Al;>^t..

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

^^ /,. WJ'.n

V-

/M/a

!.0

I.I

1.25

1^
1^

^ m

12.5

2.2

2.0

!-4 IIIIII.6

/J.

Photographic

Sciences
Cornoration

33 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 672-4503

I?-

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien da microreproductions historiques

1987

Tachnical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the beat
original copy available for filmirg. Features of this
copy which may bo biblioqraphically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

L'Institut a microfilma le meillaur exemplaire
qu il lui a ete possible de se procurer Les details
de cet axernplair" qui sont peut-etre uniques du
point de vue bib*iographique. qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la m^thode normale de fllmage
sont indiqu^s ci-dessous.

□ Coloured cowers/
Couvarture da coulaur

□ Covers damaged/
Couvertura endommagee

□ Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couvertura restaur^e et/ou pelliculee

□ Cov«
Le ti

Cover title missing/

tre de couverture manque

□ Coloured maps/
Cartes g^ographiques en rouleur

□ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encra de vjculaur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

□ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

□ Bound with other material/
Rati* avac d'autrea documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

Lar»liure seiree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distorsion lu long da la marge interieure

B'ank <eaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have S)een omitted from filming/
II se pb'jt que certaines pages blanches ajoutees
lors dune restauration apparaissant dans le texte.
mais, lorsque cela ixait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas iti film^v^s.

Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

r~~| Pages damaged/

Pages endommagees

Pages restored and/or Ijminated/
Pages restaurees et/ou pelliculees

Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages decolorees, tachet^es ou piquees

□

□ Pages detached/
Pages detachees

r/yf Showthrough/
I 1 Transparence

□ Quality cf print varies/
Qualita in^gale de I'impression

□ Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel supplamentaire

□ Only edition available/
Seule (Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure.
etc., cr.t it^ fiirr^es i nouveau de facon a
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires supplamentaires:

This item is film*"' at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document dst filme au taux de reduction indiqu^ ci-dessous.

10X

14X

18X

22X

26X

30X

/
V

12X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

■^ .\

Th« copy filmed her* hes been reproduced thenks
to the generosity of:

L'exemplaire film^'fut reproduit grlce k la
ginirosit* de:

Archives of Ontario
Toronto

The images appearing here are vhe best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Archives of Ontario
Toronto

Lee images suivantes ont AtA reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at
da la nenet* de I'axemplaire film*, et en
conformit* avec laa conditions du connat de
filmag*.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover ^when appropriate. All
other origins' copies are filrrsed beginning on tha
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

L*s exempiaires originaux dont la couverture an
papier est imprim^ sont filmto en commenpant
par le premier plat et an terminant soit par la
derniire page qui comporte une emprainte
d'impressJon ou d'illustration, soit par le second
plat, selon le cas. Tous !es autres axemplaires
originaux sont fllmte en commencant par la
premiere page qui comporte une empreinte
dlmpression ou d'illustration at en terminant par
la derniire page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol —^(meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "ENO").
whichever applies.

Un des symbolas suivants apparaitra sur la
demi^re image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbols — »• signifie "A SUIVRE", le
symboia V signifie "FIN".

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand comer, left to
right and top to bonom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

l.aa cartes, planches, tableaux, etc.. peuvent atre
filmiks ck des taux de rMuction diff Arents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtrs
reproduit en un seui ciich*. il est film* i partir
da Tangle supirieur gauche, de gauche k droite.
et de haut en baa, en prenant le nombre
d'images nicassaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la m^thoda.

1 2 3

4 5 6

^^ '

,^-U.Uv-^

^^./noSl

Information and correspondence re-
lating to the matters in dispute between
the Government of the Province of Ontario
and the firm of Darling & Curry, of
City of Toronto, Architects.

To the Honourable the Members of the Legislative Assembly of
the Province of Ontario.

Owing to the action of the Commissioner of Public Works
in refusing to bring down the correspondence relating to
above matters and owing to the speeches made by the said
the Commissioner of Public Works on the floor of Parlia-
ment in reference to said matters, tlie firm of Darling &
Curry in justice to themselves crave leave to bring to your
notice the following facts.

In the original competition which took place in 1880, 16
designs were submitted, both from Canadian and American
firms.

The following is a cutting from the Mail newspaper,
dated December 4th, 1881, from report of the experts
appointed to pronounce upoc the said designs :

" These plans, as we have said, obtained the premiums
simply because the experts were compelled to adhere to the
cost specified in tlie instructions, and these three pl-ns,
although not quite tlie lowest, were in the neighborhood of
the figures. Accordingly the experts recommended them
as worthy of the premiums but unworthy of adoption.
Viewing the designs apart from this strict cost limitation,
all of tliem, with the exception of those passing under the
titles of "liaison D'Etat " and " October," were unworthy
of the site.

THE BEST SET OF PLANS.

" October " was the best set of plans submitted. They
are designed in the thirteenth century style of Gothic, but
modernized. The subject is treated externally in a dignified
manner. A bold and massive tower of good proportions

/^7^'-

r
f

emphasizes the entrances ; the winps produce a well-
bahmced effect. It is somewhat hard and rather mechanical
in its hnes and details, its <];ronpin<,', or rather its style,
is tliorouph ; there is no flimsy superliciality of features,
and it has the genuineness of a worked-out expression.
With rej^ard to the develo;iment of plan, the positions of
the entrances hold proper rehitions to the business quarters
and localities of the particular departments. The staircases
are planned witli skill for easy communication between the
ditTerent portions of the building, connected by continuous
corridors. The court-yard has been well disposed, with
foresight as to height, light, and rther important matters.
Tliere is a good deal of detail that recalls the Manchester
Town Hall or the New Law Courts of London. In regard
to the wings at each side of the tower, the Mrst impression
would lead the visitor to think they were alike, but upon
study they present a dissimilar appearance, the I'rojecting
ends being dissimilar both in general feature and detail ;
while the otiier front shows a diversity of grouping and
general outline and massing of windows. While it is sub-
ordinated in parts to express the internal functions, yet the
general symmetry of the whole is preserved. In regard to
its adaptability to site, this plan is open to th) objection
that it covers altogether too much ground, the corridors
being of immense dimensions. If carried out, it would no
doul"t prove the most costly of the designs subraitted."

It was owing to the terms in which our design was spoken
of by the exports, Hon. A. McKenzie, Mr. Storm and Mr.
Waite, in the report quoted above that we were asked by
the Attorney-General to prepare sketches for an amended
design, and these having met with the approval of the
Government we were then ordered by the Commissioner of
Public Works to go on and prepare "the necessary specifi-
cations, detail drawings, &c." according to the terms of
the following letter :

Depautmrnt of Public W'orks, Ontario,

Toronto, March 25th, 1881.

Gentlkmkn, — I am instructed by the Hon. the Com-
missioior of Pubn^^ Works to say that having reference to
his conversation to-day with your Mr. Darling on the
subject of your preparing the necessary specification,
detail drawings, etc., on which to advertise for tenders for
the construction of the proposed new Parliament Build-

ings, according to the plans submitted by your firm, it is to
be (1 .stinctly understood :

(1) That it is interukd to ask for tenders on plans and
Pi-ecilications other than yours.

(-2) That it is to he in the discretion of the Commls-
aioner not to ask for tenders based on ycur specification,
etc ; and in this latter event your recompense therefore
is to be such only as the Commissioner may fix and deter-
mine upon.

{3} [f on tenders being asked for, an actual contract is
bona Ji(h: entered into for the construction of the Luildings
upon your plans and Hpecifications, your fees, etc. will be
such as may he mutually agreed upon ; but failing any
such contract your compensation in respect of such plans
and specifications, and all work and services in connection
therewith will he such only as the Commissioner shall,
having due regard to the circumstances, deem to be right'.
(4) The entering into any such contract is to be under-
stood as not depending upon the nature or ai^ount of any
tender received, hut to rest entirely in the discretion and
judgment of the Commissioner.

An early answer to this letter is particularly requested.
I have the honor to he, gentlemen,

Your obedient servant,
(Signed) \Vm. P^dwauds,

Secretary.
Messrs. Darling & Curry, Architects, Toronto.

After some nine months or a year's steady labour and
attention these plans and specifications were completed and
sent to the Government. Tenders were asked for, and
received in February, 1882 ; and the matter remained in
abeyance, and was not pressed on by us owing to a conver-
sation held with the Commissioner of Public Works by our
Mr. Darling in the month of June, 1882, in the course of
which the Commissioner of Public Works requested us to
forbear from pressing matters. On the 18th March, 1885,
the Commissioner of Public Works moved the House into
Committee on the resolution with reference to " New
Legislative and Departmental Buildings." The following
are extracts from his speech delivered in support of said
motion, as reported in the Globe of the 19th inst. :--

" After the Act of 1880 competitive designs were asked
for. These were remodelled and modified, and tenders

were asked for the erection of the buildings according to
t'ivo of these sets of designs, the first set being the works of
architects Messrs. Gordon and Helliwoll, and the second
set being the work of Messrs. Darling and Curry. Honour-
able gentlemen who have been in the reception room, or
what may be called such by courtesy, for it is only by
courtesy that the room at present used for this purpose can
be called such, will remember to have seen hung on the
walls two designs of the new buildings. One of these tico
desvjitu icill he'seh'cUd. There may be some slight modifi-
cations of the interior arrangements with regard to the
offices necessary for the different departments, rooms for
the convenience of members, etc. The GorerumcnVs pro-
position is to select one of thrse two designs. We are now in a
position to say with sufficient accuracy what the new-
buildings built according to either of these designs will
cost. When the House asked the Government in 1880 to
give an estimate of the cost of the proposed buildings, the
Government were not in a position to give

A CORUECT ESTIMATK.

In the estimates which I am now able to lay before the
House precautions have been taken that there should he )io
extras. We asked for tenders for the erection of buildings
according to the two plans which I have mentioned, and I
propose to give the House the result of the actual tenders
received, so that the House may see that in asking for this
sum ice are askinii for a sain that a-ill he ample for tJie erec-
tion of th;se hiiildin'is upon either one of these plans. For
the erection of the building.-i according to the plan of
Messrs. Gordon i^ Helliwell we received ten different ten-
ders from contractors, fWi of whom were men of experience
and all finaneiallif aide to nndertake this work and willing to^
undertake it, so that theif were in every respect tJie tenders of
first class men.

Mr. Caunegie— They will be tendered for again of
course ?

Mu. Frasku — Oh, yes ; and there is ererif rea:wn to heliece
that the tenders will he rather less than these. Five of these
ten were under the sum of §()0().000. These five were
respectively for $542,000, $5o(;,000, So78,000, $580,000, and
$585,000. I might say heie tliat the name of the gentleman
who made this last tender is Mr. Alexander Manning. The
three next highest were below $700,01 0, being respectively
$(517,000, $019,000, and $0(55,000. Two tenders exceeded
$700,000, but none exceeded $750,000, so that the lowest
tender was for $542,000 and the highest for §748,000.

Mr. Broder — Were they all offers based on the same
plan?

Mr. Fraskr — Yes, as far as I have been fible to sti; ■!y
this out, these ten were tenders made for the erection of
the huildinj^s according to this plan. The other plan re-
ceived nine tenders, most of which were by the same persons.
Three out of the nine exceed .S()00,0ilO, a very little. They
are resjiectivelv, $«U2,()00, 8026,000, !j>626,000. Thr'-e
others did not exceed $750,000. They wen for $708, ..00,
$719,000, and $7;")0,()00. Ho that six out oi the nine
tenders for the more expensive design did not exceed
$750,000. The lowest, $(512,000, was by a competent firm '
al)le to carry out the work, which would leave a margin
from the sum asked of about $150,000."

After this we naturally supposed that we would hava
some intimation from the Government as to what they
intended to do. Notwithstanding, however, that we wrote
several letters asking for information, and stating that we
had heard rumors emanating from Buffalo to the effect
that the Government had given ^^r. Waite the work, and
tliat he was even then preparing plans for the new build-
ings, the first information of any sort which reached us
was when we read the following report of a speech de-
livered by the Hon. Commissioner of Public Works in the
House on March 23rd, 1886 :—

NEW PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS.

"Hon. C. F. Fraseu rose to make a statement regarding
the new Parliament Buildings. The House, he said, had
consented to an expenditure of $750,000, and he had made
the statement that the intention was to adopt one of two
sets of plans, which had been sent into the Government.
After the House adjourned it was considered, that having
reference to the important nature of the undertaking, a
critical and close examination of the plans submitted by
the architects should be again had. The gentlemen who
had examined the plans sent in under the original com-
petition, were the Hon. Mr. Mackenzie and two architects
—Mr. Storm, of Toronto, and Mr. Waite, of Buffalo. The
Government had decided that Mr. Waite should be selected
to make this consultive examination for the Government
and to advise the Government how far the plans would be
suitable. On account of illness and other causes consider-
able delays took place, and the result of Mr. Waite's

enquiries was not known when he (the Commipsicur)
left for England lust year. After his return from Kn<;liind
he and the other members of the Government had several
consultations with Mr. Waite, and the result of their
consultations was that they became satisfied that none of the
plans they submitted were suitable ; that thtro were such
grave defects in heating, lighting and ventilation, that it
would be inadvisable to proceed with building on the basis
of either. The question arose what was to be done. The
Government had pledged itself to proceed with the build-
ings, and they had come to the conclusion that tin ir early
construction was a necessity. Tiiey decided to secure the
services of an architect, and to have

A NEW SET OK PLANS

prepared. A careful deliberation as to wlio the architect
should be, resulted in the selection of Mr. Waite, of 13uiralo.
Mr. Waite had been twice employed as an expert in con-
nection with the matter, and it was thought that his
ability and his position as an architect warranted the
Government in selecting him. A letter of instructions
sent to Mr, Waite, and accepted by him, embodied the
agreement on which he was to prepare the phnis. T!ie cost
of the buildings was not to exceed $7.00,000, and within
the limits of that expenditure accommodation must be
secured for the several departments, olHces, and vaults,
legislative chamber, committee rooms, speaker's chamber,
&c., as fully in all respects as set forth in the general
instructions issued by the J)ei)artment of Works, in 1880,
for the guidance of the architects. The architect's remu-
neration was to be at the usual rate of five per cent. ui)ou
the contract cost, such cost not to include sums which the
contractors may be entitled to as extras. No extras to be
allowed, except to the extent authorised by the Commis-
sioner of Public Works, for the Government has the right
to reject any plans, first, if deemed, unsuital)le, or second,
if it is considered that they cannot be constructed within
the limit of expenditure above stated. In the event of the
rejection of the plans, the architect's remuneration is to
be fixed by the Commissioner. The plans were to be ready
for inspection on March 15th, and the plans and specifi-
cations to be finished so as to admit of tenders being
advertised for on May 1st. The architect of the depart-
ment fully concurred in the opinions of Mr. Waite as to the
two sets of plans, and his conclusions were endorsed by the
department. The new plans with all details and Hi)eciti-
cations would be ready in three or four weeks, and provided
these plans were approved, it was the intention of the

Government imracdiati'ly to a'lvortiso for tondern. and it
was expected that in two or three months the contract
would he let, and tho work ready to proceed."

B' lieving that the report of Mr Waite, as stated hy the
Commissioner of Public Works, was not justifiahld, we
requested Mr. Storm, one of the experts previously ap-
pointed by the Government in the competiti(m of 1880, to
pronounce and report upon our design, and in compliance
therewith we received the following letter :

(Copy.^

Toronto, ir,th M<iy, 1H86.

Messrs. DarUiuj d Curry, Architrcts, itc.

J)K.AU Siiis, — In complying' with your request that I
should state my views in reference to the competitive de-
sign sent in by'you for the Government Buildings proposed
to be erected in this city, I beg to say —

That the design for new Piirliament and Departmental
Buildings for the Province of Ontario, offered in competi-
tion in the autumn of the year 1880, over the motto
" October " was unquestionably the best design at that time
submitted, in point of artistic merit and general arrange-
ment of pian, but was thrown out by the experts solely on
account of excessive cost.

Having seen the revised sketches of this design upon
whicli the working drawings have been prepared, 1 auMJe-
cidedlv of the opitiion that, whilst there may be some minor
defects, vvliich could easily, without adding to the cost, be
remedied during construction, the plan is really excel-
lently conceived and evidences the genuineness of a worked
out expression, combining in the elevutions that diversity
of outline, which the importance of the f.tructiuv, and tlie
couplcxity of the internal iurangemiut .lem:inds. And
also having read and compared the specitications, I have
no hesitation in sa ang that the whole taken together ex-
hibi's great skill in planning and constructi'm as well as
ability"in the authors to carry out tho work to a successful
issue, if confided to their care.

I am, dear Sirs,

Yours truly,

William G. Storm.

Subsequent to the said 23rd day of March, 188G, con-
siderable correspondence of little importance and bearing
no fruit passed between The Honorable The Commissioner of

I' i

Public Works, The Honorable the Attorn»y-Gcntral, and
ouraelveb, of which the following are the most important :

8th March, 1887.
To the Hon. the Cnmmisnioner of Piihlir Worki for Ontario:

Siu, — The matter of your conversation with Mr. Curry,
on Monday *28th February, has been most carefully
considered, and we regret that we cannoi see our way clear
to accept the sum you then offered, four thousand dollars
(§1,000) in full of our account against the (Government,
and we confess to a feeling of surprise that you are able
to justify to yourself a proposition so far beyond all reason
and fairness.

Our account was made un on the usual basis adopted in-
variably by ourselves and all other men in good standing
in our profession.

The very general and widespread accep-tancc of the
custom has proved its fairness, while the universal decision
of the courts in its favor in cases where it has been disput-
ed, has practically made it law ; you have yourself
acknowledged i«;s justice by agreeing to pay Mr. \Vai(e the
fees fixed by the same scale of charges : and we quite fail to
see why, if the system be fair in his case it should not be
equally just in ours.

In your official communication to tis, dated twenty fifth
of Maich, 1881, in which you commissioned us to proceed
with the preparation of the working drawings and specifi-
cations in accordance with the sketches previously submit-
ted by us for ths proposed new Parliament Buildings, you
refer to a conversation you had with me an hour or
two before.

In the course of that conversation when speaking on the
question of the payment you said that it was the intention
of the Government to deal fairly and liberally with us
respecting the remuneration we wei-e to receive for our
labor ; that iihey had every desire to do the fair thing
in tne matter, and that they fully intended to do it ; that
you were confident that we would ourselves be perfectly
satisfied with the arrangement which would be made, and
that we would be the last to complain of any unfair or
ungenerous treatment.

I distinctly recollect saying in reply, that if the Govern-
ment were going to do all this in the very liberal and
generous fashion you mentioned, it would be more satisfactory
and more gratifying to us if the terms were to bt stated
definitely at once, as we would naturally rork with better
heart if we know exactly the position in which we stood

financially. You declint'tl however doinp this ; sayitiR that
for reasons which vou coulii not explain to rae in detail,
it was thouj-ht desirable in the interests of the Government
that the exact amount of money remuneration to be paid
to U3 should not as that time be made public. 1 had to be
content with this, thouc^h regretting the uncertainty which
prevailed as to money matters, ard so I left you with no
suspicion that difficulties might eventually arise on that
score, as you had thoroughly impressed me during the
interview with tlu; idea that the Government was only too
anxious to deal with us in the most fair and liberal spirit
and that we should find that tlie question of fees woul'J be
settled in a way that would be satisfactory to ourselves, or
to any man conversant with the value and importance
of architectural work. It was owing principally to the
impression produced by this conversation, and to the tact
that that conversation was referred to in, and connected
with the letter written shortly afterwards, that we were
induced to proceed with the work, although the precise terms
of our engagement as set forth mi your communication
were somewhat ambiguous. We had however the word
and assurance of a minister of the Crown that we would be
treated fairlv and honorably by the Government, and
we nuturall/ did not think that we need be afraid to

venture. , ,, ^ ,,

Had we imagined for one instan'.. that there was any
danger of our being subjected to the treatment that has
since been meted out t ) us, we would not have dreamed of
undertaking the work at all. • i. • t

I must ask vou to recall to your memory an interview 1
had with vou in June. 1882— this was after the tenders had
been received, and I had written asking for information as
to the position wo occupiftil, and whether we could not be
paid some money on account of our work ; to this you sent
a messenger saying that vou would see me at your oftice if
I would call. I did so, and was told by you that you would
be obliged if we would allow the matter to stand as it was
for the present, that for reasons which you could not
explain, it was better for everybody that it should, that it
would be a convenience to the Government if we woula
forbear to press either for settlement or for remuneration
at that particular time. ^ , -• • i a

You asked me whether we had not been treated lairly, and
honorablv, and whether all promises made by you had not
been ob-ervt-d '? U)) to that date, we had certainly found
no cause of complaint and i said so, and you then went on
to say, that if I would leave the matter alone for the

mmmwmm

^'W^m*

present and trust myself in your hands I would have no
reason to regret it, that I would be doing myself and my
prospects no harm, but rather the reverse, and you gave me
to understand that our position now was an excellent one
in every way as regarded the proposed new buildings,
and to attempt to force the Government to an explanation
of ii would only work to our injury ; with that I left, feeling
confident that our interests were in safe hands, and that
we would have no cause to regret our confidence in your
fairness.

Can you honestly say that if you had asked us t ) go on
and design a building of the magnitude, elaboration, and
intricacy, such as the one you wanted — to prepare the plans,
working dravi-igs, details and specifications, and have tha
same submitted for tender — a"d for all this work, skill and
expense: offer to pay us only the sum of four thousand
dollars, just one-fourth of the proper fees to which we would
be entitled, and which we invariably get — that you think
you could have induced us *o do it for you?— the thing
would have been simply preposterous, and you know it as
well as we do.

You must remember also that we never asked favors of
any cort from you at any time, eve^y solitary bit of work
which we have done for the Government has been done
solely at their instance and at their own request. We
entered the original competition and were beaten in it, and
that closed the matter ; we had no claim on the Govern-
ment, and tho Government had no claim on us ; and the
subject, as far as v „ were concerned, stopped.

The Government, however, sent for us, made certain
changes as regards accommodation, removed the hard and
fast money limits, and requested us to make rough prelim-
inary pencil sketclies of what we would propose to do in
the way of a new building ; this we did, the sketches were
submitted, talked over, and approved of; apparently they
suited admirably, certain small changes and alterations
were suggested and carried out.

Then in the interview and letter of 25th March, 1881, we
were commissioned to go on with the working drawings ;
those drawmgs were overlooked and examined from time to
time as they progressed by yourself, and by the officials in
your department ; and changes and alterations of greater
or less extent were made in the plins and specifications as
they suggested themselves to your department or to us.

It was impressed upon us constantly during the progress
of the work, that notwithstanding that the Government
understood fully that the half million dollars already voted
by the House for the new buildings was insufficient, and

that we were removed from the necessity of adhering to it,
still w*i mast bear that sum in mind and not depart from
it any further than was necessary to insure the stability
and soundness of the building, and make it complete in all
its parts. The strictest economy had to be always
considered, we could not do, nor wore we allowed to
do, the best we coahl — but only the best we could
FOR THE MONFA' ; and we are confident that the manner
in which we exercised this ecor'omy, and the way
in which we expended the money in order to produce the
best results, either in stability or in effect, will commend
itself to the mind and judgment of any impartial compe-
tant man. During the conversation already referred to, of
25th March, 1881, you gave me the impression, if indeed
you did not actually state it in so many words, that it was
the firm intention of the Government in case the building
was proceeded with at all, that cither our design, or that
submitted by Messrs. Gordon and Helliwell, would be
selected ; and your speech in the House iu February, 1885,
confirms that impression beyond a doubt.

The Government brought down at that time bona fide
tenders for both sets of plans, sent in by compf tent and
substantial firms; they obtained from the House an appro-
priation largely in excess of the sum required to erect and
complete either set, and you stated then " that it was the
intention of the Government to proceed immediately with
the erectioa of the building on the lines of one or other of
those two designs,"

If after that the Government saw proper to change their
purpose and decided that our design was not large enough,
important enough, or sufficiently grandiose to be com-
mensurate with the wealth, size and dignity of the Pro-
vince ; that they had made a mistake, and now found that
they would be justified in erecting a larger, more eIabora.te
and costlier edifice, more substantial and more fireproof in
its construction, and more ornate in character, that was
their own affair, and certainly no fault of ours, and it is a
cowardly thing, and a dishonest thing, for the Government
to make us a scapegoat for their mistake, or because they
had seen fit to alter their intentions.

Under these circumstances it would seem that the fair
and manly thing for the Government to have done would
have been to have taken the I'esponsibility on their own
shoulders— confessed that they were in error in keeping so
closely to the side of economy ; and explained the reasons
why it was better in the interests of the country that a
more liberal policy regarding the expenditure of .. oney on

I ;^'

new buildings should be inaugurated :-settled with Messrs
r oTdon & Helliwell and ourselves for the work we had
akeadv done-rnd. then, from us two select the one whom
f should be decided was best able to carry out theji^^^f
and intentions of the Government-take Inm into th^
Pnnfidence— explain to him their desires, and hen tell him
go ahead aSd do the best thing he could and not to
cramp his ability for the sake of savmg money.

We admit that in order to arrive at a^onclusion as o
which of the two competing firms it would be ^est to m-
Trust the work, it was advisable, and we dare s. necessary,
hat the Government should call in some -P-^-!;^-
net-nt man. with whom to take counsel— to that nobody
J^uiS o^ect-and perhaps we may be P^r- ed to ^ay
here, that upon this point in our dealmgs with the Govern-
ment we have no complaints to make.

You may possibly consider that we are taking up matters
that are^ove? and clone with, and Irreign to the business of
thf letter Jbut as they keenly affect our reputation and our
rTrofelit^ml standing, and as we have never yet had any
^pportTn^t^ of stating our side of the question we trust
you will pardon our introducing them.
^ It was owmg to the very high terms in which the design
submHted by us, in the original competition in 1380 under
?he motto -October," was spoken of by the judges in their
officSl report that we were asked to prepare the drawmgs
which have since been tendered upon.

Mr Wlfte was one of the judges, in coi^unchon w^th
Mr Storm and the Hon. Alex. Mackenzie. The report was

*'firi1erral1c{'eme'orihe plan, as well as the archi-
tecw'Xracter of the elev'ation of tl-t de-g«^. ^^^^^^
hpen retained in those more complete and elaboiate draw
Lgs whi^h wee again submitted to Mr. Waitefor his judg-
ment in 1885-yet, notwithstanding that, and also the fac
That they were vastly improved by the a-o-\^f -^^^
consideration given them m the meantime-he this t me
reports that they are so deficient in every way as to be quite
unworthy of being erected, and also apparently must have
e^Dressed an opimon that we were unable to do any better,
Tnd that it woild not be safe to trust the work to us in any

^""if Uie design and general arrangement were good in the
firs nstance and three men said it was) it is equally good
fn the second, 'and had Mr. Waite been truthful he would
have said so. But no ! the position of a.fj",«^^f^^[^b\"g^i
there were two other men associated with him m the hrst

place,-in the second he was alone —and he was shrewd
enough to see the opportr.nity of which he has since so
succ^.sfully availed himBelf. Tho drawings wprc m his
possession lor month. : h. hud mti.m.t.. knowledge ot all
the designs sent in for the original com petition -he had the
benefit oi all our own experience, labor and skill ; he had
the advantage of close, parsonal communication with the
individual Members of the Government ; al their vnews
theories and suggestions were at his disposal ; and he was
in a position to make any recommendations he thought
proper regarding increased accommodation; more expen-
sive methods of construction ; and more elaboration and
richness of design ; he could criticise as he thought fit and
in any way he thought fit, everything connected with our
scheme-general arrangement; special po.nts of planning ;
. methods of construction ; and details, artistic, or other-
wise. He cculd, if it so pleased him slur over its good
points; belittle its merits ; and magnify and exaggerate its
faults. V^e were not in a posiiio-. to defend ourselves, or
to contradict him ; he had everything in his own hanas : he
was talking to nonprofessional men, and could say and do
pretty well as he liked.

It was on his report, we presume, that you rose on March
24th, 1886, and made a statement in the House to the
effect that the Government had been advised taat neither
of the designs which had been tendered upon four years
previously were worthy of adoption ; that Canadian archi-
tects had' been given a fair chance to «^^7^. ^/^f^ *^^«y
could do and had failed ignominiously ; and tmt though
5Se Government regretted it, still they felt rt their ^uty in
the interests of the Province to seek an architect elsewhere
and consequently they had comnussioned Mr Waite, of
Buffalo, to prepare plans and specifications, and had given
him the work outright.

Such a proceeding can hardly commend itself to any
honorably-minded man when he recollects that this Mr.
Waite is the man who had been acting in the capacity ot
professional adviser to the Government, and who, owing
to the delicacy of his position, should of all me- -ave, been
restrained by every principle of honor and decency from
accepting the work ander any circumstances whatever.

It appears, however, that he is to be employed, his re-
muneration being fixed definitely at once at 5 per cent.
The money limit which v/as imposed upon him was
promptlv annulled as soon as he found he could not keep
vrithin it bv at least one hundred per cent., nor is it
thought necessary that his design should be examined or

passed upon by any exports or unprejudiced persons com-
petent to judge of its merits or demerits; and while in
our case it was ins-sted that every possible item should
be included (even down to the price per yard of the paper-
hangings on the wall), in order that the exact total sum
should 1)6 known from the beginning, iiid all danger from
extras avoided as far as po'sible : he is allowed to obtain
tenders for one trade only (masons and bricklayers, and
incomplete at that), the lowest of which comes within but a
trifle of the total appropriation, and as much as our whole
building would cost complete, and finished in all its parts.

If our plan had been criticised and reported upon on
the basis of what mirjlu be done for a million and a half of
dollars, we ai-e not surprised that mucli fault was found
with it ; it was designed, however (as we mentioned before),
with the fact always before us, that it was absolutely
necessary to include every possible detail, and still keep us
close to half a million dollars as could be managed, and
we challenge the Government to submit our work to a
tribunal of competent imimrtial men ; and beg them in
the interests of justice and fair play to accept the challenge,
and to publish the result.

We are confident of our ability ; confident of the general
excellence of our design ; and confident that the result will
prove that Mr. VVaite's strictures on our design are neither
fair nor honest ; and we have made the charge most dis-
tinctly and emphatically ; and will moreover prove it if the
Government will give us proper legal place and oppor-
tunity, that Mr. Waite was and could not have been an
unbiased and impartial judge — that he had his own pur-
pose to serve — and that he intended from the first to use
his position to that end, if he found it in any way possible.

In the meantime we are dismissed ignominiously ; our
appeals for justice and fair treatment unheeded; and our
claims for payment of our services ignored — unless an
offer which bears so small a proportion to the sum to which
we are justly entitled, that the offering of it makes it almost
an msult, can be called a recognition.^

And, as if all this were not enough, you stand up in the
House in your official capacity, and besmirch and belittle
our professional standing and ability, in the most public
way, and in such a manner as tc make it impossible for us
to reply. The official report on which you base these state-
ments has never been made public, and you have also
refused to allow us or any one else to see it, notwithstand-
ing that we have complained that owing to your action
rumors have become current reflecting seriously upon our
profetisiouai reputation.

It has been said that our design was condemned, because
it would not have stood up if you had atterauted to erect
it ; as well as other remarks of a somewhat similar nature.
You told Mr. Curry, however, that you knew of nothing
which could be used as a foundation for such rumors—
that, at any rate, as far as the Government were con-
cerned, Mr. Waite had said or written nothing that could
be construed as bearing such an interpretation. You said
also that the report on which the Government acted did
not contain anything of the kmd— that, in fact, it was in
the main verbal, raid consequently could not be produced.
We are curious to know, therefore, on what grounds the
Government have acted as they have done.

We do not suppose for an instant that the Government
is desirous of damaging our reputation wilfully and un-
necessaiily, and do not therefore think that we are asking
too much when we request that you will, as soon as
possible, undo, as far as lies in your power, the damage
and annoyance caused us by your action of last year.
We have no objection to your exalting Mr. Waite as high
as you please, but we do most strenuously object that
that exaltation should be at our expense

In conclusion, we can only say, that, while earnestly
trusting that a peaceful settlement of the question may
be arrived at, we are not by any means disposed to
accept your present view of the matter.

We consider that we have been most harshly, unfairly,
and ungenerously dealt with, and that the action of the
Government has been cruel and cowjirdly in the extreme.
We cannot say whether their promises have been lu'oken
in the letter— (that will have to be settled elsewhere)—
but they have most assuredly been broken in the spirit.
We are sick and tired of the whole miserable business— dis-
gusted and disheartened at the treatment we have received—
and are only anxious to have the matter settled, if possible,
without further delay, trouble or expense ; and we offer (with-
out prejudice to our rights in the matter, whatever they may
be, legal or otherwise)— to accept a total sum of ten thou-
sand dollars (§10,000) in full of our claim against you.

Trusting that your sense of fairplay and honorable
dealings will induce you to accede to the propositions
contained in this letter, and grant us the favour of as
prompt a reply as possible,

I remain, sir, yo ir most obedient servant,
,, f Frank Darling,

(Signed) I Pq^. Darling & Curry.

Darling & Curry.

23rd March, 1887.

(Copy)
Mail Building, Toronto, SlSrd March, 1887.
To the Honourable the Attorney-General f'.ir Ontario.

Sir, — We beg to enclose you a copy of a communication
forwarded to the Honourable the Commissioner of Public
Works on Tuesday, the 8uh inst., in reply to an offer of
settlement made by him to Mr. Curry during an interview
held by appointment on Monday, 28th February last, — to
that letter we have had as yet neither answer or acknow-
ledgement — to the subject matter of it we can add but
little ; it covers the ground pretty fully and states, we
think, fairly and explicitly what our position in the matter
is.

The position of affairs at the time of our being asked to
go on with the working drawings was so peculiar that we
were compelled to a greater or less extent to trust to the
honour and verbal promises of the Government that our
remuneration would be what was just and right — and surely
any sane person would interpret such promises as mean-
ing what was a fair value for the amount of professional
labor and skill expended on the work, and such as would
commend itself to the judgment of a person familiar with
architectural practice and charges. Certtiinly that was
our impression of the matter ; and 1 was distinctly led into
forming that impression by my conversation with the Com-
missioner on 25th March, 1881, and again in June, 1982.

Whether it was purposely intended that I should take
that view or not I cannot say, but most assuredly if I had
formed any other impression we would have declined pro-
ceeding with the work at all.

But while this miserable squabbling about money matters
is bad enough — that which annoys and irritates us most
are the lying and malicious reports which have been, and
are being chculated, and which are constantly being
brought to our notice in the most galling way, respecting
the general unsuitability and manifold shortcomings and
deficiencies of the design prepared by us for the new build-
ings ; these reports are, with the exception of the perpetu-
ally repeated remark, '* that they would not stand up if
built," so vague and indefinite that they cannot well be
contradicted, even if we were in a position to do so publicly ;
and it is this very vagueness as you can well understand
that makes them so damaging.

In my interview with you on the 1st April of last year,
when i complained of this very matter, you usaured me
that the official report contained nothing which could
justify such rumour or remarks, or indeed anything that

could be considered as beint; derogatory to our professional
reputation and ability, and you told me also that while
the Government considered that that report was confiden-
tial, and should not be made pul»lic, still you thought that
there would be no ditticulty about my reading it over if I
would agree to look upon it in that light. I declined doing
81), however, as on those terms I could see no sense in my
reading it if we could not make use of it afterwards in
defending our reputation and contradicting the rumors
which had gone abroad. Mr. Fraser now says that the
report on which the Government acted was a verbal one.
I confess that I find myself rather at a loss to understand
all this. You said nothing to me about a verbal report of
any sort ; but told me most distinctly that there iras a
written one ; gave me the gist of it ; and offered on certain
conditions to xhoir it to me ; you certainly could not have
shown me a verbal report. Mr. Frazer on '28th February
gave Mr. Curry to understand that there wtis an oliicial
written report and advised him not to press for its publica-
tion. Yet on March 10th he stated in the House that the
report being verbal it necessarily could not be brought
down, but that if the House desired it he would instruct
Mr. Waite to write one uoir and submit it. Will you
pardon me for saying that matters seem to be getting just
a little mixed.

A professir al man's reputation is his only capital, and
no one — the Government least of all — has a right to impair
and injure it without giving reasons therefor.

Our plans and drawings wee in Mr. Waite's office in
Buffalo for some months in order to allow him to m-.ike a
carelul and thorough examination of them. The result of
that examination was a report that they were so defective
and unsuitable that the Government felt compelled to
reject them, and the result of the I'ejection was that Mr.
Waite was given the work.

Would :iny sensible man suppose for a moment that
such an t xhaustive and thorough examination could or
should have been made and acted upon, with nothing to
show for it in the way of a written report ; bnt that all
the Government had to go on with were the remarks which
Mr. Waite had seen fit to make in the course of conversa-
tion. The thing is preposterous.

Quite independent of your own statement we know f< a

fact that Mr. Waite did prepare a written official report, on

both Messrs. Gordon and Helliwell's design and our own,

and it is this report which we demand to see — not such a

one as Mr. Fraser now proposes to get Mr. Waite to write —

t;vw«»^

as we hardly ima}:;ine that even the Government would he
prepared to say that a report prepared hy Mr. Waite at
this staj:;e of the proceedings would'he fair, impartial, and
without hias-

We are not disputing the fact that the Government are
ahle to give the work to anyoiie it seems hest to them to
employ. We are not asking them to hreak with ^^r. "Waite
and employ us in his stead — nor are we speaking now
about the cpiestion of remuneration— (that is a matter hy
itself— the Government owes us a good deal of money, and
we have hopes that some time or otln r they will pay it.)

Our complaint is that the Government has, and is, hy
its action — cruelly — harshly— and undeservedly — injuring
our reputation and standing as professional men hy pub-
licly making statements seriously reflecting on our ability
and knowledge, and at the same time refusing to allow the
official report on which those statements are basi^'d to be
made public. Refusing to let us know the grounds on
which our plans were rejected as being defective and un-
suitable, and refusing to permit us to be heard in our own
defence. That rumors consequent upon their action have
gone abroad tending to injure and impair our business and
our position , and that though both yourself and Mr.
Fraser have most definitely and distinctly assured us per-
sonally that your expert has said or written nothing
orticiaily that could have given rise to such rumors ; still
the G(.vernment declines to set those rumors at rest, and
continues by their action and by their statements to give
color to them.

The Government, and the Government only, can put a
stop to these indefinite and unfau- charges and insijiuations
— and they owe it to us, as well as to themselves, to prove
without delay their falsity or their truth, and to prove it
also in such a way Jis to put it once and for all beyond the
reach of cavil.

We ask them therefore in the interests of justice and fair
play, and rts a simple common bit of honesty, to submit all
our i)lans, working drawings, details, and specifications,
to a committee of three or more impartial .^^mpet* nt pro-
fessional men, supplying them at the same time with such
memoranda about the matter, in the way of requirem.ents,
accommodation, original pencil sketches, the an)ount of
the lowest tender, and the amount of the total expenditure
we were asked to bear in mind, as may be necessary.

We also ask the Government to submit Mr. Waite's
plans and specifications, instructions, money limit, and
lowest tender, to the same committee, and at the same time.

That this committee be asked to go into the question
carefully and exhaustively, and to embody the result of
their examination in a written report, tne contents of which
are afterwards to be made public.

This we think is a fair and reasonable request, and wo
cannot well see how you can object to grantiu}:; it.

Mr. Waite has by his action practically put himself into
competition with us, with himself as judge ; and we cer-
tainly think that in the best interests of the country some
opinion other thnn his own should be passed upon his work.

How the Government can blind tliemselves to the injus-
tice of the matter as it now stands is more than we can
imagine. We were asked to make regular working con-
tract drawings on the lines of a sketch previously hubmit-
ted and approved of, keeping as closely as might be (with-
out actually damaging the stability of the building), to the
sum of five hundred thousand dollars ($.")( )0,000). Tenders
were received on these plans, and it was found that we had
exceeded the amount by one hundred and twelve thousand
dollars ($112,000) ; but every jiossible item that could be
tljought of was included, even down to such details as
mantelpieces and paperhangings.

Mr. Waite, was, it is understood, asked to decide upon the
resjiective merits of the two di^signs, Messrs. Gordon and
HelleweU's, and our own, for which the Government at that
time had bona tide tenders, and an appropriation more than
sufficient to erect either. He was not asked to say whether
he coidd not design with these helps, a building which in
his opinion would be superior to both of them.

However the Government ga,ve him the opportunity,
fixing the cost definitely at seven hundred and fifty thou-
sand dollars ($750,000>, for the building completely finished
in every respect. It .vas in due time submitted to tender ;
with the result, that after considerable reduction and cut-
ting: down, the lowest tender amounted to a triile over the
entirt appropriation — seven hundred and fifty two or three
thousand dollars, end this for a portion of one trade only,
masonry work ; the stone and marble staircase and arcades
of the same, as well as all other interior marble or polished
granite work (such as dadoes, fioors or columns), being
omitted ; as well as drainage works, concrete fioors, and
other matters.

The result of tl.is will be that the building when finished
will cost at the very lowest possible calmilation some
eight hundred thousand dollars more ($800,000) than the
sura which Mr. Waite was required to confine himself to —
or a total at least of something over a million and a half
of dollars v$l,500,nOO).

Mr. Waite will propably say ; in fact he has already said
so ; vide the Globe, that such a statement is absurd.
He very naturally would, but any sensible man at aU con-
versant with such matters will prove beyond the shadow of
a doubt that he is wrong, and the figures mentioned are
correct.

How best to procure a committee of perfectly unbiassed
and unprejudiced professional men — (I say " professional
men " because the question of cost being eliminated there
exists no necessity for the employment of the so-called
*' practical " man — and the matt^-r resolves itself purely
into a question of Architectural merit, of which an Archi-
tect is naturally, and properly so, the best judge;) is a
subject that requires some consideration, but it seems to
us at first sight, that if the President or Executive Ccumii-
tee, of the American Institute of Architects — a body
representing the very highest talents in the profession on
this continent — was communicated with, the difficulty
might be solved — let him ppoint a committee, the names
of those composing it to be kept secret. The drawings, if
thought desirnble, to have the names of the authors remov-
ed — a mark of some sort being substituted — furnish that
committee with all the necessary information and let them
report direct to the Government.

Th!i would place the A^hole question beyond suspicion
and the arrangement could without doubt be managed.

In any event should anything of this sort be done we
must insist on our rights to have some say in experts to I -^
selected, and as to the sort of instructions and information
to be supplied to them.

We are agreeable, also, if some such scheme should be
adopted with regard co me question of the fees in dispute
between the Government and ourselves- -provided the ex-
perts selected are men of the highest standing personally,
and professionally, and not in pny way connected with the
Government, and that we have some voice in their selec-
tion.

We confess that we are not sanguine thai the Govern-
ment will fall in with our suggestion — but we defy them to
say it is not a fair and reasonable one, and one which they
are bound in all honor to agree to, if they are as sincerely
anxious to do the honest thing in this matter as they have
always professed themselves to be.

We have always done the best we could to maintain our
rights in this affair from the beginning, but it is an uphill
fight for a private firm to struggle against a powerful and
influential Government, and we now appeal to their gen-

erosity to afford us some opportunity to remove the stigma
whicli their action has now unjustly and undeservedly cast
upon us.

You have always borne a reputation, both as a politician
and as a private citizen, which is above reproach ; and it is
from knowin<; and believing' this, that we feel confident that
we shall not appeal to you — and through you to the Gov-
ernment of \\nich you are the head — in vain, for a rehear-
inji;. and rovipenin<^ of the case and a reconsideration of the
utterly unfair proposal which the Conin:issioner has made
tons, with reference to our remuneration.

I have the honor to remain. Sir,

Your most obedient Servant,

Fh\nk Daulino,
For Darling & Ciuky.

(Copy.)

Mail Blilpino, Mauch, 1887.

Ti) the Honnurahh the Commisnoner of Puhlic M'urks :

SiK — In your speech in the House on the 10th instant,
when opposing the motion for papers re the proposed new
Pavliument Buil(iinj:;s, you made certain statements which
we tliink call for some remark.

Pjrst — " That we had no claim to further consideration
after it was proved by the tenders submitted for our desi<,'n,
that it could not be built for the sum of live hundred
thousand dollars ($500,000. )"'

We cannot see what the fact of the lowest tender being
over and above that sum has to do with this matter.
Neither by implication, word of mouth, or by document,
or writinji of any sort, kind, or description were we asked
or required to keep within that amount, on tiie contrary,
we were informed both by the Honorable the Attorney-
General and by yourself, that the money limit imposed
in the original competition had been dropped, the Gov-
ernment realizing that they could not obtain what they
wished ♦".ir that sum.

Mr. Mowat knew it, as I told him— when he saw me in
December 1881, relative to our making the pencil sketches
— that if we were to be rigidly conlined to the half million
appropriation we would decline undertaking the work,
"iou knew it also, as the same up'lc'-standing was arrive'
at in my conversatioa with you on March 25th, 1882, —
and the official communication from the Public Works
Department of same date, whei u we were ordered to
proceed with the preparation of t.c working drawings in

ncconlance with the sketches, contains not one word ahout
a money limit of any sort.

It was, however understood, and that very clearly, thi.t
we were to keep that amount of monev constantiv "in view
and not to oxccod it further than \u> Jonsdered ahsolutclv
necessary. In March. 1885, you hrin- down to tlu- House
/m//j///</f' tender sfor the plans, sayi jrthat it wastlio intention
of tlie{,overnmentto proceed immedint<'!\ with ti. irer.'ction
provided that an appropriation of $7r>(),()(iO was ^'ranted
for that purpose. Not a word was said ahout our ha\int
put ourselves out of eourt hecausc the lowest tender nnne
to more than iialf a million, and no matter what un.ler-
Btandm;,', or misunderstanding, you mav have heen lahoiin.r
under prior to that date, you cannot now use it as an
excuse lor throw.n- us overhoard— to attempt to do so, is
neither fair in principle nrr in arf^'ument.

Second— You are roi)orted in one paper as having said
that our design could not he carried out for douhle the
original appropriation, i.<'., one million dollars— in another
tbat it would CO' t more than .$7oO,0()0.

What you meant hy this it is dillicult to understand.
You said in the House in March, 1885, that every care had
been taken in the preparation of the plans andspecilicaticms
to avoid all chance of extras; and that the tenders sub-
mitted were from lirst-ciass firms, able and willing tocarrv
out the work satisiactory. ^

The loweco tender .vas for $(512,000 for the entire build-
ing, complete and finished in everv respect. Why vou
should now say tliat th.' extras on that amount wolild
IVvA^nnnZ Z^ ^T'^'f.^'''^ thirty-eight thousand
!. u'^nn' -^^ '^'''''. ^>"»'^'-«'^ a»J eighty-eiglit thousand
(!?rf»8,000) IS more than we can imagine, and we will ven-
ture to say more than you can explain.

Third.— You say that our correspondence is confiden-
tial— that it IS incorapl-te- and that consequently it would
be unfair to bring it down.

Pardon US for differing with you on all these points. It
13 distinctly not confidential -r,he wider publicity you give
it the better we shall be pleased.

If it is incomplete— whatever you may mean by the
expression-that is your fault and not ours— we have no
desire to prolong it. and it is in your power to close it-
but 80 long as you pursue your policy of not answering our
letters, IS quality of incompleteness may be continued
indefinitely.

It is unfair not to bring it down, as bv doinf^ so it dooes
the only avenue we possess of publicly defending our
reputation and of speaking la our own defence

FoiitTH. — You say that Mr. Waito's report is mainly
verbal, ami cousecjuontly it is imi)ossil)le to briny it down
or to publisu it ; but that, if we (U'sire it, you will iustr\jct
Mr. Waito to draw up a report voir, and you will submit it
to the House.

We desire nothing of the kind, thouj^h we have no objec-
tion to Imviii}^ our plans exainiiiod and rt'portt'd on l)y any
connnitteo of unbiussod, impartial, and competent profes-
sional men and will willinj^ly and cordially aj^ree to have
that report submitted to the House and jjulnished in any
way yon like, but we protest most stroii<;lv aj^ainst Mr.
\Vaite beinj; nt)w allowed to rejort on our drawinj^^s. as we
do not believe ourselv&s, nor do we think that even t'le
Government will be prepared to say that sueh a i)roeeeding
at this time, and under the cireuuistancos would be a just
and i)roi)er course to pursue.

We desire, however, and consider that we have every
right to ask that the Government sliould produce the written
olVicial rei)ort sent in by Mr. Waite prior to the session of
1HH(>. That such a document exists both Mr. Mowat and
yourself have admitted (though of course we are not in a
position to say as to how meagre or how exhaustive it may
bri). we object however to its l)L'ing supplemented by Mr.
Waito at this late date in any w.iy wiuitever.

Allow me in conclusion to call your attention to the fact,
th.i' i.ofvithstandiny thi't o.u- letter of the 8th instant
nskod lor ;ind ;i.q ;:red an answer, we have not as yet been
lav. led with a reply, nor even the usual and ordinary
courtesy of an acknowledgement of its receipt.
I have the honor to be,
oir,
Your most obedient servant,
FiiANK Darling,

For Darling & Curry.

Mail Building, Tor(mU.,2Cth Marcl',1887.
To the Iloyi. the Attorney-General for Ontario:

Sir, — We learn by yesterday's Globe that the question of
the new Parliament Buildings comes up for discussion on
Tuesday next, and as that apparently will be the last
occasion on which our views of the treatment we have
received in this matter can come before the House — a"" 1
through it before the country, and the public— we leel
compelled, owing to the action of the Hon. the Commission-
er of Public Works in refusing to bring down our cor-
respondence, to take the thing into f^nr own hands and
make it public in whatever way ma seem to us best.

We have always treated the wholn afifair as a private
business transaction between the Government and our-
selves, and as one with which the public had nothing
particular to do: and we wish much that it could have
reiiiained so. We have no longing for notoriety and this
making our private affau-s a matter of common property is
most repugnant to us.

But as the Government has evinced no desire to deal
fairly with us, in justice to ourselves, our profession, and
our reputation, we are forced with great regret to take a
step which we would gladly have avoided.

It is not a question of politics at all— it never has been—
it should not be— and we have never considered it as such.
It 18 purely a question of equity, and fair and honorable
dealing and should be settled honestly and above-board
and strictly on its merits, and we appeal therefore to the
generosity of the Government and tbe House to gr .nt us
r. fair trial and hearing ; and if nothing else at any rate a
more liberal remuneration than the utterly inadequate and
disproportionate amount offered us by the Hon. the Com-
missioner of Public Works for all the" labor, time and skill
expended upon our drawings.

When it is considered that all this work was done more
than hyp yetirs ago, it will be conceded we think, by any-
one, that we have been pretty harshly and unfairly dealt
with ; and that our patience in the matter is a fault rather
than a virtue.

Failing any better treatment than we have met with
heretofore, we will, we suppose, be compelled to petition for
leave to enter action, and have t-o matter ventilated and
settled in the Courts.

This, however, we most certainly do not wish to do if by
any means it can possibly be avoided.

We have the honour to remain. Sir,

Your most obedient servants,

rr, . ,r , ^ Darling & Curry.

Toronto, Mardi 26, 1887.

Printed by Thou. Moobe ■«. Co., 20 Adelaide Street East, Toronto.