himself personally, for political ends, with reference to this transaction.

(Mr.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER was not surprised to find that hon. gentlemen opposite were quite as ready to accept in advance the defence of the hon. gentleman as to endorse it after the hon. gentleman had taken his seat. The enthusiasm with which the hon. gentle. man, on rising, was greeted, was he thought if anything greater then that which accompanied the conclusion of the hon. gentleman's statement. He was not at all surprised, because he was certain that there was not one hon. gentleman on either side of the House, who with the facts and history of this transaction before him, could for a single moment endorse the statement with which the hon. gentleman closed his remarks that he was now prepared to defend what he had done. When the hon. gentleman said that he was not infallible, and that he was liable to make mistakes, he (Mr. Tupper) thought that he (Mr. Mackenzie) had carried the House with him; when in view of the facts as they now stood before the people of this country with relation to this transaction, the hon. gentleman said that he had nothing to regret in this connection and that he was prepared to defend it. He (Mr. Tupper) maintained that the hon. gentleman took a position which no commercial man in this country would endorse. When the hon. gentleman complained of some statements made by his hon. friend from Hastings when opening this discussion, the hon. gentleman ought not to forget that if mistakes were made no one was so much to blame for it as the hon. gentleman himself. The hon. gentleman ought to remember that on the 18th of February he had put a motion on the notice paper calling his attention to the fact that the most minute information touching the whole of this transaction was to be asked for by the House; and yet, though this was the 31st of March, and the information required could have been laid on the table in twenty-four hours, this motion, carried by the House, remained unanswered. The hon. gentleman had not been just to himself; if the hon. gentleman felt that the course

he had pursued could not be successfully impungned, and that he had nothing to regret in the whole of this transaction, it was due to himself, to the great party he led, to the Government of which he was a member and to the characters of the public men of all parties that he should have laid on the table, in response to the demand of Parliament, the most full and explicit information. The hon. gentleman instead of regarding his motion as an attack ought to have accepted it in the spirit of friendship. The hon. gentleman knew the condition of the public mind as well as any person in or out of the House, and it was no secret to the hon. gentleman that there had been widely diffused over this country, in fact from one end to the other, the impression that there were features connected with this transaction which were not creditable to him as a public man, or to the high position he occupied.

Hon. Gentlemen- No! no!

Hon. Mr. TUPPER-Was there a man in the House, who would deny that abroad, over the face of this country, were hundreds and thousands of

men

who had been most painfully impressed with this transaction?

The hon. gentleman himself would not endorse a statement to the contrary; the hon. gentleman had stood in his presence on the hustings, when men of the highest respectability and of the highest character had impugned the hon. gentleman's motives with regard to this transaction. He accordingly asked the hon. member for Hamilton if he or any other hon. gentleman dared to assert that he (Mr. Tupper) was not speaking within the strictest bounds of accuracy when he said-whether rightly or wrongly, however mistaken their impression might be-there did exist a most painful impression, spread broadcast over this country, that features were connected with this transaction, which were most reprehensible and indefensible. They were, nevertheless, left in ignorance, without a particle of information with relation to it. He could not undertake to controvert the statement of the hon. gentleman that this first advertisement was

published in the papers the hon. gentleman had mentioned; but he Believed the hon. gentleman to be entirely in error. The hon. member said that he did not speak from his own personal knowledge, but that he had instructed officers in the department to do so, and that he assumed it was done. He (Mr. Tupper) did not believe that the first advertisement had been sent to New York,, and he would give his reasons why. It would seem simply absurd to advertise in New York for the purpose of obtaining tenders, on the 29th of the month, to be received on the 8th of the month following. Was this possible? Why, the hon. member for Montreal West had stated that he was obliged to come up here for the purpose of examining the specifications on which to base his tender.

Mr. WORKMAN-Pardon me I never came here at all.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER-Very well. He said Mr. Darling came up for the purpose of examining the specifications. Mr. WORKMAN--I beg your pardon; Mr. Darling came up on other

business.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER-I would like to ask on what he tendered if he had no specifications?

Mr. WORKMAN---I wrote up from my office, and I asked for a copy of the specifications, which I obtained.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER----That would do. The hon. gentleman, who lived within a day's communication of Ottawa, wrote to secure information in relation to the specifications; but what would people in New York do under such circumstances.

The hon. gentleman knew that in Chicago one of the largest rolling mills on this continent was to be found, and he believed that if the hon. gentleman would investigate this matter he would learn that he could have bought and delivered rails for the Pembina road cheaper in Chicago, and of the same description, than through the mode the hon. gentleman had adopted for the purpose. These mills rolled out something like three miles per day; at least they possessed such capacity.

He would now draw the attention

!

[ of hon. gentlemen of the House, to a circumstance which had produced the most painful impression on the public mind with regard to this transaction, which was utterly unworthy of the business talent, to say the least of it, and of the public character the hon. gentleman enjoyed in Canada. This was a matter of fire-side gossip all over the country, and therefore the hon. gentleman, in his own vindication and in vindication of the high position he occupied, of the reputation of Canadian public men, to whatever party or section of the country they belonged, was in the best possible position to meet these points, and to deal with the things which suggested themselves under the circumstances if he was satisfied that everything in this connection was not only pure and straightforward, but reflected credit upon the high position he occupied. They had the fact that when the hon. gentleman was sitting on that side of the House he voted for the resolution declaring the Pacific Railway must be built by a private company aided by a grant of public lands and money, and that it never should be built in any other way. He gave his pledge as a statesman in regard to the mode of carrying out this work to the people of this country. But immediately after he obtained power he ignored his pledge and changed his policy in an hour. During his Ministerial election he declared that they had determined to build the road as a public work. When Parliament inet one of his first measures was to abolish the Commissioners of the Intercolonial Railroad and put that road under the sole control of the Minister of Public Works. He did not say the hon. gentleman did not do this in the public interest. He was merely calling his attention to the sequence of events. The hon. gentleman, when he brought forward his Pacific Railway policy, repeated his pledge that no expenditure of public money should take place without a direct vote from Parliament. On the 9th of May, 1874, he said: "proposed to do nothing by this Bill "without Parliament directing them "(hear, hear). What did they move "time after time when on the other

"They

"side of the House, and when the hon. gentleman was sitting on this side? They submitted that the plans and "contracts should be submitted to "Parliament and approved of (hear, "hear), and that, too, before a single "dollar would be expended upon the "work. The hon. gentleman said they only provided certain contracts, but " he must have failed to read the first "clauses of the Bill, or he could not "have made the assertion. The Gov"erninent proposed to ask a vote "of the House for every cent of "money before it was expended."

The House would agree with him that after such a declaration as that the country would be naturally startled when they heard that this same gentleman had, without a vote for a single dollar, made a contract for 50,000 tons of steel rails costing $2,665,000. In another place the government had undertaken to meet this statement by saying that the money was voted before it came due. The hon. gentleman would hardly venture to make so puerile a statement as that in the House, because he knew he was bound to make no engagements to spend a single dollar without the consent of Parliament, His hon. friend from South Wentworth amused the House the other day by putting the public debt in silver and then calculating the number of teams it would require to draw it. He would like the hon. gentleman to put these $2,665,000 into cents and then calculate the number of teams it would take to draw this

was

the

violation of the law by the Ministry he The next so faithfully supported. event in the course of this transaction which attracted public attention fact that the brother of the hon. gentleman left his home at Sarnia and went some 500 to Montreal to form a special copartnership for four years with the firm of Cooper, Fairman & Company.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-It is not true that he went there to form a copartnership.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER-What is the fact?

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-Whatever partnership there was, was formed two years before and was then about terminated.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER was glad the correction had been made, because he was under the impression that the partnership was formed subsequently. The fact, however, remained that the hon. gentleman had a brother in company with Cooper, Fairman & Company. He regretted having to refer to this portion of the subject at all, but the hon. gentleman had made a most unjustifiable assault on a gentleman who was not in the House.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-Yes; and I would do it again.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER, after condemning the conduct of the Hon. the First Minister in this respect, said the hon. gentleman had undertaken to justify the steel rail contract by reference to the Intercolonial Railroad, but there was no analogy between the two. The rails for the Intercolonial were not ordered until it was supposed, in accordance with the mode in which the works were being carried on, that they would be required. The contract under consideration involved the purchase of rails and their being delivered years before they could be used. had in his hand a note from one of the Intercolonial Railroad Commissioners. It was as follows:--"The arrangement "with manufacturers for Intercolonial "rails was to manufacture and deliver "as they were required for laying. "The figures named prevented Gov"ernment from calling for more than "that quantity within the time (to

He

save interest and rust)." He trusted this would show the hon. gentleman that he had quoted this contract in vain as a comparison. He had overlooked the fact that the Intercolonial contract was made on a rising market, while the one under consideration was made on a falling market, and was, consequently, an unsound commercial transaction and utterly indefensible.

It being six o'clock the House rose for recess.

AFTER RECESS.

PRIVATE AND LOCAL BILLS.

Bill to enable Ozro Morril to obtain a patent for certain inventions and improvements in sewing machine shut

Bill to change the name of the the Security Permanent Building and Savings Society to that of The Security Loan and Savings Company, was read the second and third time and passed.

THE STEEL RAILS CONTRACTS.

Hon Mr. TUPPER resumed his speech. He said he had been calling attention, when the House rose for recess, to the uncommercial character of the transaction, and the discrepancy between the statements of the Premier and of Messrs. Darling and Workman. | He (Mr. Tupper) did not impute intentional inaccuracy to the hon. gentleman, having seen enough in Parlia ment to be convinced that such imputations were generally made to sustain a weak cause. The Chief Engineer had been quoted by Mr. Workman as the principal one who had advised the purchase. From the following statement of Mr. Workman in his elective address, it would appear that the Premier had sent for Mr. Fleming. The circumstances attending the purchase of the rails were as follows:-" About September, 1874, Mr. Brydges, the Chief Commissioner of "the Intercolonial Railway had repre"sented to the Minister of Public "Works, who was the Premier, that a "certain quantity of steel rails were "required, and that the price being very low, that was the best time to "make the purchase. Mr. Mackenzie "sent for Mr. Fleming, an engineer of "the highest repute and Chief Engi"neer to the Government railways, ❝and he also advised it was a judicious "time to make the purchase." That was the account of the transaction given by the hon. member for Montreal West, who had evidently been instructed either by the Premier or by Mr. Brydges himself. He (Mr. Tupper) was very much surprised to hear the Premier quote as a precedent for this that the late Government or the Commissioners of the Intercolonial Railway had purchased iron for the Miramichi bridge a long time before it was required. The hon. gentleman knew that the delay in connection with that bridge arose from the discovery, as the work

The hon. gentleman had ordered 50,000 tons of rails, sufficient to lay 550 miles of roadway, and it would be years before they would be required, judging from the present position of the Canadian Pacific Railway for which they were purchased; and he did not think that he went too far when he said that they would not be required for several years. He would assume that interest only required to be paid for two years, and this allowed, he thought that all he or any party had ever claimed, that from a commercial point of view a loss to the country had been incurred in connection with this transaction, would be fully established. He did not think that any hon. gentleman on the Treasury Benches, or any hon. member who had any knowledge of the present position of the railway, would venture to say that it would be possible, with all the exertions which the Government could make, to prevent a loss in this relation of interest on the average of two years. The portions of the Canadian Pacific which at that time it was proposed to construct comprised 45 miles, from Thunder Bay to Shebandowan; 144 miles from Rat Portage to Red River; 55 miles on the proposed line from Nanaimo to Esquimalt, and 85 miles from Burnt Lake to Georgian Bay-in all 339 miles. The construction of 65 miles of railway between Pembina and Fort Gary was also intended; and yet the extraordinary course was adopted of providing for the 339 miles of road sufficient steel rails for 550 miles. The Minister of Public Works knew, when he laid the contract on the table of the House two years ago for the building of the Georgian Bay branch, he (Mr. Tupper) ventured to tell him that what he proposed was wild in the extreme. This contract provided for the building of 85 miles of road through an unknown country, over which the foot of an engineer had never travelled and yet its construction within eighteen months was pledged. No person could expect that this was

pos

accomplished;

sible to be and what was the result? These 85 miles were abandoned, and not even one mile of it had been located. This was a standing monument of the hon. gentleman's incapacity, to say the least of it. Where, also, was the Nanaimo and Esquimalt Railway? He would not have felt it necessary to dwell on these matters as he was doing if the hon. gentleman had frankly told the House that he had acted with the best intentions; that he, as were all men, was liable to err, that he had made a serious mistake, and thrown himself on the House to be judged by his intentions and not by his success; but this was not the course the hon. gentleman had pursued, On the contrary, the hon. gentleman had declared that he was prepared to defend the course he had followed, and refused to admit that he had committed the slightest error. What had the hon. gentleman to say to the British Columbia feature of the question? He thought that he was correct in saying that from 5,000 to 10,000 tons of rails-he could not say which, but he believed that it was the former figure-had been shipped from London to British Columbia after the defeat of the Bill in the Senate The fact remained that this road had been abandoned, and to retrieve the blunder he had committed in placing the Act in this regard on the Statute Book, the hon. gentleman had attempted to buy his peace with $750,000 more of public money. They had lost besides $750,000 at least on the steel rails, and this made in all one and a half millions.

They had been told that the great policy of the Government was to utilize the water stretches, as otherwise we would in vain seek the means of constructing the Canadian Pacific Railway at all. While the hon. gentleman and his colleagues were proclaiming to the world that Canada was in a most disastrous and ruinous position in consequence of the engagement to build this road, the hon. gentleman volunteered to locate 65 miles of railway from Pembina alongside of the finest water communication to be found in any part of the country and equal to any traffic. The result was that portions of the road were being washed

away. It was utterly useless to proceed with the work and lay the track unless the hon. gentleman had some assurance of an immediate intention to provide railway communication between the American line and Pembina; and the hon. gentleman who rushed into these wild, extravagant and irrational contracts so incapable of completion, bought 50,000 tons of rails on the English market to be laid on roads which it was well known could not be built, and which in two cases had been abandoned and in another deferred; yet the hon. gentleman defended his policy and claimed credit for making an excellent bargain. It was insulting to the intelligence of any hon. member to tell him at this moment that the evidence in this connection did not stand as if written with a sunbeam, clear and incontrovertible; that a great mistake had been made, and that a great loss had been inflicted on the country by the purchase of these rails on a falling market. The Intercolonial Commissioners had purchased on a rising market, showing their wisdom, and thus had succeeded in their venture. The hon. gentleman, however, had bought on a falling market, and the transaction would remain as long as Canadian history was read as one of the gravest blunders any public man in Canada ever committed. The Hon. Mr. Smith, speaking in another place, stated that within his own knowledge, steel rails of good quality, to the amount of 25,000 tons, had been purehased for £7 15s per ton; and before he (Mr. Tupper) had ventured to say a word in public on this question, he had the authority of a contractor engaged in building a railway, for his statements. Without reference to this transaction, he had asked this contractor what his prospects were, and the reply had been that if he (the contractor) only could raise the money now, he could get the rails on the most advantageous terms. best of steel rails at this moment made by the Ebbw Vale Company could be purchased for £8 per ton.

The

They had heard the statement of the hon. member for Montreal West, who said that he was prepared to stand up and pledge his reputation as a sound financier and a commercial man of