IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 12.8 
 
 Ui 
 
 m m 12.2 
 
 
 ■ 2.0 
 
 ^^ 
 
 A^ 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporatton 
 
 23 WfST MAIN STRUT 
 
 WiBSTIR.N.Y. 14SM 
 
 (716)S72 4S03 
 
 V 
 
 V 
 
 
 <^. 
 
 
 
 6^ 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHIVI/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical IV/licroreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes tachnique* at bibliographiquaa 
 
 Tha inatituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat 
 original copy avallabia for filming. Faaturoa of thia 
 copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua, 
 which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 tha usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 Q 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 2L\ Couverture de coulaur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Couverture endommagte 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurte et/ou pelliculte 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartea gAographiquas en couleur 
 
 □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 I I Coloured plates and/or iiiuatrations/ 
 
 Planches et/ou illustrationa en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avac d'autraa documents 
 
 Tight binding may cnuse shadows or diatortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 Lareliure aerrte paut cauaar de I'ombre ou de la 
 diatortion le long de la marge intArieure 
 
 Blank iaavaa added during reatoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever poasible, theae 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certainea pagea blanches aJoutAea 
 lore d'une reatauration apparaissent dana le texte, 
 mala, lorsque cela italt poasible, ces pages n'ont 
 pea AtA f ilmtes. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentairea supplAmentaires: 
 
 L'Institut a microfiimA la meiileur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a AtA possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du 
 point de vua bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 una image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la mAthoda normale de filmage 
 sont indiquAs ci-dessous. 
 
 I I Coloured pagea/ 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Pagea de couleur 
 
 Pagea damaged/ 
 Pages endommagtea 
 
 □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurAea et/ou pelliculAes 
 
 Pagea discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pagea dAcoiorAas, tachetAes ou piqui 
 
 Pagea dAcoiorAas, tachetAes ou piqutes 
 
 Pagea 
 
 Pages dAtachtes 
 
 Showthrough> 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prim 
 
 Quality inAgale de I'impression. 
 
 Includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du mfttAriel aupplAmantaira 
 
 I I Pagea detached/ 
 
 r7\ Showthrough/ 
 
 I ' Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I Includea aupplementary material/ 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 T 
 
 V 
 
 d 
 
 e 
 b 
 ri 
 r< 
 n 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Mition di^ponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been ref limed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pagea totalament ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont At* fiimAea * nouveau da fa9on i 
 obtenir la meilleure image poaaibla. 
 
 Thia item is fiSmed at the re(*uction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film* au taux da riduetlon indiqu* ci-dasaoua 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 y 
 
 f 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 
 
 
 1IX 
 
 
 
 
 20X 
 
 
 
 
 a4x 
 
 
 
 
 ax 
 
 
 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here hes been reproduced thenkt 
 to the generoeity of: 
 
 Librery of the Public 
 Archives of Ceneda 
 
 The images appeering here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed peper 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 original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol — ► (meening "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too lerge to be 
 entirely included In one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 L'exemplaire filmA f ut reproduit grAce k Is 
 gAnirositA de: 
 
 La bibliothAque des Archives 
 publiques du Canada 
 
 Les images suivantes ont tt6 reproduitas avec Is 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la conditioii et 
 de la nettet« de l'exemplaire fiim«, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont ia couverture en 
 pepier est imprimte sent filmte en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 derniire pege qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par l« second 
 plat, salon le ess. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sent film6s en commenpant par la 
 premiere page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symholes suivants apparaftra sur la 
 dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, seion le 
 cas: le symbols -^' signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbols ▼ signifie "FIN". 
 
 Les certes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre 
 filncte i des taux de rMuction diffArents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop graiad pour Atre 
 reproduit en un seul ciichA. 11 est film* i partir 
 de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mAthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
■ 
 
 ] 
 
REPLY TO A PAMPHLET, 
 
 I'l ULISHKI) HY 
 
 WM. HY. SCOVIL, ESQUIKE, 
 
 PURPORTING TO CONTAIN A 
 
 CORRESI^ONDENCIi: 
 
 BETWEEN HIM 
 
 AND 
 
 THE PROVINCIAL SECRETAKY, 
 
 RELATIVE TO THE ALLEGED LOSS 
 
 SUSTAINED BY THE PROYINCE 
 
 ON 
 
 ONE THOUSAND TONS OF IRON, 
 
 IMPOiCTED THROUGH MESSRS. NaYLOH & CO., 
 
 In 185 7. 
 
 SATNT JOHN, N. B. 
 PRINTED IIY BARNES AND COMPANY, 
 
 6(5 IMUNCK AVILI.IAM STHr.^T. 
 
 1859. 
 

 I 
 
 •'■■< ^ .y. -p^i^^itV^'. 
 
 ^Hiife.' 
 
 -<^" ■;^:':r,;. 
 
REPLY TO A TAMPHLET, 
 
 puni-isiiEn lU' 
 
 WM. HY. SCOVIL, ESQUIRE, 
 
 I'URPORTINO TO CONTAIN A 
 
 conRESF^oisrDicisrcji: 
 
 BETWEEN HIM 
 
 AND 
 
 THE PROVINCIAL SECRETARY 
 
 RELATIVi* TO THK ALLEGED LOSS 
 
 SUSTAINED BY THE PROVINCE 
 
 ON 
 
 ONE THOUSAND TONS OF IRON, 
 
 IMl'ORTED THROUGH MESSEvS. NAYLOR & CO., 
 
 In 185 7. 
 
 SAINT JOHN, N. B. 
 PRINTED BY BARNES AND COMPANY, 
 
 0(5 rniNCE william stkekt. 
 1859. 
 
I 
 
 1 
 
 Wm. 
 
 liavin 
 pond( 
 statCB 
 the 21 
 incur] 
 RailA* 
 on pe 
 and 1 
 volvir 
 adopt 
 any e 
 Tl 
 portk 
 cere i 
 not ft 
 Wi 
 in ful 
 been 
 each ; 
 as it < 
 
 1 
 "I 
 
 Repo 
 spicec 
 
 JBarii 
 
 £2,0( 
 
 "I 
 
 cxpla 
 
 " To til 
 
 day ( 
 
TO THE PUBLIC. 
 
 \Vm. Hy. Scovil, Esquire, late Chairman of the Railway Board, 
 having published a Pamphlet, purporting to be a copy of corres- 
 pondence between that Gentleman and myself, arising out of a 
 statement made by me in my place in the House of Assembly, on 
 the 29th March, 1858, to the eflFect, that the Commissioners had 
 incurred a loss of £2000 by mismanagement in the purchase of 
 Railway iron from Messrs. Naylor & Co., of Liverpool ; and finding 
 on perusal, that a part of that correspondence has been omitted, 
 and that it is accompanied by certain notes and comments in- 
 volving unfairly drawn inferences, I am compelled in self-defence to 
 adopt the present means of supplying such omissions, and correcting 
 any erroneous impression that may have thereby been produced. 
 
 The manifestation of unpleasant feeling which pervades certain 
 portions of Mr. Scovil's letters and notes, is to me a source of sin- 
 cere regret, and as I am not actuated by similar feelings, I will 
 not further notice this matter. 
 
 With the assurance, that if the coiTespondence had been given 
 in full, without any notes, comments or omissions, I would have 
 been perfectly satisfied to have left the issue with the judgment of 
 each individual reader, I now proceed to give the correspondence 
 as it occurred. 
 
 [Extract from Letter, dated Saint John, N. B., iTth April, 1868.] 
 " I find under date of 29th March, at page 79 of the Official 
 Reports of the House of Assembly, the following sentence in a 
 spicech of yours, viz : 
 
 " * The late Commissioners had not bought iron through Messrs. 
 Barings, but through a firm, Naylor & Co., by which they lost 
 £2,000 by mismanagement! 
 
 " I cannot understand how this can be ; will you oblige me by 
 explaining how this loss occurred. Your early reply will oblige, 
 
 " Yours, &c., 
 
 «WM.HY. SCOVIL. 
 
 " To the Hon. 8. L. Tnimr." 
 
 " Fredericton, 14th April, 1858. 
 
 " Sir — Your letter of 7th instant, reached mo at Saint John a 
 day or two sinc6, and I now hasten to reply thereto. Tlie loss of 
 
t*-J,OUU rotcri'oil to, Hi)pi.'ur» to have been uccasioiietl in the I'ollow- 
 
 
 { 
 
 uii; nninner 
 
 Tlio lute Commissioners agreed with Messrs. Naylor «fc Co. to 
 furnish a certain <|uantity of Iron Rails, agreeable to certain plans 
 and speeitications, and at a certain price. When these Kails were 
 received in New Drnnswick, it was found that they were not nianu- 
 factured in accordance with such regulations, and the present Com- 
 missioners refused to ])ay the amount claimed by Messrs. Naylor & 
 Co. Mr. Light's certificate, now in the office of the Commissioners, 
 shews that the Kails received are not worth as nmch by il2,000 as 
 they would have been, had the exact specification been complied 
 witli. On the Commissioners' demanding a reduction of the above 
 amount, they produced the agreement, which shewed tliatthe Kails 
 had been approved of by the person employed by them to inspect 
 them ; and the Solicitor General gave it as his opinion that, under 
 that agreement, the Commissioners were bound to pay the claim. 
 "■ The condiUotis then, vjhich jwovided that the Inspection of these 
 Mails should he made hij a person aiipointed hy Messrs. Naylor & 
 Co., led to the loss, certijied hi/ Mr. Liyht, to he i!2,000. It was on 
 these fads that I felt myself authorised to state what I did upon 
 the subject. 
 
 " Yours, kc, " S. L. TILLEY . 
 
 " To W. 11. Scovii., Esq., St. Jolin." 
 
 "St. John, N. B., 2Sth April, 1858. 
 
 " SiH: — I received your favour of 1 4th inst., in due course, and 
 knowing you were absent, have delayed writing until now. 
 
 " You refer me to a certificate of Mr. Light's, respecting the 
 Kails imported from Naylor <k Co. ; will you furnish me a copy of 
 that certificate, and oblige, 
 
 •' Yours, &c., 
 
 " WM. 11 Y. SCOVIL. 
 
 •' The Hon. S. L. TittBY." 
 
 " FiiEDERicTON, 4th Mav, 1858. 
 " Sir — In a conversation with Mr. Jardine on the 14th ult., 
 relative to a certificate referred to, he said you could see it at the 
 office if you desired to do so. 
 
 " If you prefer a copy of the certificate, 1 will apply to him for it. 
 
 " Yours, &c., 
 
 " S. L. TILLEY. 
 
 " W. II, SCOVIL, Esq." 
 
 " Sr. Joim, N. B., 18th Mav, 1858. 
 " Sir — I received yimr note of the 4th inst. I 'pr<'f'i' h copy of 
 Mr. Light's certificate. If you will furnish me one, you will oblige, 
 
 " Yours, (fee, 
 
 " WM. HY. SCOYIL. 
 
 "The Hon. S. L. Tillpv, Preilericton." 
 
i," FhlViTH.") 
 
 " FuEUKKiciox, Mav "JTiIi, IbiiH. 
 
 " Beak Sir — I now t'oiw arc! you a copy of Mr. Lii>;ht's eertificate. 
 1 scnclit to you for your personal information, and ilo not wish its 
 contents made public, without first obtaininLj the consent of tlio 
 Government to such a course. 1 suppose that the present permis- 
 sion will answer your purpose. 
 
 " Yours truly, 
 
 " S. L. TILLEY. 
 
 " W. II. ScoviL, Esq., St. Jolin." 
 
 (copy.) 
 
 "European and Noiitii Amekioax Railwav, 
 Ewjineer's Otjice, 30th Nov. 1857. 
 
 " RODEUT Jardinb, Esq., 
 
 Chief Commissioner of Railvrays. 
 
 " Sin — I have carefully examined the Iron Rails delivered by the 
 ' Favourite' and the ' Middlcton,' and am sorry to bo obliged to 
 report that they are very badly rolled indeed. Many of the bars 
 arc ^ of an inch larger on the base than the pattern sent, and an 
 Cfjually large number |- of an inch smaller, entirely precluding the 
 possibility of the Hail making a proper fit in the cliair. The ends 
 of the bars ar ; likewise very carelessly sawn ofi', many of them being 
 full f of an inch off the plumb, so that if the ends of two of these 
 Hails are laid together, there would be a V or vacant space of ^ of 
 an inch at eitlier the top or bottom of the joint, as the case may be, 
 and this is quite connnon. The tops of the Rails are likewise not 
 of the same size, and very many of those already delivered, arc odd 
 Icngtlis other tlian those specified. 
 
 " We have laid about an half mile of the iron brought by tlic 
 ' Favourite,' and although we have taken unusual care to nuitch the 
 Rails, and have rejected a largo number as unfit to lay at all with 
 the present fastenings ; we have yet found it almost impossible to 
 lay a perfect track with them, the sizes of the Rails being so un- 
 even. I liavG no hesitation in saying that, taking the iron as a 
 whole, I consider it the very w-orst specimen of rolling I have seen. 
 1 have as yet had no opportunity of tcstiny the quality, but if Mr. 
 ReciVs surmise be true, vis., that the manufacturers have put the best 
 portion of the pile in the base of (he Rail, this will have the effect 
 of rcdueiny the tiltimate durability of the iron very materially. 
 Assuming the cost of the iron in England to be £8 5s. per ton, 
 and adding the commissions, freights, insurance, &c., as well as 
 the carriage to the works in this country, I conceive that this iron, 
 when laid down upon the road, is actually worth at least £2 per 
 ton less than good iron made exactly in accordance with the pat- 
 terns and specifications, and the best part of the jjile laid, where it 
 ought to be, viz., in the top or bearing surface of the Rails. 
 " ' am, Sir, yours, kc, 
 
 . ■ '' ALEX. L. LIGHT, 
 
 •' Enirineor." 
 
r 
 
 
 ! «7 
 
 6 
 
 "Saint John, N. B., Oil June, 1858. 
 
 ** Sir — Your note of 27th ult., inclosing copy of Mr. Light's cer- 
 tiHcato or report on the Kails imported in 1867, 1 have received. 
 I'his (lofniinent docs not contain the information I expected, nor 
 does it establish the charfje made by you against the late Railway 
 Board. As I am not likely to receive any further light on this 
 subject, or do I require any more to refute the charge made by 
 you, I will now do so. 
 
 " Your charge teas, that the late Commissioners^ hy their mis- 
 management^ caused a loss to the Province of £2,000 on an imjtor- 
 tation of Railway iron. On seeing this charge in the published 
 reports, I applied to you for an explanation, you referred me to Mr. 
 Light's report, and from that report I learn that he makes up the 
 sum of £2,000, by valuing the iron at £2 per ton less than it cost, 
 thus fixing the quantity of iron at 1,000 tons. You also, in your 
 letter of 14th April, after referring me to Mr. Light's certificate, 
 say, the conditions then that provided that the inspection of those 
 Bails should be made hy a person appointed by Messrs. JVaylor <& 
 Co.^ led to the loss certified by Mr. Light to be £2,000. Tliere were 
 no such conditions made by the Board of which I was a- member. 
 The order of Messrs. Naylors was for 700 tons of Rails, and ex- 
 pressly provided for an inspector, to be appointed by the Railway 
 iioard. In absence of an inspector from that Board, Messrs. Nay- 
 lor were to employ one, who could be superseded at any time by 
 an inspector from the Board. These were the conditions on which 
 the order was sent to Messrs. Naylors. A small portion, about 
 100 tons (of the 700 tons of Rails ordered) were made, when Mr. 
 Reed, a member of the new Board, arrixid in England, and visited 
 the works, and the additional 300 tons were, I suppose, ordered by 
 tiie new Board. These being the facts, I think you have failed in 
 o«tal)lishing the charge of loss and mismanagement made by you 
 vgainst the old Railway Board. 
 
 " Awaiting your reply, I am, yours, &c., 
 
 "AVM.IIY.SCOVIL. 
 
 " Hon. S. L. TiLLBY, Frederlcton." 
 
 " Fredeiuctok, 29th Ju>:e, 1858. 
 " Sir — On my return from Canada, a few days ago, I received 
 your letter of 3d instan<^ relative to the Provincial loss on Railway 
 Iron, and in reply thereto, I beg to state that I difl^er trom you rela- 
 tive to some important facts of the case, and entirely dissent from 
 the co!iclusions to which you would appear to have arrived. 
 " The facts and arguments maybe briefly and truthfully stated thus: 
 " 1. The late Railway Board commission c'l. Messrs. Naylor & Co., 
 of Boston, to import 700 tons of Railway Iron, of special dimensions 
 and quality, and partially agreed for 300 tons in addition. This is 
 established by the letter of Messrs. Naylor &, Co. to you, of date 
 22d June, 1857. The present Board, immediately after taking 
 office, perfected your previous arrangement, by ordering the ad- 
 ditional 300 tons ; not, however, because you had spoken of them. 
 
 ■«^ 
 
Iway 
 this 
 
 3 by 
 
 or partially agreed for them, but f*>r that reason as well as because 
 it was represented to them that the iron wouhl be necessary. 
 
 " 2. Under these orders, 1,000 tons of iron were im])orted,and aa 
 Mr. Light, the Chief Engineer, lias officially represented that the iron, 
 owing to defects, is not worth the price agreed for by .€2 per ton, 
 the loss to the Province is, on official evidence, one of £2,000. 
 
 " 3. In duo course, Messrs. Naylor <fe Co. demanded payment, and 
 on the present Board representing to them the inferiority and defects 
 of the Rails, Messrs. Naylor & Co., writing to Mr. Jardine, under 
 date of 6th December, 1857, say — 'We must disclaim any respon- 
 
 * sibility whatever in regard to the same, as according to contract 
 
 * made with us by your predecessor, Mr. Scovil, it was most clearly 
 ' agreed that the decision of the Inspector was to be final.' 
 
 "4. I have not before mo yourlettcr of June 3d, 1857, which or- 
 (Ired the iron, but on turning to Messrs. Naylor & Co.'s recital of it 
 in their letter to you of 22d June, which in your letter to them of 
 27th June, you admit to be correct, except as to the place of inspec- 
 tion, which you there say must be at the works, and not at the place 
 of shipment, I find it distinctly stated that the inspection is to bo 
 final, and the Inspector is to be appointed by the Liverpool House 
 of Naylor & Co., and to act under their direction, you merely re- 
 serving the right to supersede him by one of your own appointment, 
 should yoa see fit to do so. 
 
 " 5. From the facts, that you arranged for a final inspection of 
 the Rails by an officer appointed by the shippers, unless you saw fit 
 to supersede him by an appointment of your own ; that you made 
 no such appointment, and that the defects in the Rails were not 
 discovered until they were being landed, I think it incontrovertibly 
 follows that the responsibility of the Province being deprived of a 
 right of re-survey, and being consequently subjected to the loss of 
 £2,000 on these Rails, devolves on the late Board, who provided 
 for the final inspection. 
 
 " 6. I note your argument, that Mr. Reed was in England be- 
 fore the order was executed by shipment of the iron, but I scarcely 
 think it necessary to suggest to your intelligence that neither Mr. 
 Reed, nor any other Commissioner, casually visiting England, though 
 engaged in other Railway negotiations, would thin^^ himself called 
 on to interfere with contracts made by his predecess fs on this side 
 the Atlantic, and which were being executed by a highly respectable 
 House in England, and under special inspection. 
 
 " 7. Hoping these statements will prove satisfactory, 
 
 " I am, yours, «fec., « S. L. TILLEY. 
 
 "W.H. Scovil." 
 
 The two following Letters were furnished Mr. Scovil, by his 
 
 request : 
 
 " Boston, June 22, 1857. 
 
 " Menrs. Rsilway Commissioners, Saint John, 
 " W. U. SooviL, Esq., Ohairman. 
 
 " Dbar Sir — We have the pleasure to acknowledge the receipt 
 of your esteemed favor of 3d inst., and have to thank you for the 
 
BS 
 
 8 
 
 ^1 
 
 I 
 
 1 I- 
 
 \ I 
 
 oLiiijini*' order for 700 tons of iron rails contained therein, wliicii 
 order with the wood pattern subsequently received, luivc oeen for- 
 warded to our Liverpool House, Messrs. Naylor, Yickers <fc (.'o., at 
 whose handr, they will command the most careful attention. The 
 shipments will be made as nearly as possible to your requirements, 
 thoi.jfh we beg to suggest the probability of no considerable quantity, 
 perhaps none can be got ready as early as August, as rolls must be 
 specially prepared for your Rails, the pattern being i. peculiar one. 
 
 " We note the alteration proposed by you in regard to the terms 
 of payment, to which, although less acceptable to us than those 
 previously named, we shall not hesitate to conform. 
 
 " We understand that in accordance with your letter, and with 
 the verbal arrangement made with you at Saint John by our Mr. 
 Huntingdon, the Hails are to be inspected before shipment, on your 
 account and at your expense, which inspection is to be final ; the 
 inspector to be appointed by our Liverpool house, and to act under 
 their directions, you reserving the rifjkt to siipersede him at any 
 time by one of your oton appointment, should yon sec fiit to do so. 
 
 " We are glad to learn tiirough Mr. Huntingdon that you pro- 
 bably will soon place a further order in our hands for r.bout 300 
 tons of Rails, to be shipped tlie present season, and we cannot but 
 hope that our attention to both these orders will be such as to 
 secure for us the privilege of being the medium of supply for future 
 and still larger quantities. 
 
 " Respectfully tendering to you our best services, and those of our 
 Liverpool House, for the transaction of any business in this country 
 or Great Britain, to which you may require attention, and begging 
 your acknowledgment of the receipt of tliis communication, we are 
 
 " Yours, &c., 
 
 « NAYLOR & CO. 
 
 " P. S. — Your message by telegraph came duly to hand advising 
 us that a change had been made in the model of the rails to be 
 used. "N. & CO." 
 
 Railway Commissionkks' Office, 
 
 St. John, 21 th June, 1857. 
 " Messrs, Naylor & Co., Eoston. 
 
 " Gentlemen — ^Your favour of 22d instant has been received and 
 contents noted, which are in accordance with former letters, and 
 conversations with your Mr. Huntingdon, excepting the inspection, 
 which you state to be done before shipment. The inspection must 
 be done at the works as the Rails arc manufactured. A portion of 
 this shipment will be required soon, and I hope a portion of it wMl 
 be shipped in August. " Yours, &c., 
 
 "WM. HY. SCOVIL, 
 " Chairman, Raihvay Board." 
 
 "St. John, N. B., 18th August, 1858. 
 " Sir — I am in receipt «>f your note of 3d instant, with enclo- 
 sures. There is nothino; in these letters of 22d and 2'7th June 
 
that alter the facts as stated in my letter to you of 3d June. Mr. 
 Huntingdon, a partner of the firm of Naylor &, Co., was at St. John 
 in May, 1857. At that time 1000 tons were named as the probable 
 quantity of Kails that would be required that season. 
 
 *' Before the order was sent to Messrs. Naylor tfc Co., the subject 
 was brought before the Board, when it was decided that 700 tons 
 were sufficient until more could be imported in Spring of 1858, and 
 700 tons only were ordered ; and of this 700 tons, about 100 tons 
 were manufactured when a member of the new Railway Board ar- 
 rived in England, and it appears (^from the Chief Engineer's Re- 
 port) that this gentleman was of the opinion that the manufac- 
 turers were not doing justice in the manufacture of the Rails. Not- 
 Avithstanding this they were allowed to continue the manufacture 
 of them, without an inspector from the Railway Board, although 
 this waf? expressly stipulated aud provided for by the former Board, 
 and not only so, but the present Board gave them a further order 
 for 300 tons more Rails. 
 
 " With all these facts before you, you in your letter of 29th June 
 attempt to justify the correctness of the charge made by you, viz. : 
 * That the former Board by their mismanagement caused a loss to 
 *the Province of ^'2,000 by an importation of Railway iron,' when 
 you knew that this sum was made up by estimating the value of 
 1000 tons of Rails, at £2 per ton less than it cost ; and you also 
 knew of this 1000 tons of Rails, 300 tons were ordered by the 
 present Board, and 600 tons more were manufactured under their 
 supervision. 
 
 " I enclose a copy of a letter from Messrs. Naylor, Viciers & Co., 
 of Liverpool, dated Dec. 18, 1857, addressed to Mr. Reed, as Rail- 
 way Cojnmissioner, for your perusal. 
 
 " I am. Sir, vours, <tc., 
 
 WM. in'. SCOVIL. 
 
 " The Hon, S. L. Tu.lkv, Fiodericton." 
 
 1 
 
 "Liverpool, Dec. 18, 1857. 
 
 "KoBERT Rbkd, Esq., 
 
 Railway Couimisfcioner of the Proviuce of New Brunswick, at Liverpool. 
 
 "Deah Sir — We have duly received the report of Alex. L 
 Light respecting the Rails supplied by us as per our contract with 
 the Railway Commissioners, bearing date June and SepUmhcr, 
 1857. 
 
 "Although by the express stipulations contained in that contract, 
 our responsibility ceases with the inspection at the works, and we 
 are not bound to notice or entertain any complaints made subse- 
 quently, nevertheless, act of courtesy to you and your brother Com- 
 missioners, with whom oiu* business relations hitherto have been of 
 the most satisfactory and straightforward charccter, we proceed at 
 once to investigate the merits of the sweeping charges brought 
 against the quality, regularity and finish of the Rails. 
 
 "1. As regards the charge that there is a variation of ^ of an 
 itich in the width of the flange, and also in the tops of some of the 
 2 
 
10 
 
 I' 
 
 ilails, wp will merely say that ^ nearer appvoach to uniformity is 
 impracticable, and that a thousand tons of Kails, or one hundred 
 for that matter, never were or never will bo rolled without more or 
 less variation. 
 
 " 2. The ends of the Rails are said to be unevenly sawn off, and 
 on enquiry of the manufacturer, we learn that some of the largest 
 Rails might possibly be a little oif the sqnare, but not sufficiently 
 so to interfere with a close fitting, provided a little extra care was 
 taken to attain that object. We may however state that the Rails 
 in this country are generally roughly filer' at the ends where there 
 is any of the irregularity complained of. 
 
 " 3. With respect to the rolling and general finish of the Rails, 
 independently of their being inspected by one of the best men in 
 tho trade, you had every opportunity given you of insperirf^ them 
 both at the works and when in course of shipment here. And as far 
 as our experience goes we may safely assert that we never saw a 
 better article sent out from this port. 
 
 " We must enter our protest against the delay and inconvenience 
 we arc experiencing in not being put in funds in accordance with 
 the terms of the contract. We have submitted without a word of 
 complaint to the loss inflicted upon us by the strict interpretation 
 the Commissioners have exacted from us in respect to the rate of 
 interest to be allowed on our cash advances. Wo contended that 
 6 per cent, was named at the time the contract was made, simply 
 because it was the then Bank of England rate, and that we were 
 entitled to a corresponding advance if that institution raised its 
 rates, but we at once conceded this point when you referred to the 
 contract, and exacted a literal compliance therewith. We claim 
 the same compliance on behalf of yourself and the other Commis- 
 sioners, and beg you will take immediate steps to place us in funds 
 for the balance of our account, with Bank of England rate of interest 
 added from the 14th inst, the date we ought to have received tho 
 remittance, until we are in funds. 
 
 " NAYLOR, VICKERS & CO." 
 
 "Secretary's Office, 
 
 FrederictoUj ^th September, 1858. 
 
 "Sir — After having written to you on 29th June, and agreeably 
 to the request in your note of 29th July, sent you a copy of Messrs. 
 Naylor & Co.'s letter to you of 2 2d June, and of your reply thereto 
 of 27th June, I have now to acknowledge the receipt of your letter 
 of 18th August, which I have carefully perused, touching the loss 
 on Railway iron. I remain of opinion that my letter of 29th June 
 contains a more correct recital and better arrangement, of the facts 
 of the case, and decidedly more valid conclusions than are to be 
 found in your letter of 18th ultimo. 
 
 *^rln my letter of 29th June, I noted and answered your argu- 
 
 ■m 
 
11 
 
 ineni as to Mr. lieecVs Iteing in Kuglaiid, wlien, as you say, only 
 about 100 tons of Rails had been manufactured ; and 1 now observe 
 that in connection with a repetition of the same argument, you add, 
 
 * that it appears from the Chief Engineer's Report that Mr. Reed was 
 
 * of opinion that the manufacturers loere not doing justice in the 
 *■ inanvfaciure of the Rails^ If you substantiate this last assertion of 
 Mr. Reed's early opinion of the carelessness or injustice of the 
 manufacturers, I confess you will weaken my conviction that tho 
 late Board are alone responsible for tho loss in question. I have 
 however carefully searched all the documents to which I have access, 
 and find no foundation for your assertion. 
 
 " I have received the copy you have sent to me of the letter from 
 Messrs. Naylor, Vickers & Co. to Mr. Reed, of date 18th December, 
 1857, but I feel more confidence in the statements and arguments 
 of the disinterested persons who have seen the Rails landed in the 
 Province. To enlighten you on this point, I enclose a copy of a 
 letter dated 11th May, 1858, from Mr. Jardine,the Chairman of the 
 present Board, to Messrs. Naylor & Co., of Boston, and also of a 
 letter to Mr. Jardine, dated 10th May, from Mr. Walker, one of the 
 Contractors who laid the Rails. 
 
 " I am Yours, «fcc., 
 
 "S. L. TILLEY. 
 
 " Wm. Ht. Scotil, Saint John." 
 
 I Thfl two following lettens also furnislied Mr. Scovil, were sup- 
 
 prassed by him : — 
 
 # <COPY.) 
 
 *' Railway Commissioners' Office, 
 
 Saint John^ May llth, 1858. 
 
 " Dear Sirs — I have to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 
 23d April, in which you inform me that a report had reached you 
 that dissatisfaction continued to be felt by us with the Rails fur- 
 nished by your Liverpool House, and stating that if we can make 
 out a good case, you will present it, and that you hope, from the 
 high character of the makers, that we will receive justice under 
 any circumstances. 
 
 " You will recollect, that soon after the receipt of the Rails in 
 question, we sent you certificates as to their character, from Mr, 
 Light, our Chief Engineer, and from Mr. Fleming, a Founder and 
 Machinist of standing here. We now enclose copies of these cer- 
 titicates. 
 
 " The Rails have now been laid, which has afforded an oppor- 
 
 I tunity of testing the opinion of those who previously inspected 
 
 them ; and I now enclose additional certificate from Mr. Light, and 
 
 a certificate from Messrs. Walker & Co., the contractor, who laid a 
 
 portion of them. 
 
 " If this does not satisfy you as to the quality and character of 
 the Rails furnished by you, I have to request that you will send 
 
12 
 
 'it 
 
 n 
 
 E 
 
 b:" 
 
 H-' • 
 
 some person, or authorise somo person liere to inspect tliera, to 
 whom I will afford every facility. The IJails will speak for them- 
 selves. 
 
 " I am not aware what more I can do to shew you that your 
 view was not correct. 
 
 " I may mention that we are now receiving Rails of the same 
 pattern and kind of iron, which are entirely free from the defects 
 found in yours. 
 
 " Perhaps this may be accounted for by the rejections made by 
 our Inspector, as, for example, out of the first 106 tons, he re- 
 jected — 
 
 For unsoundness, 
 
 Bad lengthsj - - - 
 
 Bad punching, 
 
 To be better squared. 
 
 To be re-straigthenedj 
 And out of 229 tons— 
 
 For unsoundness, 
 
 Bad lengths, - - - 
 
 Bad punching, 
 
 To be better squared, 
 
 To be re-straightened, 
 
 ♦' By examining the returns of the Inspector appointed by you, 
 on the Rails furnished to us, perhaps yon may find the cause of tho 
 defects, as the evident carelessness of the manufacture, even when 
 the inspection was so rigid, will account for the state of o;n* Rails, 
 under an inspection, of which we had no knowledge or controul, 
 " I am, your obd't. servant, 
 
 (Signed) " ROBERT JARDINE. 
 
 "To Messrs. NiTLon 4 Co., Boston." 
 
 14 
 
 28 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 17 
 
 29 
 20 
 7 
 57 
 41 
 
 (COPT.) 
 
 " Hammond River, May 10, 1858. 
 
 ** RoBBRT JAaoiMR, Kgquire, 
 
 " Dkar Sir — We have upon one contract here, about three hun- 
 dred tons of the Rails you imported last fall, and having laid a 
 large part of these in permanent road, we are able to speak exactly 
 as to the size and pattern, and the way they arc rolled. 
 
 " We find some Rails so wide in the bottom flange, that we have 
 to cut off a full quarter inch with cold chisel, to allow it to enter 
 the chair, while as many more are so small as to be quite a quarter 
 inch loose in the chair, when laid. The Rails thus vary half an 
 inch in the bottom flange, and are of all widths within that limit, 
 
 " In height, the Rails vary one-eighth inch full, so that wh^n 
 laid, they soon begin to bruise at the end, from waggons passing 
 over them. 
 
 " Besides this, the slotting and sawing are done so irregularly, 
 that tho expansions cannot bo kept the same ; and the difference 
 in the width of the bottom flango precluding the possibility of 
 laying the Rails in the same straight line, or fair at the joints, will 
 
13 
 
 prevent the road, however carefully laid, from being so peifect as 
 it shouUl be ; and I believe, that in twelve montlis, one half of the 
 chairs laid will be broken, from their being so bad a fit on the Rail. 
 " I am. Sir, your obd't. servant, 
 (Signed) " THOMAS M. WALKER." 
 
 "Saint John, N. B., 2d Oct., 1858. 
 
 " S/n — I am in receipt of yonr letter of Yth September. In that 
 letter you charge me with mating rtn assertion without fonndation, 
 and say ' You have searched all the documents you had access to.' 
 This extensive search was quite unnecessary, as in my letter I refer 
 to the document which gave the information. Then why not 
 examine the document to which I referred ? and if not in it, then 
 accuse mo with making false statements. 
 
 "The letters you enclose have no bearing on the point between 
 us, as I am not aware of having referred to the quality of the Rails. 
 All that has been said of them may be true. You say your letter 
 of 29th June contains a correct recital and better arrangement of 
 the facts of the case, and decidedly more valid conchisions than are 
 to be found in my letter of 18th August. • Yours of 29th June may 
 contain facts, but as you say, they arc arranged facts, any facts that 
 it may contain are certainly so arranged they are almost invisible. 
 As this letter is your standard of facts and conclusions, 1 will notice 
 a few of them. In that letter you say, 'The Railway Board com- 
 ' missioned Naylor & Co. to import 700 tons of Railway iron, and 
 ' partially agreed for 300 tons in addition! The Railway Board 
 ' authorized Naylor & Co., who are Iron Brokers and Commission 
 Merchants, not manufacturers, to purchase 700 tons only of Rails, 
 no agreement whatever for any further quantity. This partial agree- 
 ment for 300 tons in addition, is one of your arranged facts. Yon 
 aay further, * I find it distinctly stMed the inspection is to be 
 ' final, and the Inspector is to be appointed by the Livei"pool 
 'house of Naylor <fe Co., and to act under their directions, you 
 ' merely reserving the right to supersede him by one of your own 
 appointment, should you see fit to do so.' This is yonr version by 
 : your arrangement of facts. The facts, m<AoM< your arrangementy 
 < are thus, viz. : The inspection was to be final, but it never was in- 
 tended that the Inspector appointed by Naylor & Co. was to be a 
 permanent appointment, as the following extract from the original 
 order will clearly shew, ' The Hails to helpiode under inspection, in 
 ' absence of anjnspector from this Board, you, to appoint one, who 
 ' may be superseded at any time by one appointed by this Board! 
 This was Naylor & Go's, authority to employ an Inspector. It is 
 limited, and distinct! v shows the intention of the Board to appoint 
 an Inspector, and without a (feVarrangement of facts, will not bear 
 the construction you would give it. Again you say, 'Mr. Reed, 
 * nor any other Commissioner casually visiting England, though 
 ' engt^ed in other Railway negotiations, would think himself called 
 ' on to interfere with contracts made by his predecessors on thii 
 
14 
 
 
 * 8ule the AtlantSc, and which were being uxecutctl by a highly 
 
 * respectable house in England, and under special inspection.' 
 This is all very plausible, but it is not a valid conclusion, as no in- 
 terference was necessary. All that was required, was to complete 
 the arrangement made by the former Board by appointing an In- 
 spector. Had this been done, by your own shewing, i£l800 of the 
 £2000 would have been saved to the Province, for in your letter of 
 14th April you say, ' The conditions then that provided tlmt the 
 inspection of these Rails should he made by a person appointed by 
 Naylor <& Co^ led to the loss, certified by Mr, Light to be £2000.' 
 I have already shewn there were no such conditions, except by your 
 arrangements of foAits to produce your valid conclusions. When I 
 first called on you for an explanation of your charge against the 
 former Railway Board, I was then under the impression you be- 
 lieved the charge correct, I am now of a contra opinion, and I think 
 this a valid conclusion. 
 
 " I am Sir, Yours, &c., 
 
 "WM. HY. SCOVIL. 
 
 " Hon. S. L. TiLLBT, Fredericton." 
 
 tJ 
 
 " Fredericton, 12th Oct., 1858. 
 
 " Sir — I am in receipt of your letter of 2d inst., apparently in 
 answer to my letter of 29th June, as well as that of Vth Sept. I 
 have noted its contcntv°, and in some respects I regret the style in 
 which it has been conceived. 
 
 " There are only two points of which I find it necessary to re- 
 mind you. 
 
 " 1. My information as to the appointment of the Inspector of 
 the Rails, was derived from the letter of Messrs. Naylor & Co. to 
 you of date 22d June, and yours to them of the 27th Tune. The 
 words of Messrs. Naylor & Co. are these : ' We understand that in 
 ' accordance with your letter and the verbal arrangement made with 
 ' you at Saint John by our Mr. Huntingdon, the Rails are to be in- 
 
 * spected before shipment, on your account and at your expeuse, 
 
 * which inspection is to he final, the inspector to be appointed by our 
 ' Liverpool House, and to act under their direction, you reserving the 
 
 * right to supersede him at any time by one of your own appointment, 
 
 * should you see fit to do so.' Your answer was in these words : 
 
 * Your favor of 22d inst. has been received and contents noted, 
 *■ which are in accordance with former letters and conversations with 
 ' your Mr. Huntingdon, except the inspection, which must be at the 
 ' works as the Rails are manufactured. A portion of this shipment 
 *■ will be required soon, and I hope a portion of it will be shipped in 
 
 * August.' Note the dates of the letters just quoted, and it becomes 
 quite clear on whom the responsibility of the inspection arrange- 
 ment rests, and that had the late Board appointed Mr. Smith, or 
 some other competent person, as recommended by Mr. Light in his 
 report of Ist June, 1857, the loss would not have been sustained. 
 I am happy to find you recognize a plausibility even in Mr. Reed's 
 
 IK 
 
15 
 
 position, as alleged by me, but I must repeat that I have not met 
 the foundation of your assertion, that at Mr. Reed's first visit, he was 
 of opinion that tiic manufacturers were not doing justice in the ma- 
 nufactuie of the Kails. 
 
 " 2. You emphatically assert that the late Board ordered only 
 Too tons of Kails, and made no agreement whatever for any further 
 quantity. In my letter of 25th June, I was quite explicit as to the 
 manner in which the 300 tons were ordered, and I find no cause 
 for correction. 13e so good as refer to Messrs. Naylor & Co.'s letter 
 to you of 22d June, and you will find these words : ' We are glad 
 to learn, through Mr. Huntingdon, that you will probably, soon 
 place a further order in our hands for about 300 tons of Rails to 
 be shipped the present season.' I am justified therefore in what I 
 said on this head. But admit, for argument sake, that your Board 
 had made no allusion whatever to any additional quantity of 300 
 tons of Rails, the loss imputable to the late Board would not be 
 reducible in proportion, for those Rails were necessarily inspected 
 tmder your urranr/ement, which the present Board had no oppor- 
 tunity of testing until the Rails arrived here, when the matter was 
 past remedy, in consequence of your having agreed that the in- 
 spection should be final. 
 
 " I am yours, &c., 
 
 "8. L. TILLEY. 
 
 " W. H. ScoviL, St. John." 
 
 Satnt John, N. B., 24th Nov., 1858. 
 
 "Sir — I received your letter of 12th October in due course. I 
 intended my last letter to end this correspondence. It is quite 
 apparent from your last letter, as it was from previous onea, that 
 you have no intention of confining yourself to facts. You still 
 strive to cloak yourself under your arranged facts, and multi- 
 ply words in support of these imaginary images of your own crea- 
 ting. Therefore, it is useless to continue this correspondence while 
 you will persist in this unfair course. As proof of this I will make 
 one quotation from your last letter. You say, ' My information as 
 * to the appointment of the Inspector of the Kails was derived from 
 ' the letter of Messrs. Naylor & Co. to you, dated 22d June, and 
 ** yours to them of the 27th idem.^ Confining yourself to those letters 
 for information, was done inadvertently or intentionally ; if the 
 former, you have had ample time to correct yourself. Not having 
 done so, but instead, heaping up words to support your false posi- 
 tion, shews it was done intentionally, and this is more apparent 
 when these letters are referred to ; for in Messrs. Naylor & Go's, 
 letter of 22d June, in the first sentence, they acknowledge my letter 
 of 3d June. My reply of 27th June refers to previous lettei"s and 
 conversations. The conversations are of no importance, as neither 
 the present or former Board, or Messrs. Naylors were bound by any 
 private conversation between Mr. Huntingdon and myself, further 
 than are expressed in the letter, which was the result of these con- 
 
m 
 
 vcisations, so far as the Board thought iidvisahle to confirm and 
 act upon what had passed. And by this letter all were bound. 
 And you know this letter of 3d June, referred to, contains the 
 order for the Rails, and the conditions for their inspection. There 
 is nothing in these subsequent letters of 22d and 27th June to alter 
 or annul these conditions. This letter of 3d June, you arc still 
 determined to keep out of sight. 1 say still, as it was not con- 
 venient for reference when you wrote your letter of better arranged 
 facts and valid conclusions^ of 29th June last. 
 
 "Before closing, I will notice one other remark in vour last let- 
 ter. You say, 'If the late Board had appointed Mr. Smith, as 
 ' recommended by Mr. Light,' <Src., <fee., &c. 
 
 " This is taking up a new point. You have already selected and 
 assigned your reasons for making the charge of mismanagement 
 against the former Railway Board, and to these you must confine 
 yourself, or acknowledge you were wrong, and then I may reply to 
 the new point you now attempt to introduce. 
 
 " However, I do not intend to notice any further communications 
 from you on this subject, unless you confine yourself to facts. 
 
 " I am. Sir) Y«)urs, &c., 
 
 " WM. IIY. SCOVIL. 
 
 " Hon S. L. TiLLKT, Freilericton;" 
 
 [suppressed by MR. SCOVIL.] 
 
 (COPT.) 
 
 " Frederictox, 2d Dec, 1858. 
 
 "Sir — I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 
 ,24th ult., in answer to mine of the 12th of October. 
 
 " Throughout the correspondence that has been carried on be- 
 tween us since June last, relative to the loss sustained by the Go- 
 vernment from the defects of the Iron Rails imported for the 
 European and North American Railway by the late Commissioners, 
 I have endeavoured to argue the case in a fair and candid manner ; 
 and in order to sustain my views, I have, on all points, produced 
 evidence— the authenticity of which has not been questioned — 
 from the correspondence between the Commissioners, the Con- 
 tractors, and their Agents; apd I must again repeat that the 
 opinion I first arrived at, is still retained by me, and that the ar- 
 guments I have presented are, to my mind, unanswered. 
 
 " You now object to my addiicing new evidence in the case, and 
 state, that in order to sustain my position, I must confine myself to 
 reasons given in my former communications, or acknowledge that 
 I was wrong. I was under the impression that our object was to 
 elicit all the facts of the case, and, as contributing to that end, we 
 were not to be confined in this correspondence to legal quibbles 
 and technicalities, and your insisting on such a course, must w^eaken 
 your position with impartial judges. Be that as it may, I am quite 
 willing that my case shall rest upon the facts quoted, and the ar- 
 guments based on them in my letters, without referring to the new 
 
 
iimcations 
 
 It 
 
 point of view introdticcd in my last letter, and now objected to bv 
 you, as now matter. In any differences of opinion that may arise 
 between myself and others upon any subject whatever, more espe- 
 cially those affecting tlie public interests, I hope I shall ever U' 
 prepared to discuss them calmly and fully, and that I shall never 
 object to any evidence or argument that may bo brought for- 
 ward, on the gi'ound that it was not stated in a first letter or speecii 
 of my opponent. 
 
 " As to the extraordinary expressions contained in your letter 
 now acknowledged, I would remind you that it is generally ad- 
 mitted, that to lose temper in a controversy, affords tolerable good 
 evidence of inability to sustain one's position by facts and argu- 
 ments. 
 
 " Time will shew, whether or not you regard this letter as worthy 
 of an answer. 
 
 " I have the honor, <fcc. «fec., 
 
 (Signed) " S. L. TILLEY. 
 
 " Wm. Hinry Scotil, Esqu're, 
 
 Late Railway Commissioner, te. Ac." 
 
 In addition to that part of the correspondence published by Mr. 
 Scovil, he makes the following statement, as an apology for the 
 neglect of the Board to appoint the Inspector : 
 
 " I will here explain why the late Board did not appoint an In- 
 spector. When the above order was made, the Board had under 
 consideration the engagement of Mr. Smith, as Inspector, (who had 
 been recommended by the Chief Engineer). They did not know 
 at the time the order was made, if an arrangement could be made 
 with Mr. Smith to proceed immediately to England, therefore they 
 provided that an Inspector should be appointed, provisionally, by 
 Messrs. Naylor, in event of an Inspector from the Board not being 
 present to take charge at the commencement of the manufacture 
 of the Rails. A few days after this order was sent, and immediately 
 after a meeting of the present Government at Fredericton (about 
 8th June), a member of the Railway Board was informed by a mem- 
 ber of the present Government, that the then Board would bo 
 superseded by a new Board. And soon after this, hearing also 
 from Messrs. Naylor that but a small portion of those Rails, perhaps 
 none, could be got ready in August, the late Board determined to 
 leave the appointment of an Inspector with their successors. 
 
 " W. H. S.'* 
 
 Mr. Scovil's defence, thdil, may be briefly stated as follows : — 
 
 First-^That the provisional appointment oif an Inspector by 
 
 Messrs. Naylor <fe Co., was suggested by the Board, because they 
 
 did not know whether Mr. Smith's serviose* could be immediately 
 
 obtained in that capacity. 
 3 
 
18 
 
 Second — That their declining subsequently to make any appoint- 
 ment was, because a member of the Government, on or about the 
 8th June, informed one of the Commissioners that they would be 
 superseded; and 
 
 Third — That notwithstanding they had appointed no Inspector 
 up to the 14th August — Mr. Reed being in England when but 100 
 tons of the iron was manufactured, and he not having appointed a 
 new Inspector, although dissatisfied with the quality of the iron — 
 the responsibility necessarily falls upon the new Board, of which 
 Mr. Reed was a member. 
 
 I will now proceed to offer some additional remarks, to shew the 
 untenable nature of each position thus assumed by Mr. Scovil. 
 
 With reference to the first position, the natural inference is, that 
 before placing this power in the hands of Messrs. Naylor & Co., an 
 effort had been made to secure the services of Mr. Smith; and the 
 public will, doubtless, be surprised to find by the following corres- 
 pondence, that such was not the case : 
 
 1 
 
 ;coPT.') 
 
 " Frbdericton, 20th Jan., 1859. 
 
 " Sib — In a pamphlet recently issued by Wm. Henry Scovil, 
 Esquire, containing part of correspondence between us relative to a 
 loss sustained by the defective character of the Rails ordered by 
 the Uite Commissioners from Messrs. Naylor & Co., I find he states, 
 as one of the reasons why an Inspector was not appointed by the 
 late Board, that they * did not know at the time the order was 
 '• made, if any arrangement could be made with Mr. Smith to pro- 
 ' ceed immediately to England.' You will oblige me by stating 
 whether or not Mr. Scovil, or either of the other Commissioners, 
 made any proposal to you to undertake the service. If so, when 
 such application was made, and what was the nature of your reply. 
 
 " I am, &c., 
 (Signed) "S.L.TILLEY. 
 
 "T. T. ViOiiOH BlOTB, Esq." 
 
 I'l 
 
 It 
 
 (COPT.) 
 
 " Frbdericton, January 20th, 1859. 
 " Sir — I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of this 
 date, and in reply, to state that Mr. Scdvil spoke to me about the 
 usual custom of inspecting Railway Iron at the works during the 
 process of manufacture, but made no proposition to me on the »ub- 
 ject, nor, I believe, alluded to my going to England at all. 
 " I am, Sir, your obdt. servant, 
 
 (Signed) « T. T. V. SMITH. 
 
 " aoa. d. L. TwuK, Provinoial e«eretar7, Frederioton." 
 
19 
 
 appoint- 
 bout tho 
 ^ould be 
 
 uspcctor 
 but 100 
 ointed a 
 3 iron — 
 f which 
 
 ihew the 
 )vil. 
 
 i is, that 
 
 Co., an 
 
 and the 
 
 I corrcs- 
 
 1859. 
 
 Y Scovil, 
 tive to a 
 lered by 
 le states, 
 1 by the 
 •der was 
 b to pro- 
 ' stating 
 issioners, 
 50, when 
 ur reply. 
 
 LLEY. 
 
 1859. 
 
 it of tliis 
 
 iboat the 
 
 iring the 
 
 the »ub- 
 
 AITR. 
 
 
 III reply to the second point. 1 would ask — Had the notice re- 
 ferred to been an official letter from the Provincial Secretary to tho 
 Railway Board, informing them that it was the intention of the 
 Government to supersede them, instead of an unofficial and un- 
 authorized intimation by a member of the Government to one of 
 the members of the Railway Board, as stated by Mr. Scovil, 
 would even that have been a sufficient apology for their neglect 
 of a known and acknowledged duty on their part, so long as they 
 retained the office of Commissioners, and received pay for their 
 services ? But to shew that Mr. Scovil notwithstanding this inti- 
 mation, did not feel that he was relieved from tho important duties 
 of his office, it will only be necessary to state, that between the 8th 
 June and the 14th August 1857, the Commissioners not only paid 
 out jff30,000, but also received tenders, and entered into contracts 
 for the following works, viz. : Construction of the road between the 
 Nine Mile House and Hampton Ferry, and the Shcdiac Wharf; and 
 purchased two Locomotives, besides other matters of minor im- 
 portance, at a prospective cost of over £90,000 ; and even as late as 
 1st August, took possession of, and recorded the station grounds at 
 the Mill Pond, and the land for the track between that and Gilbert's 
 Island. These extensive undertakings being made by the Commis- 
 sioners between the 8th June and tho 14th August, why did they 
 not also appoint the Inspector of Rails ? It only involved the out- 
 lay of some hundred pounds, and it might have been the means of 
 saving thousands. The recording of the station grounds at so late 
 a period in their official existence, is especially worthy of note, as it 
 was an act for which there was no urgent necessity at that time ; 
 and involving as it did the unalterable adoption of that locality as 
 the terminal station, was only calculated to embarrass the arranger 
 ments of their successors. 
 
 Tlie third and last argument, is a futile attempt to transfer the 
 responsibility from the old to the new Board, To shew that such 
 a transfer cannot be made, it is only necessary to remember, that 
 Mr. Scovil's order, was for half the iron to be shipped early in 
 August or before^ and the remainder early in September or the 
 Vfhole in August ; and that notwithstanding the subsequent corres- 
 pondence between Messrs. Naylor & Co. and Mr. Scovil, the Com- 
 missioners could have had no reason for supposing that the whole 
 shipment would have been delayed beyond the early part of Sept. ; 
 particularly as Messi-s. Naylor & Co. of Boston, upon the receipt of 
 
20 
 
 Mr. Scuvirb letter of 27tli Juno informed him, under date of lut 
 July, that thoy liad infornruid thoir Liverpool houRC, that a portion 
 of the rails would be required at once. It muHt thcrofore be appa- 
 rent to every person, that the non-appointment of nn Inspector up 
 to 14th August, must have prevented any Inspector from reaching 
 the manufactory before the 7th or 8th September, at which time his 
 sorvices under tlie terms of agrooraent would not have boon required. 
 The facts of the case do not warrant Mr. Scovil's assertion, that there 
 was but 100 tons of Kails manufactured on Mr. Heed's arrival in 
 England, and upon this point Mr. Scovil must have been misin- 
 formed, as previous to Mr. Reed's leaving tliis Province for England, 
 105 tons had been shipped per "Favorite," and a few days after 
 liis arrival at the works, 350 tons more were shipped per " Mid- 
 dleton." The assumption that Mr. Heed was at that time dis- 
 satisfied with the character of the iron, is not borne out by any 
 known &cts, and is completely disproved by his letter, extracts 
 from which I here subjoin : 
 
 "Liverpool, 11th Sept., 1857. 
 
 ** RoBBRT JARNH, Esquire, 
 
 Chairman, Ac, St. John, N. B. 
 
 " Dear Sir — Ere this, you will have received Invoice of ship- 
 ment of 105 tons Rails per 'Favorite,' the lengths are abont equal, 
 ai feet*8 inchea; ^^^ *^® proportion, as per order, is to be worked out in 
 shipping the remainder. 
 
 " Yesterday I visited the works in Staffordshire, where the Rails 
 are being manufactured. The works are very extensive, and the 
 parties engaged seem to be highly respectable, which is some little 
 guarantee for the delivery of a good article. The Rolls broke n 
 rew hours before I arrived, and the Inspector left immediately after 
 the accident, tor London, so that I did not see him. This was mat- 
 ter of regret ; but, as far as I could judge, the Rails were well 
 manufactured. 
 
 14 
 
 
 " By Mr. Seely, I send you a print, shewing different sections of 
 Rails. The Bridge Rail, No. 1, is recommended by the manager 
 of the establishment in which the New Brunswick Rails are being 
 manufactured, as superior to the T Rail, for two reasons — one is, 
 that in the making, the pressure is vertical, by which process the 
 head is more firmly pressed than the head of the T Bail, which is 
 pressed sideways, causing the_grain of the iron to be edgeways in- 
 stead of flat, as in the Bndge l^il. And as they only put a certain 
 proportion of the very best iron in the Rails usually made, styled 
 best JRailSy the best is put in the top of the Bridge Rails, which is 
 the wearing part, whereas in the T Rails they are obliged to put it 
 
21 
 
 ill the tiange, in <oiiHCoiiuiiru ut' that part of the Kail being thin, 
 uarticularly tlic Saint John pattern, which iii thinner than usual. 
 Knginecrs, like Doctors, differ in opinion, and no doubt Mr. Light will 
 like his own getting up best, but it may bo worth while questioning 
 him upon the matter : it can do no harm, and may do good. It is 
 said the Bridge Rail is nsed entirely on the Grand Trunk of Canada, 
 and on the Ht. Andrews and Quebec road. 
 " Your*, very truly, 
 (Signed) " ROBERT REED." 
 
 The letter of 3d June, which Mr. Scovil charges me with wilfully 
 withholding, I never saw, until it appeared in his Pamphlet ; but 
 why he should attach so much importance to it, I cannot under- 
 stand, as it does not differ materially from the recital of it in Messrs. 
 Naylor «k Ckj.'s letter of 22d June, a copy of which was furnished 
 Mr. Scovil by me. 
 
 I now give an additional certificate furnished by Mr. Fleming on 
 the 2l8t December, 1857, in further proof of the imperfect manner 
 in which the Rails were manufactured. 
 
 " Saint John, Deo. 21st, 1857. 
 
 " Having been requested by the Chairman of tlie European and 
 North American R&ilway Board, to examine and rcpoit upon a 
 (juality of Rails landing from the Packet Ship 'Imperial,' at Law- 
 ton's wharf, I have to state, that having examined and compared 
 upwards of one hundred Rails, with a pattern furnished by A. 
 Light, Esq., Chief Engineer, I found them generally from one-six- 
 teenth to one-eighth of an inch higher, from one-sixteenth to one- 
 eighth of an inch wider on the top, and from one-sixteenth to 
 three-eighths of an inch narrower on the bottom than the aforesaid 
 pattern, and that none of them were of the same size. I found, 
 besides, that not over one-third were of any one pattern in height 
 and in width across top and bottom, and that about two-thirds 
 varied, each Rail from the other, from one-sixteenth to an eighth 
 of an inch. I also found several of them defective, presenting an 
 appearance as if there was a deficiency of metal, when passing 
 through the rollers, leaving them ragged on the edge. 
 " Respectfully submitted. 
 
 (Signed) " GEO. FLEMING." 
 
 I think I have clearly established the defective character of the 
 Rails ; that the Commissioners did not take the necessary steps to 
 secure Mr. Smith's services, or appoint some other Inspector, as 
 recommended by Mr. Light ; that they, having entered into large 
 contracts, and incurred heavy expenditures subsequent to their 
 
ifl 
 
 22 
 
 ^ tj 
 
 order to Messrs. Naylor & Co., ^ere not justified in declining to 
 appoint the Inspector for the reasons assigned ; that an Inspector, 
 appointed by the Board here, after the 14th August, could not have 
 inspected the iron while being manufactured ; and that Mr. Reed, 
 after visiting the works, was not dissatisfied with the Rails, as 
 alleged by Mr. Scovil ; and consequently that the responsibility 
 attaching to the transaction necessarily rests upon the late 
 Commissioners. 
 
 I now leave the whole question to the calm consideration of a 
 discerning public. 
 
 S. L. TILLEY. 
 
 Fredericton, 1st February, 1859. 
 
 '■: 
 
 IK 
 
 •M 
 
 i fi ■ 
 
■i