1901-02-12

THE RAILWAY QUESTION.

Mr. W. F. MACLEAN (East York).: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day arc called, I wish to ask the attention of the House to a matter which I consider of supreme importance to this country, and to put myself in order I shall conclude with a motion.


Mr. SPEAKER.: I understand that the hon. gentleman will conclude with a motion to adjourn the House ?


William Findlay Maclean: I will move the adjournment of the House, and to that motion I propose to speak.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: The hon. member may be absolutely in order in moving the adjournment of the House, but at the same time I would call his attention to the fact that he will doubtless have ample opportunity to discuss the question which he has in view under our ordinary procedure. Unless the question is of really urgent importance, it is harldy regular to bring it up in this form. At the very outset, I wish to direct the attention of hon. members to the fact that it would be much more convenient if questions of ordinary importance were placed upon the Order baper. It would greatly facilitate the business of the House if this course were adopted.

From the year 1867 up to the year 1896, during a period of nearly thirty years, there were about twenty-five motions to adjourn the House made for the purpose of bringing a special subject before the House. However, during the last session of parliament there were no fewer than thirty-four motions of that character. It is only necessary to mention this to the House to show the change that has taken place, and I might be permitted to express the opinion that it would be more regular if these motions to adjourn the House were only made in connection with questions of the most urgent importance.


William Findlay Maclean: Even under your suggestion, Mr. Speaker, I can still raise the question, because it is a question of the most urgent importance to the people of Canada. I desire to bring before this House, and before the country, the great fact transpiring in the United States to-day as to the control of railways. The railway mileage of that country is now passing into the hands of a most powerful syndicate. This syndicate controls most of the railways of the United States, and there is a dread that within two or three weeks there will not be one line of railway in the neighbouring republic which will not be controlled by Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Vanderbilt, Mr. Harri-man, Mr. Hill-whose name we hear a great deal of in Canada-and some others. These men have under their power now over $2,000,000,000 of railway capital, and not only that, but these same men control the banking institutions, they control the coal fields, they control the Standard Oil Company, and only last week they got control of the entire iron production of the United States. Last night there was a statement- and here is wheft the question comes home to Canada-in the Montreal Star


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. Where ?


William Findlay Maclean: Perhaps the statement is reported as coming from a friend of hon. gentleman opposite. That statement is this :
It would not be very difficult for the powerful financial interests which Mr. Hill represents to secure a majority of the common stock of the great Canadian Pacific Railway.
Now, the point that I want to bring before the people of Canada and this House is this, that these men, who have obtained control of the railways of the United States, are in a position to-day to capture' the control of both the Grand Trunk Railway and the Canadian Pacific Railway. I can go further : I believe that tracers are out to-day after the stock of these two railways, in order that Messrs. Morgan, Rockefeller, and the men associated with them may, if they think it necessary, get the control of these two Canadian roads ; and I call the attention of the people of this country to this fact, that less than $50,000,000 put on the stock market to-day will secure the control of the
Canadian Pacific Railway. Did this country put all the money which it has put into the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Grand Trunk Railway in order to build railroads which might pass any day from the control of this country to the control of the United States ? What do we see happening at this moment ? These Canadian railroads, in connection with which the people of this country have spent so much money under reputed Canadian or English management, are to-day a menace to Canada. The Canadian Pacific Railway and the Grand Trunk Railway have announced that they intend to shape their policies to build up American cities, if necessary, at the expense of Cana,-dian cities. There is the great question before the people of this country. We were discussing platitudes yesterday in this House, but here is a definite question. The Grand Trunk to-day is antagonizing the city of Montreal, and I believe the Canadian Pacific is antagonizing the city of St. John. These two railroads tell the people of Canada, openly and above board, that they have no consideration for Canadian interests, but will, if it is in their own interests, direct their traffic to the United States. If that is the case to-day, how much worse will it be when Messrs. Morgan and Rockefeller and their associates go on the stock market and secure control of the Grand Trunk and the Canadian Pacific Railway ? I am not dealing in a generality, but am speaking of something that might happen to-morrow. My hon. friend from West Toronto (Mr. Osier) occupies a seat on the board of directors of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and he and Mr. Shaughnessy might attend a board meeting to-morrow and have an intimation made to them that the Canadian Pacific Railway had passed from the control of Canadians to the control of these gentlemen in New York.


Mr. DAVIS.: How are you going to stop it ?


William Findlay Maclean: I will tell you how to stop it, and I am going to appeal to history. The most significant thing that has happened in my time was the thing which Benjamin Disraeli accomplished not so many years ago in connection with the Suez canal. He made an arrangement with the bankers of the British government by which he had the necessary money placed at his disposal, and before anybody knew anything about it, the world woke up and learned that England owned the controlling shares of the Suez canal. That was a first-class investment, and one of the things resulting therefrom is that Egypt is to-day one of the most important and growing sections of the British Empire. I say that if we are alive to the danger which seems to overhang our country, this parliament, irrespective of party, will take the bull by the horns, and place Canada in a position, if necessary, to go on the stock

market and buy the control of these two great Canadian railroads. Here is the point : the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Grand Trunk, as owned and controlled to-day, actually antagonize our own country, our own ports, our own canals, our own river routes, our own fast Atlantic service-antagonize Canadian interests in every way. But if the state had control of these railways, they would be the complement of our canals, of the Intercolonial Railway, of our rivers and harbours, and they would be, what they are not now, national railways helping to build up this country.
Some hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House are disposed to make sport of this ; but I read only yesterday in an Ottawa paper that the Minister of Public Works (Hon. Mr. Tarte) proposes to extend the Intercolonial Railway across this continent so as to give the people of Canada some relief from the exorbitant rates charged by the Canadian Pacific Railway. I believe in that, if we cannot nationalize the Canadian Pacific ; but it will cost more to extend the Intercolonial across the continent to the other seaboard than it would to acquire today the control of the Canadian Pacific Railway. There is the present and immediate way of settling the transportation problem of this country ; there is the way to get a fast Atlantic service-to use the railways of Canada to build up our Atlantic ports ; and it can be done for less than $50,000,000. The country would not have to bear any more expense in connection with the bonds and the various investments of the railway than it bears to-day. It is the traffic that pays all these expenses. In fact, I believe, the capital could be converted to a 21 or 3 per cent basis instead of having to bear the rather high rates that prevail to-day. The country would benefit in that way and in a thousand other ways from such an action on our part. We should not for a single day longer allow the control of our railways, and it may be the control of our coal areas, to stand in danger of passing over to the capitalists of the United States. And there is something coming in the United States. I believe a revolution is imminent there. What is likely to happen was depicted the other day in a cartoon in a New York paper in which Uncle Sam was watching some boys-Morgan, Rockefeller and others-putting the railways into a bag, and he said to the boys. ' When you get them all into one bag, I intend to take them over.' That is the position of matters in the United States. There are great constitutional difficulties in the United States in the way of the government taking over the railways ; but in Canada all that is required is a resolution to be passed by this House, and the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding) ought to be able in twenty-four hours afterwards to make arrangements by cable in England to have the Mr. MACLEAN.
necessary money to buy the control of the railways. It is au easy thing for us to do. We have extended the Intercolonial Railway, and it is the best asset Canada has to-day. I am told the Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair) is in favour of extending the national railway. If he is, he is on good lines. The Intercolonial Railway must not end where it is to-day. The people have substantial grievances, which must be remedied, and the way to remedy them is to stop chartering railways and giving away to railway corporations the lands of the country.
Somebody is going to tell me that there will be corruption and maladministration attending this project. I would be prepared to pay a man like Mr. Hays, who is admitted to-day to be the first railway man in America, $100,000 a year, if necessary, to administer our railways absolutely for the benefit of the people and irrespective of party or political considerations ; and we can get such a man. Perhaps we could get three men to do the Work for a great deal less money. But what I am talking about is a serious present problem before the people of Canada, which may be forced upon their attention any day-a problem which must be solved, and to which immediate public attention should be directed; and we should have some statement from the government as to what they would do if they should wake up some morning and find that our two great Canadian railways had passed into the hands of that enormous syndicate in the United States which to-day controls nearly every mile of railway in that country, which controls every acre of coal lands, which controls the Standard Oil Company, which controls the iron output of the country, which control^ the banks. (Mr. Morgan is besides the greatest banker in the world to-day), and directing its energies against Canada and controlling our railways with the capital behind it, could wipe the name of Canada from off the face of the earth, and that is the only thing that could do it.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Mr. Mulock).: Oh no.


William Findlay Maclean: I am glad to hear the hon. the Postmaster General say that even they could not do it. I know of some who tried to do it a few years ago and did not quite succeed. I wish, in all seriousness, to call the attention of this House and the entire country to the situation as it exists to-day and ask, under these circumstances, some information from the government of what they are likely to do under the circumstances.


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: I would not like to be offensive to my hon. friend, but I would suggest to him that if he were serious at all in the policy which he has adopted, he has

not chosen the best method of bringing the policy he advocates to the attention of parliament. The suggestion made by him that the government should buy the Canadian Pacific Railway is surely worthy of some notice beforehand so that we should have time to consider such a large question. But he has chosen instead to bring up this question, without a moment's notice, to the attention of the House. I would suggest, at the opening of this session, that we ought, as much as possible, to adhere to the old rule that no question be brought to the attention of the House on a motion to adjourn except one of great urgency.


William Findlay Maclean: Hear, hear.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I do not see the urgency in this case. This matter can stand until to-morrow. I do not think it is of such a character that twenty-four hours' notice would be too much to give, before proceeding to its discussion. If he is anxious to have the question brought up without a moment's loss of time, he could do so, within the rules, by calling attention to it in a few moments when we move that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply. And even if the House be not ready to go into supply


William Findlay Maclean: 


The PRIME MINISTER.: The motion could be moved in order to give my hon friend the opportunity he desires, which I, for my part, would be glad to give him. I therefore have no other course to ask the House to take than to vote his motion down.


Mr. N. CLARKE WALLACE (West York).: I think, Mr. Speaker, that this House is entitled to a little more information from the government than has been given us. The matter brought before our attention by my hon. friend from East York (Mr. Maclean) is one of momentous importance to the people of Canada. The right hou. the First Minister has either not been seized with its importance, or, for some other reason, is not prepared to make any statement about it.
But take the facts, as we know them, connected with this railroad question. We have had the information give us within the past few days that the Grand Trunk Railway has made the city of Portland its ocean seaport, not only for the winter months, but the whole year round. This magnanimous, generous and beneficent government built a bridge for this company in order to enable it to take its business away from Montreal to Portland, and the Grand Trunk Railway boasts that that bridge has been built without a dollar of cost to that company. I have always said in parliament, and this side of the House always protested that the bargain made with the Grand Trunk Railway and the Drummond County deal, was a most improvident one. But leaving the Drummond County Railway aside for
the moment and dealing simply with the Grand Trunk Railway, this government gave them sufficient money to enlarge the Victoria Bridge across the St. Lawrence and to carry that product, which we all desire should be shipped from the Canadian ports of Montreal or Quebec in the summer, and Halifax or St. John in the winter, to a foreign port. Now we have the important information from Mr. Reeves that the whole of that business in winter and summer is to be transported to Portland. The Grand Trunk Railway say that they have made enormous investments in Portland and ask: Are we to leave those investments idle? And they have been aided by the generosity-or rather I should say by the extravagance, the unjustifiable extravagance, of this government-to make Portland the winter and summer terminus of their road. Here is a most disastrous position of affairs. We have our Canadian cities down by the sea, Halifax and St. John, of which we are proud, and whose growth and increase we should do our best to develop. Then we have the city of Quebec, which is beginning to show- and we are glad to know it-signs of increased prosperity, and the great city of Montreal, the ocean port of Canada. Yet we are told to-day that the business of this country, so far as the Grand Trunk can do it, is to be carried past our doors into a foreign and hostile country. I protest that the government should have something to say about these matters rather than make the poor plea that it is inconvenient to bring them up, that we should adhere to the old rule and let the motion stand until to-morrow. when the House goes into Committee of Supply. In my opinion that is a most absurd proposition. You cannot move an amendment to the motion to go into supply because the government will then say: This is a want of confidence motion, and will call on all its supporters to vote it down without discussion. My hon. friend from East York (Mr. Maclean) has taken the proper course in bringing this matter to the attention of the House.
Then there is another question, which arises in a distant locality, but is closely connected with the one now before the House. We read from day to day that James J. Hill, of the Northern Pacific Railway, is acquiring possession of Canada's great coal fields, the Crow's Nest coal fields, and that he will apply to parliament for a charter to build a road into that district. It is true that the speech from the Throne gives us no enlightenment or information about this important matter, but we would like to know something about it. We would like to know whether the Crow's Nest coal fields, the greatest perhaps in the world today, are to be handed over to this rival corporation beyond the jurisdiction of the parliament of Canada or the government, which three or four years ago manipulated them in the interest of its friends.

There is another matter connected with this. We all remember when the right hon. the First Minister, at a banquet in the city of Toronto, was hailed as a great deliverer because he had got a telegram from Mr. Fielding, his Finance Minister, in England, stating that the Fast Atlantic steamship service was an accomplished fact- the business was concluded. Perhaps, I am mistaken in saying that the telegram was from the hon. Minister of Finance; it may have been from the hon. member for Quebec West (Hon. Mr. Dobell). At any rate, it was from some minister in England-but there are so many ministers in England at different times that we cannot keel) track of them. To-day, as I have said, we have a confession that there is to be no fast Atlantic line. And we have it further said that we do not need a fast Atlantic line. Why, of course not. If Portland, New York and Boston are to be the ocean ports for the Dominion of Canada, what do we want with fast steamers from Montreal, Quebec, Halifax, or St. John ? All these things seem to be going together; and we have a government in power to-day that, so far as we can see, do not realize their duty in relation to these matters. We wish to rouse the government and to make them realize that these are important questions and that we expect them to do their duty to the country with regard to them.


Mr. JOHN OHARLTON (North Norfolk).: The hon. member for West York (Mr. Wallace), possibly, has pursued a line not relevant to the question raised by the hon. member for East York (Mr. Maclean), when he attacks the government for its policy in aiding railways in the past. I imagine that the question raised by the hon. member for East York is one that we can discuss with better results if we abstain from partisan attacks upon the government for policy or action not directly bearing upon that question. It is possible that a better course could have been pursued by my hon. friend from East York in presenting this question to the House than that which he has pursued. But the question is before us norv for discussion; and it might be well to devote just a little time to it to call the attention not only of the House, but of the country to this important matter. I must confess that the position taken by my hon. friend from East York with regard to the imminence of a great crisis in this country in relation to monopolies and to transportation affairs is a position, perhaps, well taken. The absorption by a few individuals in the United States of the entire railway system of that country is a portentous fact; and the development and present condition of affairs in that country are of a character to challenge our attention. Results are being wrought out there which should be to us a warning as to the course which we shall pursue. Everything in the United States seems to tend to pass the leading Mr. WALLACE.
business interests into the hands of trusts aud rings and monopolies. A few days ago a steel trust was formed with a billion dollars capital.


Some hon. MEMBERS: A thousand millions.


John Charlton: A thousand millions are a billion, I understand. The organization of the railway trust follows fast on the steel trust. All the great railway interests of the United States are being absorbed by a few capitalists, and the position of the plutocracy threatens the best interests of the country. Half of the property in the United States is held by about twenty thousand individuals, and every conceivable kind of business seems to be legitimate prey for the trusts. The operation of these trusts must be inimical to the interests of the people at large. Transportation charges in the United States are often enormously beyond what they should be, if based upon the actual cost of operating the transportation lines. The same is true of telegraph charges. A few years ago, I looked up affairs in connection with the Western Union Telegraph Company, and I found that upon the enormous capital of $86,000,000, they were paying dividends at the rate of eight per cent. That capital covered only $16,000,000 of actual cost. That stock represented sixteen millions of money and the balance of water; but upon the whole of it the people of the United States were paying dividends of eight per cent. As to transportation, take the case of the New York Central, for instance. The stock has been watered from time to time, until that road, which is paying six percent upon its nominal capital, is paying nearly forty per cent upon its actual cost. Things go on in this way, and the people are plundered by the mono-plies and by the operations of these trusts and corporations. And now that this question is under discussion in this House, now that the discussion has been precipitated, it is our duty to consider whether we ought not to strive in some way to avert the calamities that are now falling upon the United States-whether we should not take some action in this country that will prevent the establishment of a great plutocracy, that, like a giant octopus will seize everything within its reach.
I rise merely to say as a member on this side of the House, that I think this is a question that deserves the greatest and fullest consideration on the part of the public men of Canada. Whether it is well that the government should absorb the railways, whether it is well to build an independent line and regulate rates by means of roads across the continent, as the government of the state of New York regulated rates by means of the Erie canal from tide-water to the lakes-these are questions deserving consideration; they are questions of a practical character to which we should devote

our best energies in order to find a solution that will be in the best interests of the country. I sometimes have had a fear that the government ownership of railways would lead to political corruption and to a condition of things not at all desirable. I do not know that that is necessarily the case. 1 believe the government might own the telegraphs of the country; and I would be in favour of the assumption by the government of that system at once. I am not sure, but that the government might go further in the interests of the people, and take charge of the transportation of the country as well. I do not give these as my views, but I do say that, with all the developments we see going on around us, with all the evils we see growing up, the time has come for the House to take these matters into serious consideration and to decide whether Canada cannot place herself in a position that shall avert the evils that have shown themselves among our neighbours to the south of us.


Mr. F. D. MONK (Jacques Cartier).: Before the resolution is put, I would like to ask of the Prime Minister (Right Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier), if any steps have been taken by the government to ascertain the truth of the reports that have been ventilated in the papers for some time as to the removal of the Grand Trunk Atlantic port from Montreal to Portland. The Dominion line which was largely subsidized by the government, as I understood, carries the mails; and the Grand Trunk is also greatly indebted to the government. As this matter has been before the public for some time I would like to ask the government whether they have taken any steps to ascertain what is being done by these two companies.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I wish my hon. friend (Mr. Monk) would put a notice of his question on the Order paper.
Motion (Mr. Maclean) to adjourn, negatived.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. Mr. Fielding).: My purpose, if the House be willing, is to proceed with the order of Supply to-day. But, I would refer to the observation made by the leader of the opposition yesterday, with respect to the Auditor General's Report. Of course, if that hon. gentleman takes the position that it is not expedient to go on with Supply until we have that report, I cannot take exception to his position. But, I ought to explain that the Auditor General, in the performance of what he believes to be his duty, brings his report down to a very late date and endeavours to include in it correspondence almost down to the very day of the meeting of parliament-certainly to a very recent date. The consequence is that his
report is completed late and must be hurriedly pushed ahead. We are now informed that the best that can be done is to have the report ready by Friday next. Therefore, if objection be taken, I will not press my motion, because I realize that hon. gentlemen opposite might desire to have the Auditor General's Report before them. We hope to have it here by Friday.


Mr. R. L. BORDEN (Halifax).: I suppose we might make a little progress by taking up some items as to which the Auditor General's Report would not be so necessary as with reference to some others, letting it be understood beforehand that it should not be considered a precedent. I think that course has been pursued on some other occasions. As the formal items with regard to which there will be no discussion would really take a very short time to pass, perhaps it would be as well under the circumstances to await the arrival of the Auditor General's Report, and then proceed as expeditiously as we can. If I thought there would be any great saving of time, I would be glad to fall in with the suggestion of the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding) ; but I do not think we would save more than an hour or two, and consequently we might as well wait.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Mr. Fielding).: I quite concur in the view of the hon. gentleman, and I will not press the motion.



REPORT ON TRADE AND NAVIGATION.

Nathaniel Clarke Wallace: Yesterday I asked a question concerning the report on trade and navigation, and the First Minister said that the Minister of Customs (Hon. Mr. Paterson) was not here. I see he is in his place to-day, and I would like to ask him when we may expect the report of his department to be down. 1 might say that last year


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I do not think the hon. member has the right to enter upon a discussion. He may put the question, why the report has not been brought down, but he can not discuss it.


Nathaniel Clarke Wallace: I am not going to discuss it ; but I would just say in one sentence that last session a new era was inaugurated in the Department of Customs by which the statistical branch was transferred from the outside ports of the Dominion to the city of Ottawa for the purpose of having this report down at the earliest possible moment, earlier than formerly. Now we are in the eighth month after the conclusion of the fiscal year, and the report that I thought would be down probably in three or four months, is yet to come. Now, that is a matter which I think is a grievance, because the report on trade

and navigation, perhaps above all others, loses its value by being delayed. The business men of the country require


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: As I have said, the hon. member has a right to ask a question, but I do not think it would be proper, except upon a question of urgency, to enter upon a discussion. He will be quite right in asking the reason for delay in bringing down some report, as he is doing now. I would like to be fair with the House, and I suppose it would be proper that no question should be brought up unless upon notice being given, excepting of course such questions as the hon. gentleman is bringing up now. But he cannot enter upon an argument.


Nathaniel Clarke Wallace: It has been the universal custom in the House to ask the question and to make a reasonable statement in order to explain it, but not to raise an argument. I am sure that I have not raised any argument on this occasion, because the minister himself will coincide with every word that I have said. I simply ask him now when we may expect the report of his department to be down ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. Mr. Paterson).: In reply to the hon. gentleman, I would say that the printing of the report is being expedited as much as possible, and I hope to be able to present it to the House on Monday next. I do not promise to do that, nor to say positively when it will be ready. I will not follow the hon. gentleman in the argument he made .use of ; but if he will reflect for a moment he will acknowledge, from his acquaintance with the workings of the department, that the advantage sought to be obtained in the change which was made, will only become manifest next year. He will see that we had to begin a new system of getting up monthly reports last July, and we have had to do the work of compiling the tables of the trade and navigation while this is going on, and therefore, it would be impossible the first year to reap the full benefit of the change. But I expect that under this new system we will b*e able to present the Trade and Navigation returns much more promptly than we have been doing.



QUESTIONS.


Mr. BENNETT asked :: What quantity of saw-logs was cut on Indian reserves in the province of Ontario in the season 1899-1900?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: The quantity of saw-logs cut on Indian reserves in the province of Ontario in the season of 1899-1900 was twenty-four millions three hundred and sixty-five thousand, five hundred and eighty-five feet, board measure.


Nathaniel Clarke Wallace: *


SAW-LOGS EXPORTED.
William Humphrey Bennett: What quantity of saw-logs were exported from the province of Ontario to the United States during the season of navigation of 1900?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. Wm. Paterson).: The quantity and value of logs exported from the province of Ontario to the United States from April 1 to December 31, 1900, as shown by export returns, are as follows
Quantity.	Value.
Cedar	
15 cords $	105Elm	
10,857,000	ft. B.M. 86,070Hemlock	
2,638,000	"	12,915Oak	
142,000	"	3,401Pine	
30,672.000	"	270,360All other	
4,835,000	"	27,019


SOUTH AFRICAN WAR-GRAVES OF CANADIAN SOLDIERS.
Mr. INGRAM asked :: 1.	Is It the intention of the government to bring ba^k the remains of all those Canadian soldiers who lost their lives in South Africa?
2.	Is it true that the graves of all those who have fallen are located and properly recorded in order that relatives and friends may know where to find them?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden).: The Canadian soldiers who lost their lives in South Africa were for the time being British soldiers, they received the burial of British soldiers, and it is not proposed to interfere with the traditions and customs of the British army in this respect. I may add that Her late Majesty the Queen expressed a desire, when her grandson died in South Africa, that he should be buried there ; the same is true of the only son of Lord Roberts, who lost his life there while in the British army. In reference to the second part of the question, I am not able to give a full answer. I may say that this matter is under the control of the British army authorities. I believe, however, that in many of the cases the places and graves of the Canadian soldiers who have fallen in South Africa have been properly marked and designated.


REPAIRS TO WABASH ENGINES.
Mr. INGRAM asked :: 1.	Upon how many engines have the Wabash Railway Company paid duty on repairs during the year 1900?
2.	What were the numbers on each engine repaired, what were the repairs and the amount of duty paid the government on each engine so numbered during the year 1900?
3.	What was the total amount of duty paid the government by the said company for the year 1900 on engines repaired?
4.	Did the government employ an expert mechanic to value the repairs and new parts supplied to said engines, in order to arrive at the proper amount of duty to be paid? If not, what method was adopted?

5.	Did the government, or any member of the government, receive any complaint from any quarter regarding the Wabash Railway Company being allowed to repair their Canadian engines in the United States? If so, what was the nature of said complaints?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. Wm. Paterson).: In answer to questions 1, 2, 3 and 4, I would remark that it has not been usual to disclose to the public the details of invoices or of customs duties paid by importers in individual instances, such transactions at the custom house being usually treated as confidential in their nature. Special returns from various ports would in any event be necessary to furnish the information asked for. The Customs Department is advised, however, that the Wabash Railway Company has paid duty on repairs to several engines during 1900. 5. I am informed that no complaint has been received at the Customs Department regarding the Wabash Railway Company being allowed to repair their Canadian engines in the United States, unless the following inquiries, contained in a letter from the hon. member for East Elgin can be so regarded, viz. : Whether the Department of Customs have any agreement with the Wabash Railway Company which would give them the right to take their engines or other rolling stock of their company over to their own shops in the United States for the purpose of repairs, and, if so, how does the Department of Customs arrive at the amount of duty (if any is paid) the company should pay on such repairs ?'


CENSUS COMMISSIONER FOR EAST ELGIN.
Mr. INGRAM asked :: 1.	Who is appointed Census Commissioner for the electoral district of East Elgin?
2.	How many applicants applied for the position, and what are their names?
3.	How many applied for the position of enumerator? What are their names, and how many have been selected up to date?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE (Hon. Sydney A. Fisher).: Mr. Speaker, in reply to the hon. gentleman's question, I would say that Mr. A. D. McGugan will be the census commissioner for the electoral district of East Elgin. In reply to questions 2 and 3, I would say that there have been no applicants.


Mr. INGRAM.: Did the hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Fisher) say Mr. McGugan for East Elgin or West Elgin ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE A.   D.@: McGugan for East Elgin.


ESTABLISHMENT OF A CANADIAN MINT.
Andrew B. Ingram: Is it the intention of the government to establish a Canadian mint? If so, where and when?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: In reply to the hon. gentleman 3
(Mr. Ingram), I would say that a measure respecting the establishing of a mint in Canada will be introduced during the present session.


DEFACED OR MUTILATED COINS.
Andrew B. Ingram: Is it the intention of the government to call in all defaced or mutilated coin?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: There has never been any provision in the Currency Act of Canada for the calling in of defaced or mutilated coins, and the government has no authority at present to take such action. Persons who clip or deface current coins, or who utter such clipped or defaced coins, are liable to prosecution and punishment under the provisions of the Criminal Code. Defaced coins, under the Currency Act, cease to be legal tender, and should be refused by everybody. Whether it is expedient to amend the law in respect to mutilated or defaced coins is a question for future consideration.


GRAIN RECEIVED AT INLAND CANADIAN PORTS.
William Humphrey Bennett: How many bushels of grain were received at the following ports during the season of navigation of 1900, and the port of shipment from where same was received: Midland, Owen Sound, Parry Sound, Collingwood, Goderich and Sarnia?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. Wm. Paterson).: In reply to the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennett), I would state that as soon as the notice of the question appeared on the paper, the Department of Customs wired to the different ports mentioned in the question for the information. It has not been received yet from all the ports, but the moment it is received, I will communicate the answer to the House.


REVISION OF DOMINION STATUTES.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaRIVIERE asked :
Will a revision of the Dominion Statutes take place at an early date?
The SOLICITOR GENERAL (Mr. Fitzpatrick).: In reply to the hon. gentleman (Mr. LaRiviSre), I would say that a revision of the Dominion statutes will take place at an early date.


DOMINION LANDS ACT.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaRIVIERE asked :
Is it the intention of the government to amend the Dominion Lands Act reducing the rate of interest on the unpaid portion of the price of public lands sold on terms ?
The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: Yes. The Act"referred to having fixed the standard rate of interest at 5 per cent, it is proposed to ask parlia-



ment to adopt that rate in respect of sales of Dominion lands.


LOAN TO MENNONITES IN MANITOBA.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaRIVIERE asked :
1.	What was the amount of the loan to or for the Mennonites who settled In Manitoba, and at what rate of interest?
2.	What reduction was made subsequently to the rate of interest, and what amount did that reduction represent?
3.	Has the whole amount of the loan been paid back, as well as the interest? If not, what amount is still unpaid?
The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE r(Hon. Sydney A. Fisher). 1. There were $96,400 loaned to the Mennonites who settled in Manitoba. Interest at the rate of 0 per cent, to be funded four years after date, was charged; repayments afterwards to lie annually made in sums calculated at the rate of 6 per cent compound interest. 2. A reduction was made from 6 per cent compound interest to 4 per cent simple interest. The actual amount of the reduction it is impossible to calculate. 3. The whole amount has been paid back, together witli interest at 4 per cent. Amount loaned, $96,400; amount paid, $130,381.43; interest, $33,981.43.

Sir CHARLES HIBBERT TUPPER asked :: Is it the intention of the government to introduce this session legislation respecting the appellate jurisdiction of the Minister of the Interior in ccnnection with mining claims?
The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR <Hon. Clifford Sifton). In reply to the question of the hon. gentleman, I beg to say that the jurisdiction referred to is conferred by order in council, and legislation is not required to modify it. The question of altering the method of dealing with appeals is now under consideration.


YUKON-TELEGRAPH CONSTRUCTION.
Charles Hibbert Tupper: Referring to Yukon telegraph construction and to pages 7310 and 7311 Hansard, 1900, where the right hon. the Prime Minister promised to ' find in the department (of Public Works) all the information we could get, intending to bring it down without a motion,' and to page 7514 Hansard, 1900, where the hon. Postmaster General quotes the Prime Minister's request of the Public Works Department as follows :-' That every means be taken to furnish the hon. gentleman at the earliest moment with every hit of information in the possession of the department.'
(a) Wfyen will this information be furnished?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. J. Israel Tarte).: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman (Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper)


Mr. FIELDING.: is good enough to make a motion, all the information that he desires will be brought down as speedily as possible.


Charles Hibbert Tupper: I understand that these papers will not be brought down unless they are formally moved for ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes. It will not take any time.


HARBOUR IMPROVEMENTS AT SKINNER'S POND, P.E.I.
Mr. HACKETT asked :: What amount of money was expended at Skinner's Pond, Prince County, P.E.I., for harbour improvements at that place during the year 1900?	v
Was a special appropriation made for this work, and if not, out of what vote was the money taken ?
What engineer recommended the work, and the date of his report?
On what date was the work commenced, and when stopped? The name of foreman, with number of days employed and wages paid him per diem?
Names of men employed, with number of days and wages paid each?
Names of men with teams, giving number of days employed and wages paid?
Has the department settled with and paid Mr. John Doyle, owner of the land taken for this work?
Is it the intention of the department to continue the work this season?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. J. Israel Tarte).: 1. $1,462.09.	2. No
special appropriation, money taken from general vote, Harbours, P.E.I. 3. Mr. J. B. Hegan, report dated September 30, 1898. 4. Work commenced October 1 and ended December 22, 1900. 5. Name of foreman, Edmond Gallant, employed 72 days at $2.50 a day. 6 and 7. Thirty-five men employed in October, 32 in November, and 20 in December, at $1.35 per day. 8. Nothing has been paid Mr. John Doyle for land. 9. The matter is under consideration.


RURAL POSTAL DELIVERY.
Mr. CLARKE asked :: Is it the intention of the government to institute a system of rural postal delivery?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Wm. Mulock).: The subject of a system of rural postal delivery is now receiving the consideration of the department.


CANADIAN REPRESENTATION AT OPENING OF AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENT.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. BROCK asked ;
1.	Has any communication been received by the government of Canada inviting the Dominion to be officially represented at the opening of the parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia in May next?
2.	If so, has any gentleman been chosen as the representative of Canada ? If not, why not?
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: There has been an invitation sent by Mr. Edmund Barton, the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia.' It is to the Prime Minister of Canada personally :-
The people of Australia will be overjoyed if you can visit them at the time of the opening of the first parliament of Commonwealth by His Royal Highness the Duke of York.
This is the only invitation that has been received so far, and the acceptance of it will depend on the length of the session.


ALLOTMENT OF ROOMS IN THE HOUSE OF 'COMMONS.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. ROBINSON (West Elgin) by Mr. Puttee asked :
1.	How many rooms are there in the House of Commons for the use of members during the
session ?
2.	What disposition has been made of each one for the present session and to what members have they been allotted ?
3.	Has any provision been made for the accommodation of Independent members of the House this session as was made last session ?
4.	If not, why not, and will the government make such provision?
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. J. Israel Tarte).: There are twenty rooms for the use of ministers and members of the House. The disposal that has been made this year of these rooms is the same that was made up to 1896.


Nathaniel Clarke Wallace: No.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Exactly the same as was made in 1896. The rooms have been disposed of as follows: No. 26, Nova Scotia; 27, French Whip's room; 16, Ministerial room. No. 16 is the Ministerial room. No. 6 is very well known as the Opposition room. No. 7 is the room of the Minister of Public Works. No. 7i is the room of the Postmaster General. No. 33, which was last year occupied by the Hon. Mr. Foster, has been given to the Hon. Mr. Cos-tigan, who belongs to the same province.


William Humphrey Bennett: Quite a change though.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 
VENTILATION ON OCEAN STEAMSHIPS.
Mr. SMITH (Wentworth) asked:: 1.	Has the government taken any steps to induce the ocean steamship companies to ventilate the holds in which apples are carried ? If so, what steps, and with what success ?
2.	What steamers, if any, have been induced to ventilate the holds in which apples are carried, and what means do they use to effect the ventilation?
3.	Has the government taken any steps, and if so, what steps, to ascertain if the steamers have actually carried out their promises, if any were made, in regard to ventilation of holds for apples ?
4.	Has the government taken any steps to ascertain the results of the ventilation _ of holds of vessels for apples in regard to their condition on arrival in Great Britain? If so, what is the result?
5.	Does the government intend again to test the value of British markets for Canadian grapes ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE (Hon. Sydney A. Fisher):: 1.	The Department of Agriculture requested and urged the owners and agents of various steamship lines from Canadian ports to provide ventilation for the holds or other places in which apples were carried, by the use of fans or otherwise. A communication to that effect was sent to them under date September 29, 1897. The matter has been followed up every year since that date; and the various owners and agents were urged to provide ventilated accommodation for cheese also.
2.	In July, 1900, the Department of Agriculture offered a bonus of $100 towards the initial expense of fitting up each approved steamship, to be paid after the ventilating equipment had been in use for at least three voyages. Twenty-three steamers were fitted with exhaust fans to ventilate the holds wherein fruit and other perishable cargo was stowed. These were steamers of the Allan, Thomson and Donaldson lines. The steamers of the Dominion Line, the Elder-Dempster Lines and the Manchester Liners (Limited) are reported as being provided with only the ordinary ventilators.
3.	Agents of the department were stationed in Montreal and at the ports of London, Bristol, Liverpool, Manchester and Glasgow, to observe and report on the loading and discharge of Canadian cargoes. The report indicates that the cargoes were delivered in better condition from the holds ventilated by exhaust fans than from other holds. The government intends to continue trial shipments of grapes.


SCHOOL LANDS, MANITOBA-SALES BY AUCTION.
Mr.  A. A. C.@: LaRIVIERE (Provencher) moved for:	.
List of school lands sold at public auction in Manitoba during last year, place of sale and name cf auctioneer and other officials in charge of the sale. The name of the purchaser, with the description and acreage of the respective lots purchased, price of sale per acre and amount paid on account. A list of the lots adjudicated but which were subsequently resold, name of first purchaser, price bid and at which adjudication was made; also, price at which sale of same lot was subsequently made, with name of purchaser.
He said:	It is a well-known fact, Mr. Speaker, that the school lands held for the province of Manitoba are managed by the Deparment of the Interior of the Federal government, and from time to time sales of portions of these lands are held. Many such sales have taken place in former years. During the past year several sales have taken place at different points, and it appears that speculators attended, and made bids on these lands although they did not intend to carry out their bargain, but rather expected to get the lands at a lower price when they were offered for sale again, and in some instances they actually did succeed in their expectations. I do not for one moment intend to blame the government for what has occurred, but at the same time there is something further to be done in those cases. An inquiry is now being proceeded with into the matter, and from the evidence adduced before the presiding judge it has been found that the system I have referred to has been carried out so extensively that the province of Manitoba will be at the loss of several thousand dollars. There is another phase of this case which constitutes a serious grievance. Bona fide settlers who intended to purchase these lands either to enlarge their own domain, or as farms for their children, have been ousted out of the opportunity of so purchasing by these speculators over-bidding them, and then after the bona fide intending purchaser had left the place the lands were again put up for sale and sold at a lower price than in the first instance. Evidence is daily being adduced before the presiding judge giving further instances of this kind of thing. I will not undertake to read that evidence, as it is rather long, and indeed as the inquiry has not yet been concluded, it would perhaps be premature to bring the matter before the House. I trust that as soon as this inquiry is completed and as soon as the government is convinced that there have been frauds perpetrated, that all these corrupt and fraudulent sales will be cancelled and that a chance will be given to bona fide settlers to purchase these lands, I am glad to know that an investigation has been ordered, because there undoubtedly has been something wrong Mr. FISHER.
going on. When this investigation is completed it will be the further duty of the government to rectify the wrong that has been perpetrated to the detriment of the bona fide settlers who intended to purchase those lands.


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: There is no objection whatever on the part of the government to bringing down the information which the hon. gentleman asks for. I can readily understand his desire that full and detailed information should be in his possession and in the possession of the House in regard to this matter, which in the province of Manitoba is a matter of great importance. So soon as my attention was called to the fact that there were charges of irregularities in connection with the sale, steps were taken to order an investigation, and the investigation has been going on for some time past under the direction of His Honour Judge Prendergast, one of the county judges of the province of Manitoba. We have asked Judge Prendergast to complete his report as rapidly as possible, so that it may be laid before parliament. So soon as the report is in my hands, I will have it laid before parliament without any unnecessary delay. I can assure the hon. gentleman that everything that can be done by the department to protect the interests of bona fide buyers will be done. Of course, it would be altogether improper for me to express any opinion until the result of the investigation is known ; but I might say that the investigation so far indicates that the first reports regarding the irregularities were very much exaggerated. That may or may not be the case. When the judge's report is here, we shall be able to decide.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Sir CHARLES HIBBERT TUPPER moved for :
Return showing an itemized statement of the number of gallons of spirituous and malt liquors taken into the Yukon district since the period covered by return (1900)Lthe number of permits issued therefor, names and post office addresses of those persons or companies to whom permits were granted, and the amount paid therefor, and all correspondence connected therewith.
He said : Mr. Speaker, I might remind the hon. Minister of the Interior that the language of the motion is exactly the language of the motion moved last session, which was complied with in the form there suggested. I have followed the same form for the purpose of comparison of the particulars brought down in the return of last session with those which I would like to have continued in this.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Sir CHARLES HIBBERT TUPPER moved for :
Copies of all reports from Mr. Ogilvie, Commissioner of the Yukon district, not already-brought down, together with such information as is available respecting the report referred to on page 5025 Hansard, May 10, 1900, and the delay in sending it forward.
He said : The acting Minister of the Interior (Hon. Mr. Sutherland) of last session will recollect that the session expired without his having been able to obtain from Mr. Ogilvie the report for which he asked by wire on several occasions ; and the object of this motion is to have that report brought down, if it reached the department, or, If it did not reach the department, to have brought down the explanation, or such papers or correspondence as may exist in regard to those inquiries of which we were advised from time to time. Before the motion is disposed of, 1 might take this opportunity of asking the hon. the Minister of the Interior whether there is any truth in the report that Mr. Ogilvie has resigned. The reason 1 bring this rumour to the attention of the House, is that, after it had circulated some days in the press, it was followed by the report that a gentleman-a Mr. Ross, I think -would probably be his successor, and 1 think this an opportune time to ask the hon. gentleman if there is anything in that report.
The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: In reply to the hon. gentleman, I beg to say that Mr. Ogilvie has not resigned, nor have I received any intimation from him that he intends to resign.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

John Charlton: ,
1.	That the practice of delivering speeches of great length in the Canadian House of Commons has introduced a discursive and irrelevant style of discussion, is destructive of pertinent debate upon public questions, leads to waste of valuable time, unreasonably increases the length of the sessions of parliament, is in marked contrast to the practice with regard to debate that prevails in the British House of Commons, and tends to repel the people of Canada from a careful and intelligent consideration of the proceedings of parliament.
2.	That it is desirable that rules and modes of procedure be adopted limiting, under certain conditions, the length of speeches, and regulating the general conduct of debate in that regard.
3.	That a speciaLcommittee be formed to. consider the question" of parliamentary debate, length of speeches, general conduct of debate,
and proper methods of securing greater promptitude in the despatch of the business of the Canadian House of Commons, so far as they be consistent with parliamentary rights and the general interest of the public; and report its recommendations to this House.
4.	That such special committee shall be composed of the following members : Messieurs Britton, Cowan, Haggart, Clarke, Parmalee, Monk, Madore, Fortin, Russell, Costigan, Tup-per, LaRiviere, Oliver, Prior and the mover.
He said : The motion which I am about to make, Mr. Speaker, was brought under the consideration of the House two sessions ago, and upon that occasion received unfavourable action. It was upon the Order paper last session, but owing to the delays, which this motion aims at, instituting proceedings to prevent, it was never reached.
I am glad to have this opportunity, at this early stage of the session, of bringing the matter to the attention of the House again. The feeling, I think, in the House itself, is a pretty general one that some modification of our rules might possibly be made in order to facilitate the despatch of business, and correct some of the evils that have been gradually growing up in the procedure of parliament. The tendency to lengthy speeches has been a growing one, for several sessions past, and the length of the speeches has tended to tljp prolongation ot debates often extending over days and weeks, consuming an enormous amount of time, and with practical results of very little consequence indeed.
The country, so far as my observation goes, looks upon the mode of conducting business in the House of Commons with a good deal of disfavour and dissatisfaction, and the methods which we have drifted into are of a character to repel the country from a proper consideration of the proceedings of parliament. We are gradually reaching a position when the proceedings of the House attract very little public attention, compared to their importance, owing to the prolongation of debates by speeches marked by their irrelevance and want of logical application to the case.
This resolution proposes no specific rules. It merely recites the facts with regard to the operations of this House and the methods we are falling into in the conduct of business. It proposes no line of conduct for the remedying of this evil except the indirect one, which, I trust, will bear direct and positive fruit, namely, the appointing of a committee to examine fully into the case, to take into careful consideration all the facts connected with our procedure, and the results which have flown from the application of these rules, and to consider whether it may not be practical, to some extent, to adopt a modification of these rules which will lead to a more rapid despatch of business and lessening the length of parliament and improve the conduct of business in such a way as will commend the approval of the government and the House,

and bring about a more practical method of transacting the affairs of the country.
The United States House of Representatives many years ago were driven, by long discursive speeches and waste of time, to the adoption of rules for the purpose of saving time. Some of these rules we shall have before us if a committee is given for our guidance, as well as the rules and regulations of the English House of Commons. In the United States House of Representatives, for instance, speeches are limited to one hour, a time is fixed for the closing of debate, and after a certain stage of debate speeches are limited to five minutes. Several speakers may, of course, give up their time to one, but all the time that each speaker is entitled to is five minutes. Any amendment made to an original motion, which, in our case, opens the whole field of discussion again, can only be presented in a speech of fifteen minutes, and must be replied to in a speech of ten minutes, and the debate upon it is then closed. It was found imperatively necessary to adopt rules of this character in order to get the busiuess of the country through within a reasonable time. We are reaching the same position which existed in the United States when these rules were adopted. We had a session of six months last year, during which we had thirty-three motions to adjourn, which led to a practical waste of thirty-three days, and an expenditure of that time on questions which did not appear on the Order paper. In the meantime hon. members had to wait from day to day, and from week to week, and from month to month, to reach motions they had on the Order paper. That was the ease with myself, and even then I did not reach the motion I had on the paper for final action at all. Without enlarging further on the question, I may say that we are all aware that much valuable time is thus wasted, and that it is desirable to adopt rules for the securing of greater pertinence and brevity in the character of the speeches, and greater speed in the despatch of business.
The committee, if granted, will have this question under its consideration, and will make what suggestions or recommendations to this House it may think fit. These can be dealt with by the House, and the House is not committed, by the granting of this motion, to anything the committee may recommend. Unless this House adopts any recommendation of the committee, of course, there will be no change, but I think, considering the circumstances, considering the methods we have fallen into in the discharge of our duties, it would be wise to adopt a committee to consider what should be done, and then leave the matter in the hands of the House.


Mr.  R. L.@: BORDEN, (Halifax). I would suggest to the hon. gentleman (Mr. Charlton) that there hardly seems any oc-Mr. CHARLTON.
casion for presenting this motion at the present time. It is true that the methods of debate in any deliberative assembly must always demand attention. It is possible that, sometimes, time is wasted in this House. I suppose that the same can be said of any deliberative body. Until we become perfect, it is absolutely impossible to conduct the business without wasting more or less time. But the move which the hon. gentleman (Mr. Charlton) proposes is one of a great deal of importance, and I expected to have heard a word from the right hon. gentleman who leads the House in regard to it. It is a matter that does not affect solely this parliament, or this session; it is a matter that will be of very serious moment to future parliaments. There are two things that must be borne in mind in dealing with it-in the first place, to secure the transaction of public business without waste of time, and in the second place, to secure to every man in the House of Commons as great liberty in discussion and criticism as is consistent with the transaction of public business in a legitimate way.


John Charlton: The resolution proposes that that shall be secured.


Robert Laird Borden: But the question is, whether or not, in the House of Commons of Canada at the present time, there is need of any change. If there is to be a change, the hon. gentleman (Mr. Charlton) has not given us any light as to the particular methods which will be suggested to the committee which he moved. I think that this is a matter in which we shall do well to ' hasten slowly.' We should not take it upon ourselves within a few days of the opeuing of this first session of a new parliament, to deal with a matter of this kind, which, possibly, in the opinion of a great many members of the House is not a matter that very urgently requires to be dealt with at all.


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: My hon. friend (Mr. Charlton) has reminded the House that this is not the first time he has introduced a motion .similar to this. In fact, if I remember aright, this is the third time that my hon. friend has brought this identical motion to the attention of the House. On previous occasions I did not for my part favour the passing of such a motion; and I see no reason to modify the views I formerly entertained. I agree with my hon. friend that in the last parliament the speeches we listened to, were, perhaps, of a somewhat inordinate length. At that time, I said that I would rely upon the good sense of the House to remedy that evil without taking any formal step to do so. I have reason to believe that this parliament will see, in these matters, a very marked improvement. I suppose that this year, parliament will com? back to the old practice of delivering speeches of moderate length, and that there

will be no necessity to apply the American system to our procedure. My hon. friend says, very truly, that the practice lately introduced in this House, is in marked contrast to the practice of debate that prevails in the British House of Commons. But the adoption of the rule which my hon. friend suggests, the American rule, would not


John Charlton: I did not suggest that.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Perhaps my hon. friend did not suggest that in so many words in his motion, but, as I understood his remarks, he had it in mind to adopt somewhat the American system of limiting speeches


John Charlton: Not at all.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Then I am the better pleased. Still, I cannot see that there is any reason, at this early period of the session, for trying to correct what was, no doubt, an evil. 1 think we can try this parliament and see how far the evil, which was so marked in last parliament, will prevail in this one. But, I may say to my hon. friend, that it is not out of place for parliament to revise its rules generally. For my part, I am prepared, and, indeed, I intend to see if the rules of the House cannot be modified somewhat. I am a strong believer in the British system of procedure, and 1 would only suggest that we should see how far we can adopt the rules which prevail in England. If I say, that, at an early date,
I intend to call the attention of the House to this subject, perhaps my hon. friend will agree in the meantime, to withdraw his motion.
Motion withdrawn.


MOTIONS AGREED TO WITHOUT DISCUSSION.
[Stage Direction]
Return of a certain report made in June, 1900, respecting Toronto Harbour by Engineers W. F. Jennings and Joseph R. Roy.-Mr. Kemp.
Return showing,-1. When J. R. Thompson was appointed an official of the Department of Interior, outside service.
2.	His duties and salary.
3.	Whether he ever acted in any other capacity than a homestead inspector, and if so, in what capacity or capacities, and for what length of time.	.
4.	When he was dismissd. Date of notice of dismissal. At what date he would, if on duty as homestead inspector, probably have received it.
5.	The date to which he was paid. If engaged by month, whether he was entitled to his pay up to the end of January, 1901? And if not, why not?
6.	Whether it is not customary, in dismissing officials of several years' standing, to pay them a gratuity in proportion to their length of service? Whether it has been done in similar cases? If so, why not in his?
7.	The cause of his dismissal.
8.	What charges were made against him, and whether he was given an opportunity to reply to them ?
9.	Dopy of notices issued by Mr. Burley.
10.	Copy of Mr. Burley's instructions.
11.	The name of the person at whose instance Mr. Burley issued such notices, and if on his own responsibility, whether Mr. Burley s action was approved or censured.
12.	Whether it is customary for the Department of Interior to advertise for parties to come forward and make cpmplaints against the officials of that department ? If not, why was that course followed in this case?
13.	The result of said investigation. Whether the investigation was adjourned to enable the complainant to secure evidence, and how long the investigation lasted?
14.	Whether Thompson was ever notified of the finding of the investigation ?
15.	A copy cf this notification.
16.	The date of Mr. Burley's investigation and the date of his report.
17.	Whether the files of the department in the
case under investigation furnished the complainants.	.
17a. Whether it is customary in such cases to hand over the files of the department to the complainants?	_	_
18.	Whether Mr. Thompson requested the department to furnish him certain papers on the files furnished the complainants as having any
! bearing on the complaint?
19.	Whether he made this request more than once; if so, how many times did he do so ? What reply was given him in each case?
20.	The name of the party or parties appointed in his place?
21.	The qualification of his successor or successors for the position?	_
22.	His or their experience to qualify him or
them for the said position, and of what has such experience consisted? At what date weie such appointments made and on what recommendations?	,	,
23.	At time of Thompson dismissal the amount cf work on hand requiring attention by him or some one acting in the same capacity.
24.	A comparative statement of the last two years of the .duties performed by him and all the other homestead inspectors and forest rangers where the duties of both offices are performed by the one official.
25.	The number of instructors made during the
twelve months ending November 30' in years 1896-7-8-9 by all parties acting as homestead inspectors, and the number of days in each yenr they were employed making inspections. The number of days in each year they receive pay, and during the time they were under pay, what other duties as homestead inspectors were they engaged at? Also the number of applications for patents received by each during the same period, and the fees the department received for such applications?	,
26.	The date when the charges were made against Thompson which were investigated by
' Mr. Burley?
27.	The date of Mr. Burley's report.
28.	Whether any further charges have been
TT1 fl.d ft ^
29.	If so, by whom, and their nature?
30.	When Thompson was apprised of them and asked to disprove or reply to them?
31.	Whether it is not the custom of the department to give all officials an opportunity to reply to any charges of insinuations against their conduct ?
32.	The duties of Mr. Burley prior to the investigation of charges against Mr. Thompson?
33.	How long Mr. Burley has been in the employment of the Department of the Interior ,
[Stage Direction]
his calling or business prior to appointment to investigate such charges, and what was his salary?
34.	Whether, at the date of such investigation, Mr. Burley was considered Mr. Thompson's superior officer ?
35.	Who recommended Mr. Burley's appointment as investigator or commissioner into the charges against Mr. Thompson ?
36.	Was there any protest, verbal or written, against the appointment of Mr. Burley by any official of the department or any other person ?
37.	How long the investigation lasted ?
38.	What it cost the department ?
39.	What the department paid the witnesses brought by the complainant ?
40.	Did the department pay any of the legal expenses of the complainant?
41.	Did the department pay the legal expenses of said Thompson in- the case ?
42.	Was the department asked to do so, and to what amount ?
43.	If so, what reason was given for declining to or refusing such request ?-Sir Charles Hib-bert Tupper.
Return showing :-1. The number of immigration agents employed by the government of Canada in the United States of America for each ,of the calendar years 1894-5-6-7-8-9 and 1900, together with the names of each of such agents, date of appointment of each, the location of each during each of said years, the salary of each during each of said years, number of days spent by each in his office, each year, amount of rent paid by each agent for offices during each of said years, number of days spent by each agent in travelling and amount of travelling expenses of each during each of said years and amount allowed during each of said years, to each or any of the said agents for board or lodging, or for both, the amount of help employed by each agent during each of said years together with the amounts paid by each agent each year for such help, giving the names of persons employed, number of days employed each year and amounts paid each year to each person employed and showing all other expenses in connection with these agents and their work. Date of leaving or dismissal from the service of the Dominion government. If still in the employment of the government, where, and the salary for the present year, and the number of emigrants reported by each agent during each of the said years as having emigrated to Canada from the district in which he was working.
2.	The number of agents employed by the government of Canada in the United States of America for each of the calendar years 1894-5-67-8-9 and 1900, who were paid by commission, the manner of determining the commission to be paid each agent, the amount paid to each during each of said years, the amount of all other expenditure incurred by the government of Canada during each of said years on account of immigration agents employed in the United States of America on commission, and the work done by each of such agents during each of said years.
3.	The names of all other immigration agents employed during the calendar years, 1894-5-6-78-9 and 1306 by the government of Canada, the date of appointment of each, the location of each during each of said years, the salary of each during each of said years, the number of days spent by each in travelling and the travelling expenses of each during each of the said years, the number of days spent by each in his office during each of said years and amounts paid
Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: by each for office rent and hired help, in detail, during each of said years, amount allowed to each for board and lodging during each of said years, and amount of all other expenses during each of said years of each such agents in connection with his rffiee and charged to the government of Canada.
4.	Date of appointment of W. T. R. Preston, his salary, his duties, his travelling expenses, amount he charged the government of Canada for board and lodging and other expenses in connection with his office, during each year since his appointment.-Mr. Wilson.
Return of the report of the engineer who surveyed Napanee river in 1890, and for a return showing the names of the persons employed, length of employment and sums paid to each person, and giving details of all other sums paid, with names of persons to whom payments were made on account of the said survey.-Mr. Wilson.
Copies of all papers, instructions, tenders, contracts, correspondence, reports in any way relating to the construction of a dwelling for the officers of the government or staff in Dawson City.
Also, all instructions, papers, tenders, contracts, correspondence, in any way relating to the construction of public buildings under contract awarded to William Rourke.
Also, all instructions, papers, tenders, contracts, specifications, reports in any way relating to the construction of a bridge leading from the barracks and other public buildings to the main part of the town in Dawson.-Sir Charles Hib-bert Tupper.
Copies of the address presented by the citizens cf Dawson to His Excellency the Governor General on the occasion of His Excellency's visit to that city in 1900, all orders in council, correspondence and papers in any way connected with the said address and the requests and representations contained therein.-Sir Charles Hib-bert Tupper.


REPORT.
[Stage Direction]
Report of the Minister of Justice-Penitentiaries.-Hon. Mr. Fielding, for Mr. Fitzpatrick.
On motion of the Prime Minister, the House adjourned at 4.55 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Wednesday, February 13, 1901.