Document Information

Date: 1865-09-16
By: Montreal Witness
Citation: “The North West”, Montreal Witness (16 September, 1865)
Other formats: TBA

THE NORTH-WEST.

The Montreal Witness is very decided in its opposition to any addition being made to the public debt, in the acquisition or opening up of the North-West territory, but its objections to increase the provincial indebtedness entirely disappear when it comes to speak of the enlargement of the canals. Is there anybody blind enough not to see that the reason of this is that the enlargement of the canals would directly benefit Montreal in the estimation of the Witness, while the opening up of the North-West is a western project. The Witness says that the enlargement of the canals would afford a return. We say that the opening of the North-West will make a return of fifty-fold greater. The enlargement of the canals will, we have no doubt, pay six per cent. on the cost. The opening of the North-West will create a population of millions, whose taxation will double our revenue within a very few years. Upon the matters of indebtedness, many misapprehensions are afloat at present. Money borrowed at four or five, or even six per cent., and judiciously and economically expended on public works, is money well borrowed. If it be wasted in unremunerative improvements or jobs, then it were better not to borrow.

The above paragraph which we extract from the Globe is remarkable for three things :-

1st. The Globe‘s propensity for looking upon every question in a sectional point of view. The enlargement of the canals, so far from benefiting Montreal, would rather send business past it, by enabling ocean vessels to go direct to Chicago for cargoes, and from thence direct to sea, without stopping at Montreal.

2nd. The assumption that the opening of the North-West Territory will accomplish something good for Western Canada. We cannot see that the proposed purchase will put the North-West territory any more in the British empire than it is at present, or that Canada can defend it better than Britain, or that said territory would be any more a part of Canada than it is at present; or that immigrants going through to it would benefit Canada any more than if they were going to Minnesota. Surely the Globe jests when it speaks of the North-West territory as a source of revenue. Even if its lands were sold to settlers, which is not likely in the face of the American homestead law, the expense of opening up, governing, and defending the country, would far outgo the income for very many years.

3rd. The admission that money borrowed at a low rate for productive works would pay, seems to us to decide the propriety of canal enlargement, for which, however, we are no warm advocates. In fact we would shrink from further borrowing and spending, unless a very clear case be made out. The Globe, however, will not, we think, seriously pretend that any money borrowed to pay to the Hudson Bay Company, or to open up the Northwest Territory, would be productive in any commercial sense; and we fail to see any case made out for such a great expenditure in a political or moral point of view.

For Canada to grasp after the Northwest Territory in her present position, would be like a farmer who was drowned in debt, and whose farm was not half-cultivated, purchasing on credit another farm ten times larger, and undertaking to improve and take care of it.