Public Offices document.
Minutes (7), Other documents (2).
Murdoch summarizes British Columbia’s preemption system for acquiring land, Seymour’s reports on the preemptive system’s effect on settlement and land sales in the colony,
and Seymour’s recommendations regarding British Columbia maintaining a preemption system or a survey and auction sale system. Murdoch discusses the benefits and difficulties of the preemption system and recommends a
continuation of the system in British Columbia. Minutes by Robinson and Rogers discuss how to respond to Murdoch’s letter and what to report to Seymour. Blake’s minute suggests seeing subsequent 49/5572 March 22, 69. Minutes by Blake and Holland discuss how the Colonial Office should respond to the proposed ordinance of 1867 entitled the ordinance for regulating the acquisition of Crown lands in B. Columbia.
I have to acknowledge your letter of 21st inst. with a despatch
from the Governor of B. Columbia reporting on the results of the
land system in that Colony and in Vancouvers Island.
2. In B. Columbia and Vancouvers Island a system of preemption
of land before survey which prevails largely in the United
States but does not exist in any other British Colony was
established by laws passed by the respective Legislatures.
The main features of this system are, that any person may take
possession of any unoccupied and unreserved Country land to the
extent of 160 acres on obtaining a licence from the Magistrate
of the District. A record of the transaction must be made by
the Magistrate within 7 days on payment of a fee of $2 and when
the Government survey comes up to the land the
claimant is entitled, if there has been a continuous occupation,
to purchase the land at $1 an Acre. Surveyed Land could also be
acquired in the usual manner by purchase at auction.
3. In a despatch dated 12th May last the Duke of Buckingham &
Chandos desired to be informed how the preemptive system had
worked—especially how far it had been taken advantage of by
settlers—to what extent their lands had been surveyed and
granted—whether the conditions of personal residence and
improvement had been enforced—and whether any difficulty had
been experienced in obtaining payment and in settling boundaries.
Govr Seymour's despatch is the answer to his Grace's enquiries.
4. In respect to B. Columbia he states that with the exception
of 27,797 Acres sold in New Westminster and its vicinity—almost
the whole of which remains unimproved, all the farming
establishments have been formed on the preemptive system, that
the number of claims registered is 1696, of which about 500,
comprizing 90,000 Acres, are actually settled and improved—about
20,000 acres being fenced and about 6000 under
cultivation. Since 1863 there have been numerous applications
to have preempted lands surveyed, which had been complied with
in the case of 48 Farms comprizing 5289 Acres—but in only 20
cases comprizing 2090 acres, has the purchase money been paid,
and the Government have no power of compelling payment. In
respect to personal residence he states that there is some doubt
as to the effect of the Law in B. Columbia—and that residence by
a hired agent or servant has been held to be sufficient—but as
to the running of boundaries he says that the Settlements being
very much scattered but few cases have occurred of coterminous
lots, and where such cases have occurred there has been no
difficulty in adjusting them.
5. In Vancouvers Island about 75,000 acres had been sold by
private contract at 20s/
an Acre previous to 1861, in which year preemption was
established. Under the system 1013 claims comprizing 132,153
Acres have been recorded—of which 700 claims comprizing about
87,500 acres have been settled and improved, about 8500 acres
being fenced, & 2500 under cultivation. There has been no
difficulty in enforcing personal residence in Vancouvers Island—but
I infer from the Governors silence that no preemptive lands
have been there brought under survey or finally purchased.
6. Contrasting the results of the Sale of land after survey and
its preemptive occupation before survey as seen in B. Columbia &
Vancouvers Island, the Governor expresses his decided preference
for the latter. He states that the purchased land, especially
in B. Columbia, remains perfectly unimproved—not a tree felled,
nor an acre ploughed—while the preempted land, though small in
extent, yet is of the utmost importance as the first step
towards the development of the Colony. He observes that the sum
obtained for the sold land is of no importance in comparison with
the addition to the wealth of the Colony produced by the
occupiers of the preempted lands, who, during the recent season
of depression, have been the main support of the Colony. He
points out that it is only by a very liberal land system that
the Colony can compete with the adjacent territories of the
United States—and he expresses an opinion that it would be good
policy in the Governments
to survey and grant free of charge portions of land to settlers
who should have resided on & occupied the land for a specified
term of years—although he acknowledges that this would be
impracticable on account of the expense of surveys. He,
therefore, concludes that the present system, with some slight
modifications, will best suit the circumstances of the Colony.
7. It is impossible to deny in the face of the facts stated by
Govr Seymour, that the sale of land by auction has not, in
B. Columbia at least, been as successful as elsewhere. But it
must be remembered that those sales took place under exceptional
circumstances which necessarily gave them a highly speculative
character. The existence of gold in the Colony first became
generally known in the spring of 1858, and caused an influx of
miners from the United States which in a single month exceeded
10,000 persons. In the autumn of that year a sale of lots at
what was then intended for the capital took place, and they were
eagerly bought up by speculators. The site of the capital was
afterwards transferred to New Westminster, and with it the
rights of the purchasers at the previous site.
8. But the expectations at that time formed of the yield of
gold in B. Columbia have not been realized and the white
population was we believe in 1866 (the latest year for which we
have a return) less than one third of what it was at the date of
the establishment of the Colony. It is not surprizing that
under these circumstances town lots and land in the immediate
vicinity of the capital, which had been bought in the
expectation of an extravagant increase in their value, should
have been abandoned when that expectation was so signally
disappointed. That under these circumstances the existence of
this land in an unimproved condition must be, as Govr Seymour
states, an obstacle to the progress of the Colony cannot be
disputed, and it is time to consider whether without injustice
measures might not be adopted to compel the purchasers either to
improve or to part with it. The question is one especially for
the Local Government who are better acquainted than anyone else
with the circumstances of the sales and the condition of the
purchasers. I would, therefore, suggest that the Governor
should be instructed to consider in what way the public injury
arising from the unimproved condition of the land might be best
abated. In respect to Vancouvers Island we are surprized to
hear that there is any quantity of sold land uncultivated or
unused. The sales in that Island previous to 1861 were
principally to the Hudson's Bay Co and their Settlers, and we
had been under the impression that whatever land was purchased
by them was purchased for immediate occupation. If, however, it
is the case that land belonging to private owners is becoming an
obstruction and a nuisance in Vancouvers Island also, the
necessary measures should be taken there, as well as in
B. Columbia, to remedy the evil.
9. As regards the preemptive system generally it appears to
suit the present condition of the Colony. At all events it may
be taken for granted that in the depressed state of the Colony
it would not be possible to attract or retain any settlers if
the terms offered were less favorable than are offered in the
adjoining territories of the United States. So long as the
population is small and immigration slow, and the prospect of
increase in the value of land not such as to tempt speculators,
it may not be difficult to restrict the acquisitions of Settlers
under the preemptive system to the narrow limits which the law
allows. If so the evils which have elsewhere arisen from a too
facile system in the disposal of land may be avoided. But if at
any future time the Colony should rise in popular favor &
immigration became more rapid, the working of the system would
require to be carefully watched that the earliest symptoms of
its being abused might be at once and rigorously dealt with.
It would be scarcely possible under such circumstances to
control the operations of speculators. No regulations either as
to the quantity of land to be preempted or as to occupation &
improvement would long prevent that class of men from possessing
themselves of large tracts of the best land which they would
hold not for use but for future sale. The almost unlimited
extent of land in the United States has hitherto prevented any
serious inconvenience from the operations of land jobbers in
that Country. But even there it is stated that in some
districts, especially in California & Kanzas
(vide "Contemporary Review" for Novr '68),
all the best locations are in the hands of private persons, and
that immigrants are therefore compelled to pay for the land they
require 4 or 6 times as much as is demanded by the Government.
It is scarcely probable that the same result should be produced
in B. Columbia or Vancouvers Island for many years, but the
possibility of it ought to be kept in view. Meanwhile the
sparseness of the settlements will for the present prevent any
inconvenience from conflicting claims on the part of neighboring
Settlers—and this objection, therefore, to occupation before
survey may be put aside. In respect to the deferred payments it
may be assumed that in a majority of cases the Government will
lose the money. Nevertheless the importance in a political
point of view of increasing the population is so urgent,
while the difficulty of inducing Settlers to go to the Colony is
so great, that it seems inevitable to accept this contingency as
the necessary condition of the settlement. In the meantime the
Colony derives, as the Governor observes a greater advantage
from their settlement than the price their land would have sold
for at auction—while their labour on their lands is tending to
render the Colony self-sustaining. Under these circumstances
I would submit that the present system should not be interfered
with. However open it might be to objection in Colonies more
thickly peopled and more attractive to Emigrants, it is not
likely to have any injurious effect, for the present at least,
in Colonies so exceptionally situated as B. Columbia and
Vancouvers Island.
I have the honor to be
Sir
Your obedient
Humble Servant T.W.C. Murdoch
Minutes by CO staff
Sir F. Rogers
The previous papers have only just been returned to the Dept
which accounts for the delay which has occurred. Answer
106-11068 in the sense of the 9th par of this report.
I think I wd simply say that HG saw no reason for interfering
with the system at present pursued, though it is one wh in case
of any large increase in immigration wd require careful
watching. Add that any neglect to define & record carefully all
rights of property as they are acquired will cause great
embarrassment to the settlers hereafter—& that the Govrshd
take care that no such neglect is allowed.
Sir F. Rogers
This Ordinance was sent over in a duly authenticated form ie
with the Seal of the Colony & signature of the Governor (3370/67). But
the Governor informed us that he had "reserved" it. In the same
Despatch he stated that he had "withheld his assent" to it.
From a recent Despatch (9941/68) it appears that the Bill is
totally inoperative, for that "the original has no seal & is unsigned"
though the copy sent over—by an "imprudence" of the
Secretary had the seal affixed to it. The Govrs signature
was only attached in evidence of its correctness.
The law itself was strongly reported against by the Governor,
the Attorney General & the Surveyor General, and I assume that
it is not intended to be in any way sanctioned. The Governor
expresses his satisfaction that he has not been desired to bring
it into operation.
The Governor had no power to "reserve" a Bill, but he has
practically deferred his assent to it until he receives
instructions from home.
The question raised is whether any further notice need be
taken of this Bill which is at present inoperative for want of
the Govrs assent.
I should be disposed to inform the Govr that his assent should
not be given to the Bill.
Draft reply, Buckingham to Seymour, No. 102, 1 December 1868 stating that Buckingham sees no reason to interfer with British Columbia’s preemption system and informing Seymour to carefully define and record all rights of property as they are acquired.
Draft reply, Granville to Seymour, No. 2, 21 December 1868 advising Seymour to not give assent to the Ordinance for regulating the acquisition of Crown Lands in British Columbia.