IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT.3) 1.0 I.I lis 1123 13 2 lU u. 22 12.0 1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 ^ 6" _ ► V), m ^ o T' / / /^ Photographic Sciences Corporation ^ iV ^• :\ \ ■4^ <> rv^^' 4^ <*.^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. .4580 (716) 872-4503 ^^- <;. M^. C/j <\ M: CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibiiographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D D D □ ■J Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde Cov' rs restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur6e et/ou pellicul6e I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques 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 illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int^rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. L'Institut a microfilm^ le r.:eilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a hxtt possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-6tre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^thode norrnale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. D □ □ D D n Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculdes Pages a^scoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages disolor^es, tachet^es ou piqu^es Pagi*>!? detached/ Pag^.H d6tach6es Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Quality inigale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire On]y 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 totalbment ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t^ film6es d nouveau de fa^on h obtenir la meilleure image possible. T t( T P o fi b X\ s o fi si o Tl si Tl di er b( ril re m D Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6meitaires; This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu^ ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X e 6tails 18 du nodifier ir une ilmage )S The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives cf Canada The images appearing 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 paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and erding 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 i.vith a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. IVIaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L''':remplaire filmA fut reproduit grice A la g«; Arositil de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada Les images suivantes ont 6t4 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la netteti de I'exemplaire filmi, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originHux dont In couverture en papier est imprimAe sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commen^ant 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 symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ^ signifie "A SUIVRE ", le symbole V signifie "FIN ". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre filmAs d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 A partir de Tangle sup6rieur geuche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m6thode. arrata to pelure, in d D 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 mmmmm Mm Please Keep fop Reference. ^ % Facts for the People No. 4. IKaUOHS OF DOLLARS CONTENTS. Paos. Purity of Adminiatration — Oondemn Corruption 2 For Responaible Qovemment — Inde* pendence of Parliament 2 The McGreeTjr-Lansevin Boodling 2 Facta connected with the Dredging Con- tract 3 Dredging of the Wet Baain 3 Levis Qraving Dock •«••.«• »»...». 4 The CrosB- Wall Contract 4 The Eaquimalt Dock 4 Oovemment Corruption 6 Langevin'a Quilt 6 One Law for the Rich, Another for the Poor 6 The Ourran Bridge Steal 6 Page. Samplea of Curran Bridge Wagea 7 The Caron Scandal 9 Caron'a Oonfeaaion 10 Groaa Corruption 10 Oaron Whitewashed 11 Whitewashed Again 11 Section " B " Scandal 12 The Harria Land Job 12 The Tay Canal 13 Little Rapida Lock— Eatimate, 944,000 ; Actual Coat, $300,000 14 Qalopa Channel— Eatimate, $800,000 ; Expenditure, $900,000 IB Sheik's Island Dam 13 St. Charles Uranoh 16 How to Vote 16 3^.a.roh: 1st, isQe. Copies of thbi pamphlet can be iuul from Alexander Smith, Secretair Ontario Liberal Aasoclatlon, S4 Tlctoria Street* Toronto. iiiiiiiirtiaiimirM ■ Parity of Administration— Condemn Corruption. That the Convention deplores the groHs corruption in the manngemont and expendi- tnre of public moneys which for years past has exiHtod under the rule of the Oonsorvative party, and *be rereJations of which by the difierenfc parliamentary committees of inquiry have brought discrace upon the fair name of Canada. The Government, which profited politically by these oxpendituros of public moneys of which the people have been defrauded, and which, nevertheless, have never punished the guilty parties,- mxMt be hold responsible for the wrongdoing. We arraign the Govern- ment for retaining in office a Mininter of the Crown proved to have accepted very large ooDtributiona of money for election purposes from the funds of a railway company, which, while paying the political cuntributions, to him, a member of the Government, with one hand, was receiving Government subsidies -with the other. The conduct of the Minister and the approv^al of his coUegues after the piocf becamo known to them are calculated to degrade Canada in the estimation of the world and deserve the severe condemnation of the peoj^le.- - Resolution No. 3, Liber-%1 Platform). For Responsible Qovernment— Independence of Parliament. That the Convention regrets that by the action of Ministers and their supfmrters in Parliament, in one case in which serious charges were made against a Minister of the Crown, investigation was alt/^gether refused, while in another case the charges pn ferred were altered and then referred to a comminsion appointed upon the advice nf the Ministry, contrary to the well settled practice of Parliament ; and this Convention affirms : That it is the ancient and undoubted right of the House of Commons to inquire in- to all matters of public expenditure, nnd into all charges of misconduct in office against Ministers of the Crown, and the reference of such matters to royal commissions crt^ated upon the advice of the accused is at variance with the due responsibility of Ministers to the House of Commons, and tendn to weaken the authority of the House over the Ex- ecutive Government, and this Convention affirms tliat the powers of the people's rep- resentatives in this regard shculd on all fitting occasions be upheld. — (Jiegolution No. o Liberal Platform). The Mcdreevy-Langevin Boodling:- The Quebec HarVx)r Works consisted of a dredging contract in the wet basin and tidal dock, a graving dock, a cross-wall contract, and a south wall contract. The construction of those works an;I thp expenditure of the moneys were to bo under the control and upon the reaponKibility of the Minister of Public Workn alone. The Quebec Harbor Commission, the majority of whose n-embers were appointed by the Government, had somsthing to do with the works, but all the money ca-no from the Dominion Government. The Government had to do with the plans and the letting and approval of the contracts, and, to quote the words of tho Act, " and any moneys to be hereafter paid to the Quebec Harbor GonimisHioners shall bo so paid from time to time as the work proceeds upon the report of the Minister of Public Works." The Depart- ment let the contraf!t8 and the works were carri(;d to completion under the immediate supervision of the Minister and his officials. These works were all constructed by the firm of Larkin, Connolly k Co., consisting of Patrick Larkin, X K. Connolly, Michael Connolly, Owen E. Murphy. Robtirt H. McGre^vy was given an interest in the profits of the firm in nearly every one of these contracts for the purpose of procuring the interest of his brother, the Hon. Thomas Mc- Oreevy, and through him of Sir Hector Jjan^evin, then Minister of Public Works. Up to 1889, Robert McGreevy was confidental agent for his brother Thomas and the man- ager of his private afiairs. Thomas McGreevy and Sir Hector Langevin had l)een for a liie-time inumiiU) iiicQUrf, anu wn.ii in Ottawa uutiiig the sc s^ion, representing Queoeu Weat in th" Hor»*> of '^ommons, ThoTuas Mc'Jseevy lived with Sir Ilector, to wnom he had loaned $10 000 and never asked it back. Between 1878 and 1891, inclusive, this firm received in public money $3,138,234, for which they did $2,000,000 worth of work. They expended in bribery and corruption $170,447 aooordiog to their own books. Robert McGreevy, who contributed no capital ft / s3^ -r to the firm received as his share of the profits (187,800. The Hon Thomas McGreevy received very large suidk of tnoney r'roiu the firm, and acsording to the sworn evidence. Sir Hector Langevin received $] 0,000. Thomas McGreevy admitted receiving $60,000 but the countants who examined the bookH of the firm showed that at least |l 30,000 passed into the hands of Thomas Mc- Greevy. Thomas McGreevy explained that he received this vast sum of money in his capacity BR treasurer for the Conservative party in the district of Quel)ec, but he refused to say to whom he had given the money, and when threatened with punishment tor contempt of Parliament if he did not tell, skipped out. Evidence showed that out of this fund Thomas McGreevy paid 825,000 to subsidise the ])er8onal uewnpaper organ of the Minister of Public Works, a paper iu which Sir Hector had the controlling intfcrest. Ah near as could be judged from the evidence, Thomas McGreevy handled $170,000 out of the money stolen fioni the people, and according to his own evidence as well aa that of others, he disbursed it for the benefit of the Consertative party in the elections. FACTS CONNECTED WITH THE DREDClNCi CONTRACT. In this contract Robert McGreevy was given an interest of 30 per cent. It was to terminate in 1884, but was continued until near the end of 1886. There was a lot of underhand work in procuring the contrant, such as the putting of a bogus tender in the name of Beauca^e, and th>) freezing out of contractor Aekwith, and the diHraissal of Kinniple and Morris, the engineers, who were replaced by engineern choBen by McGreevy, namely by Perley and Boyd, both engineers in the Public Works Department. FACTS CONNECTED WITH THE DREDCilNCi OF THE WET BASIN. la the winter of 1886-7 Thomas McGreevy made an arrangement with I^rkin, Donnollv & Co., whereby the firm underto<>k to pay him 825,000 on condition that ho would e)btain for them the .sum of 3.") oenta a yard for the dred^^ing of 800,000 cubic yardH, though McGreevy knew, as the leading member of the Quebec Harbor Oomraission, tha' dr«*dging of the same kind, and oven of a more diHicu t kind, had before been executed for 27 cents a yard ant' I ersonal influence to bear upon Starrs and O'Hanly, the lowest tenderers for this work, to induce them to withdraw, and Mr Starrs ■wore that Sir Hector threw so many obstacles in his way that he did finally withdraw. On the same day the Minister hurried to council with a report awarding the contract to Larkin, Connolly &, Co., whose tender was $30,000 higher than that of Starrs and O'Hanly, the figures being $374,559 and $338,945. No sooner had Larkin, Connolly &, Co. got the contract than thoy wanted a change in the length of the dock, the substitution of granite for sandstone, a heavier coursing of stone, and a reduction of the $50,000 which it was agreed they should pay for the plant belonging to the Government already on the work. There was a strict agreement that no reduction of this C>50,000 was to be made, but after a while they were allowed a rebate of $20,000. The firm offered Thomas MoGreevy $50,000 to have the dock lengthened 100 feet and Sir Hector Langevin sent a report to council advising that the dock should be lengthened 100 feet, and that an Imperial con- tribution should be applied for, but as <,he Imperial Government refused the scheme was dropped. To show how the Minister and contractors worked together in all these matters, the substitution of granite for sandstone is perhaps the best illustration. N. K. Connolly, who was on the work in British Columbia, thought it would be to their interests to have the graving dock built of granite instead of sandstone as provided in the contract. Shortly afterward Michael Connolly wrote that the granite was terribly hard and the quarry ImO miles distant, and strongly advised against any such changa Meantime Nicholas Connolly's request had been complied with in the Department, chief engineer Perley reporting to the Minister in favor of changing from sandstone to granite at an extra cost of $45,000. An Orderin-Council authorizing the change wu prepared by the Minister, but then came the news that the firm had changed its mind and did not want the change, and the Order-in-Council was torn up. The request uf the contractors that the coursing should be three feet thick instead of one foot was granted on condition that it was to coat nothing extra, but the contractors were afterwards allowed $45,000 for it. The contractors wanted three-foot masonry instead of one foot because they had discovered a quarry in the locality fornisbinf; three-foot stone and the cLange was therefor in their own interest, but notwithstanding this the change was used to steal another 840,000 from the public in order that 'J-e Uovernment should get back a portion of it to be used for party purposes in the elections. The cost of the dock when completed was |581,841, \mng $207,168 more than the amount of the tender. The contractors' profits in this contract amounted to f 240,d7i)^ in addition to $27,000 paid in " donations," namely, bribery and corruption. ilOVERN.'HENT CORRVPTION. The reason why the Government willingly paid so much money to these contractors is shown by the evidence. An extract from the books of the tirm showed a charge against the Esquimalt dock of $35,000 in seven difierent mysterious sums. This money was paid corruptly in return for the favors shewn to the firm by the Government. The sum of $5,000 was given for the Three Rivers election. Three Rivers was the constitu- ency represented by Sir Hector Langevin, the Minister of Public Works. The Con- servative mar<\ger8 relied largely on the contributions of Larkiu, Connolly ii Co. Mr. Valin, then a member of Parliament, gave this evidence at the investigation : " I applied again to Mr. McGreevy and to Mr. Murphy. Mr. Murphy told me : ' We have placed all that is necessary in Mr. McGreevy's hands and we have advised him to help you especially ; »pply to him and you will got some.' Thon, having applied to Mr. McGreevy, he said to, me the elections in the county of Quebec are costing heavily. The MiniHters ure costing us very heavily and I have no more money to give you. Caron is always aft^^r me and I cannot satisfy him with money. We have Sir Hector at Three Rivers and, besides, other counties." It will, therefore, ha seen that Mr. Thomas McGreevy was simply the custodian of these corruption funds, and that the membeis of the Dominion Cabinet were, with others, the beneficiaries. Sir Hector Langevin gave an order on Mr. McGreevy, February 2, 1887, for $600 to be spent in Bellf^chasse ; for $200 for the county of Portneuf ; for $300 on one occasion and $760 on another for Champlain election ; for $.'i00 for Quebec Etmt ; for $500 for L'Islet ; for $500 for Drummond and Arthabaska ; for $200 for litauce and for $200 for Lotbiniere. An otlicial list of expenditures in the campaign of 1887 shows that $112,700 was drawn from the reptile fund and expended over a score of Quebec constituencies accord- ing to a preconcerted arrangement between Sir Hector Langevin, Sir Adolphe Oarou and Hon. Thomas McGreevy. A list of the counties was drawn up and the sum that was to be spent in each wu placed opposite. This arrangement is referred to by Sir Hector Langevin in a letter to Mr. McGreevy, dated February 18, in which the Nlinister says: " You know that Montplaisir (the candidate in Champlain) was to receive altogether $2,000 for his legal expenses." Larkin, Connolly &, Co. were kept busy receiving money from the Dominion Govern- ment with one hand and giving a ^rartion of it back to Thomas McGreevy with th^ other hand. The expenditure in Quebec county was $18,500 ; in Three Rivers, $10,800 ; Quebec West, $8,000. Large sums were paid to the subsidized press LANCEVIN'H « LE4R lailLT. Sir Hector Langevin was Mr. McGreevy's political chief, and it is admitted that Mr. McGreevy squeezed between $150,000 and $200,000 out of these contractors as contributions to the fund of the Conservative party, of which he is the custodian, and it was paid out on orders signed hy Sir Hector Langevin hihisoit, including $35,000 which Mr. McGreevy says he paid for La Monde, Sir Hector's own personal neuspuper organ (Sir Hector thought that the sum paid was only $28,000) Thomas Mi;(jreevy admitted timt he applied to the firm for the money which Sir Hector Langevin admits he a(«ked Thui.i 'h McGreevy for. In the light of these facts can anyone belifve that the Minister of Pul>lic Work* did not know all about the manner of raising this money, or that he did not lend his influence as a Minister, and his colleagues aki', to ucccmplibh their ends I The con- G irftctorn could only pay out thftse vaat auiua to thn treaHurnr nf tlie Conncrvativo parljr on comiitijn that thi> (Jonstirvhtive Uovuruiufut allovreii thoiu to imvke that much nxtra out of the rontrftv^te, nnd sornethinij Ix'sidr-H for th«iiiHt'lvua. Thus you find boi^ua olaiiriH Hft up and allowed, extraordinary pricea paid for ordinary work and ohaiiK>le before him as a present, that the Miniater took the parc^d and put it into • drawer of the table, that nothing waa said further and Murphy wont out. That little parcel contained J?l 0,000, Murphy a ore. Sir Hector Langevin accepted SlO.OOi) from Mr. McGreevy, according to the evidence, and he accepted a testimonial of $22,000 in cash, aubscribud for the moat part by contractors having dealings with the dopartmont. The milking of contracts and the squeezing of contractora have been reduced to an art by the present Ciovernment, and Sir Hector Langevin waa acting for the (iovernment in which he held the second posi- tion, and the Government got the benefit of it all. SSir Adolpho Caron waa fully cognizant of the contributions of,Larkin, Connolly Ji Oo, He holds the aecond pluce in the Bowell Ministry, and is Premier Bowell's trusted ally. Sir Hector Langevin is a niemlwr of the Privy Council and a strong 8up|>orter of the Governnxnt. It is only a few of the small l)oodler8 who have l)een punished — the clerks under these men. The Government majority in the House of Commons white- washed Sir Hector Langevin as being ignorant of any wrongdoing. ONE LAW FOR THE KKII, ANOTHER FOR THE POOR-THE RELE.iKE FROM TRI.SO.N. In November, 1892, Thonnia Mc(ire':vy and N. K, Connolly were covicted at the AssiKcs in Ottawa of conapiiacy to defraud the Public and were sentenced by Mr. Justice Rose to one yoitr's imprisonment. The Judge said lie made the sentence very light. At the expiration of at>out three months the Government released them on the plea that confinement was iojurinc their health. As a matter of fact they never looked better in their life, never miased a meal nor lost any weight. They misaed their usual exercise in the open air, and the continement was no doubt irksome to them. Any physician could give a certificate that confinement in goal waa prejudicial to a prisoner's health, and ao the Government did not want for ne sont to the depHrtuiunt of railwayk and canals. As early as Octobf^r, 1K92, the Granr' 'i'runk wrote the tlepartment, giving their estimate of the cost of the bridge they were willing to buiid as $35,000 tor the subHtructure. The estimate for the superstructure, al)out which there never was any dispute, was $35,000. making the total cost of the bridge »b estimated by the (irand Trunk chief engineer, $70,000. Under Mr. Haggart's direction it cost $13«),0U0 for labor alone. Mr. Ilannaford swore that in his estimate of $70,000 he had calculated a profit of $10,000 for the conjpany, leaving the actual cost $uO,000. The original tsiiniate of cost for the Rubstruotures of Ijoth bridges, allowing for an ISfoot navigation, was $122,000. This was afterwards increased to a 20-foot navigation, for which tho total COSt was estimated at $160,(300. The aCtual COSt of the work waa $430,325, of which $394,()'»0 was actually paid over, a steal from the tax- payers, in Mr. iluggarl's department, of at leaat $234, CKX). It is eHtimated that the man who furnished the labor made $150,000 out of the job. This woH Mr. K. St. Louis, a cousin of the Hon. Mr. Ouimet, Minister of Public "Works, and a proniinont Oonservative contractor of Montreal. He falsified the pay-lists which contained the names of men who were never employed on the works at all, and there were live time as many men employed as was necegsary. It was reported on the 8th Idarch, 1893, that 1,300 men were employed on ihe work. Mr. St. Louis explained to the ParliHmentary committee of investigation that he had to make a good many political BubscrijjtionH, and for that reason had to make large profits. He destroyed his books, vouchers and other documents, because there were some entries 1 e did not wish to make public. It was sworn to that Mr. 8t. Ix}niu bad stated that he gave $1,500 to Mr. Emard, the legal partner of the Hon. Mr. Ouimet, for the Vaudreuil election. That evidence will Ih! found at page 344 of the blue book, 1894. The whole evidence in this atrocious scandal ehowed that the loss of hundreds of thouHunds of dollars was due to the neglect, extravagance and mihrnina^ement of the Department of Kail way and Oanab, presided over by Hon. John Haggart, under whose nose all this stealing took place. There was no (jovernment time-keeper, no proper checks on what was being done ; the only man who was exercising any efficient super- vision being dismissed at the beginning. This was Mr. Desbarats, an engineer. The overseer of the canal, Mr. Eklward Kennedy, who was appointed on the recommendation of the Hon. J. J. (.^urran, M.P., was bossing the job, and he and Mr. St. Louis had every- thing their own way. It was because Mr, Kennedy did not wish the interference of Mr. D)*«barat8 that the latter was dismissed by the Government. }^ Sir Richard C'artwright mo^ed a vote of censuie on the department for its conduct of this work ; but Mr. Haggart resisted it and every one of his followurs supported him. The division list appears on page 6,520 of the Commons Hansard of 1894, A commission was appointed to report on this contract and they presented a special report to the Govornment in 1894. Below are some of the facts stated : — Samplks ok Ourran Bkidqb Waweb, ktc, P.vid by Govkrjjmrnt. $ I a day for foreman. to a day for foreman for night or over-time. , $8 a day for foreman on Sunday. $12 a day for foreman on Sunday, over time. $6 a day for team. 8 $10 m dar for tMm on Sonday $2.60 • dmj for derriok. $3.76 a day for derriok for over time. $7.60 a day for derriok for overtime on Sunday. St Loaia puta on all the men he wiahei and gets paid for them. 2,000 men on the works at one time. Large nnmben idle. No Government time-keeper. No regular count No QovemUi3nt foreman. No Government ■nperviiion. No Government record of men or materials. No Go^'.ii ment olaiaifioation of labor. Unskilled labor pcdd for a« skillea labor. I'iO public tendem for timber. Inferior timber aupplied. * Carter's delivery tickets for lumber, etc., mining. No checks as to quality of timber and lumber supplied. Large quantities missing. New timber burnt as firewo)d, carted away, stolen, etc. Government teams haul lumber that contractor was to deliver. $39,806 04 paid for $6,000 worth of stone cutting. $16,715 paid for $3,000 worth of stone cutting. Stone hauled by team 20 miles along railway, running from quarry to works. Government warned all along of the frauds bu^ allow then to continue. Pays bills as they come in. When work completed Government issue commission to investigate. Pending investigation, Gcemment pays St. Louis balance of $106,000 for wage* that Chief Engineer discredited and would not certify to. Commission unanimously report incompetence, extravagance and fraud. People's mone^ lost No one held responsible. On page 173 of the Journals ot the House of Commons for 1896 is to be found the following amendment to the proceedings, was moved by Hon. L. H. Davies, seconded by Sir Richard Oartwright : — '* That it appoars from the report of the commissioners ap" pointed to investigate the facts connected with the construction, in the year 1893, of the two bridges at Montreal across the Lachine canal ; thai in the building of the sub- structures for these bridges the estimates for which were $.*2?,000, the Government has been already actually defrauded of about $160,000, while claims for large amounts for labor and materials, alleged to h&ve been supplied are still unpaid ; that the construction of such substructures was carried out by the Department of Railways without calling for public teuders, without proper superviHon or check and with a reckless abandonment of Dusine&s rules which encouraged fraud and wrong-doing ; that after knowledge had been brought home to the Miniett^rs and Department of the reckless extravagance which pre- vailed in the construction of these bridges, no real or effective attempt was madra to en- sure an honest carrying on of the work, but, on the contrary, enormous sums of money were, after auch knowledge, improperly paid to contractors and others, and the door was left wide open for the perpetration of fraud upon the Government ; that although the evi- dence discloses the names of many persons who were parties to these frauds, no attempt has been made to punish any of them criminally except St. Louis ; that under these circum- stances, the Minister of Railways is responsible and deserves the severest censure of the House for negligence, inefficiency and gross mismanagement in oonnection with these works, and for the losses the coootry has sustained." This was voted down by the Government supporters by a vote of 102 to 65. (See page 178 of the Journals of the ^ouse for 1896.) We will quote from the Montreal Gazett« of the 14th May, 1895, a statement made by Judge Deanoyers upon the application of the Solicitor-General with respect to th4 suit- against the contractor of the Curran bridge for a refund of money which the SolioiUMV u SM by of lb- (or on for of len re- sn- TAB vi- m- ho Me WO de lit- or- ii General claimed he had got unfairly from this Government. The Judge Haid : " There wAa no proper surveillance by the officers of the Government on two of the jobs at least viz., the Grand Trunk bridge of lock No. 1 o* the Lachine canal. The time-keeping on the two latter jobs seenjs to have been left to take care of itself, as far m the Govern- ment officers were concerned, so much so that two prominent public officers, high in of- fice, lost their situation on that account. Mr. St. Louis procured all the worknien thit were asked of him. He did not keep time personally, he had several clerks to do it, and one of them stufied the lists. This was sworn to by himself, to his own disgrace ; and when these lists were so made and cooked they were oertifi^ blindly and as a matter of form by the officers of the Government." The Government has been unable to succeed in its law suit against St. Louis, but on the contrary St. Louis brought action against the Government for payment of the balance of ^63,642,29 which he claimed was still due to him and in Hansard for February 24th, 1896, it is recorded that St. Louis was allowed by the Supreme Court, $61,842.29 with interest out of his claim of $63,642.29. He hafl also been allowed his costs. The Caron Scandal In 1892 Mr. J. D. Edgar, the member for West Ontario charged Sir Adolphe Caron with being a corrupt member of the Administration and asked for a Committee of the House to investigate the charges which Mr. Edgar formulated and declared upon his responsibility as a member of Parliament to be true. The Government Srst refused point blank to allow any investigation, on the ground that the charges were not specitio, but upon Mr. Dalton McCarthy, who was then >» supporter of the Government, and others demanding that something Hhould be done, the Government proposed to appoint a royal commission to investigate the charges, first altering the charges to suit the accused. There was no precedent in the British Parliament for refusing a committee to investigate charges of corruption made on the floor of the House, but it is still a fact that it was refused. Mr. Edgar had ten paragraphs in his indictment, the truth of which he was will- ing to leave to the judp;mont of a Committee of the House upon which there should be a Government majority. The Oovernmen*; in refusing an investigation by the House were condemned by their own act. The text of the charges can be seen in the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons of 6th April and 4th May, 1892. The Lake St. John Railway is a road in tnw vicinity of Quebec, which received upwards of one million of dollars as subsidies from the Dominion Parliament. The company which undertook to build the road made a contract with another company, known as the Oonsfcruotion Company, by which the Construction Company became the contractor for the railway and entitled to receive every dollar of Dominion subsidies voted by Parliament. Sir Adolphe Caron was a shf^reholder of the Construction Company and a director. Subse- quently the Construction Company sub-let or assigned the woi . they had undertaken to Mr, H. J. Beenier, who undertook to build the railway on consideration that the Con- struction Company transferred to him all unpaid subsidies and gave their bond to use every effort to procure for Mr. Beemer additional Government subsidies. The company which thus pledged itself had Sir Adolphe Caron for a director, and, moreovor, when the Construction Company made the contract with Mr. Beemer, Sir Adolphe Caron was present in person. The sum already spent on the road was put down at $450,Cv)0, which Mr. Beemer agreed to pay back to the Construction Company out of the bonds and subsidies. In addition to that he agreed to pay Sir Adolphe Oaron and his fellow directors L.nd shareholders of the Cvjustructirn Company $11,000 per annum for office expenses. The whole subscribed stock of the Construction Company was .'$91,250, so that what Mr. Beemer was to puy them an)Ount.ud to more than 450 per cent, upon their entire subscribed capital. Sub8e([uently the company applied for Hul)sidie8 at Ottawa and with Sir Adolphe Caron's assistance got them. In other words the Minister sat in the Cabinet and voted a million "lollars of subsidies to a road in which he w,48 finan- cially interested. The president of the Construction Company was the Hon. J. G. Rons, who had large private transactions with Mr. Beemer. who assigned all the siibsidiea to which the Lake St. John Railway wits entitled to Mr. Rohs as security for nionoya advanced V>y Ross ; ;hu8 Mr. Ross was duttbly interested in these eubHidfes both past :.l? 10 and future ; interested in Mr. Beemnr'a finnncial success as tho sub-contractor of the road, an] interested in tho profits cf thi; ConHtruction Conijjanv oC winoli \ie was picsideut. Mr. Ross and his brother held more than half of the entire stock of the Oonstruction Company, and the evidence wan that unless more subfiidies wen:) obtained and the road completed the $450,000 due the Oonstruction Company would have been lost. Mr. RoMH himself, therefore, would have on this one item have lost $118,000. Mr. Beeraer had not a cent's worth of interest in these subsidies, when his arrangement with Mr. Kos.4 was considered. CAROL'S CONFESSION. Under these circumstances the general elections of 1887 came on and what took place shortly before they were held is shown in the evidence of Sir Adolphe Caroa hin\- self, given before the Koyal Commi'^siGn of 1892 : " 1 had occasion to require some funds, for the campaign, and I called on Mr. lloss. I got from him personally an amount which I would not be absolutely ))reoi8o about, but it was between .^8,000 and 810,000 on the first day. From his otlice 1 drove up to the office of the Hon. Thos. McGreevy, a witness examined in this investigation. He was one of a committee composed of three, Hon. Sir Hector Langevin and myself being two of the three, and Mr. McGreevy being the third and the treasurer, for the purposes of that campaign. I took the money which I had received from Mr. Ross, and hiinded it personally to Mr. McGreevy who received it from me. He gave me a receipt for the amount, and in a period of time extending, probably, over seven or eight days, or ten days possibly, I drew out at ditlercnt periods. The different amounts up to the $25,000 which had been yjromised by Mr. Ross, thiough me, I placed in the hunds of Mr. McGreevy as I had done the lirst instalment, and got receipts from him. These amounts were distributed after a discussion between the members of that committee. Sir Hector Langevin, myself and Mr. McGreevy, They were distributed for what we con- sidered to be legitimate and indispensable e.Kpenses of the various counties which we were looking after in the district of Quebec. 4;R0SS tORKIPTlON. Although the prosecutor before the royal commission was an appointee of the accused, and of course avoided asking ugly questions. Sir Adolphe Oaron himself had to admit the receipt of $25,000 from the beneficiaries ot the L*ke St. John Railway. The fund, which reached at least ^100,000 for the district, was distributed in part upon the order of Sir Adolphe Caron himself. The Minister was running in Quebec county at that time and his own orders on the fund for Quebec count;' alono amounted to $5,100. Sir Adolphe Caron did not go to the Minister of Finance at Ottawa and get $5,000 from the public exchequer direct and squander it in corruption, but what ho did do was to band large sums of the public money to the promoters of the Lake St. John Railway and then recei/e from those who wore to be benefited by the Government subsid's, a portion of those subsidies for election purposes, handing the money in bank notes to Thomas McGreevy and then drawing it out again upon orders signed by himself. It was a clear case of steal, but Sir Adolphe Caron rather gloried iu the fact that ho was stealing for the party and not for himself. Speaking in the House of Commons July 3rd, 1894, Sir Adolphe said : " I take the full responsibility for my action and for assisting my friends, because it was necessary to assist them under the peculiar conditions existing in the district of Quebec, which 1 was looking after. ... 1 am prepared to stand or fall by what I have done, and considering that I have helped my friends to the extent that I have con- sidered legitimate, J say that under the same circumstances what T did on that occasion I woulH do again to-morrow, in order to help my friends." Although S18,500 was spent to elect Sir Adolphe Caron iu Quebec county, (accord- ing to the oliicial list of expenditures from the fund), Sir Adolphe Caron's agent on that occasion, in j)ubli8hing the return of expenses recpiired by the Statutes swore that the personal exjjenses of the candidate amounted to $58, and that the expenses of h's agent amounted to $846.40'; or a total expenditure for the county of )?904.4(). These wore the legitimate expenses, the "legal " expenses so often referred to in the orders on the .•eptile fund. 11 r it to |e Sir Adolphe Oaron stated that the fund was merely used to pay the legal expenses of poor candidates. Dr. Landry waa the Conservative candidate in Montraagny and a man of wealth ; nevertheless he reoeivad ^1,000 from the fund. Ortfon gave many other orders, photographs of" wl.ich were produced in Pailiaraent by Mr. Edgar, as well as those of some ordern signed by Sir Hector Langevin. A copy of the orticial list of the ex|)enfliture8 in the Quehcc district made from the fund in the campaign of 1887 can be seen on page 16 of the Votes and Proceedings and in Hansard of June 15, 1892. The total sura was $112,700. '4^aroii Whitewashed. Failing to get a select comirittee and failing to carry a motion protesting against the Hubstitution of a new set oi charges drawn up by the accused or his colleagues, the Liberals, while not recognizing the royal commission, used the evidence given before it, partial as it was, and challenged a verdict from the House upon it March 22, 1893, in the following motion in amendment to the motion to go into supply. "That Air. Speaker do now leave the cha'r, but that it be declared that in the opinion of this House the evidence taken by the royal commission appointed last session to enquire into certain charges made against the Hon. A. P. Caron, K.C.M.G., M.P., which was reported to the Government on the 24th November last and ia now laid betbre us, established facts which should have prevented the subsequent appointment of Sir A. P. Caron to be an adviser of the Crown and also renders it highly improper that he should continue to hold such office." This grave censure upon a member of the Government was endorsed and supported by several prominent Conservatives, including Mr. Calvin, Conservative M.P. for Front- enac, Mr. Ualton McOarM^y, Dr. Weldon, M.P. for Albert, N.B., and Col. O'Brien, M.P., each of whom by this vote declared Sir Aldophe Caron unfit to be a Cabinet Minister. Nevertheless, Mr. Bowell in forming his new cabinet in December, 1894, took Sir Adolphe Caron into his Governmsnt. WHITEWASHED AClllK. i and papers already beforo thi? House, it appears that large portions of the moneys which were found, upon said trial, to ha\ e been criminally received by the said Thomas McGreevy from Government con- tractors were so received by him for the purpose of being expended in elections in the iixterest of the Conservative party, and for di&tr 'lution by Sir Hector Langevin, M.P., and Sir Adolphe Caron, M.P., for the election of themselves and other supporters of the Government at the general elections held in February, 1887. "That it further appears that large portions of the said moneys, together with other large sums collected by Sir Adolph '-ron from those intere8t(»d in Governaitint railway subsidies, were expended and diatrivmtcd by Sir Hector Langevin and Sir Adolphe Oaron, and in lavish and illegal amounts, to assist in the election of themselves and of other sup- porters of the Government, in the District of Quebec, at the general election.s of 1887. " That the said Sir Hector Langevin and Sir Adolphe Oaron were then, and are now, members of this House, and on tlio roll of Her Majesty's Privy Councillors for Canada, and the said Adolphe Caron is a Cabinet Minister and Postmaster-General. " That in the opinion of this Flou.se, the said Sir Hector Langevin and Sir Adolphe Caron are deserving of the severest censure for their connection with the said trans- actions, and that it ia a public scandal and an injury to the reputation of Canada that Sir Adolphe Caron should continue to hold the position of a Minister of the Crown." This motion was voted down by 102 to 65, every Conservative in the House voting against it. Mr, Calvin wis not present but was " paired " again;?t it. Dr. Weldon voted against it. Messrs. McCarthy and O'Urien were both absent. » ■ SECTION '' B '' SCANDAL. On September 23, 1891, Mr. Lister formulated charges on the floor of Parliament against the lion. John G. Haggart, Minister of Kailwajs and Oanala. He charged that in the year 1879 MesBrs. Alexander Manning, Alexander Shields, J. J. Macdonald, Alexander MacDonnel), James Isbester and Peter Mcl^ren entered into a contract with the Government for the constiuction of a portion of the C. P. R. between Port Arthur and liat Portage, known an Section " B.," and that Mr. Haggart, who, during the whole period of the contract, was a member of the House of Commons, was beneficially inte- rested in the profit of the contract which accrued to the share standing in the name of Pe^p' McLaren and received largo sums out of the profits and otherwise derived direct anu substantia! pecuniary benefits from the contract; and that the contractors during the progress of the work made large contributions for political purposes with the know- ledge and assent of Mr. Haggart which were charged against the profits of the firm, and that unsettled matters relative to the contract, which were in dispute between the firm and the Government, were at that time, or subsequently, settled in favor of the contrac- tors. Mr. Lister moved for a select committee to examine into tht^se charges and report to the House. The committee named by Mr. Lister in his motion were four Conserva- tives and three Liberals, or seven in all, having the right to vote. Mr. Haggart denied the truth of the charges, as had Mr. Rykert, and Mr. McGreevy and Mr. Turcotte, and Sir Adolphe Caron, and others who were subsequently shown to have no defence to the respective charges brought against them, and two of whom were expelled from the House in consequence of the charges being established which they at first denied. Mr. Haggart stated that ho had arranged the partnership between Mr. McLaren and the other partners for the purpose of constructing section " B.," and over- looked the carrying on of the contract and the final settlement, but said he got no larqe Buma from McLaren. In the debate which followed, the Government practically took the stand that it was nothing wrong for public contractors to pay back to the party composing the Government, tens of thousands of dollars for tho purpose of debauching and corrupting the electors. Section "B" contract involved over $1,000,000, and was not finished until 1885 or 1886. The Liberals took the ground that if the charges were true Mr. Haggart was not the kind of man to continue to bo an adviser of the Crown. Notwithstanding Mr. Haggart's statement that there was no truth in the charges, and that he could get a declaration from Mr. McLaren in confirmation of his denial, he refused to consent to an investigation, and the Government supported him in that refusal, and every Conservative member at that time in the House voted down the motion for an enquiry, the divinion being 102 to 78. THE DAURIH LA\I> JOB. The Government purchased a piece of propeity in St. John, N. B., containing about 216,000 square feet, for the purposes ot the Intercolonial Bailway and paid $2(10,000, The land first required was covered by a vote of $80,000, but by a private arrange ment, in violation of a pledge which had been given to the House tlmt nothing would be done except by way of legal expropriation, the whole of the Harris property was pur- chased, 1802, and the anni of |200,000 paid. That this was a sum fully $100,000 in excess of what should have been paid was made very clear. Within a year of the time of the purchase the owners of the land swore that the value was $',33,401, and the pro- perty was assfSHed as of the value of $<»6,000. In the opinion of Mr. /alams, the Con- servative numiber for Northumb*'rland, N.B., the land had been purchased for three times its value. Without going into the details of this job, the language of Mr. Adams in the House of Commons, May 13, 1892, may be quoted. He said :- - " You are to-night committing a public i;riine. You are trying to force an expendi- ture upon the people you cannot justify. There is no evidence to justify this Legislature in passing •'^200,000 ff>r the purchase of this pro|)ertv. No Grit, no Tory, high or low, from the richest to the poorest, could say that $200,000 was the actual price paid by common law, prudence, or justice. It is simply a job. It stands unparalleled in the history of purchasoa. I am quite clear that this property has been purchased for three times its value, beyond all question." IS by the This was the language not of an opponent bat of a aapporter of the Government, and one who knew the city of St. John and the property in question. It was fi^nerally understood in St. John that part of the money paid over by the Government, ostensibly for this land, was applied in repayment of election expenses in St. John. THE TAY CANAL. 4C The Tay Oanal is another example of the spendthrifb character of the present Govei-nment In 1882, when a vote for $50,000 was taken for the construction of this canal, which is a ditch running from the Rideau Oanal six miles to the town of Perth, the home of the Hon. John Haggart, the Minister of Railways and (Janaid said that the total cost of the work, exclusive of the cost of the land required, would be $132,660. In 1883 another vote was taken in Parliament, when Sir Charles Tapper stated that the CAnal would cost $240,000. In that year to justify the vote, and to reply to the protest of the Liberals, Mr. Haggart promised that smelting works would be erected at Perth, which would require this canal. In 1884 another $100,000 was asked, and very little more was heard of the work until the session of 1887, when an adeing 158 times greater ihan the returns ; and the interest yielded upon the "cost of the canal, and the coHt of maintenance capitalized at four per cent, being 2^ " cents per $100, or leas than one- fortieth of one per cent. " That the amount of business transacted upon the Tay Oanal is of insignificant pro- " portions when contrasted with the cost and capacity of the work, and that the benefits " conferred upon the general public by its construction are comparatively trivial and " uuimpuf tant. " That this House expresses regret that fo large a sum as $476,128.73 was expended " in a way that no consideration of sound public n)oney could justify, leaving the country " to suffer, not only the loss of annual interest upon the investment, but a considerable "annual charge in addition if the nearly useless creation of expenditure is mciintained, " And that this House is of the o])inion that the magnitude of the public dtbt of Canada " is doe, in no inconsiderable degree, to that wasteful and unwarrantable class of expen- " ditures of which the Tay Oanal is a type," inserted instead thereof. This was voted down by the Government supporters. Thd Little lU^pids Look— Orip^inal Estimaice of Cost, $44,000 ; Aotual Cost, $300,000. In the month of December, 1886, two months before the general election of 1887, the Public Works Department entered into a contract with Mr. W. J. Poupore, Con- servative M.P. P. for Pontiac County, Quebec, for the construction of a lock and dam at Little Ilapids, on the Lievre river, a stream running through Ottawa county, and dis- charging into the Ottawa river at Buckingham, twenty miles below Ottawa city. The idea, it is said, was to facilitate the shipment of phosphates ; though, as a matter of fact, the eflect was to largely increase the cost of phosphates reaching the railway at Buckingham station. Work was not begun until the latter half of 1 887, and dragged along until April, 1892, so that it extended over two gonerai elections. After the con- tract was let, the Department of Public Works extended the work so as to include a guide-wall, • k«Uuning-wal!, a cross-wall, and a landing wharf at the lower end. All this additional work was to let to Mr. Poupore without tender, and at greatly increased prioes over and abore the prices of the original contract. I IS SSJiT I The original estimate for the work was ^44,. out when the original contract was completed the final estimate made b/ the departmont amounted to 876,680, exclusive of the lock gat as, which were built of Michigan pi^e by the Grovernment at a cost of about $10,000. Mr. Poupore, however, has receive ', so far, $260,000, and has claimed for extras $61,000. If he receives one-half of these txtras, the actual cost of the work will be $300,000 Jor which the original estimate v/aa $44 000, and the final estimate $76,000. ' The original contract included nine-tenths of the work finally built, »ud the coat at Mr. Poupore's own prices of nine-tenths of the wo-'k amounted to SS76,000, yet on one pretence or another, and for one corrupt reason or another, the Department have paifi out $169,000 additional, and as late as the session of 1894 .*n additional vote of $5,000 wiis taken on account of this work. The Q-alops Channel : Estimate $300,000 ; Expenditure $900,000. What is known as the Galops Rapids scandal consists of a scandalous waste of public money in the dndging of a channel on the north side of the Galops Rapids, opposite the electoral district of Duudas, St. Lawrence River. A channel known as the South Channel, already existed and is still used at the present day. I he contract for this work was awarded in 1879, when Sir Oharles Tapper was Minister of Railways and Canals to Uenis O'Brien for the sum of $239,750 for a fourteen-foot navigation. Mr. O'Biien withdrawing, the contract was awarded to Messrs. Davis and Sons of Ottawa for the sum of $306,600 for a fourteen-foot navigation. Davis and Sons assigned their contract to Mes.-rs. Gilbert and Sons at Montreal, who were sabsequently required by the department to make a seventeen-foot navigatioa. Tlie contract was entered into August 5, 1879, to be completed in 1881. " It was not completed until 1888, when it was taken over by the de|)artment, whose engineer reported the work to be completed and stated tiiat it was " two hundred fe( t wide, thirty-three hundred feet long, straight, and from sixteen and a half to seventeen feet in depth. Although it was officially reported as completed in 1888, it was officially stated by the Minisier of Riilway.s and Canals in the House of Commons in 1894 that it was of no ufee--thit is, that it was not used. The following is extracted from page 3531 of Hansird, 1S94. Mr. D.ivifia : Is this channel used for navigation ? Mr. Ha-:,'art : No. Thrt Minister admitted that up to that date there hud been an expenditure of $446,500 and that the contractors had claims amounting to a furth(*r sura of $130,- 000. In order to prove that the department's engineer, Mr. Rubidge, who had the general directions of the work, had given a wrong certificate in certifying that the work had been completed according to contract, the sum of $1 8,000 was expended in a new survey. The total expenditure, dfpartmental and contractors, upon this ditch in the St. Lawrence has been about $900,000, and yet the Minister in charge states officially in Parliament six years after the work was taken over as completed, that no one will use it. TIIK SHEIK'S ISLAND DAM. The Auditor-General for Canada in his public reports to Parliament took the Gov- ernment to task tor passing an order-in council on March 26, 1891, authorizing the loan of $60,000 of the public money to Messrs. William Davis and Sons of Ottawa, govern- ment contractors. The Auditor-General pointed out that there was no legal authority for such an act, but he was overruled by the Government. The date of this order m?»t fhrrty weeks alter trie "pnerni election, urrd tiie '.act tnat the Govern '^'?nt H''r>'''' to protret sixty elections, requiring a deposit of $1,000 each, made this extraordinary advance of $60,000 to Davis and Sons a peculiarly suspicious transaction. The Messrs. Davis were the chief contractors for the enlargement of the Cornwall canal, a work still in progress, although the contract provided for its completion April 5, 1891, and they have been paid about a million and a half on account of the work. 16 It will be aeen that Dayi> mi oons are favoritM with the Oovernment, and so the whole scheme of the enlargement of the Oornwall canal was changed in 1893, by which Davii and Sons obtained without tender a new contract worth $384,000 for bailding what it known as the Sheik's Iidand Dam. The object of this dam was to convert the north branch of the river into » navigable channel by throwins; dams across it at the head and foot of Sheik's Island, ffirming a deep water basin about three miles long. This basin would form a navigation past sections 6 and 7 of the Cornwall canal, which were under contract to Mossrs, Gilb<)rt and Son of Montreal, who had already been paid 1126,000, and who were afturwarr s paid a further sum of $30,000 as damages for the loss of their contract, because seciiot-a 6 and 7 were rendered useless by the adoption of the Sheik'a Island Dam scheme. The best engineer t-iiat the department ever had, the late Mr. John Page, fully con- sidered the scheme of eixcting dums at this point, when the enlargement of the canal was undertaken, and reported in February, 18K9, against the scheme, and it was decided not to adopt it. When this policy was reversed by Mr. Haggart for reasons best known to himself, and when the beneficiaries of the new policy to the extent of the profits on $384,000, were Messrs. Davis and Sons it is not hard to smell a rat. To give Messrs. Davia this new work it was necessary to break the law, which provided that no contract is to be given without tenders being called for. According to the admissions officially made the public lost $150,000 by tbeoanceMing of the contract to Messrs. Gilbert and Sons ; what they will lose by the favoritism shown to Davis and Sons or how much Davis and Sons will contribute to the Conservative cam- paign fund are matters of conjecture. A resolution introduced by Mr. Laurier in the House July 3, 1894, reciting the facts and censuring the Oovernment for their course was voted down, every Conservative present voting against it. The whole management of the Department of Canals of the works on the St. Lawrence has been of an extraordinary chamcter. " Rotten " might be a better word than extraordinary. The Cornwall canal, wL^oh is less than twelve miles long, has cost over $5,000,000 to dat\\ and yet in the blue book the superintending engineer says that even after Messrs. Dai is get through their already overrun contracts, " the class of veaselir for which the enlarged canal is designed will have great difficulty navigating it." The Qalops Channel job is quite close to the Cornwall canal, and the millionaire mistakes at these points form the most colossal blundering on record, not even excepting Sir Hector Langevin's i*3cord in the Department of Public Works. THE ST. CHARLES BRANCH. The St. Oharlefl branch of the Interoolonial Railway branches off from the Inter- colonial road to Point Levis, a distance of fourteen miles. When the Oovernment entered upon the project it was estimated to cost $136,000. Up to May, 1894, $1,723,000 had been paid on account of this branch, and there were other outstanding claims amounting, Mr. Haggart said, to $37,719, and the Government were taking at that time a further vote of $17,000. Mr. Haggart stated that the road itself cost $822,000, but that the amount required for land, damages and expenses was over $900,000. It is very evident that the people along the route of the branch were in some cases dealt with very gener- ously by the* Government. If they voted right they must have been allowed to claim almost anything they pleased, and although the Government might refer it to arbitration or some other tribunal, they would take care not to make any good defence. The only other explanation of the scandalous expenditure of almost $2,000,000 for fourteen miles of railway is that the Department of Railways has been administered by incompetents, but whether it has been incompetency or corruption the public have had to pay for it. HOW TO VOTE. These are but p few of the scandals in connection with the Dominion Government, and the people should show their disapproval of such conduct by voting against Oovern- ment candidates. M&Lii-u