1902-05-14

[Stage Direction]
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) moved that Orders No. 30, Bill (No. 28) respecting Telegraph and Telephone Companies-Mr. Fitzpatrick ; No. 31, Bill (No. 120) to amend the Dominion Lands Act-Mr. Sifton ; No. 36, Bill (No. 104) to amend and consolidate the law respecting railways-Mr. Blair ; and No. 37, Bill (No. 146) for the settlement of railway labour disputes-Mr. Mulock, be discharged.
He said : I may say in reference to these two Bills, to amend and consolidate the law respecting railways and for the settlement of railway disputes, that they will be taken up again next session. The government, in introducing these Bills, did not intend to follow them up at the present session, but rather to give notice to the public, so that their features might be carefully considered, and perchance be ready to deal with them at the next session.
I may also take advantage of this opportunity to give an answer to numerous applications which have been made for assistance in railway construction. The government has determined not to ask parliament this year for any appropriations for that object. At the same time, we are not unmindful of the fact that railway development is
[Stage Direction]
more than ever a pressing necessity. This is specially true of railway construction in those fertile lands of the North-west Territories in the valley of the North Saskatchewan river, towards which immigrants and settlers are now rapidly and numerously flocking. It is due to those people-that they should be assured that their wants in that respect are engrossing the attention of the government, and it is hoped that next session assistance will be given to the construction of a railway by as rapid stages as possible from some point in the western boundary of Manitoba, through the Saskatchewan valley towards Edmonton.
Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).: What is the Bill respecting Dominion lands ? I thought that some measure of that kind had already been passed.


The PRIME MINISTER.: It did pass, but the amendments of the Senate have been such as to make the Bill nugatory. Therefore, we do not intend to proceed with it this session.


Robert Laird Borden: I understand that Orders No. 30, respecting telegraph and telephone companies, No. 36, to amend and consolidate the law respecting railways, and No. 37, for the settlement of railway labour disputes, will be presented and pressed next session ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: I think we were promised the second reading of the Railway Commission Bill, but I suppose the time has not been found available for that purpose.


The PRIME MINISTER.: That is it.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
House proceeded to the consideration of amendments made by the Senate to Bill (No. 134) respecting representation of the Yukon Territory in the House of Commons.-The Minister of the Interior.
Robert Laird Borden: What are the amendments ?


The MINISTER OP THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: The amendments are not of an important character. There is an amendment to section 22, which is purely clerical, by which the words ' two candidates where two members are to be elected' are struck out. It does not alter the meaning of the Bill, and it is a better way of expressing it.
Section 23 in the Bill as passed reads as follows :
If at the time fixed for receiving nominations there remain more than two candidates in nomi-Sir WILFRID LAURIEK.
nation where two members are to be elected, or one candidate where one member is to be elected at the election then pending, the said officer shall grant a poll, &c.
This section has been amended so as to read :
If at the time fixed for receiving nominations there remain more than one candidate, the returning officer shall grant a poll, &c.
The draughtsman in drafting the Bill provided for a case in which there was more than one candidate, but it is unnecessary, as the Bill provides at the present time for only one member, so that this amendment is quite in accord with the rest of the Bill. Section 28 is amended by the Senate in accordance with a suggestion made by the Minister of Justice (Hon. Mr. Fitzpatrick). The hon. Minister of Justice suggested that it might be possible that the chief justice or the senior judge might be away from the territory when an election was to be held, and that it would be better to provide that the senior judge who should happen to be there should act. I see no objection to the amendment, and I move that it be concurred in.
Amendments read the second time, and agreed to.



WAYS AND MEANS-AID TO RAILWAYS.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OP FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved that the House go into Committee of Ways and Means.
Hon. JOHN HAGGART (South Lanark).: Before you leave the Chair, Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask a question of the right hon. premier. He said that the government did not intend to bring down any subsidies for railroads this session, but I understood him to say that at no time was it more desirable that assistance should be given to railroads in particular parts of the country, and he intimated that in the opinion of the government there should be some assistance given to certain railroads next session.


The PRIME MINISTER.: To one railway.


John Graham Haggart: Has the right hon. gentleman supplemented the opinion of the government by Order in Council in that direction, or does he intend to do so between now and next session ? He is pledging the government to introduce a Bill next session for the purpose of giving assistance to that particular road.


The PRIME MINISTER.: There has been no order passed, and no order shall be passed either.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into Committee of Ways and Means.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: In the budget speech I stated that we proposed to extend the time for the free admission of

machinery for the manufacture of beet root sugar, and I gave notice of the following motion:
Resolved, That It is expedient that the provisions of chapter 22 of the Acts of 1901, respecting the free admission of machinery and, structural iron and steel for use In the construction of factories for the manufacture of sugar from beet root, be extended until the 1st day of April, 1903.
I now beg to move that this resolution be agreed to.


Mr. SPROULE.: If the minister extended the time for more than one year it would be proper for him to do so. He will undoubtedly have to extend the time next year if he desires the advantage to apply to those [DOT]who are building or contemplating building beet sugar factories.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I have had no representations made to me that a further extension would be necessary. If the matter comes up again it will be considered on its merits, but I do not think that it is wise at this moment to extend the time further in view of the resolution, notice of which has been given.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I doubt if the companies will be able to get in their machinery within the time fixed in the resolution.


John Graham Haggart: Has the Minister of Finance power to remit that duty without a resolution ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That may be debatable, but the more of these things we do by resolution of the House and the fewer of them we do by executive act the better. It is always better to have these things fixed in the tariff and then the public at large understand them and not a particular individual. The next motion is this. The Minister of Militia has made a contract for the manufacture of the Ross rifle in Canada, and one of the conditions of the agreement was that the company should have the right to import the machinery and parts of their rifles free of duty. Instead of leaving that to be expressed in the contract only as applied to that particular company, it was thought better that, for the same reason I gave * moment ago, it should be set forth in the tariff, so that if it should happen that any other company should at any time make arrangements with us of a similar character, this item would stand in the tariff free to all. Practically it only applies at present to the Ross Rifle Company, because that is the only company with whom the government have this contract, but instead of leaving it to be expressed in the contract itself, we thought it better to put these items on the free list as applying to all persons with whom similar arrangements might be made.


John Graham Haggart: Does the hon. gentleman mean the parts of the rifle which are
to be taken over by the Dominion government, or the rifles manufactured ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The aim of the government was to have these rifles manufactured in Canada, but it was remembered that the machinery would have to be imported, and there is practically no harm in admitting that free. If we made them pay duty we would have to put up the price. As respects the other part of the resolution, certain parts of the rifles, it is claimed, cannot be conveniently made in Canada, and these parts may be imported. That is the substance of the resolution.


John Graham Haggart: But this rifle company manufactures rifles not only for the government but for sale. They have a contract for the manufacture of a certain portion of them for the government. What I want to know is whether the parts of the rifle which are imported into the country and not used by the.government, come in free to be sold ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Not under this regulation. It only applies to work they do for the government. The machinery, of course, which makes the rifle for the government of Canada may also make 'a rifle for somebody else. To that extent the machinery would apply to all. I think the clause (a) makes it clear that it is only for the manufacture of rifles for the government of Canada.


Mr. MONK.: How does the minister think it possible to prevent the manufacture of rifles generally for the public ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We do not want to do that.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Will it be possible to limit it to the manufacture of rifles for the use of the government ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We do not propose to limit the factory to the manufacture of rifles for the use of the government. They may do it for anybody in the world ; but they cannot have these admissions free of duty except for the use of the government.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: How will you guard against such a thing happening ? If they choose to import the material in the rough for the rifles which they will sell) to the public at large, how can you prevent it ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That is to be left to the inspection and regulation of the Customs Department. The same question my hon. friend puts might arise in connection with some other items where the article is admitted at one rate of duty for the purpose of being manufactured, and at a different rate of duty when it enters into general consumption. It is a form of legislation that has been in our tariff for a long time, and practically it works out very well.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am inclined to think they should bring in their raw material free in any event. But where the government give a consideration that is not extended to any other factory, for the purpose of supplying the government's need, there would of necessity require to be some arrangement whereby the company would not take advantage of that clause and apply it to the general public. How would the government regulate It so that they could not use the same parts of a rifle for general manufacture ?


The MINISTER OP FINANCE.: I admit that it requires very careful observation by the Customs Department. We have the same question arising in other branches of business, but in practice I understand the department manages it very well. I' think it is regrettable that we have to have these distinctions in the tariff, but experience has shown that the Customs Department can watch them and guard against any abuse.


John Graham Haggart: I would much rather see the whole rifle manufactured in Canada. Under the resolution which the minister proposes they can simply assemble the different parts of the rifle when they come into the country. I think that a provision ought to be made so that the whole of these parts except, perhaps the forgings, or something of that kind, in the rough, might be obtained from other countries ; -but the whole material that enters into the rifle ought to be manufactured in the country.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: My hon. friend is mistaken. In the first place the arrangement .made between the Commissioner of Customs and the manufacturer sets forth just what pieces are required. Practically the whole gun is made in Canada. There are a few small pieces, easily designated, in regard to which it is very simple to know just how many of them are used, and would be entitled to come in free. Supposing they manufactured 10,000 rifles for the government, the customs would know that only 10,000 of these articles, or sets of articles, used in those rifles would be entitled to come in free. I do not think there will be any difficulty in working it out. I was on the committee examining the matter, and we found it was only a few small articles that we have not yet perfected in this country, that will have to be imported from foreign countries.


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. member for Lanark (Mr. Haggart) is perfectly correct in what he stated with, regard to the effect of this resolution. He said, as I understood him, that it is quite competent for the manufacturers to merely assemble everything, importing all the materials from abroad.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: If there was not a contract, it might be possiible; but the contract specifies what is to be done.
Mi-. BORDEN (Halifax). The contract has nothing to do with this resolution. My hon. friend from Lanark was not dealing with any contract, -but with what is before the House; and he is absolutely correct in bis statement as to the effect of this resolution.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Theoretically, yes.


Robert Laird Borden: The English language could not be plainer :
All materials or parts in the rough, unfinished and finished, screws, nuts, bands 'and springs, to be used in rifles to be manufactured at any such factory for the government of Canada.
You could not get a more comprehensive statement than that by employing any language. Of course, it is to be done under regulations made by the Minister of Customs, which may afford some safeguard; but apart from that, it is certainly open to the very grave objection which the hon. member for Lanark has suggested.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: My hon. friend has perhaps not observed the distinction drawn in subsection ' b' between the rough materials and the finished materials. If he reads it again, he will see that while they are at liberty to import rough and unfinished materials generally, the finished articles which they import are limited to screws, nuts, bands and springs. Then there is the general proviso that the Minister of Customs must make the regulations.


Robert Laird Borden: The whole of what the hon. minister states depends on the punctuation marks, which are not generally taken into consideration by the courts. There might be a very strong argument made to prove that it means exactly what the hon. member for Lanark says. These punctuation marks, though regarded as important by many people, have practically no effect in determining the meaning of language in a court of law.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE, I do not think the meaning depends on the punctuation. I think the language itself is very clear. Before the resolution is disposed of, I wish to ask the attention of the committee to another item which is not included in it, but about which I do not imagine there will be any difference. There is a provision in the tariff for the admission free of duty of certain machinery for mining operations and for blast furnaces and operations of that character. Under this provision we have allowed coke-making machinery to come in free of duty. There Is certain machinery which is used in common for the manufacture of coke and the manufacture of charcoal, and the department has held that the provision might reasonably include machinery for the manufacture of charcoal. About the only difference


Hon. Mr. FIELDING.: 49 7S
is that coke is made from coal, while charcoal is made from wood. The department lias so interpreted the provision ; but the Minister of Customs has called my attention to the matter, and he thinks it advisable that there should be a clear definition in the tariff in accordance with what has been the interpretation of the department. I propose, therefore, to add to the item as clause ' c ' ' charcoal-making machinery.'


John Graham Haggart: Will it have an ex poste facto effect ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The Customs Department having hitherto interpreted in this way, I suppose in that respect it has an ex poste facto effect. But the Minister of Customs desires that it should be made a matter of tariff instead of a matter of departmental regulation.


Robert Laird Borden: There is no objection to that so long as there is no discrimination.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: None whatever.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to, and resolution as amended agreed to.
Resolution reported, read the first time and the second time and agreed to.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 169) to amend the Customs Tariff, 1897. He said : this is simply a transcript of the resolution which we have already agreed to.
Motion agreed to, Bill read the first time and the second time, considered in committee, and reported.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE moved the third reading of the Bill.
Robert Laird Borden: Before the Bill finally passes, we shall expect the government, by means of customs regulations which are referred to in the Bill, to use proper safeguards so that the danger pointed out by my hon. friend from Lanark (Mr. Haggart) shall not be realised.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I entirely concur in the suggestion of my hon. friend. The Customs Department must be instructed to look carefully into the matter.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Why does this change date from the 17th March ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: All tariff changes date from the date of the budget.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, Bill read the third time, and passed.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved that the House again go into Committee of Supply.
["existence, render this an occasion on which this country may well testify its sympathy in this effective manner. I am glad that the government propose to apply a portion of this sum at once to the relief of the sufferers in the island of Martinique, and I believe that the action of the government in that way will 'be regarded as an indication of the neighbourly feeling and good will which exist between this country and the great nation to which that island belongs. I have very much pleasure, therefore, in supporting the motion of the Minister of Finance.\nResolution reported."]
Robert Laird Borden: Before you leave the Chair, Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring briefly to the attention of the House the matter which I mentioned in a very superficial way to my hon. friend the Minister of the Interior last evening. Some considerable interest is taken, especially in the western part of the country, with regard to the concession known as the Treadgold Concession, and a good many communications have been sent to members of parliament from the Yukon concerning certain features of the arrangement between the government and Mr. Treadgold and his associates. The matter was to have been brought up in parliament by certain gentlemen on this side, but about the time when they were instructed on this matter, it was announced in the public press that the government had rescinded the Orders in Council, which had created so much excitement, and revoked a great many of the features of the concession which were regarded as objectionable. I do not propose to discuss at present, as it is too late in the session, certain constitutional features beyond saying that as it seems to me, though I have not carefully examined the question, there is a great deal of doubt ns to whether the terms of this concession did not exceed the powers which could fairly be regarded as vested in the Governor General in Council. 1 also would have suggested to the House that a concession of this kind, covering so wide a range, involving such enormous interests, might properly have been submitted to parliament in the first instance, and should not have been passed by Order in Council, even if the Governor in Council possessed the technical right to pass it under the authority of the statutes. I also would have taken the ground that assuming that the powers possessed by the Governor in Council were legitimately exercised in this instance, it was a matter upon which parliament should have been informed at the very commencement of the session, so that the House might have had occasion to fully consider the terms of this concession, which are of such great interest to the people of the Yukon. Apart from that all I have to say at present is that I have not been able-nor indeed do I profess to possess the knowledge which would so enable me-to clearly distinguish between the effect of the concession in the terms first granted and its effect in the terms granted by the subsequent Order in Council. And I do not know to what extent the excitement which prevailed among all classes in the Yukon, by reason of the terms of the first concession, has been allayed by the fact that the concession has been rescinded as well as the Order in Council granting it, and a concession in sqme what different terms granted the same gentleman. What I desire to do at present is this. I brought to the attention of my hon. friend the Minister of the Interior last evening the fact that a memorial with regard to this matter had, as I understood, been sub-

mitted to mv bon. friend, and I was anxious to know to what extent the objections raised in that memorial, which demanded the repeal of the concession, had been met by the terms of the new Order in Council and the itew concession. It appeared that either through some difficulty in the mail service or on account of the pressing engagements of my hon. friend during the closing days of the session, this memorial had not been brought to his attention, and I believe he saw it for the first time when I handed to him what purported to be a copy of it, taken from a Dawson newspaper which had been sent me. I do not suppose that the hon. minister has been able to take this matter up to any extent in the meantime, as it was three o'clock this morning when I brought it to his attention, but upon consideration I think that it may be well to read the memorial to the House in order that hon. members may be acquainted with its terms and that it may be useful to them perhaps, if there should be any occasion at a subsequent date to discuss the terms of the new concession. I think that possibly the House will pardon me for taking up its time in the few minutes necessary for the purpose of reading this document, and I trust that my hon. friend, the Minister of the Interior, will not think I am bringing this matter to his attention without notice, because I have really had no opportunity of giving him notice except that which I gave him this morning, when I told him I thought I would briefly discuss the matter in the House and desired that he should be present. The memorial is signed by a large number of gentlemen who purport to be the holders of very large claims in the Yukon. It was published in all the papers at Dawson, I believe about the 16th of this month. The newspapers I received were dated the 16th, and contained a copy of this memorial. It is in the following words:
The preamble to the Order in Council of June 12, 1901, gives as a reason for the privileges granted the following :-' The mining now carried on in the Klondike district because of the inadequate supply of water, is necessarily confined to the washing of the richest gravel only, comparatively small in area, thus leaving large tracts of gold bearing gravels unworked.'
It is true that there are large quantities of ground unworked for want of a sufficient quantity of water ; at the same time the men at present in the district are gradually absorbing this land and applying capital and machinery to the purpose. Among these are operators who are identified with the country since its discovery and have grown up with it.
The statement that the richest gravel, only is worked at present is not correct ; it is partly and only partly true. The hydraulic system has already been introduced by private enterprise. For example : Mr. Alexander McDonald has employed it on the Bonanza creek. Mr. Johannsen on Hunker, and others have followed their example and have placed hydraulic machinery upon the ground for use during the coming season. The operators above mentioned work not Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).
the richest ground only, but all the gravel on their claim, leaving nothing undisposed of. In the natural course of affairs, if miners are allowed to proceed as they have been doing hitherto and without interference, other capitalists will undoubtedly proceed on the same lines, and by this means without any cost to the country, without any special concessions, without favouritism and without injury to any other interests, the whole of the gold bearing gravel will be operated up to a certain height, which height will be determined by the cost of raising the water from the creek level up to the hill side gravels and by the values of the hill side gravels encountered.
The grantees under the Orders in Council are only required to give a 300 ft. elevation; the miners who are already using hydraulic apparatus are raising water themselves to a height of 300 ft. at a less cost than Mr. Tread-gold and his associates are authorized to charge.
It is possible, though not probable, that paying dirt might be found at a height at which a private operator under ordinary circumstances and with a small amount of capital, would find unprofitable work. In such a case it would be justifiable to grant special advantages to a largely capitalized company, which by operating on a wider scale and employing more expensive machinery, would lift the water to the highest levels at a cost sufficiently small to allow them a fair profit.
This, however, is a contingency for the future and a plan that can only be adopted fairly and with profit to the district after the creeks which are now being worked have been exhausted. Under present conditions the creeks are worked continuously, but, should a large company with an extensive volume of water operate the higher levels, there would be a discharge into the creek beds of so much dirt or debris as to effectually put an end to operations in them. For economical mining it is absolutely essential that the creek claims should be worked out before hydraulic operations on a large scale are commenced on the hill sides. The miners who work on the creeks carry on their business at present with a fair profit, having only to handle the dirt naturally belonging to the creek, but a discharge of debris from1 the hill side would so add to the expense of their operations as to take away their profit and drive them out of business. In our opinion it will be from 10 to 20 years, if then, before the district has been so far worked as to call for any such wholesale grant of lands as is included in the Treadgold concessions or justify its adoption.
Injurious Effects of the Concession.
The above incontrovertible facts and considerations establish clearly, we believe, the following propositions :
That no capital has been kept out of the country by the want of such a scheme ; that the needs of the country, in so far as the application of hydraulic machinery to mining operations is concerned, are being amply met as they arise by private enterprise and will continue so to be for many years to come ; that the concession secures nothing that the miners are not already providing for themselves ; that it saves nothing in the cost of the water to those who require it, and that if taken advantage of to carry out the purpose indicated in the preamble of Orders in Council, it will have a disastrous

effect upon the operations at present going for-w.ard in the creek beds.
We now propose to consider another important feature of the arrangement. It is provided by the Orders in Council that all abandoned claims on Bear, Bonanza and Hunker creeks and their tributaries-this includes Eldorado- shall be deemed to be vested in Mr. Treadgold and his associates, on and after the first day. of January, 1992.
It might be supposed by a person ignorant of mining that a claim which has been abandoned is by that very fact proven to be inferior and non-productive, or at least not sufficiently productive to pay for being worked by the private individual. This, however, is very far from the truth. It is the universal experience in mining countries that claims may be prospected three or four times and abandoned and may yet turn out to be rich and profitable. The value of the gift made to Mr. Treadgold and his associates is incalculable, but we believe it is no exaggeration to say that it runs up into millions of dollars.
The effect of a blanket concession like this is to close up the district and withdraw it from relocation. When it is remembered that the district included in the grant comprises the greater part of the gold bearing area which has been exploited in the vicinity of Dawson city and that ic contains almost all the roads and improvements that have been made by the government in the raining territory, it will be seen how important the consequence of this measure will be.
The prosperity of the district, the diffusion of comfort among all classes, the continued influx of population and the attraction of further capital for development-'all depend upon the abandoned claims being left open to be further prospected by private individual miners and relocated.
The closing of the district will be injurious to the interests of the wage-earner. At present the mining area is thickly populated with individual wage-earning operators. These i%sn are not occupied continually, being usually idle part of the year. During the idle period they are accustomed to prospect and try to find something for themselves.
It is not alone those who are for the time being idle who engage in prospecting, but there is another class of wage-earners even more useful. These are men who are ambitious to better their condition. They work first, in order to earn a small reserve, and spend weeks, sometimes months, searching for the precious and valuable metals. More often than not they fail and have to begin again. It is in this way that the resources of the 'district are exploited. Such is the universal practice throughout the world.
The capitalists who have been engaged in developing the country depend upon the two classes of labourers above mentioned for their supply of workmen. By closing the district to further prospecting, both the capitalists and wage-earners above spoken of will gradually disappear.
There is no longer any incentive for the individual wage-earner to stay, as he is prevented from looking about for claims for himself, and. as explained above, he cannot obtain continuous employment the year round.
The capitalist must go because he will be compelled to import labour for a short period of the yeq,r at higher wages and consequently
the cost of production will be increased. Banks of gravel that would be worked with wages on the present scale could not be profitably operated on a higher scale. Further, the ground now owned by individual miners will be worked out in many cases in from three to five year3, and the operators will 'hen be compelled to seek further locations, not from the government or under public regulations open to all the world, but from a private firm, whose interests is strictly financial, and whose only object will be to get every dollar they can out of the property they control.
The machinery belonging to miners and mining companies now in the country represents millions of dollars ; this would be rendered idle and consequently valueless, since the owners would be at the mercy of a universal landlord and must either submit to his terms or leave the country.
It may be asked why they could not remove their machinery outside the Treadgold concession and commence operations anew. The answer is that the concession covers nearly all the roads and improvements made in the district by the government ; consequently in moving to a location outside the concession new roads would have to be built to reach the objective points, and no individual could stand the expense. It would in fact be cheaper to bring in machinery for a new district from the outside up the natural water-ways of the country than to attempt to move it from its present position across intervening mountains and valleys to other places.
Minor Details.
The ordinary miner has to prospect, mark out and enter upon his claim. The grantees under the Order in Council are saved all that trouble since it is provided that all mining locations now or hereafter abandoned on the various creeks included in the grant, are to be deemed to be vested in them without entry.
The ordinary miner has to pay $15 per claim per annum rental and to do work to the extent of $200 on each claim (called ' representation * -see Order in Council, June 12, 1901, sec. IS, sub-sec. 5). Mr. Treadgold and his friends are relieved of these expenditures-sec. 13, subsec. 4 and 5.
The grantees are to expend fduring the present year at least $250,000, and this is presumed to be some kind of return for the enormous grant made them.
It is stated that 1,310 abandoned claims became vested in them January 1, and March 1, of the present year. In the hands of private miners, these would have entailed an outlay as above of $215 each, at least, or in all $281,650 per annum, some portion of which would go to the government, while the government will get none of the $250,000 required to be expended by the concessionaires.
In any event we consider the expenditure required of the grantees 'trivial in comparison to the extent of the gift made to them.
We are confident, from our experiences in this and other mining countries, that every abandoned claim in'the district will be taken up within two years, at least, if the district is left open to individual prospectors, and that most of them will be taken up within one year.
The grantees are required to deliver within the district during the summer of 1905 a flow of 3,000 cubic feet of 18,600 gallons of water per minute at such an elevation as to afford

a pressure at an effective head of not less than 300 feet, and this at a charge of 25 cents per miner's inch per hour. One private operator in the district himself raises 1,500 gallons per minute for his own use to a height of 300 teet at a less cost than 25 cents. There are others doing the same thing quite as cheaply, and additional new machinery has been placed on the ground for the same purpose by still other parties.
Generally.
It is our firm conviction that if the arrangement is not repealed and the Orders in Council rescinded, they will put an end to individual enterprise in the Yukon, will paralize every branch of industry there, will cause the people at present in the country to get out of it as quickly as they can work out existing holdings, will hand the country over bodily to a gigantic monopoly whose interest it will be to carry on their operations with Chinese or Japanese labour, and will in fact complete the ruin of the Yukon Territory, not at a distant day, but within the next four or five years.
Dated at Dawson, this 15th day of April, 1902.
Signatures :-
G. Geo. Johannson, for Johannson & Black <30 claims) ; James Henderson, manager for McDonald Bonanza, Ltd., (16 claims); Geo. T. Coffey, manager Anglo-Klondike Mining Co., Ltd., <40 claims) ; Albert Trabold, (46 claims) ; L. Faillaid, manager Syndicate Lyonnais, (lo claims) ; Charles Af. Dunn, manager for Stanley & Worden, (12 claims) ; McKay, Nelson & Dalgarn, (13 claims) ; Gervais & Simard, (10 claims) ; Thomson & Granger, Patterson & Mc-Askill, Pauli & Cordt, Southier Bros., McKnight, Chilo & Bagley, White, Sheets & Co.; Fyfe & Danson ; Alexander & Rhisdan ; Higgins & Whyte ; Johnson & Lee ; Brazeau Brothers ; Nordstrom Brothers ; Yeager & Co.; Badger & Co.; Henderson & Tange ; Fax & Co.; Miller & Curtis ; Clark, Stafford & Williams ; Disher & Christianson ; Weeks & Co.; Bourke Bros. ; August Ryberg ; Frank Agnew; H. McGuinness, Isaac Watier; James Burnfield; F. Hicks; Ef A. Wendt ; Martin Murray; Patrick King; Simon Fraser; J. S. Cameron; H. E. Boucher; Joseph View; T. Potter; C. Andrews; James Butler; John A. Moo; J* P. Simonds; John Erickson; C. J. Putrow; James Hall; H. C. Belcher; Charles J. Anderson; P. H. McCormick; F. C. Johnson; C. W. Sankey; J. B. Shattuck; Carl Blomquist; C. M. Van Cleave; James Munroe; R. G. Wilson; James Cosgrove; Lee Sholson; Ben Jones; John Macaulay; A. W. McLeod; A. F, Stander; Charles Reid; Noe Dufaul't; A. Binett; Joseph Duleau; George Harvey; H. Y. Crockett; R. J. Oliver; John Mellon; K. L. Smith; II. C. Ash; S. D. Hartman; R. Gilmore; Kenneth Sinclair; John Kerns; Louis Renand; A. H. Anderson; E. McWilliams; Frank MeCandless; John Knoll ; Albert Dalton; B. A. Burton; J. F. Brown; J. McIntyre; Louis E. Miller; John L. Eby; Chas. Olsen; Henry Aviser; Robert Casilty; J. McGrath. I
I thought It was desirable to bring this to the attention of the House, in order that hon. members may be made familiar with the claims of the miners regarding this concession, and also in the hope that the Minister of the Interior may be able to give some statement to the House as to whether Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).
the indictment which has been preferred against these gentlemen interested in that country has been met in any way by the changes which have been made by the recent Order in Council. The hon. gentleman will notice that the statements with regard to the effect of the former concession are very strong, and they are supported, apparently, by a great many people who have large interests in that country. My hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries seems to be amused by this indictment. Is there any particular cause of merriment ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes it Is rather amusing to me.
Mr. BORDEN (Halifax), In what way ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: If the hon. gentleman wants an explanation, I will say that the communication seems to he from a young lawyer who is a very active partisan, and who could not possibly know much about the conditions existing. I would be very doubtful as to the accuracy of his statements. When I was myself acting in the department, applications came in from people with interests in that country, setting forth the necessity for improvements being made for furnishing water. From the language in which the representations are made, I cannot understand them, it looks very much as if the people making them had no knowledge of the country or of the business. It seems to me a purely partisau or political statement. That is the way it strikes me. So far as I am concerned, the only object I had in view was doing the very best for the development of that country. Of course mistakes may be made. I am satisfied that one of the great needs for getting out the wealth of that country is a supply of water. If my hon. friend and I both live to he here another year, I think we will find that representations will he made by those Interested, not by people who have no interests in the country at all, asking the government to take similar action to that we have already taken. I have myself had applications from people in that country, pointing out the great urgency of the government talcing some action to provide water, so that the ground can be worked.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know that there is any particular cause for amusement in what the hon. gentleman has stated. I understand the hon. gentleman to assert that these gentlemen who purport to have signed the petition have no substantial holdings in that country.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The author of the communication is, if I am not mistaken, a young man


Robert Laird Borden: It is Mr. Shannon. The hon. gentleman is amused because Mr. Shannon has apparently been em-

ployed by these gentlemen to draw up, under their instructions, a communication to the Minister of the Interior. Well, cannot my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries free himself from partisan feelings with regard to a matter of this kind long enough to realize that a solicitor, whether he is a Liberal or Conservative, usually acts in these matters under the instructions of his clients, to carry out their views.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: If he was retained by these people I would look upon the matter as very serious but I doubt it very much.


Robert Laird Borden: Well, my hon. friend sees fit to cast a doubt upon the professsional integrity of this gentleman.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No.


Robert Laird Borden: Then I do not know what he does mean. I do not suppose the hon. gentleman is very clear as to what he does mean.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Then we are even in that respect.
I have been listening attentively to the hon. gentleman, and I do not think he is very clear himself.


Robert Laird Borden: I am endeavouring to point out to the House the objections to this concession made by people having interests in the Yukon, and this seems to touch my hon. friend very closely, for some reason or other. Possibly there may be some reasons which I do not understand on account of which he takes so deep an interest in this communication. I thought it my duty, because the Minister of the Interior said this communication had not reached him, to bring this matter to his attention. So far as the language of this communication is concerned, I cannot see anything amusing in it. If the facts are as stated, it seems to have been a very improper thing on the part of the government to have passed such a concession, and I should feel disposed to think the hon. gentleman would agree in that conclusion. Of course I do not vouch for these statements. I have not been in the Yukon, I have not cross-examined these gentlemen, I do not personally know about the technical matters of this kind which are dealt with in this memorial. Possibly the hon. gentlemau himself is not as completely acquainted with these matters as gentlemen who reside on the spot, and have some personal knowledge of them. It may be he is in a position to dispute everything that is said in this memorial, from his personal knowledge, and to say that it is absolutely false, unfounded and incorrect. But if these gentlemen are to be believed, there was a very serious condition of affairs arising from the concession first made. I was disposed to submit this matter to the Minister of the Interior in a
fair spirit. I had only one object in doing it, to know whether, with the very limited time at his disposal since I brought this memorial to his attention, he would be able to tell me whether these objections have been met by the new Order in.Council, and whether in so far as they have not been met by the new Order in Council, he, with his special knowledge of that district, attaches any particular importance to them.
I do not know that there is anything in the course which I have adopted as a member of this House which should excite the merriment of any hon. gentleman, particularly of a. member of the government who are responsible for the concession which has been made, and which has been the subject of such strong condemnation in this memorial, and which, as wre know without any doubt, has occasioned the most intense excitement and indignation in the Yukon among a very large portion of people. Now, Mr. Speaker, I realize the fact that this memorial is new to my hon. friend the Minister of the Interior, and I should not blame him in any way if he tells me that he has not liad time to take it into consideration since I brought it to his attention this morning. But I would like to know whether he has examined it for a few moments, and if so, what he has to say with regard to the statements which are made in this memorial, and to what extent the objections raised by the miners have been met by the terms of the new concession.


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: When my hon. friend called my attention to this document this morning I was under the impression that it was the same document,	or	a copy of a	document,
which had been received by me some weeks ago. But when he mentioned the date it was supposed to bear, I think the 15th of April, I was satisfied that I had not seeu it, and it had not been brought to my attention. I caused inquiry to be made this morning in the department, and I find that no document has been received, either by my own secretary, in my own private mail, or in the department. So as a matter of fact, the document which purports to be addressed to me and to be for the purpose of bringing certain objections to my attention, has not been forwarded in such a way as to lead any person to suppose that that was the bona fide intention of the person who got up the document. If it had been the bona fide intention of the person who got up the document, surely he would have sent it to me or to the department, instead of circulating it through the newspapers, and leaving It to be brought to my attention by any person who might happen to see it. t do not even now know whether the signature of the lawyer who is supposed to have it in charge is genuine ; I do not know whether the signatures of the persons who purport to have signed it are genuine. There is nothing in it to show that such a

petition had ever been prepared or signed. The fact that it is printed in a newspaper is not, unfortunately, evidence of the authenticity of the signature.


Robert Laird Borden: Not even there?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: As far as that phase of it is concerned, we will have to leave that for the proper evidence to be presented to be dealt with when it comes in.
Mr. BORDEN Halifax). When I brought this matter to the hon. gentleman's attention, I supposed that he had received a copy of it in the usual way.


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: I am not finding fault with my hon. friend, because even if I had not received a copy my hon. friend would be quite right in bringing it to my notice. But all I can say is, that it has not reached my officers as yet. It will be quite evident, however, that the gentlemen who have taken part in preparing this document have not taken the most expeditious way of arriving at a proper consideration of the circumstances which they allege he desires of bringing to my attention in good faith for the purpose of having the grievances removed. I can only say that I hope the document will be sent in, and that the gentleman who has charge of it will enable me to have proper evidence of the authenticity of the representations which have been made. However, this is beside the question of the merits of the statements which are made. I had an opportunity this morning of hurriedly looking over a copy of the document with which the hon. leader of the opposition furnished me this morning, and while from my hurried consideration of it I would not be disposed to make an unqualified and positive statement, yet, my impression is that by the changes which we made in this Order in Council, when the document was recast, with the consent of the parties, substantially every objection that has been raised was met; that is to say, every objection that is of a character that can in the nature of things be met. The objection that a water scheme of this kind is not necessary now and that the creek claims should be worked out first before anything of that kind is undertaken is something that could not be met, and I intimated to my hon. friend last night that I did not at all agree with the proposition which was set out in that portion of the document, and I do not agree with it now. After having discussed this matter with different persons from the Yukon in whose judgment I have confidence, more especially with Mr. Ross, the commissioner of the district, and with others, I see no seriousness in this objection, and I have not thought it necessary to consider that as a serious difficulty in connection with the matter. But, so far as the real objections are concerned, Hon. Mr. SIFTON.
I think I can safely say that all of these objections have been removed in the charter as it stands at the present time. The changes which were made were made with the consent of the parties after a full discussion with the commissioner of the district and two delegates who were sent down by the people of the Yukon district to represent them in the discussion. One of these delegates was Mr. Wilson, who is one of the elected members of the Yukon council, and who, therefore, apart from his capacity as a delegate, may fairly, I think be considered to be a man qualified in every way to act in a representative capacity. Mr. Wilson, I believe, himself, is also a miner and therefore in a practical way as well as representing others he was well qualified to discuss the whole matter. There was another delegate named Mr. Sugrue. The changes that were made were after full discussion with these gentlemen, and with Mr. Ross, the commissioner of the district. And these gentlemen, Mr. Wilson and Mr. Sugrue, the representative delegates who were sent down from the Yukon, expressed themselves as being satisfied with the position of the government, so that, I think I may say that every reasonable objection has been met. When the gentlemen who were sent here as the representatives of the public meeting which was called to discuss the question in Dawson City, and who were well acquainted with the whole of the circumstances of the case expressed themselves as satisfied with the changes that were made, I think I may safely say that everything has been done that could be done to make the charter satisfactory to the people there.
Rerhaps it would have been more satisfactory to the House if at an earlier period of the session, when we were not in a hurry with the proceedings necessarily pressing upon our minds at the close of parliament, a fuller discussion of this whole matter could have taken place. I have only to say that I should welcome the subject if it is brought up by my hon. friend of by any other member of the House, at some future time, because the whole subject is one in regard to which I will welcome full and complete discussion. There are many difficulties connected with the operation of affairs in the Yukon district which do not present themselves upon the surface, and one of the difficulties is that, as in most mining countries, there is a population which has a certain interest which is of a temporary character and the immediate interest of that portion of the population is not necessarily the permanent interest of the mining country or the permanent interest of the whole country. We have been endeavouring, in dealing with this subject, to serve the permanent interest, not only of the district, but of the Dominion of Canada, by attempting to provide means whereby the vast quantities of

low grade gravels which cannot at present be worked at all shall be made productive and profitable not only to the country at large by reason of the fact of the trade of the country being stimulated by the business being carried on, but profitable directly to the treasury of the country in that the production shall pay a royalty to the treasury. We have been attempting to formulate plans whereby that result might be brought about. We have in the course of the operation found that In regard to certain phases of the question there were popular objections which, while in my judgment not of a character which rendered the scheme unworkable, yet, by reason of the fact that in a country of that kind, unless the people are satisfied with such an arrangement it is practically impossible to carry it out, we felt that it would be desirable if possible to get all parties together and make an arrangement which would be of an harmonious character, and as far as possible remove all the objections that had been raised on the part of certain classes of the people there. I think that has been successfully done. As X said to my hon. friend, I cannot say in the most unqualified way, on such a cursory hearing of the objections, which are mentioned in this document, that everything that has been mentioned there has been removed, but I think every objection which is of a substantial character and which can be removed has been removed, and I think the evidence of that fact is that the changes have given full satisfaction to the delegates who were here from Dawson City urging the objections which were considered at the public meetings which were held in the Yukon district for the purpose of discussing the matter. I have nothing to say in regard to the bona tides of the document except that I think the hon. leader of the opposition will agree with me that if the gentleman promoting it wanted a fair consideration of the representations, a businesslike forwarding of the document to my office for consideration would have been the proper course rather than publishing it in a newspaper and having it brought to my attention in an indirect way. I may say, however, that I will give it the most careful consideration, and beyond that at the present time it is impossible for me to go.


Mr. G. O. ADCORN (Prince Edward).: 1 am very glad that the Minister of the Interior lias intimated that next session a full opportunity will be afforded to discuss this question, and to place it in its true light before the country. The minister has stated in a very general way, and without in the least particularizing in what respects the Order in Council of the 23rd April last has bettered the condition of the two former Orders in Council-he has stated, that all objections practically are now removed. From what little attention I have given the matter, and from some information which
I have been in receipt of, I believe that the hon. gentleman's impression in that direction is to a large extent in error, and that when particulars are discussed and when the matter is more elaborately presented, it will be found that the order of the 23rd of April is a very slight, if any, improvement upon the two preceding Orders in Council. I might mention the matter of abandoned claims, which as all interested in the matter know, has been the chief cause of complaint. With regard to these abandoned claims I am entirely unable to say that the latter order in any respects betters the position of the free miners of that district. It is said that some 4,000 of these abandoned claims are in a position to be absorbed by these concessionaires. I would draw the attention of the minister to the fact that the first Order in Council vests these abandoned claims on the 1st of January of this year in these concessionaries, and that the last Order contains no clause divesting them of these claims. The effect of that would on its face appear to be that a large number of these claims of very great value have become vested in these three gentlemen named in the original charter, and that they are in a position to-day legally to claim these properties as their own. Further, both Orders in Council free these concessionaires from the matter of representation, that is, as the leader of the. opposition has explained : the payment of a fee of $15 annually, and the doing of work of the value of $200 a year upon the claims. The matter of monopoly is by no means amended by the last Order in Council. These gentlemen are granted as full a monopoly under it as they were by the former Order in Council. That monopoly as a fact amounts to a tax upon the free miners of that district, and as we all known the Yukon Act expressly prohibits the imposition of any tax by Order in Council upon the people of that territory. The free miners if they carry on hydraulic mining are compelled by the terms of this concession to purchase water from the concessionaires and that_ in effect amounts to a tax upon their business.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


George Oscar Alcorn: It has been stated, and I believe correctly, that the terms fixed by these Orders in Council-even by the amended order-at 25 cents a miner's inch would upon an ordinary claim during an ordinary season amount to something like $18,000 of fees which these concessionaires would be in a position to collect from the free miners of that district. That, as hon. gentlemen will see, would be almost a prohibitive tax, and the effect of it would be that they would be compelled to abandon their claims, and under the clause with regard to abandoned claims, these concessionaires would thus become seized of the whole of these claims in that district. X do not intend to further pursue the particulars, especially In

view of the fact that the minister has not seen fit to go into the particulars at all.
What we complain of more particularly is that the government in this as in other matters, have taken the course of proceeding by Order in Council instead of by Act passed by this parliament. I think it will be admitted-in fact last night the right hon. Prime Minister admitted it with regard to the Yukon Railway claim then under discussion-that that course is entirely indefensible. The right hon. gentleman frankly admitted that Mackenzie & Mann had no legal claim upon this government, and for the reason that the government had seen fit to proceed by Order in Council instead of by legislation. Many instances of this will occur to hon. gentlemen-there is the Clergue steel rail contract, the Yukon Railway, the present concession and others; all of which we on this side of the House believe should have been presented by the minister in charge by statement from his place in the House before any Order in Council was passed, before any contract was signed, and before a Bill was introduced. What we complain of is that the members of the administration, being as a matter of course perfectly aware of the law upon this subject, of their rights in that respect, and of the practice and procedure obtaining in England and by which they are bound here ; we complain that they disregard these precedents and pursue a course which we regard as wholly improper and irregular, and which the Prime Minister last evening admitted to be so. While the government are well seized of the state of the law in that respect, others may not be so well informed, and I think the country should be placed in a position to judge of the acts of the members of the present administration in this respect. For that reason possibly the House will bear with me for a very few moments while I state some of the points in that respect by way of precedent laid down by Mr. Alpheus Todd in his ' Parliamentary Government in England,' a work of very high authority aud character. At page 450 Todd says :
The ancient prerogative of the Crown in legislating by Orders in Council has been subjected to the control of parliament, and is now mainly exercised as a deputed and not as a prerogative power. The Crown still retains the right to regulate various details of administration by its own prerogative authority, but it is an admitted principle that the sovereign has no right, by a mere Order in Council, either to sanction a departure from the requirements of an existing law, or to interfere with the established rights or privileges of any class of persons within the realm. It is competent to the Crown to declare and enforce, by "proclamation, the execution of any existing law, but it is not within the power of the Crown, either to add to, alter, or dispense with any law of the land. At page 461 he says :
A large proportion of what may be called the details of legislation rests upon the authority of Orders in Council, some of which are issued Mr. ALCORN.
by Her Majesty in virtue of her prerogative, while others derive their force from the provisions of Acts of parliament. It is competent to a court of justice to inquire into the validity-or accuracy, in the statement of alleged facts-of an Order in Council, duly passed and gazetted.
As examples of the variety and importance of the subjects to which this form of quasi-legislation is applicable, it may be stated that Orders in Council or royal proclamations which are usually issued in pursuance of the same, are promulgated for the assembling, prorogation and dissolution of parliament

And for various other purposes which are mentioned, but not for matters such as the one in question, in which the public property of, the country is attempted to be disposed of.
As a general rule, all Orders in Council restricting trade, unless issued under the authority of an Act of parliament, or justified by re-fe/renee' to cases coming within the prerogative of war-and all orders suspending the operation of any statute-would require an Act of indemnity.
We say that the matter in question is strictly a matter dealing with trade and in restraint of trade in connection with abandoned claims, and our contention is that this amounts to a tax on the miners of the Yukon district. On page 464 the author says:
In the working of constitutional government, experience has proved that certain subordinate powers of legislation must be intrusted to almost every leading department of state. So long as these powers are exercised with the knowledge of parliament and in direct subjection to its control

I wish here to point out that parliament prorogued last year on the 23rd of May, and that the original Order in Council is dated the 12tli of June, from which it is apparent that in a matter with the elaborate detail incident to this transaction, the government must have been in treaty with the applicants during the time parliament was sitting; yet not one syllable of the matter was communicated to parliament. The whole transaction was conceived in the dark and in secret, and parliament heard nothing whatever of it until a return was brought down this session in answer to a motion by the hon. leader of the opposition. Therefore I say the transaction cannot be said to come within the definition contained in the text, that:
So long as these powers are exercised with the knowledge of parliament and in direct subjection to its control, they can be more advantageously discharged by responsible ministers than if it were obligatory that they should emanate from parliament itself. For all such regulations are framed by a responsible minister for the sanction of the Crown, and no premature interference therein ought to be attempted by either House. Minutes of council, departmental regulations, and other authoritative directions emanating from the heads of the principal executive departments, must needs be

frequently issued in regard to particular matters of administration, which require to be determined by competent authority, but it is essential that all acts of quasi-legislative authority which may he performed by any department of state, shall be within the limits defined and prescribed by parliamentary enactment ; and also that, whenever either the expenditure of public money, or other great public interests, are concerned in the matters thus disposed of, an opportunity should be afforded to parliament of expressing its opinion upon the same, before the government proceed to take action thereon.
This government have seen fit entirely to reverse this order of procedure. Instead of communicating the matter to parliament through the mouth of the minister having charge of the transaction, and informing parliament of their intention to enter into this arrangement, and then obtaining the authority of parliament to carry it out by Order in Council or by an Act, the first we hear of it is, after the matter has become an entirely completed transaction. On page 470 it is stated :
The constitutional control of parliament over the exercise of legislative powers by ministers of state, executive departments, and other public bodies, being admitted. It is evident that there is an undeniable advantage in the practice itself.
Thus, by the Contagious Disorders of Animals Act of 1848, the Privy Council were empowered to make orders and regulations to carry out the intent of the Act, the same to_be laid before both Houses of parliament within a specified time.
It is customary to provide that Orders in Council, departmental regulations, representations, rules of court, or tables of fees, framed and issued under the authority of particular Acts of parliament, shall be laid before both Houses within twenty, thirty, or forty days (as the case may be), after the making thereof-or after the re-assembling of parliament, should they have been issued during a recess-(it is usually added), before they become operative and binding
*	*
If within that time either House address Her Majesty to withhold her consent from any scheme, or any part thereof, the Crown can only assent to so much of the same as may not have been objected to.
Showing the complete control which the representatives of the people in parliament assembled should have, and in England have, over matters of this kind, and which control is entirely withdrawn from parliament in this country by the practice adopted by the present administration. Surely, if that practice is adhered to, we are returning to the days of irresponsible government. The rights and privileges of parliament are infringed upon in a greater degree than perhaps could be done by any other course which the administration could pursue. If the practice is right, there is nothing whatever to prevent the government dealing with any part of the property of the country in the same manner, secretly, in the dark, and without communication even to the House, 157	*
much less to the country. In a note, the learned author then gives an instance which occurred in the year 1871:
On June 30, 1871, an address was moved to the Queen, in the House of Lords, that for certain reasons therein stated Her Majesty would withhold her absent from tlie proposed scheme of the Endowed School Commissioner? for the management of Emmanuel Hospital Charity School, heretofore governed by the corporation of the city of London. The motion was apposed by ministers, but agreed to on division. Immediately afterwards another address was moved praying that the royal assent might also be withheld from the schemes relating to St. Margaret's Hospital and the Greycoat Hospital, Westminister. No reason was assigned for the request in the motion ; but the mover stated that these schemes- were open to the same objections that bad been urged against the first mentioned scheme. Notwithstanding the apposition of ministers, this motion was agreed to. On July 3, Her Majesty's answer was reported, ' That she would withhold her assent from the several schemes-objected to in these addresses.'
On page 482, referring to the rights of ministers to legislate in a quasi manner within certain prescribed limits, and in regard to certain prescribed subjects, it is said:
But admitting its obvious advantages, it is liable to serious abuse. It has been well observed that there ' is no modern innovation which needs to be watched with more jealousy than the practice of delegating the authority of parliament (even in small and local matters) with no better check than the chance that some unusually vigilant legislator may move an address to reject the scheme of law before it has had time to matjire into an indefeasible enactment. The whole scope and genius of our legislative system is to afford by the forms of parliament every possible security that no law shall be made which has not been deliberately and repeatedly affirmed in all its details, and it would be alien to the essence of free government to substitute for this a system in which the relations of the Crown and parliament should be reversed, and statutes should be octroyes by the government, and nothing but a bare veto left to the Lords and Commons. .
From the authorities I have quoted, Mr. Speaker, it is abundantly plain that the course pursued by the administration with regard to this and kindred matters is entirely contrary to the constitutional rule, and is not justified by any precedent on which hon. gentlemen could rely. That is very well shown by the very frank manner in which the right hon. premier last night, when the Yukon railway vote was under consideration, admitted that it was not to be defended on any legal or constitutional ground. As I have said, I am glad to know that on a future occasion we shall have an opportunity of discussing this matter in detail; but I content myself at present with presenting these few observations on the constitutional view of the matter.



The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I would like to ask the attention of the House while



I refer to a matter which has received perhaps more importance than either the amount of money involved or anything else justified, except by reason of the manner in which the hon. leader of the opposition brought it before the House. I would ask to be permitted to quote a statement made by the hon, gentleman a short time ago, not for the purpose of commenting on it or continuing the discussion, but merely to follow it up by certain official reports relating to the matter. On the 11th of March the hon. gentleman brought to the notice of the House certain representations made to him concerning some public works in the county of Shelburne, and I take the following quotation from what he has said. It will to be found on page 1032 of the unrevised 'Hansard ':
Take the expenditure for the purpose of cutting a canal between a lake at Black Point in the county of Shelburne or Queen's-I do not know which-and tidal water. The information given me by a gentleman, who has personal knowledge, is that the project was to cut a canal between tide-water and the lake for the purpose of affording shelter to fishermen. The project had been reported on years ago adversely by the engineer in charge, Mr. Dodwell. This is the information given, not by Mr. Dodwell, but by this gentleman to whom I refer.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There is no Black Point in our books. Is there any other name by which the place is known?


Robert Laird Borden: The harbour at Black Point near Loclceport. It seems that afterwards a gentleman by the name of Locke, a civil engineer, who was placed in charge of a portion of the south shore, reported favourably on the construction of this canal. Mr. Dodwell has said it was no use undertaking the work because the bottom of the lake was higher than tide-water, and the construction of the work could not possibly result in any advantage to the fishermen ; but under Mr. Locke's report, the canal was cut at considerable expense, and it was found that the bottom of the lake was above tide-water, so that the water simply ran out of the lake, and the expenditure was absolutely thrown away. This is worse than waste of public money, and the Minister of Public Works should inform the House whether or not the statement I have made is correct.
There was a difficulty in meeting this statement for the reason that the place indicated by the hon. gentleman contains no such work as that to which he alluded. There is no such work at Black Point, and it was difficult to find out the work he referred to. But we have discovered a work which perhaps corresponds with the description he gave, and which he may have had in his mind. I shall simply read a report from the assistant engineer, Mr. Thomas J. Locke, addressed to Mr. Lafleur, acting chief engineer of the Public Works at Ottawa :
At Redhead, Shelburne county, we expended about twenty-one hundred dollars to convert a pond on inside of beach into a boat harbour in the spring of 1900, and built cribwork protection walls to low water about 300 feet in length. On November 10th, 1897, Mr. Dodwell reported Hon. Mr. FIELDING.
on examination of this place. The work is substantial and the boat harbour is now and has been used as a shelter successfully. The class of boats used are skiff boats about 18 foot keel. The channel, from low water to pond is twenty feet wide and at low tide the boats seek its mouth as shelter, and as the tide rises, go into the pond at about'

approximated half tide. For additional details, please see my annual report for fiscal years 1899-1900.


THOS. J. LOCKE,
[Stage Direction]
Asst. Engineer.
That is a recent report. I wish now to present a report made by Mr. Locke on this work, not recently, not since this session opened, not since this matter was the subject of controversy, but at the time the work was done, two years ago. This is an extract from the report of Mr. Locke, the assistant engineer, for the year 1899-1900 :
(Extract from my Annual Report, 1899-1900.)
Redhead is situate about two miles east of Roseway and 12 miles south-west of Shelburne town. It is a fishing station of some considerable importance. There are from 40 to 50 threehanded boats at present fishing from this point, and in olden times when a safe harbour was afforded the fishermen, a much larger number was engaged at this place. At the site of our work is a shingle beach about half a mile in length and separating a small lake from the sea-coast. Through this beach there was at one time a channel or inlet by means of which in stormy weather, the owners of the boats were able to seek shelter and protection for their property through this channel into the lake. In 1840 or thereabouts the provincial government, upon representations being made to them that this channel was gradually being filled up, deemed it advisable to advance the interests of the fishermen by protecting the west side of this channel with a groin of stone-filled cribwork from the lake to within 40 feet of L.W.O.S.T. This work, however, was not suitable for the purpose, and within 15 years the channel was entirely closed, so that the fishermen had no shelter whatever provided for them. Examinations and surveys of this place showed it to be necessary in order to have a permanent haven thait the channel should be reopened and cribwork protecting walls built for the entire length on both sides. Accordingly the sum of $2,000 was appropriated for this work, and during -the last fiscal year it was undertaken and completed at a total cost of $2,097.87. The work done consisted of the excavation of a channel 20 feet wide, and from four to eight feet deep for a total length of 306 feet to L.W.O.S.T. Protecting walls were built along the sides of this channel, consisting of stone-filled cribwork, 10 feet wide on top and at an average height of from eighj to eight and one-half feet. The length of the western wall was 316 feet, while that of the eastern side was but 266 feet. Besides this, we constructed a retaining cribwork wall along the face of the beach, 220 feet in length, six feet wide and three feet high, so as to more fully protect the beach and keep the violent s-torm3 of the ensuing two or three years from washing portions of the beach into the lake, thus preventing the destruction of the outlet of the main work. I may mention that the estimated cost of this work was $2,360, and although we
4997 XAY 14, 1902 4993	
constructed more work than was at first estimated to be necessary, yet the total cost was slightly under $2,100. The credit for this apparent saving is due to no engineering skill, but to the earnest and honest manner in which every labourer engaged in the work performed his duties. Too often, in employing labour upon government works, are the employees inclined to shirk responsibility, thinking in their ignorance that the money to the credit of the work is inexhaustible, but in this case each and every man knew that the building of the work meant a great deal to himself personally, and in consequence we received more than just recompense for the wages paid to labourers. The work is strong and substantial, and I have much pleasure in informing you that this work is satisfactory in every respect. I certify the above to be a correct copy taken from my annual report, 1899-1900. THOS. J. LOCKE, Asst. Engineer. This is the work which my hon. friend describes as utterly useless. I have not got the date of this report, but the engineer certifies that it is a copy of the report sent by him to the department for the fiscal year ending 30th of June, 1900. Mr. BORDEN (Halifax). What is the name V . The MINISTER OF FINANCE. Redhead. There can be no doubt that that is the place that my hon. friend refers to, because there is no such place elsewhere on that shore. But one other point-the hon. gentleman says that the work was waste-fuiiy carried on. 1 have shown by the report of the engineer that it was exceptionally well managed and that it was a work of great benefit to the people of that section, My hon. friend stated that Mr. Dodwell, the engineer in charge had previously reported against the work. i have now Mr. Dod-well's report made in 1897, addressed to the chief engineer of public works. That report is as follows : _ _ , „ November 10, 1897. L. Coste, Esq., Chief Engineer, P.W.D., Ottawa. Sir,-In accordance with instructions, con. tamed in your letter, No. 2866, of August 6th 1897, I made a survey and examination- early in September, at Red Head, Shelburne countv and I now beg to submit the inclosed plan and the following report : Red Head is a small promontory or head-land on the west side of the mouth of Shelburne harbour, 12 miles due south of the county town. The settlement on and near the head comprises some two or three hundred people dependent for a living almost exclusively upon fishing. A fresh water pond, of ten or twelve acres in extent, separated from the ocean by shingle . beaches, through which was a narrow channel used many years ago to afford a safe and convenient harbour for the fishing fleet, but it gradually filled up, owing to the drift of the gravel until it was with difficulty that a boat could be forced through even- at high water, g.orae few years before confederation, therefore, an attempt was made to re-open the channel and a grant of $100 was made by the pro-lo7j	V1^la;1 government. With this sum together with labour and materials furnished ty the inhabitants, a piece of crib and pile work about 200 feet long was built on the south side of the -channel. The north side of the channel being unprotected, it soon filled up and the work gradually became buried in gravel. At the present time, and for some years past, the fishermen of the neighbourhood, on the approach of a storm, and also for winter quarters, are obliged, in order to save their boats from destruction, to haul them up on the beach, and often, before this can be done they are dashed on the shore and injured or broken to pieces. To enable the fishermen to carry on- their operations under somewhat more favourable conditions, it is desirable that the boat channel be permanently re-opened. This can probably be accomplished by the construction of the two-winged walls of crib-work, and the digging of the channel between them, as shown on the accompanying plan, which would give a protected channel having about six feet of water at H.W.O.S.T. (spring tides rise 7 feet, neaps 51 feet). That would probably remain open for some years and prove a great boon to the inhabitants. I estimate the cost of this proposed work at $2,360. Yours obediently, (Sgd.) C. E. W. DODWELL, Resident Engineer. So, every statement that my hon. friend was induced to present to this House with regard to this work is shown to have been unjust, unwarranted and unfounded. This work was necessary; it was useful; it was not reported against by Mr. Dodwell, but was favourably reported on by him. Mr. Dodwell reported that the fair cost of the work would be $2,300, and, under the administration of Mr. Locke, who carried it out, the work was performed for $2,097. Mr. BORDEN (Halifax). So far as the present report of Mr. Locke is concerned, it was apparently -made by telegram, and I presume a telegram was sent him. I suppose that it will be produced. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. My hon. friend the Minister of Public Works, no doubt, will py^duce it. . Mr. BORDEN (Halifax). If the hon. gentleman will look closely at the wording of the report he will see that it carries out practically the information given to me : The channel from low water to pond is twenty feet wide, and at -low tide the boats seek Us mouth as shelter, and as the tide rises go into the pond at about approximate half tide. Indicating that the boats cannot use this pond at all at low water, nor until It rises to half tide. Then, further : This work has never been useless, although at tim-e of commencement the pond had a deposit of mud from five to eight feet deep which has mostly scoured out. Now, if boats can only enter at half tide and that with from five to eight feet of mud scoured out from the bottom of the lake, what would be the condition when it
[Stage Direction]
was first opened V 1 shall send this document to the gentlemen who gave that information-tor the information came to me from more than one source, including some who are political friends of lion, gentlemen opposite-and 1 shall ask these gentlemen what they have to say with regard to this report, iiut one of the first things I would expect them to say is that it is a practical admission of the truth of the statement they gave to me.- With respect to Mr. Dodwell's report, I informed the hon. gentleman when 1 brought this matter up that the information 1 had about the report did not come from Mr. Dodwell himself.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I read what the hon. gentleman said.
Mr. BOltUEN (Halifax). Hut 1 also said, which the hon. gentleman has not read :
Of course, I have no personal knowledge, but the information given me comes from ar entirely unprejudiced source - from political friends of the Minister of Public Works and the Minister of Finance, in whose constituency -I refer to the Minister of Finance-a good deal of this expenditure has been made.
And so, not having personal knowledge of these matters, 1 asked for information, shall be glad if the circumstances are not as reported to me. 1 can only add, and I think the hon. Minister of Finance knows it from other sources than myself, that with regard to many of the expenditures on the South Shore, there has been, and I think are at present a great many rumours at least, and a good deal of dissatisfaction. Therefore, with these rumours current and with dissatisfaction existing, it is only right that these matters should be discussed in parliament in order that the Minister of Finance and the Minister ofi Public Works as well, may put themselves right in regard to them. As to this particular item, I do not think that the report of Mr. Locke shows that the suggestions are unfounded. I do not so regard it at present. But, as I said, 1 will send it to the gentlemen who gave me the information and will ask them what they think of it, and 1 (j'ill deal with the matter, if necessary, in a succeeding session.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: 1 dissent rrorn the statement that there are rumours of the uselessness of these expenditures or dissatisfaction or any trouble with regard to any of the works to which the hon. gentleman has referred. He has specified this particular work, and this is the one under discussion, and 1 want to say that I have no doubt that every dollar expended along that shore under the direction of Thomas j. Locke has been expended honestly, intelligently and economically and in such a manner as to meet best the requirements of tlie people. The hon. gentleman says that if the work is what it is to-day, it must have been much worse before the bed of the lake was deepened. But liis informant was not writing of the" work as it was


Robert Laird Borden: at first, but as it is to-day. The hon. gentleman finds fault because boats can only enter at half tide. But is that any reason why the fishermen should not be permitted to get their boats in at all '! The essence of the hon. gentleman's charge was ' this is worse than waste of public money.' 1 venture to say that there never was a case in which there has been more complete vindication of the work of an engineer in preparing a useful public work. The hon. gentleman said that Mr. Dodwell had reported unfavourably, but that another engineer had gone in and done a useless piece of work there. That was the strongest point in what the hon. gentleman said, and it is shown that his statement was quite unfounded, because Mr. Dodwell recommended the work.


Robert Laird Borden: Mr. Dodwell made no other report, I suppose. I take it that the hon. gentleman means that.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I have no knowledge of any other report. Will the hon. gentleman say that he did make another ?


Mr. BURDEN  .@Halifax: I have not said that he did. But 1 have said th'at I have certain information regarding it. That is all 1 said about it, and all I brought to the attention of the House both with regard to Mr. Dodwell's report and other matters. So far as the credibility of my information is concerned, and certainly as to the good faith of my informants, I believe in it still, and 1 do not think the report differs practically from the information given to me.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Let me say that Mr. Dodwell made no other report than the one here presented. I investigated this matter since yesterday, and there is no other report from the resident engineer. Let me add that this kind of work at Red Head, not Black Point, but Red Head is not the only work of the same character that has been done in several places in the county of GaspO. It is not a costly work. You make a channel and a couple of jettes, and without a large expenditure of money you have a harbour very useful for fishermen. That is the kind of work that has been done at this point. But that is not the only one, very far from it.


PASPEBIAC AS AN OCEAN POUT.
Mr C. MARCIL (Bonaventure).: As the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce were adopted en bloc, I was deprived of the opportunity of making some remarks with reference to the needs of my county and I would like to take this opportunity, probably the last one I shall have, of doing so.
At one o'clock House took recess.

House resumed at Three o'clock.


Charles Marcil: Mr. Speaker, previous to the House rising at one o'clock X asked the privilege of speaking on this motion before you left the Chair, and I do so for the reason that no opportunity .lias been afforded me during the present session of referring to the subsidy which is paid by this government for a line of steamers between Dalhousie and Gasp6 basin. At a previous sitting of the House in committee it was agreed to vote the estimates for these steamship subsidies en bloc, and I was promised an opportunity before prorogation of referring to some of them. I am glad the Minister of Trade and Commerce is now in his seat, and I will particularly draw his attention to item 202 :
' Steam communication during the season of 1902, -from the opening to the closing of navigation between Gasp5 basin and Dalhousie, $12,500.' The county of Bonaventure which 1 represent is situated on this route, half. way, as it were, between Dalhousie, New Brunswick, and Gaspe basin, in the county of Gaspe. A line of steamers is at present subsidized by this government running practically from the 1st of May until the 15th or 20th of November. The conditions prevailing in that section of the province of Quebec are such that an effort,
I believe, should be made by this government to extend the present system of communication as much as possible, in view of the fact that the county of Gaspe is altogether deprived of railway communication of any kind, and that a portion of Bonaventure is also in that position. The North American Transportation Company has had a contract on this line for a number of years past. That contract expired at the close of navigation last year, and if I am correctly informed, the company have been allowed to run for one year more on the understanding that when tenders are called for a five years contract beginning fr'om next session, more improved methods will be applied, and that an attempt will be made on the part of the government to meet the legitimate wishes of the jieople inhabiting that coast. The steamer ' Admiral ' which is at present on the service, has certainly given satisfaction in the past. She is good enough as far as she goes. But, Mr. Speaker, when you take into consideration the fact that the steamer ' Admiral ' was formerly the property of General Grant, and navigated American waters as far back as 1861, you wall probably admit that in 1902 the time has arrived when a more modern vessel should be placed upon that route. The * Admiral ' is a paddle steamer. Now people want an iron screw steamer able to begin earlier in the spring and to continue later in the fall and winter. At the present moment the counties of Bonaventure and Gaspe have, roughly speaking, merely eight months of navigation, although navigation
is possible' for ten, eleven, and in some seasons twelve months in the year.
A number of petitions have been received by the Minister of Trade and Commerce on this subject. Some of them asked that the service to Dalhousie be discontinued because it is a parallel line with the Atlantic and Lake Superior Railway from New Carlisle for nearly a distance of 100 miles. The views expressed by those petitioners have led me to believe that the present service might be continued, but that it might also be vastly improved. If communication is desired with the province of New Brunswick via Dalhousie, we should see-to it that the facilities of the eastern end of the line are extended. I would beg leave to urge that if the present line to Dalhousie is to be continued, the line from New Carlisle, the terminus of the railway, should be kept up as long as possible during the fall and winter, starting as early as possible in the spring. At this moment there are people in the county of Bonaventure who have to drive thirty miles to reach the first railroad station. There are people in the county of Gaspe who have to drive 80, 90, and in some cases 100 miles before they can reach the nearest railway station on the Atlantic and I.ako Superior, and then go over 100 miles to reach the Intercolonial Railway at Metapedia. Their arguments have been set forth in the resolution which I beg most respectfully to read, and which I believe contains the essence of what is now asked for. It is to the following effect :
That an improvement in the steamer service between the Bale de Chaleur and Gaspe is absolutely necessary.
That in 1899 the Department of Trade and Commerce called for -tenders for said service, to terminate not earlier than the 31st day of December.
That notwithstanding said condition on the part of the department, the steamer ' Admiral ' has invariably discontinued the said service in the -month of November.
That a paddle boat is not adapted for fall and early winter navigation. That the interests of the coast suffer great injury by the steamer service being cut off at a season when, navigation is perfectly feasible and safe.
That small sailing vessels of about 100 tons load and sail from Gaspe during the month if December for Europe and South America. That the harbour of Gaspd was closed to navigation this year on the 18th January. That it is a matter of vital importance for the prosperity and welfare of this coast that the steamer subsidized to run between Gaspe Basin and a railway terminus should be a screw steamer.
I believe that when we call the attention of the lion. Minister of Trade and Commerce to this important matter, taking into consideration the fact that these people are deprived of railway communication, he will see, during the year, that no contract is entered into with the North American Transportation Company, or any other company, until it is stipulated that navigation

shall be maintained on the Baie de Chaleur as long as it is possible to do so; that a screw steamer is provided so as to be able to go into the bays when there is a formation of two, or three, or four inches of ice, and that this service shall be maintained from the terminus of the railway at New Carlisle or Pasbebiac. The North'American Transportation Company have, so far as I have been able to ascertain, given a fairly satisfactory service in the past, and if all things should be equal, I think they should be given the preference, provided they will undertake to put on a modern steamer and that they will undertake to run from the terminus of the railway until the close of navigation.
I am sorry that I cannot allow my opportunity to escape without dwelling upon another matter in connection with the navigation of the Baie de Chaleur, which is of more national interest than that to which I have just directed attention. The House will remember that a couple of days ago we adopted a Bill providing, as far as we could see into the future, for the extension of the railway service in the counties of Bonaventure and Gasp6. That Bill met with the approval of my hon. colleague from [DOT] Gaspe (Mr. Lemieux), it met with my own approval, it was discussed at a meeting of the Railway Committee, and we thought that a fair compromise had been arrived at, and that all the conditions had been taken into consideration, but I learn that at the Railway Committee of the Senate the bondholders of the Atlantic and Bake Superior Railway Company succeeded in having this Bill thrown out, so that now the eastern portions of the county of Bonaventure and the county of Gaspe are again condemned for I do not know how long to be deprived of railway facilities. In view of this fact,
I appeal to the government, to, between now and the coming session, view this matter in the light that it should be viewed, and see whether the people of these counties are not entitled to generous treatment at their hands. These counties are amongst the oldest settled portions of the province of Quebec. For many long years they have contributed their share to the building up of the magnificent railway system of the Dominion, they have contributed their share to the construction of the trans-continental lines, to the construction of the canals and the improvement of our harbours; in a word, they have paid their proportion to make Canada what it is to-day. Yet, owing to unfortunate circumstances, they have been deprived of the boon and the benefits which have been extended to every nook and corner of this Dominion, barring merely the grants for harbours, rivers and ocean service. In view of the action which the Senate has taken, I beg most respectfully to call the attention of the hon. Minister of : Railways and Canals to the consideration of a few facts whiSh I will submit to him. He stated, in the course of the debate on
Mr. MARCILi (Bonaventure).
the Intercolonial Railway, that the Intercolonial Railway is not yet a complete system, and that the time cannot be far removed when the Intercolonial Railway shall be extended westward to the lakes. We heard, during last session and during this session also, the transportation question discussed in all its phases. As far as the western portion of this country is concerned, I need not say one word in reference to that part of the question, but I would beg most respectfully to urge upon the attention of the government the importance of what may be called the eastern phase of the transportation question. When, after the 25th of November, the last steamer leaves the port of Montreal for Europe, the St. Lawrence being closed to navigation, in what position is this country placed ? It means that this route is closed for five or six months in the year. The first American seaport is Portland, and the others are Boston or New York, far,removed. There is St. John, which has to be reached through American territory. To reach a seaport in our own country, on a purely Canadian line, you have to travel 740 miles on the Intercolonial Railway to St. John, you have to go S39 miles to reach the port of Halifax, or you have to go 989 miles to reach Sydney or Louisbourg. It is not a matter of surprise that the Intercolonial Railway, being handicapped in this fashion for five months in the year, being deprived of a seaport except at the expense of travelling an enormous distance, is working under a disadvantage, but I think the time has come for the government to take this question into consideration, as it is doing now, and try to solve it. I hope that it will consider whether the time has not come when the Baie de Chaleur. one of the most magnificent bodies of water that we have on this continent, situated midway between the St. Lawrence, the maritime provinces and the Atlantic seaboard should not be utilized with the view of jestablish-ing a steamer route to Europe. I am in possession, at this moment, of evidence submitted to me by the most competent officials of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, and by men who have navigated the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the Baie de Chaleur, which goes to demonstrate that the Baie de Chaleur is navigable for at least ten months, if not eleven months, in the year for ordinary steamers and for twelve months in the year for steamers specially constructed for that purpose. In view of the fact that the Senate has thrown out this Bill which would extend this railway along the Bonaventure coast, I would submit whether it would not be wise on the part of this government and of the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals to see whether it is not possible, when the trains reach Metapedia, instead of sending them across the province of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, to find a seaport, whether it would not be possible to use the pre-


IIAY 14. 1902
[Stage Direction]
sent line of tlie Atlantic and Lake Superior down to Paspebiac and there find a seaport which could accommodate the largest vessels on the ocean and a seaport which is open for practically eleven months in the year. I do not ask the gov-[DOT] ernment to go into any reckless expenditures. I do not ask the government to increase the cost of the Intercolonial Railway to this country, but I ask the management of the Intercolonial Railway and the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals to consider if the port of Paspebiac, which is now connected with this system of railways, could not be utilized Instead of hauling the whole of our western and general trade to the seaboard through the maritime provinces. I have not a word to say against the city of St. John, or the city of Halifax, or the port of Sydney, or Louisburg. I would like to direct the attention of this parliament for a very few minutes to the fact that what I have called the eastern phase of the transportation question is not a new question. As far back as 1875 a committee of this House was appointed :
To inquire as to the best and most direct route for the conveyance of mails and passengers, between the Dominion of Canada and Europe ; the possibility of riavigating the Gulf of St. Lawrence, during the winter months ; and of finding on the shores of the Dominion a harbour accessible both in winter and summer, to be the terminus of such shortest route.
The advantages of Louisbourg, the advantages of Sydney, the advantages of St. John, the advantages of Halifax are all well known, but the advantages offered by the port of Paspebiac are not so well known, and 1 shall read a portion of the report which refers to Paspeibiac, a port which is uow accessible to us and which practically forms part of our system of railways, and a port which is nearer to Montreal than any winter ocean port we have on Canadian territory.
That Paspebiac harbour, situated on the north side of Baie de Chaleur, offers all the advantages of a first-class harbour, and is, as the evidence shows, open and approachable from the Gulf of St. Lawrence at all seasons of the year.
In examining into the merits and demerits of Paspebiac haroour your committee deemed it advisable to elicit all the information possible regarding the navigation of the Gulf of St. Lawrence.
It appears from the evidence given by Colonel Farijana, based upon careful hydrographical examinations, that the southern and western portions of the gulf are perfectly navigable at all seasons of the year.
It has been shown your committee that the Arctic ice which is carried into the gulf through the Strait of Belle Isle, strikes the N.E. of Anticosti with a velocity of current of half a mile per hour ; that the ice from the river St. Lawrence is bora upon the southern shore of the same island with a. force of current of two miles per hour ; and that the stronger current frcm the river forces the Arctic ice towards the western shore of Newfoundland, thus, leaving,
as we have stated, the southern and western portions of the gulf safe for navigation.
It has further been shown your committee that the tidal current entering the gulf between Cape Breton and Cape Bay, is divided by the Magdalen group, and that the wave which passes southward of the Magdalen islands, holds in check any ice which may appear north of the islands, thus keeping free from accumulations of ice that portion of the gulf lying north of Cape Breton and south of the Magdalen islands, and as far north as Cape GaspS.
That report was made by tlie committee as far back as 1875, and in 1876 another committee was appointed to determine if tlie river and Gulf of St. Lawrence could be made navigable during the winter season. There are persons in the city of Quebec who contend that the River St. Lawrence can be made navigable for twelve months in the year. 1 am not now dealing with that question. 1 am not asking this government, when it calls for tenders for the fast line to stipulate that the boats shall be built in such a way as to overcome the difficulties of ice, difficulties which are overcome now by the ordinary ferry boats plying between L6vis and Quebec. My point is, tbat if you do not utilize the River St. Lawrence between the 25th of November, and the month of May; if for five months in the year Canada is to be a frozen desert, so to speak, debarred from communication with the outside world except through American harbours; then' 1 say that the time has come to consider the phase of the question whicli 1 present in connection with the transportation problem. The committee of 1870 also came to the conclusion, that the Gulf of St. Lawrence is perfectly navigable for tlie whole winter and that the port of Paspebiac was opened and easy of access. I may be told that four years ago an attempt was made by the steamer ' Gaspesia ' to engage 111 winter navigation, and that the attempt failed. Let me present evidence which will show the nature of the venture made by the steamer * Gaspesia.' I have here the *statement of Captain Wakeham, commander of the government steamer ' La Oanadienne,' a gentleman who has lived on the coast of Gaspfi for nearly forty years, and who is more competent than perhaps any other to speak on this question. Here is what he says with reference to the ' Gaspesia ' conditions generally in winter in that portion of Canada:
But very little ice enters the Bay Chaleur from the gulf. Northerly and westerly winds prevail during the winter, and the gulf ice is carried past the mouth of the bay, and does not drift into it to any great extent. With prolonged easterly wind, some ice would enter the bay ; but owing to the overlapping of Point Macquereau by Miscou Point, the Bay Chaleur is never closely packed with ice.
' Gaspesia ' was an old vessel, not at all fitted for winter navigation in the gulf. She arrived off New Carlisle at a very unfortunate season. There was no wharf provision whatever for her. She was forced to anchor a considerable distance off shore in the running ice. The sea-
[Stage Direction]
son was an unusually severe one ; the thermometer was at 20° below zero, and lower, nearly all the time she was In the bay.
On making for sea, the captain of the ' Gaspesia ' took an unfortunate course, and one which he was advised to avoid by every one having the slightest knowledge of the ice conditions in the gulf. As a consequence he was caught in the pack which is always found to the westward of the Magdalen islands from the end of January to the end of March. Soon after getting into the pack, the ' Gaspesia ' lost her rudder, which was not strengthened or protected against ice, and the vessel simply drifted about until she was relieved. Had she not lost her rudder I believe that, poor vessel even as she was, she would have worked out of the pack, got round it to the north, and made her way to sea without much difficulty.
On her second trip, the ' Gaspesia ' reached Paspebiac during the last week in January. She left there again on the 3rd February. She had no difficulty in reaching Paspebiac from sea, and was not bothered with ice when going out of the Baie Chaleur and working down along the GaspS shore. She afterwards got caught in the ice to the westward of the Magdalen islands. It is the opinion of all conversant with the mat-, ter that had she on leaving Paspebiac steamed direct for the east point of Anticosti, and from thence outwards towards Cape Ray, she should have got out of the gulf without difficulty.
But, had 1 not further evidence at my command, 1 would not asU the government to test the possibility of utilizing the Baie de Chaleur for navigation during the winter months. 1 have here evidence which convinces me that the navigation of the Baie de Chaleur is perfectly feasible after navigation has been abandoned on the St. Lawrence, and that it presents none of those risks from shoals and other natural obstacles which the navigation of the St. Lawrence is exposed to. Captain Wake-ham speaks of the conditions at the present time, and of the conditions which have existed for thirty years to his knowledge. I know from letters which i have received that the Baie de Chaleur has been free from ice this winter, and that no ice has been seen at ail in the port of l'aspebiac. Captain Wakeham reports regarding the navigation of the Baie de Chaleur during the months of December and January :
There can be no question as to the navigability of the above waters in December. No ice whatever will be met with anywhere. The weather In December will generally be more moderate, that is, freer from storms than it is in October and the early part of November. For many years (over one hundred) small sailing vessels have cleared from the ports of Paspebiac and Gasue in December with Osh cargoes for the Mediterranean, South America and Jersey. These vessels usually make a quick and safe run out of the gulf. Their sailings have at times been made as late as Christmas week. The prevailing winds will be from west to northwesterly. On her first voyage the * Gaspesia ' reached Paspebiac on the 19th December, and left a week later. She saw no Ice either coming or going.
We generally have a cold spell about the 1st January, when ice will make in sheltered coves, and in the inner parts of the harbours ; but
Charles Marcil: this sort of toe will not bother an iron screw steamer. No ice will be found adrift in the gulf or Bay Chaleur, or along the shores of Bonaventure and Gaspg counties during the month of January.
I have frequently inquired of residents on the Bryon1 and others of the Magdalen islands as to the earliest dates .it which drift ice begins to be seen about the islands. In very severe winters, that is rather when the winter has set in early, the first ice is seen off the Bryon island about the end of January. This ice is not at that date heavy, and there has been no rafting so that an ordinary ocean steamer would have no difficulty with it, as it is only when ice is in large heavy pans or fields and rafted that there is difficulty and risk in getting through, it.
In a mild season, or when the winter has been late in setting in, ice will not be met with anywhere In the gulf before February.
In this connection I would particularly refer you to the evidence of Mr. Bourke, keeper of the Bird Rock Light, as given in ' La Presse ' on the 25th November, 1901, in which this gentleman, who resides on the Magdalen islands, has navigated the gulf for over thirty years, and has for some time been keeper of the light on the Bird Rocks, and was also many springs at the ice as a sealing captain, and who has thus had exceptional advantages to judge of thie matter, speakiug of the question of winter navigation1 says :
' The greatest difficulties exist in March and April ; that there is no ice in the gulf until the 15th February.'
You have therefore a magnificent port on this bay, which is open to navigation without any difficulty at all for two and a half months after navigation is closed on the St. Lawrence. You have the Intercolonial leaving Montreal and reaching Metapedia, a distance of 439 miles. You have a branch of the Atlantic and Lake Superior, running down to Paspebiac 100 miles. You have therefore a port accessible, practically over your own lines of railway, which is open to navigation half the winter without any difficulty at all. I humbly submit that when this transportation question is taken up, the government should consider whether it will not utilize this port as long as it can be utilized, without crossing the whole of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia to secure an ocean port.
Allow me now to give the table of distances between Paspebiac, to Liverpool as compared with other ports. I will give the southern route, that is by Cape Race, because the northern route via Belle Isle is somewhat difficult at that season of the
year :
From Liverpool to Paspebiac	 2,480
"	"	Halifax	
2,450"	"	North Sydney	2.2S2"	"	St. John, N.B	
2*700"	"	Louisbourg	
2.274"	"	Portland	
2,766"	" Boston	
2,837"	"	New York	
3,034
If we take into consideration the advantage of having the shortest route to Europe over our own system of railway, through our

own territory, we have here a route which can be maintained easily without any additional expense by the use of our present railway system. You can leave Montreal for Paspebiac and reach there by the shortest route to Europe, Here is a fact which cannot be contradicted. Here are the figures taken from the official statement of distances, prepared by Captain Smith, let me read this to show the advantages of the route I am advocating.
Miles.
From Montreal to Liverpool via Pasbebiac
by Cape Race	   3,034
From Montreal to Liverpool via Belle Isle 2,876 From Montreal to Liverpool via Louisbourg	 3,255
From Montreal to Liverpool via North
Sydney	 3,271
From Montreal to Liverpool via Halifax
by the Intercolonial Railway	 3,287
From Montreal to Liverpool via St. John
by the Intercolonial Railway	 3,440
From Montreal to Liverpool via St. John
by the Canadian Pacific Railway	 3,181
From Montreal to Liverpool via Portland
by the Grand Trunk Railway	 3,059
From Montreal to Liverpool via Boston
by the Central Vermont	 3,141
From Montreal to Liverpool via New York by the Central Vermont	 3,484
Here are the advantages in favour of Paspebiac over the other combined railway and ocean routes :
Miles.
Over Halifax via Cape Race	 253
Over Halifax via Belle Isle	 411
Over St. John by the Intercolonial Railway
via Cape Race	 406
Over St. John by the Intercolonial Railway
via Belle Isle	 564
Over St. John by the Canadian Pacific short
line	 147
Over St. John by the Canadian Pacific Railway via Belle Isle	 305
Over Portland by the Grand Trunk Railway
via Cape Race	*	 25
Over Portland by Belle Isle	 183
Over Boston via Cape Race	 107
Over Boston by Belle Isle	 265
Over New York by Cape Race	 450
Over New York by Belle Isle	 608 I
I respectfully submit that, in view of these statements, it is the duty of the government not to undertake to solve the fast line question or make any change concerning the eastern phase of the transportation question before fully weighing these facts, which I have the honour of submitting, and which are confirmed in every respect by the reports of the two select committees of this House appointed to investigate the matter. This is not an attempt on my part to raise a cry against the ports of St. John or Halifax, but it is well known that these ports, by our present system of communication over Canadian territory and our government road, cannot compete with the short lines to Portland and to St. John through the state of Maine.
There is another portion of the evidence I would like to submit before resuming my seat, and this is evidence which has been forwarded me through the courtesy of the senior member for Cape Breton.
We all know that during the last five years the steamer Bruce has kept up a line of communication from Cape Breton to Newfoundland during the whole winter. I inquired from Captain Delaney, the commander of that steamer, what are the conditions in the gulf of St. Lawrence and the Bale de Cha-leur, to see if it was possible for a steamer to reach Paspebiac during December and January without meeting any ice. Here is his answer :
I have been making tri-weekly trips between Port-aux-Basques, Newfoundland, and North Sydney for the last five winters, and I have not seen any Ice before the latter part of February and the beginning of March, during that period, which would lead me to believe that ships could run to Paspebiac up to the end of January.
We have been told that North Sydney is the closest port to Europe and that Louisbourg is a great competitor for that honour, but if we take into consideration the combined rail and water route yon will see that Paspebiac can beat both of them.' You can reach it from Montreal after covering 539 miles of rail, and you cannot reach North Sydney without going over 989 miles of rail. I consider that we should utilize our water communication as much as possible tvhen available in preference to our railways, in order to reduce the rates of freight and exploit most effectively our natural advantages. In order to reach Cape Sydney or Louisbourg, you have to cover 400 miles more of rail than to reach Paspebiac. Our attempt to make Halifax .a national port has practically failed because the hulk of our exports go to St. John, and we all know that to reach St. John they have to go. not only over the Intercolonial Railway, but through American territory by the Canadian Pacific Railway. Between this and next session, the government may be in a position to submit a well defined scheme on this most vital question, and I would urge them to take into consideration this fact that the Bale de Chaleur is free from obstacles, that it is situated nearer the great centres of population of this country than any other portion of our waters after the closing of the St. Lawrence, and let me say that if the St. Lawrence could be utilized after the 25th of November, I would not ask that we should convey our passengers and freights to the Baie de Chaleur.
But, the St. Lawrence being closed, why cannot we use this beautiful expanse*of water as long as it can be utilized and then if any difficulties arise because of ice, there is no reason why the Intercolonial Railway trains should be switched off on the Atlantic and Lake Superior to Paspebiac ; they can go on to Halifax or St. John. I have submitted these facts for the consideration of

hon. members of this House and for the consideration of the government. I have done so in the interest of the people I represent, who, I belieVe, have been the victims of another injustice added to the long series of injustices inflicted upon them during the last fifteen or twenty years. But beyond fulfilling my duty to my own county and to the neighbouring county of Gaspd, in which I take a great deal of interest, and which is so worthily represented in this House by my learned colleague (Mr. Lemieux), I have come to the conclusion that the Baie de Chaleur not only offers advantages for prolonged local traffic but is the natural outlet of the great national highway to Europe. Paspebiac is, beyond doubt, as the facts demonstrate, on the shortest route to Europe. I believe that for the solution of the eastern phase of the great question of transportation we should go back to the Baie de Chaleur, which has been so neglected by all governments, and the we shall find in it the solution of our winter port and difficulties. We may find there what Jacques Cartier found when he first came to this country, for it was in the Baie de Chaleur that Jacques Cartier first discovered this beautiful land ; we may find there the solution of the problem before us as he found the solution of the great enterprise he had undertaken.


Mr. RODOLPHE LEMIEUX (Gaspe).: I shall not add anything to the very able argument presented by my hon. friend from Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) with regard to this question. I wish only to say a few words with regard to winter navigation along the shores of Gaspg and our railway communications. I share his views as to the possibilities of Paspebiac becoming the terminus of a fast line between Canada and Europe. But I beg to differ with him as to the best harbour in the counties of Gaspd and Bonaventure. I believe that Paspebiac is a fine harbour, with excellent facilities and splendid possibilities. But it has been recognized beyond the shadow of a doubt that the best harbour on the coast is in the county of Gaspe, and it is called Gaspd Basin. Indeed, my hon. friend has made a very able argument and I must congratulate him. He began by speaking of the steamer service which has existed for twenty or twenty-five years between Dal-housie in New Brunswick, and Gaspe Basin. Last winter, I know, there was a certain agitation in our respective counties with a view to improve that service. I may say at once, that the old [DOT] Admiral,' has been a faithful servant of the coast of Gaspe. But, at the same time I must admit she is too old to continue the service. As my hon. friend says, the line needs some improvement. I hear that the directors of the North American Transportation Company intend crossing the ocean this summer and getting a fine iron-built screw steamer, which is ex-Mr. MARCIL (Bonaventure).
pected to begin semi-weekly trips by the beginning of next October. '
Last winter I was assailed with petitions and resolutions asking for all-winter navigation in the Bay of Gaspe and the Baie des Chaleurs. Whilst I am a believer in winter navigation in some degree, I do not share the optimism of my hon. friend as to continuous winter navigation in the Baie des Chaleurs or the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Though some reports may have been made by captains and commanders to the effect that navigation could be carried on the Whole year around, yet I have often conversed with some good old sea captains and navigators of my county, men who have spent their lives in navigating the waters of the Baie des Chaleurs and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Most of them speaking as honest men and experienced sailors, agreed in saying that while navigation was possible in the months of December and January, yet, during February and March it was almost impracticable. I say it again, I have the testimony of old sailors born and bred on the coast, men who have navigated these waters all their lives, who have been officers of the Marine and Fisheries Department, who have made a special study of the tides and currents, the winds and the movements of the ice in the Baie de Chaleur and the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and they tell me that all-winter navigation is not feasible. Against such testimony, it is not sufficient to offer statistics and reports. So I would not advocate before this House a project based upon the idea of navigating those waters during the whole winter. As I said a minute ago, I have consulted some authorities on this subject, and I have summed up their opinions on the movement of ice in the Gulf of St. Lawrence in the following lines :	The
temperature on the coast of Gaspe is milder than the rest of the province of Quebec. Fresh water will freeze at 30 degrees above zero. Salt water "will not freeze above zero. During the severest winter the temperature will not go below zero except for eight or ten days. Therefore there is practically no ice in the salt water. The ice found in these waters is fresh water ice, which is formed in and is carried down by the St. Lawrence and other rivers emptying into the gulf. When this ice strikes Anticosti island it is met by a branch of the Arctic current, and is deflected towards the south. This deviation of the current, helped by the northern and western winds, which generally prevail in that region, causes the ice to accumulate in the straits of Northumberland and adjacent waters. The prevailing western winds cause the sea generally to be free of ice along the coast of the county of Gaspe. There is not much of that ice before the 1st or 15th of February ; and although the month of March is very mild, the ice remains until it is washed away in

April. The sea is free of ice in December and January, and navigation along the coast is possible until the 1st of February, and can be resumed on the 15th of April at the latest. Last winter the temperature was exceptionally mild, and there was no ice in the gulf ; there being no ice a steamer could have run between Dal-liousie and Gaspe. In conclusion, during the winter months, navigation is feasible between the 1st or 15th of April, at the latest, until the 1st of February in the following year. Perhaps it would be possible for vessels to resist the ice from the 1st of February to the 15th of April, but such vessels should be built as the ' Stanley, which, until lately was running between Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, but such vessels are very costly.
Now, Sir, there was, last winter an agitation in my county in favour of a winter steam service. But last winter was an exceptionally mild one, there was no ice, and the same circumstances might not exist another year. We can have, as my hon. friend from Bonaventure has said, a steamer service between the 1st or 15th of April, until the 1st of February, or at least the 15th of January. As I stated it a moment ago, the ' Admiral ' is an old steamer, and although she has rendered very good service to the coast, a change is needed. My hon. friend and myself, have urged upon the government to induce the North American Transportation Company to put an iron screw steamer on the route, and I am glad to learn that by the 1st of October next, this new steamer will be ready to start, thereby rendering certain navigation during ten months; an event which the people along the coast will hail with satisfaction.
I might also mention another scheme that has been discussed in the county in connection with this question. Some people wanted a steamer service between the terminus of the Atlantic and Lake Superior Railway at New Carlisle, and GaspS Basin, instead of between Dalliousie and Gaspe Basin. I have objected strenuously to such a change, and my reason for doing so is obvious. The county of Gaspe and a part of the county of Bonaventure get their freight from Toronto, Montreal and Quebec. Now take a barrel of flour coming from Toronto, Montreal or Quebec ; it would be placed, say on board the cars of the Intercolonial Railway at Levis, would have to pay freight to the Intercolonial Railway, then to the Atlantic and Lake Superior Railway, and it would have also to pay tribute to the steamer running between New Carlisle and Gaspe Basin. You can readily understand, Mr. Speaker, to what would amount our freight rates if such conditions existed, and I was justified in objecting to such a change. I am pleased to state that the Department of Trade and Commerce did not yield to the suggestions evidently made by the Atlantic and Lake Superior Railway Company. Now,
Sir, if as 1 expect, we have a good iron screw steamer put on the route next October, the coast of Gasp6 will be satisfied provided the terminus is not changed.
As regards our railway communication, 1 fully agree with my hon. friend that the action of the Railway Committee of the Senate this morning was most deplorable. I regret to state that after our Bill had received the support of the Prime Minister, of the Minister of Railways and Canals, and of the Minister of Justice, and the unanimous assent of this House, the leader of the government in the Senate, the hon. the Secretary of State, saw fit to throw in his lot with those who for a quarter of a century have opposed the legitimate aspirations of the counties of Bonaventure and GaspS. I cannot understand how the leader of the government in the Senate found his way to vote against a Bill which had been to some extent, drafted by some of his colleagues. Yes, Sir, my hon. friend from Bonaventure and myself submitted the amendments agreed to by the interested parties, to the Minister of Justice, and to the Minister of Railways and Canals ; the amendments to the Bill were in fact drafted by them. How does it happen that the leader of the government in the Senate found his way to vote against that Bill ? Sir, I repeat that the Bill as amended, after having been sanctioned by the Minister of Justice, by, the Minister of Railways and Canals and by the Prime Minister himself, should have been, to say the least, given fair play by the Secretary of State. As I have already stated in this House, my hon. friend from Bonaventure and myself opposed the Bill as at first introduced, because we found in it no protection for the interests of the people we represent. But when these amendments had been accepted by the Prime Minister and his colleagues In this House, it was the duty of the Secretary of State to support the Bill and not nullify our common efforts as he did by his vote. I regret his action, and I desire to say that next year we shall make another attempt to get justice, not only from the government side but from the other side of the House as well.


The MINISTER OF TRADE AND COMMERCE (Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright).: I have listened with much Interest, and I have no doubt the House has also listened with much interest, to the remarks of the hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil). It is apparent from the remarks of his colleague from Gaspg (Mr. Lemieux) that this is a question which has two sides to it, and I may be pardoned if I decline to express an opinion when two gentlemen having far superior opportunities of understanding the situation than I can boast of, have hitherto failed to agree. With respect, however, to the matters more particularly belonging to my own department, l will just say that I have carefully considered the request made by niy hon. friend from

i
Bonaventure and Gaspe, and the government will endeavour to supply as good a service as they possibly can obtain for the benefit of the inhabitants of those two counties. 1 believe that up to date the steamer * Admiral,' which has been engaged for a good many years, has rendered a very efficient service. But 1 am.aware that there are difficulties connected with the employment of paddlewheel steamers, and it may be necessary to substitute another. I am in correspondence with the company on that subject at present, and I hope to be able to meet the views of my hon. friends.


SMALL-POX OX SCHOONER ' JEANIE MYRTLE '-FISHERY AWARD- COASTING TRADE.
Mr.  C. E.@: IvAULBACH (Lunenburg). Mr. Speaker, I take advantage of this opportunity to bring to the notice of the government a matter of very vital importance to every citizen of this Dominion, especially those residing near the sea engaged in shipping, but more particularly the sick seamen whose life as a rule is a hard one, when away from home and friends, and stricken down with dread disease. It will be remembered the Halifax newspapers on the 5th inst., reported the La Have schooner, ' Jeanie Myrtle,' Creaser, master, having entered i;he port of Hailfax from sea the day previous, with a sick seaman on board, and reported the same to the customs a hour after the port physician visited the ship, and when viewing the patient, at a glance pronounced it small-pox. The doctor was doubtful as to the case coming under the jurisdiction of the Dominion, but, as a precautionary measure ordered the yellow flag to be hoisted, and required the crew to remain by the vessel. When reaching the shore he wired the facts to the Minister of Agriculture, and asked for instructions, receiving as an answer, that the case was one for the local authorities, and as a result, the port physician acting under orders from here-Ottawa -refused to take any action beyond the precautions I have described.
The city authorities were next interviewed, and the chairman of the Board of Health of Halifax was asked about it, when the following episode, as reported, ensued
' What are you doing about the small-pox schooner ?'
' SVe have nothing to do with it.'
' Who has ?'
' I don't know, but not Halifax. The Ottawa telegram says " local authorities," but Or. Gil-p'c, on behalf of province, says "it's a county charge
* Are you going to allow the schooner to remain there a menace to the health of the community ?'
* The people on board have been told to stay there, and in the morning we will order the schooner to sea.'
' Where will she go ?'
' To LaHave, where she belongs, I suppose. When ordered from Canso she should have gone Sir RICHARD CARTWRIGHT.
straight home, and not put in here at all. Why should Halifax be saddled with the schooner that lies anchored over there near the Dart- * mouth shore ? '
' How can you order the vessel out of the harbour if you have no jurisdiction in the case?' the ' Herald ' asked.
But at this stage the conversation with Dr. Chisholm ended, for the genial chairman of the board of health declined to continue It.
A telegram was sent to me also the same day, which reads as follows :-
Halifax, N.S., May 5, 1902.
Schooner * Jeanie Myrtle,' Creaser, master, Ritcey's Cove, here with case of small-pox. Authorities refuse allow man land here. Has paid sick mariners' dues. Bad weather may detain vessel here days, with no attendance for man. See Minister Agriculture, ask him instruct Dominion physician to act.
BLACK, BROAD & CO.
This telegram was acted upon by me in the most energetic manner, by my calling first on the Minister of Agriculture, who informed me that he had a telegram from Halifax also, but was powerless to act at it was clearly provincial, and had answered in that way. I next applied to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and had the satisfaction of his telling me, after some slight inquiry and conference with his friends, that he would wire the officer of customs tor the port of Halifax to attend to the matter, though in reality it was no part, of the requirements of ins department, but that his action was purely from a motive of sympathy, under the peculiar circumstances of the case. I would say here, that both the Minister of Agriculture and Minister of Marine acted promptly in the matter, and X have no cause for complaint as respects either of them in that connection.
But I do say, and here state, that there is something radically wrong in this connection, that the Dominion, provincial and civic health authorities-all three should decline to act in this case, or care for this sick seaman, as a duty on their part. The very fact of the Dominion government receiving a sick mariner's fee, should in justice entitle a sick mariner having contagious disease to admission into the nearest contagious hospital that offered, and there cared for, with the best attendance possible, come from whence the patient may, within the province or from without. The expression of the chairman of the Halifax Board of Health, in the cold-hearted words, as referred to, ' In the morning we will send the vessel to sea,' if correct as reported, and I have no reason to doubt it, was very uncalled for, but in justice to him would say, that he must have given such utterance in an unguarded moment.
What is the object in exacting the sick mariner's due, I would ask, if it is not to give the sick seamen that comfort, and medical aid necessary to lead to his speedy recovery, and in the dread disease of small-

pox I contend the greatest effort should be exercised In the care of such patients, that they be kept isolated to prevent a spread, which can only he accomplished successfully in a regularly established contagious hospital, with a proper staff of attendants, that the patients may receive all necessary medical aid, care and attention.
I claim in all sincerity that the federal government should take this matter promptly in hand, and make such arrangemeuts and regulations as to settle this difficulty for ever, and have it clearly understood in future, that all sick seamen with contagious disease are to be received into the nearest contagious hospital and cared for at the expense of the federal government. This is most essential, and I sincerely hope the right hon. the First Minister will see that prompt action is taken with the view of better attention being given to this class of seamen.
Whilst I am on my feet I would ask the indulgence of the House to bring to its notice the subject of the fishery bounty. I may say that I greatly regretted my absence from the House (which was unavoidable owing to my having a cold) when the hon. member for Hamilton called attention to the statement of Premier Peters in the legislature of Prince Edward Island that ' there was no need of levying additional taxes to meet the prospective expenditure, because he was certain the Dominion government would pay over to the island government $1,000,000'as the island's share of the Halifax fishery awards.' It is also currently reported that approaches have been made by New Brunswick with the same object in view. The right hon. leader in reply stated that ' there was no ground for apprehension of this sort.' But I did not approve of his utterance that 1 It would make no difference whether this fund was administered by the Dominion or provincial authorities for the benefit of the fishermen.' I take serious exception to this, and in my mind it would make a very great deal of difference, were there to be no apportionment of this fund to the respective provinces, they to dispose of the fund as they thought proper, as the other province, Nova Scotia not excepted, would have the same view as to the appropriation as the island province expressed, and the matter of bounty for the encouragement of the fishermen would be a thing of the past. These governments have proved themselves in the past to be by no means, in the sense of the term parsimonious and would, were this money given them, spend it in an improvident manner, and the poor fishermen would in a short time have nothing in the way of bounty whatever:
The Question of the division of the fishery7 award, and the payment even of apportionments to the respective provinces, should not be entertained by7 this government for one moment, as the Dominion government is the most suitable body to be the trustee of such a fund, and not the provinces, a?
they would use the money to pay their provincial current expenses, and the bounty would be lost for ever. I here, in the most emphatic manner, protest against any attempt being made to take this fund out of the hands of the Dominion government, they being the most suitable trustees, or custodians of the fund, where we can feel assured it is safe from any attempt to have it utilized for any other purpose than that for which it was intended, viz., bounty for fishermen, it having been paid for the sacrifices the fishermen underwent, when the maritime fishing grounds were used by the United States fishermen in common with Canadian fishermen. The fishermen of the maritime provinces have a hard struggle at present to move along successfully even with the benefit of the bounty, as they7 have to compete with the bounty fed French fish of St. Pierre which means about $2 of a bonus on every7 quintal of French fish exported outside of France, Canada being excluded in the sale of fish to any French dependency, Guadeloupe and Martinique included. by reason of their prohibitory tariff. The French have the trade of these islands practically7 to themselves, and at the same time come into competition with us, with their bounty fed fish in the other markets of the world, the British West Indies included.
There is another matter of very great importance that I desire the First Minister to take cognizance of, and that is the coastwise trade of the West India Islands, enjoyed by British shipping from time immemorial, but now greatly interfered with by the embargo set up by the United States since their acquirement of the island of Porto Rico, and the monopoly of that market, which up to a recent date was largely7 the market for Nova Scotia fish, in fact the very best of all the West India group. Of course I am aware that we cannot now control this matter, but it might have been managed satisfactorily to us had active measures been taken by this government, and I strongly advised to have the imperial government informed of our interest and trade with this island, and to induce Great Britain to demand an undertaking from the United States government that they would not be allowed to plant their flag on that island-Porto Rico-inhabited by a law-abiding and peaceful people, unless they7 consented to allow the same privileges for trading with them, in common with the United States, that we previously enioyed. I tried to impress this government with the importance of the Porto Rico trade to Nova Scotia, and pointed out how essential it was in our interest to have them take prompt action to this end, but without avail. What is the condition of matters now ? Simply7 that we are handicapped by the United States in that market, and in addition prevented doing a coastwise trade ; that is in carrying fish to that island and having a return cargo of their products to any port in the United States which we had

hitherto enjoyed, whilst the United States is allowed all the coasting trade she desires with the British West India Islands without interruption.
Jamaica trade with Great Britain should be thought of also at the Coronation convention, in order that the bounty-fed beet root sugar of Germany, France and other countries should not be admitted into Great Britain to the exclusion of Jamaica cane-grown sugar, unless a bonus, or preference is given to Jamaica. I refer to this particularly, as our Nova Scotia trade with Jamaica is little at present, owing to their poverty stricken condition, brought about by England's free trade policy under which, in sugar, she can not compete with the bounty-fed product.
I mention this now, in the hope that the right hon. First Minister will make a note of it, and bring it forcibly to the notice of the Coronation convention meeting next month in London. Effective measures are demanded in the interest of Canadian trade, and the trade of the British Empire, I feel assured will co-equally be benefited by it.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. James Sutherland).: Mr. Speaker, two of the questions brought to the attention of the House by the hon. gentleman (Mr. ICauIbiich) have already been discussed, one of them at a very early hour this morning. In regard to the last question I would say that it is one, perhaps, more requiring the attention of the imperial authorities than of this parliament. I hope that the ministers who will attend the conference in London will give the suggestion which he has made their attention. In regard to the case of small-pox on the fishing craft I would say that when it was brought to my attention by the hon. gentleman and by other hon. members of the House and also by a message from the authorities in Halifax I was advised by the department that it was a provincial or local matter and that it was outside of our jurisdiction. However, as there seemed to be some doubt as to the question of jurisdiction, in my own mind, at least, and as we had a report stating that the unfortunate sailor was very ill on a fishing craft lying out in the harbour,
I made every possible effort to see that he was taken care of and I requested the use of the contagious diseases hospital there on the island. I also instructed the officer of the department at Halifax to see that every provision was made to take care of this unfortunate man.
In regard to the fisheries award I suppose that my hon. friend and that all of us will have to abide by the decision that may be given by the courts in this matter. It may be possible that it will be decided that the fund is to be administered as it now is by' the Dominion. If on the other hand, the courts decide that the provinces are entitled to have this money handed over to them, then, I do not see what else we can do than


Mr. KAULBACH.: hand it over. However, as that matter is now under consideration I do not think it is necessary to take up the time of the House in discussing it at the present time. It is a question that will come up for discussion and probably for final settlement at the next session of parliament.


Mr. BELL.: Are you discussing this matter with the provincial premiers.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes, on the 20th instant. If an amicable arrangement is made we will have a final settlement, and if it be referred to the courts I hope we will have it decided before next session.


PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.
The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: I wish to set my hon. friend the leader of the opposition right with regard to a statement he made yesterdav, and I am quite sure that he will be glad i should do so. It is with reference to the work on the Galops rapids.


Robert Laird Borden: Oh, yes, I mav say that I was yesterday told by my hon. friend (Mr. Haggart) that during mv absence on one occasion the vote had beep withdrawn.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: I understand that. The minister is quite correct in making reference to the matter.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Borden, Halifax) was not properly informed on the subject. The expenditure upon this work for which we asked an appropriation this session was not for work that was done during the previous or current fiscal year, nor was it the Auditor General who made any communication to the effect that the work had not been authorized or that there had been no appropriation for it. The officer who advised the contractor, and advised him before he did any work during the last.fiscal year, was the chief engineer of the department, whose duty it was to do so. The contractor appears to have gone on with the work to a limited extent, and he has been pressing for payment, but the hon. gentleman was wrong in saying that the department recognized his claim. There is no ground whatever upon which any gentleman in the House can say that the government Intend to, or will pay for work which was done against notice and without appropriation and with the full knowledge that there was an intention on the part of the government not to continue it. This party no doubt assumed that the work would be proceeded with later, hut he assumed it without any warrant. No officer of the

government, certainly with my knowledge, held out to him any such promise, and he therefore took upon himself the entire risk of getting recouped for any work he may have done. My kon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax), also made the statement that a member of this House had asserted that this work was not only useless but it was detrimental to the public interest and even injurious to navigation. I was present when the hon. member for Grenville (Mr. Reid) made that statement, and it is a statement which is entitled to proper consideration, but it would be a great mistake for this House to assume that any member of parliament, no matter how strong his opinion may be upon a question of that kind, can settle the matter on his mere ipse dixit. We will have to consider whether his judgment is sound on such a point, and whether he is in a better position to form an opinion upon it than experts who have made a life study of the business.
The question of the Galops rapids is not by any means an easy question to determine. The work was originally started by one of the most eminent engineers who had ever been in the service of the government. I had not the pleasure of knowing Mr. Page, but there is a tradition that Mr. Page was an engineer of exceptional ability and that he was an efficient and capable officer. Mr. Page initiated this work. It was upon his strong opinion and judgment that this work was undertaken as being a necessary and proper work, and the Minister of Railways and Canals of that day agreed in Mr. Page's opinion. After Mr. Page died the work was continued under Mr. Trudeau, who is recognized as an engineer whose opinion would be entitled to very great weight, and when Mr. Rubidge took charge of the St. Lawrence canal afterwards, his judgment was in entire accord with that of Mr. Page and of Mr. Trudeau. I am afraid to say how many years Mr. Rubidge has been in the service of the government, but he has been for probably fifty years, so that he has a very lengthened experience. Mr. Rubidge has now attained the ripe age of eighty-five years. All the officers and engineers of the department who had to do with this work were of the same opinion, so that there was a continuity of approval in the department in reference to it. I am sorry that the hon. member for Grenville (Mr. Reid) is not here, but I may say that I understand that some dispute arose which led to difficulties between Mr. Rubidge and the hon. member for Grenville, and that hon. gentleman brought this subject of the Galops rapids Into parliament before I had the honour of a seat here, and he condemned the project very strongly and has continued of that opinion. But w'hat course should a Minister of Railways and Canals take when a controversy arises in respect to a particular work upon which $700,000 or $800,000 have already been expended and for which $250,-
000 more will be required to complete 1 The work proceeded for three years or so in my department before any doubt was raised iat all with regard to the wisdom of continuing it. I am not an engineer myself and could not give an expert opinion, and until the matter was mentioned in parliament by the hon. member for Grenville I did not know that a doubt had arisen, and I concluded that as there was that doubt I would not ask for an appropriation for the work further. I have not done so except for the sum of $25,000 this session which was needed to pay, not for work which had been done since the appropriation had stopped, but for work which was done previously.


Robert Laird Borden: I have been under a misapprehension with regard to a matter which took place when I was not in the House, and my attention was not directed to it up to the time I was addressing the House yesterday. I understand that while I was absent the vote was reduced by one-half. The hon. minister is quite right in directing my attention to it now. The gist of my criticism was that it seemed to me that the government might be responsible for the work which was done, owing to what I understood to be an admitted fact, viz., that officers of the government had been on board the dredge and in charge of the dredge during the time the work was being proceeded with.


The MINISTER OE RAILWAYS AND GANALS.: We are advised that the party has had notice that there was no authority, and that he should not go on with the work.


Robert Laird Borden: I understood that, i am only gathering, from what took place when the estimates were under discussion, that an engineer of the government was on board the dredge which was performing this work after the appropriation had lapsed, and 1 thought that there might be some question as to whether the government would not be liable for that very reason.


The MINISTER OE RAILWAYS AND GANALS.: We are advised not.
Mr. Sl'KOULE. Had the minister any correspondence with the contractor about the money he earned V


The MINISTER OE RAILWAYS AND GANALS.: No, 1 think not. I think he sent his estimates in, but 1 do not think he applied for anything in any other way. He came here during the present session, and called at the office to see me, and I told him the work would not go on. I notified him that there would be no appropriation asked for to continue the work. He did not say a word to me about the work that had been done, and 1 did not know at that time that there had been any work done.


John Graham Haggart: 'i'lie question is a very simple one. The work was abandoned in June of last year in consequence of a message from the department stating tnat the appropriation for the work had been expended. But the minister brought down to this House an estimate for $50,000. What was it for Y


The MLMSTEK OF HALLWAYS AND CANALS.: 1 explained that.


John Graham Haggart: It could not be for anything but work executed after the expiration of the year, and to pay percentages which were retained by the government from the contractors for work already done.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: No. Perhaps the hon. gentleman did not follow me or he has forgotten what 1 stated, and 1 will repeat it. i said that the estimate was handed to me by the chief engineer, and 1 took it to council with this statement, that the amount would be required in order to cover what was retained by way of drawback in respect to work done prior to the 1st of July, lyui, and for a balance-he did not know exactly how much it was, but he was sure that $50,000 would cover it-that was due up to the 1st of July, and after the estimate had been made previous to that date. The amount had not been ascertained accurately and definitely, and therefore though we had enough to close that, we had not one dollar for any work done subsequent to the 1st of July; and in order that there might be no possibility for any one to say that we were proposing by the vote of $50,000 to cover anything subsequent to the 1st of July, and because we did not know, and do not know, just wTiat amount is necessary to pay for work done prior to the 1st of July, and after the estimate, 1 asked the committee to allow me to strike out everything but the drawback of $25,000.


John Graham Haggart: That is exactly the statement that 1 made in reference to the matter. The minister, in the first place, comes down to the House and asks for $50,000. He says that $25,000 or about that amount is drawback retained by the government for work executed by these contractors. The peculiarly of the drawback is this, that they were working by the day, except in the case of a small portion ot the contract for which the drawback could not possibly amount to one-fourth of the amount which the bon. gentleman has retained. YVhy did he ask for $50,000 Y He thought possibly the drawback and the amount due to the contractors was due before the 1st of July, it could not possibly be so. The Minister of Hallways would not spend an amount greater than the appropriation which was made for these works. He did not say that the amount expended was greater than what had been Hon. Mr. ELAIR.
appropriated. All that the department said to the contractor was :	' This appropriation for the year is expended, and there is no more money with which to) go on with the work.' What does the hon. minister ask the $50,000 for Y it is as plain as possible that his officers were on that dredge and were in charge of these excavation works from July to the end of the summer, and the intention of the hon. minister evidently was to pay the contractors for the rest of the year. But when he heard from my hon. friend from Grenville (Mr. Heid) the absurdity of the work he was doing and what enormous sums he was paying for a useless work, he took the House into his confidence and said :	* 1 will make
no more payments upon that work except the amount of the drawback,' and I took that promise from the minister at the time- that he was to apply the $25,000 which was voted for this particular work solely on the drawback which is retained by the government from the contractors. Under these circumstances, we will let the amount pass; but you can easily see how the right lion, leader of the government made the mistake he did when he stated that $50,000 was voted for the Galops rapids, because he was not in the House when the lion. Minister of ltailways withdrew half the vote and only retained the $25,000 for the purpose of paying the drawback.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into Committee of Supply.
To provide for additional aids to navigation, principally on the St. Lawrence route, including the purchase of a steamer for tidal and surveying purposes, $280,000.
Mr.   LAKLL@: 1 would like to ask the Minister of Marine and Fisheries if any portion of that is contemplated to be spent on the coast of British Columbia ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There is provision in this vote for some improvements to aids to navigation on the Pacific coast. Although the greater portion of it is intended for improvements on what is known as the St. Lawrence route, part of it is to be used in other parts of the Dominion. As the House is aware, very strong representations have been made for many years that the lighting and other aids to navigation on the St. Lawrence route are deficient. It is only necessary for me to mention, what every hon. member knows, that the larger portion of the trade of Canada is in Europe, and the object to be aimed at is to place the Canadian producer in a position to compete successfully with the exporters from other countries. To enable me to do this, I must be placed in a position to have the lowest possible charge imposed on the shipments of Canadian products to the European markets. This charge consists of two items-freight and

insurance. Ship owners have to provide for a profit on their enterprise. They have to add to the other expenses the insurance on the hull and there is also insurance on the produce to be taken into account, so that it will be seen that the high rates of insurance now charged are a heavy tax on the Canadian producers as against those of another country, who are charged lower rates. My information is that the insurance from St. Lawrence ports is from two to five times as great as from American ports. Figures given me by leading shippers of Montreal show that on a large steamer, worth say $500,000, the extra insurance charge is $5,000 per voyage, or $25,000 per season of five trips. Every one will see what a very heavy tax this is on the Canadian producer as compared with the American shipper. The reason of this high rate is undoubtedly the many casualties which have happened on the St. Lawrence route. It has been represented to us by the large shipping interests and by the marine and insurance people, that if we had very much improved aids to navigation, the rates would be reduced to those charged at American ports or at any rate would be very much reduced. I might quote from one of the official statements of the shipping interests of this country, that if the improvements recommended by them are made, the insurance rates would be very materially reduced. I have also had representations jnade to me by representatives of the largest marine insurance companies, and a representative of Lloyds, to the effect that the result would be, as I have said, to reduce the insurance very materially, if not to the same rates as are charged at American ports. Having been promised these reductions, I have come to the conclusion that it would be very much in the interests of this country to improve the aids to navigation. It must also be remembered that as our shipping season is short, lasting only during a portion of the year, we have to be particularly on the alert in competing with ports that are open all the year round, and must provide ourselves with the best facilities.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: On what principle is this money to be expended ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I will give my hon. friend and the House a full statement of how we propose to expend these moneys. On the southern route entering the St. Lawrence the following improvements are contemplated :
Cape Race-A quick flashing light to be established and whistle changed to syren.
Cape Pine-A first-rate light and log signal to be established here, and as this is in Newfoundland, it is proposed to invite the imperial and colonial governments to co-operate with us.
Cape Ray-Improvement of light and signal.
Bird Rocks-Light to be made occulting.
Byron Island-Light to be established.
Cape Rosier-Fog alarm to be strengthened and light made occulting.
Fame Point-A syren is now being erected and light improved.
If any hon. gentleman is sufficiently interested to look at the map, which I have laid on the Table, he will see on it those points at which we propose to make these improvements.
Entering the St. Lawrence by the Strait of Belle Isle or northern route, we propose to make the following improvements :
Belle Isle-A new light and fog alarm will be placed on the north-east end.
Cape Bauld or Cape Norman-One of the fog alarms will be changed.
Point Amour-Light will be made occulting.
East End Anticosti-Lightship will be placed.
And between [DOT] the points where the two routes above mentioned join, namely, Fame Point, and Quebec, the following improvements are contemplated :
Matane-Bell buoys being placed on extremity of shoal, a syren established at station and light improved.
Father Point-A syren is being erected and the light will be improved.
Princess Shoal-This danger at the mouth of the Saguenay is being marked by a combined gas and bell buoy, which will be placed in position as soon as one can be procured.
Lower Traverse-A pier light being erected.
Belchasse-Light being made occulting.
West end of Island of Orleans-Occulting light was established at this point last autum to guide vessels on making the turn at Quebec harbour.
With regard to the route from Quebec to Montreal, I wish to state in general terms that the policy of the department is to thoroughly mark each section of the ship channel, as improved, with buoys and range lights, and changes in aids to navigation are rapidly being made.
On the 1st day of May this year, three new range lights were established at St. Antoine, to more efficiently mark a turn complained of by the pilots, and three pairs of range rights were established near Ver-eheres to mark a new channel where the Department of Public Works have done splendid work in straightening and widening an intricate reach.
The next stretch that it is proposed to improve is a dredged cat at Pointe aux Trembles.
The deepening of Lake St. Peter will be followed by a rearrangement of the lights, and the semaphore showing the depth of water over Ste. Croix Bar, where the dredging has been completed, is being moved to show the depth over St. Augustin Bar, which is now the shoalest point above Quebec.
Gas buoys are being provided for different points on the ship channel and will be placed as fast as they can be utilized.
The aim of all these improvements will be to enable a ship to run through from



Quebec to Montreal without stopping, either by day or night.
I may say that this item was under discussion yesterday, and, at the request of some hon. members, I had it stand over. But I find that these hon. gentlemen are not present. Still, I am taking the time of the committee to submit this information, because I know that it is of the greatest possible interest to those engaged in shipping. With regard to the establishment of lights in British Columbia, I intend to ask the officers of the department to visit that province at an early date, and to learn what additional aids to navigation are urgently required. The different routes to be protected are first:
The route outside Vancouver Island on the great Circle Route to Japan, principally for the safety of the Canadian Pacific Railway steamers ; second, the inside routes to Ladysmith and other coal shipping centres for the protection of the large freight steamers now engaged in carrying coal to the United States and other ports, a traffic that is rapidly increasing ; and third, the coasting trade of British Columbia, largely increased by the rapid development of lumbering, fishing and mining industries and Yukon trade in all the inlets and inside passages from the boundary line north to Fort Simpson.
Then there is the small light to be provided In Prince Edward Island, three in Nova Scotia, one in New Brunswick and two in the province of Quebec, on the Gasp6 coast. In Ontario, five new lights have been urgently pressed upon the department on account of the increase of trade, particularly on the Georgian Bay.
With regard to the portion of this vote to be devoted to tidal survey work, I may say that the survey of the tides and currents will be extended and it is particularly desirable that the set of the currents off Cape Pine and Cape Race should be at once investigated.
Tide tables are now prepared annually from tidal record secured by this survey for all the more important harbours in eastern Canada ; and also for the principal harbours in British Columbia. Tidal differences have also been determined, which enable the time of the tide to be known at a number of harbours of secondary importance.
An investigation of the currents was carried on during three seasons, as follows:-
1891.-In the Strait of Belle Isle and Cabot Strait; two of the entrances to the Gulf of St. Lawrence.	,
1895.-The Gaspe current and the general circulation of the currents in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.
1890.-The north-eastern arm of the gulf and the steamship route from Belle Isle to Anticosti.
The regions most requiring investigation are :
(1.) Around the south-eastern coast of Newfoundland, off Cape Race and the southern bays.


Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND (Oxford).: (2.) At the entrance to the Bay of Fundy.
(3.) Further investigation in several regions within the gulf, and off the outer end of Belle Isle Strait.
I am satisfied that this Improvement of the St. Lawrence route will give satisfaction to the large shipping interests especially in the old country, and that it will so meet the views of the marine insurance people that we shall get a very largely decreased rate as compared with that in force at the present time. From this comparatively small expenditure, I believe the country will reap great benefits.


Mr. EARLE.: In addition to the expenditure on lights, on the coast of British Columbia, I think it will be well to have a minute hydrographic survey of that coast. The steamer 'Quadra' has been doing that work spasmodically. But now that the department has two steamers to replace her, one for the lighthouse and one for the fisheries' protection service, could not the whole time of the ' Quadra ' be occupied with this hydrographic work . in future ? Her chief officer is a very competent man, who has been doing as I say, more or less of this work ever since she lias been in commission. But the great difficulty is, be has not time to do all that needs to be done. He rarely comes in without being able to add to the stock of information possessed as to the dangerous rocks on that coast. As the hon. minister knows, wrecks have been frequent on that coast since the larger vessels began navigating there. Their presence makes the need of surveys all the greater.


John William Bell: If I understood the hon. minister right he said he intended to devote a good deal of the grant to improving our knowledge of Newfoundland around Cape Race.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


John William Bell: A large part of the bad reputation under which the St. Lawrence route labours is due to the number of wrecks that have taken place in the neighbourhood of Cape Race. The marine casualties in those waters are so numerous and so unaccountable that I think it not surprising that the marine insurance companies exact high rates. If, by any reasonable expenditure, any reasonable expenditure at all, our knowledge of that locality can be enlarged so as to render impossible, or at least improbable, the occun'ence of more of the mysterious wrecks that every season occur there, it will do more to improve the reputation of the St. Lawrence route than any work that could be done within the gulf of St. Lawrence itself. The chart showing the wrecks that have occurred upon this south-eastern portion of the coast of Newfoundland must convince us that it is one of the most dangerous places for navigation in the whole world. It is not within our own waters, it

is true. But if we are to make the St. Lawrence route safe and available we must master, no matter at what cost, the knowledge of that very difficult and dangerous coast. I am glad to know that the minister has taken enough money to enable him to deal with that in a satisfactory and efficient manner. Anything short of that would be an unwise expenditure. Enough expenditure must be made in the shape of vessels and the employment of enough competent men to make that coast reasonably safe, and. if possible absolutely safe.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The particular point to which my hon. friend (Mr. Bell) refers is being covered by the British government. We have been in communication with them, and at the point where they leave oft we are taking up the work. So that, for the whole coast, we shall have the information which is so necessary.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I hope the navigation companies will do their part and share, as we are doing our part and share. It is hardly the thing perhaps, for one minister to congratulate another publicly, but I ask to be allowed to do so iu this case. My hon. friend and colleague the Minister of Marine and Fisheries has undertaken to carry out improvements that should have been carried out long ago. He is doing a most useful work for this country. But again let me ask the navigation companies not to forget that in spite of the best buoys, the best lights, the best dredged channels and other improvements, if they do not employ the right men, there will still be accidents and wrecks. It is within my personal knowledge that, in many cases our navigation companies-Canadian navigation companies as well as others-employ men who should not be engaged in such important work. They employ men who drink. For instance, I was on a ship two years ago. It was a clear day, and we were nearing Father Point, the ship struck. The captain had gone down to his room to write despatches. I had just been on the bridge, and I was glad not to have been there when the accident happened, or I might have been accused of having distracted the attention of the man who had charge of the ship. I inquired of the captain how it could be that, in full daylight, with a buoy clearly in sight, the vessel could have struck bottom. He did not tell me at the moment, but when we reached port, he said:	Well, Mr. Minister,
here are the facts : This is simply a result of false friendship; the man who was employed as my second had been commander of a steamer, but he had been drinking and was discharged, and we employed him-and here is the result of my kindness. We do our part, let the navigation companies do their part also.
158J


Robert Laird Borden: I would like to ask the minister if he has received any suggestions from, or has had any communication with the underwriters whose rates have been so high on the St. Lawrence, with regard to the steps he is taking and for which he proposes to provide by this vote. The association of underwriters, or at least certain companies, have made representations to the late Minister of Marine and Fisheries as to what they thought ought to be done. I suppose it would be well, if we expect the rates to be reduced, that we should endeavour, so far as consistent with the public interest, to meet therir views in regard to this matter.
The MINISTER OB' MARINE AND BTSHEK1ES. I may say that when I took charge of the department I found that representations with regard to this matter had been made iby the representatives of the marine insurance companies, by the large ship owners, and by the Board of Trade of the city of Montreal, in fact by merchants generally; and when I undertook to consider this question 1 took the reports furnished by these different bodies and asked for an interview with their leading representatives. Having gone into the matter with the chief engineer and officers of the department, we have formed a plan which 1 think will carry out almost entirely the views of the shipping interests and of the marine and insurance people as presented by them to the department. I think if we give them what they ask, and they certainly ought to be good judges of what they need, we shall meet their views on almost every point. Of course they have asked for a great deal, 1 suppose that is human nature, and they have been perhaps exacting; but the plan 1 am recommending meets their wishes almost to the whole extent.
Some resolutions reported.


MESSAGE B'KOM THE GOVERNOR GENERAL-FURTHER SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES.
[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OB' BTNANOE (Hon. W. S. B'ielding) delivered a message from His Excellency the Governor General.
Mr. SPEAKER read the message, as follows :
Minto.
The Governor General transmits to the House of Commons further supplementary estimates of sums required for the service of the Dominion for the year ending 30th June, 1902, and in accordance with the provisions of ' The British North America Act, 1867,' the Governor General recommends these estimates to the House of Commons.
Government House,
Ottawa, May 14th, 1902.
The MINISTER OB' FINANCE moved that the message together with the esti-
[Stage Direction]
mates be referred to the Committee of Supply.
Motion agreed to.
SUPPLi.
House again in Committee of Supply.
Relief to sufferers in Martinique and St. Vinoent, $50,000.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding), it had been understood that we would have no more estimates this session, but when 1 state the purpose for which this vote is asked, 1 am sure it will have the unanimous assent of the House. We have all had our attention drawn by the press to the story of the appalling disaster which has fallen on the French island of Martinique, and to the disaster, perhaps not so great, but of a very serious character, which has fallen upon the neighbouring British island of St. Vincent. The whole world is moved to sympathy by this terrible circumstance, and there seems to be a general desire that aid should be given to those who are suffering in consequence. It is thought well that the government of Canada should contribute to this relief fund. We have therefore presented to the House an estimate appropriating the sum of $50,000 for the relief of the sufferers from the volcanic disasters in the West Indies. We propose that one-half of that sum shall be at once supplied to the relief fund for the island in which the greatest disaster has occurred, the island of Martinique; and we think that perhaps it can best be applied by placing the money at the disposal of the French colonial minister in Paris, who will, of course, be able to see that It is applied in the right direction. As respects the balance, it will, either in whole or in part, be applied for the relief of the sufferers in the island of St. Vincent. The Information respecting the disaster in St. Vincent is not yet perhaps sufficient to enable us to know whether the whole sum will be required there ; but if the necessity seems to arise, the balance will be applied to St. Vincent. At all events, the aim is that all who are suffering by these terrible disasters shall have some assistance from the government and the people of Canada In this moment of their great need.
Mr. BORDEN, (Halifax). 1 fully concur with and support the action of the government In asking parliament to make this appropriation. On occasions in the past when our own people have been in need of substantial sympathy from other countries, they have received It on many occasions in a very substantial manner. 1 think it is a fitting thing that the government should take this step at the present time. The appalling suddenness of this disaster, its tremendous extent, the amazing number of people who, in, but a moment of time, were absolutely destroyed and their homes wiped out of
William Stevens Fielding: existence, render this an occasion on which this country may well testify its sympathy in this effective manner. I am glad that the government propose to apply a portion of this sum at once to the relief of the sufferers in the island of Martinique, and I believe that the action of the government in that way will 'be regarded as an indication of the neighbourly feeling and good will which exist between this country and the great nation to which that island belongs. I have very much pleasure, therefore, in supporting the motion of the Minister of Finance.
Resolution reported.


PROROGATION.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. SPEAKER informed the House that he had received a communication from the Secretary of His Excellency the Governor General, as follows :
Office of the
Governor General's Secretary,
Ottawa, May 14th, 1902.
Sir,

I have the honour to inform you that His Excellency the Governor General will proceed to the Senate Chamber, on Thursday, the 15th instant, at three o'clock, for the purpose of proroguing the session of the parliament of Canada. *
I have the honour to be, sir,
Your obedient servant,
F. S. MAUDE, Major, Governor General's Secretary. The Honourable
The Speaker of the House of Commons.

[Stage Direction]
House proceeded to consider resolutions reported from Committee of Supply.
Militia-Rifle ranges, $75,000.
['Yes, and there are also the amendments made by the Senate to the Bill about the remission of penalties.']
Robert Laird Borden: I have received a communication from Halifax respecting the Bedford rifle range, and I will read a brief extract from it so that it may be brought to the attention of the Minister of Militia whom I do not see at present in the House. The letter says :
As one of a number of interested militiamen I take the liberty of writing you to ask you if you will try and get some definite answer from the Minister of Militia as to when Bedford rifle range is going to be ready for the use of the militia. Perhaps it may not be possible for you to obtain the same publicly owing to the session being so nearly to a close.
Briefly the case stands this way. A contract was awarded for the making of the new range, work being'commenced in the early fall, 1900, it being stipulated I understand that it was to be completed some time in June, 1901. Certain work done in the fall of 1900 not being properly arranged was destroyed by the spring freshets in 1901, the resuR was the militia had no range to shoot on last year and it was only through the kindness of the imperial government that the annual shooting of the provincial association was enabled to be held at Macnab's island.

The range is not ready yet and no one seems to know, when it will be, at least no one here. It looks very much as if the militia will he without any rifle practice this year as well.
A gentleman who was up viewing the range a couple of days ago, says that before the targets could even be used there is fully 1000 loads of earth that would have to be removed that had fallen into the trench from the embankment at the back, this theje would have been no trouble 'in guarding against, because it could have been foreseen, as last year they had a cave in only of a larger extent.
Entries for the ' Canadian Military League ' close on May 17th, the matches commencing June 14th, our militiamen always took an interest in these matches but owing to the uncertainty of any place to shoot there will be no entries from here, and there were none of course last year. (Barring a few individuals who formed a club and managed to shoot the matches at Macnabs with considerable expense to themselves.)
There seems to be a very strong desire on the part of this gentleman, whose name I could give to the minister if he desires, that some active measures should be taken in *order to place the range in a condition so that the militia may use Hi at the approaching season.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I will call the attention of the Minister of Militia to the hon. gentleman's remarks.
Royal Military College, $75,000.


Robert Laird Borden: There is another matter which I intended to have mentioned to the hon. Minister of Militia when he was in the House, and it is this. Last year I brought to his attention the desirability of some memorial being erected by this country in memory of the graduates of the Royal Military College who have fallen in South Africa. The hon. Minister of Militia seemed disposed to take that matter into favourable consideration. I think the idea was to have a memorial placed in the college buildings. I have had another communication from the gentleman who brought this matter to my attention last year, and I trust that the hon. Minister of Finance will be good enough to bring it to the attention of the hon. Minister of Militia.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I will do so.
Quarantine-Salaries and contingencies, $110,-
000.


Robert Laird Borden: I would like to bring to the attention of the government the fact that a medical practitioner, Dr. Andrew E. Porter, who resides in my province, has informed me that he has a claim against the government as to which he cannot get any reply or any satisfaction. He has brought it to the attention of the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Customs, the Department of the Interior and the Prime Minister, and the only satisfaction he is able to obtain is that one department says that another department should attend to it, and occasionally a department says it will give the matter consideration. He has sent me a statement under oath of what his claim amounts to, and I will read it in order that the government generally may have it brought to their attention :
I, Andrew E. Porter, at present of River Hebert, in the county of Cumberland and province of Nova Scotia, physician, duly admitted to the practice of medicine, do solemnly declare that :	_
1.	I have been engaged in the practice of medicine since 1876, and was admitted a practitioner in the Yukon Territory in the year 1893.
2.	During the summer of 1900, a small-pox epidemic broke out in the city of Dawson.
3.	I was instructed by D. Menzies, a customs officer and acting quarantine officer at White Horse in the said territory, to make an examination of the passengers and crews of all steamers arriving from Dawson during the prevalence of the disease.
4.	In accordance with such infractions I inspected such steamers between the 11th day of July, 1900, and the 22nd day of August, A.D. 1900.
5.	The account attached hereto gives the dates of such inspection and the steamers so inspected.
C. The amount charged per steamer is the regular medical fee allowed in the Yukon at that time for such medical work and is a reasonable charge, to which I am justly entitled.
7.	The certificate at the end of the said account is in the proper handwriting of D. Men-zies, collector of customs and acting quarantine officer as aforesaid.
8.	I have tried all reasonable means to collect this Bill, but I have not been able up to the present date to collect the total amount or any part thereof.
I do not know whether this man has any claim or whether his statements are correct or not; but there is no reason why he should not receive an answer one way or the other, and be told whether the government intend to pay his claim or not. If they do not intend to pay it, I suppose he would ask them to grant him a petition of right, so that he could enforce his claim if he has any.


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: How much is the claim 1


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Dr. Porter wrote to me on one or two occasions, and I think he was informed that his claim would not be entertained. Of course, if he wants a petition of right, he has only to address the Department of Justice, which he has never done. When he wrote to me, if I remember rightly, inquiries were made, and as a result of the inquiries, he was informed that nothing more could be done for him than what he had already received.


Robert Laird Borden: He has received a part ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: That is my impression at the present time. I would not

speak positively as to that, but I will send word immediately to have the matter again brought to my attention, and I will give an answer to my hon. friend to-morrow.


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: I distinctly remember the claim coming before me. It came into the hands of my deputy and was referred to me, and I instructed my deputy to ascertain whether this man was instructed by any officer of my deDartment to do the work. It was ascertained that he had not been instructed by any officer of my department, and he was notified to apply to the department who employed him. I have not heard from him since.


Robert Laird Borden: I cannot imagine that he did not reply to the hon. gentleman's letter, because he has written a good many letters to me on the subject, and shows a disposition to follow the matter up. He says he was instructed by the customs officer, who was acting as quarantine officer, to make this examination, and he acted for a period of some months.
Railways and Canals-Chargeable to capital- Intercolonial Railway-steel rails and fastenings, $600,000


Mr. BARKER.: I wish to enter my protest-


Mr. SPEAKER.: Will the hon. member please wait until the whole resolution is read.


Robert Laird Borden: Would it not be more convenient for the hon. gentleman to make his remarks on this special item 1
ail-. SPEAKER. There is only one motion before the Chair-that the resolution shall be read the second time.


Robert Laird Borden: But the result of that ruling would be that, instead of having one single subject for discussion, there may be a great many, according to the number of items covered by the resolution.
air. SPEAKER. The hon. gentleman prefers to proceed item by item ?
air. BORDEN (Halifax). Yes ; otherwise we would have many subjects to cover.
air. BARKER. Before the item, is concurred in, I desire to enter my protest against charging this expenditure to capital account. I do not propose at this stage of the session, to make any extended remarks on the subject, because I have already discussed it at some length. Shortly, my objection is this-that all the hon. gentleman is really doing, in relation to a capital charge, is adding to the structure of the road 13 pounds per yard of rail. He has at present rails of 67 pounds per yard, which were originally provided out of capital. He is putting down rails weighing 80 pounds per yard. He is entitled to charge the 13 pounds of increase to capital Sir WILFRID LAURIE R.
account, but no more. That is one of the most elementary principles in companies, whether railway companies or any other. The least important business concern in the country is dealt with precisely in that way. It makes no difference whether the government own a property or whether that property is owned by a corporation, the principle is just the same. Unless you adopt a recognized principle in keeping accounts no man can tell whether the business is worked at a profit or at a loss. The importance of observing that principle was illustrated by the fact that the Minister of Finance yesterday contrasted the results obtained by the hon. Minister of Railways, as shown in his report laid before this House, with the result of the operations of his predecessors. The absurdity of such a comparison must be obvious to everybody who will consider that the predecessor of the Minister of Railways would have charged not merely the 67 pounds per yard, but the whole 80 pounds per yard to maintenance account and not to capital. By charging these rails to capital, the present minister, by this one item alone saves, as compared with his predecessors, no less than $600,000. I do not say that the hon. gentleman's predecessors were under any obligation to charge the whole SO pounds per yard to maintenance. On the contrary, I say, it would be reasonable to charge the betterment. as it is commonly called, in this instance the 13 pounds per yard, to capital. But it is absurd, and every business man in this House must see that it is absurd, when capital has provided rails of 67 pounds per yard that the hon. gentleman should replace them and charge the new ones to capital also. Why, what is the result ? You would have 67 pound rails on the road, but a charge on the books of 134 pounds. Suppose that stock was being taken of this property-that the property was being sold to some company. An accountant would be sent over to examine the property. He would find there 67 pounds of rails per yard, plus the 13 pounds, but the accounts would show a charge of 134 pounds against capital. He would naturally say : You are committing a fraud ; for your accounts represent that you have 134 pounds of rails per yard in your track, whereas you have only 67 pounds. According to the principle on which he proceeds, if the minister renews the rails again he will again charge them to capital, making the discrepancy still greater. The principle of charging to capital and to maintenance, respectively, is well understood, and, for my part, I never heard it questioned. If the hon. minister kept his accounts as any business man would keep them, he would charge to capital the betterment which he has made in the property and would charge to maintenance the replacing of the original 67 pounds of rails per yard, taking credit, against that charge to his maintenance account, for the value of the old scrap that 1 he was taking up. If that method is fol-



[Stage Direction]
lowed from year to year and from administration to administration, you can compare one working with the other. But, under the system of the hon. gentleman, not only can you not compare the hon. gentleman with his predecessor, but you cannot compare two years of the hon. gentleman's own administration. I, therefore, enter my protest against this charge, as I have done before, and I desire it to be distinctly understood that, in passing this vote without dividing the House, we do not for a moment admit' the propriety of the course pursued by hon. gentlemen opposite.
At six o'clock, House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.
To provide additional siding room' and increased accommodation and facilities along the line of the Intercolonial Railway, $135,000.
Hon. Mr. HAG  HART@: The Minister of
Railways and Canals was to furnish to the House information as to the particular lines that he intended this vote to be applied to. He is not here.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I cannot furnish my hon. friend the information. I will call the attention of the Minister of Railways and Canals to it, and try, before this House closes to-morrow, to see that the hon. gentleman gets it.


John Graham Haggart: It will he rather late then.
Rolling stock, $500,000.


Samuel Barker: I wish to say a few words on this item, and to call the attention of the House to the question of'rolling stock. I object to this capital charge very much on the same grounds as I did with regard to the item of steel rails and fastenings. In taking up this item as the first since my remarks on steel rails, I do not wish to be understood that it is the only item upon which criticism might be offered ; because there are several items here that should call for remark. But I want to take up some special items and call attention to them. The question of rolling stock is a very large one and a very important one as regards the Intercolonial Railway and the Prince Edward Island Railways. Hon. members will see that last year the Minister of Railways and Canals obtained authority to expend $2,000,000 upon rolling stock for the Intercolonial. In the present estimates he asks for authority to expend half a million dollars. Now the principles I refer to with regard to steel rails apply directly to the present item. The moment that a corporation, or a company, or a government, has provided for a particular work or thing upon capital account, whether it is a structure, whether it is a car, or a locomotive, or anything else, the going concern,
must thereafter maintain that which capital has once provided. The hon. Minister of Railways and Canals and his predecessors have received from time to time certain sums on capital account to provide rolling stock with which to operate this railroad. As a going concern the railroad is required to maintain that which capital has thus provided. The hon. Minister of Railways and Canals, if he maintains out of his revenue that which capital has provided, and finds that in the improvement of his business, in the increase of his business, additional rolling stock is required, he is entitled to add to his capital account whatever may be necessary to provide that additional equipment. But that is always subject to the maintenance primarily of what capital has already provided. Now, the Minister of Railways and Canals, in his last report, has shown that of his cars, provided by capital and which it was his duty, as head of the going concern, to maintain out of its revenue, 364 were condemned as unfit for the service. In addition to that, Mr. Muhlfeld, his mechanical superintendent, who was examined as a witness before the Public Accounts Committee, admitted that there were in September last from 25 to 30 locomotives which ought to be condemned, that 12 or 14 of them were already abandoned and the balance were unfit economically to be continued in the service ; and all of these 25 or 30, he said, ought to be replaced, and he admitted in his evidence that they should be replaced out of revenue and charged to maintenance.
Now, if the hon. Minister of Railways were conducting his railway as any ordinary railway company in America or anywhere throughout the world carries on business, he would before charging one dollar to capital for additional rolling stock be required to bring up to working standard the rolling stock that capital had already provided him with. If he were to replace out of maintenance these twenty-five or thirty locomotives, and to replace the 364 cars instead of allowing them to lie as he has been allowing them to lie year after year, dead and useless stock, he would not require this money on capital account. It is his business, before he asks one dollar from the country on capital account for rolling stock, to put in proper working order what he has already been provided with. I say, Sir, that before the hon. Minister of Railways is entitled to come here and ask for more stock it is his duty to show that he is already using to the full capacity what capital has provided him with ; that is to say that it is his duty to replace and put in service these 364 cars, which he admits in his report to be condemned as unfit for service, and these twenty-five or thirty locomotives, which his mechanical superintendent condemns as unfit for service. Therefore, I protest here against this authority to him to expend * $500,000 until he assumes the responsibility

of restoring the condemned stock. It is the hon. gentleman's duty, as it would be the duty of the manager of any ordinary railway, to charge the cost of replacing these cars and locomotives to his ordinary expenses. If parliament would insist upon that it would do something to protect the public against wild extravagance in the administration of government railways. I do not propose to enter into any elaborate argument upon that point. I am addressing gentlemen, who, I think, know that what I say is the ordinary rule in their own business. There are gentleman sitting upon the opposite side of this House who are connected with large corporations, and these gentlemen would not for one moment permit the officers of those corporations to charge to the capital of the company the items that are here sought to be charged to capital, but they would say to them : You must maintain that out of your revenue, and though it will add to your operating expenses you will be telling us the truth and you will enable us to know whether the concern is working at a profit or a loss. 'What would be said of a board of directors, who. year after year, allowed their management to charge to capital that which was a charge upon revenue, and thus declared a profit, or a dividend, and distributed that dividend among their shareholders though it had not been earned, when it was a fictitious dividend, when the surplus they claimed to have was really due to the fact that they were improperly charging to capital that which did not properly belong to capital ? Why, Sir, the board of directors guilty of that sort of thing would be personally responsible for their misconduct and in some countries would be severely dealt with. I protest under these circumstances against this item being made a charge to capital. Nobody, I think, from the province of Ontario desires to limit in the least degree the capacity or the usefulness of the Intercolonial Railway. We desire to see that road a success, but because we desire to see it a success we want it administered on business principles and under conditions applicable to every business organization. I repeat, that if such a manipulation of accounts as is allowed under the present administration and endorsed by hon. gentlemen opposite, were carried on in anv business concern in England, the board of directors, who in this regard have the like responsibility as the hon. gentlemen who sit as ministers in this House, would be held personally responsible for their misleading statements, for such statements as produced the so-called surplus or surpluses which have been claimed in this country during the last two or three years. It is time we should stop that sort of thing.
Murray Harbour branch and Hillsborough bridge, Prince Edward Island Railway, $500,000.


John Graham Haggart: I am sorry the Minister of Railways is not here. He pro-


Samuel Barker: mised that he would furnish information in regard to the amount of the expenditure for improvements on the government railways. I asked for the amount of the new steel rails that -have been laid, the amount that was required to finish the work, and the sum necessary to provide additional rolling stock in order that parliament might know exactly what improvements are contemplated. I have not received that information and I suppose I must wait for it until next session. When the minister makes a promise of that kind he ought to carry it out. When we are discussing the government railways it is essential that we should know what changes he contemplates and what expenditure his changes entail. He has promised me that information time and again since I asked him when the first item was presented to the House.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The Minister of Railways will be here before we conclude and the hon. gentleman will have the right to put the question to him no matter on what item we may be.


Robert Laird Borden: Ifc is verv desirable that a promise on which items are allowed to be carried should be most carefully observed, because otherwise it will be impossible for us in future to allow items to_ pass on such an understanding. The Minister of Finance knows that even on concurrence the opposition is not by any means powerless, because we can move the adjournment of the House after every one of these items.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We could stay here a month.


Robert Laird Borden: Yes, and while we have no disposition to obstruct the business of the House as has been perfectly evident by our conduct during the whole session, still we do not propose to have promises of this kind made and absolutely disregarded.


John Graham Haggart: I should state that the Minister of Railways came over and spoke to me to-day and said that his deputy had telegraphed to Moncton for the information, but surely when the government adopts a policy in re*pect to its railways it must have decided on the extent of these improvements, and to have had before them some estimate as to the cost it was binding the country to in respect thereof. That information should have been laid on the Table before the minister asked for a single dollar from parliament.


Samuel Barker: I wish to raise a point in respect to this particular item apart from that which my hon. friend (Mr. Haggart) has brought up. No one on either side of the House can doubt, from what has transpired here for the last week or two, that it is ample time that some restriction should be placed upon ministers who seem to wish to rule their departments as auto-

crats quite outside of the law and regardless of the law. The Minister of Railways admitted. in his speech of the 6th of May that he had entered into a contract for the construction of 114 miles of this railway a year or a year and a half ago. He complied with the law in regard to that contract by asking for tenders and presumedly he gave the contract to the proper party. The work has been proceeding on that 114 miles which the hon. gentleman, as reported in 'Hansard,' declared to be a distinct portion of the railway. According to the statement of the minister, he having entered into that contract for that 114 miles, was approched by members of parliament-not by parliament but by members of parliament; no doubt gentlemen in the neighbourhood who took a particular interest in the work-and not only by members of parliament but as he says in a general way, by other persons. And having thus been approached by members of parliament and other persons, the minister, as an individual-not representing this country, not representing parliament or the government even ; not representing anybody but himself, for he had no authority to do what he did do-the minister arrives at the conclusion that it is expedient to let the same contractor construct the additional 314 miles of the road. Looking at it simply as a matter of business, on what basis did the hon. gentleman act V Anybody who has ever had any experience of public work knows that you cannot take 114 miles of railway in one district and accept the cost of work upon that section as a criterion or guide as to what you should pay for work upon another portion of the road. In all government contracts of this kind you find the road divided into sections because every one knows that the cost of moving earth and the blasting of rock, and so on, on any particular section varies materially from the cost on another section. A simpie way to explain that to the House is by stating that on one section you may have earthwork that has to be excavated and carried for half a mile, while on another section it may not have to be carried further than 100 yards. Everything depends on the particular circumstances of the particular section under contract, but the Minister of Railways having got prices for 114 miles jumps to the conclusion in his wisdom that these prices should apply to the 314 miles beyond.
A contractor is generally presumed to know his own business, and I think we may take it for granted that the contractor was quite satisfied that the cost of moving the earth on the 314 miles would not exceed what it cost on the 114 ; but the gentleman who is supposed to be looking after the interests of this Dominion does not take the ordinary precautions to see whether he ought not to get the work done at a very much less price. What does the hon. gentleman do ? Does he get estimates ? Does
he send his engineer over the 314 miles to report to him what the earthwork is, what the haul is, what the rock blasting is ? Not a bit of it. The hon. gentleman sets the contractor to work even without making a contract. The contractor goes to work upon no other authority. That is absolutely clear from the statements made to this House. After the work is actually going on. the hon. minister brings the matter before council and gets an Order in Council authorizing it. He has not even then the ordinary estimates that would be required by any business man. The hou. gentleman admitted last night that it was only within a week that he had got the estimates, although this work has been going on for some time; and what were the estimates he got ? Did he get from his engineer an estimate of what would be a reasonable price per yard to allow this contractor for earthwork, for stonework, for blasting rock, for all the different elements that enter into the construction of a railway ? Not a bit of it. He simply gets a lump sum estimate from his engineer of what the whole thing would probably cost; that is what he tells us. And what is the contract he enters into ? Having got the lump sum estimate of the probable cost, does he enter into a contract with these gentlemen to do the work for that lump sum or any lump sum 2 No. The hon. gentleman simply tells them to go on at the price per yard at which they were doing the original work. The hon. gentleman has not a scratch of the pen that will enable him to say whether the work is going to cost double the price of the lump sum estimate of his engineer or half of it. And this is what is called a business administration! The hon. gentleman's colleagues support the hon. Minister of Railways, and hon. gentlemen opposite will support him on every occasion that the question is brought up-and they are all, I presume, business men. As a mere matter of business discretion, it seems to me the most outrageous thing ever presented to any assembly of intelligent men. But I am not arguing this matter on the question whether it was a matter of reasonable business discretion on the part of the minister. If it was the most reasonable thing that was ever presented, the minister had no more right to enter into that contract than I had. The Minister of Railways is acting under a statute which defines what he shall do, just as the Minister of Public Works in his department is acting under a statute which defines and limits his authority. But the difference between the two gentlemen is probably this, that the Minister of Railways is above all law. What does he care about statute law or any other ? The hon. gentleman does what he pleases, and he relies on his supporters in parliament to back him up and stand by him, and no doubt they will. Is

that what might be expected from sensible business men. Surely we ought to expect something better than that from a number of gentlemen such as we see opposite to us. Last session their attention was directed to the method in which railway affairs were administered, and I did hope that among a number of business men who sit on the government side of the House there would have been one man with backbone enough to have gone to the Prime Minister or to the Minister of Railways and to have said: 'Sir, this thing must stop; we will not be parties to it.' But apparently lion, gentlemen opposite are a party of invertebrates. Perhaps it is a little too much, in an assembly of this kind, to exjiect hon. gentlemen to stand up in the House, or even in the committee, where their votes are not (recorded, and vote against 'their party; but surely we might have expected that some of these gentlemen would have gone to the ministers in the recess, or in caucus, and told them, ' This thing must come to an end; the reputation, if not of the government, at any rate of the men who sit behind the government, is at stake, and we will not submit to it any longer.'
But this matter goes away beyond that. It is not a question of business discretion at all. The minister lets this contract, he admits, without tender. He does not even ask for a tender. I beg to call the attention of the House to the 11th section of the Act of 1880, which gives the hon. Minister of Railways all the authority he possesses, and that section reads thus :
The minister shall invite tenders by public advertisement for the execution of all works, except, in case of pressing emergency in which delay would be injurious to the public interest, or in which from the nature of the work it can be more expeditiously and economically executed by the officers and servants of the minister.
The hon. gentleman cannot pretend that this work comes within the last exception, because he is not doing the work. He has not made a pretense that there was any emergency in this case which prevented him calling for tenders. It was simply done at the arbitrary will of the Minister of Railways who, in the eyes of hon. gentlemen opposite, is apparently such a success in his department that they are willing to go it blind for everything he does. I can understand that hon. gentlemen facing us may look at the matter somewhat differently from what we do ; but to gentlemen on this side of the House the idea that the Minister of Railways should be allowed to exercise such authority is simply ridiculous. Even if ministers have absolute confidence in their fellow minister, they have no power to confirm this action of his ; they themselves are subject to the law, and while that statute is on the book they have no right to do what has been done. The whole thing from first to last Is absolutely without authority, and I protest against it. As 1 said Mr. BARKER.
before, I do not desire to occupy time at this late hour by dividing the House, but we have heard so much from hon. gentlemen opposite about our not making any objections to such items that I think it is incumbent on this side to protest when we see such a gross avoidance of the provision of parliament has made for the protection of the country.


Mr. FARQUHARSON.: Having referred to this matter some days ago, I find it necessary now that the opposition have returned again and again to this question, to repeat what I have already said. Considering the circumstances in connection with the road referred to, of which I consider myself in a position to judge, because I know the ground, have known it all my life and have travelled over it many times, I think that the giving of the contract for the balance of the 31 miles to the contractor who had built the other 11J miles, was in the interest of the country. While the letting of contracts after calling for public tender is the principle to which we are all committed and while I think that principle is a good one, there are exceptions to every rule.


Samuel Barker: Does the statute allow any exceptionis ? It is imperative.


Donald Farquharson: I am discussing what was done from the point of view of a business man, and I say that under tbe circumstances the government acted wisely. The first 111 miles had been tendered for and the lowest of five tenders accepted. Mr. Kitchen proved himself a good contractor. He did not belong to our province, but any prejudices we might have had against him on that score were removed by the fact that he showed himself a good man, and an able contractor. To get a good man and a good contractor is a great deal.


John Graham Haggart: Hear, hear.


Donald Farquharson: Get a man who does not understand his work and you will soon find yourself in trouble. The question was asked why, in the first instance, the contract was not let for the whole distance instead of for 111 miles, and the hon. Minister of Railways properly answered that after the 11J miles had been located, the government were undecided whether the road should continue by Vernon river or take a northerly course, and it could go no further until the location was determined.


John Graham Haggart: Does the hon. gentleman claim that the government let the contract before the road was located.


Donald Farquharson: I did not say that.


John Graham Haggart: You said that you did not know where the lli miles would go.


Donald Farquharson: I did not say that. I went over this road with the hon. Minis-

ter of Railways and Canals and liis engineer. We spent a whole day, from morning till night, travelling over it. The engineer of that road is a man, I think, above approach, and he has examined all the ground carefully, and no doubt reported to his superiors, and therefore when the 311 miles were let on the same schedule rates as the 111 miles, I do not think the government could have done better. And when that contractor had all his apparatus on the ground for building the 111 miles, we thought no other man could do the rest of the work as cheaply or as well. But of course prejudices are apt to be created by letting a contract without tender, and the minister is liable to be under a cloud so to speak until the facts are all fully known.


Donald Farquharson: If these hon. gentlemen will wait a moment I will explain what I mean. This contract was not let after inviting tenders, but there are exceptions to every rule, and this is one of them.
I do not think that this country has lost a dollar by the transaction. I am satisfied that no good business man would have done otherwise than the Minister of Railways did. But prejudices are liable to be created when contracts are let without tender. If, however, hon. members opposite knew the circumstances as well as I do, I have no doubt that, as honest men, they would take the same view. The contract was a fair one and a good one and one in the interests of the people, and I am pleased to be able to congratulate the government and people, as a new member, that the opposition can find nothing greater to complain of duriug this session.


Mr. LENNOX.: The hon. gentleman thinks that if we were honest men on this side we would concur in his view. Well, I do not want to proclaim that I am an honest man because whenever you see a man declaring to everybody that he is honest, you had better look out for him. The hon. gentleman said : We on this side could let the contract. I have not heard as yet that the hon. gentleman has become a member of the cabinet; but as there are great dissensions in the cabinet, it is quite on the cards that within a few days we may have the announcement that this hon. gentleman, who went up the hills and down the vales with the hon. Minister of Railways, in order to bring about the letting of this contract without tender, has become a member of the cabinet. He has told us the greatest lot of goody goody things I have heard from any hon. gentleman opposite. We had a good man he said, and if we get a good man we ought to keep him. Hon. gentlemen on that side ought to take that lesson to heart, because good men on that side are not any more plentiful than in the interests of the country, they ought to be. He says : We got a good man, a good contractor, a good engineer-and I have no
doubt he said also a good government. There was one thing he omitted to say. He did not say that they had a good contract. No doubt this man got an eminently good contract for himself out of the government on that occasion. The hon. gentleman tells us that honourable and honest men would not protest against this transaction. Well, I am responsible to my constituents, and I venture to protest, and I want to make that protest as distinct and emphatic as I can. What are the circumstances ? According to the statute the government are bound to call for tenders in every instance except in the case of an emergency. Was there any emergency in this ease ? I do not think that the hon. gentleman who has just spoken has shown us there was. I do not think that any hon. gentlemen on the government side can show us that there was. What does it all amount to ? It amounts to just this. If you can disregard the statutes in a case of this kind, the government or the Minister of Railways can let one mile of railway after calling for tenders, and then build 999 miles without tender. Is that the meaning of the statute ? Is that the meaning of responsible government in this country? It was not the meaning of responsible government when hon. gentlemen on this side were on the government benches, nor was it the meaning of responsible government when the Liberals of old were in power, but it is to a large extent the meaning of responsible government today, as enunciated and proclaimed by these hon. gentlemen who now administer the affairs of this country. If they can do what they have done, they can do something more. It happens, but it is only a coincidence, that these two pieces of railway, the lli miles and the 31i miles, are portions of the same railway. They might just as well have been portions of two different railways, and these hon. gentlemen might just as well have done this. They could have let the lli miles at the time when, according to the hon. gentleman (Mr. Farquharson), they did not know what the location of the balance of the railway would be or whether there would be any more constructed,-they could have let those lli miles after calling for tenders, and then let to the same contractor, say 300 miles of railway, in another province on the sarhe terms, and without tender.
This shows us just where we are at, and it emphasizes the point that was made so plain by my hon. friend from Hamilton that this is a distinct violation of the statute by the government. I understand that we are not going to divide the House on this question. But 1 want to say to the government that we do protest. We may not have the remedy now, but we do not want them to do this again. We have called their attention to it as we have called their attention to a great many former violations of the principle of constitutional and responsible government. In old times who

called so loud for responsible government as the old-time Liberals 7 But if these oldtime Liberals came to this parliament tonight, i venture to say that they would go back to the retirement from which they came rather than associate; themselves with the so-called Liberals of to-day.
Trent Canal-construction (revote), $300,000.
i-iou. Mr. HAGGART. We had some discussion in Committee of Supply on the claim of Messrs. Corry & Laverdure, contractors on this canal. That claim was dealt with under a reference of some kind. I do not know whether it was before the Exchequer Court, and, if so, whether .it was on a petition of right, and whether the government stood upon their extreme rights, or whether there was a special reference as in the case of Messrs. Mackenzie & Mann. But I understand from the Minister of Railways and Canals that these contractors succeeded in obtaining a decision in their favour of $12t>,00(>-i ana not very sure as to the amount. Is any portion of this vote to be appropriated towards the payment of that arbitration 7


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: No. This is the vote for next year.


John Graham Haggart: No, the hon. minister is now taking a vote for the present year-a revote of $300,000 for construction.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: No, that is for next year. Whatever is paid we expecft to pay out of the current year.


John Graham Haggart: Does the minister intend to pay that $120,000 7


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: I have explained the matter. 1 think, four times since the session opened; but as the hon. gentleman lias asked the question, 1 do not mind giving the explanation once more. The gentlemen selected as engineers, Messrs. Hobson, Surtees and Brophy, all examined into the claim for these extras, judging of the correctness and fairness of the prices, and made a report that, that of this claim, which was for over $400,000, the chief engineer might properly, in their opinion, certify to $120,000-1 think the hon. gentleman has given the correct amount. 1 think the report came in after parliament opened, and since then no further action has been taken. The matter is now awaiting the consideration of council, as, in the midst of our other pressing duties, we have not 'been able to deal with the matter Anally.


John Graham Haggart: i must protest against the system adopted by the Minister of Railways and Canals. Under a contract-


Mr. BREAKER.: I would remind the hon. gentleman that we are not now in supply, and, under the rules it is not per-


Haughton Lennox: mitted to an hon. member to speak more than once upon any question.


John Graham Haggart: But I simply asked a question of the Minister of Railways.


Richard Langton Baker: 1 am calling the hon. member's attention to the fact that we are not now in s(upply but in concurrence.


John Graham Haggart: I can put myself in order very easily. I move that the item-be struck out


Richard Langton Baker: As the hon. gentleman has spoken, he has no right to move a motion.


Mr. CASGKAIN.: I move that this item be struck out.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: If the result of this motion is to prevent the appropriation, it will cause the suspension of work for the year, and all those interested will 'be placed in a very awkward predicament. The hon. gentleman must contemplate the possibility of that.


John Graham Haggart: The hon. minister can restore the item if he likes.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: The responsibility is upon the hon. gentleman.


John Graham Haggart: Here is a claim made by a firm of contractors against the government. Under the law, the responsibility is placed upon the deputy minister to certify as to the correctness of the claim of the contractors. In this case, the deputy minister refuses to certify that the contractors are entitled to this amount. There is no way by which the money can be obtained from the government without the certificate of the chief engineer, and he, by refusing to certify, virtually declares that the contractors are not entitled to the amount they claim. How does the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals get over it 7 Instead of applying to the court that was specially established for the purpose of finding out whether contractors have just claims or not, he refers the matter to an arbitration of engineers. 1 do not know the case that was put before them, but it was not conducted by the Minister of Justice. The government did not stick for its extreme rights, and the legality of the claim is not decided upon. These arbitrators report to whom 7 They report to the Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals, who, after all, Is the man who must certify in order that the claim may ibe paid. We have the statement of the Minister of Railways and Canals that his deputy minister has refused to certify to the amounts. Does the minister deny that 7


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: Yes.


John Graham Haggart: I asked the minister, when the deputy was present, whe-
504!*

ther the deputy, on the recommendation of the three engineers, had amended his report, and the deputy minister stated to the minister that he had not done so, and the minister made that statement to the House. Then he goes over the report of his deputy minister who refuses to certify to this claim, and asks for an Order in Council to have the amount voted by this House. I contend that we should have an opportunity of inquiring into this matter, and that we should have a promise from the minister that this $300,000 we are voting at the present moment for the Trent canal, shall be expended on the Trent canal, and not expended on something else. The law requires that an expenditure on the Trent canal shall be certified by the deputy minister, and not ordered by an Order in Council superseding the report of the deputy minister, given contrary to the law, and contrary to the contract entered into between the government and the contractors. Under that contract. the chief engineer is to judge as to whether the work is performed and as to whether the quantities are right. He refuses to certify to that amount, the Minister of Railways and Canals overrules his own chief engineer, and asks three other engineers to come in for the purpose of assisting the conscience of the chief engineer. Then the chief engineer does not support the recommendation of the three engineers, and the Minister of- Railways and Canals goes to Council for an Order in Council. Then I ask for some assurance that the sum we are voting to-day shall not be applied to the payment of any such claim as that when the law is not fulfilled. Under the contract entered into between the minister and these two parties, the chief engineer is to be the judge of the quantities and the judge of the performance of the work, and the chief engineer refuses to certify to that. If the chief engineer is wrong there is a remedy. We do not want, parliament nor the people of this country do not want, to be bound by the opinion of the chief engineer. If he is wrong in his opinion, there is a court established for the purpose of overruling him. the Exchequer Court has to decide whether the chief engineer is right or wrong.


The PRIME MINISTER.: It is difficult to understand what the hon. gentleman who has addressed the House, is driving at.


Mr. COCHRANE.: When you do not want to understand.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I do not think the hon. gentleman understands it either.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Yes I do.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Then I am sorry for the hon. gentleman's understanding if he does. The hon. gentleman, the ex-Minister of Railways and Canals, wants an assurance that this money shall not be expended
on anything else than the Trent canal. There is no necessity for any assurance of that kind. The money is voted for the Trent canal, the Auditor General will see that it is expended on the Trent canal and nothing else. It is simply childish to ask for an assurance that this money shall be expended upon the Trent canal. The ap- * propriatlon itself says it shall be. What more assurance does the hon. gentleman want than the fact that parliament has voted that money for a special object, that is, it is to be expended on the Trent canal. The Auditor General will see that it is expended on the Trent canal ; and I repeat again it is simply childish to ask for a guarantee that it shall be so expended. The hon. gentleman is wrong again in the application which he wants to make to this item. He has in his mind the contract of Messrs. Corry & Laverdure who, I understand, are contractors for a section of the Trent canal. Now Corry & Laverdure have a disputed account, as I understand it. The hon. gentleman says that this account must be paid upon the certificate of the chief engineer of the department. Certainly it must be so paid, and the Auditor General will see that it is not paid to Corry & Laverdure unless he has before him the certificate of the chief engineer of the department. The chief engineer of the department is the referee under the circumstances. If there is a dispute between the contractors and the department, the contract, which the hon. gentleman has -cited, savs that under such circumstances the chief engineer shall be the supreme arbiter. Payment cannot be made unless the chief engineer gives his certificate to that effect. But there is more than that. There may be circumstances under which the chief engineer will refuse to certify, he may say the account is disputed, somebody is in the wrong. The contractors make a demand, and I understand the chief engineer will not certify to the account. There is a dispute which has to be determined in the courts. So far so good. I know nothing of this contract personally, the matter has not come before Council, and I speak simply on the statements made by the Minister of Railways and Canals and by the hon. member for Lanark. As I understand this matter, the chief engineer, finding his opinion was disputed, before issuing his certificate, has thought advisable to have the opinion of three expert engineers instead of sending the matter to the courts.


John Graham Haggart: Do you mean to say the chief engineer has thought so ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: I do say so, according to the statements made in the House.


John Graham Haggart: I asked that question of the Minister of Railways and Canals, whether his chief engineer had accepted the

opinion of the three engineers who were called upon to report upon the question, and the chief engineer, standing beside the minister, instructed him to answer, no.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Very good, let it be so. Then the hon. gentleman ought to be satisfied. If the chief engineer is not satisfied with the account then that account cannot be paid. The hon. gentleman ought to know that.


John Graham Haggart: No, I do not.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Well, he ought to know it, because the chief engineer must certify to these accounts. The chief engineer has thought it advisable to take the opinion of other eminent engineers. One of them I know personally, Mr. Hobson, of the Grand Trunk Railway ; I think he is well known throughout Canada. I do not know that there is a more competent authority than Mr. Hobson. The other gentleman I have not the honour of knowing personally ; he lives in Ottawa, and I think his record in the city of Ottawa is unimpeachable, I refer to Mr. Surtees. The third engineer, Mr. Brophy, I think also stands high.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Has not the Treasury Board overridden the decision of the Auditor General time and again ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: The chief engineer and the Treasury Board have power to pass over the Auditor General. But whenever they do so their overruling comes before parliament and has to submit to the sanction or censure of parliament. But in this matter the chief engineer, as I understand, will not make a report, or has not made a report so far. As he has not made a report the matter cannot be dealt with, therefore like any other matter, it has to be reported in the way provided by law, either favourably or unfavourably. The hon-. gentleman stated a moment ago that he was protesting because the law was not followed. He has no reason to speak in that way. The report will be made by the chief engineer, either one way or the other. Now the hon. gentleman says that instead of sending this matter to the arbitrators it should have 'been sent to the Exchequer Court. That is the way that the law provides for parties who cannot agree. They shall have their differences adjusted by the courts of law, and the Exchequer Court is established to determine disputes between subjects and the Crown.
Now, Sir, there is another mode of dealing with this matter. Arbitration has been found in a good many cases to be just as satisfactory as the courts of law, but up to the present time we have nothing that I know of to show that there has been an arbitration or a judicial adjudication. The whole thing is still pending, the whole thing will have to be determined according to the rules provided for by the law.
Hon. Mr. HAGGART


Robert Laird Borden: If there is no arbitration it would be interesting to the House to know what there really is in regard to this matter. Is it merely the fact that the chief engineer has been so impressed by the difficulty of the situation that he has had to call to his assistance three other engineers ? The chief engineer of the Department of Railways is a man of great experience, a man who has never been afraid to deal with a question of this kind, in the past, as far as I know, and I find it difficult to believe that he has been so impressed by some difficulty in regard to this claim that he has called upon other engineers in the country to do work which he declares himself to be incapable of doing. If it is not that, what is it ? Has there been any reference of the claim, and if so what are the terms of the reference ? As to what has been done, we are entirely in the dark.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: You have had all the papers before you.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know that we have had any papers before us disclosing these matters. Occasionally papers are brought down by hon. gentlemen and, handed to some hon. member of the House, not printed, not placed before the House in a way to convey information to most of us.


John Graham Haggart: I did not get them and I do not think they were brought down to the House.


Robert Laird Borden: I have not had them and the hon. member for South Lanark (Mr. Haggart) says he has not had them.


John Graham Haggart: They were not brought down to the House.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know who has had the advantage of perusing these documents. The hon. member for South Lanark says that the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals has told us that he proposes to go to Council-


John Graham Haggart: He said that he had gone to Council but that the order had not been passed yet.


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. Minister of Railways and Canals attempted to obtain an order for the payment of this money without obtaining the certificate of the chief engineer. That is the position attacked by the hon. member for South Lanark and that is the position which the right hon. leader of the government seems to think is the correct one.


The PRIME MINISTER.: No, I have told the hon. gentleman that I did not remember that the matter had been brought up at Council. I am quite sure it has not.


John Graham Haggart: The bon. Minister of Railways and Canals stated that he had prepared a report to Council recommending the payment but that Council had not acted upon it.


The PRIME MINISTER.: That may be so.


Robert Laird Borden: The right hon. gentleman may find that there is more for him to consider in this matter than he thinks. As far as the Auditor General is concerned, he has been overruled a great many times, and we have even had occasion to consider, during this very session, the appropriation of moneys voted by parliament to purposes that seemed somewhat foreign to the vote. I have pointed out in connection with the expenditure of money voted for Yukon buildings that large sums went to pay really for the living expenses of officials out there. Attention has been directed to sums, not great in amount, it is true, but still public money of this country, voted for the purpose of taking the census of 1901 and applied to other purposes. These are matters which are clearly the subject of criticism from this side of the House and matters which I think the right hon. gentleman ought to thank us for bringing up in order that he may direct the members of his cabinet to be a little more careful in future and not subject the government to the criticism which they so richly deserve in this case. I would have supposed that the right hon. gentleman would have been inspired by feelings of gratitude towards the hon. member for South Lanark for referring to these matters in the terms in which he has done, and I say again that I think this is a subject which will demand the careful consideration of Council when the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals brings it up for further consideration.


Haughton Lennox: I am sorry that this session is so nearly at an end, as matters which are of great importance are crowding up very rapidly at the close. The right hon. leader of the government (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) intimated that he took from the statements of the hon. member for South Lanark (Mr. Haggart) sufficient information upon which to form an argument in answer to that hon. gentleman. Now, I do not possess, of course, any measure of the ability of the First Minister, but, I think, all the same, that he, in the course of his remarks, has raised a question which it is very important the government should in future take seriously into their consideration and as has been suggested, I hope they will take it in the most kindly spirit. The fact is that' the Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals is acting under a delegated authority. He is acting under a statutory authority and beyond the provisions of the statute he cannot go. He is the person pointed out by the statute who has to decide certain questions in cases of contract.
It is well known as a universal principle of law that if a person possesses delegated authority he has no power to delegate that authority to another. Therefore, I suggest to the government and to the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals that it is not competent to delegate to these three engineers the power which can be exercised by the Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals alone. Therefore, if this course is pursued I submit, of course, with a great deal of deference, but with a certain amount of confidence, that unless there is an express provision in the statute to the contrary, this delegated authority must be exercised hy the Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals alone, and that without any enlightenment to be brought about by the instrumentality of the gentlemen who have been appointed in the matter, however eminent they may be.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to withdraw the motion.
Motion withdrawn.
The PRIME MINISTER moved the adjournment of the House.


John Graham Haggart: There is only Bill (No. 161) respecting the incorporation of joint stock companies by letters patent, remaining 1


The PRIME MINISTER.: That is all.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: And the Supply Bill.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes, and there are also the amendments made by the Senate to the Bill about the remission of penalties.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 10.20 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, May 15, 1902.