« Previous page | Start of chapter | Book contents | Next page »
CHAPTER II....continued
If the claim to be released from the obligation of paying rent could in any case be regarded as fair and equitable, it would be so when urged by the cultivators of Prince Edward Island; as it was they, and they alone, who by their labour changed the whole face of the country, redeeming it from the forest which at no distant time covered the land from shore to shore. About one hundred years ago the island was parcelled out to about as many proprietors, on certain specified conditions, the principal of which was, to procure settlers, with a view to the cultivation of the soil and the population of the colony, and also to pay quit-rent to the Crown. These obligations, the conditions on which the estates were originally granted, were generally disregarded to such an extent, indeed, were they disregarded, that some forfeitures were made, and these forfeitures would have been extensively enforced had not the defaulting proprietors sufficient influence with the Home Government to retain their property, notwithstanding that they had failed in many and flagrant instances to redeem their part of the original compact. So little was done in the way of obtaining settlers, that at the commencement of the present century the population of the whole island did not exceed 6,000 souls; and it was not until the year 1830-35 that any extensive emigration from the United Kingdom took place. In 1832 the population was 32,000; it was 80,552 by the last census; and in 1866 it was rather triumphantly estimated at or near 90,000.
About two years since the anti-rent feeling resolved itself into an active organisation, having its centre in Charlottetown, the capital and seat of government. Who were its leaders, or by whom it was originated, is of little consequence to know. I have heard it stated that the Irish were not among its active promoters in the first instance, the English and Scotch settlers taking the lead. But the Irish were soon drawn into the League, as they sympathised heartily with its object, which was not so much to abolish the payment of rent, as to compel the proprietors to sell their estates on fair terms. Passive resistance was eventually adopted in certain districts, the representatives of the civil power being coolly set at defiance, or rather laughed at by the sturdy colonists. Seeing the inability of the civil force to cope with what a prosecuting crown lawyer would describe as 'a conspiracy against property at once wide-spread and formidable,' it was deemed advisable to send to the mainland for two companies of infantry, there not then being a single soldier in the colony. Backed by this armed force, the law was vindicated, a few individuals being made the victims of their bold resistance, or legal indiscretion. The Tenant League came to an end; but as proof that the feeling in which it had its origin was still potent, inasmuch as it really represented the universal sentiment of the colony, an extract or two from the public records may be useful.
On the 9th of April, 1866, the Lieutenant-Governor, when opening the legislative session, used these words in his 'speech:'--
The general prosperity of the past year has been marred by the civil disturbances which took place in several parts of this colony. Misled by ignorant or designing men, tenants were induced to form themselves into an association with the avowed intention of withholding payment of their rents, unless their landlords consented to sell their lands on such terms as this association chose to dictate.
The law was openly and systematically set at defiance, and it became necessary to use extraordinary measures to enforce it. A requisition was therefore made for a detachment of her Majesty's troops, to aid the civil power, and the authority of the law has been firmly and impartially maintained.
But, as if to show that the popular demand was not devoid of reason and justice, his Excellency made the following important announcement:--
'I have recently concluded the purchase of another estate from one of the proprietors. It is my intention to continue to buy out the rights of the landowners, whenever I am enabled to do so on reasonable terms.'
And on the 11th of May, when the short session was formally closed, the representative of the Crown thus proclaimed the triumph, if not of the League, at least of the popular demand:--
Mr. Speaker and Gentlemen of the House of Assembly:
'The measure by which you have extended my powers of purchasing land, has my hearty concurrence; and I trust that, under its provisions, I may be enabled to purchase large estates from the proprietors.'
In the 'debate on the address' many things were said on both sides of the House which would have been in the last degree startling if uttered in the senate-chamber of the mother country. A few extracts will suffice.
First from the Hon. Mr. Coles, the Leader of the Opposition, who, referring to a proposition made by the late Duke of Newcastle, as Colonial Minister, says:--
The Duke's own proposals, however, ought to have satisfied the Government. His scheme was that if a tenant had regularly paid his rent, under his lease, for 16 years, he should be entitled to the freehold of his farm at 16 years' purchase; if for 10 years, for 10 years' purchase; and if for 8 years, for 8 years' purchase; that was according to the actual interest which the proprietor had in the leasehold, as evidenced by the amount of rent which he had received on account of it. At the time it was submitted he thought the scheme was a fair one, and he thought so still; but our Government thought otherwise, rejected it, and brought forward and carried their Fifteen Years' Purchase Bill.
The Solicitor-General, the official organ of the Government, defends the Fifteen Years' Purchase Bill, which, though derided for its shortcomings by the Leader of the Opposition, would be regarded in the British House of Commons as a measure of sweeping confiscation worthy of the French Revolution, or the days of Jack Cade. That learned gentleman says :--
In every Session of the Legislature since the passage of the Fifteen Years' Purchase Bill have the Opposition assailed the Government, on the assumed grounds that that Bill was no boon to the tenantry, was unacceptable to a majority of them, and could not by any possibility be made advantageous to them. He, however, confidently maintained that the Bill was a handsome instalment of all the benefits promised to the tenantry, by the party in power, through legislative action with respect to the Land Question. By means of it large arrears of rent have been expunged from the books of proprietors, and declared irrecoverable, as against all tenants who shall avail themselves of the provisions of the Sill for the purchase of the fee-simple of their farms. Whilst the tenants' improvements were in existence they were a sufficient security for the recovery of all arrears of rent. On one-third of Lot 34, the property of Sir E. Cunard. the tenants, by having availed themselves of the advantages extended to them by that Bill, had had over 1,000l. of arrears wiped off, every farthing of which could have been recovered by the proprietor, because the tenants were, in reality, men of wealth. It was the same on the Sullivan property. There were many tenants upon the estates affected by the Fifteen Years' Purchase Bill, to whom, before the passing of it the proprietors would not consent to sell the fee-simple of their farms even at 20s. or 30s. per acre; but those proprietors were now compelled to part with the fee-simple of their leased lands at 15 years' purchase.
With the following passage from the speech of the Hon. J. C. Pope, who must be described as the Prime Minister of this sufficiently-governed colony, these extracts may be closed. Nor is it the least significant of the entire. He shows that the purchase and re-sale of the great properties has been a paying speculation for the Government; and he adds his official testimony to the universality of the feeling in favour of the conversion of tenancies into fee-simple--or, as he emphatically expresses it, 'the freeing of the country from the burden of the leasehold or rent-paying system.'
'Nearly all the money which the Conservatives have expended in the purchase of proprietary estates has been refunded. Every estate which we have bought has proved a paying speculation. We have had a profit upon every one of them. I think the Government will be justified in purchasing all the estates they can, and carrying on, as quickly as possible, the freeing of the country from the burden of the leasehold or rent-paying system; and whether I may be in the Government or out of it, I will do all in my power to bring about so desirable a consummation.'
So much for the Land Question of the British Colony of Prince Edward Island, which Sir Bulwer Lytton was as anxious to settle on satisfactory terms to the colonists as was the Duke of Newcastle. To statesmen who recoil with dismay from the least invasion of the ' rights of property' it may afford matter for useful reflection.
Before dismissing the subject, I may add, on the authority of men of all parties, classes, and positions, that not only are the Irish amongst the most thrifty, energetic, and improving of the agricultural population, but they are remarkable for their punctuality as rent-payers. I had no opportunity of visiting more than two of the settlements exclusively Irish; but I was generally assured that the other Irish settlements were in every respect equal to those I had seen.
While I was in the island, an Irishman, who had not many years before come out as a labourer, sold a farm for 1,000l., retaining another worth double that amount. 'I came out here with little in my pocket,' said an Irishman from Munster, from the borders of Cork and Tipperary, 'and I thank God I am now worth over 2,000l.' This was said, not boastingly, but in gratitude to Providence for the blessing which had attended his humble industry. 'I had nothing to depend on but God and my own four bones,' said another successful Irishman to me in Prince Edward Island; and this form of phrase, so expressive of self-reliance and trust in the Divine assistance, I heard repeated by men of the same persevering and pious race throughout the United States and the British Colonies. 'I had no one but God to help me,' is a common expression with the Irish everywhere.
« Previous page | Start of chapter | Book contents | Next page »
