History of Prince Edward Island

The report pointed to the grant made to the Lords Proprietors of Carolina, as a striking example of the inexpediency of such a plan of settlement, little progress having been made in the execution of it till the property, being reinvested in the crown, a new foundation was laid, which resulted in prosperity and advancement. The report, of which we have attempted to give a sketch, ended with the following words: – “We have not thought proper to take the opinion of Your Majesty’s servants in the law upon the question whether Your Majesty can legally make the grant desired by the Earl of Egmont, because we cannot think it expedient, either in a political or commercial light, for Your Majesty to comply with his Lordship’s proposals; and as Your Majesty has been pleased to annex the Island of Saint John to your Province of Nova Scotia, we humbly recommend the settling it upon the plan and under the regulations, approved of by Your Majesty for the settlement of that province in general.”

On receiving this reply to his memorial, the Earl addressed a second one to the King, substantially the same as the former, to which no reply seems to have been made. He accordingly had a third one drawn out and presented, attaching the names of his co-adventurers, who had agreed to assist his Lordship in the settlement of the island. The list included four admirals, a large number of officers, and eight members of parliament. This memorial, like the first, was referred to the Board of Trade, who prepared a lengthened report in answer to it. The opening passage was of such a nature as to make the memorialists imagine that all desired was to be granted. “We are of opinion,” said the Board, “it may be highly conducive to the speedy cultivation of your Majesty’s American Dominions that the nobility and other persons of rank and distinction in this country should take the lead, and show the example in the undertaking and carrying into execution the settlement thereof, and that all due encouragement should be given to officers of Your Majesty’s fleet and army, to whose distinguished bravery and conduct this kingdom is so much indebted for the acquisitions made in the last war.” But this soothing paragraph was followed by others which blasted the hopes of the ardent adventurers, by insisting on the distribution of land on the island being made in conformity to those principles of settlement, cultivation, and government which had been previously adopted, and were founded on experience.

The King referred this report, and all the other papers, to a committee of council, to whom Lord Egmont sent observations on the report, drawn up with great ability, in which his former arguments were repeated, and others adduced to strengthen them. These observations are pervaded by a bitterness of expression which, in the circumstances, is pardonable. The committee of council coincided in the views of the Board of Trade, and on the 9th of May, 1764, came the climax to Lord Egmont’s proposal, in the form of a minute of council, embodying a report adverse to the proposition of the Earl, and ordering that no grants be made of land in the Island of Saint John upon any other principles than those comprised in the reports of the Lords Commissioners of trade and plantations.

About the time of the arrival in London of Captain Holland’s plans of the island, the friends of Lord Egmont again mustered in great strength, including officers of high rank in the naval and military service, bankers, and merchants, and drew up a final memorial in behalf of his Lordship’s scheme, which closed with these words: – “That if at the end of ten years any ill consequence should be found to have arisen therefrom, upon an address to the two houses of parliament, His Majesty in council might change the jurisdiction in such manner as experience of the use or abuse might then dictate or demand.” That Lord Egmont was sanguine as to the success of this last appeal in his behalf, appears evident from a manuscript letter now before us, addressed by him on the 8th October, 1765, to Captain Holland, in which he says: – “I think it proper to let you know that a petition will be again presented to His Majesty in a few days for a grant of the Island of Saint John, upon the very same plan as that proposed before, which I have now reason to expect will meet with better success than the former. The same persons very nearly will be concerned, those only excluded who were drawn away by proposals and grants elsewhere by the Board of Trade, in order if possible to defeat my scheme. For yourself, you may be assured of your Hundred, as formerly intended, if I have anything to do in the direction of the affair, – which probably I shall have in the same mode and manner. Whether the grant may be made before the arrival of the survey or not I cannot certainly say, but we wait patiently for it, and hope it will be done accurately as to Hundreds, Manors, Freehold Villages, Towns, and Capitals, that a moment’s time may not be lost afterwards in proceeding to draw the lots, and then in proceeding to erect the Blockhouses of the Hundreds on a determined spot, which is the very first work to be put in execution, and agreed to be completed by all the chief adventurers within one twelvemonth after the grant shall be obtained.” This communication leads to the conviction, that if the island had been then granted no time would have been lost in erecting the strongholds referred to. It is evident that the erections were intended to consist mainly of wood. The adventurers were, for the most part, wealthy and influential, and under their auspices thousands would have emigrated to the island. It were vain to speculate as to the effect which would be produced if Egmont’s scheme had been put in execution. In looking over the list of those to whom Hundreds were to be allotted, we find that of the forty persons specified, thirty-two were military or naval officers, – men whose profession did not, as a rule, fit them for the direction of the settlement of a new colony. It is probable, however, that the expense to which, at the outset, the forty Lords of Hundreds were to be put would prompt them to take a more lively interest in their property than was exhibited by the subsequent grantees. It is, however, possible that not a few of the proposed lords intended to dispose of their property to the highest bidder soon after the lots were drawn, and thus to avoid the expense of the blockhouse erections, such a transference of interest being allowable under the proposed original grant. That Egmont intended to carry out his scheme in its integrity, there is no room to doubt. He must have employed the highest legal ability to frame his memorials, which are distinguished by a mastery of the ancient feudal tenures of the kingdom, which elicited expressions of admiration from the government. The pertinacity with which he urged his scheme showed that he was not a man easily diverted from any settled purpose, and few governments could have resisted the powerful influence he brought to bear for the attainment of his object. There can be little doubt that whatever might be the consequences of possession to the Lord Paramount himself and his family of nine children, the destiny of the island would have been far better in his keeping than in that of the men to whom it was afterwards unfortunately committed. In order to conciliate Lord Egmont, and make reparation to him for the trouble and expense to which he had been put in urging his scheme, the Board of Trade, by a minute dated the 5th of June, 1767, offered him any entire parish, – comprehending about one hundred thousand acres, – which he might select, but his lordship addressed a letter to the Board on the eleventh of the same month declining to take the grant. 2

CHAPTER II

Determination of the Home Government to dispose of the whole Island – The manner in which it was effected – Conditions on which grants were made – Appointment of Walter Patterson as Governor – Novel duties imposed on him – Callbeck made prisoner by Americans – Arrival of Hessian Troops – Sale of Land in 1781 – Agitation in consequence – Complaints against the Governor, and his tactics in defence – Governor superceded, and Colonel Fanning appointed – Disputes between them – Charges of immorality against Patterson – His departure from the Island.

Although the government had resolutely opposed the scheme of settlement proposed by Lord Egmont, yet it was disposed to divide the island among persons who had claims on the ground of military or other public services; and it was accordingly determined, in order to prevent disputes, to make the various allotments by ballot.3 The Board of Trade and Plantations accordingly prepared certain conditions, under which the various grants were to be made. On twenty-six specified lots or townships a quitrent of six shillings on every hundred acres was reserved, on twenty-nine lots four shillings, and on eleven lots two shillings, payable annually on one half of the grant at the expiration of five years, and on the whole at the expiration of ten years after the date of the grants. A reservation of such parts of each lot as might afterwards be found necessary for fortifications or public purposes, and of a hundred acres for a church and glebe, and of fifty acres for a schoolmaster, was made, five hundred feet from high-water mark being reserved for the purpose of a free fishery. Deposits of gold, silver, and coal were reserved for the Crown. It was stipulated that the grantee of each township should settle the same within ten years from the date of the grant, in the proportion of one person for every two hundred acres; that such settlers should be European foreign protestants, or such persons as had resided in British North America for two years previous to the date of the grant; and, finally, that if one-third of the land was not so settled within four years from the date of the grant, the whole should be forfeited. Thus the whole island was, in 1767, disposed of in one day, with the exception of lot sixty-six, reserved for the King, and lots forty and fifty-nine, – which had been promised to Messrs. Spence, Muir, and Cathcart, and Messrs. Mill, Cathcart, and Higgens, by the government, in 1764, in consideration of their having established fisheries, and made improvements on the island,4 – and three small reservations, intended for three county towns. A mandamus addressed to the Governor of Nova Scotia, the island being now annexed to that province, was handed to each of the proprietors, instructing the governor to issue the respective grants, on the conditions specified. In the following year, 1768, a large majority of the proprietors presented a petition to the King, praying that the island should be erected into a separate government; that the quitrents which would become payable, according to stipulation, in 1772, should become payable from the first of May, 1769, and that the payment of the remaining half should be deferred for the period of twenty years. This proposition was accepted by the government, and accordingly Captain Walter Patterson, one of the island proprietors, was appointed governor. He, accompanied by other officers, arrived on the island in 1770, at which period, notwithstanding the conditions of settlement attached to the land grants, there were only one hundred and fifty families and five proprietors residing on it. It was calculated by the government that the quitrents would amount in the aggregate to fourteen hundred and seventy pounds sterling. The governor was instructed to pay out of that fund the following annual salaries, in sterling currency: to himself, as governor, five hundred pounds, to the secretary and registrar, one hundred and fifty pounds, to the chief justice, two hundred pounds, to the attorney general, one hundred pounds, to the clerk of the crown and coroner, eighty pounds, to the provost marshal, fifty pounds, and to a minister of the Church of England, one hundred pounds. This arrangement was to remain in force not more than ten years, and in the event of the quitrents falling short, from any cause, of the required sum, the salaries were to be diminished in proportion.

The governor was required to perform other duties, which were grossly unjust, and in some cases beyond human capability. He was, for example, enjoined by the twenty-sixth and twenty-seventh articles of his instructions to permit “liberty of conscience to all persons (except Roman catholics), so they be contented with a quiet and peaceable enjoyment of the same, not giving offence and scandal to the government,” and he was also “to take especial care that God Almighty should be devoutly and duly served throughout his government.” No schoolmaster, coming from England, was permitted to teach without a license from the Bishop of London; and it was assumed in his instructions that all Christians, save those connected with the Church of England, were heterodox. Some denominations were, indeed, tolerated; but in conformity to the bigoted British policy of the times, Roman catholics were not permitted to settle on the island. This sectarian policy has borne bitter fruit in Ireland, in the alienation of a great mass of the Irish people. So deeply has alienation struck its roots, and so widely spread are its branches, that, notwithstanding catholic emancipation, its effects are still painfully visible, not only in Ireland, but also in the masses of the Irish people located in the United States, as strikingly evinced in the election of the late John Mitchell, for Tipperary, and in the honors which have been paid to his memory in the States. More than one generation will pass away ere the evil effects of unjust anti-catholic legislation are totally obliterated from the continent of America.

The little progress made in the settlement of the island, from the time it was granted until the year 1779, is indicated by the fact that no step had been taken to introduce settlers into all the lots, ranging from one to sixteen, besides other thirty-three which were in the same condition. Thus, although more than ten years had elapsed since the ballot took place, in scarcely a score of lots was there any attempt made to conform to the conditions attached to the sixty-seven townships.

Notwithstanding the very small population of the island, it was resolved to grant it a complete constitution. This step the governor was commanded in his instructions to take as early as possible. “The forming a lower house of representatives for our said Island of Saint John,” said His Majesty, “is a consideration that cannot be too early taken up, for until this object is attainable, the most important interests of the inhabitants will necessarily remain without that advantage and protection which can only arise out of the vigor and activity of a complete constitution.” In the year 1773, the first assembly was convened. The first act passed was one confirming the past proceedings of the governor and council, and rendering valid all manner of process and proceedings in the several courts of judicature within the island, from the first day of May, 1769, to the present session of assembly.

The proposal to pay the government officials in the island from the amount realized from the quitrents completely failed, as but few of the proprietors acted as if they had been under obligation to comply with the conditions on which they obtained their grants. The sum realized from the amount of quitrents paid was totally inadequate to pay the official salaries. Hence it was necessary that some other arrangement should be adopted. The governor was reduced to such straits for want of money, that he was under the necessity of appropriating three thousand pounds, granted by parliament for the erection of public buildings in the island, for the maintenance of himself and the other government officers. The governor went to England in 1775, when it was agreed that the proprietors, in order to meet the difficulties of the case, should present a memorial to the Secretary of State for the colonies, praying that the civil establishment of the island should be provided for by an annual parliamentary grant, as in the case of the other colonies. By a minute of the seventh August, 1776, it was ordered by the government that the arrears of the quitrents due should be enforced by legal proceedings, and that the sum thus obtained should be devoted to the refunding of the amount expended, in a manner incompatible with the object for which it was voted. The power for the recovery of the quitrents, with which the governor was thus invested, was not speedily exercised, as he was anxious not to offend the proprietors, through whose influence the payment of the civil establishment of the island was placed on a more satisfactory footing.

During the governor’s absence in England the Hon. Mr. Callbeck, being the senior member of the council, was sworn in as administrator. In November of that year, a ship from London, having on board a number of settlers, and loaded with a valuable cargo, was unfortunately wrecked on the north side of the island. All on board were saved, but the cargo was either lost, or destroyed to such an extent as to be of little value, – an accident which involved no small hardship to the inhabitants.

In this year too a memorable incident occurred. Whilst the good people of Charlottetown were living in apparent security from hostile aggression, two American armed vessels which had been sent to cruise in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence, in order to intercept English ordnance store-ships, supposed to be on the way to Quebec, entered the harbor, and a landing was effected without any opposition, when the administrator, Mr. Callbeck, Mr. Wright, the surveyor general, and other officers of the government were made prisoners, and put with such valuable booty as the Americans could lay hands on, on board ship, and conveyed to New England. On arriving at the head-quarters of the American army, then at Cambridge, General Washington disapproved of the hostile act, dismissing the principal officers from their commands, telling them that “they had done those things which they ought not to have done, and left undone those things which it was their duty to have done.” At the same time he discharged the prisoners with expressions of regret, and returned all the property.

In the following year the Diligent, an armed brig, was detached by the admiral, commanding in America, to protect the island, which vessel was replaced by the Hunter, sloop of war, towards the end of the year, and which remained till November, 1777. The arrival of the latter vessel was extremely opportune, as a hostile expedition to the island was being organized by rebels from Machias, in Massachusetts, who had arrived at Fort Cumberland, in Nova Scotia. These men paid a visit to Pictou, where they seized on an armed merchant ship, then loading for Scotland. Fearing resistance, which they were not in a condition to overcome successfully, these rebels entered, with their prize, into the Bay of Verte, for the purpose of receiving reinforcements. But not being successful in this effort, on account of a defeat at Fort Cumberland, the vessel was given up to one of the officers, the rebels escaping on shore. The vessel then came to Charlottetown, where she remained during the winter.

In 1777 the administrator received instructions from the secretary of state for the colonies to raise an independent force for the defence of the island; but from the small number of the male population, which had been previously considerably reduced by recruiting officers, this force was never completed. In the following year, however, four provincial companies were sent from New York, under the command of Major Hierliky, for whom barracks were erected, under the direction of an engineer from Nova Scotia, and the island was thus placed in a defensive position, which greatly reduced the chances of a successful attack during the American war. With the exception of a few sheep, occasionally taken by the men of privateers, and some valuable property seized at the harbor of Saint George (now Georgetown), the inhabitants of the island experienced no further annoyance from the Americans during the continuance of the contest. The monotony of Charlottetown was betimes enlivened during the summer by the presence of the British war vessels employed in accompanying convoys to Quebec, and the occasional conduct into the harbor of American privateers which had been captured at sea by the British cruisers, and whose men were marched as prisoners through the woods to Halifax.

An interesting trial took place in Charlottetown in 1779, in the case of Thomas Mellish, v. the Convoy ship Dutchess of London, which Mr. Mellish seized for smuggling. The trial lasted for several months. Mr. Mellish was an officer in the First Troop of Horse Guards, and served also in the colonial military service. He was a member of the house of assembly, and held the office of collector of customs and other public positions for many years. His son, Thomas Mellish, died at an advanced age in 1859. Referring to his death, the Islander describes him as a most loyal British subject, and a devoted adherent of the Church of England.

Towards the end of October, 1779, the town of Charlottetown received a temporary accession to its inhabitants, by the arrival of the Hessian regiment of Knyphansen, under convoy of the war ship Camilla. Severe gales were encountered in the River Saint Lawrence, which compelled the ship to take refuge in the island. The troops were landed, and there being no barrack accommodation for them, some succeeded in hutting themselves most comfortably. Some of the men were suffering from fever, but speedily recovered, on account of the admirable character of the climate. The town supply of provisions was utterly inadequate to meet the demand occasioned by so large an addition to the population, but the farmers soon made up the deficiency, and the Hessians remained till the month of June, when they left for their destination. Not a few of the men were so favorably impressed with the island, that they returned to it from Germany, many years afterwards, and became industrious settlers.

Governor Patterson returned to the island in 1780, relieving the Honorable T. DesBrisay, who had succeeded Mr. Callbeck as administrator; and shortly after his arrival he appointed Mr. Nisbet, his brother-in-law, then clerk of the council, to the office of the receiver of quitrents. It was now determined by the governor to enforce a law passed by the assembly in 1773, “for the effectual recovery of certain of His Majesty’s quitrents in the Island of Saint John,” and in conformity to the treasury minute of the seventh of August, 1776, to which reference has already been made. Accordingly, early in 1781, proceedings were commenced in the supreme court against the townships in arrear of quitrents, as enumerated in the act of 1773, and the sale of a number of townships was thus effected. These reasonable proceedings were complained of to the British government, and powerful influence was brought to bear for the purpose of counteracting them. As the act of 1773, which had been confirmed by His Majesty, only applied to a part of the lands granted, it was deemed necessary to pass another act in 1781, which was intended to take a wider scope, and to render the sale of all lands in the island, where quitrents remained unpaid, legal. This act had, however, a clause suspending its operation till the King’s pleasure should be known. It appears by a manuscript copy of a report, dated tenth of July, 1783, by the lords of the committee of council for plantations, now before us, that this act was referred to Andrew Jackson, one of the King’s council, who reported that, in point of law, no objection could be made to it; and the same report also furnishes interesting information as to the considerations by which the government was influenced in its treatment of the action of the House of Assembly in regard to land. An application was made in behalf of officers abroad in the King’s service, who were proprietors of land, praying that the arrears of quitrent due on their lands should be remitted, and that no proceedings should be taken to dispose of those lands for future arrears until the conclusion of the war, when they might be enabled to settle and improve the same. Thomas Townshend, the colonial secretary, accordingly recommended that no action during the war should be taken against the property of absent officers. A petition was about the same time presented by other proprietors of land in the island, reciting the difficulties peculiarly incident to the island, showing that their expectations, mainly in consequence of the American war, had proved abortive, and complaining that many of the allotments in the island had been sold under the assembly act of 1774, and of the treasury order of 1776, to officers resident in the island, for little more than the arrears and charges of confiscation. They further prayed for a remission of the quitrents in arrear, and that in future they might have the option of paying the quitrents either in London or the island. The council proceeded, on the first of May, to take these matters into consideration, when it was agreed “that all such as, on or before the first of May, 1784, should have paid up all the arrears of quitrent due upon their respective lots to the first of May, 1783, should, from the said first of May, 1783, until the first of May, 1789, be exempted from the payment of more than the quitrent now payable upon each of their lots, and that, for and during the further term of ten years, – to commence from the said first of May, 1789, – the same quitrent only as is now payable on each of their lots should continue to be paid in lieu of the advanced quitrent, which, by the terms of the grants, would have become due and payable from the said first of May, 1789.” In accordance with this decision, a bill was prepared, which not only granted the redress specified in the above quotation, but also disallowed the act of 1781, and repealed the act of 1774, and rendered all the sales effected under it void, on the payment by the original proprietors of the purchase-money, interest, and charges incurred by the present holders, compensation being also required for any improvements made on the lands since the date of sale. This bill was drawn out in London, and sent to Governor Patterson in 1784, in order that it might be submitted to and adopted by the house of assembly. But the governor, having been himself a purchaser to a large extent of the confiscated property, assumed the responsibility of postponing official action in the matter, on the ground that the government was mistaken as to facts connected with the sale of the land, and, on consulting with the council, it was resolved to send to the home government a correct representation of the circumstances under which confiscation took place, in justification of delay in submitting the bill to the assembly for approval.