to the rumored attempt of the liquor men to secure Mr.
Smith's dismissal, and report the facts in the case at the next
meeting of the Alliance. His conclusions after this enquiry are
embodied in the following letter, dated October 9th, and addressed to
"Thomas Tait, Esq., Assistant General Manager, Canadian Pacific
Railway":

"DEAR SIR,--I herewith return the correspondence concerning Mr.
Smith which you allowed me to have, and which our committee very
carefully considered. The action taken by your Company in
dismissing Mr. Smith from his position as your agent at Sutton
Junction, notice of which he received on Saturday last, October
6th, renders futile any further conference between the Company
and this Alliance on behalf of Mr. Smith. I am, however,
instructed to say that after a very careful consideration of all
the correspondence referred to us, after a thorough investigation
of the whole matter, we have come to the conclusion that the
paramount reason for Mr. Smith's dismissal is his activity as a
temperance man. Your Assistant Superintendent in his letter to
Mr. Smith, dated September 7th, makes this as clear as possible.
He says: 'You must either quit temperance work or quit the
Company. It makes no difference whether you are on duty or oft
duty, so far as this Company is concerned. They demand the whole
and entire time of their men, and they are going to have it.'
These are as plain words as the English language can produce, and
their meaning cannot be misunderstood. The complaints made
subsequent to my interview with you on the 19th of September
have, in our opinion, the appearance of an effort to find a
reason to explain the one given by your Assistant Superintendent;
a reason which we think your Company will find exceedingly
difficult to sustain at the bar of public opinion to which it
must now go. As regards these recent complaints, Mr. Smith has
never seen them. He has never been given an opportunity to deny
them, or offer any explanation. If these or other charges of a
similar character are the essential ones, then he has been
condemned without a hearing, either before your superintendent or
any other officer of the Company. Mr. Smith informs us that he is
quite prepared to defend himself against any charge of neglect of
duty or unfaithful service