94
collision, for all that this Government might as well have been 500 yards in advance or 100 yards further back. Now could this Government possibly divine the intended new boundary unless the plan had been shown to it?
12. Secondly. So far as Fletcher's lots are concerned, it is true that at the close of December, when a discussion had arisen as to my retaining part of those lots, the Government did transmit a plan showing those lots intended to be retained. It is strange that the General should think this partial information, accidentally supplied in December, justified the withholding all information in the previous July, the date when the proposed scheme was first actually sent to the War Department.
13. Thirdly. The danger of description without reference to the parties able to vouch for the correctness of the premises assumed is shown by the General's assumption of a "clear and distinct plan" for enlarging the Military Cantonments having been agreed to and signed by the Surveyor General in 186... and that this plan was made "for the express purpose of rendering the property for sale to the War Department." This assumption is incorrect. The first information received by this Government of the valuation and plan signed by the Surveyor General and Mr. Madlyn came from the General.