« AnteriorContinuar »
extended to the Lake of the Woods | The answers to these allegations are: and the Mississippi river (a.)
1 1. That the French claimed that the Thus by the action of the Imperial | boundaries of Canada or Nouvelle and Provincial Governments, when France extended to Hudson's Bay ; the new Province of Upper Canada and it was shown to the arbitrators was constituted, the northern limit of that the French had built and occupied Upper Canada was placed at Hudson's forts near to the Bay, after the Treaty Bay, and the western limit at the of Utrecht. Lake of the Woods—the boundaries And the award finds in favour of the fixed by the Award (6). But the French “suggested or proposed' bounDominion ignores these prerogative
nores these prerogative | dary line. acts of the Imperial Government 1 2. That as a matter of prerogative
- which, at the time the acts were | law, the Crown had the right to extend performed, “had plenary jurisdiction the civil government of Upper Canover the subject matter of these boun ada over any territories granted to its daries.'
subjects, or granted to the Hudson's The Dominion despatch of the 27th Bay Company; or had the right to as. January, 1882, accepts and approves sert the French sovereignty, which it of the findings of the report of a Com had displaced, as against the Committee of the House of Commons, pany's claims. The subjects of the made in 1880, as follows :
Crown in those territories were enti'In reference to the award made by the ar tled to the benefits of the Crown's bitrators on the 3rd August, 1878, a copy of government And a further answer which is appended, your Committee are of opinion that it does not describe the true
to this report may be found in the boundaries of Ontario. It seems to your Com opinion given by the Law Officers of mittee to be inconsistent with any bonndary
the Crown in 1857 : ‘With respect to line erer suggested or proposed subsequent to the Treaty of Utrecht (1713). It makes the
any rights of government, taxation, Provincial boundaries run into territories exclusive administration of justice, or granted by Royal charter in 1670, to the Mer
exclusive trade otherwise than as a chant Adventurers of England trading into Hudson Bay; and it cuts through Indian terri conseqnence of a right of ownership tories which, according to the Act 43 George of the land, such rights could not be III., cap. 138, and 1 and 2 George IV., cap.
legally insisted on by the Hudson's 66, formed no part of the Province of Lower Canada or Upper Canada, or either of them ; Bay Company, as having been legally and it carries the boundaries of Ontario within granted to them by the Crown' (a). . the limits of the former colony of Assiniboia.
The award also finds in favour of which was not a part of Upper Canada.'
the Crown's prerogative right to extend (a) Surveyor-General Smith's Upper Can
the civil government of Upper Canada ada, 1799, p. 3.
(6) The extent of Ontario may be thus to the shores of Hudson's Bay. stated : Area of Ontario within the limits 3. The Act of 43 George III., ch. claimed by the Dominion viz. : a line drawn due north from the confluence of the Ohio and
138 (1803), was passed in consequence Mississippi rivers on the west, and the height of crimes committed in the Indian terof land on the north:-100,000 square miles, ritories ; and those territories can only or 64,000,000 acres. Area of Ontario under the Award of the Arbitrators, 3rd August,
be ascertained by reference to the lo1878 :-197,000 square miles, or 126,000,000 calities where the crimes referred to in acres--an addition of 62,000,000 acres. After
the Act had been committed prior to the award was published in 1878, Britannicus, a correspondent of the Montreal Gazette, esti
its passing. Lord Selkirk, shortly afmated the land value of the disputed territory ter the occurrences, gave a detailed at $65,000,000. At the Detroit Trade Convention, in 1866, the Hon. James Skead, esti.
account of the crimes, and referring mated that there were 60,800 square miles of
to the Act stated: “This vague term, pine timber in the territory drained into “ Indian territories” has been used Lakes Huron and Superior ; and during a late debate (1882), in the Legislative Assembly of
without any definition to point out Ontario, Mr. J. C. Miller, M.P. P., estimated the particular territories to which the value of the timber within the disputed territory at $125,000,000.
(a) Boundary Documents, p. 201.
the Act is meant to apply. There are, i limits' of which the Committee rehowever, extensive tracts of country port have been intruded upon by the to which the provisious of the Act award. unquestionably do apply, viz. those This so-called 'proclamation' dewhich lie to the north and west of the | scribing the boundaries of the colony Hudson's Bay territories, and which of Assiniboia,' was produced in Torare known in Canada by the general onto, in 1818 (a), at the trial of Brown name of Athabasca. It was here that and others for the murder of Gov. the violences which gave occasion to ernor ' Semple, a predecessor of 'Govthe Act were committed, and these are ernor' Miles McDonell ; and Powell, the only districts in which a total de C. J., facetiously observed as to his fect of jurisdiction described in the title : 'You may call him, or they may preamble of the Act was to be found call him, just what you or they
(a). But the Committee ignores Lord will : Landlord, Master, Governor, or • Selkirk's testimony.
Bashaw' (6). Mr. Sherwood in his ar4. The reference to the colony of gument for the prisoners said : . This Assiniboia,' illustrates the question issuer of proclamations might as leable value of the findings of the gally have issued a proclamation forCommittee. This pseudo colony' bidding the people of Yonge Street to was a trading district of the Hud- | come to York Market (c). son's Bay Company, originally estab The Committee struggled to get lished by Lord Selkirk (6), under a evidence that the Crown had recognized grant of territory from a squatter this colony'(d). One witness stated company called the North-West Company, which, without any grant or (a) Trial of Brown et al. p. 98. charter from the Crown, had intruded (6) Ibid., p. 80. (c) Ibid. p, 92. into the western territory previously (d) This is illustrated by some questions occupied by French traders prior to
and answers given in the report. One witness
was asked : the conquest. Lord Selkirk sold his 277. I understand you to say Assiniboia title to the Hudson's Bay Company,
was a Crown colony? Not precisely, except
as being under the Crown as delegated to the and they re-granted to him in 1811.
Hudson's Bay Company. In 1814, Mr. Miles McDonell issued 278. It was fully recognized as a Crown a 'proclamation'setting forth that the colony? It was recognized as a colony. Hudson's Bay Company had ceded the Another witness was thus examined : territory called Assiniboia to Lord
417. Do you know of the existence of the Selkirk,—the limits of which he set
colony of Assiniboia? Yes; Lord Selkirk's
colony. out-and that he (Miles McDonell) 418. This colony was a regular Crown colhad been duly appointed Governor'
ony! No; it was not.
419. You do not admit it was ? No; it (c). In 1839, the Hudson's Bay Com
was a local establishment of the Hudson's pany declared the territory to be the Bay Company; the Crown had nothing to do * district of Assiniboia.' Such was the
420. It was first Lord Selkirk's colony. In origin of the so-called 'colony, the 1838 it was adopted by the Hudson's Bay
Company, and then it was treated in some (a) Sketch of the British Fur Trade in North measure as a Crown colony ? I must say there America, pp. 85-6. This statement is con was no Crown colony established by the firmed by the evidence of Mr. Mills (p. 27) ; Crown in Assiniboia. Mr. D. A. Smith (p. 52); and others before 421. Are you aware it was recognized as a the Committee.
Crown colony, and that Recorders were ap(6) In the proceedings before the Boundary
pointed, having civil and criminal jurisdicCommittee, the following was stated by an ex
tion under commissions issued by the Crown officer of the Hudson's Bay Company : Q.
in England ? Recorders were appointed un326. Did Lord Selkirk get any charter from
der commissions issued by the Hudson's Bay any power? A. Lord Selkirk was an usurper.'
422. Yes; under their charter from the. (c) Report of Boundary Committee, House Crown of England, as they claim? The of Commons, pp. xix, and 48; Boundary Crown appointed no officers with civil or crimDocuments, p. 28.
I inal jurisdiction in Assiniboia.
that it was so recognized because the between these two historic acts of coDuke of Wellington had sent troops ordinate prerogative assumption. But there in 1846, so that in view of any the logic of their finding as to the introuble in respect of the Oregon ques- | vasion of the Ontario boundaries on the tion, they might be made available on limits of Assiniboia is that a proclamathe other side of the mountains ;' and tion by a bailiff of Lord Selkirk or of again, 'most certainly the Duke of the Hudson's Bay Company, did limit Newcastle recognized as a possible or interpret the territorial operation of event that the Crown of England might the Crown's Proclamation, of 1791. make a crown colony of it. I believe The converse proposition: whether it was a mere accident that it was not | Lord Selkirk or the Hudson's Bay done. On such evidence the Com Company by the so-called 'proclamamittee report that, the colony of tion' had not intruded upon the Assiniboia was to some extent recog Crown's limits of Upper Canada, was nized by the Imperial Goverment,' and not considered by the Committee. that it was never treated as part of The agreement between the two the Province of Upper Canada' (a). political sovereignties of Canada and
To students of Crown law it will Ontario, referring this question of the appear novel that the Crown's Procla- disputed boundaries of Ontario to arbimation of 1791 could be revoked or tration became binding on each govlimited, or affected, by a grant or sale of ernment when approved as Orders in a squatter's claim, or by a proclama- | Council, by the Representatives of the tion' issued in 1814, by the bailiff of Crown in the Dominion and Province Lord Selkirk, or subordinate of a respectively, and pledged the good trading corporation, calling himself faith and honor of the Crown that the * governor of Assiniboia.' An act of agreement would be carried out ; and co-ordinate power was performed with therefore for the purposes of this in the same territory by M. Louis Riell arbitration, must be treated as subject in 1869, when he assumed the equally to all the incidents of a Treaty between executive title of ‘President;' and un two independent states. der an equally effective assumption of In a similar case of an agreement prerogative, issued a proclamation es- between subordinate governments in tablishing the Provisional Govern India, the English Court of Chancery ment of Assiniboia.' Riel's government, thus held : It is a case of mutual displaced the governor' who held his treaty by persons acting in that in. position by virtue of his succession to stance as states independent of each the title inaugurated by Mr, Miles other ; and the circumstances that the McDonell in 1814. And the Hudson's | East India Company are mere subBay Company, which had constituted | jects, with relation to this country, the territory as a 'colony,' and created | has nothing to do with that. That the office of governor,' abandoned its Treaty was entered into with them, not powers of government, and recognized as subjects but as a neighbouring inRiel and his confederates as a legal gov. | dependent state, and is the same as if ernment within the territorial limits it was a Treaty between two soverof the colony of Assiniboia' (b). The eigns' (a). Committee are silent on the analogy It is a rule of International Law that the powers necessary to make a valid | Ontario cannot afford to waiver in contract. That department is the or- holding firmly and fairly by the gan of the nation ; and the alienations Award. In this controversy with the by it are valid, because they are done Dominion she stands forth as the reby the reputed will of the nation' (a). presentative of all the Provinces, and
where a nation has tacitly or ex(a) Report of Buundary Committee, House pressly conferred upon its executive of Com., 1880, pp. xxi, and 96.
department, without reserve, the right (6) Report on the Difficulties in the North West Territories ; Journal of the House of
of treating with other states, it is conCommons, 1874, Appendix, p. 26. Statement
sidered as having invested it with all of claims consequent upon the insurrection in the NorthWest Territories.--Canada Ses. (a) Nabob of Carnatic v. Erst India Comsional Paper, No. 44. 1871, pp. 29-30.
pany, 2 Ves., Jun. 60.
Treaties when made by the com any abandonment by her of this Award petent power, and Awards made in would establish what to other Prov. pursuance of such Treaties, are, ac- inces might form an inconvenient precording to the ethics of nations, obli | cedent for a future breach of public gatory and binding on states as pri faith,' or—repudiation. vate contracts are binding upon indi The able state paper of the 18th viduals. If the Treaty requires an Act February, 1882, which sets forth Onof the Legislature to carry it into tario's reply to the Dominion deseffect, the Treaty is morally obligat patch, earnestly and temperately disory upon the legislature to pass the cusses the long and unexplained delay of law; and to refuse it would be a ! the Dominion rulers in announcing breach of public faith' (6). "No na their repudiation of the Award. It tion can violate public law and public shows the uselessness and delay of a faith without being subjected to the new arbitration and declines it; and penal consequences of reproach and then pleads for the sake of the dedisgrace' (C).
velopment and settlement of the terriIn the future of Canada and of the tory, the maintenance of order, and several Provinces, territorialand finan the due administration of justice cial disputes may occur, which may therein,' the “just course' of obtaining, appropriately be referred to tribunals without further delay, the Parliamentof arbitration. For the safety of their | ary recognition of the Award as a final future, and for the faithful observ adjustment of the boundaries of the ance of the pledged faith and honour Province, adding :-'the evils already of the Crown in their Governments, endured are beyond recall; but the
continuance or aggravation of them (a) Kent's Commentaries, vol. i., p. 167.
from this time forward is in the hands (6) Kent's Commentaries, vol. i., p. 166. Treaties have been confirmed by the following of your [Dominion] Government' (a) Imperial Acts, 22 Geo. III. c. 46; 2 & 3 Vic. -words which will find many an echo c 96 ; 7 Vic. c. 12 ; 15 Vic, c. 12 ; 25 & 26 Vic. c. 63; 31 & 32 Vic. c. 45 ; 33 & 34 Vic. c.
throughout Ontario. 52 ; 35 & 36 Vic, c. 45 ; 38 & 39 Vic, c. 22; 39 & 40 Vic. c. 80.
(a) Ontario Sess. Papers, No. 23, 1882, p. (c) Kent's Commentaries, vol. i., p. 182.
• THE 'ANTIGONE' OF SOPHOCLES.
BY WILLIAM H. C. KERR, M.A., BRANTFORD.
THE representation of a Greek play | alry. Yet the researches of Dr. Schlie
1 on the stage of a Canadian Uni- mann's spade on Mount Athos have versity theatre marks an era in classi- somewbat weakened the sweeping cal culture amongst us deserving of charge of mendacity brought by the something more than a passing notice. the Roman satirist against the Greek It may, moreover, excite some interest historians. But whatever may have in the approaching performance of the been the numbers engaged, it suffiAntigone of Sophocles, the tragedy ciently illustrates the spirit-stirring selected for representation, if we pre patriotism of the age that here the sent in popular form a brief outline warriors of a single Greek city, aided of the play, with some account of its by a contingent of 800 hoplites from author and his influence on Greek Platea, fought and won, against overtragic art.
whelming odds, the most decisive Sophacles was born at Colonus, a battle of historic times. village situate about a mile from The poet Æschylus, the illustrious Athens, about 500 B.C. To be strictly predecessor of Sophocles on the tragic accurate, our poet first saw the light stage, distinguished himself at Mara. five years after the dawn of the fifth thon, and, ten years later, from the century before the Christian era, and Grecian lines, saw the destruction of left 'the upper air' five years before the proud armament of the barbarians its close. His long life was, therefore, off the sea-beat isle of Ajax.' It was passed in the most momentous and in this same year (480 B. C.) that eventful epoch of Grecian history, Euripides was born ; and so we have His early childhood witnessed the the names of the Greek tragic triad heroic struggle of his countrymen associated with the most notable against the repeated attacks of the events in their country's history. Persian monarchy--a struggle in When the exultant Athenians, after which public liberty and individual the disastrous overthrow of the inprogress were matched against Oriental vaders at Salamis, were marching in despotism and slavish subjection, and procession to the shrine of Minerva which, fortunately for the destinies of and making the temple-crowned AcroEurope and the history of mankind, 1 polis ring with shouts of 'Io Kalliterminated signally in favour of the nike!' it was the comely son of Soformer. He was scarcely five years old phillus, then only in his sixteenth when he saw the return of the victorious year, who stept to the front as leader Athenians from the glorious field of of the garland-bearing train of youths Marathon. It reads like the exploits who chanted the song of triumph in of a fairy tale, that on that memorable celebration of the victory. What an plain a little band of ten thousand auspicious introduction to Athenian Greeks, with 'footsteps insupportably society! Hitherto, be had only advanced,' met and defeated an in given satisfactory evidence of his havvading bost numbered by hundreds of | ing profited by the excellent education thousands, the flower of Median chiv- | his father had provided for him by