■.%.. (\ ^> %^ w IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) .^^ wu c^. y \. Wo fA 1.0 I.I IIIIM IM IliU IIIIIZ2 h& lllllio 1.8 1.25 i.4 116 == ll 1 ^ 6" >*■ 'rl/ <9 'a "v/Zm CSSS' ^# 'eff e1 /^ °-y ^j^' *>.' °w Photographic Sciences Corporation 9?^ 4* # ^•\^" .^^"^ ^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 *1» \^ iP ///// ^ ifj'.- e CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproduct>ons / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques M s^ ©1981 Technical and Bibliographic Notes/iVSotes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of th<9 images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change tha usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilmd le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exempiaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliogiraphique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage sont indiquds ci-dsssous. D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag§e □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes D Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pelliculde D Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur^es et/ou pellicul^es I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque V Pages discoloured stai^ted or foxed/ Pages ddcolordes, tachetdes ou piqudes D n Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiquus en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents n Pages detached/ Pages d^tach^ss Showthrough/ Transparence , Quality of print varies/ Quality in^gale de i'lmpression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplemenlaire D D Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int^rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans ie texte, mats, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. □ G Only edition available/ Seuie Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmtd to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partieilement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont dt6 filmdes i nouveau de fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. D Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppi^mentaires; This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X □ 7\ 12X 16X 20X 26X 30X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grfice d la g6n6rosit6 de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont 6x6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de fa condition et de la nettetd de Texempiaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper cover? are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with s printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original espies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on thd last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^^> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon 'e cas: le symbole — ^- signifie "A SUIVRE", te symbole V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d pb/tir de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche 6 droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'imagas ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. I - 2 3 ^ ^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 COMMENTS ON THR PROCEEDINGS AND EVIDENCE ON THE CHARGES Preferred by Mk. HUNTINGTON, M.P. AGAIJ3T THB GOVERNMENT OF CANADA. MONTREAL : ''gazette" ;i?»|i»^ting Bou$o. neai|ly opposite the i^ost l|)f(jce« 1873. COMMENTS ON THK CHARGES AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT. The proceedings of the Royal (Jommission, appointed to take evi- dence on oath in support of the charges preferred by Mr. Huntington against the Government of the Douiiuion, having terminated, it is pro- posed to submit, in as condensed a form as circumstances will admit, the substance of the evidence taken before the Commissio>), and its bearing on the charges. It .'^eenis not undesirable to preface this statement by a few remarks on the proceedings in the case, which, from various causes, have been protracted much longer than would have been desirable. On tbe 2ud April Mr. Iluiitington, a member of the Flouse of Commons moved, "That Mr. Huntington, a member of this House, having stated in hi« place, that he is credibly informed and believes that he can establish by satisfactory evidence, — "That in anticipation of the Legislation of last Sessiou, as to the Pacific Railway^ an agreement was made between Sir Hngh Allan, acting for liimself and certain other Canadian promoters, and G. W. McMullen, acting for certain United States capitalists, whereby the latter agreed to furnish all the funds necessary for the construction of the contemplated Railway, and to give the former a certain per centa^'e ot interest, in consideration of their interest and position, the scheme agreed on being ostensibly that of a Canadian Company with Sir Hugh Allan at its head,— " That the Government were aware that negotiations were pending between these parties, — " Tliat subsequently, an understanding was come to between the Govetn- ment and Sir Hugh Allan and Mr. Abbott, M. P.,— that Sir Hugh Allan and his friends should advance a large sura of money for the purpose of aiding the Elections of Ministers and their supporters at the ensuing- General Election, — and that he and his friends should receive the contract for the construction of the Railway, — " That accordingly Sir Hugh Allan did advance a large sum of money for the purpose mentioned, and at the solicitation, and under the pressing instances of Ministers, — "That part of the monies, expended by Sir Hugh Allan in connection with the obtaining of the Act of Incorporation and Charter, were paid tc him by the said United States Capitalists under the agreement with him, it is ^ " Ordered, That a Committee of seven Members be appointed to enquire into all the circumstances connected with the negotiations for the construc- tion of the Pacific Railway— with the legislation of last Session on the sub- ject and with the granting of the Charter to Sir Hugh Allan and others ; with power to send for persons, papers and records ; and with instructions to report in full the evidence taken before, and all proceedingB of said Com- mittee." ' i- 6 It is to be observed that prior ♦x) Mr. Huntington's motion li. had been announced in the Toronto Otohi', the leading organ of the Opposi- tion, that th's motion was intended as a vote of want of confidence ia the Government, and it was accordingly determined by the Government to accept the challenge. It was assumed that in bringing forw-iid so ■eriouH a chnrgo airainRt the Government, Mr. Huntington would offer gome explanations ; that he would state more precisely the nature and extent of his charge, and the character of the evidence by which it was to be suhtained. As, coKi-rury to precedent in all analagous ca^es, he merely read his resolution, the First Minister had nothing to reply to, and contented himself with leaving it to the House whether Mr. Hunt- ington was entitled, on such a statement, to obtain a committoe, of which he would have been chairman, to endeavour, under the pretence of investigating a charge of corruption against the GovernnuMit, to prove that money had been expended by the Government candidates, a« it notoriously was by the Opposition candidates, at the general election. It may be asserted, without fear of contradiction, that the fact that Sir Hngh Allan, a very wealthy and influential supporter of the Go- vernment, had subscribed liberally to the election funds, was notorious at the time of the elections in July and August, 1872, not only in the City of Montreal, where he resides, but elsewhere. Had such o c1!.-m-:';c bo; :i prcllurc:! by Mr. iluntington, it would most assuredly not have been denied ; but if it had been further alleged that the election funds employed by the Ministerial candidates had been used for bribery or for ether illegal purposes, and if it had been pro- posed to appoint a committee to enquire into the subject, roost cer- tainly the House of Commons, if it had consented to such an enquiry, which it could not pc3sibly have done, until all petitions charging bribery had been disposed of, would have taken care that it should have been a strictly impartial one, and that it should have had for its object to ascertain whether the law had been violated ; and if so, whether one or both of the political parties were open to censure. The Canadian law against corrupt practices is modelled on that of England, and is very stringent ; but even without violating that law, heavy ex- penses must be incurred at elections, which are strictly legal, and which often fall heavily on the less wealthy members of political parties. Hence in Canada as in England, it has been the invariable practice since the introduction of party government, for both parties to obtain aid from their wealthy supporters. Mr. Huntington did not venture to base his charge on the fact that Sir Hugh Allan had contributed to the Minis- terial election fund, nor did he allege that money had been illegally spent by the Ministerial candidates ; he affirmed in his resolutions that " an undei'standing was come to;" that •* Sir Hugh Allan and his friends," meaning " certain United States capitalists," " should advance a large *' .sum of money for the purpose of aiding the elections of Ministers and " their supporters at the ensuing general election, and that he and his " friends should receive the contract for the construction of the «' railway." On this distinct charge the novernment joined issue, and the First Minister having given it an eraphatio denial in his place, proposed so. the appointment of a Commiteee of five by the House for the purpose, of mvestigatinj; it. In the course of the diacusBion ot this resolution ii was suggested by the Leader f^f the Opposition tliat a Bill should be introduced giving power to this and other Committees to take evidence on oath. Sir John MacJouald expressed his opinion tliat the evidence ouj^ht to bo taken uuder oath. Several uther members strongly expressed the same opinion ; and Sir John Mucdonuld, after intimating his doubt as to the power of the Canadian Parliament to pjiss an Act authorizing a Committee to take evidence on oath, promised that either by Com- mission or by Act of Parliament the witnesses iihoulJ be sworn. It may be convenient to dispose here of this branch of the proceedings. Mr. Holton, one ol the Opposition leaders, immediately objected to a Commission, on the ground that it would be uuder the control of the Government, and though Sir John Maudonald undertook that the Com- mission should report to the House, and be composed of the same mem- bers selected by the House as its Committee j and although he further oflFered to move a Committee in thvi ordinary way which would not have power to take evidence on oath, he did not succeed in satisfying the opposition. Finally, the Committee of Five was struck, and the Chairman of that Committee, in due course, introduced a Bill empower- ing the Committee to take evidence on oath. Sir John 3Iacdonald again expressed his doubt as to the constitutionality of the Bill, and warned the House that it would be a blot on the legislation of tie country if the Act should be disallowed in England, lie repeated his oiferof a Boyal Commission. Mr. James ^iacdonald and Mr, Glass, both lawyers on the Ministerial side, concurred with Sir John Macdonald, as did many mem- bers who did not speak, but the Opposition Members taunted the Government with obstructing the Bill, and it was finally ordered for a second reading. In the course of the Debate on the second reading Mr. Palmer and Mr. Carter, eminent lawyers from New Brunswick and Quebec, doubted the jurisdiction of the House in this matter, and Sir John Macdonald contented himself, in view of the unanimous feeling of the Opposition, supported by the opinion of the Chairman of the Committee, with admitting that the House ought to have the power if they had it not ; and should the Bill be disallowed, he supposed there would be no difficulty in getting an Imperial Act sanctioning it. Such were the circumstances attendant on the passing of the Oaths Bill. The doubts were entirely on the Ministerial side. Not only Sir John A. Macdonald, but Mr. James Macdonald of Nova Scotia, Mr. Pabner, of New Brunswick, Mr. Carter of Quebec, and Mr. Glass, of Ontario, warned the House that they were violating the Union Act. However, the bill passed, and received the assent of the Governor General, though not without hesita- tion. After the Governor's assent to the Vnll the Commit tee met, when Sir .John A. Macdonald objected to proceeding to business in the absence of Sir George Cartier, Mr. Abbott and Sir Hugh Allan, the two last; being the persons with whom the alleged understanding took place, and without whose evidence it was obviously impossible to dispose saticfae- tonly of the charges. The majority of the Committee admitted that the demand for delay was I'ousonable, and reported rcaolutious to the House asking leave to adjourn to the second of July, by which riginal of the 'rustce I such great Corn- stood raittee itee to obser- letteis tion of ber to liy be properly submitted to the Select Committee, to whom the whole ousf had been referred by the House. Mr. Speaker gave his decision us follows : " The question of order, as I understand it, is this : Whether " a member on makinf^ a motion is to be permitted to read certain " letters and papers which it is said will support that motio;], and which " relate to a charge referred on a previous occasion to a Select Committt •. ** for investigation. This is bringing into the House for decision evi- " (ience that must come before that Committee in support of the charges. *• 1 do thiukj and 1 appeal to both sides of the House, that upon the point " of order, as well as upon the strong justice of the case, I am bound to " rule that the Hon. member cannot read these papers." This decision of the Speaker not having been appealed from, became the decision of the House. The resolution was then carried yiemcon. the so called Trustee was in due course summoned before the Committee, and produced a sealed package, entrusted to him for safe keeping, ot the contents of which he declared himself ignorant. The package was restored to him after being endorsed by the Chairman and the members of the Com- mittee. In the discussion on Mr. Huntington's resolution, and on the point of order, Sir John Macdonald pointed out that the hon. member was pursuing the same course that he had formerly pursued in attempting to lay before the House evidence criminal in its nature, so as to leave « long time for this partial evidence to be before the country without any evidence b>;ing afforded for its rebuttal. Notwithstanding the decision of the Speaker on the 16th May, and the n^auifei^t injustice of publish- ing portions of evidence in support of charges which all parties in Par- liament had agreed to refer to the investigation of a C'ommittee, b'fore ■which the evidence was to be taken under oath, hardly had the Com- mittee adjourned early in July under the circumstances already de- scribed, than the leading organs of the Opposition, the Toronto GLbe and Montreal Herald, obviously with the concurence of the minority of the Committee, published copies of the very letters of Sir Hugh Allan which the Speaker had refused Mr. Huntington permission to read in the House, on the ground that it would be " a most unfair and irregular course,"' *' a course that would not be permitted in a court of justice." This most irregular proceeding was followed up by one, if possible, still more scandalous. Mr. Gr. VV. McMuUen, the principal witness in support of Mr. Huntington's charges, published in the form of a letter a narrative of certain transaetions between Sir Hugh Allan and himself, professing also to relate the substance of conversatiooB which took place between them, and supplementing his narrative with " authenticated copies of documents which bear on the subject, and which will demonstrate the manner of conducting the business." The documents in question were stolen from a private desk or drawer, and have no reference whatever, direct or indirect, to the Pacific Kailway, But introduced by Mr. McMuUen as supporting his charge of a corrupt bargain between the Government and Sir Hugh Allan, it can excite BO surprise that they produced a very startling impression on the public mind. Mr. McMullci likewise applied to the Hon. A. B. Foster, one of the Senators of the Dominion, as one " persoually cognizant of many of the facts," asking him for a letter in support of his statements. Mr. ^6 .! Foster was one of the witnesses, whose naniei were given to the Com- Inittce by Mr. Huntington, but he Becrns not to htive deemed it iin* proper to give to another witness for pnblic.ition a letter not under oath, sind which was calculjited to prcjudis'^ the pnblio mind. This is not the place to comment either on Mr. Mc^fullen■B narrative or Mr. Foster's letter ; they arr; referred to nit ovidenco of th'" gro^^s injustice of the proceedings adopted by the Opposition to influence public opinion against the Government, rt the very time when Piirliiiraent was about to meet pursuant to adjournmeftt. Under the very peculiar circumstan- ces of thin case, owios to the indecent and flagrantly unjust conduct of the Opposition, the members of the Government authorized n statement to be n>!>de, that " In so far n* any part of tho^^e conununionii^ns, or of " the documents published with them, tends or purports to implicate any " member of the Government in any ;igrcemont, promise, or undcrstand- ** ing to grant or to further the granting of tlie charti;r of the Canadian " Pacific liailway Company, or the contract tor the building of that *' railway as compensation for assistance to the late general elections, " or for pecuniary considerations of any kiml, or upoij any ground, or " for any reasons inconsistent with their duty ;is members of the Go- " vernmcnt, thos« communications and documents :.rc citlier absolutely " and entirely false, or so expressed is to convoy an absolutely false ** impression." While the Members of the Gov(;rnm(M\t fflt ii tlicir dutv to make the foregoing announcement they became even more stronuiy impressed with the conviction that it was indispensMbk', that the evidence must be taken under oath. To tliin all parties in the I)ouidin«.'ly, they raised the cry *hat the object of the Government was to ou-t the H deal with the evidence, and can "refer it to aeommiMee if it should se«- fit. It is unnecessary to dwell ou the proceedings at the prorogation when the Opposition members displayed a vioU^nce w'^ioh cintiot but (h tract from their political reputation. They, and tiny nione, are rei*pu!'- complaint sh'- Id bo made of the proceedings before the Coniinu«.«tioii, .^f^. IIr.ntin}>t > who declined to appear before it, and to render his aid in eliciting th- truth, must be held chiefly responsible. It is time now to consider the bearing of the oriflcnce taken li.fore the Royal Commission on the charges pr«f Mivd by Mr, lIunti>i,'ton. The ^'ist of the charge was that there w^s an understanding b>i\vecn the Government and Sir Hugh Allan, and Mr. Abbott, M.P., tin Sir Hugh Allan and his friends (meaning c(nMain Annrican capit' lists), were to advance a large sum of money Ibr the j.ur --e (S aidi.'.u- the Ministers and their supporters at the ensuing general election, and that h« and his frienda should receive the contract for the construction of tbcj Kailroad. The branch of the charge which relates to nn agreement betwr. n Sir Hugh Allan, and certain American c«ipit"«lists, was oriir'nally ritaliBt^ into bii ooupany. Completely discomfited as to this branch of the charge, the 8 J opposition liave changed their ground, and it is no longer pretended that there wns any trafficking, directly or indirectly, with foreifioera. It is Sir Hugh Allan that is said to have been induced to contributa to the elections, by — what ? Was it ever cootem^.lated or proposed by imy one, to exclude from the tfompany to be formed, to construct the Pacific Railroad, the wealthiest man in the Dominion, be being willing to incur the responsibility of joining the company ? What had the Government to offer to Sir Hugh Allan ? Parliament had already decided, not only the amount of subsidy, but the terras of the charters to the Canada Pacific and the loteroceanio Company, respectively. The single point of controversy wrs the exclusion of the American element, and that the Government decided against Sir Hugh Allan's wishes. But it is alleged thai Sir Hugh waj promised the Presidency of the Company, and that this he was very anxious to secure. The allegation is notetrictly correct. When a certain scheme of amalgama- tion was under discussion, which contemplated the appointment of 4 dir«ctors by the Canada Pacific, 4> by the Interoceanio, and U by the Governuient, the Government promised to u"se its iofluence in favor of Sir Hugh Allan for the Piesidency. He was already head of one company, and the choice wa.'i between him and the head of the other company, Mr. Mucphcrson. Surely advening to the fact that Sir Hugh Allan had been for months in correspondence with the Government before (ho Interoceanic w«s thought of, thai, the Government had conceded to the Interoceanic the exclusion of the Americans, which was all tlipy professed to Reek, other than corrupt motives may be assigned for the promise of their influence^ which, after all, might not have secured their object. The result was that the propoead amalgama- tion never took place, and although there were subsequeit negouiatioas for amalgamation on a diflForent basis, the final arrangement was a new company, and no influence respecting the Presidency was employed. It is not, however contemplated to seek to shelter the Government under the complete demolitioi\ of that portion of Mr. Huntington's charges which relate.': to intrigues with foreigners ; a broader ground must and ought to be taken, viz., an absolute denial that th re was any under- standing expressed or implied with Sir Hugh Allan, personally or in connection with associates, whether British subjects or foreigners. The alleged understanding- is said i have taken place between the Government and Sir Hugh Allan, and Mr. ^bbott, M.P. It was clearly understood that it would b proved by oral or documentary evidence, or by both combined, and accordingly Mr. Huntington furnished the Committee with the names or 38 witnesses to be examined in support of his charge, and subsequently he gave the name of a gentleman des- cribed as a Trustee, who hela " original documents of the greatest im- " portance in the investigation of the charges." Mr. Huntington further declared publicly that he would be able to prove his charge by tho evidence of ijir John A. M«:'donald and Sir Prancis HinCKS, the latter of whom was the first witness on his list, it is important to bear all this in mind, as it is now contended by Mr. Huntingtou an.i his political friends, that the mere fact that Sir Hugh Allan subsari bed largely to the election funds is of itself proof that he did so in ooasaqueDce of.aa understanding. If the position now taken be a tenable 06e, it is unfor- :. io-,> , ■/li.Mjiiil.'y i tunate that Mr. Huntington should have allejred the existence of an under- standing that Sir Hugh Allan and his friends should receive the contract for the construction of the railway, and sbouM have furnished the names of witnasses to prove it. It is, however, fortunate that the Government is not obliged to rely on the absence of all proof of the alleged under- standing, but is in a position to demonstrate that no such understanding could have taken place. As gi'eat reliance has been placed by the Opposition on certain letters and telegrams written by members of the Dominion Government in the month of July, 1872, it seems desirable before noticing these documents to state the precise position of the rela- tions of the Government to the Pacific Railway at the period when the alleged understanding was arrived at. In the session of the T Dminion Parliament, held in 1.8V 1, it was decided first, that the Government and Parliament of C-anada would secure the construction of a ll*iiway to the Pacific as one of the conditions on which the Province of British Columbia entered the Union. Secondly, that ibis railw.iy was not to be a public work, but to be constructed through the instrumentality of a chartered company. Thirdly, a voteof money for t preliminary survey was grunted, and during 1871 several parties were engaged in carry- ing 00 such survey. Member? of ilie Government trok no stejis to pro- mote the organization of companiea. In the early part of the month of July, 1871, a deputation came to Ottawa on the part of certain Ameri- can capitalists, offering to undertake to form a company for the construc- tion of the Pacific Railway. Tliey were accompanied by some Canadian gentlemen, and had an interview with two of the Ministers, Sir John A. Macdonald, and Sir Francis Iliucks, who happened to be in Ottawa at the time. They received no enc«uragement whatever, and were informed that tie Government was not prepared to enter into negociations on the subject. Subsequently the sauie parties, through an authorized ugent, proposed to nnke an attempt to interest Sir Hugh Allan and other Canadian Capitalists in the project, but received no encouragement whatever to do :'o. At a later period Sir Francis Hincks furnished to Sir Hugh Allan the names of the American capitalists who had made the proposal in July, and Sir Hugh Allan, on his own responsibility, corresponded with these gentlemen chiefly through their agent Mr. G. W. McMullen. In October, 1871, Sir Hugh Allan, accompanied by Mr. McMullen and Mr. Smith of Chicago, had an interview with some members of the Government when thej were again informed that the Government was not prepared to negociat^ on the subject. No further prnpoiition was made to the (Tovernmenc for several months after Oct., 1871 Sir Hugh Allan, shortly after the interview referred to, paid a visit to England, and only returned in December when he resumed his negociations with his American associates. Up to this time no other par*ies in Canada, unconnected with Sir Hugh Allan, hid given the least intimation to the Government that they were prepared to organize a company to construct a Pacific Railway. There is reason to believe that but for Sir Hngh Allan's .merican associates there never would have been any rivalry whatever regarding the Pacific Railway scheme. In the evidence of the Hon. D. L. Macpherson, he states: *" Had it ^* not been for my objections to Sir Hugh A lUn'« scheme, and mj '^desire in the interests of the oountry to frustrate that scheme, I i ■ i . , . • • - ? 10 " probably would not have appeared in connection vrith the Canadian " Pacific Railway at all. It was only after I found that Sir Hugh " Allan would not abandon his American associates, that I proposed *' to certain gentlemen in Toronto and elsewhere, to apply for a Char- " ter, and to be prepared to do whatever might seem best when the '' time for action arrived. The gentlemen to '«f horn I addressed myself *^ agreed in opinion with me, and we pelitioned for an Act incorpor- " ating the Inter- Oceanic Company." Without desiring in the least degree to reflect on the motives which induced Mr. Macpherson, shortly before the Session of Parliament of 1872, to organize an opposition to Sir Hugh Allan's company, it cannot but be a matter of regret in view of subsequent events that for many monthfi of 1871, no influential Canadian but Sir Hugh Allan evinced a desire to promote the construction of a Pacific Railway, by means of a company. It is a mere act of justice to Sir Hugl-. A.llan to point out that the organization of American capitalists was formed without his knowledge, that he was invited on terms that he no doubt thought advantageous as a business man, to join that organization, that he was never informed by the Government that no American capitalists would be permitted to take an interest in the company, and that he could not at the time of his first negociatioos with Mr. Macpherson, have honourably withdi-awr from his association with gentlemen, who had in fact taken him into a scheme in which originally he had no interest whatever. As beai'ing on the present cor.troversy, the negociations between Sir Hugh Allan and Mr. Macpherson are of little importance. The Government had nothing whatever to do with them, and had no oognizance of them. Mr. Macpherson, though he took the field late, bad a strong public sympathy with him, in opposiiion to the Ameriean . element in Sir Hugh AUan^s company, but on the other hand, entirely without reference to the question of whether Americans should be admitted or not, there was a very strong feeling in the Province of Quebec in favour of the Allan company. There was an idea strongly prevalent that the Inter-Oceanic Company was anxious to promote the interests of Ontario in preference to those of Quebec ; and there was likewise a very strong feeling prevalent in the Province of Quebec, and especially in Montreal, that the Grand Trunk Railway Company was hostile to the railroad enterprizes promoted by Sir Hugh Allan. Sojie of these had no direct connection with the Pacific Railway, and were not entitled to aid trom the Dominion, but they were intended to be subsidiary line? to the Pacific, and to be links in connecting that great National line with the City of Montreal. All these facts have a bearing on tha Pacific Railway negociations. When in the Session of 1872, the Government was obliged to submit a measure to Parlia- ment for the construction of the Pacific Railway, it carefully avoided entering into the disputes between the rival companies. It obtained t|he sanction of Parliament to an Act fixing the subsidy in money and land, to be given to the company consenting to oonstruct the road, and defining the conditions to which the company would be subject. It likewise obtained power to incorporate a new company, in case it should fjEiil to come to a satisfactory agreement with either of the two com- panies which were incorporated on similar terms, viz., the Canada Canadian Sir Hugh proposed a Char- when tho ed myself incorpor- es which anient of it cannot or manj I evinced y means to point without tliought t he was ts would ould not on, have vhc had ' interest )ciations lortanc*. had no 3ld late, meriean entirely . ould be /ificc of strongly lote tho 5re was Juebee, •mpany Allan. ay, and ded to ig that facts Session Parlia- voided tained jy and d, and t. It ihould com- an'ada . 11 FaoifijQ, popularly known as the Allan Company, and the Inter-Oceanic Company, popularly known as the MacphcrBon Company. At the close of the Session then, Parliament had fixed the amount to be granted in land and money in aid of the said road, it had incorporated two com- panies with power to amalgamate, hut to either of which the Govern- ment might entrust the building of the road, and it had empowered the Government, if it should see fit, to incorporate a new company. At this time, a single difficulty stood in the way of perfect agreement between all classes of Canadians, and that was Sir Hugh Allan's conoection with certain American capitalists. As Mr. Macpherson stated in his evidence, the Interoceanic Company was got up expressly because Sir Hugh Allan would not abandon his American associates. The Government, desirous not only on grounds of public policy, and in deference to the general feeling of the country, but likewise in accord- ance with their own long formed opinions, to eliminate the American element fiom the Pacific Company, let it be clearly understood that they desired an amalgamation of the two companies on the basis of the exclusion of the Anifc.icans. The general election, however, was at hand, and before any progress could be made in the negociation, the ministers of the crown were obliged to separate, and were for some weeks unable to meet in council. It was at' this tin)e that the late Sir George E. Cartier, one of the ministers, being in Montreal, and a candidate for obe of the divisions of that city, which he had represented in tho previous Parliament, had several interviews with Sir Hugh Allaaxiu the subject of the arrangements for conBtru3ting the Pacific Railroad. Sir George Cartier appears to have kept the First Minister advised of all that took place between Sir Hugh Allan and himself, and Sir John A. Macdouald was at the same time in communication with Mr. Macpher- son, the provisional President of the Interoceanic Company. It is evident from Sir John M acdonald's .telegram to Sir George Cartier, dated 2Gth July, 1872, that he then hoped that there would bp no difficulty in effecting the anr.algamation. Sir Hugh Allan was to be compelled to abandon his American associates, but it was the opinion of Sir Jolin, that it was very reasonable, in view of his wealth and position, and his previous negociations with the Government, that he should be appointed President of the amalgamated Company. It was a point on which he or Mr. ]\Iacpher8on would have to give way. Mr. Macpherson informed Sir John that he could not" in justice to Ontario ''concede any preference to Quebec in the matter of th>i Presidfucy, or " in any other particular. He says the question about the Presidency " should be left to the Board." Sir John then, with a view of inducing Sir Hugh Allan to meet Mr. Macpherson, authoized Sir George Cartier ♦' to assure Allan .tl^at the influence of the Government " willje exercised to secure him the position of President. The other {'terms to be as agreed on betwern Macpherson and Abbott." It is to be observed here that the Board of Directors was to consist of a eerxuin number from each of the riral companies, tuid a certtiin number appointed by Government, and with the lattsr alone Goverument could have any influence. The only other document tjaat has been published in connection with Sir George Cartier's negociations, is his letter of 3§*h July, 1872, to Sir Hugh Allan. This letter was the result of a 12 I ill M pressure oa the part of Sir Hugh Allan for " cerUiin modificatioos oi " the Lorms of the above telegram from Sir John Maodonald," Sir Hugh states in hia affidavit, that Sir George became convinced that he was entitled to have certain modifications conceded to him "and *' expressed his willingucss to recommend them to his colleagues." Sir Hugh requested that Sir George Cartier would put in writing what he had verbally stated, and accordingly he wrote the letter of 30th July, which is as follows : — «' Montreal, 30th July, 1872. " Dear Sir Hc«h, — I enclose you copies of telegrams received from Sir John A. Macdonald ; and wHh reference to their conton+s I would say that in my opinion the Governor in Coun^^il will approve of the amalgamation of your company with the Inter-Oceanic company, under the name of the Canodiau Pacific Railway Company ; the Provisional Board of the amalgamated company to be composed of seventeen mcmberp, of whom four shall be named from the Province of Quebec, by the Canada Pacific Railway Company, four from the Province of Ontario by the luter-Oceanic Railway Company, and the remainder by the Government ; the amalgamated Company to have the power specified in the 10th section. of the Act incorporating the Canada Pacific Railway Company, and the agreement of amalgamation to be executed between the companies within two months from this date. "The Canada Pacific Company might take the initiative in procuring the amalgamation, and if the Interoceanio Company should not execute an Hgretment of amalgamation upon such terms, and within such limited time, i think the contemplated arrangement should be made with the Canada Pacific Company under its charter. " Upon the subscription and payment on accoimt of stock being made as required by the Act of la«t Session, respecting the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, I have no doubt but that the Governor in Council will agree with the Company for the construction and working of the Canadian Pacific Rai'way, with such branches as shall be agreed upon, and will grant to the Company all such subsidies and assistance as they a^e empowered to do by the Government Act, I believe all the advantages which the Government Act empowers the Government to confer upon any company will be required to enable the works contemplated to be successfully carried through, and I am convinced that they will be accorded to the Company to be formed by amalgamation, or to the Canada Pacific Company, as the case may be. " I would add, that as I approve of the measures to which I have referred in this letter, I shall use my best endeavors to have them carried into effect. " Very truly yours, (Signed,) GEO. E. CARTIER." On this letter, which has been the subject of much comment, it is to be observed, that there is nothing inconsistent with the most perfect honesty of purpose on the part of both ncgociators. Sir Hugh Allan was impressed witL the idea which he conveyed to Mr. McMul'len ia his letter of IGth July, that Sir George Cartier, and perhaps Sir John Macdonald, were desirous of incorporating a new company, a scheme to which he naturally had a, great objection, though, ultimately, ht was compelled by circumstances to assent to it. He therefore desired that in case of the failure of the amalgamation scheme, owing to the refusal of the Interoceanic Company to come into it. " the arrangements should '* be made with the ( -anada Pacific Company, uuder its charter." Sir George, however, acted with all due caution. He gave his individual x>pim*on as to what he tijought the GoTernment would do, and wound. 13 ioDS Ojt Sir hat he "and I shall use my best up his letter by assuring Sir Hugh Allan *' eudoavours to have them carried into effect." • he letter was wholly non-committal as far as the Government was concerned, and It is evident that Sir Hugh Allan was of that opinion himself, as he deemed it expedient to endea/our to fortify himself witli a similar promise from Sir John A. Macdonald. Sir John seems at once to have perceived the danger of giving such a pledge. Anxious as he and all hi^ colleagues were to procure an amalgamation and thus recon- cile the Ontario and Quebec discordant elements, he was aware that if the charter were given to either Company to the exclusion of the other, fuel would be added to a flame already raging in cfcli Province to a daniierous extent. He prnmptiy signitied his objection to the proposal, intimating his intention of proceeding to Montreal, but Sir Hugh Allaa at once consented that Sir George Cartier's letter should be considered as withdrawn. The only doounieiit therefore on which Mr. Iluutiog- ton has to rely is Sir John Macdonalds telegram of the 26th Jul_y, and it will hardly be pretended that that affords any ground for his charges. How far, then, is the charge supported by the witnesses designated by Mr. Huntington ? There were 34 in number, and 6 additional ones were summoned by the Commission, making 40. Of these 36 were examined before the Commission, two were absent in England or elsewhere, and two declined to appear, viz., Mr. George W. McMulIen, and the Hon. A. B. Foster. The last named genclemen, have, as already stated, })rofessed to state, though not on oath, all that they knew on the subject. Not a single one of the witnesses examined before the Commis.sion knew anything of an understanding between the Government and Sir H. Allan and Mr.Abbott. The great majority of the witnesses knew nothing at all about the expenditure of money at the elections, but 5 witnesses, unconnected with Government, admitted that they were aware that Sir Hugh Allan had subscribed liberally to the elections, chiefly to that in the Eastern division of Montreal. Six of the Ministers, including the First Minister, were examined, all of whom positively swore that there was no under- standing whatever within their knowledge that Sir Hugh Allan or his friends were to have the contract or any advantage in connection with the Pacific Railway. Sir Hugh Allan and Mr. Abbott, the other par- ties to the understanding, swore likewise that there was no such arrange- ment. But in addition to this positive testimony, it was conclusively proved that long after the time when it was alleged tliat an understanding was entered into with Sir Hugh Allan and Mr. Abbott that the former and his friends were to receive the contract, the Government was laboring to effect an amalgamation between the two Companies. They did not succeed, but in justice to, Sir Hugh Allan it must be observed that he expressed his readiness to enter into the amalgamation on terms such as the Government would think reasonable. The main diflBculty in the way was the impossibility of convincing the Inter-Oceanic, or Macpherson Company that Sir Hugh Allan had really broken off all connection with the American capitalists with whom he had been origin- ally connected. However all these negociatious were finally terminated in the month of November, 1872, more than four months after the alleged understanding between Sir George Cartier and Sir Hugh Allan bad taken place. Thereupon an entirely new organixation was set on 14 m 'a foot, and it must bo Doticed that in the course of the amalgamation nep;ociations, the Government became convinced that there were in-, fiuential members of the Inter-Oceanic Company who, while concurring generally in Mr. Macpherson's views, were nevertheless of opinion that the Government had adopted adequate precautions against the introduction of foreigners into the new company. These gentlemen were not prepared to adopt Mr. Macpherson's* extreme views, and suffi- cient assurances were given to the Government that in the event of a new company being formed on a wider basis than had yet been proposed, gentlemen heretofore connected with the Inter-Oceanic Com- pany, would bvi prepared to take the position of Directors, as repre.ten- tat've men from the Province of Ontario. In this new organization. Sir Hugh Allan had no preponderating influence, indeed it must be observed, that those who pretend that a keen business man like Sir Hugh Allan would never have expended a large sum of money in aid of elections, unless he had had th« assurance either expressed or implied that he would obtain the Pacific Contract for his company, are singularly at fault, when they have to deal with the fact that a Charter was given, not to Sir Hugh Allan and hii friends (meaning his American associates,) but to 13 gentlemen — 5 from Ontario, 4 from Quebec, and 1 from each of the Provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, British Columbia and Manitoba. It has been shown in evidence, that out of the 13 gentlemen selected, Sir Hugh Allan had only influenced one appointment. Out of the 5 names from Ontario, 3 were those of Directors in the rival Inter-Oceanic or Maepherson Company, and several were appointed notwithstanding the strong opposition of Sir Hugh Allan. If then there is the least force in the argument that Sir Hugh Allan would never have subscribed so liberally to the election funds, unless he had an understanding ihat he and his friends were to get the Contract, surely the fact that he had not only consented to share this very Contract with a rival company, but that he subsequently accepted an equal interest with twelve other persons, with whom he had no previous association or undertaking, is conclusive proof that he had no pledge that he was to receive the Charter for himself and his friends. It has been candidly admitted by one of the most virulent assailants of the Government, that "it has not yet been made apparent to us, " that there was anything in the terms of the Contract, which if " honestly carried out, would necessarily have be 3a injurious to the '' public." It would have been only candid had the writer stated that the Charter was in strict conformity to the Act of Parliament, passed lorg before the alleged understanding. It seems hardly worth discussing that branch of Mr. Huntington's charge, which refers to Sir Hugh Allan's agreement with certain American capitalists, and to the cognizance of the Government of the ncgociations. As to the agreement itself, no member of the Govern- ment ever saw or heard of it until it was published. As to the fact of their being aware of the uegociatious, it is of course true that Sir Hugh Allan when he visited Ottawa in October, 1871, was accom- panied by Mr. McMuUcn, and Mr. Smith of Chicago, who were known to re^jresent other Americans, but no encouragement was given them by the Government, and it must have been well known to them all, ire m-;. urring pinion St the leuaea suffi- of a beea Com- 15 i^r that there was a decided opposition to the introduction of foreigners. The truth is that up to a short period before the Session of 1871, Sir Huo;h Allan and his American aisociutes bel»'»ved themselves masters of the position, and that they had good reason for so believing, is evident from Mr. Macpherson'e evidence already referred to, that the Jntcr-Oceanic Company was started chiefly for the purpose of frustra- ting Sir Hugh Allan's scheme of co-operating with foreigners. The evidence before the Commission is conclusive, in completely exonei *ting the Government from having given the least encouragement to Sir Hugh Allan's original scheme. Long before the elections, and of course before Sir Hugh Allan had subscribed to the election funds, he had received the fullest notification that foreigners wou^d be excluded from the company. That, be it observed, was the only point in dispute — it was what led to the formation of the Inter-Oceanic Company, and it was Mr. Macphcrson's doubt as to Sir Hugh Allan's sincerity, and perhaps, to the efficiency of the safeguards i>''op03ed by the Govern raent, that caused the failure of the amalgam: * -n scheme. While demonstrating the total failure to establish any pu_ of Mr. Hunting- ton's charge, there has been no attempt to deny the ' ct that Sir Hugh Allan contributed liberally to the election funds. He, himself, has stated his reasons. He had detertnined to take an active pari in carrying out not only the Pacific Railway scheme, but other railroads subsidiary thereto. He naturally took a deep interest in preventing the success of a party pledged to obstruct the measure to which the sanction of Parliament had been given. His wealth cnab ed him to afford liberal aid, though it is evident that in the heat and excitement of a general election, he actually subscribed much more than he had originally contemplated. The election expenditure, however, is not, as has been already stated, Mr. Huntington's charge, and but for the base attempt to connect this expendituve with the Pacific Railway charter, by the use of stolen documents, h ought not to have been enquired into, unless shown to have been advanced on the alleged condition that the railway contract was to be given as an equivalent. It may be desirable to give a brief synopsis of the evidence taken before the Commis.