IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 ^ illM M 20 1.8 14 lllll 1.6 V] <^ /}. ^;j c;^m -I' Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 V ;v qG \\ % v '^i; o'^ 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 film6s d des taux de reduction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 i partir de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas. en prenant le nombre d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. ata ilure, a 1 2X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 A.' ■H M«^he y^ 6'// (fi^.l6 I a^ rente ^omt af^fiovu ISSl. * cotin. From the County Court, District No. 1. INSOLVENT ACT OF 1875 AND AMENDING ACTS. In the matter of the Estate of JOHN R. MUREAT, an Insolvent, AND ALEXANDER UcDONALD, Claimant, AND JAMES G. FOSTEE, Assignee of said Insolvent, Contestant. ALEXANDER McDONALD, Claimant, Appellant, AND JAMES G. FOSTER. Contestant, Respondent. F. A. LAUBENCE, Attorney of Appellant. N. H, MEAGHER, Attorney of Respondent. I HALIFAX, N. S. Wm. Macnab, Law Printer, Prince Street. 1881. h-^'' O"--: Il^TlDB Agreement of Counsel (O'Doherty and Lawrence) to examine viva voce ''91"' ^^'Xnald & Co'^''' '^^''''' work claimed was performed by McKenzie, Mc- V Additional clause W , ^g Agreement of Alex. McDonald & Co. and Thos. Boggs et'al (M V)... ' . .' * ' 145-147 Agreement with McKiel (B B) jqk Assignment of sub-contract to Mitchall & Oakes (C C) ,' . . 106 Answers to Interrogatories by P. Grant '. . ....*.'.'.'..*. 75-83 •^- Jillett 84.90 Bill in Equity (A 2) j.^ , - Bill of Works (N N) !!!!!!!!!'.!!".'. ! !l30-134 Bond, Boggs et id, to the Queen (L L) ......,'...."... .116-117 Bond from Tuck to Crown (E E E) jgl Bell's evidence OC qo Crib-wharfing by Bell 99-103 Certificate of Judge Johnston o Claim of Claimant „ . C! imant's Evidence ' 11-39 59-63 Conditions of Contract for Sections No.'s 17, 18, 19 and 20 128-129 Contestant's Evidence 39 5Q Contract A. of McKenzie, McDonald & Co., under which work was performed. 160 Contract of Boggs et al. with the Queen (H H) 106-109 Cross Sections— Plan " D." (original), 247 + 259— Plan " 0. 0." '.".'.".'.'.".'.'...'. Deposition of Witnesses taken at Ottawa . 75 09 ;; sf • •. ■■■.■.■.".■.'.■.■;.■.■.■;.■.■.■.■.■.'.■.■. "90 Exhibit " D," annexed to deposition of 99-103 Jillett ■ ■ ■ ■ gg.gs Detail plan Crib-wharfing (K) Evidence of Alexander McDonald, Claimant 12-24 Wm. Delaney « 2' " Gordon Cook 25 26 " Jno. W. Muri ay 26 27 Jas. O'Dell '.................!.... 28-33 C. H. Palmeter 33.34 " Wm. Tremain 34 36 Wm. Walters !............ 36 I ii Evidence of Edw'd Whidt'en " Bernard Mahoney . ^^ John R. McKenz-'e .*.*.".".'".".'.' '■■ ^^"^" Contestant's Evidence ^^"^^ Peter Grant . . 3^ Chas. Graham ". '. *0-*'J Donald Sutherland . *^ Robert P. Mitchell ***^-^" S. D. Oakes ^"-55 John R. Murray ^^"^^ Rebuttal " ■ ■ 38-59 John R. Fisher ^^ Wm. Waiters " .' 59 Alex. McDonald ^^ Jas. O'Dell ^0-62 William TromaineV.'.".".'.".' .'.*.■. ^^-GS Tet^r Grant under Commissioii '.'.'.' ., ^? «« , . 84-00 mva voce Examination ,,o n.. Leonard 0. Re' 1 " " ^^-^^ Exiiibit " A " (Contract ) ^^-^^ " 'E"(depc.itionofBeil) ^^^'^^l " "0" (ru-ofiie) .V.V.V.V. ^^'^^ ' D ' (cros;-. sections) " E " Letter Thos. Boggs & Co ;; "K" Detail plan Crib-wharfing ."■.■.■.■.■.; ■.;;;;; ^^* " S " Detail plan Rip-rap ' V Notice of re-measurinf^ work ^^^ ;; :Y;;and"Z" Notice to produce (not printed)". ''' " "BB"X:r:7:rr;xr^-^-^^-^^"^^ ^05 « «KK" T^Tt ^«^'--^^«^-^ith the Queen V." ' ' 106- ^9 tt- K Tuck s Contract with do. M M" Specifications. 110-117 " "NN" BillofWorks 117-128 " " O O " O^nll' T'^^' Measurements-162:380.-.;.-.-.:. ^^^ '• '. A ?" ?w ' ^^'''''' "^ Qnantities-fron. (P P) . . . '^' \% _, _A 1 _ Abstmct Measurements furnished by O'Dell to Mitchell." .■;.■.■ 138 "CI " " „ " • . ■ . 139 ;; ;; F 1 •• Particulars of Borrowing, Stations IG2-380 . '". . . ' ^'^"140 „ ^ 1 " spoii_i62x38o ::: II G 1 'I O'Dell's tracing of Cro.ss-sections "Hi " Tremain's Measurements from Oross-soctions ' .".'.' 143 lii Exhibit " K 1 •• Tremain'8 Measurements of Crib-wharfing f,-oi., Cross-Bec- ) ,. ,.„,,. , tionb 340x350 M** " .. A i .. t^rT^ ""^ '^''''- M*'^^"*'^ * Co. and Thos. Boggs et al. 145-147 " "0 2" ^'^ ',? ^J'"^^^ 147-167 '^ z lirants Measurements. , . , ?o itq "D2" " " " ,'. ' '** « 1 ^ ^,? MJ'^hell and Oake's Account 164 "ZZ" Statement of admissions * 165 !.* !! S p S !! S"^^ ^T^l"" Measurements furnished McDonald .V.V.'.V. 166-167 , ,, ^°"'^~^"ck to Crown jq» " D D D " Interest Statement 'j'gy j.q " E 2 " McDonald's Memo, of Crib-wharfing . . ................. "158 II II q" 16* II " 4 " ' 162 II ,• r saTz^andioS iL:;: :tr -- --- --^trsTa t; saidiix^trirrLrii^^'X"^'"^ '^ ^-^ -' '-'■"*■ "■- ^^" 30 Oln^. And on the first day of September A D 1S70 «„ «. i in Insolvency, on the affidavit of Walla;e Grai!! ? 1'' "'"' ^™"*'^ ^^ *^« '^"'^^ that the said claimant have thirtv dlv« f .?T' *^' P^P^'^ '>"'•«»" ordering the objections filed to his 11™^!;!^ '""' "^ ^'^ *"' «^^^« '^'^ --«" ^ J. G. FOSTER. AaalgrM and Contestant. VHE INSOLVfiNT ACT OF 1876. ^^^JJovmcE^OF Nova Scotia, I CANADA, -CE OF Nova outrriA COUNTY OP HALIFAX, S.S /n t/. matter of JOHN R. MURRAY, an Insolvant AND ALEXANDER Mcdonald, C/amam AND JAMES GFOS-R, Assignee of said Insolvent. f'ontestani after the alleged claim of the clairnanrhe,-.in ^'*^^'[' ^^'^ '^""''"^y' ^^^^^ = ^^^^ fi'o,!, one W. H. McKeil for the per formance of all the work on the contract hereinb, fore referred to on section nuniber nineteen ot the Interc.donial Railway, beginning at station number three hundred and tlur^v .seven . id extending westerly to the end of .said section, and that after the said McKe.l had per ormed part thereof and after the .said clftima,.-t ha.l become and was largely indebted to hun therefor, he. the .said clain-ant. mad and entered into an agreement with the .aid M.U>hcll and Oakes hereinbefore mentioned, which agreement 9.0 IS in the wonls an.l hgu.v following: Th's indenture, dated at Metapedia. in the Provmce of Quebec, tins fifth day of August, in the year of our Lor.l one thoasand eight hunored ami .seventy -three. Witnes.seth, tnnt w ,. John C. McK..nzie. Alexander McDonald and Frank ort Davis do relea.se an.l deliver unto Mes.srs. Mitchell and Oakes of Metapedia, all our right, title and interest in that portion of our work on •section nu.nber nineteen of the Intercolonial Railway, beginning at station number three hundrec and thirty-seven and extending westerly to end of said section thi.s o comprise all the work on said portion of .section number nineteen, excepting the building of masonry free from all actions of damage or charges that may be brought against said work, and commencing at the date when W. H. McKeil commenced work 30 at said place, to wit, the twelfth day of November last. Witness— C. S. Archijuld. Mckenzie, Mcdonald .t oo.. Ali>;x. McDonald. And the said contestant alleges and avers that the consideraiion of and for the said last-mentioned agreement was that the .said Mi.chell and Oakes were to do and perform all and singular the work then remaining undone on Section number nine- teen of the Intercolonial Railway, beginning at station number three hundred-and.- thirty-.seven, and extending westerly to the end of said section, and that they the said Mitchell and" Oakes, .should pay the said McKeil the s-im due to him by the said 40 claimant, all of which they did, and the said contestant alleges and avei-s that the said Mitchell and Oakes duly performed and earned out tho said agreei.:oat in all respects on the.r part to be done and performed, and the said contestant allec'es and avers that done and : THE : Pjiovinc lOOUNTY In t The cli lobjections i Itained, and Andfc said objecti |seal and ws And fo and Stephei ant with th by tl)eni in and so done claimant wa Insolvent u: Irrespective And for McDonald h lower pri( aj^'reed betw liflerence b sub-contract lie amount 1 =int's contrac Should l)e all preiiitod witl 10 avers that the moneys so paid and work so done formed a large portion of the work done and in the original contracts, and for which the said claim is filed. N. H. MEAGHER, Atty.for Contestant. THE INSOLVENT ACT OF 1875 AND AMENDING ACTS. CAM ADA, ) Pjiovinck of Nova Scotia, I ICOUNTY OF HALIFAX, S.S. j In the County Court, District No. 1. In the matter of JOHN R. MURRAY, an Insolvent, iQ AND ALEXANDER M.DONALD, Claimant, AND JAMES G. FOSTER, Assignee of said Insolvent, Contestant. The claimant, by Frederick A. Lawrence, his attorney, in answer to the added loiyections added by leave, says that he denies the allegations in said objections con- jtamod, and each and every of them, and joins issue thereon. And for a further answer, the said claimant says that the said release in each of said objection,', mentioned is the same release, and the claimant says it was not imder 20 |seal and was made without any consideration. And for a further answer, the .said claimant says' tliat the said Robert P. Mitchell and Stephen D. Oakes, by agreement between then", and him, cliarged the said claim- ant with the costs and charges for the said work and material so dor.e and furnished by them in respect to the said portion of said section 1.9, mentioned in said agreement and so done and "urnished by them at the request of said claimant, and that the said claimant was and is entitled to be paid for the said work and mateiials by the said Insolvent under his contract on the terms and at the rate therein mentioned, quite Irrespective of said agreement with .said Mitchell and .said Oakes. And for a fourth answer, the claimant .says to said objections that .said Alexander 30 IcDonald had a sub-contract with said McKiel to do said portion of said work but at lower prices than ..aid claimant was to receive for it under hi.s contract, and it was agreed between said Mitchell and Oakes and said Alexander McDonald that the Iditterence between tne prices agreed to be paid to said W. H. McKiel upon his said ^ub-contract with said claimant, an.l thereby assigned to said Mitchell and Oakes and ^^he amount that would be due to him for said work, labor and material- np.l,,.. HaMn ku.t.s contract with them and .said in.solvent for the performance of the whole contract fclu.uld be allo'^ed to .said claimant, and .hat the .said Alexander McDonold should be l:.v.uted with the whole work done by said W. H McKiel under said contract with the 11 insolvent and said Mitchell and Oakes. and ,sho d be charged with the cost of it at the pnces m said sub-contract .vith W. H. McKiel. and the said Alexander McDonald was charged with the said cost of performing the said work bv said McKiel performed and says ne ,s entitled to be paid for the same under his said contract at the prices' mentioned therein. ^ •<= pnues F. A. LAWRENCE, • 'a Atty. for Claimant. IN Re MURRAY. Contestation of c/«im— Alkxandeii MrDoNALD. lo March 18th. CxRAHAM contends that estate ought to com.nence, the question being whether the objections should prevail or be ovei'iuled. I decide claimant to commence. Mh. Henuy asks for leave to amend claim on Alex. McDonald affidavit • do F A. Lawrence clause in contract Boggs and Murray and claimant referring to chancre m contract. (Read.) '^ RiGBY contra. Graham replie.s. „ _ , March 19th. 20 „ 1 v'. M^ ^"5"'^i ^"- ' "^"""°*^ '" '" l^-"''*^'- b"fc not as to price ; No. 6 is adu,it.ed ; No. 7 is andmitted , No. 8 is ad.nitted ; No. 9 is admitted The.se items are admitted a.s to performance, but not as to liability. To be contested, Nos. 1, 2 3 10, 11, 12, and N.. 5 as to price. > . . , Mr Graham tenders the agreement between J. Robert Murray and others, and McDonald and others, Feb'y., 1872. (Marked A, J. W. J.) Mr Graham tenders deposition of Xeomr^i ». jSe^^. (Read.) Subject to the ob- jection before Commissioners. (Marked B, J. W. J.) Deposition taken under consent. Agreement. Agreement A is received. (Read.) Plan certified by Deputy Minister of Railways under cap. 9, 1875, tendered and received, subject to objections. (Marked C.) Mr. Rigby tendered a plan he alleged to be the original. Plan C shews longitudinal plan of the entire contract number 19. Certified plan of the cross sections from 162 to 380 inclusive, read. (Marked J-». riubject to objections.) 80 Plac Lett Mr. ' i iion tl MHO. !d h« shall do ] shut it 01 leaving tl The 13. 14. Alkj tioned in stations m keel. Th contract, '. No. 162, t crib-whar westward, 355 plus , piece is o\ 31(j. The at Man's ] measured from beinj Mr. B a contract been done set out or was a pai partnere o I alloi Mr. R that thei-e Exami from Mr. I in the bott or slope 2 ( is used for the inside, feet, heavy 12 Plan by which crib-wharfing was to be done (prepared by Flemming) tendered. Letter E admitted to be in handwriting of Murray, dated June 14, 1872. March 20th. Mr. Henry, on behalf of claimant, applies for leave to amend the claim. I am of r :■; iion that I cannot do so at this stage of the proceedings, and that the application «no. !d have been to the assignee, but in view of the large amount at stake I think I shall do less injustice by allowing the amendment at the risk of the claimant than to shut It out altogether. I therefore made the order to amend, dated the 19th instant, leaving the contestants to take such action therein as they may be advised. The amendments are : ,j. 13. Levelling rock foundation for six culverts, at $100 per culvert $600 14. Underdrains, 2700 lineal feet, at $5.00 per 100 feet ..'*'. 13,5 $735 Alexander McDonald.— I am the claimant and the Alexandei' McDonald men- tioned in the contract. The contract was laid off into stations, 100 feet apart The stations were distinguished by red stakes, and the numbers marked thereon by red keel. The western end of my contract commenced at the eastern end of McCready's contract, No. IH; the west end of my station was No. 380, and extended eastward to No. 162, this was part of section 19, Intercolonial Railway. There are five pieces of crib-wharfing that I built on sec, 19; two piece ssepavate above McLean's Brook to the 20 westward. The piece to the westward, nearest sec. 18, is 848, and between 339 and 355 plus 50. The piece nearest the McLean Brook was from 329 to 334. The next piece is opposite the road diversion on the plan and on the ground, about from 304 to 316. The next piece was at Kain's Brook, between 259 and 270. The next piece was at Man's Hill. It was to be built from 247 to 250 ; it was built from 247 to 253 I measured the length of crib-wharfing. Crib-wharfing to protect the embankment from being washed away. The road ran along the Metapedia liver. Mr. Rigby objects to the receipt of this evidence, because the contract referred to a contract not now in evidence, and having put in the contract and the work having been done under the written contract does not come within this claim, which does not 30 set out or refer to the contract, or annex it as a voucher ; having proved that Murray was a partner with Boggs, Mitchell & Oaks in the contract, the liabilities of the co- partners ought to have been valued. I allow the parties to proceed subject to the objections to be considered hereafter. Mr. Rigby also objects that the evidence is a variance, because the contract shews that there are co-contractors. Examination resumed. I built the crib-wharfing according to this plan which I g from Mr. Bell in Ottawa ; I gave to Mr. Mitchell ; crib-wharfing is the laying of logs m the bottom of the river in towards the bank, and parallel to the river with a batter or slope 2 to 1, with the back plumb. The stone goes on the inside, and the outside 40 IS used for ballasting the crib ; above water mark smaller stones or gravel are used in the inside, heavy stones are used on the outside and top ; the burm at the top is six feet, heavy loaded with coarse rock ; the bottom sticks extending into the embank- 1.3 ment is 25 feet in length ; the logs are cedar ; the top is about 8 feet in length each gradually increasing in length to the bottom ; the top log is required to be longer where it has to be shoved into the bank as shown on plan ; the crib is composed of tiers of logs to the top, the perpendicular carried from 12 to 18 feet, as it extended to the river ; the pieces of crib were constructed by me in the mannei as above stated • the bottom tier of logs is level ; the bottom of the river was sufficienti ■ level except in places ; in those three places not a hundred lineal feet of crib work"; in one place we had to excavate to get the logs in the right length ; in the other two places where the work was, the lower sticks not (luite so long, the next tier would come into plumb the timbers are fastened together by oak and juniper treenails; the log, are notched into one another. I did the crib work by a plan ; Mr. Grant gave it to me ; he was 10 the government engineer; Innes was inspector of crib- working; I gave the Grant plan to Mitchell since the work wa.s done ; I saw that plan as allowed at Ottawa at the trial, Murray vs. The Qmen, Exchequer Court. I gave evidence for the plaintift'at that trial ; in giving my evidence I made refer- ence to the Giant plan ; I have not seen it since ; plan K is an exact copy of the (riant plan. The plaintiffs attorney put the plan into my hand ; I gave evidence respecting some of crib work. The crib work above Mr. McLean's brook was about 1,600 feet long; the next piece was about 500 feet ; the piece opposite the road diversion was between 1200 and 20 1300 feet. The piece at Kain's brook was between 1000 and 1100 feet ; the next piece 247 to 282, is about 500 feet. I know the lengths by actual measurement, as wel' as know- ing It by the stakes. The first piece above Mr. McLean's brook, by measurements on the ground, contained 11037 cubic yards ; the second piece, 30C0 cubic yards • the thud piece, 10,000 cubic yards ; the fourth piece, 10,300 cubic yards. •Paving is rock just on its edge in the bottoms of culverts, filled between with cement ; its object is to keep the water from getting under the n.asonry ; only one tier from a foot to 18 inches. The paving rocks I used were got from a quarry ; the sides were flat ; the rocks were packed close together, and the top was levelled with 30 eeinent ; Poitland cement was used. The paving was in nine of the structures be- sides the culvert, there is paving one bridge ; the bridge is one of the nine. X did both classes of masonry 1 and 2 on my contract. The difierence between paving and 2nd class, 2nd class masonry, is that paving costs more; paving costs more than some of my 2nd class masonry, excepting in the corners and the top stone no cement or lime is used in 2nd class masonry, and no stone dressinr^ except the too stone. ~" ^ M Alexander McDonald's examination continued. March 22nd. The paving on my section was done, commencing at the west end of 19 ; 365 was the first place it wau done in a box culvert ; there was a beam culvert at 356 in which 40 there was paving. Fourteen structures, culverts and bridges were built by me on mv contract, between 16.^ and 380. The masonry is in these fourteen structures; the 14 masonry is on the sides of the culverts an.l on the tops of the box culverts. There is only one arch culvert, the masonry is on the sides and tops. In the bridges the masonry is on the sides, and some of the masonry was at Clarke's brook bridge I constructed another bridge at " No Man's Gulch," in which there was masonry. The box culvert is two structures built up, covered over with large rocks. The beam culverts have no tops on them ; heavy wooden beams are put across them to carry the rails. The arch culvert has the roof arched ; it is a better class of work the piers sustained the bri.lges, and the masonry i.« in the piers ; of these structures two were second-cla,ss, the rest were fir.st-clas.s ; the two second-class were box culverts • there is one structure I am not certain whether it is first or second class. The box 10 culverts are the broadest acro.ss the road ; the beam culverts are longest lengthways of the roa.l ; Clarke's Brook bridge crosses the brook ■ .here was pumping in connec- tion with It; the pumping and rocks taken out of the work cost $300. At Kain'- Brook there had to be pumping, masonary and paving included in the structure • James Lowing was inspector of masonary on section 19 while I was performincr the' work ; SIX of my culverts I had to stop and level ; I ouol.t to have blown out, under the contract, the rock ; instead of this I made steps and lai.l ,ny masonry in it • this cost me more labor and expense, but saved the masonry; I had to cut it out' with chishels and points; there was one of these culverts all rock ; there would have been a hundred cubic yards of masonry ; therefore I blew it out, and there was only fifteen 20 yards of masonry; had I not made the stops I would have blasted out and built masonry ; I would as soon have done the blasting an.J masonrv as the steps ; I altered the work from blasting to steps by the direction of the engineer ; Robert P. Mitchell was back nnd forward on the works while this work was going on ; I valued the work on the SIX culverts, with .stepping aiul blowing out the rock, at $100 a culvert— «600 • It cost me twice as much ; Mitchell knew that I was doing the stepping ; Mr Grant' " the engineer, told me to step the culverts; Mitchell was .satisfied with my way of doing the work. The reason I charged the same for second-class masonry as for paving, was, that paving cost me more than some of my second-class masonry, and I had the same price fur first and second class masonry ; $11 low for first-class, hicrh for 30 second-clas^ masonry ; $11 nigh for paving, but I charged that price for it in conse- ?7o"r.- 9?n'o' rUTo"'^ ^'^"^ ^"''^ '""'■' *^^"" ^^^- ^""'^ excavations at about 170, 18.,. 210, 219, 236. 300, 360 ; the biggest rock cuttings were at 300 and 236 • the next about 210; all the rock excavations n.a.le by me, except what was done by ^rch.bald or Vosburg; the earth excavation done n, otty much from one end of the sec- ''^!! f ' o "' 'u' P"""P^'' ""^ *^' ^''^ '"^''^^'^ ^^ M"-' Lean's brook, betwoen stations 310 and 339 ; earth at cutting at Mr. Lean's brook was wasted, that is it was not put im,o the embankment, not being required : I commenced the cuttings at both ends ■ here is a small fill in the middle of the cutting; I hauled the cutting as far as r^ o. nL "T"'""' ''""' ^^^^ ^'^^' ^"'^ P"^ '^ "^t« th« embankment ; there was 40 about 25.000 yards in the centre left ; this was waste ; I filled up the fill with earth rom this ex^ ^^ation on the east side ; I did require to haul earth 16.000 feet, because the cutting from 300 met us; there was eleven stations between the two stations 1 he earth wasted at McLean's was so done with the approval of the engineer.' There ^as waste at 300 ; don't know the amount. There was waste at Man's Hill Ihe cuttings were 22 at the bottom, and the embankment 18 (^.r «.r.<.. o. .v,o ..p . .ul slope in the cutting U to 1 ; the slore in rock where it was sound was 1 inch to a footi 15 where it was not sound, sloped it back further. From 247 to 889 a change «ra, made .n the ahgnraent ; this ^raa along into the river, farther f.om the river into the bank The change mcreased the earth-excavation. It was a hill of earth about 76 feet high where the change was made. I sluiced th earth into the river. The washing owr at.on cost me as much as the crib-whurfing would have done if there had been no change of alignment ; the washing was cheaper than excavating would have been The centre of the river was changed about 12 feet into the bank The slope was back SO feet ; some of .t was more ; it would average 30 feet. There was seventy thousand cub.c yards .n the embankment from the washing ; some of the earth was wasted in mat"n OOo'" T T"' ""' ''"' '"" "" '^"^"^^ °' ""«• ^ '^-'•d have had to 10 make 17 000 yards of excavation ; 6,000 yards in the line of cutting; 12.000 would have had to be borrowed to have made up the embankment. Had the change not been made, there would have been 10.000 cubic yards of crib wharhng required. The change was done under Mr. Grant's supervision. I made catch-water drains on the top of the slope to carry the water off and pre- vent u washing awav the slopes. We d.ained into the culverts. The drains were from 162 ^o .5. and from 268 to 281. and from 281 to 380. On the upper side of the road, where we built the drains, principally earth, except some points of rocks. We had to excavate the rock to the depth of three feet in some places We came in contact with rock in half a dozen places. Rough ground on the other side of tfie rail- 20 way from the river. The ground rose from the river in some place, more than in ottiers. Ihe catch-water drains were measured by Mr. Odell. Packing rock round Cl.rk's Brook bridge was 200 yards, at $1.50 per yard We take out the excavation out of the foundation for one pier of masonry to about thirty feet square ; the pier itself w.a 24 feet square. I filled up the 6 feet round the pier about 6 feet high. The second pier is the same The excavation consisted of earth and rock. Ihe rock was hauled by means of teams and stone-boats from the quarry • some of it 2 miles, some 1 mile. We filled in with big stones first, and then packed in the small ones to make it solid. It took about 200 yards of stone, f^l 60 was a small price I charged the same for it as rip-rap; charged $1.60 in . .e contract; 30 pavings worth twice as much. March 23rd Witness stands aside in order to take the examination of Bernard Vlahonv and John R. McKenzie. Further hearing adjourned by consent to Wednesday. 7th April, at 10|. n- 4 • .• ^ . April 7th. • JJirect examination of Alexander McDonald resumed. Built some rip rap on contract. It is to protect banks from washing by river Rip-rap constructed of all rock. I built some at 375, Clarke's Brook, and about 295 and 240. and 233 and 225, and about 216 or 217 and 165 ; heaviest piece at about 240. 40 233 and 295. I constructed rip-rap by laying it off about nine feet at the bottom and buiiding up to the height, iiuiit according to the Van 1 hold in my hand, (marked S J W. J.) I built in '73 and '74, most of it in '74. I carried it on at two or three places simultaneously. None of the rock on the rock cuttings were wasted or put into the f « t f e fi G h ri re w 01 fo sa tw va W •th ro Gi thi ou th( qu oti Th for of th.i the Th 7 f rap kne Mc Grj Feb bet' whi witl wo I Oali the tb' W. 16 ;comi embankment by me. The whole of the crib-wharfing had been built, but before I commenced the rip rap Ail the crib-wharfing had been comm«„ceu. i got the rock for the cnb-wharfing out of the bed of the river and from the rock cutting., and from the shores aero., the river. I .cowed it aero- the river. I was ordered by the engineer to put the rock from the rock cutting iato the crio-wharfing because the rock from the nver would not suit, being too round and therefore had to be mixed. Mr Grant was the engineer who ordered me. f Innes. the inspector. al.o forbade me.) I had finuhed tae rock cuttings before I had formed the rip-rap-that u.ing the rock from the rock cutting.. The balance of the rock from the rock cuttings went into the np-rap. I h.d to borrow rock from the rock cuttings for both crib-wlarfing and rip- 10 rap, F scowed the rock for the rip-rap across the river. I me; by borrowing, when we got out (,f the line of the road for rock or earth. I borrowea some of the rip-rap out of the rock cutting. I had to go deeper, and bored into the rock cutting to borrow for the np-rap. I mean ^going below the bed of the road and broader tfan was nece.- .ary for the cutting I had to go deeper than the right level of the cutting. Twenty, two feet was the breadth of the cutting in the bott.,m. in both rock and earth, I had to exca- vate. Ihe engineer gave u. the grade in the cuttings. It was al.o marked in stones or pegs. When 1 borrowed for the rip-rap I excavate 1 beyond the twenty-two feet, and deeper ■than the level. I filled up the excavations in the bottom with earth. I scowed the rock for the rip-rap from the opposite shore. I had to borrow from the cutting because 20 Grant wom!.! not allo.v the round stones to go in. The rocks fro.n the shores of the bed of the nver were too round and therefore h A to l,e mixed The rip-rap would average half out of the cutting a..d half out of the river. I say this in reference to all the pieces of the np-rap I borrowed all the rock for the rip-rap at Clarke's brook, part from the quarry and part from the river. The quar.y was one about a half and the other about a m.le away. There was no rock cntting nearer than over a mile. 1 here was a httle point of rock handier than a mile, but I had to use that for other purposes, for th. ',,..,„,„• ,ha emb.nkm.nt where it was soft, the point of rock was about U stations fro.n Clarke's brook. We hauled the reck in carts from th.j cuttings and dumped it over the bank ; that we scowed, we wheeled in barrow3 op to 30 the work ; we put the heaviest stones outside, the smaller inside, this wa. done by L nd The outside was built some ^ and 2 to 1. Tne average width of the rip-rap would be 7 feet, the width m the bottom would be 10 feet in some places, in others less; th rip- rap was built under Innis the inspector', luection and according to the plan Grant knew of my havng the plan of the rip-rap marked S ; I got the plan from Thompson. Mc.ready s engineer, before I had the contract on 18 for the rip-rap on that section Grant .Jd ^e that plan would do for the other sections ; I signed the contract of 1st teb , 72, at Metapedia. At the time I signed the contract, no work had been done between stations 247 to 259 and 841 to 355. plue 50 ; there was to be crib wharfing between those stations. I proposed to Mitchell, Oakes and Grant to do away 40 with the cnb-wharfing between those stations, by shiff g the line into the bank ; this would increase the excavation and render the crib-wharfing unnecessary. Grant and Uakes furnished me with a paper stating the quantity of crib-wharfing and the earth in the work as originally proposed. T. is the pape-, it is in Grant's hand writing. I got w P'P'l'^.'^"''. ™" ^^** ^^« i° tl^e °"gi"al before the additional clause was added. W., J. W. J. is the additional clause added to the contract changing the work The I? Uake ,t wa8 added on by agreement betv^een me, Mitchell, Oakes and Murray and then the contraot, w.th the addition added, was signed. Grant could not give me the mformafon ,n T. until he made up the quantities from his plans. Oakes tJd Gr^ 1 1 make up the ciuuntmes and give me paper T. Grant gave the paper to Oakes and Oakes handed ,t to me in Grant's office; this wa, before'l closed the contract of Tst Feb a„d dunng the negotiations. After getting paper T, I decided to enter ilto the ndTsr l::m ^rr ^'' '':^'^"^^' ^^^^ ^ ^^-^ ^'"^ ^— -^^^ and Fan . F '^'^7!":^^ T7 '"' ^'"^ ^'^ '" "^P"'' ''^ ' ^ ^""''^ ^^^ «'-- Spring •73 we ^,7/^^^'";heFallof72wirhthe sluice at Man Mill; in the Spring of 10 73 we found that the sluzcng woui.l .ot work, that the embankment was washing awav wuh the r,ver m the Spring ; the river at this place was narrow and the currenf con sequently. strong. I had then to build about 500 feet of crib wharfing ; Gran orde ed the cnb wharfing at this place. I commenced building crib wharfing f„ the summer of 73 and finished u ,n the summer of '74 ; Mitchell was along the line during the progress of the cr.b wharfing ; he was there every week seeing that the work wa! a'::: dedToli; f '^^^ ^-^ "- ''- ^^ ^- -^ -^ ^^^ — ' ^ ^^e eastern td h attended to the work on my contract ; I continued the sluicing until the spring of 74 • had to cart away the slu.ced earth to make room for the crib-wharfing, so as'to get i thllh t T u°"" ^'°" '^' ^'"P^ '^«"^' P^--^ "^'^ -^^ »he river, part into 20 twelve men and s.x horses engaged in hauling away, about six weeks. From end of there ,nto the bank ; the road between the end of crib-wharfinj- t. 289 was partly a on the lower side, hand.est to the river ; the fill extended the whole length, as also the fIZv 12 r V^t' V ^'" ''• "^ ^-' ^-^ ''-' '^'- — ^ '-" J^ebruary, 72. Heavy hill on the upper side of the road furthest from the river A change was made at 276 after some of the embaukmeut had been built by Archibald or tolrr/h " . T* " ^•"^^"'^™^»' ^-- 270'^° 278; the road was shifted out 30 h rant' T 11" \^''"™^"^^'^ ' ^^« ^^ange was made in consequence of a heavy Wl , G ant ordered be change to save the c.tting; saving the cutt.n. no advantage to ot Archibald & Vosburg's embankment ; n y emhankme,,, was .o the full width of the oad 13 feet; their was 6 feet of their embankment which was useless ; 1 built to the level of the line ; theirs was a foot lower on account of the shrinkage ; part of the earth mm of Arc^rb mVv t' '"^^^^"^ P"' ^— d; I used part of the embank- ment of Archibald & Vosburg in building mine ; I hauled none of the 6 feet for use in my embankment ; Mitchell directed O'Dell to measure the piece of work I did (Pap r 7 tendered, objected to by Rigbv. 1 receive it subject to Rioby's objection.) Letter^ 40 handed me by Mitchell ; the signature is in Oakes' handwriting. (It is tendered and rece.ved-aud read.) I finished the work in October, 1874. (Jrant walked over the Ime with me and took the work off my hands ; he expressed him.s.If «»H«fi.^ „,>u ^u^ work as completed. The lower part of section 19 was not then finished. My work was done equal to that of the other part. < € t I 1 y & p A fi V is April 8th. Examination of McDonald resumed — Letter V. was handed me in Truro • after I got the paper I came to Halifax; I saw John R. Murray in reference' to paper ; I told him I was going up to help Mitchell and O'Dell measure the work. Previous to that interview I knew that he was hringing an action against the governmer^ in relation to the work on section 19. Murray told me he hoped we would succeed in getting a correct measurement ; from wh.t 1 and Mitchell had informed him he thought Grant's raeisurements were wron- • I went up and helped to measure the work ; I helped O'Dell and Mitchell' We commenced at the upper end of section 18. adjoining McCready at 380, and worked towards New Brunswick Mitchell pointed out the work to be measured to O'Dell. I remained with them till I f-'nished the measure ment of my contract and while thev were measuring two-thirds of Mitchell's contract 10 across the Rest.gouche. Crib-wharHng and rip-rap not measured at that time. Mr Dell had measured that work the fiUl before for me. When we came to the crib- wharfing and np-rap, T wanted him to me.sure it over ngain. Mitchell said no, that he was satisfied with Mr. O'Dell's previous measurements made the fall before I had the fall before employed O'Dell to measure my crib-wharfing and rip-rap. It was before the notice m letter V. was given. We measured the under-drains the same fall. I told Mitchell the result of O'Dell's measurement, and I also told Murray. In a litigation 1 had with Boggs^^ Murray I used .n affidavit of O'Dell's stating the me.surem.nts. O Dell and I explained to Mitchell the way we had measured the work a fall before Mitchell and I disagreed about the measurement of the rip-rap and of a culvert in th^ 9.0 rock I got O Dell to measure the culvert, and 1 was to be allowed his measurement, as if built with masonry. Mitchell agreed to this. The culvert was in 335 This was one of the culverts spoken of previously, where, in place of excavating and build- ing up with masonry. cut the culverts eut of the solid rock. Mitchell offered to allow one-half of what I charged for the rip-rip. We came to another piece of rip- rap and he said he would have to see Oakes and Murray about it, as he was only one partner in it^ O Dell noted our conversation in reference to the piece of masonry and np-rap m a book, by Mitchell's direction. He refused to allow me more than one-half of the np-rap because half y,,. out of the cutting and half out of the river We were to abide by O'Dell's measurements made on the ground ; we agreed to this before 30 we went to measure the work There would have been between 30 and 60 cubic yards of masonry in the culverts, according to O'Dell's measurements. Mitchell explaiued to » Dell '.he terms of our contract in regard to the work at Man's Hill, between 247 and 259; Mitchell directed O'Dell to measure that piece of work for him Previous to the contract of Feb. 1. 1872. Archibald & Vosburg had been at work'. The amount of work done on this work by Archibald & Vosburg was 10,680 cubic yards earth excavation and 1.190 c-.bi. - ards of rock excavation. Alexander McDonald & Co. did work there too, previous to contract of Feb. 1, 1872. That firm was com- posed of John C. McKenzie, David Munro. John F. McDonald, A. P. Penny, and Alexander McDonald, myself. That firm commenced work in June, 1871. The 40 farm worked at a road diversion • IS no«fo =,»= fU„ :__ .r -_..i j -- r i — " ^^^ piice ut curtii, and /o for rock exca- vation, per cubic yard there. i \^ 19 Graham tenders notices to produce Y and Z. Alexander McDonald & Co. asked for. Notices admitted. Contract with* I had to rebuild a piece of crib wharfing that was carried away, and I had to re- build ; carried by the freshet of '73 ; it was above Kane's brook; "it was carried away by the water lashing up and the ice carrying it away ; the whole structure was partly fanished ; ..e and water carried away the logs, about 700 feet in length and about three leet in depth. The accounts, I presume, are in the hand-writing of Charles Archibald ; he was m the e.nploy of Mitchell & Oaks as book-keeper. These accounts were rendered monthly to the firm of Alexander McDonald & Co. (Graham tenders accounts marked 1 3, 10 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. J. W J. Rigby objects. 1st, rendeied by Mitchell & Oaks book-keeper and do not bind Murray; 2nd, they were rendered to another firm whose claims are not being contested.) April 9th. I believe letter marked X to be in the hand-writing of John R. Murray, member of firm of Boggs & Murray ; Thomas Boggs and J. R. Murray comprised the firm. Ihomas Boggs died March '73. The P vis mentioned in the letter, is the Davis who was partner with me in this contract of FeS. 1st, '72. Letter X tendered and received under this contract. The name of the firm wa^ McKenzie. McDonald & Co. Davis left the firm .bout Uth June, '73. Previous to 20 that date we had only been partially engaged on the works. John R. Murray bought him out, that is paid him $400 to leave. 1 had to pay Murray the $400. Graham asks for the production of J. R. Murray's hooks. It is admitted that the following items appear in Murray's books : (•'June 30, '73, note to F. Davis, $400.") He had nothing to do with the contract after that. Davis is dead ; he die.l „.cr a year ago. McKenzie left the firm about August, '72. John R. Murray paid McKenzie $200 for him to clear out of the firm ; I paid the $200 to McKenzie, and it is charged to me. Item in Murray's book : f-August 3l8t,'72, cash J. C, McKenzie, $200 ") He had no connection with the 30 work after that ; he went to Colorado ; I had no direct communication from him since he left. I received an account from Boggs & Murray with this item charged. When I received the monthly account, I, 3, 4, 6, 6, 7, 8, Penery and I measured the work to ascertain that tba amounts contained accurate statements or credits of the work done. I found out that the measurements in the accounts were correct. Q. Can you tell from reference to the accounts what work was done by Alexander McDonald & Co , from June 9th, '71, to Feb. Ist, '72 ? (Rigby objects. I allow the question.) I can tell the amount of work rlono oa.^V. m<^r.fk 'i u„ iq ^ j •__ .^ accounts is for earth excavation on the road diversion, and 76 for rock excavation on the road diversion. ._ 40 20 The work shewn on the accounts represents the work done by Alexander McDonald « to. dunng those months. (Accounts 1, 3, 4. 6. 6, 7, S, tendered anf' reeeived, subject to Mr. RiRby's ore- vious objections. ) o J y M T.^" 7/a.'''^ ^'"^ °^ Alexander McDonald & Co. settled up, and the firm of McKenzie. McDonald & Co. carried on the work. In settling up the affairs of the company I dealt with Oakes. I handed him over the old contract and got a new one from him Mc- Kenzie and I wanted to get clear of Penery and John F. McDonald. McKenzie. Davis and I went into the new contract Oakes bought the plant of Alexander McDonald & Co and sold to Mr-Kenzie, McDonald & Co The retiring members got their proportion 10 coming to them by Oakes becoming security for what they owed, and I reimbursing Uakes. I he retiring members ceased to have an interest in the work on the first of February, 18 . 2 John F. McDonald I understand is dead. Between 341 and 356, plus 50. the road was not shifted in as we spoke about I mean by we. the firm of McKenzie. McDonald & Co, and Mitchell. Oakes, Murray and Grant, the engineer. The ch.nge talked of was shifting the road in r.o as to dis- pense with the crib-wharfing. The line was changed at 341 towards the river ; at 355 It was put in towards the hill. The line w s changed to m.ke the excavations less at ^57 Lessening the cutting was no advantage to me, and this change was not made at my desire (Objected.) The charge was not made for the change. The crib-wharfing was built 20 there. I he sluicing was a failure, .ud. therefore, the road was not shifted in as spoken of It would have been cheaper to build the crib-wharfing than to do the sluicing If the sluicing had not been a failure it would have been cheaper to have sluiced round tlarke s Krook. Ihere was three feet of packing stone round the bridge, I was mistaken in stating it to be six feet previously. The borrowing was chiefly at the lower end of the contract, from 162 to 281. Ihe embankments were chiefly made by borrowing trom ^81 to 380. I ho cuttings w«re the her iest at those stations, and between them we had a waste. Cross.examine(J-My first contract was made June, 1871. It was not my first railway contract. I had had two before-one on the St. Andrew's railway, the other 30 was ou the Intercolonial. Ihe contract on St. Andrew's was. I calculated the nieasurement when I was time-keeper at Elmsdale The plan of cross section will shew the earth and rock wasted, and the work as completed. The plan of the cross sections, plan D. was made after the work was done. I have seen plan of cross sections with Grant while I was working. If the embankment exceeds the excavation we have to borrow, and where the cuttings exceeds the fill, after 1600 feet we have to waste Ihe limits of our haul was 1600 feet. In cases were the cutt-ng would fill all the em- bankments within 1600 we wasted the balance, and I claim to charge for what I wasted 1 borrowed where I could not get the earth within 1600 feet, and I claim to be paid tor the borrowing. I was directed to do this by Grant. I would have hauled 1700 feet 40 It ordered. I don't know how much further I would have hauled than 100 feet beyond me ioOu leefc. The cross sections will only shew the cuttings and fillings by calculating he contents of the cuttings and fillings. I don't recollect signing any plans at the time I signed the contract. After the first contract was signed the profile plan marked E ol (1( t\ w n( do cri an th hii I wl be I B on wa Mi Soi Mc plu 33' con trac Th( bet alui the rip. the poit sluii of t that outs earti with cutti and and noth cutti for 1 / .. .• 21 E J. W. J,. wa« got from Gilliard. the assintant engineer. It was got -within two months ot the signing. There are no other general plans than the profile cross sections and the detailed plans of the crib-wharfing. rip-rap. etc.. etc. I kno^v of no other plans thp, these coming under the denomination of engineer plan. On plan C there is no cr.b- whaifing marked except between 341 and 356. The cross plan section shews the crib- wharfing along the line but not what ought to be there between Ul to 259. There is no plan produced as yet .hewing the quantity of crib wharfing intended to be done at time contract signed. Before I signed any contract I understood w, .re the cnb-wharfang was to be done. Grant poinred out the crib-wh.irfings to me on his plan and told me the stations in his office in May or June, IH71 ; he shelved me the same 10 thing several times afterwards. McKenzie was present when Grant first shewed me on his plans ; no one else, that I recollect. He pointed it out ag..iu to me in his office before signed the second contract ; can't say how long before. The upper piece ..f crib- whnrfing was done by McKiel under a sub-contract from me. There was a contract between McKiel and me. in writing, to do some work on the ,o.ul Paper writing B B 18 signed by me I signed C C in blank; there was no writing on it I gave orders to have a deed written ; signed it before it was written out ; -eceived it after- wards ; was not satisfied with it, but let it go. Archibald was present when I signed Mitchell went in with me ; I do not know whether or not he w.,s present- at the signing feome ot the cnb wharfing was done with the sections mentioned in B B ; done by 20 McKiel. I he pieee done by McKiel under his contract was between 339 and 355 Va", ^"; ,ii^ '^''^ ""' '■'' '" '^' """'^ ""^^"'' ""y '""'"'^f "^^«Pt t'»e ""^'""y between ool and 380. Apku. lOth.-Befo.e B B was signed McKiel did $2,000 worth of work under my contract^ I did some work between 337 and 380 before McKiel took hold under his con- tract. Can t say how much, but I l.uilt a dam and sluice and did some e..cavation. ihe excavation was on the line of the road between 337 and 380 The excavation between these stations was done by the first firm of Alexander McDonald & Co ; the sluice and dam was built outside of line of road hv VlcK.nzie. McDonald & Co for the purpose of sluicing. I charge in my claim for the whole done, tncluding that done r).v McKiel. I have made no special charge for the sluicing and damming. There was 30 nprap done at Clark's Brook, which is near 380. McKiel did no rip-rap I built the cnb-wharhng rendered necessary by the failure of the sluicing I'here was a little point of rock (161) on McKiel's work. 1 used some of the rock washed down by the slUTCing. I claim to be paid for what ought to go into th<. filling. What was outside of the 1,6(10 feet of a haul I do not claim for ; I claim for it as borrowed. I claim that 1 am obliged to use all the earth from excavation for the filling within 1,600 feet outside of that hmit. I ran outside the line of road for such tilling, and charge for the earth so borrowed, and that I can waste the earth in the cuttings not required for filling withm the 1,600 feet, and that I can charge for the earth so wasted. There is a cutting between 334 and 339 ; part of that cutting was washed out by sluicing, 40 , f" ^^ excavating. I sluiced the most of it. The cutting between 320 and 330 was all sluiced except what I put into the embankment. I borrowed nothing from 305 to 316 for that embankment. T HiH ^^t pco .u^ _„„,. r..__, .,_ . cutting at 300 I filled in 1.600 feet towards 18. I sluiced some, but did not charge for what I sluiced there, because I was only entitled to charge for the cuttings within 1 o m ui w G M m Wi cri no tel cri cri rip no do bo O' ma Ice a\ ' OUj Th bui sid ma t0]( no be rod exc f'oui Cla ins] was yan ma!< eng as il hav the mas the also n 1 600 feet . I charged for what wa« over and above the 1,600 feet of a haul, but lefl it to O bell to^calculate. I did not make any calculations of work myself, but gave the state- ment to O'Dell to calculate from O'Dell was never, to my knowledge, on the road until ho went w.th me tc measure the crib wharfing. Grant sometimes was not on the work more than once a month. I never had a statement of measurement from Grant or UiUiard. I got a paper containing Grant's measurements from Mitchell. Oaks & Murray I never went over the road with Grant when he made the final measure- ments; he never made monthly measurements. I do not refer to the two months Grant was away but outside of .hat; O'Dell. one m.n and myself made the measurements of the cnb-wharhng and rip-rap ; it was affer the work was taken olf my hands O'Dell did 10 not open the cnb-wharfing ; he to>,k all the demension*. except the bitter O'Dell co dd tell the WKlth of the crib-wharfing at the b.se of it. by measuring from the toe of the cr.b-wharfing to the toe of the embankment ; he coul.l not do this unless he knew the cnb-wharfang at the back was perpendicular ; he could not tell the measurement of the rip-rap except from the plan showing the work was done according to plan ; he could not tell the breadth at the bottom, except from the plan and knowing that the work wa8 done according to plan. Mitchell and I agreed before we went to the ground to be bound by O De 1 s measurements ; I only claim for the earth excavation, as measured by U Uell. I made the cal 'tjon of the four pieces of crib wharfing myself; I had a man to help me. The fir. . column in my memorandum book, marked D.D., is the 20 length of the crib wharfing; the next, the average height of the whole; the third, the a\ -age width ; and the last column is the cubic contents of the crib wharfing There ought to be an " 0" added to the figures in each line. Mitchell paid lunes for me $200 I he inspector. Laurie, told me to fill in the paving with cement. The arch culvert I built at Kane's Brook was about station 259 or 258 ; it was built by gathering the sides in as they went up and putting a large stone on top. Pumping is not unusual in making culverts. The contractors told me there was no pumping at Clarke's; Oaks told me hewas the only one present ; Davis was there also ; it was understood there was no pumping to speak of in the culvert. Pur ,_ u had Lo oe done at Clark's and Kane's brooks. A rock largo enough to 30 be blown up. I charged for as rock excavations ; rock larger than 3 cubic feet we call rock excavations ; if we could pick or break it with a hammer, we could not call it rock excavations ; the rock excavations refer to rock excavations in culverts ; stepping in foundations charged for as rock excavations. I had level to one stone of Clarke's Brook. I charged for thi. as rock excavations. Both the engineers and inspector told ir.e to do the stepping and levelling. The culvert afc 235, Man's Brook was all rock, except a few stones of masonry at the lower end; between 10 and 15 yards. I cannot say, from my own knowledge, what was the actual amount of masonry done at Man's Brook ; I cannot estimt it. The above estimate of the engineer is true, according to my judgment. I was to be paid for cutting the rock 40 as if It had been masonry. I also was to bo paid for the excavation. I would rather have excavated all oMt, and built masonry; it would have been cheaper. I suggested the cutting at ManV Brook. It cost me more to cut rock and level than to build . Li.!_,. . a.,.«j., .mvc Lu levci whuii i mase rock excavations. 1 cannot now tell the rock I would have had to excavate had I done all masonry. Grant consented, as also Mitchell, that I should do the work as above at Man's Brook. O'Dell measured 28 ii the work. The rock „,„ , '"cavttion at 360 was .lone by Mr. Kiel. The earth I wasted between 310 and 339 I wasted between ten sections As I got into the cuttir „ caln.lat.ng th« 1.000 feet I calc„lat..d the cutting already made, .s weU ^Ih! embankment. put the waste over tho bank into the river. I made the calcula- t.ons from O Dell s .noasuromonts. Our totals agreed. I cannot tell whe^.her O'Dell got h.s figmvs f,-om meaHu.ing the embankments across section.s. All my rnea- ,re m.n s.as far as rock an.l earth is concerned, are made up from O'Dell's measure- .ne,.ts I depend o,. O'Dell for .' . co... • ^^s of the rip-rap.' My state.nent TtTthe quant.t.es that would have been betwe.. 247 ang. and a. I ll I r T f ' ^••''^-^^^^'•fi"^ ^"d .ip-.ap si„.ultaneously. I will not s. .hzt I 1 anled any rock f.-om that cutting to 350. Grant and the inspector told me U . etck rsl'llfl" 'r ''' ^'•'^--•-••«"^'- H.' (G,a.t) told n. also to pJt * he ,ock at 330 All the work cont.acted under first cont.act was settled for before ments. Mitchell an.l Oakes were to settle with McKiel, and to pay ,ne $1 100 ^ go -noney tro.n T. Boggs & Co. and Mitchell and Oakes on accounVof the contl; 40 I u-.d to .ece.ve accounts from May perhaps every thrc. months; th.^y 'ere not o tfrcTa " T , ""P'""'' '' ^'^ '""''^^ ^^ ^'^^--^^ I complained! M r ay of ths charge. I also cou.piained of the c.edit I was getting for .uy work I also TgOO a^O k ''^''r^'''' n^.^^^^"'^'- ^^^^"'^^'^ ^ ^^- -^- «-^ -tract ■ «, , " 'T" , ■' ^'"'' " P^"°'^ ^"''^ ^I'i ot works. Oakes eave me tb., profile; ho producod no account. He »kcd ,„o if his account rendered f»Ii„ "t wt 24 was correct. I did not say it was all right except the tools. Oakes might have brought me a bill afterward,. I did not, on looking at bill, say it was all correct except tools, and that I owed Oakes and partners 811.000. I can't say whether I referred to Mitchell's claim for superintending, saying that I might dispute it. but would not. I do not recollect^ having a conversation with Mitchell and Sutherland at the same place. I do not rocoDect telling him that the judgment I gave was for security for supplies, and that Murray had agreed to carry me right through I don't recollect saying to Oakes that « a bill of seme kind had to be made to you fellows" Never said to Donald Sutherland that I would like to settle, and that I thought I might settle with Mitchell for a trifle, but would make no off^er to Oakes. I never 10 to d Charles Graham that I did not expect to get anything, but had to make out a bill to save my property in Truro from the Bogg«' estate, and by filing a bill against the estate, I would do better. Re-examination. The boulders I spoke of eXcavating by blasting were only at the bridge at Clarke's Brook, underneath one of the piers. In cutting with a chisel I made the wall slanting, and blew and chiselled suffi- cient to let the water run into the rock ; I chiselled the top to the bed of the river ; I cut coping on the rock ; I cut drains on the upper side of the culvert. I never charged anything for earth wasted, except beyond 1.600 feet; I would not charge within that limit even if I wasted. I don't charge for borrowing where there is 20 a cutting from which I could get the earth within 1,600 feet. The big cuttincr above McLean's br-ok was done in 1874, betv/een 334 and 339 ; that was a filling ''at 330 • the fill was from 330 to 334, and a cutting as well. ' April 13th. Some months Grant made measurements, and some months he did not- he very solflom made measurements ; he would look at the stakes, see the number on it and where abouts I was working, and the same in the pits. The last two years the assistant, QiUiard, did this ; Grant made very few measurements on the grounds for the last two years. In my first claim I charged for the work actually performed and i.ie crib-wharfing, as I got the measuremants from O'Dell ; that includes the excava- 30 tions between 247 and 2.59, and does not include the crib-wharfing as projected between these two stations, nor the crib- what fing that was built ; the rip-rap was built in '73 and '74. I could tell that the roa.l was not thrown in 12 feet from 334 to 345, and to 855 plus 50, by comparing the two set of stakes put down by the engineers. Some of the six culverts, the blowing a:.d stepping, are worth more than SlOO: and some is some less ; taking the average of the six, they are $600 ; the one at Man's hill was the heaviest ; it is worth $400 ; I charged that for it. (Objected.) William Delaney. I live at Restigouche, Quebec, northern side of river ; am a farmer and lumberman; know McDonald, Mitchell and Oakes; I worked for McDonald on section 19 ; employed in building and ballasting crib-wharfing; drove some lumber; 40 some of the rock I got from the cutting and some from the river. I was foreman of the ballasting party. I worked at 4 pieces, one was at Man Hill, another above Kane s gulsh, another above McLean's brook, another below Clarke's brook. Crib- wharf built of cedar ; logs laid up and down the river with cross-ties fastened with lo tc to of g» w to to 01 an tn; in. se^ fn SC( foi ha di( th( riv wo Mi Gr wa bei wa sto Gil cut cut Ma whi Wa ber gra( Qu« fror ordi a c deej rece side copi 26 juniper treenails. The average length of the two bottom tiers, twenty-two feet • the ogs would be from twenty to twenty-four feet; in some cases the bank would have to be cut away for the back stringers. Height of crib-wharfing at back, between 10 to 12 ; I never measured it ; butstood in crib wharfing, looked up and judged it ; back of the cnb-wharfing plumb the front with aslope 2 to 1. The foreman was my guide m building, and Innis superintended the work. The foreman had a plan to work by ; I had seen it in McDonald's hand. Innis superintended the ballasting • he told us he would not allow us to use stones from the river wholly; but required us to mix them with stone from the quarry, half and half; he said he wanted split rock • outside of cnb-wharfing was hand packed ; the inside was packed snugly, and the top 10 and back filled v.ith smaller stones. We built by the engineer's stakes, which were marked and had cross heads. Mitchell was there occasionally while we were work- ing.^^he saw the materials used ; he was there, loo, when we w'ere ballasting; I do not see how he could help soeing the materials used ; he must have seen us gettin<. rock from the cuttings; and knew what we were doing with it. I worked at rip-rap • I scowed the stone for rip-rap i mile or more. We had to take stone out of the cutting toi the np-rap for the same reason, as above, for crib-wharfing. The rip-rap was hand-packed in the front, and joints broken as much as possible. The hand-packing 'herTpraoTtH b n^^ but the stones were carefully laid in. The breadth of woi'tr"r"''"1r^''''''" "''^' '' ^^'^P""^^' '' «'• ' '"'•'- f'-» -'-'- vve were Zoh it.K T' ? sometimes every day, sometimes every two days. I saw G^t rtLT'' ''r ?T' ""' "^'"^ ^'""^ «"^^ ^ week.'sometim'es oftene^ ^.ant or Gil hard never directed me as to the work. I had nothing to do with the beTorf ThfbT'fT. ^ -- f---^" ^^P-^^P' I -er bl Lb JharfiJig TJLJa T r "P"'P ^'' '^^''^ ^''^ '^'""^'^ «^-^f"".^- The crib-wharfln. sTo e' tI! " ? ' tT' ""''V ''''■ '^'^^ •^^''"^- '••«'" ^'- •••-•• -- --d hard GilHard-fd! ''■;.'^-^^";'^"^' ^l*« ^he thichness through, was built under Grant's and direction. I was driving a team part of the time. I hauled stone from the 30 T % , P'*"'^ "^^^ ^"''^'•^' *"^ ^^'•^^ P^'-tb' when I left. The piece above ^^^^^r:zsi^:^zi:'''- '^ '- - ^ ■— - p^— ^ "b! Gordon Cook I live in Truro. Am a stonecutter and mason for 11 yea.-s Was working for McDonald on sect. 19. Worked part of three summers Remem-' .L: Th" b'' :::J'''\ ^'^ "^' ^" ^'^ "PP^^ ^"'^ ^' ^h« -'-^^ -- abovTtre oil ' """'' ^"' '" ^' ^"^ •""'■'^^^ °» '^' '''^- It would be about 8 ft. from beinTsLT '"U" 1. '.'°" ''"' *'' "^'^- ^^^^* '"^^'^ ^^ "-^ to save sides from being shaken. We had to put in three or four shots when one would do in 40 ord nary cases. After the blasting we had to take out 4 to 6 inches off the sides ^i h a chisel. Culvert about four feet deep below the grade. It might be deeper. There was masonry on the lower end. The solid rock was stepped to receive the masonrv. Th« hnHntr n— ..rv,..u,.j _^ . , "^-^Ppea co ., , '• ,. "• •'^'•' ^f^-Jtucu uii 10 carry the water. The sides were good, ordinary double sides formed with chisel. Two pieces of coping at the upper end were cut in the solid rock between the coping ; one side a W£ br It on cei in. am Pa be( by inn an; the the wa: bla ay the (lf)n stoi qua woi wei wh( the! tha be ( cub stoi; foui andi wor oftl The ther othe The niasi wou woil torn groit of sa 26 stone was stepped in, the other levelled with the solid rock. The culvert done in this way would cost about the same as if blasted out and done rock-masonry. Man's brook culvert was a beam-culvert ; three culverts were steppe.land were box-culverts 1 think they would cost $50 a-piece. There was another beam-culvert. I onlv worked on hve culverts. The paving was put in with square-hammered stone and Portland cement groited, that is mixing Portland cement and sand with water and pouring it in. I was at the works last week, John Murray with me. Masonry in culverts first and second-class ; dry work is second-class, and the first is work embedded in mortar Faving would be as good, if not better than second-class masonry. There would be between 30 and 40 yards of masonry in the stone culvert, Man's Hill, had it been done 10 by masonry. Cross-examined.-! have worked at rock blasting ; 5 or 6 men were at the blast- ing, some 3 weeks ; they were getting $1.25 or $1.40 a day ; it would not have taken any longer to blast the whole out ; not much powder, and it would have cost about the same to do the work one way as the other. Two men were G or 7 days chiselling they got $2.50 a day. There were about 10 yards of actual n.asonry ; Ihe m^soniy was one-third of the culvert. I cannot exactly tell the quantity of rock that was blasted out. I never did any paving by the yard ; the paving ought to be worth ^S a yard or niore ,n that country. The stones in the paving were bedded in cement and 20 then groited. It would take 1 bbl. of cement to do 2^ yards of paving as that was done. The wages of a man at paving would bo $2.50 , day ; cement worth $7 a bbl • stones for 2i yds. would cost $3. I was cutting stones in th. quarry ; we saved in quarrying stone fit for paving. There is no Quebec cement in the five culverts I worked at one box-culvert, was south of Man's brook, and two above it. Three men were working at the stepping; that work required experienced men. I can't say whether it would have been cheaper to have blasted rock out or to have stepped in hese three cu. verts One man would do 2^ yards of paving in a day ; I meant above that It would cost $3 a yard to quarry stone and haul it. A square yard could not be quarried by one man, out of that quarry in a day. Ten me., would get out 7 or 8 30 cubic yards in a day ; a cubic yard of stone will make over 2 yaids of paving. The stone had to be hauled abo- t six miles from the quarry. John W. Muuray.-Li>c in Truro; I worked on sect. 19; 1 am a mason for fourteen >^ars ; I was foreman of masonry on Restigouche Bridge for 9 months ; Alex, ander McDonald was working three miles from the bridge was at McDonald's works a week ago in company with Cook. I saw the culvert at Man's Hill cut out of the rock. 1 examined it. The formation of the culvert was taken out of the rock Ihe up stream end, the longitudinal timber, is on the rock. At the down stream end there is two courses of masonry under one end of stringer, and one course under the other end. The sides were cut out of the rock. The culverts would be five feet deep 40 Ihe coping at the other end was eat out of the rock. Had the whole rock been masonry there would have beea about 40 yards. The cutting out as it was .lone would cost as much as if the work had been masonry. I saw step culverts on the work. Stepping is a notch in the rock for the ston*. to ^^t \n f ^.^ pavin<' in hot ton, of culverts. Paving is stone from (J to 12 in. thick, set on edge, ^cemented and groited ; depth from 12 to 15 in. of sand, mixed and poured in the Qroiting is one bus seams. Paving would cost as much as second-class shel of cement and two bushel 27 masonry. I saw second-class masonry on McDonald's work in a dry culvert. I com- pared the paving writh McDonald's second-class masonry. Groaa - examined.— I was working on the Restigouche bridge when some of McDonald's work was done. All I know is that there was groit put on the stone. I cannot tell the thickness of the stone used. The nearest quarry with stone suitable for paving would be two miles ; the farthest five miles. Second-class masonry up there would be $8.50 a square yard. I would do 2^ or 3 yards of masonry a day. Stone for a cubic yard would cost $5.00 or $5.50. Stone for a cubic yard of paving ready to go in would be $4.00 or $4.50. If paving was a foot thick it would make three yards of paving. A barrel of cement would make three yards of paving. 10 I got $3.00 a day and found. Men could not be got up there for $2.50 a day to do three yards in a day. I would not work up more than one cubic yard of stone a day. I made no calculation to determine how much it would have taken to quarry the rock in the culvert and build up masonry. I could not see the marks of the diili in the sides of the culvert. I remember seeing one drill mark. How it was made I do not know. It was principally cut out- The drill mark might have been for plugs and feathers. It might have occurred in cutting out the sides. 20 Mr. Henry offe.., and they are reeeived, a certified agreement between Boggs & Murray and the O-ieen's Commissioners of Railroad, 2nd August, 1871 ; marked H H. Also original contract between Tuck, and the Commi.ssioners of Railway, dated 15th June, '70 ; K K. Bond from Boggs and others to the Queen, 2nd August, 71 : marked L.L.,J.W. J. RroBY objects to Bond because not referred to in any of the contracts. Bond received, subject to objections. General specification M M is received, Mr. Rigby objecting that it is not annexed to the original contract. Mr. Henry offers bill of ivorks. Rigby objects to reception because not incorporated with or referred to in the contract, and because not material to issue and inconsistent with written contract. I think it safei- to receive bill of works subject to objection. 30 Bill of works received, marked N N. Ar. Henry offers certijkd plan of crih-wharfing. Rigby objects : 1. Certificate not correct, a-^cording to the account. Plan withdrawn for the present. Henry tenders certified plan of original cross-sections between 247 to 259, plus 25 ; and from 340 to 355, plus 67. Rigby objects to its leception : 1. Because a plan of cross-sections is already inconsistent with the njan now tendered. Plan received subject to objections, and marked O O, J. W. J. 2h James O'DELL.-Live in Truro ; am civil engineer. For 25 or 26 years have had cxpenence ,n railroad building in Ontario. New Brunswick, an 1 No rSc^,"a I measured work on section 19 in October. 1875 • acrain Mav 187fi VI , • October. 1875, for McDonald. Alexander; I m;:C t^i.^fing Z^XZ between 162 and 380. In May, 1870. 1 measured oarth-work for Mifche^ and he renm.nder of cr.b-wharfing and rip-rap on the remainder of the section „ Ln bv earth work, al the excavation on the whole of section 19. I have the results of my measurements m tabular form TheDanerPP i« «n ohofvo^^ /- •^«»"^s or my between 162 an.l •?80 If i ^^ P*P;' ^ •I'- i« an abstract of the measurement 7 AM-. Vi, ^ , ' ^^''^" ^'''''" ^^'^ ^'^'"^ *^^*^ *« the statement ren- dered Mitchell and Oakes. Paper PP. i.s a correct state.nent of my measureu ent. o 1„ actual work, except as between 247 and 259. Paper Q.Q. is an abstract from P P hewmg ,n add.fon where there was material wasted or spoiled an,l borro ved.^nc.: I made the measurements of actual work I have spoken of, I calculated from the ongmal cross sections between 249 and 259. the contents of them as projected by these ^r.ss aectioas ; to quantities so calculated are contained in the detailed staLnent P.P. 1 got the data f,,r these calculations from the cross sections exhibited to me in the engineer .office Ottawa, as the original cross sections. I went to the office in company of Mitchell, at his request ; Mitchell requested Bill, an engineer in charge of tn2 If .T ;r i' u"^'"'' ^^o«--ctions between 247 and 259 ; Bill handed them to me ; Mitchell said they were what he wanted, and requested me to make a copy of 20 Mirhel s ITT T" "" ^'f -o'-P-P--. and from them I made the calculations. Mitchell stated as his reason for wanting the«e copies, that there had been an altera- tion in the ine, and that by McDonald's contract he was to be paid according o the <,uantit,es contained in the original sections, and he wanted them for tlie purpose of making out McDonald's estimate. The only item in P P re embankmen ; I nmde an estin.ate of the crib-wharfing between 247 and 259, from the cross sections I have spoken; and not from actual measurement on the ground • it re,. "SoS r"'^' m""" "" ""■' "^'^ '"^' ^^^"^"^ *^""^'- ^^^^^«' -d that 250 Iv i^r. ' """^''^^.^'^^ r' '° ^' P'^''' ^'' ^'^" '^>i^>-wlm.Hng between 247 an.l 30 ealth wo.k that he was required to do by the alteration in the line. I compared my copy of cross sections, made at Ottawa, with the cross sections on plan 0.0. n el ence and found them to agree. I measured for MitcI.ell in the autumn of 1875 a piece of crib-wharhng, between 247 and 259, that had been actually done ; this was when I was measuring for McDonald ; McDonald said that that work wa not to be included in my estimate for him, the measuren.ent was 3,428 cubic yards. The actual excavation I measured on the ground between 247 and 259, was 87, 894 cubic yards Between those stations I have returned 8,302 of excavations and 14,846 of embank- lhrH84r '% r^ quantities without any percentages. Adding 12^ pet cent, to 40 the 14,840 embankment, will make 15,701, and is the embankment McDonald had to rZ ^^'^f^^^^'l^^^ -con tractors. I kept distinct account of the work done by Archibald & Vosbnrg, McKenzie, McDonald & Co., and Alex. McDonald & Co., be- tween stations 162 and 380. I made C 2 after the work was completed, at the request of McDonald A Cakes. McDonald was preparing to leave Metapedia. The request was made at my office in the presence of Cakes, McDonald and Jillett. They asked me to make up a final measurement, so that they could settle. I agreed to do it. Jillett was to go into the details. I understood that my measurements were binding on l)oth parties. 1 .said to them it was no use my making measurements unless both parties agreed to be bound by it. I had ve y little necessity to go on the ground 30 becau.se the measurement had all been taken on the ground previously. I made two original copies of C 2. They were left in my office about a month, parties not having called for them at the end of that time. I mailed both copies to Cakes. McDonald had left some time previously. C 2 statement IS correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief. I included in my paper C 2 the work done by all the sub-contractors except McKiel, and deducted Archibald & Vosburg's work because they did not complete their work, and Alexander McDonald finished it. I kept McKiel's work separate, because I had the figures all beside me, and there was no necessity to mix them up. I do not know whether McKiel was a sub- contractor of McDonald or not. (Objected ) If he was a sub-contractor of McDonald, 40 the amount performed by him is in paper O 2. McKiel was paid in full for all the work done by him, and I had the papers connected with his work carefully put away, and had not to refer to them again. I can't tell whether the crib-wharfino' in the statement includes that done by McKieJ. 41 Paper C 2 includes the work done between stations IQ2 to 380. The total earth- excavations is the total excavation between those stations. Quea: Was, or was there not, any earth excavation besides those marked " total earth excavations," between those sections ? (Objected to.) I allow the question, subject co the objection. Answer: Mcliiei worked between those sfations ; total excavations included McKiel's work ; the paper includes all the work done except that done by previous sub-contractors. Between 247 and 253 the road was moved back at the request of Mitchell and Oakes ; they thought they would save money by saving the crib-wharfing. The request was made about the time McDonald took contract. McDonald knew of the proposed change ; he was present with O.ikes when request 10 was made, and asked for an idea of the quantities. The rond was to have been moved 13 cr 14 inches. McDonald did the work ; he placed the road too far in, and had to move it out. The slopes were done as I laid them out. I'he quantity of land sluiced down was very great, and in order to save McDonald the expense of carrying away the surplus, the road was moved out again towards the river. In one place, where there was a 20-foot embankment after the sluicing there was a 20-foot cutting. At that place the road was not built according to the contract or to the change ; a medium was taken. Following the medium line was a very great advantage to McDonald; I saw it woi-ld do no harm to the road, in consequence of moving the road, 500 feet of crib-wharfing was required to protect the road. Mad the road been bailt according to the change, no 20 crib-wharfing would have been required. For the same reason the rip-rap was slightly increased about stations 244 I saw all the crib wharfing that was built between sta- tions 162 and 380 during the progress of the work, many times. Q. Would it give the contents of the crib-wharfing correctly ' i assume the inner side, or bank, to be a perpendicular line from the inside of the burm to the bottom ? A. It would make the quantities very much larger than the actual contents of the crib- wharfing, because it went through a rough country, the average slope of which was U to 1. The back of the crib-wharfing leant on to the slope about 1| to 1 ; it was not' perpendicular. The logs used were of various lengths, from 6 to 15 and 25 feet. I do not think I ever saw a cross-tie longer than 16 feet. 30 If the crib had a 6 feet burm, its perpendicular height 12 feet, with a batter in front of 2 to 1, the bottom log would be 30 feet long. The average height of the crib- wharfing was 10 feet, from the water-level to the burm. The statement of McDonald that the lowest perpendicular height of the crib was 12, and the highest 18, would give a correct idea enough. The line marked with A x on O O is the slope' of the embankment ; the outside line is the crib-wharfing. The inside line would not repre- sent the back of the crib-wharfing. The inside line means nothing at all, as far as the crib-wharfing was concerned ; it is simply a prolongation of the slope of the embank- ment. In some cases the back of the crib-wharfing had to be made perpendicularly. It depends on the conformation of the country whether the back sloped or was perpen- 40 dicular. There were two or three places between 162 and 380 where the back had to be perpendicular. The heaviest piece was about at station 310 and about 350. At these stations the back was perpsndicular. That was all where the back was perpen- dicular. I allowed for this in making my calculations. Where the back was per- pendicular it would take {ibout three times as much to fill the crib as when it sloped. ^M r.-jm 42 The paving would be worth $3 or $4 a cubic yard ; that would be $l.dO or $2.00 the superficial foot. It was not worth as much as second-class masonry. Paving was roughly done; it was not groited, as I remember; groiting would be double the price. It would not cost aj* much to blast out the culvert at Man's Hill, as by the original con- tract there would be a saving of about two-thirds. Masonry would be worth $12 a cubic yard; culvert masonry, or second-class. Know the rip-rap between 162 and 380 was to be two feet thick at the top, and thicker at the bottom ; altogether, 3 or 4 feet. Plan S is a plan in coniiHction with section 18 ; has nothing to do with 19 ; it is a plan of substitution for crib wharfing I did not order McDonald to do any rip-rap on 19 according to that plan. It is not a plan of rip-rap at all. I don't think ttiere 10 was any rip-rap on section 19 as thick as 8 or 9 feet at the bottom. I would not be allowed to exact any such thickness .Stones packed round culverts in McDonald's contract; allowed for that under the head of paving. Packing is to protect the earth from coming down and getting into the culvert. The packing round the piers of bridges 1 allowed as rip- rap ; that is fair The stone used for packing round culverts would be the debris from the structure itself The stone from the line cuttings was put into embankments and used for crib-wharfing. I allowed the contractors to have their own way. I know of a rock cutting at 303, it was used for building purposes The width of the cutting at 303, should be 22 feet at the base, not more than 27 at the top. I did not require stone from this cut- 20 tin? to lie put in the rip-rap. any stone would do for rip-rap. The ground does not allow boi rowing rock, and anything beyond 23 feet at the base and 27 feet at the top are not shown on the plan of cross sectious. The stone and all the packing round the piers, Clarke's brook, came from the debris McDonald had a quarry ] mile away. Most of the stone used in the bridge came from that quarry. Some of the stone from that quarry was condemned by me or the inspector, probably by both of us Know ol Archibald and Vosburg ; commenced an embankment at 27H ; they only made a be- ginning. Alexander McDonald took it up and can led it along 1 don't think it was over «00 feet long ; he could only utilize for his embankment n little over { of the old one I deducted nothing from him on account of the -l he used. The 1600 feet haul 30 was returned to the government and McDonald had the benefit of the 1600. I allowed 10 per cent, for sinkage and shrinkage ; that -vas allowed all along the line by Flem- ming's direction. Q. Where a person is paid according to a fixed price per cubic yard for excava- tion, do you allow for sinkage and shrinkage? A No; we would allow according to pit measurement, or according to the contents of the measurements of the pit. (Ob- jected ) O'Dell was about one week going over the road, when he made the measure- ment. It could be possible for an engineer to measure the work from the cross sections without going over the ground ; it would take a great deal of time ; he would have difficulty in making up an estimate of the work done, because the cross sections do not 40 show ihe borrowing and spoiling ; he would have to go to the ground to make an esti- mate of the borrowing and spoiling An engineer would have to measure the cuttings and the embankments, to make a good job. It would be very difficult to make a reliable estimate without measuring the embankments on the ground. It would not be possible for an engineer to measure sec. 19 in 7 or 8 days. 43 Cross-examined —My subordinate engineers were Cadmen, Jillett and Mitchell. Lowrey was masonry inspector ; Innis. inspector of crib-wharfing ; Lowrey and Innis worked under my control and direction. I directed Lowrey and Innes how the work was to be done ; they instructed the contructors ; some times I personally directed the contractors. I would have dismissed the staff, including the inspectors, if thev had refuged to obey my instructions ; I would have reported any contractor refusing to carry out my instructions to the chief engineer. My .lirections were carried out wonderfully well. Otherwise than as to the sluicing. McDonald curried out my instructions very well. There was no direct .lisobeflience as to the sluicing. Wages and materials very high at that time ; 2;-) per cent, higher than they are now. Cost of first-cla.s3 10 masonry, $10 cubic yanl. The masonry done by McDonald on section 19 was not ti.st-class ma.sonty. It was better than second-class, I think. I admitted that all the masonry on that section was first-cla.ss. except four culverts which were dry masonry. 1 qualified the statement that the stones were too small. This admi8,sion was made m my exa i I not be exacted. The paving was not done up to the specification. The paving was in all the culverts except three or four. The paving was measured in cubic yards for the Government. I forget how it was estimated for McDonald. 1 never .saw groiting u.sed in the culverts. It might have luien used without my .seeing it. I cannot swear t'.at there is not groiting in the paving to-day. The stones were set on edge, broadside and every way. The paving not well done. It was worth S.-).()0 a cubic yard. It was at Kane's Brook that I des"- crihed the work as being well-lone and groited, and the specification exceeded. 30 .Marcus Smith was district engineer fo- the Restigouche district for about a year; then Bell for the .same length of time. Fl.tn.ning was chief engineer. I went to the Restigouche •««« together and d.v,de by two Ihe area of some of the crib-wharfing was greater than A 180. Plan R IS a conect representation of the worst of the biggest part of u. I do not think the cnb^wharfing could be measured from the cross sections ; it could be, assumi g the^O bTwe : th ''''"''■ J":^ ^f «^ '»^^ "'b-harfing would be an inlermediatf Hn o th h P"'-P«"'^-"[- b-1^ -d the front line. I did not say that the prolongation of the mbanktjient on the plan would be an intermediate line between the back and the front of tne cnb-wharhng. The back of the embankment was all imaginable slopes I dontth.nkanyone could tell the average slope ; I never told any 'one the aver g ''l nJn'tT ttAfnu'^ ""^ ^■^'^"'•'"•^ °' '""^ cib-wharfing Jith a slope of 1 1 otfi. ? 11 . ^'" '' ^'"^^^^ ^'''^- ^ h^^ ^ conversation with Bell in my after thrExot'V""' f. crib-wh.rfing, in relation to calculations; it wa's after the Exchequer Court and before the arbitration I knew of his making the calcula- te Lt ^rdf "t" \ V '' "'''''• "'^ ^'^ P'^" '°^ '""^ P-P«- °f -l^-'^t-" •' 30 he go orders to make three calcni.tions. 150 or 160 superficial feet would be a fair average of the crib-wharfing on McDonald's contract. 177 would be the average on the whole section, as the work was originally intended. Assuming an area of 150 feet as the average area, I compute the crib wharfinr between 300 and 304x90 being 490 feet, maki.g i„ all 2560 lineal feet, to contain! all H,222 ubic yards. The ength in lineal feet above is the same as the length in my 6 6x in- terrogatory. Ihe first above piece is at Kane's brook, the second is opposite the road whaT"'b",'^ . v."' 'i' ^'"^""'^ '"'''• '^'^^ ^h^^« P^-- -P-ent fairly the crib- wharfing built and the calculations above given fully .-epresent an area of the quantities. 40 d d not make my calculations in the above way, and 14,222 fairly represents the con- McDonald s work. Allowing an area of 132. those three pieces would contain 12.740 cubic yards. Allowing an average of 160, the piece at McKiel 340, 355, 1500 feet would contain 8,333 cubic yards. ^ 45 A slope of I to 1 in the back would make an average area of 132, with the back plumb 192 ; the height is allowed to be 12 feet. The cross sections shew the confor- mation of the country as far as they go. The linee marked A. in 0.0. , represent the surface of the ground, the slope of the country before any work was done. The heaviest piece of embankment between 259 and 269, I think ^59x25, it would have been possible to have built the crib there with a perpendicular back. If there was more embankment between 259 and 269 than is shewn on the plan at d. in O.O, it would have been possible to have built all fhe crib- wharfiug with a plumb back between those stations ; this could have been done at level stations. In mmy places between 259 and 269 the formation oi the country would not 10 admit of building the crib wharfing with a plumb b.ck. After looking at the cross- sections, I repeat the ab..ve answer. The foot of the slope is not so steep as 1 to I be- tween 259 and 269. The slope of the country between 25) and 269 would go 5 to I where th" em- bankment was placed ; a crib with a plumb back all the way down could not be built there without excavating. Between 259 and 265, the bed of thc3 river is level. T cannot say the year when I went on sec. 18; I think my duties commenced on sec 18 in '72. I had in adduion the Restigouche bridge to attend lo ; I had also the Mill Stream bridge ■ 1 18 to attend to. I did most of the office work ; my first assistant on 19 was Corbit, he was there ..bout a year. After him, Ji lett, he was se.ond-as.istant when Corbit left. 20 He runs a ste .m boir now ; he was not well up iti mathematics when he came : he studied hard and got .. good knowledge Two years after he came he coi-ld calculate crib-wharfing as well as anyone ; Jillett calculated the crib-wharfing some time and gave the calculations to me. I did net instruct Jillett, in calculatincr the crib-wharfing, to allow an area of 132 feet. I had no instruction f.oiu Marcus Smith to allow at. area of 132 feet ; it would have been too small in .some places, and too bi^r ii. otli.^is. I fignred oacli piece separately ; .sometimes there were three areas in one bundled feet. In the winter of 70 I made plan, of which R is a copy, after I Im.I pnssr.l through the .section in the stage. I gave Innis a plan of the erib-wharfinj^. I knew of Alexander McDonald lm-M„g. one. There was no other plan of crib-whaifing on the line of 19 except this 30 one. I hati a plan like this at the trial at Ottawa. I calculated each piece of crib- whaifing as it was done. I measured the crib-wharfing on the ground in Sept. 74 or 75. I did not measure the work on 19 in March 76. I made a final measurement of the work, each piece as it was done. The measurement in March 76 was made in the office ; I worked something like three months at it. I worked in the office at Metapedia. 1 think it was done before I went tu Ottawa. Mitchell and Oakes finished up their work in the /all of 74. I remained there from 74 to the spring of 76. The shrinkage or sinkage was made on the bill of works. I think there is as much as 15 per cent, on t!ie bill of works allowed for sinkage between 317 and 303, accoiding to the paper-sheet of bill of works. Between 289 and 277 the per- 40 centage allowed -s 14 per cent. ; between 2/5 and 237 the percentage is 15 per cent. ; between 235 and 220 the percentage is 15 per cent. ; between 220 and 317 x 30 the percentage is 15 per cent. I prepared the original bill of works. I had the test-pits to give me the data of the work. Between 162 and 380 I see no percentage less than 10 per cent. The average of the percentage was supposed to be 10 per cent. The greater portion of the earth- work on McDonald's work is between 220 and 217. I 46 remember O'Dell coming to my office when he obtained the cross-sections and profile. I may have told him that the percentage to allow was from 10 to 15 per cent. The average between 12 and 1 would be 12J. The step-culverts were between 303 and 310. No step-culvert at Clarke's Brook. There was a step-culvert at Man's Hill making three in all. The step-culverts could not be blasted. We had the same specification for 18 as 19. (Objected.) April 24. At first I could tell that there would be rock in the foundations of the masonry structure ; did not discover it till the culverts were laid out and cleaned out If the work is of good qua! ^y, the correct way is to level it in steps to receive the 10 masonry. It is a delicate job for blasting. There was rock in the foundation at Clarke's Brook. There w^s rock in the bottom of the stepped-culverts. There was rock m the culvert at Man's Brook. It is easier to take the rock out by blasting than by chiselling or picking. I cannot put any figure as the cost of levelling the rock in the foundations. There would be a step every three feet of the culvert, where there was pumping. That would very much increase the price of levelling the foundations. Levelling the foundation in Clarke's Brook and pump- ing would be worth over $100. Under-drains are 4 feet under the ground, with poles thrown m and stones over the poles. The drains were measured by lineal feet Catch drams would average 1^ cubic yard to the lineal yard. These drains were far 20 away from the top of the slopes, and, therefo.e, we did not make the contractors toe the mark, if they had it would he two-third cubic yard to the lineal yard. I don't think there was any rock in the catch-water drains. Hand packing is taking the rock thrown out of a cart and putting it into a better shape. It would be more diffi- cult to build rip-rap by hand-packing than merely by dumping the stone over. Dumj.ing would be rip-rap as well as hand-packing. It was all hand-packed. In my cdrtificate I did not carry out anything within the 2,000 feet haul for rip-rap, because there was no price for it in the agreement. The contractors were foolish to sign such an agreement, no price being allowed for hauling within 2,000 feet. After reading McDonald's agreement I separated the haul within and beyond 2,000 feet, in 30 accoidance with the terms of that agreement. I had previously returned the whole in a bulk to the Ottawa Government. I don't see now why I put the within 2,000 haul in C 2. It was worth something to hand-pack, no matter where hauled from. The Metape- dia freezes every winter. The current is strong— four miles an hour in a great many places. In consequence of the ice coming down the protection had to be good and strong. I allowed, and could not prevent, the contractors putting the rock from the rock excavation into the crib-wharfing. I could not prevent, because it was none of my business where they get it under the specifications. I knew of the rocks from the river going into the crib-wharfing and the rip-rap. The rip-rap at Clarke's Brook and Gilmore's was not returned in the final tabulated estimate for the contractor. It 40 was omitted by my mistake. Keefler rectified the n take. Contractors above refer to Mitchell and Oakes. The rip-rap in some places was thicker than four feet. The sub-contractors built it so for their own convenience, having built the rip-rap before the embankment instead of after. 1 have seen a piece of rip-rap here and there put in before the embankment. The rip-rap on McDonald's contract was from two to five feet in height. Eight feet was the diflference between the water in summer and spring freshets. The crib-wharfinfj and rip-rap would be from eighteen inches 47 I to two feet on that level. I had the original cross sections for tnaking the figures for the bill of works. The bill of works is an approximate estimate of the earth, rock, masonry, and everything required to complete a contract. It was used for letting the work to contractors, and they tendered on that basis. [I took the haul from the bill of works and specifications. The work was carried on under my directions, on the principle of 1600 feet haul. A good deal of the crib-wharfing was built out into the river ; mostly all, except the beginning and ending of each piece. The average depth of the river would be about a couple of feet for the It ngth of McDonald's contract. Objected.] The bottom oJ the river was of every imaginable shape. When wo got into the wtvter, the bottom was flat. It was not intended that 10 a hole should be dug into the natural bank, for the land tie a top-stick. The toe of the embankment on the top of the wharfing was six feet from the top of the front of the crib-wharfing. One of the logs, as represented on plan R, is about 18 feet. I don't think there were any logs over 2.5 feet ; diameter, 1.5 inches at big end, in smaP end. I do not think there wa.s any lot of cedar logs the average length of which was 30 feet and the diameter IS in. ; there might have been an occasional stick, If the logs had been there aveitiging 30 feet in length and 18 i iches in diameter, I would have certified them; but I do not remember any such. 10,(380 cubic yards represents th3 tot-'l rock-excavations of Archibald & Vosburg's work ; it represents tlji> hnal accoii.l -h'in they l.^ft. If Archibald & Vosburg's total work was deducted 20 ff )in th', estimate put in for McDonald, he would not be getting credit for the half bunk use I hy hhu. There is nothing in C 2 showing that, he got credit for it. I sent two oopies of C 2 to Oakes ; there was one addressed to McDonald and one to Oakes. I sent ihem both to Oakes. My signature is to the commission. The answer to the 12th interrogatory of my examination in this suit is not correctly taken down. I did not make the statement therein made that Exhibit B was made in duplicate, and that one copy was sent by me by mail to S. D. Oakes. I can't remember saying, in answer to the 12tli interrogatory, " I don't remember what became of the other." It is |ji)ssible the answer is taken down wrong. I did mt state as in that answer. I did not send the paper to McDonald. I did know whero he was. I forget who .signed 30 C 2 first, Jillett or myself. I recollect nothing about a thiid copy of C 2. There were only two originals signed by me ; they were both sent away to Oakes. If there was an office copy, J do not remember signing it. I seldom sign office copies. I keep an office copy of everything. The only conversation I had with Oakes and McDonald is the one I have previously detailed. I will not be positive as to where the conver- sation took place ; it is too long ago. I suggestyd that McDonald and Oakes should enter into a writing to be bound by my measurements. The writing was not entered into. I told them it was useless to make the measurements unless they entered into a writing to be bound by it. McDonald did not refuse to enter into a writing. I saw the interrogatories and cross-interrogatories in 40 Ottawa before I gave my evidence. I saw them at Dogherty's office before I gave my evidence. Oakes attended all over section 19. Gordon had the eastern end of the contract. He had nothing to do between 162 and 380. I made a very approxi- mate statement between 247 and 259 before the work was commenced or laid off" on the ground for Mitchell and Oakes. I don't remember making any similar statement as regards 341 to 355x50 ; I was not asked so to do. I estimated the work from the profiles and cross sections. It is better to have the line on terra jh'ina than crib- whar'rinj, would g betweon the eartJ had calc trouble \ would hf and Oak for the cr there. (( pond on ( make no t' 2 from Every fig cross sect I kept a 1 row-pits 1 case. I r made in t We got a of grade i large porl statement uient froii section a' necessary included I on the c abln care on the ^ change in Jillett mat book is bo Ottawa. that I spol I had not ( feet in thi( Lowrey an 'eports to 1 gulch was I was considi There was brook ; it w being extrj Kane's bro( Scotland ; r did nc/t ke( 48 wharHng. or any artificial structure. If the country «ra« flai it i. not likely the road would go near he nver. The rec,uire,l slope was taken down, as laid off by me TZZ T\ T 'r'r"^' ''^ ^^*""^^ "f -'•^h •" the«e slopes. I suppose the ear h washed down by sluicing would go into the river and be washed away I had alculated the force of water before McDonald entered on the sluicin.. The trouble was that the gravel lodged at the bottom instead of going into the river It would have cost thousands of dollars to have carted this earth'awfy I gave MLel and Oakes cred.U-s if the whole earth had been excavated. I did not ^ve the™ ed there. (Objected.) 2* percent, would be a large percentage. Percentage entirely de- 10 make no hff-e.ence m percentage m the stony, gravelly country of this section. I wrote E^^Zr-^'T^ """"'"'' '^''- ' '^"P^ '""^ -«-"t of the sub-contracton Lve.y hgure .n the book .s mine. The earth excavation can be measured from the 7Z7TZ' 'I t H ^' "''• ' '"^"""^^ "" ''^ ^^«-'^ '"^^ -^-' embankment ow n / K f ". •"^a^^ren.ents of borrow-pit. in the office. I laid out the bor- row-p.ts before the contractors were allowed to begin. I think I did this in every case I made no actual measurement in the fall of 74. The final measurement was made n the spnng ot 76. We had the necessary measurements in the office in 76. We go a tabulated form made up so as to shew the quantities arising from the change 20 of grade or location. I had fifty miles of railway to look after and that took . .a large po,-tion of ,ny time, and, in consequence. I was three months making up .he statements. It took me and Boligh three ,„onths steady work to make up a state- ment from the cros. sections of the original quantities of the measurements of this section at Dalhousie. doing nothing else. This work included all that was necessary for an approximate estimate to D.epare the bill of works by. It melucled the masonry. The rip-rap. the clearing, cutting, grubbing was shewn on the cro.s.s section No masonry. The originals were made with consider- abl. care. I computed the spoil and the borrowing. No necessity to be on the ground to compute the spoil and the borrowing. If there is no 30 change -n the alignment the work is built according to the original cross sections. J.llett made the tracing of the profile that Mitchell has. The monthly memoranda book IS bound like an account book. I gave evidence before th'^ Exchequer Court at mtawa. I won t say that I was longer than two months man ^g the final estimate .hat 1 spoke of. Rip-rap ,s shewn in plan S. but not the rip-rap on the section 19 I had not the power, under clause 20 of the specification, to exact rip-rap of eight ieet in thickness; it would not be rip-rap at all. The inspectors of rip-rap was Lowrey and Innis ; they were both on the giound at the same time, and made weekly •eports to me. I can't recollect at what stations the rip-rap was built. No Man's gulch was considerable of a stream. The paving was always put in well, where it 40 was considered necessary so to do. in consequence of the rush through the streams. Ihere was very good paving at No Man's gulch. There was a stream at McLean's biook ; it was a structure of no importance, and there was no necessity of ths paving being extra good or exceeding the specification. We exceeded the specification at Kanes brook. The paving I described the first daj as ideal :s only to be found in ^Gotland ; none in the world so good. I did not say at the Exchequer Court that I (licl not keep the measurements in books ; I could not ha^e said so ; I said 1 got the 1^" 49 monthly waste-papor or foolscap suppliod u« by tho goveramont; I may have said there was i:o record of the monthly nicaf^'irementH, lH!c«>u.se they vere bulked, that i^, made ono lump • .un as tho work proceeded. I can co:no at tho Hpoil by calculating shrinkage and knowin;? the seated length of haul. I may have said that S720 was not oxtrava'j^ant tor the culverts ouilt on the sliding rock ; ths ttnal moasuiement, I think, wa.s made in 70. I nieasujed the crib-wharfing from .(illett's report same time and from actual obseivation on tho ground. Memo, is in my hand-writing, and is the memo. I referred to on Saturday. I must have volunteered the second statement therein between sections 341 and .S.5.'>, Ijecause I was not asked to ujake those up. I did nut inteml to say that the slopo of the crib-wharfing was, in all cases, IJ t/) I, 10 but only where that was the slopo of tlie countr', and that was in occasion/il spots. li is my impression that Mitchell was not, present when Oakc and McDonald asked for the measurements. Re-ex(imhied. — Long'^r \^i would be requiitjd on a portion oi. the contract out- aide of McDonald contract at a place called Devil's hole. I was testifying before the arbitrator and the Exchequer < 'ourt on secUon 19 as a whole, and nor. in McDonald's contract alone. There wer .ulveits outside of McDonald's contract that required to hi stepped. The rip-rap at Ciark s brook and Qilmore brook r left out of the final estimates .sent to the government, but is included in C 2. T>'!; ; works would be no critei ion of tho work actually rlone. 20 On the application of Mr. Rioby, Mr. Graham cou.enting, it is agreed that the further hearing of this cause be adjourned to Monday, the 17tli May, next, at ll, A.M. May 18. CHARLR.S Graham.— Har' a converaatioti with Alex. McDonald last fall, in the train from Truro, in reference to th's claiui. I told him he hi put in a veiy largo claim against Murray's estate ; he said he did not expect that ciaiiii, but he did it as the best way to get back his property in Truro. Ci'oaa-examined. — I had no more interest in the inuttei than the interest I had as a creditor of Murray's estate. I have no interest in having McDonald's claim as smp.ll as po.ssible. 30 May 18. Donald Sutherland sworn. — Live at Shubenacadie ; have had expennce for 25 years on this side of the Atlantic ; 15 on the other, as a contractor, I worked on the main line ; three contracts, including 18 miles ; 5 milos on Pictou branch and 27 miles on Intercolonial ; worked on sec. 23. Tools in use a year would be deteriorated 75 per cent. The engineer in charge would be most capable to estimate the work done. I have been a great number of times with engineers measuring work ; engineers have alway.- supervised and controlled my woik. Q. — From your knowledge, tell me how long it would take an engineer to make an uccurate estima of the embankment ai excavation of ten miles of railroad, where heavy work is to be done ' (I decline to 40 allow the question.) I knew the sec lU by the profile and plans ; I tendered for the work ; I was newec on the ground. I recognize the profile, plan C, ^s a tracing of the plan of .sec. 19. From looking ^t this plan, I say that it would take an engineer un- acquainted with the ground 8 weeks to lueasnro the work done on sec 19 — that is the ? 60 embankment and excavation. I was present this spring at a conversation between Alex. McDonald and Oakes, in Caledonia Hall. McDonald s-sked Oakes if he had a profile of the work ; he said he thought he had, and that he would bring it to him after dinner ; he brought it after dinner ; I was again present. Oakes raked McDonald if the account he had rendered him was correct ; McDonald said it was correct except one thing, and ihat was the tools, that he charged too much for tools. McDonald said he could have objected to Mitchell's salary, but he would not do it. McDonald and Oakes both had the account. McDonald brought the account there, and said the bal- ance of SI 1,000 on that account was correct. Oakes asked McDonald how he put in such a large account for earth woik ; he said he had to make out an account of some 10 kind for you fellows. This took place about end of February, 1880. Was pre-sent at another conversation at the same place. Mitchell and McDonald were there ; >akes was not there. They were talking about the work. McDonald .said the property in Truro he gave to Murray was as security for supplies he wa, to furnish him with. This took place the end of March, 1880. About that time McDonald told me he thought he would have no difficulty in settling with Mitchell for a triffe, but he would not approach Oakes. Cross- examined— Osikea produced the profile, as far as I could see. McDonald brought the account. Oakes did not show any account at that interview. I saw the account in McDonald's hand ; I did not have it in my hand. I do not think that the 20 account annexed to the answer now shewn me is the account I saw with McDonald. * I knew at that time that McDonald had a suit pending in court, and that he was claiming an account from the contractors. I have given the whole of the conversation that took place at that time, i sup- pose McDonald wanted the profile for this t ial, and wished to save the expense of sending to Ottawa for it. i judged the timi, 8 weeks, required from a piece of my own work of 5 miles that it took a month to measure all the work on it ; there were bridges and masonry on it, also culverts ; no rip-rap work ; not so heavy as McDonald's. The profile shews where the cuttings are as a general rule. Robert P. Mitchell— Am one of the firm of Mitchell & Oakes, contractors for SO sec. No. 19. It would not give a correct estimate of the contents of the crib-wharfing between sec. 380 and 162, to assume the back to be plumb, because in a great many places the ground was not level, it would give more to calculate all the way down. The crib wharfing was not plumb in consequence of the land not being level at stations 247x75, 248, 249, 250. It was comparatively plumb between 250 and 251x90, a dis- tance of between "75 and 80 feet. There is about 500 feet of crib-wharfing at these stations, of these 75 or 80 feet was plumb, I did not measure it on the ground, that is the length of it, and speak after looking at the cross sections. This is the lowest piece of crib-wharfing in McDonald's contract. It is at Man's hill. This is at the sta- tion where McDonald had the right to change the work. It was not built according to 40 the original plan, because the ground would not allow of it. The location was changed for the purpose of straightening the line. This crib-wharfing was rendered necessary in consequence of McDonald not building the road according to the change. He did tint narrv far PnOlfVl in Mo V\aA tn An |.ir> >.cini->!nn trnrv* 0/i1 V RA fn 0/1& •« nn^r-B^ -' -' J = — — **' J-— ..«.- — , «i- .... ...^.^....^ .1...., — -: t ^. -r'J l^.' sv-xv ill vr>tj*7t3" quence of not carrying the road in as required by the agreement. The next crib wharf- 51 ing was from 259 to 2fi9 x 50, = to 1000 feet. None of that is plumb work. From 305 to 317x90 none of the crib wharfing is plnmb. From 329x76 and 349 it is partly crib-wharfing and partly rip-rap, partaking of the nature of both ; none of this is plumb. From 339x50 to 355 the work was not plumb, except at three stations where it was nearly plumb ; this last piece was dons by McKiel McKiel worked between stations 337 and 380 ; he did all the work except the masonrv and the rip-rap. There is something still due McKiel. I aid not employ him originally to do the work be- tween those stations. I paid him payments on account of the work he did. McKiel was working under McDonald, but in what capacity I cannot state. During the pro- gress of the work I was on the works all the time, except once or twice. I was away 10 not over fourteen days at a time I superintended the work done by McDonald as well as my own. I had 25 or 26 years experience as a railroad contractor ; part of the time in United States, part in Canada. I saw the crib-wharfing on McDonald's section when it was being built. I walked over and examined it The average height was a little less than 12 feet I measured it. The evidence given as to the length of the logs in the crib-wbarfing was not correct When the crib-wharfing was plumb the length of the sticks would have to be 30 feet, and was that length or near to it. 'Ihe logs in the bottom tier, where the bank was not plumb, was as short in places as 12 feet. None of the crib-wharfing was as high as 18 feet. I know the paving that was done by Mc Donald for which he claims to be paid. [ did a good deal of the work myself that 20 McDonald had originally contracted for. The paving was made by taking the stones that were left and laying them on their edge in the paving ; it was groited in some places, in others not. No cement put in except in the form of groiting. Where the force of water was not great, groiting was not used. The paving was not as valuable as second class masonry. Paving is worth $3 a cubic yard. I have done it on all my contracts and never got more, except at the culveit at Man's Hill. The culverts were excavated to the rock, the rock was levelled out and the masonry set on it. I don't think that McDonald would have been allowed to do it in any other way. The $600 charged by McDonald for blowing ont culverts and srepping was a ridiculous price, 850 or $60 would be a fair price lor the work he did ; o tsiue of the Restigouche Bridge 30 and tho culvert at Man's Hill there was not outside of twenty yards of stone excava- tion. I remember only two culverts outside the one at Man's Hill, at which there was stepping done. Pumping is generally required in foundation. I saw the rip-rap while it was being built ; it was not built according to the plan produced on this trial by Mc- Donald ; he had laid the face of it outside about 1 foot or 18 in. thick ; it was filled in behind with loose stone for another 18 in., it was about 3 feet thick, not 8 or 9 ; -the conglomeration of crib-wharfing and rip-rap between 829 s 30 and 334 would be about 4 feet 6 inches thick. May 19th The material in the .ut the embankment at 350, but material tor the embankment between 331 and not enough ; 337 would have gone into 40 was not enough; but there would be plenty between 327 and 339. It was not necessary, except in some places, to borrow or haul rock 2,000 feet for the rip-rap built by Mc- Donald. It would have been necessary to borrow or haul 2,000 ft. at th«? conwloruer- ation piece between 329 x 50 and 334, but he got the rock for that rip-rap out of the river, a distance of 300 feet, and from the cuttings that were sluiced ; all the rest of If If l-l 62 rock for the other rip-rap he could havj got without borrowing and within the 2,000 feet. He used the rock in the embankment and crib-whai-fing instead of the rip-rap, and got the stone for the rip-rap on the river near at hand, by this means he would have got paid twice. Agreement C C was not signed in blank by McDonald, and filled up afterwards. Murray had stopped McDonald's credit, and he was in consequence un- able to go on ; he brought out McI)onald'.s account with him to. Metapedia, and wanted me to assume the account ; I refused to assume the account, but agreed to take the work off Mr. McDonald's hands. Agreement C C was the output of that arrange- ment ; it was signed by McDonald after it was written, and after I had executed it. (Agreement C C is tendered and received subject to objection.) 10 I completed McDonald's work under agreement. After agreement C C was executed, the contractors (not McDonald) drew the money. The monthly warrants were lore than sufficient to pay the monthly work. In consequence of the agree- ment I had extra work to do, which took me nearly a year. I charged $1,000 for such extra work, and boarded myself ; it was cot half enough. Boggs and Murray held the contract in trust for Mitchell and Oakes ; these latter were to get the profits ; Boggs and Murray were to get $8,000 for the use of their name. (Objected.) This arrangement continued until C C was executed. I do not know whether McDonald knew of the arrangement between Mitchell and Oakes and Boggs and Murray, Boggs and Murray knew of the arrangement C C. I used some of McDonald's tools 20 in finishing the work ; the rest I bought ; I allowed McDonald for the estimated value of the tools when I took the woik over. I charged him 5 per cent, on the value of the work done for the use of the tools I bought to finish his work ; the charge is too small. In tendering for contracts we always allow 10 per cent, for depreciation of tools on the value of the wo'-k. The rip-rap done by me was done under agreement C C ; packing stones round culverts comes under the designation of rip-rap ; the stone that was left from the structures would do. I did most of the packing at Clarke's brook under C C. McDonald's statement that the stone used for packing at Clarke's biook was hauled 2 miles, not correct. McDonald had a quarry up Clarke's brook { mile away, and one on line about 1 1 a, way. Some of the stones from the quarry on the line 30 was used for rip-rap. There was no occasion to use it as stone could have been got from the river. There was a rock-cutting at 300. There was enough stone in it to do twice the amount of all the rip-rap. In some places the crib wharfing was done ahead of the em- bankment ; some places after. The catch-water drains were from one to four feet deep, according to the unevenness of the ground. I never agreed that the pencil memo, given by Grant was a correct statement. It was only intended to be an approximate statement, showing the probable amount of work supposed to be required before the change of the location. It was agreed between us that Grant & Jillet should measure the work, which should be the settlement between McDonald and us, and we were both to sign an agreement to be bound by it. This took place in my store. Oakes, 40 McDonald and Grant then started to go to Grant's office, t did not go in. O'Dell afterwards went over the line with me. I knov that he had, the previou3 fall, measured the rip-rap and crib-wharfing for McDonald. I never agreed to be bound by his measurements. I was not with them when O'Dell measured in the fall, I was laid up with a broken leg. I don't know whether he opened the crib-wharfing and rip-rap ; I knew after the second luuasurement that he had not don« so. O'Dell measured the work for me. Whole of section 19 in five days. He started at Clarke's ^m 53 Brook and measured the cuttings; did not touch the embankments. He gave evi- dence at the Exchequer Court or. his return. I went to him to get a statement on which to settle with McDonald. He had all the plans connected with the ma.sonry on McDonalds work, with the exception of Clarke's Brook bridgo. He had all the cross-sections and the profile. The contract between McDonald, Mitchell and Oakes and the coHtract between Bogf^s & Co. and the Government. He gave me the state- ment A 1 and B 1 te settle with McDonald by. Afterwards I went to him and told him I had lost the paper he gave me before and asked him for another statement when he gave me El. I had not lost A 1 or B 1 when he gave me E 1. He told me that there was about 4,000 cubic yards of the 61 19 put down for miscellane..is work that was calcu- 10 ^ted from the borrow-pits that wei* into the embankment, and that I settled with Mc- Donald on that calculation. I could deduct the 4,000, but that for the purpose of crettina a settlement it would be as well to allow it. He said to me that I ,ould settle with McDonald by paper B 1, that he could not allow him any more; that if he got paid by hat paper It would bo all right. He told me McDonald was not entitled to be paid for the rip-rap. but that I should allow him something for the hand-packinc. Ihe quantity of excavation in B 1. is made up from the quantities in A 1. It is possi- ble to make up the quantities from B 1 and A 1. the statement to the contrary by ODell IS incorrect. (Mr. Rioby tenders A 1, B 1 and E 1 and received, subject to objections.) 12| per cent, on that work was not a proper charge for shrinkage be- 20 cause It 18 mostly all gravel. I know Charles Parmiter. He tol.l me when he was here giving evidence there were only two stringers at the back of the crib-wharfinc and that from the upper of these the batter was the .same in back as front ; and th"' longest tie was 16, and the shortest 12 feet. This was at the Fanner's hotel I had a conversation with McDonald in Truro after this work was done, in presence of Oakes We were talking of settling, and McDonaM said if we could get him his pro- per y back he would give us $1,000. I was present at Caledonia Hall when Suther- land was present. McDonald grumbled that Murray ha.l not supplied him as he ought to have done, and that he had not backed him as he had agreed to do. I said McDonal.l, give the devil his due, you got $16,000 wo.th of goods from hi.n. Mc- 30 Donald agreed with me that Murray had done well. McDonald acknowledged our account to be correct, with the exception of the 5 percent, on the to is, and that i' h, pai.l us $b,000 that was in the account he could not pay Murray, as he he did not want to pay it twice. McDonald said there was a balance of $11,000 or $12,000 reference to the 20 whole work. I can't say whether I said in the presence of John Fisher and Dan Gunn at Truro, in the Reform Club hall, in the spring of '77, that I intended to pay McDonald by O'Dell's measurement ; I do . remember saying the same thing to Waters in the spring of '74. I paid Parmoter after C C, by McDonald's order, money for work ho had previously done for McDonald ; and T also paid him for the work he had done for me ; both of these sums wore chaiged to McDonald. Re examined.— I never saw any statement from O'Dell by which I could settle with McDonald but B 1, nor any statement having so large an amount as the one pro- duced by O'Dell on his examination. May 2l8t. 30 Ledger B, Mitchell & Oakes', account of Alexander McDonald & Co. and McKen- zie, McDonald & Co., tendered and received. Also Ledger C of the same firm and the same accounts. Also, Ledger Thomas Boggs & Co., containing the same accounts. W.J) (Marked D, S. D. Oakm. One of firm of Mitchell & Oakes. Commenced operations -n sec tion 19 in 1870, and before we got the assignment of Tuck's contract tro.n the Govern- ment. Thomas Boggs & Co. had no interest in the contract ; they were securities in the first instance and then took the contract in trust for us This arrangement con- tinued until the arrangement to take over McKiel's contract —(Objected.) Spei t the 40 whole time on the contract, except about three months out of the year. I boarded about two and a half miles from the N. B. end of the contract, going towards Metapedia. I oaw the crib-wharfing while it was being done by Alexander McDc- 'd, and I knew how all of it was built. To measure the work as if it all had a plump back would give a larger than the actual quantity. There were two places in McDonald's work where the 66 back was nearly plumb, in the other places It wm not piunip at nil. The length of the logs the first, second and thir ', tier running into the bank w>ire 6 to 18 and i\ ept, e« suited the bank. I know the paving ; I saw it when being built. The atone used w^s the refuse from the quarries that would not make building stone. I never saw any of it laid in cement. The top was groited. I have, since then, done paving myself. The work done bj McDonafd was, at that time, worth three dollars a cubi. yard ; U is not worth so much now. I saw t..3 difT^rent pieces of rip rap as they were being built by McDonald. I saw none built like that sh wn in plan in S. The bottom of the rip-rap would be about three feet at the bottom and come up with « slope of two to one, and waa about two feet at the top He got the stone some from the river and some 10 from the cuts. I know of the work done by the first compaiiv . of which McDonald was a partner. There is nothing due that company ; I seltUil with tham according to Grant's measurements. The $17,773.74 charged n my account is the sum paid them to balance their claims I paid McKiel according to Giant's meaenrements. I settled with him I know of no arrangement made with McKiel that was made with Mitchell. I know of thti- 30 mated the whole work under the two contracts at $80,000— (Objected). I have no recollection of making any arrangements tc pay .$600 for stones supplied McDonald as stated by McDonald in his cross-examination. McDonald had about $2,000 of materials— horses, waggons, &c., at the time we took the work off his har.its j he bold them to us, and we gave him credit for $!iJ,008 ; he was in debt, and he wanted us to take this stuff so the sheriff would not seize them ; we used the horses, niaterials, &c., in finishing the work on McDonald'^ contract, then sold the material, &c., and charged him with the loss The reason we took the raaterJ.il over was because we were finishing the contract for McDonald's benefit. U the time we took the materials over we arranged that after the work Wi»» uoue we woulo" do the best we could with them 40 for his benefit. We charged him nothing for using anything, except the tools we found ourselves after we took the work. Mitchell superintended the work, and we charged flOOO for his services; it was a low charge, not half what it was worth. 1 had a conversation with McDonald in Truro, at the time of the last exhibition I think, in which he offered us $1000 ii we would get the judg- Ik ff ment him plan. for ir one i \ me a 57 ment out of Murray's hands, and would cry quits, I had a conversation with him in Halifax in reference to his account, he wanted to borrow my profile plan. I asked him if there was anything wrong in our account, and if it was necessary for me to send for our book-keeper, who was in Winnipeg, he said he would dispute one item and that was 5 per cent on tools. I told him I would bring the profile down with me after dinner, and asked him to bring the last account we rendered him ; he brought it and said he might object to Mitchell for superintendent, but would not do so. He ook away the account. The account marked B. B. B. is here admitted to be a copy of the account proved by McDonald, to h?ve the same effect as if it had been the original. It told him he would have pretty hard work to make out 259,078 of earth, he said he 10 would have to put in 8on.ething to match us fellows. In a conversation with McDonald last year, he told me that O'Dell did not allow him for as much earth as Grant had done. I never saw a statement from O'Dell giving as large a quantity of earth as P. P., nor as large a quantity as in Q. Q. Cross-examined.— I have not heard or read over any of the evidence given in this case. I don't know wuat any of the witnesses swore to. I did not talk to Mitchell about the measurements I only gave McDonald one paper concerning Grant's measure- ments. I won't swear that the paper now marked C. C, C. is the paper I gave McDonald. I do nc: know the hand-wkiting of C. 0. 0. C. C. was written out and signed at the time the agreement was made, and before I paid any money out for McDonald. It was 20 signed either at or after the 1st October, 1873, and not before. Nothing was done un- der agreement until it was signed. I never commenced charging McDonald with the work and crediting him with the warrants until about the 1st Oct. The signatures were not put to the paper in June, July or .August, and the agreement not filled in until 1st Oct. I think ihe names were affixed to C C. before any expenditure to any amount was made on McDonald's behalf Murray was at Metapedia frequently ; he might have been there August, 1873. Jillctt went into Grant's office when we went to arrange about the final measurements. Either Grant or Jillett said there ought to be a written document. This was in his office. Grant was either in his office or the yard when we got there. We looked him up. I attended more to the eastern end of '.tie line than the western. I did not 30 give any evidence at Ottawa as to the work on McDorald end of the contract. I heard McDonald's evidence at Ottawa. (Obj'd.) I gave no evidence respecting the crib-wharfing oa McDonald contract. I furnished Alexander McKenzie, premier, with a copy of the lump quantities of the whole section 19. I think there was a paper showing the ma- terials, (fee, that made up the $2,000; I don't know where that paper is; I can't say when I had it last. Archibald was our bookkeeper from the first, and while Alexander McDonald & Co were doing the work he rendered them monthly accounts in which they were credited with the work and charged with the advances. No settlejient made with Alexander McDonald & Co, in writing to my knowledge. I think McDonald had 4 horses ; can't say how many, or if any carts ; he had one waggon. I can't say whether 40 McDonald was charged with the work done by his horses or not ; McDonald's four horses might have been some days used on my end of the contract ; I can't tell whether they were used on my end of the contract after March '74. I don't believe I charged McDonald with the hay and oats his four horses eat while in my possession ; I can't tell whether I charged him with the shoeing of their horses. There was one set of harness. ■ l 58 I don't know the value of the horses. I was paying between $4 and $5 a day for a pair of horses team. I had one railway contract before this in connection with Rich- mond depot. The conversation in Truro took place either on the station or in front of tie Parker House. There is about $60 or $70 worth of tools charged to McDonald ; can't say on how many diflferent occasions ; over ten charges. There was work done on McDonald's contract from June 34th. The reason that McDonald is not credited with the monthly warrants from January '?4, to the close of the work, is because it was broken work, and we waited until the final measurements were made. Books kept under my directions and seen by me most every day. Archibald made up McDonald's final account under my directions. The items of wear of tools was, I think, entered in 10 the books in Halifax. 1 authorized Archibald to make the accounts of Alexander McDonald «& Co ; we settled with them under Grant's measurements McKiel was a sub-contractor of us after B B was executed. I charged McDonald with McKiel's work, because we credited him with the final estimates. I can't tell from the profile handed me where the rip-rap and crib-wharfing are ; I can tell from the profile I have. The profile shown me is not a true plan. Looking at my profile, I say the crib wharf- ing from stations 248 to 252, and from 260 to 270. McDonald did four pieces of crib-wharfing including McKiel's, and also the piece at Man's hill, together five. May 22. U Boggs & Murray charged the $621.65 to McDonald, Mitchell & Oakes, they 20 should not charge it. There ia an item of $621 55 charged against McDonald in Ledger B, p. 360. The amount of the award received from the Government was up- wards of $100,000; this was over and above the lump sum — (Objected). When I settled with McDonald, he owpd certain parties in Halifax ; I gave Mc- Donald an order on Murray, so that these parties could get their money. All that I know about it is that the $621.55 is charged iri my books. We have credited McKiel with 20 cub! yards for the earth -excavation and 85 cubic yards for the crib-wharfing. McKiel got goods and cash on account as the work progressed. It appears by our books that he got in all $6,152.16. The C S. A. in pencil, on p. 406, is in the handwriting of Archibald. When 1 got settled with McKiel after getting Grant's measurement, I paid 30 him $12,700; this last item does not appear in the books, and I have not now any memo to show it. Can't tell whether the charges for work and warrants credited in Fol. 264, ledger C, was under the agreement contained in C C. I do not know that the diflFerence between 20 and 23 cents on the earth, was to go to McDonald. McDon- ald, McKiel, and Mitchell made whatever bargain there was. John R. Murray, one of the late firm of Boggs & Murray. — I have charged in my account with McDonald, under the agreement made with them. I produce a state- ment shewing the debit and credit of $116 24 and $228.45 ; shewing how those items are made up. Statement received, marked D D D. I have charged interest. 27s. on $11,575.62, to July 30, '75, :- $1,620.60. This is the interest on the bal. of the 40 account. I charged McKenzie, McDonald & Co. with $621.55 by arrangement with McDonald ; goods supplied J. F, McDonald & Co. ; and at the same time I assumed a debt due by J. F. McDonald & Co. to C Graham & Co., $1,690 55. Alex. McDonald was a member of J. F. McDonald & Co. pai coc 11 fro &( cor tha 8id( the mai ei witl stre was eng afte O'E th thei Met Ale: him fron (Ob. and mad 69 • Cross- examined.— The paper CCC is in my handwriting ; I made it from another paper 1 presumed to be an original. I did not have C 2 or D 2 annexed to the original commission before me when I copied CCC. C C C is a verbatim copy from the paper I had to copy from, inclusive of, the words McKenzie, McDonald & Co., second line from bottom. The agreement between Boggs & Co. and Mitchell & Oakf s, as to Boggs & Co.'s interest in the contract was in writing. McDonald agreed to pay interest ac- cording to our usual terms : which was three months' credit on goods and interest after that date. In addition, I charged him 5 per cent commission on goods purchased out- side, and not on goods furnished out of my store. I drew from the Government under the whole contract, exclusive of the Restigouche Bridge, between $200,000 and 10 $S00,000. The admission agreed upon in reference to the accounts are stated in the papers marked Z Z, J W J. < Contestants rest. Mk. RiGBY tenders C. C. C, J. W. J. It is leceived. IN THE INSOLVENT COURT. In re. Murray. — Contestation of claim of Alexander McDonald. IN REBUTTAL. May 31. John R. Fisher — Live in Truro, Am travelling agent. Had a convereation with Mitchell at Truro in the Reform Club room, at the railway station and on Inglis street. Mitchell told me, I think in the Reform Club room, that Grant's measurement was wrong, that he had given in too little, and that they were going to get another engineer and have the work measured over — that they were going to get O'Dell. He afterwards told me that he had O'Dell, and that they had measured the '"ork, and that O'Dell had given him quite a large sum — he mentioned the quantities but 1 have forgotten them. He said they had got a correct measurement, and that they were going to get their money. (Objected.) Remember when Mitchell returned from Ottawa in 1879. Met him in Stewart's store on Inglis street shortly after he returned. I a-ked him if Alexander McDonald had a claim, he said yes, that he conld never get ' ed up with him until they got a correct measurement ; that they had got a correct measurement from O'Dell, and they would have a settlement before McDonald could g A his money. (Objected.) Mitchell told me that after he got the measurement on O'Dell's character and standing that they could not keep him out of his mc aey. This last statement was made after the measurement by O'Dell. (Objected.) fO 30 60 WiLUAM Watter8._I was on section 19 during its construction ; I was there as a labounngman and as foreman; I have had conversations with Mitchell about the measurement of the work in 74 ; I heard him say that they had been wronged in their measurement by Grant; that they were going to have the work re-measured, and sue ht ZTru' ^^^^^''•^^•^ ^ft^-- O'Dell had measured th-. work for McDonald. I heard Mitchell say that McDonald had measured his work, and had made a good thing by so domg. Mitchell said that Grant was trying to ruin them and break the work that he was trying to rob them Mitchell said he was going to get the whole sectio,; measured by an engineer. I had a conversation with Mitchell P.fter the work was re iTXTh!. """ ''''."!,'' "!"""' ''^ "'^"'^ «^^*'°"' ^'•^ ''^^ ™^^« ^ «-d thing of 10 '.in ?.;?'"'"'■' ^"^ established that Grant's measurements were wrong. Mitchell said Jillett did not understand measuring work; he said McDonald would ret some- thing good m consequence of that measurement. Mitchell and Oakes were all on the section 19 during McDonald's contract. No one interfered with McDonald so long as he d.d his work nght. except the inspectors and engineers. I am now speakiug of Oakes as well as others. Fca&iug oi Cros..examined^The 6rst conversation I have detailed was in Mitchell's own h^dwithMTh n ,^^^ -°^^--b-^ ^-g done when the first conversation wa had with Mitchell ; I was not drunk. I was sober enough to remember ; it would sur- Tm Ci?" TkT "^"^'^^-'^^ I *>^d; the conversation between 5 o'clock. 20 IK m. and 4 a. m. I had two drinks of Scotch whiskey this morning but am quite He-examined—The conversation I detailed took place somewhere about p. m. R.„^\^n''"u''. ^'"^'" ^°°^ ""^ '^""'^ *° contradict statement of Oakes as to Thomas Z f Co. being security on the contract. I deem the evidence irrelevant, and ub HoT ^"V"^r .°^^°"f ^-^i-' but its reception being pressed, J received it subject to Rigby's objection, and mark it E E E npn.jf ^''^'" «°d Oakes; ledger O, containing McKeil's account, tendered, containing a ep ion.j ^^ Alexander McDonald.-I got C. C. C. from Oakes ; he gave ire the oaoer Oak^s nTv""'""'^^ '"^ ^h^-^ter;itwaswhenIwasi;litigitio„:Ute Oakes never gave me an original paper signed by G.ant and Jillett. f never had any other paper from him, except the paper I now hold in my hand (C C C ) I never agreed to be bound by Grant's measurement. There were several months ha eftedT TaTTr ''• . f''^' '''' '"^ ^'"^ "" ^ ^'^ ^^^ -»*^g« kept back. (Ob- jected.) I asked Grant for my measurements; he told me he would give me the measurements if I would sign writing to be bound by them. I refused !o sigT and said I did not want his measuieinents unless I got them without signing. I had no confidence m Grants measurements. (Objected.) I had four houses, two stone wag- gons, two set. double harness, about six cart, and about six rock s eds. two doll sleds foi hauling rocks. After C. O. wa.. ..mn^H T w.^f ^„ ,„uu .v_ _... . ? i\ I m-i 1 11 " , „ , "= — * ••■ -.t !/ii mtij Liic work as usua' Only Mitchell and Oakes paid the men. I superintended the work as usual The expenses of canying on the work were charged to me in the books. Mitchell and 61 Oakes charged m« for every day the horses worked on ray work. No arrange- ment that horses to be sold at end of work, and that I was to be charged with the difterence. I had a heavy force of men on October 1st, 1873. About half I had on in August and September, 1873. I had about 100 men in August and September They were supplied with plenty of tools. The new tools I used after that I bought from Mitel j11 & Oakes. I had plenty uf tools with what I bought without using any of Mitchell A Oakes' from their contract ; thev took some of my tools to the other end of the contract. Horses worked on Mitchell & Oakes' end of the contract when not working on my contract. The charge of 5 per cent, for tools is unreasonable. I would have to pay the per 10 centa-e and for the tools as well. «840.8o of tools would do three times the work done between the Ist October and the close of the work. The closing u work not hard on tools. The heft of the work was crib-wharfing and masonry, not requiring tools. I never .sold tool« io Mr. McCreedy ; he never got any from me. The tools purchased from Mitchell & Oakes were usea on my work. Mitchell & Oakes sold them after the work was done for their own benefit, same as they have charged perce itage on. I am not credited with the tools. Mitchell and I arranged the price at which the horses, tools, etc., were to be taken over. In the settlement with Alex. McDonald & Co., the company was charged with $621.55 ; and John R. Murray has charged me with the same sum. We arranged when we signed the accounts that ^0 Mitchell & Oakes were to pay Murrpy the S621.55. I was not a member of the firm of John F. McDonald & Co. I understood from Murray, Mitchell and Oakes, that Murray had a one-third interest i.i the contract at the time they signed the contract. (Objected.) Mitchell and Oakes never told me and I never knew till three minutes -.go that Murray had not a full interest in the contract. I never offered Mitchell & Oakes, in conversation with them, $1000 if they would get the judgment of Murray released, and cry quits. They always admitted there was money due me after the measurements. The suit at the time was pending for $20,000. Mitchell & Oakes wanted me to wait until they got settled before claiming on them. When I arrmged with Murray to supply me, nothing said about interest ; I 30 was to give him 5 per cent on the amount of goods he was buying for me outside his shop. I complained to him about the interest after account rendered ; I told him he did agree to change it ; he said it did not make much difference, that whenever got settled he would take it off, or it ccaiu be allowed on both sides of the account. I never admitted to any one that Grant's measurements were correct. I told O'Dell to measure to show Grant's measurements wrong. Cross-examined.— The suit I refer to with Murray was the suit in Equity. He commenced bothering about the measurement, and said he had Grant's measure- ments. I said 1 did not care whether he had them or not, I would not believe them, r gave me what he called Grant's paper. I said at first he gave me Grant's paper, 40 hut I correct myself; I knew the paper was in Grant's handwriting; I believed it to be a copy ; Oakes told me so. I don't recollect whether I asked to see the original. When Oakes gave the paper he told me the measurements were not correct. This was after the commencement of the suit in Equity. I did not say paper C C C handed me was a I. jj_, , ,p „t.,„. .^^.n.c= .v a luc 3u. 1 Knew u was not uraut's handwriting. ISJo tools used after contract taken over, except the tools I had in use, and those I bongnt. I was a w p< in wi ca de pr sai re( dil in< Tl wi I had litigation with Murray previous to the 62 afraid that my creditor, would seize the tools, and that was the reason ot the arrange- raent. All the tools, horses and plant transferred to Mitchell & Oakes when they took over the contract. (Objected.) Before Murray signed the contract, Mitchell* Oakes told me that Murray had one-third of the contract, and Murray told me the same when I signed the contract. Murray & Boggs signed the first contract last. Murray told me after he had signed the contract of Alex. McDonald & Co. and before he signed the contract of McKeniie, McDonald & Co. lie-examined — I got C C C in '76. Equity suit. James O'Dell.— I was engaged in making the measurements in the field 8 days. 10 1 was a week at work at Metapedia. OfBce work in connection with the measurements. I also worked ,n Nova Scotia making up calculations. (Objected.) I was occupied in all about 76 days I worked on the ground and at office work, Metapedia, about 11 hours " 7\ I ^^""fined rayself to the earthwork and rocks. These measurements were made for Mitchell, and does not include work done for McDouald. I ,vas wridng at the calculations 14 hours ; 8 hours is a professional day', work. I gave my evidence m Ottawr from A l.-(Objected). I kept a diary of the work done every day during the field measurement. I had two chainmen. I think, and a rodman. It is usual to charge 10 pe»- cent, for tools during superintendence. The item in B 1, of 9^0,710. was made up by deducting the whole amount of 20 actual excavation between 267 and 289 from the total amount of excavation as cal- culated from the rross sections of the work as completed, without rllowing for the excavations between Inose -wo sections as shown on original cross 8ections-(Objected). Ihe crib wharfing projected between 247 and 259 is not included in the calcula- lations in Bl. The 10 per cent, should cover all the tools and instruments used in the work from beginning to end. and also superintendence. I mean by superintendence overseeing the work and keeping the time of the men. Grant advised me to allow 16 per cent for smkage and shrinkage ; this was when I saw him at Metapedia at his own riouse ; this was in the spring. Oross-examined.~I did not bring with me the papei to which I referred after 80 my examination to refresh my memory in regard to Bl j I had not Bl or Al or copies with me when I refreshed my memory. In finding out how Bl was made up. I made calculations from other papers I had at home. I mean by instruments, plant-such as derricks, chains, pumps, eto., including carts, wheelbarrows, and whatever is used li prosecuting the work. My superintendence had reference to work done by the day I said at Ottawa, that I believed the cross sections forwarded to me by Grant were cor- rect. Grant, from his position and familiarity with the work, would be in a better con- dition to make more correct measurement than any one else. I was present at the measurements. I arrived at Metapedia 13th May; concluded the work 1. 3th July. Ihe week I was at work at Metapedia. was making traces of cross sections and plans • 40 I was not m the field. I did not toll Mitchell I could not make proper measurements within the time. Mr. Hknry asks a question forgotten. * 68 The conformation of the country would admit of the crib-wharfing being plumb at the bank. The more correct way is to calculate the embankment* from tho cross sections. William Tremainb. — Nine days would be a reasonable time to measure section 19 (9 miles.) A man could with ease arrange a mile a day. The calculations would require four times the time in making measurements on the ground where a man had no skilled assistance. I think O'Dell would do the work in the time mentioned in his evidence. From my examination of the cross section, I should say the crib-wharfing could be built with a plumb back. Oroaa-examined. — The field work included chaining, centre ane, and taking cross 10 sections of the cuttings with tape— a level wherever I deemed it necessary Building of the natural surface and without excavation, the crib-wharfing could be built with a plumb back. EXHIBIT "C." Interrogatories to be Administered under Oommission. Inten-ogatories to be administered to John JiUett, Peter Grant and James Lowrie, at Ottawa, in the Province of Ontario : — 1. State your name, age, residence and occupation. 2. Do you know the above-named claimant Alexander McDonald ? How long have you known him ? 3. State whether or not you were enga^'ed during the years 1872, 1873 andiJ74, 20 or any of them, upon, or in connection with, the construction of the Intercolonial Railway, and, if so, in what capacity ? and for what portion of said years ? 4. Do you know what portion of said Railway which was designated section nu,.:>ber nineteen, while the same was under contract and being constructed ? and if you hu ' ".rvy connection with said section during said period ? State in what respect. 5. Can you state by whom the work of building said section of said Railway was peiformtd ? If yea, name the person or persons who performed the same. 6. If you state that any portion of said work v s performed by the firm of Mc- Kenzie, McDonald & Co., state when said firm first commenced to perform work on said section. 30 7. Do you know whether or not any work had been done on said section before said firm commenced to work thereon ? If yea, set out particularly hy whom said ■work ha,tl been doiie, and the kind and tli-j quatitity of the ocveral kinds of work done by each of said persons, if more than one. 10 64 Dona?,! /r ^"^ ''°°'' the amount of work done by the said firm of McKenzie Mc 9. Look upon the exhibit annexed hereto and marked « A " «„. »• . . copy of an agreement made by Thomas Bok« and oth^^ wf^K :, P"'^P°'**^°» **> ^e a •u=h to your aoewer hereto. "'"''°"'' ""D™'" & Co. ! ,f ,„ produce .od muex date ::. .:t,:::, reiriTisTz it::' r ""='™ "^ - -^ '-•"■^ or wo'rt it rllZ 7 ""' "" '"' ""■"' '' '""^ "" '""' P''«" ««" "o "!»' -«™et 16. Is the award or certificate referred to in the preceding interrogatories the last one signed by you ? If p^t. how otherwise ? Answer fully. ''"°«"'°"*"'' '^^ worklLTh'' *^^ '"^ '''"'^''' '''■''^°'*' ^^""'^ ^y y°" ^« 'h« fi°«» one. "0 far as the Lw orJL%"'' "'^^'"^ °' ''^^^"^^^' McDonald & Co. was concerned? If not! 1Q tion f. -F'^ ^7 ^^^' ^r^ ""^ conversation with said Alexander McDonald in rela- 40 tion to said award or certificate ? ^41 Jtif r'l 'I 65 said lL^lt°l!rn:;a?"ro^^7„!.t r °'/f-.- MeDo.ala * Co., or »i, • -J recognize you as the resident enjnneer under thp termp ^t If you knoj anything further favorable to the said contestant, please state th. same as fully as if you were specially interrogated in relation thereto ? ' " N. H. MEAGHER, Att'y of Contestant. Oross-Interrogatories. The said claimant objects to the said several interroald commenced, would there not be sinkage and shrinkage which the latter would have to make up ? 30. Can you remember any place, or places, where Alexander McDonald had to do over again work which had been certified for while Archibald or Vosburg were "" ' " " If so, where was it, and in what quantities ? at work then ? 31. In answering the 8th and 9th interrogatories, are you speaking of the quantities of work uctually performed or the amount you could only certify for under the contract with Boggs and Murray ? 30 32. Did you not, each month, while the work was being carried on upon section nineteen, return to the Government or Commissioners the work performed each month, in monthly progress certificates made up by yen upon which the coatractors were to be paid ? To whom were these certificates sent by you ? 33. Did they include the work performed between Alexander McDonald ? :.tions 162 and 380 by 34. Did not the contract with Thomas Boggs and John K. Murray require you to make these returns or 68 35. Was it not a part of your duty or instructions to make these returns, irres- pective of that contract ? 86. Did they not include the work performed over the whole section indis^.n- minately ? or could you distinguish what was performed on the stations between 162 and 380 by reference to the certificates alone ? 37. Would it be possible to discover from these progress certificates now the quantities of work performed between 162 and 380 f 38. Were not these the only returns or monthly certificates you were obliged to make in pursuance of your duties ? 39. What became of these monthly certificates ? Have you searched for them 10 where they ought to be and could not find them ? 40. For what months did you give certificates under the contract with Thomas Boggs and John R. Murray for work on section 19 ? 41 Could you tell us the quantities of work performed on said section, or which are contained in each certificate so made up by you, and also the amount certified by the person who made them up in your absence ? 42. If you can tell us the amount of each certificate, from first to last do so ; specify the month for which the certificate was given. 43. At how many different places between 162 and 380 was there rock excava- ations performed ? Give the various stations where this rock excavation was done ? 20 44. Give us the several stations where the crib-wharfing between 162 and 380 was built ? Does this include all the crib-wharfing between those two stations ? 45. Where was the rip-rap between station 162 and 380 built ? Give all the places between those stations where there was any rip-rap. 46 r,ook at the clause of paper " A," providing for changes in the description of the work, or quantities or location of the line between stations 247 and 259, and 361 and 355 x 50, and tell us if at the date of that contract (1st February, 1872,) there was shown on the engineer's plan the quantities of crib-wharfing and excavation between these stations, or between or at any stations on the whole line? 47. Did the engineer's plan then show quantities at all ? How did it show them ? 80 48. If it did so state what quantities of crib-wharfing and excavation respectively, were shown ; first between 247 and 259, if there was any such change made there ; then between 351 and 355 x 50, if there was any . uch change made there. 49. What change was made between those stations at either place, if made ? At whose wish or request did you make the changes, or did you make them for the benefit of the line ? il ■^y^> 50. What became of the engineer's plan which was in existence Ist Feb., 1872 ? 69 61. State what quantities there were of crib-wharfing and excavation respectively between stations 247 and ^59. and between 351 and 355 x 50 respectively, before these changes and previou:, to 1st February, 1872? Were these quantities in the Bill of Works ? 62. In making up the monthly certificates for the government did you certify for the work as it would have been if there had been no changes between those stations, or the quantity and class of work actually performed after the changes ? 65. Was there not rlp-rap built at station 374, Clarke's Brook, and at station 191, Gilmore's Brook ? 64. Did you ever make a return of the rip-rap at 874 and 191 to anyone, or was 10 it omitted from your returns of the work performed on this section ? 55. Did you state in your evidence before the Exchequer Court, at the trial of Murray v. the Queen, that the rip-rap in those places was omitted from your measure- ments ? Did you not state this before the arbitrator, and that a mistake had been made by you ? 66. Was there L^t some rip-rap built at or near station 173 ? State what quantity there was. 57. When did you first discover that the rip-rap at 374 and 191 had been omit- ted from your returns ? 58. If you have, in answer to the 9th interrogatory, given total quantities of the 20 different descriptions of work performed, state, or annex a statement to your deposition, showing the quantities of each class of work which was done at the various stations be- tween 162 and 380 ? 69. How many cubic yards of rip-rap was built at each of the following stations, viz.: Station r^a.226, 226, 231-234, 242-247x90, 278, 287, 295, 876? 60. How many cubic yards of crib-wharfing was built at each of the following stations, viz.: Station 247-252x30, 259-269x30, 305-317x90, 329x50-334, 339x50- 355x50? 61. Are you aware that the arbitrator, Samuel Keefer, C. E , in the suit of Mur- ray V. The Q'leen, allowed the contractors for an error of 430 feet in your returns of 30 the crib-wharfing at stations 258-268, and at 307-317, and added this 430 feet as omitted by you at these stations ? 62. If this really was omitted by you from your returns as is found by the arbitra- tor, was it not also omitted from the paper dated 8th December, 1874, signed by you ? 63. How I ach of the total quantity of crib-wharfing performed on section 19 was performed between stations 162 and 380? and how much outside of those stations? 1^ 17 f j£ tf/ '+ ( li V H ^, 5> 1< b( IE If th in no St( be th( aw ret on H( 17 'i ' 1 70 64. If the original bill of works showed the crib-wharfing as follows, which assume it did, for tha whole section, J^-^S 400 ft. 87-91 100 102-106 400 110-H3 ::;;;;;; ,oo 249-268 ..... 1 noo 808-S17 900 882— 3S6 ,.,,.., 800 840-866 1600 we 10 6100 Cubic yards 40,000 how dn ^ I account for the difference between these quantities at the stations between 16? Ai.ii ^'.iO and what you have included in the paper of 8th December, 1874, as between those stations ? Answer fully. 6:>. Have you not prepared a statement or Revised Bill showing the crib-wharf- ing as actually built on section 19 to be as follows, viz : STATION. 80 — 83 + 50 87 + 50— 91 + 10 247 —252 + 30 258 + 30—268 + 50 307 —317 + 50 300 —334+90 340 —355 LIN. FEET. 350 360 530 1,020 1,050 490 1,500 20 5,300=29,650 c. yds. If not, what does your Revised Bill, referred to by the arbitrator, show in respect to the crib-wharfing ? 66. If the quantities of crib-wharfiing are not correctly ^ven in tl f «viou3 interrogatories at the several stations, please give the correct quantitie." bid -,i 30 not state before the arbitrator that between 256 and 2G9 it should be lii in- stead of 1020 feet { 67. Please explain item " original schedule, 13,000 yards, in the paper of 9th December, 1874," and if it -vas not intended to show the quantity of crib-wharfing betwpon stations 247—259, mentioned in the agreement "A," before the cbacge therein proposed ? o8. Between stations 248 and 253, where th°ro was some crib-wharfing washed away and had to be leb'ult, according to Mr. Mitchell, did you, in making up your returns or certificates, allow both for the building and rebuilding, or did you certify only for the quantity as it stood completed ? 40 G9. At what stations between 102 and 380 was the rock excavation dim? How much between stations 230-238 ? How much between 288-306 206-2^7 168- 173, 175-180, 180-186, 217-221, 359-863 ? 71 70. Annex to your answer a statement showing tli quantities of embankment in cubic yards between station 162 and 380, giving the quantities at each station. 71. Between stations 247-359, what is the difference in quantities between the crib-wharfing actually built and that laid down in the Bill of Works ? 72. How much earth was actually performed between those stations, 247-259 ? 73. What was the difference in quantities between the earth actually done and that laid down on the Bill of Works between stations 247-259 ? 74. Can you procure copies of the cross-sections be<^ween stations 162 and 380 ; if so, please do so and annex them to your deposition ? 75. In your letter to the arbitrator of 5th February, 1878. you refer to an 10 omission from your measurements at Clarke's broclc, will you tell us if this was omit- ted also from your paper of 8th December, 1874 ? 76. Was there not some rock excavation in foundation for the three culverts from station 300 to 320 ? What quantity ? 77. Was there not some rock excavation in foundations at Clarke's brook ? What quantity ? • 78. Did you not return to the Government a lump sum for this, without giving quantities ? 79. Can you state in what places, giving the stations, between station 162 and 380, earth was wasted ? What quantity was wasted ? 20 80. Can you state at what stations earth had to be borrowed for the embank- ments between 162 and 380 ? What quantity ? Where were the borrow pits ? 81. Referring to the paper bearing date the 8th of December, 1874, is that paper in the same condition as when you signed it ? 82. Did you sign any other paper of the same date showing the same measure- ments but different in other respects ? If you did, to whom did you give that other paper? How many different paper- writings did you sign of that date for the contractors ? 83. Did you not refuse to make any award between the contractor and sub- contractor, when requested so to do, unless they bound themselves in writing to abide 30 by your award ? 84. Did not Alexander McDonald refuse to sign any writing to be bound by your award ? 85. Did not Alexander McDonald complain of your measurements of the work done by him ? 86. How do you make up " f. rce estimates," or arrive at estimates of the quan- tities of work performed by calculating the nninhpT of men and teams or force employed ? wc dif bei for 3rc euf occ Bof sub con 8pe< Arc Tot Dec Tot Dec Cri: m 72 87. Could you make up a fairly correct estimate of the different classes of work performed by ascertaining the force on a given piece of work ? 88. please explain fully, for the assistance of the Court, in reference to the different classes of work, what quantities a given force would perform, distinguishing between teams and men ? 89. Have you not at times* made up estimates in that way, and can you not form a good idea of the quantity of work performed by a given force ? 90. Did you not make a final measurement of the work on section 19 on the 3rd May, 1875, or thereabouts ? Please explain how that came to be made ? 91. Did the contractors suspend the work at any time on section 19, when a 10 supplementary estimate was given ? In what month and year did tnis suspension occur, and how long did it last ? What was the cause of it ? (Signed) F. A. LAURENCE, Atty of Claimant. (C 2— J. W. J.) INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY. Metapedia, 2nd Dec, 1874. The following measurements are made by the undersigned at the request of Thos. Boggs & Co., contractors for section 19, or their agents, Mitchell and Oakea, and their sub-contractors, McKenzie, McDonald & Co., to be in the spirit and meaning of the 20 contract or agreement between the said parties. The quantities are all work actually done, except where the agreement entered into specifies that the second party gets the benefit of savings. Due notice has been taken of the work previously done on this contract by Messrs. Archibald and Vosburg, previous sub-contractors on same portion of section No. 19. Total earth 156,460 c. yds. Deduction as above 10.680 " • __L_ 144,780 " at 2S cts. $33,299 40 Total rock 6,587 " outlets 10 go Deduct as above 6,647 1,170 6,377 c. yds. at 96 cts. 6,108 16 Crib-wharfing, as built , , , 9,907 " " original schedule 13,000 " it\ 22,907 " at 85 cts, 19,470 95 I .t 73 Rip-rap . 770 c. yds. (no price) Under drains gjOO c. ft. at $6 p 100 ft 186 00 Catch-water drains : 5*"^^ 2,860 cyds. at 23 cts. 656 60 ^'^^ \ 10 « at 95 cts. 9 60 Ifirst-class masonry 75g «< Second-class masonry 684 •* B . ,,, ^ . ,. 1.436 " at $11 15,796 00 I'aving, 141 c. yds., price adjusted, $S 423 QO 10 Excavations in foundations 1,930 « at 60 cts. 965 00 Allow leveling rock foundations 60 00 Clearing, say 2i acres, at $20 60 00 T> , J. . r $76,952 60 Road dtverfion from station 299 to 320. Earth 6,660 c. yds. at 23 cts $1,276 60 * Rock, 630 c. yds. at 95 cts .'.'..'.'.... 598 iO Culverts ' " • 50 00 Posting for fence entire length 63 00 1 988 00 Total $78,940 60 20 Seventy-eighl thousand nine hundred and forty dollars and fifty cents being the amount ascertained for work done by the party of the second part, between stations 162 and the upper end of this contract, station 380. (Sg'd) JOHN JILLETT, ^., J ^ (Sg'd) EDWD. GRANT. Witness, James Lowbie, Signed Metapedia, 8th December, 1874. 'SlsS •I1 (D. 2, J. W. J.) • INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY, 2nd December, 1874. 30 The following measurements are made by the undersigned at the request of Thomas Boggs & Co. and their sub-contractors, Messrs. McKenzie, McDonald & Co., to be done in the true spirit and meaning of the contract or agreement between the said parties : The quantities are all work actually done, except where the agreement entered into specifies that the second party gets the benefit of savings. Due notice has been taken of the work previously done on this contract by iVl paara Vnab"''" and ^rph!^>«ilH r^.."».Joi'" "—K '■ ^ .= -- " •• lu. . — 5j — jj osiu xin,,!i8,,j{tiu, pscriouo ouu-tuutiactuiB, uii Quiuu puruoii or secuon number 19. 74 Total earth Deduct as above. , 155,460 10,680 144,780 c. yds., 23 cts., S34.299.40 Total rock 6.537 outlets 10 6,547 Deduct as above 1 170 5,377 @ 95 Crib-wharfing as built 9 907 original schedule 13,000 22,907 @ 85 Rip rap, 770 c. yds 660 @ $1.50 Under-drains, 2,700 cub. feet, $5.00 per 100 ft., CATCH-WATER DRAINS. Earth, 2,g .3 c. yds. @ 23 cts j{655 50 Rock, 10 " 95 " g'so First-class masonry 752 Second " " 684 5,108.15 10 19,470.95 (no price.) 990.00 135.00 615.00 15,796.00 20 1,436 @ $11.00 Paving 141 c. yds., price adjudicated, $3.00 423.00 Excavations in foundations, 1,930 @ 50 965 00 Allow for levelling rock foundations Clearing say 2.50 acres @ $20 50.00 50.00 $76,952.50 ROAD DIVISION 299 TO 320. Earth, 5,550 at 23 cts jl 276i Kock,630, "95 " .'.*.*......*..'.'... '598* Culverts gn Posts for entire length, say g3 $1,988.00 $78,940.50 Seventy-eight thousand, nine hundred and forty dollars and fifty cents being the amount ascertained for the work done between station 162 and the upper end of this contract at station 380. (Sgd.) EDW. GRANT, C. E. JOHN JILLETT. li', 8. u Dkposition of Witnksses, taken at Ottawa, in the Province of Ontario, before us, Joseph James Gormally (called in said Commission Joseph George Gornially) and G. Lefroy McCauI, Esqi-Jres, both of Ottawa aforesaid. Barristers, Com- missioners appointed for the purpose by a Commission issued out of the County Court and Court of Insolvency for the County of Halifax, Nov.-, Scotia, in the matter of the Estate of John R. Murray, an Insolvent, Alex- ander McDonald, Claimant, and James G. Foster, Assignee of said Estate, Contestant, and which Com.nission is annexed hereto, upon interrogatories and cross-interrogatories to such Commission also annexed, that is to say : Peter Grant, of Ottawa aforesaid. Civil Engineer, a Witness on thf part of the 10 Contestant, being duly sworn and examined, — 1. To the first interrogatory the said deponent saith — My name is Peter Grant ; my age is 44; my residence is Stewarlton, Ottawa; my occupation is a railway engineer. 2. To the second interrogatory the said deponent saith— I know the above named claimant, Alexander McDonald ; I have known him since 1870. 3. To the third interrogatory the said deponent saith — I was engaged in con- nection with the construction of the Intercolonial Railway during the years 187?, 1873 and 1874 as division engineer; I was engaged as such for the whole of the «aid years, except two months, during which I had leave of absence. 20 4. To the fourth interrogatory the said deponent saith — I know that portion of said railway which is designated section No. 19, and I knew the same while it was under contract and being constructed ; I had connection with the said section 19 as engineer in charge. 6. To the fifth interrogatory the said deponent saith— I can state the persons who performed the work on the said section ; Mitchell and Oakes were the contrac- tors; the sub-contractors were McKenzie, McDonald & Co., Vosburg, Archibald, Robert Gordon, and several others. 6. To the sixth interrogatory the said deponent .saith— I cannot state when McKenzie, McDonald &; Co. began operations, but I think it wt.j in 1871. 30 7. To the seventh interrogatory the said deponent saith — There was work done on said section before firm of McKenzie, McDonald & Co. began to work. There were three sub-contractors before they began, Vosburg, Archibald and Gordon. It was all earth work up to the time McKenzie, McDonald & Co. began. I cannot state the quantity of work done by these three prior sub-contractors, nor the specific amount done by each of them before McKenzie, McDonald & Co. began. This can easily be learned from my books, which were filed as Exhibits in the suit of Murray versus the Queen in the Exchequer Court. 8. To the eighth interrogatory th said deponent saith— I cannot now say from memory what amount of work McKenzie, McDonald & Co. did, but I did know. The 40 matter occurred 9 years ago. mai proi qua don foIl( di-ai: Exh Kenz road toEj was s 1 only 8 1 in duf what 1 li being 1874, 76 9 To the ninth interrogatoiy the said deponent saith-I look upon Exhibit marked A. mentioned in iuterro,ato.y No. 9. and by refe:.nce to paper, writing now produced ami marked B. which is signed by me and a Mr. JilletVl can statethe quantities of the different descriptions of work speciHed in Exhibit A, which were folW- '""'"' ^^^''^^'^ ^ ^°' '^^'^ ^'^'^^"^ descriptions of work are as Earth excavation 144780 yds. cubic. ?^Kwrr"°° 6377 yds. cubic CnbWhariing 22907 yds. cubic. Rip^r^.> hauled 2000 feet 660 yds. cubic. 10 ^''^'' *™'"« 2700 feet cubic. (I do not know the amount of eari;h and rock excavation in respect of under- drains but I do not think there was any rock. The words " cubic feet," written in lixhibit B. opposite underdrains, and also above, is incorrect, it should be lineal feet) CAICH WATER DRAINS. Earth excavation 2850 cu. yds. Rock excavation 10 cu. yds. First-class masonry 762 cu. yds. Second-class masonry 684 cu. yds. I'-^'^'S-: 141cu.yd8. 20 hixcavations in foundations 1930 cu yds ^^«*"°g ."■.".'.*."." 2i acres." 10. To the tenth interrogatory the said deponent saith— The said firm of Mc- Kenzie. McDonald & Co. did all the work in connection with diversions of road This road was the Metapedia Post road, between St. Flavie and Cross Point. By referring to Exhibit B I can give the amounts of work done. (The nature of the work done was setting back this road out of the way of the railroad line.) Earth excavation 5550 c. yds. at 23c., $1276.50 Rock excavation 630 c. yds. at 95c., 598.50 Culverts (don't know quantity) 5O.00 80 Fencing (don't know quantity) 63.00 SI 988.00 11. To the eleventh interrogatory the said deponent saith— Exhibit B is the only award or certificate given by me in connection with this sub-contract. 12. To the twelfth interrogatory the said deponent caith— Exhibit B is made m duplicate, one copy was sent by me by mail to Mr. S. D. Oakes. I don't know what became of the other. 13. To the thirteenth interrogatory said deponent saith— The said Exhibit B IS?? P°J^f ''^"^^^ and^shown to me, bearing date the 8th day of December, A. D., -374, is signed by uohn Jillctt and myself. j« • .u ,.!& h:. 77 14. To thp fourteenth interrof?atoiy said deponent saith— The said Exhibit B relates to the work done by McKonzie, McDonald f' Co. on their sub-contract under Mitchell and Oakes on Section 19 of the Intercolonial Railway. U. To the fifteenth interrogatory said deponent saith— I made the award (Exhibit B) under no authority and in performance of no duty, but at the request of A. McDonald and S. D. Oakes, and as a favor to them. 16. To the sixteenth interrogatory the said deponent saith— The said Exhibit B is the last and only award signed by me in this connection. fv \}^' '^° ^^^ seventeenth interrogatory the said cLponent saith— The said award (Exhibit B) was the final award givBn by me so Tar a^ thy work on the said sub- 10 contract of McKenzie, McDonald & Co. was 6 ^^-^r ioi. _ 18. To the eighteenth interrogatory the said deponent saith— I had no conver- sation with Alexander McDonald in relation to said award as far as I recoileC If I had any it was before the award was made. 19. To che nineteenth interrogatory the said deponent saith— The members of t.'ie fim of McKenzie, McDonald A Co. and Alexander McDonald recognized me as the resident engineer under the terms of their said contract on said section, and as far as I am aware they recognize no other. 20. further. To the twentieth interrogatory the said deponent saith— I know of nothing 20 Mr. O'DorEHiY for the contestant, objects to the cross-interrogatories of the cla'-nant, and each (.f them, on the ground that they are and each of .hem is iiTegular and iraproper, and t^ the evidence to be given the.-eunder, on the ground that the same is inadmissible and improper. 1. To the first cross-interroga -. •) . , aid deponent saith-My connection with section 19 aforesaid begun in the spnng of 1870 and terminated in June, ' : '6. I cannot state definitely when it began, but think it was in June, 1870. I v v« -'jsent from about the 24th day of March. 1872, until about the 24th day of Ma, in tha 6ame year. This is the only time I was ever absent on official leave. I was ou sev- eral other occasions away for a day or two salmon fish:ng. My assistant fulfilled my 30 duties while I was absent. My duties as engineer were-to lay out work ior con- tract to see that the work was carried out to the proper curves and grades, t. see that the work was done according to the specifications and plans furnished the con- tractors, to return monthly progress estimates of work done, &c. 2 To the second cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— After a certt.ii time I had similar d-< ies to perform on section 18, but as I lived on section 19 1 gave rather more of my time to section 19. I think I gave about two-t'Jrds of my time to section 19 and one-third to section 18 during the period that I had both in charge. I had more eflScient assist nee on section 18, 3. To the third cross-interrosfatorv ihe sniVI rlpnnnonf ooU}. uru^i^^n o, rk_i.-- "■ began work on section 19 at the end of August, 1870, as agents for Boggs & Co. and finished the work in 1874, as well as I can recollect. |l/% .%|j 78 4. To the fourth cross-inl^orrogatory the said deponent saith— I never had a copy of the contract of S. Parker Tuck & Co. (assigned to Boggs & Co.) with the Crown, but I had a printed copy of the plans and specifications referred to therein in my office. I delivered all these to the chief engineer of the Intercolonial Railway at Ottawa, and have not seen them since the trial of the case of Murray and the Queen in the Exchequer. I am therefore unable to produce them and annex them to my deposition. ? To the fifth cross-interrogatory the deponent saith— I sa«- the contract, or wha. I supposed to be the contract, in the possession of John R. Murray ; but I can- not say that I ever sav any of the plans or specifications referred to therein in his 10 possession, or in the possession of Mitchell & Oakes. 6. To the sixth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— Section 19 was about 9i miles in length, and was composed of ^bout 460 stations, as well as I can recollect. These stations were numbered from 370 to about 450, and then from to 380. Th- distance between the stations was supposed to be 100 feet, except where they we> . lengthened or shortened by the alteration of the alignment. They were mar Ked upon the ground by stakes marked with the numbers in red chalk. 7. To the seventh cross-interrogatory t,he said deponent saith— I think it was 370, but am not positive. 8. To the eighth cr«ss-interiogatory the said deponent saith— I cannot answer 20 this question without seeing the profile, w>>;ch is not here. 9. To the ninth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— Archibald & Vos- burg were two sub-con tiv.ctors under Mitchell & Oakes. Archibald had the east end and Vosburg the west end of McKenzie, )fcl)onal ' & Co.'s contiact. I cannot locate them by stations. They did the work for Mitchell & Oakes. I cannot give the dates at which they began and ended work. I measured their work. 10. To the tenth cross-intei gatory the said deponent saith : I cannot answer this question without having access to the books and papers filed in the Exchequer Court, as above mentioned. il. To the eleventh cross - intei rogatory the said deponent saith -I cannot 30 answer this question for the same reason. 12. To the twelfth cross - interrogatory the said deponei.t saith — I cannot answer t;iis for the same reason. 13. To the thirteenth cross-inter -ogatory the said deponent r^aith- A copy of the progress estimate would enable me to answ.-r, but I have not got them. 14. To the fourteenth ivoss-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I did make progress estimates under the contract of Thomas Boggs & Co. which included the work cf Vosburg and Archibald, but I cannot tell for what months. 15. To the fifteenth cross-inter! ogatory, the said deponent saith— I could. 79 16. To the sixteenth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I sent them on the first of each month to the Chief Engineer at Ottawa. I don't think I have seen them since. 17. To the seventeenth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Yes, they include the whole of section 19. 18. To the eighteenth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot tell this without looking at the books and papers in the hands of the Government. 19. To the nineteenth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— The memo- randa and computation were both along with the documents filed in the Exchequer Court, as above mentioned. I delivered all these documents to Mr. L. K. Jones, sec- 10 retary of the Chief Engineer at Ottawa, and I therefore cannot annex any of them to my depositions. 20. To the twentieth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I was unable to answer in that particular the said seventh interrogatory. 21. To the twenty-first cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Yes, I did. 22. To the twenty-second cross-interrogatory, the saith deponent saith— I did not. I did not procure information from C. S. Archibald or Mitchell, or Oakes, direct- ly or indirectly, as to the payments made by them to Archibald and Vosburg, or as to the quantities of work they were credited with, in order to make the necessary deductions to give the work performed by Alexander McDonald, except as hereinafter 20 stated. 23. To the twenty-third cross interrogatory the said deponent saith— From my own measurements. 24. To the twenty-fourth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Yes. 25. To the twenty-fifth cross - interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Yes, some of Vosburg's was. 26. To the twenty-sixth ci-oss-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Yes. 27. To the twenty-seventh cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I can- not say exactly how much, but it was not much, because they had only made a beginning. g^ 28. To the twenty-eighth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— T do not remember of anv^ n'.ange at that place. 29. To the twenty-ninth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— No ; be- cause they were paid by pit measurement. 30. To the thirtieth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — No. SI. Tu the thirty -first cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— The work actually performed, and 13,000 cubic yards crib-wharfing, original schedules, which was not actually performed. the thirl iiiak prog done were toth for al by re and I so wi this fi out t\ at the from A 4 show 4 answe 4 tion o thirty 80 32. To the thirty-second cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Yes • to the Chief Engineer. ' 33. To the thirty-third cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— They did. 34. To the thirty-fourth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith, and to the thirty-fifth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— It was a part of my duty to make such returns, irrespective of any contract. 36. For the thirty-sixth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— These progress estimates shewed the work done indiscriminately without reference to the sub-contractors, and I could not tell by reference to them alone the amount of work done by each. ,-. 87. To the thirty-seventh cross- interrogatory the said deponent saith No. 38. To the thirty-eight cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— These were all. 39. To the thirty-ninth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I gave them to the chief engineer. I think they were searched for by me, but I did not find them. 40. To the fortieth cross-interrogatory, the saith deponent saith — I gave them for all the rr^nths they worked. 41. To the forty-first cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I could tell by reference to the books. In my absence they were made up by Charles Blackwell and Marcus Smith. o^ 42. To the forty-second cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot do 80 without seeing the profile. 43. To the forty-third cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot do this for the same reason. 44. To the forty-fourth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Not with- out the profile. 46. To the forty-fifth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— It was mostly at the ends of the crib-wharfing. I cannot give the places where there was rip-rap from memory. 46. To the forty-sixth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— No. 80 47. To the forty-seventh cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — It did not show quantities — only positions. 48. To the forty-eighth cross-interrogatory, the saith deponent saith— ITie same answer as to the forty-seventh applies. 49. To the forty-ninth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— The loca- tion of thf lino b'>*'"^o'^" 9A7 onA OKQ -^nr. ™«...«rl l-n-l- e it,- „• i i thirty feet. Between 3.51 and 355x50 the line was moved towards the river about tt 1 81 twenty or thirty feet. The changes were made by me at the request of the contrac- tors, and in my opinion for the benefit of the line. 50. To the fiftieth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— It was sent to Ottawa along with the other papers. 61. To the fifty-first cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— The quanti- ties were mentioned in the Bill of Works in a lump sum of about 40,000 cubic yards. I made up the quantities in special detail, but I cannot now state them without see- ing that computation. 52. To the fifty-second cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— The quan- tity and class of work actually performed after the charges was certified for by me 10 in making up monthly certificates. 53. To the fifty-third cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— There was. 54. To the fifty-fourth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I did make a return to the Goveniment for several years, but it was omitted from the final esti- mates to the Government by a clerical error. 55. To the fifty-fifth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I did for some time. 56. To the fifty-sixth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— There was, but I cannot state the quantity. 57. To the fifty-seventh cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— At the 20 trial of Murray v. Queen in Exchequer Court. 58. To the fifty-eighth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I have an- swered this question by annexing exhibit " B." 59. To the fifty-ninth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I cannot tell, but in my final return these were set down separately. 60. To the sixtieth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— The last an- swer applies. 61. To the sixty-first cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I am not aware that he did so. 62. To the sixty-second cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I do not 30 think it was omitted. 63. To the sixty-third cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot tell now. This is all in my final return. 64. To the sixty-fourth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — The differ- ence is in the change of the alignment. 65. To the sixty-fifth oross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I have, and amounts mentioned seem to be correct. ^1 i!il tie die be rip int qui wit wit! tell teU tell, not pres was swei turn was hibit 83 66. To the sixty-sixth cross-interrogatory, the saith deponent saith— The quanti- ties of cnb-wharfing are, I believe, correctly given in cross-interrogatory No. 65. I did not state before the arbitration that between 256 and 269 the crib-wharfing should be 1,100 feet instead of 1,020 feet. The diflFerence in the measurement was made up of np-rap. *^ 67. To the sixty seventh cross-interrogatory, the said deponents saith— It is so intended. Adjourned at 5.15 p. m. till 8 p, m., at the same place. 8 p. m. met. Mr. O'Doherty and Mr. Lawbence present. Examination of Peter Grant resumed. 68. To the sixty-eighth interrogative, the said deponent saith— I certified for the quantity as it stood completed only. 69. To the sixty-ninth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot tell without the said documents, filed as aforesaid. 70. To the seventieth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot tell withoui seeing the final estimate and report to the Chief Engineer. 71. To the seventy-first cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot tell without seeing the plans and sections. 72. To the seventy-second cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot tell without reference to the papers aforesaid, filed in the Exchequer. 20 10 tell. 73. To the seventy-third cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot 74. To the seventy-fourth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I can- not get them. 75. To the seventy-fifth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— My im- pression is that it was not. 76. To the seventy-sixth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— There was no rock excavation, but they had to level the rock to receive masonry. 77. To the seventy-seventh cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— An- swer to seventy-six applies to this also. oa 78. To the seventy-eighth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I re- turned a lump s'lm. 79. To the seventy-ninth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— There was earth wanted somewhere near Station No. 320. There was over a thousand yards. 80. To the eightieth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I cannot tell. 81. To the eighty-first crosfs-inten-ogatory the said deponent saith— It is. (Ex- hibit B.) ^"m 1 I i * * ' j "l ; 1 <■ I me. 83 82. To the oifthty-second cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith-I did not. I signed Exhibit B. in duplicate. I don't know where the duplicate went to Signed only I.xhibit B in duplicate. 83. To the eighty-third cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I did. 84. To the eighty-fourth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith-He did not to me. 86. me. To the eighty-fifth cross-interrogatory the sai.l deponent saith— Never to 86. To the eighty-sixth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith-I make up force returns from personal observation from reports of my subordinates and from 10 reports of the time-keepers of the contractors. I would arrive at the estimates of the quantities performed by calculating the number of men and teams or force employ- ed in the following manner : By allowing from 6 to 7 to 10 yards per man accord- ing to the difficulties of the ground. The witness here (Mr. Lawrence objecting) says in explanation I only adopted this plan twice or three times. 87. To the eighty-seventh cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Yes. pretty nearly from a progress estimate. 88. To the eighty-eighth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— As an average 7 yards to a man, including teams. 89. To the eighty-ninth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Yes, two 20 or three times I have made up progress estimates in that way. Yes, pretty fair. 90. To the ninetieth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I probably dated a final estimate on or about that date. 1 made it by the order of Mr. Schrieber who was then acting as engineer-in-cbief. 91. To the ninety-first cross interrogatory, the said deponent saith— They did. lo the best of my knowledge it was in the winter of 1873, and lasted about a month. The cause of the suspension was as follows :~There was a long rock cutting, which, in order to get done m time, the contractors began at both ends, and in the middle also In order to begin n the centre they had to excavate a lot of extra rock-cutting not otherwise needed. I allowed this extra work to go in the progress estimates at the 80 time, taking it off gradually from time to time. When this work came to be en- tirely taken off. as had to be done when the whole cutting was nearly complete the contractors found themselves short of money on account ot it, and had to suspend. ' S»nrn .r.A • ^ J • j l . ^^s'^^ PETER GRANT. tjworn and examined and signed by the above named Peter Grant, at Ottawa, in the County of Carle- ton, in the Province of Ontario, this twenth- fourth day of February, A. D 1880. (Sg'd) J. J. GORMALLY, (Sg'd) G. Lefroy McCaul, Commissioners aforesaid. K 40 ^1 84 The commissioners then adjourned until the 25th day of February, A D 1880 at the same place, having notified such adjournment to Mr. O'Doherty and Mr. Lawrence. (Sg'd) J. J. GORMALLY, (Sg'd) G LEFBOY McCAUL, C'o/nmiWoner«. On the 25th day of February, A. D. 188), pursuant to the above adjournment. 30 the Commissioners met at the same place. P.^esent-MR. O'Doherty and Mb Law P' 'CE, Counsel. John JiLLETT, of the City of Belleville, in the C unty of Hastings, in the Pro- vince of Ontario, Civil Engineer, now steamboat proprietor, a Witness on the part of 10 tne L^ontestant. being duly sworn and examined,— 1. T. the first interrogatory the said deponent saith-My name is John JiUett • myres-dence is the said city of Belleville; my occupation at present is steamboat owner ; my age is 38. 2. To the second interrogatory the said nth interrogatory the said deponent saith— They recognized Mr. Grant as resident engineer and not me. thin ^further*'^^ twentieth interrogatory the said deponent saith-I don't know any- 30 Mr. O'DoHERTYfor the contestant, objects to the cross-interrogatories of the claimant, and each of them, on the ground that they are and each of them is irregu- lar and improper, and to the evidence to be given thereunder, on the ground that the same is inadmissible and improper. 1. To the first cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I think it began in the year 1870. Can't tell month, and it ended about the end of 1874. J was absent • s ^^$rX^^^'-%-:'i^r 86 several times ; but I do not remember all the times, I was away once for about six weeks in the fall of 1873 and again for two or th;-ee weeks on the Paspebiac survey. I do not know who fulfilled my duties when I was away. My principal duues were to lay out the work— to measure the same monthly— to make progress estimates and any other things the resident engineer required me to do. 2. To the second cross-inter» ,atory the said deponent saith— I had nothing to do with any other section except . ..e, when I went to section 18 for a few houis to assist in laying out a ..ridge at Mill Stream. 3. To the third cross-interregatory the said deponent saith— J cannot say. 4. To the fourth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I think there was 10 a copy of the contr ret with plans and specifications in Mr. Grant's offije. I i<^ft them there. I cannot produce them. 5. To the fifth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I do not remember seeing it with Murray or Mitchell and Oakes. 6. To the sixth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I think section 19 was about 9^ miles long. I don't remember hov many stations there were. I can't state how they were numbered without seeing the plan. 100 feet was the usual dis- tance between stations. They were marked by a stake with numbers in Roman numerals. 7. To the seventh crosfi-interrogatoiy, the said deponent saith— I think it was 380. 20 8. To the eighth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot tell with- out seeing the profiles. 9- To the ninth cross-inffe.iogatory, the said -'eponent saith— Archibald and Vos- burg were, I believe, sub-contractors on section 19. I do not know what stations they contracted for. I don't know for whom the/ worked. I meisured the work. I can't give the quantities 10. To the tenth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot tell. 11. To the eleventh cross-interrogato • , the said deponent saith — I cannot tell. 12. To the twelfth cross-interrogatory „he said deponent, saitl -I cannot tell. 15. To the thirteenth cross-)! ;i<,^atory, the said deponent saith— I cannot tell. 30 14. To the fourteenth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — Yes. Every mon^h they were made, but I did not '■ ,,ays make them. 16. To the fifteeuf.h cross-inferrogatory, the said deponent saith— I could not now, but I could at the time. 16. To the sixteenth crofis-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I gave them to Mr. Grant. I saw them last in hi^ office at Metapedia. n. To the seventeenth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I cannot say. I i r 87 18. To the eighteenth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I can't come at it. 19. To the nineteenth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I havf nemo- randa, but have not got them here. 20. To the twentieth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I did not answer it. 21. To the twenty-first cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I don't know. 22. To the twenty-second cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I don't remember. 23. To the twenty-third cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I don't remember of procuring them at all. 24. To the twenty-fourth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— Exhibit B shows that I and Mr. Grant did. 25. To the twenty-fifth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I think there was a small portion. 26. To the twenty-sixth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I think there was a small portion. I think he did. 27. To the twentv-seventh cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I aon't know. 20 28. To the twenty-eighth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I don't know. 29. To the twenty-ninth cross-inten-ogatory the said deponent saith— I don't know. 80. To the thirtic^th cross-interroi'atory the said deponent saith— I don't know. 31. To the thirty-first cross -interrogatory the said deponent saith— Quantities actually done. 32. To the thirty-second cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— Yes; and gave them to Mr. Grant. 33. To the thirty-third cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— They must have done so. 34. To the thirty-fourth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— 35. And to the thirty -fifth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— It was a part of my duty to make such returns, irrespective of any contract. 36. To the thirty-sixth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I think I could not distinguish. 30 tl w w sh ne rei tr£ kn act wa say it. was kill 88 37. To the thirty-seventh cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I don't think it would. 38. To the thirty-eighth cross interrogatory the said deponent saith— They were. 39. To the thirty-ninth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I do not know what became of them. I have never searched for them. 40. To the fortieth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I don't know. 41. To the forty-first cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I could not without seeing certificates. 42. To the forty-second cross-interrogatory the said deponent saich— I cannot. 10 43. To the forty-third cross-interrogatory tho said deponent saith— I can't say. 44. To the forty-fourth cross-interrogatory the sa?d deponent saith— I cannot. 45. To the forty-fifth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I cannot. 46. To the forty-sixth cr-oss-interrogatory the said deponent saith— They were shown on the plan The positions— not the quantities. 47. To the forty -seventh cross-inteiiogatory the said deponent saith— The engi- neer's plan did not show quantities, but the profile did. 48. To the forty-eighth cross interrogatory the said deponent saith— It did not. 49. To the forty-ninth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I do not remember the stations. There were some changes mple at the request of the con- 20 tractors. 50. To the fiftieth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I do not know. 51. To the fifty-first cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— T do not know. 52. To the fifty-second cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— The work actually performed after the changes. « 53.- To the fifty-third cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I think there was at both. 54. To the fifty-fourth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I cannot say. 30 it. 55. To the fifty-fifth cross-interrogatory the said deponent saith— I don't think 56, To the fifty-sixth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I think there was rip-rap there, but I can't state the quantity. 67. To the fifty seventh cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I don't know that I ever discovered it. ili know. say. 89 58. To the fifty-eighth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I cannot give the stations nor the different classes of work. 59. To the fifty-ninth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I don't know. 60. To the sixtieth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I don't know. 61. To the sixty-first cross-interrogatory, the 8i»id deponent saith — I am not. 62. To the sixty-second cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — Not that I know of. 63. To the sixty-third cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I don't know. 64. To the sixty-fourth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — By the washing of the embankment and the changes of the line. 10 66. To the sixty-fifth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I have not 66. To the sixty-sixth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I can't say. 67. To the sixty-seventh cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I can't say. 68. To the sixty-eighth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — As it stood completed only. know. 69. To the sixty-ninth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I don't 70. To the seventieth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I cannot. 71. To the seventy-first cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I do not know. 20 say. 72. To the seventy-second cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I cannot 73. To the seventy-third cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I cannot say. 74. i'o the seventy-fourth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I cannot. 75. To the seventy-fifth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I cannot say. 76. To the seventy-sixth cross interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I think there was, but cannot remember the quantity. It was trifling. 77. To the seventy-seventh cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — I don't remember. 78. To the seventy-eighth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I don't 30 remember. 79. To the seventy-ninth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith — No. oO. io tiie eigiitietii cfoas-intcrrogatory, the anid uoponont saith — No. Borrow pits (if any) were close to the line. 90 91. To the eighty-6r8t cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Ye». 82. To the eighty-second cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— The only papers I signed were exhibits B and C, as far as I now remember. 8S. To the eighty-third cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I did not. 84. To the eighty-fourth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Not to my knowledge. 85. To the eighty-6fth cross-interrogatory, the said depcuent saith— He grumbled at the smallness of it. 86. To the eighty-sixth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— They are made up from time and personal observations. The money which it amounts to is 10 turned into cubic yards. 87. To the eighty-seventh cross-interrogatory, the said deponen. saith— Approxi- mately I can. 88. To the eighty-eighth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— Can't give any estimates without seeing the ground.. 89. To the eighty-ninth cross-interrogatory, the said d jponent saith— Yes 90. To the ninetieth cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— No. I was not there then. 91. To the ninety-first cross-interrogatory, the said deponent saith— I think the contractors did suspend work. I don't know when it occurred, nor how long it lasted, 20 nor what was its cause. (Sg'd) JOHN JILLETT. Sworn and examined and signed by the above named John Jillett, at Ottawa, in the County of Carleton, in the Province of Ontario, this twenty -fifth day of February, A. D., 1880. (Sgd.) J. J. GORMALLY, G. LeFKOY McCAUL, Commisaioners aforesaid. 4 p. m. Adjourned till Thursday, the 26th day of February, A. D., 1880, at eleven o'clock in the forenoon, at the same place. Adjournment notified to Mr. 30 O'DoHERTY and Mr. Lawrence. (Sgd.) J. J. GORMALLY, G. LeFROY McCAUL, Commissioners aforesaid, (Sgd.) J. J. GORMALLY, [l. b.] Commissioner. G. LeFROY McCAUL, [l. s.] Commissitner. ftf IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) '9/ ^^ ^ .^ M^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 us IIIIIM KS lA^ 1.4 2.5 1 2.2 2.0 1.6 V] <^ /] /.^ ^ Photographic Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 d ^ ^ '^ ,\ ;v ^x ^ McDonaM than necessary or order-nl He did so m order to get rock to use u. masonry on his contract. The Government did not require him to widen it. McDonald picke.l up rock from the beach for part of the np-rap at stations 281 and 280. I don't remember who built the bridge and rip-rap at Gilmore's Brook.J— (Objected to.) 20 Re-examhied h, Mn. LAWUENCE.~The rip-rap built at stations 250 with rock trom 233 and 238 was .lone by tho orders of the engineers. McDonald Had the priv- ilege ot picking rock from the shores for rip-rap at or near stations 225 and 233. Re-croas eauimined by Mr. O'DoHERTY.-The permission to use rock from differ ent places for rip-rap was given by the engineers to the contractors when the con- tractors thought they could make more money by it. I don't think there was any rock waste,! at stations 233 and 238. All the rock from stations 233 and 238 was not used for rip-rap, they put a portion of it in tho oml)ankment. The part not put in embankment was used foi ,ip-rap. Thor. was none wasted unless putting it in embankment might be considered so. They probably put the work in thf mbank- nient instead of making rip-rap with it because they thought it would be cheaper to pick up the round stones on the shore for rip- rap. Thoie was only a small por- tion of rock from 233 to 238 put in embankment. There was rock enou',vrencb refused to consent to such examination. Thereupon, the Commissioners, considering that they had no power to act except by consent of parties, closed the evidence. J. J. GORMALLY, G. LeFROY McCAUL, Commissioners. And I, Joseph James Gormallt, do certify that the annexed consent to examine wit- nesses viva voce herein was drawn by me in the form it now appears, so that Mr. Jillett 40 might be examined at once without waiting until Mr. O'Dohbrty received instructions 30 4 •( 99 from the Attorneys at Halifax who employed him. That it certainly was intended, as I understood the agreement between Mr. O'Dohertt and Mr. Lawrence, that if Mr. O'DoHERTT, after receiving iritructions, consented generally to witnesses being called on beh, ' of the claimant (which Mr. O'Dohertt was ready to do and did) that Mr. LAWRBi,..B would also conssnt to witnesses being called generally on behalf of the contestant. S. J. GORMALLY, Ottawa, 27th February. A. D., 1880, at 4.30 p. m. ommxaaioner. Commissicn closed at 5 p. m. on the 27th day of 1q February, A. D., 1880. J. J. GORMALLY, G. LeFROY McCAUL, Commiaaionera. EXHIBIT "D." No- 9- I.C.R. Contract No. 19--Oalculatioii of Orib-wharfing as executed. station. Area, 356 355-46 185 355 115 654 350 353 330 352 300 351 315 350 335 349 255 348 2y0 347 315 346 315 345 370 344 390 343 390 342 315 341 265 340 135 339 100 338 Mean Area. 92 250 232 340 315 307 325 295 272 303 315 342 380 390 352 290 200 118 50 Length. 54 46 100 100 100 Cub. Yds. 5908 6900 23200 34000 31500 30700 32500 29500 27200 30300 31500 3*200 38000 39000 35200 29000 20000 11800 5000 3)494468 20 30 9)164823 40 18314 c.y. ; i; Station. 335 -,, 334 333 332 331 ^ 330 329 ' 318 317 316 315 314 313 ( 312 311 \ 310 309 308 307 30G 305 270 209 208 207 200 265 264 203 262 . 261 . 260 . 259-50. 259 2.58 . 100 Grih-xvharfing om Contract 19, as executed. Station. 3:55 Area. ... ... Mean Area. Len^ 1/ 334 . . . ... 2G0 ... 130 333 . . . ... 390 ... ... 230 ... 32.T 332 . . . 310 331 . . . 23.5 . .. 12.5 .... ... .... 232 330 . . . 180 329 . . . 02 10 318 317 19.5 316 280 315 270 314 20,5 313 28.5 312 230 311 300 310 140 309 280 308 235 307 130 300 200 305 98 238 275 268/ 275 258 265 220 210 258 182 195 130 Cub. Ft. 3)123900 10 9)41300 4590 c.y. 100 20 100 3)287200 9)9.5733 10637 c.y. 30 270 269 268 2G7 266 265 264 263 262 261 260 259 2,59 2.58 -50. 185 210 140 255 135 280 240 255 200 250 275 230 93 198 175 198 195 208 200 247 258 255 262 252 115 100 50 50 100 208700 13100 12600 11,500 3)245900 9)81970 40 9108 C.V. 101 CHh-xvharJing on Contract 19, an executed. Station. Area. 252 251 290 250 280 249 205 248 235 247 92 91 175 90 270 89 2G5 88 200 87 84 83 125 82 195 81 250 80 225 79 85 78 Mean Area. ..145 . ..285 . ..242 . ..220 . ..118 . 88 222 2G8 233 100 63 160 222 2S8 155 42 Length. 100 Cub. Ft. 100 3)101000 9)33667 3741 c.y. 10 100 100 3)91100 9)30367 3374 c.y. 100 100 20 3)88000 9)29333 3260 c.y. Totals. 18331 4590 10637 9108 3741 3374 3260 53041 c.y. 30 In Bill of Works. 40000 c.y. 7 8 25 2.-) :30 321 33! If 102 Contract W.—Grib-whmfing ns executed. To be (leducttuj according to lenj^ths given in Pctitionor's Exhibit. '^'^^^■■^0 to :m 5900 3r,-,.5() to :]5(i J1J2? 15,525 =_576c.y. litH tf) 335 329 to 429.50. 13,000 c. f. 1,550 14,550= = 540 c. y. 10 270 to 209.30 4 200 p f 259 to 258 •.•;;.■;.■; : .v;;;.'. : ; : ; n^o ■ • 252 to 247 15,700: ^ 581 c.y. 3,741 c. y. •^2 to 91 _ 8.800c.f. ..20 c.y. Jt.^'^Si! * 0,300 c.f. 7'> to 78 4200 10,500 ==389 c. y. 6,152 c.y. 53,041 ■ 20 46,889 Contract 19.— Crib-rvharjing as executed, taking lengths as given by Mitchell and Oakea. New measurement and calculation from cross-sections. Stations, Ciib. Yds. 79 to 83 2,926 «7 to 91 3,074 251 to 248 2 777 259 to 209.30 8737 305 to 317.90 io'407 329.50 to 334 4 083 339.50 to 355.,50. Cub. Yds. M. & O. 4,249 5,384 not in M. &0 -; C,131 9,027 30 3,828 :ct. 17,722 10,560 If 251 to 248 be left out according to M. & C account. 49,726 }. 42,779 777 40,949 IQii By third Micasmomont >vitli hack o.' erih wliarfliij,', 1 to I, 79 to h;J 2.:»7()c.y. W to 91 ;j 074 2.)1 to 248 2'.)({.1 239 to 2(19.30 fj'Jjoo 3(tr, to 317.90 s'i20 32U..)0 to 334 s's'VJ 339,50 to 3r).')..-)0 i2_'()2(i 39,292 c. V as (lt!scrib«)(J by Grant. P. Rip-Rap. C. Y. Sta'n. 479 344 494 33 495.77-500 .'.'.'..'. 1910 521-530-35 207« . 0.3.5-55 4 i 3 •''•>-W 207 0()-o2 7.-, 02-03 i;{ 94-96 195 109-113 711 1 25 . fit) 131 S/ Petitioin'm' Kui ihits. .Stn. 0109 171 1G5 101 255 22.->-22G 125 220 137 231-234 831 242-247.40 2794 278 30 287 752 295 3(,7 375 422 10 20 79-83 87-91 ' 259-2G0.30 305-217.90 329.50-334 339.50-355. ro 6109 C. \V 4 4 1030 1290 450 1600 5170 Total . 4249 5384 9131 9027 3828 10560 42779 c. y. 11987 c.v , 40000 at 70c. 2779 at $2,50. 5170 c. f Special protection at Fra,ser'.s Flat $7825.80 Section 1 9.— O. W. 40000 at 70c. 277:» at $2.50. Protection F. 30 .^7825.80. EXHIBIT I). This is Exhibit D, referred to in the viva voce examination of Leonard O. Bell, taken before us in tiiis matter at Ottawa, this 27th day of February, A. D., lc"S80. J. J. GORMALLY, J. LkFKOY McCAUL, Commissi oilers. 40 104 EXHIBIT " E." Israel Longworth, Esq: Office of Thomas Booos & Co., Halifax, N. S., June 14, 1872. Dkar Sir, — The bearer, Mr. Alexander McDonald, has taken a sub-contract from us on our section (No. 19) of the Intercolonial Railroad at Metapedia. and, as security, wishes to giv. us a confession of judgment, which you will please have executed in our favor, for the sum of ten thousand dollars. Please have it recorded, as is customary with such documentb. If a mortgage on his property is any better security, Mr. McD. 10 will give it for our benefit. Truly yours, &c., THOMAS BOGGS & CO. EXHIBIT "T." From station 247 to 259 there is 10,000 cubic yards of crib-wharfing backed up by say 17,000 cubic yards of embankment, to fill wl>^ch there is a cutting of say 5,000 cubic yards, showing about 12,000 of borrowing. From 341 to 355 -f 50 there is about 7,000 cubic yards of wharfing, backed up by say 30,000 cubic yards of embankment, of which say 29,000 cubic yards are from line cuttinjs— as this would be too long to haul, say 15,000 of this will be of spoil and say 20 15,000 cubic yards to borrow. EXHIBIT "V." To Alexander McDonald, Oldham : ' » • . . Sir, Take notice that on Saturday, the twentieth day of May, instant, at three o'clock in the afternoon of that day, we will be at Clarke's Brook on section nineteen of the Intercolonial Railway with a competent engineer ready to proceed with the measure- ment of the work done by you upon said section under your control with us ; and further take notice that we will then forthwith proceed with said engineer and duly measure the said work done by you upon said contract. We give you this notice 30 so that yon may be present at such meaBuremcnt. Yours, &c,. MITCHErX & OAKES. 1 ri c e: ti 01 di 105 EXHIBIT "X» Mr. Alexander McDonald: Office of Thos. Boggs & Co., Halifax, N. S., 11th June, 1873. Dear Sir, We were very sorry to hear that you found it necessary to discharge Ward. We had advanced his wife ten dollars before we received your telegram. We have sent another young man to Mitchell and Oakes, and have sent instructions by him to Mosher to go up and take charge of our store. We have also asked Charles Archi- bald to help him, if necessary, to get your books properly arranged. We are glad to 10 be able to inform you that we have bought Davis out of the concern. We gave him four hundred dollars. You may thank Oakes for it, although, of course, he does not wish it to be known that he had anything to do with it ; it wa: done in our name. We hope, now you will have everything to look after yourself, you will get along better. We received a telegram on Monday from Commrs. stating that May warrrat will not be paid till 17th inst., so you will not get it tUl 4 or 5 days after that. Be sure you get Mr. Grant to allow you for the cement this month and give us all you can, as we have a large sum to remit to England about the middle of next month. Truly yours, THOMAS BOGGS & CO., 20 EXHIBIT " B. B. "— J. W. J. This Indenture, dated at Metapedia, in the Province of Quebec, this fifth day of August, in the year of our Lord, one thousand, eight hundred and seventy-three. Witnesseth, that we, John C. McKenzie, Alexander McDonald and Frankfort Davis do release and deliver unto Messrs. Mitchell and Oakes, of Metapedia, all our right, title and interest in that portion of our work on section number nineteen of Inter- colonial Railway, beginning at station number three hundred and thirty -seven and extending westerly to end of said section. This is to comprise all the V7ork on said por- tion of section number nineteen, excepting the building of masonry, free from all action of damages or charges that may be brought against said work, and comnencing at the 30 date when W. H. McKiel commenced work at said place, to wit, the twelfth day of November, last. McKENziE, McDonald & co.. Witness— ALEX. McDONALD. C. S. Archibald. t 1 1 t I c i i y c S tl tl s I 106 EXHIBIT " C 0."— J. W. J. Articles of agreement made and concluded this, the first day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand, eight hundred and seventy -three, between Mitchell & Oakes of Metapedia. in the Province of Quebec, railway contractors, of the first part, ^nd McKenzie, McDonald & Co., of Metapedia. aforesaid, railway contractors, of the "jcond part. Whereas, the said parties of the second part having contracted with the said par- ties of the first part to construct a portion of their contract on section number nineteen ot the Intercolonial Railway of Canada ; And whereas, the said parties of the second part, having become embarrassed in 10 their business and unable to prosecute their work with sufficient energy, havo- and do hereby deliver unto the said parties of the fir.t part all the plant, stock and material on said work and the full control and management of same, with power to take possession of and complete said work in every particular, as specified in the contract hereinbefore referred to. they, tie said parties of the second part, paying monthly unto the said par- ties of the first part, out of the monthly warrants for said work or otherwise, a sum equal to the monthly expenditures for the completion of said work. In witness whereof, the parties to this agreement have hereunto set their'hands and seals. Signed, sealed and delivered MITCHELL & OAKES [l. s] 20 in presence of McKENZIE, McDONALD & CO. [i,. s.] C. S. Archibald. (Per A. McD.) EXHIBIT " H H."— J. W. J. This indenture, made this second day of August, in the year of ou- Lord, one thousand, eight hundred and seventy-one. by and between Thomas l^oggs and John Robert Murray, both of the City of Halifax, in the Province of Nova Scotia, in the Dominion of Canada, Iron-mongers, carrying on business there as co-partners in trade, under the name, style and firm of Thomas Boggs & Company, of the first part ; Her Majesty Queen Victoria, representee herein by Aquila Walsh, Esquire, M. P., the Hon- orable Edward Barron Chandler. Charles John Brydges. Esquire, and the Hono. .ble 30 Archibald Woodbury McLellan, Commissioners appointed under and by virtue of an Act of the Parliament of Canada, passed in the session thereof held in the thirty-first year of Her Majesty's reign, entitled, *' An Act respecting the construction of the Inter- colonial Railway," hereinafter designated as " the Commissioners," of ihe second - ; Samuel Parker Tuck, of the City ot Saint John, in the Province of New Brunswu.. n the said Dominion. Civil Engineer, of the third part ; William Frederick Harrison of the said City of St. John, Merchant, and Thomas Majoribanks Reed, of the City of Saint John, Druggist, of the fourth part, and Robert Peter Mitchell, of the Town of Truro, m the County of Colchester, and said Proviuce of Nova Scotia, and Stephen Delancy Oakes of the said City of Halifax, Railway Contractors, of the fifth part. 40 Nfe„ 107 Whereas, l.y indenture bcarinfr date on the fifteenth day of June, which was in the year of our Lord one thousan.l eight hundred and seventy, and made between tne parties liereto of the third part, of the first part and Her said Majestj- represent- ed by I' The Commissioners" of the second part, (a copy of which said indenture with the schedule and tender for the construction of section No. 19, with the schedule thereon endorsed, thereto annexed, embracing in all seventeen pages, and to which the parties hereto of the first part have respectively set and subscribed th(,ir names IS to these presents annexed, marked A, and which is to bo read and treated as part and parcel of these presents as if the same were embodied therein), the said party hei'sto of the third part contracted and agreed to and with Her Majesty, her heirs 10 and successors, that he would well, truly and faithfully, make, build, construct and complete that portion of the said Inteicolonial Railway known as "Section No 19" more paiticularly therein described, in accordance with the terms of the said above m part recited indenture, of and for the price and consideration of three hundred and ninety-five thousand seven hundred and thirty-three dollars ($395,733), the said "Section No. 19" to have been so built, constructed and entirely completed in every particular, and given up, under final certificate and to the satisfaction of "the Com- missioners" and the Engineer of the said Railway, on or before the firsi. day of July which will be in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-two' time having been declared in and by the said above in part recited indenture to be 20 material and of the essence thereof. And whereas the party hereto of the third part having been required to enter into, and give to Her Majesty his bond or writing obligatory with two good and •sufficient sureties conditioned for the due performance of the said contract, the par- ties hereto of the fourth part became parties to and executed in conjunction with him the said party of the third part, such a Bond or writing obligatory, which bears even date with the said above in part recited indenture ; And whereas the said party of the third part did, after having so entered into the said contract and agreement hereinbefore in part recited contract, and agree with the parties hereto of the fifth part to do and perform the necessary work Tnd labor 30 and to furnish the necessary materials towards the performance and fulfilment of the said contract, and he the party of the third part hath through the instrumentality of the parties hereto of the fifth part up to this time, proceeded with the construction of the said "section No. 19" of the said Railway in accordance with the tenor of the said above in part recited indenture, an <^on«tructed and com- tfllT \1" n^""' '"^'''''' ""^ ''^'' ^«'k«. '^npurtenances thereto, to the entire Lned bv'Jh (t' ^•'.'"""--"-^/"J -cording t. .'.e plans and specification thereof signed by the Commissioners and the party hereto of the third part, respectivelv «:hich said plans, so signed as aforesaid, are deposited in the office o the'Somn i -' chedle A as aforesaid, having been annexed to and made part Ll parcel of the h fi^sZ r C T-'^t "''^"'""- ^"'^' *""^*^^'' ^^^^ ^h« -^d P-"es hereto o h wo k' r 7 i"'' P"'''^ *^ '"' "^'^ *^'^ construction and completion of 40 and lontinr^h " T' P"""'^' ^"' ^'^" '"'^^'^"^'^ ^"'^ continuously prosecute pric"^^^^^^^^^^ same, observing, keeping and performing at all times during the p.osec. on of the said work aL and every the provisoes, conditions, stipulations and agreements and be liable to all the penalties in the event of default made by them thTfi,^r f ' i'^'' P'^'^"'™'*^' '"^^''-e'l ^"^ offered by the said party thereto of the first part in the same manner in every respect as if all and every such provisoes. lOti conditions, stipulations and agreements wore literally embodied in those presents; and that the same works respectively, and evry of them, and every part thereof! shall be fully and entirely completed in every particular in accordance with the said above in part recited indenture, and giv»n up under final certificate and to the satisfaction of the Commissioners and Engineer of the said Railway on or before the firs; day of July, which will be in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-two, time being declared to be material and of the essence of this contract. In WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties hereto of the first part have hereunto set and affixed their respective hands and seals, and the Commissioners acting herein on 10 behalf of Her Majesty as aforesaiil, have hereunto respectively set their hands and affixed their seals, on the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered by the respective parties of the first, third, fourth and fifth parts in the presence of (Sgd) GEO. A. ALLISON, Witness to the signatures of Thomas Boggs, John R. Murray, Samuel P. Tuck, William F. Karu:"on, Thomas M. Reed, Robert P. Mitchell, and Stephen D. Cakes. Signed, sealed and delivered by the Commis- sioners, in presence of (Sgd) B. H. FOLEY, As to the signature of A. Walsh. 30 (Sgd) THOS. BOGGS. JOHN R. MURRAY. A. WALSH. C. J. BRIDGES. A. W. McLELAN. S. PARKER TUCK. WM. F. HARRISON. 20 THOMAS M. REiilD. R. P. MITCHELL. S. D. OAKES. Compared with the original and found correct, THOMAS TAYLOR. Departmen-' of Railways and Canals. I hereby certify that the foregoing and annexed papers numbered and marked A 1 and B 2 are respectively true copies of the original contract for the construction of section number 19 Intercolonial Railway, made between Samuel Parker Tuck and Her Majesty Queen Victoria, and the original contract for construction of said sec- tion made between Thomas Boggs and John R. Murray and Her Majesty Queen Victoria, which said original contracts are filed in the Department of Railways and Canals, being one of the Departments of the Govern, .^n^ of Canada. Dated at the City of Ottawa, this third day of March, A. D., 1880. Deputy Ministt T. TRUNDEAU, *" Railways and Canals. 40 Til St nei Qi E(i Ar Ac n. loi am Di Hs rai sh) wil nei tei thi uni sail mil tis( poi cor aft( anc cor wa 6Ut of mil me anc Stl' pai 110 EXHIHIT K. K. -J. VV. J. Tl.is rn.lcntmo ma.lu tliis Hftoontli .lay of June, in the year of Our Lonl Ono Tliousand Ki^rl.t Hiin.lro.l an.l Seventy lH«twccn Samii.l Parker Tuck, of tho City of St. Jolin, in tlic IVovinc .,f N.>w Brunswick, in tlin Dominion of Canada, Civil Ku^i- neer (h.-roinafter <1ef.iP' - the use of improper materials, and he shall aold harmless and indemnify Her Majesty from all claims, losses o damages m respect thereof The contractor shall, subject to the approval of he engineer as to the same, make all necessary temporarary provisions during the progress of the works for the owners or occupants of lands crossing the lin; of railway, and shall provide the necessary accommodations for the passage of the public at the intersection of roads or highways, and .shall also make such pro- vision until fences be erected, as may be necessary to prevent the straving of cattle upon the line of railway. In the e^-ent of any bad materials being delivered or 40 worked up or any bad work being executed at any time, the same shall be imme- diately i^nioved on notice being given by the engineer, and the work shall be re- constructed at the expense of the contractor in strict conformity with this contract, and the said specification, and to the entire satisfaction of the encrineer The con- tractor shall employ as many competent agents, an> place any stake or marks which through any cause may have been remove^ or destroyed. The contractor shall not encourage, hut shall take all lawful means in their power to prevent the sale of spirituous liquors on or in the vicinity of the rail- way. The contractor shall perform and execute all the works required to be per- 10 formed by this contract and the said specification in a good, faithful, substantial and workmanlike manner, and in strict accordance with the plans and specifications thereof, and with such instructions as may be from time to time given by the engi- neer, and shall be under the direction and constant supervision of such district, division, and assistant engineers and inspectors as may be appointed, Should any work, materia], or thing of any description whatsoever be omitted from the said specification or the contract which, in the opinion of the engineer, is necessary or expedient to he executed or furnished, the contractor shall, notwithstanding such omission, upon receiving written directions to that eifect from the engineer, perform and furnish the same. All the worVs are to be executed and materials to be supplied 20 to the entire satisfaction of the Commissioners and engineer, and the Commissioners shall be the sole judges of the work and material, and their decision on all estions in dispute with regard to the works or materials, or as to the meaning or incerpreta- tion of the specifications or the plans, or upon points not provided for or not sufficient- ly explained in the plans or specifications, is to be final and binding oi. all parties. 3. The contractor shall commence the works embraced in this contract within thirty days from and after the '?^™f^*^«f" be light and strong, of an approved design, similar to those on the Grand Trunk Railway, east of Quebec, on the Nova Scotia Railway eat of Truro; they w,i, be furnished complete with proper fastenings, they will le'ceiVe two coats of white paint or one coat of tar. ^ > "^y win leceive 9. The fencing to be thoroughly complete through all the cleared lands and wherever else it may be required by the engineer. ' 10 GRADING. Time of commencement — 10. In woodland the grading will not be commenced until the clearinc. close cutting and grubbing required to completion to the satisfaction of the engin;er b done, and the contractor will be held responsible for all damage to crops. Width and Slopes — 11. The width of embankments to sub-grade or formation level is intended to twoTeet"" d 1" • ^'^ f '"^ '' ^'"""^''^ ^""'"^^ -^" ^' ^ ^--^1 tkg be twenty- 20 two feet, and of side cuttings, twenty feet, but they may vary according to the secion of the country and other circumstances as the engineer may direct The .slopes of earthworks will be made on... and a half horizontal to one perpendicular. The rock cutting slopes will be as a rule one horizontal to four perpendicular In cuttings partly earth and partly rock a berm of six feet shall be left on the surface ot the rock. The widths, slopes, and other dimensions above defined may be varied by the engineer at any time to suit circumstances. Materials in Embankments— 12. The materials to be placed in the embankments must he approved bv the engineer, and in places where the natural surface of the ground upon which the em- 30 Imnkment ,s to rest is covered with vegetable matter which cannot be burned off in clearing, and which would in the opinion of the engineer impair the work the same must be removed to his entire satisfaction. Sloping Oronnd~k\\ sloping ground covered with pasture shall be deeply ploughed over the base of the embankment, oerore the latter are commenced. Undevdrains — 13. All sidehill ground to be covered by embankments shall first be thoroucrhlv underdranied, as the engineer may see expedient ; and all cuttings after being formed and all slopes likely to be affected by wet must be similarly underdrained. longitudi- nally or transversely or both as circumstances may seem to him to require. These 40 drains will be constructed in a similar way to that in which ordinary land dra-'n- ire «on.etimes made. A trench will first be dug to a depth of four fee't on an average and barely wide enough for a man to stand. In the bottom of this tre.ich three or' 120 four cedar or spruce polea, from two to threo inches diameter, will first be laid by hand, breaking joint. Over the poles will then be placed two feet of coarse gravel or broken stone not longer than ordinary road metal, over which will be placed a coating of brush, and then the trench will be filled up to the surface of the ground with such material convenient to the place as the engineer may approve of. The contractor wust find all the material required in these drains, do all the work des- cribed, and remove the surplus earth. These drains must always be made with a suflScient longitudinal fall for the easy flow of the water, and therefore they may in level-cuttings be deeper at one end than at the other, but the average depth will in all cases be considered four feet. 10 Ditdtes — 14. On the completion of the cuttings r.nd the underdrains provided for in the last clause, ditches for the removal of surface water sliall be formed along each side at the bottom of the slopes according to directions to be given. Catchwater ditches shall also be formed some distance back from the top of slopes to exclude from the excavation any water flowing from the adjoining lands. The contractors shall also construct all other drains and ditches which the engineei may deem necessary for the perfect drainage of the railway and works. Cuttings, Ditches, Roa^% &c— 15. All open ditches in cuttings and elsewhere, and all excavations required for 20 turning, making or charging water courses other than t^ e under-drains above men- tioned, the formation of public roads, grading depot grounds, branches or turn-outs, and foundation pits for masonry, and the material deposited as the engineer may direct, must be executed as may from time to time be directed. Embankments and Cuttings — 16. The embankments must be made in such sufiicient heighth and width as will allow for the subsidence of the same, and both cuttings and embankments shall be left ac the completion of the contract at such heights, levels, widths and forms as directed by the engineer. Rounding of Roadway. Bor ■ mg — 30 17. The whole of the gi„ ..xig shall be carefully formed to the levels given, and the roadway in cuttings shall invariably be rounded and left from six to eight inches lower at the sides than in the centre line. In rock cuttings it will be sufficient to form a water channel about two feet wide and eight inches deep along each side. All materials found in excavations, whether in road-bed cubing, ditches, water channels, road crossing, borrowing pits, or elsewhere, must be deposited in such places as the engineer may direct. In cases where the road-bed excavations are insufficient to form the embankments, the deficiency shall be supplied by widening the cuttings or from the sides of the road or from borrowing pits, but no material shall be so sup- plied without his concurrence and not until the cuttings are completed without his 40 express directions. All borrowing pits shall if required by the engineer be dressed to a good shape and properly drained. Where material to make up embankments is taken from the side a berm of at least ten feet from bottom of slope of embankment shall remain untouched. } th b( ti( or • an 5i 121 Wdahiny. Wasting — 18. Where 'xe excavation in a cutting exceeds what may be reauired fn mnt. the embanlcments or the specified width, the engineer may direct that ZZl I be increased in width with the surplus materiJ. and when hTs is do e to h " "r'' t.on the remainder (if any) may be wasted ; but n every case whther!i/>, K "' ^^ is resorted to the materials, must be ta.n a^d^d;::;:^^:: tl^^^Z Building Matenals in Excavations— Rip-Rap — Service Roads, Land— 21. Roads constructed to and from any point on the line of R^iln,. t *u Road Crossings — Ballast—- tions adopted as the engineer may deem necP«sary-the whole h^,S- - V . . of the contractor. ' ^ ^^^^^ """'^ ^^ '^^^ expense 40 122 Loose Stone paddng to ivall. Filling against Wall— 25. In forming embankmenta, great care must be taken to place against the backs of all walls exposed to the action of frosts, three feet in thickness, or any greater thick- ness that the engineer may direct of rip-rap backing, consisting of small stones blinded with spalls or coarse gravel, to prevent the retention of moisture and the action of frost thereon ; and in forming embankments between wing walls against abutments of bridges, viaducts or culverts and over arches, the earth filling must be carefully packed and prumed in thin layers, and a proper quantity of material must be carefully placed equally against each side of and over all bridges, culverts or other work before the em- bankment approaches it, and in foMing embankments the greatest care must be observed 10 and every precaution must be takeu to load the masonry and structures evenly. Working in Winter — 26. In the event of earth excavation being proceeded with in winter, no snow or ice must be placed in embankments or allowed to be covered up in them, and all frozen earth must be excluded from the heart of the embankments Contractor to finish up Cuttings, Embankments, . quarter inch joints. The vertical joints will be dies.sed bacV, square, nine inches; the be is will be dressed perfectly parallel throughout. The work will be left with t'le "qua.ry face," except the outside arnsco, strings and cop- ings, which will be chistl dressed. Courses — 43. The courses of first-class Tnas( ■ •:• ^ot be less than twelve inches, and they will be arranged in preparing the p!..... .o.«uit the nature of t>^o quarry— cn'i-.es may range up to 24 inches, and the thinest courses invariably to be placed tt . atxls the top of the work. First-class Headers and Stretchers — 44. Headers will be built in every course, not furthe.' apurt than six feet ; they will have a length in line of not less than twenty-four inches, and they must run back at least two and a half times their height, unless when the wall will not all^v this proportion, in which case they will pass through from front to back. Stretchers will have a miniinum length in line of wall of thirty inches, and their breadth of bed will at least be one and a half times their length. The vertical joints in each cour.se must be arranged so as to overlap those in the course below, ten inches at least. Quoins — 46. The quoins of abutments, piers, &c., shall be of the best and largest stones, I. d have chisel drafts, n-operly tooled c the upright arris, from 2 to 6 " >ches wide, 40 according to the size anc character of the structure. — ' ' — J! — • 46. Coping stones, string courses and cut-waters, shall be neatly dressed, in ac- cordance with plans and directions to be furnished during the progress of the work. 125 Bed stones for girders — 47. The bed-stones, for girders, shall be the best descriptioa of sound stone, free from dregs or flaws of any kind. They must be not less than 12 inches in depth for the smaller bridges, and 8 feet superflcial area on the bed. The larger bridges will require bed stones of proportionately greater weight. These stones shall be solidly and carefully placed in position, so that the bridges will sit fair on the middle of the stone. First-class I iking and bond — 48. The backing will consist of flat bedded stone, well shaped, having an area of bed equal to four superficial feet or more. Except in high pieces or abutments, two thicknesaes of backing stone must be allowed, but uot more, in each course ; and their 10 joints must not exceed that of the face work. In special cases where deemed necessary by the engineer to insure stability, the backing shall be in t le one thickness. The beds raus', if necessary, be scabbed oflf so as to give a solid bearing. No pinning will be ad- mitted. Between the backing and face stones, there must be a good square joint, aot exceeding one i; jh width, and the face stones must be scabbed oflTto allow this. In walls over turee feet in thickness, headers will be built in front and back, alternately, and great care must be taken in the arrangement of the joints, so as to give perfect bond. Chouting — 49. Every stone must be set in a full be.l of mortar and beaten solid. The ver- tical joints must be flushed up solid, and every course must be perfectly level and 20 thoroughly grouted Second-class Masonry. General Description — 50. Second-class masonry shall be built of good, sound, h rge flat-headed stones laid in horizontal beds. It may be known as random worl , or broken coursed rubble. The stones employed in this class ot masonry will be generally not less in area of bed than three superficial feet, noi less in hickness than eight inches ; and tbey must be thinner dressed, so as to give good bed vith half-inch joints. In smaller structures, and in cases where stones of good sizes c. .v.aut be had, they may, if in other respects suitable, bs admitted as thin as five inches. All stones must be laid on their natural beds. 2nd-clas8 Iitaders and Stretchers — 30 51. Headers will be built in the wall, from front to back alternately, at i-ast one everj-^ five feet in line of wall and freaub.itly in rise of wall. In the smallest structures headers shall not be less than 24 inches in length, and the • minimum bed allowed for strr ;,chers shall be twelve inches. In the larger structw^es all stones must be heavier in proper proportions. Every attention must be paid to produce a pv3rfect bond, and to give the whole a strong, neat, workmanlike finish. 'Jind-daas Copings imd Coverings — 52. Wing-walls will general.^' be finished wiih steps formed of sound, durable stone, and not less than from ten to twelve inches thick and six feet superficial area. Other walls will be covered with coping of a similar thickness, and of seven feet or 40 upwards f ^perficial area. These coverings will be neatly dressed when required and as may ba (lireo.tft= ,„a,„„ry. Tho kfv- r„rw Cement to be used — lo^rnll 1 " ^"^^ ^- ■^' ' ^'g ' emu V uu incy must be thoroughly flushed on the back l.vcll„d„p and rounded to a .odctoly even and ™oo°th 'surface wi«. 2 '^ i27 Centring — 59. Centres of arches must in all cases be well formed, of ample strength, securely placed in position, and in every respect to the satisfaction of the engineei. The ribs must not be placed further apart than three feet in any case. The lag- gings shall be cut to a scantling of three inches square. The supports of centres shall be substantial and well constructed and they must be provided with proper wedges for easing centres when required. 60. Structures having more than one arch shall be provided with as many centres as the engineer may deem proper, and in no case shall the centres be struck without his sanction. 10 Gentring and Scaffolding — 61. Centring and scaffolding of all kinds shall be provided by the contractor. Pointina and Protection in Winter— 62. All masonry must be neatly and skillfully pointed ; but if done out of season, or, if from any other cause, it may require re-pointing before the expiration of the contract, the contractor must make good and complete the same at his own cost. Work left unfinished in the autumn must be properly protected during the winter by the con- tractor at his risk .ad cost. MISCELLANEOUS WORKS. Punning and Filling — 20 63. After the masonry of a structure has been completed for a period of four or five weeks, the formation of the embankment around it may be proceeded with. The earth must be carefully punned in thin layers around the walls, and in this manner the filling must be carried up simultaneously on both sides. The contractor must be extremely careful in forming the embankments around culverts and bridges, as he will be held liable for any damages to the structures that may arise. The punning must be carefully at- tended to and the whole filling must invariably be done in uniform courses from the bottom to the top of the embankment, without loading one side of the masonry more than another. Paving— 30 64. The bottoms of culverts will be paved with stones set on edge to a moderately even face packed solid, and the interstices filled with grout formed of hydraulic cement. The paving will be from 12 to 16 inches deep. 65. All the works shall be executed in a thoroughly good, substantial, workman- like manner to the satisfaction of the engineer, and upon their completion the contractor shall clear away all rubbish and unnecessary material. BRIDGES. 66. To be of the most approved Hnwe-Truss p.attern, built of pine, with white oak keys, caste iron prisms and wrought iron rods, the whole to be of first-class mate- rial and workmanship, painted three coats. Detailed drawings and specifications will 40 o noti end aboi of a easte Clar of Q tigov New over 128 (Sgd.) A. WALSH, ED. B. CHANDLER, C. J. BRYDGES, A. W. McLELAN, W. F. COFFIN, Commisnoners. (Sgd.) SANFORD FLEMMING, Compared with original and found correct. Chief Engineer. 10 T. TAYLOR. Intercolonial Railway Office, Ottawa, Uth Feb'y., 1869. Ouawt. Z £,1880.°"*'"' " "''' '" "■' '^'■"™°' 0' Mways and CanaU, T. TRUDEAU. Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals. .(Al.) INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY. CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT FOR SECTIONS Nos. 17, 18. 19 a.. .0. 20 , of about 20 mils.. "'""" "' '''"«'"*' «»'' Bonaventure, a di«ance New Brunswiclr. a distance of «hnn. """■' f , ^°- "*' "" '^"^ i'rovince of over the RiJC^Zl "" "' "^■*''^' '""^^' ^"'^'"^-^ ^^^ ^'"'^ge f 129 Section No. 20 will be in the Province of New Brunswick, an.l will extend from the easterly end of section No. 10 in the Town of Newcastle, on the Chaplin Island, and thence crossing the north-west and south-west branches ot the River Miramichi and termmafng at station No. 3^0, about one mile and three-quarters south of the south-west branch a distance of about six miles, including the bridges over the branches of the Kiver Miraraichi. The contract for section No. 17, 18. 19 and 20 to be completely Bnished and ready tor laymg the track by the first day of July, 1872. No tender will be received except upon the printed form issued with this docu- ment, and it must specify the number of the section tendered for. lo The Commissioners will provide all the land required. Plans and profiles will be exhibited to intending contractors, and they will be sup- phed with all the information in tho possession of the Commissioners as to quantities character of work, description of soil, etc.. but contractors must satisfy themselves as to all the points connected with the work as the Commissioners will no way be bound by any information so afforded. The tender must specify the lump sum for which the work will be constructed and the late per mile. The contractor will be required, also, to fill in the schedule of quantities and prices attached to his tender, to enable the Commissioners to judge as to the ter^der ; but such 20 schedule is m no way whatever to vary the condition of the contract, which is the pay- ment of a lump sum for the entire completion of the whole section contracted for. The general specification attached must be taken to include everything necessary for the entire completion of the section up to formation level, leaving nothing to com- plete It as a railway fit for carrying traffic, but the ties or sleepers, the iron rails, track laying and ballasting. The contract provides that no extras of any kind whatever will be allowed The work must be completed to the full satisfaction of the Commissioners, and no greater sum will be paid than the amount of the accepted tender. The contractor will be alone responsible for the quantities of the diflferent kinds of 30 work of every description. The form of contract to be executed is printed at the end of the specifications. (Sg'd) A. WALSH, ED. B. CHANDLER. C. J. BRIDGES, A. W. McLELAN, CoTtiTiiissiontvs. 130 Ini«rcolonial Railway Office, Ottawa, 24th March, 1870. A true coi.y of the original, as filed in the Department of Railways and Canals here. T. TRlTDEAU, Deputy Minister of Railways and Cantds. Compared with the original and found correct. THOMAS TAYLOR. EXHIBIT " N. N."— J. W. J. INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY. (division of thk line.) L 10 BILL OF WORKS AND SERVICES. CoNTKACT No. 19, extending from the easterly end of Contract No. 18, (station 380, near Clarke',s Brook) down the Metapedia Valley, to its mouth ; and thence across the River Restigouche to station .370 at the westerly end of Contract No. 3, a distance of about 9i miles, including the Bridge (except iron superstructure) over the River Restigouche. This Bill is an abstract of all the information in the possession of the Commis- sioners and the undersigned with regard to the quantities of work to be executed. The quantities herein given are ascertained from the best data obtained ; they are as far as known (approximately) accurate ; but at the .same time they are not 20 warranted as accurate and no claim of any kind will be allowed though they may prove to be inaccurate. The quantities of excavation are for the most part ascertained from cross sec- tions ; the proportion of rock excavation is estimated from information furnished by test pits dug at intervals along the line of railway, and the information thus ascer- tained, and the nature of the soil to be excavated will generally be found written on the profiles, but the accuracy of this information is not guaranteed. Contractors must satisfy th.j/nselves on this as well as on every point, as no addition ordeducuon will be made in the event of any excavation, turning out more than, or different from what may be represented or supposed. 30 A schedule of cuttings and embankments is furnished, showing the approximate quantities in each, and giving an estimate of the probable proportions of earth and rock which will require to be executed on the contract. The excavations are calcu- lated net rtieasurement and the contractor will observe that a percentage allowance is added to embankn.ents for waste suKsider.cc. wash, beyond -!ope lines, &c. Tlic eon. tractor is required to make every allowance which he may deem necessary to cover the ri,sk of any of the quantities of work being increased in execution. drui all I reqi pro' Thi upo info the onlj Con vert whe sho^ thre mus para and renci the price sum Calci ever; supe: most giver led t( " dio requi iron possil the t 131 A schedule of structures proposed for the passage of streams and Keneral surface dramage across the lin.- of railway is also furnished. The structures proposed aro, from all the information obtained, believed to be the most suitable, but should circumstances require any change in the number, position, water way or dimensions the contract will provule that all changes shall be made by the contractor without any extra charge This schedule gives the probable quantities in the struUures now proposed, and the data upon which these quai.titios are ascertained ; much, however, depend, upon additional information to be obtained with regard to the freshet, discharge of streams, as well as the -uture of the foundations, and, with respect to the latter, accurate information can only be had during the progress of the work jq The prices put in the schedules to the tenders will be applied to this bill by the Commissioners to enable them to judge how the tenders are made up. The Co.amissioners will consent to the substitution of iron cylinders for box cul- verts of nasonry at certain points to be designated by the Engineer, such as those places where the inclination of the streams on hillside ground renders the plan of construction shown on sheet No. 1 1 necessary, wherever these rviinders are employed they must be three feet in diameter in the clear and weigh not less than 450 lbs. per lineal foot; they must be embedded throughout in concrete and furnished with substantial wings and parapets of masonry at the ends ; they must be made and laid according to the plans and directions of the Engineer, and such precautions taken as h" consider? neceasary to 20 render the whole solid and perman.-nt. Where iroi. cylinders or other structures are allowed or directed to be used in the place of those mentioned in the schedule of structures, they will be paid for at the prices in the schedule to the tender, and a deduction will be made from the contract sum ol the total saving effected thereby according to the reduction in total quantities calculated at the schedule prices. This contract embraces the piers, abutments, approaches, protection works, and everything connected with the bridge across the River Restigr/achc, except the iron superstructure and the erection thereof. Both piers and abutmei.ts mbst be built in the most substantial manner of massive masonry, according to plans and directions to be 30 given. The masonry must be founded on the rock which must bs laid bare, and level- led to receive it. Thp stone employed must be according to sample (or equally good), a " diorite" found near the banks of the Restigouche, about two miles above the bridge site. The bridge will be on a skew of about forty-five degrees. The contractor will be required to complete the masonry of each successive span, so that the erection of the iron girder work must be commenced and carried on regularly at as early a date as possible, and so that the whole bridge, including superstructure, may be complete by the time fixed for the completion of this contract. Engineer's Office, Ottawa, 10th May, 1870. Oompared with original and found correct, THOMAS TAYLOR. 40 fsrn- 132 I certify that this paper is a true copy of the original as filed in the ofHce of the Department of Railways and Canals here. Ottawa, 3rd March, 1H80. T. TRUDEAU. Deputy Minister of Itailways and Canals. BILL I. \ JO Apjiroximale (iuaiitities. De.~cri))tion .■! Wmk or Service. 22 acres clearing (generally 132 feet wide, or one rod beyond fencin^r) 1 acre dase-cuttinrr. " 1^ acres gruhbing. 85,000 lineal feet fencing, as per specification. 57,500 cubic yards rock excavation. 427,000 cubic yairls earth excavation. 2,000 lineal feet under drains. 0,800 cubic yai'ds rip-iap. 1,400 cubic yards concrete. 7,000 cubic yar.ls first-class u.asonry, cut-wat.rs and exposed faces of ab.fnents Q ono V ^!"'' ^'' ^"" ""''"'■''' ^^ "''" "'^"'P'^ ^'^'d ^l"^*^'^ a« '"^^v be directed! ^,zm cubic yards second-class nipsonrv. 500 cubic yards paving. In addition to the quantities herein given, the attention of contractors is drawn 20 to other services uientioned und.M-neath, for whi. h all allowances must be embraced in the tenders. Foundations — r^nbracing coffer dams for the bridge over the River Restigouche, and all other sunnar foundations at other points. Embracing also all excavation and concrete &c (see schedules) not already include.1 in the above quantities; ami all timber plank' piles, .Iraining, pumping, blasting, levelling and everything else that may be' found necessary. Bridge Superstructure — Including Howe-Truss Timber Bridges, complete with three coats anti-corrosive 30 paint, and properly protected in all. Two Spam of 40 feet each— Including also supenstructure for one beam bridge of 20 feet .span. Also the follow: ig beam culverts, viz .—One of 12 feet span ; two of 10 feet span • three of 8 feet span ; and four of feet span ; and all bolts, rods, spikes and plates' lequired, and everything else necessary to complete this service. (NoTK.— The superstructure of the Restigouche bridge will not be include.1 in thi.s Contract.) ■^*t 133 Road Crosx'hvgs and Diversions complete!"''"'' '"" '""" '''' "■"""^•^' "''' ''''''' ^""^'•^^''' '^^""^-^ ^'^ sign boards Also about ten single fam> crossings with suitable gates, hinges and fastenings. Also one road diversion (see sp. works below.) and tlZluTT'"'' " T''"""^'''''' ""' ^^''^'^^ '"'^'"'^^'^ •" '=«^"'»«» excavations, and eve.ytlung else requned to co.nplete all road crossings and road dive,-sions. Special Works — calve,.,, i fe« x 2 fe, each, buil, of cedar log,; al,o, crib-wharflng of ,„„„d cedar 1 g, erag,„g 4 fee. h,gh .„ t-e face, well .ecured wi.h cro„-.ie,. a.%.r ,l.e.ch, ,„d «1 d ,„ fron, .he above rock a.d ear,h excavation. To be «„i,hed wi.h g„a,d-po",, ^rf:;;;!::^;:::.::''"""^"^" ''^-" '° »"-'«= -roaddiv^er.on';, » ir wasn ot the river and other streams. Omissions and Contingencies Allowances should also he m.de for the following, viz .—For any errors in me. suremenrs or calculations, or deHciencies in qua.i J For all .1 eration: o sid^l necessary .n structures that may be found inadequate in water way or sf nl For removing all bu.hhngs and other obstructions on '^e line of Railway. Fo e buihW tricf fT mt " ^1 t ^^^^''"^ ^" '"J""^^ ^'"- '^^- ^h' comp,::io o "hi contract. For making good all temporary dam:-., to owners or occupants of lands hrongh loss of. or injury to, crops or .attle, through trespass of workman r ho. gh 30 any other cause. For making compensation for . , damage done to pror ..; or pers ns through operations or accidents of any ki For orovldin., ^„H • . • tools, plant and materials for carrying on le works Z^ 'f "'^'"^T'.'lf . ^^^^P^'' ^, , . , , , * '■^'^rying on .ae works, ror re-pointing or re-bu d ne anv m^isonry injured through any cause or a., according to specifications^ For comple'ti ig' pholdngand mamtauung the whole of th- .orks until their final acceptance at the los of the contract, and for making go.d all damages which may result from flol possible risks and contingencies. ' (•%U) SANDFORD FLEMING, Chief Engineer 40 Compared with the original and found correct. IHOS. TAYLOR. 134 SCHEDULE. (Extract.) (Restigouchk District.) (Division of the Line). "B."— J.W.J. INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY. Contract No. 19, extendi-,g from easterly end of Contract No. 18 (station 880, near Clarke's Brook) down the Metapedia Valley to its mouth, thence across the River Resti- goucho to .ation 370 at the westerly end of Contract No. 3, a distance of about 9 1-3 miles. Schedules of cuttings and embankments shewing the approximate quantities in each atid giving an estimate of the probable proportions of earth and rock excavations which will require to be executed on the contract. **••**•••♦ For catch-water drains, stream diversions, entrance and outlets to cul verts, say Approaches to public and private road crossings Excavations in foundations of bridges, culverts and cattle guards. . . 1,000 Kock 1,200 lilurth. 17,000 7,600 6,300 N. B. -Where embankments require mure material tliaii the hue cuttings at ordinary widt'i supply contractors will be rotniited, under clause 17 of the -peciHcaii .ns, t . taUo the required material from the sides of cuttings by increasing their width until the haul exceeds an ave.age of 800 (eet, or a maximum of 1600 feet, after thi.^ material required mutt generally be taken fr nu borrowing pits. 22,000 cubic yards of this to be carried across the River Restigouche to form the base of the embankment between stations 494 and 479 to an average of 2 feet above high water line. This may be dor>e during the winter on the ice. The balance of the rock cutting will be deposited as may be directed for the protection of embankments east of the Restigouche Bridge. ABSTRACT. Say total rock excavation . 57,500 cubic yards. " " earth " 427,000 10 20 I hereby certify that this paper is a true copy of the original, as filed in the Office of Department of Railways and Canals here. Ottawa, 3rd March, 1880. T. TRUDEAU, Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals. 30 I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original specification for the construction of Contract No. 19 (Restigouche District) Intercolonial Railway, and also of the original schedules of works and quantities and other information respecting said section No. 19 of the Intercolonial Railway, including the bill of works and services, schedules of cuttings, embankirients excavations, &c., which said originals are filed in the Department of Railways and Canals, being one of the Departments of the Govern- ment of Canada. Dated at the City of Ottawa, this third day of March, A.D., 1880. (Sg'd ) T. TRUDEAU, Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals. 40 Sec 1.35 EXHIBIT " P P"— J. W. J. Section 19, Intercolonial Railway.— Details of Work done by Alex. McDonald, aa shewn by Cross- sections of Railway. Excavation- Cubic Yards Embank'jien*'. STATIONS. STATIONS Rock. Earth. Cub. Yds. 168x50 - 171x64 286 162 - 178x41 7967 176x74- 179x34 97 • * • > 185x40 - 206x65 13212 1»0 - 184x54 , , , , 872 214x33-218 379 184x54 - 185x40 318 . • • • 220 - 235x25 5556 206x65-216x75 1510 . • . . 237x80 - 249 16939 217x31 -221 49r. • • • • 249 - 260 14846 230 - 238 3192 16458 260 - 275x50 13587 254 - 257 > • ■ • 8802 276x10 - 289 13237 275x50 - 277x50 .... 3253 304x75-317x14 13030 288x32 - 305x60 4973 • 11336 329x60 - 334x90 3173 317 -340x75 .... 56996 339 - 3f'lxS0 33064 346x50 - 347x50 . . • ■ 793 362.X44-369 1160 359x70 - 363 U9 32 372x70 - 375x30 2085 368 - 372x70 1843 375x30 - 379 .... 1082 Totals 11001 101012 138,235 Per cent added . . 155,514 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3( 3: 3: 3. 3i 3( 3( 3( ti 3^ 3< Ki 136 Section 19, Intercolonwl Railway. -Details of Miscellaneous Work done by Alex. McDonald. STATIONS. 162 172 187 186 201 219 220 226 22S 226 231 240x50 226 242 259x30 259 259x;i0 - 269 269 - 277 - 278 281 It 287 295 807 « 310 805 327x60 329x50 340 339xi)0 361 361x50 367 t( 371x50 375 - 169x50 -175 -188 - 188x60 ■217 •228 ■230 226 234 234 247 234 247x90 269x30 278 278x50 275 278x50 317x90 -334 - 355x50 Deacription of Work. Catch-water- -Right. Drain . Cubic Yards. Rock. Earth. Right Borrowing connecting catch-water Under Drains Inlet to Culvert Rip-rap at Culvert , Road Ditch Rip-rap Ditch to No M&n'a Gulch Borrow Ditch— Right . . . Catch-water Rip-rap Inlet to Culvert Crib-wharfing Side Ditch 38 Widening Bank , Rip-rap Stream Diversion — Upper. " Lower Rip-rap Inlet to Culvert Side Ditch Inlet to Culvert Crib-wharfing Outlet from Culvert Side Ditch— Right Crib-wharfing Side Ditches Crib-wharfing Borrowing — Bight E.&W. of Culvert! Inlet to Culvert Outlet from Culvert Borrow Pit, River side Hill opp. stat'n 356 '. Inlet to Culvert Outlet from Culvert Ditch— Right .. , " " Borrowing Rip-rap, Clarke's Brook 47 24 Totals. 30 1182 "i67 105 129 141 59 224 1390 16 35 128 1219 Cubic Yards. Crib- wharf 'g Rip-rap, 125 50 5 58 234 942 15 333 158 939 33 2i4 104 158 1204 1200 588 518 84 Lin. feet under Drains, 126 137 83i 2757 464 8249 30 753 367 8665 2115 9380 I 369 104 11777 '28399 I 5369 464 ■aaaaataBPijjgpg-affiaa-a KQwm 137 EXHIBIT " Q Q "— J. W. J. Section 19. Intercolonial Railway.— Abatract of Quantities, Stations 162 to 980. Line cuttings and fillings . . . Borrow Pits measured Ditches, Inlets, Outlets, &c . Crib- wharf measured Do. Cross-sections do Bip-rap do Under-drains do Excavation. Rock. Earth. Embank- ment. Cub. Yds. 11001 io4 101012 4948 6829 155514 Crib- wharfing. Cub. Yds. 288^9 Rip-rap. Cub. Yds. Totals. Total line excavation of above spoiled . . 11105 112789 Balance available Borrow pits measured . Balance of borrowing , Total 112013 22610 89508 4948 61063 155514 155514 28399 Line Ex- cavation. C.Y. 112013 66011 178024 Under Drains. Lineal ft. 5369 5369 464 464 IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) IX) LL 1.25 1^128 IIIIIZ5 ^ 1^ 12.0 1-2.2 18 \A. 11 1.6 .V *¥>^ /O/'^i'A 1 . rllulugTcipniC Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 A^ iV ci>^ \ :\ "% V ^^1%*^!^ '-t''''"^ "•* f/. ^ 138 EXHIBIT "A 1"--J. W. J. Section 19, Intercolonial Railway.— Memorand/um of Quantitiss. Line Ccttinos. Bill of Works. 1 Measurements. iNOtejCA Hit, DllflNUTION. STATIONS. Cub. Yds Cub. Yds. Cub Yds. Cub. Yds. Bock. Earth. Rock. Earth. Bock. Earth. Bock. Bartb. 371x50 - 376x40 1610 1440 70 3«3x90 - 396 910 1036 126 • • • • 406 - 409x30 1490 1666 176 .... 416x15 - 416x50 50 83 88 .... 419x50 - 432x70 • • • . 17670 16700 * * * • 970 87 9642 6507 3303 782 441x40-445x60 650 80 663 80 • • • ■ 463x30 - 466x30 29140 14600 44670 4858 16430 .... 509x80 - 620x10 11440 18660 16272 12143 3832 76 - 79x60 790 3780 1342 477 652 .... 88x80- 88x16 11680 850 1646 68 34 91 - 103 300 2430 2403 886 2103 1644 106x50 - 108x75 460 830 380 870 70 40 112x88 - 121x60 150 1730 8937 136 3787 1694 122x25 - 124x50 580 883 147 189x20 - 148x80 26240 20306 69S4 169x60 - 171 630 236 844 176x80 - 186 1460 416 872 416 678 3370 206x80 - 215 ii-io 3370 1510 340 215 - 222 320 16«0 496 176 1660 228x60 - 238 4870 2340 3192 16453 14113 1178 254 - 277 61310 91147 29837 288x20 - 306 4330 24260 4973 11386 643 12864 317 - 338x86 36630 66^96 21466 346x70 - 848x50 3320 793 2527 25 856x50 - 373 1900 129 1876 129 376x50 - 378x60 840 1082 242 Totals 55300 227260 81014 241835 27437 65993 1773 51497 38. O'DELI b II '^ aamtcaiifT.ji.Tj.-.;;^ 139 PAPER MARKED " B 1." 249 anf S« T^ ^^"^ whole excavation between stations 249 and 258, whereas there should have been added the quantity shewn on original cross-sections (torn Sy Mitehell) \\\-- 8302 ^^^ 92710 101012 as shewn on paper P. p. EMBANKMENT, PAPER "B 1" 128012 250-260 c y Embankment by original sections 148*6 Less do by measurement 249-260 4423 10223 10223 138235 as shown on paper P P P per " B" wais prepared in 1876, (either Nov. or Dec ) before tht, nhf^?«j« * ongu.al .ectio^ ,or which I wrote to Sch.,iW (at MiSw^l^in 1™" "V/ w.rhrzfwJir'-'''™ " ^"^°''^'' "«- 0-- '" «S EXHIBIT " B l."-J. W. J. Excavation by cros. sections nZtc. y. 92no c v - Do. miscellaneous work oi "'^ ^Hx ^^ ^'^ 0119 11091 ^^ cu. yd. Embankment 128012 Excavation by cross sections. .108712 Leaving 24300 c. y. to be provided by borrowing, the Jr^^." "~" """""^ "''""" ^'""''"^ ''' »°'^ 258 are not the «.me as those furnished when MAS0N3Y. Earth. Rock. Excavations of foundations . . 1127 21 SSf^Pf^ 691 c.y. drj' do. outride 396 c. V. Concrete 37 « Clarke's brook bridge (no plan) 600 " taken from Bill of Works ^nb-wharfing measured m Oct., 1875—28399 cub. yds Kip-rap Clarke's brook bridge— 369 c. y. Note.- In the above estimate no deduction has been made for work doss by Archibald & Vusbur 1* k /S 1€ 18 21 22 23 24 26 27 30 32 33 36 37 ■ 140 EXHIBIT " E 1."— J. W. J. Section 19, Intercolonial Rat. ay.-DetaUa of Work done by Alex. McDonald, as shown by cross-sections of Roadway. STATIONS. 162 185x40 214x38 220 237x80 - 249 260 276x10 - 804x75 - 329x60 - 839 362x44 - 372x70 - - 178x41 - 206x66 - 218 - 235x25 -249 -260 - 276x50 -289 317x14 334x90 361x80 369 376x30 Totals EUBANKMKNT. Cub. Yds. 7967 J 32 12 379 5656 16939 14846 13587 13237 18030 3173 38064 1160 2086 188235 STATIONS. 168x50 176x74 180 184x54- 206x65 - 217x31 - 230 254 275x50 - 288x32 - 317 .'^46x50 - 359x70 - 368 875x30 - - 171x64 - 179x84 - 184x54 - 186x40 - 216x74 -221 -238 • 267 - 277x60 - 305x60 - 840x76 - 347x50 -363 372x70 879 Excavation (red ink). Cub. Ids. Rock. 286 97 318 1510 496 3192 4973 Earth. 129 11001 872 16453 8302 3253 11386 66996 793 32 1843 1082 101012 m la Section 19, fntercolcnicU Railway.— Details of Miscellaneous Work done by Alex. McDonald. STATIONS. 162 - 16«x50 172 -176 187 - 188 186 - 188x60 201 -217 219 -228 :i2uy. - Ahstra.^ of Quantiti.. of Emb i 17x20 ^22x76 280xkJ 264x20 276x0^ 288x40 317x00 846x00 859x85 361x83 368x00 376X.33 to 17U60 " 186.\:00 '■ 'a 16x60 " 221x00 '• 228x60 " 2.38x00 " 256x50 " 277x00 " .306x50 " S40s0u " 347x50 " 3(iOx78 " 363x00 " 372x71 " 379x00 16ix60 to 305x50 817x00 to 337x00 337x00 to 380x00 Reck RxcAvation. 346 347 ti 348 349 350 it 361 352 (t 853 354 355 Dimensions. Feet. 13x6 2 6x5 Areainehch. 1x5 20x10 2 12x3 10x6 25x12 12x5 30x15 2 15x6 30x15 2 Ux7 81x14 2 14x6 30x14 2 10x6 I 29x14 2 13"x5 J8xl4^ 2 13x6 26x18 2 14x6 30x15 2 14x5 32x14 i 16x6 83x26 2 16x7 30x15 2 14x8 33x16 2 9x6 25x12 2 39 30 35 100 36 60 150 60 225 90 226 98 917 84 210 «0 208 65 196 78 169 84 225 70 224 96 264 105 225 84 264 64 150 Total Area. 69 171 210 285 315 316 294 263 261 247 309 294 360 330 348 204 Mean Area. 120.O 190.5 247.5 300.0 316.0 304.5 278.5 262.0 254 278 301.5 327.0 245.0 339.0 276.0 Dist. Ft. 100 100 100 100 100 100 liiO !00 100 100 100 100 100 100 ITJo Cub. Feet. Cub. Yds. 12,000 19,050 2:4,760 30.000 31,500 80,450 27,850 26,200 25,400 2T,800 30,150 32,700 34,500 33,900 27,600 413,850 I 16,328 Copy of detail measurement of crib-wharfing from station 340 to 355, I. C. Railway. April 16th, 1880, 'W'. H. T. 140 EXHIBIT "M. I." Artici,^^ of agreement made and concluded this first day of August, in the year of Our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventv-one, between Thomas Boggs, of the City and County of Halifax, in the Province of Nova Scotia, Merchant ; John Robert Murray, of Halifax, aforesaid, Merchant ; ..ad Robert P. Mitchell and Stephen D. Oakes of Restigouche, in the Province of New Brunswick, Railway contractors and construc- tors on Section number nineteen of the Intercolonial Railway, of the first part ; and John C. McKenzie, David Munroe, Alexander McDonald, John F McDonald and Albert R.Penery, of Metapedia, in the County of Bonavdnture and Province of Quebec, Railway contractors of the second part. Whereas, The said parties of the first part having undertaken and become respon- 10 sible for the construction and completion, according to contract with the Government of the Dominion of Canada, of that section of the Intercolonial Railway of Canada, desig- nated and known as section number nineteen of the said Intercolonial Railway line have contracted with the said parties of the second pa.t for the constructiou and completion by them of a certain part or portion of said section number nineteen, commencing at the lower end of section number eighteen, now being constructed by Robert H. McGreevy and ending at station number one hundred and sixty-two, comprising two hundred sta- tions of one hundred feet each, as shewn upon the engineer's plan of said section nuniber nineteen ; and both parties have agreed on the following articles of agreement, in the faithful performance of which they mutually bind and engage themselves each to 20 the other, their executors and administrators. First the said parties of the second part for and in consideration of the sum here- inafter mentioned and specified to be paid unto them, their executors or administra- tors, and for and upon the other consideration following, do for themselves, their executors and administrators, promise and agree to and with the said parties of the iirst part, their exec.tors, administrators and assigns, that the said parties of the second part or their assigns shall and will in a good and workmanlike manr-r built or construct the before mentioned two hundred stations of railway line, excepting however the building of culverts and mason work in general. And the parties of the first part do covenent and agree with the parties of the 30 second part to pay to them in ihe currency of the Dominion of Cana.la for the different discriptions of work as follows :-Ninety-five cents per cubic yard for rock excavating, twenty-three cents per cubic yard for earth excavating, ei^l.ty-five cents per cubic yard for building and filling in the crib-wharfing, and one dollar and fifty cents per cubic yard for rip-rap work when the rock must be borrowed and taken to the place of building, but when ',e cuttings on the line furnish the necessary rock no pay will be given, but it is understood and agreed upon that all rock necessary to be hauled a distance of two thousand feet will be considered as borrowed and the parties of the first part bin^l themselves to pay the above mentioned one dollar and fifty cent« per yard even if such rock should be taken from the line of work. 40 And again the said parties of the first part agree and hind themselves to pay to the parties of the secon.l part fifty dollars per acre for all grubbing necessary to be 10 14G done and twenty dollars per acre for chopping and clearing the line when such des nptjon of work „.ay be needed, a.s well as one dollar and°twenty-five cTrper ya d for all good budding stone taken from the line of work. This is in addii on to the price already mentioned for excavating rock. npL H .^ the fi St part a lun.p sum of forty dollars for building nil culverts n eded on the road diversion and five dohai. for every one hundred cubic feet oi under draining necessary to be done on the line of work. All temporuy bridges built where culverts are to be made will be built at the expense of tne parties of the first part. partlt7wr!'rV':.''''P"V"''''"'^^"^'^'" ^^PP'^ '''' P-^'- «f '^^ -conJ part with what cedar they now have on imnd at the rate of two and a half cents per running foot, the same to be delivered at the works without any additional charge' Parncnts will be made once every month for all work done in the previous njonth, the parties of the first part however retaining fifteen per cent, until the com- £rr h " • 7t' "" "T"'^ ^°' '''' ^'^•^'''■"' '^''y^-S on of the within con- t act by the par les of the second part, but it is understood and agreed upon that the above men loned fifteen per cent, so retained will be paid to the parties of the .second part at or before the expiration cf sixty days from the completion of the work herein mentioned, which shall not be be considered completed until the engineer has 20 first pronounced it so and taken it off the hands of the pa.ties of the second part. And, finally, it is agreed that the work must be done to the satisfaction of the resi- dent engineer, upon whose decision the parties contracting bind themsolves to rely in any matter pertaining to the proper carrying «n of the work, and the liability of the party of the second part to forfeit said contract for non-performance of duty or negli- gence to use necessary force and diligence to bring the work to a satisfactory and timely termination, but in case the engineer considers it expedient to deal only with i he parties of the first part in reference to the carrying on of the work, or our liability to forfeit contract for neglect or non- performance of duty, then we bind ourselves to abide by the decision of the party of the first part, after satisfactory proof first having been 30 given us that said decision is a just and true reflection of the mind and will of the resi- dent engineer ; and the parties of the second part bind themselves to discharge any workmen who may be guilty of committing any unjustifiable breach of the peace or in any other manner conduct himself improperly upon the request of the resident en-ineer as the parties of the first part. And the parties of the second part further agree"to be governed and controlled by the rules and regulations mentioned in the original contract between the parties of the first part and the Dominion Government which shall not in- terfere with the foregoing contract. And the parties of both parts hereby agree that the conditions of this contract shall be considered binding from the first day of June in the present year. 40 And in conclusion, it is further agreed between the two contracting parties that the parties of the first part shall pay to the parties of the second part the sum of seventy cei • ■ th« RIK V. Big in cents per cubic yard of earth for all excavation made in that portion of the work termed the road diversion In W1TNE88 WHEREOF, the parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands and seals, the day and year first within mentioned. Signed, sealed and delivered in presence of CHAS S. ARCHIBALD. THOMAS BOGGS, [l.s.] By his Attorney, John R. Murray, JOHN R. MURRAY, [l.s ] K. P. MITCHELL, [i a ] S. D. OAKES, [l.8.]' J. C McKENZIE, [L.8.] DAVID MUNRO. [l.s] ALEX. McDonald, [lh.] JOHN F. McDonald, [lh] A. p. PENERY, [L.8] 10 EXHIBIT ' A 2." [headed in the cause] I, Alexander McDonald, of Truro, in the County of Colchester, at present of Hali- fax, in the County of Halifax, a contractor, one ot the above-named plaintiffs, make oath and say that the statements and allegations contained in the writ issued herein the 20th day of March, instant, and hereto annexed are true in substance and fact. Sworn at Halifax, in the County of Halifax, this 20fn day of March, A. I). 1876, before me. (Sg'd.j M. I WILKINS, Com. Sup. Court, Co of Halifax. (Sg'd.) ALEX. McDonald. 20 COLCHESTER, SS. IN EQUITY. Victoria, by the Orace of God, of the United Kingdmi of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, So., <&c. To THE Sheriff of the County of Halifax or to any other of our Sheriffs : 30 We command you to .summon John R. Murray, Esquire, William W. Groom, merchant, a.ssignee under the Insolvent Act of 1875 of .said John R. Murray, an In- holveni, both of the City and County of Halifax, Pichard B. Boggs, of Amherst, in the County of Cumberland, Esquire, and Charles Beverly Bullock, of Halifax, afore- .said, Barrister, Executors of the last will ano testament of Thomas Botftrs, late of / Ha toi, WOI to of 1 •■ tha into Mit der mer 14H Halifax, in the County of Halifax, merchant, deceased, Robert P. Mitchell, contrac- toi. and Stephen D. Oakes, contractor, both of Halifax, aforesaid, and Israel Long- worth, of Truro, in the County of Colchester. Esquire, Trustee of John R. Murray to appear in the Supreme Court at Tiuro within twenty days aft.ir the servico' of this writ at the suit of Alexander McDonald and Thomas G. McMullen, who say that articles of agreement dated the first day of February, A. D.. 1872, were entered into by and between the said Thomas Boggs, the aaid John R. Murray, Robert P. Mitchell and Stephen D. Oakes, of the first, and John G. McKenzie, the said Alexan- der McDonald and Frankfort Davis, of the other part, which said articles of a-n-eo- ment are m the words and figures following, that is to say :— lo Articles of Agreement made and concluded this the first day of February in the year of Our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy- two between Thomas Boggs of the City and County of Halifax, in the Province of ]^ - Scotia, merchant, John Robert Murray, of Halifax, aforesaid, merchant, and Roix.fc P Mitchell and Stephen D. Oakes, of Metapedia. in the Province of Quebec, Railway cont. actors and constructors on section number nineteen of th. Intercolonial Railway ot the first part and John C. McKenzie, Alexander McDonald and Frankfort Davis, of Metape- dia, m the Province of Quebec, Railway contractors, of the second part. Whereas, the said parties of the first part having undertaken and become res- ponsible for the construction and completion, according to contract with the Govern- 20 mentof the Dominion of Canada of that section of the Intercolonial Railway of Canada, known as section number nineteen of said railway, have contracted with the said parties of the second part for the construction and completion by them of all work now r.aiaining to be done on that portion of said section number nineteen conimencing at the lower end of section number eighteen, now being constructed by R. H. McGreevy, Esq., and ending at station number one hundred and sixty-two, comprising two hundred stations, as shown upon the engineer's plan of said section number nineteen, and both parHes have agreed on r.he following articles of agreement to the faithful performance of which they mutually bind and engage themselves, each to the other, their executors and administrators. 30 First, the said parties of the second part for and in consideration of the sums herein- after mentioned and specified to be paid into them, their executors or administrators, and for and upon the other conditions following, do for themselves, their executors and admmistrators promise and agree 'o and with the said parties of the first part, their execu- tors, administrators and assigns that the said parties of the second part or their assigns shall and will in a good and workman-like manner and according to the directions and to the entire satisfaction of the engineer in charge, build or construct the before men- tioned portion of work on said portion of said section number nineteen, excepting how- ever the building the fence and bridge at Gilmore's brook. And for and in consideration of such work, the said parties of the first part do 40 bind themselves to pay or cause to be paid unto the said parties of the sec^pnd part the "■; "3 -nvrtviic ui piiucs :ur uiu u.ncrent aescnpnoDS oi work to be done, as is com- prised in the contract, viz : — is if 11 I-, II' 149 Rock excavation per cubic yard (ninety-five cmtM) $ 95 Eurth excavition per cubic yard (twenty-three cents) , M Masonry, 1st and 2nd class, per cubic yard (eleven dollars).. 11 00 Crib-wharfiug per cubic yard (eighty-five cents) 00 86 Rip-rap when rock is to be borrowed or hauled two thou- sand feel, per cubic yard (one dollar and fifty cents). . 1 60 Grubbing per acre (fifty dollars) 60 00 Olearing per acre (twenty dollars) go 00 Under drains per hundred cubic feet (live dollars) 6 00 And it is further ;.greed to by tue parties hereto that the said parties of the 10 second part pay to the said parties of the first part two and a half cents per running foot for building logs now lying on their works and owned by the said parties of the first part ; and the parties of the second part further agree to be governed and cotttroUed by the rules and stipulations mentioned in the original contract between the parties of the first part and the Dominion Government, so far as they do not interfere with this contract ; and further, the said parties of the second part bind themselves to the said work to the satisfaction o( the said resident engineer and to rely upon his decision in any matter pertaining to the proper carrying oi of the work, and the liability of the said parties of the second part to forfeit this contiact for non-performance of dt^y or neglect to use necessary force and diligence to bring the work to a latisfactory and timely ter- 20 mmation, but in case the engineer considers it expo''' ,nt to deal with the parties of the first part in reference to the carrying on of the wo . or liability to forfeit this contract for neglect or non-performance of duty, then the parties of the second part bind them- selves to abide by the decision of the parties of the first part. And it is further agreed upon by *.he parties hereto, that if the parties of the secon.l part wish for any changes to be made, either in description of work or quanti- ties or location of line, between stations two hundred and forty-sdven and two hun- dred and fifty-nine, and stations three hurul.od and forty-one arid three hundred and fifty-five plus fifty, and then such changes shall not increase the present liabilities of the parties of the first part, but the parties of the second part shall .eceive an amount 30 equal to what the crib-wharfing and excavations will cost, as the quantities of each • are now shown on the Engineer's plan within the afore-mentioned stations. And the parties of the first part further agree to pay unto the parties of the second part fifty cents per cubic yard for earth excavation in foundation, and one dollar and fifty cents per cubic yard for rock excavation in foundations. And it is finally agreed upon that cash payments be made once each month for work done in the month previous se returned by the Engineer, the parties of the first part retaining fifteen per cent, until the completion of the whole work as security for the faithful carrying out of the within contract, the fifteen per cent, so retained to I > paid to the parties of the second part at or before the expiration of sixty days after 40 the completion of the work herein mentioned, which shall not be considered completed until tne Jiugineer has first pronounced it so and taken it ofT the hands r ,he parties of the second part. 150 In 'ntmss whereof, the parties to these pioaents have interchangeable at' heir hands and Hea!;i this the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and del'vered In presence of (Sgd.) ANDREW CRANE, \?/itnf)8s to fii-st two signatures. (Sgd.) CHARLES S. ARCHIBALD. Witness to five last signatures. (SgJ.) II M II THOS. BOQGS. JOHN R. MURRAY, R. P. MITCHELL, STEPHEN D. OAKES, J. C. McKENZIE, ALEX. McDonald, FRANKFORT DAVIS. 10 That the sai'l Thoii-»s Boggs, John R. Murray, Robert Mitchell. Stephen D. Oa,kes mentioned in said agreement are the ?M Thomas Bogjrg, John R. Murray Robert P. Mitchell, Stephen D. Oakes respectively, a-d the said Alexander McDonald is the said plauitifl'. That, by deed dated the 23rd Soptembar, 1870. the said Alexander McDon- ald purchased a lot of land situate in Truro, in the County of Colchester, and beca!.ie seized and possessed of said land, which said deed was recorded in the Registry Office 20 at Truro, on the SrJ October, 1870. in Lihro 50, folio 4^6. That ou the first of Octo- ber, 187:, the said Alexander McDonald and his wife mortgaged the said land to Edwa.d Smith for twelve hundred dollars, the princ-pal of which said mortaage is still due and unpaid, which said K.rtgage was racorded in said Registry Office on the r2nd October, 1870. in Libro 50, folio 4^9. That a Writ of Attachment was issued on the 27th day of May, 1872, under the Absent or Absconding Debtors' Act, at the suit 01 the Truro Boot and Shoe Manufacturing Company against said Alexander Mc- Donald and others, endorsed for 8724.00 and upwards, under whica said attachment said land was levied upon, and which attachment was registered on the Slst May 1872. in said Registry Office, in Lib. E., folio ^70, and that daid Truro Boot and Shoe' 30 Manufacturing Company, in said suit, thereafter recovered judgment against said Alexander McDonald for the sura of $828.90, debt and costs, which said judgment, dated June 13th, 1873, was recorded in said Registry Office on the 17th June, 1873,' in Lib. E, folio 667. That a Writ of Attachment was issued the 28th Mcy,' (872, under said Absent or Absconding Debtors' Act at the suit of James Caffroy and Gard- ner Clish. against said Alexander McDonald and others, endri-^ed for $109.20, under which said attachment said land was levied u;:on uadei said Act, and which said attachment was registered in said Registry Office on thu 4th of June, 1872, in Lib. E, folio 477, and that said James C&Srey and Gardner Clish in said suit thereafter recovered judgment against said Alexander McD-nald and othere, for the sum of 40 $168.45, debt and costs, which said judgmer, ., dated June 13th. 1873. was reenrded in said Registry Office, on the 17th June, 187?, in Lib. E, folio 568. That a Writ of Attachment was i.ssued the 3rd of June, 1872, under said Abse" c or .A bsconding Debtors- Act, of the suit of Patrick O'Mullin and John O'Mullin againat said Alexander Mc- i 151 Donald and othei-s, endorsed for S511.20, under which said attachment said land was levied upou, and which said attachment was registered in said Registry Office on the 5th of June, 1872, that the said Alexander McDonald, the now plaintiff, desiring to relieve the said land from said attachment, put in and perfected special bail under said Act to respond the judgment, and a Judge of the Supreme Court, by an order in said suit, ordered that the said land be relieved from said attachment in said last mentioned suit under said Act. That a Writ of Attachment was issued the 13th June, 1872, under said Act, at the suit of Robert O'Mullen against said Alexander McDonald and others, endorsed for $1663.47, under which said attachment said land was levied upon under said Act, 10 a-d which said attachment was registered in said Registry Office on the 5th June, 1872,inii6. E., folio 473 ; that the said Alexander McDonald, the now plainciffi desiring to relieve the said land from said attachment, put in and perfected special bail under said Act to respond the judgment under said Act, and a Judge of the Supreme Court by an order in said last mentioned suit, ordered that the said land be relieved from the said attachment in said last mentioned suit under said Act. That the said Alexander McDonald gave a confession of judgment to Thomas Bogg:5 and John R. Murray, then carrying on business as merchants in Halifax, under the style and firm of Thomas Boggs and Company, foi- ten thousand dollars, and the said judgment dated 17th June, 1872, for ten thousand dollars debt and sixteen dol- 20 lars costs, was entered up in Truro aforesaid, and recorded in the said Registry office on the 18th June, 1872, in Lib. E, folio 487. That by Indenture of Assignment, dated 13th March, 1875, made between said John R. Murray ot the one part, and Israel Longworth of the other par*,, after reciting the said last mentioned judgment and that said Robeit O'Mullen had recovered a ver- dict in said suit hereinbefore mentio'ied in which Robert O'Mullen wa? plaintiff and said Alexander McDonald and others were defendants against said Alexander Mc- Donald for $1663.49, and that a rule nisi had been taken out under f,he statute on filing bail to respond the judgment upon said rule nisi, and after reciting that, ex- ception had been taken to said bail, and that said John R. Murray had agreed to 30 assign the said judgment to the said Israel Longwoith, to hold the same in trust as further security, in addition to said bail to respond the judgment on said rule nisi, th. said John R. Murray did sell, assign, transfer, and set over unto the said Israel Longworth the said judgment upon the trust, upon said rule nisi being discharged or abandoned, to sell, assign or dispose of the said judgment or to issue execution there- upon, and to take and use all means and process to recover and collect the amount due upon said judgment, and by execution or otherwise, or to grow due thereon and out of such sums of money to arise from such rule or otherwise realized under said judgment, to pay to said Robert O'Mullen the said sum of $1663.49 and costs to be taxed and inierest from date of verdict, and the costs that the said Israel Longworth 40 should be put to under the judgment thereby assigned, and to pay over the residue to said John R. Murray or such persons as he might direct, and in case the said rule niai should be made absolute, then to reconvey said judgment to said John R. Murrry, which said Indenture of Assignment was rccordod in said Regis iffi' May, 1875, in Lib. 67, folio 6m. UlUx.andcr McDonald for the Vr'ork so don- in the tnonth of July, 1873, and the said Thomas Boggs, John R. Murray, Robert P. Mitchell and Stephen D. Oakes did not, nor did either of them, furnish or pay to the said Alexander Mc- lo4 Donald any cash payments on account of said work during the month of August, 1873, and that sometime in September, 1873, when three-fourths at least had been performed under said articles of agreement, the said Alexander McDonald, on account thereof, and for not receiving any cash payments for work done by him during the said month previous thereto under said articles of agreement, was obliged to arrange with said Robert P. Mitchell and Stephen D. Oakes, that they, the said Mitchell and Oakes, should have control and management of the said portion of the work men- tioned in said first articles of agreement, with power to take possession of and complete the said work, the said Alexander McDonald paying unto thorn out of the moneys payable to him previously for said work, a sum equal to the monthly expendi- 10 ture for the completion of said work. That said Alexander McDonald continued the work under said arrangeinent, and was charged one thousand dollars by said Mitchell and Oakes for services of said Mitchell in relation to said arrangement superintending said work, and said work was so carried on by said Alexander Mc- Donald from said month of September, 1873, until the work was completed and finished under said contract. That the said Alexander McDonald built and constructed the said portion of work on said portion of said section in a good and workmanlike manner, and accord- ing to the directions and to the satisfaction of the resident engineer, and .said work was taken ofl" his hands by said resident engineer as completed in the month of Octo- 20 ber, A. D., 1874 ; and the said Alexander McDonald was always willing and ready co perform the said contract with said Murray, Boggsj, Mitchell and Oakes on his part, and did perform the same except so far as he was prevented from so doing by the said Murray, Boggs, Mitchell and Oakes' breach of the said agreement hereinbefore mentioned. That the amount of work actually done by .said Alexander McDonald under said agreement is as follows : — 250807 oub. yds. earth excavation actually done, at 23 c. ..$ 57685 61 9650 " rock •' at 95 c 916V 50 1938 " masonry at $11.00 21318 00 1930 " earth foundation at 50 c 965 00 30 Clearing 2^ acres at 820.00 50 00 Levelling foundation 50 00 Pumping 1000 00 Road diversions 1836 00 Catch water drains 955 50 Rock excavations in drains 9 50 Packing stone round culverts 300 00 Crib wharfing performed second time in consequence crib- wharfing having been washed away by freshets 1000 00 Crib-whaifing actually built 28390, at 85 c , 24139 15 40 Rip-Rap 5369, at $1.50 8053 50 $126529 76 That under said articles of agreement the said Alexander McDonald on account of a change made by him in the location of the line by which he performed more earth excavation than he otherwise would have done, and would but for said change 165 have been obliged to have performed more crib-wharfing and thus changing the des- cription of the work, is advised that he is entitled to charge the said Thomas Boggs, John R. Murray, Robert P. Mitchell and Stephen D. Oakes for an amount less than the foregoing amount by about four thousand dollars ; that the items of pumping, $1000, and packing stone around culverts, S300, although not included in said articles of agreement were necessarily performed by said /xlexander McDonald in connection with said work, and it was verbally agreed that this work should be paid for to him. That with the exception of the said four thousand dollars, the said Alexander McDonald alleg^that he is entitled to charge the said suti of one hundred and twenty- 10 six thousand five uundred and twenty-nine dollars and 3eventy-six cents, the sum total of the said work performed by him, against the said John R. Murray, the said Richard B. Boggs and Charles Beverly Bullock, executors of said Thomas Boggs, and the said Robert P. Mitchell and Stephen D. Oakes. That although sixty days have elapsed since the completion of the work mentioned in said pgreement, neither the said Thomas Boggs, during his lifetime, nor his executors since his death, nor the said John R. Murray, nor the said assignee since his insolvency, nor the said Mitchell, nor Oakes, nor any peison on their behalf has paid to the said John C. McKenzie, Alexander McDonald, or Frinkfort Davis the prices for the work done by him, the said Alexander McDonald, under the said articles of agreement and 20 due to the said Alexander McDonald, and have not paid the fifteen per cent, which was retained by them each month on the moneys payable to the said Alexander McDonald for the work performed in each month by him under said articles of agreement ; but only a portion of said prices have been paid by them, and said Alexander McDonald alleges that a large balance or sum of money is due and owing to him from the said Murray, the said Richard B Boggs and Charles Beverly Bullock, executors of said Thomas Boggs, and said Mitchell and Oakes on account of the work performed by him under said articles of agreement, and he is ^l^illing to give them credit for every sum of money, or set-ofi which they may have against him, and are lawfully entitled to charge him with ; but which on sccount of the complicated state of their affairs and transactions, and the disputes existing between them and him, and on account of some of the parties to said articles of agreement seeking to charge bin, with moneys and goods, furnished to him as separate transactions apart from said contract, he has no meiuis of ascertaining with accurracy, but he alleges that the said balance or sum of money due to him as aroresaid, is upwards of twenty thousand dollars, and may be found to be much larger on an account being taken That the said Judgment, with interest and costs of the said Truro Boot and Shoe Marufactur ' Company, and James CaflPrty and Gardner Clish have been all paid to the said Truro Boot and Shoe Manufacturing Company, and James Caffrey and Gardner Clish. and are satisfied, although not entered as satisfied, and the said Truro Boot and 40 Shoe Manufacturing Company and the said Caffrey and Clish have no Interest in either of them, and are not selling the land under these judgments. That the said judgments, interests and costs have been paid by said Alexander McDonald and by said Thomas G. McMullen for said Alexander McDonald, with the I5fi exception of the sum of four hundred and fifty-eight dollars and thirty-three cents or thereabouts, which was paid by said John R. Murray, sur-Iving partner of said Thomas Boggs and Company, on account of the judgment of the Truro Boot and Shoe Manufac- turing Company, and charged by him to -aid Alexander McDonald, and the said John R. Murray has received the sum of two hundred and eighty dollars due for rents arising from said land for which said Alexander McDonald is entitled to be credited. That the said judgment of ten thousand dollars was only given as collateral security and was not for a debt or any part of a debt due to said Thomas Boggs and John R. Murray by said Alexander McDonald. That the said Israel Longworth and Robert O'Mullen at the time of the assignment 10 of said judgment for $10,016.00 knew that said judgment was only given to said John R. Murray and Thomas Boggs as such security as aforesaid and that it was without consideration at said time. That said Israel Longworth has given notice in the Boyal Gazette n' rt^spapt- of the sale of said land for the 27th of March, instant, under the said thee judgments, that is to say, the said j- dgment of the Truro Boot and Shoe Manufacturing Company, the said judgment of James Caffrey and Gardner Clibh and the said judgment of Thomas Boggs and John Robert Mu^ay, and three executions issued on said judgments which said executions have been issued the 2l8t February last, passed for the full amounts of said judgments with interest on each, and subsequent costs have been issued as aforesaid by 20 said Israel Longwoith, as the attorney of the plaintiffs in each suit. That although the said Th'^Tias Boggs has died since the said judgment for $10,016.00, the execution issued upon said judgment is issued in his name as well as that of said John R. Murray, who has also become insolvent since said judgment and without a writ of revivor cdor to enter a suggestion of said death, and that said John R. Murray is entitled to execution. That before this suit, the said Israel Longworth has been asked on behalf of said Alexander McDonald for whom he was acting in the sale of the said lands under said executions, and he has answered for Robert O'Mullen, of whom he is such trustee as aforesaid, and for one Samuel Rettie id Thomas G. McMuUen, anJ. said Robert O'Mullin has no interest in the two smaller j^.dgments afore- SO said. That said Samuel Rettie has now no interest in any of said judgments, and said Thomas G. McMuUen never gave any authority to said Israel iliongworth to sell said lands under any of said judgments. That the said John R. Murray having become insolvent, and the said Mitchell and Oakes unable tc pay their liabilities, the said Alexander McDonald fears that they will not be able to pay the amou sought to be recovered herein. That the sale of the said land, which, if from all incumbrances, is now worth between five p.nd six thousand dollars, under the three said executions upon the said judgments, at the same time, would greatly embarass the said Thomas G. McMullen and prejudice his interest under the circumstances hereinbefore set out, and he has no 40 other ad.oqnatc means of protecting his intcrCi f,, u.id the plaintiffs allege that raere is no adequate remedy at law. th Ri M to de w< pr th( ho Tl bo an W 1* 157 They, therefore, humblj pray that an account may be taken of the amount due to the said Alexander McDonald under the said anicles of agreement, and that the nJd Richard B. Bo^rgs and Charles Beverly Bullock, Execu»«.ra, as aforesaid, and John R. Murray, Robert P. Mitchell and Stephen D. Oakea may bo decrtjed and ordered to pay to the said Alexander McDonald the amount found to be due to him for said work un- der said agreement. 'Lhat an injunction may issue to restrain the said Israel Long- worth or any of the said defendants from selling said land or taking any further proceedings on said judgments or executions, or otherwise, and if said land bs sold by the said Israel Longworth under said executions, that he may be decreed &aC ordered to hold the proceeds thrreof in trust for said Thomas G. McMuUen, f bo paid to said 10 Thomas G. McMullen when the amount due to said Alexander McL jnald herein shall bo ascertained, and that said judgments may be released and that the defendants may answer the matters herein fully under oath. Issued at Halifax, this 20th day of March, A. D., 1976. WALLACE GRAHAM, Plai.itijr* Attorney. M. I. WILKINS, Prothonotary. (Copy.) 158 EXHIBIT •' E 2."— J. W. J. 1600 1250 450 1000 1?, CRIB-WHARFING. 16 IS! 18 12 14 18 ^0 1137 1000 S60 1030 3527 EXHIBIT "D I) D."— J. W. J. Interest statement McKemie, McDonald & Go. in account with Thos. BoggsSc Go. Dr. From 1872 to Slst December, 1872 time. Jan'y. 1 , $ 621 55 12 months 1,690 55 12 " May 16 1,738 19 137 days. June 18 76 75 104 « July 31 1,300 00 5 months. Aug. 14 81 15 47 days. 31 349 13 31 " " 762 50 " 1,793 50 " 200 00 Sept. 3 80 90 30 1,5«5 05 AMOtTNT. 10 $ 37 29 101 40 39 13 1 31 32 60 Oct. 19 13 77 4,413 00 28 58 127 25 31 800 00 Nov. 9 3 95 603 23 30 1,000 90 Dec. 31 600 00 122 122 122 27 92 19 28 61 40 31 1 76 15 27 35 95 4 01 20 35 22 75 18 30 carried to other side. 1873. 8 02 5 10 $305 46 30 lan'y . 1 . To balance of interest paper 116 24 >( 1. (( 3l8t t << 31. << (( Feb'y. 28. (( << Mar. 26. (( f( 31. «< « April 30. ki l< May 9. ft « « JiinA 30 d<>nt to his wvAvinr pn.wi,.!>nt,. thai-. tV.c \ynvk Hltos'.ld bo •»,» , twK^-'^-^i'mmis .»» g^l^^ii^^^^gjjgj^l^jj^^j^g^^^^^^g^ imik 173 returned by the engineer and that a percentage was to be retained until the engineer had pronounced the work complete and taken it off his hands. If we reject this paper C 2, there are no returns or certificates on which the claimant could recover anything. I therefore think that I am justified in looking upon this paper as equivalent tc- the returns and the certificate required from the engineer. This paper contains an esti- mate of the work done on the contract by all the contractors, except tlut portion clone by McKiel, who was paid in full for all his work, and the work done on the sedition by Archibald and Vosburg previous to the sub-contract ; and having no means of dis- tinguishing between the work done by the sub- contractors, I shall consider it all w^^ done by the claimant and charging him the monies paid to J. F. McDonald & Co. 10 The measurements given by claimant in his account annexed to his affidavit and filed as his claim, are largely in excess of the measurements given in by Gra.it, and there are some items of work not mentioned in claimant's claim, but these I let pass as they have been probably introduced under other headings. Grant returns the sum of $78,940.50 as the ascertained value of the work done by the claimant under the sub-contract between stations 162 and 380. A statement I marked ZZ contain- ing admissions of payments and oft-set were handed in and agreed to by the parties. I have not taken into account the two sums, amount paid McKiel by contestants, and the percentage retained from McKiel claimed by claimant, because his work accord- ing to Grant's testimony was kept separate and McKiel had been paid in full for all 20 the work done by him. I do not allow the contestant the amounts he claims due on horses, waggons, Ac, nor for the wear and tear of tools, nor Mitchell's charge for superintendence ; and I also strike off" all the charges for interest, and find that the contestants have paid on account of the sub-contract $85,7(j4.20, as against their indebtedness of $78,940.50. I therefore disallow the claim, and give judgment for the contestants with costs. V mm R ' 'IT fj| 174 " -tn " w Insolvent Act of 1875 and Amending Acts. IN THE COUNTY COUET FOR THE COUNTY OF HALIFAX, DISTRICT NO. Canada, Province of Nova Scotia Co. OF Halifax, SS. ] In the matter of the estate of JOHN R. MURRAY, an Insolvent, AND ALEXANDER McDONALD, Claimant, AND 10 JAMES G. FOSTER, Assignee of said estate, Contestant. Upon hearing read the petition of the claimant in the above estate herein for an appeal to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, the notice of motion and the two several affidavits of service thereof, the evidence taken before me at the hearing of the contesta- tion of the claim uerein, the objections to said claim and answers thereto, the papers in the matters before me at the hearing, and motion, I do order that said petitioner have leave to appeal, and leave is hereby granted to them to appeal to the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, at Halifax, from my judgment, sustaining said objections and overruling and disallowing this claim of the said complainant herein. Security has been filed herein to my satisfaction. gn Halifax, January 28th, 1881. J. W. JOHNSTON, Judge of Co. Court, District No. 1. > 176 Order for Amendment of Claim. INSOLVENT ACT OF 1875, AND AMENDING ACTS. In the County Court 1880, District No. I HALIFAX S.S. In the matter of the Estate of JOHN R. MURRAY, an Insolvent, AND ALEXANDER McDONALD, Claimant, AND JAMES G. FOSTER, Assignee of said Estate, Contestant. Upon hearing read the affidavits of Alexander McDonald and Frederick A Law- rence made herein on the 18th day of March, instant, and on motion, I do hereby order that the claim filed in the above matter be amended by changing item number three (crib-wharfing) from '« 28,399 cubic yards crib-wharfing at 85 cts $24 139 " to " 43 399 cubic yards crib-wharfing at 85 cts., $36,889.15," and also by adding 'to the said claim two Items as follows, that is to say : 13. To levelling rock foundations for 6 culverts at $100 per culvert $600 00 14. Undei drains, 2,700 lineal feet, at $5.00 per 100 feet 135 oq Dated at Halifax, March 19th, 1880. On motion ot Mr. Henry for Claimant. 10 J. W. JOHNSTON, Judge Co. Court, Dist. No. 1. 20