As the Hudson’s Bay Company winds down its operations the public’s attention has turned to the fate of some of the company’s historical artifacts, including the 1670 royal charter that established the company.
Since the Ontario Superior Court ruled that the company could auction off these artifacts, concerns have been raised that the royal charter in particular could be purchased by a private collector, who might then move this key part of Canadian history from public access or even from the country altogether.
Some have asked that efforts be made to ensure that items of cultural importance to or that might belong to Indigenous Peoples not fall into the hands of private collectors. Others have suggested that certain objects, including the royal charter, be transferred to a public archival institution or museum to ensure that they remain accessible to the public and also in Canadian hands.
The royal charter which launched Hudson’s Bay Company, issued by King Charles II in 1670, is shown in an undated handout image. The department store wants to auction off the document along with its trove of art and historical artifacts as part of its creditor protection process.Â
THE CANADIAN PRESSThe public concern about the fate of some of these artifacts and the fear that they might end up in the wrong hands appears at first glance to be reasonable. After all, the Hudson’s Bay Company has become because of the role it played in the establishment of a fur trading system that would come to serve as the basis of a colonial commercial economy. This commercial economy, moreover, would later give shape to what would turn into the political entity called Canada.
At the same time, concerns over the fate of these artifacts reveal the perils of linking a nation’s history or its identity too closely to the commercial interests of a private company. By fighting to prevent the royal charter from falling into the wrong hands, for example, Canadians have taken what is essentially a corporate charter and transfigured it into a founding document of our national life. In so doing we have tied our political origins and our national identities to the commercial interests of this one private company.
The Fairmont Banff Springs hotel in Alberta.
Courtesy Fairmont Banff SpringsCanadians have done the same thing with other private companies, such as the Canadian Pacific Railway, which has become a potent symbol — — of national identity and part of the history of our country. We may choose to treat these private companies and their artifacts as key parts of our history and of our collective identities.
But let us not delude ourselves into thinking that the royal charter setting up the Hudson’s Bay Company is anything more than a document written to protect the private interests of that one company.
Even so, the fate of these artifacts does matter; they are not merely private objects to be auctioned off to the highest bidder or for the sole benefit of this one corporate entity. Many Canadians have developed a sense of ownership over these artifacts in much the same way that they have developed an attachment to the grand old buildings that have housed the Hudson’s Bay department stores.
The Bay’s flagship store in downtown Montreal is seen in 2005.Â
RYAN REMIORZ The Canadian PressOnce a building is built, it becomes part of the visual landscape of a city and of a nation and it becomes part of the imaginations of the people who walk by it every day. These buildings may have been financed by private interests and for private purposes and they may sit on private land, but they also serve as visual projections into the public spaces of a city and in the process become part of the collective lives of the members of a national community.
In the process, people develop a sense of ownership over the built environment that surrounds them and will fight to preserve what has become an important backdrop to their own lives. Similarly, people have developed particular ideas about the role that Hudson’s Bay has played in the life of their country and in the process have developed a sense of ownership over the artifacts of this private company.
This sense of public ownership over the artifacts of Hudson’s Bay has not stood in the way of the company’s private needs. In fact, the Hudson’s Bay Company has until recently very successfully monetized its association with Canadian history by offering a wide array of branded merchandise designed to capitalize on the sense of national feeling that it has nurtured with its marketing campaigns.
Artifacts displayed in the Hudson’s Bay Company Gallery at the Manitoba Museum in Winnipeg on April 17. In 1994 the HBC collection of over 10,000 objects was gifted to Canada and the Manitoba Museum became it’s home.Â
JOHN WOODS THE CANADIAN PRESSAnd so, after years of profiting from its carefully cultivated association with Canadian culture the company cannot now claim to owe nothing to those who have bought into its branding exercises and who now feel a sense of ownership over the company’s artifacts. Besides, the value of that royal charter derives in large part from its association with Canadian history.
In the end, efforts should indeed be made to place the royal charter in public hands and also to preserve the old department store buildings as important parts of our built environment. But let us not treat these buildings or their artifacts as anything more than the detritus of a private company that happened to operate in Canada and that happened to slide into bankruptcy.
The Hudson’s Bay Company is in the process of disentangling itself from the country with which it has been so closely associated for so long. Perhaps it is time for Canadians to disentangle their own histories and identities from the artifacts of a soon-to-be defunct private company.
To join the conversation set a first and last name in your user profile.
Sign in or register for free to join the Conversation