IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

1.1

itt|21 12!

jj lis i2.2

u
111

U£ 12.0

IL25 m 1.4

Ihbi

1.6

FholDgraphic
_Scimces
Corparation

>>^^

.**

f#V^

^t>

•1>^

^<v

^
^^^2'

as WMT MAM sTinr

WIMTM,N.Y. USaO

(7i«)in^sos

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CiHIVI/ICIVIH
Collection de
mi

Canadian Inatituta for Hiatorical Microraproductiona / Inatitut Canadian da microraproductiona hiatoriquaa

Tachnical and Bibliographic Notaa/Notaa tachniquaa at bibliographiquas

Tha Inatituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat
original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia
copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua,
which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha
raproduction. or which may aignificantly chango
tha uaual mathod of filming, ara chaclcad balow.

□ Colourad covara/
Couvartura da eoulaur

□ Covara damagad/
Couvartura andcmmagAa

□ Covara raatorad and/or laminatad/
Couvartura raatauria at/ou pailiculto

□ Covar titia miaaing/
La titra da couvartur

D
D
D

couvartura manqua

Coiourad mapa/

Cartaa gtegraphiquaa wn eoulaur

Coiourad inic (i.a. othar than blua or black)/
Encra da eoulaur (i.a. autra qua blaua ou noira)

Coiourad plataa and/or iiiuatrationa/
Planchaa at/ou iiiuatrationa i* eoulaur

Py^ Bound with othar matarial/
LLJ RallA avac d'autraa documanta

Tight binding may eauaa ahadowa or diatortion
along intarior margin/

Laraliura twr^ paut eauaar da I'ombra ou da la
diatoraion la long da la marga Intiriaura

Blanic laavaa addad during raatoration may
appaar within tha taxt. Whanavar poaalbla. thaaa
hava baan omittad from filming/
II aa paut qua cartainaa pagaa blanchaa ajoutiaa
lora d'una raatauration apparaiaaant dana la taxta.
maia. loraqua eala itait poaalbla. eaa pagaa n'ont
paa 4tA fllmiaa.

Additional commanta:/
Commantairaa supplAmantairaa:

L'Inatitut a microfilm* la maillaur axampiaira
qu'il lui a it* poaaibia da aa procurar. Laa details
da eat axampiaira qui tont paut-4tra uniquaa du
point da vua bibiiographiqua. qui pauvant modifiar
una imaga raproduita. ou qui pauvant axigar una
modification dana la mithoda normala da filmaga
aont indiquia cl-daaaoua.

|~n Coiourad pagaa/

Pagaa da eoulaur

Pagaa damagad/
Pagaa andommagiaa

□ Pagaa raatorad and/or laminated/
Pagaa raatauriaa at/ou palllculiaa

[3pI

agaa diacoiourad. stained or foxad/
Pagaa dicoioriaa. tachatias ou piquias

□ Pagaa detached/
Pagaa ditachiaa

f^^Showthrough/
LJ Tranaparance

rn Quality of print variaa/

Qualiti inigala de I'impresaion

Includaa supplementary material/
Comprend du matiriel supplimentaira

Only edition available/
Saula Mition diaponible

Pagae wholly or partially obacurad by errata
slips, tissuaa, etc.. hava been ref timed to
enaura tha best possible image/
Lee pagaa totalement ou partiallement
obaeurciaa par un fauillet d'errata. una palure.
etc.. ont it* fiimiea * nouveau de fa^on *
obtanir la mailleura imaga poaaibia.

Thia item ia filmed at tha reduction ratio chocked below/

Ce document eat film* au taux da r*ductlon indiqu* ei-daaaoua.

10X 14X 18X 22X

aix

»x

12X

16X

aox

2SX

32X

Th« copy filmed h«r« ham bMn raproduead thanks
to tha ganaroaity of:

ArehivM of Ontario
Toronto

Tha imagaa appaaring hara ara tha liaat quality
poaaibia eonaidaring tha condition and iagibllity
of tha original copy and in icaaping with tha
filming contract spacificationa.

Original copiaa in printad papar eovara ara fllmad
iMginning with tha front covar and anding on
tha laat paga with a printad or llluatratad impraa-
sion. or tho bnclc covar whan appropriata. All
othar original copiaa ara fllmad beginning on tha
first paga with a printad or llluatratad impraa*
•ion. and anding on tlia laat paga with a printad
or llluatratad impraaalon.

L'axamplaira film* fut raproduit griea i la
ginAroait* da:

ArchiwM of Ontario
Toronto

Laa Imagaa tuivantaa ont it* raproduitaa avac la
piua grand soin, compta tanu da la condition at
da la nattatA da l'axamplaira film*, at wt
conformity avac laa condMona du contrat da
fllmaga.

Laa axamplairaa originaux dont la eouvartura •n
papiar aat imprim^a sont flimte it comman^nt
par la pramiar plat at an tarminant soit par la
damlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta
dfmpraaaion ou dllluatration. soit par la sacond
plat, salon la eaa. Toua laa autraa axamplairaa
originaux aont filmia an eommon^nt par la
prami*r« paga qui comporta una amprainta
dimpraaaion ou dllluatration at •!* tarminant par
la damlAra paga qui comporta una talla

Tha laat racordad frama on aaeh mieroficha
shall contain tha symbol — ^(maaning "CON-
TINUED"), or tha symbol ▼ (maaning "END"),
whiehavar appiiaa.

Mapa, piataa. charts, ate., may be filmed at
different reduction ratioa. Thoae too large to be
entirely included in one expoeure ara filmed
beginning in the upper left hand eomsf . left to
right and top to bottom, aa many framea aa
required. The following diagrama illustrate the
method:

Un dee symboies suivanta apparaftra sur la
damlAre imege do cheque microfiche, seion le
caa: la symbols «»• signifie "A SUIVRE". le
aymbola ▼ signifie "FIN".

Laa cartae. planchea. tableaux, etc., pauvent itre
fllmAe A dee taux da rMuetion diff irants.
Lorsque le document est trap grand pour Atra
raproduit en un soul ciich4. ii est film* * partir
do I'angle aupMaur gauche, do gaucfie A droite.
et do haut an baa. an pranent le nombre
dlmegea nAcassaira. I.as diagrammas suivanta
iiluatrent la mAthoda.

1 2 3

l(ew farlianjent Buildings.

The agitation for new Parliament buildings commenced in 1877. In
1880 the Commissioner of Public Works, Hon. 0. F. Fraser, obtained
from the Legislature a grant of $500,000 towards the erection of the
buildings. Plans and specifications on that basis of expenditure were then
invited, but it was found that suitable accommodation could not be secured
for that amount. In 1885 the Legislature set apart $250,000 additional
for that purpose. This sum was increased again during the session of
1887, making the total amount now set apart for the Parliament build-
ings $1,050,000, for which, it is confidently expected, these buildings will
be completed. The amount payable under the first contract awarded to
the late Mr. York and since transferred to his bondsmen — Messrs. Carrol
<k Company— was for $671,250 ; and in addition, 13,500,000 of Central

Prison brick to be used in the construction ofthe new buildings

v "

A careful and derailed estimate by both the Departmental architect and
the architect who prepared the plans, showed that the contract covered at
leatt two-thirds of the work that would be required for the entire com-
pletion of the buildings. Other contracts were subsequently awarded to
Mr. Yorke for carpentry work, etc., amounting to 195,300. Ur ' t the
present plans the «08t will be greater than was contemplated when the
first estimate of $500,000 was asked from the Legislature, but the increase
will be largely met by increased value that meanwhile has accrued to the
lands which the Legislature set apart to be sold to recoup the Province for
this expenditure. A parcel of land which was estimated by Hon. Mr.
Fraser in his speech, in the House, at $2,000 per acre, brought more than
double that amount when placed in the market, namely $4,100 per acre.
It is safe to say, when the new buildings are completed, that these lands
(which include the present site of the ol«^ buildings) will realize nearly
three-quarters of a million dollars, so that ohe new buildings will not cost
the Province, in cash, more than in the neighbourhood of three hundred
thousand dollars. The architect of the new buildings is Mr. Waite, a

^■!
S'

CL ;

*-* r

ar ■

3 '

3 ==1

'r.

native of England, now a resident of Buffalo, one of the most eminent,
members of his profession on the American Continent. He was the archi-
tect of the Canada Life building, Hamilton ; the ■ J/a/7, Toronto ; Bank of
Commerce, Toronto ; and the magnificent structure now nearly completed
for the Canada Life at Toronto. A comparison of the cost of public build-
ings in Canada and the United States with the Ontario Parliament build-
ings shows that the proposed expenditure in not excessive :

State Buildings.

Connecticut, at Hartford (population, 610,000) 12,500,000

Illinois, at Springfield (population, 3,077,000) 3,500,000

Iowa, at Des Moines (population 1,600,000) 1,500,000

Michigan, at Lansing (population, 1,630,000) 1,505,000

New York, at Albany (population, 5,082,000) 20,000,000

City Buildings.

Baltimore City Buildings (population, 332,000). . .
Buffalo do do (population, 155,000)..
Pittsburgh do do (population, 156,000)..
Philadelphia City do (population, 850,000)...
St. Louis Court House (population, 350,000)..,
Chicago City Hall and Court (population, 508,000)

$3,000,000
1,450,000
1,000,000
7,000,000
1,200,000
4,000,000

Public Buildings.

Toronto, Asylum for the Insane . 450,000

do The Central Prison 586,000

do City Hall and Court House (estimated),

(population, 175,000) l,405,00a

Quebec Provincial Buildings (population, 1,350,000) 1,31^^.783
Ontario Parliament Buildings, according to estimates

by architects (population, 2,000,000) 1,050,000

From which should be deducted the value
of the lands set apart by the Legislature for
that purpose, including the site of the old
buildings, amounting to, at least $700,-
000.

The above estimate of the City Hall and Court House buildings doeft
not include the coat of the site, and the present estimate of total expendi-

b eminent,
the archi-
; Bank of
completed
iblic build-
aent build-

)0,000
QO.OOO
00,000
05,000
00,000

100,000

150,000

300,000

000,000

200,000

000,000

450,000
586,000

,405,000
,31^.783

,050,000

buildings doe»
total expendi-

ture, includijrig the coat of site is $1,600,000, all of which has been voted
for and ratified by the people of Toronto.

The amount estimated for the Toronto buildings, including site, in Sep.
tember of 1884, by the committee having the matter in charge, was
$600,000. In 1887, the mayor, in his inaugural address, announced that
the cost would not * , less than $750,000. In February ot the same year,
the building committee reported that the cost would not be less thaa
$1,020,000. And finally in 1889 the people of Toronto were asked to
ratify and did ratify a total expenditure in respect of these proposed city
buildings of $1,600,000.

The final vote of the people of Toronto was in respect of a by-law for

the issue of additional debentures amounting to $600,000, and in respect

of the voting on this by-law the Toronto Empire on 17th May, 1879,

(amongst other things) said :

The building must be erected, and the only (luastion is whetlier by cheese-
paring parsimony we should have an edifice ill-adapted for its uses, unworthy of
our city, and that with our continued growth would soon recjuire additional
expenditure more costly in the long run. or whether on the other hand we
should erect city buildings which would be creditable to Toronto, and commen-
surate with its increasing population and important position.

Again in its issue of 14th May, 1889, the Empire said :

The by-law that will bo submitted to the electors on Saturday to authorize
debentures to the amount of $G0O,OUO, to complete the sum Je<iuired for the
proposed Court House and City Hall has, of course, some critics umongst those
who habitually object to any expenditure of money, even tor a necessary pur-
pose and as a measure of true economy, * * * The citizens will be
disposed to show their faith in the future of their city by constructing buildings
commensurate with its position and its continued progress. * * ♦
The Queen City of Canada's foremost province would find it advantageous to
have a City Hall and Court House suited to its important purposes and worthy
of our position.

Electors of Ontario may well ask themselves why, if the City of Toronto
is right in spending $1,600,000 for its new city hall and court house,
** Canada's foremost province" is not equally justified in an expenditure of
hundreds of thousands dollars less in the erection of its Provincial Build-
ings.

The total cost of the construction of the Toronto City buildings (ex-
cluding the cost of site) will be $1,405,000, and contracts have been
entered into for all the works except that of plumbing and heating, which
is estimated at $80,000. The work covered by Mr. Yorke's contract for the
Parliament buildings has been contracted for by the City of Toronto at the
sum of 1838,000, or at an amount exceeding the contract price of Mr.

Yorke of $86,000. It is therefore manifest that the Parliament buildings
will cost far less than the Toronto buildings, and competent judges affirm
that, when the site of the present old buildings is disposed of, the sum
realized will make the entire actual expenditure of the province in respect
of its new buildings, not to exceed $250,000.

The opponents of the Government allege that Mr. Waite when em-
ployed to prepare plans for the building was not limited in the amount of
their cost, but the following correspondence to be found in the Sessional
Papers of 1887 will shew that he was in the strictest way limited to the
amount of $750,000, then voted by the Legislature : —

III

R. A.

Dki'artment of Public Works,

Toronto, Janu ry 8th, 1886.

VVaitb, Esq.,
German Insurance Building, Buffalo, N.Y.

Sir, — Having reference to the consultation had with you this morning with
respect to your being engaged to prepare plans, etc , for the new I'rovincial
Parliament and Departmental buildings to be erected in {this city, I herewith
state briefly the terms and conditions upon which the Government will be
willing to engage your services as architect in the preparing of these plans, etc.,
and for the usual architect's control and supervision of the work until fully
completed.

1. The total cost of the buildings when fully completed is not to exceed the
amount of $750 000, set apart therefor by the Provincial Legislature, and
within the limit of that expenditure ample provision and accommuilation must
be secured for the several departments, and their offices and vaults, the provin-
cial library, the Legislative chamber, committee rooms, Speaker's and house
officers' apartments, etc. , as fully, in all respects, as is set forth and required by
the printed general instructions issued by the Department of Public Works, in
April, 1880, for the guidance of architects, then being asked to submit competi-
tive designs for said buildings, and you will consider these general instructions
as a guide in (he preparation of plans, etc , by yourself.

2. The remuneration for your services (including all necessary and usual
superintendence, etc., during the course of construction) to be at the usual rate
of five per cent, calculated upon the total contract cost ; such total contract cost
not to include any sum or sums to whibh contractors may become entitled for
any work commonly known as extras.

8. No extra work of any kind or character to be sanctioned or directed in
connection with the construction of the buildings, except, and to the extent only,
that the same has been first authorized in writing by the Commissioner of Public
Works for the time being.

4. The Government to have the absolute and unrestricted right to reject any
plans, etc., prepared or submitted.

(1) If, in the opinion of the Commissioner of Public Works, the same

are defective, faulty or unsuitable.

(2) ]f, in the opinion of the Commissioner, satisfactory contracts for the

complet'on of the building within the contemplated costs are not,
or Yiannot be secured, or entered into.
(8) And in any such case you are to have and be entitled to only such
I remuneration in respect of all services rendered, work done, loss of

time, etc., whether in respect of plans and speciHcations and their

preparation or otherwise, however, as in the discretion of the Com-

inissioner of Pubhc Works may be fixed and allowed by him

6. The plans (so far as necessary for submission to the Local Locislature) to

be ready and delivered to the Department of Public Works not later than the

loth day of March next.

6. Plans and specifications fto be sufficiently completed to admit of tenders
for the works being advertised for not later than the Ist day of May next.

You will, at your very earliest convenience, please to notify the Depart-
ment ^vhether or not yon will undertake the preparations of plans, etc., upon
and subject to the terms ano conditions above mentioned.

I remain, yours, etc.,

(Signed), C. F. FRASER

Commissioner, etc.

BiFFALO, N.Y., January 20th, 188t).

Honourable Sir,— I am in receipt of your favour of the 8th inst., em-
bodying the terms and cimditions upon which your Government offers to engage
my services as Architect for the new Provincial Parliament and Departmental
Buildings to be erected in Toronto. I have carefully noted the conditions and
requirements named, and hereby accept them.

Respectfully yours,

(Signed) RICHARD A. WAITE.

To the Hon. C. F. Fraser,

Commissioner of Public Works,

Province of Ontario, Toronto, Ont.

And further, Mr. Waite's fees as architect being limited to iive per
cent, on a sum not to exceed $750,000, he caniiot, no matter what
the buildings cost, be entitled to more than $37,500 as fees. Up to the
present time he hasrecfi.yed only $16,000, out of which he ban had to
pay his staff.

The charge against the Government that an absolute refusal was given
to produce the reports of Mr. Waite and the departmental architect, Mr.
TuUy, with respect to the defects in the modified plans prepared by
Messrs. Darling & Curry is not true, as the following extract from a
departmental letter written to these gentlemen, and to which they have
never replied, will show : —

Department of Public Works, Ontario,

Toronto, 26th April, 1887.
Messrs. Darling & Curry,

Architects, etc., Toronto.

Sirs, — # ♦ # * xhe only matter which the Commissioner
spoke of as being '• confidential " was Mr. Waite's report on the plans, and the
report of Mr. Tully, the chief architect of the department, confirming and

-v-!!S

I '

1 ' <:''-

I-

IH *^

.^H^ffiff

|!,

1 1 '"

IS-

r^^HJi^ '

^'■/,

»' s

corroborating Mi. Waiters report, both of thoin agreeing that your plans were
defective and unsuitable ; and in tLis opinion the members of the Government,
after a most careful and thorough consideration, have unanimously concurred
In this regard I am instructed to say, as has already i)een said to Messrs. Gor-
don «fc Helliwell, that if your firm desire the publication of reports by the
expert and by the departmental architect upon the alleged defects in your
plans, the Commissioner will take the necessary steps for their boing produced
to the Legislature and publishudiin the usual way ; but this will not be done
unless at your express inntanco and request. ''' * ::■.***

I am, gentlemen, etc.,

WM. EDWARDS,

Secretary Public Works.

To the same effect was the statement made in the Legislative Assembly
by the Commissioner of Public Works, on 10th March, 1887, during the
debate on Mr. Oreigh ton's motion for a return of the correspondence,
reports, etc. Mr. Fraseras reported in the Globe oi 11th of March, 1887,
then said : —

" The report of Mr. Waite was, in the main, verbal, and was confidential*
In this case, as in relation to the reports of 1880, the Government took the ground
that no public service would be done by giving these rejwrts. If the architectn
interested ilesireil tt, the Goo'^rumont would bring down il\t information^ bw at the
present time they icere considered c njidential. ''•' •'■ * * The effort to
obtain phins by competition having failed, what were the Government to do /
They acted just as any business man would have acted about his private busi-
ness. They chose an architect whom they considered competent and who had
an intimate knowledge of the re(|uirements of the Government. It was absolutely
unfair to Mr. Waite to say that the opinion which he formed, and which resulted
in the rejection of the.plans, was reported to the (jovernment on the assumption
that he himself was to be ap]>ointed as the architect. He (Mr. Eraser) pledged
his word of honor ^hat it was impossible that Mr. Waite sliould suppose, from
anything that took place, tlr^t his own services would be re(][uired. He had no
reason to believe or suspect such a thing. Had the Government selected one of
its own friends in Toronto it would have been at once charged that they had a
political end in view. (Cheers.) They had ch(»sen a gentleman with respect to
whom that could not be said. They had taken the course that any business
man would have taken and they expected that the country would sustain them
in that course.

Moreover, Mr. Waite 's plans were laid before the House in the
session of 1886, before a contract of any kind was entered into or even
tenders advertised for, and the following is reported in the Globe of 24th
March, 1886, as the statement then made b) the Commissioner of Public
Works to the House in respect of these plans :

Hon. C. F. Fraser rose to make a statement regarding the new Parliament
buildings. The House, he said, had consented to an expenditure of $750,000,
and he had made the statement that the intention was to adopt one of two sels
of plans which had been sent in to the Government After the House adjourned
it wa^ conbidered that, having reference to the important nature of the under-
taking, a critical and close examination of the plans submitted by the architects

•hould be again had. The Kentlemeu whc had examined the plans sent in under
the original competition were the Hon. Mr. Mackenzie and two architects— Mr
Storm, of Toronto, and Mr. Waite, ot Uuffalo. The (Jovernmonk had decided
that Ar. Waite should be selected to make this consultative examination for the
Government and to advise the (lovernment how far the plans would be suitable.
On account «»f illness and other causes considerable delays tof»k place and the
result of Mr. Waite's enfjuiries was not known when he (the Commissioner) left
for England last year, -^fter his return from England he and the other mem-
bers of the Government had several consultations witli Mr. Waite, and the
result of their consultations was that they became satisfied that none of the plans
they submirted were suitable ; that there were such grave defects in heating,
lighting and ventilation that it would be inadvisable to proceed with building oii
the basis of either. The question arose, what was to be done ? The Goveru-
ment had pledged itself to proceed with the buildings and they had come to the
conclusion that their early construction was a iiecessitA . They decided to secure
the services of an architect and to have

A N'KW SKT OK I'LANS

prepared. A careful deliberation as to who the architect should be resulted in
the selection of Mr. Waite, of Buffalo. Mr. Waite had been twice enjployed as
an expert in connection with the matter and it was thought that h'ifl ability
and his position as an architect warranted the (lovernmeut in selecting him A
letter of instructions sent to Mr. Waite and accepted by him embodied the ngree-
nient cm which he was to prepare the plans. The cost of ihe buildings was not
to exceed ^750,000 and within the bmits of that expenditure accommodation
must be secured for the several departments, oflices and vaults, legislative
chamber, committee rooms. Speaker's chamber, etc., as fully in all respects
as set forth in the general instructions issued by the Department of Works
in 1880, for the guidance of the architects. The architects remuneration
was to be had at the usual rate of five per cent upon the contract cost, such
cost not to include sums which the contractors may be entitled to as extras.
No extras to be allowed except to the extent authorized by the Commissioner of
Public Works, for the Government has the right to reject any plans, first, if
deemed unsuitable, or second, if it is considered that they cannot be constructed
within the limit of expenditure above stated. In the event of the rejection of
the plans, the architect's remuneration is to be fixed by the Commissioner. The
plans were to be ready for inspection on March 16th, and the plans and specifi-
cations to be finished so as to admit of tenders being advertised for on May 1st.
The architect of the Depi»rtment fully concurred in the opinions of Mr. Waite
as to the two sets of plans, and his conclusions were endorsed by the Depart-
ment. The new plans with all details and specifications would be ready in
three or four weeks, and provided these plans were approved, it was the inten-
tion of the Government immediately to advertise for tenders, and it was expected
that in two or three months the contract would be let. and the work ready to
proceed.

Hon. A. Morris asked how long it was expected that the erection of the
buildings would occupy.

Hon. ' . F. Eraser said that the building operations would be so extensive
that not less than three years, perhai>s four years, would be occupied. The floor
plans for the new buildings, as also the floor plans of the former designs, were
ready for inspection by the memberp.

In addition to the plans beinj,' so laid before the House, the contract
entered into with Mr. Yorke, on the 7th of October of the same year, con-

■Hi

'.,

<<■'

?. A

ffh'

i^ ij

ff-l

o. ;
n

o 5:1

ST ^1

I' n B'

tained an expresH stipulation that it was subject to its being ratitied by a
vote of the Legislative Assembly. The stipulation in the contract can be
found in the Sessional Papers of 1887 and is in these words :

'Mt it) horubyexprussly Agreed that tliia contract is made subject to the
condition that tlie sanie Rhall be ratified by resolution of the Legislative Assembly
of Ontario at its next ueHsicm ; provided always that should the same be not so
ratiKed, any work done or materials furnished under the said contract, by the
contract )r prior to said Bession shall, nevertheless, be paid for in accordance
ivith the terms thereof.

The Legislature was, in the session of 1887, asked to ratify the con-
tract with Mr. Yorke. The total amount of work done under this con>
tract by Mr. Yorke, up to the 3 1st December, 1886, was less than $7,000
and was entirely for work in connection with excavation for the proposed
foundations and all of which would havo been equally serviceable for any
plans in respect of the new buildings which the house might prefer.

The following is the report contained in the Globe oi 15th April, 1887,
of the speech made by the Commissioner of Public Works in making the
motion to ratify the contract with Mr. Yorke :

Hon. C. F. Fraser moved that this House doth ratify the c<jutract and articles
of agreement laid before this House by ctinmand of His Honor the Lieutenant-,
Governor, bearing date on the 7th day of October, A.D. 188G, expi'essed to be
made between Lionel Vorke, of the City of Toronto, in the County of York,
contractor, and Her Majesty Queen Victoria, represented therein by the Hon-
orable the Commissioner of Public Works, and relating to the erection and con-
struction of certain portions of the proposed new Parliament and Departmental
buildings. He said that now that the House had an opportunity of perusing the
contract and the papers it had ordered, and also the correspondence circulated by
Messrs. Darling & Curry, he might ask the House to concur on this resolution.
In 1880 it had been declared by Parliament that new buildings should be erected,
and half a million dollars were set apart for that purpose. Pursuant to the un-
derstanding arrived at, desicns were asked for and sixteen comtietitors entered
the lists and submitted designs. That competition was in terms and in effect a
failure, no one of the sixteen plans satisfying the requirements of the competi-
tion. Three of them was reported as

APPROACHING MOST JJEAKLY

to those requirements. It was then decided by the Government that the firm,
which had approached the standard most nearly, together with another Hrm,
should be asked to submit modified designs, in order to see whether buildings
could be erected within the appropiation which the House had made. The firms
so selected were Darling & Curry and Gordon & Helliwell. In the early part
of 1882 these modified designs were in such a shape as to warrant the architect,
in asking for tenders. Up to that time there had been no critical examination
of these two modified designs, which were entirely different from the plans sent
in by the same persons under competition. In the Darling and Curry corres-
pondence reference was made to a report which they alleged was the report of
the experts in connection with their designs, and they published a clipping from
the Olohe which they apparantly wished the members of the House and the publiO:

itied by a
Let can be

)ot tu the
Asaetnbly
be not BO

ict, by tlie
I accordance

y tbe cou-
r this con-
an $7,000
proposed

le for any

•efor.

Vpril, 1887,

naking the

and articleft

Lieutenant-.

ii'essed to be

ity of York,

' by the Hon-

bion and con-

Departmental

perusing the

circulated by

is resolution.

Id be erected,

,nt to the un-

titorH entered

nd in effect a

tl»e competi-

that the firni
mother tirm,
her buildings
e. The firms
:;he early part

the architect.

examination
:he plans sent
Curry corres-
the report of
clipping from
ind the publift

to believe had been taken from the report sent in l,y the experts on their i>lan«
Now, the only report sent in by the experts whh u„e\.n certain pCswhicKd
come .n ur.der the name o '' October," and the part of the expelt Weport refer
inK to these plans spoke of them very highly and stated that it was a nmtter of
regret that the authors of such plans had not take, into account the question of
costs. Where the mfonnatum was obtained from on which this article in the
«/o^e to which he referred was based he was m.able to say, but it appeared to
him that the mfoiniation contained in that article was most probably contri
buted by the competing firm itself win. i.-.r unnaturally wished to have stress
laid up'm the good and significant points in the plans they had set before the
Oovemment. The modified plans submitted by Messrs. Darlin^' & Curry were

ALTOOET :> a lUKKKKKNI

ifoin those sent in by them at the time of tio original competition The oric?-
nal plans, accordmg to the estimates .f tbo exports appointed by the Oovern-
ment to consider them, would have cv.Ht the I rovince i^2.500,0(!0. In the
spring of 1881 they were in a position to asl. for tenders upon the two modified
seta of plans prepared respectively by Messrs. Darling & Curry and Messrs.
Gordon & Helliwell. The House could readily see thiit the time had not
come when a critical examination of these plans by experts would be of
service or advantage. The government had promised the House that unless
the plans could be proceeded with at the figure of $500,000, or possibly a
trifle over that amount, they \\<»uld not be gone (m with, therefore the first
thing to be done wm to asc,ertuin if the tenders for the erection of the
buildings on either of those jtlaiis would be within the figure nam»d. It was
found that the cost of erection based on the lowest tender, would be considei-ably
over half a million and the matter, therefore, had to be suspended. The hon.
gentleman quoted from reports in the Globe the substance of the remarks he had
made in the House to show that he had publicly announced and had endeavored
to make it thoroughly understood that in consequence «)f the impossibility of
erecting the Parliament buildings for $5 0,000 on the basis of either of the two
plans he had named— the only ones before the Government- the matter of the
erection would not be further proceeded with, and so far as the two conipeting
firms were concerned, he held that the correspondence before the House showed
that they had

TUOKOUOHLV UNl»KRHTOOD THE MATTKR.

The hon. gentleman then read letteis from the two firms named, asking the
Department of Public Works to pay them the remuneration due according to the
terms of the contract for the prepara'ion of the plans. He denied tliat this
remuneration had not been settled because of a difliculty on the part of the Gov
erment in dealing with the question- He himself had repled to the firms and
had stated that the Parliament yet hoped that the matter of erecting the new
Parliament buildings would be proceeded with, and that possibly one or other
of the two sets of plans would be accepted by the Government, in which case, of
course, the Department of Public Works would have to arrange the matter of
compensation only with the firm whose plans were rejected. Jt wr»uld there-
fore be better to allow the question of remunernti<m to stand over for a while.
He objected to any other construction than this being placed upon his words,
and he wanted to set the matter clearly before the House and the public. In 1 885,
on the motion of the hon. member for Hamilton, the House decided by 50 yeas
to 25 nays that the expenditure on the erection of new Parliament buildings
could be carried as high as $760,000. It was r^uite correct, as Messrs. Darling
& Curry asserted in another of their letters, that at that time he stated that it
was the intention of the Government to erect the buildings upon one or the

■ i.ijmif-:.. ■*:,■.

]

^ther of these plans. Tenders had been asked for, and the result had shown
that the buildings could be erected within the requisite figure — $760,000, and
now came the time for the

EXAMINATION OF THESE PLANS

by an ex])ert. Now what was the action of the Government in regard to this
point? Was it not thonnr^hly businesslike and straightforward? The com-
mittee of experts appointed by the Government to examine the original plans
had consisted of the Hon. Alexander Mackenzie, Mr. Storm, of Toronto and
Mr. Waite, of Buffalo. No complaint had been made by anybody as to the
fairness and equity and abilitv of these gentlemen It was natural, then, that
when the Government wanted an expert to examine and decide upon the respec-
tive merits of these two sets of modified plans, they should determine to select
one of three who had so well served them before. Mr. Mackenzie, not being
a professional man, was out of the (][uestion. Mr. Storm was residing in the
city of Toronto, and the Government naturally considered that objections
would be raised to his appointment on the grounds of his being

LIABLE TO BE PREJUDICED.

There remained only Mr. Waite, of Butfalo. Mr. Waite was appointed as the
expert to examine these plans, and no objection was raised to his appointment
on the ground of lack of ability, impartiality or any reason whatever. He (the
speaker) wanted to show the House step by step that the Government and the
House had done what would seem fair and upright to any unbiassed and un-
prejudiced man. Well, Mr. Waite's decision as to the merits of the plans was
— he repeated now what he had said before and would retract nothing — that
they were both unsuitable and defective. Now he would not say that in con-
sequence of the plans being found to be defective and ut)suitable, the question
of remuneration for the expenses in connection with the preparation of the aame
should be

KNTIRELV PIT A8II>U,

or that it was unfair for Messrs. Darling & Curry to say they had done
their best in preparing them. He was not, he hoped, .so blind or so
prejudiced as that, althou<>h they had said harsh things about
himself and others connected with him ; and by the way, he thought that gentle-
men who were so exceedingly anxious to protect their own reputation profes-
sionally, ought scarcely to insinuate in their correspondence that the Government
had scarcely a shred of honesty, manliness or courage left amongst its members.
They were very careful of their own reputations, but when dealing with the
reputation of other people they did not hesitate to charge them with acting in a
manner which they characterisjed as downright dishonest. He would not allow
these facts to interfere with a fair and impartial consideration of the question
before them. He ventured to say that if instead of finding both sets of plans

DEFECTIVE AND UNSUITABLE,

Mr. Waite had found those of Gordon <Sc Helliwell unsuitable, and had been
favorable to those of Darling & Curry, that Darling & Curry would not have
made the complaints they were now making. He denied also, that he had ever
stated that he had received no writt 'n report from Mr. Waite, as Me^siS. Dar-
ling & Curry alleged he stated. He had stated th<tt Mr. Waite's report was
*' mainiy verbal." He had received a written report, and so stated at the time,
adding that it was confidential. He had the report with him, »nd would read
it. But this was not all. The plans were referred to the architect of the

department, and the Govenunent had his report nimle in the month sncceedin^'
the report of Mr. Waite, and

FULLY C'OXKIRMINC IT.

He had referred to the plans of Messrs. Darling .t Curry as unsuitable, and he
was bound to say that they were unsuitable in some respects as to which Messrs.
Darling & Curry could not be blamed. Darling .t Curry were dealing with an
estimate of $500,000, and had to do the best they could with that money. But
at the subsequent peru-d the Government had $750,000 to deal with, and it
became the imperative duty of the Govermneut to do the best they could with
that sum, and not to use these plans if it were found that they were unsuitable
by reason of the fact that they were prepared on the basis of a cost of S§50l»,000.
Up to this point the Goveniment had done nothing but what a wise and prudent
man would have done. This was not a great question of policy, nor of principle,
as that word is ordinarily understood : it was purely a business matter, and the
people of this country expected that the Government would deal with it on
business considerations. And one of the first things to be considered was that
the buildings, so far as they were concerned, were intended

TO l-AST KOR ALL TIME.

If faulty, such buildings could very rarely be rectified. They had instances of
faulty construction in the Parliament buildings at Ottawa and the costly State
buildings at Albany. Again, as the matter was purely a busint-s matter, it was
the duty of the Government to see that the very best that could be done for the
people should be done, irrespective of whether Darling & Curry, or (iordon &
He liwell, or Mr. Waite, or Mr. Storm or anybody else should be satisfied. It
would be utterly absurd to expect that when Mr. Waite had reported these plans
as unsuitable and defective, when the members of the Government had come to
the s I me conclusion, and when it was further ratified by the report of the archi-
tect of the department, it would have been absurd, nay, more, it would have
been criminal on the part of the Government, in the face of these things, to
have gone on with the erection of these buildings upon these plans. What,
then, was the position > They had to face the fact that another set of plans
would be necessary. Gentlemen opposite might contend that there should be
a new competition. If they argued so, the answer was that the new competi-
tion would have ended as the original competition did. The former competition
had failed : they had not obtained a single set of designs under it ; they had had
a second competition between two of the firms, and thstt had failed. They had
also before them the fact that the City Council of Toronto had asked for plans
for a new buihl.iig,

AND THAT HAI* FAILKI).

So the experience of the Government pointed to the fact that cumpetitiim was out
of the question. There remained but one alternative — the selection of some
architect competent to deal with the matter. It was suggested now that Mr.
Waites' action with regard to these plans must have been intluenced by the fact
that he expected to have his own services retained. Mr. Waite made his report
in November ; subsequently the Government had interviews with him, and
finally there was a report from the architect of the department. In all that
there was not a single word from which Mr. Waite could have imagined that he
would be ret lined. More than that, up to the time of these consultations, he
couM »ay for himself, and he believed he could say for his colleagues, that they
had not only the hope, but the conviction, that one or other of these sets of
plauB would have been found suitable. Unwillingly, and against his own bias
and prejudice, he was forced, and the Government was forced, to the conclu-

sion that it would not be possible to adopt these plans. How much time and
trouble would he have saved himself could he have reached any other conclusion?
They had no choice but to select some able, competent architect to prepare
a new set of plans If Mr. Waite had thought at all of the possibility of his
being appointed, would he not have reasoned thus, * This is a Government sub-
ject to political influences, to political exigencies — they will select

SOME POLITICAL FRIEND

of their own to prepare these plans. But that was not what the Government
conceived to be their duty.' Their duty was clear, straight and plain — to choose
the best man for the work, to give hiiu his instructions and to let him go ahead.
What other course would any gentleman oppo-ite, .-my business man having
$750,(XX) of his own to expend, have pursued ? Mr. Waite had acquired a repu-
tation before the Government hatt any dealings with him. He had designed the
Mail building, and although it had been twice visited by fire, it was Mr. Waite
who was chosen to superintend the renewal on both occasions. He had been
chosen by the experienced business men at the head of the Canada Life to
design their fine building in Hamilton, and had also designed another large
insurance building in Tor.mhj. And now he had to announce for the first time
that the Government had taken another measure of precaution. They had set
upon foot confidential inquiries in places where Mr. Waite had already been
employed in order that they might have the opinions of those he served as to
his ability. After all that was done, Mr. Waite being out of tho country and
having no relations with the Government, they came to the conclusion that, in
the interests of the people, he should be engaged. The instructions of the
Government to Mr. Waite were before the House. The House sli«<lld t»bserve
that in giving these instructitms there was absolutely no attempt on the part of
the architect to prepare inefficient plans that might be allowed to include a large
number of extras. It would be quite possible ior the architect to prepare to
build on plans that might be within ^750,000, and by extras run the total
cost up to a figure far in excess of that named, and in that case, if the ])ercentage
had been upon the whole amount of the contract price, there might have been,
on the part of the architect, a tendency to be careless in the matter of extras.
But the Government took care that no matter what the building might cost, the
architect's commission should be no more than five per cent, on ^Y'iO.OOO.
The Government had pledged itself to the Province that the building
should be proceeded with, and he had expected that the year 1885 would
have found them in a position to let the contracts. But the plans were
not prepared until a later date than was expected, and it was not until
the summer season of 1886 that the Government were in a posiiion to call
for tenders for the work. Before proceeding to the matter of tenders he
would give the House an idea what the building would be, and how much more
suitable it would be for the requirements of the Province than would have been
a building erected according to the plans of Gordon & Helliwell or Durling &
Curry.

In Darling & Curry's plans the legislative chamber was placed in the very
centre of a ({uadrangle, and the consequence was that it would be difficult to
light and ventilate. The great point of superiority in Mr. Waite's plan was
that the chamber was the principal part of the whole building. It stood boldly
out to the front, and three sides, the south, west and east were exposed, the
consequence being that it was easy to light and to ventilate. The building would
be about 400 feet in length by 2U0 feet in depth. The departments would all
be on the easterly side of the building, and the offices connected with the
Assembly on the western side. The main entrance would be on the southerly
front, facing Queen street avenue. The building was practically arranged in

blocks, 8o that ia case of a fire communication could be cut oflf. The building
was not entirely fire proof, but the Crown Lands Department would be

PRACTICALLY FIRE-PHOOF.

The dimensions of some of the rooms would be as follows :— Legislative cham-
ber, 64x80 (the present chamber being 55x46) ; library, 40x72 ; members recep-
tion room, :i0x40 ; dining-room, 29x40 ; smoking room, 30x41 ; Private Bills
Committee-room, 29x40 ; llailway Committee-room, 25x40 ; and other commit-
tee-rooms varying from 20x40 to 18x22 ; reading-room, 28x5?/ ; postt ffice and
distribution room, 24x40 ; reporters' rooms, 18x22 and 20x22. He had no hesi-
tation in saying that the plans of Mr. Waite were far and away more suitable
than either of the others. He now had to deal with

THE QUESTION OF COST.

When the tenders came in for the bricklaying and masonry it was found that
the lowest tenders exceeded the amount voted by Parliament for the entire build-
ing. The contractor had been asked to tender for Credit Valley stone, and it
was thought that this might account for the high figure the tender reached. So
Mr. Lionel Yorke and Messrs. Brown & Love, who were by far the lowest tend-
erers, w^ere asked to make new tenders, based upon three different qualities of
«tone, Ohio sandstone, Pelee Island stone and Queenston stone. Brown &
Love's original tender for Credit Valley stone had been $772*700. They made
« tender on Ohio sandstones of $698,700 and on Pelee Island stone for the same
Amount. Lit.nel Yorke's original tender had been $809,000. Both firms after-
wards sent in reduced tenders on Credit Valley stone. Brown & Love's being
$736,000 and Lionel Yorke's $762,000. It was then considered that so small
was the difference between the tenders for Credit Valley stone and the tenders
for the other varieties, and so great was the superiority of the Credit Valley
stone, that it was best to choose the Credit Valley stone. Then the Government
were face to face with the fact that the masonry and brickwork were going to
r.ost more than the amount which the Lei>islature had set apart for the entire
building. What were they to do ? The Opposition might say that they should

HAVE STAYED THEIR HANDS,

although the buildings were necessary, although the country had been promised
that the buildings would be erected. He would answer that in two ways. In
the first place the contract made by the Government had been made subject to
ratification by the House and in the second place he maintained that the Gov-
ernment would have been justified in making such a contract, even though it
were not to be subject to such ratification. Finally the people of the country

HAD RATIFIED THE ACTION

of the Government. (Applause). The quet^ion had been put before the people
and the answer of the people was the majority which stood behind the Govern-
ment in this House. (Applause). The Opposition had made the question an
issue. They told the people to defeat the Government because they had entered
into an undertaking which would cost two million dollars. He had in his hand
* campaign sheet headed " Facts for the electors. The Parliament Buildings.
Canadian architects ignored. Contracts for walls alone $50,000 more than the
whole building was to cost. Condemn the swindle." He observed that his friend
from North (xrey winked. (Laughter.) The document proceeded -.—"The
■conduct of the Ontario Government in connection with the buildings now about
to be erected in Toronto displays

THE MOST BECKLESS CHAPTER

in the history of any Government the Province has ever known." (Laughter.)
The circular called upon the people " to condemn the swindle on the people of

the Province which the Government is now perpetrating." These were brave
words — (laughter) — especially whe it was remembered that nothing was being
done that was not open to the public. Mr. Fraser continued to read from the
circular atnid the laughter of thp House, and then pioiluced an article from the
Owen Sound Timex, which, he said, wa^ word for word the same as the campaign
sheet, except that the Times article contained a very strong denunciation of the
entire Toronto press for concealing the amount i»f the Yorke contract. He would
not say ibr a moment that the two articles were penned by the same hand .
(Laughter.) No doubt their similarity was a coincidence amounting almost to a
miracle. (Laughter.) But he thought he had

TRACED HOME ONE CAMPAIGN

Hheet fairly, and he did not know but he could trace home a few more.
(Laughter). But enough for to-day — sufficient for the day is the evil thereof.

Mr. Creighton — Is that an evil ?

Mr. Fraskr— Such were the appeals which had been m^de, and the people
had answered them by sending back the Government with a largely increased
majority. Now. as to the cost of the buildings, they were not going to cost
two millions, as had been stated. He held that the amount that would have to
be paid for work done that was not named in the tender would not exceed the
same figure that Messrs Darling & Curry had estimated as being additional to
the amount they named for the erection of the buildings. That figure was
$306,000, and he believed that $30<>,0()0, on the basis of the present plans would
cover the same work, viz., all work not actually included in the contract, in
spite of Messrs Gordon & Helliwell's Htiit< ment that it would cost as
much as the actual cost of the buildiDgs. The hon. speaker said there waa
little more that he could say at the present time, but he might have occasion tu
say more during the course of the debate. He referred briefly to the

TERMS OF THE (-'ONTRACT,

showing that the public were carefully guarded against the {ilacing of any extras
in the contractor's bill, and sa'd the Government would use every means in its
power to prevent such extras creeping into the charge;), lieverting again to
Messrs. Darling & Curry's claim for remuneration, Mr. Fraser urged that their
claims foi $15,000 was exorbitant, and that the services of the best architect on
the Continent could have been secured for that figure. These young men in
fact, he said, were asking.

FOR 81X months" work,

as much pay as the Attorney-General received in three years for devoting hia
whole time and attention to the afiairs of the Province. The other competing
firm, Messrs. Gordon & Helliwell, moreover, had only asked for $5,000 for
similar plans madb under similar conditions, and had been satisfied by receiving
$3,700. He claimed that in resisting Messrs. Darling & Curry's claims he had
been defending the best interests of thu Province. The House, in ratifying
this contract, would also express its approval of the action of the department
here presented in regard to this transaction. (Applaure.)

Attempts are now being made by opponents of the Government to-
belittle Mr. Waite's plans, and to make it appear that the plans of
Darling & Ourry were greatly superior. But the Toronto Worlds on 3rd
May, 1888, in an article urging that iron instead of timber should be used
in the new building, said :

We are convinced that the Province is making a great mistake in using wood
in the new Parliament Buildings in the Park. A pile that promises to be the

finest in a|ipeai-ance of any on the continent, that appears to be built on the
plan of getting one hundred cents worth of work on the dollar, that oui;ht to be
a monument for centuries, is to be marred at its inception by the use of timber
instead of '\Ton.—TJie World, 3rd May, 1888.

And again, on 11th August, 1888, in an articln descriptive of the
character and progress of these buildings, the Toronto World contained
the following : —

How THE WORK IS PROORE.SSING AT THE (iUANIt StRKTIRE IN THE PaRK.

In close proximiny to Toronto's University and its subsidiary institutions, the
new Legislative Building is being upreared. This massive and imposing struc-
ture, stretching east and west 550 feet and extending 250 feet to the rear of the
front tower, is now advanced to such a stage that some idea of its beauty and
symmetry can be formed. The style of architecture is Romanesque. It is
eminently simple and striking in detail. Mr. R. A. Waite, Architect, of Buffalo,
prepared the plans iind designs for the building.

The front elevation contains the main entrance which consists of a tripple arch-
way. In the centre s([uare tower rises, surmounted by four domed turrets, one
at each corner of the quadrangle. The south-west front is richly ornamented by
exquisite yet massive dressed stone work. The west elevation will contain two
entrances, one of which, the Speaker's, is open to the north side, along which
hnical colums of different design are arranged. The eastern elevation is similar,
though somewhat less gorgeous. — The World, 11th August, 1888.

And the Toronto Empire, on 27th September, 1889, in an article headed
** The Big Pile slowly rises," when no eUction was pending, and when not
tempted to publish other than the truth, said as follows : —

THE BIG PILE SLOWLY RISES.

Magnitude of the Work.

The average onlooker who, standing by, watches stone after stone hoisted into
position has no conception at all of the magnitude of the work in hand. The
building covers no less than four acres of ground, and the massive stone walls,
lined with brick, are, in some parts, six feet in thickness. The building is evi-
dently being put up to stand, no matter what the ultimate cost might be. The
main entrance, the entrance to the legislative chamber from the south, will
be something handsome in its massiveness. The smoothly cut stone steps will
not be built in all probability until after the whole building is roofed, because-
the required blocks cannot be got. This main entrance is in a line looking down
Queen street avenue, and when completed the

Effect will be Something Fine.

In its present incomplete state, however, it would be useless to attempt a des-
cription of the great building. A feature of the structure, however, will be the
amount of stone carving exhibited on all sides. The carving on the front of the
building to the south will be of the most elaborate character, while grotesque,
but artistic figures will stand on each side of each of the departmental entrances.
There are many panels on the walls which will carry figures and scroll work
carved in the solid stone. The building will, no doubt, when completed \e the
finest structure in Toronto, but, of course, it is impossible at this stage to giva
any idea of the cost.

;

The Toronto Telegram, which is an independent Conservative journal,
speaks of the Government's dealings with the new Parliament buildings in
these words : —

" Hon. C. F. Fraser is fortided against eflfective attacks upon his dealings
with the question of erecting new Parliament buildings. The Government sup-
ported an outlay that is barely sufticient to satisfy the requirement and keep up
the dignity of the Province. The Minister of Public Works is seeing that the
Province gets value fur ever^' cent it spends. The country is not being cheated
and when the Opposition cannot boldly impute wrong to the Hon. Mr. Fraser it
is unfair to declaim against an expenditure that was wholly unavoidable. As to
the architect, the Government acted upon its judgment of what was right.
Political interest would have dictated the choice of a native Canadian to originate
and execute designs for the new les^islative building. The Government puts
aside every consideration but that of fitness, and did not allow the unpopularity
of its course to deter it from doing what was right. "

And again in a subsequent issue as follows : —

Of all the small-sized issues ever imported into Ontario politics the com-
plaint about the Ontario Government's dealings with the Parliament build-
ings is the smallest.

There is absolutely nothing in it. From bL*<.^'inning to end the Government
has acted in the best interests of the country. It would have been easy for
it to employ a Canadian architect and excuse his mistakes by appeals to a
spurious patriotism. The Government could gain no political glory by its
action. It served the province in this particular at the expense of party
interest, and time will declare praise, not censure, to be the just portion of
the men charged with responsibility of the erection of the new legislative
block.

And finally, though the expenditure to the close of 1889 in respect of
these buildings has been about half a million of dollars, not one dollar of
actual " extras " has been incurred or made with respect to the work
already done.