Explains the purpose of the Nova Scotia “N.S.” Overprint of 1868-71 on Canada’s Third Issue bill stamps, with illustrations of four intact cross-border bills bearing stamps of Canada and the U.S.

1. What was the Purpose of the Nova Scotia “N.S.” Overprint on Canada’s Third Issue Bill Stamps?
Figure 1. 1869
time draft made
at Liverpool, Nova
Scotia, for $50
“American Gold,”
drawn on party
in Bangor, Maine,
bearing Canada
3¢ Third Issue
bill stamp with
“N.S.” overprint
and U.S. 5¢ Inland
Exchange.
Shown here are three time drafts made between 1869 and 1872 in in Boston. The former, made May 29, 1872, for $1600 in gold, bears
Nova Scotia, drawn on parties in the U.S. As such they were subject Canada 50¢ “N.S.” overprint plus unoverprinted 5¢ and 3¢ bill stamps,
first to Canada’s tax on promissory notes, drafts and bills of exchange; and on reverse U.S. Third Issue 70¢ and Second Issue 10¢. The latter,
then upon acceptance in the U.S. to the same tax as domestic time made August 22, 1872, for $1800 in gold, bears 40¢, 10¢ and 5¢ bill
drafts. The handwritten draft shown in Figure 1, made September 9, stamps, now all unoverprinted, and alongside U.S. Third Issue 70¢
1869, by B. J. Johnson & Co. at Liverpool for $50 “American Gold” and Second Issue 20¢.
and drawn on Palmer & Johnson in Bangor, Maine, bears a Canada Other considerations aside, these usages of the U.S. Third Issue 70¢
3¢ Third Issue bill stamp with “N.S.” overprint and a U.S. 5¢ Inland are extraordinary. Some 15 years ago only one document bearing this
Exchange, the latter tied by “PAID MERCHANTS BANK BOSTON” stamp had been recorded (Mahler, 1995). That total has now climbed
embossed handstamp. The drafts shown in Figures 2 and 3 were to eight, but these remain underappreciated rarities.
both drawn by Gilbert Sanderson at Yarmouth on George W. Hunter

2. Figure 2. May
1872 time
draft for $1600
bearing Canada
Third Issue
50¢ “N.S.”
overprint plus
unoverprinted
5¢ and 3¢, and
on reverse U.S.
Third Issue 70¢
and Second
Issue 10¢.
Figure 3.
August
1872 time
draft for
$1800
bearing
Canada
Third Issue
40¢, 10¢
and 5¢,
and U.S.
Third Issue
70¢ and
Second
Issue 20¢.
The U.S. taxes here were assessed at the Inland Exchange rate of Thanks to the internet and its search engines, the answers were
5¢ per $100, in effect since August 1, 1864; they were correctly paid readily forthcoming. Before committing them to print I searched
on all three drafts. But how were the Canadian taxes assessed? What the philatelic literature1 to determine if they had already appeared
was the purpose of the “N.S.” overprints, and what rules governed elsewhere. The result was a mixed bag. Most articles dealt with the
their use? characteristics of the overprint and of possible forgeries, without

3. explaining or even considering why it had been used. To his credit, two quantifications of the difference in currency values, it does not
MacDonald (1972) at least confessed, eliminate it.
As clarification has apparently never been forthcoming in print, let
Why it was felt necessary to overprint the Canadian
us proceed, praying forbearance by Canadian readers for occasional
bill issue for the province of Nova Scotia, I have no idea.
forays into elemental history or geography necessary for my own
Possibly the rugged individualism of Howe and Woodgate
understanding.
still survived and demanded that the provincial revenue be
separate and easily definable. Dominion Bill Taxes
The question posed in the final sentence of the 1894 article is easily
“N.S.” Overprint a Currency Control Device answered. The “N.S.” overprint did not appear on Canada’s First and
Lehr (1986) reported the discovery of an early answer in the 1894 Second Issue bill stamps because they were used only in the Province
inaugural issue of The Canadian Philatelic Journal: of Canada, comprised of Canada East and Canada West, previously
named Lower Canada and Upper Canada, soon to be renamed
It has been a matter of curiosity among revenue collectors Quebec and Ontario. The Third Issue stamps, in contrast, were used
why the last issue of Canadian Bill stamps were surcharged throughout the newly-formed Dominion of Canada, which included
N.S. in use in Nova Scotia, as the currency was apparently the maritime provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia as well as
the same. This surcharging must have been done by Quebec and Ontario. The Dominion came into being July 1, 1867;2
departmental order only, as there is no trace of it in the legislation extending the bill stamp taxes of the Province of Canada
orders of Council or in the Dominion Acts. The idea was to the new Dominion was passed December 21, 1867, to take effect
this, there was a difference of 2⅔ percent between Canadian February 1, 1868; and the use of Third Issue stamps appears to have
& Nova Scotia currency, that is $1 in Canada was worth coincided with the onset of the new taxes.3
$1.03⅔ In Nova Scotia. It will be seen that there would be The enabling legislation, “An Act to impose duties on Promissory
a good opening for defrauding the revenue by the Canadian Notes and Bills of Exchange” (31 Victoria 1867, Ch. IX), imposed the
merchants and others buying their bill stamps in Nova following taxes:
Scotia. After being in use for a comparatively short time the
currency was straightened out to agree with the Canadian, Amount Tax
Less than $25 Exempt
and the necessity for surcharging done away with, their $25.00 1¢
use being limited to only one province and for such period Above $25 to $50 2¢
of time has made them quote rare, especially the 7, 8, 30, Above $50 but less than $100 3¢
40 and 50 cents, and the 1, 2, 3 dollar stamps. $100 and above
We cannot see why this was not noticed before when the Made singly 3¢ per $100 or fraction thereof
first & second issue was in use. Made in duplicate On each part, 2¢ per $100 or fraction thereof
Made in two or more parts On each part, 1¢ per $100 or fraction thereof
This explanation is substantially correct, but leaves unanswered
questions. As Lehr noted, “The two figures quoted obviously should 1. Made infinitely easier by the availability online of scans of most if not all issues
both be either 2⅔ or 3⅔ to interrelate. The 3⅔ cents difference quoted of BNA Topics, Canadian Revenue Newsletter, and The Canadian Philatelist (and
represents a 3.54% difference. In any case this lead represents the various predecessors and related publications including The Halifax Philatelist),
first printed explanation of the purpose of the N.S. overprint. It should many transcribed and searchable.
allow Nova Scotia or Revenue scholars a means to explore this further.” 2. The Canadian equivalent of July 4, 1776, in the U.S., commemorated each
In fact the first paragraph of the article quoted by Lehr had been July 1 as Confederation Day. In the present context it is worth noting that Nova
lifted almost verbatim from the September 1888 issue of The Halifax Scotians were overwhelmingly opposed to confederation.
Philatelist, and the original reads “$1.02⅓ in Nova Scotia,” not 3. Ryan (1994), Ryan and Woike (2000). Recorded usages prior to February 1,
“$1.03⅔”! However, this merely lessens the discrepancy between the 1868, were evidently back-dated.

4. For multi-part bills of exchange in amounts less than $100, the The Currency Act of 1853 confirmed these ratings, and set the
interpretation of these taxes has been problematic. This is discussed Canadian dollar at par with the U.S. dollar. It follows that the sovereign
in the Appendix. was rated at C$4.86⅔.5 If this seems a bit arbitrary, an essentially
The following Section delineated the duty payable in Nova Scotia: equivalent calculation can be based on the gold content of the coins.
In Nova Scotia, though, the sovereign was rated higher, at $5. This
7. Provided, that as regards any Promissory Note, Draft
was perhaps in part a matter of convenience; it certainly simplified
or Bill of Exchange on which the duty is payable in Nova
calculations. A more fundamental explanation is that Nova Scotia
Scotia; the amount on which the duty is payable under
had particularly strong ties to Great Britain. As summarized by Smith
this Act, and the amount of such duty, shall be reckoned
(2005),
in the currency of that Province, and the stamped paper
and stamps to be used there shall be marked according, By the time of the Revolution, Nova Scotia [“the 14th
and shall not be used in any other part of Canada. Colony”] was not an established, developed commonwealth
like the first thirteen, but a still-fledgling frontier colony
Here is the authorization for the “N.S.” overprint that the anonymous
being re-settled by British subjects, predominantly from
author of 1888 could not find, and the underlying justification: the
currency of Nova Scotia differed in value from that used in the rest
of the Dominion.
Nova Scotia currency was in fact worth 2⅔% less than Canadian;
in its most compact form, the relationship between the two was that
75¢ Nova Scotia currency was worth 73¢ Canadian. Without the “N.S.”
overprints and the prohibition against their use outside Nova Scotia,
it would have been possible to start with 73¢ Canadian, convert it
into 75¢ Nova Scotian and buy 75¢ in stamps there, depriving the
government of 2¢. On a large scale the potential loss was considered
sufficient to elicit the preventive measures taken.
Differing Currencies Explained
How did it happen that the value of the two currencies differed? In
the Province of Canada, the British gold sovereign had been rated4 in
1842 at one pound, four shillings, and four pence in local currency,
while the U.S. $10 gold eagle was valued at two pounds, ten shillings.
4. “Until the middle of the nineteenth century, each British colony in North
America regulated the use of currency in its own jurisdiction. Although pounds,
shillings, and pence (the currency system used in Great Britain) were used for
bookkeeping (i.e., as the unit of account), each colony decided for itself the value,
or “rating,” of a wide variety of coins used in transactions or to settle debts.
These included not only English and French coins, but also coins from Portugal,
Spain, and the Spanish colonies in Latin America—notably Mexico, Peru, and
Colombia. Once rated, coins became legal tender.” (Powell, 2005)
5. The sovereign, though it bore no denomination, had a nominal value of one
pound sterling. There are 20 shillings in a pound, 12 pence in a shilling. The $10
gold eagle was equivalent to 600 pence local currency and the sovereign to 292
pence, or $(2920/600) = $4.86⅔. Figure 4.

5. New England. Little Nova Scotia was nonetheless home to shall be repealed as regards Promissory Notes, Drafts and
a disproportionately large Royal Navy base and later an Bills of Exchange made, drawn or accepted in Nova Scotia
entire regiment of the British Army intended specifically to upon or after the said [blank] day of [blank] 1868, and the
enforce loyalty to the Crown, so the British government had amount on which duty is payable under the said Act upon
a military influence in Nova Scotia unparalleled in the other such Promissory Notes, Drafts or Bills of Exchange shall be
colonies. And Nova Scotia was not connected contiguously reckoned in the currency of Canada as hereby established,
to the settled regions of the other colonies. … as shall also any penalty incurred under the said Act in
Nova Scotia on and after the said day.
Nor did Nova Scotia have well-developed overland connections with the
rest of Canada. It is an “almost-island” connected to the mainland by This would have neatly rescinded the requirement for use of the
an isthmus only some 15 miles wide (Figure 4), and for decades the “N.S.” overprints. The Uniform Currency Act of 1871, though, made
sea was its only highway; this heightened the importance of commerce no direct mention of stamp duties, and instead made the “N.S.”
with Britain. overprints obsolete only in indirect and roundabout fashion. It began
by abolishing the separate currency of Nova Scotia:
Small Puzzles Solved
1. On and after the first day of July, in the present year
According to the tax table, the draft shown in Figure 1, for $50
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-one,
American gold, if made anywhere else in the Dominion, would have
the currency of the Province of Nova Scotia shall be the
been taxed at 2¢. In Nova Scotia, though, the law required “the amount
same as that of the Provinces of Quebec, Ontario, and New
on which the duty is payable … shall be reckoned in the currency of
Brunswick, in all of which one currency, of the uniform
that Province”; since US$50 was equivalent to NS$51.33, this bumped
value hereinafter mentioned, has been and is now used.
the tax to 3¢.
Similar considerations explain the 2¢ tax on a draft described Recall that Section 7 of the 1867 stamp Act stipulated that in Nova
previously (Mahler, 1999) involving the same parties, made April 4, Scotia “the amount on which the duty is payable under this Act, and
1870, for $25 gold; elsewhere the tax would have been only 1¢, but in the amount of such duty, shall be reckoned in the currency of that
Nova Scotia it was 2¢. This draft is doubly extraordinary in that the Province.” After July 1, 1871, “the currency of that Province” was the
5¢ U.S. tax was paid with a bisected 10¢ stamp. Dominion currency. But what of the further stipulation in Section 7
that “stamps to be used there shall be marked according, and shall
“N.S.” Overprints Obsolete July 1, 1871 not be used in any other part of Canada”? The need for marked stamps
Nova Scotia retained its own currency until July 1, 1871, the had been eliminated, but the requirement to mark and use them was
effective date of the Dominion’s Uniform Currency Act passed April not directly addressed. This dilemma appears to have been resolved
11, 1871, which established that the denominations of Canadian by the final sentence of the Uniform Currency Act, a blanket provision
currency would be dollars, cents, and mills, and fixed the dollar’s repealing “all other Acts and parts of Acts inconsistent with this Act.”
value by rating the British sovereign at C$4.86⅔ and the U.S. $10 gold The requirement to specially mark stamps for use in Nova Scotia, on
eagle at C$10—the same rates established in the 1853 Currency Act. account of the now-abolished currency previously used there, was
An earlier version of this Act (31 Victoria 1868, Ch. XLV), proposed clearly inconsistent with the Uniform Currency Act.
soon after establishment of the stamp taxes but never passed, had
specifically repealed Section 7 of the stamp Act, quoted above, which “N.S.” Overprints after July 1, 1871
governed stamp duties in Nova Scotia: After July 1, 1871, use of the “N.S.” overprints was no longer
required, but is occasionally observed. Figure 5 shows a first of
13. The seventh section of the Act of the Parliament of
exchange for $2500, from a set of three made January 26, 1872,
Canada passed in the present session and intitled: An Act
by Dennis & Doane of Yarmouth, drawn on George Hunter & Co. of
to impose Duties on Promissory Notes and Bills of Exchange,
Boston. The 1¢ per $100 rate for bills made in sets of three or more

6. Figure 5.
January
1872 first
of exchange
for $2500
bearing
5¢ “N.S.”
overprint plus
unoverprinted
20¢. U.S.
Third Issue
$1 and
Second Issue
25¢ are on
the reverse.
was paid by 5¢ “N.S.” and unoverprinted Third Issue 20¢. On the continue to sell them? The answer can be elegantly deduced from the
reverse are U.S. Third Issue $1 and Second Issue 25¢. Figure 2 shows government’s Inland Revenue Reports for 1870–1 and 1871–2. On June
the 50¢ “N.S.” used on May 29, 1872, together with unoverprinted 30, 1871, the Bill Stamp Account for Nova Scotia stood as follows:
5¢ and 3¢.6 Another first of exchange of Dennis & Doane drawn on District (Inland Revenue) Inspector—Cash $2087.61 (NS currency)
Hunter & Co. in Boston, made June 24, 1872, for $2000 bears two (Inland Revenue) Collector, Halifax—Stamps $5948.00 (NS currency)
Third Issue 9¢ and a 2¢, now all unoverprinted, along with U.S. $1 Post Office—Stamps $3431.12—Cash $994.50 (NS currency)
Foreign Exchange, and the draft shown in Figure 3, made August 22,
1872, again bears all unoverprinted Third Issue stamps. On the following day, July 1, 1871, the effective date of the Uniform
The overprinted stamps in the hands of the public after July 1, 1871, Currency Act, it had become:
were presumably simply used up over the ensuing months. This would District (Inland Revenue) Inspector—Cash $2031.71** (CDN currency)
have constituted a small loss of revenue for the government, since (Inland Revenue) Collector, Halifax—Stamps $5948.00 (CDN currency)
they had been purchased with the depreciated Nova Scotia currency, Post Office—Stamps $3431.12 (CDN currency)
but the aggregate loss was probably small. ** Appeared last year in Nova Scotian Currency, the alteration is made into
What of the “N.S.” overprints still unsold as of July 1, 1871? Were Dominion Currency in accordance with the assimilation, dating from 1st July, 1871.
they retired and perhaps destroyed? Or did an economical government As explained in the footnote, the cash on hand in the District
Inspector’s account was converted to the equivalent amount in the new
6. The tax was only 48¢, not 58¢; the 50¢ stamp appears to have been mistaken Dominion currency. However, the value of the stamps in the hands
for a 40¢.

7. of the Collector and Post Office showed no change after the same values. Exact parallels are the Chinese overprints of 1915–33 for the
conversion. The conclusion is inescapable that the “N.S.” overprints provinces of Manchuria, Szechuan and Yunnan, in each of which the
on hand continued to be sold at their face value, but were now paid currency was depreciated relative to that elsewhere. A variation on
for in the new currency. the theme occurred with the various “B” (for Bluefields) and “C” (for
Cabo Gracias a Dios) overprints used circa 1910 on stamps for those
Postal Analogs of the “N.S.” Overprints two regions on Nicaragua’s Atlantic coast, where rich silver mines had
In occasional scenarios far removed in time and place from 1860s led to a silver-backed peso with double the value of the paper-backed
Nova Scotia, postal administrations would create overprints to serve peso used elsewhere. In this case the overprints prevented the flow
the same purpose as the “N.S.” used here—to restrict stamp sales to a of cheaply-bought stamps into, not out of, the regions denoted by the
given region whose currency differed in value from that of other regions, overprints. Other examples can no doubted be cited.
thereby preventing loss of revenue via exploitation of those differing
References
Anonymous. The N.S. Bill Stamps. The Halifax Philatelist 1888 September 2(9):101.
——. The Canadian Philatelic Journal 1894 January 1:2.
British Colony of Canada Second Issue of Bill Stamps. http://www.billstamps.com/
Lehr, James. Nova Scotia Bill Stamps. B.N.A. Topics 1986 September–October 43(5):20.
MacDonald, J. J. Nova Scotia’s Revenue Overprint. B.N.A. Topics 1972 August 29(7):168–9.
Mahler, Michael. Reconstructing Four Fabulous Finds. 1. The Danford Knowlton Find. The American Revenuer 1995 September 49 (8):210–27.
Mahler, Michael. A Catalog of United States Revenue-Stamped Documents of the Civil War Era by Type and Tax Rate. Rockford, IA: American
Revenue Association, 1999, pp. 122–3.
McLachlan, Robert Wallace. Annals of the Nova Scotian Currency. In: Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada for the Year
1892. Ottawa: John Durie & Sons; Montreal: J. Foster Brown & Co.; London: J. Quaritch, 1893, pp. 33–68.
Powell, James. A History of the Canadian Dollar. http://www.bankofcanada.ca/en/dollar_book/, 2005.
Ryan, C. D. and M. E. Woike. A Doubly Interesting Document. Canadian Revenue Newsletter 2000 December 33:2–3.
Ryan, C. D. The Nature of, and the Circumstances Concerning the Printing of Canada’s First Issue of Bill Stamps. Appendix B: The End of
the Second Issue and the Beginning of the Third. Canadian Revenue Newsletter 1994 November-December 7:8–9.
Smith, Andrew W. What was the 14th Colony? http://the14thcolony.blogspot.com/2005/03/what-is-14th-colony.html, 2005.
Statutes of the Dominion of Canada. An Act to impose duties on Promissory Notes and Bills of Exchange. 31 Victoria 1867, Ch. IX.
———. An Act respecting the currency. 31 Victoria 1868, Ch. XLV.
Appendix. Bill Stamp Taxes on Multi-part Bills of Exchange for Amounts less than $100.
The bill of exchange, the primary instrument for transfer of funds is sometimes defined in exactly the same way, but this fails utterly
over long distances in the mid-19th Century, has long been obsolete, to capture the essence of the bills of exchange used during the mid-
so some definitions are in order. A draft is a written order from party 19th century. These were drafts drawn on a distant source of funds,
A directing party B to pay party C a certain sum. A bill of exchange typically made in sets of two or more, essentially identical except for

8. being designated “First,” “Second,” “Third,” or similar terms, so made it was to be apportioned among the parts. And here the lawmakers
to allow for the possibility that one or more might be lost in transit. appear to have been silent because they had figuratively painted
In U.S. federal and state stamp tax schedules, bills of exchange were themselves into a corner. Without cutting 1¢ stamps into pieces, the
usually referred to as being made in “sets”; a set of First, Second and parts of multi-part bills could not be uniformly stamped in all cases;
Third was considered to be comprised of three bills of exchange; for the taxes per part were as follows:
example, the U.S. tax schedules refer to “every bill of each set.” Amount One part Two parts Three parts
In Canadian law, and specifically in the various Bill Stamp Acts, To $25.00 1¢ ½¢ ⅓¢
a different terminology was used. What was elsewhere referred to as Above $25 to $50 2¢ 1¢ ⅔¢
a set of two or more bills, was defined here as a single bill comprised Above $50 but less than $100 3¢ 1½¢ 1¢
of two or more “parts.” Without cutting stamps apart, for four of these six cases the parts
The 1864 Act is clearly written, specifically covering bills made would have to have been stamped differently. For amounts to $25 and
singly, in two parts, and in more than two parts. Bills for less than two parts, one of the two would take a 1¢ stamp, the other would be
$100 were exempt. The taxes were as follows: left unstamped; for three parts, one part would be stamped at 1¢, the
Amount Tax others unstamped; and so on. Is it any wonder the law was silent on
Made singly 3¢ per $100 or fraction thereof these points? This was a royal mess!
Made in duplicate On each part, 2¢ per $100 or fraction thereof The Canadian Postal Guide for 1867 stated that multi-part bills
Made in two or more parts On each part, 1¢ per $100 or fraction thereof should be uniformly stamped as follows:
It seems important to note here that the principle underlying the Amount One part Two parts Three parts
different rates per part for bills made in one, two, or three parts was To $25.00 1¢ 1¢ 1¢
to keep the total tax the same, or as close to the same as practical, Above $25 to $50 2¢ 2¢ 1¢
for the three cases; thus a bill made singly paid 3¢ per $100, a bill in Above $50 but less than $100 3¢ 2¢ 1¢
three parts also paid 3¢, and one in duplicate paid a little more, 4¢. It would be interesting to know the basis and authority for this for-
(The U.S. Foreign Exchange and Inland Exchange rates hewed to the mulation, as neither is apparent in the 1864 and 1865 Acts then in
same principle: there a set of three foreign bills paid about the same effect. It does not result from simply rounding up to the nearest cent
total as a domestic note. For example, the blanket rates of 1864 taxed the uniform multi-part taxes set by the statute, which yields:
notes at 5¢ per $100, and a set of three foreign bills at 2¢ per $100 Amount One part Two parts Three parts
apiece, totaling 6¢ per $100.) To $25.00 1¢ 1¢ 1¢
The problems with the Bill Stamp Acts arise with the 1865 Act, Above $25 to $50 2¢ 1¢ 1¢
which extended the tax to bills of less than $100, as follows: Above $50 but less than $100 3¢ 2¢ 1¢
Amount Tax How it could be construed that two-part bills for above $25 to $50
To $25.00 1¢ should pay 2¢ per part is a mini-mystery. One possible scenario is
Above $25 to $50 2¢ the following:
Above $50 but less than $100 3¢
● Rates for bills up to $100 were treated as “flat” rates and applied
Conspicuously absent is any distinction between notes, drafts and
uniformly on each part of a multi-part bill.
bills made singly, and bills made in two or more parts, as was laid
● Rates for multi-part bills over $100 were applied to items of
out so clearly in the 1864 Act. On the one hand, given the underlying
lesser amounts.
principle of the bill stamp taxes, this makes perfect sense: the 1865
● Where two different rates applied to one document, the lower
Act presumably made no such distinction precisely because it intended
of the two prevailed.
the taxes to be the same in all cases.
On the other hand, it would have been helpful if it had spelled out These assumptions lead to the tables of the Postal Guide, but fly in
how the tax was to be paid on multi-part bills, and specifically how the face of the language and logic of the statutes! This 1867 Postal

9. Guide formulation does not appear in the 1867 Stamp Act, which or less—probably constituted a very small fraction of the instruments
was passed about a year later, on December 21, 1867. It would be subject to stamp tax. Many more promissory notes and time drafts
extremely interesting to know if it also appeared in subsequent Guides were generated than bills of exchange; moreover commercial bills,
(suitably modified to incorporate the exemption for amounts less than typically made in sets of three, were usually for amounts above $50.
$25 enacted in 1867). The bill stamp taxes remained in effect until The amount of tax over- or underpaid was presumably also small.
March 4, 1882, so there was plenty of time for this to be ironed out. A plausible working hypothesis is that all parts were stamped at 1¢
In practice, the instruments for which stamping was controversial— as a matter of convenience, with two-part bills for above $25 to $50
two-part bills for amounts less than $100, and three-part bills for $50 possibly paying 2¢ per part as per the 1867 Post Office directive.
References
Canadian Postal Guide. Compiled by John Dewé, Post Office Inspector. Printed by John Lovell, Montreal, 1867. (http://www.archive.org/
details/cihm_03899)
Thanks to Richard Fleet and Christopher Ryan for help in researching this article.
For comments: mikemahler@roadrunner.com