t oe ' that we are doing th noti a service (i rt a ) — e country | A when we agi(ate for REFORM, | Last wee we received {rom ti ie Super- ~ intendent of Public Works for Queen's "Y ’ "a ss Charlottetown, Jan. 24, 1876, ; ; a County several documents in which are . si. } } i TITE LAND OUESTIONS. plainly pointed out the evils ineide nt to | our road system,—to the quadrennial dis nissal of officials > appoi ; Re ie wt fe be just, the | ™ il official , to the ippointment of Commissioners have either not apprehend- | GR SES The GMOETECmeN hesitate with a 1 th Land Purchase, 1875," or they view to party triumphs only, and not to . . the cood ef the count -and, above \ n hasty and negligent in the diss | °" ’ Sc country, ind, above eile al ie All the Judges of | #l to that gigantic, antiquated humbug : statute labo N k we shall have Supreme Court agree that the tatute labor, Next week we shall have i . ae a } * . . ‘? { ; " ‘asu ; er se . ; ve wards “do not satisfy the = statate ne pl re of giving these documents The award on the Sullivan estate was publicty > esaotinent uched in the following terms yk Oey? 1447 pyr ’ , HE SUEZ CANAL PURCHASE I \ AN — Sle | , . . . | 11 * | No EVENT in the foreign policy of

In t matter of t \} ition Great Britain, during the last quarter of | ing cases : : MacEachen. the C Ss oF . : :

Lands. forthe Purchase of the estate | * century, can compare, in real import

Cha e Antonia Sullivan, and the /ance, with the Suez Canal Purchase. Lands Purchase Act 1875.°% The sum} p.. ia, es ad

Pc say le ey Fis ii at a Regarded merely as a business—as dis- | +} i ired 1 irs i ; 35) cu ~*s ' | ; ) course of the English Government in this | (Sig 1) } bercm Cr Sd a mutter would not appear to be founded on iss ” a y the ¢ nor | sound views, The actual outlay, though latrifle to a wealthy country like Eagland, | J » s INS . ie . un T : is yet heavy; and the direct profits are i $ i — ° “y very remote. The canal is heavily mort-

( tetown. Ath September, 1873 gaged and much money must be spent to The other awards were drawn up in pl ce it in an efficient state of re pair. sameform. Bv the Act the Com-| Although the traffic is iacreasing fast, it | sslonere wore cbliced to consid zl will yet be m iny years before the canal

: ; a can bea paying investwent. The Khedive,

ry persons who have not attorned | under the weight of French pressure | : a és brought to bear upon him, had given up | ey ble | ut his claim to dividends on the profits of

x ses t sustaing his is ii eee s i i

ee a a. Aversi the canal company, lor nineteen years to & ! ' 5 ee LW h and ali be|come. Hence, though the purchaser of } ker ion by . . . : i as nearly nine-twentieths of the stock, it!

S « s in Ling e ace 7 ia

s proprietor’s lands; (1) the | will be long before England will receive nt t ginal gran nt om. | 229 direct pecuniary return for her ex.

wn; (2) the performance or nonperform- | ,

f those conditions: (3) the effects of} penditure. Moreover, some of the French |

} al aa and } > far the | :. i

a Bon-perrormance ene Se = the | journals argue that, by surrendering tor a spa s from the giish Coloniol Secre- | Ey ee :

s io ths different Lieutenant Governors | term of years his claim to profits, the this Island, or other action of the Crown) Khedive also surrendered his right of | Goveinmen ave operated as waivers of | . . . ue

Stites hi s vente reserved voting in the management of the Com-

rin fare the ve | f : ae .

ginal grants, aud how far the pay-) pany and of exercising a powerful influ

t of the same ha been waived or re- ‘ . . ° ‘ "Phage egy cert | ence in the direction of its affairs. This, i ll ' (if England was as powerless as Egypt to On the face of the awards it does not | : ; I , Rgypt tc . cd | protect her own interests, would be a

pear thatthe Commissioners have taken | P : ee gel very serious objection. But she is not

ny of these circumstances into considera- | : | powerless ; faet that | I ’ ie

| this purchase has shown herself to be in

and in her recent action it tion; and notwithstanding th n 10

leclares that no award

| | | | | |

the law expressely She } } :

i ae . : . earnest. She has thus, ina great meas shall be declared void for “ any reason, | ' . . pegenas rage viii : ne | regained that prestige, which, under the lefect, or informality, whatever,”’ the | r ;

i age late government, she was fast losing.

Judges have deemed the omission so 1m- | Wh . ' ioht d S os lateyer, therelore, she migh Oo, were

portant, th it they ave ziveD a decision } } iI] ° } KI 1; , " -— 7 Dh | the shares still in the Khedive’s hands

no the matter. which will render all the | 3 : e's hands, France can now do no more than submit,

Land

For

Xpensive peoceedings of the mmissioners Court of none effect. t is not to be supp’

fail to take advan

triumph they have gained.

tors will the

Every

tage of Ni proprietor who thinks his estate

been

valued at as high a figure as his

serghbors, every proprietor who thinks he |

sed that the Proprie-; ~ . | parison

has not |

lof a

ia cain a hundred dollars by worrying

» country and quashing the award, will

ppeal to the Supreme Court.

To laymen it does appear somewhat strange that in spite of the positive de- claration of the Act, that with the ex-

ption of the power of the Supreme |

ourt to send the awards back,they shall be final and conclusive on all par- judges should take to declare them invalid. it is asked, “ with directions

ion needed by

binding, ” the , , nemseives Why the Commissioners

ties, upon

not’”’ remit them to

supply the informat the proprietors and the Court ?”’ ve failed all

Act

raissioners cannot h 0 take the circumstances mentioned in the inte consideration; and memoranda by means of which

it would be comparatively easy to make

'

have their judgements thereon the award.

the

appear upon » face of to

the proceedings ?

expense of a renewal of We hear some talk of

upreme Court of Can-

untry

‘

ippeal to the S

if so they must |

| lund.

| with as good a grace as possible, to what

These, the advantages

is inevitable. however, in com-

with indirect guins and the political

draw-b cks,

acquired, are small

The indirect commercial gain must be The of the canal has hitherto been in foreign hands, while by fur the greatest amount of com-

very considerable, contre!

merce passing through it was Englis>. Hence, we had a vast trade, of which the greater part was British, subject to the control —I was almost saying the capricee— interests were often antagonistic to those of Eng- Her mercantile

foreign country, whose

interests were,

| therefore, liable to be disturbed by Euro-

{ pean

complications, by internal distur-

| bances in Egypt, or by probable ruptures

| between the to | This | affairs, which Mr. Disraelie’s

The Com~ | by purchasing the stock, have very effeet-

Why put the}

| |

a. N » d ubt 1 descision of the Su- preme Court of Ay eal would devlop the true form and features of the “ Land | Purchase Act 1875” in a manner highly |

ratifying to the lawyers; but the Pro» ‘ince—which would have bear the

xpense -— would not likely gain by it.

The conflicting elements which comprise |

Khedive and the Porte.

was a very unsatisfactory state of

government,

ually It is generally understood that M. Lesseps was striving to procure the shares

changed.

for France, and that an offer was actually made of them to the French Government ; but that they could not agree about the terms, or what is more likely, could not afford the purchase. _It is also reported that negotiations were opened by Egypt

|; with Mr. Gladstone’s government for the

sale, but that the late prime minister, with his usual contemptuous disregard

for England’s foreign policy, would not entertain the offer. To Mr. Disraeli,

however, it presented strong temptatious It gave a chance for that sort of daring statesmanship whieh has so much charmed

for the conservative chief. Moreover, it

e ‘ acreed — } nye ‘ i ur Supreme Court are agreed—the | offered a brilliant opportunity of restoring,

idges are of one mind—that the awards

ire invalid ;

that the higher Court would reverse their cision.

We trust the wise and honorable gentle- men who compose the Legislative Council ire now satisfied with the result of their patriotic action on the Bill which would have enabled the the estates by voluntary sale on fair and reasonable With that Act and

t both on the Statute

Government to obtain

terms the Compulsory A:

Book, the Province would, in all proba- bility, now be in quiet possession of the vreater number of the estates; for the

proprietors would have voluntarily sold their lands—as they appointed their Com-~ leat me upon them.”’ The Local Uppositi#™ have learned

lesson—at the expense of the country.

rsissioners—'‘ a worst thing should

They will not likely again give the three nonths’ hoist to a good measure, merely because it does not appear to be consist» ent with statements made in the preamble of another Act. It may be found that the passage of an Act admitting the pos- ibility of the voluntary sale of proprie- tury estates is the best method of escaping from the difficulties which now beset the ‘iovernment in the final settlement of our Land Question. If so, we hope to see no juctious opposition o _ ;

REFORM,

THE ready response of the people to the ery we have revised for Legislative and Hepartmental Reform is a gratifying sign

the

to rouse

times. Truly, it is not too soon

With the

‘mbrous political machinery of ante-

ourseves to action,

ufederation times—when we had to cols

wet and disburse the revenues of the |

and it is not at all probable} ¢..¢

by cue bold stroke of policy, England's waning prestige abroad. Hence, when the Khedive’s offer was made, it

was at once accepted, and with such cel- erity was the business accomplished, that the first intimation ‘the public had of the matter was the news that the purchase was completed.

The sale must have been a sad blow to M. Lesseps. When he constructed the canal he boasted that he had struck a

deathblow at England’s mercantile su— periority. He believed that the trade of

the East would fall into the hands of his own countrymen, and that England’s com- mercial supremacy would be overthrown. In this he was disappointed. From the first day the canai was opened, three-fifths of the trade has been in her hands ; and, instead of seeing French commerce flour-

the expense of British, he has iven

ishing at merely g a new to the latter. acquisition,

by the Disraeli government, of a control»

and vigorous impulse And now the

ling influence in the affairs of the canal, has given the final overthrow to his hopes.

To appreciate the political importance of the purchase, it must be remembered, that it gives Great Britain the command of that portion of the highway to her Eastern Empire, which she did not already possess. She already held the entrance to, as Well as various stations in, the Medi- terranean. From Aden she could virtually command the Red Sea; and now she has secured the connecting link between them. She has also acquired influence in Egypt that foreign powers cannot well disturb ; and

pending,

said to be now for placing the Egyptain rail- roads in EKuglish hands, sueceed, her au- thority there will be complete. Thus, knowing that uninterrupted communica= tion with the Kast Indies is secured, she

if the negotiations,

ony, when we had to provide for the | will be unathected by the machinations of

tal service, to build and maintain light: | te great continental powers for the dis-

Leune inode in sbort, we had everything memberment of the tottering Ottoman

which the toes for us to do ourselves—when we grap- jeed with the Land Question, and intro-

weed Responsible Government and Free Is)

tive

Dominion Government now /mpire.

Viewed, therefore, as a whole, the pur- chase cannot but cause intense satisfaction, not only for the commercial and political

sucation—with the same number of Leg- | advantages it «affords, but also as an evi- iors and the same number of Execu-| dence that a vigorous foreign policy has Councillors aud nearly the same | been inaugurated in the place of that rea-~

vumber of office holders we had in those | | diness to yield to outside pressure, which

auyS,

it is no wonder that we receive semrances from al] parts of the country

was the weakness of Mr, Gladstone's gove ernment. A. B, W,

| for the purpose of conveying to our reat

lions of the Chief

| deavor to give short summary of it.

|

tinct from a political—transaction, the | The Commissioner of Public Lands vs.

|

| remarked the

| tional questions, applicable to some or one

JUDGES’ DECISION

THE /court to interfere remiains unrestrained ,’’

This position Judge Peters sus stains by a He concludes “]

} . Last Monday we opened our columns

lers | learned argument.

the highly important information that the Supreme Court had delivered & judgment which would have the eflect of invalidating every award heretotore made by the Com-

set aside: First, because they

'matters {hey had to consider, before ascers

kind does not apply, andsthe power of this} mere mistake to

;

|

missioners, appointed uader the *' Land | taining the amount of compensation,

Purchase Act 1875.” Everyone is, of | Secondly, for not deciding the question of | ' oe » waini > ia

course, interested to know the grounds of | Quit Rents, so as to protect the Proprietor,

after being stripped of his land, from suits respect of its liability to those rents. award,

We regret that the opin- Mr: Justice

res

this judgment. in Thirdly, for not setting out in their

Justice and orally, while our

and that the writ-

llensley were given porter was out of Court; _documents, any certain description claimed before them by the

of Public Lands,

ten opinion of Judge Peters is so yolumin ous that we have not space enough for the We will, however, en-~

‘the lands

whole decument Commissioner under his

Appeals from the awards of the Com -had been made in the follow-

by them to be transferred to him; and in for, or inrespect of what par-

missioners not showing mentioned in the several awards was res The setting aside of these

well aware, cause much

The Commissioner of Public Lands rs. R. B Stewart. The Commissioner of Public Lands rs. shiek: C.B. Fane.

| ticular parcel of land, the compensation spectively given.

} awards may, I am

Char. | disappointment as well as render useless the large expense attendant on the pro- But though this the

‘a consideration

lotte Sulivan.,

These were, by consent of both parties, ceedings. is, to use

subject to some excep»

words of Lord —,

argued as one case . that certainly ought to induce great caution “The cases themselves,” | in assuming jurisdiction, itcertainly cannot

Judge, ‘from the

of them singly. oer justify us in declining it when the law has

lodged it with the Court. We have no

learned

interests involved, are important,

some of the points invoke discussion of | more right to refuse to any of the Queen’s

|

|

}aconelusion on the many different parts | on which I am called to express an Opinion,

| question, and gives a short analysis of the

| not reproduce.

| constitutional questions of the highest im-

i and well-know facts involved in our land

| | while |

| subjects the redress which we are empower- and, I must say, that during the | argument the Counsel on! such powers as the constitution has not both sides have displayed a research and | conferred on us,’ In m. We backed by | 324, it is remarked that as laymen are fre-

and

portance ; of four days

Hodges on knowledge of principles of law, a calm, dispassionate, but close able | quently selected as arbitrators and umpires right ible

which has greatly assisted me in coming to

credit: to them, and | there cannot be any doubt that professional

reasoning, assistance should be obtained in conducting the proceedings and preparing the award; and, | must say, it is very unfortunate that in such an important matter as this, should not have

Judge Peters then relates the general

Commissioners

‘Land Purchase Act, 1875,’—which we need | He then devotes his at- | tention to the objections raised by the | Counsel for the proprietors—E. J, Hodgson, | Esq. The tirst objection was that the | award does not show how the Commission

with which they could not be supposed to have much acquaintance,

THE IMPERIAL ACT ULTRA VI2ES.

Tue next objection is that under the | provisions of the British North America Act ers have

bound to On this point, |

adjudicate upon. pass this Act. ‘By the 92ud section of

the Judge argues that it is necessary, to give | the mperial Act, (British North America validity to the award, that the Commission. Act,) it is enacted that “in each Province ers’ the matter of adverse | +), Legislature may exclusively make laws holdings, non-payment of quit rents, and| i. polation to matters coming within the non-compliance with the conditions of the | original grants, should appear on the face |

of the award,—because, under the Act, the

decision on

tioned; and the 13th class mentioned in this section is ‘+ Property and Civil Rights

|authorized to engage such assistance, at |

least in drawing up their awards—a matter | | which it is their duty to ascertain in order | to give full effect to this Act.

adjudicated on matters they were | the Joand Legislature had not the power to | aa | trustee

Commissioners were specially required to adjudicate upon these matters.

sioners have been silent. Moreover, the proprietors are permitted to appeal to the Supreme Court within thirty days; and they should at once grounds on which the award was made, so that they may, if dissatisfied, come to the Supreme Court and ask to have it remitted for reconsideration and correction before the thirty days expire. Judge Peters re- marked that a great many squatters appear | to have been auinad Some say they hold a hundred acres; some fifty acres. One says he had twelve acres cleared or fenced twenty years ago. * ee

The law as to acquiring by adverse posses-~ A squatter is not con- sidered in possession of anything excey

sion is briefly this

or appears to occupy in some way. appear that each acre claimed has been so held for twenty years ; and if it appears that he held five acres in that way for twenty years and the next five only for eighteen or nineteen years, be can only hold the first; and the proprietor (if he can make out a prima facia title) can recover the other. It does not appear that the Commissioners took any such circumstances into considera tion. QUIT RENTS.

3ut there is another and distinct point

made vy Mr. Hodgson as to the quit rents.

charge on the land; the Commissioners gave an express decision, finding that none are due or that they have | been taken into account in awarding com- pensation, the proprietor might be sued for them; and therefore the proprietor was en- | titled to have this fact found. The Counsel for the government contend that the rent is merely a charge on the land, and that no

After showing that there was a question whether these quit rents were due or not, Judge Peters said ‘that quit rents are a charge on the land there is no doubt. But although they are only a chirge on the land, yet the proprietor may be indirectly liable ; torif there be a tenant or purchaser with whom he has covenanted for quiet posses - sion or against encumberances, either could maintain an action against the proprietor. The tenant, if distrained on, or the purchas< er for that, or because the land being liable to this rent was not free from encumberan- ces. * * In the present case, the omis- sion, for the reason already stated,affects the proprietors’ interest in the whole subject matter, and also fails to provide him with a protection against future claims on account of quit rents,to which, under the Act, he was liable.” DESCRIPTIONS.

The third ground is, that the award is un- certain because it gives no description of the lands in respect of which compensation is awarded, and which are to be conveyed by the public trustee to the Commz.ssioner of public lands. The counsel for the plaintiff argued that, as the award states the com- pensation to be given for all the lands own- ed by the proprietor on the township named and the Commissioner of Public Lands’ notice of intention to take, it is suf- ficiently certain, inasmuch as the lands to be conveyed by the public trustee can be ascertained, by showing what lands the Pro< prietor owned at the time of making the award. But Judge Peters maintains, that under the Act, the Commissioners were bound, in their award, to give such a de- scription as would enable the public trustee to fill up the form in the manner directed by the Act. He quotes and argues at length on the point.

SETTING ASIDE,

Assuming the awards to be invalid, Judge Peters next considers the question “ low is the Supreme Court to deal with them ?”’ “ The 45th Section, in the most emphetic manner, declares that no award shall be deemed void for any reason, defect, or in- formality whatever; that no appeal shall be made to any tribunal, nor shall the award or proceedings be removed by cer/ro- rari or any other process; but, with the ex- ception of the power of the Supreme Court, to send it back, it shall be binding, final, and conclusive on all parties such restrictions are binding on this court, and prevent its inquiring into any decision made by Commissioners on subject matters

pears by the express words of the award, or by necessary implication, they have decd- edupon., fut the whole current of at- thorities show tht when an arbitration exceeds its jurisdiction, by taking upon it-

In such | cases silence will not do; and the Commis- |

be informed of the

He contends that the quit rents area/| and, therefore, unless |

action will be taken against the proprietors.’ |

in the Province.’"’ Mr. Hodgson contends that the power of making laws in relation |to property does not give the right of

for the purpose of giving or selling it to an- other; that the power is restricted to the taking of private property for public uses, | only when a public necessity for doing so exists, and that the existence of such pub- | lie necessity is a condition precedent to the

| right to exercise it; and thet no such neces- sity exi-ted with regard to the subject matters dealt with by this Act. The torney General on the other hand contends that the Legislature are the judges whether and therefore have a

| such necessity exists ; right to pass any law they please. If the Legislature restricted by what American

! Provincial is coming

| subjects under

° | jurists call “ the right of Eminent Domain,” what he has fenced, cleared or cultivated |*

It must |

t seems to me that this Act, at least in some of its provisions, would be an excess of Legislative power.’’ The Judge dilates upon these contentions at some length, and declares that ‘‘no amount of compen- sation can condone the impropriety 6f taking private property when no public necessity exists; for the right to take is founded on public necessity alone,”’ and that no Court could hold that any public necessity existed for giving the Government of this Island such power over private property, as the Land Purchase Act, 1875, gives. “It must

be recollected that when a constitutional | question regarding the validity of an Act of this description is raised, the Court are | bound to decide on what it finds within the

four corners of the Act, not importing any~ | thing that is not there, and not excluding anything thatis. The Imperial Act has bone and sinew. But like the dry bones of the | valley it has yet to be clothed by many a | ju licial decision from all parts of the Dos

minion, tempered and corrected by the Sus

| preme Tribunal before its true form and features will become perfectly developed; and, therefore, every question concerning its construction should be carefully con

sidered. And amongst the many questions that may be raised, none, perhaps, will be more important than those concerning the distribution of the Legislative power. Now, it seems to me that if this Island had been a new country, or one on its entry into the Union, possessed of a new Legislative power, a grant of power to make laws in re- lation to property would be understood to apply to regulations respecting property still continuing vested in its owners, and would confer only a limited jurisdiction— as contended for by Mr. Hodgson * * * * * * But this Island had a constitution similar to that of the other B.N. A. Pro- vinces, when it entered the confedracy; and the powers of its Legislature over property and civil rights were as sovereign as those of the British Parliament itself— save Only when their enactments happened to conflict with the Imparial statutes, or were repugnant to the established law of England. Te oe Es N. A. Act of 1874 does not abrogate these Provincial institutions, but merely with.~ draws from them the power of making laws regarding certain matters—enumerated in Ylst section—over which they previously had jurisdiction, But as to all matters not so withdrawn, the Provinces remain in their state of ‘‘old Dominion, their jurisdiction over them in the same plight as it previously existed, and, therefore, we cannot hold this Act to be ultra vires.

* * ° * *

* and retain

STEWART’S DEEDS TO CHILDREN.

Turning to the point applicable to the particular case of R. B. Stewart, Esq., Judge Peters addressed himself to the question whether or not Mr. Stewart could—after receiving the Government’s notice of inten- tion to purehase—convey to his children certain portions of his estates. !t appears before the case came before the Commis- sioners for hearing, Mr. Stewart conyeyed 1,499 acres of land on Lot 7,—500 of which

|

within their jurisdiction, and which, it ap, |

were leased and 999 unleased,—to his son, James F. Stewart. Ile also con- veyed 4000 acres on Lot 30 to his son Robert Stewart. On this question Judge

Peters disagreed with his brother Judge-~-, The notice of intention to purchase, in his opinion, does not, so far as any provision in Act is concerned,—excep: as regards the

No doubt | #7e4?s of rent—in any way interfere with |

the proprietor’ s dominion over his property

taking away the property of one person |

| should be rendered nugatory for want of

| case, that then

certify that the $

Sut at

Judge Peters thought, therefore, ‘that the injunction should be continued

how they decided the several preliminary | for a ver ry short time, and if, at the expiras |

tion of that time, the Treasurer shall not ),500, in lawfal gold coin, been paid into the court in this

Mr. Stewart may move to

has

| have the injunction made perpetual.”’

or by reference to any particular plans or | of | understand there are still a large sumber |

notice to the proprietors, and adjudicated |

ed to administer than to use against them |

FUTURE AWARDS,

Referring to awards which may in future |

be made, Judge Peters said:—“As I of awards not yet made, I will, therefore, before closing, briefly state some particulars which | think the awards, to be made valid, must certainly contain. I think there should be a distinct finding that the breach

of conditions in the original grants were waived or that they were not; and if not, whether any deduction

(1 don’t say that it need state how much), was made on that account. And the same with ne ard to quitrents. I think it should | also, by reference to schedule or other- wise, show the names of each person who they hold has acquired a title by posses~ sion, and the quantity and particular parcel he has soacquired by bounds. [! think it should alsoshow the names and quantity held by squatters, who have held for less than twenty years, and whether anything

| (L don’t say how much) has been deducted

| on their accout.

| There are two lines in the 29th section of | Servative, was elected in North Renfrew to- |

the | been |

| deputation presented a memorial.

| Claim classes of subjects next hereinafter men- |

| stroyed so many lives on

YVhere should also be a

schedule showing the amount of arrears

|

|

aed romaine | LATEST VEWS BY TELEGRAPH. NEW ADVERTISEMENTS.

they were otherwise valid, fame time the judges must take cure not | to add to injustice by allowing unnecessary think, therefore, that the awarls must be | delay,

do not show | «

SALLIE EIS OLAS LO elt OS ings, | -~ _— ON A itt ct a, te ay

THE

Rochford Theatricals,

ae, To Reading Room and Examine:

LONDON, Jan 19.—The Empress of Ger-

many has made elegant presents to the English ladies in recognition of their kind- i ness to the passengers and crew of the | T V Iu wrecked steamer Schiller. N iD \ J AYS., The Tublin police have discovered that | TUESDAY, Thomas, authoro*® the Bremerhaven crime | January 25th,

the Roe'fard Theatricals '

was charged, in 1866, with scuttling a ship

1 on board of which he had goods insured in England for £4009. He was arrested, but | ry - > on ie . — subsequently effected his release. | \\ O { U DD Li OY ] S !

: he comnaie of Cologue has taken AND 7

| refuge in Holland where he lately met the Bishop of Paderborn. BOX AND Cox ! Five hundred and fifty packages will be | my T Q y ‘ > = hipped from Calais on the 15th, for the | uesday 9 January 25th. Centennial. January : |, 1876.

New York, Jan. 19.—Two hundred ope- | ‘ rators have been thrown out of employe | = { e Brat rich ment by the burning of Carpenter & Co's, mils, at North Hoosiek. ‘TOTAL ABS TINENGE SOCIETY

Ottawa, Jan. 20.—!he Governor Gens | '

|

due for each tenant and how much of these |

arrears has been allowed to the proprietor

in each case. I think this last necessary.

the Act which I think have been very much | day. And the facts |

overlooked. They are these : ‘‘ which they may be to carry this Act into effect.’ The |

meaning of these I take to be is facts,

order

This goes far beyond what they themselves have to perform. It >oints to all that has to be afterwards done by others to carry out what they have begun; to what the public has to do, and to what this Court has to do in making distribution. I see it stated that in one case the arrears are assigned to Cardinal Manning. If the award finds a lump sum, and the Cardinal’s comes in to participate in the distribution, how could we ascertain bow much of the lump sum was awarded in re- spect to the land, and how much in respect of the arrears of rent? We could make no distribution in such a case; and the same thing may happen in other cases when ar- rears are due to a deceased proprietor, and the present proprietor is not his personal representative, we would be compelled to

| hold the award void in such a case, because

the Commissioners had not made it so that the Court could carry it into effect. What- ever may be thought of the character of this Act, [ think it very unfortunate that such important ane expensive proceedings proper care in conducting them; and I have made these last observations in the hope that they may assist in preventing those yet to be made from running on the on which their predecessors have suffered shipwreck.

rocks

_—o=m + -_-——_————

THE DYNAMITE FIEND.

THOMAS DESTROY THE ‘‘ CITY OF BOSTON.”’

During the enquiry respecting the ex~- plosion of the infernal machine which des

DID

board the steamer Moselle, at Bremerhaven, a suspicion arose that the fiend Thomassen (or whatever his true name was) destroyed the Inman steamer City of Boston, which sailed from New York, and subsequently from Halifax in 1870, and was never afterwards heard of. The name of the City of Boston was mens tioned to Thomassen before his death and he answered, “ Oh, yes, an Inman Steamer —I knew her well.’ The supposition is that he may have obtained insurance on fic

titious shipments by the steamer, put an infernal machine on board, came to Halifax in the steamer, and then left her, and that the infernal machine exploded while she was at sea and totally destroyed her. The proprietors of the Inman Line have thought the matter worthy an inguiry, and have in- structed their New York agent, Mr. J. G

Dale, and their Halifax agents, Messrs. J. & R. B. Seeton, to make all necessary in- vestigations. Detectives have also been employed to work up the matter. It has been learned that a person named Thomas and wife, left New York in the Inman steamer City of Brovklyn, on the 4th June, 1870, and reached Liverpool, G. B., on the 16th. Persons of the same name went to the Adelphi, Liverpool, on the same day. This would tally with their going to Eng- land after obtaining Insurance moneys on account of the City of Boston loss, in March 1870. Thomassen is described as “a tall, fat, broad shouldered fellow, of about 45 years of age, with a common !ook- ing swampy face and dark red wiskers, bearing always golden spectacles on his nose and looking over them. He hada number of aliases — Alexander, Garcie, Hendriehsen, &c,. The names of Killmore er Stillmore, and J. S. McCutchin are mentioned is those of supposed accom~ plices. Nothing has yet transpired in Halifax to show that Thomassen was ever here. A photograph of the fiend, together with a fac simile of his handwriting, may be seen at the office of Messrs. Seeton.— Hz. Chronicle.

Meeting at Fort Avaustus.— Ata meets ing held at Ten Mile House, on the 18th inst., the following resolutions passed :—

Resolved, That in view of the recent de- cision of the Judges of the Supreme Court respecting the awards of the Commissioners, it is now more than ever desirable that the Legislature shall be summoned to meet without delay for the despatch of business, in order that all causes which have render~ ed the Land Purchase Bill inoperative may be made known to both branches thereof, and an opportunity be thus offered to their united wisdom to devise suitable reme~ dies. And be it further resolved that a memorial be addressed to the Executive Government requesting them to advise His Honor to summon the Legislature ac- cordingly.

On Thursday last, the deputation waited upon the Government, The Chairman of

ply the Hon. Mr, Haviland, Provincial | Secretary, said, as there was only a minority of the Council in town at present, the me« moria] would be submitted to a full meet-

| ing and they would be guided in the matter by what they believed to be the best in. |