as a national Object. 25 1 



the only one. In the first place, very few individuals are able 

 to lay out so large a sum of money in a speculation, which, for 

 so many years, will return no interest ; and those who have the 

 means prefer investing their money where the chance of in- 

 crease of parliamentary influence may be greater than in a country 

 which offers no such inducements. The return is too distant 

 to engage the attention of companies ; and, even if it were under- 

 taken either by individuals or societies, what guarantee is there 

 that they might make a proper use of the vast power which 

 such possessions would place in their hands ? In the case of 

 individuals, I know too well that there is no fortune, however 

 great, that may not be dissipated by extravagance. What is 

 become of the Caledonian forests, in the same vicjnity ? Ca- 

 price, the existence of a minority, the avarice of a possessor, all 

 may occur to influence the management of the proprietor. On 

 these accounts, and because by government alone can be exe- 

 cuted a system of the extent I contemplate, I venture to urge 

 the adoption of it ; of course, under a strict parliamentary con- 

 trol. If the expense of advancing the necessary capital be 

 considered, I should say, without hesitation, alienate portions 

 of the crown lands, which are now of little use, and apply the 

 proceeds to the purpose. The object is worth any sacrifice. 

 At present, we are the only power without national forests of 

 extent pi'oportionate to the demand ; and we are in the most 

 miserable dependence on foreigners, not only for the materials 

 for ship-building, but for the very roofs and floors of our houses. 

 I have no hesitation in saying that, by the adoption of the sys- 

 tem above proposed, " the wastes of Caledonia stern and wild" 

 might be made not only to supply our wants, but to make 

 others our tributaries in this, as they are in so many other 

 respects. The expenditure would be a mere trifle, compared to 

 other fancies we have indulged in. What has the Rideau Canal 

 cost ? What was the object of it, but to preserve a sort of 

 monopoly of the miserable produce of New Brunswick, and to 

 carry out that masterpiece of administration for excluding good 

 timber, and forcing the use of bad ? Where are the odd five 

 millions of Lord Stanley, making twenty in all, paid to bribe 

 people for following their true interests ? I earnestly hope to 

 see the public attention called to this momentous question, and 

 that in my generation, which has witnessed so many changes, I 

 may see the foundation laid of a new source of national wealth ; 

 and that those who come after may only wonder at the folly 

 which caused us so long to overlook such advantages. 



