J THE BAIE DES CHALEDRS. 83 THE BAIE DES CHALEURS. Sttmmary of theEvidence before the Royal ConimissJon, GUILT OF THE GOVERNMENT/ CONOLUSIVELY ESTABLISHED — DISTRIBUTION OP THE BoODLE — MeRCIER's Contradictory Statements — History op the Whole Transactions. For the Information of the pubJic we give the following brief statement of the salient points elicited in the coarse of the recent enquiry at Qaebec which we believe establish against the execntive Government of the province, not only the perpetration of an act or course of acts, at once emi- nently illegal and opposed to the interests of the country, but designed and carried through from improper motives and for the personal and pecuniary advantage of certain member!* of the executive and their friends and supporters. It is desirable to begin with a narrative of the facts as the proof discloses them. The Bale des Chaleurs Railway company was incorporated in 1872 by the Quebec act 36 Vic. cap. 43, the object being to build a railway from a point on the Intercolonial near Metapedia to Paspebiac, a distance of 100 miles, and thence ultimately toGTaspe. In the sama session, a subsidy was granted it of 10,000 acres of Isnd per mile, which by the act 37 Vic , chap. 2 was converteo into a cash subsidy of $2,500 per mile. This charter was allowed to lapse. By the act 45 Vic, chap. 53, a new char- ter was given the company, the promoters and directors being, amoogst others, Mr. Theodore Rebitallle, Mr. Thomas McGreevy and Mr. Htopel, managing director, and by an act of the same eession — chapter 23 — the revived company was subsidized to the extent of 10,000 acres n^r mile for 180 miles. In apparent < com- pliance with the statute, the nromoters subscribed for shares in the undertaking to a large amount, and calls were made for a percentage on the subscriptions. By a pro- cess which it is unnecessary to detail, the amount of these calls, though apparently paid, was U'sver exacted, and it is the indis- puted fact that the company never as such had one shilling of resources beyond public grants and promised municipal subscriptions. It would seem that the promoters bent their energies successfully towards obtaining financial aid from both the Do- minion and provincial Legislatures. Before the fall of 1889 Parliament had granted no less than $620,000 to aid in the construction of the first seventy miles, and the Legislature of Quebec $350,000 for the same purpose. More than this, the province granted $280,000 to aid in the build- ing of the ntxt thirty miles — the total grant on 100 miles thus amounting to $1,250,000, or $12,500 per mile. By what is termed the doubling up procese>, although in December, 18S9, uQly 8ixty miles had been completed, and those somewhat imperfectly, the com- pany had received $874,175 equivalent to $14,569 per mile. TEE ARMSTRONG CONTRACT. On the 9th of June, 1886, Charles N. Arm- strong entered into a contract v ith the Bale des Chaleurs Railway company to build and equip the road for the first 100 miles for the sum of $20,000 per milf, pay- able as follows : $6,400 *.o be paid out of the Dorninioa sabHidies and $1:^,600 par mile ia the first mortgage bonds of the coin- paoy. The agreement provit'ed that if the Legislatare — aH proved snbseiuentiy to be tne case — aatborized the payment of cash in lien of bonds, Armstrong Bhonld bu paid BQch cash in lieu of an equivalent amount of bondt). On the 9th of lone, 1886, Armstmne: sab-let a portion of bis contract to the lirm of McDoDHld, O Brien & Co. on advantagu- ouHi term(<, aud these gentlemen practically built, au<1 vff^e ultimately, after some diffi- culty, paid for the construction of the first 20 miles. This sub-contract came to an end in April, 1887, by mutual assent, and the enterprise fell back into Armstrong's hands, and he appears to have jone a little woik on it In 1867 and the early spring of 1888, when failing to pay his wotkuien or those Jrom whom he obtained supples a new arrangement became neces- sary. So by contract dated 8th June, 1888, between himself and Henry McFarlane, to which the compa.iy became a party as joint and several obligee with Armstrong, Mc- Farlane undertook to finish the first forty miles of road, to provide rolling stock to a certain extent, and to build twenty miles of new road, the whole according to prices fixed by schedule To secure McFarlane, certain subsidies were transferred to him and be was also given a promissory lien on the road. Uniler his con- tract, McFarlane finished the first forty miles and nearly completed the followiog twenty, when for various reasons detailed in the proof he was compelled to suspend his operations and ultimately to assign his estate to curators, Riddell & Watson, of Montreal. Apart from subsidies received by him, McFarlane put into the work money of his own and funds supplied him by the Ontario and Eastern Township banks amounting to a large sum. McFarlane and his curators are now and have been for some time past at law with the company and Armstrong, claiming from them no less than $318,000 under the advice of the Hon. Francois Langelier, their counsel, and the brother of the provincial secretary. With- out encumbering this paper with the details pro and con, it is submitted that the evi- dence abundantly establishes that McFar- lane's claim against both Armstrong indthe company under his contract is a valid one, both on legal and equitable grounds, to a large amount, probably ten the extent of at least $175,006. AnUSTROMG HAD NO VALID CLAIM. Now, as no work whatever was done on the Bait) des Cbaleurs road either bv Arrc- etrong; the sole contractor in chief, or by any sub-contractor under him, after the early autumn ot 18o9. it is obviously import- ant to define accurately his position towards the company and towards his sub-con- tractors, or, in other words, to determine what amount Armstrong would i.ave been entitled to receive from the company and been bound to pay McFarlane, had his con- tract with the former ended with the com- pletion of the sixtieth mile east from Meta- pedia. In arriving at these figures, for the sake of simplicity, we shall dis- card certain considerations making against A.rmstrong ; for example that his contract was to build lOO miles, that tbe »ixty miles were not completed, and deal with his claim as if his undertaking bad bteu limited to the building of sixty miles and no more, and that he had completed such contract so as to entitle the company to issue bonds. Armstrong's pretension is (Exhibit No. 63 p. 342 ot the Senate's report) tnat taking into account, some trifling expenditure on work in excess of the sixty miles, and deducting subsidiej received, the balance due him for work done amounted to $298,- 943 62 cash and that consequently in settli'jg for $175,000 he settled lor a sum much below that actually due him as ad- mitted by the company. He asserts tbaton the contract basis of $2 0,000 a mile he did work amounting in the aggregate to $1,260,- 635 and received on account suificient to re- duce the balance due him to the cash amount just stated. Is this his true position, and, if not, what]|i8 ? The first cons deration that strikes one at a glance is that on Arm- strong's own showing, this balance is due him in bonds and not in cash. He himself puts the possihle extreme value of the com- pany's bonds at 7& cents in the dollar. This at once reduces his claim by $75,000. And if we put, as the evidence founded on the ex- perience of railway contractors and promo- ters establishes, ttie probable value of the bonds at 33 cents in the dollar — a liberal estimation — the cash value of Armstrong's claim on his own showing becomes under $100,000. And to obtain these bonds, or their cash equivalent, he bad in tbe first in- stance to discharge two precedent condi- tions, to settle the debt due by him primarily and by the company second* arily as his warrantor to McFarlane, estab- lished at at least . $175,000, and for which the latter bad the road in pledge, and farther to supply the contract pro rata •monnt of roUicif Block on the sixty milee, OS compared with the stipulated amoact on the cae hundred miles. To discharge this latter obligation would have cost him a large sum. And so on his own showing, to obtain $298,000 in bonds, equal to $100,000 in cash, he was necessarily bound to expend at least $200,000 in cash. But this position of his is not the true one. On the state- ments produced and not disputed, Armstrong, giving him the benefit of the most favor- ab e construction of his contract has been overpaid in cash to the ertent of at least $140,175. On the assumption — the reason- able assumption — that the twuds stand to cash in the ratio of one to three, it is established, incontrovertibly, that taking into account the excess of cash payments, Armstrong was merely entitled to $45,475, in bonds, being of course still bound to free the road from the sub-contractors' lien and to eupply the rolling btock as above stated. Thus on the most favorable construction of his contract and case, Armstrong was, not only as the Senate's committee found, not entitled to anything from the company, but, on the contrary, largely in its debt. The words of the Lieutenant-Governor, in his letter to Mr, Meroier, " that the company owed no money payments to its contractor, Mr. Armstrong,'' From his speeches in the House, cited in His Honor's coirespoDdence, Mr. Metcier clearly recognized this obliga- tion and .had his attention specially turned to the subject. But more than this, the re- cord of the Public Works department on the company's affairs clearly proves that some members of the executive at least both knew and had foil means of knowing. Mr. Charles Lant^elier was, by order-in-council, dated the 5th of October, 1889, appointed a special commissioner to investigate the company's affairs, and the reports made by him from time to time and printed by order of the Legislature, and specially his report under date of the 26th of February, 1890, which forms part of the record, show in so many words that he re- cognised and pointed out that the troubles on the road were attributable to the com- pany and to Armstrong, and not to McFar- lane, who in his opinion was an able and honest contractor, who had done and wag prepared to do his work well, if fairly dealt with by his employers. As the law partner of his brother Francois it was natural 'J:at he should recognise the fairness of McFarlane's claim as he did. Again, in 1 889, the McFarlane claim was'specially brought under the notice of the executive by a formal letter from Mr. Desmarais, M.L.A , of St. Hyacinthe, who ac- companied his statement by notarial copies of McFarlane's contract with Armstrong and the company, and of his protest against the latter. Add to this, repeated letters on the subject from the Ontario bank, and the curators, Eiddell & Watson, all of which are to be found now in the Public Works record, aud it is impossible to entertain the slightest doubt that, as a matter of fact, and without giving credit for any special intelligence to these gentlemen, Mr. Mercier, Mr. Garneau and Mr. Charles Lap^elier, who had by this time joined the ministry as provincial sec- retary, were one and all aware m the fall of 1890, that the company had no means apart from subsidies, that Armstrong far from having a claim against the company had received far more than he was entitled to, and that McFarlane had a large legitimate claim, for which he held both t&e company and the road, and had been thrown into difficulties solely from the improper action of Armstrong and the company. It is unnecessary to press this point/ further ; the subsequent action of the executive, as will be seen, abundantly confirms the conclusion arrived at. The Legislature in 1889, at the instance of Mr. Mhirdier, authorized an advance of $20,000 against subsidies earned, and the expendi- ture of this sum was entrusted, nob to the company, not to Armstrong, who were both distiiiatsd by tha GoTercment, bnt to Mr. Cbrj sostome Laogelier, deputy registrar of the province, with inetractions to lay it oat in defrayiog claims against the compaay, its contractors and sub-contractorB. THE ARM6TR0NG-MU0NALD PROPOSAL. While Mr. Langelier was engaged in this task Mr. Heaton Armstrong, a London baniier of means and repotation, then in the country.^ was approached by Mr, Mercier, and requested by him to make an offer to complete the railway from Mutapedia to Paspabiac, that is to complete the sixty m.les already spoken of and to bntld the additional forty. Mr. H. Armstrong en- tertained the proposal favorably and placed himself in commanication witn Mr. J. J. McDonald, au experienced contractor — a man for wbom Mr. Mercier, as appears by his evidence, has the highest opinion — and he, in company with his engineer and » practical contractor, at once examined the line, and made himsell: acquainted with the affairs and position of the company and its contractors. Mr. H. Cameron, Q.C., of To- ronto, also acted as solicitor for Mr. H. Armstrong. In the result, Mr. H. Arm- strong, through Mr. J. J. Macdonald, made the following proposal : — 1. To complete the first sixty miles except the bridge over the Cascapedia without aid. a. To build the Cascapedia bridge, with a subsidy of $60,000. 3. To build the forty miles of road from Cascapedia to PaRpebiac for a subsidy of $400,oui), or for $lo,uoo per mile, payable $200,000 on the completion ol the first, twenty miles and the balance on the completion of the last twenty. 4. To pay out of his own resources at once all the debts of the coucero, and to acquire the stock of and satisfy the promoters. 6. To supply adequate rolling stocfc and to guarantee the running of the road for five years. 6. To ideposlt $840,000, with which the Government should pay the interest on the bonds for ten years 7. The bonda at $20,000 per mile to be the properly of the new contractors . Under this proposal ihe $400,000 was to inclnde and take the place of all previous provincial subsidies voted. This was in October, 1890, and the neeotiations con- nected with it, initiated by Mr. H. Arm- strong and continued by Mr. J. J. McDonald on his behalf, lasted a considerable time. PACAUD COMES ON THB SCENE. During their course it seemed to be ad- mitted on all sides that the services of Mr. Ernest Pacand, the editor of the L'Electeur^ and a warm snpporter of the administration, were etisential to succeas, and that gentle- man as a recognized go-between was accord- ingly oiled into counsel. Through his in- tervention the above heads of agreement were rapidly determined on, and Mr. Mer-> cier's assent obtaine^i to the introduction of the necet^sary legislatio.i. Mr. H.Armstrong and Mr. McDonald arrranged for a satisfac- tory compromise of the McFarlane claim, and all ttiat remained to be done was to settle bow much Mr. C. N. Armstrong and the promotors would exact before parting with the control of the company. As difficulties were met with in deaiing with these gentlemen, on the 5ih of December, 1890, Mr. Cameron, on behalf of Mr. H. Armstrong, withdrew the latter's oCfer. .'' egotiatiuns, however, went on, Mr Pacand continuing to net in his capacity of go- between, and ultimately during the second •estion of 1890, Mr. Mercier introduced and carried through the Houses two ito^oitant measures immediately bearing on the sub- ject, both of which became law. By th#» first of these, 54 Vic., cap. 37, the executive Government took power to cancel, on grounds satisfactory to themselves, the charter of any railway company incorpor- ated under the laws of this province. This act, as appears by Mr. Merciers speech in- troducing it, was aimed in terms at the Bale do8 Chaleurs Railway company. The second measure, 54 Vic , cap. 88, authorized the Lieutenant-Governor- in-council to grant the following subsidies : — " [i] To contribute to the cost of construct- ing the bridge to be built over the Grand Cas- capediac river, on the Bale des Chaleurs rail- way, a subsidy not exceeding In all $50,000, upon condition that the said bridge be built at the place fixed by the Ijleutenant-Governor- iu council, who may order that such bridge be built for the passage of vehicles and foot passengers, as well «i8 for the passage of the railway trains, if he deems It In the public Interest. " fj] Tc aid in completing and equipping the B-iledes Chaleurs railway, throughout its whole length, for the part not comnr'?nced and hat not fims-'ed, about 80 miles, going toor near Gaspe basin, a subsidy of li),00o acres of land per mile, not to exceed in all 800,000 acres. •' Payable to any person or persons, com- pany or companies, establish ng that tbey are In a position to carry out the said works and to supply the rolling stock for the whole road and keep H in good working order, and also on condition that the balance of the pri- vileged debts of the Bale des Chaleurs Rail- way company be paid, the whole to the satis- faction of the Lleutenant-Govemor-in- council." It is no part of our present duty to criti- c!z6 the policy or impolicy of acts of the Legrlslatare, bnt we venture to Msert witb referencH to the former act, which in its terms takes valuable property out of the protection of the courts and the law and places it ander the absolute control of per- sons who most necessarily be guided by mixed motives, that no measure at once more calculated to shake confidence in in- TOBtors and excite the cupidity of the jis- bonebt And oorrupt, was ever placed on the statute book of our province. Be this as it may, on these acts being assented to on the 30th of December, 1890, Mr. Mercier was in a posi- tion to deal Hummarily with the claims of C.N. Armstrong, Riopel and Robitaille, ■which he than knew, as we now know, amounted to nothing. The proposal of the London banker was a reasonable one. It afforded a fair means of extricating the road from past difficulties and ensuring its com- pletion on terms satisfactory to all really in- terested, and liberal to the promoters and C. K. Armstrong. Why then was the action of the latter, whom Mr. Meroier had denounced, and whom both he and Mr. Garneau knew had no substantial claim allowed to block it, more particularly when Mr. Mercier had by the legislation alluded to power to enforce its acceptance by a word ? If the legislation was obtained for an honest purpose, surely in view of hie past declarations and his approval of the Eeaton-Armstrong offer, now was ^he time to cse it. Why did Mr. Mercier not do so ? The answer to this enquiry leads to the con- sideration of Mr. Pacacd's position. THE TOLL-TAKERS KXACTJ0N8. It is plain from the evidence in this mat- ter that for some years past a general im- pression has obtained amongst persons hav- ing business, and especially business of a financial nature with the ajdministration, that it is essential "to see Pituaud" and ac- -cordingly, though one would have Imgained that Mr. Mercier and Mr. Garneau eould have concluded an arrangement with busi- ness men such H. Armstrong and McDonald without the intervention of a newspaper editor, Mr. Pacaud made his appearance on the scene. His remuneration was at an early stage of the proceedings fixed at what most men wot^Id considc^r an out- tageously exorbitant sum- $50,000, for ft few interviews with his political friends. Mr. Pacaud tbonght differently. He at ODce stated to Mr. J. J. McDonald that this ram was not enongh. It is true that Mr. Facand denies this and asserts that he merely expected $4,000 or $5,000. In view, however, of the subsequent $100,000 and ol the undispij^ed fact that his services for ob- t'iining payment of an estimate from the Government to Mr. McDonald of $31,000 were rewarded by between $4,000 and $5,000, it is impossible to accept his assertion. The statement of Mr. McDonald is and was felt to be by all who heard bis evidence tir':tly true. We have therefore Mr. Pacaud from the first dissatisfiiHl with the amount he was to receive as the market value of what he calls his <■ political intluence." Meanwhile Messrs. Riopel and Charles N. Armstrong, being of course aware of the legislation and the power with which it armed the Government and gentlemen pos- sessino: po1i''cal induencewith it, undiearn- iug also of the negotiations between Mr. Mercier and McDonald, became serioasly al rmed, and it occurred to them, too, that their best course wan to applay to Mr. Pacaud. Mr. Charles N. Armstrong hud heard from different sources that the Mc- Donald-Armstrong syndicate had arranged with Pacaud for either $50,000 or $75,000 And so, in the early part ol March last, in an interview with thai gentleman Armstrong asked him to act as the agent with the Government for a new syn- dicate which was in course of formation, to take up the Bale des Chalaurs railway. Mr. Pacaud stated that he was still bound to Mr. J. J. McDonald and his friends, adding that if he were off with them he would be pleaded to assist the new syndicate. Aftei this interview of the 5th or 6th of March, no further serious consideration was evez given by the Government to McDonald or his proposal. THE COOPER SYNDICATE PROPOSALS. We now come to the new syndicate who actually obtained the road and were Mr. Pacaud's second employers. First of all comes Mr. Gooper, who as a creditor of Mc- Farlane's to the extent of $18,000 had al- ready an interest in the road. Mr. Cooper's debt was secured by bonds on the road to the extent of $50,000, which security by the way he valued, as he tells ns in his testi- mony, at $9,000 or less than twenty cents on the dollar. Amonsr the others were Mr. A. M. TiK>m, Mr. Dawes, of Lachine, and otuers, all nominees of Cooper. The leading man was Mr. Thorn who had previously learned the natare of McDonald's offer. C. N. Ai-m- strong Informed Mr. Thorn that he waa prepared for $75,000 to discharge his claim *8 and settle with the promoters in such a way thftt the new syndicate by obtaining a transfer of their shares woald vittaally con- trol the road. Under the J. J* McDonald proposal, Armstrong and the pro- moters would have received be- tween $40,000 and $50,000 only, and thus their support was obtained. Mr. Cooper shortly after this appears to have consulted Mr. R. Lailamme, of Montreal. On the loth of March, Mr. Mercier beinir aboat to sail for Europe, Mr. Armstrong wrote Pacaud urging him to come up to Montreal so as to see Mr. Mercier before he left and come to an understanding. After further correspondence by letter and tele- graph Pacaud went to Montreal, where he met C. N . Armstrong at the Windsor at 11 o'clock at night. The Premier, some of hia ministers and Mr. Pacaud were leaving for New York next morning, so it was ar- ranged that Armstrong shonld take the train as far as St. Johns and that Pacaud should endeavor to procure the acceptance of bis offer before they reached that town, which is about twenty-seven miles from Montreal. Thera Pacaud told him he bad no doubt the matter could be arranged satisfactorily. Pacaud went on to ^ew York and Arm- strong returned to Montreal. Telegrams were exchanged between them and on the 17th — fo Jays after Mr. Mercier sailed — Pacaud iniormed Armstrong that he was definitely off with McDonald aud asked him to ^o down to New York to meet the mioisterg. On the 19th of March Mr. ThomandjMr. C N. Armstrong meet Mr. Pacand, the Hon. Mr. RobidoQx and the Hon. Charles Langelier at the Brunswick hotel. Here the terms of Mr. Pacaud's remuneration were settled. Armstrong offered him $75,000, Pacaud at once demanded $100,000, to which Arm- strong agreed without demur. This essen- tial preliminary having been settled, the assurances of the ministers and Pacaud as to the affair going through were easily Ittained — five minutes was sufficient. MR. TDOM MAKES A FORMAL OFFER. As Messrs. Robidonx and C. Langelier were absent from Quebec and did not return until the middle of April, no formal offer on the part of the Cooper-Thom syndicate was laid before the Government for some time. On the 17th of April Mr. Thorn wrote Mr. Garnean a letter containing the proposal at length which was ultimately embodied in the order-in-council of the 23rd of April. His offer is as follows : — 1. The new syndicate .to voempleta the first 100 miles before the aist of December, 1892. As guarantee for such completion and subse- quent running, a denoBit of $50 <,000 of the company's bonds to be made with the G«v- ernmenl, the bonds, bowever, to be returned on the completion and equipment of tlie hun- dred miles. 2. The Oovernmeni to pay $200,000, the balance of Hubaldiet, granted by 45 Vc. cap. 2» and its amenaments and 51-62 Vic. cap. i»l, sec. 12. 3. The Qovernnjentto pay $50,000 subsidy for the bridge over the Cascapedia. 4. The Government to pay S^OO.OOO, beiucr the subsidy of b00,000 acres of land converted IntocaHb.at 7o cents per acre, in lieu oi 85 cents (a.s appears by tlie correspondence ex* chanKCd between Mr. Thorn and Mr. E. Mor- ei»u, the director of railways, under date of the 26ih of April), this sum lo be anpl'ed by the Government, flrst.'ln paying " the legitimate and privileged claimn in accordance wlin the act 64 Vic , cap. »8, existing agaiuKi the road or against the company, the surplus, if any. to go to the new company,"— uncnntesTcii claims to be settled before the loth of May. Tins letter went before Mr. Garnean, the acting premier, acting treasurer, and com- missioner of public worap, on Saturday, tne 18th of April. Oh Monday, the 20th, Mr. Garnean accepted the proposal, embodied it in a report to tbe executive co jncil of that date, which on the 23rd being approved by the Lieutenant-Governor, became an order- in-council. The only alteration suggested by Mr. Garneau and adopted by the order- in-council, is one in favor of the syndioAto by releasing them from their proposed obli^ gation to run tbe road. It is worth while here to leave the narra- tive for a moment, to contrast the RESPECTIVR MERITS OF THE TWO OFFERS from an honest government point of view and also to examine the legality of tho order-in-council. Had ihe McDonald offer been accepted the province would have paid $450,000— $200,000 when twenty miles were built and tbe balance when the bridge and work were compl»*ted . Under this offer, all debts lor whish the company and its con- tractors were liable would hare been set- tled by Mr. Heaton Armstrong — the bonds of tbe company would have been made marketable by his d^poMt of $840,000 and the permanent ranning of the road enscred. By the acceptance of the Cooper-Thom syn- dicate proposal, the executive, as far as in them lay, pledged the province to pay $590,000, if we take the conver- sion at 35 cents, $870,000 if we take tbe conversion at the special rate of 70 cents, as agreed to by Mr. Garnean and his subordinates, aa the correspondence pro- duced apparently evidences, and this with- ont any attenipt to exact proper gecnrity for the pavtuent of the compiioy's debtH, doe to coLtraciorp, or for the ^uiUciaot eqaipmeDt aud cuotiuuoud ruDuiog of the road. THE FAMOra CRDER-IN-COCNCIL. Now at, to tbe le>{:ility of the order-in- coQDcil — tbitt JH Hopposed to rest oa the Btaiuta 54 Vic. chap. feS, the special terms of which have been citea above. It needs no special knowledge of law tu arrive at the cooclusiou thai this art as b^^ing in part materia is to be construed in connection with otlier anrt previouH provincial letsiflla- tion bearing on the ucbjeot of railway sub- eidies Indeed by itt< termH it mnst bn so constiued. for under section 7 it is provided that ' it shall bn lawtnl ioi- the Lieutenant- Goveiuor-In-'ouncil to revive the provisions contaitied in SKctJon 14 of the Act 51-52 Vic. chap i>l in favor of the raiiw;iv companies to whii h enbsidies are hereby uraoted. ' among which ruiJ ways is, of course, the Bale des Chaieurs ajiway On reference to tbe latter act geccion 14, we find that the Lieutenant- Governor-iu-^8ioner of Public WoikH deciarini? the compauvd option, and this act in turn r«fer'» to 49 Vic. chapter 76, which again enacts that DO snbsidv t-hall b<^comedQn or payable whether iu land or money unleaE and ant'l ten contiraous and uninter- rDp!ed miles ot the road are '.ompleted and accepted on th« report of the Qovruuieut fniriueer If these acts are read tojietbtr, a- they must necessarily be, it in appart-nt that nndei the true construc- tion ot the grant or tiOOjOUO acres of land unde' tht" net of 1 890 to tlie Bale des Chal- enr« raiiwav, » renolution of its board of di- rectors -hould havw been obtained Bskiog for the coo version, and no order-iu-council BhonKi by itn terms have gone further thdn to proitiise the payment of tbe conversion money, it demanded, as each ten mile sec- tion was completed. If this be so, the order-iu-conncil from first to lant is illegal, and this is the view of the law which Mr. Mercier took in his recent examination be- for#( the commission, though it differs from bis views expressed on tbe subject in his letter to the Lieutenarit-Governor. Again tbe ord(rr-in-couLcil in a minor degree is unqnestionably illegal in extending tbe nature of tbe debts to be paid from the '< privileged debts " roentioued io tbe act to tbe •'actnal debts" meDtioocd in tbe order- in-couucil. Aud lastly, it is again illegal in this. By the act the payment of the privil- eged debts by persons claiming that they Were in a poi4 a special one, aud that consequently previous Ifjjirtlatioa on the subject of cot version of land subsidies into money does not apply. Mr. Robidr.ux and his depaty, in their opinions hereafter alluded to, asBOme this tc be the cawe. Let us grant it. Now the sta'^ute provides for the giving of land, not cash, and if this is a special subsidy, as these gentleman venture to a-sert, and if previous legielition on the subject of eon version does not apply, where is the shadow of authority for giving a dollar in money instead of an acre of land. We should have thought it was not in human dulne^H to have missed this, but it seems to have escaped the atten- tion of the law officers of the Crown. HTRONCr PREt:UMPTI0X8 OF CONNIVANCE. There is a further obvious illegality in the order in-council in another respect. The subsidy was for the construction and com- pletion of the 80 miles from Cascapedi* to or near Gaspe basin. Mr. Thorn's proposal is only to build the 40 miles from Casoa- pedla to Paspebiac, and the bonds which are otiored as a guarantee are to be returned after this 40 miles have been built. It is true he says the company will construct the remaining 40 miles as far as Gaspe basin as soon as circumstances will permit. And the Government, with this vague as- surance, inserted, it seems, by Mr. Chrysos- tome Langelier, at a meeting ofth^ execu- tive, and which any lawyer will say is not worth a straw, pays ever the money which the statute especially devotes to the con- struction of the whole 80 miles, having secured only for the province an agreement that 40 miles will be built. It is impossible that, with thoir experience from day to dav, obvious redactions ef this nature should not have occurred to Mr. Garsean and his assist^ints in the Railway depart- ment. That they did so Is plain, for Mr. Garneau appears t9 have applied to the Attorney-General for advice. The Attorney- 10 Oeneial, it seems, is able to giro 'ais opin- ions, each as they are, by proxy, foi we find in the rc'cord under date of the 20th of April, the day Mr. Garneaa's report was made, a letter signed J. E. Bobidonx per Charles Langelier, to tbe efiect that Mr. Thorn's proposition it in all respects agreeable ta law. Fortified by this Mr. Garneau caused the order-in-conncil to be passed. Mr. Garneau still seeas to have had mii^givings, for under date of the 24th of April, we find another opinion in the record, this time that ottheAssistaut Attorney-General, whoat great length expresses his views that the prder- In-couucii passed at 5 o'clock in the even- ing of the preceding day, was in all re- Bpecti IcKal. And his opinion is in turn endorHed «>? a letter of the same date from the Hon. Francois Langelier, who approves the opinion of the Assistant Attorney- General. He could not but approve it, as he wrote it himseit. What, then, induced Mr. Garneau to recommend in such haste the adoption of a proposal which he evidently SQMpected to be grossly illegal and which he nndoubtedly knew to be improvidtnt and UQJast ? The only reply to this ques- tion is the pressure exerted upon a weak man by the stronger minds ot Mr. Pacand, tbo Langeliers and Mr. Bobidoux. Mr. Gameau's memory, he tells us, is very de- fective, and he dues not in his examination make any effort to stimulate it, but be told enough to let us know that he was, as he informed tbe Lieutenant-Governor, so harassed that he seriously contemplated resigning. Un- fortunately in lieu of taking the honorable course, Mr. Garneau yielded. The pressure most L ve been great which would lead a man in his position in the Government, m the absence of his chief on an important mission, to seriously consider the propiiety ot throwing the country into confusion, and necessitating by his resignation the return of Mr. Mercier. We have now the promises mad<) by Messrs. Pacand, Langelier and Bobidoux in the New York hotel carried out aa tbey undertook on their return, and thus far Pacaud's wages were earned. PAYMENT HAD NOW TO BE OBTAINED. No sooner was the order-in-council passed than the efforts of Mr. Paoaud and Mr. Thorn were exerted to materialize it into oaoney. Tbe resources of the province appear tt tbe time to have been limited, and uixlona enquiries at the Treasury depart- ment elicited the discoaragins reply that no fuiids could be confidently reckoned upon until tbe payment of tbe Dominion subsidy in July. As we have seen, on ttie true con- struction of the statute, the Cooper-Tnom syndicate were bound to pay the debts themselves and were only entitled to a pro rata payment on completing; each ten milo section of the road ; and Mr. Garneau appears to have had some apprehension of this posi- tion, which according to tbe evidence of Mr. Machin, the assistant treasurer, was brought forcibly and distinctly before him. Another legal opinion was necessary to overcome his scruples and meet bis ob- jections, and it was obtainel with celerity — in this instance from Mr. Bobidoux, the attorney-general — on the 28th of April, in which that gentleman ettated that ir the money specified in the order-in-council was not ^': once forthcoming to Messrs. Cooper and Thorn, the Crown in this province would be liable in damages for all profits which the new syndicate might under any circumstfiuces have Ciade out of the road, Mr. Bobidoux farther adding that though unfortunately not able to be present when the order-in-council was passed, he entirely acquiesced in its policy and propri- ety. On the 24th of April, Mr. Garneau, by letter, instructed Mr. J. Cbrysostome Langelier, who had been named a special commissioner by an order-in-council of the previous day, to examine into and decide what claims should be consideied as privil- eged debts legitimately due by the compa^'y or its contractors, and to furnish detailed statements of such claims, upon receipt of which Mr. Garneau undertook to place Mr. J. Cbrysostome Langelier in lunds to dis- charge them. DEALING WITH THE ARMSTRONG CLAIM. From the accounts and correspondence Mr J. Cbrysostome Langelier appears to have dealt with all claims, except the Arm- strong one, in a fair and business- like manner, and according to the routine of the department ; but on tbe day before these instructions ^ ^ received, that is on the very day the or in-coaocil was passed, Mr. J . Cbrysost j Langelier wrote CO Mr. Thorn transmitting for his ap- proval, as the terms ot the order-ln-council requited, theaccountof Mr. C, N. Armstrong against tbe company to tbe amoant of $298,943.62, and by return of mail received Mr. Thorn's letter refusing to approve tbe account for more' ir^ than $175,000. It will be retDembered that Mr. Tbom, \n his evidence before the com- mission, states that be was aware that C. N. Armstrong and the promotcrg could bavo been settled with for $75,000, and that the company he represented bad a contingent interest in any oicees after the payment of the debts. It is clear that Tbom spoke the truth when he swore that he only certified for the extra $100,000, in consideratioa of the extraordinary terots his syndicate was getting from the Government. At the same time Tnom forwarded to Lan* gelier, to be fyled in the Rail- way d'lpartment, a mamorandnm from the secretary-treasurer of the company — an informal memorandum — to the effect that Cooper and his nominees were sharehold- ers, holding a controUiog amount of tde stock. The transfer, as we shall bubnecjaent- ly find, was obtained on credit Whi'e Mr. Thorn states that he did not know, and took care not to know, what Pacaud'4 share was to be, he must be a duller man than he ap- pears to be, if he hid n-ji a very shrewd suspicion. That he appreciated the power he had gained ov«r the min- istry, and framed his pecuniary demands accordingly, jis plain fr<>m the letters ex- changed between him and Mr. Garneuu under date of tne 15tb and 16th of June, that is, before ^he public bad learned any part of the truth m the Baie des Chaleurri matter,,in which Thomasks and is promised a doubling up of subisidieR to the extent of $70,000. All wasnow ready except to draw the money. Armstrong, Riopel and com- pany werd provided for ; Paoaud was pro- vided for ; the small creditorn, Mr. Mer- cier's constituents, were provided for ; legal action, the interests of the province, and the just claims of MoFarlane and his creditors, repeatedly brought under the notice of the department, were all entirely Ignored. But again a difficulty occurred. Mr. Garnean wa^ relactaot to issua letters of credit, which afforded tbe only means of raising funds, and it was only by the threat on the part of Mr. Pacaud — a man ot no of- ficial position and >>f half Mr. Gar- neau's age — that he would cattle to Mr. Mercier, who would compel Mr. Garneau to act, that he at last consented. PACAUD AND THB LETTERS OF CREDIT. On the 27th of April Mr. Garneau wrote Thorn that a letter of credit for $175,000 would be issued on the following day, and about tbe same time Mr. Ernest Pacaud had an iftterview with Mi. Webb, cashier of the UniOQ baak, to ast«rt»in upon what terms bis bank would discouDt the letter. On Mr. Webb statiag that hid bink was disposed to take $100,000 of the amount, if tbe National bank would take the balance, Mr. Pacaud stated that he would have two letters drawn out in favor of the two banks for the respec- tive amounts agreed upon. Accordingly, on the 28th, Mr. Garneau addressed two letters, one to the cashier of the Union bank, the other to the cashier of the National bank, requesting tbem to credit Mr. J. Chrysos- tome Langelier with $100,000 and $75,000 respectively, which amounts the province would make good on or before the 10th of July, 1891, with interest at five percent, from thtj Ist of June There seems to be some difference ot opinion as to how these letters reached the respective cashiers, but it is certain that their arrival was both preceded and fol- lowed by Mr. Pacaud and Mr. Charles Langelier. The manager of the National Dank, after consulting his board, discounted the letter of credit for $75,000, and on the 29th of April pla<-ed ihn proceeds of tl»e discount, $74,111 64 to the credit of the Commissioner, Mr. J. Chrysostome Lange- lier, who was not to draw against this sum until the first of May, it being also agreed that $2,250 should be retained by the bank to ensure payjient of the interest, if not met At maturity. We shall deal with the dispo- sition of this sum later no. With respect to the Union bmk, Mr. Webb, the cashiei, was at first disposed to discount the $100,000 letter ef credit and agreed to do so. To be certain of his position, he sent for and ob- tained a copy of the order-in-council re- ferred to in the letter. Circutnstanues, with which he was acquainted and conversations which he had with Mr.Facaud, led him ulti- mately to alter bin determination. Promis- sory notes of Mr. Pacaud tor large Bxims, several of them bearing the endorsation of the Hon. Mr. Mercier, the Hon . Fiancois Langelier, tbe Hon. Charles Langelier and of Senator Pelletier were about to mature at bis bank, one at least of these being a re- newal representing advances made some time before. Mr. Pacaud, before the bank had completed the arrangement to discount the letter, brought ia five cheques ot the Commissioner J. 0. Langelier, each for $-20,000 In favor of Charles N. Arm- strong and endorsed by the latter to Mr. Pacaud, the then holder. To induce Mr. Webb to make the discount, Mr. Pacaud told him that the prot^e«Mis of* these cheques 12: would b« applied in the firat invtftBce to ra- tiring iill his carrtiDt paper endorsed as above stated. He added that $40,000 or $5O,0CO of the balance was his own per- sonal money, that either $10,000 or $20,000 [ (Mr. Webb is not snre of the amount) was i to go to the Hon. Charles Langelier, and that $10,000 were to be applied in paving off : »n obligation due to Hon. Mr. Kobidoux. Mr. Pacand stated that Mr. Charleb Lan- gelier and himself wished the respective \ •mounts coming to them to be placed to i thoir credit in special accounts, and that \ they were prepared to give written under- takings that no por'lons of these deposits I would be drawn until the bank was put in | funds by the province paying the letter of credit. In other words, Mr. Pacaud's pro- posal was, that if the bank would make certain entries in their books representing transactions which would oniy occur for the modt part, on paper, they would, without parting with mtun mooey, earn a substan- tial discount on a sum of $100,000. THB banker's suspicions. On review of all the circumstances, the bank authorities came to the conclusion that they were asked to become parties to a scheme by which publ'c moneys were to be misapplied and declined to enter upon or lend themselves te tbe transaction. From the evidence of Mr. Lafrance, cashier of tbe National bank, it appears that Mr. Pacaud and Mr. Charles Lani^elier took the rt^jocted letter to the National bank, where they en- deavored to have it discounted, bat without success. On tbe 16th of May tbe letter of credit was returned to tbe Union bank, and Mr. Webb advised Mr. J. C. Laugelier, by letter, that he held it for collection only on his account. We shall now deal with the disposition of the $74,111.64 placed by tbe National bank at the credit of Mr. J. Chrysostome Lange- lier, commissioner. On the 28th of April, the day of tbe discount which was made be- tween five and six o'clock in the eveniog after bank hours, he draw three cheques in favor uf Armstrong, one for $31,750 which went to Tbom, a second for $24,000 wfaich Armstrong endorsed and Thoo. hani' i to Mr. Robitaille, the president of the company, and a third for $16,000 which Armstrong also endorsed and Thom handed to Mr. Kiopel. The balance with the exception cf $111.64, was drawn out in July when the letter of CTed!t was paid. These gentlemen appear to have been in attendance at Quebec, for the cheques were cashed by them f ar!y on the 1st of May. The promoters, who had put nothing in, took a good deal out, and Armstrong, debtor both to the company and Mc Far lane, will probably pocket a su1}stan- tial cheque. The business promptitude of the commissioner is to be rt^marked. The cheques to Riopel and Robitaille, of course, paid for the transfer of their stock, and so the province, in other words, paid to put the Cooper-Thom syndicate in gratuitous pos- session oi a Valuable enterprise. PACAUD AND HKS BOODLE. We now turn to Mr. Pacand and his five cheques for $20,000 each. The proof shows that bo »nd Armstrong entertained an un- doubtedly well founded mistrust of each other. Pacaud tsvidently was convincep tbuc if Armstrong ever got hold of the cheques^ tbe arraDgement so quickly wintered into might, perhap^^, escape his memory ; and sj Mr. Langeliei, the commissioner, Armstrong and Pacaud met shortly after the letters of credit were isiioed in Pacaud's otiic<<, where the docile commissioner pre- pared the cheques in the form dictated by Pacaud, and Armstrong endorned them over without leaving the office. The cheques, ic will be reaembered, were drawn upon a bank in which the i;om- missioner had then no account. Hr, Pacand had now tbe cheques. The next thing was to turn them into money, at least in part, and to protect his interests by having the amount they represented apparently placed to his credit. This was necessary on two grounds. First, if the funds remained in the possession of the Government commia- I sioner tbe matter might have leaked out I before the 10th of July, and public opinion, ! if it exists, might have exacted the institu- j tion of proc«ediDg8 to prevent his i touching them. Seeondly, money was absolutely necessary to take up paper to the extent of over $30,000 immediately matur- iug in various bankn, for the payment of which his politif-al fr ead.s the Hon. Mr. Mercier, tlie Laugeliers and Pelletier were responsible. These gentlemen, though quiet prepared t« lend their endorsement for po- litical purposes, had not, doubtless for good reasons, cousidered it worth their while to make the eligbte.-t provision for the pavment of their liabilities. Judging 100 bv the accounts submitted by him, Pacaud's tastes were expensive ; he and his friend V^e Provincial Seccetary were both building bonses and 13 Kieney was r«qnired. These con- cideratioPB accoant for his eyident desire to h»ve the f 100,000 letter of credit diecoQDted, and lead us to undersiand the motives which indaced him to tempt Mr. Webb by the offer of payment of disconot upoQ $100,000 when a cash advance of only about $40,000 was asked from him. As, •however, Mr. Webb refused to comply, other steps bad to be taken, and the assistance of Mr. P. Vftllieres was called 'n. That, gen- tleman, on tQe security ot to of the cheques and on receiving the substantial bonus of $1,000, agreed to lend his endorsa- tion on notes for an «qnivaient amount, payable ac three months, and these notes were ultimately discounted on the ufcual termp by the Na- tional and Peoples banks. Fuuds were essential, the double discount was imma- terial. At thw eamn lime the Attorney- General, Mr. Robidonx, was employed by Facaud to hawk a third of the cheques for $20,000 round the banks in Montreal, tt Donne moi tes papiern,' said the hon. gen- tleman to his iriend, '' et je ferai mon possible pour t'obliger." The Montreal banks hawever were shy, and the three cheques had ulti- mately to abide the slower process of col- lection. For private reasons the cashier of the Peoples bank was at first disinclined to make the advance, but on being pro- mised by the Hon. Charles Langelier, who, as usnal, was casually present on the occa- sion, an additional deposit of $50,000from the ten million loan which was being nego- tiated, he consented. On the 9th of July, the Union bank, upon the letter of credit for $100,000 being taken up out of the Dominion subsidy, placed that amount to the credit ot Mr. J. Chrvsostome Langelier, the commissioner, and, it is needless to say, it was all chequed out on the same day — $60,000 gOT.og to Pacaud's own account. Now what did Pacaud do with this money? Money, as be and his counsel pretend, the legitimate result of the exertion of his political influence during half dozen inter- views. Money, as the public must realize, dishonestly obtained, or in other words stolen. Did he keep it, or did he divide ? Let his own accounts tell the story : Classifled statement of the expenditure of the S 1 00.000 and the $h,600 which, Mr. Pacaud alleges, Hon. Mr. Mercier, on the latter's de- parture lor Europe, left with him. All as taken from Mr. Pacand's accounts:— {!) Hon. Messrs. Mercier, C. Langelier, F. Luigelier and Hon. Senator C. A. Pelletier. Payments uiade in retiring thre* notes made by E. Facaud and en- dorsed by them, proceeds of whick were usert for election purposes. Upon which all, as between them- sclve s were iiable, sh ire and sbars alike.. $l.'i,009«» 12] Hon. Messrs. Mercier, C. Langelier, C. A. P. Pelletier and Mr. J. Israel Tarte, M.P. Payments made in retiring two notes made by E Pacaud and en- dorsed oy tbera. proceeds of which were used for election purposes. Upon which all, as betweeu them- selves 'vere liable, share and share alike 8,000 0» [3] I^r^. Mr. Mercier. Payments mado ♦o and on account of Hon. Mr. Mercier 6,788 2> [4] Hon. Mr. C. Langelier. Payments mRde to and on account of Hon. Mr. C. Langelier 9,291 2» 5. Hon. Mr. Duhamel. Paj meut made to Union club for Hon. Mr. Duhamei's entrauce fee, 100 0(^ 6 . Members of the Legislature. Payments made to members of the Lesislature, not members of the Cabinet 1.582 64 7. Mr. J. Israel Tarts, M.P., and Hon. C. Langelier. Payment of Mr. Tarte's note en- dorsed by Hon. C. Langelier. pro- ceeds of which were for the Mont- morency election ?,000 0& 8. Tarte-MeGreevy enquiry. Payments made on account of this enquiry 1,900 00' 9. Political expenditure. [a]NewKpapersand cav.paign litera- ture 4,85000 [blElection expenses 2,000 00 h»] Kevlfiion voters' lists 816 00 [dj Bxpeoses ofele?tlon petitions. .. 1.560 OO^ [e] Articles in L'Elccteur not paid for by its proprietors, Belleaa & Co , but by E. Pacaud, personally. 814 00 Miscellaneous sundries 957 54 Total political expenditure..... $10,496 58 10. Personal : — [a] House— Purcliaseprice 8,000 00 New York architect, fee 1.000 00 Quebec architect, fee .SOO 00 Alterations, etc. . 2,648 3» [b] P. Vallieres, endorsiBg notes secured by Government letter of credit 1.00000 [c] J-*gal adviser 1,25000 td)Trip to Europe, August 1891.... 3.840 00 . (e) Bhare in iC'iue 1,136 55 ('Drafts. U. N. Arn^strong 2.000 00 ( ,) Special steamer to MuirayBay 100 00 Cii) Personal cheques. Drawn for Jla.expenditure of which an ac- countis given 4,243 94 Drawn for personal use in cash and of which no account is given 2,987 aS Total personal ,$27,906 74 Grand total $83,065 38 14 MONBY Ilf JIANB. Peoples bank. Ba>rlDK8baDeti $447. K5 Peoples bank, guarantee of dls* count 3,000.00 Union bank 90.41 Union bank, branch 6(>.36 Merchants bank .. 62.74 National Park bank, New York.. . . 20,000.00 Cash 1,800.00 Total $26,458.25 Paymentit on account Hon. H. Merder. Mars 11 -P. Campbell 19 00 Avrill5— ln8titntCana''.ien 4 00 2')— Club Union 100 00 2u — Monument Champlain 34 CO 30— Scusf-ription Fortrc ^ Hotel. ■ • f>00 00 Mai 8-J.,?. C. Lloyd T5 00 11— Contestation Ma;-kinonB6.. . 250 00 U— Quebec & l^evis Elec. Light Co. 39 00 14— Traitcsur Paris.. 5,000 00 In— Contestation Maskinong^ 250 00 June 1— Allan Line 28:55 1—Duuane, Colby, Broker 119 31 2^— Allan Line 1184 30-Jo.^. C. Lloyd 75 00 July T)— Allan Line l.S 93 7— Douane, Colby, Broker 227 J 9 9— Duty & charges, Colby, Broker 16 9(> 22— Allan Line 12 16 22— Alinn Line 10 55 Total 6,788 29 Payments 071 account of Hon. Chas. Langelier. 1391. May 8— Paid Frs. Parent, contractor.. $918 23 9— Deposited to Uon.Chs. Lange- lier's credit in Union Bank, Savings Dept., Upper Town. . . 200 00 12-Cail Fortre.03 Hotel Co 500 00 26— J. B.Morin 17 60 June 3— Him 555 40 July 11 — Deposit La Banque du Peuple in C. Langelier's account 3,000 00 21— do 500 00 21— Him 1,500 00 22— Note dated 16th June, due 19thinst 1,600 00 Aug' 10— Himasa deposit 500 00 $9,291 23 Payment on account Hon. 0. Duhamcl. 1891. Aug. 9— Union Club Entrance Fee .... 100 00 Payment of notes endorsed by Hon. H. Mer- cier and Hon. C. Ijmgelier, Hon. F. Langelier and C. A.P. Pelletier. 1891. May 6— La Banque Nationale for note dated 2^th February, due 1st May $5,00000 IS— La Banque Nationale for note dated 15th April due 18th May 5,000 00 July 2^La Banque Nationale for note dated Ist April due 4th Aug. Payment of Notes endorsed by Hon. H. Mer- cier, J. Israel Tnrle, Hon. Chs. Langelier and Hon. C. A. P. Pelletier. 1391. July 11 — La Banque Nationale, note dated !•! March, due 14 July . $ 5,000 00 11 — Union Bank of Canada, note dated April Ist, due 4 August. 3,000 00 $ 8,0C0 00 Payments to or on account of Memhern of Lb- gidat'ive Assembly not Members of the Cabinet. 1891. May June July 8— La Banque du Peuple, note A. F. Carrier, Al.P.P. for tiaspe, duefith ... $ 40900 13 — La Binqiie du Peuple note F. (J. M. Dochene. M.P.P. for county L'l^let, due .^Ist 150 00 15 — W. (t. De.sbiirats, note A. F. Carrier, M.P.P 150 00 29 — La Banque Nationale. for two notes made by A. F. Currier, M.P.P., dated 24th March, due 27th May 400 00 3— .Sul(Scription Union Club. F. X. Lcmieux, M.F.P., Levis. . . 100 00 22— A. Turgeon, M.P.P. for Belle- cbasse, to be handed Turgeon's father for election expenses . . 152 54 13—0. Dcmarai.o. M.P.P. St. Hya- cinthe, for election purposes • • 230 00 $ 1,532 54 J. Israel Tarte, {Election). 1891. May 6— La Banque du Peuple, note made by Hon. C. Langelier, endorsed J. Israel Tarte. — i Election expenses J. Israel Tarte, Montmorency county. . $ 2,000 00 5,000 00 $15,000 00 Payments on account of Tarte- McGreevy Enquiry. 1891. May 11. — La Banque du Peuple for note dated 3lst March, due Srd June, made by .). Israel Tarte, endorsed by Hon. F. Langelier and E- Pacaud 12. — Union Bank of Canada, for notadated 21st April, due 14th May, made by J. Israel Tarte. endorsed by J. Israel Tarte, €• Langelier and E. Pacaud.. . 27.— C. A. GeofFrion, Q.C., on ac- count services $1,000.00 400.00 500.00 $1,9ijO0O 15 Newspaper and Campaign Literature. Daily Telegraph, Quebec. 1891. May 6.— La Banque du Pcuple, for note Jo?. Carrel, Proprietor, (demand). $150.00 July 2.— Frank Carrel, Prop... 10.00 «.— do do do .. 1000 13.— do do do .. 1000 25.— do do do .. lO.OO Aug. 3.— do do do . . l'».CO 13.— do do do .. 10.00 Oct. 9.— do do do .. 1000 9.— do do do .. 10.00 9.— do do do •■ 10.00 9.— do do do .. 10.00 '— $25000 L'Evenment, Quebec. May 9.— Balance Political Lit- erature $1000.00 July 24.— Discount Government Dratt SiJOO.OO $4000.00 /xniiupvUle Cmirier. May li.— Subscriptions to E. Desaulnierg $ 100.00 Waterloo Advertiser. July 30.— C.W.Parmalee, draft 500.00 i4850 00 Election Expenses. 1891. May 18— Hon. C. A. P. Pelletier, elec- tion expenses $1,000 00 July 11— Godreau and others 1,000 00 $2,000 00 May July Aug. Revision of Voters' Lists. 9 — Jos. Martin 21— R. Kinfret, Champlain Co ... . 2— A. Corriveau, Quebec East.. • • 3— Jos, P. Roy, Quebec County.. 6 — Rodolphe Roy, Portneuf Co. . 7 — li. D. Morin. Quebec Centre.. 7 — E. Dorion, Montmorency Co. . 7— B. Letellier. Quebec West. . . . 8 — A. Tessier, Rimouski 13— A. Taschereau, Beauce Co. . . . 20 — L. Allain.Chicoutimi Co 11-L. F. Pinault, M.P.P., Ri- mouski Co $25 00 50 00 20 00 25 CO 25 00 20 00 25 00 20 00 25 00 25 00 25 00 30 00 Contestations of Elections. May 27— Deposit Co.inter Pet'tion Chi- coutimi Co. vs. Sir A. P. Caron June 4— F. G. M. Decheiie, M.P., ex- penses makiug deposit Chicou- timi Co July 3— J. A. Tessier, disbursement?.. 3— C A. Geotfrion,, Q.C., re set- tling contestations elections for Local Legislature for Counties of Vaudreuil and L'Assomption $315 00 $1,000 00 30 00 30 00 500 00 $1,560 00 Articles ivritten in VElecteur not paid for by the proprietor, hut by Pacaud per- sonally. 1891. May le— U. Barthe 14— N. Legendro 21— U. Barthe ?6-U. Barthe , June 13-U. Barthe 1"— Abbe Latlamme. 18-Dr. A. Vallee ... 2;5-U. Barthe July 10-U. Barthe 10-Dr. A. Vallee..., 17— Abbo Liiiiamme 17-U.Bartho 25-U. Barthe 30— Leon Ledieu- ... .\ug. 3— U. Barthe Oct. 5<— Errul Buucbette $30 00 25 0*) 20 00 50 00 200 OO 15 00 15 01 25 OO 25 00 15 to 15 00 25 00 50 00 154 04 100 00 50 00 $814 04 Miscellaneous Political Expenses. May 6— A. Choquette, re Belleau libel case... $130 00 23— Loan to J. B. Charleson 75 (0 June 26— Elias Mailloux 50 00 Aufir. 10— (J. Barfhe, advance on book • 500 00 29— M. A. Hearn, note J. B. Par- kin 20254 $957 54 E. Pv.caud's yew House. 1891. May 16— L. P. Sirois, N.P., to pay Mrs. Fry for House 8,000 00 26— L. P. Mrois, A'. P., professional account... 43 92 June 12— L. P. SiroiSjN.P., professional account 133 00 27-^EloiPicaTd. on accountgeneral contractor for alterations and repairs 100 00 July 3— O.Picard. on account plumber 150 00 4— Eloi Picaril, on account 150 00 11— iiloi Pioard, on account 200 00 Aug. 1— J. A Tielanger &. Co. on acc'nt 118 23 3-Eloi yicard. . . 300 00 10-Ed. Ficken.N. York. Architect 1,000 00 28-E.TanRuay. Quebec. Architect 300 00 28—0. Picard, on account 1,000 CO 28— Eloi Picard, on account 239 87 Oct. 2-E.St. Jean 11.^ 35 $11,848 39 P. Valliires for endorsing notes secured by Commissioners Cheques. 1891 May 6— P. Valli^res for endorsement note at La Banque du Peuple. 15— P. Vallieres for endorsement note at La Banque du Peuple. $500 00 500 00 $1,000 00 1& E. Pacaud'a Legal adviser. 1801. May 11 — Hon. (\. Irvine, Legal adviser. JuJy 3— Hon. (J. Irvine, Legal advisor. 9 — Hon. G. Irvine, LoKal .adviser. Sept. 25— Hon. G. Irvine, Legal adviser. $130 00 500 00 100 00 600 00 $1,250 00 Expenses of trip to Europe in August, 1891. 1S4L Aug. 10— Draft on Parif, Fraftce $1,5W 00 10— K. .M. Stockinsr, ca?h advanced 50 00 10— Travellinir expenses 1,(K)0 00 11—11. & A. Allan, for fare S.S. Parisi.an 210 00 11— Harris for fare S.S. Tourraine 280 00 28— Cable remittance to London. . 300 00 $3,340 00 Share in Mine. Aug. 23— .Tudfre C. A. Dugas for share iu Mine..,. $1,130 55 Drafts C. N. Armstrong. June 16— Draft on demand $1,C0C CO July 21— Draft at 30 days 1,000 00 $2,W)0 00 Oct. Special Steamer to Murray Bay. 10— Powell, Iliro of Steamer to Murray Buy $100 00 Personal Cheques. 1. — Drawn for expenditures of which an account is given and vouchers. 1891. May 11— W. Learm( nth, typewriter-. . $115 00 11— M. Patenaudc 20 CO II— Col. Rhodes, flowers 10 00 13— P. Richard, grocer • 45 54 15 — F. X. (Josseliu, N.P., services. 12 50 15— Morgan it Co 22 50 15— 0. Montreuil 14 25 16— Damage Daigle 15 00 16-GasCo 5112 18 — A. Livernois 25 35 19— A. Edge, secretary 10 Ol> 20— H. Beautey, wine account. . . . 425 00 2?— F. Pennee, Life Insunance 315 00 26 — Belleau Jt Co., sundries 15 35 June 5— G. I^ . W. Telegraph Co 58 63 8— P. Richard, grocer ■ • • 35 45 9— P. B. Dumoulin, for La Ban- queduPeuple — 260 00 11- Belleau & Co., s-AArfries 30 CO 12— Colonial House .... 43 2^ 1,3— .1. Hetherington 39 56 17— Major Wilson, bet 50 00 17— J. 0. More, pubn. to Short- Wallick Monument 25 00 18— Bel'-.au A: Co., sundries 28 78 IH— 0. Montreyil 9 45 18— Paul de Cizes 50 00 20— Miss Mayburn 25 00 22— Auguste Edge ,..,. 10 00 22-J. X. Perreault, subti 10 00 June 25— Wyse & Co 3 5seon 6 9C 27— Pruncfiii Jc Kirouao 18 48 30— J. 1). Chartnmd 50 OC 3'>— A. Lavigae 37 93 July 3— A. J. Maxham & Co 27 50 3.— IhoinasDonobue 37. 9S 4 — Molle.Charbonn jau 37.00 4 —P. E. Poulin & Co 59.00 6. -P. Richard 23.22 :.— P. A. Pclleaer.Loan 20.00 7 J. 0. Itainv'iUe 75.00 7.— A.Ijavi>!ue 19.47 8.— Turcotfo A: Prevost 50.25 10.— Mde. Lemieu.x, Florist 15.00 10.— CaS'grnin, Angers & Lavery... 208.89 13.— Col. Rhodes, Flowers 1.80 13.— J. Giiuthier & frere 100.00 13.— A.Buchaniin 75.00 14.— Belleau & Co.. Sundries 29.00 28.— Bibaoiheque Francaise 11 23 IS.-U. Plourde 25 0(J 21.-F. X.Warren 24.27 '2,3.-A. Edge lO.OiJ 24.— F. Peiuiee, Life Insi-rance. . . . 212.50 2.5.— (Clover Fry & Co 285.36 30.— B.Simson 5.00 30.— Belleau & Co., Sundries 21.71 30.— A. Edge 15.00 Au?. (5.— Dr.C. A. Verge 70.00 6.— T. Marrier 28.00 6.— G.N. W. Telegraph Co 11.17 6.-(4eo. Hough, Livery 20.0C 7.-J. D. Anderson, Tailor 20. OC 8.— Union Club 120(] 8,— A. Edge 5.0C lO.-G, Seitfert 50. OC 11.— A.Edge SO.OC ll.-J. Boiteau 40 00 11.— Protest charges 2.54 28.— Cable to London 5.7g 28.— Louis Rainville 100. OG 28.— Ciible to London 5 50 28.— Interest 13. 3C Sep.29.— A. Ginzras&Co 65.4ii 30.— G. N. W. Tel. Co 6.11 30.— Uelleau .t Co., Sundries 80.85 Oct. 1.— P. X. Warren 1,57.56 1.— .John Warren 17. OS 2.— T. K.Lizzette IGIC G. N.W.Tel. Co 6.15 2.^ lelegrauM 0.87 2.— Chas. Deguise lOO.OO $4,213,94 Personal Cheques. Drawn for personal use and for which no account is given. 1891. May 6— Personal ?— do 9— do Il- do ia- do 1'^ do 19- do 21— do 26- do 2*- do use $ 500 00 loa 00 40 00 50 00 10^)00 100 00 50 00 50 00 550 00 25 00 17 June 1— do 4— do 5— do t>— do .0— do 25- do 27 do 30- do July S- do 9— do 11- do 22— do 22-