,
however eminent.

Hincks returned to Canada with a tentative contract in his pocket. To
Canada, too, came Henry Jackson, a partner in the Brassey firm for this
enterprise, and one of the most skilful and domineering of the railway
lobbyists in Canada's annals, rich in such methods. At once a battle
royal began in parliament. On August 7, 1852, the Montreal and
Kingston and the Kingston and Toronto charters were proclaimed in
force; apparently the supposition of the government was that the
English contractors would simply subscribe for the bulk of the stock in
these companies. But the Canadian promoters were not willing to give
up their rights so easily; a week after the {74} books were opened,
Galt, Holton, and Macpherson subscribed between them L596,500 and seven
of their associates took up the nominal balance of the capital of
L600,000 which was authorized. Hincks met this move by bringing down a
bill to incorporate a new company, the Grand Trunk Railway Company of
Canada, and the rights of the rival claimants came before parliament
for decision.

On behalf of the English promoters it was urged that the Canadian
promoters could not raise the necessary capital, that the
Galt-Holton-Macpherson subscription was a fake, that the English
contractors could induce capitalists to invest freely at low rates, and
that their superior methods would result in a road of more solid
construction and lower working expenses than the ordinary American
railway. Holton and Galt, on the other hand, contended that their
subscription was in good faith, that tenders were in, and that with
provincial guarantee and municipal aid, and by paying the contractors
partly in stock, they could finance the road. It would be better, they
urged, to have the control in the hands of men who knew the province
rather than in the hands of outsiders. The Grand Trunk Company,
seeking incorporation, was only a {75} sham company, under the thumb of
the contractors, formed to ratify a foregone contract with them. If
the Montreal and Kingston Company was given control, it would invite
the Brassey firm to tender on the same basis as other contractors: no
more could honestly be asked.

Galt and Holton had the best of the argument, but Hincks had the votes,
and rumours which Jackson spread of the Brassey millions and the firm's
open door to all the money markets of Europe brought conviction or
afforded excuse. The railway committee reported in favour o