An historical and statistical account of Nova Scotia

rulesofprecedency

A few interesting notes about initial attempts to settle Halifax are included here, as well as some details about the settlement of Dartmouth. The entirety of Chapter five is included also, a thorough overview of Nova Scotia’s legal and constitutional situation and its place outside the realm, some interesting observations on the constitutional nature within England itself, as well as the various institutions that were a part of life previous to the “paper revolution” that introduced “Responsible government” (previous to the overthrow of Nova Scotia’s constitution in an 1867 coup known as “confederation”).


“The beauty and the safety of this (Halifax) harbor attracted the notice of speculators at a very early period, and many applications were at different times made, for a grant of land in its vicinity. The famous projector, Captain Coram, was engaged in 1718, in a scheme for settling here; and a petition was presented by Sir Alexander Cairn, James Douglas, and Joshua Gee, in behalf of themselves and others, praying for a grant upon the sea coast, five leagues S.W. and five leagues N.W. of Chebucto, upon condition of building a town, improving the country around it, be raising hemp, making pitch, tar and turpentine, and of settling two hundred families upon it within three years. This petition received a favorable report from the Lords of Trade; but as it was opposed by the Massachusetts’s agents, on account of a clause restricting the fishery, it was rejected by the Council.”

View of Halifax from Dartmouth Cove

“Dartmouth – Opposite at Halifax, on the eastern side of the harbour, which is there about nine tenths of a mile wide, is situated the town of Dartmouth, which was laid out and settled in the year 1750. In the war of 1756, the [Mi’kmaq] collected in great force on the Bason of the Minas, ascended the Shubenacadie river in their canoes, and at night, surprising the guard, scalped or carried away most of the inhabitants. From this period, settlement was almost derelict, till Governor Parr, in 1784, encouraged 20 families to remove thither from Nantucket, to carry on the south sea fishery. The town was laid out in a new form, and £1,500 provided for the inhabitants to erect buildings. The spirit and activity of the new settlers created the most flattering expectations of success. Unfortunately, in 1792, the failure of a house in Halifax, extensively concerned in the whale fishery, gave a severe check to the Dartmouth establishment, which was soon after totally ruined. About this period, an agent was employed by the merchants of Milford, in England, to persuade the Nantucket settlers to remove thither; the offers were too liberal to be rejected, and the Province lost these orderly and industrious people.

During the late war the harbour became the general rendezvous of the navy and their prizes, which materially enriched the place, and extended the number of buildings. Between Dartmouth and Halifax a team boat constantly plies, for the accommodation of passengers. The whole of the eastern shore of the harbour, though by no means the first quality of soil, is much superior to the western… On the eastern passage there are some fine farms, chiefly settled by Germans, and every cove and indent contains a few families of fisherman, who supply Halifax with fresh and cured fish. A chain of lakes in this township, connected with the source of the Shubenacadie River, suggested the idea of uniting the waters of the Bason of Minas with Halifax harbour, by means of a canal. Of these lakes Charles, or the first Shubenacadie Lake, is distant from Halifax about three miles and a half.”

A close up of the map above, centered on the Dartmouth area.

Chapter V:

Various kinds of Colonial GovernmentsPower of GovernorNature of CouncilJurisdiction and power of House of AssemblyCourt of ChanceryCourt of ErrorSupreme CourtInferior Courts of Common PleasCourts of General SessionsJustices CourtsProbate CourtsSheriff and ProthonotaryCourt of Vice AdmiraltyCourt for the trial of PiraciesGeneral observations on the laws of Nova-Scotia

“A desire to know something of the Government under which we live is not only natural but commendable. In England there are many books written on the constitution of the Country, but in Nova Scotia, the inquisitive reader, while he finds enacted laws, will search in vain for any work professedly treating the origin of the authority that enacts them. The labor of examining the History of other colonies analogous to our own for this information is very great, and the means of doing so not always attainable. In a work of this kind, a brief outline is all that can be looked for, consistently with the space claimed by the other objects which it embraces; but it is hoped that it will be sufficient for the purpose of general information.

In British America there were originally several kinds of Governments, but they have been generally classed under three heads.

  • 1st. Proprietary governments, granted by the Crown to individuals, in the nature of feudatory principalities, with all the inferior regalities and feudatory powers of Legislation, which formerly belonged to Counties Palantine, on condition that the object for which the grant was made should be substantially pursued, and that nothing should be attempted in derogation of the authority of the King of England. Of this kind were Pennsylvania, Maryland and Carolina (now Louisiana.)
  • 2nd. Charter Governments, in the nature of civil corporations, with the power of making bye laws, for their own internal regulations, and with such rights and authorities as were especially given to them in their several acts of incorporation. The only charter Governments that remained at the commencement of the Civil War, were the Colonies of Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island, Providence and Connecticut.
  • 3rd. Provincial governments, the constitutions of which depended on the respective Commissions, issued by the Crown to the governors, and the instructions which accompanied those commissions -Under this authority Provincial Assemblies were constituted, with the power of making local ordinances not repugnant to the laws of England. Of the latter kind is Nova Scotia, which is sometimes called the Province and sometimes the Colony of Nova Scotia. For some time previous to the Revolution in America, the popular leaders affected to call the Provincial establishments, or King’s governments on the Continent, Colonies instead of Provinces, from an opinion they had conceived that the word Province implied a conquered Country. But whatever distinction there might once have been between the terms Province, Colony and Plantation, there seems now to be none whatever, and they are indiscriminately used in several acts of Parliament. A Provincial government is immediately dependent upon the Crown, and the King remains sovereign of the Country. He appoints the Governor and Officers of State, and the people elect the Representatives as in England. The orders of judicature in these establishments are similar to those of the mother country, and their legislatures consist of a governor, representing the crown, a council or upper house, and an assembly chosen by, and representing the people at large. The following is a short account of the powers and privileges exercised in Nova-Scotia, by these several branches respectively in their own systems:

Governor

The Provinces in British North America are in general comprised in one command, and the Captain General, Governor and Commander-in-Chief, resides in Canada. The Governors of the several Provinces are styled Lieutenant-Governors, and have the title of Excellency, in consequence of being the King’s immediate Representative. The Governor of Nova- Scotia has the rank of Lieut.-General, and is styled “Lieutenant-Governor and Commander-in-Chief, in and over His Majesty’s Province of Nova-Scotia, and its dependencies, Chancellor and Vice-Admiral of the same”.

He is invested with the following powers:

  • 1st. As Commander-in-Chief he has the actual command of all the militia, and if a senior military officer, of all the army within his Government; and he commissions all officers of the militia. He appoints the Judges of all the different Courts of Common Law, he nominates and supersedes at will, the Custodes, Justices of the Peace, and other subordinate civil officers. With the advice of his Council he has authority to summon General Assemblies, which he may, from time to time, prorogue and dissolve as he alone shall judge needful. All such civil employments as the Crown does not dispose or are part of his patronage, and whenever vacancies happen in such offices as are usually filled up by the British Government, the Governor appoints pro-tempore, and the persons so appointed are entitled to all the emoluments till those who are nominated to supercede them arrive in the Colony. He has likewise authority, when he shall judge any offender in criminal matters a fit object of mercy, to extend the King’s pardon towards him, except in case of murder and high treason, and even in those cases he is permitted to reprieve until the signification of the Royal Pleasure.
  • 2d. The Governor has the custody of the Great Seal, presides in the High Court of Chancery, and in general exercises, within his jurisdiction, the same extensive powers as are possessed by the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, with the exception of those given by particular statutes.
  • 3d. The Governor has the power of granting probate of wills and administration of the effects of persons dying intestate, and, by statute, grants licences for marriages.
  • 4th. He presides in the Court of Error, of which he and the Council are Judges,to hear and determine all appeals, in the nature of writs of error, from the Superior Courts of Common Law.
  • 5th. The Governor is also Vice-Admiral within his Government, although he cannot, as such, issue his warrant to the Judge of the Court of Vice-Admiralty to grant commissions to privateers.
  • 6th. The Governor, besides various emoluments which arise from fees and forfeitures, has an honorable annual provision settled upon him, for the whole term of his administration in the Colony ; and that he may not be tempted to diminish the dignity of his station by improper condescensions, to leading men in the Assembly, he is in general restrained by his instructions from accepting any salary, unless the same be settled upon him by Law within the space of one year after his entrance into the Government, and expressly made irrevocable during the whole term of his residence in the administration, which appears to be a wise and necessary restriction.

A Governor, on his arrival in the Province, must (agreeably to the directions of his commission and his instructions – The Gazette has, in some instances, been held sufficient, when the Commission was not made out) in the first place, cause his commission as Governor and Commander-in-Chief, and also of Vice-Admiral, to be read and published at the first meeting of the Council, and also in such other manner as hath been usually observed on such occasions. In the next place, he must take the oaths to Government, and administer the same to each of the Council, and make and subscribe the declaration against transubstantiation, and cause the Council, unless they have previously done so, to do the same. He must then take the oath, for the due execution of the office and trust of Commander-in-Chief and Governor, and for the due and impartial administration of Justice; and he must also cause the oath of office to be administered to the Members of the Council.

— In the last place, he must take an oath to do his utmost, that the several laws relating to trade and the plantations be duly observed; which oaths and declaration, the Council, or any three of the members thereof, are empowered to administer.

Every Governor, together with his commission, receives a large body of instructions, for his guidance in the discharge of his various duties. In the event of his death, the next senior Counsellor, not being the Chief Justice or a Judge, takes the command of the Colony, until an appointment is made by His Majesty, and is required to take the same oaths, and make the same declaration as a Governor. Such are the powers and duties of a Governor, and the mode of redress for the violation of these duties, or any injuries committed by him upon the people, is prescribed with equal care. The party complaining has his choice of three modes

  • 1st. by application to Parliament.
  • 2d. by complaint to the Privy Council.
  • 3d. by action in the King’s Bench.

By statute 11 and 12th, William 3d, cap. 12, confirmed and extended by 42d Geo. 3d, cap. 85, all offences committed by Governors of plantations, or any other persons in the execution of their offices, in any public service abroad, may be prosecuted in the Court of King’s Bench in England. The indictment is to be laid in Middlesex, and the offenders are punishable, as if the offence had been committed in England, and are also incapacitated from holding any office under the Crown. The Court of King’s Bench is empowered to award a mandamus to any Court of Judicature, or to the Governor of the Colony, where the offence was committed, to obtain proof of the matter alleged, and the evidence is to be transmitted back to that Court, and admitted upon the trial.

The Council

The Council consists of twelve members, who arc appointed either by being named in the Governor’s instructions, by mandamus (A nomination by a Governor must be followed by a mandamus, but the person nominated acts until his mandamus arrives) or by the Governor. Their privileges, powers, and office, are as follow:

  • 1st. They are severally styled Honorable, they take precedency, next to the Commander in-Chief, and on his death or absence, the eldest member succeeds to the government,under the title of President.
  • 2d. They are a Council of State, the Governor or Commander-in-Chief, presiding in person, to whom they stand nearly in the same relation as the Privy Council in Great Britain does to the Sovereign.
  • 3d. They are named, in every commission of the peace, as Justices throughout the province.
  • 4th. The Council together with the Governor, sit as Judges in the Court of error, or Court of appeal, in civil causes, from the courts of Record, and constitute also a Court of Marriage and Divorce. It has, however, been lately decided, that if the Governor dissent from the Judgment of the Council or be in the minority, the judgment is nevertheless valid.
  • 5th. The Council is a constituent part of the legislature, as their consent is necessary to the enacting of Laws. In this capacity of legislators, they sit as the upper house, distinct from the Governor, and enter protests on their journals, after the manner of the House of Peers, and are attended by their Chaplain, Clerk, &c. As there was no order of hereditary nobility in the Colonies, out of which to constitute an intermediate body, like the Peers of England and Ireland, a legislative authority was doubtless, at an early period intrusted to the Governors and their Council acting conjointly, and forming a middle branch, between the Crown on the one hand, and the representatives of the people on the other. That this was formerly the case, the history of most of the colonies clearly evinces.

(In the Saxon times the Parliament did not consist of two distinct houses, the Peers being freeholders of large territory, were deemed the hereditary representatives of their vassals and tenants. In the Scotch Parliament there ever was one House, consisting of three estates, Peers, Representatives of Shires, and commissioners of Boroughs, they all voted together indifferently, but in Committees and the like, the proportion of Committee-men from each was limited).

The governor and council in legislative affairs, constitutes not two separate and distinct bodies independent of each other, but one constituent branch only, sitting and deliberating together. As it sometimes became necessary to reject popular bills, the Governors to divert the displeasure of the assembly from themselves to the Council, gradually declined attending on such occasions, leaving it to the board to settle matters as they could, without their interference. The council readily concurred with their designs, because their absence, removing a restraint, gave them the appearance of a distinct independent estate, and the crown perceiving the utility of the measure, gradually confirmed the practice in most of the British Colonies. This appears to be the plain origin which the Council enjoy of deliberating apart from the governors, on all bills sent up by the Assembly, of proposing amendments, to such bills, or of rejecting them entirely, without the concurrence of the governor.

The Councillors serve his Majesty without salary. In the grant of all patents, the Governor is bound to consult them, and they cannot regularly pass the seal without their advice. Though they deliberate as a distinct body, in their capacity as legislators, yet as a privy council, they are always convened by the Governor, who is present at their deliberations. As an upper house, their proceedings, though conducted with closed doors, are formal, and in imitation of the usage of the house of Lords, and although they cannot vote by proxy, they may enter the reasons of their dissent on their journals. Dissimilar as this body is in many important particulars to the house of Lords, any nearer approach to the original, appears from the state of the country, to be very difficult.

Mr. Pitt seems to have entertained the idea of creating an order of hereditary nobility in Canada, for the purpose of assimilating the constitution of that province, as nearly as possible to that of Great Britain; and accordingly a clause was introduced to that effect, in the act of the 31st. Geo. 3d. Chap. 31. “That whenever his Majesty, his heirs, or successors, shall think proper to confer upon any subject of the Crown of Great Britain, by letters patent, under the great seal of either of the said Provinces, any hereditary title of honor, rank or dignity of such Province descendable* according” to any course of descent therein limited, it shall and may be lawful for his Majesty, his heirs, or successors, to annex thereto, by the said letters patent of his Majesty, his heirs or successors, shall think fit an hereditary right of being summoned to the Legislative Council of such Province, descendable according to the course of descent so limited, with respect to such title rank or dignity, and that every person on whom such right shall be conferred, or to whom such right shall severally so descend, shall be entitled to demand of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, or Commander-in-Chief, or person administering the government of such province, his writ of summons to such Legislative Council, at any town, after he shall have attained the age of twenty one years, subject nevertheless to the provisions hereinafter contained.”

Rules of precedency compared and adjusted from the several acts and statutes, made and provided in England, for the settlement of the precedency of men and women in America

This power has never been exercised: it has been justly observed, that these honors might be very proper, and of great utility in countries where they have existed by long custom, but they are not fit to be introduced where they have no original existence; where there is no particular reason for introducing them, arising from the nature of the country, its extent, its state of improvement or its peculiar customs; and where instead of attracting respect they might excite envy. Lords, it was said, might be given to the Colonies, but there was no such thing as creating that reserve and respect for them, on which their dignity and weight in the view of both the popular and monarchical part of the Constitution depended, and which could alone give them that power of controul and support, which were the objects of their institution.

But although the introduction of titles is not desirable, this board is susceptible of great improvement, by a total separation of its duties as a Privy Council, and a branch of the Legislature. Experiments of all kinds in Government are undoubtedly much to be deprecated, but this plan has been adopted elsewhere, not only with safety but with mutual advantage to the interests of the Crown and the people. By making the Members of the Legislative Council independent of the Governor for their existence, (for at present he has not only the power of nomination, but of suspension – Stokes mentions an instance of a Governor of a Colony, suspending a Councillor, on the singular ground of having married his daughter without his consent) and investing them with no other powers than those necessary to a branch of the Legislature, much weight would be added to administration, on the confidence and extent of interest that it would thereby obtain, a much more perfect and political distribution of power would be given to the Legislature, and the strange anomaly avoided of the same persons passing a law, and then sitting in judgement on their own act, and advising the Governor to assent to it.

This could be effected in two ways, by making the Legislative Council elective, or leaving the nomination to the Crown. If the former were preferred, it could be constructed on the plan proposed by Mr. Fox, in his speech in Parliament on the Quebec Bill. He suggested that the Members of the Council should not be eligible to be elected, unless they possessed qualifications infinitely higher than those who were eligible to be chosen members of the House of Assembly, and in the like manner, that the electors of the members of the Council, should possess qualifications, also proportionally higher than those of the electors of Representatives. By this means this country would have a real aristocracy chosen from among persons of the highest property, by people possessed of large landed estate, who would thus necessarily have the weight, influence, and independency, from which alone can be derived a power of guarding against any innovations which might be made either by the people on the one side, or the Crown on the other; should this mode be objected to, as bordering too much on democracy, the election might be left with great safety to the Crown, with this express proviso, that every Councillor so named, should be possessed of landed estate in the Colony, to a certain given extent, and should hold his seat for life. In either mode it would be rendered a most respectable and useful body.

Whether the Council forms a Court for the trial of offences, by impeachment from the House of Assembly, upon analogy to the practice of Parliament, is a question which never having been agitated here, has not been judicially determined. As Councillors do not represent any particular body of people, like the House of Lords, nor assemble as hereditary Legislators, in support of their rights and dignities, equally independent of the Crown and the people, but are appointed at the discretion of the Governor (In 1791, the articles of impeachment against the Judges of Nova-Scotia, were ordered to be heard before the King in Council), it seems very questionable whether they possess the power. The reason assigned in England, for the peculiar propriety of prosecuting high crimes and misdemeanors, by impeachment, is that as the Constituents of the Commons, are the parties generally injured, they cannot judge with impartiality, and therefore prefer their accusations before the other branch, which consists of the nobility, who have neither the same interest nor the same passions as popular assemblies. This distinction not being so obvious in the Colonial Legislatures, it appears that a complaint in the nature of impeachment, should be addressed to the King in Council.

House Of Assembly

The Assembly resembles the lower house of Parliament in its formation, mode of procedure, and power within its jurisdiction, as far as the different circumstances of the country permit. The freeholders are are assembled in the several Counties and Towns entitled to representation by the king’s writ, and their suffrages taken by the Sheriff. The members thus elected, are required by the Governor to meet at Halifax, the capital of the province, at a certain day, when the usual oaths being administered, and a Speaker chosen and approved, the sessions is opened by a speech from the person administering the Government, in imitation of that usually delivered from the throne, in which after adverting to the state of the Province, he calls their attention to such local subjects, as seem to require their immediate consideration. Halifax chooses 4 county, and 2 town, members; all the other counties 2, and the towns mentioned in the subjoined Table one.

The qualifications for a vote or representation are either a yearly income of forty shillings, derived from real estate within the particular county or town for which the election is held, or a title in fee simple of a dwelling house, and the ground on which it stands, or one hundred acres of land, five of which must be under cultivation. It is requisite that the title be registered six months before the test of the writ, unless it be by descent or devise. The declaration against transubstantiation has hitherto proved an effectual bar to the admission of Catholics into the Assembly, but upon the re-annexation of Cape-Breton to the Government of the Province, a gentleman professing that faith was returned as a member for the Island, and a dispensation procured from his Majesty, for administering the declaration to him.

—When this was made known, the Assembly, after much debate, adopted the following resolution:

“Resolved, that this House, grateful to his Majesty for relieving his Roman Catholic subjects from the disability they were heretofore under, from sitting- in this House, do admit the said Lawrence Kavanagh to take his seat, and will in future permit Roman Catholics, who may be duly elected, and shall have the necessary qualifications for a seat in this House, to take such seat without making a declaration against popery and transubstantiation; and that a Committee be appointed to wait upon his Excellency the Governor, and communicate to him the Resolution of this House.”

In 1827, an address was voted to his Majesty, by the unanimous voice of the House, praying for the total removal of this obnoxious test, as far as regarded his Catholic subjects of Nova Scotia. The Assembly continues for the term of seven years, from the return day of the writs of election, subject nevertheless to be dissolved in the mean time by the Governor, who has the power of proroguing the Council and Assembly, and appointing the time and place of their Session; with this constitutional injunction, that they shall be called together once at least every year.

The Legislature meets generally in winter, and continues in Session from six to twelve weeks. The principal business consists in investigating the public accounts; in appropriating the Revenue; which, after the discharging of the civil list, is chiefly applied to the improvement of the roads and bridges, bounties for the encouragement of agriculture; and sometimes for promoting the fisheries. As its jurisdiction is confined to the limits of the Province, and as there are no direct taxes in the Country (poor and county rates and statute labour excepted) the above mentioned business, together with some few Laws, principally of a local nature, usually occupies their attention. Sometimes however, business of a more general interest comes before them, when the debates are often conducted with ability and spirit. In treating of the Assembly, it will be proper to investigate the origin of the claim of the Colonists to legislate for themselves; and to unfold the principles in which this claim was confirmed by the Mother Country.

—The constitution of England, as it stood at the discovery of America, had nothing in its nature providing for Colonies. They have therefore, at different periods of their growth, experienced very different treatment. At first they were considered lauds without the limits of the realm, and therefore, not being united to it, not the property of the Realm: as the people who settled upon these lands in partibus exteris, were liege subjects, the King assumed the right of property and Government, to the preclusion of the jurisdiction of the state. He called them his foreign dominions, his possessions abroad, not parts and parcels of the Realm, and “as not yet annexed to the crown.”

It was upon this principle, that in the year 1621, when the Commons asserted the right of Parliament to a jurisdiction over them, by attempting to pass a bill for establishing a free fishery on the coasts of Virginia, New England, and Newfoundland, they were told by the servants of the crown that it was not fit for them to make laws for those countries which were not yet annexed to the crown, and that the bill was not proper for that house, as it concerned America. Upon this assumption the Colonies were settled by the King’s license, and the Governments established by Royal Charters; while the people emigrating to the Provinces considered themselves out of the realm; and in their executive and legislative capacities, in immediate connection with the King as their only Sovereign Lord. These novel possessions requiring some form of government, it became an exceedingly difficult matter to select that form. At last an analogy was supposed to exist between the Colonies and the Dutchy of Normandy; and the same form of Government* was adopted as had been used for the Island of Jersey.

*It is however observable, that although it was evidently the intention of the mother country, to grant the power of election to the people of the Colonies, so soon as they should be in a situation to receive a representative form of Government, yet the people assumed the right themselves, as appears by the following extract from Hutchinson, 1 vol. 94. ‘”Virginia had been many years distracted, under the government of Presidents and Governors, with Councils, in whose nomination or removal of the people had no voice until in the year 1620, a house of Burgesses broke out in the Colony, the King nor the grand Council at home, not having given any powers or direction for it. The Governor and assistants of the Massachusetts, at first intended to rule the people, but this lasted two or three years only, and although there is no colour for it in the Charter, yet a house of deputies appeared suddenly in 1634, to the surprise of the Magistrates, and the disappointment of their schemes of power. Connecticut soon after followed the plan of Massachusetts. New Haven, although the people had the highest reverence for their leaders, yet on matters of legislation the people, from the beginning, would have their share by their representatives. New Hampshire, combined together under the same form with Massachusetts. Barbadoes or the Leeward Islands began in 1625, struggled under Governors and Councils, and contending proprietors, 20 years. At length in 1645, an Assembly was called and the only reason given was, that by the grant to the Earl of Carlisle, the inhabitants were to have all the liberties, privileges and franchises of English subjects. After the restoration, there is no instance on the American continent, of a colony settled without a representation of the people, nor any attempt to deprive the colonies of this privilege, except in the arbitrary reign of King James the 2d.

It was a most fortunate circumstance, that the Island had by its constitution, “a right to hold a convention or meeting of the three orders of the Islands, in imitation of those august bodies in great kingdoms, a shadow and resemblance of an English Parliament.”

The King having assumed a right to govern the Colonies, without the intervention of Parliament, so the two Houses of Lords and Commons, in the year 1643, exerted the same power, without the concurrence of the King. They appointed the Earl of Warwick Governor in Chief of all the Plantations of America,created a committee for their regulation, and passed several laws concerning them. (See Pownal on the Colonies, passim)

Upon the restoration of Monarchy, the constitution of the Colonies received a great change. Parliament asserted, that all His Majesty’s Foreign Dominions were part of the realm, and then, for the first time, in their proper capacity, interposed in the regulation and government of the Colonies. From that period sundry laws have been passed, regulating their commerce, and having, in other respects, a direct operation on the Colonies. But nothing emanating either from the power assumed by the King, independent of Parliament, or from the Parliament without the concurrence of the King, or from the union of both, establishing the right of legislation in the colonists. It may be asserted, that every British subject has an essential right to the enjoyment of such a form of government, as secures the unrestrained exercise of all those powers necessary for the preservation of his freedom and his rights, according to the constitution of England; and that no authority can contract it within a narrower compass than the subject is entitled to by the Great Charter. Hence the Charters and Proclamations of the Crown to the several Colonies, are considered as declaratory only of ancient rights, and not creative of new privileges.

It is worthy of remark, that when England was herself a Province, the Colonies of London, Colchester, &c. enjoyed the same privilege of being governed by a legislative magistracy, which the American Colonies always contended for. At a subsequent period, but before the discovery of the New World, and when the precedent was considered as not likely to be often followed, we find that when King Edward ordered the French inhabitants to leave Calais, and planted an English Colony there, that place sent Burgesses to Parliament.

To all this it has often been answered, that the Colonies are virtually represented in Parliament. A few words will suffice in reply to this position. It was well observed by the Earl of Chatham, (although he carried the doctrine of the power of Parliament over the Colonies, to every circumstance of legislation and government short of taxation) “that the idea of virtual representation, as regards America, is the most contemptible that ever entered the head of man.” Of England it is entirely true.

Although copyholders and even freeholders, within the precincts of boroughs (not being burgesses) have no vote, yet the property of the copy-holders is represented by its lord, and the property of the borough is represented by the corporation, who choose the member of Parliament; while those persons who are not actually freeholders, have the option of becoming so if they think proper. But the Colonies are neither within any county or borough of England. Few members of Parliament have ever seen them, and none have a very perfect knowledge of them. They can therefore neither be said to be actually, or virtually represented, in that august body.

Hence the Colonies have a right, either to a legislature of their own, or to participate in that of Great-Britain. To the latter there are many objections; and when suggested on a former occasion, the plan was not cordially received on either side of the water; the other, custom has sanctioned and experience approved. To what extent the British Parliament has a right to interpose its authority, or how far the power of the Colonial Assembly extends, it is impossible to ascertain with accuracy. The doctrine of the omnipotence of the one, and the independence of the other, has at different times been pushed to an extreme by the advocates of each.

The true distinction appears to be, that Parliament is supreme in all external, and the Colonial Assembly in all internal matters. The unalterable right of property has been guaranteed to the Colonists, by the act renouncing the claim of taxation, the 18th Geo. 3d, by which it is declared “that the King and Parliament of Great Britain will not impose any duty, tax, or assessment, whether payable in any of his Majesty’s Colonies, Provinces or Plantations, in North America or the West Indies, except such duties as it may be expedient to impose, for the regulation of commerce; the net produce of such duties to be always paid and applied to, and for the use of the Colony, Province or Plantation, in which the same shall be respectively levied, in such manner as other duties, collected by the authority of the respective General Courts or General Assemblies of such Colonies, Provinces or Plantations, are ordinarily paid and applies.

Taxation is ours, commercial regulation is theirs; this distinction, says a distinguished statesman, is involved in the abstract nature of things. Property is private, individual, abstract; and it is contrary to the principles of natural and civil liberty, that a man should be divested of any part of his property without his consent. Trade is a complicated and extended consideration; to regulate the numberless movements of its several parts, and to combine them in one harmonious effect for the good of the whole, requires the superintending wisdom and energy of the supreme power of the Empire.

—The Colonist acknowledges this supremacy in all things, with the exception of taxation and of legislation in those matters of internal Government to which the Local Assemblies are competent. This may be said to be the “quam ultra contraque nequit consistere rectum.” But ever in matters of a local nature the regal control is well secured by the negative of the Governor; by his standing instructions not to give his assent to any law of a doubtful nature without a clause suspending its operation, until his Majesty’s pleasure be known, and by the power assumed and exercised, if disagreeing to any law within three years after it has passed the Colonial Legislature.

With these Provinces it is absurd to suppose, whatever may be said to the contrary, that the Local Assemblies are not supreme within their own jurisdiction; or that a people can be subject to two different Legislatures; exercising at the same time equal powers yet not communicating with each other, nor from their situation capable of being privy to each others proceedings. This whole state of commercial servitude and civil liberty when taken together, says Mr. Burke, is certainly not perfect freedom, but comparing it with the ordinary circumstances of human nature, a happy and liberal condition.

Court Of Chancery

The Governor is Chancellor in Office. The union of these two offices is filled with difficulties, and where the Governor is, as has been the case in almost all the Colonies of late years, a military man, they seem wholly incompatible. Mr. Pownal, a gentleman of great experience in colonial affairs, having been Governor of Massachusetts, South Carolina and New Jersey, thus expresses himself on this subject: “How unfit are Governors in general for this high office of law, and how improper it is, that they should be Judges, where perhaps the consequence of judgment may involve Government and the administration thereof, in the contentions of parties.— Indeed the fact is, that the general diffidence of the wisdom of this Court, thus constituted, the apprehension that reasons of state may be mingled with the grounds of the judgment, have had an effect that the coming to this Court is avoided as much as possible, so that it is almost in disuse, where the establishment of it is allowed.”

The Court of Chancery in this Colony, has never been conducted in a manner to create the dissatisfaction alluded to in other Provinces; but the increased business of the Court, the delicate nature of the appointment, and the difficulties attending the situation, induced our late Lieutenant Governor, Sir James Kempt, to request his Majesty’s Ministers to appoint a professional man, to fill the situation of the Master of the Rolls, and the Solicitor General has been appointed to that office, with a Provincial salary of £600 a year. This is the first appointment of the kind ever made in the Colonies. It may be still doubted, whether it would not have been more advantageous and convenient to the country at large, to have abolished the Court altogether, and to have empowered the Judges of the King’s Bench to sit as Judges in Equity, at stated and different terms from those of the Common Law Courts. The nature of the Court, as at present constituted, admits of great delays. An appeal lies from an interlocutory decretal order of a Chancellor to His Majesty in Council, and so toties quoties, by means of which the proceedings may be protracted by a litigious person to an indefinite length. The unnecessary prolixity of pleadings, which characterises the Chancery at home, has been introduced into practice here, and the expence and delay incidental to its proceedings, arc not at all calculated for the exigencies and means of the country.

Court Of Error And Appeals

The Governor and Council, conjointly, constitute a Court of Error, from which an appeal lies in the dernier resort to the King in Council. At the time of settling the Colonies, there was no precedent of a Judicatory besides those within the realm, except in the cases of Guernsey and Jersey. These remnants of the Dutchy of Normandy were not, according to the prevailing doctrine of those times, within the realm. According to the custom in Normandy, appeals lay to the Duke in Council; and upon the general precedent (without, perhaps, adverting to the peculiarity of the appeal, lying to the Duke of Normandy, and not to the King) was an appeal established from the Courts in the Colony to the King in Council. An appeal is under the following restrictions :

  • 1st. No appeal shall be allowed to the Governor in Council, in any civil cause, unless the debtor damage, or the sum or value appealed for, do exceed the sum of £300 sterling, except the matter in question relates to the taking or demanding any duty payable to the King, or to any fee of office, or annual rent, or other such-like matter or thing, where his rights in future may be bound ; in all which cases an appeal is admitted to the King, in his Privy Council, though the sum or value appealed for, be of less value. In all cases of fines for misdemeanours, no appeals are admitted to the King in Council, except the fines, so imposed, amount to or exceed the value of £200 sterling.
  • 2d. That every such appeal to the Governor in Council be made within fourteen days after Judgment or sentence is pronounced in the Court below ; and that the appellant or plaintiff in error, do give good security that he will effectually prosecute his appeal or writ of error, and answer the condemnation money, and also pay such costs and damages as shall be awarded, in case the judgment or sentence of the Court below shall be affirmed.
  • 3d. That no appeal be allowed from the judgment or sentence of the Governor in Council, or from the decree of the Court of Chancery, to the King in his Council, unless the debt, damages, or the sum or value so appealed for, do exceed the sum of £500 sterling, except where the matter in question relates to the taking or demanding any duty payable to the King, or to any fee of office, or an annual rent, as above mentioned.
  • 4th. That such appeal to His Majesty or his Privy Council, be made within fourteen days after judgment or sentence is pronounced by the Governor, in the Court of Chancery ; and that the appellant or plaintiff in error, do give good security, that he will effectually prosecute his appeal or writ of error, and answer the condemnation money ; and also pay such costs and damages as shall be awarded by his Majesty, in case the sentence of the Governor in Council, or decree of the Court of Chancery, be affirmed. There is no appeal allowed in criminal causes.

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is invested with the powers of the King’s Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer. It is composed of a Chief Justice, three Assistants and a Circuit Associate. The Chief Justice receives from the English Government an annual salary oi £800 sterling, in addition to which he receives fees to a large amount. The assistants are paid by the Province, and are entitled, under a permanent act, to £600 a year, and a guinea a day additional, when travelling. This Court has a jurisdiction extending over the whole Province, including Cape Breton, in all matters criminal and civil; but cannot try any actions for the collection of debts, when the whole amount of dealings do not exceed five pounds, except on appeal, or when the parties reside in different counties. It sets four times a year at Halifax, and has two Circuits on the eastern and western districts —one at Cape Breton, and one on the south shore. The venerable Chief Justice, Hon. S.S. Blowers, has presided in this Court since the year 1798—the patient investigation which he gives every cause that is tried before him—the firmness, yet moderation of temper which he exhibits—the impartiality, integrity and profound legal knowledge, with which he dignifies the bench, have rendered him an object of affection, not only to the gentlemen of the bar, but to the public at large. Etiam contra quos statuit, tequos placates que dimisit.


The law regulating the admission of the Attorneys has been allowed to expire, and it is now governed by rule of Court. It is required, that every person applying for admission, shall have been duly articled as a clerk, to an Attorney of the Supreme Court, for the period of five years preceding such application; except graduates of King’s College, Windsor, who are eligible to admission at the expiration of four years. There is also a farther distinction made in favor of the College. The graduate signs the roll as an Attorney and Barrister at the same time, while the other student is required to practice as an Attorney for the space of one year, before he is entitled to the privileges of a Barrister. The conduct and discipline of the bar is regulated by an Institution, established in 1825, under the patronage of his Excellency Sir James Kempt, and denominated the Bar Society. It consists of the Judges of the Supreme Court and Common Pleas, the Crown Officers, and other members of the profession.

The legal acquirements of the Bench and Bar are highly respectable, but the decisions of the Court are not easily known for want of reports. There are a great variety of questions constantly arising upon our Provincial Statutes, which, from the novelty of the circumstances under which they were framed, are peculiar to the Country, and correct reports of these cases are alike important to the Judges, the Lawyers, and the public. Such a system would tend to produce an uniformity of decision, to check litigation, and to foster a laudable ambition in the Court, to administer law upon such principles of argument and construction, as may furnish rules which shall govern in all similar or analogous cases. At an early period of the Constitution of England, the reasons of a judgment were set forth in the record, but that practice has long been disused.

According to the modern practice, the greater number of important questions agitated in the Courts of Law come before them on motions for new trial; cases reserved on summary applications of different sorts. In neither of these cases does the record furnish the evidence, either of the facts, or the arguments of the Counsel and the Court, for which there is no other depositor} than reports, on the fidelity of which a great part of the Law almost entirely depends. The most ancient compilations of this sort are the year books, the works of persons appointed for that purpose. The special office of Reporter was discontinued so long ago as the reign of Henry VIII. and although, in the reign of James I., Lord Chancellor Bacon procured its revival, it was soon dropped again,and the proceedings of Westminster Hall, from that time till now, would have been lost in oblivion; had it not been for the voluntary industry of succeeding Reporters. As the demand for books of reports in the Province, would be chiefly confined to the Gentlemen of the profession, the sale of them would not only afford no remuneration for the labour of preparing them for the press, but would not even defray the expense of publication, which most unquestionably deserves to be borne by the public purse. It is hoped that the time is not far distant, when this subject will receive the attention of the Legislature, and that means will be found to remedy the evil so universally felt in the Province.

Inferior Courts Of Common Pleas

There is no separate Court of Common Pleas for the Province, but there are Courts in each County, bearing the same appellation, and resembling it in many of its powers. These Courts, when first constituted, had power to issue both mesne and final process to any part of the Province; and had a concurrent jurisdiction with the Supreme Court in all civil causes. They were held in the several counties by Magistrates, or such other persons as were deemed best qualified to fill the situation of Judges; but there was no salary attached to the office, and fees, similar in their nature, but smaller in amount than those received by the Judges of the Supreme Court, were the only remuneration given them for their trouble.

As the King’s Bench was rising in reputation, from the ability and learning of its Judges, these Courts fell into disuse, and few causes of difficulty or importance were tried in them. It was even found necessary to limit their jurisdiction, and they were restrained from issuing mesne process out of the county in which they sat. The exigencies of the county requiring them to be put into a more efficient state, a law was passed in 1824, for dividing the Province into three Districts or Circuits, and the Governor empowered to appoint unprofessional man to each Circuit, as first Justice of the several Courts of Common Pleas within the District, and also President of the Courts of Sessions. The salary provided for their appointments was £450, inclusive of travelling and other fees, while the fees previously held by the former Judges, were made payable to them as long as they continued in office. The process and course of practice is the same in the Courts of King’s Bench and Common Pleas, and the jurisdiction of both limited to five pounds. All original process is issued by the Court of common law itself, and tested in the name of the Chief Justice; and the Chancellor issues no writ whatever, whereon to found the proceeding of these Courts.

Few real actions are in use in the Colony, except actions of Dower and Partition, as all titles to land are tried either by ejectment, trespass, or replevin. The writs of mesne process are of three kinds. A summons, or order to appear and defend suit, a capias by which the Sheriffis ordered to arrest the debtor, and on which bail may be put in, as in England, and an attachment, which is a mened writ, and both summonses the party,and attaches as much property as, by appraisement, will amount to the sum sworn to. Perishable property, thus attached, if not bailed or security given for its forth-coming after judgement is immediately sold. The operation of this writ has of late been restrained to the recovery of debts existing prior to the year 1821, and to securing the effects of absent or absconding debtors. After judgment an execution is issued, which, combining the four English writs of final process, directs the Sheriff to levy the amount thereof on the goods and chattles, lands and tenements of the defendant, and in default thereof to commit him to prison.

Court Of General Sessions

This Court is similar in its constitution, powers and practice, to the Courts of Quarter Sessions in England.

Justices Court

The collection of small debts is a subject every¬ where fraught with difficulties; and various modes have been adopted at different times, with a view to combine correctness of decision in the Judge, with a diminution of the expense of collection. At present any two Magistrates are authorised to hold a Court for the trial of all actions of debt, where the whole amount of dealings is not less than three, and does not exceed five pounds. All sums under three pounds may be collected by suit before a single Justice. From the decision of these Courts, an appeal lies to the Supreme and Inferior Courts of Common Pleas.

Hitherto local influence, and the intrigues of elections, have had great weight in too many of the recommendations which have been made to the Executive, for the appointment of Justices of the Peace; and the patronage, and the little emoluments of the office, which the collection of small debts has encreased, have occasioned the commission to be eagerly sought after; and to use the words of Lord Bacon—“There are many who account it an honor to be burdened with the office of Justice of the Peace.” The proceedings in these Courts are summary, and when judgment is given, an execution issues to a constable to levy the debt and costs, in the same manner as the Sheriff proceeds on a similar writ, from the higher Courts. Whether the evils incidental to these Courts are unavoidable, or whether a better system could not be devised, is a subject well worthy of serious consideration.

Probate Courts

The Governor, in his capacity of ordinary, formerly delegated his power to the Surrogate General, who resided at Halifax, and whose jurisdiction extended over the whole Province. Since that period, Surrogates have been appointed in the several counties, and the law requires probate to be granted in the county where the testator last dwelt. There is no Provincial system of law regulating these Probate Courts, and the Judges are left to find their way by the feeble light of analogy to the Ecclesiastical Courts of England. This, perhaps, will account for the irregularity and confusion prevailing in those districts where Lawyers do not preside in these Courts. There is no branch of the jurisprudence of the country which requires revision so much as this department. The statute of distribution, of Nova Scotia, directs the estate of an intestate to be divided in the following manner:

—One third, after the payment of debts, is allotted to the widow, both of personal and real estate, the former absolutely, the latter during her life. Of the other two thirds, two shares are given to the eldest son, and the residue equally distributed between the remaining children, or such as legally represent them. If the real estate cannot be divided without great injury, the Judge of Probate is required, upon evidence thereof, to order it to be appraised, and to offer it at such appraised value to the sons of the intestate successively, who have preference according to seniority. If either of the sons take the estate at the price offered, he is bound to pay, in a given time, the proportionable shares of the purchase money to the other heirs.

— After the widow’s death, her dower in land is divided in like manner. If there be no child, the widow is entitled to a moiety of the personal estate, and a life interest in one third of the real estate ; and if there be neither wife nor child, the whole is distributed among the next of kin to the intestate, in equal degree, and their legal representatives ; but representatives among collaterals, after the children of brothers and sisters, are not admitted. Where the estate is insolvent, an equal distribution takes place among the creditors, with the exception of the King, who takes precedence of all other mortgages, and those who have obtained judgment against the debtor in his life time.

The act of distribution was founded upon that in Massachusetts, and the reason given for deviating from the course of descent in England, and assigning only two shares of the real estate to the eldest son, is, that in a new country, the improvements necessary to be made upon land, and the expence of subduing the soil, constantly absorb the whole of the personal property ; and that if the real estate were inherited by the eldest, there would be nothing left to provide for the younger children. And it is on this ground that such an essential alteration in the Law of England has been approved of by the King in Council.

Sheriff And Prothonotary

The Sheriffs of the different Counties are appointed annually by the Governor, from a list made by the Chief Justice, proposing three persons for each county for his choice. This office being lucrative is always solicited, and the Sheriff is invariably continued from year to year, so long as he discharges the duties of his situation with diligence and fidelity.

—The offices of Prothonotory and clerk of the Court, are patent appointments held by the same officer. The person now holding them, notwithstanding the law on the subject of non residence, has lived for many years in England. He has a deputy in each county, who acts as clerk of the Supreme Court and Common Pleas.

Court Of Vice Admiralty

In the year 1801 his Majesty directed the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to revoke the prize Commissions, which had been granted to the Vice Admiralty Courts in the West Indies, and in the Colonies upon the American continent, except Jamaica and Martinique. An act of Parliament was then passed, 41. Geo. 3. c. 96. by which each and every of the Vice-Admiralty Courts, established in any two of the Islands in the West Indies and at Halifax, were empowered to issue their process to any other of his Majesty’s Colonies or Territories in the West Indies or America, including therein the Bahama and Bermuda Islands, as if the Court were established in the Island, Colony or Territory, within which its Junctions were to be exercised.

His Majesty was also authorised to fix salaries for Judges, not exceeding the sum of two thousand pounds per annum for each Judge, and it was enacted that the profits and emoluments of the said Judges should in no case exceed two thousand pounds each and every year, over and above the salary. Sir Alexander Croke, L.L.D. then an advocate of the Civil Law, had the first appointment upon this new establishment at Halifax, and presided in it from that period until the termination of the American War. He had not only distinguished himself as an advocate in Doctors Commons, but his vindication of the belligerent rights of Great Britain, in his celebrated answer to Schlegel, and his introduction to the case of Horner and Lydiard, brought his talents into that notice which added a value to his judicial decisions. The causes decided in that Court have been collected, and very ably reported, by the Hon. James Stewart. As the emoluments of the office terminated with the war, the duties of the situation are performed temporally by the Chief Justice. The Court of Vice Admiralty exercises three sorts of jurisdictions.

  • 1st. it is the proper Court for deciding all maritime causes.
  • 2d. it is the Court for the trial of prizes taken in time of war, between Great Britain and any other state, to deter¬ mine whether they be lawful prizes or not.
  • 3d. it exercises a concurrent jurisdiction with the Courts of Record in the cases of forfeiture and penalties,incurred by the breach of any act of Parliament, relating to the trade and revenue of the Colony.

The King’s Privy Council constitute a court of appeal, to which body, by 22 . Geo. 2 . c. 3. the Judges of the Court of Westminster Hall were added, with a proviso that no Judgment should be valid unless a majority of the Commissioners present were actually Privy Counsellors. In matters relating to the trade and revenues of the Colony, if the sum in question does not exceed £500 sterling, the party aggrieved must first prefer a petition to his Majesty, for leave to appeal from the judgment of this Court.

Court For The Trial Of Piracies

There is a Court of a peculiar construction established in the Colonies, for the trial of piracies. Formerly pirates were tried in England by the Court of Admiralty, which proceeded without Jury, but as the exercise of such an authority was not only repugnant to the feelings of Englishmen, but to the genius of the Laws of the country, a statute was passed in 28 Henry VIII. which enacted that all piracies, felonies and robberies, committed on the high seas, should be tried by Commissioners, to be nominated by the Lord Chancellor; the indictment being first found by a Grand Jury, and afterwards tried by a Petit Jury, and that the proceedings should be according to the Common Law.

Under this Law piracies have continued to be tried in England, but as the provisions of that statute did not extend to the Colonies, it became necessary, when offenders were apprehended in the Plantations, to send them to England, to take their trial. To remedy so great an inconvenience, the statute of William III. was passed, which enacts that all piracies, felonies and robberies,committed on the high seas, may be tried in any of the Colonies by Commissioners, to be appointed by the King’s Commission, directed to any of the Admirals, &c. and such persons, by name, for the time being, as his Majesty shall think fit; who shall have power jointly and severally to call a Court of Admiralty, which shall consist of seven persons at least, and shall proceed to the trial of said offenders.

The statute of Henry VIII. was also extended to the Colonies by the 4 Geo. I. c. 11. The mode hitherto adopted in the Colonies is, to collect the Court under the 11 and 12 of William III. and to proceed to the trial of the prisoners without the intervention of a Jury. But this practice seems very questionable; wherever, by any constitution of Law, a man may enjoy the privilege of trial by Jury, great care should be taken that he be not deprived of it. To obviate these difficulties, it has been thought that a Commission might issue under 11 and 12 of William III. and the proceedings be regulated by the statute of 2S Henry VIII.

When this Court assembled but once in several years, its extraordinary jurisdiction was in some measure excused by the rare exercise of its powers; but when it meets so often as it has of late years in the West Indies, it affords a just ground of Legislative interference. Having treated of the several Courts, it will now be necessary to make a few observations upon the Laws of the country.

Laws of Nova Scotia

The Law of the Province is divisible into three parts. Is. the Common Law of England. 2d. the Statute Law of England. 3d. the Statute Law of Nova-Scotia. A minute consideration of each would be foreign from the design of this work, but the subject is too interesting to be altogether passed over. I shall therefore show in what manner the two first were introduced, the extent to which they apply, and the alteration made in them by the Local Statute Law.


Upon the first settlement of this country, as there was no established system of jurisprudence, until a local one was legally constituted, the emigrants naturally continued subject and entitled to the benefit of all such Laws of the parent country, as were applicable to their new situation. As their allegiance continued, and travelled along with them according to those Laws, their co-relative right of protection necessarily accompanied them.


The common law, composed of long established customs, originating beyond what is technically called the memory of man, gradually crept into use as occasion and necessity dictated. The Statute Law, consisting of acts, regularly made and enacted by constituted authority, has increased as the nation has become more refined, and its relationship more intricate. As both these laws grew up with the local circumstances of the times, so it cannot be supposed that either of them, in every respect, ought to be in force in a new settled country ; because crimes that are the occasion of penalties, especially those arising out of political, instead of natural and moral relationship, are not equally crimes in every situation.

Of the two, the common law is much more likely to apply to an infant colony, because it is coeval with the earliest periods of the English history, and is mainly grounded on general moral principles, which are very similar in every situation and in every country. The common law of England, including those statutes which are in affirmance of it, contains all the fundamental principles of the British constitution, and is calculated to secure the most essential rights and liberties of the subject. It has therefore been considered by the highest jurisdictions in the parent country, and by the legislatures of every colony, to be the prevailing law in all cases not expressly altered by statute, or by an old local usage of the colonists, similarly situated; for there is a colonial common Law, common to a number of colonies, as there is a customary common Law, common to all the Realm of England.

With such exceptions, not only the civil but the penal part of it, as well as the rules of administering justice and expounding Laws, have been considered as binding in Nova-Scotia. In many instances, to avoid question, colonial statutes and rules of court have been made, expressly adopting them. Since the artificial refinements and distinctions incidental to the property of the mother country, the laws of police and revenue, such especially as are enforced by penalty, the modes of maintenance for the clergy, the Jurisdiction of the spiritual Courts, and a multitude of other provisions, are neither necessary nor convenient for such a colony, and therefore are not in force here.

The rule laid down by Blackstone is, that all Acts of Parliament, made in affirmance or amendment of the common law, and such as expressly include the colonies by name, are obligatory in this country. On the first part of this proposition there can be no difficulty, except as to determining whether a particular statute is in fact in amendment and affirmance of the common law or not, and whether any particular act of Parliament is applicable or not to the state of the Colony. The power of making this decision, a power little short of legislation, is and must be left with the Judges of our Local Courts, and on referring to the manner in which it has been exercised, there is little danger to be apprehended that an improper use will be made of it. Hence it is that the rights of the subject, as declared in the petition of rights, the limitation of the prerogative by the act for abolishing the Star Chamber, and regulating the Privy Council, the Habaes Corpus act and the Bill of rights, extend to the Colonies. In the same manner do all statutes respecting the general relation between the crown and the subject, such as the Laws relative to the succession, to treason, &e. extend throughout the Realm.

—The difference between the local and general laws, or clauses of a law, may be illustrated by 13 and 14 of Charles II. c. 2. By that act the supreme military power is vested in the King without limitation ; this part of the act extends to all the Colonies, but the enacting clause respecting the militia officers applies to England alone. The other part of the proposition of Blackstone, that act; of Parliament are binding upon such Colonies as are expressly named therein, is not expressed with his usual accuracy, and must be understood with some very material exceptions. It is true that Parliament has declared, by act 6. Geo. III. c. 12, that it has the power to make laws and statutes of sufficient validity to bind the Colonies in all cases whatever. But it is plain, if it had not the power before, it is impossible the mere declaration could invest it with it.

I have already observed that the true line is, that Parliament is supreme in all external, and the Colonial Assemblies in all internal legislation ; and that the Colonies have a right to be governed, within their own jurisdiction, by their own laws, made by their own internal will. But if the Colonies exceed their peculiar limits, form other alliances, or refuse obediance to the general laws for the regulation of Commerce or external Government, in these cases there must necessarily be a coercive power lodged somewhere : and cannot be lodged more safely for the Empire at large than in Parliament, which has an undoubted right to exercise it in such cases of necessity. It is in this manner the passage alluded to, in the commentaries, must be understood, which states those laws to be binding on the Colonies that include them by express words, and the English act of Parliament is generally received in the same sense.

The system of jurisprudence is, from these circumstances, very similar in both countries; and as it is a fundamental principle in all the Colonies not to enact laws repugnant to those of England, the deviation is less than might be supposed. The statute of distribution has been already alluded to and explained, and it may be added that, as respects wills, the same formality in execution, and the same rules of construction, as prevail in the parent state, are adopted here. For other peculiarities the reader is referred to various parts of this work, where they are incidentally mentioned.”

A note at the end of Volume II on behalf of publisher Joseph Howe.

Haliburton, Thomas Chandler. “An historical and statistical account of Nova-Scotia : in two volumes” Halifax [N.S.] : J. Howe, 1829. Volume I: https://archive.org/details/historicalstatis01hali/mode/2up, Volume II: https://archive.org/details/McGillLibrary-rbsc_lc_historical-nova-scotia_lande00400-v2-16708/mode/2up

A hand book of the geography and natural history of the province of Nova Scotia

“Dartmouth was founded in 1750, but in 1756 it was destroyed by the [Mi’kmaq]. In 1784 it was again settled by emigrants from Nantucket, most of whom removed in 1793. Since that time its population has gradually increased. The townships of this county-are Halifax, Dartmouth, Laurencetown (sic) and Preston. The first of these has two representatives in the Assembly.”

Dawson, J.W. “A hand book of the geography and natural history of the province of Nova Scotia” Pictou [N.S.] : J. Dawson, 1848. https://www.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.37346/34?r=0&s=1

Chronological Table of Dartmouth, Preston, and Lawrencetown

dartmouth township

Between 1746 and 1894, Dartmouth’s history unfolds with significant events including the arrival of settlers, establishment of saw-mills, and conflicts with the Mi’kmaq people. Dartmouth saw fluctuations in population, the building of churches and other infrastructure, and incorporation as a town in 1873. Economic activities like shipbuilding, ferry services, and the discovery of gold at Waverley mark periods of prosperity. However, tragedies such as fires, mysterious disappearances, and drowning incidents also punctuate Dartmouth’s timeline.

The town experienced advancements such as the introduction of steamboats, electricity, and the establishment of amenities like bathing houses and public reading rooms. Infrastructure projects like railway construction, water supply, and sewerage systems reflect efforts to modernize Dartmouth. Despite setbacks like bridge collapses and refinery closures, the town continued to evolve and grow, reaching a population of over 6,000 by 1891.


1746-1799

  • Duc d’Anville arrived at Chebucto, 10 Sept 1746
  • Halifax founded, 21 June 1749
  • [Mi’kmaq] attacked 6 men at Maj. Gilman’s saw-mill, Dartmouth Cove, killing 4, 30 Sept 1749
  • Saw-mill let to Capt. Wm. Clapham, 1750
  • Alderney arrived from Europe with 353 settlers, Aug. 1750
  • Town of Dartmouth laid out for the Alderney emigrants, Autumn 1750
  • Order issued relative to guard at Dartmouth, 31 Dec. 1750
  • Sergeant and 10 or 12 men ordered to mount guard during the nights at the Blockhouse, Dartmouth, 23 Feb. 1751
  • [Mi’kmaq] attacked Dartmouth, killing a number of the inhabitants, 13 May, 1751
  • German emigrants arrived at Halifax and were employed in picketing the back of Dartmouth, July 1751
  • Ferry established between Dartmouth and Halifax, John Connor, ferryman, 3 Feb. 1752
  • Mill at Dartmouth sold to Maj. Ezekiel Gilman, June 1752
  • Population of Dartmouth 193, or 53 families, July 1752
  • Advertisement ordered for the alteration of the style [Introduction of the Gregorian calendar], 31 Aug. 1752
  • Permission given Connor to assign ferry to Henry Wynne and William Manthorne, 22 Dec 1752
  • Township of Lawrencetown granted to 20 proprietors, 10 June 1754
  • Fort Clarence built, 1754
  • John Rock appointed ferryman in place of Wynne and Manthorne, 26 Jan. 1756
  • Troops withdrawn from Lawrencetown by order dated, 25 Aug, 1757
  • Dartmouth contained only 2 families, 9 Jan 1762
  • Phillip Westphal (afterwards Admiral), born, 1782
  • Preston Township granted to Theophilus Chamberlain and 163 others, chiefly loyalists, 15 Oct, 1784
  • Free [black people] arrived at Halifax and afterwards settled at Preston, Apr., 1785
  • George Augustus Westphal (afterwards Sir) born, 1785
  • Whalers from Nantucket arrived at Halifax, 1785
  • Town lots of Dartmouth escheated [See also] in order to grant them to the Nantucket whalers (Quakers), 2 Mar, 1786
  • Grant of land at Preston to T. Young and 34 others, 20 Dec. 1787
  • Common granted to inhabitants of Dartmouth [District, aka Township], 4 Sept. 1788 [Oct 2, 1758?] [–see also: “For regulating the Dartmouth Common, 1841 c52“]
  • First church at Preston consecrated (on “Church Hill”), 1791
  • Free [black people] departed for Sierra Leone, 15 Jan, 1792
  • Nantucket Whalers left Dartmouth, 1792
  • Francis Green built house (afterwards “Maroon Hall”) near Preston, 1792
  • Dartmouth, Preston, Lawrencetown and Cole Harbour erected into parish of St. John, Nov. 22, 1792
  • M. Danesville, governor of St. Pierre, arrived at Halifax (afterwards lived at “Brook House”), 20 June 1793
  • Act passed to build bridge of boats across the Harbour (1796, c7), 1796
  • Maroons arrived at Halifax (afterwards settled at Preston), 22 or 23 July, 1796
  • Subject of a canal between Minas Basin and Halifax Harbour brought before the legislature, 1797
  • Col. W.D. Quarrell returned to Jamaica, Spring 1797
  • Capt. A. Howe took charge of Maroons, Ochterloney having been removed, 1797
  • John Skerry began running ferry, about 1797
  • Howe removed and T. Chamberlain appointed to superintend Maroons, 9 July, 1798
  • Heavy storm did much damage, 25 Sept, 1798
  • Mary Russell killed by her lover, Thomas Bembridge, at her father’s house, Russell’s Lake, 27 Sept. 1798
  • Bembridge executed at Halifax, 18 Oct, 1798

1800-1849

  • Maroons left Halifax, Aug 1800
  • “Maroon Hall” sold to Samuel Hart, 8 Oct, 1801
  • Town of Dartmouth said to have contained only 19 dwellings, 1809
  • S. Hart died at “Maroon Hall” (property afterwards sold to John Prescott), 1810
  • United States prisoners of war on parole at Dartmouth, Preston, etc. About 1812-1814
  • Terrible gale, much damage to shipping 12 Nov 1813
  • Gov Danseville left “Brook House”, 1814
  • [Black people] arrived from Chesapeake Bay, 1 Sept 1814
  • Smallpox appeared in Dartmouth, Preston, etc., Autumn, 1814
  • Margaret Floyer died at “Brook House”, 9 Dec 1814
  • Act passed to incorporate Halifax Steamboat Co., 1815
  • Act passed allowing substitution of team-boats for steamboats by the company just mentioned, 1816
  • Team-boat Sherbrooke launched, 30 Sept, 1816
  • The team-boat made its first trip, 8 Nov., 1816
  • Foundation stone of Christ Church laid, 9 July, 1817
  • John Prescott died at “Maroon Hall” (property afterwards sold to Lieut. Katzmann), 1821
  • Ninety Chesapeake Bay [black people] sent to Trinidad, 1821
  • Dartmouth Fire Engine Co. established, 1822
  • Lyle’s and Chapel’s shipyards opened, About 1823
  • Act passed to authorize incorporation of a canal company, 1824
  • Theophilus Chamberlain died, 20 July, 1824
  • Joseph Findlay became lessee of Creighton’s ferry, About 1824
  • Shubenacadie Canal Co. incorporated by letters patent, 1 June, 1826
  • Ground first broken on canal, at Port Wallace, 25 July, 1826
  • Consecration of church at Preston which had been built to replace the one consecrated in 1791, 1828
  • Congregation of Church of St. James (Presbyterian) formed, Jan (?), 1829
  • St. Peter’s Chapel commenced at Dartmouth, 26 Oct. 1829
  • J. Findlay succeeded by Thos. Brewer at Creighton’s Ferry, About 1829-30
  • Sir C. Ogle launched (first steamboat on ferry), 1 Jan, 1830
  • Sixteen persons drowned by the upsetting of one of the small ferry boats, 14 Aug, 1831
  • Ferry steamboat Boxer launched, 1832
  • Brewer retired, and Creighton’s or the lower ferry ceased to exist, About 1832-33
  • A. Shiels started Ellenvale Carding Mill, July, 1834
  • Cholera in Halifax, Aug to Oct 1834
  • William Foster built an ice-house near the lakes, 1836
  • “Mount Amelia” built by Hon. J.W. Johnston, About, 1840
  • Death of Meagher children, Jane Elizabeth, and Margaret, in woods near Preston (bodies found 17 April), April 1842
  • Adam Laidlaw began ice-cutting on a large scale, 1843
  • Dartmouth Baptist Church organized, 29 Oct, 1843
  • Death of Lieut. C. C. Katzmann at “Maroon Hall”, 15 Dec, 1843
  • Ferry steamboat Micmac build, 1844
  • Dartmouth Baptist meeting-house opened, Sept, 1844
  • Cole Harbour Dyke Co. incorporated, 28 Mar., 1845
  • Incorporation of Richmond Bridge Co. (J.E. Starr, A.W. Godfrey, etc.) for purpose of erecting bridge of boards across Harbour, 14 April, 1845
  • Mechanics’ Institute building erected, 1845
  • Col. G. F. Thompson’s wife, said to have been a cousin of the Empress Eugenie, died under suspicious circumstances at “Lake Loon”, 20 Sept., 1846
  • First regatta on Dartmouth Lake, 5 Oct, 1846
  • Dr. MacDonald mysteriously disappeared, 30 Nov, 1846
  • Mechanic’s Institute building opened, 7 Dec, 1846
  • Second church at Preston (in the “Long swamp”) destroyed by fire, June (?), 1849

1850-1894

  • Third C. of E. church built at Preston, near Salmon River, About 1850-1851
  • Subenacadie Canal sold to government of N.S. (McNab, trustee), 1851-52
  • Inland Navigation Co. incorporated, 4 April, 1853
  • Methodist Church dedicated at Dartmouth, 1853
  • Canal purchased by Inland Navigation Co., 10 June, 1854
  • Mount Hope Insane Asylum cornerstone laid, 9 June, 1856
  • “Maroon Hall” burnt, June, 1856
  • Dartmouth Rifles and Engineers organized, Spring 1860
  • Checbucto Marine Railway Co. formed by A. Pillsbury, 1860
  • Gold discovered at Waverley, 1861
  • Lake and River Navigation Co. purchased Canal, 18 June, 1862
  • Dartmouth Rifles disbanded, 1 July, 1864
  • Dartmouth Axe and Ladder Co,. formed, 1865
  • Dartmouth Ropewalk began manufacturing, Spring, 1869
  • Ferry steamboat Chebucto built, About 1869
  • Prince Arthur’s Park Co. incorporated, 1870
  • New St. James’s Church (Presbyterian) built, 1870
  • Lewis P. Fairbanks purchased the canal from the Lake and River Navigation Co., Feb, 1870
  • Population of town of Dartmouth, 3,786, 1871
  • Dartmouth incorporated, 30 April, 1873
  • Union Protection Co. organized, 1876
  • Andrew Shiels, “Albyn”, died, 5 Nov, 1879
  • New Baptist Church opened, 4 Jan, 1880
  • Sandy Cove bathing houses opened at Dartmouth, 7 Aug, 1880
  • Foundation-stone of Woodside Refinery laid, 3 July, 1883
  • Railway to Dartmouth commenced, 1885
  • Railway opened for business, 6 Jan, 1886
  • Halifax and Dartmouth Steam Ferry Co. formed, in place of old company, 1886
  • Woodside Refinery closed, Dec, 1886
  • Ferry steamboat Dartmouth built, 1888
  • Public Reading-Room opened, 1 Jan, 1889
  • Dartmouth Ferry Commission formed, 17 April, 1890
  • Ferry Co. sells its property to the commission, 1 July, 1890
  • Several persons drowned on the arrival of the ferry-boat Annex 2 (Halifax), 11 July, 1890
  • New St. Peter’s Chapel begun, Autumn, 1890
  • Act passed to provide for supplying Dartmouth with water and sewerage, 19 May, 1891
  • Narrows railway bridge carried away, 7 Sept., 1891
  • Trenching and laying the main water pipe begun, 3 Oct., 1891
  • Woodside Refinery again opened, 1891
  • Population of town of Dartmouth, 6,252, 1891
  • St. Peter’s chapel opened, 7 Feb., 1892
  • Dartmouth first lighted by electricity, 13 July, 1892
  • Water turned on the town from Topsail and Lamont’s Lakes, 2 Nov, 1892
  • Narrows bridge destroyed for second time, 23 July, 1893
  • Woodside Refinery transferred to Acadia Sugar Refining Co., Aug, 1893
  • New Post Office opened, 1 May, 1894

Piers, Harry, 1870-1940. Chronological Table of Dartmouth, Preston, And Lawrencetown, County of Halifax, Nova Scotia. Halifax, N.S.: [s.n.], 1894. https://www.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.12013/12?r=0&s=1, https://hdl.handle.net/2027/aeu.ark:/13960/t8pc3fx9z

The Jay Treaty

Treaty of Amity Commerce and Navigation

Concluded November 19, 1794; ratification advised by the senate with amendment June 24, 1795; ratified by the President; ratifications exchanged October 28, 1795; proclaimed February 29, 1796.

His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, being desirous, by a treaty of amity, commerce and navigation, to terminate their difference in such a manner, as, without reference to the merits of their respective complaints and pretentions, may be the best calculated to produce mutual satisfaction and good understanding; and also to regulate the commerce and navigation between their respective countries, territories and people, in such a manner as to render the same reciprocally beneficial and satisfactory; they have, respectively, named their Plenipotentiaries, and given them full powers to treat of, and conclude the said treaty, that is to say:

His Britannic Majesty has named for his Plenipotentiary, the Right Honorable William Wyndham Baron Grenville of Wotton, one of His Majesty’s Privy Council, and His Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs; and the President of the said United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, hath appointed for their Plenipotentiary, the Honorable John Jay, Chief Justice of the said United States, and their Envoy Extraordinary to His Majesty;

Who have agreed on and concluded the following articles:

ARTICLE I.

There shall be a firm, inviolable and universal peace, and a true and sincere friendship between His Britannic Majesty, his heirs and successors, and the United States of America; and between their respective countries, territories, cities, towns and people of every degree, without exception of persons or places.

ARTICLE II.

His Majesty will withdraw all his troops and garrisons from all posts and places within the boundary lines assigned by the treaty of peace to the United States. This evacuation shall take place on or before the first day of June, one thousand seven hundred and ninetysix, and all the proper measures shall in the interval be taken by concert between the Government of the United States and His Majesty’s Governor-General in America for settling the previous arrangements which may be necessary respecting the delivery of the said posts: The United States in the mean time, at their discretion, extending their settlements to any part within the said boundary line, except within the precincts or jurisdiction of any of the said posts. All settlers and traders, within the precincts or jurisdiction of the said posts, shall continue to enjoy, unmolested, all their property of every kind, and shall be protected therein. They shall be at full liberty to remain there, or to remove with all or any part of their effects; and it shall also be free to them to sell their lands, houses or effects, or to retain the property thereof, at their discretion; such of them as shall continue to reside within the said boundary lines, shall not be compelled to become citizens of the United States, or to take any oath of allegiance to the Government thereof; but they shall be at full liberty so to do if they think proper, and they shall make and declare their election within one year after the evacuation aforesaid. And all persons who shall continue there after the expiration of the said year, without having declared their intention of remaining subjects of His Britannic Majesty, shall be considered as having elected to become citizens of the United States.

ARTICLE III.

It is agreed that it shall at all times be free to His Majesty’s subjects, and to the citizens of the United States, and also to the Indians dwelling on either side of the said boundary line, freely to pass and repass by land or inland navigation, into the respective territories and countries of the two parties, on the continent of America, (the country within the limits of the Hudson’s Bay Company only excepted.) and to navigate all the lakes, rivers and waters thereof, and freely to carry on trade and commerce with each other. But it is understood that this article does not extend to the admission of vessels of the United States into the seaports, harbours, bays or creeks of His Majesty’s said territories; nor into such parts of the rivers in His Majesty’s said territories as are between the mouth thereof, and the highest port of entry from the sea, except in small vessels trading bona fide between Montreal and Quebec, under such regulations as shall be established to prevent the possibility of any frauds in this respect. Nor to the admission of British vessels from the sea into the rivers of the United States, beyond the highest ports of entry for foreign vessels from the sea. The river Mississippi shall, however, according to the treaty of peace, be entirely open to both parties; and it is further agreed, that all the ports and places on its eastern side, to whichsoever of the parties belonging, may freely be resorted to and used by both parties, in as ample a manner as any of the Atlantic ports or places of the United States, or any of the ports or places of His Majesty in Great Britain

All goods and merchandize whose importation into His Majesty’s said territories in America shall not be entirely prohibited, may freely, for the purposes of commerce, be carried into the same in the manner aforesaid, by the citizens of the United States, and such goods and merchandize shall be subject to no higher or other duties than would be payable by HisMajesty’s subjects on the importation of the same from Europe into the said territories. And in like manner all goods and merchandize whose importation into the United States shall not be wholly prohibited, may freely, for the purposes of commerce, be carried into the same, in the manner aforesaid, by HisMajesty’s subjects, and such goods and merchandize shall be subject to no higher or other duties than would be payable by the citizens of the United States on the importation of the same in American vessels into the Atlantic ports of the said States. And all goods not prohibited to be exported from the said territories respectively, may in like manner be carried out of the same by the two parties respectively, paying duty as aforesaid.

No duty of entry shall ever be levied by either party on peltries brought by land or inland navigation into the said territories respectively, nor shall the Indians passing or repassing with their own proper goods and effects of whatever nature, pay for the same any impost or duty whatever. But goods in bales, or other large packages, unusual among Indians, shall not be considered as goods belonging bona fide to Indians.

No higher or other tolls or rates of ferriage than what are or shall be payable by natives, shall be demanded on either side; and no duties shall be payable on any goods which shall merely be carried over any of the portages or carrying places on either side, for the purpose of being immediately reembarked and carried to some other place or places. But as by this stipulation it is only meant to secure to each party a free passage across the portages on both sides, it is agreed that this exemption from duty shall extend only to such goods as are carried in the usual and direct road across the portage, and are not attempted to be in any manner sold or exchanged during their passage across the same, and proper regulations may be established to prevent the possibility of any frauds in this respect.

As this article is intended to render in a great degree the local advantages of each party common to both, and thereby to promote a disposition favorable to friendship and good neighborhood, it is agreed that the respective Governments will mutually promote this amicable intercourse, by causing speedy and impartial justice to be done, and necessary protection to be extended to all who may be concerned therein.

ARTICLE IV.

Whereas it is uncertain whether the river Mississippi extends so far to the northward as to be intersected by a line to be drawn due west from the Lake of the Woods, in the manner mentioned in the treaty of peace between His Majesty and the United States: it is agreed that measures shall be taken in concert between His Majesty’s Government in America and the Government of the United States, for making a joint survey of the said river from one degree of latitude below the falls of St. Anthony, to the principal source or sources of the said river, and also of the parts adjacent thereto; and that if, on the result of such survey, it should appear that the said river would not be intersected by such a line as is above mentioned, the two parties will thereupon proceed, by amicable negotiation, to regulate the boundary line in that quarter, as well as all other points to be adjusted between the said parties, according to justice and mutual convenience, and in conformity to the intent of the said treaty.

ARTICLE V.

Whereas doubts have arisen what river was truly intended under the name of the river St. Croix, mentioned in the said treaty of peace, and forming a part of the boundary therein described; that question shall be referred to the final decision of commissioners to be appointed in the following manner. viz.:

One commissioner shall be named by His Majesty, and one by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and the said two commissioners shall agree on the choice of a third; or if they cannot so agree, they shall each propose one person, and of the two names so proposed, one shall be drawn by lot in the presence of the two original Commissioners. And the three Commissioners so appointed shall be sworn, impartially to examine and decide the said question, according to such evidence as shall respectively be laid before them on the part of the British Government and of the United States. The said Commissioners shall meet at Halifax, and shall have power to adjourn to such other place or places as they shall think fit. They shall have power to appoint a Secretary, and to employ such surveyors or other persons as they shall judge necessary. The said Commissioners shall, by a declaration, under their hands and seals, decide what river is the river St. Croix, intended by the treaty. The said declaration shall contain a description of the said river, and shall particularize the latitude and longitude of its mouth and of its source. Duplicates of this declaration and of the statements of their accounts, and of the journal of their proceedings, shall be delivered by them to the agent of His Majesty, and to the agent of the United States, who may be respectively appointed and authorized to manage the business on behalf of the respective Governments. And both parties agree to consider such decision as final and conclusive, so as that the same shall never thereafter be called into question, or made the subject of dispute or difference between them.

ARTICLE VI.

Whereas it is alleged by divers British merchants and others His Majesty’s subjects, that debts, to a considerable amount, which were bona fide contracted before the peace, still remain owing to them by citizens or inhabitants of the United States, and that by the operation of various lawful impediments since the peace, not only the full recovery of the said debts has been delayed, but also the value and security thereof have been, in several instances, impaired and lessened, so that, by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, the British creditors cannot now obtain, and actually have and receive full and adequate compensation for the losses and damages which they have thereby sustained: It is agreed, that in all such cases, where full compensation for such losses and damages cannot, for whatever reason, be actually obtained, had and received by the said creditors in the ordinary course of justice, the United States will make full and complete compensation for the same to the said creditors: But it is distinctly understood, that this provision is to extend to such losses only as have been occasioned by the lawful impediments aforesaid, and is not to extend to losses occasioned by such insolvency of the debtors or other causes as would equally have operated to produce such loss, if the said impediments had not existed; nor to such losses or damages as have been occasioned by the manifest delay or negligence, or wilful omission of the claimant.

For the purpose of ascertaining the amount of any such losses and damages, five Commissioners shall be appointed and authorized to meet and act in manner following, viz.: Two of them shall be appointed by His Majesty, two of them by the President of the United States by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and the fifth by the unanimous voice of the other four; and if they should not agree in such choice, then the Commissioners named by the two parties shall respectively propose one person, and of the two names so proposed, one shall be drawn by lot, in the presence of the four original Commissioners. When the five Commissioners thus appointed shall first meet, they shall, before they proceed to act, respectively take the following oath, or affirmation, in the presence of each other; which oath, or affirmation, being so taken and duly attested, shall be entered on the record of their proceedings, viz.: I, A. B., one of the Commissioners appointed in pursuance of the sixth article of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation, between His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will honestly, diligently, impartially and carefully examine, and to the best of my judgment, according to justice and equity, decide all such complaints, as under the said article shall be preferred to the said Commissioners: and that I will forbear to act as a Commissioner, in any case in which I may be personally interested.

Three of the said Commissioners shall constitute a board, and shall have power to do any act appertaining to the said Commission, provided that one of the Commissioners named on each side, and the fifth Commissioner shall be present, and all decisions shall be made by the majority of the voices of the Commissioners than present. Eighteen months from the day on which the said Commissioners shall form a board, and be ready to proceed to business, are assigned for receiving complaints and applications; but they are nevertheless authorized, in any particular cases in which it shall appear to them to be reasonable and just, to extend the said term of eighteen months for any term not exceeding six months, after the expiration thereof. The said Commissioners shall first meet at Philadelphia, but they shall have power to adjourn from place to place as they shall see cause.

The said Commissioners in examining the complaints and applications so preferred to them, are empowered and required in pursuance of the true intent and meaning of this article to take into their consideration all claims, whether of principal or interest, or balances of principal and interest and to determine the same respectively, according to the merits of the several cases, due regard being had to all the circumstances thereof, and as equity and justice shall appear to them to require. And the said Commissioners shall have power to examine all such persons as shall come before them on oath or affirmation, touching the premises; and also to receive in evidence, according as they may think most consistent with equity and justice, all written depositions, or books, or papers, or copies, or extracts thereof, every such deposition, book, or paper, or copy, or extract, being duly authenticated either according to the legal form now respectively existing in the two countries, or in such other manner as the said Commissioners shall see cause to require or allow.

The award of the said Commissioners, or of any three of them as aforesaid, shall in all cases be final and conclusive both as to the justice of the claim, and to the amount of the sum to be paid to the creditor or claimant; and the United States undertake to cause the sum so awarded to be paid in specie to such creditor or claimant without deduction; and at such time or times and at such place or places, as shall be awarded by the said Commissioners; and on condition of such releases or assignments to be given by the creditor or claimant, as by the said Commissioners may be directed: Provided always, that no such payment shall be fixed by the said Commissioners to take place sooner than twelve months from the day of the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty.

ARTICLE VII.

Whereas complaints have been made by divers merchants and others, citizens of the United States, that during the course of the war in which His Majesty is now engaged, they have sustained considerable losses and damage, by reason of irregular or illegal captures or condemnations of their vessels and other property, under color of authority or commissions from His Majesty, and that from various circumstances belonging to the said cases, adequate compensation for the losses and damages so sustained cannot now be actually obtained, had, and received by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings; it is agreed, that in all such cases, where adequate compensation cannot, for whatever reason, be now actually obtained, had, and received by the said merchants and others, in the ordinary course of justice, full and complete compensation for the same will be made by the British Government to the said complainants. But it is distinctly understood that this provision is not to extend to such losses or damages as have been occasioned by the manifest delay or negligence, or wilful omission of the claimant.

That for the purpose of ascertaining the amount of any such losses and damages, five Commissioners shall be appointed and authorized to act in London, exactly in the manner directed with respect to those mentioned in the preceding article, and after having taken the same oath or affirmation, (mutatis mutandis,) the same term of eighteen months is also assigned for the reception of claims, and they are in like manner authorized to extend the same in particular cases. They shall receive testimony, books, papers and evidence in the same latitude, and exercise the like discretion and powers respecting that subject; and shall decide the claims in question according to the merits of the several cases, and to justice, equity and the laws of nations. The award of the said Commissioners, or any such three of them as aforesaid, shall in all cases be final and conclusive, both as to the justice of the claim, and the amount of the sum to be paid to the claimant; and His Britannic Majesty undertakes to cause the same to be paid to such claimant in specie, without any deduction, at such place or places, and at such time or times, as shall be awarded by the said Commissioners, and on condition of such releases or assignments to be given by the claimant, as by the said Commissioners may be directed.

And whereas certain merchants and others, His Majesty s subjects, complain that, in the course of the war, they have sustained loss and damage by reason of the capture of their vessels and merchandise, taken within the limits and jurisdiction of the States and brought into the ports of the same, or taken by vessels originally armed in ports of the said States:

It is agreed that in all such cases where restitution shall not have been made agreeably to the tenor of the letter from Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Hammond, dated at Philadelphia, September 5, 1793, a copy of which is annexed to this treaty; the complaints of the parties shall be and hereby are referred to the Commissioners to be appointed by virtue of this article, who are hereby authorized and required to proceed in the like manner relative to these as to the other cases committed to them; and the United States undertake to pay to the complainants or claimants in specie, without deduction, the amount of such sums as shall be awarded to them respectively by the said Commissioners, and at the times and places which in such awards shall be specified; and on condition of such releases or assignments to be given by the claimants as in the said awards may be directed: And it is further agreed, that not only the now existing cases of both descriptions, but also all such as shall exist at the time of exchanging the ratifications of this treaty, shall be considered as being within the provisions, intent and meaning of this article.

ARTICLE VIII.

It is further agreed that the Commissioners mentioned in this and in the two preceding articles shall be respectively paid in such manner as shall be agreed between the two parties such agreement being to be settled at the time of the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty. And all other expenses attending the said Commissions shall be defrayed jointly by the two parties, the same being previously ascertained and allowed by the majority of the Commissioners. And in the case of death, sickness or necessary absence, the place of every such Commissioner respectively shall be supplied in the same manner as such Commissioner was first appointed, and the new Commissioners shall take the same oath or affirmation and do the same duties.

ARTICLE IX.

It is agreed that British subjects who now hold lands in the territories of the United States, and American citizens who now hold lands in the dominions of His Majesty, shall continue to hold them according to the nature and tenure of their respective estates and titles therein; and may grant, sell or devise the same to whom they please, in like manner as if they were natives and that neither they nor their heirs or assigns shall, so far as may respect the said lands and the legal remedies incident thereto, be regarded as aliens.

ARTICLE X.

Neither the debts due from individuals of the one nation to individuals of the other, nor shares, nor monies, which they may have in the public funds, or in the public or private banks, shall ever in any event of war or national differences be sequestered or confiscated, it being unjust and impolitic that debts and engagements contracted and made by individuals having confidence in each other and in their respective Governments, should ever be destroyed or impaired by national authority on account of national differences and discontents.

ARTICLE XI.

It is agreed between His Majesty and the United States of America, that there shall be a reciprocal and entirely perfect liberty of navigation and commerce between their respective people, in the manner, under the limitations, and on the conditions specified in the following articles.

ARTICLE XII.

His Majesty consents that it shall and may be lawful, during the time hereinafter limited, for the citizens of the United States to carry to any of His Majesty’s islands and ports in the West Indies from the United States, in their own vessels, not being above the burthen of seventy tons, any goods or merchandizes, being of the growth, manufacture or produce of the said States, which it is or may be lawful to carry to the said islands or ports from the said States in British vessels; and that the said American vessels shall be subject there to no other or higher tonnage duties or charges than shall be payable by British vessels in the ports of the United States; and that the cargoes of the said American vessels shall be subject there to no other or higher duties or charges than shall be payable on the like articles if imported there from the said States in British vessels.

And His Majesty also consents that it shall be lawful for the said American citizens to purchase, load and carry away in their said vessels to the United States, from the said islands and ports, all such articles, being of the growth, manufacture or produce of the said islands, as may now by law be carried from thence to the said States in British vessels, and subject only to the same duties and charges on exportation, to which British vessels and their cargoes are or shall be subject in similar circumstances.

Provided always, that the said American vessels do carry and land their cargoes in the United States only, it being expressly agreed and declared that, during the continuance of this article, the United States will prohibit and restrain the carrying any molasses, sugar, coffee, cocoa or cotton in American vessels, either from His Majesty’s islands or from the United States to any part of the world except the United States, reasonable seastores excepted. Provided, also, that it shall and may be lawful, during the same period, for British vessels to import from the said islands into the United States, and to export from the United States to the said islands, all articles whatever, being of the growth, produce or manufacture of the said islands, or of the United States respectively, which now may, by the laws of the said States, be so imported and exported. And that the cargoes of the said British vessels shall be subject to no other or higher duties or charges, than shall be payable on the same articles if so imported or exported in American vessels.

It is agreed that this article, and every matter and thing therein contained, shall continue to be in force during the continuance of the war in which His Majesty is now engaged; and also for two years from and after the date of the signature of the preliminary or other articles of peace, by which the same may be terminated.

And it is further agreed that, at the expiration of the said term, the two contracting parties will endeavour further to regulate their commerce in this respect, according to the situation in which His Majesty may then find himself with respect to the West Indies, and with a view to such arrangements as may best conduce to the mutual advantage and extension of commerce. And the said parties will then also renew their discussions, and endeavour to agree, whether in any and what cases, neutral vessels shall protect enemy’s property; and in what cases provisions and other articles, not generally contraband, may become such. But in the mean time, their conduct towards each other in these respects shall be regulated by the articles hereinafter inserted on those subjects.

ARTICLE XIII.

His Majesty consents that the vessels belonging to the citizens of the United States of America shall be admitted and hospitably received in all the seaports and harbors of the British territories in the East Indies. And that the citizens of the said United States may freely carry on a trade between the said territories and the said United States, in all articles of which the importation or exportation respectively, to or from the said territories, shall not be entirely prohibited. Provided only, that it shall not be lawful for them in any time of war between the British Government and any other Power or State whatever, to export from the said territories, without the special permission of the British Government there, any military stores, or naval stores, or rice. The citizens of the United States shall pay for their vessels when admitted into the said ports no other or higher tonnage duty than shall be payable on British vessels when admitted into the ports of the United States. And they shall pay no other or higher duties or charges, on the importation or exportation of the cargoes of the said vessels, than shall be payable on the same articles when imported or exported in British vessels. But it is expressly agreed that the vessels of the United States shall not carry any of the articles exported by them from the said British territories to any port or place, except to some port or place in America, where the same shall be unladen and such regulations shall be adopted by both parties as shall from time to time be found necessary to enforce the due and faithful observance of this stipulation. It is also understood that the permission granted by this article is not to extend to allow the vessels of the United States to carry on any part of the coasting trade of the said British territories; but vessels going with their original cargoes, or part thereof, from one port of discharge to another, are not to be considered as carrying on the coasting trade. Neither is this article to be construed to allow the citizens of the said States to settle or reside within the said territories, or to go into the interior parts thereof, without the permission of the British Government established there; and if any transgression should be attempted against the regulations of the British Government in this respect, the observance of the same shall and may be enforced against the citizens of America in the same manner as against British subjects or others transgressing the same rule. And the citizens of the United States, whenever they arrive in any port or harbour in the said territories, or if they should be permitted, in manner aforesaid, to go to any other place therein, shall always be subject to the laws, government and jurisdiction of what nature established in such harbor, port pr place, according as the same may be. The citizens of the United States may also touch for refreshment at the island of St. Helena, but subject in all respects to such regulations as the British Government may from time to time establish there.

ARTICLE XIV.

There shall be between all the dominions of His Majesty in Europe and the territories of the United States a reciprocal and perfect liberty of commerce and navigation. The people and inhabitants of the two countries, respectively, shall have liberty freely and securely, and without hindrance and molestation, to come with their ships and cargoes to the lands, countries, cities, ports, places and rivers within the dominions and territories aforesaid, to enter into the same, to resort there, and to remain and reside there, without any limitation of time. Also to hire and possess houses and warehouses for the purposes of their commerce, and generally the merchants and traders on each side shall enjoy the most complete protection and security for their commerce; but subject always as to what respects this article to the laws and statutes of the two countries respectively.

ARTICLE XV.

It is agreed that no other or high duties shall be paid by the ships or merchandise of the one party in the ports of the other than such as are paid by the like vessels or merchandize of all other nations. Nor shall any other or higher duty be imposed in one country on the importation of any articles the growth, produce or manufacture of the other, than are or shall be payable on the importation of the like articles being of the growth, produce or manufacture of any other foreign country. Nor shall any prohibition be imposed on the exportation or importation of any articles to or from the territories of the two parties respectively, which shall not equally extend to all other nations.

But the British Government reserves to itself the right of imposing on American vessels entering into the British ports in Europe a tonnage duty equal to that which shall be payable by British vessels in the ports of America; and also such duty as may be adequate to countervail the difference of duty now payable on the importation of European and Asiatic goods, when imported into the United States in British or in American vessels

The two parties agree to treat for the more exact equalization of the duties on the respective navigation of their subjects and people, in such manner as may be most beneficial to the two countries. The arrangements for this purpose shall be made at the same time with those mentioned at the conclusion of the twelfth article of this treaty, and are to be considered as a part thereof. In the interval it is agreed that the United States will not impose any new or additional tonnage duties on British vessels, nor increase the nowsubsisting difference between the duties payable on the importation of any articles in British or in American vessels.

ARTICLE XVI.

It shall be free for the two contracting parties, respectively, to appoint Consuls for the protection of trade, to reside in the dominions and territories aforesaid; and the said Consuls shall enjoy those liberties and rights which belong to them by reason of their function. But before any Consul shall act as such, he shall be in the usual forms approved and admitted by the party to whom he is sent; and it is hereby declared to be lawful and proper that, in case of illegal or improper conduct towards the laws or Government, a Consul may either be punished according to law, if the laws will reach the case, or be dismissed, or even sent back, the offended Government assigning to the other their reasons for the same.

Either of the parties may except from the residence of Consuls such particular places as such party shall judge proper to be so excepted.

ARTICLE XVII.

It is agreed that in all cases where vessels shall be captured or detained on just suspicion of having on board enemy’s property, or of carrying to the enemy any of the articles which are contraband of war, the said vessels shall be brought to the nearest or most convenient port; and if any property of an enemy should be found on board such vessel, that part only which belongs to the enemy shall be made prize, and the vessel shall be at liberty to proceed with the remainder without any impediment. And it is agreed that all proper measures shall be taken to prevent delay in deciding the cases of ships or cargoes so brought in for adjudication, and in the payment or recovery of any indemnification, adjudged or agreed to be paid to the masters or owners of such ships.

ARTICLE XVIII.

In order to regulate what is in future to be esteemed contraband of war, it is agreed that under the said denomination shall be comprised all arms and implements serving for the purposes of war, by land or sea, such as cannon, muskets, mortars, petards, bombs, grenades, carcasses, saucisses, carriages for cannon, musketrests, bandoliers, gunpowder, match, saltpetre, ball, pikes, swords, headpieces, cuirasses, halberts, lances, javelins, horsefurniture, holsters, belts, and generally all other implements of war, as also timber for shipbuilding, tar or rozin, copper in sheets, sails, hemp, and cordage, and generally whatever may serve directly to the equipment of vessels, unwrought iron and fir planks only excepted, and all the above articles are hereby declared to be just objects of confiscation whenever they are attempted to be carried to an enemy.

And whereas the difficulty of agreeing on the precise cases in which alone provisions and other articles not generally contraband may be regarded as such, renders it expedient to provide against the inconveniences and misunderstandings which might thence arise: It is further agreed that whenever any such articles so becoming contraband, according to the existing laws of nations, shall for that reason be seized, the same shall not be confiscated, but the owners thereof shall be speedily and completely indemnified; and the captors, or, in their default, the Government under whose authority they act, shall pay to the masters or owners of such vessels the full value of all such articles, with a reasonable mercantile profit thereon, together with the freight, and also the demurrage incident to such detention.

And whereas it frequently happens that vessels sail for a port or place belonging to an enemy without knowing that the same is either besieged, blockaded or invested, it is agreed that every vessel so circumstanced may be turned away from such port or place; but she shall not be detained, nor her cargo, if not contraband, be confiscated, unless after notice she shall again attempt to enter, but she shall be permitted to go to any other port or place she may think proper; nor shall any vessel or goods of either party that may have entered into such port or place before the same was besieged, blockaded, or invested by the other, and be found thereinafter the reduction or surrender of such place, be liable to confiscation, but shall be restored to the owners or proprietors there.

ARTICLE XIX.

And that more abundant care may be taken for the security of the respective subjects and citizens of the contracting parties, and to prevent their suffering injuries by the menofwar, or privateers of either party, all commanders of ships of war and privateers, and all others the said subjects and citizens, shall forbear doing any damage to those of the other party or committing any outrage against them, and if they act to the contrary they shall be punished, and shall also be bound in their persons and estates to make satisfaction and reparation for all damages, and the interest thereof, of whatever nature the said damages may be.

For this cause, all commanders of privateers, before they receive their commissions, shall hereafter be obliged to give, before a competent judge, sufficient security by at least two responsible sureties, who have no interest in the said privateer, each of whom, together with the said commander, shall be jointly and severally bound in the sum of fifteen hundred pounds sterling, or, if such ships be provided with above one hundred and fifty seamen or soldiers, in the sum of three thousand pounds sterling, to satisfy all damages and injuries which the said privateer, or her officers or men, or any of them, may do or commit during their cruise contrary to the tenor of this treaty, or to the laws and instructions for regulating their conduct; and further, that in all cases of aggressions the said commissions shall be revoked and annulled.

It is also agreed that whenever a judge of a court of admiralty of either of the parties shall pronounce sentence against any vessel or goods or property belonging to the subjects or citizens of the other party, a formal and duly authenticated copy of all the proceedings in the cause, and of the said sentence, shall, if required, be delivered to the commander of the said vessel, without the smallest delay, he paying all legal fees and demands for the same.

ARTICLE XX.

It is further agreed that both the said contracting parties shall not only refuse to receive any pirates into any of their ports, havens or towns, or permit any of their inhabitants to receive, protect, harbor, conceal or assist them in any manner, but will bring to condign punishment all such inhabitants as shall be guilty of such acts or offences.

And all their ships, with the goods or merchandizes taken by them and brought into the port of either of the said parties, shall be seized as far as they can be discovered, and shall be restored to the owners, or their factors or agents, duly deputed and authorized in writing by them (proper evidence being first given in the court of admiralty for proving the property) even in case such effects should have passed into other hands by sale, if it be proved that the buyers knew or had good reason to believe or suspect that they had been piratically taken.

ARTICLE XXI.

It is likewise agreed that the subjects and citizens of the two nations shall not do any acts of hostility or violence against each other, nor accept commissions or instructions so to act from any foreign Prince or State, enemies to the other party; nor shall the enemies of one of the parties be permitted to invite, or endeavor to enlist in their military service, any of the subjects or citizens of the other party; and the laws against all such offences and aggressions shall be punctually executed. And if any subject or citizen of the said parties respectively shall accept any foreign commission or letters of marque for arming any vessel to act as a privateer against the other party, and be taken by the other party, it is hereby declared to be lawful for the said party to treat and punish the said subject or citizen having such commission or letters of marque as a pirate.

ARTICLE XXII.

It is expressly stipulated that neither of the said contracting parties will order or authorize any acts of reprisal against the other, on complaints of injuries or damages, until the said party shall first have presented to the other a statement thereof, verified by competent proof and evidence, and demanded justice and satisfaction, and the same shall either have been refused or unreasonably delayed.

ARTICLE XXIII.

The ships of war of each of the contracting parties shall, at all times, be hospitably received in the ports of the other, their officers and crews paying due respect to the laws and Government of the country. The officers shall be treated with that respect which is due to the commissions which they bear, and if any insult should be offered to them by any of the inhabitants, all offenders in this respect shall be punished as disturbers of the peace and amity between the two countries. And His Majesty consents that in case an American vessel should, by stress of weather, danger from enemies, or other misfortune, be reduced to the necessity of seeking shelter in any of His Majesty’s ports, into which such vessel could not in ordinary cases claim to be admitted, she shall, on manifesting that necessity to the satisfaction of the Government of the place, be hospitably received, and be permitted to refit and to purchase at the market price such necessaries as she may stand in need of, conformably to such orders and regulations at the Government of the place, having respect to the circumstances of each case, shall prescribe. She shall not be allowed to break bulk or unload her cargo, unless the same should be bona fide necessary to her being refitted. Nor shall be permitted to sell any part of her cargo, unless so much only as may be necessary to defray her expences, and then not without the express permission of the Government of the place. Nor shall she be obliged to pay any duties whatever, except only on such articles as she may be permitted to sell for the purpose aforesaid.

ARTICLE XXIV.

It shall not be lawful for any foreign privateers (not being subjects or citizens of either of the said parties) who have commissions from any other Prince or State in enmity with either nation to arm their ships in the ports of either of the said parties, nor to sell what they have taken, nor in any other manner to exchange the same; nor shall they be allowed to purchase more provisions than shall be necessary for their going to the nearest port of that Prince or State from whom they obtained their commissions.

ARTICLE XXV.

It shall be lawful for the ships of war and privateers belonging to the said parties respectively to carry whithersoever they please the ships and goods taken from their enemies, without being obliged to pay any fee to the officers of the admiralty, or to any judges whatever; nor shall the said prizes, when they arrive at and enter the ports of the said parties, be detained or seized, neither shall the searchers or other officers of those places visit such prizes, (except for the purpose of preventing the carrying of any of the cargo thereof on shore in any manner contrary to the established laws of revenue, navigation, or commerce,) nor shall such officers take cognizance of the validity of such prizes; but they shall be at liberty to hoist sail and depart as speedily as may be, and carry their said prizes to the place mentioned in their commissions or patents, which the commanders of the said ships of war or privateers shall be obliged to show. No shelter or refuge shall be given in their ports to such as have made a prize upon the subjects or citizens of either of the said parties; but if forced by stress of weather, or the dangers of the sea, to enter therein, particular care shall be taken to hasten their departure, and to cause them to retire as soon as possible. Nothing in this treaty contained shall, however, be construed or operate contrary to former and existing public treaties with other sovereigns or States. But the two parties agree that while they continue in amity neither of them will in future make any treaty that shall be inconsistent with this or the preceding article.

Neither of the said parties shall permit the ships or goods belonging to the subjects or citizens of the other to be taken within cannon shot of the coast, nor in any of the bays, ports or rivers of their territories, by ships of war or others having commission from any Prince, Republic or State whatever. But in case it should so happen, the party whose territorial rights shall thus have been violated shall use his utmost endeavors to obtain from the offending party full and ample satisfaction for the vessel or vessels so taken, whether the same be vessels of war or merchant vessels.

ARTICLE XXVI.

If at any time a rupture should take place (which God forbid) between His Majesty and the United States, and merchants and others of each of the two nations residing in the dominions of the other shall have the privilege of remaining and continuing their trade, so long as they behave peaceably and commit no offence against the laws; and in case their conduct should render them suspected, and the respective Governments should think proper to order them to remove, the term of twelve months from the publication of the order shall be allowed them for that purpose, to remove with their families, effects and property, but this favor shall not be extended to those who shall act contrary to the established laws; and for greater certainty, it is declared that such rupture shall not be deemed to exist while negociations for accommodating differences shall be depending, nor until the respective Ambassadors or Ministers, if such there shall be, shall be recalled or sent home on account of such differences, and not on account of personal misconduct, according to the nature and degrees of which both parties retain their rights, either to request the recall, or immediately to send home the Ambassador or Minister of the other, and that without prejudice to their mutual friendship and good understanding.

ARTICLE XXVII.

It is further agreed that His Majesty and the United States, on mutual requisitions, by them respectively, or by their respective Ministers or officers authorized to make the same, will deliver up to justice all persons who, being charged with murder or forgery, committed within the jurisdiction of either, shall seek an asylum within any of the countries of the other, provided that this shall only be done on such evidence of criminality as, according to the laws of the place, where the fugitive or person so charged shall be found, would justify his apprehension and commitment for trial, if the offence had there been committed. The expence of such apprehension and delivery shall be borne and defrayed by those who made the requisition and receive the fugitive.

ARTICLE XXVIII.

It is agreed that the first ten articles of this treaty shall be permanent, and that the subsequent articles, except the twelfth, shall be limited in their duration to twelve years, to be computed from the day on which the ratifications of this treaty shall be exchanged, but subject to this condition. That whereas the said twelfth article will expire by the limitation therein contained, at the end of two years from the signing of the preliminary or other articles of peace, which shall terminate the present war in which His Majesty is engaged, it is agreed that proper measures shall by concert be taken for bringing the subject of that article into amicable treaty and discussion, so early before the expiration of the said term as that new arrangements on that head may by that time be perfected and ready to take place. But if it should unfortunately happen that His Majesty and the United States should not be able to agree on such new arrangements, in that case all the articles of this treaty, except the first ten, shall then cease and expire together.

Lastly. This treaty, when the same shall have been ratified by His Majesty and by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of their Senate, and the respective ratifications mutually exchanged, shall be binding and obligatory on His Majesty and on the said States, and shall be by them respectively executed and observed with punctuality and the most sincere regard to good faith; and whereas it will be expedient, in order the better to facilitate intercourse and obviate difficulties, that other articles be proposed and added to this treaty, which articles, from want of time and other circumstances, cannot now be perfected, it is agreed that the said parties will, from time to time, readily treat of and concerning such articles, and will sincerely endeavor so to form them as that they may conduce to mutual convenience and tend to promote mutual satisfaction and friendship; and that the said articles, after having been duly ratified, shall be added to and make a part of this treaty. In faith whereof we, the undersigned Ministers Plenipotentiary of His Majesty the King of Great Britain and the United States of America, have singed this present treaty, and have caused to be affixed thereto the seal of our arms.

Done at London this nineteenth day of November, one thousand seven hundred and ninety four.

(SEAL.) GRENVILLE.

(SEAL.) JOHN JAY.


Letter from Thomas Jefferson to George Hammond.

PHILADELPHIA, September 5, 1793.

Sir: I am honored with yours of August 30. Mine of the 7th of that month assured you that measures were taken for excluding from all further asylum in our ports vessels armed in them to cruise on nations with which we are at peace, and for the restoration of the prizes the Lovely Lass, Prince William Henry, and the Jane of Dublin; and that should the measures for restitution fail in their effect, the President considered it as incumbent on the United States to make compensation for the vessels.

We are bound by our treaties with three of the belligerent nations, by all the means in our power, to protect and defend their vessels and effects in our ports, or waters, or on the seas near our shores, and to recover and restore the same to the right owners when taken from them. If all the means in our power are used, and fail in their effect, we are not bound by our treaties with those nations to make compensation.

Though we have no similar treaty with Great Britain, it was the opinion of the President that we should use towards that nation the same rule which, under this article, was to govern us with the other nations; and even to extend it to captures made on the high seas and brought into our ports f done by vessels which had been armed within them.

Having, for particular reasons, forbore to use all the means in our power for the restitution of the three vessels mentioned in my letter of August 7th, the President thought it incumbent on the United States to make compensation for them; and though nothing was said in that letter of other vessels taken under like circumstances, and brought in after the 5th of June, and before the date of that letter, yet when the same forbearance had taken place, it was and is his opinion, that compensation would be equally due.

As to prizes made under the same circumstances, and brought in after the date of that letter, the President determined that all the means in our power should be used for their restitution. If these fail, as we should not be bound by our treaties to make compensation to the other Powers in the analogous case, he did not mean to give an opinion that it ought to be done to Great Britain. But still, if any cases shall arise subsequent to that date, the circumstances of which shall place them on similar ground with those before it, the President would think compensation equally incumbent on the United States.

Instructions are given to the Governors of the different States to use all the means in their power for restoring prizes of this last description found within their ports. Though they will, of course, take measures to be infomed of them, and the General Government has given them the aid of the customhouse officers for this purpose, yet you will be sensible of the importance of multiplying the channels of their infomation as far as shall depend on yourself, or any person under your direction, or order that the Governors may use the means in their power for making restitution.

Without knowledge of the capture they cannot restore it. It will always be best to give the notice to them directly; but any infomation which you shall be pleased to send to me also, at any time, shall be forwarded to them as quickly as distance will permit.

Hence you will perceive, sir, that the President contemplates restitution or compensation in the case before the 7th of August; and after that date, restitution if it can be effected by any means in our power. And that it will be important that you should substantiate the fact that such prizes are in our ports or waters.

Your list of the privateers illicitly armed in our ports is, I believe, correct.

With respect to losses by detention, waste, spoilation sustained by vessels taken as before mentioned, between the dates of June 5th and August 7th, it is proposed as a provisional measure that the Collector of the Customs of the district, and the British Consul, or any other person you please, shall appoint persons to establish the value of the vessel and cargo at the time of her capture and of her arrival in the port into which she is brought, according to their value in that port. If this shall be agreeable to you, and you will be pleased to signify it to me, with the names of the prizes understood to be of this description, instructions will be given accordingly to the Collector of the Customs where the respective vessels are.

I have the honor to be, &c., TH: JEFFERSON. GEO: HAMMOND,
Esq.


ADDITIONAL ARTICLE.

It is further agreed, between the said contracting parties, that the operation of so much of the twelfth article of the said treaty as respects the trade which his said Majesty thereby consents may be carried on between the United States and his islands in the West Indies, in the manner and on the terms and conditions therein specified, shall be suspended.

1796.

EXPLANATORY ARTICLE TO THE THIRD ARTICLE OF THE TREATY OF NOVEMBER 19, 1794, RESPECTING THE LIBERTY TO PASS AND REPASS THE BORDERS AND TO CARRY ON TRADE AND COMMERCE.

Concluded May 4, 1796; Ratification advised by Senate May 9, 1796.

Whereas by the third article of the treaty of amity, commerce and navigation, concluded at London on the nineteenth day of November, one thousand seven hundred and ninetyfour, between His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, it was agreed that is should at all times be free to His Majesty’s subjects and to the citizens of the United States, and also to the Indians dwelling on either side of the boundary line, assigned by the treaty of peace to the United States, freely to pass and repass, by land or inland navigation, into the respective territories and countries of the two contracting parties, on the continent of America, (the country within the limits of the Hudson’s Bay Company only excepted,) and to navigate all the lakes, rivers, and waters thereof, and freely to carry on trade and commerce with each other, subject to the provisions and limitations contained in the said article: And whereas by the eighth article of the treaty of peace and friendship concluded at Greenville on the third day of August, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-five, between the United States and the nations or tribes of Indians called the Wyandots, Delawares, Shawanoes, Ottawas, Chippewas, Putawatimies, Miamis, Eel River, Weeas, Kickapoos, Piankashaws, and Kaskaskias, it was stipulated that no person should be permitted to reside at any of the towns or the hunting camps of the said Indian tribes, as a trader, who is not furnished with a licence for that purpose under the authority of the United States: Which latter stipulation has excited doubts, whether in its operation it may not interfere with the due execution of the third article of the treaty of amity, commerce and navigation: And it being the sincere desire of His Britannic Majesty and of the United States that this point should be so explained as to remove all doubts and promote mutual satisfaction and friendship: And for this purpose His Britannic Majesty having named for his Commissioner, Phineas Bond, Esquire, His Majesty’s ConsulGeneral for the Middle and Southern States of America, (and now His Majesty’s Chargé d’Affaires to the United States,) and the President of the United States having named for their Commissioner, Timothy Pickering, Esquire, Secretary of State of the United States, to whom, agreeably to the laws of the United States, he has intrusted this negotiation: They, the said Commissioners, having communicated to each other their full powers, have, in virtue of the same, and conformably to the spirit of the last article of the said treaty of amity, commerce and navigation, entered into this explanatory article, and do by these presents explicitly agree and declare, that no stipulations in any treaty subsequently concluded by either of the contracting parties with any other State or nation, or with any Indian tribe, can be understood to derogate in any manner from the rights of free intercourse and commerce, secured by the aforesaid third article of the treaty of amity, commerce and navigation, to the subjects of his Majesty and to the citizens of the United States, and to the Indians dwelling on either side of the boundary line aforesaid; but that all the said persons shall remain at full liberty freely to pass and repass, by land or inland navigation, into the respective territories and countries of the contracting parties, on either side of the said boundary line, and freely to carry on trade and commerce with each other, according to the stipulations of the said third article of the treaty of amity, commerce and navigation.

This explanatory article, when the same shall have been ratified by His Majesty and by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of their Senate, and the respective ratifications mutually exchanged, shall be added to and make a part of the said treaty of amity commerce and navigation, and shall be permanently binding upon His Majesty and the United States.

In witness whereof we, the said Commissioners of His Majesty the King of Great Britain and the United States of America, have signed this present explanatory article, and thereto affixed our seals.

Done at Philadelphia this fourth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninetysix.

(SEAL.) P. BOND. (SEAL.) TIMOTHY PICKERING.

1798.


EXPLANATORY ARTICLE TO THE TREATY OF NOVEMBER 19, 1794, RELEASING THE COMMISSIONERS UNDER THE FIFTH ARTICLE FROM PARTICULARIZING THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE OF THE RIVER ST. CROIX.

Concluded March 15, 1798; Ratification advised by Senate June 5, 1798.

Whereas by the twenty eight article of the treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation between His Britannic Majesty and the United States, signed at London on the nineteenth day of November, one thousand seven hundred and ninety four, it was agreed that the contracting parties would, from time to time, readily treat of and concerning such further articles as might be proposed; that they would sincerely endeavour so to form such articles as that they might conduce to mutual convenience and tend to promote mutual satisfaction and ,friendship; and that such articles, after having been duly ratified, should be added to and make a part of that treaty: And whereas difficulties have arisen with respect to the execution of so much of the fifth article of the said treaty as requires that the Commissioners appointed under the same should in their description particularize the latitude and longitude of the source of the river which may be found to be the one truly intended in the treaty of peace between His Britannic Majesty and the United States, under the name of the river St. Croix, by reason whereof it is expedient that the said Commissioners should be released from the obligation of conforming to the provisions of the said article in this respect. The undersigned being respectively named by His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America their Plenipotentiaries for the purpose of treating of and concluding such articles as may be proper to be added to the said treaty, in conformity to the above mentioned stipulation, and having communicated to each other their respective full powers, have agreed and concluded, and do hereby declare in the name of His Britannic Majesty and of the United States of America that the Commissioners appointed under the fifth article of the above mentioned treaty shall not be obliged to particularize in their description, the latitude and longitude of the source of the river which may be found to be the one truly intended in the aforesaid treaty of peace under the name of the river St. Croix, but they shall be at liberty to describe the said river, in such other manner as they may judge expedient, which description shall be considered as a complete execution of the duty required of the said Commissioners in this respect by the article aforesaid. And to the end that no uncertainty may hereafter exist on this subject, it is further agreed, that as soon as may be after the decision of the said Commissioners, measures shall be concerted between the Government of the United States and His Britannic Majesty’s Governors or Lieutenant Governors in America, in order to erect and keep in repair a suitable monument at the place ascertained and described to be the source of the said river St. Croix, which measures shall immediately thereupon, and as often afterwards as may be requisite, be duly executed on both sides with punctuality and good faith.

This explanatory article, when the same shall have been ratified by His Majesty and by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of their Senate, and the respective ratifications mutually exchanged, shall be added to and make a part of the treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation between His Majesty and the United States, signed at London on the nineteenth day of November, one thousand seven hundred and ninetyfour, and shall be permanently binding upon His Majesty and the United States.

In witness whereof we, the said undersigned Plenipotentiaries of His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America, have signed this present article, and have caused to be affixed thereto the seal of our arms.

Done at London this fifteenth day of March, one thousand seven hundred and ninety eight.

(SEAL.) GRENVILLE. (SEAL.) RUFUS KING.

A Journal of the Life, Travels, Religious Exercises and Labours in the Work of the Ministry of Joshua Evans, Late of Newton Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey

“As I was waiting in silence for right direction, and feeling the Divine presence near, it opened to me , that as my prospect of going to Nova Scotia remained weighty, my best way was to take a passage by water, from this place, if I could obtain it. I knew not that this was likely to be had; but, on going to the door soon after, a man came to me and queried, whence I came, and whither I was going. I told him I came from near Philadelphia, and was going to Dartmouth, in Nova Scotia, if I could get there; that I had been advised to go by water, but knew not how to get a passage. He then informed me of a vessel bound for that place, which was to sail the next day. My companion having walked out, and the man being willing to go with me to see the captain of the vessel, I went with him, and having found the captain, he readily agreed to take us. Upon this, I went to speak with my companion, and he uniting with the proposal, we soon agreed for a passage, the price of which was five guineas, each. The matter being thus concluded, the Friend who came with us, agreed to take back the carriage and our horses.”

“After passing through grievous sea-sickness and various difficulties, occasioned by contrary winds, fogs, and rough weather, we were favoured to land safe at our desired port of Dartmouth, on the 17th of 7th month, 1795, and were kindly received by our friend, Seth Coleman. The next day, I felt my self weak, and did not go about much. But my tongue cannot describe the feelings I had of the Lord’s loving kindness, which had been extended towards me, and is still continued towards all who are given up to serve him in humility and sincerity of heart.

19th. Being first-day, we attended the meeting at Dartmouth. It was large for the place, and proved to be a heart-tendering, favoured opportunity. We then went out about four miles to our friend Thomas Green’s, where next day, we visited three families in the neighbourhood, to good satisfaction. These Friends have had their trials, by reason of others removing away, when they had not freedom to go. Our visit was very acceptable, as coming in a needful time; which some of them expressed.

21st. We visited six other families, who seemed tender. Dartmouth is situated on the east side of Chebucto bay, and contains between fifty and a hundred houses. The town of Halifax, containing about five hundred houses, lies nearly opposite, on the west side.

23rd. We were at three meetings; one for public worship; one, a meeting of conference; and at the third hour was held their preparative meeting; in which, those who incline to marry are allowed to declare their intentions. This is on account of their situation being so remote from any monthly meeting. These were opportunities of remarkable favour; and I thought their business was well conducted. On the next first-day, we had a solemn, parting meeting, which was a favoured season; and the next day we took our leave of Dartmouth. — Many people, Friends and others, coming together, we had a solemn opportunity before we left them.”

A Journal of the Life, Travels, Religious Exercises and Labours in the Work of the Ministry of Joshua Evans, Late of Newton Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey, https://books.google.ca/books?id=Z92QXSO773EC

Body politic, Body corporate ⁠— City limits

dartmouth city limits

An examination of the legislated spatial dimensions of Dartmouth – from its initial definition as a township care of the Royal instructions that accompanied Cornwallis in 1749 to its dissolution in one of Nova Scotia’s city county mergers by fiat (aka a “municipal coup”) in 1996.

“And whereas for the better security, regulation and government of our said settlement, it will be necessary that such persons as we shall judge proper to send to our said province should be settled in townships; you are therefore hereby authorized and required to appoint such proper persons as you shall find there fully qualified to carry along with you forthwith to survey and mark out the said townships in such manner and at such places as is herein directed, that is to say, two townships containing 100,000 acres of land each be marked out at or near our harbor of Chebucto, as also one township of the like extent at each of the aforementioned places or such others as you shall judge most proper; and you are to take particular care in laying out such townships that they do include the best and most profitable land and also that they do include the best and most profitable rivers as may be at or near the said settlements and that the said townships do extend as far up into the country as conveniently may be, taking in a necessary part of the seacoast”.

769: Laying out townships in Nova Scotia (I). 1749-1752; (§§ 770, 766).
Labaree, Leonard Woods. “Royal Instructions To British Colonial Governors”, Volume II. New York, Octagon Books, 1967.
https://archive.org/details/royalinstruction028364mbp/page/n93/mode/2up

 “the Town and Suburbs of Dartmouth”

An Act for Establishing and Regulating a Militia, Law by Proclamation, by Command of his Excellency the Governor and his Majesty’s Council, May 10, 1753.

“That the Township of Dartmouth comprehend all the Lands lying on the East Side of the Harbour of Halifax and Bedford Basin, and extending and bounded Easterly by the Grant to the Proprietors of Lawrence-Town, and extending from the North-easterly Head of Bedford Basin into the Country, until One Hundred Thousand Acres be comprehended.”

Proclamation of His Excellency Charles Lawrence, with the Advice and Consent of His Majesty’s Council, January 3rd 1757. Journals of the Board of Trade and Plantations; Townships, Elections, 1757. Proclamation, Governor Charles Lawrence – official announcement and details about the election of representatives to the new General Assembly. The National Archives of the UK (TNA) . Colonial Office and Predecessors: Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Original Correspondence. CO 21/16 ff. 154

“the inhabitants of the town plot of Dartmouth…in said town…the district of Dartmouth”

Chapter 6 of the Acts of 1789, “An act to enable the Inhabitants of the Town Plot of Dartmouth to use and occupy the Common Field, granted them by his excellency the Lieutenant-Governor, in such way as they may think most beneficial to them”
http://0-nsleg–edeposit.gov.ns.ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/at_large/volume1/1789.pdf

“Common of the town of Dartmouth…the common of the township of Dartmouth; situate on the eastern side of the harbour of Halifax, in special trust, for the use of the inhabitants settled and resident in the town plot, or that might thereafter settle, and actually reside, within the township of Dartmouth… Within the township of Dartmouth”

Chapter 2 of the Acts of 1797, “An act to enable the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, or Commander in chief for the time being, to appoint Trustees, for the Common of the Town of Dartmouth, on the death, or removal, of the Trustees holding the same, and to vacate that part of the grant of the Common aforesaid, which vests trust in the heirs, executors or administrators, of the Trustees, named in the said grant, on the death of such Trustees”
http://0-nsleg–edeposit.gov.ns.ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/at_large/volume1/1797.pdf

“Town plot of Dartmouth… The said town… The town plot of Dartmouth, bounded on the North by the Common, on the South and West by the Halifax Harbour, and on the east by Mill Brook… Of the said towns respectively, within the said limits.”

Chapter 23 of the Acts of 1818, “An act to extend the provisions of c15 of 1761 relating to Trespasses, to the Town of Pictou and the Town Plot of Dartmouth”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/at_large/volume3/1818.pdf

“The town of Dartmouth”

Chapter 32 of the Acts of 1820-21 “To extend the Act for appointing Firewards to the Town of Dartmouth”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/at_large/volume3/1820-21.pdf

“the Town of Dartmouth… inhabitants of the said town… the jurisdiction, powers and authority, of the commissioners so to be appointed for the said Town of Dartmouth, shall be confined and restricted to the bounds and limits following, that is to say:⁠— to the direction or space of one Mile, measured in a southwardly, Easterly, and Northerly direction, from the Public Landing, or Steam Boat Company Wharf, in the said Town.”

Chapter 27 of the Acts of 1828 “To extend the Act relating to Commissioners of Highways to the Town of Dartmouth” https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/at_large/volume3/1828.pdf
A rough idea of what a 1 mile radius from the Ferry terminal wharf looks like.

“Inhabitants resident in the Town Plot of Dartmouth, at a meeting to be called for that purpose… Annual Meeting of the said Inhabitants”

Chapter 52 of the Acts of 1841, “An Act for regulating the Dartmouth Common” http://0-nsleg–edeposit.gov.ns.ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1841.pdf

“the Town of Dartmouth, in the County of Halifax… the said Town of Dartmouth”

Chapter 48 of the Acts of 1843, “An Act to extend to the Town of Dartmouth the Act to amend the Act to regulate the Assize of Bread” http://0-nsleg–edeposit.gov.ns.ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1843.pdf

“Whereas some uncertainty exists as regards the limits of the Township of Dartmouth… Be it therefore enacted by the Lieutenant Governor, Council and Assembly, that the lines of the Township of Dartmouth shall be established and settled as follows, beginning on the Eastern side of Bedford Basin at the head of Pace’s cove at low water mark, and thence to run north seventy four degrees east until it meets the main stream running Into Lake Major, thence southerly through the center of Lake Major and West Salmon River to the waters of Cole Harbor and thence Southwestwardly along the shore the several courses of the shore to Roaring Point, thence northerly following the course of the shore of the Main Land at low water mark to the place of beginning, so as not to include any Islands lying on or near said shore.

Chapter 17 of the Acts of 1846, “An Act to define and establish the Lines of the Township of Dartmouth”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1846.pdf

“…the inhabitants of the said town of Dartmouth …within the space of one mile, measured in a southwardly, easterly and northerly direction from the public landing or Steamboat Company’s wharf in said town”

Chapter 29 of the Acts of 1847, “In relation to Assessment for a Fire Engine at Dartmouth”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1847.pdf

For Dartmouth…one mile, measured in a southwardly, easterly and northerly direction from the public landing or Steamboat Company’s wharf in the said Town”

Chapter 46 of the Acts of 1847, “An act relating to Streets and Highways … in the Town of Dartmouth”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1847.pdf

“After the first Annual Town Meeting in the Township of Dartmouth, Three Trustees of Public Property shall be chosen, in whom shall be vested the legal possession of the several Water Lots that have been reserved for the use of the Public along the shores of the Town Plot of Dartmouth, and of a certain Lot of Land and School House now known and distinguished as the School Lot, lying in the Town Plot, to be recovered, held and preserved by the Trustees for the uses to which the same respectively have been reserved and applied, but the School House and School Lot shall be preserved exclusively to the use of Schools and Education, and nothing herein shall excuse the possession and control of the Trustees to be appointed under the Act passed in the present Session for the support of Schools if the School House and Lot might otherwise come under control of such Trustees. Any other Public Property in the Township of Dartmouth not legally possessed by or under the charge and supervision of any person, shall also be legally vested in the Trustees appointed under this act… three trustees shall be annually thereafter appointed at each Annual Town Meeting of the Township… The Inhabitants, in Town Meeting, at any time may declare the purposes to which the Town Property shall be applied by the Trustees, provided those purposes shall not be inconsistent with the uses to which the property has been granted, reserved or legally appropriated… the next Annual Town Meeting of Dartmouth”

Chapter 53 of the Acts of 1850, “An Act Concerning Town Property in Dartmouth” http://0-nsleg–edeposit.gov.ns.ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1850.pdf

“The rateable inhabitants residing within the town plot of the township of Dartmouth, in the county of Halifax, may assess themselves, at any public meeting… for the purpose of obtaining a good and sufficient plan of said town plot… the inhabitants of the said town plot… The Commissioner of Streets for the said township…”

Chapter 56 of the Acts of 1866, “To authorize an assessment on the inhabitants of the Town Plot of Dartmouth”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1866.pdf

“The Trustees of the Dartmouth Common shall be a Body politic and corporate… the Commissioner of Streets for the Town of Dartmouth… A requisition signed by two thirds at least of the rate payers residing within the limits of the town plot of Dartmouth… Which town plot shall be construed to embrace an area within a distance of one mile measured in a southwardly, easterly and northerly direction from the public landing or Steamboat Company’s wharf in said town”

Chapter 31 of the Acts of 1868, “To amend the several Acts relating to the Dartmouth Common”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1868.pdf

‘A municipality shall be erected within the County of Halifax, to be bounded as follows, that is to say: Beginning on the eastern side of the Harbor of Halifax, at a point in such Harbor distant three hundred feet Westerly from the South Western corner of a lot of land formerly owned by Judge Johnston and by him conveyed to John Esdaile; thence to run Eastwardly till it strikes the road leading to the property of the late John Esson; thence by the Southern side of such road and following the course thereof Eastwardly to such Esson property; thence along the Western boundary of such property, Southwardly to the South-Western corner thereof; thence Eastwardly to Gaston’s Road, and crossing such road to a point at right angles with the extension of a new road laid out by J.W. Watt through manor Hill Farm; thence Northwardly to such road and by such road for the length thereof; thence Northwardly to the causeway at Hurley’s on the First Lake; thence Northwardly to the North East boundary of Stair’s Ropewalk property; thence Westwardly to a point three hundred feet into the Harbor of Halifax; and thence Southwardly to then place of beginning; to be called and known as “The Town of Dartmouth”‘.

Chapter 17 of the Acts of 1873, “An Act to Incorporate the Town of Dartmouth” https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1873.pdf

The inhabitants of the town of Dartmouth are constituted and declared to be a body corporate and politic by the name of the Town of Dartmouth. They shall as a corporation have perpetual succession and a Common Seal, changeable at pleasure, and shall be capable of suing and being sued in all Courts of Justice, and of acquiring, holding and conveying any description of property, real, personal or mixed, and shall have all the other rights usually had and enjoyed by corporations.

The Town of Dartmouth shall be bounded as follows:⁠—

Beginning on the eastern side of the Harbor of Halifax, at a point in such Harbor distant three hundred feet Westerly from the South Western corner of a lot of land formerly owned by Judge Johnston and by him conveyed to John Esdaile; thence to run Eastwardly till it strikes the road leading to the property of the late John Esson; thence by centre of such road and following the course thereof Eastwardly to such Esson property; thence along the Western boundary of such property, Southwardly to the South-Western corner thereof; thence Eastwardly to Gaston’s Road, and crossing such road to a point at right angles with the extension of a new road laid out by J.W. Watt through manor Hill Farm; thence Northwardly to such road and by such road for the length thereof; thence Northwardly to the western extremity of the causeway at Hurley’s on the First Lake; thence Northwestardly through Taylor’s barn on the opposite side of the lake until it strikes the Southern side line of the road which connects with the new road laid out by G. A. S Chichton, thence following the southern line of said road until it reaches the main road leading from Dartmouth to Bedford; and from thence crossing said road in a straight line following the said line of the said new road until it extends three hundred feet into the harbor of Halifax, and thence Southwardly to the place of beginning to be called and known as “The Town of Dartmouth”.

Chapter 40 of the Acts of 1877, “An Act to amend the Act entitled, “An Act to Incorporate the Town of Dartmouth” https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1873.pdf

“The inhabitants of the town of Dartmouth are constituted and declared to be a body corporate and politic by the name of the Town of Dartmouth, and the boundaries of the town of Dartmouth, the division of the same into wards, and the boundaries of the several wards thereof, shall continue as at the passing of this Act.”

Chapter 86 of the acts of 1886, “An Act to Amend the Acts relating to the Town of Dartmouth”

[Included is a copy of the 1886 Statues from archive.org, since the copy supplied by the Government of Nova Scotia is missing page 253, which just so happens to be paragraph 1-3 of this Act to Amend the Acts relating to the Town of Dartmouth, which contains the above quoted passage, along with an explicit mention of male or female ratepayers, residents and nonresidents as qualified to vote.]

https://archive.org/embed/statutesnovasco01scotgoog
http://0-nsleg–edeposit.gov.ns.ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1886.pdf

‘The body so constituted shall be a body corporate, under the name of “The Dartmouth Ferry Commission…”‘

Chapter 83 of the Acts of 1890, “An Act to provide for the establishment and operation of a Public Ferry between Dartmouth and Halifax”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1890.pdf

“The Dartmouth Ferry Commission shall continue to be a body politic and corporate, as constituted under chapter 83 of the Acts of 1890 and amending Acts.”

Chapter 37 of the Acts of 1894, “An Act to Consolidate the Acts relating to the establishment and operation of a Public Ferry between Dartmouth and Halifax”, https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1894.pdf

“The assessors shall also insert on the roll the names of all yearly tenants in occupation of real property assessed.”

Chapter 65 of the Acts of 1901, “Act to amend Chapter 50 of the Acts 1897, amending Towns’ Incorporation Act so far as relates to Dartmouth”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1901.pdf

The town of Dartmouth is bounded as follows:

Beginning at a point in the harbor of Halifax distant three hundred feet westerly from the southwestern corner of a lot of land formerly owned by the late Judge Johnstone, and by him conveyed to John Esdaile; thence eastwardly to the road leading to the property of the late John Esson; thence by the centre of such road and following the course thereof eastwardly to such Esson property; thence along the Western boundary of such property southwardly to the southwestern corner thereof; thence eastwardly to the eastern side of Gaston’s Road; thence in a straight line to the point of intersection of the eastern side line of a new road laid out by J. W. Watt through Manor Hill farm, and the northern side line of Cole Harbor Road; thence northwardly by the said new road for the length thereof; thence northwardly to the western extremity of the causeway at Hurley’s on the first lake; thence northwestwardly through Taylor’s born on the opposite side of the lake until it strikes the southern line of the road which connects with the new road laid out by G. A. S. Chrichton; thence following the southern side of said road until it reaches the main road leading from Dartmouth to Bedford, and from thence crossing said road in a straight line following the said line of the said new road until it extends three hundred feet into the harbor of Halifax; thence southwardly in a line parallel to the shore of the harbor, and distant three hundred feet therefrom to the place of beginning. (1873, c. 17, s. 1; 1877, c. 40; 1897, c. 50, s. 3)

Chapter 56 of the Acts of 1902, “An Act to Consolidate the Acts Relating to the Town of Dartmouth
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1902.pdf

The Town of Dartmouth is bounded as follows:

Beginning at the point of intersection of ordinary high water mark on the eastern shore of Halifax Harbor with the prolongation south-westerly of the centre line of a stone wall defining the south-eastern boundary of a lot of land formerly owned by the late Judge Johnstone and by him conveyed to John Esdaile; thence north-easterly along said prolongation and the centre line of said stone wall 1084 feet to a monument on the eastern line of Pleasant Street; thence 52 degrees 22 minutes right, 880.9 feet to a monument; thence 38 degrees 24 minutes left, 826.8 feet to a monument on the south western boundary of the Esson farm; thence 76 degrees 48 minutes right along the southwestern boundary of said Esson Farm 1097.5 feet to a monument; thence 89 degrees 49 minutes left 1799 feet to a monument on the southeastern boundary of the Dartmouth Rod and Gun club; thence 86 degrees 50 minutes left along the rear line of properties situated on the southern side of Gaston Road, and crossing Gaston Road 1322.4 feet to a monument in rear of Atwood’s house on Gaston Road; thence 10 degrees 22 minutes right crossing Cole Harbor Road and along the eastern side of Watt Street 2411.2 feet to a monument on the southern line of Maynard Street; thence 11 degrees 7 minutes right crossing Oat Hill Lake, 2628 feet to a monument on the southwestern corner of the causeway on the Preston or Lake Road near Robert Carter’s; thence 13 degrees 32 minutes left, crossing Banook Lake 4757 feet to a monument on the southwestern corner of Crichton Avenue and Albro Lake Road; thence 10 degrees 19 minutes left along the southwestern side of Albro Lake Road 1085.8 feet to a monument; thence 88 degrees 25 minutes left along the south-eastern side of Albro Lake Road 2061.6 feet to a monument; thence 42 degrees 40 minutes right along the southern side of Albro Lake Road 400 feet to a monument; thence 19 degrees along the south side of Albro Lake Road 841 feet to a monument; thence 26 degrees 27 minutes left along the southeastern side of Albro Lake Road 1328.5 feet to a monument on the eastern line of Wyse Road at the point of intersection with the prolongation easterly of the northern side of the stone wall on the southern side of Albro Lake Road; thence 19 degrees 50 minutes right along the northern side of the stone wall on the southern side of Albro Lake Road 877.9 feet to a monument on the eastern side of Windmill Road; thence 6 degrees 30 minutes left, 1030 feet more or less to ordinary high water mark; thence in a general southerly direction along the shore of Halifax Harbor, as defined by ordinary high water mark, to the place of beginning, together will all water grants, docks, quays, slips and erections connected with the shores of the town which shall be deemed to be included in the boundaries and form part of the town.

Chapter 97 of the Acts of 1925, “An Act Relating to the Town of Dartmouth”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1925.pdf

The Town of Dartmouth is bounded as follows:

Beginning at the point of intersection of ordinary high water mark on the eastern shore of Halifax Harbor with the prolongation south-westerly of the centre line of a stone wall defining the south-eastern boundary of a lot of land formerly owned by the late Judge Johnstone and by him conveyed to John Esdaile;

Thence north-easterly along said prolongation and the centre line of said stone wall 1084 feet to a monument on the eastern line of Pleasant Street;

Thence southerly along the eastern line of Pleasant Street to the northern line of Johnstone avenue and northern line of Esson Road to the south western boundary of the “Esson farm”;

Thence southeasterly along the southwestern boundary of the “Esson Farm” 100 feet (one hundred) more or less to a monument;

Thence continuing southeasterly along the southwestern boundary of the “Esson Farm” 1097.5 feet to a monument;

Thence 89 degrees 49 minutes left 1799 feet to a monument on the southeastern boundary of the Dartmouth Rod and Gun club;

Thence 86 degrees fifty minutes left along the rear line of properties situated on the southern side of Gaston Road, and crossing Gaston Road 1322.4 feet to a monument in rear of Atwood’s house on Gaston Road;

Thence 10 degrees 22 minutes right crossing Cole Harbor Road and along the eastern side of Watt Street 2411.2 feet to a monument on the southern line of Maynard Street;

Thence 11 degrees 7 minutes right crossing Oat Hill Lake, 2628 feet to a monument on the southwestern corner of the causeway on the Preston or Lake Road near Robert Carter’s;

Thence 13 degrees 32 minutes left, crossing Banook Lake 4757 feet to a monument on the southwestern corner of Crichton Avenue and Albro Lake Road;

Thence 10 degrees 19 minutes left along the southwestern side of Albro Lake Road 1085.8 feet to a monument;

Thence 88 degrees 25 minutes left along the south-eastern side of Albro Lake Road 2061.6 feet to a monument;

Thence 42 degrees 40 minutes right along the southern side of Albro Lake Road 400 feet to a monument;

Thence 19 degrees along the south side of Albro Lake Road 841 feet to a monument;

Thence 26 degrees 27 minutes left along the southeastern side of Albro Lake Road 2700 feet to a monument;

Thence 3 degrees 43 minutes right along the southern side of Albro Lake Road 1328.5 feet to a monument on the eastern line of Wyse Road at the point of intersection with the prolongation easterly of the northern side of the stone wall on the southern side of Albro Lake Road;

Thence 19 degrees 50 minutes right along the northern side of the stone wall on the southern side of Albro Lake Road 877.9 feet to a monument on the eastern side of Windmill Road;

thence 6 degrees 30 minutes left, 1030 feet more or less to ordinary high water mark;

thence in a general southerly direction along the shore of Halifax Harbor, as defined by ordinary high water mark, to the place of beginning, together will all water grants, docks, quays, slips and erections connected with the shores of the town which shall be deemed to be included in the boundaries and form part of the town.

Chapter 60 of the Acts of 1938, “An Act Relating to the Town of Dartmouth”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1938.pdf

The Town of Dartmouth shall continue to be a body corporate under the name “City of Dartmouth” .

The boundaries of the City are as follows:-

Beginning at a point defined by the intersection of the centre line of Wright Brook (at its mouth) with the shoreline of Wright Cove on the north-eastern shore of Bedford Basin;

Thence generally north-easterly along the centre line of Wright Brook to its intersection with the north-western boundary of the Canadian National Railways Right-of-way;

Thence generally north-easterly along the north-western boundary of the said Canadian National Railways Right-of-way to its first intersection with the centre line of McGregor Brook;

Thence generally south-easterly crossing the Canadian National Railways Right-of-way and along the centre line of McGregor Brook to its origin approximately at grid point 52.4 by east 54.7 (Department of Mines and Surveys Map, Bedford Basin, Scale 1 to 25,000) which aforesaid water course flows generally south-easterly into Lake Charles;

Thence generally south-easterly along the centre line of aforesaid Water Course to its mouth on the western shore oof Lake Charles;

Thence easterly along a straight line to the general centre of Lake Charles easterly from the mouth of the aforesaid water course;

Thence northerly along the general centre line of Lake Charles to the northern shore of Lake Charles at its junction with the centre line of the mouth of the northerly water course leading from Lake Charles to Lake William;

Thence generally northerly along the centre line of the aforesaid water course to its intersection with the southern boundary of the Nova Scotia Light and Power Company limited transmission line right-of-way;

Thence easterly along the aforesaid water course to its intersection with the southern boundary of the Nova Scotia Light and Power Company Limited transmission line right-of-way;

Thence easterly along the aforesaid southern boundary of the Nova Scotia Light and Power Company Limited transmission line right-of-way to a point on said southern boundary, which point is at the intersection of this boundary with straight line measured 1,000 feet at right angles from the north-eastern boundary of No. 18 Highway;

Thence generally south-easterly along a line parallel to and distant 1,000 feet easterly from the north-eastern boundary of No. 18 Highway to the centre line of Mitchell Brook;

Thence generally south-easterly along the centre line of said Mitchell Brook to its junction with the shore line of Loon Lake;

Thence south-easterly along the general centre line of Loon Lake to a point northerly from the centre line of the mouth of Cranberry Lake Brook at its mouth on the shore of Loon Lake;

Thence southerly to the centre line of the mouth of said Cranberry Lake Brook at the shore of Loon Lake;

Thence generally south easterly along the centre line of said Cranberry Lake Brook to its junction with the shore line of Cranberry Lake;

Thence south easterly along the general centre line of Cranberry Lake to its southern tip;

Thence south-westerly along a straight line to the northern tip of Settle Lake;

Thence southerly along the general centre line of Settle Lake to its southern shore at tis junction with the centre line of the water course flowing out of the southern tip of Settle Lake;

Thence south-easterly along the centre line of said water course to its intersection with the centre line of the Cole Harbour Road;

Thence south-westerly along a straight line to the north-western tip of Morris Lake;

Thence south-easterly along the general centre line of Morris Lake to a point north easterly from the intersection of the north western boundary of the Department of National Defense property (R.C.N.A.S., H.M.C.S. Shearwater) with the western shore of Morris Lake;

Thence south-westerly along a straight line to the said point of intersection;

Thence south-westerly by the several courses of the aforesaid north-western boundary to the shore of Eastern Passage in Halifax Harbour;

Thence south-westerly across the waters of Eastern Passage of Halifax Harbour to a point 2,000 feet off the general shoreline of the north-eastern shoreline of Halifax Harbour;

Thence north-westerly along a straight line to a point 2,000 feet south-westerly from the most south-western point of lands of the Imperial Oil Refinery property; Thence north-westerly along a straight line to a point on the westerly prolongation of the centre line of Lyle Street 1,300 feet from the intersection of said prolongation with the shoreline of Halifax Harbour;

Thence north-westerly along a straight line to the most northern point of the line marking the headline of Halifax Harbour as laid down on a plan entitled “Plan of the Port of Halifax, Nova Scotia – National Harbours Board, 1931”, said point being on the eastern boundary line of the City of Halifax;

Thence north 60° 44′ west (astronomical bearing) following said eastern boundary line a distance of 6,950 feet to the most northerly angle of the City of Halifax boundary;

Thence northerly along a straight line to a point 1,000 feet due north-west from the most north-western point of Navy Island;

Thence along a straight line in a north-easterly direction to the center of the mouth of the small cove into which Wright Brook empties;

Thence north easterly along the general center line of said cove to the centre line of Wright Brook at its mouth, or to the place of beginning.

Chapter 64 of the Acts of 1961, “The City of Dartmouth Act”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1961.pdf

“The City of Dartmouth shall continue, subject to change in accordance with the provisions thereof to be a body corporate…”

Chapter 67 of the Acts of 1962, “Dartmouth City Charter”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1962-2.pdf

“…all persons of the full age of twenty-one years; whose names appear upon the last revised list of electors; whose names do not appear upon the last revised list of electors but who are Canadian citizens or British subjects and who have continuously resided in the City or in an area annexed to the City since the first day of May immediately preceding the date of election and who continue to reside therein on the date of election and who take the oath or affirmation in Form 14 of the schedule”

Chapter 86 of the Acts of 1966, “An Act to amend Chapter 67 of the Acts of 1962, the Dartmouth City Charter”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1966.pdf

“the City of Dartmouth shall continue… to be a body corporate…”

Chapter 43A of the Acts of 1978, “Dartmouth City Charter”
https://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1978.pdf

And then: by fiat, without a plebiscite, without any measure of support from the body politic as composed of the citizens of any of the municipalities involved:

“On and after April 1, 1996, the inhabitants of the County of Halifax are a body corporate under the name “Halifax Regional Municipality”

“Chapter 3 of the Acts of 1995, An Act to Incorporate the Halifax Regional Municipality”
http://0-nsleg–edeposit-gov-ns-ca.legcat.gov.ns.ca/deposit/Statutes/1995.pdf

The Geography of Haliburton’s Nova Scotia

“Across the harbour from Halifax were the settlements of Dartmouth and Preston, already economically dominated by the capital. Dartmouth had been settled in 1784 by twenty families from Nantucket. The men had been engaged in whaling, as had the men of Barrington, but the enterprise had suffered a financial disaster in 1792, and most of the original inhabitants had moved to Milford in South Wales. Preston had been settled in 1784 by Loyalists, disbanded soldiers, and freed [black] slaves. Only the Loyalists had remained. The [black people] were industrious, gaining a living by supplying butter, eggs, and poultry to Halifax, but most of them had taken advantage of the offer in 1791, extended by the British government, to resettle them in the newly purchased Colony of Sierra Leone. Of the other group of settlers Haliburton notes that “the disbanded soldiers were prone to idleness and intemperance, and when they had exhausted his Majesty’s bounty of provisions, they sold their lands and quitted the settlement.”

Rimmington, Gerald T. “The Geography of Haliburton’s Nova Scotia” Dalhousie Review, Volume 48, Number 4, 1969 https://dalspace.library.dal.ca/bitstream/handle/10222/59262/dalrev_vol48_iss4_pp488_499.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

The Impeachment of the Judges of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, 1787-1793: Colonial Judges, Loyalist Lawyers, and the Colonial Assembly

In 1790, the Nova Scotia Assembly passed impeachment articles against two puisne judges, Isaac Deschamps and James Brenton, accusing them of illegal and corrupt acts. The charges stemmed from alleged incompetence, partiality, and dishonesty, including lying during an earlier inquiry. The trial before the Committee of the Privy Council in London resulted in the judges’ exoneration. Despite the failure, the impeachment attempt sheds light on colonial legal systems, judicial professionalization, and the relationship between judges and local power structures. In particular, it highlights the lack of separation of powers between the executive and judiciary in colonial governance.

The judges received staunch support from the executive, revealing the limited control the elected branch had over judicial appointments and dismissals. One of the impeachment articles, focusing on a criminal case involving Christian Bartling, criticized Judge Brenton’s handling of the bail process and re-committal following the failure to secure an indictment. However, the criticisms were largely unfounded, with the Privy Council finding no fault in Brenton’s actions. The Bartling case, marked by political tensions and racial prejudice, exemplified the complexities of colonial justice and the influence of local politics on legal proceedings. Despite attempts to discredit the judges, the impeachment proceedings failed to tarnish their reputations or undermine their authority.


“Isaac Deschamps and James Brenton, puisne judges of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court [NSSC], had, charged the colonial Assembly in April 1790, committed “divers illegal, partial, and corrupt acts” such as to justify “Impeachment” for “High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”‘ These words come from the preamble to a list of seven “articles of impeachment” passed by the Nova Scotia Assembly on 5-7 April 1790. The seven articles, distilled from thirteen draft articles which had been introduced on 10 March, listed ten cases in which the judges were alleged to have acted incompetently or partially, or both, and also included accusations that they had lied to the Lieutenant-Governor’s Council of Twelve when it had conducted an inquiry into some of the allegations two and a half years earlier. The “trial” of the judges on these articles of impeachment took place before the Committee of the Privy Council for Trade and Plantations in London, and resulted in their complete exoneration. This was one of only two occasions on which pre-confederation Canadian colonial assemblies passed “impeachment” articles against superior court judges, and both failed. Judges were removed, but by executive power, for they did not hold their commissions on “good behavior” and, thus, enjoy independence. The best known Canadian examples of executive removal are Robert Thorpe and John Willis in Upper Canada, but three other British North American judges were removed by colonial executives-Caesar Colclough and Thomas Tremlett in Prince Edward Island, and Richard Gibbons in Cape Breton.’

The Nova Scotia Assembly’s failure matters much less than the attempt; the long, drawn out saga of the efforts to censure and remove the NSSC judges is of interest to historians of colonial legal systems. It represents a chapter in the history of judicial professionalization, for much of the rhetoric aimed at the judges, especially Deschamps, concerned their basic competence. The event also reveals the role played by colonial judges within local power structures. The modern notion of a separation of powers between executive and judiciary was no part of the British system of colonial governance, with judges expected to be firm supporters, indeed active members, of government and receive in turn the backing of the executive. Hence, the Nova Scotia judges received unqualified support from the Lieutenant-Governor and his Council. Conversely, the failed impeachment shows that the elected branch of the constitution had as little control over the dismissal of judges as it did over their appointment. While the impeachment crisis is a significant event in Canadian legal history, and while that is the focus of the article, the events of the late 1780s and early 1790s also contribute to our understanding of the province’s general history, in particular of the transformations that took place after the American revolution.”

Article 2: R v Bartling (and R v Small)

Article 2 principally concerned R v Bartling, one of only two criminal cases among the allegations, the other being R v Small, which was used not so much as a ground of complaint but as a contrast to the Bartling case. Bartling and Small were the two cases from 1789 that, I suggest above, provided part of the catalyst for a successful re-raising of the judges’ question early in 1790, at a time when Parr believed the crisis was long over.

Christian Bartling was a very early settler in Halifax/Dartmouth and, by the 1780s, a substantial landowner on the Dartmouth side of the harbour. In May 1789 he got into boundary disputes with Jonathan Foster, Nathaniel Macy, and Barnabas Swain, all recent arrivals and all members of a group-some 40 families-of Nantucket Quaker whalers who had moved to the area in 1785. Although encouraged and indeed subsidized by Parr and his Council, the move was controversial both in London and Halifax in part because a considerable amount of land had been expropriated for them from absentee proprietors and in part because this particular economic development project was seen as aiding Americans and evading the imperial Navigation Acts.”‘ Bartling, apparently convinced that Swain et al were trespassing, defended his turf with a shotgun, and a considerable amount of shot ended up in Swain. He lost an eye to the assault.

Bartling was remanded for trial by a JP, and an application for release through a writ of habeas corpus in mid-June was denied. He went to trial a month or so later in Trinity Term. Although, as was common, the indictment was prosecuted by Attorney-General Blowers, the grand jury rejected it. When the judges were told this Brenton asked Blowers if he had another charge to prefer, but he did not. In Bartling’s lawyer Martin Wilkins’ words, he “turned his Back upon the Court and remarked that he washed his hands Clear of it and their Honors must decide for themselves.” Solicitor-General Uniacke, also in court, then declared “with some degree of heat” that “he would prefer Bills to.. .Grand Jury after Grand Jury, against Bartling so long as there was a Grand Jury in the Country, until a Bill was found… or until the Prisoner had a Public Trial.” Brenton remanded Bartling, although his further confinement lasted only one day; he was discharged when the court met the following morning. According to lawyer Daniel Wood, Deschamps gave no reasons but told Bartling “that in consideration of his long confinement and Large family they would then release him, without his giving Security, notwithstanding the Grand Jury had tho[ugh]t proper to acquit him, his Crimes appeared to be very enormous, and hoped the indulgence they then gave him would have some good effect upon him.”‘

The second article of impeachment criticized two aspects of Brenton’s handling of this case; Deschamps was not involved in the charges. It complained that Bartling had not been given bail when habeas corpus was applied for, as he should have been for committing a trespass. It was here that a contrast was drawn to R v Small. 4′ William Small was one of a group of black men and women who became involved in an altercation with three young, and drunk, white men returning home from a night of carousing in late November 1788. The whites had assaulted a fiddle player, George Warner, and Warner ran for refuge to Small’s house. When the whites tried to follow Warner in, Small came out armed with a spade. In the melee William Lloyd was struck with the spade and he died almost two months later. A coroner’s jury found that Lloyd had died from the blow inflicted by Small and he was arrested. A week later Small was bailed, by Brenton, with the sureties being William Brenton, the judge’s half-brother, and loyalist merchant Samuel Hart. Article 2 made the contrast between the two cases: Brenton had refused bail to Bartling but he had earlier “bailed a certain William Small, a [black] man, positively charged by, and committed on the Coroner’s Inquest, for [a]… felonious murder.”

The Privy Council made short work of the bail complaint, not even adverting to the contrast with Small. The evidence before the Assembly had made a lot of the fact that Brenton waited a day to hear the habeas corpus application, and the committee simply, and rightly, held that a Judge was not required to hear the application “the moment it is presented to him,” as “[i]t may be often material to enquire for what… crime” a person had committed “before he is brought up in order to be prepared in some sort to judge how it would be either legal or proper to Bail him.” When Brenton did hear the application, he was prepared to grant bail, but no sureties could be found, always a requirement for bail. In the Assembly the prosecution had alleged that Bartling had lost his sureties by the delay, but the evidence also showed, and the committee accepted this, that the reason he could find no sureties was that the men willing to do so were only prepared to stand bail for his appearance in court, not to be answerable for his keeping the peace, because Bartling “was apt to be in liquor.” The committee also adverted to evidence from Halifax sheriff James Clarke that he had summonsed possible sureties to court but they had refused to come.

The committee also noted that the statement in Article 2 that Bartling had been arrested for trespass was inaccurate, that he had been arrested for a felony, a serious assault leading to a wounding. As the indictment put it, Bartling had inflicted “several grievous wounds” and “the sight of one of [Swain’s] eyes” had been “ruined and destroyed.”‘ The committee made nothing more of this mis-statement in the charge, perhaps because if Brenton could have been criticized for anything in this stage of the proceedings it was that he was prepared to bail Bartling at all. The Marian bail laws were in force in Nova Scotia and they made remand the default option in the vast majority of felonies. It was extremely rare for anybody charged with a felony to receive bail-only ten of the more than 700 defendants who appeared in the NSSC at Halifax between 1754 and 1803 were bailed.'” Evidence given before the Assembly suggested that it was known that Parr favoured remand, and thus Brenton had somehow been improperly influenced by the Lieutenant-Governor. But since Brenton granted bail that complaint amounted to naught and did not find its way into the article of impeachment.

All in all the Assembly’s complaint about the bail process was worthless; ironically, as noted, they would have had a stronger case if they had attacked Brenton for not remanding Bartling. There was not even any validity to the contrast with the Small case-the latter was a highly exceptional but nonetheless explicable exercise of discretion, and, given contemporary attitudes towards blacks, criticisms of Brenton were surely a product of racism as much as anything else.

The second principal cause for complaint over the Bartling case was the re-committal following the failure to get an indictment. Certainly it was an unusual proceeding-normally a defendant not indicted or found not guilty was immediately released from custody. Yet there were other cases in which defendants were recommitted and another indictment drawn up, and in this instance Solicitor-General Uniacke declared that he would do so. Questioning of witnesses before the Assembly tried to elucidate testimony to the effect that Brenton remanded Bartling before Uniacke made his declaration, but witnesses were either contradictory or unsure on the point. The committee asserted that a recommittal pending another indictment was “the common practice at the Old Bailey,” and criticized the grand jury’s decision in any event. It was clearly a felony and there seemed to be enough evidence to proceed to trial. The committee could have made more of this point. A marginal note in the proceedings states that if the English “Black Act” was in force in the colony it certainly was a felony. What it did not say was that it was not just a felony, but a capital offence, and it seems surprising that the committee did not pursue this question further, for malicious shooting at somebody was indeed a capital offence in the colony. That they did not do so is perhaps attributable to the problem raised above: Brenton was very much at fault for bailing a person accused of so serious a crime.

It seems likely that the Bartling case became something of a cause celebre because of its political overtones. Neither the loyalists who supported Bartling out of resentment at the American whalers nor the elements in government and the city who sided with the whalers behaved particularly creditably. The JP who initially took down the parties’ depositions, loyalist James Gautier, does not appear to have committed Bartling or issued recognizances to prosecute, as he should have done. It was only later that another JP, William Folger, one of the whalers, did so. Parr, a supporter of the whalers, might well have had an opinion, along with many other people in the city, but as we have seen that opinion cannot have influenced Brenton. The fact that the contrast with Small included the statement that he was “a [black] man” suggests that racism played a role; the contrast of Bartling’s treatment with somebody else’s would not have mattered had not that other person been a black resident.

As already noted, the really questionable decision was the grand jury’s turning back of the indictment. Attorney-General Blowers probably should have had another indictment to put forward, but seems from the evidence given above to have been too peeved, and perhaps surprised, to bother. Solicitor-General Uniacke had to intervene on the spur of the moment; he was a vigorous supporter of the whalers’ move to Dartmouth and obviously wished the law to be used against those who resisted their integration into the community. Initially exasperated at a form of “grand jury nullification,” we can only suppose that he thought better of the politics of preferring another indictment on reflection. But the principal point for our purposes is that the Assembly’s criticisms of Brenton in this case were misplaced. It was a case riven with politics and prejudice, which may have inflamed local passions on all sides, but not one which showed the court in the bad light the Assembly tried to cast on it.

Jim Phillips, “The Impeachment of the Judges of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, 1787-1793: Colonial Judges, Loyalist Lawyers, and the Colonial Assembly” (2011) 34:2 Dal LJ 265.

https://digitalcommons.schulichlaw.dal.ca/dlj/vol34/iss2/1/

An act for extending an act…to prevent unnecessary firing of guns, and other fire arms…to the Town Plot of Dartmouth, 1793 c12

To extend Act respecting Guns and Firearms to (Dartmouth), 1793 c12

An ACT for extending an Act, passed in the Thirty-second year of the reign of his late Majesty, entitled, an Act to prevent unnecessary firing off Guns, and other Fire Arms, in the Town and Suburbs of Halifax, to the Town Plot of Dartmouth.

For acts on this subject, see note on 32d Geo. ad. cap. a.

Preamble:
WHEREAS it is deemed necessary for the safety of the inhabitants of the town plot of Dartmouth, that an Act passed in the thirty-second year of the reign of His late Majesty, entitled, An Act to prevent unnecessary firing off Guns, and other Fire Arms, in the Town and Suburbs of Halifax, should be extended to the said town plot of Dartmouth :

Act to prevent unnecessary firing off Guns in the town of Halifax, &c. extended to Town Plot of Dartmouth:
I. Be it therefore enacted, by the Lieutenant-Governor, Council and Assembly, That every matter, clause and thing, contained in the above recited Act, shall be, and the fame is hereby extended to the said town plot of Dartmouth.

“An act for extending an act … to prevent unnecessary firing of guns, and other fire arms … to the Town Plot of Dartmouth”, 1793 c12

Page 3 of 4
1 2 3 4