::"^lr^ 
 
 ^i> 
 
 
THE ESPLANADE DIFFICULTY. 
 
 THE REPLY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CREDIT VALLEY RAILWAY 
 
 TO THE STATEMENTS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 irand f runfe and jvorthern ][ail«jag tompuiea 
 
 IN THE MATTER OF TUB 
 
 DISPUTED ENTRANCE TO TORONTO HARROUR. 
 
 LEGAL ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF THE CREDIT 
 VALLEY'S CONTENTION. 
 
 ::;%FPE^X TO PAR]JAMENT. 
 
 » ■ « » e ■ • 
 
 •• •• .♦, • • . » . . -; 
 
 » 
 
 ^otonio, (Ontario: 
 Globe Pbiktino Company, 26 and 28 Kinu Street East. 
 
 1880. 
 
f. 
 
 ■ « 
 
 « 
 
 • 
 
 ) 
 
 1 
 
 •* .* 
 
 
 • 
 
 -• • 
 
 • • 
 
 • 
 
 f i > 
 
 
 t 
 
 
 « * 1 
 
 
 
 
 t 
 
 1 r 
 
 
 e 
 
 
 ■•• • 
 
 .1 ■> 
 
 1 
 
 
 • • • 
 
 i » 
 
 (to 
 
 • 
 1 
 
THE tSPUNADE IIIFFICULK. 
 
 '' The Disputed Entrance to Toronto 
 
 Harbour!' 
 
 On January 24th, the " Qloht " and " Mail " contained the following 
 reply of the Credit Valley Railway Company to th« statements recently 
 published on behalf of the Grand Trunk and Northern Railway Companies* 
 in the matter of the Esplanade dispute. 
 
 MR. LAIDLAWS LETTER. 
 (To the Editor.) 
 
 Sir, — Herewith you will find the opinion of Messrs. Dalton McCarthy, 
 Q.C., and Thomas Ferguson, Q.C., also Mr. Wells' reply to the character- 
 istic statements recently published by the Northern Railway Company. 
 
 Let me also draw your attention to the propositions made by the 
 
 Northern and Grand Trunk Railway Companies, formerly published in 
 your newspaper, and to the reply of the Credit Valley Railway Company 
 thereto. This was the first publication of any matter relating to the dis- 
 pute among the three Railway Companies as to this Esplanade difficulty. 
 
 Mr. Wells' letter explains how the Grand Trunk and Northern Rail- 
 way Companies have succeeded in playing battledore and shuttlecock 
 with the Credit Valley. 
 
 The opinion of Messrs. McCarthy and Ferguson will satisfy all as to 
 our legal rights in this dispute. 
 
 The Credit Valley Company are willing to pay the cost of the work, 
 excavation and filling (as may be shown by documentary evidence, cross 
 sections, &c.)done upon the track, which may be adjudged to them down 
 to their water lots ; but as the Grand Trunk Company and the Northern 
 Company have not themselves paid one cent for the property in question, 
 and have no title whatever, the Credit Valley cannot become parties to 
 any private arrangement with them. The Credit Valley Railway Company 
 believe that on a final settlement of the question, they will get their right 
 of way for the same price per acre that it may be decided the Grand 
 Trunk and Northern should pay to the Government, or to whomsoever 
 due. 
 
 We are willing to leave the settlement of the whole question to the 
 Railway Committee of the Privy Council, if they have the power to deal 
 with it, or to Parliament ; or we will gladly accept the decision of parties 
 empowered to act on behalf of the Government to dispose of the whole 
 
 55954 
 
matter, giving to the Crown and to the city what may be due to thetn, 
 and to the Grand Trunk, Northern and Credit Valley what they are, 
 under th circum8t;inces, tutitlud to. 
 
 The Credit Valloy cMiinot and will not make a private agreement for 
 ai bitration with these companies, who detain our railway at Parkdale, 
 and are in a position to starve us out or force us into most onerous terms. 
 We therefore appeal to the Government to pass such a bill as will dis- 
 pose of the difficulty. 
 
 It has been a grievous piece of mismanagement on the part of the 
 city to have for so many years allowed the whole of the Esplanade, in 
 value equivalent to the city debt, to be frittered away for nothing. It is 
 the duty of the city to now assert and maintain its rights to what remains 
 of this valuable property, and to bring its influence to bear upon a satis- 
 factory aettlement of the difliculty with the (jovernment — in a manner 
 worthy of the capital of this Province. 
 
 To make way for the Grand Trunk Railway along the Esplanade, 
 literally to enable that Company to crush the lake commerce of Toronto, 
 the city devoted $800,000, and allowed the Grand Trunk Railway rights 
 over its property and streets for little or no compensation. 
 
 The Northern Railway Company were assisted with $200,000 in 
 money, and were allowed the use of fifty or sixty acres of land and 
 water. 
 
 Both Companies, by the Government and by the municipality, have 
 been ntirsed from a state of poverty and confusion, the result of extrava- 
 gance and mismanagement in construction, until they are now so pros- 
 perous and strong that the revenue of the Grand Trunk appi'oximates to 
 two-thirds of the revenue of the Dominion, and that of the Northern, I 
 do not doubt, to the revenue of the City of Toronto. 
 
 Yet notwithstanding all that Canada and this municipality have done 
 for these railways, they resist the entrance into Toronto of a railway 
 which the people of the city have subsidized so liberally, for the purpose 
 of curing evils brought upon the city's commerce mainly by the discrimi- 
 nating rates of the Grand Trunk. 
 
 When and by whom was the sixty acres of land (held by the city 
 under a license of occupation from the Crown) transferred to the 
 Northern Railway Company ? Was any citizen of Toronto ever made 
 aware of the transference ? Is it not well known by the members of 
 Parliament acquainted with the circumstances that no intention of trans- 
 ferring this property ever existed 1 
 
 No Government of Canada would take from the City of Toronto 
 without notice, and give to a railway company, sixty acres of land within 
 the corporation. I maintain, therefore, that the Government of the day 
 wil 1 set this matter right. 
 
 Permit me to remind you that the frightful waste and gross mis- 
 management connected with the finance and construction of these 
 railways destroyed the credit of railway enterprise here and disgraced 
 this c ountry for years, so that the name of Canada was a byword in every 
 hotel in Britairr. Railway enterprise was paralyzed for twenty years in 
 consequence of the people of England having been induced to shoulder 
 the stock and bonds of these railways to the extent of three times the 
 actual cash required for construction and equipment. 
 
 For the money given by Canada to the Grand Trunk that railway 
 could be built to-day, yet its policy is to discriminate against Canadian 
 freight in favour of that of the United States. 
 
 When my first Railway By-laws were proposed in Toronto the city 
 was assessed for only $22,500,000 ; when the last, the Credit Valley, was 
 ubmitted, th e city's assessment was $50,000,000. 
 
 The country has been opened up and cleared ; the population has 
 
rapidly increased ; the farmers have thriven ; the people have been saved 
 their waggon drives of 100 miles with crops ; thriving towns and villages 
 now exist on those railways where before was nothing but wilderness or 
 little hamlets ; and the movement in railway construction having spread 
 to other districts, in fact, throughout Canada, vast improvement in the 
 wealth, comfort and general prosperity of the people has resulted. 
 
 The Grand Trunk received thereby an additional traffic which I dare 
 say approximates in volume to their total business when these railways 
 were first suggested, yet the Grand Trunk, the Great Western, the Nor- 
 thern, and the Midland Railways devoted a large proportion of their 
 means and energies to the task of arresting that railway movement. 
 
 The pride and arrogance of the management of these great railways, 
 combined with discriminations against persons and places, and as against 
 the whole country in favour of a foreign countiy, has resulted in the con- 
 struction of the Canada Southern Railway, the Toronto, Grey and Bruce 
 Railway, the Loop Line (the greatest folly ever perpetrated in Canada 
 with the money oif English shareholders), and a number of other local 
 lines. 
 
 The management and attitude of the Northern Railway Company 
 brought into what should have been a district tributary to that Company 
 alone (which might easily have been kept undisturbed by judicious 
 management), the Midland of Canada and the Hamilton and North- 
 western. 
 
 This pretentious and irritating opposition to the general i.^teresta of 
 the Canadian people culminated when the then President of the Grand 
 Trunk (Mr. Potter) asked Lor<l Carnarvon, Secretary of State for the 
 Colonies, to use his influence towards coercing Canada to desist from con- 
 structing further railways, notably the " North Shore " and the " Mon- 
 treal and Ottawa." 
 
 Their opposition in th'j first stages of the newer railways, and down 
 to the minor points of crossings and interchange of traffic, passengers and 
 goods, even to the laying by night of a track in Toronto for the purpose 
 of excluding the Credit Valley, all evinces the same spirit of stubborn and 
 reckless disregard of the Canadian people. 
 
 I do not think the English Companies understand the feelings and 
 processes by which they have lost so much money in Canada, and have 
 irritated and alienated its people to such an extent as to have greatly 
 assisted in inducing them to submit to taxation that has built thousands 
 of miles of railway in this country in the last few years. 
 
 If this demeanour were held towards the people of England it would 
 speedily lead the English magnates there to Mr. Potter's fate — oblivion. 
 
 For my part, I have determined to seek the first favourable oppor- 
 tunity of asking the support of a constituency to return nie to Parliament, 
 that I may speak with the authority of erne of its members on the carrying 
 trade of the country, &c., although 1 have already upon four occasions 
 declined to become a candidate. I defy now the whole of the aforemen- 
 tioned corporations to keep me out. 
 
 I will never rest — if I have to go back to first principles (porridge 
 and milk, herring and potatoes) — until the country has adopted some 
 means of securing equitable treatment of the people by these railway cor- 
 porations ; nor until the Grand Trunk Company (or any other through 
 railway then existing) shall carry the produce of Canada to its own sea- 
 port at the same rate per ton per mile as the produce of the United States 
 is carried. 
 
 The Credit Valley is threatened with all sorts of suits, with receivers, 
 Ac, but if there were a receiver in every office of the Company, the pre- 
 sent directorate will never yield what they feel to be their rights and the 
 rights of the people until the Government or Parliament refuse to act 
 
Then the Company must yield, unable to stand the pressure of legal 
 oppression at the instance of companies with large revenues to back them. 
 
 With regard to the opinions paraded as to the proposed tracks of the 
 Credit Valley Railway, it must not be overlooked that these are the 
 opinions, without exception, I think, of ex-officers of the Grand Trunk, 
 Great Western, or Northern, or of gentlemen who have at one time been 
 associated therewith as contractors or otherwise. As a change of venue is 
 allowed in this country where local passionp or sympathy may affect 
 opii'ion, I decline, on behalf of the Credit Valley, to be tried by such a 
 jurj', because whatever of railway construction has been done in the last 
 ton years has practically been carried out against their wishes, with the 
 exception of the Messrs. Shanly. 
 
 There is more business done within the confines of some of the Lon- 
 don station grounds in a week bj' the greatest railway corporations of 
 London than is done by the Northern Railway Company upon its sixty 
 acres in half a year. The latter Company has aboiit three dozen locomo- 
 tives ; and to one who has seen the network of tracks at London stations, 
 and the number of trains occupying them, the claim that there is danger 
 or difficulty in laying another track upon the " Northern" sixty acres is 
 strikingly absurd. 
 
 If the Railway Committee of the Privy Council choose to get a neutral 
 expert to come np and re-arrange the tracks laid down so hurriedly by 
 the Northern and Grand Tnmk Companies last summer, it will be found 
 that there would be little difficulty indeed in giving the Credit Valley the 
 tracks they require to reach their water lots and some sidings to shunt 
 trains upon for the purpose of loading and unloading at the wharves. 
 
 The independence and competing power of the Credit Valley, together 
 with its connections, are the salient points of its usefulness to Toronto 
 and to the municipalities. 
 
 The public will forgive me any warmth of expression herein. It is 
 well known from end to end of the country to what an extent of persecu- 
 tion myself and the companies with which I have been concerned have 
 been subjected at the hands of these older companies. 
 
 I am. Sir, 
 
 Tours faithfully, 
 (Signed), GEORGE LAIDLAW, 
 
 President €. V.B. Co. 
 Toronto, January 23, 1880. 
 
 OPINION OF MESSRS. MCCARTHY AND FER- 
 GUSON. 
 
 Our opinion has been asked as to the probable success of an appeal 
 from the decision pronounced in this case on the 7th January instant by 
 Mr. Vice-Chancellor Proudfoot, wherein he decreed that an injunction 
 should issue against the Credit Valley Railway Company restraining them 
 from taking possession of a portion of the 1 00 feet strip between Queen 
 Street and the diamond crossing, which the hitter Company claimed the 
 right to occupy under authority given to them by a Licenao of Occupation 
 granted in July last by the Minister of the Interior. 
 
 We were also reqiiested, in case we should be of opinion that it 
 would be advisable to appeal from the decree mavie, to state at length our 
 reasons for coming to that conclusion. 
 
 We have considered the questions which were determined by Mr. 
 Vice-Chancellor Proudfoot in arriving at his decision, and we are of 
 opinion that an appeal should be had from the decree. 
 
It is not diBputed by any of the parties to the litigation that the fee 
 of this land is still in the Crown, and that no grant of any kind was ever 
 made of it excepting to the military authorities as hereinafter mentioned 
 until the License of Occupation was issued to the Credit Valley Railway 
 Company. 
 
 It is not denied either, and is not capable of denial, that no purchase 
 money or compensotion of any kind has ever been made to the Crown, or 
 to the military authorities who were at onetime interested in this property, 
 for the strip of land which the Grand Trunk and Northern companies now 
 claim to hold, and to he entitled not only to hold as against the Credit 
 Valley Railway Company, but as against the Crown itself. 
 
 Unless, therefore, these companies, the Grand Trunk and the North- 
 ern, can show some title, the Credit Valley, being the licensee of the Crown, 
 it is clear, is entitled to enter tipou and occupy the portion of the strip 
 embraced in their license. 
 
 The Grand Trunk Railway Company claimed to have acquired a 
 possessory right to a portion of this property under an agreement made 
 with the Northeia Railway Company in or about the year 1860, and un- 
 less their title under the Northern Railway Company is a valid one they 
 have no right whatever to any portion of this 100 feet strip. 
 
 The Northern Railway Company claim it in various ways, and we 
 now proceed to discuss the different grounds upon which tliey claim to be 
 entitled to hold and dispose of this property. 
 
 The Northern Railway was incorporated in 1849 by 12 Victoria, cap. 
 196, and they proceeded with the work of constructing their railway in 
 the year A.D. 1852. At this date this property was vested in the prin- 
 cipal officers of Her Majesty's Ordnance, whose headquarters were in Lon- 
 don, Englaml, and was by them held in trust for the Queen for military 
 purposes. 
 
 By the Act Vict., cap. 11, by which this property was vested in the 
 principal officers of Ordnance, the rights of the Crown were specially re- 
 served by sec. 33, and by sec. 15 the Parliament of Canada reserved to 
 itself the right to authorize the construction of a railway over any part of 
 the land which was vestetl in these officers, and which had been set apart 
 by the Government of either of the then late Provinces of Canada for 
 military purposes. 
 
 The lands that were vested by this Act in these principal officers of 
 Ordnance were not only the lands that had been set apart for military 
 purposes by the Provinces, but also the lands which had been purchased, 
 conveyed, or surrendered to, or in trust for, Her Majesty for military 
 or other like purposes, and we are of opinion that the effect of the J 5th 
 clause of this Act is to exclude the right of Parliament to authorize the 
 construction of public works over those portions of the military lands 
 which had been acquired by purchase or otherwise than by dedication by 
 the Provincial authorities. 
 
 Therefore it is important, in considering the authority of the North- 
 ern Railway Company to enter upon these lands, to ascertain, and it was 
 essentially a part of the case of the Grand Trunk and Northern Railway 
 Companies that they should establish, as a matter of fact, whether this 
 Ordnance property had been set apart and dedicated by the Province for 
 military purposes, and not to leave it in doubt whether this property had 
 been purchased by the Crown or not. No evidence was offered at the 
 hearing of the case to show how this fact is. 
 
 The learned Vice-Chancellor has assumed, as stated in his judgment, 
 that this property had been set apart by the Lieutenant-Governor by 
 reason of the statement on Mr. Fleming's map, a portion of which is called 
 the " Garrison Reserve ;" and because, as he further finds, that the right 
 of the railway to enter upon the lands was never disputed upon this ground^ 
 
8 
 
 it was pointed out in the argument, though not noticed in the judgment, 
 that the statement on Mr. Fleming's map of the Garrison Reserve has re- 
 ference to the portion of the Ordnance property in the City of Toronto 
 (altogether embracing 510 acres), which had not been leased to the city, 
 and which was specially reserved for Garrison purposes, and that the word 
 " reserve" had no such meaning as was attempted to be attached to it by 
 the Plaintiff's Counsel. 
 
 We think a perusal of the correspondence will lead to the conclusion 
 that the distinction which we now draw, as between land dedicated by 
 the Province and land purchased for military purposes, was never present 
 to the minds of the gentlemen who conducted that correspondence. The 
 moat that can be said in favour of the plaintiff's view of this point is that 
 no objection on this specific ground was taken against the right of the 
 Ontario, Simcoe and Huron Railway Company to enter upon the lands. 
 
 Until this fact is proved the charier of the Northern Railway Com- 
 pany could by no possibility be held to authorize them to e^^ ^er upon this 
 military property. Apart from this question, the charter of the Northern 
 Railway Company has been decided, even as against private individuals, 
 not to have authorized or empowered them to enter upon or take possts- 
 sion of land until they have made compensation therefor, as provided for 
 in the 16th section of their Act — and all the right they had, even against 
 individuals (prior to making compensation), was to enter upon lands for 
 the purpose of locating their line, making surveys, «S;c. Johnson v. the 
 Ontario, Simcoe and Huron Railway Company, 11 Queen's Bench, 246, 
 establishes this point. 
 
 So that, whether this was military property dedicated by the Province 
 or not, until the railway compensated, or agreed with, the military 
 authorities, they had no right to do more than enter upon the property 
 for the purpose of surveying and locating their line. 
 
 We notice that Mr. Vice-Chancellor Proudfoot, in giving judgment, 
 states that the full Court, on the re-hearing of the motion to dissolve the 
 injunction in this cause, decided that this Ordnance property was subject 
 to their Act of Incorporation, and that the Northern Railway Company 
 was subject to the General Railway Clauses Act, which was passed in the 
 year 1851. We think his Lordship is in error in both these points, as 
 upon reference to the reported judgment it will be found that neither of 
 these points is decided, and that one of them is not referred to. However 
 that may be, it is plain upon the authority of Johnson's case that the Rail- 
 way Company had no right to enter upon the land for the purpose of con- 
 structing the road until they had agreed with the owners of it, and as 
 Johnson's case is decided upon the charter of this very company, its 
 authority is unmistakeable. 
 
 Now, then, it appears in this case, from the correspondence put in 
 evidence by the plaintiffs, that the Northern Railway Company, through 
 their President, applied to the military authorities for permission to enter 
 upon, construct their line, and erect their stations upon this property. 
 This application, which was made to the respective officers of the Board of 
 Ordnance stationed in Montreal (though not being the principal officers in 
 whom the property was vested, they had no authority to deal with the 
 matter further than to communicate on the subject with the principal 
 officers of the Board in London), led to a correspondence between the 
 military authorities then stationed in this Province, and ultimately to a 
 correspondence with the military authorities at home ; and communica- 
 tions passed between the Secretary of State for War and the Colonial Sec- 
 retary with reference thereto. Before any decision was arrived at, the 
 contractors who were building the road, without authority or permission, 
 entered upon this land and comraenciid to grade the track. This Jed to 
 remonstrance on the part of the military authoritie* here and in Mon- 
 
treal, and finally they consulted Mr. Kirkpatrick, of Kingston, who 
 advised them that the Railway Company or the contractors, in entering 
 upon the property without having made compensation, were trespassers, 
 and could be enjoined against so doing, This important commimication 
 of Mr. Kirkpatrick, which we shall show afterwards received the approval 
 of the principal officers and the Board in London, need not be set out in 
 full, but the concluding portion may be quoted. Mr. Kirkpatrick writes : 
 
 ' ' By these clauses it appears that in the first instance the Company 
 have only the right to enter upon and survey the land and mark out wliat 
 is required for the work. Notice is then given to the parties interested, 
 by filing the plans in certain public offices, and the Company must agree 
 with the owners, and in the case of disagreement lodge the supposed value 
 of the land to be taken in the Court of Chancery, before they can take 
 possession for the purpose of making the railroad ;" and further, Mr. Kirk- 
 patrick instructed his agent in Toronto to see that the Company, who hud 
 desisted in their attempt to construct the road, did not again trespass upon 
 the land. 
 
 This letter of Mr. Kirkpatrick is dated the 24th December, 1851, and 
 contains his advice and opinion upon the matter, as communicated to him 
 by the respective officers in a letter dated the 16th of that month. 
 
 Mr. Kirkpatrick's opinion was adopted by the respective officers at 
 Montreal, and in a letter dated 12th January of the following year, tliey 
 authorized instructions to be given to Mr. Kirkpatrick, " as the reply of 
 the Company " — meaning the Ontario, Simcoe, and Huron Railway 
 Company — " to the notices served upon them is by no means satisfactorv ; 
 to proceed with such measures as the law will warrant to restrain the 
 trespasses of the Company ; and to prevent, if possible, the contractors 
 from exercising the right of desisting from and resuming their operations 
 upi '. Ordnance land at their discretion." 
 
 On the 6th January, 1852, the respective officers at Montreal reported 
 to the Board in London, in the following terms, the steps they had taken : — 
 
 " We respectfully submit for the Master-General's and Board's perusal 
 copies of the correspondence that has passed, and trust they will approve 
 of the instructions we have given to the solicitors for the assertion of 
 the Ordnance rights and for resisting to the uttermost the encroachmtnts 
 of the Company. Mr. Kirkpatrick, Q.C., who has been for many years 
 past consulted by the Department on important questions, has been 
 consulted in this case in consequence of the office of Attorney-General 
 having lately changed hands, and the seat of Government, where the 
 presence of the latter officer is supposed to be required, being at Queliec. 
 The protection of the Ordnance interests in this instance manifestly ilc- 
 manded the adoption of prt)mpt action. We shall not fail to keep tlie 
 Master- General and Board informed of any further proceedings that may 
 be taken in this matter, antl will submit Mr. Kirkpatrick's further re- 
 port as soon as it is received." 
 
 This communication reached England early in February, and is en- 
 dorsed in the following tonus : — " 2nd February, 1852 — Approved, but 
 apprise the R. O. at the same time of the purport of the Board's com- 
 munication of the 9th ultimo, S. 1012, to the Secretary of State, in 
 answer to a reference from his Lordship on the subject." 
 
 A further endorsement is : — " Wrote R. O. Montreal 3rd. " 
 
 Again, on the 20th January, Mr. Kirkpatrick wrote to the respective 
 officers, apprising them of his determination to take immediate steps in 
 oase any attempt was made by the Company to resume the construction 
 of the works. This communication of Mr. Kirkpatrick was adopted by 
 the military authorities in this country ; and, it is to he presumed, was 
 communicated to the Board in London. 
 
 So far, therefore, it appears quite clear that the Board never reoog- 
 
10 
 
 nized the right of the Company to enter upon the lands against their will, 
 but, on the contrary, were taking active steps to prevent their so doing. 
 
 While, however, the respective officers at Montreal and the officers 
 stationed in the Upper Provinces were thus opposing the right of the Com- 
 pany to trespass upon their lands, the Board in London consulted their 
 Solicitor, Mr. Clarke, and also Mr. Elliott, who had formerly been an officer 
 in Canada, and happened then to be in London. 
 
 Mr. Clarke made his report on the Hist December, and Mr. Elliott 
 about the same time made his. Mr. Clarke was of opinion that the only 
 course open to the military authorities was to demand of the Company 
 such a sum as might be considered a fair value of the land taken ; and, if 
 refused, to have the price fixed in the manner pointed out by the statute. 
 Mr. Elliott, who at first thought the Company ought to be restrained from 
 TJTOceeding with their work and to be ejected from the property, finally, 
 it was said, acceded to Mr. Clarke's view of the law. 
 
 The.se communications were reported to the Secretary of State on the 
 0th of January, 1852, for what purpose does not very plainly appear ; and 
 upon the 2nd February, in acknowledgment of the letter from Montreal 
 of the 6th January, in which (in addition to the portion already quoted), 
 the respective officers, in the following language, asked the approval of 
 the principal officers and Board : — 
 
 " We respectfully submit, for the Master-General and Board's appro- 
 val, copies of the correspondence that has passed, and trust they will 
 approve of the instruction we have given to the solicitor for the assertion 
 of the Ordnance rights, and for resisting to the utmost the encroachments 
 of the Company." 
 
 The following letter was sent : 
 
 " Office of Ordnance, 2nd February, 1853. 
 
 Gentlemen, — Having laid before the Board your letter dated 6th 
 ultimo, reporting proceedings in consequence of the Ontario, Simcoe and 
 Huron Railway Company having taken possession of that portion of the 
 Ordjiance Reserve in Toronto which they require, I am directed to signify 
 the Board's approval of your proceedings, and to transmit for your infor- 
 mation the enclosed extract of a letter the Master-General and Board 
 addressed to the Secretary of State on the 9th ultimo, in answer to a 
 reference from his Lordship on the subject. 
 
 I have, &c., 
 
 (Signed), G. Butler. 
 
 Respective Officers, Montreal." 
 
 Here the correspondence ends, at least so far as proved in this cause ; 
 and now it is quite plain that Mr. Kirkpatrick's opinion was correct, so 
 far, at k-ast, as it goes, in construing the law empowering the Company 
 to take possession without having m'lde compensation to the owners of the 
 land ; and that Mr. Clarke was in error in the view he took of the rights 
 «f tlie Company under their charter. This the case of Johnson, already 
 referred to, clearly determines. It must also be borne in mind that there 
 is no reliable evidence— we think we may in strictness say no evidence — 
 that the correspondence, or any of it, which is wholly among the military 
 auihorities, was communicated to the Railway Company. 
 
 It is also clear that no agreement between the Ordnance officers and 
 the Railway Company respecting this parcel of land was established, or 
 even attempted to be proved, in this case ; but the contention of the 
 (ilrand Trunk and Northern Railway Companies is that the right of the 
 Northern to enter was acquiesced in, and that the matter became simply 
 one of compensation ; and that the question as to the amount of this com- 
 pensation was permitted to remain in abeyance. 
 
11 
 
 In our view, the correspondence, ending as it does, raises no such 
 inference. On the contrary, it appears clearly that the hostile proceed- 
 ings initiated by Mr. Kirkpatrick, instead of being countermanded (as, 
 if Mr. Clarke's opinion had been followed, they would have been), wore 
 adopted and approved, no that it is incumbent upon these Companies to 
 establish in some other way that the Northern Railway Company, in pm- 
 secuting their works over this land, were anything but mere trespassers. 
 
 They attempt to do this, not by proving any agreement, but by 
 contending that there is no evidence that they were interfered with by 
 the military authorities, who, they say, were cognizant of their proseoil- 
 ing their works on and over this property. 
 
 Now, the force of this argument is destroyed by the considertition that 
 this property was held in trust for the Crown ; that no person in Canada 
 was authorized to deal with it, excepting when specially instructed ; that 
 the nulitary men who were then in garrison here in Toronto (and whose 
 knowledge of the prosecution of the works is invoked in lid of the argu- 
 ment) were in no sense the representatives of the princip. ' officers of the 
 Board of Ordnance ; and that they had no authority or power to either 
 interfere with, or acquiesce in, the proceedings of the Company ; so th-it, 
 at the best, for the Company all that can be said is that for some reasi >n 
 which has not been disclosed fche principal officer and Board of Ordnance 
 neglected to assert their rights and the rights of the Crown in the matter 
 until the time for the revocation of the letters patent to them hereinafter 
 mentioned. 
 
 The Credit Valley Kailway Company are not called upon to explain 
 how this was, as they represent, under their License of Occupation, tlie 
 Crown, who, as we said before, are indisputably the oivners in fee. But mi 
 explanation of this apparent neglect may be afforded by the statement ot 
 the fact that very shortly afterwards the Letters Patent to the princij al 
 officers, under which they had authority to hold these lands, were revokoil 
 by an Order in Council. 
 
 The road, it appears from the evidence, was constructed over this 
 property in '62 and '53. No further correspondence appears to have taken 
 place, and nothing further appears to have been done in the matter until 
 in 1856 this property was, by 19 Victoria, cap. 46, reinvested in the 
 Crown for the general purposes of the Province. 
 
 Pausing here, we are of opinion that up to this time the Northern 
 Railway Company had acquired no right either to enter upon or retain 
 possession of this land, and that, as against the Crown, they were meie 
 trespassers. Nor does the Act, 19 Vict., cap. 46, in any way strengthen 
 their position. It vests, by Parliamentary title, these lands (amongst 
 others) in the Crown for the public uses of this Province, so that the 
 Crown here again starts with a fresh title, and which is free from nil 
 claim excepting that of parties who had any right to the land as trans- 
 ferred ; and, as we have already stated, in our opinion the Northern 
 Railway Company had not at this period, so far as by the evidence is 
 disclosed, acquired any right. 
 
 The Northern Railway Company next claim title under the provisioiis 
 of the Acts and the Order in Council respecting it, passed in 1859 and 
 1860, and they contend that the effect of this legislation was actually to 
 vest this strip of land, which they then occupied and had fenced in, in 
 them. 
 
 3y referring to the Act passed in 1869, 22 Victoria, cap. 89, it will 
 appear that Farliament transferred and vested in the Crown (who li.id 
 then a lien on the road for advances made to aid in its construction) the 
 Northern Railway, with all the appurtenances and appliances thereof, 
 whether consisting of real or personal property, its rolling stock and 
 plant, and all the corporate privileges of the Company. By the same 
 
12 
 
 Act the Governor in Council was authorized to put the road in a state of 
 repair and cause it to be worked ; to be sold, and the proceeds of such 
 sale to be distributed amongst the creditors of the Company, or to be 
 purchased in for the use of the Province at such sale. Or the Governor 
 was authorized to treat or agree with the Company and its bondholders 
 for the transfer of the lailway and appurtenances, and for permitting the 
 parties to whom such transfer should be made to raise additional capital, 
 to be applied in the repair and improvement of the stock and in payment 
 of the debts and obligations of the Company ; and this Act was assented 
 to on the 4th day of May, in the year last mentioned. On" the 12th of 
 the same month an Order in Council was passed in pursuance' of tho 
 authority vested in the Governor, by which it was agreed that the road 
 should be re-vested in the Company ; and certain powers of issuin*? pre- 
 ference bonds were given to the Company, and the Government thereby 
 agreed to grant priority of dividends over the Provincial claim to the 
 amount of the then bond or debenture debt of the Company, being the 
 sum of $1,185,834. 
 
 Provision was also made for the appropriation of the earnings of the 
 road in the manner therein specified, but the Provincial lien was only post- 
 poned. It was not at this time in any other way aflfected, and it is 
 specifically stated as being the sum of ;£475,000 sterling. 
 
 This Order in Council was in 1860 confirmed by Act of Parliament, 
 and the words used for re-vesting the property in the Northern Railway 
 Company are as follows : — 
 
 " And the Northern Railway, with all the appurtenances and appli- 
 ances thereof, whether consisting of real or personal property, its rolling 
 stock and plant, and all the corporate rights and privileges possessed by 
 the Northern Railway Company of Canada, immediately before and up to the 
 time of the passing of the said Act of 1859, shall be, and are hereby declared 
 t<j have been by the said Order in Council, re-iransferred to and re-invested 
 in the said Company, subject to the conditions, clauses, and provisions 
 made in and by the said Order in Council, which apply to and govern the 
 said Comj)any in all matters and things therein provided for." 
 
 Now, the right of the Crown to the property in question, which, 
 according to our view, was then unquestionable, is not dealt with by this 
 legislation ; nor is any reference made to the title of the Company in the 
 land uver which their railway was built. In our opinion it would be doing 
 violence to the obvious intent of the legislation in question to construe it 
 as vesting in the Company the property of an individual over which the 
 road had not been built, who had not parted with it or been jjaid for it— 
 much less that of the Crown, whose rights are not afi'ected by legislation 
 unless the Crown is sptoifically mentioned ; and as the obvious intent of 
 these Acts and of the Order in Council was to foreclose the Government 
 lien, or, as finally arranged, to postpone the payment of the Government 
 lien, so as to enable the Company to put the road in working order and 
 to successfully operate it, we do not think that it ought to be, or can pro- 
 perly be, held to have divested the Crown of the property which then 
 belonged to it, and upon which it so happened that the Northern Railway 
 Company had located their line. 
 
 But it is said on behalf of the Northern Railway Company that there 
 is a special reservation in the Order in Council in the following words : 
 "The Governor in Council reserves the complete control and direction of 
 the station and other ground in the City of Toronto occupied by the said 
 company, as well as the alignment and disposition of the track of the said 
 railway leading into and within the city, with the view of completing such 
 arrangements as may be deemed expedient by the Governor for the proper 
 connections with the other provincial railways in the said city." 
 
 It is said that these words indicate that the Crown had parted with 
 
13 
 
 its property over this Ordnance Reserve, reserving only the rights in this 
 Order mentioned ; and that the Crown cannot be permitted to say that 
 they own the land in whictli they had only reserved to thbmselves these 
 limited rights. 
 
 The answer to this argument is to be found in the enacting clause of 
 the Act 23 Vict. , cap. 106, the Act of 1860, which we havealrepdy quoted. 
 From this it is made perfectly plain that all that v/as re -invested in the 
 company were the appurtenances, &c ., possessed by the company immedi- 
 ately before arid up to the time of the pasaitcg of the Act of 1869, which were 
 re-transfen'ed and re-invested, subject to the provisions of the order. 
 
 This did not give to the Company anything more than they had before, 
 but it retained over the property of the Company control which the Crown 
 had not any right to exercise prior to this legislation. It is not easy, 
 therefore, to see how an Act of Parliament which purports to only re-in- 
 vest in tlie Company what had belonged to them before it was taken from 
 them and vested in the Crown, and out of this carve certain powers and 
 rights, can be held to have given to the Company something more and 
 beyond that which they possessed before. 
 
 The argument of the learned Vice-Chancellor as to the assertion by 
 the Crown of the right of this property being a fraud upon the persons 
 who invested their money under the provisions of this re-vesting Act, is 
 best answered in the language of Sir Alexander Campbell, who, when 
 Commissioner of Crown Lands, was called upon to adjudicate on this 
 very contention, then made on behalf of the Company. Sir Alexander 
 Campbell said : "A much more difficult question remains under the 
 operation of the 22 Vict., cap. 89, and the Order in Council under it of 
 12th May, 1859, and 23 Vict., cap. 105. Mr. Gait contends that by the 
 operation of the first Act this piece of ground becomes vested in the 
 Crown ; * * * * that a new company was 
 
 organized, advancing further capital, and under the operation of the 
 Order in Council and the statute 23 Vict., cap. 106, the real estate, plant, 
 etc. , was vested in this new company, free from all debts and liens created 
 by the old company ; that it was only upon the faith of obtaining a clear 
 and indefeasible title to the real estate, plant, etc., of the Company that 
 the ^250,000 new capital was obtained, and that a gross breach of faith 
 would be committed to those who advanced it, and to the newly-organized 
 company, if the title to the whole of the real estate, plant, &c., of the 
 former company should not be confirmed to them.'" • * * 
 
 And after referring to the Order in Council, Sir Alexander says : " I do 
 not gather from the language used in the Order in Council, or in the Act, 
 that anything more was intended by the Legislature than to deal with the 
 real and personal estate, rights and properties of the Northern Railway 
 Company as they stood on the 4th of May, 1859. As they than existed 
 they were transferred to the Crown, and as they then existed they were 
 re-transferred and re-invested in the Company by the express language of 
 23 Vict., cap. 106." 
 
 " The reservation by the Ox'der in Council of the entire control and 
 direction of the station and other ground in the city of Toronto, occupietl 
 by the Company in the city of Toronto, and the complete appropriation of 
 all the earnings of the Company, are referred to as evidence that the 
 Company was assumed to be the owner of the piece of land, it being part 
 of the station ground, and that no lien upon it was recognized inasmuch 
 as the appropriation made by the Order in Council contained no provision 
 for the payment of such lien. The new stockholders and bondholders 
 had the statutes and Order in Council before them, and could not have 
 anticipated acquiring under them anything more than the property and 
 franchise of the Company as they stood on the 4th May, 1858. It may 
 be that they assumed and believed that this piece of land belonged t« the 
 
14 
 
 Company. * # * * gut j cannot resist the 
 
 conclusion * * that this Act was not intended to alter the title 
 of the Company in any way, but siiii|(ly to pass it as it stood to the 
 Crown, in contemplation of the Unlor in (Jouiicil arranging the affairs 
 of the Company ; that both the Oriler in- Council and the statute 23 Vict., 
 cap. 106, observe the same principle, and the whole scope of the Acts 
 relate to the position of the title as it was." 
 
 " That this title, and this only, was transferred and re-invested in 
 the Company." 
 
 " That it was upon this and no other title that the new bondholders 
 and stockholders, as far as regards this piece of land, were entitled to 
 rely ; that it was attributable to their own laches if they did not inform 
 themselves of this ; that I am bound to adjudicate upon the matter as it 
 stood prior to the passing of the statute 22 Vict. , cap. 89. " 
 
 We entirely adopt the reasoning and opinion of Sir Alexander 
 • 'ampbell on these statutes and the Order in Council, and cannot but 
 think the opposite conclusion is wholly untenable. 
 
 This, the second ground upon which the Northern Railway Company 
 rely for holding possession of this property, we think cannot be sustained. 
 
 So much for the title of the Northern Railway Company. 
 
 And now the Grand Trunk Railway Company asisert title to a portion 
 of this strip 100 feet in width under the following circumstances : — 
 
 Negotiations had been pending, prior to the passage of the legislation 
 just referred to, between the Northern Railway Company, the Great 
 Western and the Grand Trunk, with the view of bringing the lines of these 
 three companies within one fence and having a union passenger depot foi 
 all three roads at some central place, and the matter of this negotiation 
 came before the Railway Commission, but under what circumstances does 
 not very plainly appear beyond this : That as the Crown was interested 
 in some of the land on which it was proposed to have the Union Station 
 ei-ected, the acquiescence of the Railway Commission (to whom the matter 
 appears to have been referred by the Governor in Council) to parting with 
 this land for the purposes of the station was desired. 
 
 The Railway Commission did finally adopt a report presented by Mr. 
 Sandford Fleming, embodying the views of the three companies, and this 
 report recommended that the Northern Railway line should be departed 
 from, and their track brought down to the point where the Grand Trunk 
 and the Great Western lines crossed (the point of intersection of the To- 
 ronto, Grey and Bruce Railway with the Great Western Railway as at 
 present), and that from thence the line should take a direct course into 
 the Esplanade, which was then being constructed, and so to the proposed 
 depot. 
 
 This recommendation (for it appears to have been nothing more) 
 seems never to have been looked upon as a decision or binding authority 
 by any of the companies, and was not— as alleged, from want of means, 
 or because the Government refused to contribute a portion of the necessary 
 expenditure to carry out the proposal — carried out ; but in lieu of that an 
 agreement was come to among the companies by which the Grand Trunk 
 obtained a right of passage or easement over a portion of this strip of 100 
 feet (which the Northern Railway Company were in possession of down 
 as far as the diamond crossing) to the south of the Northern track, and 
 from the diamond crossing eastwards to the north of the Northern track. 
 
 To facilitate this arrangement, the Northern Railway track from 
 Queen Street to the diamond crossing was shifted to the north of the 
 centre of the 100 feet, and the Grand Trunk track was constructed as 
 nearly as possible on the centre of the 100 feet. 
 
 The Northern Railway Company pretended to give to the Grand 
 Trunk a width sufficient for two tracks on and near to the centre of the 
 
ih 
 
 100 feet, reserving to themselves up to the diamond crossing the land to 
 the north of the centre of the 100 feat, and a portion of the strip south of 
 the space required by the («rand Trunk, about 30 feet. 
 
 To this claim of title tlie firat thing that has to be observed is this: — 
 That it leaves unoccupie<l and undisposed of a strip 30 feet wide on the 
 southern part of this lOO'feet, to which, until the agreement hereinafter 
 referred to, the Grand Trunk had no pretence of title, according to the 
 deposition of Mr, Cumberland ; but the Grand Trunk and Northern Com- 
 panies got into some difficulties, had some dispute about their rights, not 
 to this part of the land, but to the portion east of the diamond crossing 
 and north of the Northern Railway Company's i ra ok, where the Northern 
 Railway Company claimed 30 feet north of the Grand Trunk track, as they 
 did the 30 feet west of the diamond crossing. 
 
 After that .suit, and within the last year, these companies made an , 
 agreement by which they gave to one another, or piirported to give, rights 
 in common over the portion of land in question. 
 
 To complete tho statement of the case upon this point, we must add 
 that the Grand Trunk Company have not filed any plan purporting to 
 take any portion of this 100 feet for their track, nor can they pretend to 
 have any title excepting by agreement with the Northern Railway 
 Company. 
 
 We are of opinion that the proceedings before and the alleged dispo- 
 sition of the matters by the Railway Commission did not, and did not 
 purport to, vest any part of this property in either of these companies ; 
 nor can we see, from any opinion l.hat was expressed by the Railway 
 Commission, that acquiescence on the part of the Crown (who in this 
 matter the Railway Commission did not represent) can be inferred. 
 
 It is contended that this was an exercise of the power reserved in the 
 Order in Council recited in the Act of 1860. There is not a tittle of 
 evidence to warrant any such assumption. Even if it was, it would not, 
 according to the view we have already expressed, vest property belonging 
 to the Crown in either of these companies. On the contrary, even if the 
 Northern Railway Company had a right of possession to this property, the 
 fee of which was still admittedly in the Crown ("and for which they had 
 not paid any compensation nor purchase money), we think that the 
 yielding up of possession to another company would be, in eflFect an 
 abandonment of any right to hold the same as against the Crown ; and 
 the authorities which were cited on the argument, and which were referred 
 to in the judgment of the Vice-Chancellor, as to the limited nature of the 
 estate which railway companies have in land taken for railway purposes, 
 would go a long way to support this view. 
 
 The Vice-Chancellor is of opinion that while the Northern Railway 
 Company may not have had a right to part with their possessory title to 
 the Grand Trunk Railway Company, the Credit Valley Railway Company 
 could not be permitted to set up this defect in title of the Grand Trunk, 
 because, in his opinion, the land would still belong to the Northern Rail- 
 way Company. 
 
 In our opinion this is not the correct view of the law ; and holding, 
 as the Credit Valley Railway Company do, directly under the Crown, 
 they have a right to claim, as representing the Cr«wn, this abandonment 
 of Crown property by the Northern Railway Company, who were then in 
 possession of ^t. 
 
 It only remains to notice the final claim that the Northern Railway 
 Company assert to the land in question. 
 
 It is contended by these Companies that in 1875, by the Act of the 
 Dominion Parliament by which all the Railway Acts belonging to the 
 Northern Railway Company were consolidated (38 Vict. , cap. 65), that the 
 title of the Company to the track "as it then existed" was confirmed to 
 the Northern Railway Company. 
 
16 
 
 This contention is founded on the 26th clause of the Act, which pui*- 
 ports to define the undertaking of the foiupany, and enacts that it shall 
 consist of its main line of railway, " us (he same now exists, or may he com- 
 ■phted or extended. " 
 
 To this Are would say -hat it is quite apparent that there wa^ no 
 intention t" vest in the Company anything which they did not already 
 possess, and the Act was passed, as the preamble shows, for the purpose 
 of arranging the internal, and, so to speak, domestic affairs of the Com- 
 pany, and for bringing under the control of the Dominion Parliament the 
 extension roads, power to amalgamate with which was conferred by this 
 Act. 
 
 It is, as it appears to us, abeurd to suppose an Act thus framed would, 
 without notice of any kind, take from a man his property ; and if not 
 from a private individual, it is quite clear that it could not, and would 
 not, divest the property of the Crown ; and, besides, the Act does not 
 contain apt words to vest this property in the Company, assuming that 
 up to this time it was Llie property of the Crown. 
 
 We have not overlooked the reasoning of Mr. Vice-Chancellor Proud- 
 foot, that the power over this property having been conferred (as he con- 
 siders the law) by the Act of 1860, it could, by the same power, be revoked. 
 But we conceive that his Lordship has misunderstood the argument 
 presented on behalf of the Credit Valley Railway Company, that the 
 Crown's title is not derived from the Act of 1860 but from the Act of 
 1856 — an Act of a very different character, passed at the instance of the 
 Crown, and, in effect, merely transferring the land, held in the Crown for 
 one purpose, to the Crown for another — the use of the Province. 
 
 Nor do we think his Lordship is correct in saying that property, 
 vested in the Crown for Provincial purposes, could be divested, unless 
 the Crown was named or the legislation was so expressed as to leave no 
 room for doubt that the rights of the Crown were intended to be affected. 
 
 We have now gone over the grounds upon which the right of plaintiff's 
 company to resist the Credit Valley Railwaj' Company is placed. We 
 have only to add, in conclusion, that the position of the Credit Valley 
 Railway Company under the License of Occupation is that which the 
 Crown would occupy if they were proceeding against these companies by 
 a Writ of Intrusion. The Crown could not eject these companies if they 
 had a title to the property, nor can the Credit Valley Railway Company, 
 but the Crown have deliberately, and after notice to all parties, and hear- 
 inw; argument of counsel on behalf of these companies, granted to the 
 Credit Valley Railway Company a right of way over the property, the 
 title of which, as we said at the outset, is still vested in the Crown, and 
 for which it has rever received any compensation ; and we think these 
 circumstances distinguish this case from the case so much relied on of 
 Buffalo V. the County of Welland, wherein the Crown, although granting 
 the land occupied by the railway company, did so apparently through in- 
 advertence, and without any intent to interfere with the occupation of the 
 railway company. In support of which, and of the rights which a patent 
 under the Crown confers, we would refer to Clench v. Hendrick, Taylor's 
 Reports, 566 ; Weaver v. Burgess, 22 Com. Pleas, 104 ; Doe de Fitzgerald 
 V. Finn, 1 Up. C. R., 170 ; Greenlaw v. Fraser, 24 Up. C. R., 230. 
 
 D. McCarthy, 
 
 THOMAS FERGUSON. 
 
1^ 
 
 STATEMENT OF THE HON. R. M. WELLS. 
 
 There are three distinct points involved in the statement of the 
 Esplanade difficulty published in the Mail of Friday and Siilurday last on 
 behalf of the Grand Trunk and Northern Railway Companies. 
 
 First. — Sir John Macdonald was misled by counsel for the Credit 
 Valley Company, and would not have granted the License of Occupation 
 had he not been informed that there was no other entrance into Toront<i 
 except over the 100 feet strip. 
 
 Second.— The Grand Trunk and Northern Companies expended over 
 $50,00<) in making this atrip available for their railways, and the Credit 
 Valley Company hope to avail themselves of this expenditure by merely 
 paying the Government a rental of $H)() per annimi. 
 
 Third. — The increase of traffic is so great that the Grand Ti-unk and 
 Northern Companies require the whole width of 100 feet lor their tracks. 
 
 As to the first of these statements : 
 
 The 100 feet strip runs along the northern boundary of the Central 
 Prison grounds, a considerable portion of which grounds— adjacent to the 
 ■trip — that is to say, from Strachan Avenue to the Central Prison — has 
 been planted with ornamental trees. There is, of cour«e, no power to take 
 any portion of this land except with the consent of the Government, and 
 it is not difficult to understand that where land has been specially appro- 
 priated by the Government for an asylum or other public institution, they 
 would not consent to give it up until it should be made clear that there 
 is no other available entrance to the city. 
 
 When Mr. Shanly wtvh examined, counsel for the Grand Trunk 
 endeavoured over and ovc i again to make him say that there was no reason 
 wliy the Credit Valley Railway line should not be laid down upon this 
 Central Prison gn)und ; but Mr. Shanly's reply was invariable, namely, 
 that there was no difficulty provided the t ompaiiy got the land. 
 
 There would indeed be no difficulty in constructing a road through 
 the heart of the city if the Company got the land, and that was all that Mr. 
 Shanly intended to or did say. 
 
 Granted that the Government of Ontario should give a right of way 
 along the northern boundary of the Central Prison grounds ; granted that 
 they should permit the Credit Valley Railway to remove the emigrant 
 sheds, and that the track of the Credit Valley Railway should be brought 
 as far east as the small Great Western Station about 800 feet west of 
 Bathurst Street, what advantage would be gained ? Are the Credit Valley 
 Company to build their terminal station at that point, or liaving reached 
 that point, are the Northern willing to give a right of way through their 
 ample grounds between Bathurst and Brock Streets, or ai*e the Grand 
 lYunk willing to give a right of way across their depot grounds east of 
 the round houses to the Esplanade ? 
 
 It is well known that each of these companies strongly opposes any 
 such interference with their ground. The Northern Company say : — 
 " Take as much of the Grand Trunk property aa you please, but leave us 
 alone." The Grand Trunk say :—" Take as much ot the Northern pro- 
 perty as you please, but leave us alone." They agree, howsver, in fight- 
 ing the Credit Valley Railway as their common enemy. 
 
 No douM the Grand Trunk are willing to allow the Credit Valley 
 Railway to run upon one of their tracks to the Union Station, and to use 
 that station for a rental. Indeed, under their agreement with the city 
 they can be compelled to do so. But that will neither suit the Credit 
 Valley nor the citizens of Toronto, nor the general public. The Credit 
 Valley Railway have extensive water lots, extending from a point near 
 the L nion Station to the Water- Works, upon which they propose to build 
 their wharves and elevator. They are desirous of reaching these lots, 
 
18 
 
 and the Qiand Trunk are apparently as determined, except under 
 unreasonable conditions, that they shall not. That is really the whole 
 difficulty between the Credit Valley Railway and that Company. 
 
 The Grand Trunk are bound to keep the Credit Valley from the 
 water if they can. They are bound to compel the Credit Valley Railway 
 to give them their eastern-bound freight at the Union Station if they can. 
 In this contention the Northern are not interested ; the sole object of that 
 Company is to keep the Credit Valley Railway from encroaching on their 
 60 acres of so-called depot ground. 
 
 The statement, therefore, tliat there is space for a track south of the 
 100 feet strip available to the Credit Valley Railway as an entrance to the 
 city is delusive and misleading. We challenge the Northern and Grand 
 Trunk Companies to answer these questions : — If the Credit Valley Rail- 
 way should obtain such a track from the Government of Ontario, will the 
 Northern grant a right of way through their depot grounds from 
 Bathurst to Brock, or will the Grand Trunk grant a right of way east of 
 the round-houses to the Esplanade ? When the public have waited a 
 reasonable time for an answer to these questions, they will have no diffi- 
 culty in estimating at its true value that portion of the published state- 
 ment which relates to the Central Prison grounds. 
 
 Second. — It is asserted that the Grand Trunk and Northern have 
 expended j!60,000 in making the strip from Queen Street to Bathurst Street 
 available for their railways. If they did spend that sum of money upon 
 this strip they spent too much. There are only, I am informed, a few 
 thousand yards of excavation in the whole distance, for that ground was 
 and is for the most part a dead plain. The evidence of Mr. Shanly as 
 quoted in the statement is itself decisive of this. 
 
 Mr. Shanly was asked whether, " with fair engineering talent, there 
 would be difficulty in constructing a railway on Government lands south 
 of and adjoining the strip." 
 
 He replied ; — " It would hardly req^dre an eiiginei'r to put a railway 
 there if you had the land. All you would have lo do is to loiden out the rest 
 of the tracks. It is all the same level." 
 
 How was it possible to spend $50,000 in grading a line for a distance 
 of a mi'e and a half over an abnost level country ? 
 
 The statement that the Credit Valley Railway desire to get the benefit 
 of the expenditure of the Grand Trunk and Northern without paying 
 their fair share is very unfair. The Credit Valley Railway have repeatedly 
 offered to pay their share. Their answer to the bill in the very suit, 
 which is referred to in the statement, contains the following submission: — 
 
 " We are informed ami believe that the mm, expended upon the land and 
 premises now in question was very trijliny, but whatever it is we have always 
 been, and now are willing to account and pay for any admntaye that we may 
 derive from the work done thereon by the plaintiff's and the said Northern 
 Railway Company." 
 
 In the face of this, and in the face of the provisional arrangement 
 made in the office of the Northern Railway Company, and in the presence 
 of their President, Directors, Solicitor, &c., the author of this statement 
 thinks it right to say that the motive ot the Credit Valley Railway is to 
 escape with only paying the sum of f 100 a year. 
 
 Third. — It is said that the increase of traffic upon the Grand Trunk 
 and Northern is so great that they require the whole width of 100 feet for 
 their tracks. 
 
 For twenty years the Grand Trunk and Northern were content with 
 one track each along this strip. As soon as the Credit Valley ask for a 
 track upon it they find that they require it all. 
 
 'J'here is room upon this strip for seven tracks, with a space between 
 passing trains of five or six feet. Allowing a space of say three feet, there 
 
19 
 
 ia room for eight or nine tracks. Does any one believe that with over 50 
 acres of terminal grounds, two iniiin entering tracks are not enough for 
 the Northern Railway Company ? Does any one believe that with 30 or 
 40 acre) of depot groimd, three main entering tracks are not enougli for 
 the Grand Trunk ifJomj)Hny ? But after allowing the Northern two and 
 the Grand Trunk four tracks, surely the (-'red it Valley Railway are en- 
 titled to space for one or two tracks. It is a bold thing to say that the 
 business of the Northern is so great that two main entering tracks from 
 Queen Street to Bathurst Street are insufficient for it. The public know 
 better. It is a bolder thing to say that three or four main entering tracks 
 are not enough or aie required for the Grand Trunk. The public know 
 better. And when they understand that this sudden anxiety for more 
 space dates from the time when the Credit Valley Railway ra' appeared 
 upon the ground, they will be better able to estimate the v;iluo of this 
 published statement, and of the true character of the hostility with which 
 the Creilit Valley Company are met. 
 
 The selfishness of both the Grantl Trunk and the Northern in this 
 matter is very remarkable. The ( ourt of Chancery has indeed held that 
 they have acquired a title to the land in question, but the Court did not 
 hold that they had paid value for it. They did not, as a matter of fact, 
 pay one farthing for this land, either to the Government or to the Ord- 
 nance Department. 
 
 Each Company grabbed a right of way. The Ordnance Department, 
 to whom the land belonged, ordered them oflF, and treated them as tres- 
 passers. But that Department was advised by their solicitor that with 
 respect to the Northern Company there was no way of ejecting them, and 
 that it was only a matter for compensation. 
 
 It is perfectly clear, however, from the following letters, which were 
 not found until after judgment had been given in the recent suit, that, 
 with respect to the Grand Trunk at all events, the Ordnance Department 
 did not cea-se to treat them as trespassers down to the year 1856, and did 
 not agree that it was a mere matter for compensation. 
 
 War Department, Montreal, 8th October, 1856. 
 
 Sir, — The authoiitiea at Home having had under coiuideration the subject 
 of unauthorized cncroachineiits by the Grand Trunk Railway Company on the 
 Garrison Re.«erve at Toronto, we have the honour to transmit herewith, for the 
 information of the Lieutenant-General Commanding, a copy of the communica- 
 tion we have received from the War Department at Pall Mall on the subject, 
 and request that he may be pleased to notify the same to the Colonial Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 We have, Ac. , 
 
 (Signed), W. Ord, Col. Com. Royal Engineera. 
 A. Gun, Storekeeper, 
 W. H. Blenkarne, Deputy Storekeeper. 
 
 To the Military Secretary, Jtc, &c., Montreal. 
 
 War Department, Pall Mall, 10th Sept., UM. 
 
 Gentlemen, — I am directed by the Secretary of State for War to acquaint 
 you that the explanation given in your letter dated the 6th ultimo, relative to 
 encroachments by the Grand Truidi Railway Company of Toronto, is .satisfactory. 
 I am further desired to request that you will inform the Colonial Govern- 
 ment that the occupation of this ground by the railway company is wholly un- 
 authorized. 
 
 I have, &c., 
 
 H. R. Drury. 
 The respective Officers, War Department, Montreal. 
 
 These letters also throw strong light upon what was undoubtedly the 
 final opinion of the Ordnance Department as to the right of railway com- 
 panies to take their land without consent. 
 
20 
 
 The Northern Railway Company have from first to last been paid by 
 the Government— that is to say, by the [)e(i|)le — more than enough to 
 build and equip their road. In addition to this they have appropriated 
 without leave or licenso over fifty acres of land and of water lots in this 
 city, for which they have never paid one farthing. The Grand Trunk 
 Company have also received an enormous sum from the (lovenunent — 
 that is, from the i)eople — more than enough to build their road, and yet 
 these are the companies who say to the city of Toronto, and to the 
 counties, townships, and towns which have been compelled by their dis- 
 criminations and conduct to build the Credit Valley Railway, " We 
 will keep the Credit Valley out of Toronto, and for that purpose will 
 fight them froni Court to Court until the last forum is reached." 
 
 The author of the published statement has given one extract from the 
 speech of Sir John Macdonald on this subject. I will give another from 
 the same speech : — 
 
 " I think it would he impogaible and vtry nnwiite. for the other railways 
 to attempt to keep the Credit Valley Railway out of Toronto, hecavse it is 
 quite true, as Mr. Macdougall says, it vfoiild he Impomhh to prevent their 
 getting power from the Legislature to do so, if in no other may. Public 
 opinion ivoxild be against the Credit Valley heim/ kept out, Whethtr it was 
 wisely commenced or not is another question. 'Dure it is, a railway now in 
 existence, a railway which is standing at the threshold of Toronto, iranting 
 to get i?i ; ond if by any exercise of legal right the other railways keep it out of 
 the city, I xm quite sure the Legislature, as a matter of justice, would he com- 
 pelled by public opinion to override all these legal rights, and give this Com- 
 pany's railway admission into Toronto. Just is surely as I sit here the 
 Legislature would force the other railways to yield the track; and having that 
 fact before them, I think that thy should address themselves at once to do it 
 without any trouble from litigation or otherioise." 
 
 The friends of the Credit Valley Railway venture to think that this 
 earnest public declaration and pledge by the First Minister of the Crown 
 will convince the public that the entrance of the Credit Valley Railway 
 into the commercial centre of the city by a right of way which shall be 
 uncontrolled by, and independent of, any rival railway company, will be 
 surely and certainly granted by Parliament, if in no other way. 
 
 There may be a little further delay, but the interests involved are too 
 great, and the public are too much in earnest, to make the final result a 
 matter of very mucli doubt. 
 
 Since the above was written the Northem Railway Company have 
 published a long statement in e.xplanation of their hostility to the Credit 
 Valley Company. They say that in April, 1879, they prepared and sub- 
 mitted a plan showing a line for the Credit Valley from Queen Street to 
 Bathurst Street, and that the plan was agreed to provisionally on behalf 
 of the Credit Valley by Messrs. Campbell, Wells and Bailey. That is 
 quite true ; but the Northem Company are perfectly well aware that as 
 soon as the Grand Trunk Company heard of what had been done they 
 promptly repudiated the whole arrangement. 
 
 The following letter was received I'rom Mr. Bell, their .solicitor, within 
 three days alter the submission of the Northern Railway Company's plan : 
 
 Bklleville, 22nd April, 1879. 
 Hon. R. M. Wells, Barrister, Toronto. 
 
 My Dear Sir,—E€ C. V. R. and G. T. E.— I have your letter, which I 
 have at once sent to Mr. Hickson. I may in the meantime say that the recent 
 litigation between the Northern Railway and this Company has been as to the 
 ownerihip of the land between the Queen Street crossing and the diamond 
 crossing and south of the Grand Trunk Railway tracks up to the fence, and on 
 the part north of our tracks between diamond crossing and Bathurst Street. 
 
21 
 
 TheM lanrU are nur^, and thf. Northttn have no claim to them in any form. 
 One cannot thereforo help admiring the generosity of that Company in giving 
 
 your people liberty to use thnt which is futt theirs. 
 
 • »'« • • • « • 
 
 We must, from the diamoml ea«t, have anrl own onr own double track. 
 What right Mr. ffickson will give your people 1 cannot say ; but this 1 can say. 
 that if vou attumpt to take property clnimed by U8, we will take iitepg to protect 
 our rigfits, and thai at ouce. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 (Sigurd), John Bell. 
 
 I pass over for the present the extraordinary contradiction, as to the 
 ownership of tliis land, betwton Mr. lioU's letter and the evidence given 
 in the suit between the Credit Valley and the Oran<l Trunk. 
 
 The truth is, that the Northern and Orand Tnink Companies are 
 ingeniously playing into eacli other's hands. They have a sort of joint 
 control over the one hundred feet strip from Queen to Bathurst Street, 
 and they occupy between H;ithurHt Street and York Street a block containing 
 about eighty acres. 
 
 The Northern virtually say to the Credit Valley Railway — " We 
 will lot you come to Bathunst Street provided you do not touch our ground 
 between Bathur.st and Brock Streets, and we won't let you come unless 
 you make an agreement to that effect." 
 
 The Urand Trunk virtually say — " The Northern have no right to 
 give you that track at all, but it' you will agree not to cross our ground to 
 your water lots we will permit yon to come to Bathurst Street. The 
 result of this happy combination of offers, conditions, provisos, stipula- 
 tions and humbug, is to keep the Credit Valley at Queen Street. 
 
 The Credit Valley do not care by which route they reach their water 
 lots. If they can get a track through the Northern depot grounds, they 
 are content to abandon the Shanly route through the Grand Trunk 
 ground ; if they can get the track laid down by Mr. Shanly across the 
 Grand Trunk ground, they are content to abandon the route through the 
 Northern ground. 
 
 But tile Northern say — " You shall not go through our ground," 
 and the Grand Trunk say — "You shall not go through o\ir ground ;" 
 and they both say in effect — " You shall not even come to Bathurst 
 Street until you bind yourselves to abandon both routes." That is the 
 plain English of it, and no amount of bland protestations can make it 
 otherwise. 
 
 The Northern Company have obtained opinions from several engineers 
 adverse to the route through the Northern grounds. It is perfectly clear, 
 however, that these gentlemen have been entirely misinformed as to the 
 facts. They have been led to suppose that the Credit Valley had a safe, 
 easy, clear and unopposed track through the Grand Trunk ground, and 
 that, perversely and unreasonably, they insist upon the other and more 
 dangerous one. Mr. Walter Shanly, for instance, says : — " It seems hard 
 to comprehend why the Credit Valley should turn aside from the direct 
 line pointed out to it, ivith one crossing only, to entangle itself in a mesh 
 of rails involving eight." Mr. Brydges says : — " It is besides entirely 
 unnecessary, as what is wanted can be accomplished mthout incurrin<i 
 risks and difficalties." Mr. Muir says: — "There is not the slightest 
 necessity of running their line upon this track, because a cheap, simple, 
 and ea.->i/ line can he got ivithoiit interefering with -the tracks, yardage and 
 switching operations of the other companies." Mr. Paine says: — "Such 
 a location should not be considered when any other can be found at 
 reasonable cost. In this instance the alternative is simple, lets expensive, 
 and less free from any of the objections by which the line through the 
 Northern ground is surrounded." 
 
 Had these engineers been told that the line laid down by Mr. Frank 
 
•I 
 
 92 
 
 Shanly through the Grand Trunk ground is opposed by that Company 
 with the utmost vehemence and determination, and that it crosses the 
 Great Western track east of Bathurst Street twice, the old and newly laid 
 Grand Trunk tracks east of Brock Street eight or nine times, and the 
 Northern track once, it is not unreasonable to suppose that their opinions 
 would, to say the least, have been considerably modified. 
 
 As to the difficulty and danger of crossing the Northern ground, I 
 venture to think that, having a spac i exceeding 50 acres between Bathurst 
 and Brock Streets, the Northern Company would have very little difficulty 
 in so readjusting their tracks as to permit the location of at least one more 
 track — a track which would be perfectly easy and safe — and that this 
 might be done without straining the ingenuity of any one of the engineers 
 whose opinions have been obtained. 
 
 It appears perfectly monstrous that one company should be allowed 
 to appropriate fifty acres of land commanding the approach to the business 
 centre of the city, fill it with tracks, and then obstruct all other railway 
 enterprise. 
 
 The situation is very much aggravated when one considers that the 
 Northern road has practically been built not only for but by the people, 
 and that for all this land the Northern Company have never paid one 
 farthing. 
 
 R. M. WELLS, 
 Toronto, January 22nd, 1880. Solicitor, C. V. R. 
 
 Tii« following editorial appeared in the Daily Globe of Saturday, 
 simultaneously with the foregoing : — 
 
 THE ESPLANADE DIFFICULTY- 
 
 Whatever the railways which now have access to the city may urge in 
 defence of their claims ; by however great a variety of dodges and eva- 
 sions they may attempt to justify their proceedings ; the broad fact remains 
 that the Credit Valley Railway is not allowed to enter upon the land which 
 was originally set apart expresslj'' lor the use of railways centring at To- 
 ronto, except in the enormously expensive way dictated to it by the Nor- 
 thern and Grand Trunk, and fettered by conditions fatal to independent 
 action. Whatever the legal claims on the land may be, the land is still 
 rightfully public land, and such portions as the existing roads do not 
 actually use for needful tracks are righteously open to other lines. The 
 city has a right to demand that the Credit Valley line be allowed access. 
 The occupying companies may think that their nine points of possession 
 practically give them the tenth, but they will assuredly find themselves 
 mistaken. If the Courts cannot brush away the thorny thickets raised in 
 (iefianco of justice, Parliament can ; and no Parliament of Canada dare 
 truckle to a railroad in such a case as this. The railways have pushed 
 things to such a point that it is necessary for the (question of supremacy 
 to be settled once for all. If the railroads are superior to equity, the 
 public cannot know the fact too soon. If a new competitor can be de- 
 liberately worried into a surrender of its independence, Canadians may as 
 well at once bow down before Managers Cumberland and Hickson and 
 acknowledge them lords. But there will be a battle to be fought before 
 railroad rule is finally submitted to in Canada. The Credit Valley Com- 
 pany represent the people in their struggle against monopoly, and the 
 case of the people, when divested of the legal haze thrown around it, will 
 be found to be wonderfully simple. The Credit Valley road must be 
 admitted upon the land which the people set apart for it. Of course that 
 company must pay a fair share of the money spent in earth-filling, but the 
 amount is a question for arbitrators, and affords no reason why the squat- 
 ting occupants should set themselves up in defiance of the law. 
 
On Monday the 2Gth the Daily Mail commented as followa : — 
 
 THE RAILWAY DISPUTE- 
 
 The public has now had before it the statements of the three parties 
 to the dispute about the entrance of the Credit Valley Railway into the 
 city. The main fact that stands out clear and prominent amid the vast 
 mass of evidence bearing on the case, is that the Grand Trunk and North- 
 em roads refuse to allow the Credit Valley to use the lands which they 
 obtained from the city by nothing more valid than a sqiiatter's deed. 
 Whatever the Courts of Law may hold as to an acquired title, that fact is 
 incontrovertible, all else is mere detail, with which the citizens need n ol 
 specially concern themselves. The position of the city is simply this : It 
 built the Esplanade at an enormous cost for the benefit not only of the 
 roads then existing but of all future roads ; and the question now is 
 whether the two old railways shall henceforth be allowed to control it anu 
 the other property which they acquired by the city's good will, even to 
 the extent of blocking the entrance of a railway which the city has sub- 
 sidized conditionally on its making the Esplanade its terminus ? 
 
 It seems to us that the course of the city is clear enough. Parliament 
 has the power, if the Courts have not, to force the two old roads to do the 
 city justice, and to that supreme body the citizens should appeal. Morally, 
 however it may be in the rigid interpretation of the Court of Chancery, 
 the Credit Valley has equal rights with the Northern and Grand Tnuilc 
 to the use of the land in dispute ; and in its own interest, as well as in 
 justice to the Credit Valley Company, the city is bound to enforce that 
 equality and make it law. The city gave the Credit Valley bonuses to 
 the amount of $350,000, but apart from that, the city is largely interested 
 in the road, which will open up a vast agricultural region, and make it 
 tributary to this market. It is intolerable, therefore, that a strip of pro-' 
 perty, which the city allowed the older roads to occupy, should be used as 
 an instrument for depriving the people of the benefits of an undertaking 
 in which, directly and indirectly, they have an enonnous stake. More- 
 over, it is absolutely necessary that this question should be settled unce 
 for all. Other roads, of which this city will be the terminus, are being 
 projected ; but until the right of entrance to the lake front is thrown open 
 to all, the new enterprises will not feel secure, nor will the people feel 
 safe in encouragiri; them. In short, the railway enterprise of the city is 
 dependent for all time to come upon the definitive adjustment of this 
 long-standing dispute ; and the sooner the people appeal to Parliament 
 on the subject the better for all concerned. 
 
 WEST TO EAST. 
 
 RAILWAY COMMUNICATIONS. 
 
 Credit Valley ami Quebec Provincial Systems The Latest Project. 
 
 (From the Montreal Herald, j 
 
 Mr. George Laidlaw, President of the Credit Valley Railway, is at 
 present staying at the Windsor, and yesterday a representative of this 
 journal waited upon that gentleman for the purpose of ascertaining as to 
 whether he had any particular mission to the city. After being received 
 in a very gentlemanly manner, the following colloquy took place : — 
 
 Reportkr. — Would you, sir, object to inform me what your present 
 purpose is in visiting our city \ 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — I visited Ottawa for the first time in eight years with 
 a view to lay before the Government matters peculiar to the Credit Valley 
 
^4 
 
 line, and other things affecting tlie railways of the country, t came to 
 Montreal especially to see the Premier, Mr. Chapleau, with a view to 
 promote the formation of a company or syndicate to purchase the Quebec 
 Railway from Quebec to Ottawa, and to undertake the construction of the 
 Toronto and Ottawa Railway, subject to power being reserved by the 
 Provinces of Quebec and Ontario, guaranteeing for ever the independence 
 of the line. The whole of the proposed system of railways, if the new 
 portion were well built on easy gradients, would jjrove a most valuable 
 property, and be of the greatest possible consequence to the prosperity of 
 the cities of Montreal and Quebec, as well as the Province generally. As 
 an independent outlet from Toronto eastward for the Great Western, the 
 Credit Valley, the Northern, the Toronto, Grey and Bruce, the Toronto 
 and Nipissing, the Midland, etc., it would be of the first importance to 
 the Province of Ontario. 
 
 Reporter. — Do you consider the scheme of that importance to the 
 city of Toronto that the city should give it any money ? 
 
 Mr. Laiulaw. — Toronto should not be required to give it much 
 money. Toronto has invested in its Esplanade $800,000 for the con- 
 venience of railways, and it has given to the Northern $200,000, to the 
 Narrow Gauges $400,000, to the Muskoka $100,000, and to the Credit 
 Valley $350,000, making a total of $1,850,000, an amount in excess of the 
 mcmey hitherto paid by the whole Province of Ontario. This outlay has 
 raised the assessed value of Toronto about $30,000,000 in ten years. No 
 doubt the city would derive benefit from the competition for its trade ami 
 receipts, but Toronto would, after all, only be the " hojiper " for the 
 spout which would discharge into Montreal. Therefore, as a collecting 
 point, it is in no degree so much interested in a railway leading away 
 from it as is Montreal in a new railway which would duplicate its business 
 with the West. 
 
 Reporter. -What do you think Montreal should do ( 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — Montreal has done very little for herself, excepting 
 the aid to the Occidental. Montreal cannot expect to become the great 
 commercial emporium which it ought to be, and which it should be tiie 
 pleasure of the Dominion to make it, upon a single pair of rails leading 
 to the West. It is an absurd comparison between the ninuber of rails 
 leading into New Vork, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, to think that the 
 Dominion of Canada has only one single line, the control and manage- 
 ment of which is worked to the disadvantage of Canada, and Montreal 
 especially, and in favour of the United States. Montreal should be the 
 centre of the organization which should control this new through, inde- 
 pendent, internal line of communication from Toronto to Quebec. Its 
 president should reside here as well as the principal directors, and nothing 
 is wanted to make this line of paramount importance to both Provinces 
 but the one fact that the line should be secured for the country, subject 
 to the control of the Provinces as to its independence for ever to prevent 
 its being pooled, leased, or bought by any organization in Canada or else- 
 where. The bulk of the trade of the Great Western Railway is lost to 
 the port of Montreal because better facilities exist for its transmission to 
 New York. Every vessel loaded in New York with produce which might 
 be carried by Canadian railways is one less loaded in Montreal or Quebec. 
 The time has come when Montreal must move. The continuing of the 
 Canada Central to a port on Lake Huron, and the construction of the 
 Toronto and Ottawa Railway, with a double track on the Grand Trunk 
 westward, are all points of vital interest to the prosperity of Montreal. 
 
 Reporter. — Do you think the French people would be in favour of 
 the scheme '/ 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — Certainly I do, because if the case was clearly reasoned 
 and plainly laid before those upon whom the French people mainly 
 
20 
 
 depend for advice in such matters, I have r.ot the slightest donbt they 
 would go for the increase of the value of their property and business. 
 M. Freycinet, notwithstanding the recent misfortunes of France, has just 
 broHglit out the most magnificent scheme of railway and harbour improve- 
 ment to be added to the already grand system of France — such a scheme 
 as has never been equalled or proposed in Europe before — and, therefore, 
 I think that if the leaders of French public opinion in Montreal will 
 only drop their peculiar differences and go for such improvements as 
 would duplicate its trade, as we have done in Toronto, it would be done 
 in a few years. 
 
 Rrporter. — Have you spoken to .any of the gentlemen of Montreal on 
 the subject 1 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — Yes ; Messrs. A. W. Ogilvie, T. Cramp, R. Thibau- 
 deau, and other French gentlemen, whose names I forget, have been 
 suggested, and this by their political opponents, as men whom the people 
 will trust. 
 
 Reporter. — Do you intend to take any active interest in the scheme ? 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — I will take no direct or indirect pecuniary interest 
 in the matter because I have no money, but I will lend all the help that 
 I can spare from my own serious responsibilities to assist the promotion 
 of this syndicate or company, in the belief that it is the luty of every 
 patriot to assist in doing good to the country, but more especially is that 
 the case with the people of Quebec, because it would relieve the Province 
 of the major part of its indebtedness on the North Shore Railway, and 
 furnish the business necessary to make that railway profitable to the State 
 and advantageous to the community. 
 
 Reporter. — Is Mr. Prentice, or any other gentleman in New York or 
 Montreal, authorized to speak on behalf of the Credit Valley Railway ? 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw^. — No. Mr. Prentice or any one else has not the 
 slightest authority for propcjsing anything in connection with the Credit 
 Valley besides its Directors. 
 
 Reporter. — What is your objection to a New York Compar- aking 
 up this scheme and carrying.it out ? 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — We do not want a New York Company, with a line 
 of American agents, through the heart of our countrj^ from Toronto to 
 Quebec, neither do we want a line which would be controlled "n the 
 United States, and be made a foot-ball for the stock-jobbers of Wall 
 Street. 
 
 Reporter. — What is your theory for raising the money to carry out 
 the proposed scheme t 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — Simply that a responsible body of men should get the 
 legislative power to bond the whole line from Quebec to Ottawa, and from 
 Ottawa to Toronto, for say an average of $16,000 to $20,000 per mile, 
 with which to pay off the Quebec Government and to construct the Toronto 
 and Ottawa extension. 
 
 Reporter. — Who do you anticipate would buy these bonds 1 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — So small a lien on such a great through trunk line 
 would be greedily taken up in London as exactly what it would be, a 
 first-rate investment. 
 
 Reporter.— Would the Grand Trunk Railway oppose the sale of the 
 bonds in London 1 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw — Undoubtedly ; but the Grand Trunk Railway has not 
 much financial influence in London. The small cliqiie of ex-officials of 
 Canada and the Grand Trunk who affect to look wise and determine the 
 fate of all Canadian enterprises, public and private, constitute what I call 
 " Grand Trunk Society," and have no influence over the floating capital of 
 England ; and if this question and a proper explanation of the whole 
 case, inclusive of the interests o^ the Great Western, Grand Trunk, and 
 
26 
 
 the credit and worth of the Province of Quebec, were laid before the 
 English public in the Times, these gentlemen would find themselves 
 unable to control investments in a security so simple and so self-evident. 
 
 Rbportbb. — Why did not the Quebec loan have greater success in 
 London ? 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — Becaiise the Grand Trunk and those ex officio people 
 in London exerted themselves to discredit the great Province of Quebec, 
 when little places like New Zealand were permitted, without any protest, 
 and with only 350,000 inhabitants, to borrow 3100,000,000, although their 
 market was 8,000 miles away. 
 
 R»PORTBR. — Then you believe that malign influences were brought to 
 bear on the press, and otherwise, to defeat that loan ? 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — Certainly. "It is naught, it is naught, saith the 
 buyer ; but when he is gone his way, then he boasteth." 
 
 Reporter. — How do you think the difficulty is to be overcome in the 
 new scheme ? 
 
 Mb. Laidlaw. — By succinct statements of the whole case and attend- 
 ing circumstances being published in the London press by and under the 
 authority of the Canadian Resident in London, Sir Alexander Gait, who 
 should be so authorized by the Government of Canada. 
 
 Reporter. — Do you think the Grand Trunk has much influence in 
 Canada ? 
 
 Mr. Laidlaw. — Oh, yes ; the Grand Trunk has considerable influence 
 here, from the fact that the leading lawyers of the day were connected 
 with its formation, and contractors accumulated fortunes. These people 
 have in time risen to influence, and they have naturally a sympathy for 
 the institution from which they derived so much consequence and wealth. 
 
 Reporter. — Have you any doubt about succeeding at Ottawa ? 
 
 Mr. Laidt .V Not the least. The Government will act in a strict 
 spirit of impartiality, and give that which is due to the respective parties 
 in the struggle. 
 
 From beginning to end Mr. Laidlaw spoke respectful 'y of those 
 whose interests it may be to oppose the scheme, but he did ot seem to 
 have the slightest doubt as to its realization. 
 
 THE NEW THROUGH ROUTE. 
 
 (From the Globe. Jl 
 
 All Canadians, except the few who, out of considerations o,' pelf, put 
 the interests of the Grand Trunk Railway before those of the country, 
 will rejoice to hear of a feasible project for the construction of the Toronto 
 and Ottawa Railway as a link in a grand through line, the remainder of 
 which is already in operation. The proposal is to form a company or 
 syndicate to purchase the Quebec Provincial Railway from Quebec to 
 Ottawa, to undertake the construction of the Toronto and Ottawa line, 
 and to enter upon sucli relations with the roads now centring at Toronto, 
 as will secure a great through business for the new route as soon as it 
 is open. 
 
 To the Province of Quebec this scheme presents a golden opportunity 
 for making the road which is now an incubus upon its energies a means of 
 contributing to its prosperity. As a part of a great through route the 
 North Shore road would have all the business it could do over a large por- 
 tion of the line. A source of chronic corruption and constant peril would 
 be removed from politics, and the Province generally would receive such 
 an impetus as would lift it clear of its present depression. 
 
 The whole of the Dominion would be released from the chains in 
 which the Grand Trunk monopoly now holds it. The Great Western, 
 Canada Southern, Credit Valley, Toronto, Grey and Bruce, Northern, 
 
 ■M- 
 
27 
 
 Toronto and Nipissing, Midland, Central, Whitby and Port Perry, 
 Victoria, Kingston and Pembroke, St. Lawrence and Ottawa, and other 
 lines, are virtually concerned in getting a competing outlet such as the 
 projected route will give them. A vast tract of excellent agriciiltural 
 land is waiting to be opened up, and the possessors of it have agreed to 
 tax themselves liberally in return for railway communication. A great 
 trade in minerals has already sprung up in the face of serious disadvan- 
 tages. The proposed Toronto and Ottawa line will pass through extensive 
 mineral lands, and from them will get a paying return freight westward, 
 thus enabling eastward business to be transacted at a very low rate. 
 There is literally no end to the advantages to be gained by this new 
 through line. It would release us from Grand Trunk control not only in 
 summer by its outlet at Quebec, but in winter by its alternative route 
 across the St. Lawrence at Coteau Landing, and thonce to Boston or New 
 York. The present Government's opposition to this scheme may be 
 counted out of the question. If the Government continues to prefer 
 Grand Trunk interests to those of all the remainder of the country, it is 
 simply writing its own death-warrant. After the spectacle now visible 
 near Montreal the Government will scarcely dare to pin its faith to an 
 assertion that a new bridge is not necessary. When, in order to escape 
 paying the outrageous tolls demanded by the Grand Trunk for the passage 
 across the Victoria Bridge, people are forced to lay a track on the frozen 
 .river, where, with open water within a pistol-shot on each side, passen- 
 gers are crossing in constant fear of a catastrophe, it is superfluous to argue 
 that additional accommodation is necessary. It is necessary, and it will 
 have to be given. 
 
 The prospects of the Toronto and Ottawa line are fairer than those of 
 any other line now possible in this Dominion, probably on this continent. 
 The road could be built now without a cent of extraneous aid, and would 
 pay at once a remunerative dividend on the cost of construction. It would 
 create a large local business, and could do as much through business as it 
 pleased on terms at least as good as those on which the Grand Trm ijets 
 its American trade. By bringing to Montreal and Quebec as much again 
 • of through business as can now be done, it would attract shipping, and 
 hy the competition induced cut down ocean freights. As far as its numoy- 
 earning power is concerned, it would be superior to the capacity of the 
 best part of the Grand Trunk, namely, that between Toronto and Mon- 
 treal, because the Grand Trunk draws local business mainly from the 
 northward, and is competed with by water communication for its entire 
 length. Notwithstanding its bad location, this last mentioned part of the 
 Grand Trunk is a highly profitable piece of road, even when the ruinously 
 wasteful cost of its construction is taken as the basis of calculation. That 
 being so, it follows that the Toronto and Ottawa line, when constructed, 
 being a better located and much cheaper line than the Grand Trunk, will 
 also be profitable. The new line might, in fact, be advantageously built 
 by the companies which are now indebted to the Grand Trunk for their 
 outlet. It would require nothing more than a guarantee from each of 
 them for a certain proportion of the interest on bonds to give the pro- 
 jectors of the line all the money wanted for its construction. 
 
 It is unnecessary to add that now is the time to proceed with the 
 business. We are on the eve of a revival of business all the world over. 
 With the revival will come a general rise in the price of material and 
 labour, by means of which the cost of railroad-building will soon be almost 
 doubled. At present labour is to be had in any quantity for very little 
 money ; but if time is lost, and the work of grading and so forth only 
 entered upon when the good times come, the Company will be competing 
 for labour in an understocked market, and the great opportunity now pre- 
 sented will have passed away. , 
 
 • « I 
 
 • > • • • 
 • ' • •