64 



would go in where they liked, without respect to other's rights, and rush out all the 

 timber they could manage to cut in one season. As a remedy, positive rights of the 

 renewal of licenses was recommended so as to give certainty of tenure. Surveys of 

 boundaries, and the imposition of ground rent for the areas covered by the license 

 was also suggested, and it was recommended that no distribution of areas should take 

 place. It was further pointed out that under the regulations the practice with respect 

 to the collection of dues was to ascertain the quantity by counting the number of sticks 

 without respect to size and averaging them at a certain number of feet per stick, 

 which average was too high in some cases and too low in others, and with respect to 

 this the suggestion was made that dues should be paid on the actual contents of the 

 timber ascertained by count and measurement. 



The result of the report of this committee was the passage of the ' Crown Timber 

 Act,' which, with comparatively little change, is to-day the law under which all the 

 timber licenses are issued in the Provinces of Ontario and Quebec. This Act pro- 

 vided that the Commissioner of Crown Lands might grant licenses for unoccupied 

 territory, at such rates and subject to such conditions, regulations and restrictions as 

 the Lieutenant Governor might establish from time to time. No license was to be 

 granted for a longer period than twelve months and all the licenses expired on the 

 30th April of each year. The territory licensed was to be described in each license. 

 The licensee was given absolute possession of the territory, so he could prosecute 

 trespassers and seize the timber cut by them. The making of sworn returns of the 

 timber cut year by year was provided for, and there were many other provisions of 

 less importance. The first regulations under this Act are dated 5th September, 1849. 

 Agencies were established agents might, on application, grant licenses, apparently 

 without referring the applicants to the Commissioner of Crown Lands. Sketches of 

 the territory applied for had to be furnished. The area of timber limits was increased 

 from five miles by five miles to ten miles by five miles. Licenses were to be confined 

 as far as possible to one side of the river. There was no restriction to the number of 

 limits a man might hold. The timber was to be cut and paid for at certain rates. 

 Transfers of limits were to be in writing, and not valid until approved by the Com- 

 missioner of Crown Lands. It also provided that settlers or squatters cutting without 

 authority if they cut any timber except for building, fencing, clearing, &c., were to 

 be treated as trespassers. These restrictions contained a distinct provision for renewal 

 of licenses. The proper counting and measuring of timber cut, was also provided 

 for, and a clause was inserted in the regulations that actual settlers were not to be 

 interfered with in the clearing of the land, &c. Here the settler first appears in the 

 regulations. Under these regulations all a person had to do in order to obtain a limit 

 waa to make application to the agent, furnish a sketch of the territory he desired to 

 obtain and give security to pay the dues on the timber cut. There was no provision 

 for competition except where adverse applications were received. Generally speaking, 

 the principle of selling limits by public auction appears to have been entirely absent 

 from the regulations. 



In 1851 fresh regulations were promulgated. The new provisions were I call 

 particular attention to this that sawlogs cut on the public domain, if exported, paid 

 double dues. Ground rent at the rate of fifty cents per mile was imposed. Here we 

 have discrimination against the export of logs and the first imposition of ground rent. 

 The ground rent was to be doubled each year that the limit was worked. Vacant 

 territory was to be granted to the first applicant provided he called and paid the ground 

 rent, in the Bytown agency within three months, elsewhere one month. If adverse 

 applications were made for the same territory then the right to receive the license 

 was decided by lot. Here we notice a gambling spirit in deciding the rights of indi- 

 Who would toss up for a limit to-day ? There was also a provision to sell to 

 the highest bidder in case of clashing of applications. Registers of the licenses issued 

 were to be kept in the agencies and the Crown Lands Department and were to be open 

 for public inspection. Decisions of the Crown Timber Agents as to disputed bound- 



