•V*.^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) '^O %. ^Z^ fe ^ 4c I. I.I 11.25 IAS IIS |2.5 • 50 *^" MlHI "^ US, 12.0 2.2 U 11.6 Va %. yl '?; Photographic Sciences Corporalion 23 WEST MAIN SYXEET WEBSIER.N.Y. 14580 (7l6)C72-4i»03 i\^ ^•\- ^m^^ V ^.> ^\7 %0 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche CIHM/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian institute for Historical Micr'>reproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1 O^ 1981 Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquas at bibliographiques Tha Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Featurae of this copy which may be bibiiographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. □ n n D n Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g6ograph>ques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de cculeur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int^rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from fiCminy/ II S9 peut que certaines pagas blanches ajout^as lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film6es. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires: L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a it* possible de se procurer. Les details de cet axemplaira qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans ia methods normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. r~~\ Coloured pages/ I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ n Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/oi Pages restauries et/ou peilicul6es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d6color6es, tachetdos ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages d6tach6es Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Quality inigals de I'impression Includes supplementary materia Comprend du materiel suppi^mentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition dispo.iibie I j Pages detached/ I I Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ I I Only edition available/ Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6X6 film^es A nouveau de fapon d obtenir ia meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmA au tauu de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X V 26X 30X 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanke to the generosity of: National Library of Canada L'exempiaire fllm6 fut reproduit grAce d la ginArositi de: Bibiiothdque nationale du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont <9t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la netteti de I'exeniplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending or. the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The le,st recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^^- (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est ImprimAe sont film6s en commen^ant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniftre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impi'assion ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, setcn le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont fiimis en commengant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derniAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un dtis symboies suivants apparattra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — »> signifie "A SUIVRE ', le symbols V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre filmte A dea taux de reduction diffArents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clichA, 11 est filmA A partir de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombra d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mAthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 — ~4r •. I \yy' ■ II !■ «l w m iOi w iw < II II -v THE . ^ .'^^..*^ ^ -^^-^^- VIADUCT, ESPLANADE AND DON IMPROVEMENT QUESTIONS. LKTT KR From the PRESIDENT of the CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY CO. TO THE MAYOR OF TORONTO. THB VIADPOT. ■nclRMr Wellington says that Two Truoks Will Ba Sufflolant. EnKlnoer WjBllinKton has f urniiibcd tho boavd of trade coiDU)itt«!e with « •upplement/try report on tl.o rladuct ucttcme, dealing with the sngKCS- tlon contained In the citlKens committoo a ropoi t that a double txack instead of a fonr-traclt via- duct would ftflbrd sumclent fafilltios for all Srobablo trnfflo, and with tho contention of Sr oseoh Hlcicson. that the elevation of tho nUls would entail auch operative inconveniences that tho Grand Trunlt would not only bo unwilling r« pay a rental for tho use of tiio viaduct, but would demand compensation from the city for running their trnina over it, Mr. Wellington •ays: , , u ^' Thera la always a certain convenience in the conduct of trnfflo in having an abnrdanco of main tracks, with the contraventng diaadvan- t«go of having tf) lose tho interest on the cost of nlltrtcks which m gilt bo dlspensisd with. In view of this fact, ana of tho resulting pr-ferenco among all railway ofiicors for ample trock facili- ties, even if not strictly essential, and in tho be- lief that the benefits of a viaduct would be so great that the difference between the cost of a two-track and four-track viaduct would be of minor moment, this whole question of whether a two-track viaduct would suftlco or not was waived in tho prepai-ation of my original report on the Esplanade question, and I presume by Messi-s. Gzowski and Shanly and by Messrs. Cunningham and Sanltoy, by all of whom it was assumed without discussion that a four-track viaduct was to bo constructed. After the further investigation of tlio whole question which I have been requested to make, I find myself still of the same opinion, to the extent of tho conclusion reachtil in the subsequent con- ferences of engineers, which hav; been made tho basis of the report of your committee, that is to say: I deem that it would bo injudicious to construct a two-trae,k viivduct without designing it in such way that it could bo readily extended into a four-track. But this is easily done with- out any very great increase In tho cost of the two-track viaduct; and, with this pro^'iso, I have to report, as tho result of my investiga- tions, what indeed I was well satialled of from the first, that there will be no real difticulty nor senstble increase of expense in handling the trniRo which is "in sight for many years ahead over a two-track viaduct properly equipped with ih„erlocking block signals. "This results from the fact that the total trnJilc entering Toronto ia not a large o;.j. nor even a considerable one, measured by that} handled at various American and Enelish cities over two trucks oidy. Thus, at the Market street station of the Pennsylvania railroad there are 211 regultur passenger txains per day arriving at the station, some ot them in two or three sections : and 210 trains per day dep*\rting. all over two tracks. At Toronto there are only 61 trains arriving and 50 departing, about 40 of those only arriving at and departing from the Union station, and that over fo^r tracks, two to the east and two to the west. It is apparent that t« make a proper comparison of a station liko the Philadelphia and most of the New York stations, approachable from one direction and over two tracks only, with a r.tatioa like that of Toronto, approachable in two directions, each with two tracks, we must consider the two approaches separately for a purpose like our present one, >to see whai tragic can be properly handled over two tracks in the approaon to the station. Doing tois, we have the following comparison : Ar. Dep. Traiofl over two tntcks at Phila- delphia 311 210 Trains over two tracks at Toronto ^ from west ; 36 34 TTiilus over two tracks at Toronto fromeast Ifi 16 It is this last traffle only (perhaps doutle after constructioa ot the viaduct, and with the freight traffic not yet considered) which it is proposed to carry over two tracks for a diatance of about a mile. For the traffic weatwardfour tracks are pro- posed. At Philadelphia fmirteen times as many passenger trains are handled over two tracks tor a nearly equal distance. It is tree that the Toronto nassenger traffic may he more than doubledalter the viaduct is constructed, and that thwfria the^fretaht- toiffio tJaote {mss over it; bnt ip view of tnn /act tltat the Pennsylvania raUroad is now handUnjK over two tracks 19S more trains than the fifteen passenger trains whhAarB"iBBlrfrt"rMc(iKt «rq^||pl^to> tabn t'oan , jCilloMd^^wF^iftMnr teiet^) lu>t b»»teiiw of tort paitfng o?« tM luKaottbeNewYorkCtMi^al. ^ ^ „ Wmni^on us» ^Hnstt •ettnw to to no JMttK»ttii^tiMim»fl«ea freight fat& faolHttoa tum atnide. Be bad seen no reason to cause htm r^ /■ Id (^ V THE VIADUCT, ESPLANADE AND DON IMPROVEMENT QUESTIONS. L K T T E R From the PRESIDENT of the OAJSTADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY CO. TO THE MAYOK OF TORONTO. ^ HE ^^^"^ Ml ^F ■V w^—^ « ^ M. r B^^MHIB I^HB CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY CO., MONTREAL. 23rd Jauuarv, 1890. I i To His Worship The Mayor of Toronto. Sir, — Early in 1885, or nearly five years ago, the Cana- dian Pacific Company took definite steps towards securing an independent entrance to Toronto and independent terminal facilities on the city front. The first step con- sisted in the purchase of ground for station purposes, and before the close of 1885 a considerable portion of the ground between York and Yonge Streets, south of the Esplanade, had been acquired. On the 1st April, 1886, the Company's plans were com- pleted and fyled, and during that year nearly all of the remaining property between York and Yonge Streets was acquired, together with a large part of the right of way from York Street eastward. The plans, of the Company have remained practically without change from that time to this. These plans were exhibited to Mayor Howland, to many of the members of 3^ mmftv^"" the City Council, to mauy of the leading members of the Board of Trade, and to a large number of the prominent citizenn of Toronto early in 1886, and no objection was made to them from any quarter ; but, on the contrary, they seemed to meet the unqualified approval of every- body. It was the intention of the Company from the beginning to carry out the work on its station grounds between York and Yonge Streets in a very handsome and substantial manner — in a manner that would reflect credit upon itself and so that its works should be such as the City as well as the Company might be proud of The Company was, therefore, anxious from the outset to guard against the erection of unsightly structures between its station build- ings and the water front ; to guard against this water front being used for the storage of coal, timber, cordwood and similar purposes, and to avoid the risk of being cut off" from the lake view by such structures and accuiaula- tions as have disgraced the city front for so mauy years. It could only make itself safe in this respect by acquiring an absolute title in all the property between the streets named. This involved a large expenditure of money, for which some return might reasonably be expected from wharfage privileges. It was, and is, the plan of the Company to limit the use of these wharves mainly to ferry boats and passenger steamers — at all events, not to permit them to be used for any unsightly purposes, or for the erection of any unsightly structures that would either obstruct the view or disfigure the lake front. In making its plans the Company has always kept in view the importance to the City of direct and free access to the water front, without the necessity of crossing rail- I way tracks at grade. That these plans, il' carried out, will afford such access to the water iroiit can hiirdly be dis- puted. The plans and operations of the Coinpa:iy were fre- quently discussed with the Mayor, the City Engineer and different members of the City Council, and the utmost publicity was given to them, as the columns of the city press will bear witness. Indeed, the plans were described in full in the Toronto newspapers as early as May, 1886, and the Daihj Tele'^ram at that time illustrated them with elaborate engravings. Hardly a voice was then, nor for nearly three years thereafter, raised against the plans, either as to their efficiency or desirability. The Company proceeded steadily with its work, and, as will be shewn further on, had the hearty support of the City authorities and of the Board of Trade in all questions coming before Pa liameat and the Railway Committee of the Privy Council relating to it ; and in April, 1888, nearly two years ago, through the interven- tion of Your Worship, Alderman Carlisle, Alderman McMillan and the City Solicitor, an agreement was brought about between the Grand Trunk and the Cana- dian Pacific Companies, that seemed to remove the only obstacle in the way of the complete realization of the plans of the latter ; and this agreement, judging from the opinions of all the city newspapers, seemed to meet with general approval. The plan upon which the agreement was reached at that meeting in Montreal in April, 1888, and which agreement was assented to by Your Worship and all those who were there with you representing the City, is precisely the same in every particular that the Company is still seeking to carry out. When tin' Montreal agreement came before the City Council for ratification, its consideration was prevented by injunction, hut this injunction had no relation to the merits of the plan. It was not until after the plans of the Company had been well known in Toronto for nearly three year^, nor until the Company had expendisd a million dollars towards carrying them out, that any opposition to them developed. Under these circum- stances, I feel ju8tili(!d in urging upon Your Worship that, even if some other plan should be found at this late date to suit the City better, Toronto is bound in good faith and honour not only to permit the completion of the Company's work but to assist, in every reasonable way, in carrying it out. The Company has been earnestly desirous of standing well with the people of Toronto, and when the opposition to which I have referred was manifested, although it was looked upon as factious, the work of the Company was suspended as far as possible in order that due con- sideration might be given to any new plan that might be proposi'd on the part of the City, and that the dilficulties in the way of an alt«;rnative plan might not be increased. All the discussions of alternative plans seem to have resulted in the recent report of a committee, appointed by a Joint Committee of the City Council, the Board of Trade, the Citizens' Association, the Harbour Commis- sion and the Trades and Labour Council, recommending amongst other things, a high level viaduct along the Esplanade, which report has, I believe, been laid before the City Council, and is shortly to be submitted for adoption. Before discussing the question of cost, permit me to say that the recommendation of the Committee substituting mmmfKifmmm ■M a two-track viadurt for the four-track structure vecom- mended by Messrs. Gzowski, Shanly and Wellington (and also by Messrs. Cunningham and Sankey) cannot possibly be accepted by the railway companies. The report assumes that to be prac-ticable which is not practicable, viz. : that all the eastern trains of the Grand Trunk and Canadian Pacific Companies, all the shunting of the Grand Trnnk Company to and from its York and Don yards, and all the shunting of both Companies to and from the Don Improvement, as well as a suburban train service of indefinite (extent, can be handled over two tracks. Such a thing could not have been suggested by anybody having any experience whatever in railway working. Theory and practice &ni wide apart in this matter. My calculations have, therefore, bt^en based on four tracks throughout, as recommended by the engineers. The estimates contained in the report relate only to structural work. The report is silent as to that most important matter, land damages. It is also silent as to compensation to the Grand Trunk and Canadian I'acific Companies for so much of their property as is proposed to be taken, and this, in the case of the Grand Trunk at all events, will surely be a formidable item ; and the report overlooks or ignores a great many other important items that will certainly add to the expense. I have gone over the estimates for structural work with our Chief Engineer, Mr. Peterson, and our Constructing Engineer in Ontario, Mr. Jennings, both of whom have had large and very recent experience in carrying out similar works. We are unable to make the cost of the structural work involved in the four-track viaduct scheme less than $4,332,000, exclusive of the passenger station ; and in this we have allowed only 10 per cent, for contiug-encies — an allowance usually found far too low. Adding $500,000 for the passenger station (as estimated by Messrs. Gzowski, Shanly and Wellington for a station on the Parliament grounds) would bring the structural work up to $4,832,000 ; but a passenger station of the dimensions named in the report could not be buiit in suitable style on the site now proposed for the amount estimated for one on the Parliament grounds, and it would be unsafe, therefore, to estimate the total sirnctural work at less than $5,000,000. Now as to land damages. The value of the land required for the west approach and for the passenger station and *br right of way between Simcoe and York streets is, according to Whitney & Sons estimate, $276,940. The four-track viaduct would occupy the entire width of Mill Street and the damage to property on the north side of the street would therefore nearly equal its entire value at expropriation pi ices. A moderate estimate would be $100,000 And the damages to the Grooderham & Worts and Grrand Trunk properties on the south side of the street must be estimated at not less than $50,000. In connection with this item it should be remembered that when the Canadian Pacific Company v/as expro- priating its right of way along the north side of Mill street the damages to the Gooderham & Worts' property was sworn to before the arbitrators at over $100,000. The removal of all tracks from Esplanade street, be- tween York and Berkeley streets, as recommended by the Committee, is, of course, a necessary incident- of the viaduct scheme. To spend such an enormous sum of money and leave Esplanade street as it is, would be +he supremest fol]y. The removal of these tracks will, how- ever, be a costly matter. The owners of the property on the south side of Esplanade street have vested rights of great value, namely, the right to have sidings from the G-r .nd Trunk and Canadian Pacific railways into their respective properties. The Esplanade agreement between the City and the Grand Trunk Company, 19th April, 1865, provided:— " That any person or persons owning or leasing a wharf " or wharves south of Esplanade street may, at any time, " lay down and construct from the south side of the Grand " Trunk a siding or switch and connect the same with the " southerly track of the Grand Trunk Railway." And the Canadian Pacific Company in purchasing its right of way along the south side of Esplanade street was obliged, in the case of almost every lot, to enter into bind- ing covenants with the owners for siding facilities. Each owner or tenant, therefore, from Yonge to Berkeley street, will have a claim for damages if these siding facilities are destroyed. What the aggregate amount of such damages would be at expropriation prices is, of course, a mere mat- ter of conjecture, but having recently acquired some knowledge of the value which these owners place upon their siding facilities, and guided to some extent by the amount which the Canadian Pacific Company had to pay for its right of way from Berkeley to Yonge street, and knowing something of the process by which damages are inflated in expropriation cases, I do not think it would be safe to estimate the aggregate dam- ages under this item at less than |250,000. The right of way required for the viaduct from Mill street to a junction with the Canadian Pacific right of way near Eastern avenue is estimated by Whitney & Sons at $80,000. 10 Then the Canadian Pacific would have to l^e reimbursed for the amount paid for the right of way for its Don Branch from Yonge street to Eastern avenue, and for the amount expended towards construction on this right of way, and for interest. Also for the interest on the cost of the property betw een York and Yonge streets, and for the amount expended in clearing and improving the property, and all other expenses in connection therewith. As to how the propoSvjd freight station grounds west of York street are to be secured to the Canadian Pacific Company the report is silent. The Company could not part with its grounds east of York street without a clear title to the proposed grounds west of it and without proper compensation for the dliference in value of the property exchanged and for the extra cost of handling all its traffic in a yard accessible only from the west and for the extra tolls payable to the G-rand Trunk Company — all cars reaching the yard from the west being subject to such tolls. The cost of the property that would have to be acquired would be large and the property east of York street is far more valuable than that west of it for any purpose. What the total cost of the exchange would be cannot easily be estimated. And then the G-rand Trunk Company would have to be compensated for right of way for the viaduct through iti Nipissing Yard, for the Northern Station at the foot of West Market street and for the Great Western Station at the foot of Yonge street. I am unable to estimate for these^ The Grand Trunk would also have to be reimbursed for its present freight sheds, say $35, 000, and for the cost of temporary accommodations for its freight traffic during construction and for the extra cost of hand- *> *) 11 ling its traffic during that time. This item cannot well be estimated, but it will be no small one. Aside from any question of compensation to the Grand Trunk Railway Company for extra haul of freight or the extra shunting resulting from the viaduct scheme, there are two very important matters that would have to be adjusted with that Company as to the cost of which I can hardly form even a conjectural estimate, viz : 1. The proprietary rights of that Company on the Esplanade between York and Berkeley streets, the posses- sion of which enables the Grand Trunk Company m practically control the street delivery of freight in Toronto. [The Canadian Pacific Company paid about $200,000 for a strip 28 feet wide from Berkeley to Yonge streets, a strip less than half the width of that occupied by the Grand Trunk Company on the Esplanade, and affording no unloading facilities whatever]. 2. The special value of the Grand Trunk local freight and passenger facilities— the special value of its position in Toronto. It cannot be expected that the great advantages enjoyed by the Grand Trunk Company in this respect will be surrendered without ample compensation. It is not easy to estimate the value of such advantages but some idea may be formed of it in this case from the fact that the Canadian Pacific Compauv would be glad to complete its proposed local freight and passenger facilities on the Lake front, and exchange them for the corresponding facilities of the Granc" Trunk, giving $2,000,000 to boot, and I very much doubt if the astute General Manager of the Grand Trunk Company would make the exchange for twice this ar:iount, although his Northern and Don yards, his train tracks and shop grounds would not be included in the exchange— only his local freight and pas- M 12 senger stations, his local freight and passenger tracks and his rights on the Esplanade. There are many other contingent liabilities in connec- tion with this viaduct scheme that I need not mention at this time. I trust that the items I have particularly indicated are sufficient to convince any reasonable person that the estimates contained in the report are absurdly in- adequate. The manner in which the estimates for structural work are made up may be judged by the fact that while Mr. Wellington estimated the cost of a four-track viaduct at $160 per foot — a dangerously low estimate according to our recent experience — the report puts the cost of a four- track structure at only $150 per foot, although iron- work has advanced more than twenty per cent, since Mr. Wel- lington's estimate was made. But although this advance in price was ignored in estimating for the viaduct it was evidently considered very seriously in estimating the cost of the John, York and Yonge street overhead bridges. The items that I have been able to estimate with some degree of certainty aggregate nearly, $6,000,000, and those for w^hich there is no definite basis for an estimate cannot safely be assumed at less than $3,000,000, and, therefore, I do not hesitate to say that the cost of the viaduct scheme with four-tracks throughout, together with the supplementary works involved, and a suitable paseenger station, will be, if it can be carried out at all, from seven to ten million dollars, on which the annual charge for interest will be from three hundred thousand to four hundred thousand dollars ; and in my estimates I have not considered the large expense that would be in- curred by the city in making the park between York and Scott streets as recommended in the report. I 13 I I The desire of those who made the estimates upon which the report is based seems to have been to exag- gerate as much as possible the cosl and difficulties of the overhead bridges and to conceal as much as possible the cost and difficulties of their own scheme. Why is the cost of the John street viaduct referred to at all ? The Montreal agreement provided that it should be built by the Grand Trunk Company at its own expense. The question of land damages so flippantly dismissed by the report in connection with the viaduct scheme re- reived " careful consideration " in connection with the overhead bridges, but the report faiis to refer to the well known fact that the Canadian Pacific Company long ago purchased the only private^ property that w^ould be affected by the York and Yonge street bridges. It is true that the overhead bridges at York and Yonge streets will now cost more than ray estimate of three or four years ago, because of the advance in the price of iron work, but the Canadian Pacific Company will under- take to build them for much less than the estimate given in the report. But even if they should cost the entire amount named in the report, |98,250 each (clearly a guess, for one bridge is much smaller than the other), what is this for the city and the railways together to bear as compared with the enormous amount involved in the viaduct ? True, several more overhead bridges may bo requi^'ed in course of time, but a year's or at most eighteen months' interest on the amount involved in the viaduct would cover the cost of all of them. And in what respect do the overhead bridges fall short of providing what the public wants in the way of easy and safe access to the water front? They start from Front street, run out nearly level, and, after crossing the railway, descend by an easy incline to the new street 14 beyond the Esplanade. They have ample room for vehicles, as well as for foot passengers, and people cross- ing by them need not see a railway ; and it will be just as convenient to use them as to pass down York or Yonge streets under the proposed viaduct, and so out to the water front, and it will, at the same time, be much more comfortable. The structures would be ornamental, and they would not obstruct the lake view. The private property on the lake front east of Yonge street is particularly adapted to business requiring both railway and lake facilities. It is the only property in Toronto that can freely enjoy both; but the viaduct scheme would deprive it of the railway facilities upon which its value chiefly depends. It should not be overlooked that the principal use of the water front by the people of Toronto is confined to four months in the year, and that for the rest of the year the business south of the Esplanade will be chiefly that of the railways themselves or that created by them. So that there may be no possible misunderstanding as to the plans of the Company, either as regards the treat- ment of the water front or as to the overhead bridges, I have had careful drawings prepared fully illustrating them, which drawings will be sent to Your Worship for inspection. The Canadian Pacific Company has no desire to obtain or exercise anything like a monopoly of the wharves and shipping facilities on the water front of Toronto, and has all along been willing to enter into any fair and reason- able agreement with the City concerning that part of the water front which the Company has acquired. There is plenty of room for all, and it would b., neither good 16 policy nor good sense to embarrass the shipping business of Toronto by excessive wharfage charges or in any other way. Nor has the Canadian Pacific Company any objection to the principle of a high-level viaduct. It would gladly cooperate with the City in carrying out such a project if the traffic were of sufficient magnitude to justify the ex- pense, and if the advantages to be gained would warrant it ; but great as is my opinion of the future of Toronto, I fear that it will be many years before such works as are to be found in London, Liverpool and Glasgow will bo practicable in Toronto. Even Chicago with its vast traffic cannot affi^rd them. A viaduct to be acceptable to the railways must be workable, convenient and not excessively expensive, and it must provide reasonably for the future. The four-track viaduct might meet the first and fourth of these con- ditions, but not the second or third ; the viaduct recommended by the report would not meet any of them. "What the railways would be willing to pay towards a viaduct, assuming that all four conditions could be ful- filled would doubtless be a mere question of arithmetic ; it would be governed by the cost of handling their traffic one way as compared with the other. In concluding what I have to say on that part of the report relating to the viaduct question, I will venture to remark that it does not seem to have occurred to the Com- mittee to enquire whether the Grrand Trunk Company would be willing to give up its present position in Toronto and join in the project, for any consideration or on any terms. If it will not the project must certainly fail, and all of the time and expense given to the consideration and preparation of viaduct plans must go for nothing. ^ T i 16 Another important subject is touched upon by the report of the Committee which recommends, " that the " City must maintain at all hazards the right to the use " by all railway companies of the railway reserve along " the Don and must prevent the Canadian Pacific Com^ " pany from acquiring the exclusive right to any tracks " along the Don either on the level or along the elevation." Permit me to briefly review the facts of the case. The original design of the Company, as shewn by the plan fyled at Ottawa, was to bring its branch down the oast side of the Don Valley crossing the river at Eastern avenue. In a conversation with Mayor Rowland, during the early summer of 1886, he urged upon me the desirability of a change in our plan so as to cross the Don at Winchester street and to make use of the railway reserve on the Improvement on the west side of the Don from Winchester street to a point near Eastern avenue, his objects being, as he stated, to avoid the building of our bridge at Eastern avenue and to save something for the City through the participation of the Canadian Pacific Company in the cost of the Don Improvement. I expressed a desire to meet his wishes in the matter if the Company could have an independent right of way for two tracks, that being a vital point with us. He thought this so reasonable that he did not anticipate any difficulty in arranging it and a few weeks later a meeting was held by his invitation, at his office, at which were present the Mayor, Alderman Carlisle, Mr. E. B. Osier, Mr. Wells, Mr. Sproatt, Mr. Sankey and Mr. Lumsden. The result is clearly stated in the following telegram, which I received from Mr. Wells immediately after the meeting : — 17 •' Toronto, 30th September, 1886. .< l^t^ interview with Mayor, Mr. Carlisle, Chairman „ ot Board of Works, and City Engineer. The City '' En. after whi.^h ''tho Prcmi(*r annouiK-ed that the Committee was of " opinion that the proposal to send Mr. Schrieber or *' another (uij-iueer to Toronto to meet th engineers of the •|City and railway (>ompany should be aeeeded to, and " that ht should locate the line most convenient for the *| railway and the City without raising the question " whether it was to be an independent Hue or not." On the 16th September, 188!), Mr. Schriober, in pur- suance of his instructions, made his report to the Privy Council in whi.ih, amongst other things, h(^ says : "That having met Mr. Cunningham, Mr. Wragge, ^^'Mr. Edgar and Mr. Jennings, and afti-r reviewing the " -round and listening to all these genth'men had to say," he arrived at the conclusion " that it is essential to the "interests of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company and ''the public that the said Railway should have an ii.de- " pendent and uninterrupted entrance to the City ; that *| the business of the Company requires two tracks and "that the two centre tracks should be allotted to the *' Canadian Pacific Company and the two outer tracks " Ur-ei as loading and discharging tracks." 1 Iiave little to aid to this solid body of facts. 1 see that the city has published a notice in the Canada Gazette of an application to Parliament for legislation to override all that it has done. If propositions made in good faith by the Mayor and accepted by the Company ; if plans prepared by the City officials under the instructions of the Mayor for the guidance of the Company ; if the cooperation of the City 1 I 21 Engineers for a whole year in the work of the Company ; if the expenditure of Inrge sumH of money by the Company on the faith of these representations and actions ; and if resolutions, memorials and delegations sent to Ottawa not merely to support an independent entrant^ by way of the i)on Improvement but to support a Bill which authorized the Governor-in-(-oun , " or that any one company should be placed in a position " to perpetually keep out all others. * * * q^j^jg " Company would be willing to afford to other railways "entering the City of Toronto the fair use of the tracks to " be laid on reasonable terms ; but in the case of ei-isting T 23 " lines having already extensive track facilities in Toronto, " this joint use of tracks should be reciprocal ; in other " words, we should not be expected to give to the Grand " Trunk the use of our tracks while we are debarred from ■" the use of theirs." These are my views to-day ; but it does not follow that we should permit the shunting engines of other com- panies to work on our main passenger tracks, nor that we should afford the use of these tracks for anything re- sembling a street car service. In conclusion I beg leave to say that when the Com- pany's works were interrupted by the notice of the City Solicitor respecting the Don Improvement they were within two weeks of completion to a sufficient extent to be serviceable— sufficient at least to admit the Company's trains from the east. Many months have elapsed and the work remains at a standstill, and the large amount of money the Company has expended on its eastern entrance and strtion grounds is bringing no return. The Com- pany is laboring under many disadvantages in conduct- ing its bisiness in Toronto and the delay has become very serious. The Patriots who would save the c?7 from rail- way aggression have had full opportunity to be heard. I earnestly hope that the case of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company may now be dispassionately consider- ed, and that the Company may be accorded such t^ ^atment at the hands of the city as its own good faith and public spirit deserve, and as the good faith and honour of the city of Toronjfco require. I have the honour to be. Sir, Your obedient servant, W. C. Van Horne, President.