The Board’s method was for the local superintendents’ suggested appropriations to be refined by the officers above them, passed on by the President, submitted by him to the directors; revised by them, and then by the President carried to the Minister and a strong and, as I can testify, a vigilant committee of the Cabinet. Finally they were brought to the House by the Minister, with whom sat his deputy, who was also a director of the railways. Then they were open to the criticism of two hundred and thirty-five members, and were entirely subject to the approval of the House of Commons, which could demand all our reports. Now let us take a concrete case, not of permanent betterment, but of contracts for one of the most important operating supplies. In 1922 we were summoned before the Public Accounts Committee. What took place is on the record. Inquiry was made by a member for the current cost of a commodity for the supply of which known friends of his were also in the field. I took the position that it would be against the national interest to disclose prices, which, I knew from experience, were apt to be taken by certain firms desiring to get the business, the duty and freight added, and a tender put in for a few cents per ton below the price obtained by absolutely strict competition. I instructed my subordinate not to bring the information demanded. The member demanding the information is one of the most expert in all the forms of the House. When we pointed out that the subject of his demand had to do with the current year’s expenses, with which Parliament was concerned only as estimates; and did not touch the year’s business then before the Public Accounts Committee, no further effort was made to get the information. It would be inaccurate to say no further effort was made to get me. The episode was typical of many things, as to which men of affairs will need no further elucidations. Heaven preserve me from expressing political opinions; but there is a temptation to say that the Conservative party may regard itself as fortunate in the Borden Government’s double experience of war and railway administration. From the point of view of observing the conditions which Sir Robert laid down in May, 1918, the war stress, and the necessity for respecting the non-partisan avowals of the Union Government helped greatly to wean old fashioned politicians from the ancient customs. Whatever their private feelings about the loss of patronage and the helplessness of pull, they could not launch bitter complaints to Mr. Speaker without harming their own side of the House. Some of them had the mortification, though, of seeing their traditional opponents making attacks, which, naturally, were received with intense interest and favor by some of the folks back home.