ment, themselves. It was supposed by many who knew a good deal about the Straits of Northumberland, that it was impossible to ply a steamer across it the year round, though at the time of Confederation it was promised that this would be done. He believed the Government were desirous of doing the best they could. They would have to make proper arrangements for crossing by ice boats in the winter season. For instance, when the steamers ceased to ply, no preparations were made to continue the conveyance of passengers and mails. His opinion was that the Government would have to furnish a proper steamer for the service, and when it could not run, arrangements should be made for larger ice boats. The traffic had greatly increased during the past year, and what was required was larger accommodation. They should receive so much per round trip, and be required to provide more suitable boats, manned by six instead of four men, and capable of carrying five or six passengers and about a ton of mails. The present boat was a failure. In the most favorable weather it would not make more than five or six miles per hour, and many passengers preferred to travel by the ice boats. With reference to the latter, he believed there should be boat houses in which to repair them. He hoped Prince Edward Island would be given this convenience as promised when the Province entered the Union. Mr. DAWSON said although this was an exceptionally severe winter, it was also true that the steamer was unfit for the service, and many persons who wished to cross to the island preferred to go in the smallest boat rather than by the packet. The contractor was not fit for the service, and the whole matter was worth investigating. He (Mr. DAWSON) was very sorry to hear that the inspector had reported the boat as a good one. It certainly was anything but that. The Government should make an inquiry into the matter, and if they could not get a better boat, he (Mr. DAWSON) would take the contract from them. Hon. Mr. LAIRD said this was a matter in which he had always taken a deep interest, and he had something to do in having that condition inserted in the terms of nnion. He was fully aware at the time that the proposition was made that it Mr. Sinclair. would be a matter of some difficulty, but as the trade between the island and the mainland was annually increasing, it was a matter that should be entertained by the Dominion Government. So far the service had not been successful. A suitable vessel could not be found for the purpose. Tenders had been asked for after the present Government came into power (the former Government having failed to ask for them) for a suitable vessel, but it was impossible to construct one between Nov. 1873, and Nov. 1874. Under the circumstances the Government were obliged to accept the services of the best boat they could get for one winter. The condition of the contract was that the vessel was only to be retained for this winter, and the contractors must furnish a suitable one for the remainder of the term of their contract. A screw boat would be necessary,as a paddlewheel boat would never do to cut through the ice, yet that was the only kind that could be obtained for this winter. The inspector found the boat new, safe, strongly built, and the engines good. It was thought better, therefore, taking all things into consideration, to use the boat for this winter than to be without any. He was very sorry to hear from the hon. member for Pictou, that the contractor was not at all times fit for his business. Mr. KING was a well known contractor in steamboats and owned several. He was interested in the St. John and Digby line which was very successful. He seemed, therefore, to be a man well fitted for the service. He did not think there was any steamer built that could ply regularly across the straits during two months of the winter season. the latter part of January, the month of February, and part of March. During that period the service could be performed in ice-boats. The contractors for carrying the mails across the Straits of Northumberland by ice-boats were bound to perform their duty as soon as they received the mails from the Post Office. If they had not done so they were sadly neglectful of their duty. He had no doubt it was only a little oversight on their part. This winter was the severest that had been experienced on the island for thirty years. Such another might not occur for thirty years again, and he did not think the contractors should be charged with neglect of duty. No.person could say what sort of boat exactly would be suitable. It must be built on the prin- | a wrong remedied, but written at the ciple of the vessels engaged in seal fishing, which were suited for sailing through ice. Mr. PERRY said the fact was the persons who carried the mails in the ice-boats were not paid sufficiently. They should receive a sufficient amount to keep men enough around them, and pay them daily wages with board, so that when the weather was favorable for crossing they might take advantage of it. The contractors were experienced men, and if they had proper boats and a sufficient number of men the passage could be made much easier and in a much shorter time than at present. As far as steam communication was concerned, he was satisfied that the Government would do all in their power to carry out the terms of union with the Island. The steamer had failed this winter, as many a large enterprise had failed, but he had no doubt that a steamer would be constructed which would be much better suited for the service. He believed the Government would do better by renewing the contract with the ice-boat contractors than by calling for tenders. The motion was carried.' PACIFIC RAILWAY SURVEY ACCOUNTS. instigation or at the solicitation of a gen- He Mr. WALLACE said that in moving the motion which he had placed on the notice paper he would recite, with the permission of the House, some facts which bore on the question. From 15th May, 1871, till 31st July, 1872, he was com-rectly stated, because the duties he was dismissariat officer and paymaster on the charging were not those of paymaster. He Eastern division of the Canada Pacific Sur- was accountant on the Intercolonial railvey, and since that period he had at inter- way. The payments on that work were vals rendered service in connection with made at the office on the check of two of the survey. He challenged the strictest the commissioners, countersigned by the inquiry into every act of his, and he Secretary. The payments which were defied it to be shown that he wrongfully made down the line of the railway were appropriated a cent of money from the sur-made by paymasters, of whom there were vey, or knowingly allowed any one else to three, and he was not one of them. do so. Having made that statement he was only the accountant that recorded the would pass on to refer to matters that had transactions of the paymasters. Then, arisen in connection with it. First he again, the hon. Premier says:— “Mr. would refer to a letter written by the hon. WALLACE resigned. Up to the time he Premier, and he would say of that letter resigned, Mr. WALLACE had received a sum that it was extraordinary in its contents- of $338,871.62." Now, that was not correct. extraordinary on account of the time and He (Mr. WALLACE) had not received up circumstances in which it was written, that time that amount, and, indeed, had and extraordinary in that no action never received it. He believed that had been taken since the letter was all the money ever paid into his written. The letter was extraordin-hands was between $150,000 and $160,000, ary, first: because it was written by and of that sum there was a detailed state the hon. Premier, not with a desire to see ment in the books. When the correct_ Hon Mr. Laird. to ness of any entry made in that statement | charge which had recently been made "To that period the books show that $584,579 had been received and vouchers fyled accounting for $373,663; and that from June, 1873, to August of the same year there was further accounted for $151,522, leaving at the latter date $59,394 unaccounted for, and in reduction of which no vouchers have since been fyled." That statement, however, if it were correct, would show that more vouchers had been fyled with the Department than he had received money, or vouchers were admitted to have been fyled for the sums of $151,522 and $373,663, which made a total of $520,000. Since that period vouchers and accounts were brought from the Province of Manitoba in the latter end of the year 1874, amounting to $50,000, and these were in the Department at the time this letter was written. Add that to the above sum stated to have been accounted for, and instead of a deficit as alleged of $59,000, if there was a deficit at all, it would not exceed $10,000 or $12,000. Then further on the hon. Premier says :-"Mr. STEERS, senior, has been continuously, and Mr. STEERS, junior, partially, occupied in the unsuccessful endeavor to strike a balance." Now Mr. STEERS, senior, never touched the books he (Mr. WALLACE) had under his control, while he (Mr. WALLACE) was in that department. The letter also contained a statement that Mr. STEERS, junior, went into the Department in October, 1872. That was not strictly in accordance with the fact, because that gentleman did not enter the office until the end of February, or beginning of March, 1873, where he remained until he went up to Manitoba in connection with some duties arising out of transactions with the office, and did not return to the office, except to do something in connection with duties he had performed in Manitoba. Again, this letter, though it did not expressly charge him with being a defaulter, was used to make people believe he was a defaulter. To show that this inference was drawn from him, he might say that the hon. member for South Wentworth, in addressing the electors of South Norfolk, was reported to have spoken as follows:-"He alluded to the Mr. Wallace. Mr. RYMAL-Hear, hear! Mr. WALLACE-The hon. gentleman in making that statement was guilty of saying that which had not a particle of foundation in truth, and if Parliament would allow him to make use of stronger expression he would use it. The report of the hon. gentleman's remarks continued: "It would be strange if some of that $60,000 were not still sticking to his (Mr. WALLACE'S) fingers, and it was possible some of it might during the present contest be employed in corrupting the electors of this constituency." So that, if this letter was not written with the design of charging him with being a defaulter, it had the effect of making some people believe that he was guilty, or otherwise the hon. member for South Wentworth had been guilty of having wilfully done a wrong to him. An effort was also made to show that he had overdrawn his salary. In this matter he had been treated most unjustly by his opponents, because, while they had showed the amounts he had taken and charged to himself, they did not give him any credit for services that were rendered subsequently to the 30th June, 1872. It was also stated that he strove, by crediting himself with a larger salary than he was entitled to, to account for the deficiency between the amount he had charged himself with and the amount he was said to be entitled to. With regard to salary, he might say that when he first spoke to Mr. FLEMING his duties were declared to be to buy supplies and attend to their shipment, and for these duties he was to be paid at the rate of $1,800 a. year; and Mr. FLEMING had stated that, considering the responsibilities involved, that salary was large enough. Subsequently, when the parties went into the field, and it was decided that payments should be made periodically from the office to their families, the work of attending to these payments was thrown upon him in addition to his other duties, and for these additional duties additional remuneration was spoken of, but as no rate was fixed he credited, himself in the books with the lowest sum, and up to the time of his leaving there was no such thing as over-payment; on the contrary, as the books in the office would show, instead of being over-paid there was a balance in his favor of something like $330 or $340. It was stated that $200 was inserted in pencil for the purpose, as was alleged, of endeavoring to make his salary more nearly correspond with what he had charged himself with. He did not enter that amount at all. When he prepared the statement and showed it to Mr. FLEMING, he put in the time during which he had rendered service, and accounted for all the moneys he had taken, and allowed Mr. FLEMING to fix the remuneration for that time, and if $200 was put in it must have been done by Mr. FLEMING or some other person after the document went into his possession. This was the language used in the Premier's letter: "Thus apparently by an attempt to get an increase of pay, beyond what his books show him to have been entitled to, endeavoring to make his earnings more nearly balance the money he had drawn. But even at $2,400, instead of $1,800 per annum, there is a considerable balance against him. The over-drawn amount as previously stated was $1,772.95 claim for 131 months at $50 | extra per month, $675; extra month, July, 1872, claimed in statement $200, leaving a balance of $897.95." How was that balance made out? By not allowing anything for services that were rendered subsequent to the 31st of July. Then the hon. gentleman further on stated in his letter: "The above information compiled from the statement furnished by the accountant is the most exact statement I "These representations were wholly at varican give in reply to your question. This ance with the truth, for in the books in your letter, as he had before stated, was not possession, there was a cash account which shows the moneys I had received, and a detailwritten in the public interest to bring to ed statement of their expenditure, and I am light any wrong committed against the now ready, and always have been ready, to public service, but for the sole purpose answer if any charge is preferred against me in of destroying his (Mr. WALLACE's) election. connection therewith. I may also say that I Immediately after his election he came transactions in connection with the whole expenam prepared to write up the balance of the down to Ottawa to attend the trial of diture on the Eastern division from THOMAS STEERS, jr., who had been the 30th June 1873, if the books, papers and connected with the office he was in, and vouchers taken by you from the office lately surely if the Government had any charge under my control. As you are aware, the in charge of the elder Mr. STEERS are placed to make, they should have then taken details and vouchers of over fifty thousand dolproceedings against him. Not only was lars, which was charged to the WALLACE account this letter published and distributed among few months that they were given you for adjustwere only received at Ottawa within the past his constituents, but a letter he had few months that they were given you for adjusthis constituents, but a letter he had ment, that they were being audited by an received from the Public Works' Depart-officer of your department, and that therefore, Mr. Wallace. ment in reference to his cash book, and a copy of his telegram in reply had also been sent to his opponent. The Premier telegraphed to Mr. STUART: "None of these books or papers print. Demand made. WALLACE yesterday telegraphed that cash book and cheques would be returned, but not to hand yet." He (Mr. WALLACE) had taken at first an article in the Globe, because at that time he had not seen the Premier's letter, and in replying to that had stated:-"It is possible that when the surveys were burnt, some of the vouchers may have been destroyed," and the reference in this telegram was in reply to that statement. He would ask the House how it was possible that the Premier, knowing nothing of the internal management of the office, could state positively that none of the vouchers were burnt when the office was burned. However, when he came to Ottawa, he wrote to the professional accountant, who now had charge of the books, to this effect "Upon your representation, endorsed by the Hon. the Premier of the Dominion, the public has been led to believe that I am unable to account for nearly sixty thousand dollars of the funds of the Canadian The Canadian Pacific Survey, with which I was entrusted while paymaster on that work, and that therefore I must be a defaulter to that amount." It was true that it was not expressly stated that he was a defaulter, but the public were led to believe, and did believe, that he was. unable to account for $60,000 of the funds of the survey that came into his hands, and what else could he be called than a defaulter? Then he went on to say in this letter to it was impossible for me to write up that expen- | by some gentlemen who had been charged diture until I received the documents, from with sums of money for which they would which it could be done, You were also aware, have to accouut, and he had no doubt the as I had informed you of the facts that very He referred large sums of the money charged to the WALLACE matter would be correct. account, have been paid to others, that the settlement of these sums had in many instances been made when I was disconnected with the office and had no control in the matter, and that, therefore, it was most unjust to have me published to the world as a defaulter, before it was clearly established that there was a deficiency and that I was responsible for it, waiting your immediate reply. He received the next day the following reply from Mr. RADFORD :— "I am in receipt of your letter of the 4th instant. You state in it that I have made representations endorsed by the hon. Premier of the Dominion, charging you with being a defaulter to the extent of nearly sixty thousand dollars of the funds of the Canadian Pacific Survey. I take the opportunity of denying this statement—no such representations have ever been made. I may say on this subject, that when your books came into my possession on the 18th of November last, your ledger showed your account with Mr. FLEMING to stand as follows :-you had taken credit for vouchers to the extent of $473,191.36 against a total debit of $584,582.82. Now, there was no such debit against him, because, while writing up these books, he did not charge himself with moneys that he had never received. When money was sent through the department, through the paymaster or the assistant paymaster, it was charged to the persons getting it, so that there could be no such debit as $584,582. Neither did he admit that there would be a deficiency when all was straightened up, but if there were a deficiency, he was not going to assume responsibility which other men should bear. If it could be shown that he had misappropriated to his own use or allowed others to do so, he believed he ought to be punished for malfeasance in office. Mr. RADFORD's letter continued: Leaving a balance to be accounted for of $111,391.46. From this amount I deducted $52,703.90, said to be the value of the vouchers brought from Manitoba and handed to me at the end of October, leaving $59,187.56 for which vouchers had still to be found." Now, when he (Mr. WALLACE) went over to Mr. RADFORD'S office, he referred to the vouchers that had been sent in. He (Mr. WALLACE) told him he did not hold himself responsible, but that there were other vouchers to be sent in, and that there were balances due Mr. Wallace. M Mr. RADFORD to his cash account in the books, showing it to be balanced, and Mr. RADFORD admitted it would be unjust to hold him (Mr. WALLACE) responsible for expenditures he never made. In the face of this admission Mr. RADFORD wrote: "You will remember my showing you the above figures, and giving you an opportunity to explain the difference before I reported the matter to the department. Now, as he was informed, this same Mr. RADFORD, at the request of the Premier, had some conversation with Mr. STEERS, sr., who was spoken of as his (Mr. WALLACE's) subordinate, but who was rather a superior for the time being, inasmuch as he checked the vouchers and sent them in to the Department. Now, it would have been more honourable if the Premier had dealt with him, if he suspected anything was wrong, than to talk to Mr. STEERS about him (Mr. WALLACE) in his absence. Mr. RADFORD writes: "I would remind you that your cash book was not in my possession at that time." A great deal had been said about this cash book. A great deal was made of the fact that he had taken it away with him, but he did not take it away surreptiously or unknown to the Department. The other books were there and there was nothing in the whole matter for which he objected to the closest scrutiny. But it showed they were determined to make some charge against him. They had the total statement of every cent of money that came into his hands so that they did not want the cash book, Mr. RADFORD writes: "With reference to your offer now to write up the balance of the transactions to the 30th June, 1873, I am directed to say that the whole of your accounts are under examination the result of which will be made known to you as soon as possible." This showed that they were not in a position to say that any one had done wrong, or that there was any deficiency at all. It would have been time enough to make these serious charges after it was shown by an investigation that there was a deficiency, and that he was responsible for it. Mr. RADFORD concludes :-" And that in the meantime the Department is prepared to receive any vouchers for |