Ai 
 
 "iu 
 
 ^>, 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 <-. 
 ^4^. 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 |50 '""^= 
 
 IM 
 
 IM 
 
 1= 
 \A. IIIIII.6 
 
 V 
 
 <^ 
 
 //. 
 
 
 ^^ ^ 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4S03 
 
.<i' 
 
 ^. 
 
 .% ^. 
 
 ^o 
 
 i/.A 
 
 CIKM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiquas 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notas tachniques at bibliogrtiphiquas 
 
 Tha Institute has attamptad to obtain the bast 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may altar any of the images in tha 
 rsproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usua' method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 n 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 nn Covers damaged/ 
 
 Couverture endommagie 
 
 □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^ et/ou pelliculie 
 
 □ Cover title missing/ 
 Le titre de couverti're manque 
 
 I I Coloured maps/ 
 
 □ 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Cartes giographiquaa en couleur 
 
 □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than biue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 I I Coloured plates artd/or illustrations/ 
 
 Planches et/ou illustrations on couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 ReliA avac d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may causa shf^dows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distorsion le long do la marge intiriauro 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certainea pages blanches ajout^ea 
 lors d'une restauration apparaiosant dans le texte, 
 maia, lorsque cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas M filmtes. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires supplimantaires; 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaira 
 qu'il lui a iti possible de se procurer. Les details 
 da cat exemplaira qui sont peut-^tre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reprcduite, ou qui peuvent exiger una 
 modification dans la m^thode normale de fllmage 
 sont indiqute ci-dessous. 
 
 r~n Coloufed pages/ 
 
 Pagea de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagies 
 
 □ ?ages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurias et/ou pelliculies 
 
 r~~> Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 b^ Pages d-^color6os, tachaties ou piquies 
 
 Pages ditachies 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Quaiiti inigala de I'Jmpression 
 
 Includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du material supplementaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 r~~| Pages detached/ 
 
 r~n Showthrough/ 
 
 h/j Transparence 
 
 F~l Quality of print varies/ 
 
 rn Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 n*~| Only edition available/ 
 
 D 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurctes par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont iti film^as d nouveau de facon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at ^He reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film*., au taux de rMuction indiquA ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 _/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 a4x 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
Th« copy f]lm«d h«r« has b««n reproduced thanks 
 to tha ganarosity of: 
 
 Law Library 
 Yo'k University 
 Toronto 
 
 Tha imagaa appaaring hara ara tha baat quality 
 possibia considaring tha condition and laglbility 
 of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha 
 filming contract spacificationa. 
 
 L'axamplaira film* fut raproduit grAca A la 
 g^niroslti da: 
 
 Law Library 
 York University 
 Toronto 
 
 Las imagas suivantas ont 4t* raproduitas avac la 
 plus grand soin, compta tonu da la condition at 
 da la nattat* da I'axanipiaira filmi, at an 
 conformity avac las conditions du contrat da 
 filmaga. 
 
 Original copiaa in printad papar covars ara filmad 
 bagHrning with tha front covar and anding on 
 tha last paga with a printad or illustratad impraa- 
 sion, or tha back covar whan appropriate. All 
 othar original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or iliuatratad imprea- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printad ^ 
 or Illustratad impression. 
 
 Lee exemplairaa origlnaux dont la couvarture en 
 papier eat imprimte sont filmto an commenpant 
 par la premier pl«t et en termiuant soit par la 
 darniire paga qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par la second 
 plat, salon la cas. Tous las cutras exemplairaa 
 originaux sont filmfo en commen9ant par la 
 pramiAre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration at en terminant par 
 la darniAre paga qui comporte uno telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol —^> (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED "). or tha symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Un des symbolea suivants apparattra sur le 
 derni&re image de chaque microfiche, selon te 
 cas: la symbola «*> signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 aymbola V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, piatea, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one expoaura are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, aa many framea as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Lea cartea, planches, tableaux, etc., pauvent Atre 
 filmte A dee taux de reduction diffirents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre 
 reproduit en un seui clichA, 11 est fiim^ A partir 
 da Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant la nomb'e 
 d'imagea nteausaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la m^thoda. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
/ 
 
 0^' 
 
 In the High Court of Justice 
 
 Queen's Bench Division. -^^^ 
 
 Between 
 
 coNMEE & McLennan, 
 
 AND Plaintiffs, 
 
 THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, 
 
 Defendants. 
 
 ^^ MILE CONTRACT 
 
 20 MILE CONTRACT 
 
 TIE CONTRACT 
 
 iPLEj^IDHSra-S 
 
 McCarthy, osler, hoskin & creelman, 
 
 Plaintiffs' Solicitors. 
 WELLS & MacMURCHY, 
 
 Defendants' Solicitors. 
 
 TORONTO : 
 PRINTED AT THE MAIL JOB DEPARTMENT 
 
 1889 
 
C67 
 
 */ d 
 
INDEX. 
 
 33 MILE CONTRACT. 
 
 Sr.vi'EMKXT OF Claim •■'*o« 
 
 Statkment of Defenok and ('oijnteuclaim I, 
 
 Repkv "^ 
 
 ••'■• , If 
 
 Repi,v to Amended Statement of Defence \l 
 
 1)EFEN(JE TO Amended Countehclaim ly 
 
 20 MILE CONTRACT. 
 
 Statement of Claim 
 
 Phoposed Amendment to Statement of Claim 
 
 Statement of I)efenc:k ... 
 
 90 
 
 Joinder of Is.sue an« Rh>lv J: 
 
 Zo 
 
 TIE CONTRACT. 
 State.ment of Claim 
 
 , 9J, 
 
 Statement of Defence 
 
 Joinder ^^ 
 
 25 
 

In the Hiirh Court of Justice 
 
 QUEHX'S BHNCII DIVISION. 
 
 Between 
 
 Wi'it issued fclie 5tli day of Oetobi-r, 18.S5. 
 
 coNiViEE & McLennan, 
 
 AND 
 
 Plaint if 8. 
 
 rHE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, 
 
 Defendants. 
 
 STATEMENT OF CLAIM. 
 
 10 
 
 1. The plaintiffs are contractors, resident at the Town of Port Arthur. 
 
 2. The defendants' railway company is a corporation duly incorporated by an Act of the 
 Parliament of the Dominion of Can ad i, passed in the 44tli year of the reiyn of Her Majesty 
 Queen Victoria, and chaptered one. 
 
 3. The ohject of tlie said corporation wns to construct a line of railway connecting the sea- 
 board of British Columbia with the railway .^system of Canada. 
 
 4. In order the more easily and effectually to carry out the construction of the said railway, 
 and for the purposes of the defendant corporation only, a charter was obtained by the defen- 
 dant company for a corporation .,'alieil the North American Railway Contracting Company, the 
 name of which latter corporation was used by the said defendant railway company in entering .^q 
 into contracts for the construction and ecpnpment of the said railway. 
 
 5. On or about the ;h-d day of September, A. Yi. 1883, the said plaintiffs entered into a contract 
 with the said " The North American Contracting Company," acting for and on behalf of the 
 defendant railway company, wliich contract has subseciuently been adopted, ratified, assumed 
 
aii.l iictfil iijMm liy t\\v. (lefcii.Imit railway company, uii.l which contract amonjrst othi-r provi- 
 sions (to which the plaintirts for jrrcater certainty beg Icavo to r.-IVr when pnxluccd to this 
 lionoialih- Court) contained tlie following,': — 
 
 That the specification annex.'d to tlie said contract marked 'A," and the accepted tendci 
 unnoxed niarl<ed " 11," and tlie several parts of tlie contract, siionid >«' tal<( ii to;,'etl)er to explain 
 each other, an.l to make the whole consistent ; and .should it be found that anything,' had been 
 omitted or .nis-stat.'.l, which was neces.-ary for the proju-r perfornwinco and completion of any 
 part of tlie work contemplated, tlw contractors should at their own expi-nse exeeute the same as 
 if it had been properly describ.-d, and the .lecision of the manaevr was to lie final /is to any such 
 
 error or omission, and the correction of any such eiior or issiun shoidd not be deemed to be 10 
 
 an addition to or deviation fiom the works thereby contracted for. 
 
 (!. Jiy such contract, the contractors (the plaintiHs) were to furnish all labor, machinery 
 Iilant, articles and things necessary for the execnt ion (.r the work referred to in .said specitica- 
 tiona, and in the i)lans und profiles therein referred to as prepared :)r to be prepared for the 
 I)ur])Oses of the work. 
 
 7. The sidd work was by the .saiii specilication described as tin; work upc.n Mag])ie Riv.^r 
 Station, No. 5440, to the east end of division of that portion of the Canadian Pacific Railway 
 between Nepigon and Michipicoten, a distance of thirty-tliree nnie.s or therealnuits. 
 
 -S. By the .said contract tli(^ word "mnnntr,.r" wh.'i'ever u.sed sliould mean the manager of 
 constructi.^n for the time being having control of the work, and should exten.l to and include ^o 
 any of his assistant.s acting under his instructions, and all instructions, dirc^ctions or certificate,-? " 
 given (..• d.'cisions made by any one acting for him, or of the engineer, should be .subject to his 
 approval, and might l)e cancelled, altered, modified or changed by him. 
 
 !). The .said manager was also by the .said contract permitted at any time before the com- 
 mencement of the work, or during its eon.struction, to order any work to be done or to make any 
 changes wliich he deemed expedii^nt in the grades. The manager also to be at liberty to give 
 an3- orders he de,;med fit as to cuttings or fillings, dimensions, character, nature, location or 
 position of work, the price to be according to the tender forming part of the contract where such 
 class of work was specified. 
 
 10. The manager by the said contract was constituted the .sole judge of work and material ^q 
 ni respect of both (juantity and quality; and his decisions as to woi-k or material, or the meanincr' 
 or uitention of the contract, plans, profiles, specificati*,ns and drawings to be final. " 
 
 11. The manager's decision was also made Hnal and conclusive in reference to what work, 
 labor, material, tools and plant v/ere included in any price. 
 
 12. By the said contract it was further agreed the plaintiffs should be paid of the prices 
 named in .said tender, ninety pe • cent, in cash of the value of work done on the nro-rcss tsti- 
 mates of the manager, the balance to be paid on completion of the work to the satisfaction of 
 the manager. 
 
 U. The contract furtlier provided for the plaintiffs being di.s.satisfied with the manacrer's 
 certificates, and for the method of appeal therefrom. " a(^ 
 
 14. The work has within the time, intent and meaning of the .said contracts, specifications 
 tenders, plans and profiles been long since completed, a.id the said manager has expresseil him- 
 .self as satisfied with tlu; same, and has passed the final estimates of the plaintifii^ for such work • 
 but the defendants have restrained the said manager from granting his .said certificate, and have' 
 wrongfully ordered the .said manager not to sign or grant the same. 
 
ti 
 
 tl 
 II' 
 fr 
 
 Pl 
 I" 
 
 $: 
 
 ol 
 
 (•II 
 rn 
 
 "1 
 ill 
 
 111 
 til 
 til 
 th 
 nil 
 sai 
 ^1 
 till 
 
 of 
 
 pl. 
 till 
 1st 
 till 
 
 Ills 
 
 illK 
 llIU 
 
 the 
 
 till 
 lai'j 
 biti 
 .slii 
 put 
 sun 
 the 
 "K 
 li-iv 
 plai 
 alsc 
 pur 
 saiil 
 
15. All tliingH Imve liivppi.no.l oth.«r ihaii tlm ^mutiiiK of sucl. cntilioat.- afore.- M, and nil 
 times elaim.Ml ami ull thiii^h Im-oii porfoniio.! not. H.sary to oiititlo tlu* plaintiHs to lie ivpai.i fcr 
 tlM'ir w.rk s(. (lone for tlm .IffriMlniit railway ouipany an.l nm.pte.I l,y ilwiv nn<l now hving 
 used hy tliniii. yet tlio deft ndant railway company have for a Ion;; tinir wron^d'nlly witlilnld 
 from til.- plaintitls lar;?.; .sums of mon.-y dw under such |>ro;.rr.-.s.s and (ituil <',stimute and the 
 plaintiffs claim payment of tlui Hamu, tojfcther with intfrcnt npon all sums from the date when 
 j.ropeily payal.Ii' an-' wroii^d'ully withh-l I, .iinonntin^' in all to the ,sinn of «:{()0,()()(), l„.i,„r 
 SJ27!»,00() for ini|)a.d pri'Kiipal and !!52l,()0() fur unpaid inti-rest. 
 
 I(i. And for a further cause of action, the phdntiUs .say that nt the n.pie.st, an.l upon tho 
 order and .lirections of the dcfen.hn.ts' proper oUieer in that hehalf. the plaintiffk l.uilt an.. |() 
 completed a r.w,d from the 1,as(. of siip;.h'es for the defendants' railway cotnpany to tho lin.' of 
 railway which was taken over and accepted l.y the railway company aiul u.sed l,y them, nnd 
 upon which a I.alance remains payahle to the piaintitl's of SI,(iO(». of all of which .sums and 
 interest thereon the plaintiffs pray payment ; ami the plaintiffs further .say that wlien thengree- 
 meiit was made for the huildini; of this said roid the .said mann^rcr a;r,ved with the plaintiHs 
 that should the nature ..f th.. work he fnun.l to he such that a greater allowance shoidd he made 
 than thai aeree.l upon, upon the nature of tin- ground has.id upon the r.^pr.'.sentations as such wre 
 then made up.ai which tin- ahove Imlance is due, that he wouhl go over the saiee and make .such 
 allow lice. irp„n this conditicm the plaintifKs carried on the • -Md work to completion and the 
 sai.l manager went over it and insprrted it and agree-l ^ ..,.„w plaintiffs for .same a sum of'JO 
 *l(i,0()() further than that returned in the estin.ates, tnd the piaintiffs therefore claim payment of " 
 the sai<l sum. 
 
 17. And for a further cau.se ol aetic.n tlu; i)laintilf:s say that tho .hd'endants, hy their mnna-'er 
 of C(mstruction and tlieir officers d dy (pialitie.l to make .sneli an agreement, agreed with the 
 l)laintiHs over and heyond the contract refenvd to that they, the defendants, would furnish fioni 
 time to time, and not later than the close of navigation f„r the fall of IHH'.i, to wit, prior to the 
 1st day of Novemlier of that year, the neee.s.sary plant, provisions, tools and .supplies for not less 
 than .SOO men fora term of twelve months.toenai.le the plaintiffs to carry on the .said contract, and 
 also agreed to supply, not later than the close oF navigation, to wit, the 1st of Novemher, LS.S.% 
 and deliver at the Micliipicoten River, on a dock to he erected hy the defendants, 100 tons of so 
 hacon, 200 tuns of hay and 30,000 husliels of oats, for the use of the said plaintiHk in and al.out 
 the ,sai<l work. 
 
 18. The plaintiffs say tliat the defendants did not deliver a.s agreed the said .supplies dui-in.^ 
 the season of n.vigation as aforesaid, to the great loss of the plaintiffs, causing them to expend 
 large sums of money in <.btainii!g .such supplh-s', h<.th from the fact that they had to pay exor- 
 bitant rates for such .sui)plies, the season of navigation having closed, and also were unable to 
 ship the same to the delivery points upm the line of w.adc during the winter of 1.S.S4, and were 
 put to an enormous expen.se in hauling .said .supplies to the line of work .luiing the .spring an.l 
 sunnner of 1.S,S4, and also l.,st a great number .)f supplies en.leavoriiig to get tlie .same in^after 
 the close of navigation, including the cargoe? of two barges, namely, the " Enterprise " and the j,n 
 " Kincar.line," an.l \oy^ a great number ..f Imrses owing to such non-delivery, the defendants 
 Iruing ha.l n.)tice, mu.I well knowing that such jo.sses w.nUd and were likely to ..ccur ; an.l the 
 plaintiffs claim for the extra cost of hauling the necessary supplies, etc., the .sum of Si 50,000 
 also for a rea,sonable poiiion of the cjst of constructing a roa.l which had to he built for the' 
 purpose of summer .leliv.ry, along the line . f n.a.l, re.ider..<l necessary as aforesaid by the afore- 
 said non-lehvery, an.l which the defea.lants w.ail.l have had to make for other purposes 
 
connectKl with tl.eir line an J whicl. they use.l continually, the sum of $.%.500,and for the loss of 
 supplies on sai.l l.ai-ges the sun. of .«8,000, in all the sum of !^1 61 nOO 
 
 m The pkintitts further say that the .ief.n.lants agree.l to n.aintain at the landing place at 
 
 2!). The plaintiffs say that l.y reason of the non-erection a.id maintenance of a proper and 
 sufteient dock tor the unlading of supplies at Michipicoten as agreed by th I^LTnts "e 
 phun^tls were oh hged to and did incur la.^e expense in the han.Uing of goods to tTe^^o 
 .^.S.OOO and ost a arge nu.nher of supplies which were washed away through the non-ex Xn 
 
 21 The plaintiffs fiu-ther say that .luring the continuance of the contract the .lefendants 
 '1-nnnl up he waters ot ])og Lake and Manitou i, ke so as to create a serious flood wro "^^ 
 an I agamstthe r.ghts of the ph.intiffs, whereby a nund,er of can.ps, store houses c^Hftl^ 
 P un ,«s were washed away and Hooded, an.l whereby the line of rill way was Ho.' led In 
 p a,nt.Hs thereby prevented from working the said line, entail" • a large amount o^" los. bo h t " 
 U e sau ca,nps an.l store h.>uses an.l the supplies contained therein, and loss caused bv the flood- 
 m> ot tlH hue as atoresmd, an.l the planitiffs claim therefor the suiu of .<^8,000 .laniac'res 
 
 22. Ihe pimntiffs farther say that they at the request of the defen.lants sinndied them 
 ..several tents for the use of tl. troops then being transported by the said railway ^.^ 20 
 to the seat of the rebellion ,n the North- West Territories of Canada 
 
 tlu.mt le slim :" lo^ "'^^ '^^ ''' ''''''' '' ''''' *^"^" ^'^ '^'^^'-^^ - -^^''^ed to 
 24. An.l the plaintiffs further say that the defendants further agreed to have the work on 
 he hne referred o ,n the saul contract rea.ly to be procee.lo.l with by the first day of October 
 18,S.3, at the latest an.l as an in.lueement to enter into the said contract, and as an a^reemenfi 
 ZoTsiSoO ^""'"''' *'"' "" '^'' ""■' "P"'^ ''''' ^-''''''' wouhlamouTittotL 
 2o. The plaintiffs further say that owing to the non-location of the said line, the plaintiffs 
 were delayed t<n- a long time in the commencement of the work, having pr..pare.l fo:- such com- ,o 
 mencement at and before the sai.l period as the defendants well knew, and had fathered 
 together a large number of men, to wit, 600 or thereabouts, who were thereby kept idle for a 
 long time an. under wages from the plaintiHs, and the plaintiffs were also by relvson of the 
 d..fendans de ay in location of said line, obliged to carry on the said work durin. the 
 winters of 1884 and 1885, putting them at a great lo,ss and e.xtra expenses, among other Items 
 of extra expense, o larg.- expemlitur.-s for the removal of ice an.l snow ; and^the plaintiffs 
 .uither say that after the location of the sai.l line in a number of places where Hllings Ld been 
 agreed upon, and after the work ha,l proceeded f.n' about nine months an.l the plaintiffs had 
 made all preparations to carry it out as propose.l an.l had sub-let the work so struck out the 
 defen.lants ,ntro.luce.l trestle work, cutting down the amount of the said contract which' the 40 
 planit.ffs had at a much greater expense than woul.l have been necessary pivpare.l themselves 
 tor, up..n the basis of the agreement for such g;<)ss,.xpenditure of $1,750,000. an.l the .lefen.lants 
 also at various places narrowed banks an.l cuts an.l lowered gra.le. thereby also reducii... the 
 work, entaihns a very great loss of plant, and upon the extra materh, . and supplies, the plai",tiHs 
 having on hail. ..n the faith of such agreeu.eut a much larger q, atity of plant an.l supplies 
 than was foun.l necessary for the completion of the said work, an.l the plaintiffs claim f.n- the 
 
tl 
 
 a] 
 
 t\ 
 
 III 
 
 M 
 
 ac 
 
 ill 
 sa 
 ai 
 
 lU 
 
cutting down of such contracts reasonalilo profit upon the amount, nanioly the su:.i of $100,000, 
 and for the loss of phint, supplies, etc., tlic stun of iJi^oO.OOO, and for the removal of snow and ice 
 during the winter of 1.S84 tlie sum of So.OOO. 
 
 25 («.) And the plaintiffs say that owing to tlie changes made in. alignment over the portion 
 of the work covered by their said contract, after they had made all arrangements to connnence 
 work and employed men for same, the (pianlity of work was very considerably reduced from the 
 sai.l estimate of iii!l,7.)(),000, thereby causing a reduction of some 100,000 yards of work and 
 delaying the location of the line, thus throwing the plaintiffs' men idle and disorganizing their 
 forces, thus causing great loss and damage to then), anil the plaintiffs claim on account of th- 
 said reduction in amount of work, a reasonable profit on the amount of such reduction, for which, 10 
 together with the loss surtered by reason of such ielay, tlicy now claim the sum of $20,000. 
 
 26. The plaintiffs further say that owing to the non-payment of the cash on the progi-ess 
 estimates as stipulated in the contract wrongfully and maliciously by the defendants, the 
 plaintiffs were put to large expense in the raising of money for the purpose of buying supplies, 
 and were largely danuiified by strikes occurring upon the said works amongst the laborers, and 
 were obliged to borrow money at high and exorbitant rate of interest, which the defendants 
 well knew were likely to occur, and on account of which the plaintiffs claim the sum of 
 $75,000. 
 
 27. The defendants allege that the certificates of the said engineers under the contract are 
 not binding and conclusive upon them, and should the Court be of opinion that such was the 20 
 case, and that the parties were at large upim the contract, the plaintiffs claim that the work 
 done was worth on a classification, such as they always claimed, the sum of $282,500 more than 
 the classification of the engineers in charge under the contract gives them by the said certificates, 
 and in case the Court should hold that the said certificates were not binding, the plaintiffs claim 
 the said amount of classification extra for the said work done. 
 
 28. By an order of the Divisional Court of the Common Pleas Division of this Honorable Court 
 made on the 2nd day of January, 188(J, in a certain action in the said Division, and wherein the 
 parties hereto were parties thereto respectively, it was ordered, reinstating the order of the 
 Master in Chambers made in said action on the 23rd of December, 1885, that the plaintirts' said 
 action be stayed and that they set up by way of defence, set ofi' on counterclaim to an action 30 
 in the Chancery Division of this Honorable Court brought by the said defendants against the' 
 said plaintift's, which action has since been stayed, all their claim in said first mention^ed action, 
 and these plaintifi's for a further cause of action therefore .say :— 
 
 29. Between the IHth of July, .1885, and llth Septem'ber, 188.-, the plaintifi's supplied the 
 defendants, at their request, with explosives, the delivery of which was as follows :— 
 
 July 13th, 1 885 (JOO lbs. Dualiu @ 40c $240 00 
 
 4 Coils Fuse (a 45c 1 80 
 
 July 81st, 1885 2,400 lbs. Dynamite, 50%, @ 40c 900 00 
 
 200 lbs. Dynamite, 40%, @ 35c 70 00 
 
 500 lbs. Dynamite, 30%, @ 30c 150 00 
 
 August 3rd, 1885 300 lb.s. Dynamite, 30%, @ 30c 90 00 
 
 August 31st, 1885 900 lbs. Dualin @ 40c ° 360 00 
 
 2,100 lbs. Dynamite, 50%, @ 45c 945 00 
 
 September llth, 1885 300 lbs. Dualin @ 40c .". 120 00 
 
 40 
 
 $2,936 80 
 
i 
 
 nt 
 
 
 me 
 
 
 cor 
 
 
 alv 
 
 
 asl 
 
 
 nai 
 
 i 
 
 abc 
 
 
 ace 
 
 
 api 
 
 '^m 
 
 api 
 
 
 the 
 
 
 am 
 
 
 wit 
 
 
 wh 
 
 
 lias 
 
 
 clia 
 
 
 req 
 
 
 wer 
 
 
 by 
 
 
 Lak 
 
 
 thei 
 
 
 cert 
 
 
 Boll 
 
 
 Wh 
 
 
 $10 
 
 9 
 
 tiie 
 
 
 beer 
 
 
 com 
 
 
 the 
 
 
 dofe 
 
 
 trac 
 
 i|^H 
 
 com 
 
.30. Tlic plaiiitifis also in March Inst sold to tiio defendants a lot of camps and stables, etc., 
 at and for the price of $200. 
 
 31. All of the above goods were received and accepted by the defendants on the dates above 
 mentioned. 
 
 32. The defendants throujrh their agents have always admitted, and never denied, the 
 correctness of the above acconnt and their lial)ility for tlie amount of .same, but they have 
 always put off the plaintiffs and postponed payment of the above amount thoui;h fre(juently 
 asked and pressed by plaintiH's to pay it. 
 
 33. The defendants have ne\er paid any of the above amount, and the full sum thereof, 
 namely, ^3,136.80, is still due and payable to the plaintiffs. 10 
 
 34. The plaintiffs claim the said sum of S3,13U.80, with interest from the dates of delivery of 
 above goods, and costs. 
 
 3."). And the plaintiffs further claim that should the Court hold that the payments made on 
 account to the plaintiffs by the defendants, as above set out, do not cover and a^.. not to be 
 applied in liquidation of any amoimts outside of this contract, and which the 2)laintifi;s have so 
 applied on the following amounts, which were paya1)le at the time the payments were made, 
 then the plaintiff's as a further claim .say that they are entitled to the payment of the followino' 
 amounts, viz. : — 
 
 I. On account of a certain supply road mentioned hereinbefore, which the plaintiffs agreed 
 with the manager acting on behalf of the company to construct for the said company and for 20 
 which they were {)romised payment by the said manager for the company, and which amount 
 has as above been admitted by the said manager and the other officers of the company who had 
 charge of the work to be done, the sum of $87,105.57. 
 
 IL On account of goods supplied to the Canadian Pacific Railway for their use and at their 
 request at lied Rock, Michipicoten and ]:>c4Lake, and accepted by them, and the bills for which 
 were passed and certified to in their office Hy the proper officer in that behalf and thus admitted 
 by the said company, the sum of .'ii!2, 194.37. 
 
 III. On account of supplies, labor and cash furnished at the defendants' request to the Dog 
 Lake Ho.spital, which hospital belonged to the Canadian Pacific Railway and was managed bv 
 them, and which goods were received and accepted by them and the bills^for same admitted and 30 
 certified to, the amount of $4,453.03. 
 
 IV. On account of orders given on the Canadian Pacific Railway and accepted by them by 
 Boland & Savage for the sum of 1^1,175 ; by W. J. Connolly, the sum of $150.50 ; by Joseph 
 Whalen, the sum of $200 ; by James Winstan, the sum of $401.75 ; by J. A. McRae, the .sum of 
 $101.03, in all the sum of $2,088.88. 
 
 V. On account of supplies furni.shed and labor performed by the engineering department of 
 the Canadian Pacific Railway at their rec^uist, and the several amounts of which have always 
 been admitted to be due by the said company, and the total amount of which is $12,041.31. 
 
 VI. On account of explosive and other goods delivered to David Ogilvy for the defendant 
 company, at their recpiest acting for the said company, and received and accepted by them for 49 
 the said company, and the amounts of the bills for which have always been admitted by the 
 defendants, a sum of $5,347. 
 
 VII. On account of explosives used in blasting hard pan on the work under the said con- 
 tract, and the amount for which has been certified to and allowed by the proper officers of the 
 company, the sum of $0,957.80. 
 
H 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 lal 
 
 
 adi 
 
 
 $6; 
 
 
 del 
 
 
 am 
 
 ^H 
 
 Inu 
 
 ^H 
 
 aiit 
 
 
 dot' 
 
 
 $1, 
 
 
 Art 
 
 
 mei 
 
 
 uiul 
 
 
 mai 
 
 
 exei 
 
 
 upo 
 
 
 inar 
 
 
 estii 
 
 
 him 
 
 
 mea 
 
 ^H 
 
 hav( 
 
 
 tifici 
 
9 
 
 VIIT. On account of supplies und labor furnished and frtijrht carried for the telecrraph 
 department of the defendant company at the re(|uest r,f the company, and which supplii* and 
 labor have been received and accepted by the .lefendant company, and the change therefor 
 adnntted and certiHed to, as is also the charyo for the said carriage of freight, the sum of 
 
 IX. On account of goods ami board furnished and iivl^ht carried for the employees of the 
 defendant company working on construction of Dog Lake Hospital, and which were furnished 
 and earned for said emi)loyees at re.juest of defendant company, and the account fo.- which 
 has been admitted ami allowed by them, the sum of Sl.OSO.Mf). 
 
 X. On account of freighting done by the plaintiffs' tug "Silver Spray" for the said .lefend- 10 
 ants at their request, and supplies delivered to her while used by tlie said defendants on the 
 defendants' order, and the amount of which has been admitted by them to be due, the sum of 
 $1,587.00. 
 
 XI. On account of overcharge on 11 carloads of goods carried from Dog Lake to Port 
 .'Vrtliur by defendants for plaintitts in Augu.st, 1885, the sum of $110. 
 
 The plaintitts propose that this action be tried at Toronto. 
 
 STATEMENT OF DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM. 
 
 1. The defendants admit the 1st, 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of the Statement of Claim 
 
 2. The .l.-fendants say that by the terms and conditions ot the contract and agreement 
 mentioned ni the said Statement of Clain,, progress measuren.ents and estimates of the M^ork 20 
 under the sai,! contract were to be furnishe.l monthly, with the written certificate of the 
 manager that Lne work for and on account of which the certificate was granted had been duly 
 executed to h.s satisfaction, and stating the value of such work computed at the prices agreed 
 upon or determined under the provisions of the contract. 
 
 3. The defendants further say that no such certificates were ever made or granted by the 
 manager, and that although certain papers purporting to be approximate measurement; and 
 estimates were from tnne to time presented to the manager, the san.e were never certified to by 
 him in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said contract, and no proper or valid 
 measurements and estimates of tlie work done by the plaintiffs as required by the said contract 
 have ever been presented or received by the defetidants. 30 
 
 4. The defemlants further say U.at the said pretended approximate measurements and cer- 
 tificates were and are false and fraudulent, and therein the n,easurements and classification of 
 work pre ended to have been done by the plaintiffs were largely overestimated and stated, and 
 thereby it is made to appear that the plaintiffs had done and executed a much greater amount 
 
 erf;'';r r'" i'"''; •^''"'''" ""'"""'"*■ ""^*^""^'^' ^'^^^ ^^^^ actuaUvthe fact,havin. 
 lega d to the erms and conditions of the said contract ; and that the plaintifik were entitle.l to 
 be paid much larger sums of n.oney than, having regard to the terms and conditions of the said 
 contract, they were justly and truly entitled to receive. 
 
 5. Tlie .said pretended measurements and esti.nates were and are false and fraudulent a« 
 aforesaid to the knowledge of the plaintiffs, and they were made and furnished at their instanL^ 40 
 and by persons acting collusively and in connivance with the plaintiffs 
 
 6. The defendants further say that they have paid the plaintiffs for all the work justly and 
 truly performed, done and executed by them under the said contract or otherwise. 
 
th 
 
 re I 
 an 
 
 10 
 
 LSf 
 in I 
 tra 
 cor 
 iiiri 
 
 cer 
 
 UIK 
 
 feei 
 
 $2.! 
 mui 
 pan 
 per 
 
 con: 
 
 N 
 
 01 
 
 und 
 con I 
 tiiai 
 in tl 
 ileff 
 tlie 
 
 the ( 
 
 StlHli 
 
 the 
 Com 
 
 sole 
 all q 
 this 
 worl 
 shall 
 dircc 
 as ev 
 the 1 
 
10 
 
 the Jt,.":::f J,'",;:-: ' "'" """'■"'-" """"'""' ■" '"» »"■■ '••"" -'' '«'■ .-'«™. >■ 
 
 «g.-,oJ t» oxceute ,.,„1 fully > , c , " ' , ,';','"" '"':■' ^'""™'' ""-' ™"'"'"'°'-» 
 
 „ ,p. , , ■>, I"' ■'''.' '''y » '""liii iiMiic'cl till. \v(>rk tK-rc II ,lcsci-il.cJ 
 
 pan, per cubic yaid, 80 cents- f.„. c,.,„ !;„ ? f , ' '^ , '■" >'"'''■ "^ °"'"i '"'' '""'l 
 
 in the saia contract, an. L:t t : ^ ^f/; .f;;':^^'^^'"-^'^''? 
 
 iletendants ha.l been parties thereto f,™ ' ' ' "\""'""»''f >1™"I and aele.l upon n» if the 30 
 
 the .aid North Anreriln^Ii*:^ cJZtt ^:^' '"" '"^ ""'"»■' "'= » ■»*»<' "' 
 
 this contract and the plan. .T.d prohle,,. Z^SIl^^^^^l^ ^J^:^::C,:Zl"''^ "'*' 
 works, or extra or additional works or clian-e, ,h.dl I,, I ''*>' '""' '« *""' • '^<"> 10 
 
 shall the contractors he entitled to ,LZon t t^ '" '""■*-• '"™ '•~^«-"'«l. "«■ 
 
 directed in writing as he," „reLenr.^^^ T","' ""''"' "" "'""" *°" '""•« '■«■> 
 
 as evidenced by hFs stlltrc , Z " » ' l" """^ ' -tisf.etion of the .nanager, 
 
 the right of th^econtrrr;'i;rL::^;:..''rrti;:::';:;der;::;:" -"-^ 
 
H 
 
 "2i). Cash payments equal to f)0 per cent, of the value of the work dono, approximately 
 made up from returns of pi'i^ress measiinMn-iitH, and eomputed at the prices ii;,M'ee(l upon or 
 determined under the pruvisionM of this eontriiet, will lie made to tiie contriictorH niontidy, on 
 the written certificate of the manager, that the work for or on account of which the certiHcato 
 is granted has heen duly executed to his satisfaction, and stating the value of such work com- 
 puted as above-mentioned, ami such condition shall be a condition pric(<ient to the rif>ht of 
 the contractors to be puid the said !)0 ]m- cent, or any part thereof. The remaining 10 per 
 cent, shall be retained until the final completion of the whoh? work to the satisfaction of the 
 manager; umi within two months after the eompletion, tlie remaining 10 \n:v cent, will be paid. 
 And it is herel)y tieelared that the written et-itiHcate of the manager, certifying to the final 10 
 completion of said works to his satisfaction, shall be o condition precedent to the ri<dit of the 
 contractors to receive or to be paid t'ne said remaining 10 per cent, or any part thereof." And 
 it is ah'o provided that : 
 
 "20. The progress measurements and ecrtificates shall not in any respect be taken as an 
 acceptance of the work or release of the emitractors from responsibility in resp<'et thereof, but 
 they shall at the conchision of the work, deliver over tlie same in good order, according to the 
 true intou*'' m and meaning of this contract." 
 
 15. Upon assuming the podtion of manasrer of construction, the said John Ross established 
 an office at Port Arthur, being the western end of the said section, and from thence carried on 
 his supervision and management of tlie s lid works ; and for the pnrpo.se of carrying them on, the 20 
 defundants from time to time furnished him with large sums of numey, to be paid to the various 
 contractors upon the said section, relying upon the perfoimaiiee by the .said John Ko.ss of the 
 duties imposed upon him of ascertairdng and certifying that all work on which payments were 
 made by him had been executed to l.l.s satisfaction, and also ascertaining and eertifyin<' the 
 value of such work. And that from and out of the moneys ,so remitted to him, the said'john 
 Ross paid to the plaintiff's Conmeo k McLennan the sum of §1,427,089.74; but as the 
 defendants have since ascertained, ami as the fact is, without having ascertained or certified to 
 the character of the work alleged to be done, or to its value. 
 
 16. The defendants oidy discovered that the said John Ro.ss had made the said payments to 
 the said plaintiffs Conmee & McLennan, and that he had done so without any veriHcation orJJO 
 certificate being provided by him of the work done or of its value, after the termination of the ' 
 engagement of the said John Ross, on the completion of the said work, to wit, in or about the 
 month of August last, when tlie papers, accounts and documents were removed from his office 
 at Port Arthur, and transmitted to defendants' head office at Montreal. 
 
 ^ 17. The said approximate estimates purport to show tliat the aggregate amount of work 
 performed under the said contract, being the whole work contracted for as aforesaid, was :— 
 Solid trap rock excavations under three feet deep, 38,770 cubic 
 
 yards, at S3.40 per cubic yard §131,838.40 
 
 bohd trap rock in excavations over throe feet deep, 179,855, at 
 
 ,,. *^^?; •. : '....'... 503,594.00 
 
 Mica schist ni excavations, 25,192 cubic yards, at S2.75 69,278 00 *" 
 
 Granite in excavations, 19,383 cubic yards, at 82.20 ". . . . . 42 642 60 
 
 Loose lock in excavations, 241,278 cubic yards, at 81.10 . . 265,405.80 
 
 Earth, ordinary in excavations, 266,973 cubic yards, at 38 cents 101 449 74 
 
 Earth stripiiing, 11,774 cubic yards, at 42 cents 4,945 08 
 
 Earth in muskeg, including removal of snow, ice, grub, etc.", 
 
 61,558 Cubic yards, at 33 cents 20 314 14 
 
 Hard pan i^ -^rcavations, 203,979 cubic yards, at 80 cents! . . . . 184 783 20 
 
 Cemeuted gi^.el in excavations, 23,396 cubic yards, at 75 cents 17i547.00 
 
 40 
 
 $1,341,797.96 
 
It 
 
 c.rkifl!'l T'" ' '*' "'T" ''''""^" '"""'?'""• ^"'■"''''"' *" *^^ 'l«fo».l«„tH as «fore«ni,l, appear to \^ 
 cert.H ..I o as , re.t, „. sonu- .as-s hy o„.. VV. M. .IoIl,u..|, for the ..„gi.u.er i,. .Uar.l, in som! 
 
 «H m.gn.et.r in vnnr^o. In no can. avo. t\u-y ....rtiti...! t., or si.n.xl hv tlw n n ll ' m 
 conKtruotion po.Honally.altlu.uKh in a few cJ. tl.enan.e of John iLl , i n . •/ 3.1; " 
 
 ,>..n>..r^^to..si^...., tl...M..,,-on..Tl U. NfoHat, a.l in no el ' f J ;:^ ^ 
 
 ot lu, SHwl John KoH. t atth.. ..i.l wo,.i<. for ..on a.vonn. of whi.h th. s.i.l .v.tifi"ftr' ^ 
 ..^havo ..en .granted, ha.) h..n .h.ly cxocut..! to hin natLsfuetion and .statin, the v.l.' ."'C 
 
 «aid !;;p:;:i;:ttr;::;':;;;r 
 
 Z'TT'T" H f«-"'r^^" "^- '<' ''nK..onsif^:;;n;l::, ;:;:;;:, :;;;;t;z 
 
 an,] th. la.- ..s, tha tho sa.d ,.stin,at,.s .show ai-ont 200,000 cnbic yards n.oro than t u sa 
 w..rk aetnally contain.nl. an.l that thcv w..,v ,,,„,.« .,f ,he n..,st s.M-i.a.s ,L t 7 a 
 
 ration of th. work. Tho partL-nlar. ..f th.- s.i.l .rn.r,s =:: 1 "!!'' : fe ^U^ *'"' "'r^^'^- 
 
 d:;r;;^^rr.:;^" -'•-— ^<'rv.,dnpon t.. iziSrr;:::^ 
 ;:^;;t::ir;;i:t;t,t;:;^::r:'^:^^.,:^^^^ 
 
 payahh. to tJ.-n. in .vsp.ct theivofis only S7,S7 1( 7 •>. ' '"' ";.';;:""*^ .I"'^tly an.l truly 
 
 ™cl, <Iclo,-,„i„„tio„, ,u„l i„ t„rt,,e,-„„c;il,c,.c.„f p «" t , t ■, r '," ,'""■"'"""' "' 
 
 and become ontitlcl t. n,uC "ii c , , 1 , , ,' . "T" ,"■'"':'' ""^' '""■'■' P^P^'-'J' '■■'"■"«<i 
 

 t: 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 S 
 
 
 
 
 r( 
 
 
 tc 
 
 • 
 
 sc 
 
 
 M ti 
 
 . 
 
 S ti 
 
 
 H ^ 
 
 
 ■ ^° 
 
 
 I al 
 
 
 ^B CMI 
 
 
 ^B "^^ 
 
 
 ^B ^^)^ 
 
 
 I ^' 
 
 
 ■ ''11 
 
 
 ^H cv( 
 
 
 I ''^ 
 
 
 1 te.] 
 
 
 ^H 
 
 
 ^B 
 
 j 
 
 ^B coil 
 
 be ( 
 
 furl 
 
 mee 
 the 
 
 Stat 
 inch 
 
 ants 
 
 tlie 
 
 auth 
 
13 
 
 trnof !: f T P'°'''/"' '^"*^ •■ " ^'^"'^^ constructed for the convenience of the con- 
 
 a tors for the eonvoyarce of n.atcrials or otherwise, must beat their own risk cos and 
 c arge ; whereas the sau approxi.nate cstin.ates embrace, and the said contractors have been 
 a lowed and pa..l for supply roads made solely for their own convenience, at least ths^m of 
 .^40,000, and tor repairs to same about .$9,000, and for docks built at nnrf«rr»l ,, ""' "* 
 roads *5,4f)0, and for tu,,s for the conveyance of contractors' sup^i "^'^ ^iTf'"'' '':"' 
 to the said tugs .$2.8.1, and also large sums for n.akingdams. h:^^ :l^^::tr^:\2Z 
 scows, all of which work amounting to over .$90,000, as the contractors wel knew w^^f 
 ho,r sole conven.once in the conveyance of their supplies, and should, under the x pre s terms o 
 the said contract, have been made at their own "risk cost and ch«rr^.« " n , ^.^''P'^'^f. '^""■'' »* 
 
 2.5. T; '• said conti-act also provides that the contractors ivill nt fi • 
 
 estimates, but iievcrtbcless the d,.f, ,„, ,.f '»*;"' '^"° ^^^cuiacy ot the said approximate 
 
 The defendants by way of counterclaim claim • 
 
 ^^ ^1= :i:— ;: :? - s- — ^ - ^;^....^ 
 
 o. lliiit an account may be taken of *■]•<■ vnln,> ,>p ;.i i i- , . 
 
 niee & McLennan are justlv and t X e t itied to 1 ''"""^'^ f^, -'-'' ^he plaintitfs Con- 
 ..e,amti.m,. ;l.....,;U;:^^^^^^^^ 
 
 .5^ And that the plaintiffs may be ordered to pay the defendants' costs 
 
 inclusive. " ""'"P"'''''' ^^'thin the paragraphs L5 to 3.5 thereof, both 40 
 
 2,S. In reply to paragraphs numbers Hi, 17, IS, I!) 20 "4 9^ 9^ /^^ or- , o- ., 
 ants say that they never entered into the .uv, , ' ^ ^' "'' ''"'"' ^•^' ^'c defend- 
 
 the offieerswithllumitl"!^ e I J r'1 ""''""^'^ "'"•^''" ^^* -^' -'' that 
 
 authority to enter into the sa;;;::j;;U!!;^^;i^>::::^i:;:;;-^^ --'^ "-< no power or 
 
14 
 
 taiutho whole agreement between tlio oni-tios „i,.l tl,„t ,1,, ° " ' '"' ""'It'istooil to con- 
 a...v,.,„ent.s therein contah.ed slioul^ L t , l" I ''""" """'™"'' ''''™"»"'-^ "■' 
 
 Stat "ei:; :z:. :::':;:Lr ■ :: ti::r!;r ,^„is.r ;,'""'ir' -^ "•» -™"'" 
 
 bef„re referrc.l to, it h nroviJe.l tl,-,t , v,..-, , 1 ! , • ? "■■ "■'■""'" ~"'"'=' l"»i"- 10 
 
 entitle! .„„„h, bo;.n,Wr:,,e 1 :/,.:' :™^^^^^^^^^^^^ -WW '-riy ta 
 
 tor, at any time have chiims of anv ,hl,tV "'"""l.\ «■'"":»'», but tiiat should the contrac- 
 
 pn«,.e.s, oertihcate, it w^^U Z^:^:^^ ^:::;1"''r'l T "'*''^"' '" "'« 
 tlK- manager .-ithin U ,,a,, iron, the ^dtsZ^Z^I^^':::;' ZtZ^i:'::^'^"''^ '° 
 snch clanas to have beeh on.itlej, anj the ,leten,Iant, sav ll„r ) 1 « '"'^ "ny aljese 
 
 nnder the »aid written contract do not =001,,^ 1 , " '"■"''"■'" ">"■«»''■» i«™ed 
 
 in,, to the n,ana,.„. a, prov d«l I tt ° h "7 "■ '"" ""''"' "'" ■"""" "'"™ '" «■"'- 
 
 »«i»faetorv evidence orthdrclc', ">'""";•"<>■■ "«■'« »'«!■ «!»""» aecon.panied with 
 
 ".■ t..o wori, in con.. :e:::':;;::r ;„ rT;t . r :;•",! .*;;,;"::"■ 'tr '"'r"- 
 
 contract the same l,eca„ie forever barred " ""-' """' "■""«" 20 
 
 State!,',;.,;!:]',:,;; Tz"z.!:>!7f"^V!'- "• '"■ ■» •■■"' ^" ■■' "- '-""i-i 
 provided that the pHe.:: n't;;- 1;:' V;',,' ^ h^int .^"rr "ti: rr" "■;■'?" n ""■°°' '' ■■» 
 
 and every kind of worl,-. laho,- tool, a„,I „I„ , , «''«''«■ "to annexe.l shonW inehi.lc all 
 .^-y .'or the ,,,1 ...eonti;,,, and^ c^l^^lLrS'ln™'-;:* ^' «'^"«» -'■— -- 
 
 »«yttatlh;;s„:;;,!:"z;::;;,;i!w;:™::;,f't'n'' n "'""'"" "''™^-" "-"- 
 
 tion 15 of tl, »i,l u-ritten »nlra i „. Z , ■ , /^ " " "' '"■""•*•«•»■ ""'l »i» that by sec- 
 all lo« or da,na„e whatsoevc t I Iv hall ^ ' """""'t"" »'"'" '- "t H'» risk of 
 and delivered to'and t::;^ b;t„:X:;;: ""° "™'"« ""'" "'» -* " '""^ -*'«'"• 30 
 
 .■ore chibite,. npon the p.ui";;.;;';,',:' ":; :;:'■«,;' i:,!:::™::;,',';:";:^'""';"" '"'■'■1'- 
 n^cHy at a.,y ti,„e befo,.e rirc:m,;;::::;;e: :: ; ;: i;;:: :: ;^^^^^^ 
 
 ton contract, that the sa.'e sb a 1 „ I ^ p'"" T' M " "'" ''""'''"'' ''J' "'" «"'l "■"'■ 
 
 M. The dete, ,- l^,rt e Iv th t be " "' '"' "' "'" """■-'»■■»• 
 
 Staten,ent of Clai,n, and the v^ril ,.',:.; Z'Z:!^- "'„' :", I" "■" ■"'''' »'""■"'"' 
 
 as provided by the said written contact ""'"'"-' '°' "'''^ ""' "' '"'"■'"«. 
 
15 
 
 37. The tlefondants further say tlmt the prices agreed to be paid to the plaintiffs for work 
 done under the written contract, as shown by the list or schedule thereto annexed, were much 
 larger than the prjces usually allowed for sinnlar work, and the defendants further say that the 
 said large prices were so agreed upon to cover every possible contingency, such as the difficulty 
 of getting supplies and the building of roads and other matters set up in the said amended 
 htatement of Claim. 
 
 38. The defendants further say that the .said written contract bars and precludes any re- 
 covery by the plaintiffs in respect of the claims sued on in the said amended Statement of Claim 
 and the defen, ants crave leave to refer to the several provisions of the said written contract 
 applicable to tiie said claims as if specifically pleaded thereto respectively 
 
 39. And by way of counterclaim to the plaintittV amendments to their Statement of Claim 
 the defendants .say that in and by the said written contract it is provided that the plaintiffs 
 should execute and construct the works therein referred to in a good an<l sufficient workman- 
 like manner ready for use by the defendants, yet the plaintiffs failed to perform the said 
 contract, and constructed the said works in a careless and improper manner, and did not com- 
 S Ibt tbr' r"f; abandoned and left the same in an incomplete condition, unready for 
 use by the defendants, and the defendants aver, as the fact is, that they were put to great 
 12ZI" --P e -g the said works and making the same ready for use as provkled by the 
 said contiact, and the defendants claim in respect thereof the sum of $100 000 
 
 40. And for a further counterclaim the defendants say that in and by the' said written con- 90 
 tract It IS provided that should material be wasted from cuttings or borrow pits, witlTout specTal 
 
 of the estimates, and the defendants ver, as the fact is, that the plaintiffs without such permis- 
 
 :z^^:^iZz:j^^ '"'-' ^-^"-^-^ ^^^ '--- '-''- -^ *^^ ^^^-^-*« ^^^- - 
 
 .nil ^•'' "^"fwu *" w "'?"" '=*^""*'^'-«'^»» the defendants say that the plaintiffs improperly and in 
 coilu.sion with the defendants' officers procured the said officers or some of them L Lue to he 
 plaintiffs estimates or certificates for work alleged to have been done bv the plaintif^^ und 1 
 aid written contract and otherwise, but which said work had not been^one as t e d 
 fendan ts will show whereby the defendants were obliged to re-measure and re-ckss v tie ,n 
 excavations upon the said works, in order to ascertain the actual work done, and were tl ilrebv 
 put to much damage and expense, and the defen.lants cldm in respect thereof the sum of $20 OOO- ' 
 
Hi 
 
 REPLY. 
 
 1. The pkintifls join issue upon the amended Statement of Defence of the defendants 
 
 2. And by way of reply to tl.e said Statement of Defence and Counterclaim of the defend- 
 ants the plaintiffs say : — 
 
 8. That they entered into tlu, contract Mith the North American Railway Contracting 
 Company, who, as the plaintiHs allege, were nuTely the agents of the defendants in makin<rthe 
 said contract, the said Jolm Ross heing at sucli time manager of construction of the det'end- 
 ants. 
 
 4. The plaintiffs say that in the said contract it is provided that where the word 
 manager ,s used the same shall mean the manager of construction for the time being havino lo 
 control over the works on behalf of the company, and shall extend to and include any of his 
 assistants actuig under his instructions, and that ^he said assistants by reason of the largo 
 arnount of work necessary to be done under such contr.^ots, did in fact act for and on behalf of 
 the saul Koss as manager ni the greater portion of the work. 
 
 5. The said contract further provides that the meaning or intention of the contract or any 
 question ansmg out of same, should be solely under the judgment of the said manage; in the 
 .sen.se above used, and the said plaintiffs say that the said assistants, acting as managers also 
 
 Zetr'Tr'^'^'^l" '"",''•" *"''"^ "P'^" "^^^^'' pay-ents were "„ade, and 'the 'sat 
 wie treated a.s properly complying with the said contract by the said manager. And tlie 
 plaintiffs say that they were not at any time in a position to know whether such certifi at 20 
 as between the company and the said manager were granted or not, but relied upon t e saS 
 p^gress estimates and went on and completed the work on the faith of the Lne beTn! 
 ceitihed to by such manager, .nd the plaintiffs submit that the defendants cannot now 
 If any such deads as are required by the contract have been neglected by the manager taTe 
 advantage of the same as against the plaintiffs. ° 
 
 6. The plaintiffs further say that it is provided by the contract that at the time the 
 
 battle a? n ^'^ I'l T "'"""" P""''"^ ^^' '''' '""'^ ''''''^''' and the plaintiffs say 
 t at the said progress certihcates were issued after due consideration and discussion between 
 
 the parties and were arrzved at as a proper estimate of the work done; and they submt tha^SO 
 the defendants cannot now say that such estimates were not the proper estiL es he 
 same being made under the contract, and being made by the parties who' we e the ^e udg 
 of the work as to quantity and quality of material, and submit that the said defendants fre 
 estopped from any such contention now. ueiendants are 
 
 C. (a) And the plaintiffs further .say that the said company, the defendants by accenting 
 the said progress certificates and paying under the same, are unable to re,sciiu same ow a! 
 he position of the plaintiffs has been greatly altered by relying upon such pro.! e s eiSte 
 
 ueuaueu tiom taking any such objection 
 
 OouIerllS''""™' '""" "" "'"""'■'"• "' '■'■'"' ■"""" "' -* S"'"-"' of Defe„.o and « 
 
17 
 
 S. Tlu) pliiintirtw Hay tliat the inattcr allcf'ed in thp T5tJ, «r„l irn> .. , o . 
 
 10. The plaintiHs furtl)or say that tho roaii ivferrol h, in th.. -i 
 
 oate, „„, ,„.,,,.,,„ f„, „„ „„x„i„„„ „. t,.:; 1::, i'',: :t zLtz r" ;'° 
 
 convenience o£ the contractors alon.r tlio to«,] nn,l f h . general 
 
 wor.. .., .as n..o entirely ll 'l^Jt,;;:: J^ s^ ZT^^r^i-roi ^ ^^ "^I 
 referred tc, and was done solely upon the un.lerstanding that the a e was not to be inH^T 
 in the contract, or in any way to be included utwI,.,- fl... f .1 1 7. included 
 
 such ,tcra.,, if ,„,y oxi»t. which the plainliHi ,1„,„I,1 „ot be paid ^ "" ■"■" 
 
 '30 
 
h( 
 
 th 
 
 fr( 
 
 ex 
 
 ma 
 
18 
 
 KEI'I.Y TO AMKNDKf) STATRMKNT OF DICKICNCE . 
 ,l,.l,v,';.I'"' '"""' ■'"'■" '"" "■'■ «"' "' "'■ "'■'•-« l-i" f. «... » n,l„,o„t. 
 
 'c an 
 
 i Tlif plaintiflk lurtlK.. s„y tliut Hi,, dnin,, irfVrml t., ,,s l„.i,„, „.i,l . . 
 
 r;;:':,::;r""' ► "" ' "">— "-"■ ■ « .::.. :::i Li:irrt"r,;: 
 
 DEFENCE TO AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM. 
 
 this book). ''"- '^tuten.ei.t ot Defence as printed in 2() 
 
 feel- 
 
(V 
 
 fl( 
 
 in 
 
10 
 
 In the Iliirli Court of Justice 
 
 Qin'i;\'S BHNCII DIVISION. 
 
 Be'iwkkn 
 
 ^^''■'*^ '^^ 1 "" 2h<l December. A.l). IHH5. 
 
 (;OXMK|.: \: McLK.VXAX 
 
 A\n 
 
 Plaintifti, 
 
 7^i^;rv^,?:^^^:;^i^'^s™i?--:-v 
 
 De/endantft. 10 
 
 STAT .iVIHNT OF CLy\IM. 
 
 1. The plaintiffs are c.,„u.aeto,-s, r..si.I..„t at the T,.wn of Port Arthur 
 MHjesty g„oen Vietoria. an.l chapter..,! on, ^-'t^ -t«".rth year of the ,,.i,^.n of H,.r 
 
 i..cut_oftl,e».f,l r„i|„„,, - °""^""= ""° cw'tafts tor tl,e coi,»traclio„ ,„„| ,,|„i|,. 
 
 o. In or about tlie vem- H<V9 *i,« -i , . 
 
 w.,c, contact ha. been «„b,e^„enSy .Zed ,t « , ' ''','""'''"" ""'""J' """'I'-'y 
 
 .lelen, ,„,t ,.»ilway eornp,™,), to b„il,l „„d Zt u tt Tt i T'Tr' "'"' '"■"■■'' "1'"" '•.>• "- 
 
 ^"r; :s ii"""°" '"'"«'■" "■" '"■-'3.-c.i;i::;:: r:it°o/p:,, t';f'''' "f r-^: - •'»■"'» 
 
 miio oast inclusive. '■ "^ f^""^ Aitiiur and the fortj-ei(r|,t]i 
 
20 
 
 6. By sijcli conti-act tlic plaintiffs wore to furnisli nil lol.n,. i • 
 
 tilings necessary for tho execution of fcl.e wn.I 7 f >»achmery, plant, articles an.l 
 
 conte-acfc, and in plans an.l^ht tll-e n T .";"'"' '" "" '^I'-^^-t-- -"--"1 ^ th. 
 poses of the wort. ^ ''"" ''^''''"'^ *" ^''^ P'"^!'^^'^'' "^^ *« 1-' P^'^pare-l for the pnr- 
 
 7. By the said contract the word '• manager " wlienever used s1.n„I 1 
 
 construction having control over the work, and all dir^^J ^^ ^ ^ ::^:^,^;: "'^"'^Sor of 
 iiiaile l.y any one actin.-^ for or nn.lor I,;,., i ii i ,- '^^"'"'^'"'•'' M'^cn or decisions 
 
 «n«Hc<.it..<,,,„.„,v:i!,;:,;;;„;;:;°',;';;;;,,*""''' '« "■'■j»' '» »« .'pi.~v«i, a,„i ,„igui,„ 
 
 tl,c ,„«a„i„s a,„| |,L,ti„ , S I 2 , ; l""'"^'- "'"' '"■■' *■<''«»" "« "> "0,-k „, ,„atc.,.ial or 10 
 
 law.., n,atHau»,, ana ,,:;:::::;::;; ;:;■;;;;;;•;;-■'-■- "■ ■*■■«■■- '■> "-'»" -^. 
 <i.«-..on. a,„i u„ .,,,,ta„e, „a„.o,, Howani Zi' s.iaf'T, r!;!;,:;:;';::"'-' ""^''"'■«' ■■?'","' 
 
 work as It progressed and returned snol. ,„ T\ V '^■^*'>^*'"'* engineer measured the 
 
 nordon. ^>e;iaintifl.clai:;u;:;^ ~:;;r;^^,, - V .^Ik- district engineer 
 
 forworkdoncLutcut.lowntheainount^ rZ, iV .1 ''" '^"^^'^•^^"^1^ ^'^^'li^ amounts 
 
 ...anager of construction, the .e Join; Ro s ' '' T "^'^-^"^:"---«- --> ^'-7 .«ay that the 
 plaintiffs, but he has not yet Ze so h udf T' T^'^f'' ""'> ^°"*«"^-" "^' *'- ^^ 
 
 doing, who have thus prevented the plai'n iff ' " " ^^■'■ "'■'^V'"'"' ''^' ^'^^^ ''^'^-^'I'^'ts from ... 
 ior by the contract irL said John Rolr " """'^' ''^" '"^^ '■^^■'■^-' -^'^i^-^^' -^"-1 
 
 11. After the expiration of about three months tlie ^nil p i • 
 notwithstanding the objection of the T^lnini^ ;"'"'"' '"^'P'^"^^^'' '^^^^ 
 
 with the Hnal estimates.' Also l^c^ tl™n V ' i''"'"'' ''"^' ''''''"'' ^«"''' ^^ *'- ''- 
 <-ordon died, the result to th pi S,' ,■, '£: T "' ""^ '^""^'iT^ «°---'' ^'— -sane and 
 the men who measured the work and w " bot? T""'""' ""''^'' *" «'^'' ^ «"'^' -"-^^^ f™- 
 '.ad agreed to reconsider the ,uesZ of da S f '"'"" "'""^'''^' P''"^'-« -*"-*-> 
 
 the plaintiffs say the said V^r^X^^T^t' " TJ "^' ^'" "^^ -^--^es whereb.: 
 upon them. ^ ^^ estimates aie ,n no way binding nor were intended to be suc'h 8 
 
 12. The defendants then made nn n finoi r , r 
 
 ^'--nanager repeatedly applied :\;^;:J^t:rt"t'"'"'V"^^^^^^^^ 
 
 sider the cla.s.sification previously to fii IS '/'"'^'^^ '•^•-' t'-' work and recon- 
 
 certificate of correction of such fina 11.1" '"'"^^'r" ^''^ ■'-' "Ot so done, and the 
 Mr. Ross, and payment offered 1,. d tuk " o ,1" ri;^ I,'' "" ''' "" ""'''-''' '^ '^'--'^ "->- 
 l..-n>e.its and gave receipts the.^for ^^^ h t^^ '^ t ^ P "' v" ^'^'"""^ '''^'^'' ^^'^ 
 ior the Canadian Pacific Railway Company ,n , ■^,, ''"" '''"' """ ^^"«'^t, who acted 
 
 that such receipt was not to del.r the p 2 .^ ^^ "t '''"'•"' ""' "'"^ ''^^ '^'''"'^t-' --• 
 I-<1 1-n long promised and the right to t^ ! J;"' --'-^^x- ''^ the manager which 
 Payment was made as aforesai.l ' "^ "''* '"'''^ "^^"^''^ '"'^J certificate upon which 40 
 
 ^">-ti"i;r;;::;s::sr?ot 11^:^^ ':vt"- -^-- - ••■a-^^ t,.. certam 
 
 ■•oward..n classification, their ret;ri:^h:vt^',::^r";r '""'^ "''• '"^' ''°^'' «"•''- -'' 
 paration of final estimate. ^ '" cli^'uted. agreed to reconsi.ler same on pre- 
 
 80 
 
21 
 
 tlie etuin. of the suh-ono-meers, they have not receive.) imyuu-nt fur tlie work they have well 
 and properb^ -lone for defendants under the above eontn.t work to the an.unt " f: (^18 4 
 
 X^^^;^::;^::r '''' ''- ^""" -' '''''''■''' ^"- ^---^ '^ ^^'^- eiair t 
 
 the ^^:::::^'rI::::^Z:'^ ':f^'^''' l-e in.proi.rly and u^ustly prevented 
 Pflh-n„ .,« .n.,. I 1 " pi-o-rress estnnates and measurements and clas-iH- 
 
 ihe plauititts propose that this aetion should be tried at Toronto 
 Cree^:;-^;trs;^,t^^^^ ---- -. Ho.kin . 
 
 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO STATEMENT OF CLAIM. 
 
 in the s'^;'.S': -iS/:; t' ^V^'!"/ r"" «^ ^'^^ ^'-"^- •" ^^^ --thod of exeavation an<l 
 
 l.y the n.an,.ge:;;^^. !' ; r^L^lr, ' ^"V''^'',^'-'^- ^^ P^P-'y ordered 
 e<>ntract,the^vereput;<.nL;e^e:;ens: ' "" ^^■''^■' ""^ "^^^^ """ ^^''"^■•' *^'^ «^"^ 
 
 reu.>let Z::u.;l ';:!:• u'rT *^;rf •'\*" -^«»S« ^^^^ ^avin, re„.oved gullets and'' 
 and of extra haul and "'^ ''" '"^''' *''"^ "'"■^"^■^"'^' ^'"-' ^P-^ ^>^' --*"»- Plant 
 
 tho.;ni;™;;:;;L;',!;:;::;;^t:':;'""*^r ^'■*"" -'^^'"^^ -"'^" --^ *^> -^e 
 
 engineers. "' "'^^ '^'' ''"''''' "^ ^'"-^ nnrro^.ln. of the bank ordered by the 
 
 but r dZZiis'c' :r i?' ri"^ '" '^"^^ *■" p'"'"^'«^ ^^ ^'"^ -"-- -^ --i. work 
 
 eontraet requires. ^ ^""" ''"" "^""'■^"^^ "^" P™^"""^^ the eertiheate whieh the 
 
 30 
 
 On those aceounts, the plaintiffs clain. the sun, of 81.5 000 -xn,! nr... fl f H ' 
 
 be allowed and directed to make snob .,11,,.. , P ^^ ^'"^'^ *'"' "'•inug<.r may 
 
 ^.rtificate therefor. allo.-ances and elassiHcation an,l to give the nl^cessary 
 
 b 
 
 ce 
 
^' 
 
 tl 
 
22 
 
 STATEMENT OF DEFENCE. 
 
 -in, tl.,t portion tI,.vofU.tu.,..:^^,i:,';\^^ "' *''""' '•""-^•- ""^ 
 
 4. TJ. plaiMtins perforn....] tl,.. w.'., ^i L e '; h' r""!' '" ''"'""^^ ""^•" ^t'' -^^s. 10 
 
 tI.c.ofor, una tl,o defendants say tlu.ttlK;"r,r ""'^ I"^''' "' f"" 
 
 respect thereof. ^ ' ^ ""'^ ".del.ted to tl,,.,., tor anytl,i„»- whatever in 
 
 '^^^^^^^'i^'^^^^^J;^^^ 'Tr^' •''■"^- '-^ ^"" -" -'- 
 
 ^i-l -tin.ate, as stated i.Uhe mh ^^^ , Zt^l^i^^^'rTnT' " "'""^'"'^ "^ *"" 
 any power to bind the defendants to an.^sud, a.a.c^nent "'"' "' ^'"' "'^"^ ^"^^ 
 
 in ^'-2l;:riS:;t^:::r^^^ ''•■•.- ^-.e a,h,ations contained 
 
 Howanl and Gordon had no pow or tW '',.;"'','';'''' '"' ^'"^' ^''•- -''^ ^otfat, 
 iiailway Con>pany, by the agree nent or ^^^^^^^^ '"' 'T "'"r'"'*'^' ^'^ ^'-'-J'-^ facitic20 
 
 7. The dei^.ndants, the Canadi^ pISc^r:. ^^^r" ''^' '' ''"" '"-'' '"'^'"'^ ^'^^ t'-"- 
 agreed to reconsider the rettn^ns of tlH^^^.r-r'"^ "'■''* *''^ ^'^i'» J"l'» Koss 
 
 tms for the said wo.l, as .u'l: 1 ^ ^ u ,:S:'::"' f t f" ""' ^^^^'^"""^ -'*" *'- P'-- ' 
 !-• l.ad any power or authoritj- io e^^^-n U e • f^^ ""^ ''-"'' ''^^'^^---^ "^ Ch.in,, o 't„.t 
 
 '.^or..aid without the anthorii of ^i^i^ii^:: t ^ t;^: ;i;;;: ,;-r ^'":i'^ --'^'^ - 
 
 .S. ihe sa.d contract amongst other thir.o-., contains t ''^' C'on.p.u.y. 
 
 entit^, ^^n;:::;;;:;:Lf ;i z :"^^^-^ ^" ---"::::i:.s are fair.y 
 
 eontractorsatanvW a' hn :;?''" T'''''''^' ^^^*''^^^^^^' '-* «'-''' ^1^ 
 notinehuledinthepr:.^^^ ^ :,l7; ! rT'^f*'-' -^-'' they consider are ^^0 
 
 -peat such c]ain,s in w^itino . , .m n •"''"'"^' ''"' ^'"■"' *" "-'^---»1 
 
 «"«! every certih'cate in w id/ e^^ " ""' ,""'"' '' '''^^^ I"-" *'- ''-^te of ead, 
 
 25. The contruetors in to e Ln ' " " . V"^ '" ''^"" ''^"■» --"od. 
 eIause,u.ustaeeon,p.n:t::^rs«:'r "'"'':''"'' ^^^^-"' ^« - the last 
 
 t'.^'-son why th.Uidnh the;^;:.:;; :^:^;;:„7--- " ''rr--'^ -^^ 
 
 •"H.le duru.g tlie progress of the M.,rk within T ■"' ""'' ''"""■^ *^^- tl'"s 
 
 »-l -'P-ted in writing every nu t u^ 1 'n '^"^' '" '" t'"' I'^'-e^ling clause, 
 clearly understood tluU thc.y u" " ' ^r''^ "^'"f "" '^ •*''^^'^''' ^^ '"-* '- 
 
 ;...;.t::,;X^^^^^^^^^^^ -„ t... provisions of the ..r 
 
 t^ey ^ere shut out. and that the pl.nti. ,.:; T dllr^rX-^t^J '^^ '^^^ 
 
2d 
 
 10 Tin- plaintiffs Imve never made any claim or .leman.l upon the defendants, the Canadian 
 1 .leihc Railway C.-mpany, in respect of ti)e matters lierein complained of. althoutrh they are 
 a le-ed to have existed ever sihce the year 1 882, nor di.l they tlie defendants ever hear of any such 
 elands until the be,i,nm.in,ir of this action, and they helieve that the plaintiffs have sonie'other 
 purpose or object iii now assertinjr them than a bona fide expectation of establishin-r them and 
 they plead the laches of the plaintiffs in a matter of this nature as a bar to the said action' 
 
 11. The plaintiffs have brouojit three other separate actions against the defendants all in 
 resj.ect ot^ matt.'rs arising out of the contracts with the defendants, the Canadian Pacific 
 
 aihvay (..mpany, for the construction of their railway, and the said defendants charge that 
 tliey luive .lone so vexatiously, and that all of the said actions ought to he consoIi<lated 10 
 
 12. The defen.Iants submit that this action should be <li8mis.sed against each of them 
 respectively with costs. 
 
 l>;'liveml the 5tli day of May, 188(1, by R. M. Wells, of No. 110 King St. West, Toronto 
 JJetendants Solicitors. ' 
 
 JOINDER OF ISSUE AND I^EPLY. 
 
 Tin., plaintiffs join issue upon the <lefeiidants' Statement of Defence herein 
 _ And for a reply to the ninth paragraph of the .said statement, the plaintiffs sav that the 
 
 delivered this 10th day of May, LS8(i. 
 
 McCarthy, osler, hoskin & creelman, 
 
 Plaint if n' Solicitors. 
 
 20 
 
2* 
 
 In the High Court of Justice 
 
 QUHHN'S HHNCII DIVISION. 
 
 Betwekn 
 
 Writ issu...! tl.,; '2u,\ .lay of J)oceii.bor, 1885. 
 CONMEE ct iVkLENNAN, 
 
 AM) 
 
 THE CANADIAN PACIEKJ RAILWAY COMPANY 
 
 Plaintifti, 
 
 J)i'f('iKhtntx. 
 
 STATEMENT OF CLAIM. 
 
 1. The plaintiffs are contmctcrs. resi.lont at the Town of Port Arthur 
 
 Pa.Han.nt ^^ll^:^^:'!^: ^r:^^ ^''y 'r-PO-t.l hy .n Act of the 
 Queen Victoria, and chaptered one. *'' ^'"'' "^ '^'' ^■^""^'^ "*' "^^^ ^l^J-ty 
 
 3. The ol.ject of the .said corporation wa.s to construot n lin. F -i 
 board o British Coluud.ia with the railway .yZ^^^^^a^ ' "'""""^^ ''^^ •^^'^- 
 
 saiddef::i::r:^;;rur:^[:;5j;:r'^^^'"^"^^^ -'''--' --^^ ^ --^-^ -^^>^ ^^^e 
 
 per tie. for the constrL'tfon ^1::^^^'^^::^ [^d:!:;'"^""" '"''l ^ *'"' '^'^ '' '' ^^^^ 
 east, to tlie number of 2,640 ties for ead^ f . ' -"-"'"""'S at Port Arthur and running- 
 
 inspection by the con.panv. ' '''^' """'^^^- "^^ "'"-^' «»^'l' ti^"« to be subject to 20 
 
 f-v uuies fro. the place ^l^:'Z;:TZ^:Z'i:\^'^'''f' .^ ''' ''"' ^'"^^ ^''^' «-* 
 -luire,!. The said defendant co.npaJy then stt^^^^^ P"'* '' "" !"" "'"'■■^' *'''-'3' -«- 
 
 10 
 
C] 
 
25 
 
 were , Mt.vul l,;y tl... .\vUnuhmt c.npany tVo,„ plaintiffs an-l insp-cte.! l.y tl... cinpanv's i, «n..o 
 o.■andproKn.ssost,^.ateH.■et.u•„e.ltothopl.untiHs,^.,. tl. sanl., an.l U^hI T mi^TI; 
 ...„• .sulM...nt,aotor.s on such pro.a-es.s ostin.ato.s, l.ut ,sui.,scK,uontIy on. Si s wa . .i t 
 
 oth r Tl ' , .' ' '"""""•'^' ^^•''" ""'■^' '■"^•^'•"1 ^" '•••PIHOO such ti..s thrown out 1 v 
 
 uscl by tho .h.fen.lants. «"^'«^4"^'"t to the suxl secon.i .nsp,,cti..n as aforesaid, an.l 10 
 
 7. The ;)laiiititfs have under said contract sunnlicl tn ♦!„> i p i i 
 have been ae .ented an.l us..d bv said .h-f^.T \ T' , «Icfendant con>pany ties which 
 
 1_ "^ """ "'"" 'JJ f<ai(l (letendants to the number of "•''; ()()() „,„l m,,.,. i i 
 
 received tro.a the defen.lants on account thereof the sun. of 4-. on < ^ ? ""'^ 
 
 «lu" plaintiffs of «.%()7!)()4 which fb..v ) i "^ i#3.),()2().<K,, thus leavin- a balance 
 
 J!'; >•''"■;«■» I - "■»' ti,i» „i,„. f„,u::;,i',f„;t,:'t: "" '"' •''""""'' '""*■ 
 
 STATHMENT OF DEFENCE. 
 
 1. Tlie defendants admit the first secoiwl nn,l f).;..i ., , ,. . 
 
 of Claim. • *"'"'"' '*"'' *'^"^' P'^'-ttgraphs of the Plaintiffs' Statement 20 
 
 respect of the n.atter compLne.l of ' "^'"' '" ""•^' ^""" ^^''"^t^'ver in 
 
 4. This action should be disnusse.l m ith costs 
 
 JOINDER. 
 
 in &30