CHAPTER XXXIX

TRANSPORTATION

I

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PORT OF MONTREAL--HERIOT’S DESCRIPTION IN 1815--T.S. BROWN IN 1818--THE ISLAND WHARF--THE CREEK--THE PRIMITIVE WHARVES--THE “POINTS”--THE RIVER FRONT--THE SPRING FLEET--FIREWOOD RAFTS--TOW BOATS--THE EVERETTA--AN ACCOUNT OF 1819--BOUCHETTE’S PLAN OF 1824--THE FIRST HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS, “THE TRINITY BOARD”--FIRST REPORT--LATEST REPORT--EARLY ENGINEERS--REVIEW OF HARBOUR IN 1872--A TRANSFORMATION FROM 1818--GRAIN ELEVATORS--NUMBER OF VESSELS--MARKET AND WOOD BOATS--THE BONSECOURS MARKET--1875 PLAN FOR IMPROVEMENT NOW CARRIED OUT--FLOATING DOCK--DESCRIPTION OF PRESENT HARBOUR--ITS FACILITIES FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT--THE DESIRE TO LENGTHEN THE SHIPPING SEASON.

II

HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS--THE HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS FROM 1830 TO THE PRESENT TIME.

III

CUSTOMS--SHIPPING FEDERATION--THE PILOTAGE AUTHORITY--IMPORTS AND EXPORTS.

I

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PORT OF MONTREAL

Heriot in his travels, thus describes the harbour front about the year 1815: “A natural wharf, very near to the town is formed by the depth of the stream and the sudden declivity of the bank. At the breaking up of the river, the buildings of the town, which are situated nearest the bank, are sometimes subject to damage by the accumulating of ice, impelled by the rapidity of the current.”

A description of three years later is to be found in a rare pamphlet entitled,

THE HARBOUR OF MONTREAL IN 1818 AND IN 1872

By T.S. Brown

I came to Montreal on the 28th day of May, 1818, in a Bateau from La Prairie--no steamer had made the trip at the time--and landed on a sloping, rough beach, exactly where the pier next below the Custom House runs out to the Island wharf and St. Lambert Ferry. What is now the Island wharf was then a rocky Island separated from the main land by a Channel about one hundred feet wide.

On my left was a small brook called the “Creek,” being the discharge of a wide open ditch that ran from the Champ de Mars, through Craig Street, round to Inspector Street and then down Commissioners Street to a stone bridge, crossing at the bottom of St. Francis Xavier Street. From this till near the river it ran between the wall of a rough stone building, on the site of the present Custom House, and another wall that supported Commissioners Street.

Above the brook a low narrow wooden wharf ran to Port Street, Common Street being supported by a wooden revetment, with gaps for sloping roadway to the river.

All beyond Port Street was the natural Bank, the same as in the front of country villages, except a small wharf opposite the north end of Youville Street, at which point, then called Pointe à Blondeau, there was a cottage, with garden in front, running down to the water.

Here, too, was a shipyard and the east wall of the Grey Nunnery. Further on, all was vacant, except some buildings at the corner of Grey Nun Street, and beyond here open fields, running up to Point St. Charles, with three windmills, the graves of three soldiers, shot for desertion, and the Nuns buildings at Point St. Charles, since used for offices, while Victoria bridge was in course of construction.

The Lachine Canal had not been commenced, and distances appeared so much farther than now, that the river front was divided into “Pointe à Callière,” “Pointe à Blondeau,” “Windmill Point,” and “Point St. Charles.”

Directly before me was a sloping beach running up to an opening or street between low houses, forming the east side.

On the square, now occupied by the old Custom House, and then by the “old Market,” so much frequented by Country people, that they blockaded the approaches, and had sometimes to be driven away by constables to the “new market,” then built on Jacques Cartier Square.

On my right the natural beach continued down to Hochelaga, or “the Cross” as it was then called. A wooden revetment held up Commissioner Street and St. Sulpice Street and thence downward there was nothing but the natural bank, on which weeds grew profusely. There may have been something more opposite the Barracks.

The buildings fronting on the river were mostly old, low and dilapidated. A good part of the space was occupied by walls and mean outbuildings of the houses fronting on St. Paul Street. The new buildings were the three-story brick stores just above St. Diziers Lane, and a three-story store just below.

The “spring fleet” mostly in port (a part may have arrived a few days later), consisted of, I think, half a dozen brigs of from one hundred and eighty to two hundred and fifty tons burthen, moored to the muddy beach; below them were some “Durham boats,” which we should now call small barges, navigators to Upper Canada, carrying a very large fore and aft sail and top sail. Wind then had to do what is now done by steam. Below these, opposite the present Jacques Cartier Square, were moored many rafts--mostly of firewood.

There were no steamboats, except those running to Quebec, clumsy things, with bluff bows, built on the model of sailing vessels, rigged with bowsprit, high mast and square sail; the deck flush, and cabins all below.

Their steam power was so small that they could not get fifty miles from Quebec unless they left with the tide; and oxen were frequently used in assisting them up the current, below the city. All the structure on the deck of the largest, called the “Car of Commerce,” was a square house over the stairway, which may still be seen, converted into a summer house, with gallery surrounding, at St. Catherines, that all may notice on the right side of the road, when riding round the mountain.

There were no tow boats then. Vessels from sea had to make their way to Montreal by wind which often took a month or more, the worst being the last mile where I have seen oxen used on a tow line, as otherwise the light winds would be insufficient to enable them to overcome the force of the strong current.

The “ship” of the period was the Everetta from London, which arrived some days after, and summer goods were advertised about the middle of June, there being no way of getting Spring and Summer “fashions” earlier, so that our ladies were always one year behind the age.

I have in my possession a bill of lading of goods by this ship, dated 25th of March, 1800. She brought the supplies to the “Northwest Company,” which then carried on the great Indian Trade, from Montreal, by canoes, up to Lake Superior, and onwards.

The Ship remained moored at the foot of St. Sulpice Street all summer, till the canoes returned with the year’s catch of furs, and carried them to England.

A traveller quoted by Mr. Sandham in “Ville Marie” as visiting the city in 1819 thus describes the activity of the water side:

“We crossed the river in a canoe hollowed out of a single log, and on landing we climbed a steep and slippery bank, and found ourselves in one of the principal streets of the city.”

“In the morning” continues the account “we witnessed a scene of considerable activity, caused by the carts and horses which are driven into the river as far as possible to obtain wood, etc, from the boats, and as they go out so far, the body of the cart is sometimes out of water and the larger sticks are drawn out with a rope.”

It would be hard to imagine a more hopeless outlook than existed in the Harbour of Montreal, as indicated on Bouchette’s plan of 1824. The first Lachine Canal was only completed in 1825, having a depth over the sills of 4½ feet, and is not shown on that plan.

Two stone windmills marked the progress of industrial development to the westward of what is now McGill Street. They were situated on top of the open beach.

The Grand Trunk Railway Company’s elevator now stands on the site of the water front of 1824.

A small wharf 200 feet long existed, providing a depth of water of 9 feet, in the position of the flood wall opposite the present Harbour Commissioners’ office.

Another irregular wharf known as Berthelette’s Wharf existed between the Harbour Commissioners’ office and the Custom House.

From the Little River, now the Custom House, downward, the beach was unimproved except by the construction of sloping roadways down to the water.

Shallow water, even points of exposed rocks, existed two-thirds of the distance across to St. Helen’s Island, in the early days before the Moffatt’s Island Wharf was built.

The size and type of the vessels trading to Montreal may be imagined from the fact that Lake St. Peter limited the draft to 11 feet, and even that depth was not available at any of the wharves in the Harbour.

The shipping trade of a whole season, eighty years ago, could have been carried in one or two of the modern ships which now frequent the port.

Sloping roadways down to the water where the river was so low as to permit of rocks showing above the current, a long stretch of beach where the children of those days romped and played, and the poorer women washed the linen using the big stones as washing boards, a long unbroken line of trees and shrubberies past Maisonneuve, where now the Harbour Commissioners’ powerful locomotives transport merchandise from vessels of 15,000 tons register to the various railway terminals, these were the features of the Port of Montreal long before Confederation had ever been dreamed of. In those days inland navigation commenced at Lachine. Goods for Upper Canada were carted to Lachine and from there taken up the Haldimand Canals in bateaux about thirty-five feet long and 5½ feet beam, built of the type of a modern raft boat with pointed bow and stern.

From 1824 to 1892 the development of the port progressed but slowly. Still, in the early days the development of the harbour was a very live question and it was on the 8th of May, 1830, that George Moffatt, Jules Quesnel and Capt. Robert S. Piper, R.E., were appointed commissioners under the Great Seal of the Province of Lower Canada and signed by His Excellency the Governor at the Castle of St. Louis; for the purpose of carrying into effect an Act of the Provincial Legislature, 10 and 11, Geo. IV., Cap. 28: “An Act to provide for the Improvement and Enlargement of the Harbour of Montreal.”

The first works undertaken were for the construction of wharves, ramps, slips for Durham boats, a revetment wall and a bridge to Oyster Island, which was to be the principal wharf.

In their first annual report the commissioners, who were called the Corporation of the Trinity Board of Montreal until 1855 when an act was passed changing the name to the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal and increasing the number of commissioners from three to five, stated that they confidently anticipated that the wharves undertaken, when completed, would be superior to any works of the kind in the Province, and would enable the City of Montreal to be advantageously contrasted with any other in North America for beauty, solidity and convenience of approach by water, and the present Harbour of Montreal rather justifies the modest boast of the commissioners of eighty years ago.

Writing in 1839, before the improvements had been made in the harbour by the commissioners, Mr. Newton Bosworth in “Hochelaga Depicta” quotes a New York traveller, who, on landing from a bateau which brought him from La Prairie, thus afterwards expressed himself:

“The approach to Montreal conveyed no prepossessing idea of the enterprise of its municipality; ships, brigs and steamboats lay on the margin of the river at the foot of the hill, no long line of wharves, built of the substantial free stone of which there is an abundance in the very harbour affording security to vessels and profit to owners; the commercial haven looked as ragged and as muddy as the shores of Nieu Nederlandt when the Guede Vrow first made her appearance off the battery.”

“Now,” remarks Mr. Bosworth in 1839, commenting on this “if he were to repeat his visit he would be constrained to make a different report, and find himself able to step ashore without more trouble than in walking across a room.”

The appropriation for the first three years amounted to $4,000, while at present the Harbour Commissioners have undertaken a series of improvements which are soon to be completed at an approximate cost of $6,000,000.

During the past ten years no less than thirty-eight million dollars has been expended to improve the local harbour and ship channel, nearly one-half of which immense sum has gone towards the establishment of harbour and terminal improvements.

Millions of dollars have been spent on lighthouses, light ships, submarine bell stations, whistling buoys, the dredging of the main ship channel from 27½ to 30 feet at low water, its widening and straightening have been carried out at a cost of $14,000,000, the reorganization of the pilotage system has cost $140,000, the establishment of fifteen land telephone stations between Quebec and Montreal has involved the expenditure of $150,000, while hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent for other important projects.

Since 1830 some of the best Engineers in Canada, the United States and Great Britain, have from time to time been called upon to investigate and submit plans for improvements.

Messrs. Gzowsky, Keefer, Forsythe, Trautwine, Legge, Nish, and Slippell all submitted plans up to 1873.

A picture of the results of the improvements during the intervening period is to be found in Mr. T.S. Brown’s retrospect, already quoted.

“I visited it (the harbour)” says the same writer, “at the end of fifty-four years, on the 28th of May, 1872. And what did I see?[1]

“A canal of the largest dimensions coming in at Windmill Point, and the old fields converted into basins, filled with steamers, schooners and barges, one side fringed by manufactories, and the other by lofty warehouses, and platforms filled with merchandise.

“From ‘Pointe à Blondeau,’ or Grey Nun Street, to the Barracks, there is a high stone revetment wall, supporting Commissioners Street, with Ramps at convenient distances, leading to a broad platform or wharf running down to below the barracks and Dalhousie Square, along which is a track for Railway Cars, and from which project many piers, one connecting with the Island before mentioned, and others lower down, extending further out.

“This platform or line wharf, and the piers, are covered and filled with merchandise, of all discriptions, in bars, bundles, casks, cases, boxes and bales, a part being covered with temporary sheds.

“The quantity and weight is so immense that one wonders where it comes from, and where it goes to, but the immense mass extending along Harbour and Canal for a mile, is but a small portion of what is passing into or through the port, for while countless carts and cars, are daily removing from one side, steamers and ships fill up every space by discharging on the other, with steam power and regiments of laborers. The taking in of the cargo is going on at the same time and elevators alongside the ships are taking from propellors alongside from the west and far west thousands of bushels of grain. Instead of the half a dozen brigs of 1818, with an aggregate tonnage of twelve to fifteen hundred tons discharging slowly with skids on a rough beach, there lays one steamer that will measure more than the whole put together.

“In all there is in port, stretched along the wharves and piers from Grey Nun Street to below the Barracks, 21 Ocean Steamers, 22,612 tons; 20 Ships, 17,710 tons; 22 Barques, 12,409 tons; 3 Brigs, 760 tons; 4 Brigantines and Schooners, 278 tons, in all 70 Vessels with an aggregate tonnage of 53,769 tons.

“The shore (I have often seen it bare), below the foot of St. Sulpice Street has been dredged and wharfed to accommodate ships drawing twenty feet of water. A Quebec Steamer, not stumpy, low and flush deck, but long, built on a skiff model, with two stories of staterooms raised above the deck, is at a pier at the bottom of Jacques Cartier Square, stretching out beyond the limits of the old firewood rafts, brought down by farmers from Chateaguay and neighbouring regions, to be sold in June, when they were impatient to get home, for $2.00 a cord.

“Directly below is a fleet of ‘Market Boats,’ really elegant steamers, of modern build, that navigate to all ports down to ‘Three Rivers.’

“Mixed with these are a fleet of ‘Wood Barges,’ rigged on the principle of a ‘Chinese Junk’ (which some of them resemble on a small scale), with a very high mast, and very long square-sail yards.

“These bring up firewood, hay, grain, lumber, etc., from below, a trade little dreamed of in old times.

“Further down are piles of boards, planks, and other lumber, and ships being loaded with it for the South Atlantic, or perhaps Pacific, and work is in progress for continuing the wharves to Hochelaga where I have seen many ships launched.

“Where stood the ‘Mansion House’ (in 1818 our great hotel), a former residence of Sir John Johnson, and dwelling houses with small gardens, there is now the Bonsecour Market. The old walls and sheds, along the ‘front’ to ‘Pointe à Calliêre,’ are replaced by tall warehouses. An elegant Custom House on the Pointe replaces an old potash store. Other warehouses are built on the old ship yard, and the Grey Nuns having removed to their new establishment on Guy Street, their buildings are disappearing, St. Peter Street being continued to the harbour by cutting directly through their old church.

“Such was the aspect of the harbour of Montreal in 1818, and such it is today (1872) and I sincerely hope this article may be preserved to be republished half a century hence, accompanied by a description of the harbour as it then was.”

To continue the story of the developments of the harbour for the greater part of fifty years. In 1875 Mr. Robert Bruce Bell, Major General Newton and Mr. Sanford Fleming drew up a report and plan for the improvement of the Habour. Mr. John Kennedy, for so many years Chief Engineer of the Harbour Commissioners, has not only designed but carried out many of the improvements now existing.

Ten years ago there was no Alexandra Basin or wharf to speak of, there was no level harbour front, no permanent sheds, over a dozen of which have only been finished within the past four years.

Magnificent concrete wharves with corrugated iron sheds built on solid concrete foundations have been built opposite the plants of some of Montreal’s largest industries.

The Harbour Commissioners’ tracks pass behind the sheds affording direct communication all over the harbour, while excellent wharfage facilities permit of the circulation of any amount of traffic.

The greatest addition to the port in recent years, however, and urged by the Montreal Board of Trade since 1887, has been the huge floating dock, the “Duke of Connaught,” which was successfully towed across the Atlantic in the fall of 1912. It was dedicated by H.R.H., the Governor General on 18th of November, 1912.

H.R.H. the Governor General in replying to the Commissioners’ address well said that “by the arrival and installation of this great floating dock, the great reproach against the St. Lawrence trade route has been removed, and the largest vessels can now run up to Montreal, secure in the consciousness of entering a port which is in possession of a competent modern equipment for repair and examination.”

The dock is capable[2] of accommodating vessels of Olympic size or larger and necessitates the employment of a staff of 500 men, the majority of them skilled workmen. The dock can accommodate thirty vessels at present operating on the St. Lawrence route which are too wide of beam to be taken into any existing dock between here and Halifax, 1,000 miles away.

A ship building plant which is to be operated in connection with the dock is to give employment to about two thousand men.

The type of Port of Montreal is a combination of a protected tidal basin, riverside quays and pier jetties.

There is no rise and fall of tide, but the river level fluctuates to an extent of about 12 feet from high water in the spring to low water in the autumn.

During the winter, due to ice shoves, the water occasionally rises to an extreme of 28 feet above the low water level. An artificial embarkment, parallel to the shore, about one and one-third miles long, protects the whole of the upper part of the harbour, including the entrance to the Lachine Canal, from not only the currents of the river but from ice shoves. This constitutes the protected tidal basin in which the water rises and falls with the river level.

It has not been necessary to purchase any land above the high water mark on the beach, as all piers and wharves have been made artificially by building out into the shallow water and the berths formed by dredging.

From the entrance to the protected basin for about two and one-half miles downstream, to Hochelaga, the river channel is too much contracted to permit of the construction of piers or jetties, and this part of the harbour is developed as riverside quays, sufficient width for harbour purposes being obtained by building the quay-walls in deep water and filling in the area behind to give a width from 100 to 250 feet. Below Hochelaga, where the river section is larger, piers have been built out into the river, inclined so as to give an easy angle of approach from the ship channel.

The success of the port is due primarily to its early development, before any of the water front had been alienated from the crown, and to its geographical, physical and trade situation.

No rights or franchises stand in the way of further extensions, and the sentiment of the country is in favour of a continuance of the policy of retaining the whole harbour area in the public interests.

The facility of approach both by ocean vessels, inland vessels and railways to a convenient point of transfer makes Montreal almost unique, there being nothing in the way of close connection for traffic from all points, and almost in the heart of a large and growing city.

Montreal Harbour is also the terminus of the St. Lawrence Canal System, which affords navigation between Montreal and Lake Erie, a distance of 300 miles, for vessels of 14 feet draft and a carrying capacity of 2,500 tons. From Lake Erie to this head of Lake Superior vessels are able to navigate with a draft of 20 feet and a carrying capacity of 10,000 tons. The inland navigation centering in Montreal therefore commences either by the all lake route of 1,600 miles and vessels of 14 feet draft, or by the lake-and-rail routes, using the 10,000 ton boats to Georgian Bay ports or Port Colborne, and connecting with Montreal either by short-haul rail route or the St. Lawrence canals.

The following figures give the total trade in the Harbour from 1901 to 1914:

Sea-going Vessels Inland Vessels. Arrived in Port. Total Total Number Tonnage Number Tonnage 1912 736 2,403,924 12,586 4,649,767 1900 726 1,393,886 8,310 1,659,616

Total Trade 1911 $201,066,256 1901 $121,292,349 1914 $251,873,912

About two-thirds of the grain comes to Montreal in steamers carrying 2,500 tons on the 14 foot draft. These vessels cannot afford to wait, but must be unloaded at once if they are to be attracted to Montreal. The rest of the grain coming from the Georgian Bay ports by rail must also be unloaded quickly, as during the grain rush there is a constant railway car shortage. The storage and rapid handling of grain has thus become, in the last few years, a new factor in the problem of harbour economy. There are three modern grain elevators at present in the harbour and none of the older type. Of the modern elevators, one belongs to the Grand Trunk Railway. It had a capacity of 1,000,000 bushels, but has been enlarged to a capacity of 2,100,000. The others belong to the Harbour Commissioners. No. 1 in 1915 will be capable of storing 4,000,000 bushels; while No. 2, recently erected opposite Bonsecours Market, has a capacity of 2,600,000, and can handle 1,000,000 bushels a day. It is entirely built of reinforced concrete, and is the largest of this kind in the world.

It is easy to see that Montreal Harbour, being the farthest inland ocean port of the Northern Continent and also the terminus of the inland Canadian canal and railway routes, is an important factor in the grain carrying trade of the Northern part of the Continent.

In 1914 about two million dollars have been expended by the Harbour Commission in dredging, renovating piers and wharves, building new sheds and wharves, and other work incidental to the five-year program of development undertaken by them at a total cost of $15,000,000. All this work has been under the direction of Mr. W.G. Ross, chairman, Mr. Farquhar Robertson, and Colonel A.E. Labelle, commissioners.

The great desire is now to lengthen the shipping season. Professor Barnes, of McGill University, has made the study of ice his specialty and he is at present carrying on experiments for the Canadian government. He is of the opinion that winter navigation is a possibility. At present the government has, on the St. Lawrence, two ice-breakers, which extend the time of navigation by a few days. The ice difficulty arises where the river widens into a lake, as at Lake St. Peter. Ice forms on the sides of the lake and is blown into the current. When the banks again converge, this ice jams, soon forming a solid ice-bridge. The ice-shoves which occur in the spring are caused in the same way. The solution of the problem is to have ice-breakers always suitably situated to break these bridges as soon as they form.

II

HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS

The following is a list of the Boards of Harbour Commissioners that have executed the duties of the Trust from 1830 up to the present time showing the interest represented by each member:--

* Indicates the President of the Board.

(_c_) Indicates the representative of the Corn Exchange. (_t_) Indicates the representative of the Montreal Board of Trade. (_m_) Indicates the representative of the City of Montreal. (_s_) Indicates the representative of the Shipping interest. (_c de c_) Indicates the representative of the Chambre de Commerce.

The members not indicated as representatives of the Corn Exchange, Board of Trade, City of Montreal, Chambre de Commerce or Shipping interest have been appointed by the Government of their time. From 1907 the members have been exclusively appointed by the Government.

1830 to 1836. Hon. George Moffatt.* Jules Quesnel, Esq. Capt. Robert S. Piper.

1836 to 1839. P.L. Letourneux, Esq. Thomas Cringan, Esq. Turton Penn, Esq.*

1839 to 1840. Turton Penn, Esq.* Thomas Cringan, Esq. William Lunn, Esq.

1840 to 1850. J.G. Mackenzie, Esq.* John Try, Esq. C.S. Rodier, Esq.

1850 to 1855. John Try, Esq.* Hon. John Young,* from 1853. Louis Marchand, Esq.

1855 to 1856. Hon. John Young.* H.H. Whitney, Esq. Sir George E. Cartier. Doctor Nelson. (_m_) Hon. H. Starnes. (_t_)

1856 to 1858. Hon. John Young.* H.H. Whitney, Esq.* Chairman _pro tem_. Sir George E. Cartier. Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_) Hon. L.H. Holton. (_t_)

1858 to 1859. Hon. John Young.* Sir George E. Cartier. H.H. Whitney, Esq. Hon. L.H. Holton. (_t_) J.A. Berthelot, Esq. (_m_)

1859 to 1860. C.S. Rodier, Esq. (_m_) Hon. John Young. H.H. Whitney, Esq.* Thomas Kay, Esq. (_t_) A.M. Delisle, Esq.

1860 to 1861. C.S. Rodier, Esq. (_m_) Hon. John Young. H.H. Whitney, Esq.* A.M. Delisle, Esq. Thomas Cramp, Esq. (_t_)

1861 to 1862. C.S. Rodier, Esq. (_m_) Hon. John Young,* Chairman _pro tem_ in 1862. H.H. Whitney, Esq.* A.M. Delisle, Esq. E. Atwater, Esq. (_t_)

1862 to 1863. Hon. John Young. H.H. Whitney, Esq.* Hon. L.H. Holton. (_t_) A.M. Delisle, Esq. Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_)

1863 to 1864. Hon. John Young.* A.M. Delisle, Esq. Thomas Cramp, Esq. (_t_) Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_) Henry Lyman, Esq. (_t_)

1864 to 1865. Hon. John Young.* Thomas Cramp, Esq. Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_) John Pratt, Esq. P. Redpath, Esq. (_t_)

1865 to 1866. Hon. John Young. * Thomas Cramp, Esq. Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_) John Pratt, Esq. J.H. Winn, Esq. (_t_)

1866 to 1867. Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_) A.M. Delisle, Esq.* J. McLennan, Esq. (_t_) George Stephen, Esq. William Workman, Esq.

1867 to 1869. Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_) A.M. Delisle, Esq.* George Stephen, Esq. William Workman, Esq. Thomas Rimmer, Esq. (_t_)

1869 to 1870. Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_) A.M. Delisle, Esq.* J.H. Winn, Esq. (_t_) George Stephen, Esq. William Workman, Esq.

1870 to 1871. Hon. John Young. (_t_) Hon. H. Starnes. (_m_) A.M. Delisle, Esq. George Stephen, Esq. William Workman, Esq.

1871 to 1872. Hon. John Young. (_t_) A.M. Delisle, Esq.* George Stephen, Esq. William Workman, Esq. C.J. Coursol, Esq. (_m_)

1872 to 1873. A.M. Delisle, Esq.* George Stephen, Esq. William Workman, Esq. C.J. Coursol, Esq. (_m_) Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_)

1873 to 1874. Hon. John Young.* A.M. Delisle. William Workman, Esq. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Doctor Bernard, (_m_) Victor Hudon, Esq. M.P. Ryan, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) W.W. Ogilvie, Esq. (_c_)

1874 to 1875. Hon. John Young.* Thomas Cramp, Esq. John Pratt, Esq. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Doctor Bernard. (_m_) Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) W.W. Ogilvie, Esq. (_c_) Peter Donovan, Esq. Adolphe Roy, Esq.

1875 to 1876. Hon. John Young.* Thomas Cramp, Esq. John Pratt, Esq. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Doctor Bernard. (_m_) Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Peter Donovan, Esq. Adolphe Roy, Esq. Charles H, Gould, Esq. (_c_)

1876 to 1877. Hon. John Young.* Thomas Cramp, Esq. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Peter Donovan, Esq. Adolphe Roy, Esq. Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Dr. W.H. Hingston. (_m_) Hon. J.R. Thibaudeau.

1877 to 1878. Hon. John Young.* Thomas Cramp, Esq.* _pro tem_ 1877. Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_) Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Peter Donovan, Esq. Adolphe Roy, Esq. Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Hon. J.R. Thibaudeau.

1878 to 1879. Thomas Cramp, Esq.* Hon. J.L. Beaudry (_m_) Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Peter Donovan, Esq. Adolphe Roy, Esq. Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Hon. J.R. Thibaudeau. Edward Mackay, Esq.

1879 to 1881. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) S. Rivard, Esq. (_m_) Andrew Robertson, Esq.* J.B. Rolland, Esq. Edward Murphy, Esq. Henry Bulmer, Esq., *Chairman _pro tem_.

1881 to 1885. Hon. J.L. Beaudry. (_m_) Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Andrew Robertson, Esq.* J.B. Rolland, Esq. Edward Murphy, Esq. Henry Bulmer, Esq.

1885 to 1887. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan. Esq. (_s_) Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Andrew Robertson, Esq.* J.B. Rolland, Esq. Edward Murphy, Esq. Henry Bulmer, Esq. Honoré Beaugrand, Esq. (_m_)

1887 to 1888. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (t) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (s) Charles H. Gould, Esq. (c) Andrew Robertson, Esq.* Hon. J.B. Rolland. Edward Murphy, Esq. Henry Bulmer, Esq. Hon. J.J.C. Abbott, Q.C., M.P. (_m_)

1888 to 1889. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Chas. H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Andrew Robertson, Esq.* Edward Murphy, Esq. Henry Bulmer, Esq. Hon. J.J.C. Abbott, Q.C., M.P. (_m_) J.O. Villeneuve, Esq.

1889 to 1890. Hugh McLennan, Esq, (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Chas. H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Andrew Robertson, Esq.* Hon. Edward Murphy. Henry Bulmer, Esq.* J.O. Villeneuve, Esq. Jacques Grenier, Esq. (_m_)

1890 to 1891. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq, (_s_) Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Hon. Edward Murphy. Henry Bulmer, Esq.* J.O. Villeneuve, Esq. Jacques Grenier, Esq. (_m_) Richard White, Esq.

1891 to 1893. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Hon. Edward Murphy. Henry Bulmer, Esq.* Richard White, Esq. James McShane, Esq. (_m_)

1893 to 1894. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Charles H. Gould, Esq. (_c_) Hon. Edward Murphy. Henry Bulmer, Esq.* J.O. Villeneuve, Esq. Richard White, Esq. Hon. Alphonse Desjardins. (_m_) L.E. Morin, Esq. (_c de c_)

1894 to 1895. Hugh McLennan, Esq, (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Hon. Edward Murphy. Henry Bulmer, Esq.* J.O. Villeneuve, Esq. Richard White, Esq. L.E. Morin, Esq. (_c de c_) W.W. Ogilvie, Esq. N.A. Hurteau, Esq. John Torrance, Esq. (_c_)

1895 to 1896. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Victor Hudon, Esq. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) Hon. Edward Murphy. Henry Bulmer, Esq.* J.O. Villeneuve, Esq. (_m_) Richard White, Esq. L.E. Morin, Esq. (_c de c_) W.W. Ogilvie, Esq. N.A. Hurteau, Esq. John Torrance, Esq. H. Laporte, Esq. Frank J. Hart, Esq.

1896 to 1897. Hugh McLennan, Esq. (_t_) Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) L.E. Morin, Esq. (_c de c_) John Torrance, Esq. (_c_) R. Wilson Smith, Esq. (_m_) Robert Mackay, Esq.* Jonathan Hodgson, Esq. Robert Bickerdike, Esq. Alphonse Racine, Esq. Eustache H. Lemay, Esq. William Farrell, Esq.

1897 to 1898. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) John Torrance, Esq. (_c_) R. Wilson Smith, Esq. (_m_) Robert Mackay, Esq.* Jonathan Hodgson, Esq. Robert Bickerdike, M.L.A. Alphonse Racine, Esq. Eustache H. Lemay, Esq. William Farrell, Esq. David G. Thomson, Esq. (_t_) Joseph Contant, Esq. (_c de c_)

1898 to 1899. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) John Torrance, Esq. (_c_) Robert Mackay, Esq.* Jonathan Hodgson, Esq. Robert Bickerdike. M.L.A. Alphonse Racine, Esq. Eustache H. Lemay, Esq. William Farrell, Esq. David G. Thomson, Esq. (_t_) Joseph Contant. Esq. (_c de c_) Raymond Préfontaine, Q.C., M.P. (_m_)

1899 to 1901. Andrew Allan, Esq. (_s_) John Torrance, Esq. (_c_) Hon. Robert Mackay.* Jonathan Hodgson, Esq. Robert Bickerdike. M.L.A. Alphonse Racine, Esq. Eustache H. Lemay, Esq. William Farrell, Esq. Joseph Contant, Esq. (_c de c_) Raymond Préfontaine, K.C., M.P. (_m_) James Crathern, Esq. (_t_)

1901 to 1906. R. Mackay, Esq.* R. Bickerdike, Esq. J. Hodgson (resigned). A. Racine. E.H. Lemay. J. Crathern. (_t_) L.E. Geoffrion. (_c de c_) H.A.A. Brault. A. McFee. (_c_) W.E. Doran. H. Laporte. (_m_) H.A. Ekers. (_m_) J. Cochrane. (_m_) R. Reford. (_s_) resigned. Andrew A. Allen. E. Goff Penny.

1907 to 1912 G.W. Stephens.* L.E. Geoffrion. C C. Ballantyne.

1913 W.G. Ross.* F. Robertson. A.E. Labelle.

List of Secretaries of the Board of Harbour Commissioners of Montreal, from its establishment in 1830 up to the present time (1914).

Frederick Griffin, May, 1830, to May, 1831. Nicholas Charles Radiger, May, 1831, to April, 1837. W. Badgley, April, 1837, to January, 1838. Francis Badgley, January, 1838, to July, 1841. John F. Badgley, July, 1841, to February, 1852. John Glass, February, 1852, to October, 1855. Alexander Clerk, October, 1855, to May, 1863. H.H. Whitney, May, 1863, to January, 1877. H.D. Whitney, January, 1877, to June, 1887. Alexander Robertson, July, 1887, to December, 1898. David Seath, December, 1898, to present time (1914). Michael Fennell, Assistant Secretary (1909-1914).

List of Engineers and Superintendents in charge of the deepening of the Ship Channel between Montreal and Quebec, or otherwise prominently connected with the execution of the work up to 1914.

Capt. Henry W. Bayfield, R.N., in charge of the Admiralty Survey of the River and Gulf of St. Lawrence, made several special reports in connection with the deepening of Lake St. Peter.

Capt. Robert S. Piper, Royal Engineer, Consulting Engineer, 1830.

John Cliff, C E., Superintendent of Works and Draughtsman, 1830 to 1845.

C.M. Tate, C.E., Superintendent of Works and Draughtsman, 1845 to 1848.

David Thompson, Esq., C.E., made survey and estimate for deepening channel in 1841.

Charles Atherton, Esq., Civil Engineer in charge of the surveys and investigations made in Lake St. Peter, in 1842-3.

F.P. Rubidge, Esq., Civil Engineer in charge of surveys, investigations, etc., in Lake St. Peter, in 1847.

C.S. Gzowski, Esq., C.E., Engineer of the Harbour Works and Consulting Engineer to the Ship Channel Improvements, 1851 to 1853.

T.C. Keefer, Esq., C.E., Engineer of the Harbour Works and Consulting Engineer to the Ship Channel Improvements, 1853 to 1855.

Robert Forsyth, Esq., C.E., Engineer of the Harbour Works and Consulting Engineer to the Ship Channel Improvements, 1855 to 1864.

A.G. Nish, Esq., C.E., Engineer of the Harbour Works and Consulting Engineer to the Ship Channel Improvements, 1864 to 1875.

John Kennedy, Esq., C.E., M.I.C.E., Chief Engineer of the Harbour Works and the Ship Channel Improvements, 1875 to 1907.

Captain Vaughan, Superintendent of Dredging, 1844 to 1846.

Captain Bell, Superintendent of Dredging, 1851 to 1856.

Robert Forsyth, Esq., C.E., Superintendent of Dredging, November, 1856, to April, 1857.

Capt C.L. Armstrong, Superintendent of Dredging, 1857 to 1867, and in 1874-5.

Capt. Thomas McKenzie, Superintendent of Dredging, 1876 to 1883.

James Howden, Esq., Superintendent of Dredging, 1883 to 1888.

Frederick W. Cowie, M.J.C.E., Chief Engineer, 1907.

III

CUSTOMS AND EXCISE

IMPORTS AND EXPORTS--EXCISE DUTIES

THE PRESENT CUSTOM HOUSE--A MEMORIAL OF 1790 FOR A CUSTOM HOUSE INDEPENDENT OF QUEBEC--THAT OF 1799 RECANTING THE FORMER MEMORIAL--THE MONTREAL COMMITTEE OF TRADE OF 1831--STEAM VESSELS CHANGE CONDITIONS--FIRST CUSTOM HOUSE PROPER AT MONTREAL--THE COLLECTORS’ NAMES--THE SHIPPING FEDERATION--STATISTICS--EXPORTS AND IMPORTS SINCE 1842--TRADE OF PORT OF MONTREAL--CUSTOMS DUTIES SINCE CONFEDERATION--EXCISE DEPARTMENT OF MONTREAL.

The business of the Customs was conducted before 1840 in a building on Capitol Street. In 1836 the building now used by the Inland Revenue on Place Royale was commenced and opened for the customs office in 1845. It is of the Tuscan order and was designed by Mr. Ostell.

In 1790 in the fall the merchants of Montreal presented a memorial desiring the establishment of a custom house separate from that of Quebec on two grounds: (1) the necessity of having the goods landed at Quebec; (2) the want of authority in the surveyor of the ports to grant certificates for the exportation of pot and pearl ashes. This was strenuously objected to by the naval officers, on the ground that were the prayer answered the passage between Quebec and Montreal would be taken advantage of by the country merchants, shop keepers, publicans, etc., to carry on an illicit trade “to the injury of the revenue and the fur traders.” The complaints in the memorial state that the landing at Quebec of cargoes for Montreal “must be attended with very heavy expense for agents, wharfage and labourers, besides the waste that will happen on cargoes of liquor by landing. What is of still greater consequence, is the loss of time which may arise, it being well known that the delay of a few hours waiting for a clearance upwards has occasioned vessels to be many weeks in performing a voyage of sixty leagues.” This is, of course, an allusion to the sailing vessels then solely used. These inconveniences were removed and the application was not repeated. A further memorial, dated from Montreal the 21st of October, 1799, represents that certain modifications are all that are required and that “a separate and independent custom house may introduce intricacies, difficulties, delays and expense beyond what at present exists and can be foreseen and if so render the means of redress extremely tedious, not to say impracticable.” The names attached to the memorial are Isaac Todd, Forsyth, Richardson & Company, Auldjo, Maitland & Co.; Leith, Jameson & Company; John Gray; Samuel David; James and Andrew McGill; David David; McTavish, Frobisher & Company; J. Laing; Parker, Gerard & Ogilvie; Richard Dobie.

The introduction of steam vessels made new regulations necessary. In 1831 vessels coming to Montreal continued to report at Quebec. In consequence of remonstrances the superintendent of customs residing at Montreal was authorized by a provisional act to collect the provincial revenues there, but this was only a partial relief, as the crown duties had still to be settled for at Quebec, to the great loss of merchants, shippers and consignees. The Committee of Trade of Montreal represented in their memorial of 1831 that the navigation of the St. Lawrence between Quebec and Montreal was rendered speedy and certain by the employment of steam towboats, but the necessity of entering the vessels at the Quebec custom house caused a delay of one day and sometimes two days in unloading. The burdens laid upon the shipping coming to Montreal, the memorial states to have been exceptional for that city, no other instance being known of a merchant being compelled to pay duties on his importations at a distance of 180 miles from the port of discharge, the expense and inconvenience thence arising being equivalent to an extra tax. The memorial reveals the difference of the two ports today. It states that the vessels resorting to Montreal bore a small proportion to those entering Quebec, but the memorials already anticipated that by improvements in the river, vessels from sea would land at Montreal the whole of the goods for its own district, Upper Canada and the adjoining frontier of the United States.

The first Custom House building situated at Place Royale was begun in 1836 and finished in 1838. Montreal, accordingly obtained its own completed Custom House in 1838. In 1870 the Government purchased from the Royal Insurance Company the present Custom House building at 1 Common Street. A newly erected Custom House is now (1914) in course of completion on Youville Square.

The Collectors of Customs at the Port of Montreal have been:

Wm. Hall, from 1838 to 1849: Tancrède Bouthillier, from July, 1850, to November, 1863; Benj. Holmes, from December, 1863, to May, 1865; John Lewis, acting, from May, 1865, to September, 1866; A.M. Delisle, from September, 1866, to October, 1873; W.B. Simpson, from November, 1873, to June, 1882; M.P. Ryan, from July, 1882, to January, 1893; W.J. O’Hara, acting, from January, 1893, to December, 1895; R.S. White, from January, 1896.

Montreal became a port of entry in 1842.

THE MONTREAL PILOTAGE AUTHORITY

In the early part of the eighteenth century an official knowing the navigation of the St. Lawrence boarded the king’s ships and brought them to Quebec, and in 1731 the first official pilot was appointed, and sent each season thereafter to Isle Verte, to await ships arrivals. This appears to have been the beginning of the St. Lawrence Pilotage.

After the British occupation, and during the term of General Murray’s governorship, in 1762, an order was issued requiring a number of pilots to be stationed early in each season at Bic, and to remain until the middle of October, also a further number at Isle aux Coudres. No person was to act as a pilot, unless he had passed a satisfactory examination, and had a certificate signed by the governor.

In 1805 there was passed an act entitled “An Act for the better regulation of pilots and shipping in the Port of Quebec, and in the harbours of Quebec and Montreal and for improving the navigation of the River St. Lawrence, and for establishing a fund for decayed pilots, their wives and children.”

This was the beginning of the Trinity House of Quebec and its jurisdiction then included the harbour of Montreal. Further acts were passed in 1807, 1811, 1812, 1822 and 1834, amending and extending the provisions of the preceding acts. By an act passed in 1832, a separate Trinity House was constituted for Montreal. This arrangement continued until the passing of the act in 1873, which made the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal the authority. They continued to be the authority till the passing of the Act of 1903, when the Minister of Marine and Fisheries became the authority, which he still continues to be.

THE SHIPPING FEDERATION OF CANADA

Montreal is the headquarters of the Shipping Federation of Canada. In 1903 in order to amalgamate those interested in the shipping business of Canada a charter of incorporation (3 Edward, VII Chap.), was granted to “Hugh Andrew Allan, representing the firm of H. & A. Allan; John Russell Binning, representing Furness, Withy & Company, Limited; James Thom, representing the Hamburg-American Packet Company; William I. Gear, representing the Robert Reford Company, Limited; Frank A. Routh, representing the firm of F.A. Routh & Company; David W. Campbell, representing the Elder-Dempster Company, Limited; James Gordon Brock, representing J.G. Brock & Company; Charles McLean; McLean, Kennedy & Company; and John Torrence, representing the Dominion Line of Steamships; and the Leyland Line of Steamships respectively, and such others as hereafter become members of the association.”

IMPORTS AND EXPORTS

Statistics of Imports and Exports since Montreal was made a Port of Entry in 1842:

In its fiftieth annual report the Montreal Board of Trade in 1892 presented tables of statistics showing as nearly as possible the development of trade in Montreal since 1842, when this city was made a port of entry.

The accompanying figures portraying conditions every ten years, were taken from that report and give an excellent summary.

Prior to 1850 the government did not publish blue book information of trade conditions, and the statistics referring to trade before that time were obtained from various sources. What early figures were obtained are accurate so far as could be determined, but there are unavoidable gaps where information could not be secured.

EXCISE DEPARTMENT

Previous to the confederation of the provinces, the excise duties, the canal tolls and the harbor dues were collected under the management of the Customs Department. The revenues from the other public works were collected either by the Department of Public Works or by the Crown Lands Department and the issue of bill stamps was managed by a Board of Stamps and Excise.

By the act constituting the Department of Inland Revenue, it was enacted that the Department should have the control and management

1. Of the collections of all duties of excise.

2. Of the collections of all stamp duties and the preparation and issue of stamps and stamped paper, except postage stamps.

3. Of Internal taxes.

4. Of Standard weights and measures.

5. Of the administration of the laws affecting the culling and measuring of timber and the collection of slidage and boomage dues.

6. The collection of bridges and ferry tolls and rents.

These conditions have at different dates been changed until now.

The Inland Revenue consists of Excise, Weights and Measures, Gas and Electric Light, and Food Inspections.

Excise is the branch which supervises and collects the duties from distilleries, malthouses, breweries, tobacco factories, cigar factories, bonding warehouses, compounders, bonded factories for the manufacture in bond of vinegar, acetic acid, perfumes, pharmaceutical preparations, soaps, fulminates, malt cereals, etc.

The Inland Revenue is divided into two services: the Inside and the Outside.

The Inside comprises all officials in the Department at Ottawa.

The Outside comprises all the rest of the staff, the officials who actually assess and collect the revenues and duties.

The Excise, Montreal, is officered by sixty-two men--forty-six of whom are permanently appointed, the rest, sixteen, are temporary employees.

There are licensed, in Montreal: One distillery, four malthouses, sixteen breweries, forty-one cigar factories, one acetic acid factory, five perfumes, six pharmaceutical preparations, fourteen bonded warehouses, twenty-one chemical stills and one wood alcohol manufacturer.

The Weights and Measures Inspection are responsible for the verification of all weights and measures used in trade.

Gas Inspection has charge of the inspection of all meters used by consumers of gas and the illuminating power and purity of gas.

Food Inspection deals with the purity of alimentary substances.

As a collecting office, the Inland Revenue, Montreal, is second only to the Customs, and collects nearly one-half of all the excise revenue of Canada.

The officers named by the British Government and who remained in office at Confederation were R. Bellemare, Inspector; P. Durnford, Collector, assisted by a staff of fourteen officers.

The first excise office was situated on St. James Street, on part of the site now occupied by “La Presse Building”; in 1871, it was moved to the present location, at No. 412 St. Paul Street, (the site of the first public square in Montreal).

The steady increase in collections of the Inland Revenue duties is one of the best indications of the growth of Montreal.

TABLE OF THE TRADE OF THE PORT OF MONTREAL FROM 1882 TO 1912

Sea-going Value of Value of Vessels arrived Total Merchandise Merchandise Years in Port Tonnage Exported Imported

1913-14 --- --- $99,238,107 $152,635,805 1912 736 2,403,924 87,679,422 148,977,605 1911 762 2,338,252 71,254,446 129,811,810 1910 747 2,234,722 71,642,648 114,473,845 1909 670 1,911,413 76,642,485 96,787,938 1908 739 1,958,604 80,583,171 79,851,814 1907 740 1,924,475 85,494,534 106,391,891 1906 820 1,973,223 89,616,459 89,376,259 1905 833 1,940,056 73,786,548 80,345,420 1904 796 1,853,853 57,947,045 76,056,830 1903 802 1,890,904 70,939,510 78,527,078 1902 758 1,541,272 59,755,673 70,737,832 1901 742 1,453,048 56,220,759 65,632,086 1900 726 1,393,886 62,496,431 64,071,590 1899 801 1,517,611 64,040,982 65,018,544 1898 868 1,584,072 62,729,180 61,117,703 1897 796 1,379,002 55,156,956 47,036,196 1896 709 1,216,468 49,160,364 45,900,270 1895 640 1,069,386 40,348,197 41,996,686 1894 734 1,096,909 40,401,392 42,514,582 1893 804 1,151,777 47,700,433 53,796,227 1892 735 1,036,707 45,638,275 47,670,361 1891 725 938,657 39,344,783 48,418,569 1890 746 930,332 32,027,176 45,159,124 1889 695 823,165 32,638,270 47,415,620 1888 655 782,473 24,049,638 39,856,283 1887 767 870,773 29,391,858 43,391,715 1886 703 859,699 27,925,916 42,086,266 1885 629 683,854 25,209,813 37,042,660 1884 626 649,374 27,458,775 41,859,299 1883 660 664,263 27,122,891 44,073,915 1882 648 554,692 26,503,001 50,527,497

The foregoing table does not include inland vessels, the figures of which for the season of 1912 were 12,586 vessels with a tonnage of 4,649,767.

CUSTOMS DUTIES COLLECTED AT PORT OF MONTREAL SINCE CONFEDERATION

1867-68 $4,009,675.56 1868-69 3,608,254.75 1869-70 4,128,051.89 1870-71 5,140,132.03 1871-72 5,358,701.13 1872-73 5,011,154.89 1873-74 5,633,705.88 1874-75 5,862,047.05 1875-76 4,292,057.10 1876-77 3,865,410.50 1877-78 3,814,864.77 1878-79 4,026,975.75 1879-80 5,232,802.19 1880-81 7,077,793.32 1881-82 8,100,341.40 1882-83 8,181,935.78 1883-84 7,041,306.18 1884-85 6,856,186.99 1885-86 7,353,009.24 1886-87 8,874,147.75 1887-88 8,548,737.15 1888-89 9,265,405.73 1889-90 8,776,875.22 1890-91 9,065,486.99 1891-92 6,627,526.11 1892-93 7,078,707.12 1893-94 6,653,299.34 1894-95 5,983,342.25 1895-96 6,779,879.74 1896-97 6,765,771.85 1897-98 7,207,005.29 1898-99 8,662,764.98 1899-1900 9,136,377.52 1900-01 9,018,659.84 1901-02 10,041,662.04 1902-03 11,803,298.00 1903-04 12,437,927.95 1904-05 11,591,656.70 1905-06 13,275,623.17 1906-07 11,433,595.61 1907-08 16,480,921.60 1908-09 12,935,098.62 1909-10 16,325,229.78 1910-11 18,327,198.73 1911-12 19,951,815.23 1912-13 25,655,340.42 1913-14 24,732,198.57

The variations in the amount of duties collected are due (1) to the growth of imports and (2) to changes in tariff rates.

IMPORTS AND EXPORTS

1842. 1850. Imports $8,075,840 $6,905,400 Exports 1,714,644 1,744,772 Ocean vessels-- Number 137 222 Tonnage 41,319 46,867 Exports-- Butter (lb.) 595,840 Cheese (boxes) 44 Breadstuffs (bushels), flour reduced to terms of wheat 1,091,435 Inland vessels--- Number 3,726 Tonnage 391,520

1860. Imports $15,334,010 Exports 6,020,715 Ocean vessels--number 259 Ocean vessels--tonnage 121,559 Inland vessels--number 4,558 Inland vessels--tonnage 348,652 Exports--Butter (lb.) 2,598,262 Exports--Cheese (boxes) 301 Exports--Breadstuffs (bushels) 4,563,206 Imports--Teas (lb.) 1,577,179 Imports--Raw sugar (lb.) 18,862,536

1870. Imports $25,680,814 Exports 19,100,413 Ocean vessels--number 680 Ocean vessels--tonnage 316,846 Inland vessels--number 6,345 Inland vessels--tonnage 819,476 Exports--Butter (lb.) 8,127,360 Exports--Cheese (boxes) 99,576 Exports--Breadstuffs (bushels) 13,691,310 Exports--Lumber (value) 528,793 Imports--Teas (lb.) 6,269,071 Imports--Raw sugar (lb.) 51,857,741

1880. Imports $37,073,068 Exports 30,224,673 Ocean vessels--number 710 Ocean vessels---tonnage 628,271 Inland vessels--number 6,489 Inland vessels--tonnage 1,044,380 Exports--Butter (lb.) 20,547,840 Exports--Cheese (boxes) 514,964 Exports--Breadstuffs (bushels) 26,091,130 Exports--Cattle 35,070 Exports--Sheep 64,592 Exports--Lumber (value) 673,481 Exports--Phosphates (tons) 8,667 Imports--Teas (lb.) 4,339,182 Imports--Raw sugar (lb.) 82,551,474

1890. Imports $45,934,406 Exports 31,660,216 Ocean vessels--number 746 Ocean vessels--tonnage 930,332 Inland vessels--number 5,162 Inland vessels--tonnage 966,959 Exports--Butter (lb.) 3,243,920 Exports--Cheese (boxes) 1,379,684 Exports--Breadstuffs (bushels) 13,550,974 Exports--Cattle 123,136 Exports--Sheep 43,135 Exports--Lumber (value) 3,039,963 Exports--Phosphates (tons) 23,488 Imports--Teas (lb.) 7,020,076 Imports--Raw sugar (lb.) 136,874,550

PORT OF MONTREAL

Combined Statement Showing the Number and Tonnage of all Vessels that Arrived in Port During Ten Years--1901 to 1913:

Trans-Atlantic Maritime Provinces Inland Grand Total Year Vessels Tonnage Vessels Tonnage Vessels Tonnage Vessels Tonnage

1901 449 1,016,918 293 436,130 8,450 1,683,186 9,192 3,136,334 1902 436 1,072,538 322 468,734 9,395 1,885,150 10,153 3,426,522 1903 484 1,418,156 318 472,748 15,358 2,415,791 16,140 4,306,695 1904 417 1,270,640 379 586,057 10,063 2,354,975 10,859 4,211,672 1905 442 1,354,829 391 585,227 11,112 2,785,551 11,945 4,725,607 1906 439 1,380,835 381 592,388 12,557 3,095,174 13,377 5,068,395 1907 381 1,339,014 361 586,972 14,420 3,620,950 15,161 5,546,936 1908 364 1,315,688 375 642,916 12,434 3,589,124 13,173 5,548,028 1909 371 1,436,963 299 474,450 10,991 3,146,494 11,661 5,057,907 1910 411 1,658,414 336 574,808 13,636 4,327,799 14,383 6,561,021 1911 401 1,695,613 361 642,639 11,670 4,275,019 12,432 6,613,271 1912 409 1,775,487 327 628,437 12,586 4,649,767 13,322 7,053,691 1913 477 2,020,333 343 670,202 13,426 5,703,467 14,246 8,394,002

Statement Showing Classification of Vessels that Arrived in Port for Ten Years, from the Lower St. Lawrence and Martime Provinces.

Steamships Barques Schooners Grand Total Year No. Tonnage No. Tonnage No. Tonnage Nos. Tonnage

1901 282 434,140 1 999 10 991 293 436,130 1902 311 406,671 ---- ---- 11 1,063 322 468,734 1903 303 468,100 ---- ---- 15 4,648 318 472,748 1904 366 582,819 ---- ---- 13 3,238 379 586,057 1905 364 580,485 ---- ---- 26 4,116 391 585,127 1906 367 588,980 ---- ---- 14 3,408 381 592,388 1907 343 579,930 ---- ---- 18 7,042 361 586,972 1908 350 640,244 ---- ---- 25 2,672 375 642,916 1909 273 470,936 ---- ---- 26 3,514 299 474,450 1910 346 572,022 ---- ---- 30 2,786 336 574,808 1911 330 639,752 ---- ---- 31 2,887 361 642,639 1912 292 625,099 ---- ---- 35 3,388 327 628,457 1913 299 666,053 ---- ---- 44 4,149 343 670,202

FOOTNOTES:

[1] “Canadian Antiquarian,” 1873, Vol. II, pp. 16-21.

[2] The Dock, one of the largest yet built, is capable of docking the largest existing vessel in the British Navy. It is of the double-sided self-docking type, on the principle known as the “bolted sectional.” It consists of a pontoon or lifting portion of the dock, and two parallel side walls, built on to and forming part of the same, and the whole length is divided into three complete and separate sections, which, when bolted together, form the complete dock. These sections are so arranged that when the dock is separated into its three parts, any two of them can dock the remaining third between them. For this purpose each section is fitted with its own independent pumping machinery, so that it can also act as an independent unit.

The general dimensions of the dock are as follows:--

Ft. In. Length over platforms 600 0 Length over pontoons 550 6 Width over all 135 0 Depth of pontoon at center 17 0 Length of side walls 470 6 Height of side walls above pontoon deck 42 0 Width of side walls at base 17 6 Width of side walls at top 12 6 Clear width between roller fenders 100 0 Draught of vessel 27 6 Lifting capacity 25,000 tons

The construction of the dock is such as to make it suitable for lifting a modern British battleship, the pontoon deck being specially stiffened to allow it to support a large portion of the weight of the vessel on side or bilge, as well as central, keels.

In the season of 1914, 27 vessels were repaired.

In addition a ship building yard has been built in 1914 with five or six miles of railroad connecting with the C.P.R., C.N.R., and G.T.R. lines. At present a gigantic million dollar ice breaker, the second in the world, is being built by this firm for the Dominion government to be launched in 1915. In addition a bucket dredge costing $835,000 has been ordered by the Government for delivery in June, 1916.