ENE FOTN DS

yor Ep er ope ins

Summerside and Charlottetown.

mt TIDY A A CRS

observe that no British sub-

wi “ee i wai ae mDHmmomne er : : | THE PROPRIETORS’ PROTESTS 7 ee ' cory.) i ° . 4 me i. ee. en hia Sir Frederic % Intintin Marel wg 1875 [ae tit Exeellen \ tl Richt —_ Pyle il i sa ck Chariot ecrown, Naren. «i, eo Tonia Teast Karl Dafleie, be. de cea neral of the Dominton ol Cannda, &e,. &e a tain marr wy} CORRESPON- ; wii co ry yy 1 ORE : } Phe humble Petition and Memorial of the undersigned, ’ | William Candall, Eliza Mary Cundall, Louisa Montgomery VI ian © lenee f >} and Henry Jones Candal!, of Prince Edward Island. { transter and ¢ n our Raiiw 5 | t a ily s vol wi was laid on the table of the House of | [ the | rof the General Assembly of the , ; 1» > : RD eek Was Rae ee ‘ . a Va yaaaped ii lhe Assemblv on Wednesday at. It com-} Piov i ee Edward Island, an Act wi pa di by th los Lit tranche f the Leg tture. and reserved for the sanetion prises letters from the contractors an ae ‘3 ! . ee aa eee \ot : . lof ve xcel { mytitu i fhe Land VPurehase <Act, their arent, Mr. {rregory, to the Loeal 1874." to the ol ag 1 provisions of which Aet Your Government ; from the Chief Engineer, | ps. octency’s memoralists would respect(ully request particular Mr. Bovd. to the Loeal Government ; | att: n, involving a does the transfer of nearly, if not , : Swi tte one-fourth part of the whole area ofthe Provinee by an from Mr. Owen to Mr. Swinyard, and j quite one-fourth | rt | ithe wi irea ol and os a a a ‘ “official funetionary re wily mo Acquaimees wilh ne from Mr. Swinyard to Mr. Owen. It] “ ome'st . ee ee a z deserinptions, boundaries, areas, and olher detatis o the re may be divided Into three parts anective pr perties even without the econeurrence or consent lL. That which relates to the proposed of the undoubted owners, and in some instances in contraven , , +} tiot their expressed desi such mode of transfer virtually of the section of Railway between | von of their expressed I ch mode « nD j |

» That which relates to Mr

vard's objections to accepting t w tv, ia } t zi ernment. That whieh relat of the line in the exrly ] sty ‘ On the 25th of May, 1874, the lo Mr. Gwen, learning that Mr. Schreiber

. ' ' ' ; y} ' had arrived on th Island, addressed to ]

* . . 7 ? } » lim a letter In wh th he isked whether

or not the Contractors would agree to hand over the portion of the Road _be- tween Charlottetown and Summerside,

when completed, and whether or not that section of the line would be completed so that it might be made available for trafhe by the first of July, ensuing. To this request Mr. Schreiber replied that the section in question would be in a condition for traffic “in ample time to enable the Government to make the necessary pre- paration for opening the Road for traffic on the firstof July ’’ ; that the contractors were not, however, prepared to transfer it unconditionally, as it was for them an absolute and positive necessity to reserve the right of running construction trains, | of passing on Government trains their em-

ployees and freight free of charge; and

that they were prepared to give up to the

Government 2 engines, 8 platform-ears,

48 box cars, 7 first-class passenger cars,

G second-class passenger cars, and five |

postal ears. This letter having been re- ferred to Mr. Boyd, that gentleman re- ported that it should be distinctly under-

stood thatthe contractors’ trains, when

on the part of the Jine open for traffic,

were to be completely under the control

ef the Government superintendent ; and ] envtines, so as to have a |

that at least three

spare one in case of uecident, and twenty |

platform cars for the transport of timber, | were wanted. These requirements were re- ported tothe contractors. On their part, Mr. Gregory replied that to place the construction cars under the complete con- trol or the Government superintendent, would operate greatly to their hinderance

}

and i038 ;

and that, in consequence of the

Government failing for a period of four-

teen months to put them in possession of

the ground required for building ia | Charlottetown, so delaying the importa- | tion and construction of Railway stock, they feared it would be impossible fi r | them to finish the line according to con- | tract if they gave up the number of | platform-cars demanded by Mr. Boyd. Mr. Gregory continued :-—

“ While most anxious te meet the wish of the Government, yet we most respectfully

beg to suggest, that the true interests of t people ef the Isiand, taken asa whole, se likely to be hetter ser a4 gif iny portion of the raj f sini ‘ ant yeu 5 end whi 4 s | $ zreat i s : . * ai ‘ AT 3 S ‘ : ' . I LWweer k, } i ' { ind ( : tw urties to ti } iss tions revgar f= ti riain 2) which the itractors 1 time pa sustained, Ww probal a ne time, res etol scussed and disposed of, w would mos! respectfully deprecaleany action the pa 4 nf fhe hove n ent. hich uO j fend to ¢ licate maliers, or u hich woul ' a gem fo tnvit interfere we, or dictation, 0

yppearance of any such from any *‘ The Contractors, at all times, fullestinspection and investigation into their works by the Government and Government departments, or by any parties whom thie Government may, from time to time, think fit to appoint, but they hold that they would be treated with doubtful courtesy, were the Government, in dealing with any third party, to be so premature as to cause the manner, whether satisfactory er unsatisfactory, in which the contractors were fulfilling their works, to be the subject of official report to any other body, or of newspaper remark through invitation or Government.”

countenance of the

To this letter W. C. DesBrisay, Esq., |

Assistant Clerk of the Executive Council, replied that—

‘In view of the incomplete state of the whole line, and the limited amount of rolling stock which the contractors would be enabled to deliver, as also the probability of the open- ing of the central section seriously endanger- ing the finishing of the Eastern and Western sections at the time stated in the Contract, the Government have come to the conclusion that it would not conduce to the public inter- est, at the present, to accept from the Con- tractors the portion of the Railway between Charlottetown and Summerside, on the terms proposed by them.”

This letter closed the correspondence respecting the opening of the section between Summerside and Charlottetown, We will endeavor to review the corres- pondence relating to the other points meno- tioned, in our next issue.

‘THE LAND PURCHASE ACT, 1874."

iris but right that the Tenants of this Island should know how the proprietors regard the ‘Land Purchase Act 1874.” A considerable portion of our space, this week, is therefore taken up in the repro- duction of their “ protests.” These are amusing as well as instructive. If strong words make a strong position the proprie- tors are, certainly, invincible.

As we predicted, they have not neglected to make a point of the fact that the Legis- lative Council refused to pass a Bill which would have enabled the Government to purchase their lands at a higher price than seven shillings and six pence per acre. We trust they will not this year have the same just ground of complaint. We trust that this year their Honors will see matter in a different light. If their Honors had but listened to the voicc of reason last year, the tenant: on the estates of Messrs. and Misses Cundail at least might now po:sess the fee simple of their farms,

The despatches sent to Lord Dufferin by the Lieutenant Governor and the Attorney ‘ieneral are both able documents. They present the case from the tenants’ stanas point ina very forcible manner. In them the history of the Land Question of this Is- land, from first to last, is reviewed ; and w.th them, documents were enclosed. by means of which His Exceilency could make him~ self aequainted with all the details of the Caestion. The correspondence shows that the Government were true to the interests

of the people of this Province.

i whi h is tl

‘inasmuch as an otfer has been within the last

court the |

ay ee } » Your Memorialists beg to

tean under the British Constitution be deprived of his ‘ v his will, unless ic be tor purposes falling t roht of “eminent domat to which every man ° . ! ires property knows it must be subject

In the present Act the Legislature are attempting to the private property of one person ana give o1 sell it,

. . . » i “i sce) eo he same thing in principle to another, which is,

bevend doubt. unconstitutional and void.

Your Memoralists, are the owners or proprietors of the Eastern moiety of Lot or Township Number Twenty, (20) whieh Estate was allotted by Lis late Majesty, Ning George I1I.. on the 27th Avenst, 1767, in the General Partition of the Province into Lois or Townships to their ancestor Thomas Basset, then Captain, afterwards Lieutenant Colonel in the Corps of Royai Engineers, for his long military service, and has never been alienated, but remains in your Memorial- ists to this day by direct deseeut.

The whole of the said Estate (with the exception of a few hundred acres which have been sold to ‘Tenants in actual possession) is held by Tenants on leases for long terms, vary- ing from 200 years to 999 years, at a very low rental, | mostly 18 cents per acre) some of the Leases dat.ng back from the year 1795, a large number from the year 1816, the whole of

the remainder of the Estate (with a very small exception)

was leased in the year 18 .Z,

With Your Excellency’s permission, your Memorailiste

would respectfully beg to point out a few portions of the Act in question bearing more particularly on your -Memorialists.

The assertion in the preamble that there is no reason able hope of the Proprietors voluntarily selling their lands to the Government at moderate prices, is thoroughly incorrect, inasmuch as one of your Memorialists, William Cundall, is voluntari)y bound by a Local Statute 17 Vie, Cap. 2 (a copy of whieh is hereunto annexed) along with several other owners of tenanted lands, to sell, within the period of ten years from the time of passing said Statute, to his ‘Tenants the fee simple of their respective holdings at a fixed rate viz., at fifteen years purchase of the annual rent, by the acceptance of which Statute he (as well as other parties bound thereby ) considered that it was to be construed to be a final settlement of the long agitated and vexed question connected with the tenure of the lands referred to, and that after the expiration of the ten years, no attempts would be made to compel him to sell at any price; and on this consideration, he, your Memoralist, abandoned arrears of rent which might have been collected, equival nt to at least three years rental, and three months already made by the said William Cundall to sell his remain. ing lands to the Local Government at the same rate, if said

coffer be accepted w ithin the said period of ten yaars, and inas-

| much as ofrers have been severally made by the others of your

Mewmorialists to sell at a price which as capital would realize at six per centum per annum an interest equivalent to the present rental.

The limitations in the first and second sections of the Act in question, whereby it is declared that five hundred (500) acres of land shall be the mazimum of tenanted Jands tu be held by any one individual landlord, either in his own right as ‘Trustee for an indefinite number of other persons, is

or

| certainly inconsistent with British enstom and Law, and is |only paralleled by the agrarian Law of the ancient, Romans,

(he Seventeenth and Twenty-fifth Sections of the Act in question enact a complusory inquisitorial scrutiny into the private business and resources of individuals, manifestly un- necessary and oppressive inasmuch as a valuation founded on the receipts of an Estate as a basis of calculation, would punish the lenient landlord for the indulgence he had pre- viously shown to his poorer tenants, and reward the strict, urgent, and oppresive one, for his prompt collection of rents,

The nineteenth section of the Act in questicn enabling the Court to proceed ezparte on the non appearance of the Proprietor, appears to bear hard on the dissentient party.

‘The twenty-third and twenty-fourth sections of the Act

| in question, appear to contradict each other, the former allow- |} ing what the latter disallows.

Tie twenty-ninth section of the Act in question appoint- ing a * Pi lie ‘Trust to make conveyance of Proprietor

land without thei neurrence or appival, is legislation, as your Memorialists believe. uyheard and unattempted in any country.

the forty-first section of the Act in question, readering valid the apy raisement made by the Commissioners, and re- fusing any appeal to Courts of Law or Equity, is singularly

hard and oppressive, as well as unusual in matters of litigation of such magnitude. :

Phe prohibition in the forty-fourth section of the Act in question preventing the right ot action or distraint for arrears of rent, is an loterterence with the covenanis or contracts be- tween landlord and tenant eutirely unconstitutional and an | invasion of privat: rights. Your Memorialists have only touched upon 2 few points }of the Act in question. Many more might be commented | upon, but they trust that the fore going will be sufficient to convince Your Exe+llency of the anconstitutional and almost revolutionary character of tae measure.

Your Memorialists would take the liberty to remark that the highest price now allowed by the Statutes of this Islard to be pail for the interest of Pro, rietors, iS seven shillings and sixpence of the iormer currency of this Island, " o . . . | per acre, equivalent to five shillings sterling. or one dollar and | twenty-t*vo cents ol the currency of the Dominion, and that a | Bill to allow a larger price to be placed at the dispo-al of the | Government for such purchases as would be voluntarily

i

. | effected, was refused by the Legislative Council at the late

Session, showing evidently that there is no desire in that branch of the Legislature to have a just and equitable settle- ment of the Land Question.

Your Memotialists would also refer to the fact that on the two adjoining Townships, Numbers Twenty-one (21) and Nineteen (19), appraisements have Leen made during the last year jor damage done to lands (both wiiderness and cleared) by reasons of the portions required for Railway track and Stations, and that the average compensation allowed on the said Townships has been at the rate of eighty-f.ur (84) dollars per acre more than twenty-four times as much as the price demanded by your M2morialists, all of which fac's can be verefied.

Your Memorialists, in addition to the foregoing observa- tions would quote the words of the Land Commissioners (Honorable J. H. Gniay, at present Ju'ge in British Columbia; Honorable Joseph Howe, late President of the Privy Council, and afterward Governor of Nova Scotia; and the Hon J. W. Ritchie, now Judge in Nova Scotia;) in their Report of 18th July, 1861, as to a mode of arbitration nearly identical with the one under re- view, they say, ‘The objections to this course are that no application of general principles, no uniformity, would govern the decisions. The men selected would be as various as the localities, many of them, it is reasonable to assume, would hardly possess the necessary qualifications for an enlightened judgment. Sume of them might be zealous partizans, and even if an umpire could in all cases be selected who was not, the decisions would be as eccentric as the views aid tempers of the parties engaged were diverse and irreconcilable, or their skill in argument or negotiation was fairly balanerd.”

Ia conclusion, your Memorialists fecr that there is too good reason to believe that the Act in question has been passed by the Legislature more “to disguise the want of practical state-manship than to increase the prosperity of this Province or prom .ote the contentment ané happiness of its people.”

Your Memorialists, therefore, respectfully pray that Your Excellency will be pleased to disallow the said * Land Parchase Act, 1874.”

And as in duty bound will ever pray.

( Signed ) WM, CUNDALL, “ E. M. CUNDALL, o LOUISA MONTGOMERY, By her Trustee H. J. CUNDALL, H. J. CUNDALL. C ariottetown, P. E. 1., May 1874.

(copy.) To His Excellency the Right Honorable Sir Frederick Temple,

Dominion of Canada : Cundall, of Charlottetown, in Prince Edward Island, Guardian Winsloe, infant children of the late Alfred Winsloe, Esquire,

said Island, at present of Halifax, Nova Scotia, humbly sheweth :

Loca] Legislature intituled “The Land Purchase Act, 1874,”

RP Pe Oe eet.

and Committee for John Winsloe, Esquire, formerly of the

That an Act was passed during the late Session of the

LTTE ee ae ae

lschich is fo transfer to the Loeal Government without the consent of the owners the lands of all persons holding upwards by actual use and occupation a Proprietor may hold 1000 neres of untenanted lands,

The small possessions and sole dependence of the poor, the fatherless and the widow, are arbitrarily dealt «with by this sweeping and unconstitutional measure in the same mune ner as the large properties of the comparatively wealthy and independ nt. : : ; :

As the attempted injustice of the Act in question will be fully exposed and set before your Excellency by others, your

memorialist will merely refer to the points peculiar to the |

cases of those whom he represents, and the very great hard. ship and trouble which they wouldgbe liable to should the Act | in question receive your Kxeellen' * wWeonsent,

The wards of your memorialist are orphans (the youngest and eldest being of the respective ages of 11 and 18 years) }and entirely dependent for their support and education upon l the rents derived from their small estates.

The gross annual rental of each amounts to about $350, «t which it remains for 80 or 100 years from the date of the lease, after which, many years henee, the rents rise. This amount ‘even when fully paid up, is barely sufficient to meet the or- dinary expenses of living and edueation.

Owinz to cireumstances beyond the control of your

memorialist, there are not now, nor will be, any funds in hand to meet the present necessities of his wards before next autumn, and any event which would delay the payment of the ren; } bevond that time, would entail the greatest privation wud har iship upon those for whom your memorialist prays.

Their only means of support would be taken away ; their relations in this country are few, and, like themselves, de- pendent upon a small annual rental, would be unable to assi-t , them, and the children being too young and inexperienced to earn their daily bread, would either be reduced to actual stary-

ation, or dependent upon the private charity of persons upon whom they have no claims—a wretched state of things which your memorialist contends the Government of any country has no right to impose upon any portion of its people without good cause,

Sucha delay of payments and lamentable consequences | will inevitably ensue should the Act in question come into | operation.

The Tenantry would tike Your Excelleney’s assent to the Bill as the signal to withhold all moneys due for rent : months, at least,—perhaps years—would elapse before all the ‘legal and other complications comprehended in the Act could be complied with, and the wards of your memorialist derive any benefit from the price awarded to them for the compulsory | transfer of their lands.

Their condition, meanwhile, would be truly humiliating

and disastrous, brought about, not by any fault or crime of their own, (save that inheriting ancestral acres) by the Act of a Legislature whose office should be rather to protect than to | oppress the fatherless. Your memorialist, moreover, firmly believes that the future income of his wards would be so materially reduced by the | change of property, as to be utterly inadequate for their sup- port.

The above remarks apply generally to the case of John | Winsloe, Esquire, formerly of this Province, but for many /years an inmate of the Provineial Lunatie Hospital, near Halifax, Nova Seotia, who has two children both under age, himself and one of the children being altogether dependent for their maintenance and support upon the receipts of his yearly rents ; and further, in his case, the most valuable portion of his property consists of a,farm of about one hundred and seventy acres, centrally situated for business, on which he | formerly resided for several years amongst his tenants, but was ‘compelled to leave through ill health. This farm has been let for a short term of years only, so that in the event of the owner or his children being able or desirous to oceupy it again, there should be no obstacle Your memorialist cannot perceive any provision in the Act in question whereby this preperty may be preserved for the use of Mr. Winsloe or his children, if he or they desire it; but, | rather on the contrary, that it would be included with the _ lands tenanted for long terms, and treated as any other part of the estate which would in effeet be confiscation. The owner and former occupant would thus be deprived | of the commonest rights of a British subject—that of a fire- side and a home on his own property—a cruelty and absurdity which your memorialist cannot believe Your Excellency will | sanction under the specious pretence of justice and equity. Your memorialist, therefore, prays Your Excellency will | be pleased to withhold your assont from “ The Land Purchase | Act, 1874.” And, as in duty bound, will ever pray, (Signed) H. a, CUNDALL Guardian of Alice Winsloe, Amy Winsloe, Isabel Winsloe and Arthur Winsloe, and Committee for Joha Winsloe, Esquire.

lo the Right Honorable Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of

State for the Colonies :

We the undersigned Proprietors of land in Prince Edward Island in the Dominion of Canada, have learned with surprise | that an Act,a Draft Copy of which is appended, is now before the Legislature of that Island. We respectfully invite your Lord ship’s attention to this subject, and submit that the proposed Act is subversive of the rights of property, that it will prove most ruinous to all who own land in that Colony, and that it will be a dangerous prececent to establish as a mode of allaying popu- lar agitation. It+hould be borne in mind that there is nothing whatever to distinguish us from landowners in other portions of |the Empire. In no other Colony can land be obtained on such

favorable terms as in Prince Edward Island where the rent per | acre, after a lapse of some years, rises only to Ten pence sters ling, per acre, and where the Leases are in most cases for 999 i years.

Fourteen years ago, at the urgent instance of the British Government, a large number of the Prince Edward Island Lands owners consented to their rights to the decision of a Royal Coms mission with a view to putting an end to the various questions that had arisen in that ‘olony. Theresut of that Commission was a Declaration that not a single case of harsh treatment had been proved by the Tenants. lhe Proprietors were urged to consent toa remission of the large amount of rent which they had too indulgently allowed to accumulate. In the hope that by such concessions some security could be thenceforth ensured to them, the Proprietors assented to the remission, and, also, in some instances to an equally serious surrender of their rights in other respects. But the concessions proved unavailing, and bes came only the stepping stones for fresh agressions. A Tenants’ Compensation Act for Ireland haying been passed by the late Government, they send it as a boon to Prince Edward Island politicians who only too readily adopted such an acceptable mea- sure of confiscation. By it the Tenants were able to demand liberal compensation for their outlay upon property held by them while the unfortunate Landlord was precluded, by his ill-timed | generosity.from using as a set off to such claims the large arrears of rent which had been so unwisely surrendered.

it might have been hoped that this Act would have been the last of the long series of oppressive laws that have been passed to harrass the owners of land in that country. But the resu!t | proves that this is not the case. Though settlers on Prince | Edward Island can secure abundance of land, either freehold or | leasehold, on singularly favorable terms a further Act is now in , contemplation to deprive the proprietors of their lands. One of | the inducements to adopt such legislation is the offer of the Dominion Government to assist the Island Government to buy the lands of the proprietors as a reward for the adoption of Con- | federation by the people of Prince Edward Island. We respectfully submit that the proposed Act is without a | precedent in the history of legislation. But even if it were called for, and constitutional ss respects its objects, the mode of pros | cedure adopted by it would prove inevitably most ruinous and harrassing to the owners of property in that Island. ; The Government, which is practically irresponsible, as it cans | not be sued in a Court of Law, can hold this Act for years over | the unfortunate proprietor, who cannot force on the proceedings | when once commenced, nor obtain compensation nor costs when | |

such proceedings have been abandoned. Nor is there any basis provided for valuing the property, so that if a refractory Tenant has paid nothing for years. there is every reason to believe that the Government will avail thomselves of the Landlord’s misfor~ ‘tune, and will pay him only an equivalent for what he had been actually receiving from the Tenant, who will get the land at the lowest possible figure, payable on the easiest possible terms.

Apart from these and many other equally serious objections to

the form of the Act we respectfully submit that the Act itself is

| simply an outrage against modern civilization, and cannot fail to | be utilized in England and Ireland by agitators as a precedent | for abolishing leasehold Tenures, and for preventing any pro prietor from owning more than 5V0 acres of land,

We beg to draw your Lordship’s attention to the singular grounds on which this Act of Confiscation is based. ‘he first is that the leasehold Tenures of the Island have long been a sub- ject of contention, and have proved seriously detrimental to the prosperity of that Province, and to the contentment and happi-~ nessof the people.

We beg to submit that this statement is clearly unfounded, that the cause of the agitation on the Island has been the ex. istence of demagogues there ; and thatjthe Land Commission of 1860, clearly established the fact that those Townships where leasehold Tenures existed were far more prosperous than those whose occupants held in fee simple, while the remarkable in- crease in the wealth and population of the whole Island since 1860 proves that it has enjoyed a measure of prosperity which has been equalled in few portions of the British Empire.

One of the other two grounds alleged is that it is very de-~ sirable to convert leasehold tenures into freehold estates. This is equally applicable to every part of the Empire, and could be urged with peculiar force in the vicinity of Westminster Hall.

There is one more ground for despoiling us of our property, and that is that there is “ no reasonable hope of certain proprie- tors voluntarily selling their Township lands to the Government at moderate prices.”

We beg to suggest that evenif this state of things does ex- | ist in Prince Edward Island, an unwillingnoss to sell property at | a price below its value must exist in every free country where a

|

‘

Baronet, Karl Dafferin, &c., &e., Governor General of the | man’s property is secured by law against arbitrary confiscation

| Ly the Government. | The conclusion arrived at from these remarkable premises is

The humble Petition and Memorial of Henry Jones | even more astounding, viz: that because some proprietors do

| not wish to sell to the Government at moderate prices, and it is

of Alice Winsloe, Amy Winsloe, Isabel Winsloe and Arthur desirable to convert leasehold tenures into freehold, therefere

any person owning over 1000 aeres can be forced to sell to the Government by appraisement, so that the Act applies to all lands whether held on leasehold or on freehold, and practically amounts to this that no one shal] own over 1000 acres of land.

We have learned, too, that even this is regarded as too large an amount of liberality to extend to the owners of property, | the Opposition having endeavored to amend the Act by prevent»

and reserved for your Exeellency’s sanction, the object of | ing any one from owning over 500 acres of land,

* * ~~ \? = hn aes ws. S—> “, LS +. $3 > S %

in conclusion, we respectfully urge that we have acted most | liberally and fairly to our Tenauts, who hold their lands on more

| Empire—that we have made most liberal sacrifices of targe ar- | rears for the sake ef peace ~that year after year we have been incessantly harrassed by a Legislature elected by the tenants and | their friends, and that there is no shadow of excuse for such exs | ceptional legislation against us, unless Her Majesty’s Government | are prepared to sanction that princip!e which is the corner stone | of Communism —that property is a crime against society. We therefore pray that the Royal assent miy be withheld | from this Act,and feel assured that, as British subjects. we can | now very safely leave a measure based on such socialist principles | to the wisdom and justice of [ler Majesty’s Government. We have, &c.,

(Signed) MELVILL¥,

(. GEORGINA FANE,

CG. SULLIVAN,

G, GRAHAM MONTGOMERY,

W. STEWART,

For self & sister,

M. FANNING,

B- H. CUMBERLAND, LT. COL.

M. W. CUMBERLAND,

JOHN MACDONALD.

{cory ] 5 Urrer Brook Srreer. June 19th, 1874,

| My Lord,

Iam informed, that the Act called Land Purehase Act, of | Prince Edward Island, the object of which is to confiseate the ! " * . ° '

| Estates of the Proprietors of land in the Island, has been passed by the Local Legislature, and has been sent to Your Excellency.

I enclose a copy of the Memorial that was signed by the | Proprietors, now in England, when we received a draft copy of | due; and that to take action for the past year's

I have received a copy of the Act as it has been passed, render- ed by some amendments, still more injurious to the Proprietors than it was at first, and I now write to your Excellency, to protest

' | the Act as it was first proposed by the Government

the Legislation of any country that has a réspectable Govern- ment.

I entreat that the assent of Her Majesty may not be given to this Act, for which there is no precedent in the annals of our Country or any of its Colonies.

This Act is a violation of the first principles of English liberty and of rights that have been held sacred ever since the great ' charter that is held to be the foundation of the liberty of English< | men, secured to every individual of the nation, the free enjoy- | ment of his life, his liberty, and his property.

} It empowers the Government, to seize, when it pleases, the |

: ‘ . : : ! favor: Bs o be found in any other part of the | of 500 neres in this Province, the onty exception being thas | favorable terms than are to be f ’ }

against this Act which, in injustice and tyranny, has no parallel) in |

iin,

employed by the Government to plead theircase before the ( missioners, that to attempt to prejudice the case of the paanel . tors by means of instructions to the Commissioners thane is as unfair as it is injudicial. wes, Your memorialists would further submit that whereas | voluntarily consenting to arbitration, have hitherto} capable of ousting the jurisdiction of the Courts of La | by any articles of arbitration, and all awards under such arbitra | tion have been leld to be liable to be set aside lew vmtous | reasons in the discretion of said Courts ; and whereas the vighie | of your memorialists and others, as being sought to be made | parties to the arbitration clauses of this Bill against their will should have been most jealously guarded; that Section XLI “ said Bill would have tho effect of taki 1g the award of said oatelieias: tors out of the jurisdiction of all Courts either of Law or E nity with the exception of errors in the award, which, when walabad | out by the Supreme Conrt, are to be corrected by the arbitrators themselves, if they see fit to do so, Your memorialists would further submit that whereas larce | amounts of money would be required for carrying out the pro-

j 4

parties en held ins wand Equity

| Visions of this Bill, no provision has been made, by either tha Local or D >minion Legislature for placing at the immediate dis- | posal of the Local Government any amount or amounts of money | for that purpose. Your memorialists further submit that the first clause of | section XLIV. of said Bill woula, if enacted, be a direct Act of | wrong intaking from a proprietor, without any compensation | whatever, those just rights in the possession of which every Brits ish subject has been hitherto guaranteed: and is eo totally at variance with every principle of equity or justiec >, and is sucha | direct manifestation of the spirit in which the Biil was frame 1, as should Jead to the closest and most adverse seratiny of its othér enactments, :

It would appear hardly necessary for your \'emorialists to mention any further objection to the akove cl ‘use of the Bill - but it may be stated that to take action for the recovery of the accruing or ensuing vear’s rent, is already iNegal, as it is not yet

an rent (Gif that be what is intended to be alone permitted) without, at the same time including in the action all arrears that may be due, would by common law and practice, be to forfeit the right to recover any such arrears in future.

Your memorialists would further submit that the fact of the last clause of section XLIV interfering with actions now pending in the Supreme Court of this Province, is unparalleled and uns precedented in the history of British legislatic n; and that the two clauses, taken together, could only be exceeded by an ens actment to compel a proprietor to hand back to a tenant any rent he had ever received from him, which, although it would be _an injury and hardship to the proprietor, would be only putting | the honest and inéustrious, or fortunate tenant, who had paid tp, on the same or as good a footing as the dishonest. lazy or | unfortunate tenant who has fallen into arrear. ‘ Your memorialists submit that taking the last mentioned

‘landed property of any one who is possessed of more than 500 | section No, XLIV. in connection with the latter part of clause

/ acres, to summon him to a Court of Inquisition, where he is to be ’ 1 ,

| is of the XXVth section of this Bill, the intention of the whole

| examined on oath as to the extent and amount of his property, to | Bill is to take from the proprietors the right to recover any arrears

inflict upon him, fine and imprisonment, and any other punish« ment that the Supreme Court may please to inflict, if he does not

| that may be due to them, without any compensation; as clause | B says the Arbitrators shall take into consideration, in estimating

| sppear before the court, or being there, if he does not give infor- | the value of those arrears, the probability of their being recover.

| mation in answer to any enquiry they may chose to make, and | produce any paper or document they may wish to have in order to enable them to get possession of his property, and obtain full power over it.

There is no iaw in any part of the British Dominions pro- | hibiting a man from owning more than 500 or 1000 acres of land, | and rendering the possession punishable by the confiscation of it. , There is no such law in the United States where there are large | estates still held by the descendants and representatives of those to whom grants of land were made when they were British Colo. nies, and by the descendants or representatives of the Dutch, French and Spanish land owners in the States, that were not originally colonies of England. There is no such law in any | civilized country.

I protest against this Act as one of spoliation and tyranny that could emanate only from a communistic and socialist as. sembly.

It is called Land Purchase, but on looking over the clauses, Your Excellency will see that it is confiscation, and only in name purchase.

1 request Your Excellency to observe the clause 44, that abolishes the payment of rent throughout the Island, to any proprietor, after the passing of the Act, except for the present and accruing year, releasing the tenant from any payment of

secured to the government.

leasehold tenure into freehold.

perience in allages of the wgld has shewn that it has often been found convenient to a man to pay an anual rent rather than pay the value of property for absolute possession. The «assertion, | therefore, that it would be desirable to a community, that Lease. | hold tenure should be abol#shed, is untrue. The Act, however, | is false to its preamble.

It does not convert one acre of leasehold land ints freehold. It only empowers the Government of the Island to seize the land of every proprietor, who is owner of more than 500 acres, and to become a great Land Jobbing Company.

. As regards the tenants in Prince Edward Island, they do not usually wish to purchase the freehold ef their farms, The rent which they pay for the land is so low, anu the length of the lease generally 999 years, gives them so completely the fixity and secur- ity of freehold, that they do not usually wish to purchase the free- hold. Oa many of the Estates they can purchasg if they please, and they can also purchase land that is still wilderness,

They generally prefer taking alease. I have not heard that my tenants wish to purchase the freehold of their farms, but I have often application for leases.

The Tenants are not the persons who are to be benefitted by the Act called Land Purchase, but the men possessed of money who are anxious to lend it to tenants at the high inte:est which can be obtained for money in the Island. The land is mortgaged to them, and eventually becomes theirs.

The memorial that I enclose states objections to the Act which I will not trouble Your Excellency by repeating: