IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

'^^

f/.

1.0

I.I

■ 50 """^^ IIHl^^E
Wuu

III 1-8

1.25

M J4

< 6"

!►

<P!

*> s>"

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHJVJ/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommagde

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e

I I Cover title missing/

Le titre dr^ couverture manque

I I Coloured maps/

Cartes g^ographiques en couleur

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/

Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Relid avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La re Mure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intdrieure

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 ajoutdes
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmdes.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppl6mentaires;

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du
^loint de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage
sont indiqu^s ci-dessous.

I I Coloured pages/

D
D

Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommagdes

□ Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul^es

Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages ddcolor6es, tachetdes ou piqudes

Pages detached/
Pages ddtachSes

Showthrough/
Transparence

Quality of prir

Quality indgale de I'impression

Includes supplementary materii
Comprend du materiel supplementaire

I I Pages detached/

r~7| Showthrough/

I I Quality of print varies/

I I Includes supplementary material/

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6t6 filmdes d nouveau de fapon d
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous.

10X 14X 18X 22X

26X

SOX

La^HM

12X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

Bibliothdque nationale du Qudbec

L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grfice d la
g6n6rosit6 de:

Bibliothdque nationale du Qu6bec

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Las images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire film6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and endirg on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprimde sont film6s en commenpant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second
plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont film6s en commenpant par la
premidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la dernidre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol —^-(meaning "CON-
TINUFD"), or the symbol V (meaning "END "),
whichever applies.

Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE ", le
symbols V signifie "FIN ".

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre
filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir
de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mdthode.

]

MR. WOOD'S ARGUMENT

BEFORF, THK

PROVINCIAL ARBITRATORS

ON THE MODES rROrOSL,i> FOR THE

AproitTio:(]iE:^T of tue excess of debt m division of assets

1 ^

BETWEEN

ONTARIO AND QUEBEC,

TORONTO:

PRINTED BY HUNTER, ROSE & COMPANY.

1870.

»► . ■..•>.

"'*

.^i^**

^'} ' ..n ^t'JBiica.f.aA iW*.

a', • '^

piipiijii.i I! immtm

911.01
W6 5 f

■"■nwpiPMPHi

:i /

MR. WOOD'S ARGUMEN

BKFORK THK

PROVINCIAL ARBITRATORS

(•V TtlE MODES PROPOSED FOR THE

APPORTIONMENT (IF THE Umi OF DEBT A\'l) OIVISKIV OF ASSETS

BETWEEN

"::',r .■ 1

ONTARIO AND QUEBEC.

••• ■ • ••

• * * • • « *

I • ' « « • , I • ^

• • * • • *

• •» . • • I

» • • • • • t

M t » « I

« • • •

« • » • ' t '

I • * » *

TORONTO:

PRINTED BY HUNTER, ROSE & COMPANV.

1870.

* . • * * •
- • « *

( • •

• • •

MR, WOOD'S ARGUMENT

Before th< Provincial Arbitmtors on the modes proposed /or the appor-
tiottment of the exc<:ss of Debt, and division of A'^aefs
hrlweeu Ontario and Quebec.

Ontario has suggested three modes, upon one of which or upon parts of the
three comhined, the excess of debt and the assets should be divided between
Ontario and Quebec : —

1. Origin of Local Debt.

2. Population.

3. Value of Capitalized Assets.

]. Origin of Local Deht.

In treating of the propositions for the division of the excess of debt and the
assets, I shall assume certain amounts, for the purpose of presenting more clearly
what I have to offer, and which, though not strictly correct, can in no way affect
the principle of the mode of division. It is known that the total debt of the late
Province will be at least ^79,500,000, without the deductions provided for by The
British North America Act, and after such deductions, to $73,000,000. That
will make the excess of debt over $62,500,000, at least $10,600,000. Now, on
examination of the items which compose the total debt, it will be found that that
portion of it created for Local purposes in Upper Canada and Lower Canada,
amounts in round numbers to $17,000,000, of which, $10,000,000 was for Upper
Canada purposes and $7,000,000 for Lower Canada purposes. The total debt is
reduced from $79,600,000 to $73,000,000 as I have just said by deductions ', and
therefore, the excess of debt to oe divided, is only $10,500,000, instead of $17,-
000,000, the amount of the debt created for Local purposes. If the total debt
were not reduced, there would have been $17,000,000 instead of $10,500,000
excess of debt to be divided between Upper Canada and Lower Canada. In the
latter case, it is manifest that the correct principle would have been to apportion
to Lower Canada the debt created for her Local purposes, namely, $7,000,000,
and to Upper Canada that created for her Local purposes, namely, $10,000,000.
Can the soundness, justice and fairness of this principle be assailed ? If it can,
it certainly has not been so far attempted. I cannot conceive how any one can
offer «.ny rational objection to tbe principle of the dirision embraced in this pro-

61743

position. If tliis 1)0 ^rantod, tlio roal exeosa of dcht, l»o it !i?l",'')OO,()O0 or any
jjjroatcr or \chh huiii, nuist l)o «livi(lo<l ratcably as follows ; —

17,0(M),0(lll : l(>,r)0(),000 : : 10,000,0011: ( hitaiio .Icl.t.
17,000,000: 10,500,000 : : 7,0O0,0()O : (,)iu'l>or dc-bt.
or tlio debt oroatod for local purposes, (917,000,000), in round nunibers
3'J,000,000 rosultinj^ from the Seigniorial logislation, left no asset behind it. If
the wholi' $17,000,000 had loft behind it ^17,000,000 of assets, tiieii Lower
Canada would just simply take its assets, situate within its own Province, namely,
.$7,000,000, and Upper Canada would take its assets, situate within its own Pro-
vince, namely, ^10,000,000. But as I have said before, .SO,000,(iOO of (bo
^17,000,000 left no asset behind it — that is, the assets to be divided amount
to only ^11,000,000. It follows logically that the assets should bo awarded
on the same principle as the excess of debt ; or to speak more accurately, it
necessarily follows that the same principle actually divides the assets, giving
to Lower Canada the assets left behind its local expenditure of ^7,000,000, less
its Seigniorial Legislation expenditure ; and to Upper Canada tlic assets left
behind its local expenditure of .^10,000,000, less its compensatif)n IJowing from
the Seigniorial Legislation. In other words, of the assets to be divided by the
arbitrators, it gives to Lower Canada its local assets, and to Upper Canada its
local assets. It is worthy of observation that so unassailable is this principle,
that the principle of proportion applied to the division of the tlebt, is ef[ually
applicable to the division of the assets, and produces the same results. Of all the
modes suggested, this is least open to objection. It is founded on truth and
justice. It is not even open to criticism. It is able to be understood by the
commonest intellect. It cannot be attacked by the partizans of either Province,
and must recommend itself to the common sense of the whole country. The same
cannot be said of any other moUo which has been suggested or which 1 have been
able to suggest to myself.

2. Population.

In dealing with large sums to be distributed among or to be borne by the
people of one country who are homogeneous, of the same origin, and of the same
general habits and characteristics, the principle of population has been uniformly
adopted. For in such a country it is reasonable to suppose that members of
one community in one portion of the country taken as a whole, contribute as
much to the general expense of the whole as the members of any other portion of
the commonwealth, and are therefore entitled to participate equally in any distri-
bution made to the whole country, and should, for the same reason, be equally
liable to bear any impositions imposed on the whole country. On this
principle the ZoUverein or Customs Union of the Germanic States was
formed, and forty years experience has demonstrated the correctness of ihia
principle. Under this Customs Union now, over 23,000,000 thalers are

ail
inl

fol
wl
t<l

p«

rf
wl
itl
ti

*"- ♦'

,000

any

I'll iiiiiiiberh
liii'I it. If
t'lfii Lower
cc, namely,
tH own Pro-
»00 of tl.o
^'•1 .•iiuourit
"' iiwardod
ourately, it
sets, fi^ivinfr
'0,000, Joss
iissets loft
w\u<r from
iilcd hy the
Canada it.s
"^ principlo,
i« (-'qually
Of all tbo
truth and
ood by the
Province,
The same
liave been

»o by the
the same
uniformly
embers of
ribute as
lortion of
ny distri-
5 e(|ua]ly
On this
ates was
? of this
lers are

annually collected in (»ne couniutn Treasury, and distributed aiuon^ fiftocn
independent States, whose pojjulation in the aj^grcgate amounts to nearly
forty millions, pro rata of their population, liut wo have a notable oxainplo
where this principle was recognized and acted upon neiirer home. Aecordinj^
to the Quebec llesolutif)ns, as sanctioned by the liCgislaturcM of the several
Provinces, the debts which each Province might bring into the Union, which
were to be the debt of the Dominion, and to form a charge on the joint
revenues of all, were based on the population of each Province. The subsidy
which each Province v;a» to draw from tJie Common Kxche(|uer for the support of
its local government, was according to and baseil upon its ])opulatioii. An addi-
tiont subsidy for a limited period of time was given to New lirnnswick. I>ut
this was not a departure from the princi[»le, but a most emphatic recognition of
it, as will be seen by reference to the sixty-fifth of the Quebec Resolutions.
True it i;', additional subsidies were given in the way of special payments by the
delegates in England, and which are now embraced in the British North America
Act, which are not based strictly, though approximatively, on population. l)Ut
these were never authorized or sanctioned by eit-her the Legislatures of the Pro-
vinces or the people. They were declared by the whole country to be wrong,
while the adjustmerit of the debts, and the subsidies on the princi[)le of population,
met with the universal approbation of the whole country ; and one does not see
how it could be otherwise, for its justness and fairness as a rule, applicable to a
homogeneous people, cannot bo denied. The principlo of division, according to
population, has tho more force in the case under consideration, from the fact that
this division of tho excess of the debt of the late Province at the Union, and this
division of the assets handed over to Upper Canada and Lower Canada, spring
directly out of and are cognate to thf> Confederation of tho British i^orth vVmerican
Colonies, the financial arrangement of the Union of which, was based expressly
on population. It may perhaps bo as well in order to silence for ever any argu-
ment as to the principle upon which " the adjustment of the debts, credits and
liabilities " of tho several Provinces was based in the great scheme of Confedera-
tion, to make a few quotations from the Quebec Resolutions, and from tho Speeches
of the Minister of Finance (Hon. Sir A. T. Gait), and the President of the Cv)uncil
(Hon. George Brown), in the Parliament of the late Province, while the Quebec
Resolutions were under consideration.

Qiielnr Ii( solid idiii'.

'' C4. In consideration of the transfor to tho (jcnonil Parliament of tlic powers of Taxatieu,
" an annual i^rnnt iti ;iiil of each Province shall be made, ccjual to eighty cents per licad
" of the population, as established by cousus of ISGl, the population of Newfoundland
" being estimated at liUMlOO. Sucli aid ;-hall be in full settlement of all future
'• demands upon tiio (ioncral Govoruuicnt for local purposes, and shall bo paid half
" yearly in advance to each I'roviuco :

" fift. The itrtsitioii (if New Brunswick Itrinp; Mich an to ciitnil lurno iminrdioto charj^os upon
" her local rcvcnuo, it i.s ngrcfil that lor the pcrnid ol' ton years, Irnni the tin>e when
" the Union takes cffeet, an additional allowance of $(■>;{, 00(1 per aiuutni hhall hp made
" to that I'rovinee. Hut that ho loni; ns the liahility of that I'rovineo roniainH under
" 87,(t(M»,(tOO, II deduction eipial to the intoreHt on such delieiency shall he made from
•' the 8ti;},000."

JIiiu. A. T. Giilt'f Sfjccch, Con. Dehate*^ /niife «»(>.

" It inu..t ho evident that entering such a piutnornhip as is proposed, some
" coininoii hasia must l)e arrived at on which each Provinoe must enter into the
** Confederation. Taking; all the engagements, present and future, of Nova
" Scotia and New i'n-unswick, it was found that relalivelji to their populations they
*' amounted to ahout .^25 per head, and this a.aount so applied to Canada would
" entitle us to enter the Union with a deht of $ti2,r)()0,000. "

Hon, ift'o/yn Uro'i'ii's JSpeeeh, Con. Uehatis, putfe 03.

'' But as any ^raiit j^iven from the common chest for local purposes to one Pro-
" vince must he extended to all on the basis of population, it follows that for every
" $l,O0O j^iven, fur example, to New Brunswick, we must give over $1,800 to
" Nova 8cotia, ^4,000 to Lower Canada, and $0,000 to Upper Canada * *

■•i< ;H t ■;•■ ■]•■ * :|: ;(: -X- :',< .|, ■+' Jjt ))(

*' But it is sail! that in a<ldition to her eighty cents per head under this arrango-
" ment. New Brunswick is to receive an extra grant from the federalchost of ^68,000
" annually for ten years * * .-x Mt * * * * ♦

■M -X- :K •;:• ■:;• ^r-- -it * * :K ^H ;|t * *

" The Ilotiso is aware tliat the Federal Government is to' assume the debts of the
" several Provinces ; each Province being entitled to throw upon it a debt of $25
" per head of its population. Should the debt of any Province exceed $25 i)er
" head, it is to pay interest on the excess to the Federal Treasury, but should it
" fall below $25 per head, it is to receive interest from the Federal Treasury on
" the difference between its actual debt and the debt to whicii it is entitled."

In this same connection it may not bo inappropriate to mention the fact that
the representation in the popular branch of the legislature in all free countries is
based more or less on the principle of population. To obtain a practicable
recognition of this principle was one of the causes which led to CoTifederation :
and in adjusting the representation in the House of Commons this principle is
expressly incorporated in the Quebec llcsolations and in the British North America
Act.

In further confirmation of the justice of this principle T refer to the fact, that
it has on more than one occasion, in addition to what baa already been stated,
been recognized and acted upon by the Parliament of the late Province of Canada. A
notable instance of it Ayill bo found in the apportionment of the Conirnon S<'hoo]

(ir

ac(|

»:-;|
th

uni

ulll

i)i|

, St

,S p.

} »"

% fe

""^ h'ino when

f-linll he nindo

f'ln/iin.s iinclpr

' lie iiiado from

'P"«oiI, soniP
liter into the

<'i of Nova
/f/ations tlioy
nuntin would

^ to one Pro-
at for every

'1- si,aoo to

la * *

is arrango-
of«!68,000

* >«

nlits of tlio

el)t of $25
$2lj per
should it

easury on

led."

fiict that

iintries is

acticablc

leration :

ncipio is

America

let, til at

I stated,

lada. A

N''hnoj

(iraiit to Upper and Lowor Canada. That was always 1»aHcd on j.opulation
according to the last oonsu.s.

It is, therefore, diflicult to conceivf what reason or arj^umont can bo urged
ajrainst udoptin;; the principle of population, according to tho census of 18(11, in
the apportionment of tho excess of debt between Upper Canada and Lower Canada,
and the division of iho assets belonging to them under The British North America
Act, conjointly — especially us it is so manifestly just in 'tself— haa been so gener-
ally recognized under similar circumstances by other nations — and was expressly
acted upon in forming the Union of tho IJritish North American Provinces — and
in now in explicit terms embodieil in the Constitution)*' ^ -t.

If this principle be adopted, the apportionment of the debt and the division of
the ujseta, become simple and easy, and free from all complications. It would
stand thus : As the population of Upper and Lower (^Vniida is io that of each
Province, so is tho excess of debt to that portion of it which each I'rovincc shouM
boar. The proportions would be stated as follows : —

I'op. of U. C. and L. C. Pop. of U. C. Anaumed excess o( d.O.i

Ontario, 2,507,057: 1,390,091: : .^10,500,000;

guebec, i2,5o7,657 : 1,111,560: : $10,500,000:

And on precisely the same principle and for the same reasons would the
assets be divided. These assets for the sake of illustration are assumed at ^11.-
000,000. That is about their nominal amount. It would, therefore, follow that
as tho population of Upper and Lower Canada is to the population of each Pro-
vince, so is tho total assets to that portion to which each is entitled. Tho results
of which would be to leave each Province in possession of the assets located in
each Province. In the application of this principle to the division of assets, the
final results may, and no doubt should be modilied in consideratioTi of the peculiar
circumstances under which some of the assets had their origin, and in the further
consideration of their intrinsic value.

3. Capitalization of Assets.

At a meeting of the Arbitrators held on the 2nd day of Septend)er, 1809,
Judge Day stated that it was desirable that a valuation of the assets to be divided
should take place, with a view, as it may reasonably be supposed, to their division
according to value ; and he proposed that the Treasurers of the respective Pro-
vinces should h-" *he valuators. Mr. Wood objected to this, on the ground that
the Treasurers would be most unlikely t j ogree on such valuation, and suggested
that as the annual income was the best ci'terion by which to judge the value of
any property, the Auditor should be ordered to make up, for the use of the Arbi-
trators, a statement shewing the annual revenue or proceeds derived from the assets
for four and a-half years prior to Confederation, and the average annual per
centage of the proceeds of each asset for that period. To this proposition the

/^--

It, I

I" L

%\\

\ \ ,

i ;

. Treasurers of both Provinces assentetl. The arbitrators, thereupon, ordered the
i statement to bo made up by the Auditor, and it was accordingly done, and laid
before tlie Arbitrators. It is submitted that the vahie of the assets thus ascertain-
ed, is the best that can be obtained, and sho\YS correctly the value of the assets in
the hands of the respective Provinces. It may be urged in respect of some of the
assets, as for example, the Municipal Loan Fund U. C. and L. C, the Quebec
Fire Loan and some other assets, a greater annual sum might be derived from
them by using coercive measures, than was derived for the four and a half years
next preceding Confederation, or than was annually derived from them from the
origin of the assets down to Confederation — the average for the entire latter period
being about the same as the average for the former period of four and one half
years, liat I think it fair to assume that the same causes, be they local, political
or otherwise, which prevented a larger annual income to be derived from these assets
than that ^ shown on the average of four and a half years prior to Confederation,
and which sinc^ Confederation have rather diminished than increased this income,
will continue to operate in "Snch a way as to preclude any well founded expectation
that these assets under Provincial management will produce any greater annual in-
come than has heretofore been derived from them. P>o this as it may, this mode
of valuation, taking the period of four and a half years, was deliberately assented
to by the Treasurers of the respective Provi' ^es, and as deliberately ordered by
the Arbitrators; and, therefore, it is not competent, 1 think, now for either the
Treasurers or the Arbitrators to question its correctness.

The following is the Statement of Assets of Ontario Capitalized at 6 per
cent, on the average per centage of four and one half years next preceding Con •
federation :

,1!

O N T A R T .

ASSETS.

U. C. Building Fund

Law Society, U. C

Consolidttted Municipal Loan Fund, U. C. —

Principnl $4,651,895 98

luteroBt 2,166,460 35

Agriculturul Society, I). C. (This is put down aa yield-
ing notbin;;, yet it i» u good asset for the amount
the Society being able to pay)

Kevenne Inspectors, U. C

Amount.

$ 36,800
156,015

6,81S,.3«2

4,000
2,426

7,017,6D4

00
61

?,3

00
41

Average rate

per cent,
for 4i years.

$ O.Ot
7.14

1.69

Value capitaliied
at 6 per cent.

$ 36,800
156,016

1,920,505

4,000

2,117,320

00
61

•^

,'0.,

)n, ordered the i
done, and laid
thus ascertain- I
5f the assets in
ofsomeofthe
C, the Quebec

derived from
d a half years
hem from the
■e latter period ^
• and one half
ocal, political
01 these assets 'i,
'onfederation,

this income,
[1 expectation
er annual in-
ty, this mode
ely assented

ordered by
iv either the

ied at 6 per
ceding Con •

ue capitaliied
■ 6 per cent.

36,800
156,016

00
61

'20,505 38

4,000 00
17,320 89

QUEBEC.

ASSETS.

Amount.

Aylraer Co.irt TIouso Dobenturo Account, 6 per cent

Aylmer Court House, Accouut Current

Average rate j^.^,„^ capitaHsed

per cent.

at C pui oont.

Montreal Court House—

Debenture Accouut $95,600 00

Account Current IS.yyi! 21

Kamouraska Court House Account Current, $201,91.
There are S8,955, 8 ;'er cent Debentures, forming o
first charge o:i tlio iocoiiie. Ton per cent, would
pay the interest on tlio Dubentiire?, and leave amplei'i
to wipe out the Account Current, $202 91 ^

Consolidated Municipal Lijan Fund, L. C. — ,i

Principal $2,156,687 14 ij

Interest 787,742 83 ;

2,000 1 00 1
1,239 '■' 70

114,596 21 1

201 91

2,939,429 ! 97

Superior Education, L. C. —

Legislative Grant $ 28,494 73

Balance of deficit in Education Gffice.. 290 10

Income Fund 234,281 46

Quebec Fire Loan

Building and Jury Fuml, I,, (;..

Municipal Loan Fund, L. C

Registration Services, L. C

Tomisoouatv Advance Account

263,066

261,254

65 j

116,475

484,244

2,524

3,000

51 \
33!

38
00 I

4,191,032

Upper Canada Assets $7,017,604 35 valued at $2,117,320 99
Lower Canada Assets 4,191,032 95 valued at 2,087,001 13

Total assets U. C. and L. C, $11,208,037 30 Total value $4,204,322 12

NoAV it is quite clear that if the debt is to be divided according to the value

of the assets ^Yhich are in each Province, it will be stated thus : As the total value

of assets ($4,204,332 12) is to the value of the assets in each TVovince (Ontario

?2,117,320 99 and Quebec §2,087,322 12) so is the excess of debt (§10,500,000)

to that portion of it which each Province should bear ; and it is equally clear on

the same principle that the assets which should be given to each Province would

be— as the total excess of debt is to that portion of it Avhich would by the foregoing

proportion fall on each Province, so is the total assets to that portion of them

which would belong to each Province. In short, the first proportion gives the debt

to be borne by each Province, and the second proportion, the converse of the first,

gives the assets which should belong to each Province. The two proportions may

be stated as follows :
2

I I!

■ (i

■ 'f

111

i I

4,204,332 12: 2,117,320 09 :: 10,500,000: Ontario djbt.

4,204,332 12: 2,087,001 13 : : 10,500,000: Quebec debt.

10,500,000 : Ontario debt : : 4,204,332 12 : Ontario assets.

10,500,000: Quebec debt :: 4,204,332 12: Quebec assets.

By tbis mode of dividing the excess of debt and the assets, predicated as it is
on the real value of tlie assets as fixed by the average annual per centage for four
years and a half years prior to Confederation, or for any longer period prior thereto
— (for as has been observed if the annual average per centage for the whole of +he
existence of each asset be taken, instead of four and a lialf years, the result
Avill be substantially the same) — all questions and disputes as to whether one
asset is good or bad, or worth more or less than another, are avoided. One Pro-
vince might say, " true we did expend so much on local objects in our Province but
" the investment lias proved unremunerative, and the asset is unproductive, and,
" however valuable it may be as a public work to the whole Province, as a source
" of revenue it is worth nothing, and it should in the division of the excess of debt
" and the assets be put down at less than its nominal value or at nil." The principle
of capitalizing the assets, that is, arriving at their real value in the way agreed upon
by the Treasurers, and then capitalizing the average annual per centage, entirely
removes all such objections : and as it substantially agrees with the other two
modes of division, namely, " Origin of local debt," and " Population," it is equally
fortified by every argument and consideration which has been adduced in support
of a division on the principle of the " Origin of local debt," and the principle of
" Population."

The consideration of the three modes suggested, substantially lead to the
same conclusions. Neither is hostile to or opposed to the other. Each starting
from independent first principles, produces substantially the same results as the
other. The basis upon which each is predicated, cannot be shaken ; for it is
founded on truth and justice ; and the arguments and reasons which may be
adduced in support of each, are equally applicable to all, and are unanswerable
and conclusive.

Quebec objects to any and all of the three modes suggested, buthas really offered
no argument against any of them unless an argument can be gleaned from the
following quotation from the

" Memokandum submitted on behalf of the Province or Quebec," by its

Council, Messrs. Casault and Ritchie.

" 11 Division of the tSurplus Debt.

" One of the most important tasks which the Arbitrators will have to perform

" is to divide the surplus debt of the late Province of Canada between Ontario and

"Quebec. The 112th section of the Confederation Act makes Ontario and

" Quebec conjointly liable to Canada for t'le amount by which the debt of the

" Province of Canada exceeds at the Union 1^02,500,000 ; these Provinces being

" chargeable with interest at 5 per cent per annum upon such surplus debt.

^>U

cL'bt.
lebt.
sets.
3ets,

dicateJ as it is
nitage for four
d prior thereto
10 wliole of +he
I's. the result
whether one
!(1. One Pro-
' Province but
'ductive, and,
e, as a source
jxcess of debt
The principle
'■ agreed upon
age, entirely
he other two
' it is equally
id in support
principle of

lead to the
ich starting
!sults as the
; for it is
ich may be
answerable

ally ofiered
d from the

!<-'," I5T ITS

to perform
ntario and
tario and
2bt of the
ices beint;
5bt.

" This debt is to be apportioned by the Arbitrators between Ontario and

" Quebec.

" It has been suggested, that this division should be according to the popula-
" tion of each, as it stood either when the Confederation took place, or at the last
" census in 1861, or according to the origin of the debt.

" 1. To take the population whether that of 1861 or that of 1867, as a guide,
" without taking into account the respective financial positions of the parties
" when first united in 1841, or enquiring in whose interest and in what pvopor-'
" tion for each the subsequent indebtedness was incurred, would be most unjust.
" It might free from its just proportion of the debt the party which had profited
" the most by it, and charge it to the one which had the least interest in its being
" incurred, or which derived from it the smallest benefit. The injustice of this
" method will be made apparent by reference to a few facts and figures taken
" from the public returns.

'• The dd)t, of Upper Canada on the 10th February, 1841, was —
- 1. [Xibeutui-es (;is per Appendix No. 3, Vol. 6, 1817, K. K. K.,)ey, £1,308,855 \h. KM

<• Equivalent to §.-),r)95,421 07

"2. Floatinr; debt, being balance of expenditure over receipts, from 1821

" to 1841, (same Appendix) 33(i,357J)7

" Making to>j;cthcr $5,925,(79 ;)4

'•■ Dcht of Lower Canada, \Oth February, 1841 —

" 1. Debentures, (same Appendix) £96,748 4s. 7d.

" Less Montreal Harbour (the debt due by the same
" no*, being charged against Ontario and Quebec in
" the statement of affairs, on the ground that it is
" only a contingent liability, and that the fund always
" paid its interest) £81,499 4s. 7d.

£15,249 Os. Od.

" Equal to $ 60,996 00

" But Lower Canada had at its credit, (being excess
" of receipts over expenditures, from 1791 to 1841)

" appendix K. K. K., of 1847 $ 250,.302 41

" From which deducting above debt 60,096 00

" It is found that instead of having any debt, it had

« then at its command ^ 189,306 41

" Striking out this amount is equivalent to its addition to the debt of

« Upper Canada $ 18^-306 41

" Which would then stand ^^..,, m „,- •"•' $6,115,085 05

ill

i >
i

'• Taking the population of each at that date, Upper Canadn, (sec
"Census 1851, vol. 1, p. xvii,) was 465,377, and Lower Ounadn,
" making it as near as anterior and subsequent census permit, to wit :
" consus of 1831 and 1844, there being none for that Province in 1841,)
" was 0(53,258. — it establishes that, to be on an equal footing according
" to population. Lower Canada should have entered the Union with a
" debt of. ^8,715,630 60

" Must not such disproportion ho taken into account in the division of the
debts, credits, properties and assets ; and the more since it existed at a time,
when improvements of all kinds were so much needed, and money expended in
roads and other public works, would, no doubt, have given to Lower as it did to
Upper Canada, an impetus which would have given an immense augmentation
of population, resources and wealth ?

" 2. The other mode suggested, if its adoption was possible, would bo more
consonant with the requirements of justice. But to be so, rocourso must be
had to the true and real origin of the debt, not to that which is the work of
mere fancy. It would require to go back to the Union of the two Canadas,
take their respective debts and credits at that time, examine in detail all the
expenses incurred since, note specially the Province for which or in whose
interest it was incurred, and determine thereby the share of each. Such a work
would not only entail an amount of labour, atid a consideration of circumstances
which the arbitrators are not expected to undertake, but would also require a
minute examination of all the administrative acts of the different governments
since 1841, and an accurate appreciation of the same. In fact the adoption of
this mode is impracticable.

" To take the assets as a guide would be most fallacious, and the more so if
only a part of them were taken into consideration. It has often occurred that
very important and advantageous outlay for the part of the Province in Avhich it
was made, was the most unproductive to the treasury. For instance, the roads
in Upper Canada, on which very large sums of money were expended, which
tended as much if not more than any other expenditure to open up and colonise
Ontario and thereby create its wealth ; government nevertheless felt it its
interest to surrender for a nominal consideration to private companies or to the
several municipalities within which they lie. The assets are silent on that head.
Agiin the amount set down as the value of public works retained by the Domi-
nion may be fairly contested ar between Ontario and Quebec. To the Dominion
they are worth their present value ; but in determining the origin of the debt, it
is not their present value but their original cost which should bc considered.

" 3. The plainest, easiest, and it may be said the only just and practicable
way of settling the question, is to treat the case as one of ordinary partnership,
and apply the rules which govern the partition of partnership estates, rules

^1
" t|

a
"ll

((

$8,715,G30 60

vision of tlio
tetl at a time,
expended in
■'1" ''is it did to
augmentation

iild be more
i"se must be
tJio Avork of
CO Canadas,
ctail all the
"" in whose
^uch a work
'■ciimstanccs
" I'equire a
overnments
^''option of

"lore so if
'Un-ed that
in which it

ti'e roads
led, which
^ colonise
felt it ita

or to the
that head,
he Domi-
t>ominion
e debt, it
lered.

acticable
tnership,
es, rules

" which are the same in the old Roman, and in the modern English and French
" law.

" Adopting this principle, the arbitrators would treat the Union of the two
" Canadas, from 1841 to 1867, as having been equally advantageous to both, or.
" in other words, as if each had derived the same benefit from it. Considering
" that Lower Canada, which came into the T^ .ion in 1841 with a large sum at its
" credit, and a population about one half larger than that of Upper Canada, left
" in 1867 with comparatively limited resources, and that although Upper Canada
" entered it with an exhausted treasury and a small population, it left with a much
" larger number of inhabitants, an annual subsidy which exceeds by $237,620,
" representing a capital of $3,01)0,333.34, that of its sister Province, and great
" wealth, it will be admitted that this hypothesis is not partial to Quebec. It will
" however do away with what has been shown above to be impracticable the minute
" inspection and appreciation of all the accounts of the Province of Canada during
" the twenty-six years of its existence, and will leave only the consideration of the
" financial position of Upper and Lower Canada, when they became united, and
** the debts, credits, properties or assets, the partitiott of which is remlcred neces-
" sary by the dissolution of their partnership.

" According to this method of division, each Province ought first to assume
" the excess of debt, a sum equal to its own debt, when it entered the Union in
" 1841, and the balance ought to be equally divided.

" Whatever may be urged against this mode, it is nevertheless the only just
** and reliable one. It has this advantage over all other modes, that being the
"rule which governs the relations of man with man in similar positions, it cannot
** give rise to grounds of complaint nor to suspicions of favor, imfairness or in-
" justice.

" Assuming it to be impossible, as above demonstrated, to ignore the relative
"financial positions of the two Provinces in 1841, even if population were taken
'* as a basis for the division of the surplus debt, the following concise statements
'* will prove that the adoption of this arbitrary rule, namely, population, would
" free Quebec from a larger amount of the debt.

" Debt of Upper Cannrfa in 1841, (nif nhnvc .stadi/) —

" 1. Debentures $5,595,421 97

"2. Floating Debt 330,357 57

55,925,779 .54
•■ Df'!,t nf J.iivcr ('(HifK/d ?')i ] S41 —

"1. Credit S250,302 41

" Lcf^s Dobeuturcs 00,99(5 00

§189,300 41 189,300 41

" Striking it off, makes jis already stated, debt of Upper Canada,

" equivalent to $0,115,085 95

' I

" Surplus debt payable by Ontario and Quebec, ou terms agreed upon

" at the Montreal Conference $10,424,853 87

" Deduct for Upper Canada its debt in 1841 0,115,085 95

Balauoc,

'• Divided e(|ually, it ^ives each Trovincc

•' According to population in 1801.

" It gives Ontario $2,399,382 48

"Quebec , 1,910,385 41

84,309,707 92

$2,154,883 96

1867.
$2,512,050 89
1,797,117 03

84,309,707 92 $4,309,767 92
" So that by the mode suj^gested, Ontario 'vould, on the surplus of debt, be
" charged with ^244,498 fi2, less than according to its population in 1861, and
" with ^367,700 lt3 less than its share by its population in 1S67."

It is not proper to be discourteous in dealing with so grave a question as that
under consideration, and yet I can scarcely forbear remarking that it is difficult
to conceive how any sane man could seriously propose so absurd a proposition as
is contained in tnc foregoing extract. Aside from the inaccuracy of the figures,
it proposes to take the debts of Upper Canada and Lower Canada at the Union
on the 10th Feby., 1841, or rather the debt of Upper Canada, and an alleged
balance in the Exche(juor of Lower Canada, added to the alleged debt of Upper
Canada, and, Avhilo ignoring the principle of population, increasing it in the ratio
by which the population in Lower Canada at that time exceeded the population in
Upper Canada, and then, leaping over a period of twenty-six years, (from 10th
Feby., 1841, to 1st .Tuly, 1867), to charge directly this alleged amount of debt
($8,715,680 CO) to Upper Canada in the apportionment of the < \ccss of debt over
^62,500,000, and then, while all the time ignoring the principle of population, ac-
tually proposing to divide the balance of the excess of debt, after deducting the
alleged debt of Upper Canada according to population ; even suggesting that the
population should not be taken according to the census of 1861, on which Con-
federation was based, but the supposed population of 1S67 ! and this is said to
be based on the principle of a general partnership, as defined by the Roman Law
and the Common Law of England ! If it were not urged with an apparent serious-
ness, and if the interests involved were not so momentous, I would content myself
with simply stating this most extraordinary proposition without saying one word
in reply to it. Can it be possible that any one can seriously argue that the arbi-
trators arc to simply take into consideration the debt of Upper Canada at the
Union as proposed, Avithout any reference to the assets of the two Provinces, and
then pass over the intervening period of the Union, continue this debt for all that
time, and at the separation of the Provinces by Confederation in 1867, revive
this debt as against Upper Canada, although all or nearly all of it was long prior
to Confederation, paid and discharged, and charge it to C'^.tario in the division of
the excess of debt of the lato Province of Cana(]a ov^r $62,500,000 ! m^\ this* ii?

attl

be,

nii«

not

anil

eqi

the

latl

Thl

whl

onl

fig
be

K*ki4.

ion

...810,424,863 87
... (3,115,085 95

•■ H;{09,7fi7~92

•• «2,154,883~9fi

1867.
i $-^5l2,G50 89
1,797,117 03

84,309,767 92
lus of debt, be
>n in 1861, and

uestion as that

It it is difficult

proposition as

of the figures,

iit the Union
lid an alleged
Icbt of Upper
it in the ratio
population in
•s, (from 10th
lount of debt

of debt over
ipulation, ac-
educting the
ting that the

which Con-
lis is said to
Roman LaAv
ircntserious-
itent myself
g one word
lat the arbi-
lada at the
)vinces, and
for all that
867, revive

long prior

division of

n<l thia is

attempted to bo justified on the principle of a general partnership ! This would
be, I must confess a most extraordinary partnership, — a partnership at the begin-
ning and at the end, but not during the existence of the partnership. Why did
not the Counsel propose to charge interest on the debt of Upper Canada with
annual rests for twenty-six years ? If it is proper to charge the principal it is
equally proper to charge the interest. In this way instead of making it $6,000,000,
they would make it $20,000,000 ! They have just as much right to make it the
latter sum as the former. If any thing were needed to show the utter absurdity
of the proposition it is this following out the proposition to its logical Bcquenco.
The figures in the foregoing quotation are entirely wrong. The source from
which they profess to be derived, has the sanction of no authority, and is not
only unreliable but positively erroneous. The only reliable source whence any
figures relating to the debts and assets of Upper Canada and Lower Canada can
be derived is the Public Accounts, as thoy appear in the annual printed reports
of the Minister of Finance, and as they stand in the Provincial books in the
Finance Department. No compilation of Committees can supercede these.
Taking the Public Accounts then for a guide, the debt of Upper Canada in 1841
was not $5,925,770 54, but it was only $5,416,855 70. Instead of Lower Canada,
after deducting its debt having at its credit i$180,800 41, it had a debt of
$488,369 83 over all credits; and if from this is deducted the Montreal Harbour
Debentures of X8],40!l : 4 : 7, it would still stand at $162,372 92. Tu short,
there is scarcely a correct figure in the whole statoiaent. To show what was the
actual state of the debt of each Province and the assets, provincial in their cha-
racter, brought into the Union on the lOth February, 1841, I subjoin the
following statement from the Public xYccounts, verified by the Provincial bocks
in the Finance Department :

Debt of the Provinces at the Union, February 10th, 1841,

' Upper C

anad

i
a. 1

Lower C

anad

1,346,633
19,089

a.
5
5

5
7J

£,
]23.('75
;io,530

5
18

Less— To credit, as per Consolidated Fund Statement, 1841..

Add to Debt, as per do do

1,345,543
8,669

19
18

18
18

87,144

;iO,857

Add also for sums credited above whicb could not bo collected...

1,354,213

118,002
4,090

8
6

1,354,213

122,092

83
91

5,416,855

483,369
325,996

1 6,416,855

162,372

Schedule of Assets which at the Union became *' Provincial."

Piiid by
Upper Canada.

WellHnil Canal $

lUirlinKtoD liny Canal i

Kt. LHwruDCo (lu I

Uidmiu do

Liioliiuo do !

St. Ann's Locks I

Uicholieu and Lnko Champlain Navigation I

Lachine, Cotoau and Cedar Kapids {

Li);lit Houses, lieacons and Buoys |

Slides and Booms on tlio Trent <

Do Novrcastlo District '

Kingston Penitentiary I

Ofk — Lower Canada Assets.,

Debt of Upper Canada at the Union..
Li-.ss — Escess of Assets

1,411,427

124,;t56

1,107,444

:.,630

08,550 :

41,822

43,320

176,7»5

3,309,346
1,361,136

1,948,210

6,416,855
1,948,210

Deduct Debt of Lower Canada at the Union.,

Leaviii, Dulit of Upper Canada at {

Ai '. Lower Canada nil.

Lkss — lusurrection losses included in the Debt of U. C, as stated;
above, dubontures for which wore issued under 8 Vic, cap. 72,1
mid woro paid out of Upper Canada Tavern Licences, £10,000.1

Deduct — Xot having been incurred £117,800 ey., Welland Canal

Leaving total Oebt of Upper Canada.
And that of Lower Canada nil

3,40,8,645
102,372

eta.
77
08
43
35

51
67
00
01

Paid by
Lower Canada.

82
32

70
50

20
92

3,306,272 ! 28

160,000

3,140,272
471,200

28
00

2,076,072 28

100,000

398,404
19,860

322,441
48,405

472,024

1,361,136

cti.
00

02
58
83
74

By the above statement it appears that the $C>,U2,'),11\)JA debt of Upper
Canada dwindles down to §2,675,072.28, and the boasted surplus of LoAver Canada
of $189,300.41 disappears altogether. But I contend it is useless to discuss so
absurd a proposition as to treat the matters under consideration in the manner
propose*!, on the specious pretence that to do so would be in accordance with the
principles of a general partnership ; but if it is to be done, the principle must run
through the whole course of receipts and expenditures from the beginning of the
union to the end of it ; in which case we shall not proceed far in the investigation
before the balance will not only not be against Ontario, but largely, very
largely, against Quebec. The (juestion then may be asked, why object to the pro-
posed method of dealing with the excess of debt and the assets to be divided in the
British North Amorioa Act? I answer because it will be the occasion of the de-
velopment of a state of things which would prove anything but satisfactory to the
Province of Quebec, and might give rise to discontent at the present state of things
in the most important portion of the Dominion, and might produce results which

Qnl

th.f

■will

full

ncial."

Paid by
Lower Canada.

oti.

100,000

398,404

1»,860

322,441

48,406

472,024

1,361,136

ebt of Upper
oyer Canada
to discuss so
the manner
mce with the
3le must run
nning of the
nvestigation
rgely, very
t to the pro-
ivided in the
n of the de-
ctory to the
ate of things
jsults which

_ Qiu'lxH! iiii;,'ht iind itself unable to accede to. My object is to arrive :it some me-
thod which will be practicable, and at the same time founded on sound principles
which will recommend themselves to the jiu'^jment of the people in both I'rovinccs.
If the principle of a general partnership is to be adopted, it must be tiikcu at its
full measure and in its full legal and proper length and breadth ; not at the begin-
ning and end of the partnership concern, with a discrimination as to the capital,
as proposed by Quebec, but the Provinces must be considered as having started as
equals in all respects at the beginning, and be treated as equiils during its con-
tinuance, and at its end and in its winding up. It cannot be taken in any mod-
ified form. Even the Counsel for (^)uebec a obliged to adfiiit that tliere is no
warrant for the departure from the principles of a general partnership, which they
propose by attempting to drag in the (luostion, "who put in the greater or the
"smaller capital, and whose assets or revenues were free from or had charges in
" the shnpo of debts incumbering them at the beginning ;" and then at the end or
dissolution of tlio partiiorsliip, to attempt to charge the one i)arty or the other with a
greater or loss |ii>rlioii tlian half the debts or to give to one party or the other more
or less than half tlie assets — the principle being too well understood that in every
- partnership Avhere the contrary is not expressly stipulated, each partner must be
presumed to ha^'e brought in equal capital, and at the end of the partnership must
share equally in the ])rofits and losses, and in all the partnership property and
assets. The oidy renson given for the course proposed is that it is inconvenient to
do otherwise. TJut the question arises, on what authority can the principle of a
general partnership be adopted and acted upon, and yet go into any and least of
all a partial consideration of what each partner brought into the common concern,
in the apportionment of profits and losses — that is — assets ard excess of debt at
the dissolution ? Such a mode of dealing with the assets and liabilities of a gen-
eral partnership is Avithout any authority whatever. It has not one single charac-
teristic of a general partnership. The name of partnership is used by the Counsel,
but that is all. In the case of the Provinces, if it had been specially agreed that
the Provinces should be united — that the revenues of each should be merged — and
that at the dissolution each should be charged or credited Avith the debt each owed,
or credited with the money each had at the union, und that all revenue and expen-
diture during the union should be considered equally advantageous to both, — (the
very contrary of all which is expressly or impliedly declared in the Union Act of
1840), one could understand the proposition of the Counsel for Quebec. This, if
in the nature of a partnership at all, would be one founded on a contract contain-
ing the most specific terms. But no such contract is pretended. The entire pro-
posal is wholly arbitrary. It has not one solitary feature of any partnership
whatever to sustain it ; and yet it is put forth under the specious pretence and de-
lusive guise that it is founded on the principles of a partnership entered into by two
parties without any stipulation as to capital, profits or losses — which is called by
the Counsel a general partnership, having neither the sanction nor the authority
3

•vf^i--mtKK*-' ■'"'■''■■ •"

;i'j

ll>

i'l

of tlio Koman, French or English law. It may bo as woll to nmlorstand what is
the i)ro|)or meaning of a {general partnership :

" General partnerships arc j)roperly such when the parties carrying on all
" their trade anil husincaa, whatever it maybe, for the joint benefit and profit
" of all the parties concerned, whether tlie capital stock bo limited or not, or
"the contributions thereto be c(iua! or uncciual." — Story on J*arlnerahij>,
see. 74.
Such a partnership without an express contract to the contrary would entitle
each i)artncr to share equally in the profits, and subject him to bear etiually the
losses. Now as I have already eaid, it is not pretended in the case of the Pro-
vinces there was any stipulations as to the terms a/ulconditionnof partnership con-
tended for. What then if a general partnership bo conceded, would on authority be
its necessary incidents V Story in his work on Partnership, Sees, 24 k 26, says : —
'• In the absence however of all precise stipulations between the partners as
'* to their respective shares in the profits and losses, and in the absence of all other
*' controlling evidence and circumstances, the rule of the common law is, that they
*• :ue to share eciually of both ; for in such a case equality would seem to be equity.
"■ And tlie cireumstanco that each partner has brought an une([ual amount of capi-
*• till into the Common Stock, or that one or more has brought in the whole capital,
'' iind tlie otlier have only brought in industry, skill and experience would not
'• seem to rurnish any substantial or decisive ground of difference as to the distri-
'" Initinn : on tlie contrary the very silence of the partners as to any particular
'• sti[tulation, might seem fairly to import, either that there was not, all things
'' considered, any real inequality in the Ixjnefits to the partnership in the case, or
" that the matter was Avaived on the grounds of good will, or affection, or liberality,
" or expediency. ■ ^' ^ ' *

'•The Roman Law promulgates the like doctrine. If no express agreement were
" niiide l)y the partners ct)necrning their share.-i of the profit and loss, the profit
" ;irid loss Avere shared eiiually between them. If there was any sucli agreement,
"tliiit was to be faithfully observed. VvV (juidein (says Institutes), «i niliil dc
" iiariilnis htcri et damni nomination convencrit, '''r/iiales scilicet partes ct in liiero
" (t in damnospcc/aniur. (juod si express^ fucrunt partes, luce scrvari debent.

" So the Digest. Si non fuerint partes wcietati adjcct'r nifuas eas esse constat.

* * ■+ * t- * •:;• ■:: t- «•

'' This also seems to be the rule adopted into the modern commercial law."
it may be objected that while in a general partnership, in the absence of any
express stipidation to the contrary, it is admitted that each partner will be con-
sidered as being e(jually entitled to an equal share of the partnership property and
of nil j.rofits, and equally liable inter se for an equal share of all losses, and for
deficiencies of the partnership assets to meet the partnership liabilities, still if the
private debt of any partner is paid out of the common fund, that ' bt at the dis-
solution should be charged against that partner ; and that in the case under con-

Hll

dl
f;i
b

*'l

('I

rstand what is

•:in-ying on all
ncfitund profit
litod or not, or
' I*artnerahij>,

would entitle
iir erjually the
(.' of the Pro-
•tnerBhip con-
n authority be
t 2i, says : —
J partners as
e of all other

i^, that they
to be equity,
ount of capi-
hole capital,
e would not
to the distri-
y particular
't, all things
the case, or
r liberality,

cment were
i, the profit
iigreenicnt,
»i nihil (h'
't in Iticro
^ctri debcnt.
isc constat.

ial law."
nco of any
ill be con-
>perty and
s, and for
still if the
It the dis-
inder con-

Hideration, ii is only contended that the aamo rule should apjily to the alleged
debt ofUpper (?anada at the Union in 1841. Hut this mode of reaHoning i.s
fallacious, as a moment's reilection will demonstrate. J'artncrship or co-partner«hip
has been defined by text writers on the law of partnership, to be ''a combination
" of two or more persoi a of capital, of labor or skill for the purpose of busitiess
"for their common \)iix\\:Z' "—{Parnont on Partnerahii).) "It is a voluntary
" contract l)etween two or more competent persons, to place their monoy, eflects,
" labiir, and skill, i>r ,siu/u', or nil of them, in lawful commerce or business with
•' the understanding; that there shall be a communion of profits and of losses
" between them." — [Storj/ on Paiiacrship.) This same author further states thai
partners r.iiiy not contribute e([\ially, antl that some of them may (Contribute neither
money nor eft'eets. nor IiiIku' nor skill, but all these may be '•'■ irair, il ii/>on //if
"• i/ronndx of i/o'xl will, of alfcction, or/ilirm/iti/, or i:ri)et(ie)tci/,'' and will be emi
sidered in law to have been waived, and that each partnership was put (Ui an
e(|uality as to eomuuiiiily of the partnership property and liabilities with all tin-
other partners, althoui^h be may have brought into the partnership niucli less than
some one or more of the partners, or indeed nothing at all, unless the eontrai-y
shall appear by express stipulation or by evidence fairly deducil)le from surroundini::
circumstances, ami the course of dealing of the partners inter se.

Now, let us clearly understand what the Counsel for (Quebec moan. Tlu'V
say : " Let this division of the excess of debt and this division of iissets proceed (ni
" partnershi]) principles." To do this, you must consider the debt of Upper Canada
at the Tnion in 1841 to be its private debt ; and the alleged cash in band of Lower
Canada, to be its private cash ; and taking away this debt and this cas-h, that the
Provinces entered into partnersuip, making all else in both Provinces common.
That the joint concern, having paid or assumed and become responsible for the
debt of Upper Canada, L^ppcr Canada is chargeable with it, and bound to pay it
back ; and that the united concern having had, and used the private canh of
Lower Canada is bound to pay back to Lower Canada that cash. They say that
it is to be assumed that every thing during the partnership was equal and fair to
both Provinces, and that an equal division of the excess of debt (the liabilities or
losses of the partnership concern), and an equal division of the assets (the profits
or debts due the partnership concern) should at the end or dissolution ci partner-
ship (the Confederation of the Provinces) take place. Now, as I have before said,
does not any one see if this were correct. Upper Canada should be charged interest
with annual rests on its debt for twenty -six j^ars, rad Lower Cana<la should be
credited with interest with annual rests on its cash for the same period. The nere
statement of this fact shows the nonsense of the whole thing. But we are not
left to the reductio ad absurdtim. This debt of Upper Canada, as I have already
shown, was chiefly contracted for public works which passed over as the common
property of both Provinces at the Union, and are now, by the British North Ame-
rica Act, made the common property of the Dominion. The supposed cash in

^.m

l'«r,,:,„ •'' "■"• «'"!"« <■ 'nor,. „ ,. ,;::.'/;:•»' '" --"-. /„

It In, „ , ""' V'W«„.4„,,„,.

tins matter of, 1,0,,,, I,, „..™'- ""' ""'"'timatoly f„r t|„, f, '''"

n^Lip c„„eo,-„ of r " ^^ "•"» transferred to ,1 ' ■'■""'" "'' ''""'

p-";=Mot,eAet„A4t;e:":;t'"'-''-"»"'"'™°f -

" P-Po' OS of E , ^ ;"" ^'■-•-- ^e re.„„itej and ^o™ eT '^ "" '"'" "

fcection two removPQ oii . ^

>-'ections from twn *« r^-a "^

°°er in ^vhich the Executive and

Eoa

"'' "'t. Counsel

"■iotlH Acts of

^iJ indi-
••'■^ into {,
"'<^'"'. being
•■'•'■t.iiii e.\-
'"•■•I'-v, tll(.
"■•"'«<'. ;!ii.|

""f-'-Imir of
'"''■ •'<• tlif
'"'• Qiielioc
i«<'^ I'otter,
"i«oli(Iuted
^'veniie— 18
'le artielos

■■•^ of hoti,
ase) pjirt-
* stipulji-
siblo for,
" end is
>«. 7'ho
be iiiado i

ts of a]J

s end it |

^'" the J

Icr the
1 cons-
laj so

tides

and

Legislative (luverninont of the Huhject of partnership dhuuld be constituted, inun-
•gcd and carried on.

Section fifty provides tiiat all tlie ineome, revenues and oHects . f l»otli the
partners should be the joint propi'rty nf the partners, in which each partner should
have an e<iual share without any re}j;ard to the amount or value of the revenues,
income w eflects which each contributeil to the one common fund. It say.i :

"That upon the Union of the I'rovinccs of U[»pcr and Lower ('.-inada all
** duties au<l reventu\s over Avhicli the resj.eetive Tiep^islatures of the said I'rovinces
" bolVire and at the time of the jiassing of this Act had and have power of api)ro-
" priation shall form one consolidated fund to bo appropriated for t' ' i'uhlic
** Service! of the Province of Canathi in the manner, ami subject to the charges
*' hereinafter mentioned.

l^y section lifty-one, the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the I'rovince of
Caiuuhi is chargetl with the costs, charges and expenses of collecting the l"'iind.

By sections fifty-two, tifiy-threo and fifty four, certain other clu'v^es are
made on the Consolidated Revenue Fund, including the Civil List to Her Majesty.

Section fifty-five, is special ; and it would do no violence to its construction
to say that it fully provides for any charges which the Legislature of the Pro-
vince of Upper Canada or that of Lower Canada had previously made upon its
Duties and Revenues, by the incurring of debts, which prior to the Union were
made charges upon its Consolidated Revenue Fund. It is contendeil that this
section is broad enough to cover, and does in fact in explicit terms cover, the
reservation of Duties and Revenues suflicient to pay off all Upper Canada or
Lower Canada debts contracted prior to the Union. It is as follows :

" LV. And be it enacted, that the Consolidation of the Duties and Revenues
" of the said Province, shall not be taken to affect the payment out of the .said
" Consolidated Revenue Fund, of any sum or sums hereinbefore charged upon the
" Rates and Duties already raised, levied and collected, or to be raised, levied or
" collected, to and for the use of either of the said Provinces of l-pper Canada or
" Lower Canada, or of the Province of Canada, for such time as sluill have been
" appointed by the several Acts of the Legislature of the Province, by Avhich such
" charges were severally authorized."

All the debts of Upper Canada, as well as of Lower Canada, were by Ijcgis-
lative enactments made charges on the " Rates" x\n\ '• l)u(i,'8 " of each Province
respectively. Therefore it Is submitted that this section alone provides amply
for the payment out of reserved " Rates " and " Duties " of all pre-existing
debts. But the (jucstion is not left hero. ;. Section fifty-six says :

'* LVT. And bo it enacted, that the expenses ot the collection and managc-
" ment and receipt of the said Consolidated Revenue Fund, shall form the first
" charge thereon ; and that the annual interest of the pubJio debt of the Prc-
" vinocs of Upper and Loivcr Canadu, or either of them, at the. time of the
^^ jRe'imion of the mid J^rovitmit, shall form the seoond cliarge thereon ; iind that

" the payments to be made to the Clergy of the United Church of England and
" Ireland, and to Clergy of the Church of Scotland, and to Ministers of other
" Christian denominations, pursuant to any law or usage whereby such payments,
" before or at the time of passing this Act, were or are legally or usually paid
" out of the public or Crown Revenue, of either of the Provinces of Upper and
" Lower Canada, shall form the third charge upon the said Consolidated Revenue
*' Fund ; and that the said sum of forty-iivc thousand pounds shall form the
" fourth charge thereon ; and that the said sum of thirty thousand pounds, so
" long as the same shall continue to bo payable, shall form the fifth charge
" thereon ; and that the other charges on the Rates and Dutus levied
" within the said Province of Canada, hercinhefore reserved, shall form the sixth
" charge thereon, so long as sitoh charges shall continve to be pagahle."

Particular attention is called to three points in sections fifty-five and fifty-six :

1. Section fifty-five expressly declares that any sum or sums of money thereto-
fore charged upon the " Rates " and " Duties " of Upper or Lower Canada cither
already collected or thereafter to be collect-.-'d should be paid out of tln^ Con-
solidated Revenue Fund of Canada thereby formed of such '■'■Rates " and " Duties.''
The debts of Upper 'Janada and Lower Canada were sums of money charged upon
the said Rates and Duties by the several Acts of the respective Legislatures autho-
rizing the creation of the several debts.

2. By section fifty-six the interest on the public debt of the Provinces of
Upper and Lower Canada or either of them at the time of the Union is made the
second charge on the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada.

3. The other charges on the '• Rates " and " Duties " levied within the Pro-
vince of Canada thereinbefore reserved, that is, reserved in section fifty-five, is
made the sixth charge on the Consolidated Revenue Fund so long as such cli.iigos
shall exist ; that is, until from Consolidated Revenue Fund the principal of tlie
debts of Upper Canada and Lower Canada, or cither of them shall have been paid
oflf — the interest of such debts having been declared to be the second charge on the
Consolidated Revenue Fund. The fifty-fourth section reserves out of the " Rates'
and " i)t(f«es" the charges made by the creation of the local debts of each I'ro-
vince. Section fifty-six makes the interest of sucli debts a second charge ;
and " the other charges on the Rates and Duties " tliut is the principal of the
debts the sixth charge on the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

The foregoing, then, are the express terms upon which the partnership was
formed ; and it is Avorthy of remark that not the slightest trace ,)f any intended
inequality m respect of or on account of one or the other of the partners bringing
into the partnership concern an unequal share or capital, that is, '■^Rates'' and
*• Duties," which in the one case might be more or less heavily charged than in the
other, can be found. Therefore whether you view the partnership as without stipu-
lations, and therefore a general partnershiji, to which the well known and admitted
rules of law are applicable, or regard it in the light of the special and precise stipu-

id and
f other
Clients,
y paid
or and
evonuo
rin tlie
nds, so
charge
levied
le sixth

lations upon ^hich in Tact it was formed, the conclusion is precisely the same. Both
Provinces must be considered to have entered the Union on equal terms. The
fact that the " Rates " and " DutiiS " of the one were more heavily charged
th.'iU those of the otlier, or that the ^^ Mates" and " i>w«ics " of the one were
charged witli, considerable sums, while those of the other were not charged at all,
can make no diifercnoc either according to the law of Partnorsliip or the express
Agreements as found in the Union Act. And the truth is it should not, for
while it may be admitted that the charges on the ^^ Hates" and ^^ Duties " of
Upper Canada were greater than those of Lower Canada, it must also be admitted
that the assets flowing from those greater charges in Upper Canada in the shape
of Public Works, and which were made the joint property of both Provinces, were
also greater. It would be, according to Partnersliip law, necessarily assumed that
all advantages and disadvantages of the property and effects of each, charged or not
charged, were well known and considered by the parties before forming the partner-
ship, especially in the aljsenca of all express declarations to the contrary on the
subject. lint wlieu to this is added the express stipulations of the parties,
unequivocall}'' pronouncing as doth the law, ivhcn stipulations are not found, the
same thing, argument becomes a waste of words. Further confirmation of this
view, and which of itself as a matter of evidence ought to settle the whole con-
troversy, is the fact that all the books of account, all the published public accounts
of the late Province, all the legislation, running over a period of twenty-six
years, prove the equality of the partners, and entirely remove any ground for
setting up any claim as to inequality of capital at the beginning of the partner-
ship, by maintaining throughout that period an unbroken silence, in so far as
the legislation and the public accounts are concerned, on the subject. These
are the only witnesses to which we can appeal or \ hich we can summon, and they
afford no evidence that any inequality existed in fact, or in the opinion of the
partners in respect of the financial position in which each stood at the Union ;
on the contrary, these records construed according to tlio well-know n ))riuci[)les
of the law of evidence prove the very revtrse of all this.

To keep up the partnership view of the case, this partnership was I)y the
British North America Act, dissolved in 1807. It was a dissolution by the
agreement of the partners ; the partnership was formed by the agreement of the
partners, at least it nuist be so considered, and it was Avithout any doubt dissolved
by the consent and agreement of the partners. In the instrument of dissolution,
it is provided that the partners should form a new and more extended partnership
with the Provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick ; — that certain large
properties and effects, beside large rates and duties of the several Provinces should
be surrendered to the joint concern; — that a certain amount of debt charged on
the rates and duties of the several Provinces, should bo cast upon the rates and
duties surrendered to the joint concern, while a certain amount of debt should be
borne bi/ themselves, and certain assets should be reserved to themselves. But

the instrument of dissolution, while it defined and settled many things connected
with the dissolution, did not state what portion of the debt which was to be borne
by Upper Canada and Lower Canada, should be borne by each ; nor what portion
of the assets each should have ; but it provided for the appointment of arbitrators
to adjust and settle these points; just as under the winding-up Acts, an Official
Manager is appointed, or as in the case of disagreement among partners in settling
tlicir partnership accounts, or apportioning or dividing tlieir liabilities or ass-^ts,
a Court of Chancery steps in and through the Master, Avinds up the concern. In
the case before us, instead of the Official Manager or the Court of Chancery, we
have a Court of Arbitrators who are bound to deal with th« questions before them,
if they are to be dealt with on the principles of partnership, in the same manner
as w6uld an Official Manager or the Court of Chancery. In the first place, they
must determine the character of the partnership, whether it be general, universal
or special. In the second place, whether it is founded on written or verbal contract
or stipulations, or on the assent of the parties, not evidenced ])y special agreement,
written or verbal. In the former case, the written or expressed stipulations alone
must govern in every matter to which they apply. In the latter ca8o, the law
steps in and lays down the rules which must prevail.

In the present case the Arbitrators are asked to apply the principles which
control general partnerships without any written or express stipulations. As the
Law applicable to such a partnership lays down rules which are the same as those
which arc found written and expressed in the Union Act of 1840, it makes but
little difference whether tho partnership bo regarded as one with or without
special stipulations. In either case the course of procedure must be the same.
Both parties must be considered as having entered the partnership with effects
equal in value, notwithstanding any charges thereon ; and each party must be
assumed to have derived equal advantages from the partnership during its continu-
ance, and in the arrangements made in the formation of the Dominion of Canada.
Then it follows according to the rules of law applicable to such a partnership that
the debt reserved to be borne by the Provinces conjointly by the British North
America Act must be equally divided, one half to be borne by Ontario and one
half ])y Quebec. Tiio same rule must be applied to the Assets,— Ontario should
be assigned one half and Quebec the other half. These Assets differ in value.
Fortunately, however, a value has been placed on them at the instance and by the
consent of both tho Arbitrators, and the Treasurers of the two Provinces. And
j therefore it will not be difficult for tho Arbitrators to divide them according to

) tlieir value.

Althougli I do not think the division, on the principle of partnership, at all
comparable to the other modes suggested ; still, if tho Arbitrators think differ-
ently, and after all that has been urged against it, adopt it, it must be on the
distinct understanding that it must be taken in its entirety, and that the law of
partnership in its full depth, length and breadth must be applied, and followed
out to its logical consequences.

.:^iJXSiLS^.Ji^'%

The results of the partnership principle -would be as follows : — Assume the
excess of debt as before at $10,500,000 to be equally divided,

Ontario's portion would be $5,250,000

Quebec's portion would be '). 250,000

Assume the Assets as valued at $4,204,322 12—

Ontario's share would be $2,102,1G1 OG

Quebec's share would be 2,102,161 06

The principle of a general partnership, without stipulations or with stipula-
tions, cannot be adopted and then worked out partly on that principle and partly
on the principle of a special partnership, with special stipulations, as is proposed
by the Counsel for Quebec. The moment] you take into account the value of the
Capital Stock (Rates and Duties), each brought into the Union, and the charges with
which such Capital Stock (Rates and Duties) were encumbered, then you must pro-
ceed on that i)rinciple throughout. It is impossible any one can contend that on
the principle of partnership accoixnts, or any other principle whatever, you can
take an isolated item, for example, as is proposed by the Counsel for Quebec in
this case, a charge or incumbrance on the Rates and Duties brought into the
partnership concern, and stop short there— making no enquiry into the assets
created by this very debt or charge, aud handed over to the partnership firm, and
no investigation into the partnership dealings and transactions during the long
period the partnership continued. If it be assumed that absolute equality did not
exist at the beginning, and did not continue throughout the partnership in all
its accounts and dealings, and at its end, but on the contrary that there toas
inequalit// at the beginning, then the Arbitrators will have made up their minds to
discard, in the consideration cf this question, the provisions of the Union Act of
1840, to Avliich I have referred, and the subsequent legislation of the late Province
of Canada throughout the period of the Union, and must proceed to take the
accounts according to law, as follow :-"

"1. Ascertain how the firm stands as regard non-partners," (which in the
present case would be the amount of the excess of debt over $62,500,000, a
matter to be determined, not by the Arbitrators, but by the Dominion Govern-
ment and the Province.)

" 2. Ascertain what each partner is entitled to charge in account with his
*' co-partner, remembering in the words of Lord Hardwicke, that each is entitled to
" bo allowed, as against the other, every thing he has advanced or brought in as
" a partnership transaction, and to charge tlie other in account with what that
" other has not brought in, or has taken out, more than he ought."

";>. Apportion between the partners, all profits to be divided, or losses to be
" made good, and ascertain what, if any thing, each partner must pay to the other
" in order that all cross claims may be settled. In order therefore to take a part-

" nership account it is necessary to diatinguish joint estate from separate estate ;
"joint dobts from separate debts; and to determine what gains and what losses
" are to be placed to the joint account of all the partners, or to the separate
"account of some or one of them exclusively." — Lindiey's Law of Partnership
p. 828.

This author goes on to say — " The principles on which this is to be done have
" been explained in previous chapters. Referring the reader therefore to them, and
" reminding him that in taking the accounts between partners, attention must bo
" paid, not only to the terms of the partnership articles, but also to the manner in
" which they have been acted on by the partners, there remains but little to add
" on the present subject, except as regards just allowances, the period over which
" the account is to extend and the evidence upon which it is to be taken."

In the latter quotation reference is made to " the terms of the partnership
" articles, and the manner in which they have been acted on by the partners."
In the present case reference to the Union Act of 1840, and to the manner in
wliich the provisions of that act were acted on during the Union, as evidenced by
the Statutes passed under it, including the appropriation acts for each year, and
the records contained in the Public Accounts published annually, would, in any
court of laiv or equity forever preclude any other accounting than an equal division
of the excess of debt and of the assets. I make this observation to show that this
portion of the direction of the author in taking the account is inapplicable in the
view I am now discussing of applying the partnership principle to the adjustment
of the debts, credits &c., of the Provinces. For if reference is made " to the terms
'• of the articles of partnership, and to the manner in which they lipve been acted
du," for one purpose, it must be for all purposes. They must l)e excluded entirely,
or acted upon altogether in respect of all matters to which they apply ; and in the
present case tliey apply to every transaction whatever. But assuming they do
not apply, and assuming that the "■ charge on the Jiates and Jjntiis" of T.^pper
(.'imada, culled its debt, as also the state of the Exchequer of Lower Canada, called
its eredit or casli in hand, are to be taken into account in tbe apportionment of the
excess of debt and the division of the assets, it inevitably foUows as a rule of law>
sanctioned by every principle of justice, that the account between Upper and Lower
Canada must be taken as follows : —

1. An account of the debt of each Province at the Union, assumed by United
Canada.

2. An account of the value of the assets in the natu.-c of publi(! Avorks of each
Province transferred to United Canada.

'5. An account of the net revenue derived from each Province, during the
Union from sources other than from public works which were provincial in their
character, and although situate entirely in one Province were common to both,
as for example the Welland Canal, St. Lawrence Canals, Lake St. Peter Works,
Chambly Canal, Works on th« Ottawa, Slides, &c.

estate ;
t losses
eparate
nership

4. An :iccount of tlio rcvonue dorivcd from the works mentioned in the third

and

liaragrapli.

'). An account ol tlie expenditure i
other than those mentioned in tlie third

n eacli Province on objects or for purposes

)aratri

aph

t>. An account of the expenditure on objects 'or for purposes mentioned in
tlio third piirai^rraph.

In order that disputes may be avoided, the public accounts should be strictly
adhered to in taking tlio accounts. The total debt after deductions to be made
according to the British Nortli Aniorica Act will be given by the Dominion Govern-
ment—from it will bo deducted §0-2,500,000, which, in so far as Ontario and
Quebec are conriertied removes altogether from the consideration of the arbitrators
this sum — Ontario and Quebec paying their proper portion of it into the Dominion
exchequer. Therefore, it will only be the excess debt over this amount with which
the arbitrators will have to deal.

The accounts being taken in accordance with the above six propositions, it
will be seen whether Lower Canada has paid more or less into the Treasury of the
late Province from local or Lower Canada sources than it has drawn out of it for
local or Lower Canada purposes and objects ; if more, the late Province will be
indebted to it for the excess ; if leas, it will owe the late Province what it has drawn
out over its contributions into tho Common Treasury.

The same consequences will attach to Upper Canada, and the apportionment
of the excess of debt and the division of the assets will be made between the two
Profinces accordingly.

I have now said all T think it necessary at present to say on the subject. It
seems to me, it would be well in the first place, carefully to consider in connection
with the whole subject, the Union Act of 1840. In my judgment, it lays down a
broad and fundamental basis which must be taken to be the solemn contract be-
tween the parties, and from the provisions of which no departure can be permitted.
Here is something tangible, something explicit, something which cannot be denied,
and which on all occasions can bo invoked in justification of all things done in
conformity to its stipulations. Let the question be asked with respect to every
view which has been taken of the subject and every suggestion which has been
oftered, " what says the Constitutional Act, under which Lpper Canada and
Lower Canada became re-united in relation to this matter "' ':" In the s'^cond
place it would, I submit, be well attentively t»> consider and never to lose sight of
the fact that the annual appropriation Acts were passed by the Legislature in view
of and with full notice and knowledge of all the circumstances of the Union and of
the contributions made to the revenue by each Province, and that therefore it
must be assumed that the Legislature has adequately provided for, met and satisfied
the just claims of eacK Prp.vince. . IS^eith^r. should it escape attention that the pro-
per adjustment of the {ip|)Ci;rtioii>ponv of n<on,e.yshaf^ been recognized, and expressly

acted on in many acta of the Legislafure of the late Province. It was done in the
Kebcllion Losses Act, which as compensation to L'pper Canada gave to it its Mar-
riage License money. It was done in the Seignorial Act of 1864 Avhen $600,000
was specially set apart for Upper Canada purposes as compensation for that amount
charged on Consolidated Revenue for the redumption of Seigniorial rights. It was
again done in 185!) when compensation to tiie amount of upwards of $2,218,000
cliargedupon Consolidated Revenue in respect of Seigniorial rights was carried to
tiio credit of the Municipal Loan Fund of Upper Canada. It was yearly done in
the Appioi>'-iation Acts in respect of Common Schools, Colonization roads, Char-
itable and Liducational Insti*^^utions, in short in almost every grant of public money
for local as distinguished from general Provincial objects. If these facts, with the man-
ner in which the Public Accounts have been kept, and the manner in which the debt
of the Dominion was adjusted in Confederation, are taken into consideration and
duly weighed, it seems to me the arbitrators cannot be at a loss or have even
doubts as to the judgment at which they should, nay necessarily must, arrive.

^•^ \J- ■^ ^ ^- V \l V \>-s.

'•• ■•«* ••«•

! in the
;8 Mar-
00,000
mount
It was
L8,000
led to
one in
Char-
ion e J
man-
debt
and
even