should be raised at four per cent., which would amount to an annual charge of £80,000, and that by means of the system thus established, we could, as I feel very confident we should, double the present annual amount of Emigration to Canada. Who would refuse to pay £80,000 a-year, in order to enable 40,000 more of our countrymen to emigrate every year? It would be carrying on Emigration at the rate, after all, of £2 a-head. And if these 40,000 Emigrants were landed in Canada, and, from paupers fed by our bounty, became customers demanding and paying for our goods, the cost incurred on their account would be paid over and over again, by the mere addition to our revenue which would result from the increase in our trade which they must create. But I lay this down merely as a position, which I should not scruple to defend, if driven to it. I have not the slightest fear of the produce of the land sales proving insufficient for the discharge of every claim upon it."

To these propositions of Mr. Buller, I offer the following objections:

The proposition that Government should resume the ownership of the lands, is perfectly untenable. These lands, now held by individuals, are a source of public revenue to the country, that is to each district, and taking Mr. Buller's estimate, of 14,000,000 of acres, the various districts would lose a revenue applicable to local purposes only, of about £20,000 annually. Of course the moment the lands now held by individuals should pass to the Crown, that moment this local tax would terminate, and a direct tax would then have to be levied, to meet the purposes provided for by the present tax upon wild lands.

Mr. Buller contends that it would be wrong "to fix a special value on each acre," and therefore steps must be taken to obtain a general valuation. By the recommendation of this step, he manifests great want of knowledge of the country that he proposes to colonize. He would not value each acre separately, but he must value the lots as they are laid off, as they are patented; and it frequently occurs, that one lot may

be worth 20s. an acre, while the adjoining lot is almost valueless; and Mr. Buller would find, that in purchasing from the present proprietors, he would receive no small quantity of this latter quality, and, except by compulsion, not a great deal of the former. A large quantity of the wild lands of Canada are held by substantial farmers, who have families growing up, and who have invested a large amount of their savings in procuring this domain, for settling their children as they grow up. Is it reasonable or right that these men should be deprived of their investments, that when their children become of a suitable age to clear the forest, and commence the world for themselves, that then, and only then, the parent is to look out for lands upon which to settle them; and this because the parent state has taken from him his individual property for her redundant population? The idea is not to be entertained for one moment; and it is only surprising how Mr. Buller could have conceived this notion of despoiling the honest yeomen of the country.

With regard to the possessions of large quantities of land, which Mr. Buller calls estates, and speaks of them in a manner as though these 10,000 acres were in a block and formed but one estate, as regards these individuals, they are for the most part involuntary possessors of the same. The Montreal and Quebec merchants have taken these lands in payment from the country merchants who became possessed of them in the course of business. Is it right then to say to these gentlemen,—the Government want your lands, and you must give them at such a price as we think they are worth? You have paid 20s. an acre, have paid taxes on them for several years, until the lands have become more valuable; but you must forego all these, and yield up your claim to us? It is true, that the interest of the investment, together with the tax, will have doubled the amount of your original purchase; yet, if you paid £5,000 at the time, and now by these means they stand you in £8,000, you must charge the £3,000 to profit and loss; for we cannot, and will not, pay you more than you paid for the land fifteen or twenty years ago?-Could this be called justice?

X

If the full value of the land is to be paid, what necessity is there to re-convey to the Government, more especially if land fairly appraised was to be allowed to form a portion of the capital stock of a voluntary Association for Colonization. In 1840 many proprietors were willing to make free grants, how far more ready would they be to unite their lands with British capital, to render them useful and productive. Individuals are just as capable of effecting sales as Government agents; and generally those Emigrants who purchased from individuals, are more successful in their labours than those who purchase from the Government. Few, very few Government sales are punctually closed; and this being known, the Emigrant seldom exerts himself to comply with the terms of his purchase.

It is then said that the land is entirely unproductive, as it now remains, in the hands of the proprietors; and for this reason, the Government should not pay interest on the amount of purchase. This is not the case. The country is constantly settling, and of course the more it settles the more valuable the lands become. But Mr. Buller would not only take the lands at a set valuation, instead of a fair appraisement by those who were willing to unite their lands with the British capitalists, but, after having done this, would deprive the proprietors of the right of drawing interest on the amount of sales effected with the Government; when it is well known that in all such transactions Government, as well as individuals, invariably charge interest from the day of sale, and it is certain, if Colonization was carried on by means of their lands and British money, they would receive the same dividend as the individual investing capital.

Mr. Buller states, "that at the present rate of settlement, the proprietor cannot count on getting anything from his land for many long years." This also is incorrect. Take any of the counties in the eastern districts for example: lands, the property of individuals and of the Canada Company are settling fast, while Government lands are comparatively seldom purchased; and even in those cases where Government lands are

becoming D enterprise, than a tran But in Buller doe and would would sett few facts The Emig be shippe the Emig bringing pared for out to th might a Mr.

of settlin by indivi that they perfectly profitless add valu was esta vate co

becoming patented to individuals, it arises from individual enterprise, and is frequently more of a private arrangement than a transaction with the Government,

But in alluding to "the present rate of settlement," Mr. Buller does this in contradistinction to his proposed measure, and would lead to the inference that his Colonization scheme would settle it rapidly. Mr. Buller, however, has to learn a few facts connected with any forced system of Emigration. The Emigrants whom he calls pauper Emigrants, who are to be shipped to Canada at a cost of £2 a-head, are not generally the Emigrants who will turn to woods and forests, and aid in bringing the land under cultivation, without lands were prepared for them, habitations erected, and every inducement held out to them to persevere in their new toil. Then indeed they might and would flourish.

Mr. Buller is wrong, when he speaks of the present rate of settling the country; he is wrong when he says the lands held by individuals cannot be sold; and he is wrong when he says that they do not increase in value as they now are: but he is perfectly correct in saying that all that is still comparatively profitless, would be immediately valuable and productive, and add value to all around, if any sound system of Colonization was established, whether it was by the Government or by private combination.

After alluding to the scheme of issuing debentures, he then says, "supposing £100,000 to be got by land sales!!!" How does he expect to obtain this £100,000? By sales of lands to Emigrants, who cannot afford to pay their passage, but who are sent out by the Government at £2 a-head. Does he intend to exact the full payment down, when this needy. Emigrant goes on the land? If so, where is it to come from? All who know what a Canadian bush-life is, are aware that this is impossible;-nay more, unless such Emigrants have additional aid to the amount of £10, £15, or £20 for the first year or two, it will be a hard matter for them to get along at all. With this aid, only to be procured by conjoining the means of the capitalist with the voluntary subscription in capital

stock, of the tracts of land retained by the land-owner, and this fairly appraised, can Colonization be rendered mutually beneficial and available to all parties,-landowners, capitalists, and Emigrants.

Mr. Buller then says that "his argument to recommend this to the proprietors would be very simple." I think he is mistaken if he supposes these proprietors would give up their "estates" for half their cost: although I do not doubt that Government would use its energies to give a value to those lands, when they belonged to it, and by which means the present proprietors would soon receive their pay. Of course this additional value, after parting with property, must be a great consideration; and to receive half the value of property in a short time, when the proprietors could afford to wait a longer period, and obtain the full value, is, to say the least of it, a very feeble argument,-that Government would take their "estates," and give them an acknowledgment for them; and when Government sold these estates, they would pay them 21 per cent. and to render this transfer the more valuable, they would receive this 2 per cent. on the capital, without having anything to do or say in the matter. He would then tell them "that if things are left as they are, they will infallibly, according to the general practice in North America, and the received notions of public justice current there," be subjected to a wild land tax, which will ultimately take their land without any compensation.

The tax upon wild land must be in proportion to the taxes upon other property, and there is no fear in Canada of any "notions of justice" depriving people of their lands without paying for them. But mark the injustice in this matter.-As soon as Government obtains the possession of those lands, and they are no longer opposed by individuals, they will give an increased value to the lands, and this by individual sacrifice. This is surely not a characteristic of British Justice.

I certainly agree with Mr. Buller, that the mother country should pay the expense of Emigration. The relief afforded to the Empire is of infinitely greater value than the benefit con