71 Regular e d i t o r i a l s such as the following appeared i n that newspaper: " I t i s said we cannot afford to extend any monied assistance to bring emigrants out. I f we cannot help to pay th e i r passage to the Colony l e t us seek at l e a s t to a t t r a c t 72 them to i t by of f e r i n g free grants of land." Judging, how-ever, by the small number of s e t t l e r s that immigration com-panies would undertake to bring to the colony, something more than free land was needed. Transportation costs were too high. I t was not u n t i l a f t e r confederation, and the promise of a r a i l r o a d , that free grants were offered by the government to immigrants. In answer to a l e t t e r inquiring what assistance the government would give to immigrants from the B r i t i s h I s l e s , Moody sent a copy of the pre-emption act and the f o l -lowing advice to prospective s e t t l e r s . I f they wished to 70 Crease to Col. S e c , A p r i l 21, 1866, Attorney General Correspondence. Outward, M.A.B.C. 71 B r i t i s h Columbian, January 2, 1862, May 4, August 27 and September 7, 1861, March 27 and A p r i l 23, 1869. 72 Ibid.. June 19, 1869. buy surveyed land, they should Inquire at the Lands and Works Office i n New Westminster. To f i n d out what land was availab l e for pre-emption "the evidence of his own senses and honest inq u i r i e s on the ground from the Indians, or from the Set t l e r s i n occupation w i l l be quite s u f f i c i e n t , to guide him 73 from trespass . . . " As fo r f i n a n c i a l assistance the only encouragement given was that land s c r i p might be issued to 74 immigrants i n return for work they might do on branch roads. The government interviewed several agents i n t e r e s t -ed i n bringing immigrants to B r i t i s h Columbia but found t h e i r demands f a r beyond the resources of the colony. One proposed company would agree to bring i n only one hundred s e t t l e r s within f i v e years on the following terms: one m i l l i o n acres of land was to be selected by the company and paid f o r at the rate of 2d. an acre within two years after the date of selection; the selected land was to be sold to B r i t i s h sub-jects at an upset price of 4s. an acre; the company was to be w i l l i n g to loan up to one m i l l i o n d o l l a r s within f i v e years to the government, security being the customs and t o l l of the colony. Both Moody and Douglas agreed ". . . that there i s nothing whatever to shew . . . . a large population would a r r i v e , would remain and would occupy the land eto the.-perma-73 Moody to W. Cormack, May 11, 1862, Lands, and Works De- . partment Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. 74 Moody to W. Cormack, May 11,. 1862, Lands and Works De-partment Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. - T I P 75 nent advantage of themselves and the Colony." Another proposed concern was w i l l i n g to send out 400 fam i l i e s i n return f o r 50,000 acres of land of which 40,000 acres were to he given to the s e t t l e r s i n allotments of 400 acres, the remaining 10,000 acres to be a free grant to the company. The government of B r i t i s h Columbia was to pay the t r a v e l l i n g expenses of the colonists and f u r n i s h them with tools and seed. I t was suggested that i t could meet • 76 these expenses by s e l l i n g £100,000 worth, of bonds. Had i t not been f o r the remoteness of the colony, the o f f e r of free land would have relieved the government of any f i n a n c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y regarding immigration. Yet since the govern-ment was unable to give the necessary f i n a n c i a l assistance, land as a natural resource was of l i t t l e value as a stimulus to immigration. The table on the following page shows that the revenue from land was i n s i g n i f i c a n t compared with that receiv-77 ed from custom duties and road t o l l s . I t was even i n s u f f i -cient to cover the c i v i l l i s t approved by the council i n 1864, which guaranteed s a l a r i e s t o t a l l i n g £8700 to the nine 78 chief o f f i c i a l s . In the year 1870, land revenue contributed only a l i t t l e more than one-fortieth of the t o t a l revenue of the colony. 75 Moody to Douglas, June 9, 1863, Lands and Works Depart-ment to the Governor, M.A.B.C. Col. Sec. to Moody, June 76 19, 1863, Col. Sec. to the Lands and Works Department, M.A.B.C. 76 Trutch to Musgrave, November 1, 1870, Lands and Works Department to the Governor, M.A.B.C. 1865 to 77 Blue Books f o r the years 1859 to 1862 and / I§7^ J~i n ci Usive. 78 Crown O f f i c e r s ' Salaries Act, B r i t i s h Columbia Proclama-tions. 1863, No. 12. A Comparative Statement of the Amounts Received from Lands, Road Tolls and Custom Duties. Figures obtained from the annual Blue Books of the Colony. The} Blue Book for 1865 i s missing. Shillings and pence are omitted) Year Revenue from Land Revenue from Revenue from Total Revenue (Including amounts Custom Duties Road Tolls of the Colony received from the sale of land, fees & rents.) 1858 & 1859 1860 1861 1862 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 £19>512 £11,156 £ 6,489 £ 6,254 £ 4,418 £ 2,106 $10,059.55 $ 7,162.16 $11,718.43 $ 6,017.20 $12,883.18 £18,308 £29,829 £32,950 £49,356 £47,627 £73,109 $224,239.61 $258,354.27 $369,447.45 $344,577.34 $314,028.18 £589 £6,296 £11,368 £25,416 £17,098 $79,579.44 $59,522.86 $67,802.94 $47,512.14 $39,553.12 £47,125 £53,526 £58,595 £88,598 £104,099 £116,106 $454,799.49 $462,894.76 $583,945.00 $530,474.20 $494,550.34 Chapter Eight The Effects of Confederation upon the Land Settlement Policy of British Columbia, 1871 - 1874 The most important feature of Br i t i s h Columbia's land-settlement policy before 1871 was the pre-emption sys-tem, copied from the United States and reluctantly allowed by Great Britain because the colony needed settlers. Free home-steadsrdid not become part of the colony's land policy for two reasons: the reluctance of Great Britain to sanction such a policy and the lack of surveyed land. After 1871 the government of B r i t i s h Columbia approached i t s land-settlement policy with renewed interest. Confederation and the promise of a railway diverted i t s point of view from the land policy of the United States to that of the Canadian Government. The Dominion Government's objec-tive i n administering Manitoba's public lands was similar to that of the government of B r i t i s h Columbia—to obtain settlers at the expense of revenue from the land. Its land policy therefore had considerable influence upon that of B r i t i s h Columbia. For a period of two years the land policy of B r i t i s h Columbia was limited by the Terms of Union with Canada. Article eleven of the Terms of Union, which obliged the province to convey to the Dominion Government a belt of land not more than twenty miles wide on either side of the proposed railway, restricted the province to i t s pre-emption system in dealing with the public lands. It read i n part as follows: "....until the commencement within two years...from the date of the Union, of the construction of the said r a i l -way, the Government of British Columbia shall not s e l l or alienate any further portions of the public lands of Bri t i s h Columbia in any other way than under right of pre-emption, requiring actual residence of the preemptor on the land 1 claimed by him." Any change i n the method of disposing of the public lands had thus to be delayed u n t i l July 20, 1873. One amendment which the government was anxious to introduce was a system of free grants. In his opening speech to the Legislature i n February 1872, the Lieutenant-Governor, J. W. Trutch, regretted that "the 11th Section of the Terms of Union with Canada tends to delay the introduction of a system of Free Grants of Land, the adoption of which seems advisable in entering into competition for population as we 2 do with other countries on the Continent." The Land O r d i -nance, 1870, contained a provision allowing the Governor i n Council to make free grants but his power to do so was \ / Address of the Legislative Council of Bri t i s h Columbia to Her Majesty i n Council, B r i t i s h North America Acts and Selected Statutes. Ottawa, King's Printer, 1943, / pp. 163 - 164. 2/ Journals of the Legislative Assembly of B r i t i s h Columbia, , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - 5 -lloto automatically revoked by the 11th A r t i c l e of the Terms of Union. Although a change was thus precluded for two years, the British Colonist followed closely the Dominion Govern-ment's land policy during that period. A Dominion Order in Council of March 1, 1871 made provision for free homesteads of 160 acres in Manitoba upon payment of $10. Settlers were required to l i v e on the land for five years before receiving 3 t i t l e to their land. In the same month an editorial i n the Br i t i s h Colonist urged the adoption of a similar policy i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The editor asked: "... does not the prop-osition to give a free homestead to every settler i n Manitoba f i t l y suggest the duty of the early adoption of a similar policy in this colony? Shall we be less l i b e r a l and progres-sive in dealing with the almost boundless acres to be l e f t 4 at the disposal of the local Government?" The following month the same paper publicized the homestead system of the Province of Ontario, under which a married man received a free grant of 200 acres, and a single person at the age of eighteen 100 acres. "The settler i s required to clear and crop at least 15 acres on each 100 acres and to build habitable houses not less than 16 x 20 feet in size, and to reside on the-land at least six months 3/ Morton, A. S. and Martin,C., History of Prairie Settle-ment and "Dominion Lands" Policy. Toronto, Macmillan Co., 1938, p. 395. 4/ British Colonist. March 30, 1871. i n each year. Having complied with these certainly not arbi-trary conditions he i s entitled at the expiration of five 5 years to receive his Crown deed." Influenced by the adoption of free grants in Ontario and Manitoba, the Executive Council of B r i t i s h Columbia re- 1 a. quested the Dominion Government to modify A r t i c l e eleven of the Terms of Union so as to allow the province to make free grants in certain areas. The request was refused and B r i t i s h Columbia therefore had to wait u n t i l the two-year period had 6 expired. In the meantime the f i r s t Dominion Lands Act was passed in 1872, embodying in a statute the free-homestead system and reducing the residence requirements from five to 7 three years. In the following year, B r i t i s h Columbia pas-sed the Land Ordinance Amendment Act authorizing the LieuX-tenant-Governor in Council to set aside lands for free grants in the Province. Although assented to i n February 1873, the Act was not to become effective u n t i l July 21, 1873, in accordance with the Terms of Union. By the new Act,the system of free grants was super-imposed upon the pre-emption system as provided for in-the main .Act, the Land Ordinance of 1870. Settlers could either pre-empt unsurveyed land and pay for i t at the rate of $1 an 5/ B r i t i s h Colonist. April 21. 1871. 6/" Joseph Howe to Trutch', November 29, 1872 and February 14, 1873, Despatches from Ottawa, M.A.B.C. 7/ Morten and Martin, O P . c i t . . p. 396. lto8 acre, when surveyed, or be located for a free grant on land so appropriated by the government. As in the Dominion Act, settlers had to l i v e for three years on their lands before receiving the t i t l e . The settlement duties were the same as those required i n Ontario. They were as follows: ".- . . the locatee . . . shall have cleared and have under cultivation at least twenty acres of the said land, whereof at least five acres shall be cleared and cultivated annually during the three years next after the date of location, . . . and have built a house thereon f i t for habitation, at least 16 x 20 feet . . . and . . . absence from the said land for in a l l not more than six months during any one year . . . shall not 8 be held to be a cessation of such residence." An Order in Council issued on July 25, 1873 set forth the areas i n which free grants might be Ideated. East of the Cascade Range a settler might have up to 240 acres, while in the New Westminster Dis t r i c t the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works was authorized to set apart two townships 9 in which settlers could receive free grants of 160 acres. Regulations were printed in September confining the settler to either a pre-emption claim or a free grant, and reiterat-ing the settlement duties as stated in the Land Ordinance Amendment Act. Although the land act had stated that settlers By 36 V i c , C. 1 (British Columbia.) 9/ Order in Council, July 25, 1873, Land Laws of B r i t i s h  Columbiaf 1873. 14,9 would receive not more than 250 acres, the maximum was reduc-ed to 240 acres so as to conform with the system of survey 10 adopted in 1873. The free-grant system alone was not the solution to B r i t i s h Columbia's problems. By the end of August 1873 not one application had been made for a free grant. Settlers had inquired in the New Westminster Di s t r i c t , but were wait-ing u n t i l the surveys of the two townships had been completed. No enthusiasm could be aroused for free grants in the unsur-11 veyed land east of the Cascades. As was the case before Confederation, land-settlement policy was hampered by the lack of surveyed land. Nevertheless, the surveys carried out by the Do;_-minion Government served as a model to B r i t i s h Columbia. "A glance abroad may help to sharpen public perception. It i s not yet two years since Manitoba was "unblanketed" and con-stituted a Province of the Dominion of Canada. There are no fewer than f i f t y Government surveying parties out i n Manitoba this season, and i t i s confidently expected that by the close of the summer they w i l l have no less than 100 townships lai d out and completely surveyed, i n a l l or nearly a l l of which the intending settler may select and take possession of a free homestead . . . . British Columbia has been an organized 10/ Regulations Respecting the Acquisition of Free Grants, September-5, 1873, Land Laws of British Columbia. 1873. 11/ Victoria Daily Standard. August 30, 1873, (hereafter referred to as the Daily Standard). J70 colony of the Br i t i s h Empire for over fifteen years and yet there i s not a single township l a i d out: There i s not a base line run—nothing in fact to guide the immigrant i n his 12 search for land." The situation in B r i t i s h Columbia was not quite as bad as that pictured by the B r i t i s h Colonist. A beginning had been made during the colonial period, but as previously related financial problems had curtailed surveying. In 1859 about 41,000 acres of delta land at the mouth of the Fraser River had been laid out i n sections of 160 acres. A further 30,000 acres lying between the Fraser and Burrard Inlet had been divided into sections of irregular size varying in area from f i f t y to five hundred acres. The remaining work during the colonial period had been concerned with surveying isqX-13 lated pre-emption claims and pastoral leases. The method of surveying to be used by the Dominion Government in Manitoba was announced in an Order in Council 14 of April 25, 1871. Dominion lands were to be divided into square townships of 36 sections, each section to contain 640 acres, as i n the United States. The main deviation from the American method was the fact that on Dominion lands a road allowance of 99 feet was to be l e f t between each section 15 and the next one. 12/ Br i t i s h Colonist. May 23, 1872. 13V Journals and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. ' 1873-74, p. 54. 14/ Morton and Martin, op. c i t . . p. 234. 15/ Morton and Martin, op. c i t . . p. 232. 171 In 1873 B r i t i s h Columbia decided to follow the Dominion Government's model. "The system of surveying adop^-ted this season [l873] has been as nearly as circumstances would permit, similar to that in use in the Dominion, in the Province of Manitoba, and also by the Government of the 16 United States on this coast..." In Bri t i s h Columbia no provision was made for a road allowance between sections, the Chief Commissioner being authorized to take land up to ^ c t / 17 j>6- feet i n width for road purposes. The ranges of town-ships were run east and west of the Coast Meridian. As was - t W t t l - S L * the case in Manitoba, the .156- sections of each township were numbered from a base line beginning at the lower right-hand corner of the township instead of from the north-east corner as in the United States. On July 21, 1873, no longer hampered by the Terms of Union, the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works instru-cted two of his surveyors to run the exterior lines of town-, ships i n the New Westminster District and ten days later the subdivision of Township No. 1 was begun. By the end of the season $10,000 had been spent on running the exterior lines jtt*. 18 of 1& townships and subdividing two of them. In 1874 approximately $33,000 was spent on survey-1 6 J o u r n a l s and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. : ' 1873-74, p. 55. 17, / Land Act, 1874, 36 V i c , c 2 (British Columbia). 18. - Journals and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1873-74, p. 55. m ing, and the work was therefore more extensive than that of the previous year. The subdivision of townships in the New Westminster District continued, and the exterior lines of eight new townships were run. Work was also begun i n the Interior. Pre-emption claims in the Nicola Valley were adjusted. A portion of three townships in the Okanagan Val-ley was surveyed along with fourteen f u l l sections in the 19 Lillooet D i s t r i c t . By the end of 1875 the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works was proud to announce that not only had the pre-emption claims of settlers who had recorded lands fifteen years ago been satisfactorily adjusted, in the principal centres of settlement, but that the Government also had a large extent of surveyed land available for incoming settlers. For information the settler had only to inspect the maps in the Land Office on which the nature of the land was described in d e t a i l . During the year $33,600 had been spent on sur-veys. Subdivision of townships had continued and pre-emption claims had been adjusted i n Sumas and Chilliwack. In the Interior pre-emption claims had been surveyed in the Kamloops and, Osoyoos areas as well as three more sections in the 20 Lillooet area. 19/ Journals and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1875, pp. 444 - 446 and p. 475. 20./ Sessional Papers of Br i t i s h Columbia, 1876, pp. 531 -533 and p. 594. -iQ-J73 With surveyed land now available, the government was able to match more closely the land policy of the Dqflf-minion Government. Complaints were made that the land laws of the province were too complicated and not l i b e r a l enough, since pre-emptors had to pay for their land after survey. It was also f e l t that free grants should not be restricted to certain areas. Upon moving the second reading of the Land Amendment B i l l in January 1874, one of the Assembly members argued that pre-emptors after obtaining their Cert-i f i c a t e of Improvement should receive a Crown Grant with no charge for the land. The British Colonist reported his opinion thus: "So far as the exchequer of the Province was concerned i t would make very l i t t l e difference, but to the hardworking settlers the free grant would be a great boon. If the Province was ever to be settled i t must be by a free 21 grant system." The question was thereupon referred to a Select Committee. The result of the deliberations of the Select Committee was the Land Act of 1874 which repealed a l l pre-vious land ordinances. Settlers could now obtain a free grant of surveyed or unsurveyed land anywhere in the Province. A settler choosing surveyed land could pre-empt, a maximum of 160 acres elsewhere i n the Province. Upon payment of $2, the C R pre-emptor received a Certificate of r"ecord and became known as a "homestead settler." To receive a Crown Grant for his 21/ B r i t i s h Colonist. January 7. 18747" r. land the "homestead settler" was required to l i v e for two years on i t , and to qualify for a Certificate of Improvement which signified that he had made improvements to the extent of. $2.50 an acre. The total cost to the pre-emptor was thus $7, $2 for the Certificate of Record and $5 for the Crown Grant, no charge being made for the land. A settler choos-ing unsurveyed land could record a maximum of 320 acres east and north of the Cascades or a maximum of 160 acres elsewhere in the Province. Upon payment of $2 a Certificate of Record was issued to him and he became known as a "settler." The "settler" could, i f he so wished, have his land surveyed at his own expense. Upon depositing the map of his surveyed ; : land with the Land and Works Department he became known as a "homestead settler." To receive t i t l e for his land he then had to f u l f i l l the same conditions as the "homestead settler" 22 who originally had occupied surveyed land. Although the word "pre-emption" was s t i l l used in the Act, i t no longer had the same significance as i t had had in the colonial period. At that time the right of pre-emption involved the privilege of settling upon unsurveyed land and paying for i t when surveyed at the upset price without com-peting at auction. In the new Act pre-emption simply meant the right to a free homestead upon surveyed land. The effective operation of the Act was postponed 22,/36 V i c , c 2 (British Columbia) 4 7 5 owing to misunderstanding between the Federal Government and that of Br i t i s h Columbia concerning Indian affairs and- the railway lands. The Land Act of 1874 was assented to by the Lieutenant-Governor on March 2, 1874, but disallowed by the 23 Governor General on March 16, 1875. A report by the Min-ister of Justice,, sent to the Provincial Government in Jan-uary .1875, had explained why the Act was l i k e l y to be d i s a l -lowed. No land for the Indians had been reserved by the Land 24 Act of 1874., nor had the railway lands been mentioned; consequently the Act was repealed and replaced by the Land 25 Act of 1875 which was not disallowed by Ottawa. The latter made no change i n the land-settlement policy of the province, since the Act was simply a transcript of the previous one ex-cept that the provincial government was given power to lay aside lands for railway purposes and f u l l e r authority as to Indian, reserves. The main object of Brit i s h Columbia's land-settle-ment policy in,the years immediately following Confederation was to acquire settlers. Free homesteads were therefore the chief feature of the Province's land laws, whereas the rais -ing, of revenue was merely incidental. The Terms of Union prevented the sale of land for 23/ E. J. Langevin to Trutch, March 18, 1875, Despatches from Ottawa, M.A.B.C. 24/ Report of the Minister of Justice enclosed i n Langevin to Trutch, January 29, 1875, Despatches from Ottawa, M.A.B.C. 25.^ R. W..Scott to Trutch, May 11, 1876, Despatches from Ottawa, M.A.B.C. ~±5~ .76 two years. After July 21, 1873, however, auction sales could once more take place and were provided for by the Land Ordi-nance Amendment Act of 1873, which set the upset price of un-occupied land at $1 an acre, with the added proviso that the Lieutenant-Governor in Council could s e l l such land at auc-26 tion at the upset price of not less than $1 when so desired. The f i r s t sale of surveyed land took place on September 30, 1873, at Victoria, when 37,000 acres of land situated in the New Westminster Di s t r i c t were offered at the upset price of $1 an acre. Upon hearing of the proposed sale the Br i t i s h  Colonist charged the government with encouraging speculation. "Instead . . . of holding the sale i n the most important Di s t r i c t in which the land i s situated, i t i s to be held on Vancouver Island, where the settlers must go at an expense in time and money . . . They must come a l l the way here tq com-pete with outside speculators, or else they must be absent and allow the bits of land they so much need and to which, through their industry, they have, so to speak, acquired a 27 moral t i t l e , to f a l l into the hands of absentee speculators J3 The reason for offering the land for sale was to allow aliens to acquire land. Under the existing laws they were barred from pre-empting or receiving a free grant u n t i l 28 they had sworn to become Brit i s h subjects. The B r i t i s h 26/ 36 Vic. c. 1 (British Columbia). 27/ B r i t i s h Colonist, August 13, 1873. 28/ Daily Standard. August 5, 1873. -±4* \77 Colonist continued to complain about the sale and the expen-ses involved i n p r i n t i n g "sheaves of catalogues" and a"large 29 number of maps . . . at San Francisco." The results of the sale were disappointing, and revealed that B r i t i s h Columbia's farm lands were not yet high-l y valued by immigrants. Only 8,284 of the 37,000 acres offered were sold and those at an average price of only $1.21 an acre. After deducting the expenses involved i n advertis-ing and carrying out the sale, the gross proceeds of $10,06-4..50 were reduced to $9,052.99, reducing the average p r i c e of each 30 acre to $1.09. Section 16 of the Land Ordinance Amendment Act of 1873 introduced a new feature into the land sales p o l i c y of B r i t i s h Columbia by authorizing the sale of unsurveyed land. During the consideration of the b i l l i n the L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly, the Attorney-General explained that the idea was 31 similar to the p o l i c y of the Dominion Government i n Manitoba. Section 29 of the Dominion Lands Act set the price of unap-propriated land at $1 an acre, reserving the Secretary of 32 State's r i g h t to s e l l land at auction at the same upset p r i c e . In B r i t i s h Columbia elaborate regulations were issued governing the sale of unsurveyed land. For t h i r t y days 29/ B r i t i s h Colonist. October 2, 1873. 30,.' Journals and Ses ional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1875-74. p. 64. 31.- Daily Standard. February 19, 1873. 52'/ 35 V i c , c 23. (Dominion) 178 previous to the date of application, the s e t t l e r had to post a notice on the land he proposed to purchase, thus giving f a i r warning to anyone who might object. A fee of $5, toget-her with payment for the estimated acreage at the rate of $1 an acre, had to accompany the a p p l i c a t i o n form v" . describing the s i t u a t i o n and dimensions of the land. The government would then inform the s e t t l e r how many acres he could have and advise him of the terms of payment should the price exceed $1 an acre. After the land had been surveyed, either at the farmer's expense or a f t e r the government sur-33 vey, the s e t t l e r could apply f o r a Crown Grant. An Order i n Council of September 5, 1873, set the price of unsurveyed land at $2.50 an acre, reserving to the Crown a l l precious and base metals and as i n the Dominion Act, r e s t r i c t i n g the 34 s e t t l e r to 640 acres. The B r i t i s h Colonist had nothing but d e r i s i o n f o r the burdensome regulations to which the intending buyers were subjected. "In so f a r as the s i m p l i c i t y of. these regulations i s concerned, l e t i t s u f f i c e for the present to say that the immigrant w i l l f i n d i t very desirable to a v a i l himself of the services of a lawyer and a surveyor; and inasmuch as these are luxuries beyond the reach of many, we i n c l i n e to the 33/ Regulations Concerning the Purchase of Unsurveyed Land, August 27, 1873, Land Laws of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1873. 34/ Order i n Council f i x i n g the p r i c e of Unsurveyed and Unoccupied Land, September 5, 1873, Land Laws of  B r i t i s h Columbia. 1873. 179 opinion that few w i l l attempt to thread unaided the labyrin-35 thian mazes of these "few simple" regulations." The same newspaper took exception to the high price of unsurveyed land 36 and to the decision of the government to reserve a l l minerals. Although the government's explanation of i t s course of action was a reasonable one, the Order i n Council was re-37 scinded on February 28, 1874. This action heralded a change to be contained i n the Land Act of 1874, then being consid-ered by the Legislative Assembly. The government defended i t s original policy by pointing out that the relatively high charge for unsurveyed land and the reservation of a l l miner-als were intended to discourage speculation, whereas bona fide settlers pre-empting or receiving free grants were en-38 t i t l e d to the base metals. The price proved prohibitive, however, and the Land Act of 1874, although preserving the same policy of selling unsurveyed as well as surveyed land, 39 reduced the price of both to $1 an acre. The new price was obviously an attempt to sacrifice revenue i n order to attract settlers to the province. Although the Bri t i s h Colonist had previously urged a lower price, the newspaper inconsistently charged the government with encouraging speculation. As a specific instance i t 35/ B r i t i s h Colonist. August 30, 1873. 36V B r i t i s h Colonist. September 14, 1873. 37V Daily Standard. March 17, 1874. 38.' Daily Standard. September 20. 1873. 39/ 36 V i c , c.2 (British Columbia). ~±7-18o mentioned the sale of 6500 acres of land i n the Lower Fraser 40 area to one man for $1 an acre. The result was a thorough discussion of the government's sales policy i n the Assembly. A resolution was introduced to prevent the govern-ment from "selling rural lands, except to bona fide settlers and not to them i n such considerable quantities to make i t appear that speculation as well as p a r t i a l cultivation and . 41 settlement i s intended." In moving the resolution, the member referred to the sale of the 6500 acres on the Lower Fraser. Defending the government's action, R.B.eaven;..,the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works explained that the pro-visions were very much l i k e those i n force i n the Province of Manitoba. He went on to reveal that the land i n the Lower yet Fraser had been sold, but the Crown Grant not/issued f to a gentleman who intended to settle fourteen families from the County of Bruce, Ontario, on the land i n question. A Select Committee to investigate the disposal of land by outright 42 sale and by auction was consequently appointed. In i t s report the Select Committee upheld ithe Government's action. Under the Land Act of 1874 only 2,726 acres had been sold by auction, consisting principally of land unfit for cultivation. In the New Westminster Di s t r i c t only 6,602§ acres of surveyed land had been transferred by 40/ B r i t i s h Colonist. September 12, 1874. 41/ B r i t i s h Colonist. March 23, 1875. 42/ Daily Standard. March 23, 1875. private sale and that chiefly to bona fide settlers. The only unsurveyed land sold during the year had been the 6500 acres previously mentioned. In concluding i t s report the committee affirmed "that the Government, i n thus disposing of the said Lands, acted s t r i c t l y i n accordance with the 43 Land Act of 1874." Statistics show that the revenue from the sale of land during these early years following Confederation was not great. The amounts collected from the sale of land for the years 1874, 1875 and 1876 were respectively: $23,617.86, 44 $18,324.53, and $16,904.73. Although the report of the committee disproved that extensive land speculation was being encouraged by the sale of land under the provisions of the Land Act of 1874, some damage had been done previous to Confederation i n the 45 New Westminster D i s t r i c t . A wild-land tax was therefore levied by the Assembly i n 1872. This tax provided an addi-tional revenue for the province, but the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works explained that revenue was not the main purpose of the Act. "He thought i t was time that some action was taken in the Province to rescue some of the fine agri-cultural lands which were locked up i n the hands of specula-43.- Journals and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1875, p. 692. 44. - Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1875, p. 642; -' 1876, p. 563; 1877, p. 356. 45/ Trutch to Seymour, August 12, 1868, Lands and Works Department to the Governor, M.A.B.C. 46 tors . . . around New Westminster and Victoria." The Wild Land Tax Act, as originally passed i n 47 April 1872, provided for a tax of 44 an acre on wild land. Exempt from the tax were lands vested i n or held i n trust for Her Majesty or for the public uses of the province. The ex-emption would thus include the lands to be conveyed i n trust by British Columbia to the Federal Government according to the Terms of Union. However, the Dominion Government reserv-ed the Act, arguing that once the land was i n turn conveyed by them to the railway company, i t would become taxable. "The chief inducement to such Capitalists, i s the promise of a large grant of land in aid of the enterprise and the impo-sition of such a tax upon Railway lands would greatly dimin-48 ish the prospect of a Company being formed." It was there-fore suggested that i n future, i n any such acts, the railway land should be exempted. A Wild Land Tax B i l l was again considered by the Assembly i n February 1873. The new b i l l differed from the Act of 1872 in the adoption of an ad valorem instead of a specific tax of 44 an acre. However the suggestion of the Federal Government to exempt railway lands as a p o l i t i c mea#-sure to f a c i l i t a t e the construction of the railway was not 46/ Daily Standard. April 6, 1872. 47/ Daily Standard. April 10, 1872. 48.' Report of the Committee of the Honourable Privy Council enclosed i n E.A.Meredith to Trutch, October 16, 1872, Despatches from Ottawa, M.A.B.C. -an J83 adopted. Certain members of the Assembly urged the govern-ment not to throw obstacles i n the way of the railway company. "Such an action would seriously cripple the undertakings of the railway company, and put them to a great inconvenience 49 i n raising capital i n England." The Attorney General fear-ed that once they had exempted land companies the government would be unable to tax the land after i t had been sold to private individuals. "The precedent of exemption would be a bad one, and would only put so much more money i n the hands of the companies, and take so much more out of the coffers 50 of the colony." The question of inserting a clause ex-empting the railway lands was accordingly lost by a vote of *a to ys. The Land Tax Act of 1873 imposed an annual ad val-orem tax of 1% upon unimproved country lands. The fact that certain types of land were enumerated i n the act as being exempt from the tax protected the bona fide settler who was making proper use of his land. The exemptions were as follows.: Mad held i n trust for Her Majesty; land within the limits of any incorporated 6ity, Township or Di s t r i c t ; Indian reserves; the land of benevolent societies, schools or hospitals; pre-empted land occupied i n accordance with the requirements of the Land Ordinance of 1870; lands upon which the owner r e s i -ded and sgent $1 an acre provided the land was not worth more 49/ Daily Standard. February 13, 1873. 50/ Ibid. 184 than $20 an acre; land which had been permanently improved to the extent of 20$ of i t s assessed value; land not worth more than $5 an acre upon which Vef head of horses or c a t t l e per JL0O acres or y3 head of sheep per AOC" acres were depas--51 tured and any land held under a timber or pastoral lease. Although one member of the Assembly moved i n 1874 that the Act be repealed as being too burdensome, the Chief Commissioner ridiculed the attempt by claiming to be a con-stituent of the mover and the only one i n his d i s t r i c t paying 52 the tax. The general feeling was that although the revenue collected was small, the general effect of the Act upon the 53 province was beneficial. How l i t t l e the treasury benefited i s shown by the amounts collected under the Act for the years 1873, 1874, 1875 and 1876 respectively: $938.79, $2543.42, 54 $1510.00 and $2108.70. The rents gathered from pastoral leases provided an additional though small source of revBnue for the Province. The policy of leasing continued unchanged after Confederation. The Sessional Papers show the following acreage under pastoral 55 lease on the mainland by November 30, 1873, New Westminster Dis t r i c t , 1467 acres, and Yale D i s t r i c t 67,253 acres. The 51/ 36 V i c , c . l l (British Columbia). 52'.- Daily Standard. January 10, 1874. 53V Ibid., and January 14, 1874. 5 4 J o u r n a l s and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. , 18,73" m?4. p. 2 of the Estimates: 1875. p. 642: 1876. p. 725: 1877 p. 505. 55/ Journals and Sessional Papers of Br i t i s h Columbia. 1875-1874. p. 65. 185 total acreage under pastoral lease on the mainland was there-fore 68,720 acres. No statistics are available showing the actual revenue which the government collected from these lea-ses since land fees and rents are l i s t e d as one sum. However, the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works, i n answer to a question i n the Assembly, stated that the average rent for 56 pastoral leases was 40 an acre. On this basis the annual revenue would be approximately $2690. As before Confederation, the d i f f i c u l t i e s of trans-portation s t i l l obstructed the success of stockraising i n B r i t i s h Columbia. For this reason, i n 1874, construction was started on a road beginning at Ladner's Landing and leading to Hope, and explorations were carried out to discover the most direct route by which a road might connect Hope with the 57 Nicola Valley. "The main object which the Government have i n view i n procuring the construction of this road i s to give the stock-raisers i n the interior of our own country the means of transporting their animals to the seaboard to supply the demand for beef, mutton, etc. of the people of Victoria, New Westminster, Burrard Inlet and Nanaimo, which are now mainly supplied by American produce at a loss to the Province, i n 58 hard cash, of upwards of $150,000 per annum." The concern over the problems which the stockraisers 56/ B r i t i s h Colonist. January 18, 1873. 57/ Journals and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1875, pp.303-306,. 58./ Daily Standard. March 19, 1874. -23-faced i n driving their cattle to market was part of the Government's growing realization that certain physical im-pediments had to he overcome before any land-settlement policy could be successful i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The promised railway was to be the answer to the Province's isolation. However, the provincial government was s t i l l confronted with the water problems of B r i t i s h Columbia. The need for irrigation i n many areas i n the Pro-vince had been recognized during the colonial period. In 1859, the magistrate at Cayoosh reported that two settlers i n the v i c i n i t y were diverting water from a nearby stream since the land i n the area was too sandy to be farmed with-59 out irrigation. The same defect was noted i n the s o i l 60 around William's Lake and from Kamloops to Shuswap Lake. The Cariboo Sentinel verified these reports by citing sev-eral instances of irrigation, one of which read as follows: " . . . at one ranch not far from Soda Creek, that of the popular Frank Way's [sic] , there are more than 150 acres under oats and barley, the land being a l l irrigated and 61 highly cultivated." 59/ T. Elwyn to Douglas, July 30, 1859, Elwyn Correspond-ence, M.A.B.C. 60/ Cox to Col. Sec, August 9, 1863, Cox Correspondence, M.A.B.C. Moberly to Trutch, January 22, 1866, Moberly Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 61/ Cariboo Sentinel. June 17, 1865, see also July 19, 1866 and July 24, 1869. »87 Towards the end of the colonial period there was an increasing awareness of the ultimate value of the colony's land i f only irrigation could be applied on a large scale. A despatch to London of 1866, referring to the lands beyond the Cascades summed up the situation well. "A very erroneous opinion of the capabilities of B r i t i s h Columbia as an Agri-cultural and Stock raising country has been formed and the year 1865 may be said to be the f i r s t in which practical ex-perience has refuted the general opinion as to the s t e r i l i t y of the s o i l . . . . It has been proved by the experience of by 1865 thafya system of irrigation (rendered necessary by the small amount of rain that f a l l s ) this land w i l l produce ex-traordinary crops of a l l descriptions. The root crops are not to be surpassed i n any Part of the World, and the cereals, both as regards the quantity and quality of the crops can 62 compete with any that are grown i n the Mother Country." The government, however, could give no financial assistance to settlers desiring to build irrigation works. The editor of the Cariboo Sentinel estimated that i t would cost $15,000 to construct a flume with which to irrigate 2500 63 acres. A petition from the settlers of Hat Creek for a loan of £1000, being half the sum required, in their estima-62/ A. N. Birch to Carnarvon, October 31, 1866, Despatches to London, M.A.B.C. 63/ Cariboo Sentinel. July 24, 1869. 188 tion, to build an irrigation ditch sixteen miles i n length, . 64 was refused by the government for lack of funds. Where irrigation could not be carried out without financial aid, the government simply granted pastoral leases. In replying to applicationsfor such leases around Alkali Lake, Pearse agreed to grant the leases; but i n passing he remarked that in the course of time a l l the land would be u t i l i z e d by an 65 extensive system of irrigation. For those who wanted to irrigate on a small scale the Land Ordinance of 1865 contained the f i r s t provisions regulating the use of water for agricultural purposes. By that act settlers after applying for a license from the local magistrate " . . . could divert any unoccupied water from the natural channel of any stream, lake or river adja-cent to or passing through such land . . . specifying . . . quantity sought to be diverted, the place of diversion and 66 the object thereof . . . " The Land Ordinance of 1870 con-firmed this right and emphasized the fact that i n cases of dispute "priority of right' to any such water privilege . . . shall depend on priority of record." Settlers were moreover entitled to pass through the land of others for carrying such water, provided that they compensated the owner for any 6 4 / J. Veasey and Co. to Seymour, October 20, 1868, Veasey Correspondence. 65/ Memo by Pearse on back of Sanders to Col. Sec, June 15, 1870, Sanders Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 66..- B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1865, No. 27. -26-189 damages that might result. As a conservation measure, a settler's right to the water he recorded could he forfeited 67 i f he willingly wasted i t . During a meeting of the Legis-lative Council i n January 1871 the question was asked whether or not the government would give financial aid to farmers 68 for irrigating their land; but nothing further was done. Following Confederation the Land Ordinance Amend-ment Act of 1872 was devoted exclusively to stri c t e r regu-lations preventing the wasting of water. Hereafter a set-t l e r recording water had to construct a ditch and use only such water as i t was capable of carrying. A maximum fine of 69 $100 could be collected from anyone wasting water. Although the available correspondence of the Lands and Works Department for the period immediately following Confederation i s meagre, there i s one letter written by Beaven which i l l u s -trates that he was concerned with the problem of ir r i g a t i o n . In this letter to C. A. Semlin of Cache Creek, the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works revealed his intention of boring for water on Semlin's property. If the experiment was successful, he pointed out that there was plenty of wind for 70 operating windmills. The B r i t i s h Colonist welcomed the news of the experiment, and i n October reported that opera-67/ B r i t i s h Columbia Ordinances. 1870, No. 18. 68'.-- Daily Standard. February 1, 1871. 69> 35 V i c , c. 31 (British Columbia). 70./ R. Beaven to C. A. Semlin, August 14, 1874, Lands and Works Department, Correspondence Outward, M.A.B.C. ipo tions would be started very shortly with the use of a bor-71 ing plant bequeathed to the colony by Colonel Moody. However, beyond this item there i s no further reference to the experiment either i n that newspaper or i n the available correspondence of the Lands and Works Department. The Drainage, Dyking and Irrigation Act of 1873, to be mentioned later i n this chapter, was the earliest piece of legislation to deal with B r i t i s h Columbia's arid as well as her flooded lands. The areas subject to overflow in B r i t i s h Columbia received more attention than those which needed irrigation, since the most f e r t i l e d i s t r i c t s of the Province and those closest to the centres of settlement, that i s to say the Fraser Valley lands, suffered the most seriously from floods. A report of the Land and Works Department on the New Westminster District revealed the same physical obstacles to farming in that d i s t r i c t as Douglas had noted fifteen years before. Describing the country between Boundary Bay and Langley Prairie the report read: "A few patches of swamp grass land were met with; also two belts of alder land. With the exception of these the country i s heavily timbered . . . . years of labour would have to be expended, before even the most favourable parts could be made available for 72 agricultural purposes. " The country between Langley and 71/ B r i t i s h Colonist. October 7, 1874. 72/ J. Fannin's Report on the New Westminster Land Dis/-t r i c t , October 25, 1873, Lands and Works Department Inward Correspondence, M.A.B.C. »9» Matsqui was described as being even worse. "The timber has been nearly a l l destroyed by f i r e , and fallen timber and matted undergrowth, cover the whole face of the country, forming an almost impenetrable jungle . . . no settler, how-ever earnestly he may be i n search of a home, w i l l be lik e l y to penetrate this jungle of fallen timber and matted under-73 growth." Although much of Sumas Prairie, an area of approximately 25,000 acres, was subject to flooding, the au-thor of the report f e l t that the land could be made ava i l -able for settlement much more cheaply than the heavily tim-bered land in the v i c i n i t y . "Guarded on the east and west by the Chilliwhack [sic] and Sumass Mountains fsic] , i t pre-sents a frontage to the river two and a half miles long, across which and between the points of these two mountains i t i s contended a dyke, the average height of which would not exceede six feet, would effectually reclaim the whole valley. It i s also claimed by practical minds, that the actual cost of dyking, would not exceed an average of one dollar per 74 acre." P i t t River Meadows, an area of almost 20,000 acres, was also subject to flood, but since the whole plain was nearly surrounded by water, dyking was not considered possible. Offers by private individuals to reclaim the two above mentioned areas forcibly impressed the government with tfy' Ibid.. 74.- Fannin, On. Cit. »92> the importance of the matter. Three Americans who stated that they had already reclaimed 120,000 acres of swamp land around the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers wanted to buy "the swamp or tide lands situated at the delta of the Fraser River | s i c | and also the land known as P i t t River Meadows L75 J . . They enclosed a copy of the California Law and offered to pay the same price as that provided by i t for swamp land. Two years earlier a request had been submitted by a government surveyor, E. Mohun, and two others, to re-claim Sumas Prairie. In return ifor their work they wanted a free grant of Sumas Lake and 5000 acres of land i n addition to the land of Sumas Prairie, not already alienated, for 76 which they were willing to pay at the rate of 500 an acre. Very l i t t l e was done to dyke agricultural land during the period under discussion, but i t i s only f a i r to mention that the problem was considered by the Legislative Assembly. The Land Ordinance Amendment Act of 1873 author-ized the Lieutenant-Governor i n Council "to s e l l any vacant land of the Crown, or make free grants thereof to any person or company, for the purpose of dyking, draining or i r r i g a t -ing the same, subject to such regulations as the Lieutenant-77 Governor i n Council shall see f i t . " During the same ses-75/ Haggin, Hearst and Lane to Beavan, February 13, 1873, Lands and Works Department, Inward Correspondence,M.A.B.C. 76/ Mohun, Wilson and Dupont to Beaven, 1871, Lands and Works Department Inward Correspondence, M.A.B.C. 77./ 36 V i c , c l . (British Columbia). »93 sion a Drainage, Dyking and Irrigation Act was passed which provided for the appointment of Commissioners hy the Govern-ment and hy the owners of "marsh, swamp or meadow lands." The commissioners were empowered to request help i n the form of men, teams and tools from such landowners for building or repairing dykes. Landowners were to be assessed for the cost of "dykes, weirs, dams, ditches, flumes, flood-gates or breakwaters" according to the quantity and quality of their 78 land and the benefit received." Of much more immediate value as a dyking measure was the road leading from Ladner's Landing to Hope, which was begun i n 1874. The f i r s t nine miles of the road, which passed across t i d a l lands of the Lower Fraser, was constr-^ Tae-ted as an experiment to determine whether or not a system of roads, dykes, and ditches could be combined. The method of construction was described as follows: " . . . by cutting two wide and deep ditches, twenty-one feet apart, on the Township line, between No. S and 4, and by building up i n the centre, between two walls of sod, the material excavated from the ditches, a roadway and dyke i s formed, the ditches draining the land into the different sloughs and other out-lets, and by putting in flood-gates, that close by the action of the tide, at the crossings of a l l sloughs, culverts and termination of ditches, the salt water i s entirely excluded from the inside ditch, thus dyking the land i n the rear of 78//36 V i c , c 10, (British Columbia). -Si B94-79 the roadway." An added advantage was the fact that by opening the floodgate of the outside ditch where i t emptied into the Fraser, and thus letting i n water when the tide rose, settlers could transport supplies by boat to their farms. The Department of Lands and Works was particularly pleased by the fact that even former settlers of the Wilamette Val-80 ley in Oregon were seeking land along the roadway. Nevertheless the results of the provincial land-settlement policy from 1871 to 1874 were disappointing. Although there were prosperous farmers i n the province there was room for many more. An item i n the Cariboo Sentinel described the rich possibilities of the country from Cache Creek to the Okanagan, but l e f t unanswered the question of why there were only a few hundred settlers i n the whole area. The description read as follows: . . . 6000 head of cattle fatten upon nature's rich pastures. There i s room for double that number. In 1871 the yield on the Tranquille, North and South Forks of the Thompson, amounted to l j million lbs. That was the product of less than 1/10 of the land held under pre-emption, the whole being 6680 acres which should be capable of producing at least 12 million lbs. Of bacon upwards of 40,000 lbs. were cured. At one dairy . . . 2500 lbs. of excel-lent butter was made . . . The Okanagan w i l l y i e l d only f a l l wheat without irrigation: spring wheat, oats and barley, etc. i n wonderful profusion with irrigation. The yie l d of wheat ranges from 1^ to l | tons per acre, the grain producing from 65 to 70$ of flour. As high as nine tons of potatoes have been taken from the acre. Wherever tried f r u i t trees have done exceedingly well . . . Indian corn, tomatoes, 79,/ Journals and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. 1875, p. 304. 80. / Loc. Cit. 195 musk melons, water melons, and even the grape vine have been cultivated with great success and without recourse to a r t i f i c i a l expedients . . . Horses, horned cattle and sheep pass the winter unhoused and uncared for and as a rule come out in good condition i n the spring . . . In the country there are . . . a few hundred settlers. 81 J. Fannin, i n his report on the New Westminster Dis t r i c t was impressed by the progress of Chilliwack and des-cribed i t as the best regulated farming d i s t r i c t on the main-lie land. "Here are to/seen those signs which are the certain indications of prosperity; extensive and carefully cultivated f i e l d s , large and well f i l l e d barns, and neat and comfortable looking farm houses aurrounded with their gardens of f r u i t 82 and vegetables." But he too was unable to explain why ao much good land was l e f t uncultivated. In his description of Matsqui Prairie he added the significant remark that "I have no doubt that most of the land bordering on the prairie, i s already occupied, and taking into consideration the ease with which this land can be cleared, i t i s somewhat surprising that more of i t i s not under cultivation. However, back, and within easy access of the prairie, the settler who i s really earnest with regard to seeking a home w i l l find his wants 83 satisfied." It i s unreasonable to blame the policy of the Pro-vince for the limited number of farming population. Sincere 81/ Cariboo Sentinel. August 24, 1872. 82/ Fannin, Qp. Cit. 83V Ibid. efforts had been made to make i t easy for the conscientious settler to acquire land. For example, previous to the intro-duction of the l i b e r a l free-grant system provided for i n the Land Act of 1874, the residence conditions required of pre-emptors had been relaxed. The Land Ordinance Amendment Act 84 of 1873 allov/ed settlers to occupy their land through agents. The B r i t i s h Colonist, late i n 1870, had reported that many complaints had been voiced over the s t r i c t residence duties required i n the Land Ordinance of 1870 and expressed the opinion that i t seemed "as though the man who is prepared to pay another for occupying and working his farm should enjoy 85 a l l the privileges of a pre-emptor." The new regulation offered some re l i e f for i n the year 1873 a total of 441 pre-emptors were recorded as opposed to 287, 204 and 228 for the 86 years 1870, 1871 and 1872 respectively. Yet the attempts of the Provincial Government to accelerate the immigration of farmers met with l i t t l e but frustration. A new Military and Naval Settlers Act was pas-sed i n March 1872, to make i t easier for such men to acquire land. Because of the long journey from England to B r i t i s h Columbia, the new Act allowed them three years instead of one 87 to claim their land. The acting Attorney General of Br i t i s h Columbia realized that the Act was i n conflict with 84.- 36 Vic. c. 1., (British Columbia). 85V B r i t i s h Colonist f December 17, 1870, see also November * 30, 1872. 86.* Sessional Papers of Brit i s h Columbia./1876. p. 563. 87/ Daily Standard. March 22. 1 8 7 2 . ' """ - 3 4 -097 the eleventh a r t i c l e of the Terms of Union, which prohibited free grants, and could only recommend that the Lieutenant-88 Governor reserve his assent. Upon i t s transmission to Ottawa, the Act was reserved by the Governor General i n 89 Council for the reason which McCreight had foreseen. At the conference on immigration between the Fed-eral and Provincial Governments i n 1871, several proposals were agreed upon for promoting the settlement of Canada. The Dominion Government agreed to maintain immigration agen-cies i n the United Kingdom, Europe and elsewhere i n addition to promoting the settlement of Manitoba and the Northwest Territories by a l i b e r a l land policy. The Provinces l i k e -wise agreed to adopt "a l i b e r a l policy for the settlement and colonization of [theirl uncultivated lands," and to fur-nish "The Department of Agriculture and . . . the Immigration Agents of the Dominion, f u l l information as to i t s system of settlement and colonization, the lands assigned for free grants to settlers, i f any, and the conditions of such grants; and a l l other information, and a l l documents deemed requisite 90 for the advancement of immigration." B r i t i s h Columbia subsequently liberalized her land policy by adopting f i r s t a restricted system of free grants under the Land Ordinance Amendment Act of 1873 and then a 88/ J. F. McCreight to Trutch, April 16, 2, Attorney General Correspondence Outward, M. A. B. C. 89. - E.A.Meredith to Trutch, October 7, 1872, Despatches from Ottawa, M.A.B.C. 90. ^ Journals and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. /1875-•55-«98 complete homestead policy under the Land Act of 1874, More-over, the Lieutenant-Governor, i n his opening speech to the Assembly i n 1872, reported that much attention had been drawn to the Province by the Agents i n London and San Fran-91 cisco. The Daily Standard enlightened the public by printing extracts from the placards used by the agents to advertise B r i t i s h Columbia i n London and San Francisco. Two of them were as follows: Westward Hoi Brit i s h Columbia (including Vancouver Island). The new maritime Province on the Pacific Ocean, western end of the Canadian Pacific Railway, wages high, provisions cheap, superb climate, fine country for'-, young farmers, homes reserved against seizure for debt, free and non-sectarian education, laws r i g i d l y enforced . . . Apply to the Agent General (G. M. Sproat Esq.) London. Brit i s h Columbia! Immigrants are invited to inquire into the advantages of settling i n B r i t i s h Columbia, free grants of land, high wages, good climate, maps and cereals may be seen and a l l information obtained at the office of the immigration agent, W.H.R. Adam-son, 315 California Street. 92 According to the B r i t i s h Colonist the reputation of B r i t i s h Columbia as a desirable home for immigrants was considerably damaged by a later action of the San Francisco Agent. The latter published i n 1873 a notice to the effect that Br i t i s h Columbia was offering free grants of 250 acres to each settler of 18 years or over upon performance of the 93 necessary settlement duties. He had obviously taken as his authority the Land Ordinance Amendment Act and had not been 92v Daily Standard. May 29, 1873. 95.- Bri t i s h Colonist. September 10, 1873. * 91/ Journals and Sessional Papers of Br i t i s h Columbia,  1875-74, p. 21. ""56 • .99 informed of the later decision of the Executive Council to limit the free grants to either 240 or 160 acres according to their location east or west of the Cascades. The announ-cement also failed to point out that on the mainland, west of the Cascades the free grants were available only i n the two townships, not yet surveyed i n the New Westminster Dis-t r i c t . The B r i t i s h Colonist took f u l l advantage of the misunderstanding that ensued. According to i t s columns more than 40© misinformed Americans arrived i n July 1873, ex-pecting free grants of 250 acres anywhere i n the Province. One item copied from the San Francisco Bulletin expressed the feelings of the Americans concerning B r i t i s h Columbia. 94 It read i n part as follows: For some few months past placards have been exten-sively posted i n San Francisco, advising those i n search of a permanent home to depart . . . for this so-called paradise of the Pacific. Among other inducements held out are, a free grant of 250 acres of land . . . We find that some of our most recent arrivals, who were not familiar with the hardships encountered by those led away by the B r i t i s h Colum-bia excitement a few years ago, have been induced to break up their homes i n California to wop Dame Fortune under the Cross of St. George. A few of these . . .have now returned to San Francisco and they ask the Bulletin, as a matter of kindness and as a duty to those who are debating the prospect of emigrating, to c a l l attention to the fact that the advertisements of B r i t i s h Columbia only exist i n the imagination of the writer of the placard . . . One of these informs us that the land grant of 250 acres i s a l l moonshine...." 94/ B r i t i s h Colonist. September 13, 1873. Zoo The Agent no doubt should have been informed as to the exact nature of the free-grant system in force i n B r i t i s h Columbia but the above item from the Bulletin made so much of by the Brit i s h Colonist, was a natural one to appear i n the news-paper of an American State which had no desire to lose any of i t s settlers to B r i t i s h Territory. However, the editor had no cause to worry for the dismal report i n the Sessional Papers of 1873-4 revealed that only 142 persons "visited B r i t i s h Columbia i n 1873, after communicating with Mr. Adam-son, the Agent at San Francisco, with the avowed intention 95 of settling. Statistics show that the l i b e r a l land laws of the Province, adopted i n the period immediately following Con-federation, made no great change i n the settlement of B r i t -t i s h Columbia. The Homestead Act of 1867 was amended early i n 1873 so as to increase the amount of personal property 96 exempt from seizure for debt from $150 to $500. The f o l -lowing figures, showing the number of homesteads registered up to December 31, 1873, reveal that the amendment made 97 l i t t l e difference: 95.^ Journals and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia. " 1873-74. p. 81. 96/ Homestead Amendment Act, 1873, 36 V i c , c.38. (Brit-ish Columbia. 97.^ Journals and Sessional Papers of Bri t i s h Columbia. 1875-74. p. 35. Number of Homesteads Registered i n B r i t i s h Columbia up to December 31, 1873. Year. Number Declared Number Registered Value Abandoned 1867 14 $26,850 1 1868 13 25,940 3 1869 11 23,600 2 1870 12 20,550 3 1871 11 19,800 2 1872 7 14,600 3 1873 11 22,950 4 Nothing could have been more l i b e r a l than the free-grant system provided for by the Land Act of 1874 but i t s influence upon the settlement of the province was negli-gible. Under the Land Act of 1874 allowing free grants anywhere i n the Province, 93, 179 and 171 homesteads were recorded i n the years 1874, 1875 and 1876 respectively. A comparison of the number of pre-emptions made during the years from 1870 to 1873 with the number of free grants made 98 from 1874 to 1876 i s significant. Year No. of Pre- Year . No. of emptions Free Grants 1870 287 1874 93 1871 204 1875 179 1872 228 1876 171 1873 441 The above figures show that i n the period under consideration the free-grant system was no more effective 98/ Journals and Sessional Papers of Br i t i s h Columbia. 1875, p. 480; 1876 pp. 562-563; 1877, p. 356. -39-i n settling the Province than the old pre-emption system. In other words, the charge often made during the colonial period that Britain was preventing the settlement of the colony hy prohibiting a free-grant system was erroneous. The rapid settlement of the Province i n these early years was beyond the unaided power of any land-settle-ment policy. Before i t s lands would attract settlers i n large numbers, -British Columbia needed a railway to overcome both i t s isolated position and the transportation d i f f i c u l -ties within the Province i t s e l f . Nevertheless the provin-c i a l o f f i c i a l s had no need to feel ashamed of the meagre results of their carefully planned land-settlement policy, for i n the seventies the efforts of the Dominion Government on the prairies were equally disappointing. 2 0 3 BIBLIOGRAPHY I MANUSCRIPT MATERIAL (A) CORRESPONDENCE: 1. Despatches from the Governors of Bri t i s h Columbia to the Colonial Secretary, 1858 - 1871 2. Despatches from the Colonial Secretary to the Governors of Bri t i s h Columbia, 1858 - 1871 3. Governor's Private O f f i c i a l Letter Book, 1859 - 1864 4. Colonial Secretary of B r i t i s h Columbia: Bound letter-books (9 vols.): January 1859 to September 1860 September 1860 to September 1863 September 1863 to May 1872 July 1858 to May 1859 July 1860 to September 1861 September 1861 to November 1862 November 1862 to September 1864 September 1864 to December 1866 O f f i c i a l Letter Book 1867 - 1870 The f i r s t three volumes consist of letters to the Lands and Works Department. The last six volumes consist of letters to various cor-respondents among which those to the District Magistrates wereuus.eful. Despatches from the Secretary of State, Ottawa to the Lieutenant-Governor of Br i t i s h Columbia, 1872 - 1875 Lands and Works Department of Br i t i s h Columbia: Bound letter-books (9 vols.): August 1859 to March 1860 February 1860 to April 1861 April 1861 to September 1863 September 1863 to November 1864 September 1865 to January 1872 March 1859 to August 1859 August 1859 to August 1861 August 1861 to May 1865 June 1865 to August 1872 5. 6. The f i r s t five volumes consist of letters to the Governor. The last four contain letters to various cor-respondents. Unbound letters: Letters to the Governor and Colonial Secretary, 1859 - 1871 (Folders 915-957 except Nos. 929,930,934.937,938,940,943/ 944,945,948,949 and 954). Letters to various correspondents (Mis-cellaneous Folders, 1870 and 1871). Letters to various correspondents, 1873-1883, incomplete series. Contracts and Agreements (Folder 957a, 1859). Unclassified.Material, 1871 - 1875: Mohun and Dupont's Application for Dyk-ing Sumas Lake, 1871; Mohun's Application for Sumas Dyke, 1872; J. Fannin's Report on the New Westminster Land District, 1873; American offer to buy 100,000 acres at P i t t Meadows, 1873; Estimate of Stock between New Westminster and Fort Hope, 1873; Early Settlers in Nicola Valley, 1874; Pastoral Leases of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1874; N. D. Patterson to Surveyor-General, 1875; and Walkem on Military Grants,1875. Attorney General of B r i t i s h Columbia: Bound letter-books (5 vols.): . October 1861-May 1863 May 1863-February 1866 February 1866-April 1870 April 1870-April 1871 November 1871-February 1874. These volumes consist of letters to the Governor and to various corres-pondents. The Attorney General's reports on the land laws were par-ticularly useful. Zo5 8. D i s t r i c t Magistrates: Unbound l e t t e r s of H. M. B a l l , C. Brew, W.G.Cox, A. C. E l l i o t , T. Elwyn, J . B. Gaggin, J . C. Haynes, R. H. Hicks, S. C> Ni c o l , P. H. Nind, P. O'Reilly, E. H. Sanders and W. R. Spalding. These l e t t e r s to the Governor and to the Commissioner of Lands and Works were useful f o r information concerning the pre-emption system. 9. Unbound l e t t e r s of Judge Begbie to the Governor and Colonial Secretary. The l e t t e r s containing Judge Begbie's opinion of what land settlement p o l i c y should be adopted i n the early years of the colony were valuable. 10. Unbound l e t t e r s of A. T. Bushby, the Registrar General, to the Governor and Colonial Secretary. 11. Unbound l e t t e r s of the following Surveyors: P. J . Leech, Capt. H. R. Luard, W. Moberley, E. Mohun, Lieut. Palmer, Capt. Parsons and J . Turnbull. (B) REPORTS and BLUE BOOKS: James Douglas—Confidential Report on the O f f i c e r s of B r i t i s h Columbia. Blue Books of the Colony, 1859, 1860, 1861, 1862, 1865, 1866, 1867, 1868, 1869 and 1870. II PRINTED and TYPESCRIPT MATERIAL (A) OFFICIAL: B r i t i s h Columbia Proclamations, 1858-1864, New West-:• '\. ..minster. Ordinances of the L e g i s l a t i v e Council of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1865-1871, New Westminster. B r i t i s h Columbia Statutes, 1872-1375, V i c t o r i a . Papers Relative to the A f f a i r s of B r i t i s h Columbia, Part I. Presented to both Houses of Parliament -4-by Command of Her Majesty, February 18, 1859, London, Printed by Eyre and Spottiswoode. Part I I , August 12, 1859; Part I I I , I860 and Part IV, 1862. Papers Relative to the Proposed Union of B r i t i s h Columbia and Vancouver Island. Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty, 1866; London, Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1866-1367. Journals of the L e g i s l a t i v e Council of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1865-1868, New Westminster (4 v o l s . ) ; 1868-1871, V i c t o r i a /(3 v o l s . ) . Journals and Sessional Papers of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1872-1877, V i c t o r i a . The Land Laws of B r i t i s h Columbia, V i c t o r i a , 1873. Transactions of the Second,Resources Conference, Department of Land's and Forests, V i c t o r i a , 1949 (bound t y p e s c r i p t ) . (B) UNOFFICIAL: Books: Currie, A. W. Economic Geography of Canada, Toronto, Macmillan Company, 1945. Flugel, F. and Faulkner, H. V., Readings on the  Economic and S o c i a l History of the United  States. New York, Harpers, 1929. Howay, F. W. and Sc h o l e f i e l d , E. 0. S., B r i t i s h  Columbia, Vancouver, Clarke Company, 1914. Shann, E., An Economic History of A u s t r a l i a . Cambridge University Press, 1930. Wrinch, L. A., Land Pol i c y of the Colony of Vancouver Island. 1849-1866, M. A. Thesis, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1932(bound t y p e s c r i p t ) . A r t i c l e s : Buckland, F. M., "The Hope T r a i l , " F i r s t Annual  Report of the Okanagan H i s t o r i c a l and Nat-u r a l History Society. Vernon, 1926, p. 14. Buckland, F. M., "The'Hudson's Bay Brigade T r a i l , " Sixth Report of the Okanagan H i s t -t o r i c a l Society, Vancouver, Wrigley P r i n t -ing Company, 1936, pp. 11-22. 207 Laing, F. W., "Hudson's Bay Company Lands on the Mainland of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1858-1861," B r i t i s h Columbia H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly. V i c t o r i a , 1939, v o l . 3, pp. 75-99. Morrison, H. M., "The Background of the Free Land Homestead Law of 1872," Annual Report  of the Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Association, Toronto University Press, 1935, pp. 58-66. Morris, L., "The Rise and F a l l of Rock Creek," Sixth Report of the Okanagan H i s t o r i c a l  Society, Vancouver,. Wrigley Pr i n t i n g Comp-any, 1936, pp. 233-241. Norris, L., "W. G. Cox and His Times," Sixth  Report of the Okanagan H i s t o r i c a l Society, Vancouver, Wrigley Pr i n t i n g Company, 1936, pp. 195-199. Patterson, G. C , "Land Settlement i n Upper Canada, 1783-1840," Sixteenth Report of the  Department of Archives,-Ontario, Toronto, Clarkson, 1920, pp. 1-278. White, H. E_, "John Carmichael Haynes," B r i t i s h  Columbia H i s t o r i c a l Quarterly. V i c t o r i a , 1940, v o l . 4, pp. 183-207. Newspapers: -The B r i t i s h Columbian, New Westminster, . The B r i t i s h Colonist, V i c t o r i a , The Cariboo Sentinel, B a r k e r v i l l e , The V i c t o r i a Gazette, -The V i c t o r i a Daily Standard, 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0106644/manifest

Comment

Related Items