all such places where planting and settlement as well as trade and commerce were the immediate objects. They, accordingly, proposed the erection of a civil government in the settled portion of Canada. This section was but a small portion of the immense tract of country which had been possessed and claimed by the French as Canada. Within the limits proposed for this area the inhabitants were to have the advantages of a regular civil government.
"But as no such regular civil Government is either necessary or, indeed, can be established, where no perpetual residence or planting is intended; It will there be sufficient," the Lords of Trade stated dealing now with the other two interests referred to above, "to provide for the free Trade of all Your Majesty's subjects under such Regulations, and such Administration of Justice as is best suited to that End. Such We apprehend to be the case of Newfoundland, where a temporary Fishery is the only object, and this We suppose has been the reason, which induced Your Majesty to annex the Coast of Labrador to that Government; . . . . And such we apprehend will be the Case of that Territory in North America which in Your Majesty's justice and Humanity as well as sound Policy is proposed to be left, under Your Majesty's immediate Protection to the Indian Tribes for their hunting grounds; where no Settlement by planting is intended, immediately at least, to be attempted; and consequently where no particular form of Civil Government can be established. In such Territory we should propose, that a free Trade with the Indian Tribes should be granted to all Your Majesty's Colonies and Subjects under such Regulations as shall be judged most proper for that End, and under the protection of such Military Force, to be kept up in the different Posts & Forts in the Indian Country as may be judged necessary, as well for the Protection of Trade and the good Treatment of the Indians as the Maintenance of Your Majesty's Sovereignty and the general defence of North America."
Pending the receipt of more exact information the Lords of Trade proposed that a large tract of
country around the Great Lakes and beyond the sources of the rivers which fall into the River St. Lawrence from the North, should be left as an Indian country, open to trade, but not to grants and settlements.
7. On the 14th July, 1763, the Lords of Trade were informed that their report had been considered by the King and that he approved of the proposed erection of the three new governments of Canada, East Florida, and West Florida. But, with regard to the Indian territory, His Majesty, foreseeing difficulties arising from the lack of some form of civil government in the Indian territory, as proposed, and from the possibility of some foreign power taking possession of this territory as derelict, was of the opinion, that the Great Lakes should be included, with the country, as far north and west as the limits of the Hudson's Bay Company and the Mississippi; and also that all lands whatsoever ceded by the late treaty and which were not already included within the limits of His Majesty's ancient colonies, or intended to form the Governments of East and West Florida, should be assigned to the Government of Canada, but, under the restriction recommended as to grants and settlements, unless their Lordships had some other suggestion to make for obviating the difficulties mentioned.
8. In a representation of the 5th August, 1763, the Lords of Trade concurred in His Majesty's opinion as to the propriety of putting the Indian territory under a particular government by Commission under the Great Seal, but pointed out objections to attaching it to any one existing government and particularly that of Canada. They proposed, instead, that a commission for the government of this country should be given to the Commander-in-Chief of His Majesty's troops, but, as the preparation of the instructions to such Governor would require a great variety of information, they suggested that the issuing of such commission and instructions should be delayed until they were able to make a full and particular report on the subject. In the meantime, they proposed that a proclamation be immediately issued "as well on account of the late complaints of the Indians and the actual . . . "
" . . . disturbances in consequence, as of your Majesty's fixed determination, to permit no grants of lands nor any settlements to be made within certain fixed bounds . . . . leaving all that territory within it free for the hunting grounds of those Indian nations subjects of Your Majesty," &c.
On the 19th September, 1763, His Majesty, through the Secretary of State, approved of the proposal of the Lords of Trade and of the issue of the Proclamation recommended, and expressed his opinion that such proclamation might, with great propriety, provide for the other matters which are dealt with in it. The Royal Proclamation was accordingly, approved and published on the 7th October, 1763.
The material parts of this Proclamation are hereinabove set out.
9. Arrangements were made in accordance with the terms of the Proclamation. On November 21st, 1763, a Commission issued appointing James Murray Captain and Governor-in-Chief of the Province of Quebec, and in his Instructions, which were passed on the 17th December, he was authorised to dispose of the Crown lands of the Province, as directed by the Proclamation. In the provisions for the establishment of a civil government, and the promoting of settlement by the granting of Crown lands to intending settlers in that Province, the difference may be seen between the royal intentions as respects Quebec, on the one hand, and Newfoundland, on the other, with which the fortunes of the coast of Labrador were identified. In the latter case, there was no Civil Government established, nor were any provisions made for permanent settlements.
10. Captain Hugh Palliser was, on the 9th April, 1764, appointed Governor of Newfoundland and served in that capacity for the unusual period of four years (1764-1768). To him fell the task of carrying into execution the royal intentions with regard to the extension of "the open and free fishery" to the coast of Labrador. He undertook this duty with memorable spirit and ability. His proceedings and the controversies to which they
gave rise set in a clear light the policy which, with some modifications, was continuously pursued by the British Government with regard to that coast until 1824. Quite clear and definite was his conception of the area of the coast which had been placed under his authority, for in his official reports and correspondence with the home authorities, he repeatedly referred to the coast of Labrador as "the fishing coast," "that new fishing coast" and "the new fishing coast of Labrador"; and he formally defined the coast of Labrador under his authority as "an extent of 310 leagues of sea-coast." A later Governor, Commodore Shuldham, defined the coast in substantially the same terms.
Palliser, in accordance with his Commission and Instructions, pursued the traditional policy of the British Government with regard to the Newfoundland fishery and endeavoured to extend that policy to the Labrador coast which had, in effect, been merged in that fishery. He was confronted by two obstacles: the hostility of the Eskimos inhabiting the Atlantic seaboard northward from the Strait of Belleisle, and the presence on the coast of the Gulf of inhabitants of Quebec claiming, either under French titles or leases granted by General Murray when he was Military Governor of Quebec, the right to exclusive possession and permanent occupation of certain extensive tracts that sea-coast with the adjacent islands, for the carrying on of the sedentary fishery. The latter was a fishery for seal and seacows (walrus), requiring fixed possession and permanent occupation of the places on the sea-coast where it was carried on, whereas the fishery carried on under the Act of 10 & 11 William III., chap. 25, was a transitory cod fishery, for the conduct of which it was essential that the whole sea-coast should remain open and free to the British adventurers from Europe to enjoy their privilege of the first choice of places on shore yearly for the fishery, according to the rules prescribed by that Act.
In order to extend this free fishery to the new field and to maintain it upon its original principles, Palliser sought, on the one hand, to conciliate the Eskimos, and, on the other, to rid the coast of the sedentary fishermen; to this end, he made and published from time to time regulations for the
coast of Labrador. These regulations did not deal with the variety of matters which one would expect, if he had considered the area of the coast under his authority to be an extensive region. They were directed solely to the establishment of the fishery and the regulation of matters incidental thereto. His first regulations were published in 1765. They ordained, inter alia, that all the rules and regulations of the Act of 10 & 11 William III., c. 25, should be strictly observed on the coast; forbade all persons from the colonies (except whale fishers within the Gulf of St. Lawrence who were allowed a limited privilege of landing on that part of the coast to cut up their whales and to make oil) to resort to that coast and reserved the whole coast for the use of the qualified British fishing ships annually arriving from His Majesty's dominions in Europe. In addition, the regulations provided special privileges, in the nature of rewards, to encourage the industry of the British ship fishers in the cod fishery: the first arriving ship in any harbour, in addition to being Admiral, should have the privilege of leaving a crew for the winter seal and whale fishing; the second arriving ship, besides being Vice-Admiral, should have the exclusive right to all the salmon fishing in that harbour during that season, and the third arriving ship, besides being Rear-Admiral, should enjoy the exclusive privilege of trading with the Indians that might come within the limits of that harbour.
By these regulations and the measures he took to enforce them, Palliser conceived that he had laid the coast open and free to all the King's subjects from his dominions in Europe, agreeably to the Newfoundland Fishery Act above cited, which he held to extend, under his Commission and Instructions, to the coast of Labrador. The exclusive possessions on the fishing coast held by the colonists as mentioned above, operated, Palliser held, to the absolute exclusion of the adventurers' ships from Great Britain as well as all other of the King's subjects and, therefore, were directly contrary and repugnant to the true meaning and intent of the Act of 10 & 11 William III., c. 25, and to the provisions of the Royal Proclaiflation of 1763. Palliser designed, by his regulations, to annul the grants