37 
uing to free British subjects. These concessions, in connection 
Be wen-occupation by the French, have been regarded by the 
ists as a clear and undoubted assurance that the “rights” 
the French were merely mythical, and of no practical 
ect; that “subject to French treaty rights,” whether in 
gre nt of land, or in any other connection, had no real or 
actical significance; and that subject only to the French 
na . a fide requirements in the very few places where they now 
try on the fishery, our people could acquire and maintain the 
dinary rights of property on the same footing as their fellow- 
sts in other parts of the colony, and like British subjects in 
er parts of the world. This has turned out to be a complete 
Ss ion. The French assert their “claims” as persistently as 
r and no matter how preposterous they may be, the fact 
mains that these claims are put forward. There is just enough 
f show of foundation for them, on strictly legal or technical 
nds, to throw a doubt or shadow over the title, or the value 
the title, to every bit of land upon the whole of the coast 
question. There is no security of title or of right 
occupation or possession of any sort. The practical effect 
' the existence of these French claims has been an in- 
uperable obstacle to development or improvement of any 
, or even of settlement itself—the “locking up,” so to 
ak, of the whole of that part of the colony, which is known 
to be rich in agricultural, lumbering, and mineral wealth. By 
“that part of the colony” we mean not only the portion strictly 
within the French treaty limits, which extend to half.a mile 
land from the shore, but also the whole of the interior in the 
vicinity of the coast, or, roughly speaking, about one-third of the 
‘e superficial area of the island. 
Capitalists have been ready to invest in large and bona fide 
ions in the development of these resources, but French 
aty rights” have been in every case an insuperable difficulty, 
the enterprise has been abandoned as hopeless. To such 
osterous lengths, in the hindrance of the exercise of the 
ts of sovereignty and ownership of the soil, have these 
alled rights of the French been asserted and enforced against 
people, and even the Crown itself, that a project for the 
ding of a railway across the colony has actually been forbidden 
Imperial Government because the terminus at George’s 
