Chapter One

561

Chapter OneThe Millstream Valley, Kings County, New Brunswick and the North West Arm, Cape Breton in Historical Context

I

Millstream Valley, Kings County, New BrunswickIntroduction and Historiography

The idea for this book came about as the result of suggestions made to the author that a scholarly examination of Kings County history was needed. The author is a descendant of the McEwen and Cook families from the Carsonville area of the Millstream. As a professional historian he determined that researching the history of the Millstream would help him to understand his Kings County roots better and, at the same time, would add to the constantly developing and evolving historical literature pertaining to settlement and development in, more specifically, Kings County; and, more broadly, the Province of New Brunswick. It would also, from a wider perspective, contribute to the literature of settlement pertaining to various regions and rural communities across North America. It is placing this study within this broader framework and larger historical context that gives the work its significance.

This book takes a historiographical look at the history of the Millstream Valley from its first European settlement in the 1780s to the present day. Several previous works have been written on the area by various individuals and community groups.. Largely these works have been essentially oral history; that is, compilations of stories as told by local residents.[endnoteRef:1] As such, they rely heavily on the accuracy and trustworthiness of the information provided by these residents which may or may not have a basis in historical fact. [1: See Berwick-Mt. Middleton Womens Institute comp., Echoes of the Past: From the Millstream and Surrounding Areas, (Berwick-Mt. Middleton: Berwick-Mt. Middleton Womens Institute, 1984); See also Horace R. Macaulay comp., Historical Writings of Lower Millstream, Kings County, New Brunswick, (Ottawa: Horace R. Macaulay, 2003).]

Two examples of these histories are Echoes of the Past which was compiled by the Millstream Womens Institute and a second by Horace Macaulay. Macaulay declares that for his book the term compiler/writer would be more appropriate than author in my attempt to summarize relevant material to complete the story.[endnoteRef:2] Essentially, both Macaulay and the Womens Institute assembled a collection of stories from the past and put them together as a book, not taking into account any possible biases that some of these stories might have. For example, an article written by a member of one of the Millstreams wealthiest families.[endnoteRef:3] As such one might have only discussed the happenings of the better off families in that area; the less well off families may not have received a mention. Neither of these books provide the reader with the two components that comprise a modern day historiographical approach: interpretation and analysis. [2: Macaulay comp., Historical Writings of Lower Millstream, iv.] [3: Macaulay comp., Historical Writings of Lower Millstream, 94-109.]

As compilations of oral history or oral tradition as related by some local residents, these books provide significant information of great local interest. The two books mentioned above and others provide a very useful and highly valued addition to local knowledge of the area, its people, economy and culture. While local histories of this type are also of interest to the scholar, they lack the detailed analysis which could paint, for the general reader and researcher alike, a more realistic and accurate picture of life in the Millstream valley of Kings County in the period 1784 to 2001.

Books such as Echoes of the Past, Grace Aitons book The Story of Sussex and Vicinity produced by the Kings County Historical and Archival Society in the early 1960s and Horace R. Macaulays book Historical Writings of Lower Millstream which was self-published, are all examples of local histories. These works are reflective of the appearance of community-sponsored local histories in communities all across Canada. According to historian Paul Voisey in his assessment of the state of rural local history in Western Canada, governments urged everyone to become more historically minded and provided funds for local history projects.[endnoteRef:4] The Echoes of the Past book was a New Brunswick Bicentennial project funded by the provincial government. [4: Paul Voisey, Rural Local History and the Prairie West, in R. Douglas Francis and Howard Palmer, eds., The Prairie West: Historical Readings, Second Edition, (Edmonton: Pica Pica Press, 1992), 504.]

According to Voisey, A desperate sense that important links to the past would soon be obliterated launched many local history societies.[endnoteRef:5] This may have been the case with the Kings County Historical Society which published Grace Aitons book. The attention of many of these local histories was focused upon the earlier settlement period, the era most clearly threatened with loss and the one believed most important in fostering local identity. Thus the purposes of community-sponsored local history differed radically from those of the scholar.[endnoteRef:6] [5: Voisey, Rural Local History, 504.] [6: Voisey, Rural Local History, 504.]

One of the problems sponsors face when setting out to publish one of these community-sponsored local histories is that many residents in rural communities such as the Millstream often have difficulty in determining how to proceed with their projects. This may have been the case with the three books just mentioned. According to Paul Voisey, in his discussion of the writing of community histories in the Prairie West and, more specifically, the community of Vulcan, Alberta, In most places no one had ever researched and written anything as long as a book, but they turned to the prairie tradition of cooperative enterprise; coordinating committees asked members of the community to write brief histories of their own families, and they did so largely from oral tradition rather than documents.[endnoteRef:7] The author believes that Voiseys findings on the Prairies are equally valid here in New Brunswick. The books so far produced on the history of the Millstream appear to have been dependent upon limited church, school and organization records and on the memories of local residents. As Voisey notes in his description of histories prepared by local groups, Sometimes the committee also asked contributors for brief institutional biographies; local teachers wrote about schools and local ministers about churches. The typical history book committee solicited four hundred contributions, two-thirds of them family biographies.[endnoteRef:8] Voisey notes that many professional historians dismiss the results of these community histories; however, he says that many of these local history societies, such as the Kings County Historical Society, wrote for themselves and did not expect anyone outside the community to read their books, save former residents.[endnoteRef:9] Many of these local histories, he says, suited local purposes very well. These books, such as the three on the Millstream, are loaded with names, landmarks, incidents, anecdotes, and pictures, they preserved grandmothers story, drew personal links between past and present, and bolstered local identity.[endnoteRef:10] [7: Voisey, Rural Local History, 504.] [8: Voisey, Rural Local History, 504.] [9: Voisey, Rural Local History, 504-505.] [10: Voisey, Rural Local History, 505.]

The author of this book seeks to provide both an interpretation and an analysis of settlement and social life in the Millstream valley in the period 1784-2001. The research and findings in this book are based upon the authors belief that: interpretation of the past is a worthwhile undertaking; that the past is not dead but can be a very important tool to understanding the present; and that modern historiography offers the appropriate analytical methods to understand and interpret the past.

Given these beliefs the author set out to analyze issues affecting settlement of the Millstream area. First, to interpret the process by which the area was settled as a means of understanding who settled, where they settled, when they settled, what lands they obtained and why they received these lands. Secondly, to provide a picture of the physical environment and its impact on the process of settlement, settlement patterns and on economic activity. For example, part of the analysis will involve an examination of the influence of soil quality on settlement and economic well being. Lastly, the book will discuss society on the Millstream as it evolved in the period between the initial settlement of the area in the 1780s and 1900. To do this, the book will be limited to the first three to five generations of families along the Millstream.

By an examination of these factors one can come to some conclusions as to why families would have chosen to settle where they did. Who settled where and why? That is a question that this book will seek to answer. Did families choose particular parcels of land because they sought to make a living off of farming or lumbering, did they choose it to be close to other kin or did they choose it for both reasons? Did the time of arrival and time of receipt of their land grants have a significant impact on their future lot in life?

In general, is there a pattern to the way that families settled in the area? In an effort to better understand this pattern a selection of local families and their ties to other families in the Millstream from 1784 onward will be examined through the use of archival materials, census data, and local histories and genealogies. One of the major factors to be considered will be an analysis of the extent to which families persisted (or remained in the area). A number of families departed(or outmigrated from) the area. Were there some economic reasons for these families either staying or going?

Religion, politics, ethnicity and economic pursuits all play important roles in the development and sustainability of all rural communities The author will discuss the ethnic and religious composition of the families settled in this valley. He will touch upon, to the extent possible, the role that political representatives in the area during this period had on the process of settlement. The economic structure of the local family households will be analyzed and measured primarily by examining the occupational backgrounds of the families. The social life and social structure, including such issues as education and literacy, will be considered as will land and home ownership and the relative wealth or lack thereof of the families. There will also be a discussion of the manner in which settlers would have interacted socially with one another. Were there any significant social distinctions between the settlers? The book will end with a concluding chapter which will offer a brief synopsis of the findings of the book.

A note needs to be made at this stage about the geographic area that the Millstream valley encompasses. For the purposes of this book, the area that will be examined starts at Apohaqui at the junction of the Millstream and Kennebecasis Rivers. The area to be studied is focused in the direction of the communities of Lower Millstream and Berwick; and it terminates at the Head of Millstream and Cosman Settlement, where the headwaters of the Millstream River can be found. The following communities will also be mentioned in this discussion: Carsonville, Pleasant Ridge, Centre Millstream (or Centreville), Summerfield, Gibbon, Dubee Settlement, Dingley Cooch and Perry Settlement. In a broader sense, the book is looking at settlement in the Millstream watershed.

The primary purpose of this chapter is to place this study of the Millstream Area of Kings County, which is essentially an exercise in historical demography[endnoteRef:11], within the broader historical context of works dealing with settlement and socioeconomic developments in other geographic locales of North America. The author has already illustrated the works of several local historians and has described what their findings were. The writer will explain in the following pages what it is he is doing and how this methodology is similar and different from the works of the local historians; and he will demonstrate why this book is thought to be significant. The work will then be put into the overall context of what professional historians, geographers, sociologists, economists and others, have found for different regions of North America and will show where this work fits in from a historiographical perspective.[endnoteRef:12] [11: Historical Demography, for the layperson, is simply, the study of past populations. This study might also, based upon its focus on land settlement, be seen as a work in Historical Geography.] [12: The word Historiographical, better known to academic historians as Historiography is, in effect, another term for an examination of all the literature that is pertinent to the individual historians research topic. It simply is a synonym for a literature review which is something most frequently seen in academia. Because of its usefulness and relevance to the author it will be used fairly frequently throughout the book. In a more complex manner historiography can also relate to the type of historical philosophy that the researcher employs in their work. Post-Modernism is a type of historical philosophy (it is utilized in other disciplines as well); however, because of its complexity, it will not be employed or examined in this work. There are some historians cited in this book whose research is based on Marxist thought; however these sources are limited. Most notable in their usage of Marxist philosophy is Rusty Bittermann.]

The general hypothesis of this book is that the Millstream area was both culturally and economically diverse and was one in which interfaith and interethnic marriage played a significant role in bringing families of different ethnic and religious persuasions, together. The author also believes that the social structure that developed in the area was also the result of socioeconomic factors such as education level and occupation as much as it was based upon ethnicity and religion. There were distinctions amongst the different ethnic and religious groups which will be noted in this book, but the examples of interfaith marriage in this work suggest that the area was not as socially stratified as other areas which have been studied elsewhere in North America. This issue has been studied extensively and will be discussed later in this chapter.

The second purpose of this chapter, is to describe the methodology (research method) that the book will employ. There were a total of 304 land grants distributed throughout the Millstream area in the period for which this study encompasses- the years 1784 to 1987. Together with this, there were an inanimate number of settlers listed in the Censuses of 1851, 1881, 1901 and 1911 who did not receive land grants. Rather, these families either purchased land from one of the earlier settlers or they inherited land from other family members through the means of probate records which will be a focus of Chapter Two. A large cross-section of these grants were located in portions of Studholm, Havelock and Sussex parishes. These grants comprise all of the land constituting the overall geographical area of the study which the author selected based upon geographical and topographical factors. These are grants for which there is available information in the PANB. Appendix 2 will be the basis for a discussion of those families who purchased or inherited land who are listed in the censuses of 1851, 1881, 1901 and 1911.

The settlers discussed in this work were selected from three separate and distinct sources- off of the land grant maps, out of the Land Grant Records, and out of the Land Petition Records, all found at the Provincial Archives of New Brunswick, as is evidenced by Appendices 1 and 2; secondly, out of the census, as indicated by information provided in Appendices 5, 6, and 7; and, lastly, from Birth and Marriage Records as found in Appendix 8. To clarify: Appendix 1 contains data representative of those families who arrived at an earlier date and were able to obtain land grants; and Appendix 2 is data which is representative of those families who either purchased or inherited land when they had arrived in the area at a later date and realized that all the available land grants had already been distributed. Therefore, there were two groups of settler families which can be identified: those that received land grants and a second group, some related to the grantee families and some not, who either obtained land through deed of purchase or inherited it through probate will. This cross-section of these local families is based upon the various ethnic, religious and occupational characteristics which distinguished each settler from one another.

These settler families are being utilized as a representative cross-section of society on the Millstream. The basic purpose, in examining these families, is to demonstrate that the group was both culturally and economically diverse, and, therefore, truly representative of the local population in Kings County and, for that matter, the population of New Brunswick as a whole. This book, as was stated earlier, will focus upon the process of settlement in all of the major communities situated in the Millstream both big and small. It is hoped that this will paint a picture for the reader of what the society was like at the time and what life was like for the average settler.

The author would note here, for the readers interest, the names of a few of the families from each community.[endnoteRef:13] From Apohaqui and Lower Millstream are included the Sharps and Fosters(the Foster family had another land grant at Carsonville and the Sharps had two grants in the community of Gibbon). In reference to Gibbon there was also the Little family which had two grants in that area and another lot in Dingley Cooch. Also located in the Apohaqui/Lower Millstream area was the Good family(the Goods, as well, possessed other land grants at Summerfield, Head of Millstream and just inside the Kings County boundary not too far from Snider Mountain which is not included in this study). The Ryan family also had a significant presence in the area- in Apohaqui, Lower Millstream and further upriver.The Ryans had grants of land in Lower Millstream, Carsonville, Head Of Millstream, Dubee Settlement and Centre Millstream. The McLeods too, were present in Apohaqui and Lower Millstream; they also owned land in Carsonville. [13: For a more complete list of family names in the local community see the Land Grant Records in Appendix 1; the Census records in Appendices 5, 6, and 7; and the Birth and Marriage records in Appendix 8.]

Some other notable names include: in the Berwick area, the Fenwick and Kierstead families; from Head of Millstream, the Hayes and McMillan families; from Cosman Settlement the Cosman and Elder families; from Queensville, the Gaileys and Kelsoes; from Perry Settlement, the Perrys and Elliotts; from Dingley Cooch the ODonnells and Goggins; and, lastly, from the community of Carsonville, the Carsons, Beldings, Spicers, Schofields and Northrups. The Northrups (See Map #...) also had land grants located within the study area not far from both Snider Mountain and from the Kings/Queens County line and the parish boundary between Studholm and Brunswick parishes. These families are representative of the first five generations of families settled along the Millstream as noted by the Land Grant Maps.[endnoteRef:14] [14: See Crown Grant Maps #129, 130 and 140.]

For the reader it should be noted that a certain percentage of families persisted only until 1851 or prior to that date. Those families or settlers that did not persist up until 1851 had likely outmigrated from the area in search of economic opportunities elsewhere. Other settlers would, of course, have died, which, in certain circumstances, would have explained why those surnames were not present in later censuses. This type of information can be gleaned from an examination of the Census of 1851 for Kings County, Studholm Parish. Some other families, constituting another percentile of the total immigrant population settling the local area , persisted until 1881 as noted in the 1881 Census for Kings County, Studholm Parish. Some of those 1881 families had been present in 1851 while others had newly migrated into or outmigrated from, the area. Yet other families, constituting the remaining percentile, some having, as well, been new arrivals in the area and others, having been present at the time of both the 1851 and 1881 Censuses, had persisted up until 1901 and 1911 as data from these two censuses would indicate. Throughout each census there can be found examples of families that had either persisted or outmigrated from the area. It is of interest to note the percentages of families that either persisted, outmigrated or had shrunken in size over the course of these censuses due to natural decrease ie. deaths in the family. Many of these family names are still present in the Millstream area up to the present(2006). An examination of the 2001 Census would suggest this. The persistence of certain local families is also to be noted in the cemetery records found online at the Provincial Archives of New Brunswick website. These are issues that will be examined as a part of a more detailed analysis which is provided in chapters two, three and four. The objective of this book, is to examine the first five generations of settlement on the Millstream to 1900 and then to look ahead another five generations at the persistence of the pioneers descendants in the area. What is the historical significance of this?

The utilization of the cross-sectional approach, based upon the random selection of families extracted from data found in the land grant records, census records and the birth and marriage records, is a more scientific way of choosing families. This way there is more likelihood that you will achieve some semblance of a balance between wealthy families, poor families and middling families. The problem with not doing it this way and picking families through the process of talking to older people in the communities is that those older people have their personal biases as to who would be worthy of mention in a book such as this and who would not be. Many of these older residents would probably look upon the wealthy families favourably and look down upon the less well off ones. That is exactly the problem with not using a scientific approach.

The authors approach to this study of the Millstream has been greatly influenced by his earlier study on the North West Arm area of Cape Breton, entitled, Settlement, Family Persistence and Wealth in the North West Arm Area, Cape Breton, 1785-1835. Many of the concepts in this work here are similar to those utilized in the Cape Breton study.[endnoteRef:15] The author has also been influenced by similar works completed in Canada and the United States, a number of which will be referred to in this and subsequent chapters. In a similar manner to these works, the author is using size or number of land grants as one indicator of the wealth of individual families. There is a significant amount of historical literature which asserts the importance of land ownership as the prime measure of an individuals or familys wealth. It is useful here to discuss some of this literature and to show where this book fits in. [15: See Michael R. Ball, Settlement, Family Persistence and Wealth in the North West Arm Area, Cape Breton 1785 to 1835, (MA Thesis, University of New Brunswick, 2001).]

Sociologist Gordon Darroch and Economist Lee Soltow suggest in a 1994 study that land and home ownership and, for that matter, any type of property ownership, was the most important source of wealth for settlers in nineteenth-century Ontario.[endnoteRef:16] The author of this book agrees with this position and believes that this is most likely the case for the Millstream area as well. To this end, the relationship between patterns of landholding (or, more generally, property holding, which land is a constituent part of) and the question of whether any social/economic distinctions, if any, developed based on these patterns will be examined. The methodology used in looking at land holding patterns in rural communities in nineteenth-century Ontario will be used in examining issues of landholding and wealth amongst the families on the Millstream. The Ontario study does a number of things, the most significant of which is to look at the evolution of social/economic distinctions by examining the process of acquiring land and the differentiation in terms of acreage owned. This book will include a discussion of this process for the Millstream area.[endnoteRef:17] [16: Gordon Darroch and Lee Soltow, Property and Inequality in Victorian Ontario: Structural Patterns and Cultural Communities in the 1871 Census, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), 3.] [17: Darroch and Soltow, Property and Inequality in Victorian Ontario, 201.]

Historian T.W. Acheson, in a study which examines the social and economic characteristics of agriculture in New Brunswick in the 19th century argues that the majority of New Brunswick farmers could be viewed as rational men and women who pursued those economic activities which would have resulted in the highest return for their efforts, be it farming, lumbering or any other activity.[endnoteRef:18] The author believes that Achesons conclusions are equally applicable on the Millstream. Another historian, Beatrice Craig, in a study examining the Upper St. John River Valley appears to agree with Achesons assessment.[endnoteRef:19] This book will show that the people of the Millstream valley were no different than anyone else in New Brunswick in terms of the practical approach that each family took in terms of attempting to become the ideal, that is, completely self-sufficient. Some studies done in areas across North America, however, suggest that complete self-sufficiency is not possible. Craig herself suggests that farmers in New Brunswick, did not constitute a homogeneous class of self-sufficient households with tenuous relations to the market.[endnoteRef:20] Acheson points out that agriculture was the most significant sector of the provincial economy; however, he also believes that even though much of the output of the agriculture industry went towards the support of family subsistence, there were, in his opinion, few farms that could be seen as self-sufficient.[endnoteRef:21] [18: T. W. Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture at the End of the Colonial Era: A Reassessment, in Kris Inwood ed., Farm, Factory and Fortune: New Studies in the Economic History of the Maritime Provinces, (Fredericton: Acadiensis Press, 1993), 41.] [19: Beatrice Craig, Agriculture in a Pioneer Region: The Upper St. John River Valley in the first half of the 19th Century, in Inwood ed., Farm, Factory and Fortune, 36.] [20: Craig, Agriculture in a Pioneer Region, 36.] [21: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 41.]

This was likely the case in the Millstream valley as well. Most of the families in the Millstream, it will be suggested here, were likely subsistence operations with just enough goods being produced for family needs and with little left over for the market. Many farm families, being flexible, viewed agriculture as one of a number of activities. According to Acheson, Younger men, in particular, participated in the timber trade when more money could be made through this avenue of endeavour[endnoteRef:22]just as they may have fished or operated a mill (of which a number were established along the Millstream, hence the name) or, as Acheson says, when satisfactory opportunities were not available at home, they emigrated to foreign lands.[endnoteRef:23] In the case of the Millstream these foreign lands would either have been other parts of Canada or quite often, the New England States. In later sections of this book the reader will note that some of the original settlers along the Millstream would have moved away making room for the arrival of a new group of settlers, many of whom may have occupied the lands either sold by or abandoned by the original settlers. In the process of examining the first two to three generations of settlement the reader will note that some family names will disappear to be replaced with new ones. Other families, however, may remain in the area over several generations. Did those that persist remain in the area because of economic reasons or because of strong kinship ties? This will be discussed further in future chapters. [22: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 41.] [23: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 41.]

According to T.W. Acheson, the nature and extent of agriculture is linked to the fertility of the soil. This is, he says, a function both of the soil base and of the climatic conditions found in an area.[endnoteRef:24] New Brunswick (and the Millstream is no exception to the general trend across the province) contains a variety of soils interspersed to the point where a single hundred-acre lot may contain several varieties.[endnoteRef:25] The author, in his study of settlement in Cape Breton, found that there was a direct link between soil quality and the wealth and persistence of families in the area. Chapter Two will examine the soils and topography of the Millstream Valley in greater detail and will draw relationships between the settlement pattern, economic activity and soil quality. Acheson says that in the 19th century agriculture was almost always a local affair.[endnoteRef:26] The nature of the soils and their availability for agricultural use, farming was so different even between adjoining parishes ie. Studholm and Havelock parishes to give an example from the area that this book covers, that, he says, it is impossible to speak of the province as a whole or even a significant part of it, as being a common agricultural community.[endnoteRef:27] Rather, economic specialization occurred rapidly in most parts of the province, typically within a generation of the initial settlement of the parish.[endnoteRef:28] In this book the author will provide a description of the soils in the Millstream area; he will illustrate the differences between various locations in the study area; and he will comment on the impact of these differences on wealth accumulation and persistence. [24: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 42.] [25: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 42.] [26: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 43.] [27: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 43.] [28: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 43.]

In areas where the agricultural soil resources were not as good and where there were significant timber resources it will be argued that most farmers were involved in a mix of forestry and subsistence agriculture. Acheson argues that in most cases farm-based income was being supplemented by that received for off-farm operations either in the woods or in nearby villages.[endnoteRef:29] He says that in older areas of settlement, in areas with good agricultural resources, and in almost any parish near a town or city, some form of commercial agriculture was an important element in the incomes of many and, depending on the time and circumstances, perhaps most farmers.[endnoteRef:30] In the early part of the century that commercial agriculture was more often than not a form of barter with neighbouring farmers and local storekeepers.[endnoteRef:31] [29: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 43.] [30: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 43.] [31: Acheson, New Brunswick Agriculture, 43.]

It will be shown that many of the families settled along the Millstream, especially those on the more marginal agricultural land, pursued a number of occupations besides farming in order to sustain themselves. According to historian Rusty Bittermann, he found that, in many instances, the quality of land resources available[endnoteRef:32] combined with, a poverty that diverted labour and capital away from farm improvements and toward the needs of basic sustenance-precluded ever escaping the necessity of engaging in extensive wage work.[endnoteRef:33] In his study on farm households and wage labour in the Northeastern Maritimes Bittermann points out that, to use Cape Breton as an example, there were hundreds of farms in this region of Cape Breton where years after initial settlement their occupants remained heavily reliant on off-farm employment in order to eke out the means of a scanty subsistence.[endnoteRef:34] He points out that While some households made ends meet by combining wage work with the sale of selected farm surpluses, often enough exchanging costly foods like butter and meat for cheaper breadstuffs and fish, there were others which appear to have been exclusively, or almost exclusively, reliant on the sale of labour to meet the costs of household goods and food and to procure seed and animal provisions.[endnoteRef:35] The situation in those areas of the Millstream where the soil is of lower quality is not significantly different than in other areas such as Cape Breton. Many of the families in this area became reliant on wage work to earn a living primarily because they may have had difficulty producing enough goods on their farms to be self-sufficient or to even survive. [32: Rusty Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour in the Northeastern Maritimes in the Early 19th Century, in Daniel Samson ed., Contested Countryside: Rural Workers and Modern Society in Atlantic Canada, 1800-1950, (Fredericton: Acadiensis Press, 1994), 41.] [33: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 41.] [34: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 41.] [35: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 41-42.]

While the soils on the Millstream are on average better than those in the area studied by Bittermann, it is that his model of three household types is applicable on the Millstream. He states, At one end of the spectrum there were households, primarily those of backlanders, where farm returns were chronically and substantially short of household subsistence needs- households that of necessity had to look for income beyond the farm across the full course of the family life cycle.[endnoteRef:36] It is argued that this type of household did, in fact, exist in the backland areas of the Millstream. Bittermann suggests that, On the other extreme there was a significant minority of householdswhere farm production was well in excess of household subsistence needs and the returns from farm-product sales were sufficient to permit substantial reinvestments in agriculture and in other pursuits.[endnoteRef:37] These families, he argues, had the option of working for themselves with their own resources or working for others.[endnoteRef:38] It is believed that most of those that settled on the best lands along the banks of the Millstream did, in fact, fall into this category. Between these two groups of families lay a third group- families whose condition more closely approximated the image of household self-sufficiency permeating so much of the literature on the rural Maritimes- farms on which the value of production roughly matched current needs.[endnoteRef:39] Although these families possessed sufficient resources to make a living off the land, it is apparent, Bittermann says, that the resources of many of these households were not expanding at a rate sufficient to permit all their offspring to begin life in similar circumstances.[endnoteRef:40] He argues that, Demographic growth was forcing, and would force, many individuals from an emerging generation within these middle strata households into participation in the labour force.[endnoteRef:41] [36: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 43.] [37: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 43-45.] [38: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 45.] [39: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 45.] [40: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 45.] [41: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 45.]

Throughout the 19th century, according to Bittermann, substantial numbers of the members of farm households situated in the northeastern Maritimes- new settlers, backlanders (along with others whose farm resources were chronically insufficient for household needs), and some of the offspring of middle-strata households- necessarily had to maintain a significant and regular involvement in the labour force despite their access to extensive tracts of land.[endnoteRef:42] Added in with these people, were many who were drawn for one reason or another by the opportunities afforded by off-farm work,[endnoteRef:43] people whom, Bittermann says, might move in and out of the work force at will, alternately deriving a living from farm resources or choosing to participate in the labour force.[endnoteRef:44] It was likely that way in the Millstream as well. [42: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 45.] [43: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 45.] [44: Bittermann, Farm Households and Wage Labour, 45.]

As a community study, this book will also use genealogical records and sources as a basis for understanding the evolution of life on the Millstream. Geographer Randy Widdis suggests that in terms of writing a community history the genealogical approach is essential as it is one of the best ways to relate individuals to their families and socio-economic and physical environments.[endnoteRef:45]According to Widdis, Well-documented genealogies enable us to study the mobility experiences of pioneer families and their descendants and, when linked with other records, also allow us to trace land ownership, occupation, and other economic and demographic indicators.[endnoteRef:46] In his work, Widdis cites another study by Bruce Elliott which examines Irish migration to Canada. Elliotts study, according to Widdis, is the major Canadian example of large-scale life-course analysis using a genealogical method.[endnoteRef:47] Widdis points out that Elliotts study, concentrates on a well-defined group who shared a common origin and left good records of themselves, making it possible to locate, identify, and trace their experiences.[endnoteRef:48] Widdis says that the success of Elliotts work strengthens the cause of the genealogical approach to the study of migration.[endnoteRef:49] [45: Randy William Widdis, With Scarcely a Ripple: Anglo-Canadian Migration into the United States and Western Canada 1880-1920, (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 1998), 85.] [46: Widdis, With Scarcely a Ripple, 85.] [47: Bruce Elliott, Irish Migrants in the Canadas: A New Approach, (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 1988) cited in Widdis, With Scarcely a Ripple, 85. It might be noted here that there were a number of settlers of Irish origin in the Millstream area and these settlers will be discussed in future chapters. ] [48: Widdis, With Scarcely a Ripple, 85.] [49: Widdis, With Scarcely a Ripple, 85.]

Randy Widdis emphasizes the significance of the genealogical investigation of persistence and the development of community as researchers increasingly realize that despite the tremendous mobility that characterized nineteenth-century North America, many individuals remained in place and played a key role in the development of community, particularly in the rural context.[endnoteRef:50] Widdis does raise some concerns about the use of genealogies, however. He says that they can be criticized on several grounds as to their representativeness.[endnoteRef:51] Genealogies, in Randy Widdiss view, are secondary compilations based on primary sources and many of the earlier genealogies are highly unreliable, reflecting the poor state of record collection techniques that existed in the past.[endnoteRef:52] Widdis states that The majority of published genealogies are often testimonies to social status and, in a minority of cases, religious or racial purity. Recent genealogies are more reliable and detailed in nature as researchers take advantage of more sophisticated compilations of records and expand their pedigree charts to include full-scale biographies.[endnoteRef:53] In examining the settlement and persistence (or non-persistence) of families on the Millstream these issues will be taken into account. [50: Widdis, With Scarcely a Ripple, 85-86.] [51: Widdis, With Scarcely a Ripple, 86.] [52: Widdis, With Scarcely a Ripple, 86.] [53: Widdis, With Scarcely a Ripple, 86.]

A study done on Montague Township in Eastern Ontario by historian Glenn Lockwood argues that there was a great deal of interdependence existing between the settlers, both amongst family members and neighbours. One thing that Lockwoods work clearly points out and which the author agrees with, was that sons and their families quite often lived near their fathers farm and the fathers and sons more often than not, worked together and with fellow neighbours at farming. Lockwood argues that Those few farmers without brothers and parents could join with neighbours in mutual chores and bees just as they did when performing statute labour.[endnoteRef:54] It will be shown in this book that the Millstream was a similar case to Montague Township, and, for that matter, to many other rural areas in Canada in that there were many examples of interdependence amongst the local families and their neighbours and of families and neighbours working together for the benefit of the community as a whole. Lockwood also suggests that Although there were examples of poverty, indeed of near-starvation, within Montagues modest general living standard, there was no rigid structure of inequality dividing local society.[endnoteRef:55] [54: Glenn J. Lockwood, Irish Immigrants and the Critical Years in Eastern Ontario: The Case of Montague Township, 1821-1881, in J.K. Johnson and Bruce G. Wilson eds., Historical Essays on Upper Canada: New Perspectives, (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1989), 230.] [55: Lockwood, Irish Immigrants, 231. These findings contradict, most notably, the work of Rusty Bittermann, who found for the Middle River area of Cape Breton that a socio-economically stratified society developed in the area with the later arriving settlers, who were generally poorer, becoming dependent upon the earlier arriving frontland settlers, who were wealthier, for wage labour. See Rusty Bittermann, Economic Stratification and Agrarian Settlement, in Ken Donovan ed., The Island: New Perspectives on Cape Breton History 1713-1990, (Fredericton and Sydney: Acadiensis Press and University College of Cape Breton Press, 1990), 71-87 and Rusty Bittermann, The Hierarchy of the Soil: Land and Labour in a 19th Century Cape Breton Community, in P.A. Buckner and David Frank eds., Atlantic Canada Before Confederation, (Fredericton: Acadiensis Press, 1990), 220-242. Bittermanns MA Thesis at UNB is also useful. For a further examination of this issue one should look at the work of the following: most notably, Beatrice Craig, T.W. Acheson, Stephen Hornsby, Jack Little and James Lemon. For a detailed discussion of the literature pertinent to settlement, the distribution of wealth and socio-economic stratification see Ball, Settlement, Family Persistence and Wealth.]

This book on the Millstream might best be considered a local history. Donald Akenson argues in his study on the settlement of the Irish in Leeds and Lansdowne townships in Eastern Ontario that in interpreting the significance of a local study such as the Millstream, one must first realize that the place was not typical. No community is.[endnoteRef:56] He points out that Even if one took typical to mean average and studied only local societiesthat were close to the average on various major indices (population, age, ethnic source and economic structure), one still would not have analysed a typical community, for most communities were far from being average on all the major indices.[endnoteRef:57] In writing this book on the Millstream the author will be careful not to make too many generalizations based on one small geographic area. It is important to place the findings of the Millstream area within the context of the broader historiography of North America as a whole. By placing this book within the context of this broader literature, this book, and its findings will have much more credibility. In reading and interpreting Akensons work, it becomes evident that you cannot make generalizations based upon an examination of one geographic area. However, the same cannot be said about doing this after looking at a number of different studies. [56: Donald Harman Akenson, The Irish in Ontario: A Study in Rural History, Second Edition, (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 1999), 333.] [57: Akenson, The Irish in Ontario, 333.]

The key, Akenson says, to interpreting a local study is to determine where on the entire spectrum of the provincial experience the particular locale fit.[endnoteRef:58] Akenson states that A set of local studies are like the colours of light that issue from a prism: each is part of the overall provincial picture, but no one colour is typical or average in any meaningful sense. One wants to know where, in the entire visible spectrum, each colour, that is, each community, fit.[endnoteRef:59] When the question of the significance of the specific geographic locale being studied is posed this way, it, according to Akenson, frees the local historian from having to argue that his case-study is more typical (and thus more important) than that of someone else.[endnoteRef:60] Put together, historians who do local studies are attempting to understand the nature of the entire social and economic situation of the province (in this case, New Brunswick).Only in this way, by comparing studies done in other geographic locales can one come to some intelligent conclusions about the society and economy of the Millstream valley. One significant example of a local history is the work of David Gagan.[endnoteRef:61] Donald Akenson praises Gagans book and comments that Given the quality of most local historical writing, it is understandable that Professor Gagan wished to dissociate himself from the local antiquarians and to underscore the fact that his work had a wider purpose than the mere satisfaction of local piety. His work was both a local history and of general significance.[endnoteRef:62] That is what this book on the Millstream seeks to accomplish: to be a local history of general significance. [58: Akenson, The Irish in Ontario, 333.] [59: Akenson, The Irish in Ontario, 333.] [60: Akenson, The Irish in Ontario, 333.] [61: See David Gagan, Hopeful Travellers: Families, Land, and Social Change in Mid-Victorian Peel County, Canada West, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1981).] [62: Akenson, The Irish in Ontario, 333.]

It is not the purpose of this book to discuss every source available (the number of sources being quite voluminous) which deal with the issues of settlement, family persistence, the distribution of wealth and socio-economic stratification. These issues have been dealt with in greater detail elsewhere (see endnote #30). Therefore, this historiographical chapter is only focusing on a discussion of the more significant sources to give the reader a general taste of the work that has been done in these areas and to demonstrate to the reader where this book on the Millstream valley fits in. Geographer Darrell Norris makes an important comment on a significant debate in the historiography of land settlement.[endnoteRef:63] Norris refers to a study done on Mono Township in Ontario by Geographer Cole Harris and his colleagues[endnoteRef:64] which in Norriss interpretation speculates that a predisposition toward social and economic individualism amongemigrants was fuelled by an abundant supply of land and steady demand for labour in pioneer settings.[endnoteRef:65] According to Norris, the authors of this article single out the nuclear family as the paramount social and economic unit of settlement, and regard wider ties of kinship, acquaintance, and community as having been weakened by colonial migration and assimilation.[endnoteRef:66] Norriss work implies that their study argues for a relatively egalitarian society based upon similar farms occupied by nuclear families.[endnoteRef:67] [63: See Darrell A. Norris, Migration, Pioneer Settlement, and the Life Course: The First Families of an Ontario Township, in Johnson and Wilson eds., Historical Essays on Upper Canada, 177.] [64: See R. Cole Harris, Pauline Roulston, and Chris de Freitas, The Settlement of Mono Township, Canadian Geographer, vol. 19 (1975), 10-17.] [65: Norris, Migration, Pioneer Settlement, 177.] [66: Norris, Migration, Pioneer Settlement, 177.] [67: Norris, Migration, Pioneer Settlement, 177.]

That is one side of the debate. To present the other side of the debate, Norris refers to an article by Geographer James Lemon.[endnoteRef:68] Lemons primary argument was, to quote Norris, that, early colonists were predisposed to regard land as wealth, status, and a means of exchange, and that, however cheap and abundant, land was not the neutral equalizing force needed to sustain Harris interpretation of early colonial settlement.[endnoteRef:69] According to Norris, Lemon regards social stratification in the North American colonies as a transplanted earmark of...Englands commercial and agrarian capitalism, not as a consequence of an incipient colonial land shortage.[endnoteRef:70] This debate illustrates two different perspectives on the European rural experience in colonial North America. Norris comments, The first equates individualism, opportunity, family, uniformity, and the backwoods experience. The second stresses stratification, limited social mobility, and a pre-industrial capitalism permeated by the forces of trans-Atlantic staple commerce.[endnoteRef:71] [68: See James T. Lemon, Early Americans and their Social Environment, Journal of Historical Geography, vol. 6 (1980), 115-131.] [69: Norris, Migration, Pioneer Settlement, 177.] [70: Norris, Migration, Pioneer Settlement, 177.] [71: Norris, Migration, Pioneer Settlement, 177.]

The next four chapters will deal with the issue of the extent to which stratification of the Millstream population existed. It will also examine whether if it indeed existed was it related to land availability as is implied by Norris or was it the result of Englands Colonial Lands Policy from the 1780s through to Confederation or was it a combination of both factors.

IINorth West Arm Area, Cape Breton, 1785 to 1900Introduction and Historiography In 1984, two University of South Carolina anthropologists, John W. Adams and Alice Bee Kasakoff, pointed out that a number of town (community) studies, including their own, had determined that "stayers" (those settlers who "persisted" in a particular geographic area) were wealthier than "movers" (or those who emigrated out of the area)1 and, in his 1973 study, Daniel Scott Smith noted an inverse correlation between wealth and the propensity to leave a community after marriage.2 The "stayers", or "persisters", examined in community studies were often descendants of the first to arrive, who were often proprietors given more land than later arrivals and who had a vote on subsequent distributions.3 Adams and Kasakoff have suggested that it was in the best interests of the descendants of the original settlers (the second, third and later generations of a family) to remain in order to get parcels of land, either through the process of 1 John W. Adams and Alice Bee Kasakoff, "Migration and the Family in Colonial New England: The View From Genealogies," Journal of Family History, (Spring, 1984), 29. Some of these town studies include: Linda Auwers Bissell, "From One Generation to Another: Mobility in 17th Century Windsor, Connecticut," William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 31, (1974), 87; Douglas Lamar Jones, Village and Seaport: Migration and Society in Eighteenth Century Massachusetts, (Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1981); and John Waters, "Family, Inheritance, and Migration in Colonial New England: The Evidence from Guilford, Connecticut," William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd Series, vol. 39, (1982), 64-86. For a Canadian example which presents a similar argument for a later period see David Gagan, Land, Population, and Social Change: The Critical Years in Rural Canada West Canadian Historical Review, vol. LIX no. 3, (1978), 293-318. 2 Daniel Scott Smith, "Parental Power and Marriage Patterns: An Analysis of Historical Trends in Hingham, Massachusetts," Journal of Marriage and the Family, vol. 35, (1973), 419-428. 3 Bissell notes that men given smaller grants were more likely to leave Windsor. See Bissell,From one Generation to Another, 87; Adams and Kasakoff, Migration and the Family, 30.

inheritance or through direct sale from one family member to another, just as it was also

in the interests of later arrivals to seek more land elsewhere.[footnoteRef:1] [1: Adams and Kasakoff, Migration and the Family, 30. ]

These assertions by Adams, Kasakoff, Daniel Scott Smith, and others, raise what is to be the fundamental question that this thesis will seek to answer. That is, what relationship, if any, was there between the propensity for certain families to either persist or out-migrate from the area, the manner in which land was distributed among these families and the relative wealth of these families? Using wealth as the primary indicator of status, this study will, further, consider whether the community around the North West Arm of Sydney Harbour, Cape Breton, offers an example of a stratified, market-driven society, as some historians might argue. Or might it be considered to be a fundamentally rough egalitarian and economically self-sufficient society, as others might suggest? In either circumstance, the question is, why or why not? Did settlers persist in the area because they had a "good thing going" economically? Or did they persist because of family and kinship ties in the area? Or, was, in fact, the decision to remain based upon a combination of both factors? In general, what similarities and differences may be found between this community and other, similar, rural communities examined by other researchers both in Canada and elsewhere in North America? The primary focus of this thesis will be on the predominant role land distribution played in creating new or reinforcing existing socio-economic divisions in the community geographically defined by the North West Arm. The concept, or idea, of socioeconomic stratification and its impact on the evolution of communities is one that has been examined by a number of scholars.[footnoteRef:2] In the broader perspective, it should be noted here that the development of socioeconomic divisions within a community is the result of the interaction of a combination of factors, including ethnicity, religion, education, politics, age, sex and land distribution. This study will be conducted with an awareness of this broader context, but will concentrate mainly upon the roles that land distribution and the land acquisition strategies of the settlers in the North West Arm area played in the social and economic development of the area. [2: Most significantly for the purposes of this thesis (although, of course, there are many others), Rusty Bittermann, Robert MacKinnon, Graeme Wynn, Stephen Hornsby, Beatrice Craig, James Lemon and Gary Nash, Duane Ball and Jack Little. ]

The idea for this study has come from the researcher's developing interest in the field of rural history. This thesis takes much of its inspiration from the writings of historian Robert Swierenga, who, in 1981, made a plea for both historians and geographers to respond to what he termed, "the scholarly neglect of rural life" that characterized most of the "new social history".[footnoteRef:3] It also takes its inspiration from the research of historians and historical geographers, Rusty [3: Robert Swierenga, "The New Rural History: Defining the Parameters," The Great Plains Quarterly, vol. 1, (1981), 211-223. ]

Bittermann, Robert A. MacKinnon and Graeme Wynn, who, a decade later, pointed out that, for Canada, at least, there remained a "dearth of detailed work on the rural scene".[footnoteRef:4] [4: Rusty Bittermann, Robert A. MacKinnon and Graeme Wynn, "Of Inequality and Interdependence in the Nova Scotian Countryside, 1850-70," Canadian Historical Review, vol. LXXIV no. 1, (1993), 4.]

An important objective of this thesis is to both broaden our knowledge of and expand upon previous work done in the field of rural history. Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn have commented that, "In the absence of new inquiries, addressed to new questions and informed by the insights and approaches of studies in agricultural history elsewhere, old concepts have survived, neither challenged nor confirmed, to assume the authority of convention".8 In the case of the history of the Maritime provinces, these old concepts can be seen most clearly in the works of the "Golden Age" historians, Lawrence J. Burpee and Daniel C. Harvey.9 Both Burpee and Harvey offered a romanticized vision of rural life in earlier times. Later generations of historians generally accepted this vision, emphasizing the self-sufficiency and independence of nineteenth-century farm households and farm communities. At the heart of their argument lay the assumption that easy access to land offered settlers both security and opportunity and that this, in turn, resulted in an essentially egalitarian rural social structure.10 Real poverty, wrote W. S .MacNutt, in 1965, was an urban ill, "found only in the 8 Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, Of Inequality and Interdependence, 4. 9 Lawrence J. Burpee, "The Golden Age of Nova Scotia," Queen's Quarterly, vol. 36, (1929), 380-94; Daniel C. Harvey, "The Spacious Days of Nova Scotia," Dalhousie Review, vol. 19, (1939), 132-42. For a critique of the Golden Age approach which predates that of Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, see Vernon C. Fowke, The Myth of the Self-Sufficient Canadian Pioneer, Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, vol. LVI series III, (June, 1962), 23-24. 10 Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn,Of Inequality and Interdependence, 2. As they point out, there is an extensive literature which is grounded in this assumption. Much of it takes its inspiration from the work of Frederick Jackson Turner. See, for example, A.R.M. Lowers "The Origins of Democracy in Canada," Canadian Historical Association Report, (1930); J.L. McDougall, "The Frontier School and Canadian History," Canadian Historical Association Report, (1929); and Michael S. Cross, The Frontier Thesis and the Canadas: The Debate on the Impact of the Canadian Environment, (Toronto: Copp Clark, 1970). See also Donald C. Creighton, British North America at Confederation, (Ottawa: King's Printer, 1939). Some of these viewpoints persisted well into the 1960s. See, for example, S.D. Clarks argument in S.D. Clark, The Developing Canadian Community, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1968). more squalid slums of the seaports". He argued that even where the land was of marginal quality, "the country could always produce food". The Maritime region was a region of pioneers, "but pioneering was yielding a modest competence".[footnoteRef:5] [5: W. S. MacNutt, The Atlantic Provinces: The Emergence of Colonial Society, 1712 to 1857, (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Ltd., 1965), 267. ]

Historians in more recent years have begun to challenge the work of these earlier scholars. Yet as early as the 1960s, Vernon Fowke concluded that in many agricultural communities the degree of self-sufficiency had been significantly less than commonly assumed by historians. Pioneer agricultural self-sufficiency, he argued, had been, and remained, a persistently fostered Canadian myth.[footnoteRef:6] As Daniel Samson has noted, Fowke, who wrote from the 1940s through the 1960s, went far beyond the older emphases in describing the myth of the self-sufficient farmer.[footnoteRef:7] Pointing out that the farm sector was divided by production capacities and marketing activities, Fowke outlined the role of class divisions in rural society.[footnoteRef:8] However, it was not until the late 1970s , that, with the publication of the first volume of essays in the Canadian Papers in Rural History series, Canadian historians began to follow the path established by Fowke.[footnoteRef:9] This thesis will take a further step along that path, by examining the production capacities of the land as a factor in the creation of wealth and the development of socio-economic divisions in the North West Arm. [6: Fowke, "The Myth of the Self-Sufficient Canadian Pioneer," 23-24. ] [7: Daniel Samson, "Introduction: Situating the Rural in Atlantic Canada," in Daniel Samson, ed., Contested Countryside: Rural Workers and Modern Society in Atlantic Canada, 1800-1950, (Fredericton: Acadiensis Press, 1994), 2. ] [8: Daniel Samson, Contested Countryside, 2. See Vernon C. Fowke, "The Myth of the Self-Sufficient Canadian Pioneer," 28-37; and Vernon C. Fowke, "An Introduction to Canadian Agricultural History," Agricultural History, vol., 16 no. 2, (1942), 79-90; See as well Vernon C. Fowke, Canadian Agricultural Policy: The Historical Pattern, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1946). ] [9: See Donald H. Akenson, ed., Canadian Papers in Rural History, vol. 1, (Gananoque, Ont.: Langdale Press, 1978). ]

Because they knew relatively little about the social and economic structure of rural communities in the nineteenth-century Maritimes, and even less about how farm families dealt with the varying soil capabilities of the land resources they obtained and with the social and economic changes that were a constant aspect of life in the region during this period, many of the earlier historians tended to fall back upon sweeping generalizations in their assessments of the nature of rural life in the Maritime region during the early years of settlement. Many of these scholars concentrated upon the Golden Age notion of an egalitarian North American rural society, where immigrants had equal opportunities to make the transition from subsistence to commercial agriculture--from a traditional to a modern society. This tendency towards sweeping overviews founded on assumptions of a mythical Golden Age has resulted in what Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn have identified as the "general failure of recent Maritime scholarship to ask fundamental questions about how the rural majority of the region's people lived; how they shaped their material, social, and political worlds; and how their life-chances were affected by their background, economic status and the timing and location of their settlement in the provinces".[footnoteRef:10] This thesis sets out to determine how the people of the North West Arm lived and [10: Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, Of Inequality and Interdependence, 4-5. ]

how their life choices were affected by their access to land. One of the several models which shape this study is the work of Bitterman, MacKinnon and Wynn. In their research, they have begun the necessary process of exploration and reassessment of previous works on the rural Maritimes.[footnoteRef:11] In a 1993 article published in the Canadian Historical Review, Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn brought together their individual research findings and combined expertise for what they refer to as "a preliminary foray", which they point out is tightly bound in time and space, that attempts to tackle some of the long-neglected questions about rural life in the Maritimes.[footnoteRef:12] The result is a comparative study which explores some of the basic tenets of rural economic and social life in two small nineteenth-century Nova Scotian communities: Middle River, in Victoria County, Cape Breton and Hardwood Hill, close to the Town of Pictou, in Pictou County, on the Northumberland Strait.[footnoteRef:13] [11: See Rusty Bittermann, Middle River: The Social Structure of Agriculture in a Nineteenth-Century Cape Breton Community, M.A. Thesis, University of New Brunswick, 1987; and Robert A. MacKinnon, The Historical Geography of Agriculture in Nova Scotia, 1851-1951, Ph.D. Thesis, University of British Columbia, 1991. ] [12: Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, Of Inequality and Interdependence, 4-5. ] [13: Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, Of Inequality and Interdependence, 4-5. ]

Models, such as the Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn study, are a very useful tool to help historians understand and explain events in small rural communities. In their assessment of the value of local community studies, J. M. Bumsted and James T. Lemon emphasize the importance of using models in historical demography, arguing that all historians implicitly employ models as analytical tools. Models, by supplying frameworks for analysis, even though they may be tentative and imprecise, can serve to open up possibilities for future syntheses and comparative study. In this study, several models will be used as an aid in understanding the demographic evolution of the North West Arm area and the similarities and differences between the North West Arm and communities studied by other researchers. As Bumsted and Lemon put it in their discussion of using models as analytical tools: Assuming that they are a reasonably accurate (though simple) statement of general developments, they can be used as yardsticks against which to measure future community studies and can also be utilized to suggest similarities or differences in comparison to other regions or colonies. 119

With this in mind, an overview of some of the models which will be drawn upon in this study will be useful here.The Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn study of Middle River and Hardwood Hill is fundamentally Marxist in its outlook and focuses on a number of interrelated themes, the most important being the nature and significance of dependency, subservience and exploitation. They argue that the settlers who arrived in the area at a later date were less likely to obtain the parcels of land suitable, in terms of soil quality, for a "modest competency" at farming. This forced these later, poorer settlers to become dependent upon and subservient to the wealthier frontland farmers and merchants for wage labour. Accordingly, this left the poorer settlers open to exploitation by their wealthier neighbours. In essence, Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn argue that the later settlers traded domination by landlords in Scotland for domination by merchants and wealthier neighbours in Cape Breton. In other words, they are suggesting that previous class divisions which existed in Scotland were transferred to North America. In a broader perspective, they argue that both in these settlements, and, by extrapolation, in almost any community of several hundred residents in Nova Scotia's farming zone, society was, by and large, divided and stratified along class lines imported by migrants arriving from the British Isles. The primary questions that their study poses for this thesis are: a) to what extent, if any, did later arriving (poorer?) settlers become "dependent" upon the earlier arriving (wealthier?) frontland settlers for wage labour, if, in fact, they did at all; b) did the later arriving settlers become dependent on the frontland settlers and did dependency itself necessarily lead to the subservience and exploitation of the poorer settlers by the wealthier settlers? and c) did the settlers bring class distinctions with them when they arrived at the North West Arm? The idea of "dependence" would appear to be a relative term. Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn emphasize both the dependency of the poorer backlanders upon their wealthier frontland neighbours and the "exploitation" of the backlanders by the very same people.[footnoteRef:14] But the picture may be more complex. When families that were part of an extended kin group, like the Highland Scots, chose to settle together in the local area, did they then cooperate to earn a relatively self-sufficient living based upon subsistence agriculture and other related occupations such as lumbering, fishing, etc? Conversely was farming even necessarily a priority for most of these settlers or was there, perhaps, enough diversification in terms of occupations in the North West Arm that this, in effect, turned farming more into a secondary, rather than a primary occupation? These are some important questions and themes that this thesis will examine. [14: Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, Of Inequality and Interdependence, 17-18, 31-41. ]

Similarly to what Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn found, Stephen Hornsby determined that the early, relatively well-off Scottish tenant farmers and crofters who arrived in Cape Breton between 1802 and the mid-1820s had the choice of the best land and soon settled the accessible and fertile frontlands on the coast and along the major river valleys. By 1830 much of the best land on the Island had been occupied. The immigrants arriving in the 1825 to 1840 period consisted mainly of destitute crofters and cottars who occupied not only whatever good land remained, but also large areas of the poorer backlands. According to Hornsby, after the relatively fertile areas had been occupied, settlers moved onto rocky backlands behind the first range of lots. Much of this land was extremely poor in quality, being stony and containing acidic soils.[footnoteRef:15] [15: Stephen J. Hornsby, Nineteenth-Century Cape Breton: A Historical Geography, (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1992), 48-51. This book is based upon his 1986 Ph.D. thesis at UBC entitled, "An Historical Geography of Cape Breton Island in the Nineteenth Century," Ph.D. thesis, University of British Columbia, 1986. See as well his "Scottish Emigration and Settlement in Early Nineteenth-Century Cape Breton," in Ken Donovan, ed., The Island, New Perspectives on Cape Breton History, 1713-1990 (Fredericton and Sydney: Acadiensis Press and University College of Cape Breton Press (1990), 56-57. ]

In essence, Hornsby argues that these settlers had exchanged landlords and bailiffs back in Scotland for poor acidic soils and long winters in Cape Breton. Very few could support themselves by farming and forestry alone and they were forced to turn to whatever forms of wage labour were available. Some eventually worked in the island's forestry or mining industries, while others worked on frontland farms. Like Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, Hornsby believes that the economic stratification between frontland and backland settlers in Cape Breton was a perpetuation of that seen between crofters and cottars back in Scotland, that is: cultural and socioeconomic divisions which existed in Scotland were transferred to Cape Breton. He argues that for many, the trans-Atlantic migration had hardly improved their situation; they still faced rural poverty, part-time work, and eventual emigration. Many in the areas studied by Hornsby would ultimately choose to leave Cape Breton, migrating to areas such as Southern Ontario, the Saint John River Valley of New Brunswick, the Annapolis Valley of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, where agricultural opportunities for immigrants from the British Isles were more promising than on Cape Breton Island.[footnoteRef:16] [16: Hornsby, "Scottish Emigration and Settlement," 68-69; and, Hornsby, Nineteenth-Century Cape Breton, 83-84. ]

The North West Arm area was somewhat different from the areas described by Hornsby, in that the early arrivals were Loyalists and British settlers who had little previous contact with the Highlanders who were to arrive in the area after 1825. Very few Scots settled the North West Arm area in the 1800 to 1820 period: in this area, the better quality land was taken by Loyalist and British settlers, leaving the backlands, as elsewhere in Cape Breton, to be occupied by the late arriving Highlanders. This thesis will examine the extent to which the pattern of developing dependence described by Hornsby was a factor in the North West Arm and, further, whether the land allocation process perpetuated and reinforced class distinctions these later migrants had experienced in Scotland. Similar to the arguments developed by Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn and Hornsby, Beatrice Craig, in her research dealing with the settlement of the Madawaska region of New Brunswick, notes that frontier regions have a tendency to attract continuous waves of immigrants until all available land has been completely settled. Craig argues that, in Madawaska, not only was the best land taken up by the early settlers, but that those settlers, in their determination to provide their own families with the best opportunities, did not welcome newcomers, but acted in such a way as to create significant barriers to the integration of the later migrants into the original community. The result in the case of the Upper Saint John Valley was the emergence of a clearly stratified society which was dominated by the original families and their descendants, and this, Craig claims, came about within the first 50 years of the settlement's founding.[footnoteRef:17] Craig's research raises an important question for this thesis: that is, were the original frontland settlers in the North West Arm open to newcomers? Or, as in the case of Madawaska, were the later migrants in some manner hindered from integrating into the original community? [17: Beatrice C. Craig, "Immigrants in a Frontier Community: Madawaska 1785-1850," Histoire Sociale/Social History, vol. XIX no. 38, (November, 1986), 277. See as well, Beatrice C. Craig, "Agriculture and the Lumberman's Frontier in the Upper St. John Valley, 1800-70," Journal of Forest History, (July, 1988), 125-137; and, Beatrice C. Craig, "Agriculture in a Pioneer Region: The Upper St. John River Valley in the first half of the 19th Century," in Kris Inwood, ed., Farm, Factory and Fortune: New Studies in the Economic History of the Maritime Provinces, (Fredericton: Acadiensis Press, 1994), 17-36. ]

In his work on the colonization settlements in the St. Francis District of Quebec, J.I. Little examines the colonization of the District by both Highland Scots from the Isle of Lewis and French Canadians. He rejects the arguments made by proponents of the frontier thesis regarding the "assimilation" of the various settler groups and sets out instead to examine the collective responses of the two different ethnic groups. He found that the two groups established relatively separate and distinct communities grounded in the cultural and social values that they had brought with them from their previous homelands. Each group adopted their own way of coping with the frontiers harsh physical and economic environment and, in effect, developed their own distinct local culture. Both groups sought independence in their situations, but they did so in different ways. On the basis of his study, Little concludes that: In order to apply general historical and social concepts to the study of any settler society, it is important to understand the nature of the cultural values in the homeland, why and how the colonists migrated, the limitations imposed by the new physical environment, and the nature of the political-economic structures imposed on the community.25 25 J. I. Little, Crofters and Habitants: Settler Society, Economy, and Culture in a Quebec Township, 1848-1881, (Kingston and Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1991), 259. See also his "Ethnicity, Family Structure, and Seasonal Labor Strategies on Quebec's Appalachian Frontier, 1852-1881," Journal of Family History, vol. 17, no. 3, (1992), 289-302. Little also cautions that, in studying settler societies, it is necessary to study more than the "needs of capital", arguing that any explanation of capital requirements and its use must be based upon a greater understanding of the context of the community that capital exploits.[footnoteRef:18] This thesis will pursue an argument which tends to lean, historiographically, more in the direction of Jack Little than that of Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, or that of Stephen Hornsby or Beatrice Craig. It will be argued that both the frontier ( in the North West Arm) and the adaptation of the cultural and socioeconomic outlooks and values the immigrants brought with them played roles in shaping their social and economic behaviour and the nature of the relatively discrete communities they established. [18: J. I. Little, Crofters and Habitants: 134 - 155. ]

The concepts of dependency, subservience and exploitation are indicators of socio-economic stratification and are all related to the manner in which wealth is distributed within a given area. With this statement in mind, the present study will utilize wealth as the primary measure of stratification. More specifically, it will use real property (land) as the major indicator of wealth, the reason for this being that, within the context of the period being examined, 1785-1835, a large proportion of settlers would have considered their most important source of wealth to be their land. Many historians and social scientists who are concerned with the study of class structure have concentrated upon the division of wealth as measured through real property (land) and/or taxes. James Lemon and Gary Nash point out that the distribution of wealth is the ...most obvious and most readily quantified criterion of stratification....[footnoteRef:19] However, as Lemon and Nash warn, this method of analysis can be very problematic since scholars are far from uniform in either their approach to the problem of social (and economic) stratification or their use of evidence. In this context, Lemon and Nash note that socioeconomic stratification involves not only the division of material wealth, but also the distribution of political power and social prestige. They point out that although these are related, connections between them are not easy to make; each of these components of stratification can be discrete and each has its own dynamics of change. As a result, the conclusions one may reach about societal structure and the changes it underwent are many and varied and may sometimes be contradictory.[footnoteRef:20] [19: James T. Lemon and Gary B. Nash, The Distribution of Wealth in Eighteenth-Century America: A Century of Change in Chester County, Pennsylvania, 1693-1802, Journal of Social History, (1968), 1. ] [20: Lemon and Nash, The Distribution of Wealth, 1-2. ]

In their study of Chester County, a largely agricultural county in southeastern Pennsylvania, Lemon and Nash discovered that an analysis of soil conditions and topographical features could provide very useful insight into variations in the distribution of wealth. Although their findings were suggestive rather than definitive, the evidence did indicate that, in the areas with the best soils, the land owners were generally better off than those in areas where soils were not as good. Similarly, although population density did not correlate clearly with the distribution of wealth, better incomes did tend to occur where the settlers were more highly concentrated. They also suggest that cultural differences, as measured by the ethnic and religious backgrounds of the settlers, may also have had some impact; however, definitive correlations cannot be made. The most important lesson emerging from their study is that generalizations about social stratification or wealth distribution need to be made with great care. Lemon and Nashs evidence suggested that wealth often (though not always) became more concentrated at the top of the social hierarchy in areas accessible to water transportation and not too distant from commercial centres, especially if those areas contained rich soils. They further note that, in more newly settled areas, even those with less productive soils, society tended to have more of a middling look.[footnoteRef:21] [21: Lemon and Nash, The Distribution of Wealth, 22-23. ]

This thesis, following the example of Lemon and Nash's study, will undertake an analysis of both soil and, to an extent, topographic conditions to determine what insight they may provide into variations in the distribution of wealth in the North West Arm area. Their study raises a number of questions which this thesis will seek to examine. First, in the areas with the best soils, was the distribution of wealth greater or less than in areas where soils were not as good? Secondly, what impact, if any, did culture, as measured by ethnic and religious backgrounds, appear to have upon wealth distribution? Was wealth more concentrated in areas accessible to water transportation and which permitted easy access to markets, especially if those areas possessed good quality soils? Lastly, in the areas with less productive soils, is there evidence to suggest that society tended to develop more of a "middling" look? Finally, this thesis will be strongly guided by the advice of Lemon and Nash who warn that any generalizations about social stratification or wealth will need to be made with great caution. In another study of Chester County Pennsylvania, Duane Ball, taking a slightly different approach from that of Lemon and Nash, examines the relationship between population density and the distribution of wealth. He criticizes some historians, most notably, Kenneth Lockridge, for having made the arbitrary assumption that the link between land and population increase remained strong throughout the eighteenth century, and that increasing population made for pressure on the land which resulted in stagnation, or even a decline in the average per capita income.[footnoteRef:22] Ball set out to test that assumption, to determine whether there was a break in the link between land and population increase prior to the nineteenth century. His findings indicate that such a break did occur in Chester County during the eighteenth century, as the passing of the frontier, contrary to the traditional model, was followed by increases not only in population, but also in wealth.[footnoteRef:23] The question of the link between land and population increase will be kept in mind in this study of the settlement of the North West Arm. [22: Duane E. Ball, Dynamics of Population and Wealth in Eighteenth-Century Chester County, Pennsylvania, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, vol. VI no. 4, (Spring, 1976), 622. For the clearest expression of this viewpoint see Kenneth A. Lockridge, Social Change and the Meaning of the American Revolution, Journal of Social History, vol. VI, (1973), 403-437. ] [23: Ball, Dynamics of Population, 622. ]

Although the models outlined differ in focus and approach, all of them could accurately be classified as micro-studies". All have all adopted a "micro-analytic" method in their efforts to try to understand the patterns and dynamics of these different rural communities, and all would agree that, local as their studies are, their findings do demonstrate the value of new approaches to understanding patterns of change in nineteenth-century rural North American society. The questions raised by these community study models will be tested through a community study of the North West Arm of Sydney Harbour. The study will pay considerable attention to the "fundamental questions" identified by Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn: how the people of the North West Arm "...shaped their material, social and political worlds; and how their life-chances were affected by their background, economic status and the timing and location of their settlement in the provinces".[footnoteRef:24] In the Maritime context, the studies completed to date reveal the need, as Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn point out, for a reassessment of common perceptions of the colonial period as a regional, "Golden Age".[footnoteRef:25] [24: Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, Of Inequality and Interdependence, 5. ] [25: Bittermann, MacKinnon and Wynn, Of Inequality and Interdependence, 5. ]

Micro-analytic models will be used in this study, keeping in mind that the usefulness of micro-analysis has been questioned in the past. The decision to use a micro-analytical approach raises the issue of the relevance of micro-studies within the broader parameters of historical research being done elsewhere. Over the years this has been a contentious issue among historians. As Bumsted and Lemon note, the major debate has focused upon the extent to which micro- studies, both conceptually and substantatively, lack a broader historical context. [footnoteRef:26] The debate is well illustrated in Herbert Butterfields criticism of Sir Lewis Namier, namely that micro-analysis tends to over particularize to the point that macro-historical movement and direction are lost.[footnoteRef:27] However, as Bumsted and Lemon point out, even though the authors of local studies may be reluctant to generalize from their particular cases, it does not follow that a local study cannot produce useful hypotheses. Nor is it necessarily true that macro-studies which ignore contradictory evidence from case studies are particularly useful. Certainly it is necessary to recognize the limitations as well as the strengths of both community studies and more general studies. Bumsted and Lemon stress the need to be aware that events take place at the personal, small community and larger provincial and national levels and that the local study must take account of events at these broader levels. Thus, while they believe that "the closer the investigator comes to the primary constituents of a phenomenon, the higher the probability of accuracy", they also recognize that "a historical phenomenon is more than the sum total of its manifestations on local levels, just as it is more than the phenomenon as it manifests itself on the general level".[footnoteRef:28] This thesis, although focused at the community level, will be mindful of the larger economic, political and social context within which the North West Arm was settled and which influenced its growth and development. It is, in fact, this awareness of the need to place this study within a broader historical framework, that led to the selection of the different "models" previously mentioned to use for the purposes of comparison. Each of the models chosen deals with the broader question of socioeconomic stratification in various geographical locations across North America; however, they all tend to deal with it in slightly different ways. [26: Bumsted and Lemon, New Approaches, 99. ] [27: Herbert Butterfield, George III and the Historians, (New York, 1959), 206-213; cited in Bumsted and Lemon, New Approaches, 100. ] [28: Bumsted and Lemon, New Approaches, 100. ]

It should be emphasized here that, in spite of all of the contextual problems that were inherent in many of the older local studies, significant progress has since been made towards rectifying these problems. Most notably, in the past three decades, those professional historians who have moved into the field of local history, in choosing a region or community to study, have demonstrated their awareness and understanding of the larger historical questions. In many instances, the primary criterion in selecting a particular community for analysis is the completeness or richness of records.[footnoteRef:29] Unfortunately it is seldom possible to achieve the ideal. Nevertheless, in micro-analysis, the researcher seeks to achieve as detailed and total a reconstruction of the local community as is possible. Such careful reconstruction is grounded in the belief that the vast majority of the population experience economic, political and social change at the level of their families and their communities, acting and reacting at the local level in structuring and restructuring their lives. Because micro-analysts view this level of action as intrinsically important, they seek to test the generalizations of the "traditional" scholars (the macro-analysts) in an objective and scientific way.[footnoteRef:30] [29: Bumsted and Lemon suggest that very few American colonies or states have available as rich and complete a collection of local records (especially public ones) as Upper Canada prior to Confederation. They also point out that the opportunities for micro-study in Upper Canada are almost