Then the hon. member proceeded to say:
And in that way the entire amount of the subsidies which were authorized for the construction of branch lines was disposed of, $20,000 for branch lines, and of that same sum David O'Connell, money lender of the c\ty of St. John, received $5,600 under the direction of ffm. Pugsley. Now, I think, in view of this record, the statement which the Minister of Publio Works made, and the strictures he passed upon the commission for commenting upon this matter, will not carry very much weight, either in this House or with anybody who reads his speech, and who reads the record that I have adduced.
Any one reading the statement would assume-and no doubt the hon. gentleman intended that to be assumed-that the $5,600 was assigned and paid to Mr. Connell in satisfaction of some old claim in 1896, some Mr. PUGSLEY.
eight years before, which Mr. Connell had against me. I desire to say that Mr. David O'Connell had no claim against me and that there were no transactions outstanding of any kind or description between him and me; and so far from this $5,600 having any connection with business between] Mr. Connell and myself, it was for the payment of a promissory note of the New Brunswick Coal and Railway Company which Mr. Connell had discounted and the proceeds of which were used to pay fori steel rails purchased from the Intercolonial Railway at Moncton and used on the branch lines of the New Brunswick Coal and Railway Company. Regarding the remaining portion of the $20,000 subsidy to the branch lines the $14,000 was paid the Bank of New Brunswick on account of a note which the bank_had discounted for that company and the proceeds of which had gone into the construction of these branch lines. I felt it my duty to call attention to this as early as possible so that the House may understand there is no ground whatever for the suggestion sought to be conveyed by the hon. member for York referred to it, I suppose, by reason is to be found in the report of the commissioners. They did not refer to this matter at all, but the hon. member for York referred to it, I suppose, by reason of orders in council and documents which he found on file but which are not mentioned in the report of the commissioners, which has been printed and is now in the hands of many hon. members. The commissioners make no reference whatever to the $5,600 and make no charge against me such as is suggested by the hon. member for York.