New-York tribune., 1873-07-30
A MINISTERIAL DEFENSE.

Canadian correspondence OF lHE Tribune
unfolds novel defense of the Canadian Min
istry. The Pacific Railroad scandal has not
been fairly explained by the newspaper organs
of the Government nor has anything
more than general and detailed de-
NAL of the charges brought by the OPP
position been attempted by the Government.
But in the letter which we print elsewhere is
given the explanation which is privately put
out by the members and friends of the Min
istry. Ii must be confessed that the defense
is somewhat weak one; in fact, for the sake
of quashng one indictment, it admits the force
of another 1t was found absolutely neces-
sary to explain why certain moneys were paid
to the Government party in the midst Of hot
canvass, and by men who were notoriOusly en-
gagged in railroad jobbery.
-. Mr.. McMulen's published documents con-
clusively establish the fact that money was
paid by the Allan Ring to the Election Com,
mittee of the Government party and, in some
cases, to the Ministers themselves. As there
has not yet been any satisfactory explanation
of the transaction by which Sir Hugh Allan
secured the Canadian Pacific Railroad contract,
it was naturally inferred that the money paid
to Sir John A. Macdonald. Sir Francis Hincks
! and other Ministers, was paid to influence the
award of that contract. This charge was
openly made against the Government ;
the whole affair was alleged to be
directly involved in the disposition OF
the Canadian PPacifc Railr9ad charter
| and Contract One after another, the
Ministers formally denied that they bad ever
received any money for that drard. we do
not recollect that any of the numerous denials
which have been called out by the publica-
tions of McMullen have attempted to refute
the charge that money had been received from
the Allan Ring for some purpose. On the
other hand, there is legal and documentary
evidence that the money had been so received
Now, we are informed, the Canadian Min
istry do not deny the fact that the
Allan party did pay over considerable
amounts of money to help carry the elections
for the Government; but it was not in con-
sideration of the award of the Allan contract (;
it was for quito another purpose. The grain
of trutL in the allegation brought against the
Government is that the party which represents
it took money Ito be used in tie electiOn) for
Governmental influence in railroad matters.
In other words, the Ministers triumphantly say
that they were not induced by pecuniary con-
siderations to give their influence in the Cana
dian Pacific Railroad award; but they were so
influenced to support another railroad scheme
of the same Ring.
We do not know how such defense will
be received in Canada. The charge which
has been so strongly pressed by the Opposi-
ton is still denied; but it is to be acknowl-
edged. we are told, that the Ministerial party
sold their support of the North Shore Rail
way for money which was used in the elections.
Indeed, ore of the Ministers, Sir George E.
Cartier who was personally hostile to this
newly mentioned railroad scheme, gave
his support to it on condition that
tho Allan Ring should spend money
for him in the Montreal elections.
We cannot see that this novel defense will
help the case in the least. 1t is like q mans
denying that he stole boots and admitting
that he stole shoes. The difference is in the
name, not in the degree of the offense. The
gravamen of the original charge is likely to
he sustained,