At a second pine site mentioned both in the French records and by Samuel Holland, Malpeque Bay, because of the survival of the landlord’s papers in an intact archive in England”, we have, at least for part of the Bay shoreline — Lot 13, fronting the north-west corner of the bay — an interesting sequence of records on the changing status of pine in that area: In 1769 Charles Morris, surveying the eastern frontage of the lot, listed ’Pine’ as one of the trees comprising the forest on the uncleared areas near the shores of Richmond Bay [i.e. Malpeque Bay].28 Twenty-five years later the landlord’s agent Robert Gray also noted ”very lofty pine” as an element of what appears to have been a mixed hardwood forest on "the whole east end of the lot for three or four miles back”29. However, in 1815 the new agent, James B. Palmer, in referring to the Richmond Bay frontage of the lot, wrote that ”the valuable timber", including the ’Pine’, had been ”nearly all plundered”3°. A year later he reported that the western half of the lot still had valuable timber on it — at one spot on an enclosed map he noted "plenty of pine timber"31 — but he commented that it was under increasing pressure from illegal logging”. Twenty-four years later, when the proprietor himself, Sir George Seymour, was finally able to visit Lot 13, he noted only ”a few pines left” on the "reserved land" on the eastern side of the lot”, while in the extreme west, roughly in the

Bond had been given as the law directs". The Diadem was escorted to Halifax and a few months later was lost at sea. Lockerby speculates that Livingstone was also involved in this earlier exploitation of the pines at Three Rivers. [Lockerby's references: Captain's Journal of HMS Magdalene, PRO, Admiralty 51/3893, entries for 11 October - 11 November 1765; Captain’s Journal of HMS Senegal, PRO 51/885, entries for 11 October - 21 November 1765; the notice of the Diadem‘s loss at sea is contained in: Francklin to Lords Commissioners of Trade and Plantations, 22 November 1766, CO 217/21, pp. 384—385v.]

27 Seymour of Ragley Collection, Warwickshire County Record Office, Warwick CR114A/380. Selective items are in the Prince Edward Island PARO (Acc. 3485/1).

25 Morris 1769. Over a century later, [Lawson] (1877-1878) also commented that "originally the country around Port Hill was covered with very large and lofty pines".

29 Gray 1793, see also Sobey (1997), (p. 29). He especially

commented on the forests (including “lofty pines“) on the ridge of land north of the Trout River, along which he trekked.

3° Palmer 1815.

3' In the present-day Victoria West area.

32 Palmer1816. 33 The "reserved land” lay between the mouths of the present Trout River and Yeos Creek (see Sobey 2003 and PARO, Maps 0,497 and 0,011).

158

area where Palmer had noted ”plenty of pine timber”, Seymour could only record "a few pines still standing and traces of mine having been plundered"34.

l have found no further specific mention of the pines at Captain Holland's third site, Murray Harbour, but we do have evidence of the occurrence of ’pine’ (probably mostly white pine) at a number of other places (see Figure 1-1, from west to east): in the Miminegash and Alberton areas“, more specifically, on Savage [now Oulton] Island, in Cascumpec Bay“; in Lots 1037 and 1138; in the Wilmot River valley”; at Springfield“; in the New London Bay area“; at Wheatley River in Lot 2442; in the Brackley Point area”; near the mill-site at Stanhope“, and at another spot on Lot 34, probably near the Hillsborough River“; in Lots 58, 60 and 62 generally“; at Point Prim“, more specifically at Newtown in Lot 5748, and on the portage crossing

34

Seymour 1840.

35 [Lawson] 1877-1878.

3'5 Lawson 1851.

37 Prendergast 1834.

3“ Craswell 8. Anderson 1856; [Lawson] 1877-1878. The pine that Craswell & Anderson recorded was somewhere within the part

of Lot 11 that lay to the east of the Western Road.

39 Schurman(1819, 1824). ‘0 Bain 1868-1884 (in 1873). At another date in his 'Notes’ (16 Dec. 1880) Bain describes pine as an element of the forest at a particular site but he does not record where it was. I presume it was somewhere within walking distance of his home at York Point.

‘1 Chappell 1775-1818 (in 1775 and 1776); Curtis 1775; [Lawson] 1877-1878. Curtis records ”pine of different quality" occurring, ‘quality‘ probably meaning species or kind, and since he does not mention the other conifers as occurring at New London, it is just possible that he is using ‘pine' in the sense of conifers in general.

‘2 Land Commission 1875: evidence of Henry Lawson.

‘3 [Lawson] 1877-1878.

44

Lawson post 1777. PARO Map 0,737E (of unknown date but clearly early) shows a mill near the mouth of what is now Bells Creek).

‘5 Stewart 1783. Peter Stewart does not state the location of the site. However, it is likely to have been near the 1000 acres that he had leased in the south-east corner of Lot 34, shown on PARO Map 0,074.

‘6 Selkirk (1809) referred to a contract for the extraction of pine

from “Lots 58, 60 and part of Lot 62” ‘7 [Lawson] 1877-1878.

‘5 Macphail 1939.