1902-04-30

QUESTIONS.


Mr. SCOTT asked :: 1.	Has the Governor in Council received a memorial or communication from the Northwest legislature on the subject of land grants In relation to Canadian volunteers for the war in South Africa ?
2.	If so, v/hat was the purport thereof, and what reply was made by the Governor in Council ?
3.	Has the government considered the matter of granting lands to such volunteers ; and if so, what decision has been arrived at ?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Eaurier) :: 1.	Yes.
2.	A request that the government make a grant of land to each volunteer who being a resident of the territories participated in the war in South Africa.
3.	No reply has yet been made.


CANOE COVE, P.E.I., BREAKWATER.
Mr. LEFURGEY asked :: 1.	What sum of money was expended oil Canoe Cove (Prince Edward Island) breakwater from June 29th to December 31st, i901 ?
2.	What amount of this sum was expended for labour and material, respectively ?
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS {Hon. J. I. Tarte) :
1.	Three thousand seven hundred and twenty-two dollars and fourteen cents.
2.	Labour, $2,070.75 ; material, $1,651.39; total, $3,722.14.


ST. VINCENT DE PAUL PENITENTIARY.
Mr. LEONARD asked :: 1.	Does the St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary have a veterinary surgeon on its staff ?
2.	If so, who is he, and what is his salary ?
3.	If not, what is the occupation of Dr. C. A'. Descary, whose name appears in the last report of the Auditor General ?
4.	Is the said C. A. Descary the same C. A. Descary, veterinary surgeon of St. Martin, Laval, and Liberal candidate for some time at the last election in Lavil ?


The SOLICITOR GENERAL (Hon. H. G. Carroll) :: 1 and 2. There is no veterinary surgeon on the staff of the penitentiary.
3.	Dr. Descary has been employed professionally, from time to time, when such service has been required.
4.	The department is not aware.


Hon. Mr. BLAIR.: 



CHINESE IMMIGRATION.

[Stage Direction]
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) moved that to-morrow the House go into Committee of the Whole on the following resolution ;
That it is expedient to provide that, after July 1st, 1902, one-half of the net proceeds of all taxes paid by Chinese immigrants shall, at the end of every fiscal year, be paid to the province wherein they were collected.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
House again in committee on Bill (No. 120) to amend the Dominion Lands Act.- The Minister of the Interior.
The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR (Hon. Clifford Sifton).: This Bill was adopted yesterday with the exception of section 2. Upon examining that section I have decided to ask the committee to make it read as follows :
Section 1 of this Act shall not apply to any contract, agreement, undertaking for sale, or grant, containing an express declaration that it is exempt from this section.
This will have the effect of enabling the government, if it is thought desirable in any special case, to withdraw any particular sale from the effect of this section.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Bill as amended reported, read the third time, and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 119) further to amend the Yukon Territory Act (the Minister of the Interior), read the second time, and House went into committee thereon.
On section 1,
Mr. SPROUEE.: What are these sections of the old Act which we have repealed ?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: This is just a re-enactment of the old section, with the exception that we provide for five members instead of two.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will the hon. minister tell us approximately what the population of that district is now ?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: According to the census, it is about 21,000.
On section 2,


Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).: What change in the law is effected by this ?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: One change is this, that in case of an ordinance being passed by the local council which conflicts with an order affecting the same subject passed by the Governor in Council, the latter shall prevail. The second change

is to give the local council control of the traffic in intoxicating liquors, the section relating to the manufacture of liquors remaining as it is in the old Act.
On section 3,
Mr. BORDEN (Halifax), What change is effected by this ?


The MINISTER OE THE INTERIOR.: There has been a misunderstanding between my hon. friend the Minister of Justice and myself as to some changes which are to be made in this section. I have the amendments ready, but I wish to furnish my hon. friend the leader of the opposition with a copy of them before moving them. I will, therefore, move that the committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.


Robert Laird Borden: Before the committee rises, I would like to ask the hon. Minister of the Interior as to the legislative powers which the Governor in Council now has with regard to the Yukon Territory. My attention has been directed to the Order in Council which was made with regard to what is known as the Treadgold concession. the provisions of which seem to have a very wide scope indeed. If the Governor in Council possesses power to legislate for the territory in that way, I do not see exactly where they are to stop; and it struck me that it might be expedient for the government to consider whether some amendment should not be made whereby powers of so sweeping a character should be exercised not by the Governor in Council, but by parliament. It is not desirable that I should go into the details with regard to that particular matter at the present time. Possibly I may have some observations to make at a later date; but as my hon. friend the Minister of the Interior is considering the amendments to this Bill, I mention it now. The Order in Council may not be founded on the Yukon Territory Act; possibly it is founded on the Dominion Lands Act.


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: Partially both.


Robert Laird Borden: Perhaps it would not incommode my hon. friend if he can do so, to state now the statutory enactments upon which that particular concession is founded.


The MINISTER OP THE INTERIOR.: The provision in the Dominion Lands Act which authorizes the Governor in Council to regulate the carrying on of mining on Dominion lands, and section 2 of the Act entitled an Act to amend the Yukon, Territory Act which was passed in 1899, 62 and 63 Victoria.


Robert Laird Borden: That is the section which we are now amending ?


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: Yes. My hon. friend will see that that gives very wide powers. What I want to call my hon. friend's attention to, in regard
to his other observation, is this, that in passing this legislation the House practically followed the old North-west Territories Act and gave the same powers to the Governor in Council as were given to them with regard to the North-west Territories before they received a constitutional form of government. No doubt the power of the Governor in Council under the legislation as it now stands is very wide. The question as to whether that should be curtailed by giving exclusive power to the Commissioner in Council was considered, but it was thought that for a time at least it might be left in the shape in which it is in the clause we are now passing, that is to say, that in case of any conflict between the Governor in Council and the local council, the decision of the Governor in Council shall prevail. There has not been any conflict, so far as I am aware, and I do not think that there is any matter which has been dealt with by an ordinance of the Governor in Council except one. I think that under the late Minister of Justice an Order in Council was passed relating to the legal profession. The reason why I ask that this matter be laid over is because there is a portion of the old clause which, under the amendment, will be required to be left in. This amendment was not in contemplation at the time the Bill was drawn and that portion of the clause was left out. I will send my ,hon. friend a copy of the amendment before it is put in.


Robert Laird Borden: Orders in Council dealing with the disposal of very large interests in the Yukon apparently need not be laid before parliament or have the sanction of parliament in any way. That is correct, I think. What I would suggest is that the conferring of rights of so great a scope, and possibly of such large value, as those contained in this Treadgold concession, might be limited in some way. I appreciate the fact that it is necessary to give the Governor in Council certain powers with regard to unorganized territories, but I have not been able to persuade myself that it is necessary to give such wide powers as are required for the disposal of concessions of that kind. That is a matter^ to which I would like my hon. friend to give his attention, and when the Bill comes up again we may discuss it with the view to an amendment of that character.


The MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR.: I think the subject is a very fair one for discussion, and I do not think that the government desires any greater powers than are necessary for the administration of the territories. Of course, powers are necessary for the administration of a territory such as the Yukon, which would not be required in any other part of Canada. If my non. friend desires to make any suggestion of a definite character regarding the limitations which should be put on the power of the

government, I would be quite willing to give them the fullest consideration.
Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.
SUPPLY-THE CORONATION CONTIN-[DOT] GENT.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved that the House go again into Committee of Supply.


Mr. E. GUSS PORTER (West Hastings).: I desire, Mr. Speaker, to call the attention of the House, and especially the attention of the Minister of Militia and Defence, to a certain matter, resulting from certain questions put by me to the House a few days ago, and which has come to me with some degree of surprise, and I may say has caused an important branch of the military service of this country a considerable amount of disapproval and disappointment. On the 9th of April, a resolution was moved by the hon. member for East Sinmoe (Mr. Bennett) to the effect that in the opinion of this House, the military force to be sent from Canada to the approaching Coronation ceremonies should be composed in its entirety of officers and men who have seen active service on the Canadian contingents in South Africa. In speaking to that resolution, the hon. the Minister of Militia is reported as having used the following language :
All I can say now to my hon. friend and to the House is that I propose to recommend to the government that we should send a contingent composed of 580 men, representative of all the different branches of the Canadian militia ; that the different corps in the various districts of Canada should be fairly represented numerically , that the selection should be made with reference to the numbers enrolled in the militia in each district ; and that we will endeavour to have it truly representative of the force of this Dominion which will show to the people of England and to the people of the empire as clearly as possible the kind of militia force we have in this country.
If reference be made to the regulations and orders of the militia of Canada, tlie table of precedence will be found in section 7 of subsection 17 :
The following is the order of precedence of the several corps of the militia of the Dominion of Canada. The corps of each arm taking precedence according to the date of formation. 1st, the gentlemen cadets cf the Royal Military College.
Now, we have the statement of the bon. minister that each and every branch of the militia of Canada should be represented upon the contingent sent home to attend the Coronation festivities. We have then the fact that the gentlemen cadets of the Royal Military College are a branch of the militia force of this Dominion, and rank first, according to the regulations and orders of the militia department. In addition we Hon. Mr. SIPTON.
know that during the visit lately made by His Royal Highness, the Duke of Cornwall and York, His Royal Highness took advantage of tlie opportunity to visit the Royal Military College, and expressed himself as being very highly pleased with his visit. In fact he used-even stronger language to show his appreciation of the work done by those cadets. I am Instructed further, that in June last the hon. minister himself paid a visit to the college at Kingston, and during the course of his inspection promised the cadets that he would use every possible endeavour to see that this branch of our Canadian military forces would be represented at the Coronation proceedings. He further expressed the hope that the conduct of the cadets would fully warrant him in making such a recommendation. I am not at all surprised that the minister should have made that pledge, but am disappointed that he should have, despite his promise, adopted the course which he has within the last few days. These young men who are attending the college are sons of some of the very best families in this Dominion. They are young men who have placed their services at the disposal of their country, and who are obliged, in the course of their studies, to undergo considerable hardship. They have to spend a number of years of the very best of their lives in qualifying themselves to render greater service to their country.
Not only is that the fact, but they are obliged to spend considerable sums of money in order to so qualify themselves. .These young men have not only done this, but those who have passed through the college have brought glory to the name of this country. It is only a few days ago that the First Minister spoke of the' brave acts of one of the cadets of the Royal Military College, and could hardly find language strong enough to express his admiration -an admiration which is felt by all the people of Canada-for the bravery displayed by Lieut. Bruce Carrutliers of the Royal Military College. While Bruce Carrutliers stands out as a shining example, he is no exception to the young men who pass through that college. So, if there is any part of the militia of this country that should be recognized by parliament and the people it is that made up of the gentlemen cadets of tlie Royal Military College. In view of the facts that are so well known,
I was surprised at the answer I received to a question I put in the House only nineteen days after the minister had made the statement which I have refered to. The question will be found reported in ' Hansard' of the 28th April. It is as follows :
Is it the intention of the government to send a detachment of cadets from the Royal Military College to attend the Coronation ?	'	"
The answer to that question is simply ' No ' And so we have this state of affairs : First, there is the statement made by the minister

pledging himself that each and every branch of the militia force of the Dominon should be represented on the contingent to be sent to the Coronation; secondly, we have the statement made by the minister to the cadets of the Royal Military College that he would use every possible endeavour to have this branch of the militia force represented on that occasion, and that he hoped they would so acquit themselves from that time until the time came to send them to the Coronation, that he would feel warranted in doing so. 1 have letters from a gentleman high in military circles who says that, when recently in England he learned that the present Prince of Wales had expressed the hope that there would be a detachment from the Royal Military College to attend the Coronation proceedings. In view of the promise made by the minister, these young men have been striving to the best of their ability, they have been putting forward extraordinary efforts to qualify themselves the better for a representation on the Coronation contingent. And now they are told by the minister on the floor of this House that he does not intend to send any squad or detachment from the college to accompany the Coronation contingent. It is needless to say that these young men are disappointed. I think the country also will be disappointed. I would like to know from the minister whether the government have changed their minds as to sending a squad or detachment from the Royal Military College to the Coronation. Or is it posible that these young men, even in the face of the promise given them, have not acquitted themselves in such a manner as to justify the minister in giving them representation upon this contingent? If that is so, I would like the hon. minister to point out on the floor of this House in what way they have been deficient or lacking in their efforts properly to represent their country.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. F. W. Borden).: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Porter) has not been a member of the House long enough, I suppose, to become aware of the custom of the House to give notice to the minister immediately concerned of intention to bring up a matter of this kind. If my hon. friend had done so. I would, perhaps, have been better prepared to meet his statements than I am. However. I may say that this complaint is quite wide of the mark when it is based upon the assumption that there was ever any intention expressed or understood, or any promise whatever given, that a representation as such should be sent from the Royal Military College. I do not understand what the hon. gentleman means by a reference to a promise made by me or by the government to send such a representation. I understood the hon. gentleman to say that the Duke of Cornwall and York, now the Prince of Wales, when visiting the
Royal Military College, had expressed some hope that the college would be represented at the Coronation of the King. That is the first intimation I have had of any such statement being made. But my hon. friend need not worry. There is no doubt whatever that there will be, among the officers, and probably among the men, who will go over to take part in the Coronation proceedings, gentlemen who have graduated at the Royal Military College. The hon. gentleman refers to the cadets of the college as being part of the active militia. Technically they are. but practically, until they have received their diplomas, they are not members of the active militia in the ordinary sense of the word. When the question was raised, I think by the fathers of some of the young men in the college, I discussed the matter with the General Officer Commanding, and he advised me very strongly against sending these young gentlemen over on this errand. I will not go into details with reference to the matter, but it will be readily understood that if they were to go, they must go as ordinary privates of the militia, and it seemed to me undesirable that this should be. They are very young men, and their studies are not yet completed. Besides, if we accepted cadets of the Royal Military College, there are cadets of other schools of Canada whom we would be obilged to accept. We thought it would be impossible to accept these cadets without accepting representatives from the cadets in different parts of Canada. It did not seem to the general, and I approved of his decision, that this was what was understood as a representation of the militia of Canada. I have only to say, in conclusion, that I think I have as high an opinion of the merits of the cadets of the Royal Military College and of the importance of that institution itself as the hon. gentleman can possibly have. I think the government have shown, by the consideration which we have given to the college since we came to power, that we have the interests of the college at heart. When it is known that when this government came in there was a list of less than 30 students at the Royal Military College, with an annual graduating class of seven or eight, and that now we have 80 or 90, or more, on the list of the college, with an annual graduating class of over 30, I think the House and the public will take very litle stock in any cheap attempt which the hon. gentleman may make here to endeavour to show that this government are not looking properly after the interests of the college. After careful consideration, wre thought it was in the best interest of these >oung gentlemen that they should not take part in this demonstration. In conclusion. I repeat what I have already said, that there is no doubt whatever that among the officers and men of the contingent there will be found graduates of the Royal Military Col-

lege who have distinguished themselves, not only at the college, but on the field of battle in South Africa, and in militia service generally throughout the Dominion.


Mr. HAUGHTON LENNOX (South Sim-coe).: There is one matter the Minister of Militia and Defence referred to which ought not to be allowed to pass without reference, and that is his statement that the number of graduates attending the Royal Military College when the present government came in has greatly increased. It might appear at first blush that there was something in the contention the hon. gentleman wishes to suggest by that comparison of figures. But I venture to say that any one who reflects upon the position of affairs today as compared with what obtained when the hon. gentlemen opposite came into power, will see at once that the comparison is not at all favourable to the minister ; and in fact we would expect a much larger increase under the conditions which exist in Canada to-day. When we bear in mind the dominant military spirit that has been aroused by the recent contest in which Britain has been engaged, a contest which has been echoed throughout every part of the British empire, the feeling of unity and the desire to maintain the integrity of the empire being now everywhere prevalent, it is not at all surprising to find that there are a larger number of young men now attending the Royal Military College than in 1896. The imperial feeling and the feeling that animates almost all classes of Canadians to-day is that Canada, as an important part of the British empire, has reached a period when, by reason of its resources, and by reason of its increasing wealth, it should be able and willing to defend itself and to aid materially in the defence of the British empire when occasion arises ; and this fact is quite sufficient of itself to account for the difference in numbers at present as contrasted with four or five years ago.	.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The increase in numbers had taken place prior to the commencement of the Boer war. The college was up to its maximum before there was any prospect of a war in South Africa.


Haughton Lennox: I accept the hon. gentleman's statement, although he does not give us any figures as regards the two periods. But the minister must not forget that when the war was declared between Britain and South Africa the defence of the British empire had already been engaging attention in this country. As far back as 1894 there was a military spirit aroused in Canada in reference to the defence of the empire, which was expressed in this House, and which received a ready response among all classes of our people. So that prior, at all events, Hon. Mr. BORDEN (King's).
to 1896 we see that a spirit had arisen in this country which would account for the difference in numbers, and that spirit has been developing ever since. Now, we have reached the time when Canadians recognize that, having been under the wing of the British empire for so long and receiving protection for which we gave nothing in return, it is their duty, and it will be their pleasure in future, though perhaps not engaging in the European wars of Britain, to adopt some means of affording a reasonable measure of assistance to Britain whenever occasion arises, both for the defence of the empire as a whole, and for the defence of Canada in particular.



EXCLUSION OF CANADIAN BEEF FROM IMPERIAL CONTRACTS.

Mr. N. BOYD (Macdonald).: Before you leave the chair, Mr. Speaker, I desire briefly to bring to the attention of the House and of the country a matter of great importance to the majority of the people of this country, and at the close of my remarks I shall move a resolution bearing upon that subject. I refer to the fact that by an order of the War Office passed apparently in 1901, Canadian cattle cannot participate in the contracts for the supply of beef to the imperial troops of the United Kingdom. As I say, that was done by an order of the War Office, because there has been no legislation passed as was the case in regard to the embargo, or the statute, that compels the slaughter of cattle immediately upon their arrival in Great Britain. First I will read to you a letter dated Liverpool, January 4th, 1902 :


Mr.  D. A.@: 

W. P. FURY.

[Stage Direction]
Assistant Director of Army Contracts.
Now, I liave here the form of tender previous to the date I have mentioned, that is the 1st of June last, calling for the supply of beef from the 1st of December, 1900, to the 31st May, 1901. Clause 1 reads as follows :
The meat shall be well fed, good, sound, sweet and wholesome. The beef shall he ox, not under two nor more than eight years old, or heifer or cow, not under two nor more than four years old ; the mutton, wether or ewe, Carcasses of sheep weighing less than' 50 pounds will not be received.
That is the form of tender previous to this restriction being embodied. Then, this is the form of tender calling for the supply of meat from the 1st of June, 1901, to the 30th November, 1901. These tenders had to be in on the 24th April, 1901. The form of tender having been redrawn, and in the amended form the first clause reads :
The meat shall be well fed, good, sound, sweet and wholesome. The beef shall be home bred ox, not under two nor more than eight years old, or home bred heifer and cow, not under two nor more than eight years old ; the mutton, wether or ewe. Carcasses of sheep weighing less than 50 pounds will not be rereceived.
We now pass to the form of tender from the 1st December, 1901, to the 31st May, 1902, which is as follows :
The meat shall be well fed, good, sound, sweet and wholesome. The beef shall be home bred ox, not under two, nor more than eight years old, or home bred heifer and cow, not under two nor more than four years old ; the mutton, wether or ewe. Carcasses of sheep weighing less than 50 pounds will not he received.
Subject to clause 19 as to issue of preserved meat, and to clause 9 as to hospital requirements, the demand will be for the supply of home bred beef five days each week, and mutton (which may be frozen) two days.
Then there is a clause added to this form of tender.
Clause 23. Each quarter or other portion of beef supplied under this contract must have a label attached to it guaranteeing that it is the produce of a home bred animal in accordance with clause 1 of the specification. The labels will be provided by the contractor and should be drawn up in accordance with the pro forms as follows :-
The beef to which this label Is attached is guaranteed to he the produce of a beast reared in the United Kingdom.
Signature of contractor	
Date	190....
Now, notwithstanding the fact that this very important industry, as I have said, has, by this Act of the Imperial War Office, been 121
debarred from participating in this trade, it seems strange that our government should not be aware of it. It seems that even as late as the 31st of January the government, presided over by our practical farmer here, was not aware of the great injustice that was being done our people in that respect.
I say it is strange that such should be the case, but it is a fact, nevertheless. The lion, member for Russell (Mr. Edwards) and the hon. member for West Elgin (Mr. Robinson), whose speeches I heard during the debate on the budget, told us that all we had to do was to go to the free trade market of England with our stock and there place it. I would like these hon. gentlemen, and I am glad they are both here, to think about this. Not alone was protection adopted at the time the embargo was placed against our cattle, as I shall take occasion later on to prove, but, in a matter which the Imperial War Office and the imperial government have control of, it is total exclusion. Coming back to the point at which I referred to the hon. Minister of Agriculture, mentioning the date of the 31st January, I would say that this matter was agitating the minds of the people of Manitoba, and that it was made the subject of a resolution which was brought up in the form of a petition to be presented to this House asking whether this could be so or how it possibly could be true after all that had taken place between the imperial government and our own government. I, for my part believe that if the attention of the War Office had been called to this matter a remedy would have been provided. On the 30th of January the following telegram was sent to the hon. Minister of Agriculture :
Winnipeg, Jan. 30.
Please wire why Canadian cattle not accepted by imperial authorities for army contracts, quoting authority under which exclusion is enforced.
(Sgd.) CLERK OF THE HOUSE. To that the hon. minister replied :
Ottawa, 31st January. To the Clerk of the House, Winnipeg.
Regarding your question, why Canadian cattle not accepted for army contracts, I am not aware of any such exclusion.
(Sgd.) SYDNEY FISHER.
It seems strange that such an important industry as this should have such an embargo placed upon it and the Minister of Agriculture should not be aware of it. I was told by Mr. Wylie, a large cattle raiser and trader of Maple Creek, that this embargo made a difference of at least $5 a head because he said the contractors to whom they were selling took advantage of it and said : We regret that we are not able to supply this Canadian beef to the contractors ; otherwise we would be able to give you a better price than we are giving. I do not wish
[Stage Direction]
commons
to occupy very much time. I have briefly stated the facts and I regret that the hon. member for Montreal, St. Lawrence, (Mr. Bickerdike) is not here, because I expected his support in regard to the matter with which I am now dealing.
That hon. gentleman (Mr. Bickerdike) feels very keenly upon this subject, but owing to the serious accident which befell him, he has not been able to attend constantly in the House. However, the last time he was here I told him that I would take an opportunity of discussing the question on going into Supply, and that I would refer to what took place between us. I cannot understand how the government can justify their action in allowing this very important matter affecting Canadian interests to pass without notice. I understand that the Minister of Agriculture has been in England since this exclusion took place, and as Mr. Wylie told me many of the cattle commissioners were surprised that he did not go to interview them, and that he did not exercise his influence with the imperial authorities to have this exclusion removed. A deputation waited on the Minister of Agriculture in Aberdeen with reference to the embargo on Canadian cattle, and he told them that if this embargo were not incorporated in an Act of the imperial parliament it might be dealt with. Well, Sir, this exclusion of Canadian beef from Imperial contracts is not incorporated in an Act of Parliament, and why did our government not deal with it ? Indeed, one would think, in view of the action of the imperial authorities in this matter, that they place very little value on the preference which Canada has seen fit to give them. It will be noticed that the exclusion does not apply to mutton, and so Australia is not affected, and Canada is practically the only colony whose interests are militated against by this order of the imperial authorities. It is a very serious matter, and I think that the House will agree with me that the government is deserving of censure for not having acted more promptly and with more effect in regard to the protection of this important industry. I therefore beg to move, seconded by Mr. Halliday :
That ail the words after ' that ' in the main motion1 be struck out and the following substituted.	'	;	t
It appears from the form of tender and contract called for by the British government for the supply of beef to the British troops in Great Britain and Ireland ; contractors are not allowed to supply Canadian beef for that purpose. That although this exclusion has prevailed since the month of Jun'3, 1901 ; this House regrets that no steps have been taken by this present government to redress this grievance by making timely representations to the British government with a view of securing the protection of the interests of the farmers and cattle dealers of Canada.
The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE (Hou. Sydney Fisher).: The hon. gentle-Mr. BOYD.
man (Mr. Boyd.) has moved what is practically a motion of want of confidence in the government, on going into Supply. I regret that he has taken this step and I think perhaps that if he had considered the matter a little more carefully he would not have gone to the extreme of making this motion. He wishes to censure the government and myself particularly, because, as he says, we did not take time by the forelock, and when I was in England last spring especially, see that this action was not taken by the imperial government. The action of which he complained was taken, as I understand it, in the month of June last, actually, I believe, when I was in England. I must confess that I was not aware of it then, nor had I any means of being aware of it for some time afterwards. It would no doubt be better tbat we should have the contracts of the War Office and of the navy sent to us in the regular form. That has not been done ns a matter of practice in the past. This form of contract in question was issued without any notice to us, or as far as I know, to anybody else, and it did not come under my attention until tbe early part of this year. It was known to a certain gentleman who is interested in the cattle trade, and who,
I presume, obtained the information from his friends in England who are interested in the supplying of this beef to the British army. The moment that information came under our notice representations were made by Lord Strathcona to tlie War Office, pointing out that this was detrimental to the Canadian trade; that it was unfair, and that he hoped steps would he taken to remove that restriction in the form of the contract. It will be a perfectly fair and frank statement of the course of events when I say, that since Lord Strathcona made that representation to the War Office no reply lias been received by my department. If Lord Strathcona had received a reply I think it would have been forwarded immediately to me, but of course I cannot say that he lias not received a reply within the last week or ten days. At any rate, no reply to his communication has been received by my department or by tbe government here. I appreciate fully tbat this action on the part of the War Office may have some detrimental effect upon the Canadian cattle trade in England. I believe that it will cut out to a certain extent our cattle from the market of the dealers who are filling these contracts. But I find it rather a peculiar circumstance that since this form of contract has been adopted there have been contracts made by the War Office for the supply of meat to South Africa, in which they have allowed colonial cattle to be received. I may tell the hon. gentleman (Mr. Boyd) that in consequence of representations which my department has made to the WTar Office, forms of contract both for the army and navy have been sent to Canada quite recently, and

3S46
these forms of contract are for the supply of meat by Canadian contractors whose names have been put on the contract list in Great Britain. The War Office and the navy have lately sent these forms of contract to people in Canada to be filled up by Canadian contractors for the supply of Canadian meat.


Mr. MONK.: Has the minister any of these forms !


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have not them under my hand at the present moment.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I suppose they will be laid on the Table ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes. The forms of contract were not sent in very great numbers, but I think they have been forwarded to the people whose names had been submitted, and who asked to have an opportunity of tendering for such contracts.


Robert Laird Borden: Will the minis-ted lay on the Table of the House the communication of Lord Strathcona to the imperial authorities, to which he has referred.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes. I have that particular communication here. I have not got the communications which have passed between my own department and the War Office in regard to contracts being let to Canadian firms. But I can assure the House and the hon. gentleman that while I have not particularly noticed the form of the contract In Great Britain which was a form for British contractors, I have been and my department has been for some time back exerting all our influence and all our efforts to secure from the War Office, and also from the navy, contracts for contractors in Canada to supply what was wanted for these services; and the War Office and the navy have both exhibited a certain amount of readiness to yield to these representations and to allow Canadian contractors to take part in the supply of these requirements. This indicates that while under the particular forms of contracts which have been quoted this afternoon as being entered into by British dealers and British butchers, they have required home-bred cattle to be used, they have not hesitated at all to take the meat from Canadian-bred cattle when it has been supplied or contracted for by Canadian contractors. I believe most sincerely that, on the representations that have already been made and the representations that are being made to-day in London. this disability also will disappear. I trust that it will do so, not that I fear any very great hurt to our cattle trade in England, but because I feel, as I think every Canadian feels, that our cattle in England 1214
are just as worthy to supply the meat for fulfilling these contracts as any home-bred cattle are, and that wre should not suffer on the English market from any greater disabilities than we do now.
The hon. gentleman has referred to the question of the embargo. In regard to that, I have only to say that over and over again, not only to our own representations, but also to the representations qf certain classes and associations in England, the Minister of Agriculture in England has declared that he cannot and will not remove that embargo. It was only lately, as I dare say. the hon. gentleman and others have noticed, that the Butchers' Association of London have made representations, in consequence of the scarcity of meat in England, that the embargo on Canadian cattle should be removed; but they received just the same reply from the Minister of Agriculture in England that the associated interests in Edinburgh did last year. The injustice, as I think I may fairly describe it, which Canadian cattle are suffering from in the English market through the embargo is one on which I think everybody in this House and this country is thoroughly agreed; and nobody is more desirous than myself to try to persuade the English Department of Agriculture, or the English government, or the English parliament, to raise that embargo; but the way in which our representations have been received by the Minister of Agriculture in England, and the way in which he has replied, has led me to believe that at the present time there is really no hope of securing a change in that respect. While thus quoting the Minister of Agriculture in England, I must also confess that Mr. Chamberlain, the Colonial Secretary, dealt with me in the same way in regard to this matter when I was in England last year, and he gave me to understand that the dictum of the Minister of Agriculture must be considered as final. Under these circumstances, I do not consider that it would to-day be worth our while or in anyway necessary to discuss the question of the embargo.
I do not know that I can add much more; but I am afraid I must ask the House to vote down the motion which the hon. gentleman has placed in your hands, Mr. Speaker. I do not consider that any fair or just cause has been made out to show that my department or the government have in any way failed in their duty: but they have taken the necessary precautions to try to remove any difficulty that may have occurred, and are ready at all times to work to the best of their ability in the interest of our Canadian farmers.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman's speech is largely apologetic. He speaks just like a school boy who has done wrong and knows it. and expects to be whipped. The hon. minister has first called the attention

3S4S
of the House to the fact that this is a vote of want of confidence, and he complains of that. Well, in the first place, my hon. friend could not well bring it up in any other form at the present stage of the session. He has been endeavouring for a length of time to get it before the House, but unsuccessfully. In the second place, I do not know whether the hon. minister should complain, because my hon. friend proposes to express the regret of the House that he had not availed himself of an earlier opportunity to make some effort to prevent this embargo being placed on Canadian cattle. It is quite plain that the hon. minister either gave the matter no attention or that there was culpable negligence or carelessness in his department. If he had been giving any attention to it, it would scarcely have escaped his notice that for over a year this position of things had existed. He above all others was interested in ascertaining in every possible way where the Canadian farmer could get an advantage in the British market. During a large portion of last summer the Minister of Agriculture was in England along with the Dairy Commissioner. They went all over that country, made speeches,! had reporters along with them, and had their speeches liberally reported; and the minister conducted himself in a most generous way towards the British people. I noticed in a report of one of his speeches that he told the British people how generously Canada had acted towards them-how we had reduced the duties on their imports, gracefully and deliberately, without desiring or asking any return. He was extremely generous about what we had done for England, but at the same time he was extremely neglectful of the opportunity which was presented to him of getting anything for the Canadian farmer in return. It was a generosity on his, part which the Canadian farmer scarcely expected. But this matter was drawn to his attention on the 1st of December, 1901, and although it had been in existence for over a year it was unknown either to him or his department. He could not have been keeping himself very closely in touch with what was taking place on the market which above all others is of great value to the Canadian farmer.
The very fact that he did not know justifies us in expressing regret that he was not more alive to the needs of the situation and looking more closely after the interests of the Canadian farmers, which he, above all others, ought to have at heart. On the 31st December, 1901, or on the 30th January, 1902. the hon. gentleman wired the secretary of Agriculture in Manitoba that he knew nothing about the matter. It is somewhat strange that the people in Manitoba and British Columbia and the territories should know all about it and that the Minister of Agriculture at Ottawa, who is supposed to be always in touch with the British people, should know nothing.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Does this not show that he is not sufficiently alive to the situation ? Does it not show a carelessness in the management of his department not at all compatible with the responsibilities of his position ?
He says that some contracts have been sent lately to Canadians to supply beef to the imperial army. But he did not tell us when representations were made to the High Commissioner to have the embargo raised. Had the hon. minister been as anxious to benefit the Canadian farmer, as he ought to be, he would have done as Sir Charles Tupper did, when High Commissioner. He would have availed himself of the earliest opportunity, and both by wire and otherwise put in play every influence to get the advantage desired for the Canadian farmer. Sir Charles Tupper did not wait for letters to pass to and fro between the Department of Agriculture in this country and the Department of Agriculture in England, but he used the cable, and used it extensively. He did not allow an hour to be wasted before endeavouring to get the embargo raised, and succeeded in having it raised at a very early date. But all the present Minister of Agriculture has done lms been to make some representations to the High Commissioner in London, and we are not informed whether these were made one, two or three months ago, but he tells us he has no information about the matter to-day. Ho has been content to rest on his oars, apparently indifferent as to whether the High Commissioner sends him a reply in six months or not. I think, therefore, that this House should express regret that the hon. minister did not take action earlier or was not more alive to the situation in the interests of our Canadian farmers than he has shown himself to be.


Mr. HENRI BOURASSA (Labelle).: If the hon. gentleman had drawn this motion on broader lines, and with the idea of getting rid of the grievance complained of, I would be most happy to support him. I consider this a pressing matter, and drew the attention of the House to it at the very beginning of the session, when I moved for the correspondence relating to the embargo on Canadian cattle. I regret that my hon. friend should have made his motion with the sole object of casting blame on the Minister of Agriculture, when the Minister of Agriculture is really not the guilty party. It is the British government and parliament who are to blame. And had the hon. gentleman simply asked this parliament to protest against the glaring Injustice inflicted by the British government and parliament on the Canadian people by this embargo on Canadian cattle, I would have been glad to vote for his motion. The hon. gentleman has told us that the British Minister of Agriculture, the Rt. Hon. Mr. Han-bury. declared last year that were it not for the statute, the general question of the embargo on Canadian cattle might be dealt

with. But my hon. friend has evidently forgotten what Mr. Hanbury did say. If he will refer to the Montreal ' Star,' of the 26th October last, and the Montreal ' Herald' of the 30th October last, he will find that what Mr. Hanbury did say was that so long as he would be Minister of Agriculture, not only would the statute remain as it was, but he would never ask the British parliament to remedy the injustice. Therefore if we are to blame anybody, we should blame the British government. I believe that this parliament should express its opinion, not in any spirit of anger, but in a dignified, temperate manner, on the injustice perpetrated, and ask the British goverment and parliament to remedy that injustice. In my opinion, we should urge upon the British government and parliament the propriety and the justice of abrogating or amending that statute. But so far as Canada is concerned, if anybody is open to blame, it is our High Commissioner in London. I do not say that he is, but I say that when we pay $10,000 a year to a High Commissioner to represent us in London, and when we maintain a staff of officials in London, to keep us in touch with the British government, and report upon any matter of importance, it is their duty to inform immediately the Canadian government of anything that may transpire. Surely the High Commissioner should be made aware of what is done against Canadian interests before any minister in Canada. I should suppose that the reason we employ the High Commissioner is that he may keep us informed of any advantage we may obtain in Great Britain, and of any disadvantage we may have to contend against. But I am afraid that he is so busy complying with the wishes of Mr. Chamberlain, that he has no time to look after the interests of Canadians. I am afraid that Lord Strathcona, with all due respect for his devotion to Canada, is so busy supplying live stock to the British army that he has no time to look after the interests of our cattle raisers who want to supply it with dead meat beef. I think it only right that 1 should correct tiie mistake of my hon. friend in quoting the words of Mr. Hanbury.


Nathaniel Boyd: What I said was that in discussing this matter in Scotland, before a deputation of farmers, Mr. Hanbury said that there was a statute passed as late as 1896. and for that reason he covdd not consider their representations. The words my hon. friend has quoted, Mr. Hanbury used later on.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: But if my hon. friend wants us to be really aware of the position in England, he should nut lay the whole blame on the Minister of Agriculture here, but let us understand that not only is the Minister of Agriculture in England prevented by statute from acting, but he has stated most positively that he would not act so long as he continued to be Minister of
Agriculture. As far as the Minister of Agriculture here is concerned, I am glad to say that I was present in England at the time he was making all the efforts he could in our behalf, and I know that he did not neglect anything possible to bring about a change in the feelings of the British people. In saying this, I am not moved by any purpose of flattering the Minister of Agriculture or the government in general. I think that the position I occupy in this House will free me from any imputation of that kind. When I give credit to the government, it is simply because I believe it is due, and when I blame the government it is equally because, in my opinion, they are deserving of blame.


Nathaniel Boyd: You don't blame them very often.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: There is one point on which I differ with the Minister of Agriculture and it is this. I do not agree that because Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Hanbury have said that they will not correct the wrong, we should therefore submit. I believe that this parliament ought to give expression to its views and transmit those views to the British government and parliament. The hon. gentleman has just admitted that this is an injustice. He has said that at the present moment there is no reason for keeping this exclusion Act in force against Canadian cattle. Therefore, I say that no session of this parliament should pass without a direct expression of opinion being given by a unanimous voice of this House protesting against the injustice, so long as it is not corrected. Those who have the right to complain of this injustice are the representatives of the Canadian people, and they should protest. I regret that the hon. gentleman has not brought forward his motion in this broad spirit, and I hope that the session will not pass without a motion directed by this spirit being proposed, a motion designed to convey the protest of the representatives of the Canadian people but without the intention of making political capital for one side or the other.


Mr. WM. J. ROCHE (Marquette).: The subject which has been brought to the attention of the House by the hon. member for Macdonald (Mr. Boyd) is one of very great importance, I think we will all agree, to the people of Canada as a whole, but more particularly to our ranchers and farmers. The South African war is the opening up of a new market, we might say, causing an increased demand for many of the products of our farmers, especially for our hay, our flour, and our meats. But we can only look upon it as a temporary market. And, as we raise so much more of articles of this character than we require for home consumption and must And an export market. it behooves us to have every possible restriction or embargo that might tend to

hamper this trade removed, whether it refers to the army in South Africa or in the British Isles. So far as the slaughtering of our cattle at the port of entry into Great Britain is concerned, that embargo has existed for a number of years past. The Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Fisher) has told us that he has given up all idea of having that embargo removed through representations (to the British authorities, that, in fact, he has practically ceased all efforts in that direction. But if the hon. minister has not been any more prompt in his efforts to have that embargo removed than he has been in the matter of having the clause in the contract prohibiting the use of outside beef in the army contracts, I do not wonder that he despairs of having the embargo removed in the near future. Whatever show of colour there may have been at the time the embargo was placed upon our cattle, on the ground of disease- and I believe that there may have been some cases of disease among American cattle- there has been no reason for it in the way of an ascertained case of pleuro pneumonia amongst our Canadian cattle since that embargo was adopted. So, we are driven to the conclusion that the embargo is intended simply as a measure of protection to the cattle raisers of Great Britain. And this clause of the contracts for army beef is simply designed for the same purpose. It seems a rather peculiar condition of affairs that, while Canada has granted a preference in trade matters to Great Britain, allowing the products of her manufacturers to come into this country at 33J per cent below our usual tariff, and, while our boys have been in South Africa fighting the battles of the empire, where they are privileged to eat Canadian beef, the remainder of the British soldiers in England are prevented from eating Canadian beef. Actually our beef is prohibited and not a pound can be supplied for the use of the imperial troops on account of this clause in the contract. It may be that the home government is taking the Minister of Agriculture at his word. As the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule) said when the hon. minister was in England, he advised the statesmen of Great Britain that we did not desire any return for the preference we granted to Great Britain in our markets. This measure not merely does not grant us a preference so far as our beef is concerned-I am not aware that any has been asked-but places a prohibition upon Canadian beef, shuts it out from competition with the old country beef. Some may think that this is no very great loss to the cattle raisers of Canada. But we have heard an hon. gentleman who is engaged in the trade declare here to-day that at least forty per cent of our North-west cattle were used in connection with the supplying of beef to the army, and also that this clause means that a loss of at least $5 a head on these 1 Mr. ROCHE (Marnuette).
cattle shipped from Canada has been incurred. The loss, therefore, is a very serious one. But, even if there were no financial loss at all, from a sentimental standpoint the condition is most undesirable. Our government has allowed sentiment to move us in changing our commercial arrangements with the mother land. The sentiment of imperialism now prevails, and the tendency in business, as in other matters, is to draw the empire together. To have this additional embargo placed upon Canadian beef at this time is most unwjse. It may be a business move on the part of Great Britain, but it seems rather strange for a free trade government to adopt a course not of protection but of what is worse, prohibition. It seems also that Canadians might well take a lesson from this example, that Canadian statesmen should learn to look after the interests of Canada. I am quite in accord with the Prime Minister in the declaration he made not very long ago that John Bull will respect us all the more, the more we take care of our own interests. Now, the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) says he cannot support this resolution because it condems this government. The hon. member is always ready to give advice to this government, he is always ready to be the adviser of the British government, to be even the censor of that government and to condemn it strongly ; but when it comes to condemning his own leader, of course he will not do that.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: If the hon. gentleman will allow me I would like to say that I have voted more often against my party than he has voted against his.


William James Roche: That shows that the hon. gentleman's party is more frequently wrong than my party is. Besides, I do not pose as an independent member of the House or as the leader of a third or fourth party. The hon. member (Mr. Bourassa) says he cannot condemn this government, because they have exercised due diligence in the matter, and that it is the fault of the British government. But, considering that these tenders had to be put in in April of last year and that a whole year has gone by, it seems clear that the Minister of Agriculture has not exercised the diligence he should have shown. And, when the matter was brought to his attention last January by the clerk of the legislative assembly in Manitoba, the hon. minister admitted that he knew nothing about it whatever. One would imagine that in such a case as this a clause referring to a matter under his own department, a matter so important as the supply of the army rations, the hon. Minister of Agriculture would be the first man in Canada to be seized of the facts and the man who would take the first and promptest measure. But the records show that, as I say, he knew nothing about the matter until his attention was

called to it last January by the clerk of the legislative assembly of Manitoba. Therefore, we have a right to condemn the hon. gentleman for not being as diligent as he should have been, and for not taking steps for doing away with this clause in the contract. A series of resolutions were passed by the legislature of Manitoba last February, just prior to the prorogation of the legislature, urging upon the Dominion government the necessity of petitioning the imperial authorities in favour of allowing bur cattle to be placed on the same footing as the cattle of Great Britain in relation to these contracts. Those resolutions were passed unanimously. They were moved by a man who is a large exporter of cattle. Evidently, the people of the North-west look upon this as a most important matter and one that, unless a change is made, will have a serious detrimental effect upon the interests of our people. Therefore, I view this differently from the hon. member for Labelle, and think that the resolution introduced by the hon. member for Macdonald is worthy of the support of every Conservative member of the House and of every independent member as well.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I feel disposed to adopt a middle course in this matter, because it seems to me that both the British government and our own government are to blame. I do not believe that the home government will vary from the course that is indicated to us by Mr. Hanbury's speech. And why should they ? There is no doubt that if they admit our own beef on the same footing as the home-bred beef, they will do a certain amount of injury to the stock-raisers of the British Isles, their own constituents; and I doubt very much if any pressure we can bring to bear upon them would lead them to remove that impediment to our trade. Where I find the action of the home government at fault is in the fact that we ourselves having given them a considerable preference in our market, and having, as indicated by my hon. friends from the west, made considerable sacrifices, particularly of late years, in defence of the flag, it seems to me that under these circumstances we would be entitled to more consideration. But as to our being successful in any representations we may make, I doubt very much. The language of Mr. Hanbury, as quoted by the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa), is much more positive than is generally used by British statesmen, and I think we may regard it as a certainty that our efforts for a long time to come in that direction will be fruitless.
But I wish particularly to point out that our own government has in that respect a duty to perform, and that the Minister of Agriculture has totally failed to perform that duty. I believe that when the House is in session it is the prerogative of the House to express its opinion on matters of this kind; and during the recess, it belongs to the department interested to make proper representations to the home government in trade matters of this magnitude which concern the welfare of our agriculture. It is the duty of the Minister of Agriculture at any time, and at very short notice, to make proper representations to foreign authorities, and to the home government particularly, when that is necessary for the preservation of our interests.	The question which arises in my
mind is, What has the Minister of Agriculture done under the present circumstances 1 He has had three or four days' notice at least of this motion, and what has he brought down to the House to show that he has used diligence ? A motion such as that made by my hon. friend (Mr. Boyd) places upon the Minister of Agriculture the obligation of showing that he has used diligence in the premises.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I never had any notice of a motion. The hon. gentleman said he was going to make some remarks about this matter, but until he moved this motion this afternoon we never knew anything about it.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: 

Agriculture excited the interest of our commissioner in England ; it was correspondence, a copy of which is here found, from one of the cattle ranchers, if I am not mistaken; a private individual interested in the cattle trade took up this question and brought it to the notice of Lord Strath-cona. Lord Strathcona having communicated with the War Office, he was not sure, was not certain, but he imagined that possibly the Minister of Agriculture might take some interest in this matter, and sent him over this correspondence. Therefore, though I agree with the bon. member for Labelle in thinking that the British government is at fault, if we are to take the view expressed by the hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Roche), still it seems to me it is impossible not to arrive at the conclusion that the Minister of Agriculture has not moved one step in this matter, or at least, he has not seen fit to lay before the House proof of any diligence whatever. What we have from him is the proof that he knew nothing about the matter, and a letter from our commissioner in London inviting his attention to the matter, and to the correspondence which he, upon his own responsibility, had had with the War Office. With what result ? None whatever. That restriction pointed out by the hon. member for Macdonald (Mr. Boyd) still exists, and in my opinion will continue to exist. The Minister of Agriculture will not deny that it exists, and we are precluded from supplying beef to the British army. Out cattle'are excluded today as they were a month ago. There is no change, the Minister of Agriculture knows it. It may be true that for supplying the army in the field in South Africa, as competition has been invited from all quarters. as there are contracts with the Americans, so there may be contracts with the people of this country for furnishing these war supplies. But will the minister state here on his responsibility that the restriction complained of by the hon. member for Macdonald has been removed, and that that form of contract is to-day changed ? If he will make that statement" he will enlighten the House on the point that we are discussing.
Under these circumstances it seems to me that there is ground for the claim that these things have occurred, and that they have been brought to the notice of the minister, although that should have been unnecessary. That should have been unnecessary. That hon. gentleman was travelling in England last year and surely this was the matter which might have caught his attention without his attention having been specially called to it.


Mr. SAM HUGHES (North Victoria).: He was treading on air.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not say that, but I do say that he, having been in England, when Mr. MONK.
this important matter was brought to his attention he failed to ustrdiligence. Under these circumstances it is our duty to say that he has been lacking. Now, I am not going [DOT] to take up any further time upon this question, but it is a matter which invites the attention and consideration of all the members of this House. When year after year, we have given a preference to the home government, in our markets, a preference which I. for one, and I believe some hon. members on this side of the House, claim has been a disastrous one [DOT] to our own industries in many respects, we find here, as I have found on more than one occasion, that our own interests on the other side have not been guarded as they should have been. I will not carry this discussion any further.


Mr. W. ROCIIE (Halifax).: Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of asking any of those hon. gentlemen who have spoken on the other side of the House what reason was given by the British government for the exclusion of Canadian cattle. They have not been pleased to enlighten us on this subject.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I suppose the hon. gentleman (Mr. Roche, Halifax) does not ask me to enlighten him on that subject. I suppose, however, that there are two reasons, one perhaps resulting from this embargo on our cattle and another probably from the praiseworthy desire to encourage their own stock raisers. I do not blame them.


William Roche: Did they keep out Canadian cattle because they were diseased or for any reason of that kind.


Mr. BENNETT.: I think it was deceased cattle they wanted.


Samuel Hughes: Mr. Speaker, I just wish to say that the correspondence which has been referred to by the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) has completely met the argument of the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) that it was the High Commissioner in London who was in a sense responsible for the injury done to Canada in the contracts, or the tenders for food supplies for the Britisli army. I cannot see how tile hon. member for Labelle can possibly drag the name of the High Commissioner into this question. The High Commissioner. I can assure him, has been most energetic in looking after Canadian interests. The High Commissoner, without the authority of the Canadian government endeavoured to have the embargo on Canadian cattle removed, and I am satisfied by tiie correspondence which has been produced here that he is still active in looking after Canada's interest.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: Does the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hughes. Victoria) not know that the letter just read by the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) is dated the 18th

3S5S
of November ? How is it that the High Commissioner, who is looking after our business, did not know between the 30th June, 1901, and the 18th November, 1902, that the War Office was putting a condition into its contracts which would do harm to Canada ? Is he not there to look after our business ?


Samuel Hughes: No, he is not there to look after contracts of that kind, or to conduct such business ; he is only there to carry out the instructions of the Canadian government. It is the duty of the hon. Minister of Agriculture here and his agents to see that the interests of Canada are properly guarded in all these respects. I merely rose to point out the fact that the High Commissioner seems to be the only person in London who has taken an active part in looking after Canada's interests in this matter.
House divided on amendment (Mr. Boyd).
yeas :
Messieurs
Alcorn,	LaRivi&re,
Barker, .	Lennox,
Bennett,	Leonard,
Birkett,	MacLaren (Perth),
Blain,	McCormick,
Borden (Halifax),	McGowan,
Boyd, .	McIntosh,
Brock,	McLeod,
Bruce,	Monk,
Carscallen,	Morin,
Clarke,	Northrup,
Cochrane,	Osier,
Culbert,	Porter,
Earle,	Richardson,
Fowler,	Robinson (Elgin),
Ganong,	Roche (Marquette),
Gourley,	Rosamond,
Hackett,	Sherritt,
Haggart,	Sproule,
Halliday,	Taylor,
Henderson,	Tolton,
Hughes (Victoria),	Vrooman,
Ingram,	Ward,
Kemp,	Wilmot,
Kidd, Lancaster,	Wilson.-51.
 NAYS : Messieurs
Ar gers,	Legris,
Basinet,	Lemieux,
B61and,	Lewis,
Bernier,	Lovell,
Blair,	Loy,
Bourassa,	Macdonald,
Bourbonnais,	Mackie,
Bureau,	MacKinnon,
Calvert,	! j MacLaren (Hunt'n),
Campbell,	McCarthy,
Carbonneau,	MeColl,
Carroll,	McCreary,
Champagne,	McEwen,
Christie,	McGugan,
Ccpp,	Mclsaac,
Costigan,	McLennan,
Cowan,	Madore,
Delisle,	Malouin,
Demers (LSvis),	Marcil (Bagot),
Douglas,	Marcil (Bonaventure)
Dugas,	Martineau,
Dyment,	Matheson,
Edwards,	Meigs,
Emmerson,	Morrison,
Etbier,	Mulock,
Farquharson,	Oliver,
Fielding,	Paterson,
Fisher,	Power,
Fitzpatrick,	Prefontaine,
Flint,	Puttee,
Fortier,	Reid (Ristigouche),
Gauvreau,	Riley,
Geoffrion,	Roche (Halifax),
German,	Ross (Ontario),
Gibson,	Ross (Victoria, N.S.),
Girard,	Scott, .
Gould,	Siftou,
Guthrie,	Smith (Vancouver),
Harwood,	Stephens,
Heyd,	Stewart,
H olmes,	Sutherland (Essex),
Hughes (Kings, P.E.I.)	Sutherland (Oxford),
Johnston (Cape Breton), Talbot,	
Kendall,	Tarte,
Lang,	Thompson,
Laurier (Sir Wilfrid),	Tolmie,
Laurier (L'Assom'n),	Turcot,
Lavergne,	Turgeon,
LeBlanc,	Wade-98.
PAIRS :	
Ministerial.	Opposition.
Hyman,	Gilmour,
Logan,	Lefurgey,
Cartwright,	Tupper,
Johnston (Lambton),	Simmons,
Fraser,	Bell,
Horsey,	Pringle,
Harty,	Reid (Grenville),
Charlton,	Tisdale,
Bickcrdike,	Cargill,
Parmelee,	Pope,
Archambault,	Avery,
Beith,	Kendrey,
Belcourt,	Kaulbach,
Borden (Kings, N.S.)	Maclean,
Brown,	Bail,
Bruneau,	Roddick,
Davis,	Casgrain,
ErL,	Calvin,
Gallery,	[DOT]Seagram,
McCool,	Clancy,
Murray,	La veil.
Pioulx,	Robinson (Northum-
	berland),
Russell,	Broder,
Schell,	Smith (Wentworth),
Tobin,	Clare,
Tucker,	Hale,
Wright,	Johnston (Cardwell),
Amendment (Mr. Boyd) negatived.



EMBARGO ON CANADIAN CATTLE.

Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: I beg to give notice. Mr. Speaker, that when the House is again moved into Committee of Supply, I shall move the following amendment : '
That this House protests against the maintenance of the provisions of the Diseases of Animals Act, G.B., against Canadian cattle, and hopes that the Prime Minister will take advan-

tage of the proposed imperial conference in London, to press upon the British government the necessity of amending the said^ Act in order to free Canadian cattle from the operations of the said Act.



THE FISHERY AWARD-STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND.

Mr. SAMUEL BARKER (Hamilton).: Before you leave the Chair, Mr. Speaker, 1 desire to call the attention of the House and of the government to the budget speech delivered on the 10th of this month by the Prime Minister of Prince Edward Island, in which he spoke of certain negotiations now pending between the government of that province and the government of this Dominion with regard to claims toy that province upon what is known as the fishery award. I propose to read a portion of the speech of the premier of Prince Edward Island in which that reference is made. He was speaking of the taxation of his province, and he said :
We had in mind a plan of taxation which would practically remodel the whole existing system, but when we set about making up our estimates for the year, we found that the deficit woul be so small that it would be absurd to change the existing system of taxation in order to meet it. But not only that, I believe before the year 1902 closes, we will receive from Ottawa a sum which will be sufficient to carry on the affairs of this province without any additional taxation. We tnought it would be absurd to go to the expense and annoyance of putting extra taxes on the people, entailing a large expenditure in connection therewith, when we felt confident from advices from Ottawa that in a very short time our claims for our share of the Fishery Award would be recognized and paid. I am well aware that this has been flaunted, this little flag of truce has been held before the face of the electors of the province for a great number of years-that is true, but every thing has its day. We all know the story of the importunate widow.'
Then the Prime Minister of Prince Edward Island goes on to refer to certain claims heretofore made by the province upon tills government, and which claims were successfully made. I will not allude to these, as they are past transactions. The Prime Minister of Prince Edward Island continues, in his speech :
Thus was our persistence rewarded and so will it he with our Fishery Award. $4,000,000 of hard earned money was paid by the American government to the British government and by them paid to the Canadian government ; money earned by the sweat of the brow, by the toiling on the rowlocks of the boats of our island fishermen ; and by the terms of union and by the evidence given before the Halifax commission, we are entitled to our [DOT]share of that money. It has been claimed for years and now I am happy to say our hope is near fruition. Messrs. Farquharson and Mackinnon, who represent West and East Queen's in the House of Commons, have been pressing this claim, and Mr. BOURASSA.
I have communications not only from Mr. Mackinnon but also from the Department of Marine at Ottawa, which indicate that our claim has been so far admitted that the federal government is willing that it should be submitted to the Supreme Court of Canada for decision as to whether or not we are entitled to the amount. As to the result, any lawyer who has studied the question, the statute, and the evidence taken before the commission' will admit that we as well as Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova. Scotia, are entitled to the $4,000,000 ; and if it should have been ours in 1878, we are now clearly entitled also to the interest that the Dominion government has been putting into its .coffers for all these years down to date. They have been collecting interest on our $1,000,000 at 3 per cent, $30,000 per annum and have been paying back in fisheries bounties to this province the sum of $13,000. We will be entitled to receive at least $30,000 yearly interest, per annum, since confederation, in addition to our $1,000,000, and, Mr. Speaker, I feel all the more confident that our claim will be acknowledged since I find that the great province of Quebec, the pivotal province of. the Dominion, has taken the initiative and is now claiming her share of the award.
Now, Sir, in the King's speech at the opening of the session, we were told that this government had been negotiating with the Canadian Pacific Railway Company about a matter between the people of the Northwest and that company, and that the government had agreed to refer that matter to the Supreme Court. That was thought of sufficient importance to be communicated to this House in the speech from the Throne ; but although important negotiations affecting nearly $7,000,000-84,000,000 of principal and about $2,800,000 interest-although these negotiations have been pending with certain provinces, not one word has been communicated to parliament on this subject, and that, mark you, although the negotiations seem to have progressed so far that members of this House who are in communication with the government, have been able to inform the premier of Prince Edward Island that this claim is so far admitted! that the question will be submitted to the courts. Further than that, the government of Prince Edward Island seem to have had communications officially with the Minister of Marine upon this subject, and all this has been going on without the slightest word to this House. I do not know that I need make any extended remarks upon that question. It does seem to me a most extraordinary thing, that while this House is sitting and when we are only two weeks from the end of this session, we have not heard a word| on this subject from any of the ministers. I cannot believe that this statement of the premier of Prince Edward Island ds wholly without foundation. So certain is he of what he speaks, that he actually puts off the raising of necessary taxation in his province, because he believes that during this year and before another session this money will be paid, and it will not be necessary to raise that taxation, but that the province will be able

to pay its debts out of the money that is to be handed over by the Dominion government. I am not going to discuss the question as to whether the provinces are entitled to any portion of this award. I think it will be found that the people of this Dominion are not disposed to concede that this is not an asset of the Dominion at large. Whatever may be the case upon that point, what I contend for is this :	That
no such negotiations should have been carried on without our having knowledge of them in this House. I think, Sir, we are entitled to at least that much consideration. It is not merely that the province of Prince Edward Island is being led to expect the payment of this money, but probably Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia are expecting it as well. I suppose these are all importunate widows as the premier of Prince Edward Island calls them. We, therefore, have four importunate widows appealing to the government for this $4,000,000 principal and a quarter million dollars interest. Perhaps it would be good advice for :me to tender the Prime Minister to beware of the widows. However, that may be, if the right hon. gentleman's government is negotiating with them he should let us know it. I hope that the First Minister will be able to assure the House, that notwithstanding the positive language used by the premier of Prince Edward Island there is really no foundation for these expectations of his.


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: I have no fault to find with the spirit of the remarks of my hon. friend from Hamilton (Mr. Barker), and in view of the speech which has been delivered by the Prime Minister of Prince Edward Island, perhaps it would not be amiss if I should take this opportunity of altogether reassuring my hon. friend from Hamilton on the fears which he entertains that we may succumb to the blandishments of these several widows of whom he has spoken. I hope our virtue will be equal to the occasion, and that he will have nothing to fear upon that score. There has been loose talk, as my hon. friend knows for several years in the maritime provinces, and even in the province of Quebec :	That the award which
we obtained under the Washington treaty (which was not $4,000,000, but $4,500,000) should be distributed amongst the provinces. My hon. friend is aware that for a great many years past-almost since the time we received that award-we have been distributing, practically the interest on it in the shape of bounty to the fishermen; and whether the fishermen receive it from us or from the interested governments in the provinces in which they live, I do not know it would make very much difference. But there is another question which has occasioned a good deal of correspondence with, and remonstrances from the maritime provinces-indeed from all the provinces connected with fishery questions-and that is the foreshore question. A judgment was given three years ago by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Gouncil, which, unfortunately has left in doubt a good many questions with regard to the ownership of the foreshore. We have received communications from the several governments upon this point, and we have agreed to have a conference upon the whole subject. As to the distribution of the money which we have received under the fisheries award, though I am aware that claims have been made to us by several provinces, no decision has been arrived at. In fact, the subject has not been considered at all; and I may supplement what I say now by stating that at an early day the whole correspondence will be brought down, and then my hon. friend will know what action has been taken.



INQUIRY FOR PAPERS.

Robert Laird Borden: Might I ask the right hon. gentleman whether certain resolutions and memorials from boards of trade, which were to be brought down in answer to a question by my hon. friend from Toronto, have been brought down.


The PRIME MINISTER.: They will all be brought down at an early day. They are being prepared.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into Committee of Supply.
Prince Edward Island Railway-Murray Harbour Branch and Hillsboro' Bridge, $500,000.
The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: This vote is to continue the undertaking for the current year.


Hon. Mr. HAGGART.: What is the total amount required to finish the bridge and this branch, and what has been expended already ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: There has been expended from the 30th of June to the 31st of December, on the bridge and the railway, $215,210. The bi anch, including the rolling stock, will cost in the neighbourhood of $2,620,000. The bridge itself will cost $1,100,000.


Mr. INGRAM.: How long is the bridge ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: Between three-quarters of a mile and a mile, I think.


Andrew B. Ingram: How many abutments are under it ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: I think 13 or 14.


John Graham Haggart: What is the amount required for rolling stock?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: 


Mr. HACKETT.: Does not the local government pay a part of the expense of building this bridge?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: No.


Edward Hackett: Is there not $10,000 deducted every year from the subsidy to the island ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: Yes. We have a contract with the island.


Mr. CLARKE.: What is the length of this branch ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: If the line is continued all the way to Murray Harbour, with a loop, as is under consideration, there will be about 55 miles altogether. If we stop at the Murray river, as to which no definite decision has yet been arrived at, it will be shorter.


Mr. TAYLOR.: Is the work being done by contract ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: Yes.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What is the object of the bridge ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: The railway is constructed from the main line at Charlottetown across the Hillsboro river and thence down to Murray Harbour.
Mr. LEFURGEY'. I have no objection whatever to make to the expenditure of $10,650 for improvements along the Prince Edward Island Railway, but I think the amount might well have been larger. I am in receipt of communications from different sources on the island, which point out a great many improvements that might be made, and for which I see no provision in the estimates. On the line between Cape Traverse and Emerald, there is not a booking station in that Whole length. The people of Kinkora, where there is quite a large settlement, have been asking for freight accommodation for some years, but so far have failed to obtain any satisfaction. In February last a large and influential meeting was held at Kinkora, and the following resolution unanimously adopted :
Moved by Rev. J. J. Macdonald, and seconded by Mr. John P. Smith :
Whereas up to the present, Kinkora has had insufficient railway station accommodations ; and whereas a cheese factory has been recently established, an agricultural implement factory is in operation, several merchants do a large import and export trade and the traffic on the railway here has about trebled itself within' the last three years.
And whereas a greater volume of business is transacted at Kinkora than at many localities along the main line where booking stations are now established.
And whereas there is every indication that in the near future there will be a large Increase Hon. Mr. BLAIR.
in the import and export trade of the community.
And whereas the government outlay necessary to establish proper station facilities will be more than compensated for by the consequent increased traffic.
And whereas great inconvenience and loss have been sustained for want of a proper station and for lack of telegraphic communication with business centres.
Be it therefore resolved that for the benefit of the railway itself, as well as for the interests of the community, this meeting recommends and urges the immediate erection by the government, of a suitable booking station at Kinkora crossing.
Further resolved, that a petition praying for sucl: railway facilities and for the appropriation necessary for that purpose, be circulated and presented to the government without delay, so that action may be taken thereon during the present session of the federal parliament.
These resolutions were passed at a large representative meeting and a petition forwarded to the government asking that the required improvements be made.
During the past season two merchants alone at Kinkora paid out $500 freight on their shipments, which of course is but a fraction of the general business done both in exports and imports. The train on this section leaves Cape Traverse about six o'clock in the morning, and the people exporting freight have to be out along the line about seven o'clock, in order to get it shipped, and as most of the shipping is done in the summer and the train has to wait for the boat, there is often no end of delay. The train frequently gets into Kinkora about two o'clock in the morning, so that the people there have to wait, up to receive their goods and the mail carrier has to sit up all night to receive the mail. And as the trains are not always on time, people have been known to wait hours in order to catch the train going out or coming back. There is only one train a day for passengers and freight. Besides the station for payment of freight is at Emerald, and goods are often held over until the merchant can go up to Emerald and pay his freight there. There is a large amount of business done in this section. As shown by the report, business has trebled there in the past three years. The business of the Prince Edward Island Railway during the past three years has increased- thus keeping pace with the general prosperity of the Dominion-some $50,000 over previous years, and there is every reason why the people of this vicinity should not be given railway accommodation at that point.
I may also say that the people of Kensington. a village which has grown considerably during the past few years, require increased freight accommodation. There is a large cheese and butter export from that section, and the superintendent of the company requires increased accommodation for the freight, and is anxious that the yard around the station should be put in proper repair. There are also several other sta-

tions along tlie line which are asking for improved accommodation. I am personally acquainted with the condition of affairs in Kinkora and Kensington, and I know that repairs and improvements are very much needed in these places. It seems to me that the hon. minister might well put in something more than $10,650 for improvements on the Prince Edward Island Railway, especially when the amount is charged to capital account. I would ask him to take this matter into consideration and not let another season pass without having this crying need of the people of Kinkora and Kensington for freight accommodation and booking stations supplied. I do not think it would cost over $3,000 or $4,000 to do the whole thing, and I have no doubt that the business of the. railway would benefit.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: I am quite ready to acknowledge that there is much in what the hon. gentleman has said with respect to the necessity of making improvements, at the earliest possible moment, along the line. It is not very long since I paid a personal visit to the island and traversed it on the railway, and I am free to acknowledge that there is quite a lot that should be done in order to give the people the facilities they need. I have not been allowed to lose sight of the importance of the question, because a number of members of parliament, among them my hon. friend from East Queen's (Mr. Mackinnon) and my hon. friend from West Queen's (Mr. Farquharson) and of King's (Mr. Hughes) have been urging upon me the importance of providing these improvements without delay. The necessity of having booking stations at Alberton, Fredericton and Kincora have been strongly impressed upon hie, and I shall be very glad to give all this matter the eraliest possible attention.


Mr. LEFURGEY.: I would ask the hon. minister to take the Kinkora station especially into his consideration at an early day, because the people there have been asking for this accommodation for some years. The hon. members for West Prince and West Queen's understand the situation as well as I do, and we have talked it over on several occasions. I have also discussed it with the superintendent of the railway, who was strongly of the opinion that this improvement is needed at that point.
At six o'clock, House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.



CONSIDERED IN COMMITTEE-THIRD READING.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 101) to incorporate the Nepigon Railway Company.-Mr. Campbell.

[Stage Direction]
On the Order being called for :
Second reading of Bill (No. 140) to incorporate the Bishop of the Orthodox Russo-Greek Catholic Church for North America and Aleutian Islands, and each of the parishes and missions of the said church in Manitoba and the North-west Territories.-Mr. Oliver.
Mr.  A. A. C.@: LaRIVIERE (Proveneher). I would ask my hon. friend to allow this Bill to stand until Friday.


Mr. FRANK OLIVER (Alberta).: May I ask the hon. member (Mr. LaRiviere) why he wishes the Bill to stand ?	*


Mr. RODOLPHE LEMIEUX (Gaspe).: I may say that the Bill is not yet printed in French.


Frank Oliver: The hon. gentleman is mistaken. The Bill is printed in French.
Sir. SPEAKER, Does the hon. member (Sir. Oliver) move the second reading ?
air. OLIVER. Unless the hon. member (air. LaRiviere) gives good reason for postponement. The Bill has already been postponed a number of times. If the hon. gentleman has any reason to give, I shall be glad to hear it. But a mere request for postponement is hardly sufficient.
air. LaRIVIERE. I have some reasons which are personal. I hope my hon. friend will not insist upon going on with the Bill. I do not intend to offer any opposition to the Bill unless I have good grounds for it. If he will not object to the postponement, I will be prepared to tell him my reasons when the Bill comes up on Friday.
The ailNISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. James Sutherland). We entertain the hope that we are geting near the close of the session. This is only the second reading of this Bill, and it will have to be referred to the committee. Would it not suit the hon. gentleman (air. LaRiviere) better to discuss it before the committee ? If there is delay, the consideration of the Bill may take so long that it may be difficult to get it through.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. The hon. gentleman (Hon. air. Sutherland) seems to forget that in giving the Bill its second reading, we are affirming the principle of the measure.
air. SPEAKER. Does the hon. gentleman (air. Oliver) move the second reading ?
air. OLIVER. I wish to accommodate the hon. gentleman, and if he says it is a personal matter, and if he says he has good reason. I will agree to the postponement if he will concede

air. SPEAKER. Stand.
Order allowed to stand.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
House again in Committee of Supply.
Post office-Outside service-Salaries and allowances, $1,302,580.
['Certainly. Surely every hon. member of this House will endorse the position he takes, that if a man has a just claim he ought to be heard.\nSome resolutions reported.']
Thomas Simpson Sproule: There is an increase here. Will the hon. Postmaster General please explain ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There are a very large number of changes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I notice that the letter carriers and mail delivery men have been pressing for an increase of salary, and I saw by a circular issued by them that something equivalent to a promise had been made by the minister that he would increase their salaries.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I suppose the hon. gentleman refers to the mail carriers. What is contemplated appears in the Bill before the House, which will be moved to a second reading at an early date. The hon. gentleman refers to an alleged promise of mine. 1 made no promise except to give the matter consideration, and that I have done.


Edward Frederick Clarke: In the Bill which the hon. gentleman has before the House I understand that the letter carriers are allowed to reach a salary of $600 in four years and a half instead of, as formerly, in nine years. But I understand that men who were appointed previous to 1896 are not receiving any consideration at the hands of the hon. gentleman in the Bill before the House.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Perhaps it would be more satisfactory if we discussed the Bill when it is up for its second reading. I will take the Bill up to-morrow if the hon. gentleman likes.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Is the minister making any provision for the appointment of an additional number of letter carriers in-Toronto, and if so, how many ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There is no provision here for an increase in the number of letter carriers in Toronto, for the reason that certain changes are being made now in the Toronto service, and it is premature, therefore, to anticipate any necessity for an increased staff of letter carriers. At present the collection of letters is made by the staff, and it is intended to have that done by contract. There is a considerable number of men specially engaged in the collection of letters, and they will be relieved from that work and available to be transferred to the regular staff of letter carriers. Then we are erecting a station in the west end, at the corner of Queen and Abel streets, which I hope will be completed in the month of July. When it is completed it will simplify and Mr. SPEAKER.
expedite the work to be done in the west end. At j)resent mail matter for the west end arriving in Toronto has to be taken from the railway station to the city post office, there to be handled. By the methods now in view the mail matter will be taken from the railway station to this depot, and the carriers will have much shorter routes; they will start from this depot instead of, at present, as many of them do, from the central post office, or other places not so convenient. That will also have its effect. But until the system is in full operation it is not possible to say definitely whether any increase will be required in the numerical strength.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Will the automobiles now in use be taken over by the contractors, or be left in the hands of the department ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: They are on trial yet, and the trial, on the whole, is not satisfactory. One of the large machines answers fairly well. I do not want to say anything against the city, but I think the automobiles would be more satisfactory if the conditions were more favourable for their use. We hope there may be some change, and we are still hanging on to them.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Were they purchased by the Post Office Department ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: They were purchased, like all public property, by the Public Works Department. They are charged to public works, like public buildings.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That would be another item fairly chargeable to the Post Office Department that is not found in the accounts.


Mr. McCREARY.: Before this item passes, I would like to ask the Postmaster General when he is likely to visit the west. We have had a good many ministers visiting there, but we have never had the Postmaster General visiting Winnipeg, and the cities of the west. It may be news to most hon. gentlemen here that the city of Winnipeg to-day is the third highest in post office receipts of any city in Canada. Last year $116,000 were received in revenue from the Winnipeg post office, and it is expected this year that the revenue will be $150,000 or $200,000; in fact, we will come very close to Toronto in a year or two. I want to suggest that the post office should be increased in size. The ground floor is very small, and when I came down this session I proposed to one or two of the ministers that a certain property could be bought at that time for about $750 to $S00 per foot. They laughed at the idea of buying pro-r-erty for $800 a foot. I want to tell the hon. gentleman that that property has since been sold for $850 per foot to an American firm, who expect to build a block upon it, and to make money

out of their investment. So the government was not very businesslike in that matter. Now, we are growing, our post office is growing and going to grow, and we want the ministers to grow up with it, and to realize what is going on. Our post office is a backwoods post office, the city of Winnipeg has to-day practically a backwoods post office. I have stood at the general wicket, and seen ten or fifteen people, on the average, waiting for one hour to get their mail, people who have no private boxes. The boxes are always taken up very quickly, and people have to wait at the general inquiry wicket; as I have said, I have seen ten or fifteen at a time waiting for an hour to get their mail. That is a condition of affairs that should not prevail in an up-to-date city. With regard to the distribution of the mail, why should we not have some such arrangement as Toronto, that the mail should be taken from the depot in an electric railway and distributed throughout the city by automobiles? It may surprise you to know that though, a few years ago, we were a muddy city, now we are building ten miles of streets per year, asphalted, at the expense of the city, the property is owned by the city. We are not doing that by contract, but by day labour. It is one of the most modern municipalities in Canada. Why will not the Postmaster General come up and see us, and see if he cannot increase the efficiency of the post office in the city of Winnipeg, see if he cannot give us some better facilities for getting our mail. A letter comes in there now and it is probably four or five hours before a business man receives it. That should not be permitted, it is not permitted in eastern cities. I cordially invite the Postmaster General to pay us a visit, and give us the benefit of his long experience, and try to help us out.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I would like the Postmaster General not to confine his visits to the west but come to the east also.


Mr. MORIN.: I say, stay where you are.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: If the hon. Postmaster General will come to Montreal he will find, that, having regard to the proportionate population, we have, probably, there, the most unsuitable post office that there is in the Dominion.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Hear, hear.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: If, as the hon. gentleman (Mr. McCreary) says, there is not sufficient accommodation in Winnipeg, it will be found that having regard to population the accommodation in Montreal is still more insufficient, and I believe, as we contribute such a large amount to the public revenue, we are entitled, in this respect, to some consideration. Those who are familiar with the conditions in Montreal know that the accommodation of the Dominion government in that city is altogether inadequate.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Hear, hear.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: The Dominion government are obliged to pay a very considerable sum in rent in order to procure insufficient accommodation. I have in past years, urged, and I urge again on the attention of the government the fact that they would really economise considerably if they gave to the post office the dimensions that the post office should have, in view of the large population there is in Montreal, and by enlarging the building they could give the public the accommodation they are clearly entitled to above the post office-accommodation for the different departments of the public service that at present are obliged to pay a considerable amount of rental, representing certainly more than the capital which would be sufficient to place the post office on a decent footing.


Mr. FARQUHARSON.: While the hon. Postmaster General (Mr. Mulock) is on the eastern tack, I would invite him to come down to Charlottetown. Charlottetown is the capital of the province and in that city the post office is altogether inadequate to the wants of the people. It is small and it is dark. The hon. minister kindly consented to send an engineer down there, I understand; in fact, he has so informed me, and I hope we will hear something about it later. I hope the hon. minister will place an amount in the estimates about to be submitted for this purpose. However, I will say that we have been kindly treated, and I have to thank the hon. minister for any favours which we have received in regard to the post office. In fact, I think, we may have in some places too many post offices in Prince Edward Island. In our province it is very difficult to get suitable men to keep the post offices, because the remuneration is very small. I do not know whether there is any provision made for an increase in the remuneration or not. I believe that if it is not increased in the near future there will be many men who will give up their post offices, and the department will have to give them in charge of people who are not fit for the offices or who are located at inconvenient places. In Charlottetown we have no delivery system. That was suggested to me when I heard the hon. member for Toronto (Mr. Clarke). I do not know that we are asking for that, but if we do not get it, I think we should have an equivalent, a good post office in Charlottetown. Then again I would say a word in reference to the mail carriers in the country. I find that some of these men carry the mails for a mere nothing. As it is a matter of tender largely, I would say that it is their own fault, but I can assure the committee that there is no extravagance in connection with the mail service so far as Prince Edward Island is concerned. In reference to the officials in the post office and in other offices in the civil service, and I refer more particularly

now to the post office, I wish to say one word. I spoke here the other evening, and 1 now repeat what I then said, that I do not think it is fair that there should be the large discrepancy which does exist between the remuneration paid to different officials doing the same work. I have in my mind several good men that are in offices side by side with men who are no better than they are and not as good in some cases, because they entered the service at a different time, and under different conditions ; yet, some of these men draw $350 to $500 only a year, and the other $800 or $1,000, or $1,200, though doing the same work. 1 know all about this. There is something wrong which should be remedied. The law may be against the men who come in latterly. This is a condition which prevails under the laws and regulations as at present existing. Why should an official be the victim of some law that is perhaps an improper law? I consider that the law in these matters must be changed to meet the circumstances. You cannot get good men to go in under certain conditions at a salary of $400 or $500 a year. Wo have one young man in the post office at Charlottetown who, I think, will be six years in the service in July, lie is competent to perform the work of the post office. He gets, I think, $510, and there are others in the service geting $1,200. He is a better man than some others. I am not saying anything against the others, because they are very good men. I say this with all respect to the government and to the hon. Postmaster General, and I hope that there will be a redress of wrongs. I want to serve every one alike. I do not want to over pay a man, I do not want to under pay a man, but I want to see men paid in proportion to the work they perform. I would say: Get good men, and when you get them pay them fairly and see that they do their work. If the hon. Postmaster General does this, I believe that the people will stand by him. I consider that the law, as at present constituted, must be changed in order that these men shall receive justice at the hands of the government.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL moved:: That the item be amended by adding, after the word ' allowances ' the following words : 'including J. W. Bain, post office inspector of the first-class in Montreal at $2,200, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act.'


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
["That the item be amended by adding, after the word ' allowances ' the following words : 'including J. W. Bain, post office inspector of the first-class in Montreal at $2,200, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act.'"]
Edward Frederick Clarke: Who is Mr. Bain ? Is he a new appointee ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Mr. Bain is a former member of this House, and was appointed hy the late government. He is a worthy officer and deserving of this.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is this an additional employee beyond the number contemplated in the estimates ?


Donald Farquharson: 


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: No.
The item was included but these words are necessary in compliance with the ruling of the Auditor General.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The minister told us that the automobiles were not proving satisfactory, but he did not tell us how many were purchased, and what they cost.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: We
have had them for about three years now. My recollection is that there were six quad-rocyeles which are used for the collection of mail matter, and which I think cost about $000 each. There are I think two four-wheeled vehicles for carrying light loads between the post office and branches. There is also a large wagon capable of carrying probably a ton and a half which is in operation between the post office and the Union station. Of course I am only speaking from memory, as the contract was mado by the Public Works Department. I think the assistant postmaster for Toronto told me that these other machines cost in the neighbourhood of $1,500 each.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: On what principle do you charge those to the Public Works Department ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There is a mixing up of the departments in the public service. There is not the clear accounting between the departments that I think there ought to be. For instance, the Post Office Department renders a great many services that it gets no credit for, and perhaps in turn it may be a charge on other departments. The enormous amount of franking that goes on is not remunerative. During the recess, the different departments send an immense quantity of free mail matter, and the local governments have certain franking privileges as well. The Post Office Department is put to a large expense in connection with the savings banks which it carries on for the Finance Department, and which of course is not properly a matter of mail service, although it may very fittingly be done by the Post Office Department. There is no revenue from this, and the larger the savings the more it costs the Post Office Department to manage that service.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What difference does the Postmaster General make between paying contractors for carrying the mails all over the country, and this automobile service that he charges to the Public Works Department ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I suppose the theory is that the Post Office Department does not own any property, and that the Public Works Department is supposed to own the buildings and everything else. The view of my hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) is perhaps more accurate, and if there was a strict accounting, everything used by the Post Office Department should
be charged against it and every service that is rendered by it to the other departments should be credited to it. However, that is not the way it has been done in the past. I do not know whether the country is prepared yet to do away with the "franking and other abuses: I consider them abuses to a certain extent. My hon. friend from Montreal (Mr. Monk) has referred to the post office building in that city; my hon. friend from Winnipeg (Mr. McCreary) has alluded to the Winnipeg building, and my hon. friend from Charlottetown (Mr. Far-quharson) draws the attention of the House to the inadequacy of the post office building at Charlottetown. I believe that all these objections are perhaps well taken, and it is gratifying in a sense to find that the increased volume of business under the policy of the administration is causing these public buildings to be inadequate for the demands upon them. I suppose that as fast as the circumstances of the countrv will admit, the Minister of Public Works will endeavour to enlarge these buildings so that they will meet the increased demands upon them. In all cases these buildings were in existence when we took office they have not been made smaller, but the business has outgrown the facilities afforded by them. My hon. friend (Mr. Farquharson) refers to inadequate salaries being paid, and lie cites a case in Charlottetown where one cleik.is receiving $500 a year and another cierk is receiving $1,200. I do not know whether the hon. gentleman desires me to accept as a standard every abuse that may * of,,;!!1 .pubIic service. It is perhaps a difficult thing to explain why one man do-mg the same kind of work as another, is paid a large salary and the other a much smaller one; but it happens that in our service men are promoted from the third to the second-class, and from the second-class to the first-class in process of time, without due regard at times to their efficiency or to the value of the service they lender. That is to be found in all branches of the service. When I took office, I may say by way of illustration, I found a clerk who was reported to me as engaged in doing nothing more than copying letters in a let-tei press, and I think the salary he received for that valuable service was $1,400 a year. That was an abuse of course, and yet if I employed a boy to do the work at $300 a year he would have complained that his mate was being paid four times as much. However, I would not think that that abuse should form a guide for our conduct. Abuses seem to be inseparable from the public service and in giving this illustration I am not reflecting on any person or on anv government.
It often happens that men grow old in the service and yet are not retired, though they are more or less unable to perform work, and light work is given to them. It 122
is a very pardonable weakness of human nature if we are kindly disposed towards those who have grown old and infirm ; but all the same, in view of a debate which took place in this House a short time ago, I am afraid that parliament would not approve of an increase of the salary list of the Charlottetown post office just now. I think tile hon. member for West Hastings (Mr Porter) pointed out that the amount being paid by way of salaries in the Charlottetown post office was very greatly out of proportion to what was being paid in other parts of the Dominion.


William Forsythe McCreary: Before this item passes, I would like to get a promise from the minister that he will give us an electric service in Winnipeg from the station to the post office the same as there is in Ottawa, a city which contributes less -revenue to the Post Office Department than the city of Winnipeg a!so that he will provide automobiles to collect the mall matter throughout the city.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The hon gentleman knows that I could not promise anything involving public expenditure without obtaining the permission of the government and the assent of His Excellency, because that would involve a vote ; but I will promise this, which is all he can expect from me, that I will give the matter my best consideration. As to putting the mails on a tramway between the station and the post office, I will promise to give that consideration too ; and if it is reported to be a better plan than the one that exists now, and we can make fair terms for the service, we will adopt the improvement. We are always ready to adopt an improvement if we can make proper terms. As to adopting automobiles in Winnipeg, I would not care to promise it at present, because we are testing them. They have only gone through one winter, and the test up to date is not satisfactory.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It is said that they are most of the time iu the blacksmith's shop being repaired.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: It is very much that way.


Mr. KEMP.: I think I might come to the rescue of the Postmaster General at this stage. He has been requested by hon. members to visit Winnipeg, Montreal and Charlottetown, in order that he may see for himself the very poor facilities which are provided in the post offices of these cities. In Toronto we enjoy the distinction, I may say the honour, of having the Postmaster General with us all the time, and I must take issue with my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) when he says that Montreal has the most unsuitable post office in proportion to population in tne Dominion.
I venture to say that we have in Toronto



the most unsuitable post office in the Dominion in proportion to the amount of business done. Perhaps when only half the business was done that we are now doing, it might have been considered satisfactory ; but at present it is most unsatisfactory. The Postmaster General informed us to-night, as I think he has done on previous occasions, that it was the intention to build branch post offices-one at the corner of Queen and Abell streets, and perhaps others at other points. But it would be a great credit to the country and the city to have a fine post office building, and I hope the government are not shirking the responsibility they should assume in the way of erecting a respectable post office building in the city of Toronto, a city which I understand pays the largest revenue to the Post Office Department of any city in the Dominion. If the system is carried out of having these branch post offices, I suppose the mail will have to be assorted at the Union Station.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: On the train.


Albert Edward Kemp: I do not understand the system sufficiently to discuss that feature ; but I hope that we shall not be side-tracked in Toronto in the ambition to have a fine public building in the shape of a post office, such as the Dominion will have good reason to be proud of.


Mr. RICHARDSON.: I would like to ask the lion. Postmaster General whether the postmaster for Holstein in the south riding of Grey has been dismissed, and if so, for what reason ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I cannot say from memory, but I will mane inquiries and tell the hon. gentleman tomorrow.


Mr. BLAIN.: I wish to say a word or two about the small salaries paid the country postmasters throughout the province of Ontario. There is a very universal complaint on this subject among the postmasters and farmers in the rural districts of the western part of the province. As the hon. Postmaster General will understand, a different condition of things prevails among the farmers now from what there was several years ago. The farmers are now engaged in supplying the larger cities with dairy produce, such as butter, milk and cream, and they require a better postal service than they did many years ago when they were engaged in growing grain. The country postmasters are really very poorly paid. In many instances in the county which I have the honour to represent the patrons of country post offices are compelled to contribute money privately in order to get a proper service. It is all very well for the hon. minister to talk about the large and increasing revenue, and I am very glad he has the privilege of talking


Albert Edward Kemp: that way ; and it is all very well for the city members to ask for larger post office buildings. I am not complaining of that; but I say that in my humble opinion there is no class of employees of the Post Office Department of Canada who are so poorly paid as the postmasters in the rural districts. If ever there was an opportunity for the Postmaster General to comply with the demands of the country people in that respect, surely it is now, when the revenue is so large ; because there will come a time,
I have no doubt, when the revenue will not be so large. I am sure that I speak the sentiments of the members on both sides of the House when I say that in this prosperous time some special provision should be made for paying country postmasters a sufficient salary for the work they are called on to perform.


Mr. HENDERSON.: 1 listened to the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) when he was speaking for better postal facilities in the city of Winnipeg. I was rather surprised to hear that hon. gentleman ask for such an expenditure as would be necessary to provide the accommodation he desires, when we remember that the Postmaster General is extremely anxious to make his department self-sustaining, and also that our friend from the North-west is always prepared to talk free trade and to deprive the country of that revenue from customs imports which is necessary to supplement the postal revenue and to provide the accommodation he desires. The hon. gentlemen who do not want to contribute to the revenue of the country should not be so exacting upon the Postmaster General or any other minister for increased expenditure. While on my feet I desire to ask a question of the Postmaster General in reference to a matter which came up the other evening in connection with the Customs Department ; that is, how postmasters provide their sureties. I understand that the plan adopted by the Postmaster General is to have the government bond all the postmasters and the other officers of the department, instead of paying a guarantee company a certain sum of money or compelling the postmasters to pay a certain sum for their guarantee. I am under the impression that this is a wise movement. I understand that the postmasters are now guaranteed for about two-thirds of what they were guaranteed before by the Guarantee Company, and I am under the impression still that that could be even cut in two and yet leave a sufficient sum to meet all the default cases likely to occur in the Post Office Department. I would like the Postmaster General to go a little further along this line, and he would then be assisting men, who are underpaid, by enabling them to contribute less for their guarantee. I understand that that has been the practice for one or two years, and I hope that it will be extended.

There is another matter I would ask the hon. gentleman about. I am told that a letter posted at Toronto Junction, which is a separate post office, requires only a cent stamp to carry it to Toronto, but to carry a letter from the city of Toronto to Toronto Junction requires 2 cents. It seems to me that that is an anomaly.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The condition to which the hon. gentleman refers did exist with regard to the mail service between a number of the villages around Toronto and Toronto itself, but I put an end to it when it was brought to my attention some two or three years ago.


David Henderson: I thought that if it extended to villages around Toronto, say five miles out, there was no reason why it should not extend 35 miles out, and include the village I am living in. I am glad to hear that we are all put on the same footing. I would like to hear from the hon. gentleman what he proposes to do with reference to guarantees.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: When I took office I found that the only system in vogue was a separate guarantee bond for each official. These bonds lasted a year, and it was quite a task to keep track of them, and also to get the bonds taken out in the first instance. I got parliament to authorize the establishment of an assessment system in the service itself, but did not transfer to that system all the insurance of every officer, but only a portion. By degrees, however, the system has been extended, and by the 30th June next we will cease taking the bonds of any guarantee company at all. A^, regards the postmasters, where the revenue of the office is $200 or less, it is optional with them to furnish a private bond or to subscribe to the assessment system, in which latter case they will have to pay 40 cents per $100 or 80 cents for the $200. We may practically consider that the whole service is now under the system with the exception of postmasters, the revenue of whose offices is $200 and under, and it is optional with them to join the system or not.


David Henderson: Then, the government practically bond their officers without reference to any guarantee company.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: At the end of the fiscal year the majority of the officers will be furnishing insurance on the assessment system. Some of the higher officers, who have to furnish a larger amount of security, are partly insured in the assessment system and partly in the guarantee company.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I understood the Postmaster General to say, in reply to the question as to whether he has made provision for the employment of a larger number of 122}
letter carriers, that he is going to ask for tenders for the collection of street letter boxes, and that the men who are now engaged in that work will be available to act as letter carriers. There will probably be eight or ten of these men available for that purpose, but so far as I can gather, that number is entirely inadequate. If the hon. gentleman will examine internally the Toronto post office, he will find that it is the biggest sweating shop in Canada.
The hon. member for Selkirk said that merchants from Winnipeg have to wait from four to five hours after the mails are received in the general post office, before they are delivered by the carriers. Well, it is a fact that merchants in Toronto send their messengers to the side door of the post office to get their mails rather than wait until the over-burdened letter carrier is able to reach them.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: What do you think should be the load of a letter carrier ?


Edward Frederick Clarke: That would depend upon the size of the man, and I do not know what the weight should be, but the letter carriers are pretty heavily la'den down, especially on the first delivery. As a matter of fact, they cannot complete their delivery in the time they were able to do it formerly. Merchants are compelled to have the letters brought by special messengers of their own rather than wait until the letter carrier reaches them. In some instances, the first delivery does not reach them until nine or ten o'clock. It is false economy not to employ a sufficient number of men to do the work promptly. It seems to me that if the hon. minister has the time to spare he should look into the situation, so far as the distribution is concerned in the city of Toronto.
I do not want to worry the hon. gentleman but would like to know what has become of the branch post offices. They appear to have dropped out of existence. We require pretty sharp eyes to find them out. We had several of them, and I believe the deputy postmasters received salaries equi-valentLto $500 or $600 a year, but their services have been dispensed with and others appointed on salaries from $100 to $200 a year. And instead of being in commodious, suitable places, these branch offices have been transferred, in many instances, to small places you can hardly find. Why was the change made? Was it to effect a saving in Ihe salaries? Was any complaint made as to the inefficiency of the men in this branch of the service ? Were they not discharging their duties satisfactorily? Or was the sole idea of dispensing with the services of these men and appointing others the saving of three or four hundred dollars a year in each case? The complaint, as the Postmaster General knows, was very general with re-

spect to the change of these branch post offices in Toronto. Complaints were made by friends of the hon. gentlemen opposite, as well as by those who are not so friendly, against the dismissal of these men, and the removal of their offices from their various locations.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: As to the last Inquiry, of what had become of the branch post offiees ?	1 would say
that the branch post offiees Were found to be largely engaged in so-called work which was not only useless, but was really an obstruction to the public service. Though the system of collection and delivery by special messengers existed in the city, yet some twenty or thirty branch post offices had been established to which people could go and post their letters, the branch postmaster taking possession of them, stamping them and tying them in bundles to be taken to the city post office, where the parcels had to be untied, and the letters re-stamped. This meant a wholly unnecessary handling of the letters. Experience has shown that the more hands letters pass through, the less security there is, as a rule. A recognized part of good management of a postal system is to have letters pass through as few hands as possible. It was considered in the public interest, as being more expeditious, not to have the letters pass into the hands of the branch postmasters but to have them taken from the ordinary receptacles by the collector and carried at once to the central office. With this change, the work of handling the letters was taken from the branch postmasters. The remaining portion of the work is of a comparatively trifling character. These should not be called branch post offices, because they are not such in the ordinary sense; the term is a misleading one. They sell postage stamps-which are to be found on sale in hundreds of places throughout the city-they receive registered letters and issue postal notes and money orders. That is about the extent of the work in these institutions.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I tried to follow the hon. Postmaster General closely. If I understand him, the letters instead of being posted in the branch post offices are posted in the pillars outside. But the letters have still to be collected from these receptacles as they were before, and there are as many collectors as there were before. I take it that the only difference in the work done by the branch postmasters is that they do not have to stamp the letters and send them to the general office.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: That was nine-tenths of their work-the handling of the letters. The public would hand letters to them, and the branch postmasters would act as postmasters and make up a mail on the central office. That was a wholly unnecessary procedure. We have


Mr CLARKE.: many letter boxes in Toronto and the letters dropped into them are simply taken by the collectors to the general office where they are stamped, and this one handling is sufficient.


Edward Frederick Clarke: All these branch post offices were supplied with letter boxes. Parties going in to buy stamps handed their letters to postmasters or dropped them into the boxes. Now, I understand,i they must go outside to drop the letter in the pillar outside the branch post office.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The ordinary boxes on the highway. My hon. friend knows that when they were dropped in the branch post office they were practically in the custody of the branch postmaster and were handled by him. That is not the case now-he cannot touch them. The letters go direct from the letter boxes through the bag of the collector, to the post office. They are not handled by the branch postmaster, and that unnecessary handling is dispensed with.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Is there an additional collection made from the pillars or large receptacles outside the branch post offices now as compared with the number of collections made before the branch post offices were dispensed with ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I cannot tell whether there has been an increase in the frequency of the collections. The practical working of the post office in Toronto is left in the hands of the staff there, and I do not think the hon. gentleman can expect me to tell him how many times a day these boxes are visited. I believe the boxes are visited frequently-I think more frequently thifn before. The hon. gentleman shakes his head, but I am sure he will not contradict what I say.


Edward Frederick Clarke: As the Postmaster General said he did not know anything about it, I thought! that perhaps


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I am sure there has been no reduction in the frequency of collections.


George Taylor: In the amount that the Postmaster General has asked the House to vote, has he made provision for the reopening of the post office at Marble Rock, a post office established some thirty years ago.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Where is it ?


George Taylor: Seven miles from Gan-anoque. A petition was presented to the Postmaster General not very long since, signed by over a hundred persons who received or would receive their mail at that office.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I will make a note of the inquiry and will be able-

to give my hon. friend the answer tomorrow.


George Taylor: Very well. 1 desire also to call the attention of the Postmaster General to what I consider an abuse of the postal service-the post office practically doing an express office business. Large departmental stores, as I understand, get the voters' lists of the various municipalities throughout the province, and to the names upon these lists they send catalogues. In response to a letter they will send a full set of samples of dry goods or to other articles, which they can send for a few cents. People make their selection, send their money and get the goods back by mail. This is a great injury to the country storekeeper, and, as I say amounts to the post office doing an express office business. A large portion of the mail now is made up of dry goods and other merchandise. The mails should be exclusively for mail matter and the post offices should not be the means of carrying on a retail and wholesale dry goods business.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: That is a very proper subject for consideration. But perhaps my hon. friend would not find public opinion at his back if he proposed to restrict the mails entirely to correspondence. That is not the practice either in the United Kingdom or in the United States. I do not know when the parcel system was inaugurated in Canada, but it was many years ago, and no change has been made in any respect since the present government took office. The abuse my hon. friend refers to has existed for many years. I do not remember having heard him take this point earlier. I doubt very much if public opinion would support us in refusing to allow small parcels to be sent through the mails. That would be a very sweeping change. A person can send a small parcel through the post office for a couple of cents, which he would have to pay 25 cents to send by an express company.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Referring to the question of wages brought up a few minutes ago by the hon. member for Prince Edward Island (Mr. Farquharson), I would suggest to the Postmaster General a change in the basis of paying for carrying the mails. At present in many country districts the mail is carried on horseback or with a vehicle, and I think the hon. gentleman would do well to pay so much per mile instead of as at present, paying a fixed price. Sometimes the mail carriage is given out by tender and sometimes it is not. When it is not given out by tender, of course the friends of the government get it, and when it is given by tender they have some other way of getting it. I remember the Postmaster General said five years ago in this House that all mail should be carried by public tender, he said he was going to do so, but he has not fulfilled his promise. He still keeps up
the system of giving that work to the friends of the government. I know one of his friends who is carrying the mail a distance of 26 miles, and it takes the whole day to make the trip back and forth, on a very bad road, and that man only gets $270 a year. He gets a starving price, a bankrupt price to carry that mail. I say, give him a little more, and let the man live. I know another place where the mail carrier carries the mail 6 miles. He leaves home in the morning about 9 o'clock and comes back in the afternoon at 5 o'clock. He has a horse and wagon, and that man gets $90 a year. How can a man live at such a price, maintain his horse, and keep up his wagon or sleigh for $90 a year ? At another place a man carries the mail 13 miles, or 26 miles the round trip. He leaves home in the morning at about 7 o'clock and gets back at 8 or 9 in the evening, by very rough roads. The Postmaster General should establish a price of so much per mile, as he gives railway companies so much per pound.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I am afraid that mileage system would hardly work. The law says that we shall give out the contracts, and award them to the lowest tenderer. When men tender I cannot go and increase the tender price for them. . If I did so, I think my hon. friend would very likely take exception to it. As to adopting the mileage system, it is to be borne in mind that many mail carriers do the business of carrying parcels and passengers as well as the mails. There are other districts, perhaps, which do not afford any such advantages.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: That is all right, but I would advise the hon. gentleman to do as he has been doing. The law says that he shall do one thing, and he does another, and so he could in reference to these mail carriers.


Robert Laird Borden: I would like to ask the Postmaster General whether the Morris street branch at Halifax has been closed, and if so, for what reason ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I am informed it has been discontinued as a branch office, and will be opened out shortly as a sub-office.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the distinction between a branch office and a sub-office ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Under the old system a branch office was, or might be, an independent post office. Mail matter was posted there and handled by the postmaster, and if people in the vicinity chose to go there they could get their letters. We have discontinued generally throughout Canada the system of branch offices, and are applying the free delivery system.


Robert Laird Borden: Will the public at these sub-offices be enabled to transact business in the same way as at the post office ? For example, can they get money orders ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Yes, they can buy postage stamps, money orders and postal notes, and deliver registered letters and get receipts for them, and do savings bank business.


Robert Laird Borden: At how early a date is it expected that office will be opened ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: At once, you may look for it daily.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Can the Postmaster General inform me what salaries were paid to branch postmasters prior to the 31st of December last, and what salaries are paid now?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I have not had the fixing of salaries before the 1st of January. There was an arbitrary sum being paid, that was not based upon any rule that I could discover. I suppose it was dependent on the amount of influence the postmasters had. As to the present system, a general scale of remuneration has been adopted, and a printed tariff; and keepers of'branch post offices were furnished with a copy of the terms upon which they could continue as keepers of the sub-offices. In most cases they have elected to continue on as keepers of the sub-offices.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What salaries were paid to keepers of these branch offices prior to the change referred to; what was the smallest salary paid under the old method ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: As I have said, there was no fixed salary. They were paid varying sums. The hon. gentleman will find in the report of the Postmaster General, that in the city of Toronto, sums were paid varying from $200 to $800 or $900. They are now paid according to a regular scale applicable to all.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Would it be possible to get the information from the hon. Postmaster General now. Could he say how much he is paying now ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There is a minimum allowance, by way of gratuity, for postmasters of $60. A postmaster is also paid one per cent upon the postage stamp sales, he is also paid a commission upon the sales of money orders and postal notes and a commission of one-quarter percent on the receipt of deposits.


Edward Frederick Clarke: His salary, or gratuity, is $60 a year ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He receives a gratuity of from $60 to $100. One Hon. Mr. MULOCK.
hundred dollars is the maximum of the allowance which covers any special inconvenience he may be put to. He also receives a commission on certain classes of business.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Has the person who has charge of the branch office to pay the rent of the building and give attendance, to issue money orders, registered letters and receive deposits for this amount ? Is he called upon to provide a suitable place and to pay the rent for which he receives $100 remuneration and a commission amounting to $50 or $100 ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: We do not employ persons who are not engaged in business as the keepers of sub offices. The sub offices are placed, as a rule, in charge of druggists and stationers. This does not involve an,increased size of building, extra equipment, or staff. The amount of business done at a sub" office is comparatively trifling and the keeper probably makes no addition to his expenses.


Mr. PUTTEE.: We, in the city of Winnipeg, for a couple of years have had these sub post offices. I remember that at the time the Board of Trade of Winnipeg and I first applied to the hon. Postmaster General for branch post offices such as they had in the city of Toronto, the hon. Postmaster General pointed out the serious drawbacks he had found in the department when operating these branch offices. He established five or six sub offices which have proved of great benefit. The public appreciate them very much. As far as we are concerned, as the city extends, we shall apply for more sub post offices. The people who keep these sub offices get very little for it. They admit that. I am doubtful if it actually pays the expenses but I notice that these offices are always given to tradesmen, that there is keen competition for them and I am also aware of the fact that they hang on to them so closely that it is hard even to change a location. I have been impressed with the idea that the system of sub post offices is the best system to operate. I would like to ask the hon. minister, in cities where there is a letter carrier service, is there any basis of apportioning the number of carriers according to the population. Is there any approximate relation between the population and the number of carriers that a city is allowed ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: No, the number of carriers is increased from time to time in accordance with the local demands. The officers in a city, report that they require additional assistance and that becomes the foundation for increases. The volume of business would not be the only basis because it is sometimes more difficult to serve one city than another. One city may extend over a greater area than another, or

one city may be more difficult to serve. Take the city of Quebec, for instance. Therefore, the volume of business, although it has a material influence, is not the only determining factor.


Arthur W. Puttee: Having reference to the complaint of the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Clarke) that there were not enough letter carriers in Toronto, which is probably correct, I want to state that I have looked through the civil service list and I have found that Toronto has 140 carriers and that in Winnipeg, according to the Civil Service list, there are only eighteen. Our population at the last census, and the actual population is greater than the census population, was over 44,000, which would give us one carrier to every 2,400 of the population. Upon that same basis Toronto would have a population of over 300,000. Whatever may be the position of affairs in Toronto we are exactly in the position that has been brought to the attention of the hon. Postmaster General by the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) that we cannot get any of the public services in the west to extend as rapidly as business and population increase. I have had great trouble and the postmaster in Winnipeg has had trouble to impress upon the post office department that there is need of a steady increase of the staff there. Two years ago when this matter was brought before the post office authorities it was not nearly^ so pressing as it is now. It was almost impossible then to conceive that the business which is being done to-day could be done without more accommodation and without an increase in the staff. I imagine that the business has increased more than fifty per cent. We have still only eighteen letter carriers. As a matter of fact there are some temporary men, as I presume there are in Toronto, but our city covers a large amount of ground, it is not an easy city for a letter carrier service and yet we have that limited number of carriers.


Albert Edward Kemp: Mr. Chairman, I did not understand from the Postmaster General whether the system which he intended to adopt in Toronto of having district post offices was a system which would be adopted generally in places where the business has increased. Is it intended to have a similar system in Montreal to that which it is proposed to establish in Toronto ; for instance, the system of having a post office in the west end at the corner of Queen and Abel streets, because of the inadequacy of the present post office ? Then, before he answers that question, I would like to ask him another. He said that he intends to sort letters for the western post office on the trains. Does he intend to divide the city up into districts numbered 1, 2 and 3, or A, B and C, and is it possible to have a staff of clerks on the trains coming in from all directions to handle the mail matter intended for district offices. Is this to be a general policy or is it to be a policy just for Toronto ? Is it intended to extend this policy and have other district post offices ? Is it the policy of the hon. gentleman to have more than one, or two or three post offices in large centres ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: As far as Toronto is concerned it is found that tlie post office now is not central. It is too far to the east. My hon. friend (Mr. Kemp) is familiar with the locality. It lias been found that there is a loss of time in the transfer of the mails from the station to the eastern part of the city in which the post office is situated; that is of those mails which are intended for the west. In like manner there is an unnecessary delay in transferring the mail matter from the west end to the station if it it has to go around bv the post office. By cutting off the Toronto post office from the route to be taken the mail matter which will come in by rail will arrive at station C in the west end much more quickly and we will be able to close the outgoing mails from the west much later. That office has been decided upon as the outcome of the situation there. It is in contemplation as well to have at least one more in the northerly part and perhaps one. or two coming around towards the east, but we cannot do it all at once. This one office will be equipped and I hope in working order towards the middle of July and my hope is that next year I will be permitted by parliament to make provision for another station at the next most convenient place in Toronto. As to Montreal, simultaneously with the arrangements being made for the establishment of a west end office in Toronto it was decided to inaugurate the system in Montreal by having a similar station in that city. The Minister of Public Works (Hon. Mr. Tarte) is in charge of the matter and I think has been negotiating for the selection of a suitable place as a site for it. I do not know whether there will be provision made in the estimates but that will appear when they come down. But Montreal is as much in need of a station as is Toronto, and I hope it will have one in the near future. The hon. gentleman asked me what the system of sorting it. The heaviest mails come in from the east arriving by the morning trains, and in order to enable these letters to go out on the first delivery in the morning, officers are sent down the night before by the night train to meet the upcoming train and to sort the letters for the letter carriers. That enables the letters to go out on the first delivery instead of on the second delivery as formerly. That is not yet necessary on the westerly trains, but should it be necessary that system will be adopted also.


Albert Edward Kemp: I do not think that it is the practice in the United States to have so

many different post offices in cities of the population of Montreal ana Toronto. I presume that the Postmaster General has given this matter a great deal of consideration, and I will have to bow to his decision, but it strikes me at first glance that the better system would be to have one central post office. If the Toronto post office is not now in the centre of the city according as the population has grown of late years, would it not be better to sell that property and build a large post office that would be a credit to the country, near the present centre of population, rather than to have so many small post offices scattered in different places. Has the Postmaster General considered the Question of this American advertising matter which comes through the post office at very low rates. I see the letter carriers bags overburdened with this useless matter, and I would like to know if it is carried at a less rate of postage in the United States than would be charged in Canada ?	[DOT]


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The newspaper rate in the United States is 100 per cent higher than in Canada.


Albert Edward Kemp: These are not newspapers, but large cards printed on one side with the address on the other.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: These would probably pass in the United States as post cards, which have the same rate here as in the United States, and according to the international arrangement, mail matter posted in the United States and directed to Canada must be delivered for the rate prevailing in the country of origin.


Albert Edward Kemp: What is the policy of the government as to branch post offices ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: These are the outgrowth of necessity, and when the conditions demand it an additional station is erected. The letter carriers for the districts assemble at these stations, and a great deal of time is saved by them in not having to go to the central post office and return to their beats. I think my hon. friend will see the wisdom of that feature.


Mr. BELL.: Experiments have been made in the United States in regard to rural delivery. Has the Postmaster General considered the application of that system to Canada ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I sent Mr. George Ross, assistant postmaster at Toronto, to the United States to study the system, and he was of opinion that it was not adaptable to Canada, which is a country of vast distances and rather sparse settlement. I do not think that the taxpayers of Canada would for a moment consent to the great expense which would be involved. Moreover, there is a very divided opinion as to its benefits in the rural dis-Mr. KEMP.
tricts of the United States, the contention being that the post office is used by farmers and others for the purchase of goods from larger cities, and the local merchants are not patronized as they were before. The system is not at all popular in some districts in the United States.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I am afraid I will have to withdraw my invitation to the Postmaster General to come to Montreal, because 1 notice that in Toronto, where he lives, the same abuses exist as in Montreal; but in Winnipeg, where the Postmaster General has not been, the conditions seem to be better. Perhaps living is more expensive in Winnipeg, but at all events the letter carriers are comparatively adequately paid.


Arthur W. Puttee: We are not satisfied.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It shows how these western people are difficult to satisfy. The smallness of the salaries paid to the letter carriers in Montreal and Toronto is a very real grievance.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) So it is everywhere.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Surely not where the hon. gentleman lives; living must be very cheap down there.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) I live in Halifax.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I find that in Winnipeg the majority of the letter carriers get a salary of $720 a year. The salaries of the letter carriers in Montreal are much too low. There is no sense in it at all; they are almost as bad as the salaries of our judges. In Montreal, I say, the delivery is not satisfactory, because I think the letter carriers are very badly organized, very poorly paid. The delivery is not what it should be in a large city. I have been in other cities where you couid drop a letter in the box, and tell to the hour almost when it would reach its destination. It is not so in Montreal by any means. You find letter carriers in Montreal getting $365, $390, $358, $367, $382, $308.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There is no officer getting $308.	'


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Here it is in the public accounts.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Not; for a year's work.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Yes, to be exact, $308.71 for a year's work. The man's name is Pacific, and the hon. Postmaster General must admit that he has to be very pacific indeed to live on that.


Mr. McEWEN.: Is that the highest ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No, there are some who receive $600-why ? Does the one who gets $308 not deliver as much as the others ? I say the salary is inadequate and the system is bad. It is a cause of complaint in

Montreal among a large class. I do not say that the Postmaster General should come there, because his residence in Toronto does not seem to have improved matters; but he should send down some one who can give us a remedy.


Richard Blain: Before the item is adopted, X would like the minister to make some statement in reference to the salaries paid to country postmasters, and as to whether the government are prepared to make any proposition to the House for paying them better ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The salaries paid to the country postmasters are in accordance with a scale adopted by my predecessor's in office. They maintained that scale for eighteen years, with the approval of the country, and I suppose also of my hon. friends who are now in opposition: and they have not yet explained to this House any changed circumstances which would call for a reduction of those rates.


Mr. WILSON.: The growing times.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I may say that there are a great many small post offices where the postmasters receive the whole revenue and more too. Post offices are found dotted all over the country-almost too close to each other, as my hon. friend from Queen's, P.E.I. stated a little while ago. Does my hon. friend from Peel (Mr. Blain) propose that a person who keeps a post office the gross revenue of which is only $10 or $15 a year, shall be paid more than $15 ? In many cases the postmaster himself is the chief gainer, because he has the mails brought to his house instead of having to go for them to a post office a mile or so away. If the public insists on post offices being so close together, there must be small salaries paid. In reality, these alre only nominal allowances, the offices themselves doing a merely nominal business.


Richard Blain: Would the hon. minister state about what the average pay of a country postmaster is in the western part of Ontario ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The pay is based on the revenue of the office. Up to a revenue of $800 the postmaster receives 40 per cent of the gross receipts. He also gets some small commissions on money orders, postal notes and savings bank business; but these make a rather trifling amount. When the revenue is in excess of $800 and up to $10,000, he gets 25 per cent on the excess ; and if it is over $10,000 he is paid 15 per cent on the excess.
offices which have been opened perhaps for the convenience of half a dozen people, the postmaster being the chief beneficiary. These offices are only doing a nominal post office business, perhaps averaging only a letter a, day, and the postmasters are paid a nominal fee. That has been the invariable practice in Canada, and I presume it will continue for all time. I do not know what my hon. friend's idea would be for paying postmasters. You could not, I suppose, offer a man a lower salary then say $100 a year. At that rate you would pay $1,000 postmasters $100,000, while the revenue from their offices would perhaps be only $10,000. I do not think the country would justify our opening those offices on such conditions.


Richard Blain: I am sure that the Postmaster General's statement will not be satisfactory to the farming community of the province of Ontario. It is all very well for tlie minister to say that he found a certain state of things existing when he came into office. I would remind him that he has been making many changes, some of which have been approved of by the people of Canada; but many of his changes have been in the direction of benefiting the cities almost exclusively. Who gets the greatest benefit of the reduction of the postage from 3 cents to 2 cents ? Is it not the banking institutions, the large loan companies, the merchants and manufacturers of this country ? These are the people who have been getting the chief advantage of the changes which the hon. minister has made. If it is true, as I think it is, that in some parts of Ontario there are too many post offices, that is a matter that ought to concern the hon. minister himself, and he should give it some consideration. If there are too many, he should reduce the number and equip the offices, and pay the postmasters proper salaries. The farmers in Ontario are now engaged in a different kind of work from what they were engaged in twenty years ago. They are supplying butter and small produce to the larger cities, and for that reason require to go to the post office every day for their mail matter. Therefore, the minister should seriously consider the advisability of re-adjusting the condition of things in the country districts, so that the farmers may have a better service, and not be called upon to contribute a special amount to the country postmasters, as they are in many parts of Ontario at present. No doubt the hon. minister has been considering this question, but what I complain about is his want of action in giving the farmers better mail service in the province of Ontario.


Richard Blain: >Is it not a fact that there are a large number of postmasters in country districts who get salaries ranging' from $10 to $25 a year ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of small


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: My hon. friend complains that we are doing more for the cities and less for the rural districts, but he will only have to wait a few minutes to hear a different story from the representatives of the cities. He suggests that there

should be a reduction in the number of post offices and larger salaries paid the postmasters remaining. Would the hon. gentleman like me to give any attention to the county of Peel and reduce the number of post offices there ? Would it be far more satisfactory to the farmers of Peel to drive a longer distance for them mails than they do now and pay higher salaries to the postmasters. It may be that in the hon. gentleman's county the farmers are so philanthropic that they believe that the offices exist for the benefit of the postmasters. Elsewhere, however, the idea prevails that these offices exist for the general public. Surely the hon. gentleman is not serious when he proposes a reduction in the number of post offices. He may rest easy, however, in his mind as regards the county of Peel, for I do not purpose to close any of the post offices there or elsewhere. Let me tell the hon. gentleman that I do not believe he could get any of the people to consent to the closing up of one office out of a thousand in the whole Dominion, however, unnecessary these offices might be. Once post offices are established and the people have become accustomed to them, they insist on their being kept open. I have had not only to open up new offices but to carry on those which were established by the late government, even in places where perhaps they were not actually required. There has been no such serious change in the mode of carrying on business to-day as calls for a greater increase in the number of post offices in close proximity than existed five years ago in the rural districts. I am quite as familiar with the methods of doing business in the rural districts as my hon. friend, and with the conditions in Ontario, and I think that the farmers are in favour of a multiplicity of small offices. When a man, for his own sake, or that of his neighbours allows his farm house on the road side to be used as a post office, he does not, as a rule, expect any substantial remuneration, although quite willing to take it should it come his way.


Mr. UP AIN.: Let me remind the hon. minister that he has already given some consideration to the county of Peel by cutting off the heads of some of the postmasters in that county.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I did hot close the offices.


Richard Blain: No, but the hon. gentleman cut some of their heads off, without any complaint being made against the postmasters at all. He need not therefore expect to create any apprehension by saying that he might bring further consideration to the county of Peel. No doubt he will do that in any case, in the general conduct of his business. I am quite sure that the hon. gentleman did not wish to misquote me. I did not say that the post offices should be reduced in Ontario.


Hon. Mr. MULOCK.: 


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: You argued that way.


Richard Blain: I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon. What I did say is that the question should get the consideration of the minister, and if he found that there were too many post offices in the province of Ontario, it would be his duty to reduce the number.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I am quite satisfied that there are too many, and I am perfectly satisfied that if I took the hon. gentleman's own riding I would find too many there. Would he wish me to close any of the post offices in that county because I thought there were too many.


Richard Blain: I might tell the hon. minister that he could begin with his own county. I had a drive through his county a short time ago, and the gentleman who accompanied me pointed out where the hon. minister had opened up several post offices in North York, for some very peculiar reasons which I will not weary the House with at present. When the hon. gentleman says I am not in earnest, I wish to correct him. I am in earnest, and I might remind him that many of his own supporters in the county of Peel have written me complaining of the condition of things, complaining that the minister gives special consideration to the large manufacturing establishments and the large financial and banking institutions, but does not give the same consideration to the farmers by furnishing them with a proper postal service in the province of Ontario. Let the hon. gentleman come to the county of Peel if he wishes, and make such arrangements as will bring about a better system of postal service for the people of that county, and I will be very glad to give him what assistance I can. But I would like him to see that there are no postmasters who work twelve months in the year and only get from $10 to $14 for their services.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The hon. gentleman complains that the reduction in postage favours certain classes and not others. He has argued that that reduction inures only to the benefit of the large banking establishments and manufacturers, but that the farmers get no advantage.


Richard Blain: I did not make any such statement.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Then what is the hon. gentleman complaining about ? If he thinks that the whole advantage derived from the reduction of postage rates accrues to the inhabitants of large cities, he is mistaken. Only one-third of the postal revenue is derived from the cities. Two-thirds is derived outside the cities, so that two-thirds of the advantage accrues to the rural districts. Every one who senus a letter, be he a farmer or a millionaire, nas a corresponding advantage. If my hon. friend means to say that he represents a

constituency, the farmers in which never write letters, he would be correct in saying that they get no advantage from the reduction of postage. But if, like other farmers, they make a reasonable use of the mails, they get the same relative advantage as other Canadian citizens.


Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.).: I think the county of Peel has been pretty well aired between the Postmaster General and its representative, and it is time that we should be allowed a few minutes for the other counties. The complaint is general that the amount received by the postmasters throughout the Dominion is very small, but there is no use to expect any increase while there is such a large deficit in the postal revenue.
1 look to the time when there will be a surplus, and then we will make a general raid on the Postmaster General for the increase of the salaries of the postmasters throughout the Dominion. In Nova Scotia, before confederation, when I represented my county for eight years, the direct salaries paid to postmasters were much better than they are now. Postmasters were paid salaries according to the services performed, but now they are paid a certain percentage.
I do not think any person wants to reduce the number of post offices in his own couuty, but the desire would be to increase them in several instances. So far, in all my appeals to the Postmaster General, I find that we cannot make any impression upon him. He is very pleasant when in the House, but when you want a particular favour from him for your own county, he is pretty rigid. In fact, there is no elasticity in him at all. I hope that after this he'will be a little more elastic and that we shall be able to get our daily mail betweeu Baddeck and Englishtown for which I have been ipleadidg all this time.


Mr. ROBINSON (Elgin).: I hope the Postmaster General wall take the cue from the hon. members wTho nave spoken of reducing the post offices. You may do it in some of the counties where the people do not read and write, but I hope you will not attempt to reduce the number of post offices in my county. Most of the farmers in that county take a daily paper, and I am sure you will be doing them an injustice if you do not make it convenient for them to get that paper. As to the farmers contributing toward the expense of the post office, I think the farmers already contribute their share. They help to keep up the merchants, the bankers and others "who are benefited by cheap postage. Now as to the centralizing of post offices in large cities, I know that St. Martins le Grand in Old London is the head post office, and the only large post office in that city of over four millions of people, but I have never heard of any suggestion of a change because the city has
grown west. It seems to me it would be folly to tear down the post offices in Toronto and Montreal because they_ are not in the present centres of those cities. I do not think it would be1 wise for the government to spend more money building more post offices when those now in existence will do, even though they are not in the centre, of the city. I think that it would be much to the public advantage to have a system of free delivery in cities of from ten to twelve thousand inhabitants. Much time is wasted by people trudging to the post office, it may toe miles, two or three times a day to look into their boxes and see if there is anything for them. It js time that in these large towns postal matter should be delivered two or three times a day. I am pleased to see the reduction in postage. But there is one point worthy of consideration. I was in the little post office in my neighbourhood a few nights ago, and I saw the postmaster putting circulars into almost every box. He handed one to me. These were circulars from the United States that had come in a large bundle, each circular bearing a one cent stamp. Our government got no revenue from that. I asked the postmaster if he had sent the names of parties in that neighbourhood to the firm, and he said he thought they had secured a copy of the voters' list. We are carrying free a large amount of mail matter for the purpose of advertising quack medicines from otlier places, and I think it is time we had a change. The Postmaster General talks a great deal about plans that existed eighteen years ago. He talks back to hon. gentlemen on this side because he found such and such a system in existence when he took office. But you know we have had a growing time since then, and people have to pay a good deal more for everything they get. I do not know but that the Postmaster General should have a little of that growing time for the villages. The postmasters in towns and cities are well paid, and do little work. It would be a good thing if we could get some of this money from the cities and towns and give it to the rural districts.


David Henderson: As to the view taken by the Postmaster General of the statement made by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Blain) I do not for one moment under-stand'the hon. member for Peel as agitating for a reduction in the number of post offices in that county. I understand the remark to have a more general application, perhaps to the whole province. There may be some counties which have too many post offices while some may have too few. For example, the county of North York, the constituency represented by the Postmaster General, has secured recently a number ot new post offices. But if the matter were equalized, probably Peel would have got one post office while North York might have got two. I take it that the remarks of the

lion, member for Peel were intended to have general application, and not by any means-


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I suppose they were to apply to every place but Peel.


David Henderson: They were to have a general application. As to my own county, the Postmaster General since he came into office has been very generous. We have had only one post office closed. And I may tell the Postmaster General now, that I think it was a mistake to close that post office, for the simple reason that it was on a mail route, the carrier passed it every day in the year, and could just as well supply that office as not. The only difference, I suppose, would be that the postmaster would be paid at the rate of about $10 a year for keeping the post office open.
I am one who favours the extension of the postal system in the rural districts, and have advocated that time and again. I believe the reduction of postage from 3 cents to 2 cents is of far greater benefit to the large centres of population than it is to the rural districts, and that the rural districts, the farmers especially, have to make up the deficiency in the revenue of the postal system. For I do not expect ever to see the revenue of the Post Office Department meet the expenditure. I tell the Postmaster General plainly that 1 do not hope to see it. I think it would be a mistake to try to attain such an end. There is no more reason why the Postal Department should be made self-sustaining than there is why the Intercolonial Railway, which cost us $13,000,000 in five years more than the revenues accruing from it should be self-sustaining. There is no more reason why the post office should be self-sustaining than there is why the Department of Public Works should be self-sustaining. Who would think of making the St. Lawrence route pay ? We do not expect to get enough out of the canals to pay the interest on the expenditure we have made on that route. Why should we expect the Post Office Department, which interests every man, woman and child in the country, to be selfsustaining ? Why not give that department a more extended operation and bring it within the reach of every person, even if it costs more money, and let the deficit be charged to the general revenue of the country the same as the deficiency in other departments is made a general charge ? 1 believe the Postmaster General would find that system approved of toy the country even if it did cause a larger deficit.
I find that in 1891 the number of post offices was 8,061, and in 1896 there were 9,103, an average yearly increase of 208 offices. The hon. gentleman was making some comparisons with his predecessors, and I desire to make this comparison with his predecessors, who established on an average 208 new post offices a year during the period of five years before going out of Mr. HENDERSON.
power. Now what did the hon. gentleman do ? He came into power and attempted to do what no Postmaster General in this country has done since Confederation, because every year since Confederation we have had a deficit in the Post Office Department, and I do not look for anything else, in the near future at any rate. The hon. gentleman, in his efforts to make revenue and expenditure meet, commenced the system of curtailing the number of offices he was opening up, and in some cases struck off offices that he found in existence, notwithstanding the great development we hear of, especially in new Ontario, where so many offices will be required. The hon. gentleman found 9,103 offices in existence when he came into power in 1896, and on the 1st of July, 1901, he has only 9,834 offices, or a yearly increase of 14G, 'instead of 208 under his predecessor. I tell the hon. gentleman plainly that if he is going to make revenue meet expenditure simply by curtailing the service, I do not think he will meet with the approval of the people. What the people want is a better service, a more extended service, even if it costs more money. The revenue from the Post Office Department increased $630,000 under the old 3 cent rate, between 1891 and 1S96. From 1896 to 1901 the revenue increased $625,000. The increase during the last five years was not as large by $5,000 as it was in the previous five years. Of course that may be owing to a reduction in the rate of postagg. The deficit in the Post Office Department, I say, must be made up from the general revenues of the country. The farmers are called upon to contribute through customs duties and otherwise to make up that deficit, and they do not derive the same benefit pro rata from the reduced postage that the people do in large centres of population. Therefore, I say they ought to have a better postal accommodation accorded to them. Where there were two mails a week, they should have three where they have three mails a week give them a daily mail. Where new post offices are required by the new conditions of things mentioned by the hon. member for Peel, on account of the changed occupation of the people from being simply growers of grain to producers of small commodities that require to be sent daily to market, where the farmers want to be in daily touch with the great centres through their newspapers and letters -I say this new condition of things requires in many rural districts that there should be more post offices. I was very anxious a year ago to have a post office opened in my county, because the hon. gentleman had closed one, and I thought it was only fair that he should open another in a section of the country where the people largely grow small fruits, and they pleaded that as a reason why they should have better postal accommodation. I hope the hon. gentleman will reconsider that application; and do

something for the rural section generally in order to compensate them for what they are contributing to pay postage for these business centres. I would be the last to complain about an increased deficit if it was caused by an increase in the number of post offices. There is another point mentioned by the hon. member for Leeds. I would like to ask the minister if he has ever made a calculation whether the government is losing money by carrying small packages of dry goods from large mercantile establishments in the cities. Take a parcel weighing four pounds, for instance, at one cent per four ounces, the postage would be 16 cents. Such a parcel sent from Toronto to Vancouver would cost 16 cents.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The rate on general merchandise is one cent an ounce. But there are plenty of other articles carried at the rate the hon. gentleman quotes.


David Henderson: I was going to ask the hon. gentleman if he has ever made a calculation as to whether the department does not pay the railway more for carrying that parcel than he receives in stamps ? I am under the impression that the department is losing money, and if that is the case there would be no hardship whatever in doubling the rate on such parcels.


Mr. MCLENNAN.: I hope the Postmaster General will not apply the suggestion of the hon. member for Peel so far as the county of Inverness is concerned. It is a large farming county, and I am afraid the people of that county are not so altruistic as the people of the county of Peel are represented to be, who are willing to walk two or three miles to post a letter in order that one of their number may be adequately paid for keeping a post office. I would also remind the Postmaster General that the county of Inverness has special claims upon his attention; and I desire to tell him that, like my hon. friend from Victoria, I propose laying siege to him before the session is over in order to get more post offices. In answer to a question I asked in the House last year, he gave the very gratifying answer that .$5,000 a year was saved in the postal service of Inverness since 1896, as compared with a like previous period. With that satisfactory record I hope the hon. gentleman will give the people of that county better postal accommodation.


George Taylor: I see that a number of postmasters, besides being paid a salary, are allowed a rent allowance. Now what must be the revenue of the post office in that case ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Eight hundred dollars.


George Taylor: There is no rent allowance allowed to any postmaster unless the revenue amount to $800 ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: That Is
the rule, I understand. I am not aware of any exception.


George Taylor: Does that apply to branch post offices in the city ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The hon. gentleman is asking me about a rent allowance made to postmasters. These sub-offices are not. post offices in the full sense of the word.


George Taylor: There are post offices that are given a rental allowance and as I am informed by the Postmaster General the revenue must amount to $800 a year before a rental allowance is made. I think that rule is not strictly adhered to in every particular.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I do not think I have varied from it. If there are any exceptions they have been made before I took office. If my hon. friend will call my attention to any particular cases I will look into them.


George Taylor: The hon. Postmaster General made the statement a few minutes ago that the revenue from the cities amounted to only one-third of the gross revenue of the post office department and that the other two-thirds was derived from the towns, villages and rural constituencies. The argument of the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Blain) is that the reduced postage is not a benefit to the farmer. That is his argument and that is my argument, and the hon. Postmaster General corroborates that by saying that one-third of the revenue comes from the cities and two-thirds from the towns, villages and rural municipalities. Therefore, it would be fair to assume that one-third comes from the towns and villages and one-third from the rural population. If the post office was a self-sustaining institution, then, the rural municipalities would benefit pro rata with the merchants, manufacturers and bankers, but when it has a deficit of half a million, or a million, as it probably will have this year, who pays the taxation ? If the cities pay one-third of the revenue, if the towns and villages pay one-third and the rural municipalities pay one-third, the farmers pay three-fourths of the taxation and therefore they have to pay three-fourths of the deficit that will occur in the administration of the Post Office Department. The farmers, no matter whether they write a few letters or not and receive the slight abatement from the reduction of postage, have to pay more in proportion to make up the abatement they receive than the manufacturers and merchants of the country, so that while the post office is a losing concern, the farmers are the parties who are paying the largest proportion to make up that revenue.


Samuel Hughes: I would draw the attention of the committee to the fact

that the hon. Postmaster General represents a little bit of a county and that in his riding he has thirty-nine post offices, whereas the great county of Peel, represented by my hon. friend (Mr. Blain) has only thirty-eight.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yet he wants to close them up.


Richard Blain: No, he does not. ,


Samuel Hughes: He wants to close up unnecessary post offices in ridings like North York.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The riding of North York is a gerrymandered riding representing pieces of different counties and so inaccessible that it is necessary to supply a large amount of accom-modaton.


Samuel Hughes: I should say that as the hon. Postmaster General gets returned regularly it is a gerrymandered riding. I find that in the county of Inverness there 155 post offices. I wonder if that is a gerrymandered riding.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: What is the length of the riding ?


Angus McLennan: It is 140 miles long and 50 miles wide.


Samuel Hughes: That is a small riding. I have the honour of representing a riding much larger in every way yet we have only one-third of the post offices and a people much more given to reading. What I rose to ask the hon. Postmaster General about is the matter to which I drew his attention a few days ago. It is the removal of a post office from the centre of popu-laion to one side of a settlement.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: What is the name of it ?


Samuel Hughes: Head Lake.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The papers have been forwarded to the inspector but his report has not been received.


David Henderson: I would like to ask the hon. Postmaster General to say whether he has ever made any calculation in regard to the cost of sending parcel letters long distances to ascertain whether the government really loses money or gains money in carrying mail matter of this kind, practically merchandise, because I do not think there would be any hardship if the government were actually losing money in the rate being doubled so as to compensate the department for the outlay.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: At the present time statistics on this point are being gathered throughout the whole of the Dominion. It will be some time in June before the weighing is completed, but we are studying that question now. The parcel


Samuel Hughes: post rates are unsatisfactory in many respects. Some of the rates are arbitrarily fixed by Act of parliament, other rates are fixed by the Postmaster General and in short, the rates are to-day in an unsatisfactory condition.


Robert Laird Borden: Before the item is adopted I would like to ask the hon. Postmaster General about the dismissal of two postmasters in my county. Mr. David Mitchell, of Jeddore, and Mr. Robert Raul-bach, of Middle Musquodoboit. Gan he tell me if they were dismissed and if so for what reason ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I will give the hon. gentleman the information to-morrow.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I would like to ask the hon. Postmaster General, if, in this vote, provision has been made to give statutory increases to the third-class clerks and letter carriers who have not reached the maximum sum in their different classes.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The supplementaries will deal with that branch of the expenditure.


Edward Frederick Clarke: There is no provision in this vote ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There may be some small increases, but the report was not ready when these estimates were prepared, and the increases were not dealt with when the main estimates were sent over to council. But, these estimates contain increases in all cases in which the salaries are under $800. They are provided for in these estimates.


Mr. AVERY.: Is it the intention of the hon. Postmaster General to raise the salaries of the postmasters in the rural districts where they are so poorly paid ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: My hon. friend (Mr. Avery) has missed a most valuable and instructive debate on that question. We have had it before the committee for some time and I would say that there is no policy in that direction at the present time.


Robert Laird Borden: The complaint of these men is that the quantity of work under the new postal rate has increased, while their salaries have been diminished.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There has. been no diminution.


Robert Laird Borden: The postmasters in my own county have told me the reverse. They say their salaries are paid to a certain extent by commission.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: When the rate of postage was reduced, instructions were given that whatever salaries they were receiving before the reduction they should continue to receive.


Robert Laird Borden: Then some of them who have spoken to me on the subject cannot understand it that way, because they tell me they get less than before, and have more work to do. I particularly wish to bring to the attention of the Postmaster General that in Halifax, one letter carrier has a salary of $336.77 a year; another, $375; another, $373; another, $331.96; and another $375. Is this salary which is set out in the public accounts the total amount they receive for the year ? At what rate of pay do they enter the service ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: A letter carrier is entitled by law to receive the minimum of $360 a year on entering the service. The policy is to appoint letter carriers who have passed the examination but where there are none such, temporary letter carriers may be put on.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the yearly increase ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: At present it is $30, and if a man enters the service at $360, it would take him eight years to attain the maximum, but under the Bill which I have submitted to parliament, a letter carrier on entering the service will remain for six months probationary at a salary of $1.25 a day, or $390 a year. At the end of six months he will be confirmed in his position if he is deserving and get $1.50 per day, or $400 a year; after two years he will get $1.75 a day, or about $540 a year, and at the end of the fourth year he will get $2 a day.


Mr. JOHNSTON (Cape Breton).: In confirmation of what the hon. leader of the opposition has said, I desire to state that in my own constituency I have almost^ positive knowledge that the salaries paid to postmasters some years ago were a little in excess of the salaries they receive to-day. For what reason the salaries have been reduced I am at a loss to know.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: That is quite an error.


Alexander Johnston: I am delighted to hear that, but I think I cau produce evidence to show that what I state is the fact, and if I do produce such evidence I shall expect to know from the Postmaster General the reason for the reduction.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Of course, salaries are sometimes reduced for different causes. If my hon. friend can produce a single instance where a postmaster's salary was reduced simply because of the reduction in the rates, the department will feel bound to recoup the amount. When the reduced postage Bill was going through, I stated that the government did not intend to reduce the salaries should the revenues decrease. I only know of one instance where a reduction took place contrary to that rule, and in that case the amount that was reduced was repaid.


David Henderson: I quite well remember the statement made by the Postmaster General with regard to the salaries of country postmasters. But I desire to call his attention to the fact that the rule which he announces has not been adhered to. I can give him the name of the post office in the village of Acton in which I live as an example of that. I cannot suppose for one moment that the revenue of that post office has been reduced because that village has about 300 more people than it had in 1891; the surrounding country is equally well populated, and the manufacturing industries are as extensive now as they were then. I do not think the revenue from that post office has been reduced, but the salary of the postmaster has been reduced.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: We will look into it.


David Henderson: Thank) you. If the Postmaster General will look into that one and find that I am correct, I will give him the name of another postmaster similarly situated, because I think the hon. gentleman intends to do what is fair with these postmasters.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Are the commissions paid now, the same as before ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Yes.


Mr. MARCIL (Bonaventure).: It has been well said that the country does not expect the post office to be a revenue producing department. It is, of all the departments of government, the one which comes nearest to the people. Those of us who represent outlying regions far removed from large cities-I may say that my own county of Bonaventure is 180 miles long-those of us who represent such constituencies know how much our electors appreciate the post office, and they certainly have reason to thank the present Postmaster General for the great improvements which he has made in the postal service. The Post Office Department is to a great extent an educational agency in so far as it contributes to the diffusion of literature and newspapers amongst the people. Though newspapers may in some cases be looked upon with no very great favour, yet we know how glad we are to see a newspaper when we are far removed from the centres of population. The Post Office Department has done very satisfactory work under the present minister, but I would like the hon. gentleman to consider whether it is not possible to have newspapers more cheaply distributed through the mails in the rural districts. The newspaper proprietors are at present weighed down by a very heavy postage tax, and I would ask the Postmaster General to give this subject his consideration during the recess, and to endeavour if possible to reduce the postage rate on newspapers. We all know that almost the only means of communication which the people who live far from large centres have with the outside

*world is through the newspapers. They are a great educational agency and their diffusion should be encouraged by all means possible ; and the Post Office Department ean do more towards that work than probably any other department of the government.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I would like to say a word about the mail service between the Magdalen Islands and the mainland. As you are well aware, comunication is closed there from the beginning of December till about the 15th of April. This year navigation was opened on the 7th of April, but that is quite unusual. Every year I am asked by my electors to obtain for them an extra mail between Pictou and the Magdalen Islands during the early part of April. The people of the Magdalen Islands, 5,000 or 0,000 in number, would like the Postmaster General to send one of the government steamers with the mails, because the merchants and the canners there are very anxious to begin their business early. This year I called the attention of the hon. Postmaster General to this matter, and he promised that he would consider it very seriously ; and I hope that next year we shall have a steamer to take the mails to the Magdalen Islands in the early part of April. As I see the hon. Minister of Public Works in his seat, I may say that we have a cable system connecting the Magdalen Islands with the mainland at Meat Cove in Gape Breton. This is the only means of communication the people of the Magdalen Islands have during the winter, and it has been suggested that while navigation is closed the government should give them a telegraph mail rate, of say 10 cents and postage for 25 words between Magdalen Island and Meat Cove or North Sydney, to which place correspondents would post their matter. This cable does not pay, and it Is not supposed to be a paying institution. It is used only for government business, and 'the ordinary rate is quite high. So I think it would be a good thing if the hon. Minister of Public Works, who is so progressive, would think of my poor electors, who cannot communicate during the winter months with their relatives on the mainland, and grant them a special telegraph mail rate.


George Taylor: The Postmaster General, in answer to my inquiry a few moments ago as to where the rental allowances began, told me that the amount of revenue must be $800. If he will turn to his report in reference to Ontario, he will find that at the post office of Emsdale the receipts are $456, and the postmaster gets a salary of $295, and an allowance of $40 for fuel and rent. Then, at me very next post office. Enterprise, the receipts are $475, and the postmaster gets a salary of $210, and no allowance for fuel or rent, so that I fancy there is a political friend of the minister in that post office of the village of Newboro, the


Charles Marcil: receipts are $654, and there is a salary of $330, a forward allowance of $30, and an allowance for fuel and rent of $40. In neither of these cases has the sum of $800 been reached. I find the same thing all through, In Nova Scotia and New Brunswick as well as in Ontario.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I will say to the hon. gentleman that never once have I authorized a departure from the rule that has been laid down ; and if my hon. friend now desires it, I will instruct the department to go through the list and in every case apply the rule. Many cases of this kind I found in existence and left there; but these are not advantages to our friends ; they are advantages which our predecessors granted, and therefore it is reasonable to suppose they were not made to benefit the Liberal party. My hon. friend knows about Newboro. I know nothing about that, but I will look into it, and I will apply the rule generally if my hon. friend desires.


George Taylor: I can assure the hon. gentleman that he will not apply it to Newboro, because the postmaster there is me secretary of the Reform Association.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: How long has he been postmaster there ?


George Taylor: I have been member for the county for 20 years, and he was postmaster when I was first elected, and he is yet.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: This allowance was made before I was Postmaster General.


George Taylor: Although he was a most active partisan against me in every election, while the Conservative government was in power, and I could have had him displaced as an offensive partisan, yet I never interfered with him, because he was within his right. But the hon. gentleman has dismissed many postmasters in my county.


William Humphrey Bennett: May I ask the hon. Postmaster General if Mr. LeSueur is still in the service ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He has been recommended for superannuation. The recommendation went to council some time ago.


William Humphrey Bennett: May I ask the hon. Postmaster General what age Mr. LeSueur has arrived at, and the reason for his superannuation ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He has arrived at the age of 60 years, and the reason for his superannuation is enfeebled health. He applied for supperannuation some two or three years ago, and I asked him to remain in the service, if possible, for a couple of years. He repeated his request, and finally last fall I yielded to it. He told me he was in reduced health, that ihe was suffering, I

think, from disease of the heart, and required rest. I acceded to his request and made the recommendation.


William Humphrey Bennett: I understand that Mr. LeSueur is still in the service ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He is not in harness but has been recommended for superannuation.


William Humphrey Bennett: What would be the amount of his superannuation allowance, and the salary of his successor ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He has been over forty years in the service and would be entitled to 70 per cent of his salary. Of course, the appointment of a successor could not go through until Mr. LeSueur is superannuated, but his successor will be Mr. William Smith, who has been recommended at the initial salary of ?1,800, which is that of a chief clerk. Mr. LeSueur was appointed in February, 1856, and has therefore now been in office 46 years.


William Humphrey Bennett: Was Mr. Smith a senior in the office, and in what grade ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He is a first-class clerk, and entered the service in 1878. He was appointed in 1876, but I am told that he was only appointed to the Ottawa inside service about 1883 or 1884.


William Humphrey Bennett: He has every qualification I assume ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I recommended him because of his fitness.


William Humphrey Bennett: Is he the gentleman who distinguished himself in the preparation of a book commonly known as the private letters of Sir Adolphe Caron ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Never heard of the book.


William Humphrey Bennett: The Postmaster General's memory is singularly at fault. He must remember with what a flourish of trumpets he published at one time a blue-book consisting of private letters, which had been laid aside by Sir Adolphe Caron when he went out of office, and which comprised correspondence of a very private character. Might I ask the Postmaster General if he now remembers the book to which I refer?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I never heard of any book of the name mentioned by the hon. gentleman. I remember an official book published as an appendix to the Postmaster General's report, containing very useful information of a public character, which the public had a right to. Mr. Smith rendered useful assistance, as did other clerks, in the details of that work.


William Humphrey Bennett: Mr. Smith was credited with having been the chief compiler of that 123
book. In what year did Mr. Smith come to Ottawa ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I am told in 1883.


William Humphrey Bennett: Was he the senior in the office or were there other clerks, his seniors, available for the position ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Mr. Smith was recommended because of his special fitness. In the opinion of myself and the deputy, there was nobody in the department as well qualified. At present he is in Newfoundland, where he has been some months putting the postal service of that country into a satisfactory condition. As soon as he is relieved from that work and his appointment goes through Council here, he will be put in Mr. LeSueur's place.


Mr. COCHRANE.: I wonder whether he is preparing another work down there.


Mr. KENDALL.: I would like to endorse the remarks of my hon. friend from Gaspe (Mr. Lemieux). I happen to be somewhat acquainted with the Magdalen Islands, having lived among the people a certain time, and taken a considerable interest in them, these islands have been inhabited since about 140 years, and at present the population is about 6,000. During four months of the year these people are cut off from communication with the mainland. There is a telegraph system connecting with the island, which is owned by the government, but the rates are very high, and it seems to me that it would be only reasonable for the government to allow the people to send their messages at much lower rates than are charged at present. The government has to keep a full staff in constant employment, and it would not add materially to the expense of operating the line if messages were transmitted at lower rates.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It would bring revenue.


Arthur Samuel Kendall: And no doubt it would add to the revenue. Another point I would like to make, is that the present steamship service from Pictou to the Magdalen Islands might be made much more valuable, if for a certain length of time the steamship was sent from North Sydney instead of from Prince Edward Island, particularly during the later part of March and April. I wish to endorse the remarks made by my hon. friend from Gaspe. If members of the cabinet could only visit the islands and see the conditions under which those people live, they would appreciate to some extent the difficulties from which they suffer, and I am sure 'would make provision as far as possible for better service.


George Taylor: I would like to ask the hon. minister if the law does not require a person asking superannuation to make application in writing and have it aecom-



panied by a certificate from two medical doctors that he is unable to perform his duties. Did Mr. LeSueur make an application in writing, and accompany it by the necessary medical certificate ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He made an application in writing, but when an officer is oyer sixty years of age, he may be retired for other reasons than ill health, and no medical certificate is required. I have given the reasons why he wants to be retired and he has made application in writing.


Charles Marcil: In connection with the Magdalen Islands, I would ask the hon. minister to remember that those people are deprived during four months of the year of newspapers and letters. The splendid postal service which we enjoy is of no avail to them whatever during that period. There is a cable telegraph service, but the rates are almost prohibitive. The people of the islands have to endure great hardships. They have no railway facilities and are deprived of most of the benefits enjoyed by citizens in other parts of Canada, and surely it is not much to ask that they be given the privilege of using the cable at the lowest possible rate. If the Minister of Public Works will give the matter his attention, he will admit at once that what my hon. friend from Gaspfi has asked for is most reasonable and should be granted, and it would tend to increase the revenue from that cable, which to-day is only a few hundred dollars. The cable is very seldom used because the rates are too" high, but -the government have to employ a staff to work the cable, and might as well reduce the rates and give the people the advantage. If the hon. minister will just consider that during four months of the year these -people are without a newspaper or a letter, and are unable to use the government cable, which stretches across sixty miles of water, because of the high rates charged, several cents a word, he will see the justice of conceding to this request and enabling the poor fisherman to make some use of this means of communication with the world outside. At present the rate is prohibitive except to commercial people.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is not the first time that my hon. friend from Gaspe has called my attention to the peculiar and difficult position of the people in the Magdalen Islands. The great trouble is that our telegraph system is not completed. It is true we have a cable, but on the main land we have no lines. We have only a small piece of cable which has no connection with the outside world, except through the Western Union Telegraph Company and other companies. I have just now under consideration, and. I may add, under discussion with my colleagues, a plan to complete our telegraph Mr. TAYLOR.
system. It would not cost very much money for us to become master of the situation. We could connect our telegraph system with the cables at Canso and also with our present system on the North Shore. We have just completed that system to Belle Isle, our terminal point being St. Paul's Bay iu the county of Charlevoix. For a small amount of money we could take the system up to Quebec, if we could not make satisfactory arrangements with the Great North-western Telegraph Company. I am very glad that the attention of the House has been called to the difficulties of the situation In the Magdalen Islands. While I am on my feet, I would like to ask the name of the postmaster in the riding of my hon. friend from Leeds (Mr. Taylor) who is secretary of the Liberal Association V And when I learn his name, I shall be glad to suggest that he be dismissed because he has not been successful in defeating my hon. friend.


Samuel Hughes: I would like to direct the attention of the Postmaster General to the fact that there are a great many people living away in the northern part of the Canadian North-west who receive a mail, some of them only once a year and many of them twice a year. The way these gentlemen keep up with the times is this-they take their daily papers, lay out their year's or half year's supply in order, and then read one paper each day. These are very intelligent and altogether a very fine class of people, who live in that remote region, and I would urge that they be considered. And I would like to ask the Minister of Public Works (Hon. Mr. Tarte) whether, after those cables and telegraph lines that he speaks of are constructed, they will be controlled by the Department of Public Works or by the Post Oflice Department ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That grave question will, no doubt, engage the attention of the best minds of the land.


Robert Laird Borden: I think that probably it will be arranged in this way- the cables and telegraphs will be in charge of the Minister of Public Works, while the Postmaster General will have charge of the Marconi system.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The Marconi system is not bad, but, so far, we have not been able to establish it in such a satisfactory manner that we can quite understand one another across the floor of this House.


George Taylor: I would like to inform the Postmaster General that the name of the postmaster at Newboro, to whom I referred, is Mr. Lewis. He is the postmaster there and the secretary of the Reform Association. Prior to the last election but one, there were appeals put in to strike names off the voters' list. I appeared to defend the parties who were appealed

against. And when we came before the judge, I raised the point that the notice had to be sent by registered letter, and I wanted the registration receipts produced. The postmaster was called, and swore that the letters were registered. When asked where the receipts were, he said they were at the post office. The judge asked him to bring them. He went away, and, in about half an hour returned with a bundle of receipts. I asked the question :	Have you
changed the date of your post office stamp, written out the receipts and stamped them ? And he had to admit that he had' done so. That is the kind of postmaster they have al Newboro.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Iam not responsible.


Samuel Hughes: Is the hou. gentleman going to dismiss this man ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I would like to have some information on the subject.


George Taylor: If the hou. gentleman will inquire of Judge Macdonald, of Brock-ville, he can get full particulars.


Melzar Avery: I understood that the hou. gentleman was going to have this man dismissed because he had not succeeded in defeating the hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Taylor) '!


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: If I should attempt to interfere in Ontario, they would say it was a case of French domination.


Edward Frederick Clarke: The question of superannuation has been raised. Has Mr. David Matheson, who was one of the chief officials of the savings branch, been superannuated ? And if so, what was his age when superannuated, and what allowance is he to receive ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: It is at least two or three years since Mr. Matheson was superannuated. He is an old officer of the department. He broke down in the service. As in the case of Mr. LeSueur, I did not accept his resignation at first, but gave him leave of absence- I think for six months-I hoped that he would recruit. He came back and resumed his duties, but the anxieties of so important an office bore too heavily upon him, and, he felt would shorten his days. He came to me and said that he must be superaju-nuated so that he could live a quiet life. I do not remember his age, but I am pretty sure it exceeded sixty years. He was in the department for many years, having come in, I think, under Sir Oliver Mowatt before confederation.


William Humphrey Bennett: I find, by the report that Mr. Matheson was born in 1840.


Samuel Hughes: He was an excellent officer and had only one fault-he was a Liberal.
123J


Edward Frederick Clarke: Has the minister a list of superannuations that he intends to make in the Toronto post office on the 1st of July ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I have no such list.


William Humphrey Bennett: Is the carriage of the mails between the post office and railway station at Barrie, the courier service I referred to, now done by tender or by appointed officials ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I think it is done by tender.


William Humphrey Bennett: I am informed that instead of being done as formerly by contract, there is now an appointed official for that purpose. My information is of such a nature that I think it is correct.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I think the hon. gentleman has been misinformed.


William Humphrey Bennett: Have any statutory additions been made in his department this year in the chief offices here ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: These estimates provide for increases in all cases where the salaries are less than $800 a year. As to cases of salaries exceeding $800, all that we propose to recommend will appear in the supplementary estimates.


William Humphrey Bennett: Then everybody with a salary of less than $800 is to be advanced ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Only those who are deserving.


William Humphrey Bennett: How many cases are there which he considers deserving ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I do not exercise any judgment upon that point at all. When the fiscal year is closed the superior officers wifi make their reports and the increases will depend on those reports.


William Humphrey Bennett: How many clerks in the department will come under that system ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Every clerk in the service will come under that system, that is, his increase will depend upon the recommendation of the proper officers. There are nearly 2,000 of a staff, and many of them are at a maximum. All who are not at a maximum will be considered.


Richard Blain: Are all mail carrying contracts let by tender now ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Not all, but as a rule they are. There are some exceptions for small distances, but as a rule we try to live up to that system.


Richard Blain: Do country postmasters receiving these small salaries give bonds to the department for the fulfilment of their duty, and what kind of bonds are given ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Thr lowest amount exacted is $200. A post-

master suqIi as the hon. gentleman refers to would give security to the extent of- $200.
Mr. TA1 lOR. Did Mr. Matheson put in a written application ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Yes.


George Taylor: And furnished medical certificates ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Yes.
Mail service, $2,344,700.


Robert Laird Borden: Would the minister explain with reference to the matter of parcels, what arrangement he has made with railway companies for transmission from one part of Canada to another ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The railways are paid in some instances per track mile, in other cases per train mile, and there is a different rate according to whether it is a postal car or a baggage car service, and in accordance with the frequency of the service. Where there is an insignificant amount of mail matter there is a reduction in the rates. The rate varies from one cent to eight cents a mile per car mile. I do not remember the smallest rate per lineal mile, but, I think in the case between Ottawa and Smith's Falls we pay about $320 a year per mile of railway. There are cases on the Grand Trunk Railway where we pay $160 a mile.


Robert Laird Borden: Could the hon. gentleman say how the revenue derived from parcels of merchandise compares with the amount paid to railway companies or other common carriers for the transmission ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: You mean the gross amount the department derives from the total amount of parcels.


Robert Laird Borden: I mean, is that particular class of business paying, and if not, what is the loss ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: As I said some time ago, weights are now being taken throughout Canada, and I am told by the accountant, will not be completed until the month of June. We are ascertaining the exact weight of parcel post matter being carried, and that will form a basis upon which to make a calculation. We are ascertaining the exact weights of mails of all classes, that is, of letters, newspapers and other things. These data may enable us to form some estimate as to whether we are carrying merchandise parcels at a loss or a profit.


Albert Edward Kemp: Speaking of the $320 per mile per annum between Ottawa and Smith's Falls-presuming that is the approximate amount-you are paying exactly the same amount as between Ottawa and Vancouver. That kind of matter has increased very rapidly in the last few years, until it is said the post office has come into competition Hon. Mr. MULOCK.
with other carriers or express companies. Is it not fair to assume that in a country like this, so long and narrow, this system will have to be changed ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: AVhat does my hon. friend suggest ?


Albert Edward Kemp: I was going to say that in a country like Great Britain where the population is dense, whether the distance is short or long, it does not make so much difference. I would like to ask the hon. minister whether that feature has been considered, and if it has been considered, even before the report to which he refers is complete, had he anything in his mind as to how it might be remedied ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I am quite cognizant of the fact that our distances are vast but I woidd like the hon. gentleman (Mr. Kemp) to give me a suggestion. I have had a great many questions put to me but I would like to put some questions to other people. What would my hon. friend propose ? My mind is in a receptive condition. Has he a policy to propose, because if he has, I shall welcome it. I would be thankful for it.


Albert Edward Kemp: I quite appreciate the position of the hon. Postmaster General in regard to this question. If I were in his position and had to deal with the finances of the country I might put such questions as he does, but, I never expect to be in that position. I cannot formulate a policy for the hon. gentleman this evening. I do not feel called upon to do it. I have thought of it the same as he has. I think he will have to solve that problem, because I think the problem will have to be solved. I dare say there may be shipped out of certain places in this country daily a carload of parcel post merchandise. If the government is paying too much for the delivery of parcel post merchandise at great distances from the centres from which it is shipped, is it fair that that should continue ? It is a fair thing to deliver letters and postal cards but when you are coming into competition with freight carriers and express companies it seems to me that some readjustment should take place. I would ask the hon. gentleman if he knows whether merchandise is carried in the United States at as low a rate as it is carried here. If it is marked ' sample post ' it is carried at the rate of one cent for four ounces, while if it is merchandise it costs a cent an ounce. A large amount is carried at the rate of a cent for four ounces.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I do not think the post office gets the profitable end of the traffic. I fancy that if merchants can despatch their parcels more cheaply for a short distance by express they will do so and give us the non-paying business. That is one of the questions that is causing

this inquiry to be made. In answer to the question of my hon. friend I would say that the best rate given to the public in the United States is two ounces to be carried for one cent. In Canada we have a lower rate than that, carrying four ounces for one cent. The Bill which I have before parliament purposes to deal with that subject.


George Taylor: I would like to suggest to the hon. Postmaster General that he should instruct his officers at Toronto to weigh during one week all the parcels that come from the two large departmental stores, that of the Simpson Company and that of the T. Eaton Company, and then count up the revenue that he receives for carrying these parcels, because I am informed that there is practically a carload going out daily from these two stores and being distributed all over the country from Halifax to Vancouver.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: We are having a more extended investigation than for a week.


George Taylor: Well then, take it for a month ; instruct your officers to weigh the whole output of the goods coming from these stores and w'hich ought to go by express.


Samuel Hughes: I do not wish to interfere with the hon. Postmaster General's desire to get a revenue out of that class of service, but I wish to say that there are a great many people who live in the Northwest Territories, as the hon. gentleman for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) knows, as well as in Ontario, long distances from the railway stations, and it is a very great convenience for these people who cannot go to town more than once or twice a year to be able to send for samples and get parcels back by mail. As long as the rate is not too low this traffic should not be interfered with. I know that the hon. member for Selkirk will agree with me when I say that it is a great benefit to the people living in remote parts of the North-west Territories to receive mail matter in that way.


William Forsythe McCreary: It is a question to consider as to how far this privilege should be curtailed. I have been on the Gilbert Plains and I am familiar with the custom there. The Timothy Eaton catalogue comes once a year and the people order their goods from that catalogue. They tell me they can order goods at from 23 to 50 per cent less than the price at which they could buy them in Dauphin. Consequently, they get the balance of the people in Canada to pay the postage on their goods from Timothy Eaton's store to Gilbert Plains and if they get these goods so much cheaper I do not know that there is any great wrong in that. I think the poor pioneer on the prairies ought to make a little out of the people of Canada in a legitimate way as long as he
can. If the pioneer who is carving out a home for himself on these plains and prairies can get his goods a little cheaper in that way and if the people have to pay for it through the postal system I do not think he should be prevented from doing so. It will work out the other way when he comes to ship his hogs and wheat down to the seaports in the east. In regard to the postal department the hon. Postmaster General seems to have adopted a picayune policy. He is a little bit niggardly. In my opinion, at the present time, the department should not be considered only from a revenue point of view. It should be considered from a public point of view and it should be made easy for people to get their mail. In regard to the eastern provinces very few farmers occupy more than 50 or 100 acres of land and they get their mail along the old and regular lines. In the North-west, where the people have 320 acre farms, they live a mile or two apart and they have great difficulty in getting their mail. One of the greatest drawbacks to immigration in that western country is the want of post offices. I know people in the Swan river district and the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Hughes) knows this to be a fact, who have been there for a year or more and who are from thirty-five to fifty miles distant from a post office. I know a gentleman named Mr. Richard Lyons, who lives thirty-five miles from Swan river. That man came from the north of Ireland, he lived in that district for nearly two years and he told me that he thought he would go back to Ireland because he could not get his mail.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Was he 'agin' the government ?


William Forsythe McCreary: No, he was a good Orange Conservative. He said : If I cannot get my mail oftener than once in six months it is pretty nearly time to move away from this country. There are other places where they feel this same drawback, and I do think that in our western countries the hon. Postmaster General should exercise more generosity than he does in the east. I believe that if the postal service runs behind there it should be charged up to immigration or provided for in some other way so that the people would have a sufficient number of post offices. I hope the hon. Postmaster General will look into this question.


William Humphrey Bennett: I would like to call the hon. minister's attention to the fact that I see that at page 115 of the civil service list the name of Thomas Robinson Garrett as a third-class clerk in the Toronto district, being among the railway mail clerks. He was apparently born on the 15th September, 1845. May I ask the hon. minister if the date is correct as to his age ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I do not know what his age is, but I assume the record is correct.


William Humphrey Bennett: Assuming that the date is correct, the hon. Postmaster General has informed us that on account of age and infirmity he retired Mr. LeSueur and Mr. Matheson, whose superannuation allowance will amount to about $2,000 a year each. The Postmaster General retires a gentleman who is 61 years old, and he appoints another who is 55 years. The life of a railway mail clerk, under ordinary circumstances, is not very long, because of his arduous work, and does the Postmaster General think that it is in the interest of the country to appoint a mail clerk at such an age ? Where does Mr. Garrett come from ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He comes from East Northumberland. He was appointed in 1900, and is therefore not entitled to superannuation.


William Humphrey Bennett: Is it the policy of the government to appoint men at such an age.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: No.


William Humphrey Bennett: The point arises, that if a man has a retiring allowance it is easier to dispense with his services, because it may be a case of hardship to throw him out on the street if he has no superannuation. Have any other appointments been made of men 55 years of age.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I cannot recall the ages of all these we have appointed, but I can say that in the Bill which I have submitted I ask parliament to fix the age limit at 30 years.


William Humphrey Bennett: The Postmaster General is not alone in inconsistency, because a few years ago the government introduced the Bill to retire judges when they reached 70 years, and a judge was recently appointed at the age of 71 years. Is George G. Anderson now a permanent railway mail clerk?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I will give the information to-morrow.


Edward Frederick Clarke: On a former occasion the Postmaster General promised that he would consider the question of reducing the postage rate on drop letters in cities. Has the hon. gentleman given that matter consideration ? It is a fact wmch must be well known to the Postmaster General and his officers that a large number of local letters are distributed by leading concerns in cities by messengers employed for that purpose at a lower rate than the 2 cents that the post office charges. That would seem to prove that the drop letter rate is altogether too high.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The 2 cent letter rate is only in force in cities where free delivery exists, and elsewhere people have to walk to the post office to get their letters. To charge a 1-cent rate Hon. Mr. MULOCK.
would be giving an unfair advantage to people who live in cities.


Edward Frederick Clarke: In what respect ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: They would be getting their letters at a less rate than would be charged our friend the farmer who has to walk to the post office. I do not think that the people who live outside of the cities would be very anxious to adopt the suggestion made by the hon. gentleman. The free delivery is very expensive, and those who get the benefit of it might be expected to pay the extra expense, either in the way of an extra rate or by contribution of a bulk sum.


Edward Frederick Clarke: The Postmaster General forgets that postal cards and circulars now require only a 1-cent postage, and are delivered iu cities just as letters and newspapers are. My contention is that a 2cent rate is too much for this service, and that is proven by the fact that large legal and mercantile firms can employ messengers to distribute their letters and circulars at a less rate than 2' cents each. In view of that fact, it is not an unreasonable request to ask the minister to take this matter into consideration.


William Forsythe McCreary: The hon. member for West Toronto has raised a very important question with reference to the postage on newspapers. What revenue does the Postmaster General get to-day from postage on newspapers, and what does their circulation cost him ? We get some newspapers in the western countries that are all right, but we also get a lot of terrible Tory sheets that are not worth paying for. They have a bad effect on our western people and some limit should be put upon their circulation by an increased postage rate.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Mr. FOWLER.: Has the Postmaster General made any change in the carrying of the mails from Round Hill, King's county, N.B., to Armstrong Corner, Queen's county ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The officers will make a note of the question, and I will give the information to-morrow.
IVIr. RRNNETT ^ s to the postmaster at Midland, I wish to state that it is not at all adequate for the accommodation afforded. My recollection is that the rent is only $70 a year, and it is only fair that that rent should be increased. The post office is in a building erected by the postmaster and has an equipment for the service equal to that of many of the public buildings that are owned by the government and which have cost the country a very large sum. I think there is a space for the general public who come to transact post office business about 40 feet by 20 feet. These facts should be taken into'consideration in the rental paid.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: This report shows that it is $160.


William Humphrey Bennett: I am pleased to see that that is the amount. I understood that it was much less than that. However, even at $160, when we consider the cost of maintaining other places where there are caretakers, and having regard to the expense for fuel, lighting and rental, I am pleased to see that the Postmaster General is prepared to advance it still further.


Robert Laird Borden: There is a matter which I want the Postmaster General to he prepared to deal with at some time before his estimates are disposed of. It is a matter that was brought to the attention of the House, I think, two years ago. That is, the refusal of the government to grant petitions of right to a number of persons who claim that their contracts were cancelled without authority in law by the Postmaster General. They have been applying for petitions of right for two years or more, and I understood from the Postmaster General two years ago that there was to be a report made in writing by him to the Minister of Justice, and that was to be laid on the Table of the House, or the House was to be informed in regard to it. Up to the present time the House has not been informed in regard to it, and I understand that these people have not been able to get the slightest satisfaction except such as may be derived from a letter from the Department of Justice stating that as the matter had been discussed by the late Minister of Justice with the Postmaster General, the present Minister of Justice was not prepared to open it up again. I am prepared to say that there is a perfectly fair and arguable case for submission to the courts on the facts in my possession, and it seems to me a most unfair and tyrannical thing that this matter should be postponed from time to time, and that these people should not be allowed to assert their rights, if they have any, in the courts. The refusal to grant a petition of right simply amounts to this, that the Postmaster General constitutes himself the judge as to whether these people have any arguable case or not. These people have been advised by counsel of high standing that they have a proper-case against the government for argument and decision in the courts; and under these circumstances what possible reason can there be for refusing them a petition of right ? I was very much surprised indeed at the action of my hon. friend the Postmaster General in regard to the matter. If he has made a mistake in cancelling these contracts, when he had not the legal right to do so, surely, if he is a fair-minded man. he would be the. very first person who would be anxious that they should have redress in the courts. I do not think that is a proposition which my hon. friend would controvert. If he has not made a mistake, if
he is right in the position he has assumed, what possible risk can there be to the government or detriment to the public interest In allowing the men to go into court and obtain the satisfaction of finding out that they are wrong 1 In doing so they would subject themselves to the costs which every man has to pay who takes into court a claim that is unfounded. I hope the Postmaster General will be prepared to deal with this matter, which I will discuss at greater length, going into the merits, if necessary, when the supplementary estimates come before us. At present, I cannot possibly see why claims, having a prima facie standing at least, should be kept so long out of court, and why these men should be so long debarred from having their rights adjudicated upon by an independent tribunal.


Mr. GERMAN.: I do not often agree with the leader of the opposition, but in this proposition I certainly do agree with him absolutely. The theory that the King can do no wrong is in this democratic country absolutely exploded. The Crown, as represented by the government of the country, can do wrong just as any private individual can do wrong, and there should be no petition of right at all. An individual having a claim against the government should have a right to bring an action in court against the government just the same as he would against a private individual. If he fails in his action, he is mulcted in his costs; if the government succeed, they get their costs; and there is no reason on earth that I can see why an individual should not have the same right against the government that he has against anybody else. I would like to hear some reasonable argument against that proposition. I am prepared to support the proposition laid down by the leader of the opposition now or at any other time. There should not be, and will not be within a very few years, the problem of a petition of right in this country.


William Forsythe McCreary: Do the leader of the opposition and the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Clarke) endorse the statements made by the hon. member for Welland ?


Edward Frederick Clarke: Certainly. Surely every hon. member of this House will endorse the position he takes, that if a man has a just claim he ought to be heard.
Some resolutions reported.



[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) delivered a message from His Excellency the Governor General.
Mr. SPEAKER read the message as follows ;
[Stage Direction]


The Governor General transmits to the House o£ 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, 30th April, 1902.
The MINISTER OP FINANCE moved that the message of His Excellency together with the estimates be referred to the Committee of Supply. *
Motion agreed to.
On motion of the Minister of Finance, House adjourned at 11.55 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, May 1, 1902.