IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 ■ 50 — 
 
 '^ 14.0 
 
 1.4 
 
 I— 
 1.6 
 
 V] 
 
 <^ 
 
 /] 
 
 A 
 
 '<^1 
 
 A 
 
 ^J' 
 
 
 .% 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Ck3rporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 A 
 
 ^^ 
 
 '^^ 
 
 s. 
 
 ^ 
 
 4^ 
 
 -\ 
 
 v>^ 
 
 ■"•«> 
 
 
fm 
 
 
 
 
 & 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 if^ 
 
 ^1^86 
 
Technical and bibliographic i\lotfts/Notas tachniquas at bibllographiquaa 
 
 The Instituta has attamptad to obtain tha bast 
 original copy availabia for filming. Faat'jras uf this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may altar any of tha images in tha 
 reproduction, or which ma/ significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 n 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 D 
 
 Coui/erture endommagie 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^ et/ou peiltculie 
 
 I I Cover title missing/ 
 
 La titra de couverture manque 
 
 □ Coloured maps/ 
 Cartes g^ographiques en couleur 
 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encra de couleur (i.e. rutre que bloue i u noirei 
 
 Coloured plates dnd/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Relii avec d'autres documar '« 
 
 Tight binding may causa shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de ia 
 distorsion ie long de ia marge intirieurs 
 
 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 apparaissant dans Ie texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas iti film^es. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires supplimentaires; 
 
 L'Insiitut a microfilm^ la meiileur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a iti possible de S9 procurer Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-^tre uniques du 
 point de vue hibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ru qui peuvent axiger une 
 modification dans la mithode normale de filmage 
 sont indiquAs ci-dessous. 
 
 |~~| Coloured pages/ 
 
 Pages de couieur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 Pages restored and/oi 
 
 Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculies 
 
 Pagas discoloured, stained or foxei 
 Pages ddcolories, tachat^es ou piqudes 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages d^tachees 
 
 [~~| Pages damaged/ 
 
 I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 
 ! n Pagas discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 
 I I Pages detached/ 
 
 0Showthrough/ 
 Ti 
 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Quality inigate de I'rmpression 
 
 Includes supplementary materie 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 rn Only edition available/ 
 
 D 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slipiii, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pagas totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., onx iti filrr^es i nouveau de facon ^ 
 obtenir la meilieure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 r« document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu* ci-dessous. 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 ~r 
 
 A 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
Th« copy filmed h«r« has b««n raproducad thanks 
 to tha ganaroaity of: 
 
 Department of Rare Books 
 
 and Special Collections, 
 
 McGill University, Montreal. 
 
 Tha imagaa appaaring hara ara tha baat quality 
 poscibia con«idaring tha condition and lagibility 
 of tha original sopy and in kaaping with tha 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copiaa in printed paper eovefs are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illuatrated impree- 
 si(^n, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copiea are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated imprea- 
 sion. and ending on the laat page with a printed 
 or illuatrated impreaaion. 
 
 The laat recorded frame on each micrc-^che 
 shall contain the symbol — »• (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meening "END"), 
 whichever appiiea. 
 
 Mttp: plataa. charts, etc.. may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratioa. Thoae too large to be 
 entirely included in one expoaure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand comer, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames aa 
 required. The foJiowing diagrsma iiluetrata the 
 method: 
 
 L'exampiaire filmi fut reproduit grAce ^ la 
 giniroaiti de: 
 
 Department of Rare Books 
 
 and Special Coliectior.4, 
 
 McGill University, Montreal. 
 
 Lee imagee suh/antea ont 4t* raproduitea avac la 
 piua grand soin, compta tenu de la condition at 
 da la nettet« de I'exemplaira fi!m«, et an 
 conformiti avac lea conditiona du contrat de 
 filmaga. 
 
 Lee exemplaires originaux dont Ik couvarture an 
 papier eat imprimie sont filmte an commanqant 
 par la premier plat at an t&rminant soit par la 
 darniira page qui comporte une ampreinte 
 d'ImpreHion ou d'liluatration, soit par la second 
 plat, saior k caa. Toua lea autras •xomplsiras 
 originaux sont filmte sn commancant par la 
 premiere page qui comporte une ampreinte 
 dimpreaaion ou d'illuatration at an tarminant par 
 la df rnlAra page qui comporte une telle 
 ampreinte. 
 
 Un dee symboies suivants apparaitra sur la 
 demi*rk> image de cheque microfiche, scion le 
 caa: le symbole — e«. siynlfie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbols V signifle TIN". 
 
 Lee cartes, planches. tabieeu». «tc., peuvent itre 
 fllmte i dee taux de reduction diff«rcnts. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour itre 
 reproduit en un seul cliche, il eat fiimA A partir 
 de I'angie sup4rieur gauche, de gauche il droite. 
 et de haut en bee. en prenant le nomhra 
 d'imegea nicaaaaira. Lea diagrammaa suivants 
 iilustrent la m«ithode. 
 
 1 2 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
tretiented by 
 
 
 THE KAMINISTIQUIA AFFAIR 
 
 The Parliamentary In- 
 vestigation. 
 
 REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE. 
 
 THE "JOB" EXPLODED 
 
 WHY THE TERMINUS WAS SELECTED. 
 THE NEEBING HOTEL 
 
 Testimony Before the Senate Com- 
 nnittee. 
 
 ( From (he Ottawa Free Press, Jnhj/fth, 
 
 1878. ) 
 
 Perhaps no single action of the present 
 Reform GJovernment has given rise 
 to more anil gi-eater misrepresentations 
 than the selection of the Lake Superior 
 terminus of tlie Canada Pacific Railway, 
 anil certainly none has been more free 
 from the very suspicion of favoritism or 
 corruption in the opinion of unprejudiced 
 and reflecting observers of public events. 
 l''or two years, or more, the people of 
 Canada have been treated to a surfeit of 
 slanders, on the part of Conservative 
 speakers and journals, in cotniection with 
 what has been called the " Kaministiquia 
 Land Job," which includes also that 
 special delight of the Opposition, the 
 iNTeebing Hotel. It is a healthy sign of 
 a bettir state of affairs in Canadian 
 matters of this 
 form the chief 
 upon an adminis- 
 unfortunate it may 
 be tliat our country contains a class of 
 people who can consent to resort to such 
 a necessity. It is the earnest desire of 
 tlie writer of thef-e lima to speak without 
 exa^'geration or umUu" party l.iias, but tho 
 
 politics when 
 kind necessarily 
 ground of attack 
 tration, however 
 
 conviction cannot be overcome that tlji.s 
 and other charges of a similar nature aie 
 made with singular insincerity, and f« >• 
 the smgie purpose of so injuring the char- 
 acters of our present rulers, that they 
 may be supplanted by their assailants. 
 Ihe administration of Mr. Mackenzie and 
 his colleagues has been remarkably free 
 from either blunders or crimes ; after 
 nearly five years of office, it speaks 
 volumes for their capacity ..nd integ- 
 rity, that their opponents can neither 
 discover nor invent any greater or graver 
 charges than this miserable Neebing 
 Hotel affair, the Steel Rails purchase and 
 others of a like character. It may not, 
 perhaps, appear singular to those conver- 
 sant with the history of the Conservative 
 party during the last twenty years, that 
 "\eir leaders prove themselves unscrupu- 
 lous enough to resort to any ex- 
 pedient in order to regain that place and 
 power from which they A^ere so sum- 
 marily hurled by an indignant and out- 
 raged people a few years ago, but it is 
 cause for extreme regret that the Senate 
 of Canada could lend itself to the promul- 
 gation of charges that escajje being mis- 
 chievous, simply because they are so con- 
 temptible. Well knowing how badly the 
 'Kaoiinistiquia Land Job'would fare in the 
 popular branch of the legislature, the in- 
 vestigation was carried on before a Com- 
 mittee of the Senate, a large majority of 
 whose members were bitter partisans 
 prepared to go almost any length to serve 
 the interests of their party. The report 
 made by that Committee, together with 
 all the evidence taken in connection 
 with the matter- nave been published, 
 and it is proposed to show froin 
 these how groundless have been 
 thechargea of wrongdoingin the .^election 
 of Fort William as the Lake Suiierii.r 
 terminus of the Pacific Railway. 
 
 In considering the subject where 
 questions or propositions actually pre- 
 sent themselves, and it will be best, ay 
 w. U as most convenient, to discuss each 
 separately. 
 
 (1.) Was the choice of the terminus a 
 judicious one ? 
 
u 
 
 (•' ) Was the Ciovernmeiit guided solely 
 l.y cunHideratioiiB for the Ijublic iiiteroHt 
 ill making the choice ? 
 
 (3.) Having regard to all the ciicuiu- 
 stances was the value paid leaaonable 
 
 iind just ? ... 
 
 Ill the diacussion of matters bearing 
 (.11 these (questions nothing will be ac- 
 vanced but what cannot be supported by 
 evidence; indeed, it is intended to allow 
 the evidence to speak for itself on every 
 possible occasion. 
 
 (1 ) Was the choice of the terminus 
 a judicious one ? Originally there were 
 three points contending for the honor 
 and advantage of theterminus— Aepigon, 
 Prince Arthur's Landing, and i<ort 
 William. The former, however, was 
 early abandoned as impracticable, the 
 choice virtually resting between the 
 other tv.-o. In coming to a decision, the 
 consideration of greatest importance, of 
 course, was the question of a harbor. 
 1 he future had to be regarded as well as 
 the present; accommodation for a trade 
 we all expect to see developed in the 
 course of years had to be provided, and 
 it was desirable to do it at a cost some- 
 what commensurate with our j^resent 
 circumstances. Of course, a present 
 economy which the conditions of the 
 luture might prove to be a false one, 
 could not be justified; not more could an 
 increased expenditure to make an stftiti- 
 cial harbor when the most perfect of 
 natural ones was equally available, and 
 at a comparatively moderate cost. 
 Touching the relative merits of the 
 Kaministiqnia and Prince Arthur s Land- 
 ing it may be said that the evidence 
 strongly favored the former: * 
 
 Mr! Wm. Murdoch, a civil endneer, , 
 \vho made surveys at Nepigon, ■ nnc- ' 
 Arthur's Landing and Fort William, an 
 who was a hostile witness, owing, it ib 
 nresumed, to his dismissal by Mr. Mac- 
 ken/,ie in 1874, testified that the river 
 opened earlier than Thunder Bay. When 
 asked vhich was the better as a harbor, 
 the reply was, "I favor the Kammistiquia 
 as a harbor." On this point however, 
 perhaps the evidence by practical seamen 
 would be of more value, and naturally 
 a large number of them were examined. 
 Mr. Archibald McMaugh, captain ot 
 the propeller Ocean, and who has navi- 
 j/ated the upper lakes for years, was 
 Ssked: "What is your conclusion as to 
 the relative advantages of the two points 
 as a harbor ? Answer-' ' The conclusion 
 I wouhl come to is that the one is a har- 
 
 bor and the other is not." g-"vyhK-h 
 is the harbor?- A-"Tiie river is the- 
 harbor." Q-" Ave vou clear about the 
 suiieriority of one harborover the otherr 
 A.— ."Yes; I have no hesitation i.. saying 
 that the Kaministiqnia is superior to the 
 other; 1 would not look upon, or could 
 not look upon the Landing as a harbor; 
 / look upon it an a dock on iht lakr shore 
 Q_" Could 20 or 30 good sized ves^ cla 
 be. on the Kaministiquia at the same 
 time, lying there as in a harbor, anrt 
 leave rooni to go about for other vessels 
 that would arrive at the terminus ? A— 
 " I know that they could from practical 
 experience, for it is as wide m a good 
 many places as the Chicago River; it is 
 almost as wide as the widest part of the 
 Chicago River at the railway dock, and 1 
 have been all through both harbors. 
 Q_" How does the Kammistiquia, 
 in its present state, compare 
 with the Chicago River as J* was then 
 (before the removal of the bar)? A— i 
 should say the Kaministiquia, in its pre- 
 sent state, compares very fa^'or^bly with 
 what the Chicago River was. It has a 
 much better entrance than we can get 
 throii hat any time." Q-"With further 
 drediring in the mouth of the river, do 
 you suppose that the facilities for ap- 
 proaching Prince Arthur's Landing are 
 any better than they would be at the 
 Kaministiquia?" A-"If the Kaminis- 
 tiquia was sufficiently dredged! should 
 think there would be no difficulty at any 
 time for a vessel to go there, and com- 
 pared with the other place, it would be 
 safer— in fact it would be taking a land- 
 locked harbor in prercrence to running on 
 to the shore of the Bay. At present 
 Prince Arthur's Landing is affected with 
 the southeast winds. There is a fetch o 
 twenty to thirty miles with the wind 
 from about southeast round to east north- 
 east. There would be a sweep also frotn 
 Thunder Cape to the Landing of about 
 fourteen mil s, and the opening is some- 
 where between eight or nine miles wide 
 to Isle Royale." Q-"Can you make any 
 comparison between Thunder Bay and 
 Hamilton Bay?" A-"Nothing further 
 than that there would be a much longer 
 sweep of sea in Thunder Bay from any ol 
 thost points than there would be m 
 Hamilton Bay; along the Great Western 
 dock at Hamilton is a very unsafe iilace 
 for vessels to lie in an easterly wmd. 
 
 Robert McMaugh, captain of the pro- 
 peller Dominion, was called and sworn. 
 Q— "Had vou any difficulty m entering 
 
 N 
 
 (' 
 
u 
 
 
 I 
 
 8 
 
 the river?" A — "No, none whatever. 
 Tlie HrHt time I went np I v ent in after 
 night." Q — "What is yonr opinion of 
 the Kaministiquia as a harbor? A — "I 
 think it is a splendid harbor." Q — 
 "How are the facilities for dot^kage? 
 Doe? the character of the hank 
 afford an opportunity for build- 
 ing docks readily ?" A—" I think 
 80. "J'he banks are good up at the rail- 
 way station, I know they are." Q — 
 " Wliat is you'' opinion of it as compared 
 with I'rince Arthtir's Landing for a harbor 
 and deckage ?" A — " T would not con- 
 sider Prince Arthur's Landing a harbor 
 at all; it is a mere dock on thebay." 
 
 James McMaugh, Captain of the pro- 
 peller Sovereign, called and sworn : Q — 
 " Will you give us your experience of the 
 two places as a desirable harbor for 
 vessels?' A — " I do not think there is 
 any (comparison at all. We know that 
 I'rince Arthur's Landing is no harbor as 
 it is, and the Kaministiquia is one of the 
 best harbors on the whole chain of lakes, 
 in my opinion. You are sheltenfl there 
 from wind from all (quarters. They have 
 no otl'ect whatever on it." Q— " What 
 number of vessels do you sup])ose the 
 Kaministiquia is capable of receiving 
 and allowing to unload?" A— "You 
 could get a large fleet of vessels in there." 
 Q — " Do you know the nature of the soil 
 on the banks, whether it will be very easy 
 to widen particular points on the river ?" 
 A — " I do not think there would be any 
 trouble." Q — " What would be your 
 opinion of the re'piirements of Prince 
 Arthur's Landing to make it equal to the 
 Kaministiquia? Are you a civil engineer?" 
 A — " lam civil engineer enough to know 
 that it would require a good deal ef 
 money. I doubt very mu?h if the Domin- 
 ion has enough to make the harbor there 
 as safe as the Kaministiquia. ' 
 
 James B. Symes, Captain of the steamer 
 Manitoba, called and sworn : 
 
 Q. Give me your experience of the 
 timos in the spring and fall that you 
 have been up there, taking from 1869 ? — 
 r have kept a log ever since I ran up Lake 
 Superior, and before coming down here I 
 took a list of the first and last trips from 
 the ship's log, which is as follows : 
 
 AliSTRACT OF Smi-'S I,0(!. 
 
 "18(59. Arrived at Thunder Bay, May 
 " 18tli. Hay full of ice. Noicointhc 
 "liver. Left Thunder Bay. November 
 " 4th, No ice in Bay or rJNcr,'" 
 
 " 1870. Arnved in Thunder Bay, May 
 " 8th. No ice in Bay or river. Leit 
 " Noveml)€r 7th. No ice in bay or 
 " river," 
 
 ." 1871, Left Thunder Bay, November 
 "27th. Ice making very fast in bay. 
 " River frozen ; 22 IhjIow zero." 
 
 " 1872. Arrived in Thunder Bay, May 
 '• 18th, Could not get to the lamfing foi' 
 " ice ; landed passengers in small btiats 
 " l.J miles east of Prince Arthur's Land- 
 " ing. River clear of ice. Took in nine 
 " cords of wood from Fort William out 
 " to the .steamer in H.B.C. Schooner. 
 " Left November 15th ; no ice in bay or 
 " river." 
 
 " 1873. Arrived at Thunder Bay, May 
 " 12th. Bay full of ice from Thunder 
 " ('ape to Welcome Islands, but clear 
 '■ from Welcome Islands to I'rince 
 " Arthur's Landing. No ice in the rive:-. 
 " Left November 13th ; no ice in Bay or 
 " river." 
 
 " 1874. Arrived in Thunder Bay, May 
 " Ifitli. Ice from Thunder Cai)e to Wei- 
 " come Islands ; cle-jr from Welcome 
 " Islandsto Prince Arthur's Landing. 
 " River clear of ice. Left October 13th ; 
 ' ' no ice in Bay or river. " 
 
 "1875. Arrived in Thunder Bay, May 
 " 23rd. Bay full of ice from Thunder Cape 
 " to Prince Arthur's Landing; solid ice 
 ' ' east of Welcome Islands clear to the 
 " west ("Chicora") lying at anchor at the 
 " mouth of the Kaministiquia, landing 
 " his passengers in small boats at Fort 
 " William. She could not get to the 
 " landing for ice. Left October 5th; no 
 " ice in bay or river," 
 
 "1876. Arrived in Thunder Bay, May 
 " 19th. Bay full of ice from Welcome Is- 
 " lands to Prince Arthur's Landing. 
 ' ' Went up the river and discharged load 
 " at Fort William and returned to 
 ' Sarnia. Left November 1st; no ice in 
 " bay or river." 
 
 " 1877. Arrived in Thunder Bay, May 
 " 21st; no ice in bay or river. Left Oc- 
 " tober 20th; no ice in bay or river." 
 
 Q. Have you had any experience of 
 Prince Arthur's Landing in stormy 
 weather ? -Yes; I have been calling at 
 Prince Arthur's Landing before and ever 
 since it has been a landing. 
 
 Q. Have you had any experience of 
 gales there ? Yes; I have been there in 
 all sorts of weather. 
 
 Q. Give us your experience of its at- 
 tractions as a harbor?- -I had to loavo it 
 twice and run to Welcome Island.s to 
 conic to anchor; once in the fall of 1S73, 
 
anil frhe other in IS't, I think, I am M(tt 
 quite poBitive as to t'\e time. 
 . Q. Were the doukb onstnicted at that 
 time? — Yes, 
 
 Q. Waa it not safe to have staid ahmc- 
 aide of tlie dock"/ — No; the boat would 
 have K«t ou top of the dock; the fenders 
 could not keep her off. 
 
 Q. What IS the range of the wind 
 there? — The wind from the E.N.E. has a 
 run of 20 miles on to the docks; and from 
 the south-east, from Thunder Cape, 14 
 miles. 
 
 Q. Whi.t is your opinion of the river 
 an a harbo,^" and the facilities which it 
 allords for vessels entering it? — My opin- 
 ion about the river as a harbor is that 
 there is no better, 
 
 Q. Is any harbor better on Lake 
 Superior? — Not that I know of, and I 
 know every harbor on the north shore of 
 Lake Superior, that is, after the entrance 
 is once completed, 
 
 Q. Is it equal to a considerable trade 
 and a large number of vessels? — Yea; 
 there is no difficulty about making dock- 
 age. 
 
 Q, "What in your opinion would 
 be necessary to make Prince Arthur's 
 Landing equal to the Kaministiquia as a 
 harbor? Could it be made equal?" A, 
 "No; I do not think it could, not with- 
 out shutting it in altogether, because the 
 one is open and the other perfectly shut 
 in." Q. "You speak as a "mariner, not 
 as an engineer ?" A. "I speak from tak" 
 ing Fort William in comparison with 
 Milwaukee, Chicago, fad other rivers 
 tliat I hPiVe been in the habifi of running 
 in." Q, "How do the facilities in the 
 Kaministiquia — capable of being made — 
 compare with Chicago?" A. "In the 
 Kaministiquia you can turn a vessel al- 
 most in every place, while in the Chicago 
 River it is impossible to turn except at 
 niven points; you have to take a vessel 
 into slips before you can turn her round 
 in the Chicago River." Q. "Do you 
 think there would be an undertow at the 
 Landing?" A. "I do, because you can- 
 not construct a dock on the lake shore 
 without creating an undertow. The mo- 
 ment the sea strikes the vessel it has to 
 disperse, and the moment it strikes the 
 dock it creates the uiuiertow." Q. 
 "What would be the eSect of it on a ves- 
 sel unloading at an elevator?" A. "With 
 an undertow they could not keep the 
 leg of the elevator in; even iit Sarnia they 
 cannot keep the leg of the elevator in, 
 sometinica on account of the undertow." 
 
 .John S. Moocr, captain of the proinl- 
 lor ''Asia,' in reply to a question, said 
 "As a harbor 1 would prefer the rive.." 
 
 William Kingsford, Civil Engineer, 
 for six or eiglit years in the employ of the 
 iTOvernment, and a strong CoiiHorvative, 
 when under examination, oegged to road 
 a report cm the survey of the Kaminieti- 
 quia maile in Ai)ril, 1877, from which the 
 following extracts are taken; "The 
 River Kaministiquia possesses the ad- 
 vantage of forming an excMleiit liarbor 
 for snipping, ofi'ering perfect j>rotec- 
 tion from all windH. \t presents a 
 marked parallelism to tlio rivers whicli 
 iiave led to tlie jommercial pre-eminence 
 of Chicago and Milwaukee. No othir 
 walern in thin riciniti/ extend the Htiui.t nnf'i 
 haven to vensdn lo'ulin;/ and tlijirJmrijin;/. 
 The winds passing with extreme violence 
 over the bay create seas extremely heavy, 
 which render the mooring of vessels at 
 any exposed wharf impossible. * » » 
 The width of the river is generally .ViO 
 feet, and it is evident that M'e have here 
 a harbor of rare capacity, equal to any of 
 the requirements oi commerce which the 
 enterprise calling it into being may 
 create, giving efficient protection to 
 shipping, with every convenience for 
 wharf construction." Aud he added: 
 " I think you have to guard against 
 peiiodical storms on Lake .Superior, 
 which some day will tell a very serious 
 tale." Asked as to the relative cost of 
 the cwo harbors, Mr. Kingsford said: " I 
 hold that Prince Arthur's Landin|j should 
 be 18 feet in depth. My estimate is 
 $64.3,000 for a harljor of 18 feet and per- 
 manent work. By making tlie river 17 
 feet deep, 100 feet wide, and 200 feet 
 wide througli the ))ar, the cost of diclg- 
 ing would be $81,700. To make it only 
 100 feet across the bar it would be >?(i4,- 
 000." In reply to another ((uestion thi; 
 witness said: '* I consider the Kaminis- 
 tiquia is- just the same as the harbor at 
 Chicago or Milwaukee." 
 
 Mr. Jolm ^lackellar, an old resident 
 of the locality, testified that in the fail 
 of 1877 the steamer Frances Saiith put 
 out from the Landing for tlie river to 
 seek shelter, the weather being too rougli 
 to admit of her lying at the dock. lie 
 also said : "I have seen tlie steamer 
 Ontario, in 1874, come within a hundred 
 yards of the dock, and leave it, and I 
 have seen boats in 1S70 take up their 
 anchors and run to Welcome Islands for 
 shelter. That was before there was a 
 dock at the Lauding. The bay is like 
 
any (itiicr c:.\|iiiiisonl' water, '.'lio wimls 
 Miivv tliortj as vvuU as tlioy will on Lake 
 Ontario or any other open bay." 
 
 Q - Wiit< the iroronimcnl (fUuled HO^eh/ fii/ 
 rnnmln-atiom for the pi'ihlic hitcri'x'sf i'n 
 )iiid-iii<i the choice, 'f 
 
 Much of thy evidence already given 
 tends very strongly to a Hatisfautoi'y as- 
 surance on this point. It is only neces- 
 sary to further add the following : - 
 Hon. Alex. Mackenzie toatiiied : 
 (l~ I should like to ask you first as to 
 the s«ilection of tlie Kaniinisti(|uia for 
 the terminus of the Pacific Railway - 
 Itow it was arrived at? When I took 
 charge of the Tuhlic Works Department, 
 an cjigineer of the name of Murdoch had 
 lic,e;ii Hcnt >to survey the line from tlie 
 i\aministi<|uia River, or, more jjarticu- 
 larly,from Thunder Bay. T do not know 
 Miat it was from the Kaministiquia 
 Kiver, westward. When we obtained 
 informaticm regarding the work, in the 
 .s|>.-iug we (thp-t is Mr. .Fleming, Mr. 
 '! rudeau. my deputy and myself), had 
 repeated consultations about it, and my 
 own impressitm was that it would be 
 better to bring the railway to Pointe le 
 Meurons, that ijeing the head of the 
 deep water navigation in the Kaminis- 
 ti(piia River, so as to have the whole 
 length of the river for haibor purposes, 
 and save so many miles of railroad. Mr. 
 -vlurdoch, I understand, had in the mean- 
 time surveyed a portion of the river 
 bank where it was ultimately located. 
 Mr. Fleming, Mr. Trudeau (mydeinity) 
 and inyself had frequent consultations 
 about it. I knew nothi/ig technically 
 myself. ^ liad been in the Kaministi- 
 quia Rivt I, and knew generally what 
 isortofa river it was, the formation of 
 tlic banks, the deptl, of the water, and 
 also the depth of water on the bar. I 
 liad that general information ; and Mr. 
 Fleming seemed to be quite clew, as 
 well as Mr. Trudeau, that that was the 
 best place to locate it. I coincided with 
 that view, and it was selected by general 
 ac(piiesc€nce of the heads of the Depart- 
 ment ; the Chief Engineer ; I also under- 
 stood the district engineer, my deputy 
 and myself. 
 
 Q— Vour own opinion, however, was 
 tliat the cite should have been higher up 
 than the point ultimately chosen ? — Yes, 
 it was my impression, and Mr. Fleming 
 and Mr. Mr .och both said the high 
 banks aliove would make it ])ractically 
 iinpo.ssiblc to get to any point high up on 
 the river Ijank. 
 
 <2 -It was then brougiil ('own to the 
 nearest available jioint ? It was l>rought 
 to where it is. \ do not renKsmber :.ll 
 the reasons, as it was in general consul- 
 tation of an oral ciiaraeter rather tlian 
 written eonununications ; but .it was 
 brought where it is wholly by the en- 
 gineer and by me. 
 
 Wliat more is noeded ? Surely no- 
 thing ; a clearer case could not have been 
 ma<lo out, if the Select Committee of the 
 Senate had gone to work to justify the 
 selection ma(le by the Government. Mr. 
 Mackenzie, anxious to save the exijcnse 
 (•f every mile of railway he possibly 
 could, wa.s himself favcrrable to locating 
 the terminus at a point further up the 
 liver, but from tiiis he vas di.ssuadcd by 
 the engineers in connccticm with the De- 
 l)artment, the high banks of the river at 
 that place being hehl as an almost insup- 
 erable obstacle to the construction of 
 docks. Between thq Kaministifiuia 
 River and Prince Arthur's Landing, 
 the Minister had really no choice ; 
 his professional advisers favored the 
 former; his own common sense also fa- 
 vored it, and the weight of all the testi- 
 mony taken since goes to justify tiie 
 wisdom of the selection. At this termi- 
 nus it is expected that in time a large 
 commercial city will grow up. Let us 
 see for a moment how it will compare, as 
 to situation, with tlie leading cities of 
 the Morld. From Mr. Kingsford's evi- 
 dence it will be seen that the Kaminis- 
 ti(piia "presents a marked parallelism to 
 the rivers which have led to the commer- 
 cial pre-eminence of Chicago and Mil- 
 waukee." Taking other American cities, 
 we notice that Detroit is situat';d on a 
 river, ai.-d Cleveland, Buffalo, Oswego, 
 New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, 
 Richmond, Wilmington, Mol)ile and New 
 Orleans, all either lake or seaports, and 
 all carefully hugging the river for per- 
 fect harborage. In the old world we fiml 
 London, Liverpool, Glasgow, Dublin, 
 Belfast, Cork, Lyons, jNIarseilles, St. 
 Petersburg, Calcutta, Pekin- in fact 
 nearly all of them— situated on rivers. 
 That the same wise forethought was dis- 
 played ill selecting the site of that future 
 Canadian city, •which is destined to grow 
 on the shores of tiiat mighty lake, is 
 cause for thankfulness and congratu- 
 lation. 
 
 (3.) Hav'mcj regard to all the circtim- 
 staiiceti, w«,s (he ralae palifrcdsoiKihli aiii/' 
 ji(d> 
 
 It may be ncccHWiry to say at tlie ouf • 
 
•set that, luvd MoKsrs. Uli\or, DavidHou A, 
 (V). un interest in any of those lands, it 
 IS oxtieniely j robahle nothing would ever 
 have l)cen said ahout the value paid for 
 tlieu). Mr. Oliver especially vi'as known 
 as a prominent nicniber of the Rofomi 
 party, and having a shrewd suspicion 
 "^i )«ow similar matters were 
 inanage<l un<ler the old King, yir John, 
 tl.'ise scandalmongers thouglit that pos- 
 Hihly the Minister played into his hands 
 111 (Tder to give him an advantage. It is 
 nocdless to say that not a tittle of proof 
 ol this was forthcoming, but much evi- 
 detifle to show that every matter eoii- 
 neeted with the expn.priation of the land, 
 as wfill as the selection of the site, was 
 conducted with absolute and unimpeach- 
 able honesty and fairness. The Govern- 
 ment were not responsible for the actions 
 oMMiver, Davidson fc Co.; the memliers 
 ot the hrin are wealtJiy and speculative, 
 and to imike theiliselvessure of reaping a 
 beiielit h-om the terminus they purchased 
 largely at Sault'Ste. Marie, Nei)igon, and 
 I'rincu Arthur's Landhig, as well as on 
 the Kaministiquia. They were determined 
 to strike the terminus, wherever it might 
 be, and ))ctweeii all tiio.se points they 
 were j.retty safe to doit. This, really, 
 IS all that ought to be necessary in ex- 
 plaiiung the Government's connection 
 with ( Ml ver, Davidson & Co. For any - 
 tiling with which Mr. Mackenzie is con- 
 eerned, the firm might just as well have 
 been Brown, Jones & Robinson. The 
 .overnment cannot stop private specula- 
 tion, and unless tliese gentlemen had 
 been proliibited from purchasing land at 
 Nepigon, Prince Arthur's Landing, and 
 I'ort William, it was quite impossible 
 that the Government could escape deal- 
 ing with them when the necessary ex- 
 propriations for the terminus came to be 
 made. 
 
 Ill answering this last (luestion, the 
 CA idonee as in the case of the other two, 
 wil le allowed to si^eak for itself. It 
 u ill be well, however, to understand ex- 
 actly the einuise pursued in making the | 
 valuations, although, of course, it was 
 the same as i■^ all cases of a similar 
 nature. The law provides for it- pro- 
 vides for the appointment of valuators, 
 and lays down rules to govern them. 
 JNotlung was done in con- 
 
 nection witli this matter that was not 
 usual in all others like it. 
 Here is Mr. Mackenzie's simjilc statement, 
 inade under oath, as to the aj>pointment 
 of the valuators:-! wrote to Mr. Panlec 
 
 Cominissioner of Crown Lamls for 
 Ontario, stating that we liad to obtain 
 the services of a I'rovincial land surveyor 
 to work out afr-jsh many of the boun- 
 dariea in the townshiitH and in the town 
 plot through which the railway was to 
 run, and that it would bo necessary for 
 us to get a petition from tlio residents 
 under the Surveycu-s' Act to make sueli 
 fresh definition of the boundary legal; 
 and I wished at the same time to use 
 such surveyor as valuator. Not knowing 
 any suitable person myself, I said 1 would 
 be glad if he would name some person to 
 me who was acquainted with that coun- 
 try, and ha<l ibme work there for tln^ 
 Department -a man in whom we could 
 have confidence. He reconmiended Mr. 
 Wilson, of whom I knew nothing, never 
 having met him to my knowledge; but 
 we accepted his roeomniendation. I then 
 telegraplied to Kobert lleid, of London, 
 to ask him if he would accept the position 
 ')f valuator with Mr. Wilson, wiiicii lie 
 agreed to do. 
 
 Mr. Wilson was and is a Coiis(;rvative; 
 Mr. Keid is a Reformer. Of their quali- 
 fications for the duty imposed upon them 
 not a single doubt has ever been 
 expres^sed. They entered upon their 
 work with the simple object of performing 
 their duy, and they did it impartially. 
 The first thing to do was to determin*! 
 the basis on which values should be 
 placed on the landt3. For a year or two 
 previously parties had been active inspecu 
 lation in anticipation of the terminus 
 being fixed at Fort William. Lots hail 
 changed hands at good figures, and, to 
 show that the trausaetions were in good 
 faith, many of the lots had been improved 
 and built upon. Tliey had a regular 
 marketable value at the time, and the 
 valuators had no optitm but to pay that 
 value. The basis mutually agreed upon 
 was the prevailing ju-ice in 1875, the time 
 the terminus was fixed; any other would 
 have been manifestly unfair. As far back 
 as 1872 or 1873, according to Mr.Wilson'.s 
 evidence, half-acre lota in the towr '^)lot 
 were held at forty and fifty dollars taoli. 
 In 187.') Mr. John McKellar, tlown the 
 river f^'om the plot, was asking tw,- 
 hundred and fifty dollars for lots aloiu' 
 the front street running on top of the 
 bank of the river. They were asking 
 two hundred and fifty dollars for fifty 
 feet frontage. Mr, Wilson also testified 
 that the Prince Arthur Land- 
 ing Railway Company paid cuii- 
 isidnably iiiwie for their ri^'ht of w;iv 
 
Ill- 
 
 of it iiiirtMiiig 
 
 tlt:i wiw paid l,y thi' ( 
 'loi'd, for that |ii>rtion . 
 tlir<niL|'i tlio town piv.t they paid "at tin- 
 iatoo?*|,10()peiai'iv." "Hf added: "If 
 the aamo area had been taken out of 
 I'rince Arthur'g Landing as the (lovern- 
 ment reserve at the town plot, it would 
 liave taken tip two-thirda of the wiiolo 
 t )wn, and would have coHt an enormous 
 Hum of money." He also said that, in the 
 judgment of the valuators, "the ol>ieot 
 was to buy land as cheaply as possible 
 at a uniform price, and not to allow an 
 mcreased price in one placer ore than in 
 another." To supj ose nnythinft else 
 would be to argue that the vafuators 
 were a pair of knaves and imbeciles. M:-. 
 P. .1. Brown testified that the firm of 
 Oliver, Davidson & Co. had invested 
 "something over one hundred tliousand 
 dollars in lands at Fort William." This 
 witness gave the prices at which lots had 
 been sold previous to the valuatitm, and 
 al.so what had been allowed for them on 
 the part of the (jlovernment. Lot 22, 
 south of Frederick street, had been aohl 
 tor ^250 in 1874, and the valuator al- 
 lowed 1290. Lots 35 and 36, north of 
 <iore street, sold for !f;250, and tlie /abla- 
 tors allowed |275. Lot 24, north of 
 Kie<lericka street, sold for $275, and the 
 same was allowed for it. Part of lot .32, 
 north of the (:;ore, was sold for $300, and 
 tile valuators allowed $18f>, but the owner 
 refused to accept it i^nd threatened arbi- 
 <-ration, md the whole amount was afier- 
 wards refunded to him. In Mr. Brown's 
 opinion, which was supported by that of 
 Mr. Bethune, Q.C., Toronto, the case 
 \\ould have gone against the (>ove>-nment 
 if it had been left to arbitration, on the 
 ground that the purchaser had bought it 
 111 good faith, and without notice of the 
 same having been appropriated by the 
 (Government. Mr. Brown furtlier testi- 
 hed; — 
 
 Q. Do you know anything of lot 26 on 
 the .south side of Fredericka street ?— 
 ^'es; that lot had been sold and subdivid- 
 ed a dozen times during the winter of 
 J 875, at Fort William. It has been mh 
 divided ;nto seven parcels. 
 
 Q. Do you know their names ?— There 
 1.S Driscoll of Kincardine, and Cameron of 
 Kincardine. 
 
 Q. Do you know what they paid ?~I 
 liave a memorandum here, an abstract 
 taken from the registry ofKce, which 
 shows that on 5th of February, 1875, 
 Ambrose Cyrette, who is the patentee 
 from the Crown, sold twenty perches to 
 
 Yumiiii;^' loi .ifiw. iiien .John Park 
 divided that piece, and solil ten pen;he« 
 to D. Cameron of Kincardine, who was 
 
 .lohn I'aik.a nier-jhaiit at I'liiicc Artiiur's 
 Luiidmi; for .*150. 'I'lien .)o!,u Park 
 
 1 -- — -»--....., v.i.ir fv'as 
 
 lis partner in tliu businoss at Prince 
 Arthur's Landing for $350 ; and Um 
 perches to , John \V. Driscoll of Kincar- 
 .hne, merchant, for .$.';<)(». On the same 
 day the 5tli of February, 1875, Cyrette 
 sold to Andrew Boulanger .35 perches for 
 $200. Boulanger sold that to Tliomas 
 Marks, of Prince Arthur's Landing, for 
 the same money, and he was tlic owner 
 when the reserve was taken. Then 
 (Vrette soM 29i perches to ' )hn C. 
 Hoskmgs, who keeps a hotel, I think, at 
 Irince Arthur's Landing, for .'ii!jr»0. 
 Hoskings sold tliat parcel to John Pork 
 and John Park sold half of it to William 
 Kamsav of 1 oronto for $3.30. 
 
 Q. What is the sum total for that hjt •' 
 —The sum total would be between $1 500 
 and $l,«UO. 
 
 Q. What is the date of that sale t(. 
 Kamsay ?— June 6th, 1876. The tirst sale 
 was in February, I875. 
 
 y. What sale occurred in February, 
 18/5 ?-From Cyrette to Park; Cyrette to 
 Boulangar; and Cyrette to .fohn C. Hos- 
 kings. 
 
 Q. When was the sale to Boulani/er •' 
 -In Felrua 
 
 y. Can yr 
 and state ' 
 lots. Take 
 paid, you sa 
 in 1875?— t 
 
 Q. What (U 
 Hoskings ?— Th-vt 
 
 he valuators list 
 
 '•>wed for those 
 
 instance, ho 
 
 Sispurchaseil 
 
 l;ors allow to 
 me under the 
 
 names of John Vark, .>)^., and William 
 Rambojr, $190, or $160 for that, parcel. 
 
 Q. That would be ten dt)llar8 more 
 than they paid? What was Kamsay 
 allowed ?-Ohe hundred dollars -that is 
 for the part of the Hoskings purchase. 
 
 Q. What did Ramsay's purchase cost 
 hnn ?— Three hundred and thirty dollars. 
 
 Q.— Did he lose that $230 ?— I suppose 
 so. I had considerable correspondence 
 with him, and he speaks very harshly of 
 Mr. Park who conveyed it to him. 
 
 Q. Take Cameron's case; he was al- 
 lowed ^100. Wliat did that lot cost 
 him?— Three hundred or three hundred 
 and fifty dollars. It appears on the 
 abstract. 
 
 Q. Then he lost $250? --Yes; he told 
 me he had paid $350, I think it was, 
 Marks paid $200, and got $80. He h.st 
 $120. 
 
 Q. Did he make a row .aboutit? He did. 
 
Q. Did hi" appoal agaiiust tli« valua- 
 tion ? If,, canio t.. i,„. Movoral ti.uea, l.«t 
 I t.l.l liiiii I ooiil.. do iiotliiiig, UH the 
 valuators inado that award. Pinally, he 
 tmk the n.oncy, but it wa« several 
 months aftt-rward < when he got it 
 
 <■}. What did Nicholson pay "—I do 
 not know what ho paid; ho got «40. 
 to I nnce ArMiur'n Landing, as (H)n.pared 
 witli itH preHcpt terminus at Fort Wil- 
 • •un? -I wo.dd Hay if the station were to 
 Itephiced, sa: whore the «iovernn.ent 
 i^3.j<erve IS at Prince Artlnir's Landing, 
 ti -nig the lotH in the town ph)t (and I 
 .eheve there are two survejs adjoining 
 the town plot of Prince Arthur's Land 
 lUL', two parcels of land that have been 
 Hubdivided) 1 am sure one hundred thou- 
 sand dollars would not have covered the 
 umount- -tl.at is, inchiding the balance 
 of the lots at Fort William, and running 
 through the McKeliar and other property 
 adjouung Fort William. ^ 
 
 M. Confine your remarks to wheu any 
 line would haN e entered Prince Arthur's 
 Landing thiougli the building portion of 
 It to have snthcient dockage frontace fo- 
 tlio purpose of the railway v-I should 
 
 v^Yfi l!*"'i*^" ,V''"".l^^''*^™- C'l^versations 
 with tlie late Mr. Haziewood on the sul)- 
 ject and he estimated it at more tirm 
 
 Q. Are you an engineer ?-I av., not 
 speaking as as engineer: I am not rai 
 en^rineev. 
 
 »^ Then you are not competent 
 
 woie Homo C080H wo could hardly close . n 
 that baMiM. 
 
 10 
 
 speak professionally as *o it ?-Unly as to 
 the vafue of the lau-.I, v;pon which 1 con- 
 sider myself capable of judging. 
 
 il Then you say that tlie land 
 
 damages A -ould have been fully double at 
 
 "f wAr '"" ' l^anding what it was at 
 
 I r.rt Willian. ?- Yes; I .ay so, because 
 
 the .ots are all dotted with buildings. 
 
 Of the general valuation Mr. Reid 
 teatihed as followf? : j 
 
 Q. Were you aware that if the price I 
 asl'ed was, in your judgment, exnessive- j 
 that you had another tribunal— that of i 
 arbitration, to go to ?-8o far as my own I 
 judgment is concerr.ed, it would be re- 
 gulated by circumstances. I did not 
 k.iow the country or the values of land ' 
 turther than the circumstances concern- ' 
 ing tne case. I ascertained - hat parties ' 
 had paid for lots, and the rates ^hev ' 
 were selling for, and was perfectly satis- 
 hed that we laid down the basis that 
 half acre lots were worth from |250 to 
 •>.SUO, according to location; that was the 
 huam of our valur.tion. ()f course tliere 
 
 g. Iheaverag.. of the whole would bo 
 li.ghor than tf.at ?--Vo., but it was 
 ma. (, uj. by parties who had jiaid a L^roak 
 deal more, and they would not take le.-s 
 witliout going to arbitrati(.n. Wo ol..sed 
 by givm ' $'2r> to r»0 extra in casoa -.vlinv 
 they had paid m.Me for the lota. 
 
 Q. What in the conclusion in y,„ir 
 '"•nd? Would the Government have 
 saved, or would you have been enabled to 
 ol'tain a less price, if you ha.l gone to 
 arbitration?- I «,„ positive we couhl not. 
 In any case •> uer^ there was an attempt 
 to get excessive prices, as there was in 
 iine or two cases -for ii.stance, one lot 
 that was s(dd and cut up they valued at 
 nearly .$2.00() - it was rcisted. It was 
 lot number 20. Scuith Fre.lericka Street- 
 we valued it at S.S50. 1 1 was a laive lot. 
 considered to be spfjcially valuable, md 1 
 am not .ure but what we went up to 
 •HIH' va'ue for it. 
 
 ^^ ^;>; V>^^ticiiltxv cMea, Air. Read 
 gave the following evi.lence : There was 
 Mr Robert Thompson, of J)aluth, we 
 Had also to arrange w-th him, but he 
 placed his case in the hands of a lawver 
 there, to deal with me. He said he had 
 been udercd $-400 for his lot-r27r) was 
 the value we fixed upon it, but we finally 
 closed with him for |.S(X). 
 
 Q. Do you think bitter terms M-uuhl 
 have been made if it had gone to ari.i- 
 I tration ?-No; I think not 
 
 Q. How do you know that ?— I do not 
 know but 1 think not. Then there w -s 
 Ars Newton in Duluth, whom M'e liad to 
 deal with. 
 
 Q. Did you arrange with her ?— Yes. 
 
 $m "'"'''' *^''' ^"" ^'^'*' '^*"' •" 
 
 Q. How hmg did slie hold lier lot '— 
 She had held her lot for some years. 
 Ihose parties would rather not sell- thev 
 prefe-red to keep their lots. 
 
 <^Ann ^n?""* '■'"/«''« ^ant for her lot ? - 
 -WOO. hen there is a Mr. Charles . 
 Bak^H- held lot No. 2, Water street, 
 east. ' 
 
 ,.,9- ^^'I'cre di.l he live ?-I„ Fort 
 William. 
 
 Q. Is he living on his land there •>— 
 \ es; he i.or/.ht forty feet frontage of 
 that from Ax. McLeod, ,vud paid $100 
 tor it. 
 
 Q. Did you satisfy yourself that he ac- 
 tually paid the money?- Yes; there is no 
 doubt of that at all. He put up two 
 buildings for a store and ))ake-Iiouse He 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 t 
 
 ♦ 
 
 i 
 t 
 
 (i 
 
 ^ 
 
 t 
 
 il 
 
 F 
 
 c 
 
 fi 
 P 
 
•i,., . 
 
 I 
 
 9 
 
 I 
 
 Wfts carrying on n littlo bakory at fclio 
 turiu. H«' Idimocl CtOO, of course there 
 was Honii' (Iniriugw to 'lis btisiiioHH, t iking 
 ;iway Ivn lot ami hako-lioiiHo, hut wo 
 finally elo'^od with hitn for $'M)0. [t in- 
 «!lii(l()il tlio two hull lings he halput up 
 for h.iKiii'{ pnritosen. 'Ihere is a Wm.Mc- 
 (^arrou who bought from Cyrotti 'Ju feet 
 of lot No. 1, WatMr street, tn 1874. He 
 paid $W)0 U>v that lot and the building, 
 
 Q. When \v\i\ the buihiijng upon it 
 been erected? -It liad been up some years. 
 Wo thought that ho had been imposed 
 upon, and had paid too much money on 
 the property. However, we closed with 
 him for $r)50, for what he had paid SffiOO 
 in !874. * 
 
 Q. Had you any doubt on your own 
 mind from cho evidencj y, .. took that he 
 ha<l really paid !|i!(10() for it in 1874?— No; 
 n(mo whatever. Then there i,s the Wake 
 land property which is still in aboyanco. 
 'ct No. 11, Hector street 
 
 Q. What is the reason it is not settled 
 
 foe '—He would not take our offer He 
 ha I been offered !$1,000 for it. 
 
 Q, What did you offer him for it"— 
 Five hundred and fifty dollars. Five 
 hundred dollars was the value we put on 
 on it, but we came to $550. 
 
 Q. How long had he held it?— He had 
 lived there at one time for over four or 
 five years before that. 
 , According to Mr. Reid those terrible 
 people, Olive-, Davidson & Co. , fared pretty 
 much as the others; wonderful as it may 
 seem the valuators quietly proceeded to 
 deal out to them precisely the same 
 maasure of justice and cousiduratiou as 
 was shown to those whose names j,te not 
 half so well known. Here is Mr. Raid's 
 evidence as to their property: — 
 
 Q. Describe to us how you arranged 
 for the lands of Oliver, Davidsm & Co.? 
 —We went into Mr. Olivers ortiue and 
 saw either him or his book-keeper, aud 
 told him to make out a list of thoir lots 
 that they owned there. In a day or iw9 
 they made up a list and seiit it in to us, 
 the number of lots t'ley owned, and put 
 their valuation on them. It was several 
 days after we had asked for it. 
 
 Q Did you accept their valuation?— , 
 We took th(ur list and occupied two or ! 
 three days locking it over and examining j 
 it, carefully going over the land, and we I 
 pulled it down a good deal— reduced it ' 
 considerably. We finally came to a i 
 figure that we wordd allow them. We 
 presented it to them They disputed i 
 
 I some things, but on the wli 't>, I think 
 wo got imr own valuation fixo.l upon. 
 
 Q. Relat vely to the amounts paid to 
 other parties, wore the figures given 
 *hiim in eyeess of those given to (>iher 
 parties, conaideriug the position of the 
 lots?— iVo; thi'i/ wi-ii- not; tkni wore raf/wr 
 ttruler. 
 
 Q. Vou think yor. effected a better ar- 
 rangement with ihom?- Yes; taking the 
 two lots together— lot numlwr six and 
 tha town plot -the town plot lots were 
 pretty much the same. 
 
 In fact one member of the firm. Mr 
 Davidsou, testified tliat ho "got lesaf:-orn 
 the Oovernmjnt for Mrs. Davidfjoa'a lots 
 than anybofly else." 
 
 In all this valuation, where so many 
 different individuals were concerned, and 
 so many different properties were con- 
 sidered, it would probably bo ctrango if 
 some isolated cases did not occur in whch 
 some hostile and unscrupulous critic couhi 
 not hang a suspicion. Honest and rea- 
 aonabh people, however, will ailmit, 
 from the foregoing, that the vrdiiators 
 discharged the onerous duties e-,, ffjd 
 to them with great carefulnes :„.i: - 
 Q. And Dnscoll?— Driscoll j^ „ .HfiOo. 
 y. What did he lose ?— Twa hundred 
 and ninety dollars. 
 
 Q. You have been Reeve of the Muni- 
 cipality of 8huniah and own prop^.-ty at 
 Prince Arthur's Linding,and are capable 
 of answi .ng the question 1 am about to 
 put to you. What would have been, in 
 your judgment, the relative cost to the 
 country if the railway had boen extended 
 gencB aud fidelity. They had many 
 things to consider of which we who stand 
 in judgment over them have no know- 
 ledge whatever; that they succeeded in a 
 manner, upon which a most searching 
 and prolonged investigation utterly failed 
 to en^t the least discredit, speaks highly 
 for the good judgment and integrity of 
 themselves and tlie Minister who ap- 
 pointed them. 
 
 Vnd now we come to that Neebin" 
 Hotel affair, perhaps tlie most oontempt- 
 ible of all the slanders which a political 
 party could stoop to use agaiuat another. 
 It is so contemptible thac one's common 
 ..rnse and dignity are offended by beini' 
 obliged to discass it at ^ii. The whole 
 affair involves a sum of only five <-hou3- 
 and dollars, and if every charge, every 
 claim made by the Opposition in connec- 
 tion with it. be admitted, t!iG verdict of 
 the frovernment's extravagance and cor- 
 ruption would probably reach the enor- 
 
10 
 
 I 
 
 mouB Bum of three or four hundred dol- 
 lars. Even Senator Aikins will not deny 
 that the hotel was worth something, and 
 in his most desperate moments he has not 
 been known to accuse the (Government of 
 a greater crime than the squandering of 
 the sum mentioned. The circumstances 
 are briefly stated thus: Befc ^ it became 
 known that Fort William had been 
 elected as the terminus a number of gen- 
 tlemen formed a company to build an 
 hotel at this place. The members of the 
 company were Allan Oliver, Jos. David- 
 son, Brown & Wells, J. J. Vickers, 
 Geo. Faulkener, J. S. Mc- 
 Hannay, A. Mitchell, J. Duck 
 worth, W. D. Mackenzie, John Ritchie. 
 Robert Hay (now the Conservative can- 
 didate for Centre Toronto), Robert 
 Henry, John McNab, S. J. Keith, and 
 J. D. Henderson, nearly all of Toronto 
 and of both shades tf pohtics. The un- 
 dertaking vt'as a purely business one, but 
 unfortunately the firm of Oliver, David 
 son & Co. M as mixed up with it, and 
 that, of course, is enough to stamp the 
 whole affair as the basest of political 
 conspiracies — in the eyes of your genuine 
 Conservative. A builder, Mr. J. D. 
 Henderson, mentioned as a stockholder, 
 was assigned half the shares on the un- 
 derstanding that he Mould put up the 
 building. Work was begun early ii- 
 1875. and when the valuators visired 
 Fort William the following year the 
 hotel was well advanced towards ccmi 
 pletion. The buildijg was rough in its 
 construction, especially when compared 
 with others in older and more civilized 
 districts ; but from t' i evidence 
 taken before the Committee, it 
 would seem to have been of 
 a tolerably substantial character, and ex- 
 actly what would be expected in a 
 "western town," just springing into ex- 
 istence. It came within the limits of 
 the Government reserve, however, and 
 had lO be appropriated. In valuing it 
 Messrs. Reid and Wilson took exact cost 
 as nearly as could be ascertained, and 
 with a reasonable allowance for damages, 
 a sum of five thousand and twenty-nine 
 dollars was allowed. It may have been 
 excessive, but surely it is fair to assume 
 that the valuators were in a better posi- 
 tion to judge of the reasonableness of 
 the amount than any of those Conserva- 
 tive orators who have so much to say 
 about it, and they were at least equally 
 anxious to do thestrictest justice between 
 the company and the Government. Apart 
 
 from every other consideration, the pub- 
 lic will be disposed to place im- 
 plicit reliance on the judgment of 
 the valuators, who had no possible 
 interest of any kind to serve other than 
 the simple carrying out of a fair and 
 equitable bargain between the two 
 parties. They were honorable men, and 
 in discharging the the position to which 
 they were appointed there 's not the 
 slightest reason to believe that they had 
 any desire to favor one party morr than 
 another; indeed, the supposition is all 
 the other way, and there was not a 
 particle of evidence throughout the whole 
 investigation to indicate anything to the 
 contrary. The testimony of Henderson, 
 Oliver, Davidson, Leys and other inter- 
 ested parties may be entirely disregarded, 
 although it may be stated that the first 
 mentionedj in his examination, showed 
 himself to be a person of very loose 
 scruples, and his evidence was di'^tinctly 
 contradicted in several important points 
 by all the others. There is good 
 reason to believe that nothing would 
 ever h,ave been heard by the Neebing 
 Hotel had not ii euden on disputed with 
 Mr. Davidson over a payment of sixteen 
 dollars, which the former claimed as due 
 to bim. Two practical builders, Mr. 
 Durrand of London, and Mr. Law of 
 Meaford, made estimates of the cost, the 
 former from measurements supplied him 
 by Mr. Eeid, and the latter from mea- 
 surements made fey himself. Mr. 
 Durrand expressed it as his opinion that 
 $2,500 would have been a reasonable al- 
 lowance for the building as it came into 
 the hands of the Goverr;ment. Mr. Law 
 went more into detail, examined care- 
 fully the whole structure f om cellar to 
 roof, and declared on oath that the 
 building was worth $3,000. Ihe amount 
 allowed by the valuators was 13,450, 
 the difference between that sum and 
 $5,029, the to' i\ value being made up by 
 the price of the land, unused material 
 and damages or interest. But it must 
 not be too hurriedly concluded that the 
 sum of $460, the difference between the 
 estimate made by the valuators and that 
 made by Mr. Law, was in reality 
 a gift to the Hotel Company, or that the 
 tountry suffered to that extent* through 
 che incapacity or worse, of the valuators. 
 There is no reason to bel'eve that the ac- 
 jounts of all work and material, which 
 were supplied to them by the Managers 
 of the Company, w« re other than correct, 
 ud had the law experienced all the dia- 
 
 ' T 
 
 L 
 •'} 
 
 i 
 
11 
 
 > r 
 
 advantages of buildinc on thn> , 
 
 or course; indeed, so far did thev carrv 
 
 
 i