1903-04-06

FIRST READINGS.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 83) to incorporate the New Canadian Company.-Mr. Lemieux.
Bill (No. 84) respecting the Quebec and New Brunswick Railway Company.-Mr. Belcourt.
Bill (No. 85) to incorporate the Berlin, Waterloo, Wellesley and Georgian Bay Railway Company.-Mr. Clare.
Bill (No. 86) to amend the Fruit Marks Act, 1901.-Mr. Smith (Wentworth) by Mr. Gourley.
. VACANCY.
Mr. SPEAKER.: I have the honour to inform the House that a vacancy having occurred in the representation of the electoral district of Russell, province of Ontario, by reason of William Cameron Edwards, Esquire, having been called to the Senate, I have accordingly issued my warrant to the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery to make out a new writ of election for the said electoral district.



ELECTORAL DIVISION OF ST. JAMES.

Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I have also the honour to inform the House that in obedience to the order of the House of Friday last, April 3rd, I have issued my warrantAo the Clerk Mr. CLARKE.
of the Crown in Chancery to make out a new writ of election for the electoral district of St. James, Montreal.



YUKON TERRITORY-TREADGOLD CONCESSION.

Mr. R. L. BORDEN (Halifax).: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to inquire from the Prime Minister whether any communications have been received from the Dawson Board of Trade with regard to the concession known as the Treadgold concession. Some members of parliament have received a communication from the board of trade in which the following is alleged :
It is the wish of the Dawson Board of Trade, that you he forwarded a copy of a telegram sent this day to Messrs, the Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Premier of Canada ; Clifford Sifton, Minister of the Interior; William Mulock, Postmaster General, and James Hamilton Ross, member of parliament for Yukon, and which reads as follows :
Oppose any attempt to pass Order In Council or Act in parliament that will in any way confirm Treadgold concession. Are having monster petition signed and reliable data prepared to forward Ottawa asking government to aid in furnishing water for mining purposes. People are a unit in making demand and will insist upon government protection from monopoly of Treadgold octomis.



THE DAWSON BOARD OF TRADE,

[Stage Direction]
H. C. Macaulay, President.
And it is the further wish of said board that your influence, help and co-operation in assisting the people of this territory to make the necessary recommendations to the parliament of the Dominion of Canada to prevent the passage through parliament of the Treadgold concession and water grant from Klondike river and Rock Creek such as is and has been contemplated.
The Treadgold concession and water grant as granted by an Order In Council and which when ratified by the parliament at its next session will become law is in the opinion of this board one of the most iniquitous measures that was ever inflicted upon the people, and (in the consideration of the Dawson Board of Trade) will work a groat hardship upon the people of this territory since it will mean the virtual bankruptcy of all the property holders of Dawson and surrounding territory, and instead of the Klondike becoming the prosperous country we expect, it will virtually become the property of Mr. Treadgold and those who are associated with him in his scheme.
An immense petition to the Dominion parliament to cancel and disallow this measure is being prepared and circulated fa copy of which will be sent you) embodying the objections of the people of the Yukon to the granting of this measure and asking the government to provide water for the miners of this territory.
Then, the communication proceeds at great length to state grounds against the Treadgold concession,with which I will not trouble tiie House at this time. Accompanying it is a copy of a petition which, in the second paragraph, in referring to this concession, says :

That the benefits conferred upon the grantees are of incalculable value and involve an enormous exploitation of the public resources of this territory for the benefit of a few favoured concessionaires.
And in the fourth paragraph it says :
That the need of this territory is not the creation of monopolies but their prevention, and the encouragement of the individual miners by securing equal privileges and opportunities to all as far as the law and the administration can provide them.
It concludes by asking that the Order in Council of April 21, 1902, may be cancelled. I would like to ask the right lion, leader of the government (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laur-ier) what the position of the government is in reference to the Treadgold concession, and whether this communication has been received by the government ? I would like any information as to the action of the government in future in regard to it which the right hon. gentleman thinks it proper to give to the House now.
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: Mr. Speaker, I have received a copy of the paper which has just been partially read by the hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden, Halifax). I do not remember if any other communications have been received by the government outside of that. But, as is frequently the case, there are probably two sides to this question ; there is the side of those who oppose the concession and the side of those who favour it The government, about a year ago, amended the Treadgold concession in a manner which it was thought would be satisfactory to the miners of the Yukon. We certainly had no intention of creating a mon-oply, but we thought that by passing this concession, we were providing the miners of the Yukon with water for their mining operations. This view of the case has been controverted. There is another side to it, but no action has been taken so far, and it is not contemplated, at all events, at this moment to take any action. It may be that we will have to reconsider the action taken by the government if we find that the representations made have some foundation, but I am not prepared at this moment to say anything further to my hon. friend.



REPORT PRESENTED.

[Stage Direction]
Abstract of Statements of Insurance Companies of Canada for the year ended 31st December, 1902.-Hon. Mr. Fielding.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 27) respecting the Canada National Railway and Transport Company.- Mr. Campbell.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 24) to extend the power of Loan Companies.-Mr. Thompson (Haldimand).
Bill (No. 71) to incorporate the Imperial Company.-Mr. Bickerdike.
Bill (No. 72) respecting the Bank of Montreal.-Mr. Bickerdike.
Bill (No. 73) to incorporate the Ontario and Quebec Power Company.-Mr. Belcourt.
Bill (No. 75) respecting the Canadian Pacific Railway Company.-Mr. Thompson (Haldimand).
Bill (No. 76) to enable the city of Vancouver to acquire certain lands and interests adjoining Vancouver Harbour.-Mr. Mac-pherson.
Bill (No. 79) to incorporate the Bank of Winnipeg.-Mr. Scott.
Bill (No. 80) respecting the Canada Northwest Land Company, Limited-Mr. McCarthy.
Bill (No. 81) respecting the Brandon and South-western Railway Company.-Mr. Morrison.


Mr. MONK asked :: 1.	Has the government received any proposal from the Trans-Canada Railway Company, in regard to the construction of a new Transcontinental railway 1
2.	Has the government invited the said railway company to offer its terms for the con-strution of said railway across the continent ?
3.	Will it be a condition of any agreement for said construction that it should begin at its eastern terminus ?
4.	Has any demand for financial assistance for said construction been made to the government ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Biair).: It is impossible to answer any of these questions at present. The House has already been informed that communications, largely verbal, have taken place between the government and other parties, but it would be premature to make any announcements now. As soon as this can be done in the public interests, parliament will be informed fully.


SOUTH AFRICAN WAR-GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AS VOLUNTEERS.
Mr. HUGHES (Victoria) asked :: 1.	What servants of the government, in permanent or temporary employ, went to South Africa in any of the 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th Canadian Mounted Rifles ?
2.	Were the places of all these kept for them on their return ?
3.	What ones were not reinstated ?
4.	Who received Canadian pay while in service in South Africa, viz., the pay, or any pay for their office as member or employee in the Canadian civil service ?
5.	Will those not yet reinstated in their positions be reinstated forthwith ?



102S
6.	Did any minister promise those in government service that their places would be retained for them 7


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. Sir Frederick Borden).: I would ask that the first four questions be put in the form of a motion. If the hon. gentleman will make a motion I will be very glad to bring down the information, which it is difficult to do in the form of an answer to a question. With regard to question No. <>. 1 am informed that no minister promised those in the government service who went to South Africa that their places would be retained for them.


Mr. CLARKE.: What about question No.
5.


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I cannot answer that.



SOUTH AFRICAN CONSTABULARY.

Mr. INGRAM asked :: 1 Have any documents been received by the Department of Militia and Defence, complaining of the treatment the Canadians received in the South African Constabulary 7
2.	If so, has the department taken any action; or does the government intend to take any action in the matter; and if so, what action ?
3.	Has the attention of the hon. Minister of Militia, or any officer of his department, been called to the following article, which appeared in the Montreal * Star,' Monday, March 30, 3003 7



CONSTABULARY BACK. TELL OF GRIEV-VANCES.

[Stage Direction]
Allege That They Were not Well Treated in South Africa.
Reasons for Leaving.
When seen to-day by a ' Star ' reporter, they somewhat reluctantly discussed their reasons for leaving the South African Constabulary.
Some of the Grievances.
The following are a few of their grievances. They allege :
That the British officers, in carrying out the government's order to reduce the strength of the constabulary from 10,000 to 6,000 men, attempted, without just cause, to dismiss most of the Canadians ;
That if a Canadian whom they wanted to get rid of, failed to purchase his discharge, he was dismissed from the service on the pretext of being unfit for duty in the constabulary ;
That such dismissal carried with it a certain odium, to the great disadvantage and injury of those thus summarily dismissed ;
That is virtually amounted to a bad conduct dismissal ;
That a person so dismissed was obliged to pay his own expenses back to Canada ;
That, when it was determined to dispense with the services of a Canadian, and when the Canadian refused to purchase his discharge, charges were trumped up against that individual. leaving him no alternative but to get out of the service ;
That, in the appointment of non-commissioned officers in the Canadian squadron of the Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).
constabulary, the Canadians were needlessly discriminated against, English sergeants invariably being appointed to the vacancies on the non-commissioned staff as they occurred ;
That, in some cases, Dutch officers and noncommissioned officers were given the preference over Canadians by the British officers in the matter of promotions ;
That, while the other British troops received their issues of clothing regularly, the Canadians were not so favoured ;
That, in many cases, the Canadians were obliged to either purchase certain articles of clothing, which the government should have supplied, out of their private funds, or suffer hardships and inconvenience ;
That, on an average, each Canadian was obliged to disburse out of his private purse upwards of £1 10s. each month in order to secure the actual necessaries of life ;
That attempts were made to convert the Canadians into mere military machines ;
That a show of independence on their part was regarded by the British officers as an act of insubordination ;
That the most trivial breaches of discipline on the part of the Canadians were rigorously punished, while similar infractions on the part of the troops belonging to the British columns were not noticed.
In discussing these grievances with a ' Star ' reporter to-day, the men emphatically declared that nothing in the world would tempt them to return to the life they had but recently left in South Africa.
Only One Blanket Each.
Some of the men had received only one blanket each during the whole of their sojourn in South Africa. In order to sleep with any degree of comfort during the cold nights of the South African winter, they were obliged to fall back on the blankets-two per man-which they had brought with them from Canada.
Matter of Uniform.
In the matter of uniforms, bandolier equipment, belts and other accoutrements, the men allege that the Canadians were shabbily treated in comparison with the British Tommy.
When they left the constabulary, they each received a ticket to Durban. From Durban they had to pay their passage to England out of their own pocket money. The trip cost $60, or 15 guineas, per man.
The expenses of their passage from England to Canada were borne by Lord Strathcona.
4.	If so, what course of action, if any, does the department, or the government, propose to take regarding these alleged serious grievances ?
The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. Sir Frederick Borden).: To the first question the answer is ' none ' and that answer will apply to the second question as well. To the third question the answer is : not until I read the article as quoted in the hon. gentleman's question. In this connection, I think it would be proper in further answer to the questions to say that extracts from an article published in the ' Mail and Empire,' two days after the article quoted here, might appear in the ' Hansard ' alongside of the quotation in question. That article reads as follows :



CANADIAN TROOPERS.

[Stage Direction]
Letters received from Canadians in the South African Constabulary indicate that there are those who are well satisfied with their treatment. One correspondent who signs himself :
' A Canadian Trooper ' is quite indignant at the stories brought home by discharged men. He suggests that many of these have been * kicked out as unfit for service.' Without expressing an opinion on this phase of the subject, it must be said that the correspondent speaks with apparent authority on other points. He explains that when the war ended the corps was twice as strong numerically as was necessary in times of peace. However, there was no effort made to reduce it immediately for obvious reasons. Now that the whole country has settled down the order has gone forth that many of the troopers are to be discharged. Our correspondent conveys the impression, complimentary to himself, that the very best men are being retained and the inefficient and dissatisfied discharged. As proof that all is well, he says, in effect. ' Behold me; I remain.' Canadians who have protested against the way they were treated, say, in effect, ' Behold us; we could not stay.' The public has little other evidence before it. The truth lies somewhere between the extreme statements :	* They illtreat us because we are Canadians, and they are good to us because we hail from Canada.' It is hard to believe that any British officer would annoy a colonial trooper because he was a Canadian. The probability is that the opposite would be the case. The trouble is that many officers treat Canadians just as they would treat denizens of London, E.C. Londoners are used to it ; Canadians are not, nor does the public opinion of this country demand that Canadians become lackeys for English officers. A Canadian trooper is a fighting man; he is not a soldier.' Our correspondent does not touch on the question of the ' haw-haw ' ways of the officers. He does, however, find fauli with the men who complain that they were turned adrift penniless. Ho intimates that the card game and the canteen are responsible for this, and that the men have only themselves to blame. If there is truth in this suggestion it should silence the unmanly whining of the victims of the bobtailed flush. This journal does not sympathize with this complaint. The troopers had their pay; that all have not arrived home peLniless is evidence that this is sufficient, under certain circumstances. If they did not save it, no one will find fault, as long as they do not begin to lament. Thus the case stands. The final verdict will depend largely on the future conduct of the ex-constables themselves. If they acquit_ themselves like men in the new life that lies before them, they will be believed when they criticise the army. If not they will be discredited.
In reply to question No. 4 I may say : There does not appear to be anything for the government to do. The government is in no way responsible even if it were true that members of the South African Constabulary had been harshly treated.

Mr. SPROULE asked :: 1.	Of whom is the commission for the revision of the statutes composed ?
2.	When did the commission begin its work ?
3.	What progress has been made in the work of the revision 1
4.	At what date is it expected that the commission will complete its work ?
5.	Has the rate of remuneration to the members and officers of the commission been fixed; and if so, what is it ?
6.	What is the estimated cost of the proposed revision, when completed ?
The SOLICITOR GENERAL (Hon. H. G. Carroll)
1.	The Minister of Justice and Solicitor General, members ex officio, the Right Honourable Sir Henry Strong, President; Edmund Leslie Neweombe, K. C., Deputy Minister of Justice ; Wentworth E. Roscoe, K.C., of Kentville, Nova Scotia ; Augustus Power, K.C., of the Department of Justice; Edward R. Cameron, K.C., Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada; Henry Robertson, K.C., of Collngwood, Ontario, Barrister; and Louis Philippe Sirois, of Quebec, Notary Public; Hon. R. J. Ritchie, of St. John, and Horace St. Louis, of Montreal, Advocate, Secretaries of the Commission.
2.	The commission began its work on 21st November, 3902.
3.	The commissioners have held two meetings at Ottawa and a number of the statutes have been revised and printed by the individual commissioners. It is hoped to have all the work already printed passed by the commission about the end of this month.
4.	It is too early to mention a date for completion of the work.
5.	The following rates of renumeration have been fixed :
per an.


The Right Hon.   S@: 

Mr. Neweombe	
1,500	00Mr. Power	
1,200	00Mr. Cameron	
1,200	00
The remuneration of the other commissioners and the secretaries has not been fixed.
0.	No estimate has been made of the cost.



THE DOUKHOBORS.

Mr. BLAIN asked :: 1.	Has the government any information as to the alleged pilgrimage or expedition of the persons known as Doukhobors. during the months of November and December, 1902, in the North-west Territories and the province of Manitoba ? If so, what is the information ?
2.	How many persons were engaged in such pilgrimage or expedition ?
3.	What was the alleged object of such pilgrimage or expedition ?
4.	Did the government take any steps to interfere with, or prevent the completion of such pilgrimage or expedition; and if so, what were such steps, and what were the means employed by the government for the purpose ?
5.	Under what law, or by what authority, did the government so interfere, and take such steps and measures, if any ?
6.	If the government seized and sold any horses, sheep and cattle, of the Doukhobors, in November and December last, by what au-

thority, or under what provision of the law, was such action taken ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Sir William Mulock).: 1.	The government received information from its officers that a number of Doukho-bors intended to and did make a pilgrimage in the months of October and November last year.
2.	Of the total of about 8,000 Doukho-bors in the west about 1,800 men, women and children engaged in the pilgrimage as far as Yorlcton. There were about 450 men and boys in it and these continued as far as Minnedosa.
3.	Conducting a religious crusade.
4.	The government through its officers advised the Doukhobors not to start on this pilgrimage and after they had started persuaded them to return. The women and children were taken back by special train and wagons or sleighs, the men partly by special train and the rest of the way by foot.
5.	Under no specific law, as the action of the government did not require such.
6.	No horses, sheep or cattle of the Doukhobors were seized and sold by the government in November or December, but in the month of October some cattle and horses which had been turned loose by the Doukhobors were, with their consent, sold by the government by public auction.



TRANSCONTINENTAL RAILWAY.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. MONK-by Mr. Clarke-asked :
1.	Until what date is the government prepared to receive proposals in connection with the construction of a transcontinental railway 1
2.	Is the government willing to recommend that financial aid he granted by parliament to those who are ready to execute such construction ?
3.	Will the government entertain a proposal for a land grant in favour of such enterprise ?
4.	What are the principal conditions which the government will impose upon those who are prepared to undertake such construction ?
The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair)). It is impossible to answer any of these questions at present. The House has already been informed that communications, largely verbal, have taken place between the government and other parties, but it would be premature to make any announcements now. As soon as this can be done in the public interests, parliament will be informed fully.

Mr. CLARKE asked :: 1.	Has the Canadian emigration office at Belfast, Ireland, been closed ; and if so, for what reason, and on whose recommendation ? If the office is open, who is the officer in charge, and when was he appointed ?


Mr. BLAIN.: 2.	How many Canadian emigration agencies are there in Ireland ; where are they located ; and who is the officer in charge of each such agency ?
3.	How many Irish emigrants were sent to Canada by the government agents during the past departmental year ; and what was the expenditure made in connection with the maintenance and work of tho Irish emigration agencies, salaries of agents, travelling expenses, &c.?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Sir Wm. Mulock).: 1.	The office at Belfast was closed for a few days, the minister having instructed Mr. O'Kelly, the agent there, to take the place of Mr. C. R. Devlin, who resigned his position as Canadian Emigration Commissioner at Dublin, on March 5th. The Belfast agency is now open, and is temporarily in charge of Mr. Kilburn, from 1st April.
2.	Two. At Dublin and Belfast, Ed. O'Kelly, Dublin, Mr. Kilburn, Belfast.
3.	One. All Irish emigrants arrived in Canada during the year ending 30tli June, 1002, as a result of the work performed by the immigration agents in Ireland.
The total amount of expenditure for salaries, office, living, travelling and other expenses of the immigration agents in Ireland during 1002-03 was .$14,173.00.



RAILWAY ACCIDENTS. '

Edward Frederick Clarke: Is it the duty of any public official, and if so, of whom, to inquire into and report to the government, upon all railway accidents which occur in the Dominion ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Biair).: No official in particular has been assigned to the duty of making inquiry intoi railway accidents, but since and owing to recent railway accidents, the subject has been engaging the serious consideration of the government.



&quot; LE CANADA &quot; AND L. J. LATOUR.

Mr. LEONARD asked :: 1.	Is the government aware that the following circular has been addressed to postmasters in different parts of the country, and especially in the province of Quebec ?
Montreal, March 24, 1903.
To the Postmaster.
Sir,-As you are aware, we are to commence in a few days the publication of the new Liberal organ, ' Le Canada.'
The management of the company directs me to W'rite you, in the name of the good 'cause, to ask you to help us regarding our circulation (within the limits of the possible, be it well understood).
Needless to tell you that the postmaster fills an important role in his locality in regard to newspapers and can render great services.
We count upon your legitimate sympathies and on your co-operation for the ' Canada.' Your work will be recompensed.

We give you the following commission :-10 per cent on collections, and 25 per cent on the subscriptions, according to the list that you will prepare for us.
I venture the hope that these offers will be taken into consideration.
I close with thanking you in advance for all that you may do for the newspaper and for our undertaking, the success of which you doubtless have at heart.
Your ever devotedly,



L. J. LATOUR.

[Stage Direction]
General Circulation Manager.
2.	What position does the said L. J. Latour hold, or has he held, in the civil service at Ottawa ? What is his salary ? When was he appointed ?
3.	When Bid the said L. J. Latour obtain six months' leave of absence, and for what reasons?
4.	When did he draw his salary the last time, and what amount did he draw ?
5.	Is it true that this L. J. Latour is at present replaced in the civil service by his young son, who is entirely incompetent to fulfil the duties of his position ?
6.	What are the age and salary of young Latour ?
7.	Is it true that L. J. Latour has collected, and collects, amongst his colleagues in the civil service subscriptions and contributions to the future new publication, ' Le Canada.'
S.	Would the government take cognizance of this fact, a notorious one for those who live in Ottawa, and inform the civil service employees that they may retain their positions, even if not subscribing for the newspaper ' Le Canada,' provided they fulfil their duties in their respective positions ?
9.	Does the government approve of those subscriptions ?
10.	What means does the government propose to take to put an end to this state of things ?
11.	Will it have the amounts of their subscriptions returned to those employees, or increase their salaries in consequence ?
12.	Who are the directors of the new publication, to whom reference is made in the said circular ?
13.	Which ministers of the present government, and which members of this House, are financially interested in the said newspaper ?
14.	Is it not. true that the said newspaper will be published under the aegis of members of the federal parliament and of the Quebec legislature ?
The MINISTER OE PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. Jas. Sutherland) :: 1.	No.
2.	Departmental mail officer Public Works Department at a salary of $3 per day from 1st 31a v. 1902.
3.	On the 6th March. 1903, without salary.
4.	On the 6th March last, at rate given
above.	.
5.	Mr. Latour has a son employed in the Department of Public Works who is considered competent to do his work.
6.	Twenty-one years, salary $3 per day.
7.	8, 9, 10, 11. No information in reference to these matters.
12. 13, 14. These matters mentioned in these three questions have no official connection with the department and have not been brought to its knowledge.



ERNESTOWN STATION POST OFFICE.

Mr. WILSON asked :: Has a change been made of the postmaster at Ernestown station post office, county of Lennox ? If so, what are the circumstances under which such change occurred 1


The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Sir Wm. Mulock).: The postmaster resigned and Mrs. Oriana Johnston was appointed in his place.



THE CATTLE-GUARD COMMISSION.

Mr. LENNOX asked :: 1.	The Minister of Railways and Canals having stated to the House on 2nd April instant, in reply to questions, that Mr. Robertson withdrew from the cattle-guard commission on the 14th of February last ; that the work was then supposed to be practically concluded, and a report prepared, which was substantially settled upon between the two commissioners, and only then remained to be put in form and signed, why has the report of the commission, as originally constituted, not been put in form, signed and returned to the department ?
2.	Has Mr. Robertson any conection with the investigation tests, or proceedings, subsequent to the 14th of February last ?
3.	What were the causes, or causes alleged, for Mr. Robertson's retirement ?
4.	What is , the cost of the commission down to the 14th of February ?
5.	Was the retirement of Mr. Robertson voluntary, and solely of his own motion ?


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair) :: 1.	Although the chief portion of the work of the Commission was done when Mr. Robertson withdrew from the Commission, the inquiries and investigations into the cattle-guards in use on the leading railways in the United States and Canada had been finished, and there only remained what seemed to be a few cattle-guards which had been apparently recent inventions to be tested. The number of these increased, and the delay in finally completing the report has arisen from that circumstance. It is thought better that the report should state whether any of the recent tests would show that any efficient cattle-guard had been designed.
2.	Mr. Robertson has not been present at any of the tests since the 14th of February last.
3.	Mr. Robertson asked leave to withdraw, considering it was his duty to do so. as he was about to engage in a provincial election contest.
4.	The cost of this Commission up to the 14th of February last was $3,624.32.
5.	Mr. Robertson's retirement was voluntary and solely of his own motion.



CANADIAN TOBACCO.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. MONK-by Mr. Clarke-asked :
1.	Has the government a written report front Mr. Blaise Dugas, of Saint-Jacques de l'Achigan, relating to his trip to Europe in connection
[Stage Direction]
with the sale of Canadian tobacco in foreign countries ?
2.	What was the cost of that trip ?
3.	What is the amount paid to Mr. Blaise Dugas, and does that sum cover all that is due to him ?
4.	What has been the result of that trip ?
5.	If there is a writen report from Mr. Dugas, will it be printed and laid on the Table of this House ?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W.
S.	Fielding) :
1.	Yes.
2.	$4T0.25.
3.	$470.25 paid for time and expenses of trip to Belgium; $146.25 paid for time and expenses collecting samples of tobacco and delivering lectures in Quebec; .$36.50, still due for time and expenses delivering lectures in 1903.
4.	Useful information has been obtained and published by means of lectures in the tobacco-growing districts of Quebec.
5.	Yes.

Mr. ROBINSON (Northumberland) asked :: How many tons of oxide of aluminum (alumina (Alo Oa ) was imported into Canada for the fiscal year ending June, 1902 ? What country or countries was it imported from ? What port or ports was it entered at, and what was the valuation for duty ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. ffm. Paterson).: The officers of the department inform me that the article mentioned in this question is not specified under that name in the classification of imports in the Trade and Navigation tables, nor will they be able to get the information asked for without special examination of invoices at different ports of entry. If the hon. gentleman will specify the different articles, such as baroxite, corundum, emery, &c.. on which he wishes to obtain information, they will endeavour to get it.



IMMIGRATION STATISTICS.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. ROSS (Ontario) asked ;
1.	What has been the total immigration into Canada each year during the past ten years ?
2.	What has been the total expenditure on immigration each year during the same period?
3.	What has been the total immigration during each month of this calendar year ?
4.	When did the first immigration, of which the department has a record, commence from the United States to Canada ?
5.	How many settlers or immigrants have come to Canada from the United States during each year of which the department has a record ?
6.	Of the total immigrants arriving from the United States, how many have declared themselves of Canadian origin ?
The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Sir Wm. Mulock).: The return asked for would be rather voluminous, and perhaps


Mr. MONK.: my hon. friend would be good enough to make a motion for it.



P.E.I.-WINTER COMMUNICATION.

Mr.  J. J.@: HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) moved for :
Copies of all correspondence received by the government, or any department of the government. and the answers made thereto, concerning the winter navigation of the Northumberland Straits, during the season of 1902-03.
He said :	Mr. Speaker, I desire to say
a few words in explanation of this motion. When Prince Edward Island entered into confederation in 1873, this stipulation was set out in the agreement :
The Dominion government shall provide and maintain an efficient steam service between the Island and the mainland, winter and summer, thus placing the island in continuous communication with the Intercolonial Railway and the other railways of the Dominion.
There was no stipulation in the agreement that was considered so important by the people of Prince Edward Island and by the delegates appointed to negotiate the terms of union, as this. There was no stipulation that appealed with so much force to the people of Prince Edward Island as this, by which their isolation was to be a thing of the past; but there is no stipulation that has been so much disregarded. The service during the last season was the worst that has ever been experienced during any year since we came into confederation. It has been all the worse comparatively speaking, because the trade of the island, as well as the trade of other parts of the Dominion, has greatly increased in the last few years, and therefore we felt it the more keenly and severely that that trade was interrupted during several months of the past year. During the last few years the trade of the country in the finished products of the farm has so greatly increased-and this will apply to all the provinces of old Canada lying east of the great lakes-that between 1890 and 1902, the exports of these products have increased $24,000,000 to a total of $80,000,000.
The farmers of Prince Edward Island have contributed their full share of this increase ; and they have besides supplied a largely increased home market. To prove this, I need only mention one item, that of cheese. During the term I have mentioned, the increased manufacture of cheese in Prince Edward Island has been 6,700 per cent. We have increased also in all the other lines of farm products-pork, bacon, ham, live stock, beef, sheep, eggs, butter, &c.-so that our trade to-day is very much larger than it was a few years ago, and consequently when the facilities for moving our products to the mainland come to a standstill, we suffer much more than we did. Not only has our trade in agricultural products largely increased, but we have established a large

trade in frozen fish with the cities of Boston and New York. During the past season, we sent several carloads to Georgetown to be exported in the usual way, hut we found we could not have them carried to the markets for which they were intended. They were held over at Georgetown several weeks, the warm season came on, and they had to be sold for the freight and carted out to the fields for manure. Not only witli regard to these products, but others as well, tens of thousands of dollars were lost by the people of Prince Edward Island, owing to our inability to export them during the winter. Trade was diverted from the island, merchants who had endeavoured to fill orders could not do so, the orders went to other places, and our people incurred great loss. The extent of that loss I am not in a position to measure at the present, but no doubt it was very severe, and it was not only a loss to the island, but also to the mainland. I have been told by the representatives from eastern Nova Scotia that the products which they generally expect to receive from Prince Edward Island advanced largely in price. In fact it was difficult to obtain them at all. Last winter was of course exceptionally severe, but the difficulties of winter navigation were increased by the mistakes made by the department here in Ottawa. The Department of Marine and Fisheries made some years ago, and particularly last year, the mistake of taking advice from too many people on how to conduct winter navigation, and largely in consequence of that the experiment proved a failure. At present there is a movement on foot at Prince Edward Island to have the management of this service placed in the hands of a local committee. I wish to enter my strongest protest against any such idea. I believe that we will not succeed in having a satisfactory winter service until the lion. Minister of Marine and Fisheries takes the management of this service immediately under his own control. There are two good men now in command of the winter boats. There is no better man in the service than Captain Finlayson, who has had twenty-five years experience, and Captain Brown, in charge of the ' Stanley,' was an experienced navigator before he took charge and has had five years' experience since then. I would, therefore, advise the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries to consult these captains if he requires any more information. There are no men better calculated to give advice. Let him also consult the records of the department, and then make up his mind to place those steamers where the records show they can do really practical work. I would advise him to leave a good deal to the responsibility and judgment of these two captains, and with their assistance and the assistance of the officials he has in the island, he will be able to so conduct the service that it will in future give reasonable and satisfactory results both in the island and the mainland.
There is another point which I wish to bring out. Last year there was some mismanagement in the railway service in connection with the winter service in the straits. Several times when the steamer arrived in Georgetown with a large quantity of mail and a large number of passengers, there was no special train to meet the steamer. Of course the steamer could not arrive on schedule time on account of having to meet adverse conditions, but in previous years there was always a special train to meet the steamer upon arrival. Last year, however, the arrangement was not carried out, and when the steamer arrived with mails and passengers, the train had gone and there would be no other for some twenty hours. The hon. members for West Queen's and and East Queen's, and, I think, the hon. member for one of the Prince's, had to put their hands into their pockets and deposit a sufficient amount to hire a special train in order to bring the mails and passengers to Charlottetown. That is a condition of affairs we never experienced before and which should not exist. On one occasion when a large number of passengers came to Georgetown-a sufficient number to warrant, undqr ordinary circumstances, -the1 railway department in running a special train-the local management declined to do so. The hon. member for West Queen's went to see the. superinten-tendent of the railway and offered to guarantee him against loss, provided the number of passengers were not sufficient to pay the ordinary railway fare, but still the superintendent refused, and my hon. colleague had to put up the whole of the money himself. On another occasion a number of commercial passengers arrived, they were several days late, the mails were late, and they wanted to get a train. It was necessary that the mails should be moved by a special train. But even under these circumstances the local management refused to provide a special train until one of the men deposited sufficient money, that is a dollar a mile for the number of miles the train had to go, some forty-six miles, and then they refused to carry the mails, and the mails had to remain over for another day. So great was the inconvenience and loss sustained by the people that the indignation expressed on every hand was something unprecedented in the history of that province.
Now. I cannot for a moment believe that the Minister of Railways or the minister of any other department would wish the officials of their departments to act in that way. I am sure they wish their officials to take into consideration difficulties of this kind as they arise, and to give the people the reasonable accommodation they have a right to call for. I trust that if an investigation has not already been held into this matter, that one will be held, and that no such acts as I have related here to-day will ever be allowed to take place again; I would suggest to the Minister of Marine and Fish-

eries that he take this matter into his consideration and make such arrangements as will put these boats, the 'Minto' and 'Stanley' in a first-class condition. It is now stated that the ' Stanley,' on account of her age and the rough usage she has endured for several years past, requires considerable repairs. If that is the case, I would suggest tc the Minister of Marine and Fisheries that he look into this matter duriag the summer, and that at the same time he examine the condition of the steamer ' Minto ' and put both these steamers in as good a condition as it is possible for him to do. I would suggest that he take the advice of the officers of those steamships, the officers of his own department, that he be guided by the experience of the last thirty years, and that at the close of the navigation of the summer season he place such boats on that route as thirty years' experience has shown to be necessary and practicable. I would also suggest that he give to the captains of those boats a larger measure of discretion, and that he hold the local officers of his department responsible for successfully carrying out that service, and if these men do not give the people satisfaction, that he put other men in their places. I would also suggest to the Minister of Railways that an arrangement be made by which a special train shall meet the winter steamers on their arrival, whether at Georgetown or Charlottetown, to carry the mails and passengers from the port to their destination on the Island. I think he should make such arrangements during this summer as will ensure a service fairly satisfactory to the people. If these arrangements are made during the coming summer, I believe that the service will be satisfactory. I hope, when the minister makes these arrangements, that he will not allow himself to be influenced in any way by the local advice he may receive.
Now, I object to a local board or a local committee having charge of these steamers, because, as I said before, the difficulties we have had to contend with last year will be intensified. Local influence and local prejudice will be brought to bear upon this board, and the service will not be satisfactorily carried out. We Prince Edward Islanders contend, and we have a right to contend, that the Dominion government should carry out the terms of union, the agreement stipulated at the time of confederation ; and if the government places the management of these steamers in charge of a local board or a local committee, the people will hold the government responsible for the non-fulfilment of the service and the bad management that will ensue. I think the departments in Ottawa should now be in possession of sufficient information to enable them to carry oat this service in a satisfactory manner, and if they do not do so. then we shall know where the responsibility lies. If the local officials are respon-Mr. HUGHES (King's P.E.I.).
sible for the trouble that arose last year, as I believe they were largely responsible, then the Ministers must look after their officials, and the people will look after the ministers. I hope and trust that we will not have a repetition of the trouble of last year, to the great annoyance and loss, not only to the people of Prince Edward Island, but to the people of the other provinces, particularly of Nova Scotia, with which we have so much business and personal intercourse. I have much pleasure, Sir, in moving the motion which stands in my name.


Mr.   ED@: HACICETT (Prince West, P.E.I.) I want to say a few words on this very important matter. The question of the communication between Prince Edward Island and the mainland is no new question in this House : it has engaged the attention of this House from time to time since confederation. Since I have had the honour of representing a Prince Edward Island constituency in this House. I have endeavoured on several occasions to impress on hon. gentlemen occupying the treasury benches the great necessity of paying more attention to this matter than they have done in the past. The hon. gentleman from King's, P.E.I. (Mr. Hughes), in just speaking to his motion, has corroborated what I have stated heretofore, and it is not necessary for me to enter into details at the present time. But, Sir, he has made a statement this afternoon that condemns the present administration of Canada in relation to this matter. He says that the service last season was the worst since confederation. After all the advice that we have endeavoured to give these hon. gentlemen who occupy the treasury benches, and after all our endeavours to get them to do something tangible in the way of keeping up this communication, we have now a statement from the lips of one of their supporters who represents a constituency of Prince Edward Island, that the service during the past year was the worst since confederation. His statement strongly confirms other statements that have been made in this House before. I have been a little backward this session about raising the question, because so much has already been said in this House in regard to that matter, and I hoped the government would take action without any more urging. But since we have heard such a strong condemnation of the government from one of their own supporters, I think I am justified in referring to the subject once more.
The hon. gentleman has spoken of the great importance of this communication. We know that it is important, not only to the people living in the smallest, yet fairest, province of Canada, the province of Prince Edward Island, but to the people of all Canada from Vancouver to Sydney. I shall not repeat what the hon. gentleman has said about the terms of confed-

sel into the board ice so that it received the heavy impact of the ice coming down the strait, and so was frozen in. The pilot is accustomed to the conditions of the ice, and, if the captain disregards his pilot's advice, it is quite fair that he should be held responsible for his action. I have nothing to say with regard to the captains. I believe they are good men. The man who is in command of his ship is the one who is held responsible for the safety of ship and cargo. And I think it would be wrong to criticise the action or conduct of the captain.
Another thing the hon. gentleman referred to was the mail service. And, no doubt, he included in that the management of the service under the present Postmaster General, as well as the management of the steamships under the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. And what does the hon. gentleman tell us ? He tells us, after all these years of confederation for Prince Edward Island-and I can corroborate his statements, for I am aware of the facts-that the Postmaster General will not pay for a train to convey the mail from Georgetown or Summerside to Charlottetown. So the business-men must wait until a wedding or a funeral takes place and the parties engage a special train, or some noble minded man will come forward and deposit the amount to pay for running a special train.
This being the terrible state of affairs as regards the mails of Prince Edward Island, I most fully corroborate what has been said by the hon. gentleman in that respect. The citizens of Charlottetown, Souris, Summer-side, Alberton and Tignisli, and all over the province were deprived of their mails because of the penuriousness and meanness of the government, and especially the hon. Postmaster General in not providing a train to convey these mails to their destinations. In this respect the government have failed to carry out the terms of confederation guaranteed to us at the time of union. The hon. Minister of Railways and Canals would have readily granted that train if the hon. Postmaster General had been willing to pay for it. The hon. Minister of Railways and Canals has plenty of trains, he has numbers of men to operate the trains, and he would have performed the service, but the hon. Postmaster General was so penurious that he would not pay $20 to convey these mails from Georgetown or Summerside to Charlottetown, and thus they had to remain over for twenty-four hours until the regular trains were run. Coming on towards the end of the season, when the people all over Prince Edward Island became indignant, because this is not a matter of Liberals or Conservatives, but the indignation was general all over the province, a gentleman was sent down from Ottawa who remained there for a few days. As soon as he arrived at Charlottetown he telegraphed to Ottawa and Mr. HACKETT.
a special train was provided. Although the season had almost passed, although the time of the greatest difficulty, the time when the people suffered most from the want of their mails had almost passed, when navigation was in sight, a train was put on to convey these mails. I fully agree with what the hon. member for King's has gaid in connection with the matter. As I said before it is not my intention on this occasion to speak on the subject. For the last two years I have endeavoured to bring the matter to the attention of the House to the best of my ability. I now speak because of the motion of the hon. gentleman and I am pleased to think, that, after the third session of parliament since 1600, we have a supporter of the government from the province of Prince Edward Island corroborating every word I said here during the past three years and condemning the government in stronger language than I can condemn it in connection with this matter.


Mr. A. C. BELL (Pictou).: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words on this subject, because I do not think it is well that the House should get the impression that this is altogether a matter that affects tlie province of Prince Edward Island or that it is a matter in respect to which the members of this House from the other provinces of Canada have any feeling of indifference. I would like to say a few words from the knowledge I have, living as I do upon the Nova Scotia side of the strait, and being interested in the maintenance of the service, to corroborate all that has been said by the representatives of Prince Edward Island who have been heard here to-day. I am aware that successive governments have been charged by the citizens of Prince Edward Island with failing to carry out one of the very important provisions of the Act of Union between that province and the older parts of Canada, and I know perfectly well that successive governments have endeavoured to give a satisfactory service across the strait. I think, from the local knowledge I have of the situation, that they have now succeeded in providing a service by twTo steamers which is as good as anything that could be provided, short of tunnel service of which the hon. member for Prince West (Mr. Hackett) has just spoken, and which would be the complete and final solution of this difficulty that affects the people of Prince Edward Island. The tunnel question has not been heard of for a long time in practical politics :	nevertheless, I
have a strong impression that some day or other it will again come to the front and at a time when the greatly increased facilities for excavating tunnels and the advantage of cheap money will render the scheme a feasible one. We might expect to see the government of Canada in the position, if the rate of interest should continue to fall as it has been doing for a long time, of being able to undertake to give Prince Edward

Island connection with the mainland by means of a tunnel. It would not be a very bad financial operation. The cost can be easily ascertained and in consequence of the great improvement that has taken place in the method of excavating tunnels and of the cheapening of money, the cost is something that is diminishing every day.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Is there an estimate of the cost ?


Adam Carr Bell: Yes.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: What is the amount of the estimate V


Adam Carr Bell: I think about $14,000,000 ; there were two or three estimates for tunnels of various sizes, but the one that would give a satisfactory passage to a modern locomotive would cost somewhere in the neighbourhood of $14,000,000.


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


Adam Carr Bell: Nine miles. It is becoming every day more and more feasible. As far as the length of the tunnel is concerned, it is not unprecedented. At this moment, in Europe, a tunnel is nearing completion which is eleven miles in length, and it seems to have been constructed with comparative ease and with comparative absence of loss of life to the men employed. I think that the investigations made at the time that that question was to the front showed that the stratum through which the tunnel would be excavated would admit of comparatively easy work. I do not think that the government is prepared to consider at this moment a tunnel seriously, but they have, in my opinion, in steamship communication, the means of connecting almost perfectly Prince Edward Island and the mainland if the service be handled in a satisfactory manner. But, in the course of the past winter, the hon. member for King's, P.E.I. (Mr. Hughes) informs us, that we have had the worst service we have ever had since confederation. I do not think he is altogether right in that respect, because, during some of the years since confederation, people were confined to the old-fashioned mode of reaching the mainland, by tbe primitive ice-boat. Still, as steam communication has been adopted, I presume he meant to say that more difficulty has occurred in relation to steam communication during the past winter than in any other year. That is entirely owing to one circumstance. If no attempt had been made to keep up communication between Summerside and Cape Tormentine or, if that attempt had been abandoned when the increasing severity of the winter made it hazardous and the communication maintained entirely between Pictou and Georgetown by the two boats, giving every facility for passenger and freight communication, would have been in constant operation during the whole of the winter. It would not be fail' to condemn the service simply because the experiment tried in response to the representations from a very important section of Prince Edward Island resulted in imprisoning one of the steamers in the ice floe, and because the attempt of one of the other steamers to get out of that difficulty resulted in breaking her propellor and the second steamer was ineapaciated, thus nullifying the whole of the service for several weeks. Instead of diminishing the communication by the established route which time has proven to be a safe and satisfactory one, an experiment was made involving one of the steamers, imprisoning her in 'the ice and making her absolutely useless for the purpose for which she was placed in the service. The matter is perfectly obvious to any person acquainted with the conditions there that while Charlottetown and Summer-side are the most important points, and while mail communication must be kept up uninterruptedly in the summer season when winter comes the conditions change and if there is to be a regular communication between Pictou and the mainland that communication must pass via Pictou and Georgetown. That has been satisfactorily and conclusively proven by the experience of the years in which our race has inhabited this country. I would not altogether go so far as to condemn the government for having yielded to the request of the people of the western part of the island to try the experiment, but I think they lutve sufficient warning in the experience of the past winter to prevent them from resorting to that experiment in the future. If they do adhere to the winter service route between Pictou and Georgetown with two such steamers as the ' Stanley ' and the ' Minto,' we can count on having regular communication between Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia in the winter season. It is true that this has been a severe winter; still, not so severe as some others I can recollect in my own life. It has been a severe winter, and yet I am quite satisfied it was not the severity of the winter which interrupted the communication-it was the fact of having sent the ' Stanley ' to run into the port of Summerside where she was caught under unfavourable conditions and that accident resulted not only in losing her service to the country, but also the loss of the service of the steamer ' Minto ' as well. There are reasons why it would be very agreeable to people living in Prince Edward Island that communication should be kept up with Charlottetown and Summer-side direct, but it is impossible to do that in winter with any facilities that could be commanded by the government, no tuatter what the expenditure of the government might be in the shape of steamers or ice breakers. Across the mouth of these ports where the water is shallow the drifting ice gets in and under pressure of great

weight there is a solid wall of ice formed through which nothing that floats can make its way. On the other hand the port of Georgetown is always accessible and the port of Pictou is comparatively accessible as well. If the government find itself, with means at their disposal to keep open a communication which is feasible and which has been proved in the past to be feasible, I do not think that the same Interruption of commerce will result in any future winter. It is very deplorable, and every one regrets it, that our friends of Prince Edward Island have been subjected to such great loss, and one of the reasons for speaking to-day is to show that we in Nova Scotia have a great feeling of sympathy for our friends and brothers in Prince Edward Island and would like the government of Canada to do everything in their power to satisfactorily fulfil the terms of the Act of Confederation. There is one suggestion which I would make, and it is merely a suggestion. We have heard a good deal in the course of the discussion to-day from the two lion, gentlemen who have spoken, about the defectiveness of the railway service in Prince Edward Island, to the effect that trains were not ready at the moment the boats arrived to take the passengers and mails and freight.. We have heard a good deal of censure applied to the lion. Postmaster General. No doubt he deserves a good deal of it and he is fortunately of sufficient stature and breadth of shoulder to bear his burden without feeling much affected by it. But it does strike me that the chief ground of complaint is, that there is some defect in the history of the organization of the whole of this service. These boats are run under the Department of Marine and Fisheries. Why should not this steamer service be treated as the service across the Straits of Canso, and these boats be regarded simply as a ferry; a portion of the Intercolonial railway; a part of the service connecting the Intercolonial railway with the government railway on Prince Edward Island. If such were the case you would have concerted action and there would be no excuse whatever for failure on the part of the railway controlling these boats to serve them at every landing place with trains and afford every facility for moving passengers and freight. Were that done it would give to the control of the service a large and competent staff of officials who are at Moncton and at Truro and Pictou. The railway men under the officers of the Department of the Minister of Railways and Canals are perfectly conversant with the conditions of weather, and to my mind they would much more satisfactorily and effectively control and regulate the movements of these boats than they will ever be controlled and regulated as long as they are under a department which has not any direct connection with the great system of railways which must serve to feed these
boats, and which these boats must always serve in the capacity of ferries. I do not conceive for my part that the greater distance between Pictou and Georgetown, or Summerside or Cape Tormentine constitute any reason why these boats should not be regarded as ferry boats, and as a portion of the government system of railways just as are the ferry boats which to-day are carrying the traffic of the Intercolonial railway across the Strait of Canso. There are tremendous difficulties also at Canso and this last winter in order to overcome these difficulties, under the management of my friend the Minister of Railways and Canals, a special manager to take complete charge of the ferryage across that strait was put in charge, and the result has been very great efficiency. As every one who has travelled that route knows there are tremendous difficulties of ice and tide to be encountered in the Strait of Canso just as well as in the Straits of Northumberland. I would suggest that this matter be taken into careful consideration and it may be that the result will show that the concentration of the management of the whole service in one hand will result in giving far greater efficiency.
If there be any doubt in the mind of the department that now controls or that will hereafter control these boats as to the proper points for them to make in Nova Scotia or New' Brunswick, all they have to do is to consult the experienced captains, pilots, and coasters; those whose business requires them to navigate these waters ; to be satisfied at once and for ever that the proper points between which these boats should play, are, after the hard part of the winter comes, Georgetown! and Pictou. Up to the end of the year, and perhaps in the month of January the water is so free from ice that even if there would be a somewhat great degree of frost there is no difficulty whatever in keeping up the navigation because at that time the water is perfectly clear and open as it is in summer. But w'hen we have entered upon a new year-


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: It was in January that the * Stanley ' was caught in the ice.


Adam Carr Bell: It may be the first part of January but sometimes the whole month of January is free from ice. It is after we enter the month of January that the trouble comes. In the months of January and February we experience the great difficulties of that navigation.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: The ' Stanley ' first got into the ice on the 12th of Jammry.


Adam Carr Bell: At Summerside, and she was then caught in the board ice, not in the heavy floe and drift ice which later on is found in the straits.


Adam Carr Bell: 


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: She was caught fast enough.


Adam Carr Bell: Up to the end of the year it may be possible to navigate between these points, but the real difficulties commence in the month of January and last through February and possibly a part of March. If this service is to be maintained in the proper way, I think it is absolutely essential that the government should make itself perfectly understood as having a decided opinion that the service must be continued by Pictou and Georgetown.


Mr. H. R. EMMERSON (Westmoreland).: As I represent the constituency lying nearest to Prince Edward Island on the mainland,
I hope I may be pardoned if I say a few words in respect to the motion now before the House. It seems to me that it is not so much a question of administration as it is a question of conditions. It may not be known to all the members of this House that until the year 1902 the only attempt at steamer navigation between the mainland and Prince Edward Island was by way of the ports of Pictou and Georgetown. During the season of 1902 an attempt was made to have winter communication between the port of Summerside in Prince Edward Island and Cape Tormentine on the New Brunswick shore. During that winter the ' Stanley ' ran with very great regularity and the experiment was a success as an attempt to solve the problem of communication between Prince Edward Island and the mainland during the winter months. During the present winter the conditions which have prevailed practically made that route somewhat of a failure. I do not say that it has been demonstrated to be an actual failure but certainly under the conditions which have prevailed during the past winter it has not been a success. The difficulty prevailing with respect to winter communication with Prince Edward Island has been-the hon. members from Prince Edward Island will, I hope, pardon me for saying it-has been to some extent sectional. Tlie people of the eastern section of the Island have been very desirous of having communication between the port of Pictou and Georgetown. The western people, that is, those living in the county of Prince, have been very anxious to have communication with the port of Summerside; hence the attempt during the spast two seasons to have communication between Summerside and a New Brunswick port. Now, I think it has been demonstrated during the past winter that while boats could not successfully run from the port of Summerside to the port of Cape Tormentine, they could run every day of the year without exception between Cape Tormentine and what_ is known as Carleton Head or Carleton Point. IF will be borne in mind that the distance between Georgetown on Prince Edward
Island and Pictou harbour is somewhere in excess of thirty miles, and that the distance between Tormentine and Summerside is about eighteen miles, whereas the distance between Cax'leton Head and Cape Tormen-tin is about eight miles.
Now, the question may be asked, why did the ' Stanley ' not run between Cape Tormentine and Carleton Head ? At Cape Traverse many years ago the government of Canada built a breakwater, which is still there, a monument of a large expenditure of money ; but it is impossible for a steamer of any considerable size such as the ' Stanley ' to approach that point. The breakwater extends out into the sand bar, and is unapproachable. I do not know for what reason that breakwater was built; but if it were at Carleton Head, there would not be the slightest difficulty of running a steamer to that point every single day during the winter months, without exception-why ? Because the action of the tides and the currents is such that twice during every twenty-four hours, or once during every twelve hours, there is an open sea between Cape Tormentine and Carleton Head,
It seems to me this is a matter of importance not merely to Prince Edward Island, but to the Dominion of Canada at large. The trade of that island is very large indeed, It is a very fruitful island and a rich one ; and the people of the mainland must be deeply interested in having regular communication with the island, not merely during the summer months, but throughout the year. The matter of their daily mail must be one of supreme importance to the people of the Island. We on the mainland do not suffer in that respect, and in that respect alone this is perhaps exclusively an island question. If there were established at Carleton Head terminal facilities for the ' Stanley ' or any other steamer, there is no question that there would be practically a ferry; if more than one service a day were wanted, I believe it could be had. But there can be no question as to the one service. I am warranted in asserting that, by reason of information which I have received from gentlemen who are in no way interested in this matter, who have no sectional views, and who are well informed as to the conditions which prevail in the seasons which are most severe, and are particularly familiar with the conditions that have prevailed during the months of January, February and March of this year.
Now, if the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries is desirous of taking into consideration this question, and will inquire into the conditions which I have described as existing at Carleton Head, I feel sure that having secured the necessary information and having provided the breakwater at Carleton Head, he will have solved the question of winter communication, without reference to a tunnel, which may come in the distant future, but which we must all

admit cannot come within the immediate future. We. who live on the mainland and who look at this matter dispassionately, are, I think, iu a position to invite the people of Prince Edward Island, in considering this matter, to sink any sectional differences ns to whether the eastern end or the western end of the island shall receive the greatest accommodation. If they have a daily communication between the mainland and the island at a point almost equidistant between Summerside and Charlottetown, their wants will be satisfied, and the requirements of the country will be satisfied. Until the unfortunate accident which occurred to the ' Stanley ' resulting in her being frozen in the ice on the seaboard, commonly called board ice, there was almost continuous communication daily between Summerside and Cape Tormentine. Now, there was considerable complaint with respect to the mail communication, and I am bound to say that the arrangements made for the conveyance of mails between the' Intercolonial Railway and the ' Stanley ' were not satisfactory, for the reason that the mails coming from the west on the Intercolonial Railway and arriving at Sackville at about five o'clock in the evening, had to remain at Sackville, unless there happened to be a special train going, until one o'clock the following day, when they were shipped on the New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island Railway and conveyed to Cape Tormentine. The 1 Stanley ' leaves at about two o'clock in the afternoon; so that the mails arrive at Cape Tormentine about an hour and a half or two hours after the ' Stanley's ' departure, and there they remain until the following day at two o'clock with the result that they do not reach Summerside until perhaps five o'clock on the succeeding day. Thus it takes forty-eight hours to convey the mails from Sackville on the Intercolonial Railway to Summerside; that is, assuming that the ' Stanley ' was making her regular trips, and I am bound to say she did make her regular trips for a number of weeks until the accident happened to which I have referred. But, at least this can be said, that with open water for a distance of eight miles from board ice to board ice, every day during the winter months, there can be no question of the possibility of regular communication between Prince Edward Island and the mainland. I admit it Is imperative that the representatives of Prince Edward Island should be united upon this one thing at least, as it is of vital importance to them to have daily communications with the mainland whether it be at Georgetown, Summerside or Carleton Head.


Mr.  J. .T.@: HUGHES (King's. P.E.I.) Just one word of explanation. Mr. Speaker. The information I have been able to obtain from seafaring men is not quite in accord with what the hon. gentleman Mr. EMMERSON. -
states. He argues that where the straits are narrow, must necessarily be the best place for winter navigation. But seafaring men and others who have given some study to this question, say that where the straits are the narrowest, namely, between Carle-ton Head and Cape Tormentine, the ice has a tendency to pack, owing to the westerly and north-westerly winds which prevail during the autumn and early winter. Consequently where the straits are narrowest navigation is most difficult, but that is the best place for a small boat to cross because you can drag a small boat along on top of the ice. That is why the small boats, which keep up navigation when the steamers are not able to run, find between Carleton and Cape Tormentine the best crossing. My hon. friend says that every twelve hours the tide and the wind form a lake of open water between Carleton Head and Cape Tormentine, which steamers might cross if breakwaters were erected on which they could land their cargoes. But my information is that these lakes do not form always in the same place. It depends upon the winds and the tides, and this open water may be half a mile distant to-morrow from where it is to-day. Consequently a breakwater might be good today and be half a mile out of the proper place to-morrow. This is the information I have, and while I would not discourage investigation into the possibilities of navigating the straits between these two points, I think that the hon. minister would be well advised in acting slowly before committing his department to any large expenditure. The people of Prince Edward Island want this service kept up at the best place. On that point we are unanimous, but .we do not want any more experiments. Twenty-five or thirty years experience has shoWn that between Georgetown and Pic-tou a fairly satisfactory and reasonable service can be maintained until we get another steamer. I believe the time has come when we shall require three steamers. Our trade has so increased that we require now a third steamer, nearly as much as we did a second steamer when the ' Minto ' was built. I am sure that the rest of Canada will be glad to know that our interprovincial trade is so increasing that we require greater facilities for carrying it in. We are not sectional in this matter and are glad to see in every portion of Canada trade increasing. We have^the greatest country under the sun, and development, not only in the younger but in the older provinces, is going on by leaps and bounds. This demand by Prince Edward Island for another steamer is an additional proof of what I say. There is another point to which I would like to call attention, and that is the fact that although we have a government railway system from Montreal to Charlottetown and from Charlottetown to Halifax, travellers cannot get through tickets or

their baggage checked through. A person leaving Charlottetown for Halifax or Montreal has to buy a ticket on the Prince Edward Island railway, then another on the boats to Pictou, and then another to Halifax, Truro or Montreal. He has to get his baggage checked three times. That is a very great inconvenience.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS.: That is not the case during the summer.
Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) No, but it is during the winter. If the officials of the department will seriously consider this matter we could make a better arrangement. I think it is they who are wholly to blame, because we cannot expect the minister himself to attend to these small matters. But it is these small things which occasion so much trouble, inconvenience and annoyance to the travelling public.


The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS (Hon. A. G. Blair).: I am very much surprised to hear that it has not been found possible or practicable by the railway officials to arrange for through tickets and checking of baggage to and from the island. I am aware that during the summer season, when we have to deal with a private corporation, there is no difficulty at all, and through ticketing and checking are gone on with without any trouble. No doubt the officials of Charlottetown, who are chiefly interested in this branch of the question, have been making every effort to remedy this, and I do not know why they have not succeeded in effecting some through ticket arrangement with the steamers under the management of my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. I shall have great pleasure in instituting inquiries at once and finding out where the fault lies. It ought to be an easy matter for the two departments or three-if three are concerned-to come to an understanding which will ensure the convenience of the travelling public. As regards what my hon. friend has said about the delays at Georgetown and the inability to secure train connections there, I can only say that this is the first time I have learned that trouble of that kind had arisen, either this year or last. I asked my hon. friend if he had previously communicated with my department, and he does not remember distinctly whether it was with mine or some other department that communications took place. My own pretty strong conviction is that it was not with my department, because I would consider it a very serious grievance to have mails and passengers delayed many hours in consequence of the failure of the steamer to arrive on time to make connection with ordinary trains. I think that the train arrangements on the island are made in such a way as to connect with the steamers, if they arrive on schedule time or nearly that time.
As anybody can see at once, a through train, which has brought passengers from some distance still further east, cannot be detained at the point of connection with tlie steamer. It is necessary that that train shall continue on its journey with as little delay as possible. No one would think that that train should be kept at the point of connection with the steamer until the steamer arrives, for the steamer may be many hours late. But, if while the passengers who have been delayed at Pictou and have reached Georgetown, should be detained there for many hours, I do not see why the mails which are brought to Georgetown for transmission and distribution throughout the island should be kept for many hours for the want or the absence of a train or the want of through connection. Of course, that is not a matter that I can deal with wholly within my own department. But I apprehend it could be settled without serious trouble between the hon. Postmaster General and myself. I am sure that he is alive to the necessity of furnishing all necessary facilities and accommodation to the public in the matter of train service. By cooperating, we could secure, and would secure that necessary accommodation. My hon. colleague would have a duty cast upon him, and I should be required to see that the trains were carried forward without delay, and so the duty would be cast upon me of considering any proposition he might make for the sending forward ot the mail. Of course, he would not expect that the mail should be carried for nothing. But the' exchange of reasonable views would lead to the settlement of a matter of that sort. I think it will be possible to avoid an occurrence of the kind referred to. I am not sufficiently informed of the advantages of the various routes offering communication between the island and the mainland to make any suggestion. I do, however, know this, and I think the travelling public feel it, that if it were possible to make the direct connection from Cape Tormentine to some point -on the island a few miles distant-my hon. friend (Mr. Hughes, King's) says eight miles -it would be a convenience which would be much appreciated by the very great number of people who travel from and to the west. There are many passengers desiring to reach Prince Edward Island, a great deal of freight and much mail matter for distribution on the island, which now has to travel all the way round by Pictou, a distance. I should think, of somewhere between 150 and 200 miles further than it would go if it could make the short connection at Cape Tormentine. The people would receive their mails and travellers would reach their des-filiation many hours earlier than under the present arrangements. So far as light has been thrown upon it. it seems that the way by Pictou and Georgetown is the easiest and safest mode of making communication. But I think the suggestion made during the discussion, that inquiry might be made whe-

ther or not a safe mode of crossing could be insured between Cape Tormentine and Carleton Point, is one which might well receive the consideration of the department.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Raymond Prefontaine).: I have but a few remarks to make on the motion before the Chair. I have only to give, to a certain extent, the facts as they are contained in the correspondence that will be filed. Of course, this consists of letters and telegrams relating to instructions given to the officers in Prince Edward Island and on the steamers on the route. According to the information I have procured in the department, the instructions were the same as were given for the season of navigation for 1902. The experience in 1902 of having steamers on the two lines-this is before I came to the department, of course-had shown that this method was a success, according to what I am told. So, last fall, the ' Stanley ' was placed upon the route between Summerside and Cape Tormentine. She became ice-bound on January 12, and was not released until March 17. The ' Minto ' was placed, as on the year previous, on the route between Georgetown and Pic-tou. But when the ' Stanley ' was caught in the ice, the ' Minto ' was sent to her assistance. The ice being extremely heavy-it appears that in certain places it was as much as fourteen feet in thickness- the ' Minto ' broke the blades of her propeller, and so was rendered helpless until the ' Stanley ' got clear and towed her into Pictou. There is no doubt that, if an error was made, the department should not be blamed. The two ports to which the ferries cross had been fixed at the demand of the members for Prince Edward Island. The correspondence will show that, for years and years, those hon. gentlemen had been demanding that the line should be established between Summerside and Cape Tormentine. It stands to reason that, with the severe winter we had this year, when one of the boats was caught in the ice, there was nothing to do but send the other one to its rescue. And that is what was done, and it was the cause of the whole trouble. The correspondence will show there was no error on the part of the officers in charge of the ' Stanley.' And to save the boat, which is a valuable one, the officers of the department thought there was nothing to do but send the ' Minto ' to her release. The ' Minto ' did not succeed in releasing the ' Stanley,' on the contrary, she was herself disabled, and is now undergoing repairs. She is not seriously damaged, but she could not continue on the line. The service has been resumed since March 17, and it has given satisfaction. I shall make inquiries during the coming season in order to ascertain what is the best line to adopt. But it seems perfectly clear that the old line between Georgetown and Pictou was the best, because there was scarcely any interruption when the two Hon. Mr. BLAIR.
steamers were put on that line. Since 1902 the officers of the department have been endeavouring to improve the service, and if, unfortunately, they did not succeed last winter, I do not think the department should be blamed for the accident that occurred. As regards the building of some other and stronger boats than those now employed, that is a very serious question. There is in the department correspondence to the effect that an iceboat of special construction, of somewhat the same kind as they have in Russia, on the Baltic Sea, might be put on that line. I am informed, however, that the conditions of the two places are not the same. In Russia, where they have iceboats running during the winter that go through ice from two to four feet thick, they do not encounter masses of ice like those in the Straits of Northumberland. According to the information that I have received, it is impossible to construct boats that will go through a pack of ice from ten or fourteen to twenty feet in thickness. Of course, I shall continue my endeavours to get all the information possible in order to be able to decide on the best course to pursue.


Hon. Mr. HAGGART.: Is the ice ever fourteen feet thick between Georgetown and Pictou ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No ; that was on the route between Summerside and Cape Tormentine. The fact is that the ' Minto ' could have continued in crossing and giving the communication if she had not been called upon to go to the relief of the ' Stanley.' We tried to get some other steamers, we even tried to get two boats from Newfoundland, and the crew of one of these boats started to go to the relief of the ' Stanley ' and discovered that it was impossible to reach her, packed as she was in the ice. All possible means were used. Men were sent out with dynamite who tried to break the ice pack, but they were quite unable to do so, and it was only when nature came to the rescue of the ' Stanley ' that she was got out of that ice, otherwise she would have been obliged to stay there until spring. I have no objection whatever to the correspondence being brought before the House, because I think it will show all the facts to be as I have stated.
I may say again that the department will make' all necessary inquiries into the case, and during the recess I will personally visit Prince Edward Island and the maritime provinces and make myself cognizant of the situation.


Robert Laird Borden: I would like to ask the hon. gentleman whether he made any investigation as to the conditions between Cape Tormentine and Summerside before changing the route, which, as I understand, was formerly from Pictou to Georgetown ?


The MINISTER OP MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We did not change the route, but we took two routes instead of one, in order to give the people of Prince Edward Island the better accommodation that they were asking for. In 1902 the service was divided. The ' Minto ' was left on the old line between Georgetown and Pictou, and the ' Stanley ' was put on the other line, which was considered last fall perfectly safe, because it had been in operation during the winter of 1902.


Mr. HACKETT.: I would like the minister to explain how it is, if the same conditions do not prevail as regards the thickness of the ice between Pictou and Georgetown as between Cape Tormentine and Summer-side, that the ' Minto ' had to go to the rescue of the ' Stanley ' between Pictou and Georgteown. Did the ' Stanley ' take the field of ice with her or did the ice take the ' Stanley ' ?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the Order for :
Copies of all Orders In Council, and all correspondence between the imperial government or any departmental officer thereof, and the government of Canada, or any department, or officer thereof; and all reports respecting the purchase in Canada, by or through the government of Canada, or any department, or officer thereof, of any horses, hay, oats, material, supplies, animals, or merchandise, for the imperial government, or any department, or officer thereof, during the years 1900, 1901, and 1902.-Mr. Borden (Halifax).
Robert Laird Borden: The other day this motion stood at the request of the Minister of Finance.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: If the hon. gentleman wishes to proceed, I am willing.


Robert Laird Borden: I understood from the hon. gentleman that probably there were some papers that he would be willing to bring down.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: It might stand for the present, and in the meantime the hon. gentleman will indicate those that he is willing to bring down, so that I may come to a conclusion as to whether it is necessary to speak to the motion.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: If the hon. gentleman will make his motion now, I will state the view I have of it.


Robert Laird Borden: I may require to speak upon it afterwards. Perhaps the hon. gentleman would indicate to me his views at some convenient time.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I will do that personally.
Order allowed to stand.



EMPLOYEES OF PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LEONARD-by Mr. Borden (Halifax)-moved for ;
Return showing ;
1.	The number of employees appointed in the Public Works Department since the 21st October, 1902.
2.	Their names and their salaries.
3.	The changes made amongst the employee* ; the names and the salaries of those who have been replaced or promoted, as well as the reasons for such changes.
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. James Sutherland).: Mr. Speaker, I do not think there can be any objection to the motion. I do not think there have been any appointments, or changes, during the time mentioned. However, if there a,re, we will bring down the information.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
1.	The quantity of vegetables entered at the custom-house at Montreal, as imported from the United States, from the first of February, 1902, to the first of March, 1903.
2.	The quantity of vegetables entered at the custom-house at Toronto, as imported from the United States, from the first of February, 1902, to the first of March, 1903.
3.	The amount of duty levied and collected in each case respectively.-Mr. Monk-by Mr. Borden (Halifax).
Copies of all telegrams, reports, letters, photographs, and correspondence, of every description, between the Department of Agriculture and any person, or persons, whatsoever, relevant to the outbreak of hog cholera in the township of Yarmouth, Ontario.-Mr. Ingram.
Return of all papers, documents, and correspondence between the Department of Railways and Canals, the Department of Justice, the Treasury Board, and the Auditor General, or between any of them, relating to the promotion of Mr. F. A. Dixon to the rank of Chief clerk, at a salary of $1,800 a year ; to take effect from July 1, 1902, and the payment of said salary ; and including amongst other papers the report of the deputy head of the Department of Railways and Canals, as provided for by subsection (a) of section 15 of the Civil Service Act ; the Minute or Memorandum of concurrence of the Minister of Railways in said Report ; and a copy of the Order in Council creating such chief clerkship ; pursuant to section 15 of said Act, and of the Order in Council in this matter of May 20, 1902 ; and including all papers, documents, letters and proceedings, in this matter, referred to on pages A-19, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 and 55 of the Auditor General's Report for the year ending June, 1902.-Mr. Lennox.
Statement in detail of amounts paid for travelling expenses in connection with the Census of 1891, to any census commissioner, in the province of Quebec, since June 30, 1902 ; with
[Stage Direction]


names of officers to whom such travelling expenses were paid ; and the places such officer travelled to.-Mr. Monk-by Mr. Borden (Halifax).	,
Copies of all correspondence, representations, memoranda, Minutes or Orders in Council, appointments, instructions, papers and writings, in reference to or in connection with railway cattle guards or in reference to, -or in connection with the selection or appointment of the cattle-guard commission, and the members thereof ; and their action and proceedings, including the retirement of Mr. Robertson, and the appointment of Mr. P. W. Holt, C.E., as sole commissioner, and his instructions and subsequent proceedings ; and including all interim reports by the original or subsequent commission, between the date of the report of the Railway Committee of last session on the Lancaster Bill No. 3 of last session, and this date.-Mr. Lennox.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee oa Bill (No. 2) to amend chapter 8 of the Statutes of 1900, authorizing the granting of railway subsidies.-Mr. Charlton.
On section 1.
John Graham Haggart: What is the length of this road and what is the total amount to be expended on it ? Why is it that you wish the sum reduced from $60,000 to $30,000.


Mr. THOMPSON (Haldimand and Monck).: I may say to the hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Haggart) that there is no particular road mentioned. I believe it merely proposes the general principle of reducing the amount of the payment from $60,000 to $30,000 to meet the case of short roads where the expenditure is not sufficiently large to permit of an application as the statute stands. The matter was before the Railway .Committee, discussed there and carried unanimously.


John Graham Haggart: The old law was that the road must be completed in ten mile sections. It must be less than a ten mile section that you wish to apply this provision to. Why should not a short road of say 6, 7 or 8 miles be completed before the application is made.


Andrew Thorburn Thompson: I am afraid my hon. friend has me somewhat at a disadvantage. I am moving this in a formal way in the absence of the hon. member who is promoting the Bill. It was discussed in committee but I have not the same familiarity with the matter which he has. Of-course, if the hon. gentleman takes exception, it will have to stand.


John Graham Haggart: I have no objection to the Bill, but I do not know to what it is proposed to apply this principle. This is to amend the principle which was introduced into the Railway Act only to give progress estimates in connection with the construction of railways where the amount earned is $60,000. This proposes to reduce Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND.
the amount so as to enable the government to give a progress estimate on the amount of the subsidy earned when the amount is only $30,000. It is possible that the railway may be a very short one but that is all the more reason why the principle should lie retained, and the subsidy should not be paid unless the whole road is constructed. I am opposed to the principle entirely. 'I think it is wrong to give progress estimates on a road a large proportion of which may not be completed and which may not be of any benefit to the coulitry.


Andrew Thorburn Thompson: I understood the Minister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair) to say during tiie progress of the discussion at the Railway Committee that progress estimates were very likely to be done away with before a very great while.


The MINISTER OP FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: There was a question as to whether or not it was wise to have the system of progress estimates at all. The view the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals took was that inasmuch as we had that principle in the Act at present he thought there would be no injustice in placing the amount at $30,000 which would enable smaller roads to obtain the advantage of the system, whereas, at present, it can only apply to large undertakings. There was some question in the minutes of the Railway Committee as to whether progress estimates were wise at all, but since we have them and since they apply to large enterprises only, it was thought, in the view of tiie committee, that there would be no injustice in allowing it to be made more favourable to the smaller companies which might receive $30,000 which they cannot receive as long as the sum is fixed at $00,000.


Robert Laird Borden: That desire will be satisfied by an amendment providing that the amount should be reduced to $30,000 in case of railways not exceeding a certain length.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think practically that is the way it works out.


Robert Laird Borden: The Act is of perfectly general application at present. Even if the road was fifty or one hundred miles long, this Bill would apply to it.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: What the hon. gentleman suggests has some force in it, perhaps, but I should think the proper way to amend the statute would be by stating that where a road is only of a certain length, where it does not exceed ten, fifteen or twenty miles, then you may make payments where the amount earned is $30,000. I do not know whether that view was suggested in the Railway Committee or not.
Bill reported.



DOMINION ELECTIONS ACT, 1900-AMENDMENT.

Mr.  J. J.@: CLANCY (Bothwell) moved the second reading of Bill (No. 15) to amend the Dominion Elections Act, 1900. He said I would like to ask the Minister of Justice if he is prepared to adopt this Bill ? The reason I ask the question is that there seems to be some difference of oinnion between the hon. leader of the opposition and the hon. Minister of Justice as to whether the offence proposed to be dealt with in this Bill is covered by the present law. I take it for granted that if the present law does not cover the offence, the Minister of Justice will accept the remedy provided in this Bill.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE (Hon. C. Fitzpatrick).: My opinion still is that the provision of this Bill is already covered by the existing law. I believe that the words in section 112, 'in any manner practices intimidation on or against any person ' are sufficiently broad to cover the evil which my hon. friend complains of.


Mr. CLANCY.: The hon. minister will see that it was thought necessary to specifically state in section 112 what were the offences, and after having stated them specifically, then it concludes by saying ' or in any manner practices intimidation upon or against any person.' The offence that my Bill proposes to remedy is just as definite in its nature as any of those specifically mentioned in section 112, but it is not mentioned in that section. The offence I am endeavouring to remedy is as far-reaching in its effects as any already stated in the statute. I am not a lawyer, but taking a common sense view of it, it does seem to me that the existing law leaves the matter so indefinite that it would be difficult to prove in a court the particular intimidation spoken of in my Bill as an offence under the law. I am sure that the Minister of Justice will sympathize with our position in the province of Ontario. Every one knows that we have not a secret ballot In the local elections, and unfortunately that fact is used as a means of intimidation. Then, when the federal elections come on the voters are told that the Dominion ballot, like the provincial ballot, is not secret, and so voters are intimidated. That is the offence which I want to punish. Perhaps the language used in my Bill may not exactly describe the offence which I intend to punish, but if not the Minister of Justice can substitute such other words which will have the intended effect. Of course, if the Minister of Justice takes the ground that such an act of intimidation should not be punished, that is another story, but if he does admit that such gross intimidation should be prevented by the law, then I think he should accept my Bill.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: What does the hon. gentleman wish to punish by his Bill ?
34}


James Clancy: I have already explained and the language in my Bill is clear upon the point. It says : Or makes use of any language to the effect that the ballot to be used or the mode of voting at the elections is not secret.'


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Is it the intention to prohibit the use of these words, because they may be a form of intimidation ?


James Clancy: Not ' may be,' but are, as a matter of fact.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: The answer to that question shows the absolute necessity of the position I take, and shows how absolutely useless are the words suggested in the amendment, because if they describe a form of intimidation, the statute brings it within the operation of the law.


James Clancy: It might be a question with the judge whether they were acts of intimidation. He might take a different view.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: This discussion is getting somewhat irregular at this stage. Would it not be better to allow the Bill to go to committee ?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, Bill read the second time, and House went into committee thereon.
On section 1.
Andrew B. Ingram: The words that follow the word ' loss ' in section 112 read : ' Or in any manner practices intimidation upon or against any person in order to induce such person to vote or to refrain from voting.'
I think the contention of the Minister of Justice would be a very proper one if the offence were a means of intimidating any person to vote or to refrain from voting. That is not the complaint of the mover of the Bill at all. What he complains of is that by reason of being told that the ballot is not a secret ballot, the voter, instead of voting in the way he would have voted, is influenced on the opposite side.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: That case is covered by the provision against interfer-ring with a voter in the free exercise of his franchise. Would it not be an interference with the free exercise of the franchise by any person to tell him that you know how he is going to vote ?


Mr. HENDERSON.: I think it would be a very serious interference with the rights of a voter for another elector to tell him that when the election was over he would know how he voted. The Bill of my hon. friend from Bothwell has a special application to the province of Ontario, and perhaps for that reason the hon. Minister of Justice does not see the great necessity for the change, he living in the province of Quebec, where there is an absolutely secret ballot for provincial electoral purposes. Unfor-

tunately in the province of Ontario we have not such, nor have we had for a great many years. It is well known that in all provincial elections the ballot is not a secret ballot. The marking of the ballots is known to the party in power. They have the means of obtaining that knowledge, and without any doubt whatever they do examine the ballots after they are returned to the city of Toronto and are placed in the hands of government officials there. In that way they are enabled to mark the lists for the next genera] election. So that when an election comes on it is practically known to them just how every voter voted in the previous election. For this reason, we from the province of Ontario, feel that something ought to be done to prevent the intimidation which is practiced on voters in that province. As the hon. member for Bothwell has said, not only is this intimidation carried on in provincial elections, but it has come to be so well understood that it is now carried into Dominion elections, and voters are told, though not truthfully, that their vote will be known in Dominion elections the same as in provincial elections ; and men who are not familiar with the election law readily believe that when their vote is known in one case, it is known in the other. It seems to me that the hon. Minister of Justice should do everything he can to assist us in the province of Ontario to remove the evil complained of. I do not say for one moment that the Dominion ballot is not an absolutely secret ballot. If the voter folds his ballot properly, I do not think it is possible for the returning officer to know how he votes; and certainly, after the ballot is placed in the ballot box, no one can find out how the voter has marked it. But I think the hon. member for Bothwell has made it plain that the Ontario ballot is not a secret ballot. In fact, the officers say, and the judges on the bench say, that it is not a secret ballot. I have heard Judge Armour say :	* In the province of
Ontario we have not a secret ballot.' Under these circumstances, the hon. Minister of Justice can easily see how voters can be misled in a Dominion election, when they are told by some person, perhaps one having superior knowledge, that their vote can be discovered. I think that an offence of that kind, intended to deter a voter from voting for the candidate of his choice, should be a crime under the election law. I hope that the hon. Minister of Justice will allow the words proposed in the Bill to be added to the election law. It appears that the words in the Act are not sufficiently strong to meet the case. They are too general ; let us make them more specific. I trust that the hon. Minister of Justice will lend us in ' the province of Ontario his assistance to do away with this species of intimidation, which does not prevail in any other part of the Dominion.	i


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: I am ab- 1 solutely in sympathy with every effort that Mr. HENDERSON.
i can be made to prevent fraud in elections ; ' but in drafting a statute it is a great mistake 1 to attempt to specialize. The legal theory i is to use words of general application, be! cause the moment you commence to specify ; ! you limit the scope of the Act, and the resuit is disastrous. So far as my information i goes, the language of the Act is sufficient to cover the offence sought to be met by this Bill. But if the condition of things in the i province of Ontario is such that it is necessary to meet that particular case, I am pre-i pared to consider the matter, and I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again, for that purpose.


Robert Laird Borden: Before the committee rises, I would like to suggest that so far as the word ' intimidation ' is concerned, the hon. member for Bothwell might regard the offence in question as intimidation, but it does not necessarily follow that the court would so construe it. The words of the statute are :	' Any injury, damage,
harm or loss, or in any manner practices intimidation upon or against any person.' But the mere statement that the ballot was not secret might not be considered as covered by these words or regarded as intimidation.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Perhaps the voter would not so regard it ?


Robert Laird Borden: That is another observation in favour of the view of my hon. friend from Bothwell (Mr. Clancy) has advanced. As I understand the suggestion of the Postmaster General it is this, that you should have words which would be distinctly understood by people who are not lawyers. My hon. friend the Minister of Justice suggests that if this particular offence is not covered by the word ' intimidation ' it would be covered by the words ' fraudulent device or contrivance.' Whether or not the mere representation that the ballot is not secret would be regarded as a fraudulent device or contrivance is open, it seems to me, with all deference to the opinion of the Minister of Justice, to some question. If there be a particular difficulty, as suggested by the hon. member for Bothwell, I think the Minister of Justice will agree that he might amend this statute so as not to interfere in any way with the general application of the words. For instance we could add a subsection providing that the words ' fraudulent device or contrivance ' would include the offence in question. It is only in exceptional cases we should adopt legislation of this kind, but the case mentioned by my hon. friend from Bothwell seems to be one of these, and the difficulty mentioned by my hon. friend the Minister of Justice might be got over very easily in the way I have mentioned.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: I shall consider all the suggestions made. I move that the Committee rise and report progress.
Progress reported.



GENERAL INSPECTION ACT.

Andrew Thorburn Thompson: In the absence of Mr. McCarthy, I beg to move that Bill (No. 48) to amend the General Inspection Act be read the second time.


David Henderson: What is the explanation of the Bill ?


Andrew Thorburn Thompson: I move that the debate be adjourned.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Public works-chargeable to Income-rents, repairs, furniture, heating-heating Dominion public buildings, fuel, &c., $60,000.
['I am pleased with the progress we have made and I shall be glad to meet the views of the Committee.\nSome resolutions reported.']
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. James Sutherland).: There is an increase here of $5,000. The increase is owing to the increased number of public buildings to be heated.


Robert Laird Borden: Which new public buildings are these ?


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: Public buildings at Granby, Quebec ; Des-eronto, Sarnia, Cardiff, North-west Territories, court house ; Nelson, public building ; Rossland, public building. It was found that the item was a little short anyway. Last year was hardly a fair one to judge by, owing to the strike and the increased prices of fuel ; but, after a careful estimate, it was found that it will require about $60,000 to furnish fuel for the various buildings throughout the Dominion.


Robert Laird Borden: How much is due to the new public buildings, and how much to shortage ?


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC AVORKS.: It was thought that the item of $55,000 voted last year would turn out to be about $3,500 short. The balance, $1,500, would be for the new buildings.


Mr. BLAIN.: Would the minister please tell us what is the policy of the government in the supplying of coal in the individual towns ? Do the government advertise in each town for supply or do they put in a general advertisement ?


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: We have an advertisement which reaches the dealers throughout the Dominion. They can tender for any building or for the whole supply. The practice is, besides that, to advertise for tenders in each place.


Richard Blain: Why should not the government purchase the whole quantity, say $60,000 worth ? They could purchase this
coal cheaper than any dealer. At least that is true of the province of Ontario.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC AVORKS.: My hon. friend (Mr. Blain) will see that that would be impossible. The coal has to be delivered, in some places, in small quantities, and the buildings to be heated are situated all over the Dominion. A Toronto or Montreal dealer could not supply various places unless he had agents in the several towns, and, of course, none of the dealers have such an organization. The dealer in any town in Ontario applies to headquarters, the same as the dealer in the large city. Of course, they supply practically at the lowest prices.


Andrew B. Ingram: Did the hon. minister bring down the statement that he promised on Friday evening with respect to contracts for coal for Ottawa buildings ? That would give us an idea what prices should be elsewhere.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: I think that if my hon. friend (Mr. Ingram) will look at ' Hansard,' I think he will find that I gave all the information with regard to the principal tenders. It may be that there was a misunderstanding, and that there is further information to be given. There is no objection to the bringing down of fuller information with regard to prices, tenders, &c. But that information relates to the Ottawa buildings, while this item is for coal for public buildings throughout the Dominion.


Mr. CLARE.: I think that if the hon. minister could give us an account of the coal bought in the different towns, and the prices paid, that information would be valuable.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: I shall be very pleased to bring down a return showing the amount used in the different towns. Of course, I cannot be expected to have that here.


George Adam Clare: No.


Robert Laird Borden: Sly hon. friend from West Toronto (Sir. Clarke), who is not present at the moment, informed me at six o'clock, as I understood him, that there was some information to be brought down with regard to this.


The MINISTER OP PUBLIC WORKS.: No, there were two other items which the hon. member (Sir. Clarke) asked to have stand until the information was furnished. I have a statement here which I will hand to him, and the other statement which he asked for will be laid on the Table tomorrow. The officials of the department could not get it ready to-day.


Andrew B. Ingram: Could the hon. minister give me the figures showing the quantity of coal for the government building at "St. Thomas, the price and name of the contractor ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am not able to give the prices of each place, but, as I have said, I shall be pleased to bring down a return giving that information.
Lighting Dominion public buildings, $75,000.


Robert Laird Borden: There is a very large increase here.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 
Robert Laird Borden: It is a marked improvement in the system to bring the expenditures down all in one item. We may conclude, therefore, that so far as this item is concerned, there will be no further vote asked.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Not with regard to this item. The object of the department will be to make a correct estimate of what will be required. The difference between the vote of $55,000 and what will be required will have to be brought down under a new estimate, but there will be no supplementary estimate for 1903-4. This is estimated to cover the full amount.


Robert Laird Borden: The supplementary estimate to which the hon. gentleman refers has yet to be brought down for this year to cover the shortage of the current year.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That has been the practice. But henceforth we are going to take an appropriation for the full amount required.
Water-Dominion public buildings, $16,000.


Robert Laird Borden: Does this cover the water tax in cities for water supplied to government buildings ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is to supply water to the various public buildings under the control of the Dominion government. The officers of the department think that $16,000 will be sufficient. We had a small balance left over last year, when the sum was $16,000, the same as this year.
Electric and other power for running elevators, stamp cancelling machines, &c., Dominion public buildings, $8,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Electricity is used in the Montreal post of-Mr. INGRAM.
flee for stamp cancelling machines, freight and passenger elevators, $3,200 ; stamp cancelling machine in Quebec post office, $200 ; Toronto, elevator at the station in connection with the post office, stamp cancelling machine at the post office, elevator at the custom house, amounting altogether to $950; Ottawa, one elevator in the east block, two in the parliament building, one at the military stores, current for the fire pump, stamp cancelling machine in the post office, $2,270; Victoria, B.C., passenger and freight elevator, $920 ; Vancouver, stamp cancelling machine at post office.


Mr. LENNOX.: Could the minister tell us what it costs to run the elevator in the Sey-hold building ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That is not run by electricity. These items I have read represent the cost of electrical power.


Andrew B. Ingram: Did we not have a power house at the foot of the hill here a few years ago ? What was done with that ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The machinery became obsolete and the plant was abandoned. The machinery is still there.
Harbours and river, Nova Seotia-Amagandus wharf, $2,000.


Mr. TAYLOR.: Will the minister please explain where in the Auditor General's Report we will find the details of the expenditure at this place ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: None of the money voted was spent last year.


George Taylor: Then why should you ask for a vote this year ? I see that it has been voted for two years and nothing done. Perhaps, if it is not necessary, you might drop the item.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In explanation I may say that it is quite right that this money has not been spent though previously voted, but the work is now under way. It is being done by day's labour, and it is intended to spend $1,000 during the current year, so that, we are revoting $1,000 and asking for $2,000 more as it is estimated that the cost of this work will be $4,000.


Robert Laird Borden: What purpose is to be served by this wharf ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I find that this wharf is being built for the local trade principally. From the petition presented by the inhabitants of this district there are considerable shipments of' fire wood and coal from this point. As other wharfs are a good distance from this place and the roads are very bad it was thought desirable in the public interest to serve these people by building this wharf.


Hr. COCHRANE.: Is it a new wharf ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Andrew B. Ingram: When was this money expended on this wharf ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The work is under way now. It is expected that $1,000 will he spent before the 30th June. We are asking for a revote of a $1,000 and $2,000 more to complete the work.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: What will be the depth of the water when the wharf is completed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am sorry I cannot give the hon. gentleman the information he asks for.
Mr. INGRAM, The Auditor General's Report does not show any expenditure on this work.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, none of this money was spent last year.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: So that the benefit will be from the landing of coal ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Coal and fire wood seems to be principally shipped from that point.


Richard Blain: Does the department purchase the land or how do you secure it before commencing the construction of a wharf like this ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In this case the proprietor of the land at the foot of the road where the wharf is to be built has made a free grant to the Crown of the site.
Mr, BLAIN. Is there any population in this town, or village ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is just a scattered settlement along the coast of Cape Breton.


George Taylor: What is the expected revenue from this wharf V


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I doubt very much if there will be any . revenue from this wharf.


Haughton Lennox: Mr. Chairman, I want to call attention to this point which I gleaned from a statement by the hon. Minister of Public Works. I understand him to say that this is a local matter serving a few people in that neighbourhood. I have no objection at all to it because it is in Nova Scotia, but, I have noticed in other years that the public expenditure has proceeded upon the same lines, not in Nova Scotia alone, but in my own province and, I believe, in all the provinces of the Dominion. I may be wrong, but it appears to me that the practice of expending the money of the Dominion of Canada upon small' undertakings which are in their nature local is not a fair expenditure of the money of the Dominion. It may be a perfectly legitimate expenditure by a province or it may be a perfectly legitimate expenditure by a local municipality. But, unless it serves the interests of Canada as a whole, it is not an honest or judicious expenditure of the moneys of this country. We should not, as a federal parliament, vote the moneys of the people of this country for the promotion of what is merely a local concern. Now, whenever an hon. member of one province opposes an expenditure of this kind, if it is in reference to another province, it is likely to be suggested that he is sectional in his tendencies. But I do so now because this is the first opportunity I have had this session of drawing attention to the matter. I speak of it not in reference to Nova Scotia, but I speak of it in reference to every province of the Dominion, and from my point of view-I do not know what the opinion of the committee is-unless it is shown that there is through traffic to be provided for and that this work in some way will serve the interest of the Dominion as a whole it is not a fair or honest expenditure of the public money and we as a parliament are not justified" in sanctioning the expenditure.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I suppose there is a good deal to be said on both sides of this question. A fine distinction must be drawn to know whether the public interest is being served in each particular locality. On the one hand you have municipal corporations which are wealthy and where the people interested in doing business are wealthy, and a wharf is built at large expenditure to serve the trade of that place, while on the other hand yon have a small place where the people are engaged, as in this instance, in fishing, farm-, ing and that sort of thing and who require wharf accommodation. It has been the policy of the Dominion parliament, probably ever since confederation, to construct these works. I am not prepared at the present moment to make any announcement as to a change of policy. There is no doubt very good service is done the country and that the development of the country is promoted by affording these facilities to the smaller places. We cannot forget that the fishing industry brings a large revenue to the country. It gives employment to a great number of people, although perhaps in an humble way, and it is quite open to discussion whether or not in a locality such as this a small expenditure is not perfectly justifiable. I am not prepared for myself and the government to announce a change of policy at the present moment. Parliament has already approved of these works and I do not think that we would be at liberty to stop their progress. The depth at this point is eleven feet at low water.


Andrew B. Ingram: There was no discussion on this item last year. I do not know where this place is or anything about it.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will have to send my hon. friend to school to learn the geography of Nova Scotia.


Andrew B. Ingram: It would be pretty hard to find in any geography some of the places in Nova Scotia you build wharfs in.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: When my hon. friend (Mr. Ingram) is Minister of Public Works he will find that he has a good deal of geography to learn. This is situated in Cape Breton county.


Robert Laird Borden: Is it let by contract.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is built by day labour, under the supervision of the government engineer.


Robert Laird Borden: Is it the duty of any particular officer to see that the wharfingers all over the country make returns of the revenue received from these wharfs, or whether, as I am informed, there is a rather lax system in regard to this.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The system is that when a wharf has been transferred from the Department of Public Works to the Department of Marine, a wharfinger is appointed and he is bound to make returns and as a rule he does. From some of them there is a very small revenue. The system requires, that returns should be made and I will call the attention of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to the statement of my hon. friend.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Is it not the law that where the expenditure is over a certain amount the work has to be let by contract.
THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS. For eighteen or twenty years in the ease of a work costing less than $5,000 it was supposed that it could be let by an Order in Council without tender. This was found to be ultra vires and now all works are let by tender unless done by day's labour under the department.


George Adam Clare: It would appear that this wharf cannot be of very great importance because it is three years since we began to vote money for it and it has not yet been commenced.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It has come under my notice that the delay in commencing these public works is sometimes caused by the difficulty in getting a site, and sometimes the estimated cost of the work turns out to be more than the vote and the work is not gone on with until we get a further vote.
Big Pond wharf, $3,100.


George Taylor: Last year $900 was voted for this work, and according to the Audi-


Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND.: tor General's Report, none of that money was expended. Now we are asked for $2,500.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The $900 was voted last year, but owing to the heavy storms and damage done it was found that it required $2,500 more to renew the superstructure and put it in proper shape. The $900 was spent, .but not having been expended before the 36th of June last, it does not appear in this year's Auditor General's Report.


Edward Hackett: In what county is this.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Antigonish county.


Haughton Lennox: Are we to understand from the hon. Minister of Public Works that he knows as a matter of fact that a storm swept away this pier and that this accounts for this very large additional amount being required; or are we to understand simply that may be a way for accounting for it ?
The MINISTER OB' PUBLIC WORKS. My hon. friend has drawn a little on his imagination. I did not say that the pier had been swept away. This is a large wharf, having cost some $35,000. Our information comes from the local engineers who made an estimate of the amount required to put it in repair, and I do not think he would report that it is necessary to repair it unless it is really so.
Bailey's Brook-breakwater wharf, $3,000.


George Taylor: There was $2,000 asked for this wharf last year-a new wharf. That was the estimated cost at the time.
I do not see in the Auditor General's Report any account of that $2,000 having been spent. Now my hon. friend asks for $3,000,
I presume to complete the work.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes. As none of the $2,000 was spent previous to the 30th of June last, no account of it would appear in the Auditor General's Report of this year. This wharf breakwater is in Pictou county, Nova Scotia, and the estimated cost of the work is $5,000. $2,000 will be spent during the present year and we are asking for $3,000 to complete the work.	.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the object of the proposed expenditure ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This wharf is on the southern shore of Pictou county. It is to provide accommodation for the fishermen and the people in that locality. There was a wharf there previously, but it was very much destroyed, and this expenditure will practically make a new wharf. It is at the mouth of the river, and really acts as a breakwater as well as a landing wharf.


Robert Laird Borden: Is the work done by contract or by day labour ?
1Q73


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: By day labour.


Andrew B. Ingram: Do we understand that hereafter all new works are to be done by day labour ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No. In almost every case except repairs and very small works, they are let by public tender. I would not say that in some cases repairs are not let by public tender. The policy of the department is to do most of the repairs and to build some of these small wharfs by day labour under the supervision of the resident engineer; but wherever a wharf can be built by tender, that is done.
Big Pond wharf, $3,100.


Robert Laird Borden: Is this for a new structure, or for repairs ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: A new structure. The work has not been commenced. The estimated cost is $3,100.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the purpose of it ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: A small wharf is being built for the accommodation of fishermen residing in that district. Their nearest railway station is Grand Narrows1. Freight is iforwarded from that station by steamer.


Robert Laird Borden: Is there any anticipated revenue ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I can hardlyj answer that question. Some of these small wharfs yield quite a revenue and others do not give enough to pay the wharfinger's fees. It is difficult to know until the wharf is built and placed under the jurisdiction of the Marine Department.


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. minister can no doubt tell us from his experience in the Marine Department something about the system of returns from these wharfs.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: When a wharf is completed it is handed over to the Marine Department and that department finds a wharfinger. In the case of these small wharfs, the wharfinger is generally allowed all the revenue up to $20. Where the revenue is more considerable, the wharfinger receives 25 per cent and makes a regular return to the department according to printed form sent him.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Is this work to be let by contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a small work which, will cost altogether $3,100, and will probably be done by day work under the supervision of the government engineer. It is divided up into a great many items and will probably be better done by days' work, under the supervision of the engineer, than by contract.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Would not a small contract like this draw more competition than a large one as there would be more men capable of undertaking it ? In this way the work would likely be done cheaper by contract.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have to depend a good deal upon the advice of the local engineer. While it might appear to us that it could be done cheaper; by contract, still in places distant from any village, town or settlement, and where the lumber has to be purchased and perhaps floated down during certain seasons of the year, on the whole, taking into account the delays, it would be better to have it done by day work under the supervision of our own engineer.


Haughton Lennox: Is this $3,100 to be the total cost ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, that is the total estimated cost.
Bridgewater, N.S., dredging, $5,000.


George Taylor: Why was this money not spent last year ? I see it is a revote.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The department has no dredge to do it, and I am sorry to say there is none to be hired. In a good many places like this, dredging is very much required, and it may be some time before the dredge now under construction may be completed. This is a matter that will have to receive the serious attention of the department.


Haughton Lennox: Is there any chance of getting the ' J. Israel Tarte ' dredge on this work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That dredge is doing important work on the St. Lawrence at present.


Mr. LOGAN.: What preparation is the hon. minister making for increased dredging facilities in Nova Scotia V


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There is a large dredge under construction, but I regret that it could not be ready this season. The department will have to seriously consider -what arrangement may be made for the present season as in many of these places dredging is urgently required


Hance James Logan: I trust the department will look into this matter of dredging very seriously, at once. In a large part of Nova Scotia dredging is absolutely necessary. I have in mind just now one harbour, the harbour of Wallace, where I have been endeavouring for two years to get the department to send a dredge. A part of that harbour is becoming absolutely unnavigable for the want of a small amount of dredging, and it is very important that entrance into the harbour should be improved as a considerable amount of shipping use it. The department would be justified in making

extraordinary efforts to provide increased dredging facilities particularly for tlie harbours in the maritime provinces.


Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.).: No doubt the province of Nova Scotia is suffering for the want of dredges to do work absolutely necessary. There is a harbour in my county which was deepened in 1882 and on which $82,000 was spent, but which is now beginning- to get shoaly for the want of dredging. During the last two years it has required dredging very badly. We were told by the ex-Minister of Public Works that a new dredge was being built, but from recent inquiries I am afraid it will take as long to build that dredge as it took to build the Temple of Jerusalem.


Hon. Mr. TARTE.: All those who have followed with some degree of care the shipbuilding that has been going on in the world during the last couple of years, know that material has been very difficult to obtain. Railway men and ship-building men have been unable to get the material they require, and the department, no doubt, has been hampered by the same difficulty. When I left the department a large dredge was well under way at the government shipyard at Sorel, but some time ago I heard that it is not yet completed. I am not surprised, but I fully expected it would be completed in the month of July or August. Of course during the last five months I have not followed up matters in connection with our public works, but that dredge which is under way now in Sorel will have a greater capacity than any of the dredges working in the maritime provinces now. Just as the dredge that bears my name has a greater capacity than nearly all the dredges on the St. Lawrence. That dredge, with the changes that have been made, if I am well informed, will have a capacity of 1,000,000 cubic yards a month. There was never a dredge of that kind built in this country before. The dredge that was intended for the maritime provinces is a suction and also a dipper dredge. It will be a large, sea-going ship. So far, we have imported dredges for the maritime provinces from England. We are now building our own dredges with Canadian hands and on Canadian soil, and, as far as possible we are building them of Canadian material. But, unfortunately, we have not been able, up to this time, to secure Canadian steel plates ; but I hope that the time is not far away when our country will be able to produce the plates. The reason why delays took place while I was in office was that we could not get material. We are not the only ones that have been delayed, however. All the railways, not only in this country, but in the United States, have been hampered in their work because they could not get material. We must take the times as they are- we are in the growing time, in every part of the world. But let me say that the Department of Public Works has built Mr. LOGAN.
a good many dredges during recent years, and it will be necessary to build more, if we wish to grapple with the difficulties and progress with the times. Of course, this country cannot expect to build dredges without providing the money for them. I do not know what my successor's plans are, but I know very well what it is necessary to do in the public interest at this time. We should not hesitate one minute, in my humble opinion in providing all the money that is necessary to equip our waterways in first-class shape.


Mr. FRASER.: There are a number of places in Nova Scotia-indeed in all the lower provinces-where, though the members from Ontario and the west may not understand it-it is absolutely necessary that dredging should be done and wharfs built. I have in my mind one instance in a county represented here not by a gentleman supporting the government, but by one on the other side of the House. I refer to the East river in Pictou county. From the harbour at Pictou up to New Glasgow, there are the large works of the Nova Scotia Steel Company. There is need of dredging there. And I trust we shall never assert the rule, that, simply because the county sends a man to support the opposition, therefore no public work shall be done in that county. I understand from those who know that in a number of places in Nova Scotia and in the lower provinces generally dredging can be carried on in winter. In northern Europe, I understand, excellent work is done in dredging during that season. The ice is cut and the material is taken up and put at some distance on the ice. It is carried away by the ice in the spring or sinks at the side of the channel. There are estuaries and rivers in Nova Scotia also, I believe, in Quebec, where work can be done all winter. What can be done elsewhere can be done in Canada, and I am told on very good authority that that work is done in Europe. I am informed that in this way a dredge could be utilized both winter and summer. There are many places where a dredge could not work in winter, for the dredging is carried on in harbours during the fine weather, but when the fall comes and the sea gets rough, nothing can be done. Thus a dredge could work all summer in the harbours, and then, in winter, be taken to East river or some similar place and be utilized all winter. We are only beginning what we have to do in this respect, for we need breakwaters for the security of their boats and we need the dredging in the interests of navigation. I would suggest to the minister that he make inquiries whether or not this winter dredging can be carried on.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I am afraid that it would be very difficult to carry out the suggestion that has been made. My hon. friend

(Mr. Fraser) knows better than I do that most of the harbours in the maritime provinces are very much exposed. Particularly with the dredges that we have to-day, 1 think it would be very difficult to carry on anything of the kind.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: I am speaking of rivers.


Joseph Israël Tarte: My experience is that in the months of fall, it is very difficult indeed to get the crews to do any work. In the St. Lawrence river, when November comes it is time to lay up the dredges for a rest. Permit me to say, Mr. Chairman, that it would be in the public interest to equip our country just now, with all the dredges that are necessary. If you look carefully at the reports showing the results of the dredging in the past, you will find that the modern dredges supplied by the government do their work for three or four and five cents a yard, work that, in the past, would have cost twenty-live, forty or fifty cents a yard. The dredge that bears my name, which is the most modern dredge that has been built in this country, during one of the months last season made 600,000 yards in a month. Well, that dredging did not cost much money.


Edward Frederick Clarke: That was working day and night.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Yes. But the dredge has a greater capacity than that. With the changes that have been ordered, the capacity of that dredge is 1,000,000 cubic yards a month. Dredging in so large a quantity, with the same crew of twenty-four men, the cost per cubic yard would be very little indeed. For dredging in the port of St. John, we were asked $1 per cubic yard for dredging, if I remember well. That dredging will not cost us, I am sure, if it is made by one of the government dredges more than five cents or six cents a yard. It is particularly in the public interest to build dredges and to build them in the most modern way. And we must build them without any delay. There is no doubt that we have been late. I do not say that to throw blame on those ministers before me. Now, I may say that when I took office the Department of Public Works had scarcely any dredges worthy of the name. We had only two tubs. It is not then surprising that we are behind the times, that we have many ports that have not been dredged that should have been dredged. But, with the modern implements that we have, with the ship-yard that we have built in Sorel, with many other private ship-yards that we have in Ontario, we can make up for lost time. I would earnestly invite the Minister of Public Works to go on without any hesitation. The country will certainly support him. Our waterways must be equipped now, if we do not want to lose our trade. Our American friends are not losing time. I will not say any more now on this item,
as perhaps we shall have another opportunity to discuss the great question involved.


Haughton Lennox: How much is proposed to be expended on the building of the wharf 1


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I can hardly give the hon. gentleman an estimate as to the amount of dredging that may be required at that point. It was thought that $5,000, would do a great deal of useful work in the river, but I do not think it will complete all the dredging that will be required.
Cheverie, breakwater extension, $1,600. '


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There was expended in 1901-02, $768, and in the succeeding year, $175. This amount is required to complete the extension. The cost altogether will be $5,243, including the present vote.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the necessity of the extension ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is an extension into deeper water. It is also used as a landing pier as well as a breakwater.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Why do you make a distinction between a breakwater and a wharf ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have never been) able to find out exactly where the distinction is made.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: There may be a breakwater and a wharf combined. Suppose you have 200 feet of a breakwater, you build that up with stone until you get out to a certain depth where schooners can come up. Then the stone is covered with cement or wood, so that you can go out upon it just as well as on a wharf. But it serves at the same time as a breakwater for the shipping. It serves as a wharf on which you caul receive goods at the end of it and deliver goods. " Sometimes the wharf is not used at all, because vessels can come inside of the breakwater, which prevent the dashing away of the vessels. But sometimes a breakwater is used to give a certain depth of water to the vessels.
Church Point, repairs to breakwater, $3,000. The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS. Last year $1,800 was voted and spent on this work, which will require $3,000 to complete. It is in Digby county.


George Adam Clare: Has the $1,800 been spent ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.
Cow Bay (Port Morien),' repairs to breakwater, $25,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This was originally built of wood, and the * wood is to be replaced with concrete blocks.

There has been expended on that work, $334,000.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Is this expenditure like those the hon. gentleman and his friends used to accuse us of making, to buy up constituencies with the people's money ?


The MINISTER OE FINANCE.: This is a very old and expensive work. It was built many years ago, and has cost nearly half a million dollars. It will necessarily cost a considerable sum every year if it is to be kept up.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Is it worth the money?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think it is. There is a large coal mining enterprise carried on in that region, with every promise of great development. I think the country could hardly afford to let the work go down.


Robert Laird Borden: I suppose it answers some purpose in connection with coal mining now ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Tes, the Newcastle Company are operating at that place, it is a service to them. It is a breakwater.


Robert Laird Borden: Is that work let by tender, or is it done by day's work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think it is being done by day labour. 260 feet of this breakwater was carried away, and in order to have a permanent work there that would stand the storm, it has been decided to build it with concrete.


Robert Laird Borden: Is there any reason why this should not be done by tender and contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is very difficult to make specifications on which to receive tenders for repairing an old work.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Why should it be difficult ? If it was repairing an old wharf, I could understand it, but here you are providing! for a new breakwater.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is not a new work. A good deal of that was swept away and we are now going to repair the old pier. As I said, it is difficult to make specifications, because, until the wood work is torn away and uncovered, we do not know how much work will have to be( done. In making the concrete, if it is properly looked after, the work ought to be done as cheaply by day's labour as bv contract.


Haughton Lennox: I did not quite hear the explanation that the hon. minister made when he first was dealing with this matter, but I understand that the $10,000 voted last year has not yet been expended. Is that right ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Part of it has been expended and the bal- ' ance is now being expended. The estimate of the engineer is that it will be all expended before the 30th June next.


Haughton Lennox: Then I assume that the expenditure has been since the 30th June last, because it is not in the public accounts. That is an expenditure of $10,000 last year and a contemplated expenditure of $25,000 additional this year. This is a very large expenditure. It may be quite justifiable, but it does appear to me that where there is an expenditure of probably $35,000 within two years, the suggestion that the work cannot readily be let by contract does not appear to be reasonable. It may be difficult; all these public undertakings are difficult, more or less, but it is hard to conceive that it is impossible. When it comes to an expenditure so large as this, I think a very serious effort ought to be made to carry out the principle that we are endeavouring to work on in regard to the expenditure of public moneys for large public works in this country, that is, that the work shall be done by tender and contract. Although the hon. minister says that the work to some extent is patching or repairing, I cannot understand why it cannot be done by contract. Both parties to the work would understand it to a large extent. The engineer of the government would understand it on his part, the contractor would be able to estimate it on his part, and it does not appear to me to be a very reasonable ground for departing from what the true intention is, and to say that this work cannot be done by contract. With a work of the magnitude of $25,000 or $30,000 it seems to me it is almost quibbling with the law to say that it cannot properly be done otherwise than by day labour. It is very much like the case of some towns where they have fire limits. When a structure is destroyed you cannot put up a new one unless it comes within the provisions of the fire by-law, but if the structure is only partially destroyed, and you repair it, you may escape the provisions of the by-law. It seems to be a mere distinction in name, because repairs of such an extensive character as to cost $35,000 practically amount to a reconstruction, and they come within the spirit, if not within the letter of the law, which requires public works to be let by tender.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I can hardly agree with the hon. gentleman in regard to a work of this description. This work which is being carried on by day labour would give the department much less trouble if it were let by tender. On the report of the local engineer, approved of by the chief engineer at headquarters, this work is undertaken by day labour, because, in consequence of the peculiarity of the work, they cannot prepare specifications by which it can be let by tender. Any one

who has had any experience of contractors, either in his own business or in connection with the government, will know the great difficulty of letting a work of this kind by contract. It is almost impossible to avoid difficulties and disputes, and when these arise with the contractor, we generally get a good deal the worst of it.-There is not the slightest doubt that owing to the peculiar conditions existing at this particular work it can be much more economically carried on by day labour than by contract. I quite agree with the views of the chief engineer, after hearing the explanations which he has given me that the work can be carried on much more economically under proper supervision by day labour than by advertising for tenders and making a contract


Robert Laird Borden: I understood from the hon. minister that 260 feet have been completely carried away. One would suppose that would be a portion which might be reconstructed by tender as it was originally constructed, I suppose by tender.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: If it is decided to rebuild that 260 feet certainly the work shall be let by public tender. What we are doing now is repairing and replacing the concrete on the part of the pier which has not been carried away. A great deal of money has already been spent on this work, and in the opinion of the chief engineer, so far as he is able to judge, $25,000 will complete it.


Joseph Israël Tarte: How much 7


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 


Joseph Israël Tarte: For what 7


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: For the portion that is being repaired, but not adding the 260 feet. That would cost $200,000 and $300,000.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the length of the portion that has not been carried away 7


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 1.374	feet is the length of the part now under repair.


Robert Laird Borden: Is that portion servicable for the purpose intended ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, I understand from the report that it renders great service.


Andrew B. Ingram: I understand the hon. minister to say that the balance of this work will cost $200,000. Has that been stated 7 Does the government intend to spend $200,-000 7


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No decision has been come to in regard to extending this pier to the original length, with this vote it is hoped to complete the
1.374	feet.


Andrew B. Ingram: With an additional expenditure of $200,000 would this pier be all right 7


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This pier will serve a very good purpose. I do not say that the breakwater will be as serviceable as if extended to the original length of 260 feet, but it will answer the purpose very well.


Andrew B. Ingram: What trade is carried on there 7


Joseph Israël Tarte: Coal.


Andrew B. Ingram: Are large quantities of coal shipped from It 7


Mr. KENDALL.: The amount provided | for this work looks like a large amount but this work is one of the very largest we have in the maritime provinces and has during the last thirty years been of great service. Probably, a great many million tons of coal have been shipped at this point. A few years ago two of the mines formerly operated at this place were closed, and even after they were closed the breakwater was of great importance, because it is the only haven between Louisburg and Sydney, and is frequented by a large fleet of coasting and fishing vessels. During the last two or three years an English company has undertaken to develop the coal areas under the water in the bay, and at present they have driven levels to a distance of some 1,200 or 1,300 feet. It is estimated that by July they will have opened up a great submarine area of coal and will probably produce not less than 1,200 or 1,500 tons of coal a day or probably 300,000 tons a year. It has been demonstrated also within a short time, that certain coal seams which were not considered to be contiguous with the Cow Bay Basin coal seams, have been located on another point in this territory and it is quite likely that before long-I say this on the advice of scientific men-that several marine areas which we never hoped to be able to operate will be operated at a point not very far away. Although we are making these large expenditures now, I am afraid that we can scarcely assure the House that we shall not ask for more money than this. We must recognize the fact that the coal areas we have down in Cape Breton probably occupies the most commanding position of any coal fields on the whole Atlantic Ocean east or west. We are able to boast of the fact that we can put coal on the sea board for fifty cents a ton cheaper than any other colliery either in the American or Eastern hemisphere. To-day we see our coal going to Norway, Sweden, the Mediterranean, South Africa and West India, and we may look forward to a very great development in the coal industry. Astonishing as that development has been during the last few years, we expect a proportionate rate increase for the future. I

may state that for many reasons I would prefer that this work should be done by tender and contract, but I believe that in this case it is impracticable for the reasons which have been stated, and for another which I shall add. That it is the face of the structure is so bad that even if estimates were made to-day for repairs, storms might occur and new gaps made that would have to be repaired during the season.


Robert Laird Borden: Will the new enterprise of which the hon. gentleman speaks, have this harbour as its shipping place ?


Arthur Samuel Kendall: Yes; no other.
Digby pier-renewal repairs, $2,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is for minor general repairs to the pier and building.


Robert Laird Borden: There seems to have been $3,700 spent last year. Was that for general repairs also ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes; it was very much out of condition and there had to be a great deal of work done on it.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the total cost of these repairs likely to be ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is the total cost so far as we know at the present time required for next year. During the present year there will be expended $3,700, and $2,000 is estimated to complete all the repairs necessary next year.
Drumhead breakwater, $4,500.


Andrew B. Ingram: What is the estimated cost ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This work is now under contract. The total estimated cost is $7,000. Although there was $7,000 voted for this work last year I find that the contract price was $4,805, so that we are only revoting $4,500 of the $7,000 granted last year.


Andrew B. Ingram: Is $4,500 the total cost ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There will be a small amount this year to spend, and the total cost is estimated here at $4,500.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the purpose of this pier ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: It is altogether for the fishing boats small and large along the coast. They are going out now further than they did formerly and they are building in fact small 'schooners. This is a breakwater at Drumhead which is about six miles to the south-east of Isaac's Harbour and serves that whole district.


Adam Carr Bell: Is it near New Harbour ?


Arthur Samuel Kendall: 


Duncan Cameron Fraser: New Harbour is a good deal further east I may say for the benefit of the hon. member. It is between Isaac's Harbour and New Harbour and serves the fishing industry.


Robert Laird Borden: It is a harbour of refuge.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: It will not be a harbour of refuge for large vessels but it will be for the large boats that go out fifteen or twenty miles deep sea fishing. However, it is largely in the interest of the inshore fishery and smaller boats.


Robert Laird Borden: How far is it from New Harbour ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: It is fifteen or twenty miles.


Robert Laird Borden: Is it a wharf breakwater or a breakwater wharf ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: It is a breakwater.


Robert Laird Borden: Will it answer the purposes of both ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: No, it will not be a shipping pier.	*


Andrew B. Ingram: Last year the estimate was $7,000, and this year it is $5,500. What is the explanation of the difference ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The only explanation is that the estimate of the department was higher than the lowest tender.


Adam Carr Bell: There was no work done last year ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: No, it is under contract now, and will be done this year.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: During the present year we expect to spend $1,000.


Andrew B. Ingram: I think this case demonstrates pretty well that there is no genuine system in the department of estimating the cost of these public works. The estimate of $7,000 was evidently simply a rough guess, because when the tenders were called for it was found that the work could be done for $5,500. In Nova Scotia we have some 49 different items of harbours to accommodate fishing smacks and such like, and in that number there are only five harbours calling for double figures. I think it should be the duty of the department, when petitioned for a harbour, pier or any other improvements, before asking for any money from this parliament, to have a proper estimate made so that the minister would be prepared to state to parliament what the total cost of the work would be. I want to know whether there was a systematic estimate made by the department of the cost of this work.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I can hardily agree with my hon. friend

lose
that there is any reflection to be cast on the engineer's branch of the department. In the large number of works that have to be constructed by the department, I think the estimates will be found to be fairly correct. If my hon. friend had experience, he would know that it is often very difficult to estimate the cost of a work, owing to the -variation of prices in different localities.-There is also a great difference in the tenders of contractors. It is true, we sometimes have a great deal of trouble owing to contractors undertaking to do work at too low a price. I think the minister should have more latitude to refuse contracts at figures which he knows to be lower than the actual work can be done for, because in such cases the public interests suffer in the end. But I do not think that, because in one particular case the estimate exceeds the costs, that should occasion a serious reflection on the ability of the officers of the department to estimate pretty correctly the cost of these works. I am sorry to say that in some instances the estimates of the officers have been below the cost. I have been encouraging them to be most careful in their estimates, and to give me the outside figures, because it is not in the public interest that we should ask an appropriation for a work, and when we came to take tenders we find that it costs a great deal more than we expected. It is better that our estimates should be on the high side, because if the money is not spent, there is no loss to the country.


Andrew B. Ingram: I am not condemning the engineer's department at all. My remarks had no reference to him. The hon. gentleman said that if I had experience, I would know differently. I can guess the experience of the hon. gentleman, and I think it is something like this. A man who wants a pier or a breakwater in his constituency goes to the minister or takes with him a petition, and asks for the work. The minister asks him what it will cost. He says about 87,000. The minister says: ' Well, we will put $2,000 in the estimates this year, and that will do for a beginning.' I have no experience of it, but I can guess that the thing is done in that way. Now, before any work is done, I think the department should send the engineer to make a proper estimate of what the cost of the work will be. Then the minister would come here prepared to say, ' the engineer estimates that the work will cost so much, and we are asking for so much this year.' That would be the proper way, instead of taking the other plan simply to satisfy a supporter of the government.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In every case before a work is advertised, a very careful estimate is made by the officers of the department.


George Adam Clare: I see in the estimates for 1902-3 there was a vote for $2,000 for this
very work, and now you ask for $7,000 more. That $2,000 has not been expended,
, and it was a revote.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I I find that my hon. friend refers to the appropriations for 1901-2. Nothing was done that year, and the $2,000 was revoted with_ $0,000 more, making $i',u00 for last year.


Mr. RICHARDSON.: 1 would like to ask the hon. minister if there is any well-defined principle accepted for the guidance of the government in making these grants, distinguishing between public interests and private interests. I understand that while there is no revenue derived from these wharfs and piers, and so on, some of them may benefit some individual or private corporation to a very considerable extent. In some cases 90 per cent of the benefit derived from these wharfs will go to some private enterprise, as for instance the owner of a mine or quarry or mill or some other industry for which a wharf is required. The wharf may perhaps be of very little use to the general public. Upon what principle does the government act in calling on parliament to vote moneys for such public works? Has the political complexion or political pull of the parties mainly to be benefited anything to do with the policy of the government. or do the government proceed on any fixed principle of public utility ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There is no question of party politics in this matter that I am aware of. These votes are asked for in the public interest, but of course while the work is in the public interest it is quite possible that some corporation may use it to a greater extent than the general public. But even in this case, as these large corporations give employment to a considerable portion of the community, indirectly the whole community is benefited. But in so far as any of these votes are concerned, I am not aware that there is any one of them which benefits any private corporation.


Robert Lorne Richardson: In the estimates last year, the attention of the government was called to the expenditure of a large amount of public money on a wharf which was particularly in the interest of some party or corporation that owned a mill in the vicinity. In this way an individual or corporation may owe a considerable part of its income to the expenditure of public money. There should be some guiding and distinct principle laid down defining what are public and what are private interests.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: So far as the item under consideration is concerned, it is for the benefit of fishermen irrespective of their political views. It is the fishermen whom this breakwater will serve. There is not a mill or manufactory of any kind In the vicinity. Take for example the vote for expenditure at Bridgewater, in that case the sum of

10S8
$5,000 is voted to be spent in the county of Lunenburg which does not return a supporter to the government. I rose chiefly bo say that the vote under consideration is intended to serve a large section of fishermen by providing them with a harbour for their boats and has nothing to do with their political views.


Robert Lorne Richardson: My inquiry had no special reference to this or any particular item but only as to expenditures of this character.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: As respects all these Items we have had under consideration to-night, I can only recall one in which any corporation may be interested, and that is the item for expenditure in Cow Bay, where there is a coal mine. But in that case the work was done by our predecessors. who spent $200,000 there, and did so wisely and well. That is the only case where there is any large enterprise concerned. All the others are for the benefit of fishermen, who are not likely to have any trade union or corporation or anything of that sort which could be particularly Interested. Whatever benefits there are from these expenditures are distributed among the poorer classes.
Economy, N.S., wharf extension, &c., $2,500.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: That is the first time we find economy in the estimates.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This $2,500 is for the purpose of extending tlie wharf 150 feet.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the object of the extension ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is to give deeper water.
Fort Lawrence landing pier, $5,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The estimated cost of this work is $13,500. The reason we are only asking for a revote of $5,000 is because the engineer does not expect that we will be able to spend more than that on the contract this year.


Robert Laird Borden: Is it by tender ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, by public advertisement.
Friar's Head, N.S., boat harbour, $500.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The total cost of this is $3,252. This completes the work.
Glace Bay, harbour improvements, $10,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There has not been any work done here yet. The specifications and contract are not fully completed. The estimated cost is between $50,000 and $60,000.


Robert Laird Borden: Will the hon. gentleman be good enough to state what is the need of this expenditure.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: 


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Glace Bay is the very centre of the coal mining district of Cape Breton. The town of Glace Bay and the neighbourhood immediately surrounding it, I suppose, contain now 10,000 or 12,000 people, and this centre serves a population of some 20,000. Some years ago it was an important shipping point, but when the Dominion Coal Company consolidated the mines and built a very large pier at Sydney, the operations at Glace Bay were suspended and the harbour has largely filled up. As there is a large local trade and the town has increased in numbers, a proposal has been made that the Dominion Coal Company might be induced to contribute something to the benefit of the harbour if the Dominion would do likewise. The town council had a deputation here recently, and I think it is their intention to make further representations in the hope that a scheme may be arranged whereby, with the co-operation of the government and the coal company, that harbour may be opened up and utilized for a smaller class of vessels. Sometimes there is a complaint that these smaller vessels cannot obtain attention at the great pier, and it is thought that by opening this harbour close by, they could do a good deal of the coal business as conveniently as at the pier at Sydney. And, with the large population to be supplied, there would be an advantage In obtaining supplies by water as well as by rail. The hon. Minister of Public Works has not committed himself as to how far he will go with the scheme. But, I think that if $60,000 were to be spent, a considerable sum would be contributed by the coal company. My hon. friend from Cape Breton (Mr. Kendall) is aware of the proposals that are made, and may have a few words to say on the subject. The government have not gone further than to say that the matter is a fair one for consideration; and, when it comes up in detail it will be fairly considered. But, we have no intention of spending $60,000 without giving the House further information about it.


Richard Blain: When a town council contributes money to be expended in connection with the money of the government, would the government control the expenditure of the whole ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: In this case it would not be the town council that would contribute it. But the council are interested in inducing, if they can, the Dominion Coal Company to co-operate with the Dominion government in the matter. Part of the harbour, I am not sure but the whole harbour, is the property of the Dominion Coal Company, and that would make it necessary to enlist the co-operation of the coal company before the government would undertake the expenditure of the money.


Richard Blain: Do they each spend their own money ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: No arrangement has been come to. The matter is only at the first stage. But it is only right that the House should be informed that a project of that kind has been brought forward, involving a considerable expenditure, a portion of which would be by the coal company.
_ Mr. BLALN.-Then-tire- "guverfiBlent expend money on private wharfs and in prl-, vate enterprises ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am not aware of any such case. This would not be a private enterprise if the wharfs were constructed. It would be a public wharf, open to all who wished to use it.


Robert Laird Borden: It is not a wharf, it is a harbour improvement ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: I was going to ask whether this was an experimental vote or something distinct from the expenditure of the $60,000 referred to by the Minister of Finance ? This is a vote of $10,000. Is it for a portion of the work, or is it a preliminary of the whole ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: If the work goes on as suggested, its total cost would be $60,000 I think. The hon. member for Cape Breton (Mr. Kendall) understands the project, and seems to think it could be finished for $50,000, but that would be divided between the government and the company. That view was expressed by the town council. I have no right to say that the coal company agreed to that. It is easy to make improvements in the harbour, but unless some such arrangement as I have suggested is made, it would be hardly wise to go on with the expenditure of so much money. The expenditure of this sum would furnish accommodation for the people of Glace Bay, and the government desire to co-operate to help them. I think it would not be wise to go on with the expenditure unless some arrangement were come to.


Robert Laird Borden: Is this for dredging ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: For dredging and docks.


Robert Laird Borden: I suppose it affords an opportunity to load schooners at once, instead of having them wait at Sydney. Steamers come first in loading at the pier at Sydney, I understand ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: This would decrease the necessity for delay. Perhaps the hon. member for Cape Breton (Mr. Kendall) would give us a little more information about this. I am not criticising the item, but I want to get a little more information.


Arthur Samuel Kendall: When the Dominion Coal Company opened its big piers at Sydney and Louisburg, it abandoned Glace Bay. This is simply an indentation, and the harbour is practically an artificial one, the only one of that kind we have on our coast. An enormous amount of money was expended there-I think some three or four -hundred- thousand dollars-in dredging and equipping the harbour. That was many years ago.


Robert Laird Borden: Was this money spent by the government ?


Arthur Samuel Kendall: No, mostly by the coal companies using the harbour. A small amount, was, I think, spent by the Dominion government in dredging. The Dominion Coal Company refused point blank to reopen the harbour. It fell into a state of disuetude, and the citizens complained that they were charged, as they thought, excessive rates on heavy freights such as lumber, hay, agricultural implements, building material and so on. There are twenty thousand people within three miles of Glace Bay, and my impression is that it would be in the public interest to have this work done. The Dominion Coal Company, through its agent Mr. Shields, has stated that if the government will make an appropriation of $25,000, the company will be prepared to give the same amount, and undertake to open the harbour and supply the improvements.


Joseph Israël Tarte: We pay $25,000 and the company as much ; who would be the owner of the work ?


Arthur Samuel Kendall: With the arrangement, as I understand it, the company will still own the property, but ample provision will be made to safeguard the interest of the town.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Of course, I have not studied the question, but that seems to me a pretty doubtful thing. I recognize the difficulty the hon. gentleman (Mr. Kendall) speaks of ; but what would the hon. gentleman do in the situation ? Here are twenty thousand people who are suffering from the lack of accommodation, and, for a very moderate expenditure, considering the interest involved, provision could be made for safeguarding the public. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Kendall) asks me what to do. Of course, I am no longer responsibile for what is done on the treasury benches. But if it is really necessary to build a harbour there, I would rather build it and charge the Dominion Coal Company the usual rates. I do not believe it would be wise-of course I do not wish to be bound by what I say now, for I have not given much attention to the question-I do not think it would be wise to spend $25,000 in these works. It is a pretty doubtful arrangement. We have never done it before- *
1 Mr. KENDALL. Oh, yes.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I do not think we have done it before at any time.


Arthur Samuel Kendall: Depot Harbour.


Joseph Israël Tarte: No, in that case we did nothing of this kind. We simply did a piece of work which will be government property. 1 feel sure the hon. gentleman will not find a precedent for this, and I think it is a very doubtful arrangement
' Mr. KENDALL. I want to tell the hon. gentleman that it is impracticable for the government to get control of that harbour.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Why ?


Arthur Samuel Kendall: Well, the amount Involved would be too large.


Joseph Israël Tarte: How much would it cost '!


Arthur Samuel Kendall: I do not care to state the reason openly, but I may say the amount would be very large.


Robert Laird Borden: ' So far as the harbour improvements are concerned, I do not see any difficulty. It is impossible that the Dominion Coal Company or any other company should have such a control of the harbour as to interfere with the rights of navigation. This harbour is a navigable water. The Dominion Coal Company, by holding mining areas covering that country, cannot interfere with the right of navigation. This expenditure may be divided into two classes. One is the improvement of the harbour by dredging it so as to increase the depth of water. The Dominion Coal Company cannot have control over that. The other class of expenditure is for the wharf. So far as that is concerned, it depends altogether on the arrangements made with the Dominion Coal Company. Of course if you go and build a wharf on property belonging to the Dominion Coal Company, one result might be that the company would own the wharf. A matter of that kind must be covered by some arrangement with the Dominion Coal Company before the money is expended. The government ought to retain the ownership and control of the wharf but it would be justified in making a generous arrangement with the company as to its use. I would think that if government money is expended to the extent of one-half the whole expenditure on property of that kind, the property ought to remain under the control of the government, because otherwise tlie vote is made a means of granting a subsidy for a wharf which afterwards becomes the property of a private corporation.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am satisfied that no such proposal would be made. I quite agree with the hon. gentleman that any thing of that kind should not be allowed. I have been asked by the people of the district to interest myself in a Mr. KENDALL.
friendly way in the matter. I agree with the general view expressed by the ex-Minister of Public Works as to the undesirability of a government being mixed up with a private enterprise of that character. But there are exceptions which prove the rule, and if we could make adequate arrangements with the company whereby they might use the property under a tariff of freights which would be fair and reasonable to all, there could be no objection. Assuming for a moment that that can be done, I do not suppose that any one would object under such conditions to dividing the expenditure between the government and the company ; although as a rule it is a bad practice, and to avoid trouble it requires to be carefully guarded. If any such arrangements are made they will also be made upon terms which will protect the public interest in every way.


Robert Laird Borden: If government money is expended I would suggest that tlie control be retained in the Crown, at the same time granting to the Dominion Coal Company in a generous way the use of it for the purposes of the business, which is of interest to all in that community.
lion. Sir. TARTE. I understand it would cost about $50,000 or $00,000 to build a wharf. I would not hesitate to say that the government should rather' build that wharf altogether and remain the owner of it, than to contribute $25,000 to the Dominion Coal Company and not be the owner of tlie wharf. I think the House would sustain my hon. friend if lie were to ask for tiie amount necessary to build the wharf there. Otherwise I think it would be a bad precedent indeed, it would be a subsidy in disguise. The Dominion Coal Company is too powerful a company to ask for a subsidy of that kind. Let us build the wharf and let us pay for it. The House will sustain my hon. friend in asking for $50,000 for that purpose. My hon. friend from Cape Breton (Mr. Kendall) tells us that there is a population of 20,000 or 25,000 to be served by that wharf. I would not hesitate, if the work is necessary, to ask for the money to construct this work and remain tlie owner of it.


Arthur Samuel Kendall: The hon. gentleman is under a misapprehension. The Dominion government does not own this harbour, does not control it in any way. It was formerly dredged out and owned by the old coal companies, and that harbour was constructed by the old companies. It is an inland harbour altogether, built on land formerly owned by the coal companies. It does not belong to us.
lion. Mr. TARTE. Then we are simply being asked to contribute $25,000 to build a work on a piece of property which is not our property. The case is worse. Let tlie Dominion Coal Company give us a

deed for the land, a thing that is being done every day, and let us buy that piece of land. But it would be an unwise thing to spend $25,000 on that piece of property which does not belong to us, and over which we would have no control. It would be a bad precedent. I am sure that if the Dominion Coal Company was approached in a proner wav they would wnwnt tn soll-us the land. The government would then build the harbour works and would own them.


Uriah Wilson: Do you own the land ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: No, it is owned by the Dominion Coal Company.


Robert Laird Borden: We might let the vote pass on the understanding that if any arrangement is entered into before the close of the session it will be laid on the Table uf the House. "


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Certainly, that is fair.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think that my hon. friend is mistaken about the absence of a precedent. But I do not want to raise that point. I think there are precedents, and that they have occurred even in his day. However, that is not the main point. I think the main point is that if any public money is to be granted for this enterprise we must take great care to safeguard the public interest. I would like to have it understood that the Dominion Coal Company are not seeking this work at all. They have not given it a thought, until it was brought to their notice by the municipal council of Glace Bay, who are doing their best to interest the Dominion Coal Company to some extent and the government of Canada to some extent. I have no communication from the Coal Company, but the representatives of the municipality have told me that they hoped to be able to induce the Dominion Coal Company to take an interest in it. I would not like the House to get the idea that it is a case of the Dominion Coal Company seeking a grant. They are not asking anything, and they won't care if we do not spend a cent on it.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I would suggest that the Dominion Coal Company be approached and asked to give a deed of land to the government. Then if it is necessary to build a harbour there, let us build it and let us own it.


George Adam Clare: If this money is voted and expended, we do not know whether the work will be the property of the Dominion government or of this coal company. From what the Finance Minister has said, an arrangement may be made with the Dominion Coal Company and the Glace Bay municipality. If that is the case, the money should not be expended at all until that arrangement is made. I would suggest that the estimate be withdrawn.


Adam Carr Bell: If this is a private harbour and not under the control of the Dominion government, is there any possibility of the harbour owners charging dues and acquiring a revenue ? It must be a very extraordinary piece of property if it is a navigable water and is still a private property.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I suppose a canal constructed by the company would be a navigable water, and still it might become a highway, yet remain private property. I would not like to answer my hon. friend's question, that would be a legal question. But it seems that this harbour was built, or was dredged and constructed years ago by some companies owning the mines in those days, and all the rights of those companies passed under the Dominion Coal Company. It is evident that they own the land.


Adam Carr Bell: What they did was to improve an inlet, if I am not mistaken. They excavated and dredged an inlet, but there must be some property vested in the government of Canada.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The hon. gentleman, may be correct.
Grand river-to improve entrance, $1,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a revote of $1,000 to complete the improvement of the present entrance of Grand river and to remove a large rock that obstructs the channel.


Robert Laird Borden: Where is this Grand river ? There are several of them.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In Richmond County, Nova Scotia.
Grand Narrows-repairs to wharf, $400.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is just for small repairs.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: If my hon. friend lived at Glace Bay he would not take that view. If we were to withdraw this item after what has occurred, it would be interpreted as an unfavourable act. I would suggest that the House let the item pass-we have had a full discussion-and bon. gentlemen may be assured that this money will not be spent except upon terms which will thoroughly safeguard every public interest.


Richard Blain: Who owns that wharf ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The Dominion of Canada.


Richard Blain: What were the receipts from that wharf last year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: These improvements are being made at the request of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, but I have no record of the fees received.
35}

Grand Etang-bridge works at entrance to pond, $1,000.


Edward Hackett: May I ask what this is intended for ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is intended to complete the work.


Mr. MCLENNAN.: The government, in opening out the harbour of Grand Etang, took away the highway bridge and it is therefore bound to replace it. It was thought by the resident engineer that $1,000 would suffice to repair the old bridge, but it was found on examination that it was of no use whatever, and the engineer, upon re examination, came to the conclusion that it was necessary to have an absolutely new bridge. Hence, the $1,000 additional to build this bridge.


Edward Hackett: I come from a province where the people have to build their own bridges even when the government takes away a part of their rights. I think it is strange on this occasion that the people of Canada should be asked to supply a bridge where the government of Canada have taken rights away from the people of the province. At present, in the province of Prince Edward Island, the people are contributing $32,000 towards the construction of a bridge across the Hillsborough river where their rights have been taken away by the Dominion government and the property is owned by this government. I think it is strange that we should be asked to contribute towards the construction of a bridge across the Grand Etang in Nova Scotia. It is true that under the British North America Act where a bridge connects two provinces the cost of that bridge is borne by the Dominion government, but where it is a private and local matter the costs should be borne by the province and not by the Dominion of Canada.


Angus McLennan: This harbour has become a public harbour and the bridge is stretched across the middle of the harbour.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: There is a bridge across one of the best harbours on Lake Ontario, Presque Isle, and the cost of that bridge was borne by the municipality. I have never given a vote against the expenditure of money properly by the Dominion government in any province of the Dominion. I do not care where the money is going to be expended as long as it is for the benefit of the Dominion of Canada, but it must be confessed, if I understand this matter aright, that we must have a large amount of the money of the people expended in wharfs that are not necessary or the government is defrauded out of the revenue from them. Looking over the province of Nova Scotia, I find that there are twenty-four wharfs that have been built out of the Dominion exchequer and that there is not one cent of revenue from them. You may Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND.
take whichever horn of the dilemma you have a mind to. If the wharfs are necessary they must do some business, and if they are doing some business the government is receiving no benefit from the expenditure of that money. We are given to understand that the people require this expenditure because they are exporting the commodities and the produce of their farms, There must be some revenue if the people require these wharfs. I find by referring to the Auditor General's report that there are twenty-four wharfs in Nova Scotia that do not pay one cent of revenue and there are nearly a dozen wharfs that are only paying a few cents. I might read the list but I do not want to detain the committee. It will be seen at page P-172, 173 what the receipts of the government are from the expenditure of these enormous sums of money. To my mind there must be something radically wrong. I do not see how we can come to other conclusion. If these wharfs are necessary, and I want to repeat it with some emphasis, because we have always been ready to believe that they were required for the use of the people, there would be some evidence that business was done upon them. I am not so narrow minded as to say that if there is a community that requires a wharf that because it does not benefit the Dominion as a whole there should not be some expenditure of money, but, in these cases to which I am referring, if the people exported or imported any tiling there must be a revenue and if there is no revenue it is quite evident to any fair minded man that this money was expended when it was really not necessary for the benefit of the community in which the money was expended. I would like an explanation of the fact to clear my mind of suspicion.


Angus McLennan: I forgot to mention that this is merely the rebuilding of a bridge constructed by the late government supported by hon. gentlemen opposite. The bridge was constructed by the late government and taken over from the provincial government and the municipality. The present government in seeking to vote this money is merely rebuilding the bridge constructed by the late government across that harbour.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: I-asked for information and that is no information at all. I was not talking about the bridge.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That happens to be the subject under discussion.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: In the province of Ontario a bridge is built across Presque Isle harbour, one of the finest harbours on Lake Ontario, a bridge similar to the one we have under discussion here and it was built by the municipality of Brighton. In the Auditor General's report I find that the revenue of Avonport was $2, which was an in-

crease of seventy-one cents; Bear Point, thirty-four cents; Canada Creek, $2.83; and Cbipman's Brook, $1.20. I might go over a dozen like that and then there are twenty-four from which there is no revenue at all. If the people amongst whom these wharfs are built have anything either to import or export there must be a revenue, and if there is no revenue. it It plain l.o mv inlnT that the wharfs are built at places where they are not necessary.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I may be allowed to explain to my hon. friend (Mr. Cochrane), because I know he is in perfect good faith, that I have visited the maritime provinces twice and I have come back with the conviction that the fishermen are a class of men that deserve special attention. We must not expect that they will pay dues for the use of small wharfs we are building. They are carrying on a large and profitable trade for the Dominion, and it is because I acquired that belief after having visited the maritime provinces, that I am responsible for the very many wharfs that appear today in these estimates. If my hon. friend would give himself the pleasure of visiting the maritime provinces he would appreciate the importance of these works. The fishermen are carrying on a most profitable trade for the Dominion and they deserve to be encouraged. When my friends on the other side [DOT]will be in power they will build wharfs as the present government is building them to-day. This is not a party question by any means ; it is a large public question and I invite my hon. friend (Sir. Cochrane) to think twice over what I have said in my very humble way, before condemning that expenditure of money.


Andrew B. Ingram: Nova Scotia seems to be well served in this matter. There are fishermen in my own constituency who have paid their licenses for years and have never received any assistance to improve their harbours. In fact, they have had to find the money for that out of their own pockets.


The Right Hon.   S@: 
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: On several occasions votes have been placed in the estimates without the department having full information as to the cost of the work to be carried out ; and I must say that that is so in this case.


Mr. SPROULE.: Why should it be so ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is a little difficult to say why, to be frank. Petitions are put in asking for works, and then a certain amount is placed in the estimates. Any man who has passed through the Department of Public Works knows that we have so many works that it is quite impossible to have surveys in every case.
Some hon. gentlemen from Nova Scotia may go back to their constituencies and say that the opposition is objecting to all these items. We don't object to these improvements, but we object to the system pursued by the government, which keeps the House in the dark as to what the ultimate cost of these works will be.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I agree with the hon. gentleman (Mr. Ingram) but he must remember that in no case to-night were we unable to estimate almost in detail the total cost of any work we asked a vote for. I hope in future to stick to that rule. There may be exceptions to every rule, but so far as I am concerned, I think it is a good rule, and I shall have a report and an estimate made on every work for which we ask a vote when that is possible. It is quite probable that it may take more than one year to do certain works, but 1 believe that the House should be in possession of full information as to what the probable cost of a work will be before we undertake it.


Andrew B. Ingram: They applied for $1,000 or $2,000 to enable their boats to go in and out of the harbour, but they were refused. I myself have applied to the Marine Department and was refused and told to go to the Public Works Department. The government issue licenses to the fishermen and if they can render the harbours serviceable at a reasonable cost they are doing right in making these expenditures. But what we complain of is that the government puts an item in the estimates the first year and then for several years afterwards they come down asking more money for the same work. That is not right. When we pass an appropriation here to commence a work we should know the full cost of that work so that we may understand what we are doing. The system of applying for these works is either by petitioning the department, or get-


George Taylor: We are pursuing the rather unusual course here of voting money for a bridge, and I would ask my hon. friend from Inverness (Mr. McLennan) who is conversant with this matter, if this is a swing bridge.


Angus McLennan: There is a draw on this bridge.


George Taylor: My hon. friend stated that tliis bridge was originally constructed by the late government. In what year was the money voted for it.


Angus McLennan: The money was voted in 1895 and it was built in 1896.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The hon. gentleman lias treated this as a bridge over a natural channel, and he cited the case of a bridge in Ontario which was constructed

over a harbour, aiul where the municipality had to build it. I do not understand that in that case there was auy interference with the natural conditions. In this case the Dominion government for its own purpose in making a harbour, cut through the public highway and rendered a bridge necessary where there was no bridge required before, or perhaps only a small culvert. If the Dominion government had not touched the place there would be no necessity for the local authorities to put in a costly bridge at all. But if the Dominion government cut through the public highway and made a waterway across, then there was the same reason why the Dominion government should build a bridge over that as they would over a canal. I happen to know something about this, because I was in the government of Nova Scotia when the question was raised between the Dominion and local authorities as to who should build that bridge, and after full discussion, it was concluded that inasmuch the need for the bridge was caused by the construction by the Dominion government of what was practically a canal, they were as much obliged to provide a bridge over that waterway as they would be to provide a bridge over a canal in any part of Ontario. That is the principle upon which this bridge was constructed by the Dominion government.


Edward Hackett: Iam not quite satisfied about this bridge yet. This is called a pond, but we have many of these ponds in the maritime provinces which may be called harbours, and this bridge at the entrance to this pond is going to cost $1,500 for repairs. I cannot yet see for the life of me why the people of Canada should pay for the building of a bridge to the entrance of that pond. I have known cases in Prince Edward Island where the Dominion government by deepening the water have caused the local authorities great expense to build bridges to accommodate the travelling public. This is merely an ordinary traffic bridge. It is simply a local bridge. A good deal has been said with regard to the amount expended in Nova Scotia for these public works. I have no fault to find with that expenditure. I speak in no carping spirit of the money spent on these improvements, and I can appreciate the needs of the fishermen of Nova Scotia in prosecuting their precarious industry, but we have a right to have these matters fully discussed in parliament, and when we find the public money is being diverted from its proper use, to have it explained by the government.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Do I understand the Minister of Finance to say that the channel which this bridge covers was excavated by the Dominion government ? What does pond mean ? In our section of the country it means a body of still water. Is it utilized for a harbour ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: This channel was constructed into a harbour.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: What was it before V


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: There was no navigable channel before.
Green Cove-boat harbour, $6,600.


Robert Laird Borden: Will the minister explain this ?
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) That work is in the county of Victoria, and is now under contract. The object is to have a harbour for the shelter of fishermen's boats.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The total cost of this work is $G,G00. It is now under contract. The amount of the contract is $6,275.


Robert Laird Borden: What sized boats will it accommodate ?
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) Sailing boats belonging to the fishermen who go out quite long distances from the shore when the navigation opens, and continue till the fall of the year. Formerly they could not use larger boats because they had to haul them up in stormy weather. When this is built, the boats will be comfortably moored from tlie beginning of the fishing season till the fall of the year.


Robert Laird Borden: Will it enable the fishermen to use larger boats ?
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) Yes, that is the object of it.
Mi\ BLAIN. What system of collecting these small amounts from wharfs do the government adopt ? Have they officials for that purpose ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Whenever a wharf is completed and turned over to the Marine Department, they appoint a wharfinger who collects the fees and turns them over to the department. In the case of these small wharfs which are built to provide shelter for fishermen, I doubt very much if fees are collected. In some cases wharfs are not turned over to the Marine Department, but are kept under the control of the Department of Public Works.


Richard Blain: For instance, at Avonport, there was a revenue last year of $2. How would that be collected ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It would be collected by a wharfinger.


Richard Blain: What salary would be paid to the wharfinger ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The general rule is to allow the wharfinger 25 per cent of the receipts.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: My impression is that where the collections do


Hon. Mr. FIELDING.: not reach the amount which the wharfinger is to be paid for his services, he is not obliged to make a return, and that may be the reason why some of these wharfs do not appear to pay any fees. I would not be positive as to that, but even in such cases I think the wharfinger ought to make a return to show what he receives and what he keeps. That is worth looking into.


Richard Blain: I notice a number of wharfs returning from 37 cents up to $2. Can the minister tell us how these fees were collected, and what percentage of salary was paid to the persons who made the collections ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That is information to be obtained from the Marine Department. There is no doubt that the small return made to the department is the amount over and above the salary or percentage allowed to the wliarf-. inger for collecting the fees and attending to the wharf.


Richard Blain: 
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 1-Ie may or he may not.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That may be the net revenue after paying his fees. I will look into that.


Edward Hackett: What are the duties of a wharfinger ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: To take care of the wharf and collect the wharfage rates.


Edward Hackett: What do you mean by taking care of the wharf ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Ills chief duty would be to see that every person who used the wharf would pay a proper wharfage rate. He would also see that no damage was done to the wharf.


Robert Laird Borden: I agree with the Minister of Finance that in any case there should be a return made of the amount collected. When there is no return, you may assume that the wharfinger has not collected the amount of his remuneration, but you have no guarantee of that.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: What is understood by a boat harbour ? I understand that it means a harbour for fishermen ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yes.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: It would be convenient if that term were applied to all these harbours which are built solely for fishermen, so that when we came to them we would not expect any revenue. In several eases to-night we were told that a wharf was necessary. As I said before, I am prepared to vote the money if it is necessary, but it must be necessary for importing or
exporting something, and if so there must be some revenue. Does the wharfinger take any of the receipts of the wharf for repairs?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Not Without special order.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: If the wharf is necessary for the people in order to serve in the export for their commodities and the import of what they require, there must be a revenue from it, and that would appear in the Auditor General's Report. If there is no revenue then the wharf is not necessary or the wharfinger is pocketing the money.
Hawk Point Inlet, N.S., boat channel, $1,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to permit a larger class of boats going in than now pass through. This will complete the work.
Herring Cove, breakwater, $9,800.


Robert Laird Borden: By tender, I suppose ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, the work is let to the lowest tenderer. It is in Halifax county.
Janvrin's Island wharf, $2,000.


Robert Laird Borden: Is this a new work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, the total estimated cost is $2,000.


James Clancy: Has anything been done up to this time ? It appears to have been standing some years and nothing spent.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, nothing has been spent.


Andrew B. Ingram: What is the idea of voting this year after year and not spending the money ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: A considerable number of votes were taken for small works down in that province and the engineer in charge with his staff has not been able to look after them all.


Andrew B. Ingram: It is not very pressing.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Tlie people there seem to think it is important. I shall try and see that it is attended to during the next few months.


James Clancy: What year was the first vote taken ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have not the records.


James Clancy: Was it before the last election ?


Mr. MATHESON.: The vote was taken last year.


James Clancy: I think the kon. gentleman is mistaken. If he will look at the estimates he will find that it was taken before last year.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, last year was the first time this vote was taken.
Judique, repairs, &c., to breakwater, $400.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the total cost ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 

Kingsport, reconstruction of pier, $3,000.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the necessity for this ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: This is a government breakwater which was constructed some twenty or thirty years ago and on which probably $30,000 of Dominion money has been expended. A year ago last autumn, as the result of a very severe gale, a portion of the pier was injured very seriously, and this money is for the purpose of repairs.


Andrew B. Ingram: How long is the pier ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: About 500 feet.


Andrew B. Ingram: What proportion was torn down or blown away ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: The upper portion of the pier was twisted over down to within a few feet of the bottom. It is a tidal pier and when the tide is out it is dry land,* but there is about thirty feet of water when the tide is in. This storm came while the tide was in, and tin; force of the waves carried probably forty or fifty feet of the end of the pier over.


Andrew B. Ingram: Will this put it in good shape and be all the money required ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The engineer estimates that this will complete the work and put it in good shape.


George Taylor: I see by the Auditor General's Report that last year there was expended on this work $9,208.70 and now we are asked to spend another $4,000. On page V-208 I find that Mr. Alfred Totter was conductor for 181 days at $2.50 per day and that Mr. Eben Cox was foreman for sixty-four days at $2.50 a day. I notice that on all these constructions of piers and wharfs there is a conductor at $2.50 or $3 per day, but in this case there were both a conductor and a foreman at $2.50 per day-and all for an expenditure of $9,000. What are their respective duties ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The conductor is the man who buys the material and generally conducts the' work. The foreman of construction is a mechanic who sees that the work is done properly by the men engaged.


George Taylor: How much will the work cost altogether ?


James Clancy: 


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The total cost will be $41,790.


Robert Laird Borden: One would suppose that a practical man could both superintend the work and buy the material. That is merely a suggestion. Perhaps, for some reason he cannot do it.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In some circumstances, that might be so. But this is a considerable work, and if he went away to look after material, leaving no one to take charge of the men, it might not be an economical arrangement.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: What is it built of ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Timber.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: In our section to do work with timber economically we would have the timber cut in the water, when it could be hauled cheaply and then built in the summer.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That was done with many works.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Then, you would not need two men. One man capable of buying timber would also see that the work was done.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There are two men named, but they are not both on all the time.
Larry's river, breakwater, $14,250.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This work is under contract. The amount being $15,840. The contractors are Reid & Archibald, of Halifax.


Andrew B. Ingram: What is this work and what constituency is it in ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: In my constituency. This is a small fair harbour. Two years ago there came a terrific storm by which the mouth of the harbour was filled up.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: With suckers ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: No, largely with rocks. The people there own quite a number of schooners, and this vote is to make a breakwater.


Sir. KAULBACH.: How many schooners ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: I do not know how many- but quite a number of schooners ply between there and Halifax and go to the fishing grounds. This is a very necessary work.


Andrew B. Ingram: What did the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fraser) do in order to get the department to undertake this work ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: Nothing, except to ask them to send the engineer. The need of the work was so apparent that the engineer reported in favour of it'without another word from me.


Andrew B. Ingram: Will the hon. gentleman say what time the engineer reported ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: I think it was last year.


Andrew B. Ingram: Before the session of parliament ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: I am not sure of the date of my report. The first vote was given last session.


Andrew B. Ingram: If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fraser) will refer to page 1002 of last year's ' Hansard ' he will see that the hon. minister says there was no report.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: There may have been no report at that time. The engineer was there. But I may say about the engineers in Nova Scotia-and I am speaking in the presence of the hon. minister-that last year I think I had four reports to be made in my county, and one of them is not made yet. The engineers have so little help, at least that is what they say, that they do not make reports. They were ordered to make this report before the vote. There was a report came in before any contract was made.


Andrew B. Ingram: That is what we complain of on this side-that the department was induced to put a sum in the estimates last year without a report, for the minister was asked what the probable cost would be and he said he had no idea, for there was no estimate to show. Now, lion, gentlemen opposite can quite understand that we are justified in complaining about estimates so made. This is not a business way for a business administration to do-to bring down votes without preparing an estimate, so that both sides may know what they are doing.
Lingan, beach protection, $1,000.


Andrew B. Ingram: Why is this money asked this year for this work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This makes a total of $1,600 for this work- $600 last year and $1,000 this year. This is brush and stone work, to repair damage made in beach protection work.


Andrew B. Ingram: But we were told that the $600 voted last year would complete the work.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This damage may have occurred during the interval. It may be that the $600 is for repairs then required, but that since then the necessity has arisen for spending this money.


Robert Laird Borden: The hand of Providence seems to have been very hard on these works.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It does seem to have been stormy in Nova Scotia.


Andrew B. Ingram: But there must be some reasonable excuse for this vote if it is worthy of our consideration.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: In all seriousness, what is this vote for ? What do we understand
by * beach protection ?' There must be something inside the beach in which the public is interested in order to justify this work.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: As I understand it, these are small natural "harbours which are injured by the waves of the seas, and, to protect them, brush and stone are put down to make a shelter to protect the points of beach from washing away. It is much cheaper than building wharfs.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: So this is to protect some point that might otherwise be washed away ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Fes.
Lunenburg, dredging harbour, $5,000.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: This is a revote of a sum that has been standing in the estimates for a number of years-and why it should be there, without being appropriated, I cannot understand. My friends say it is to please the people. My own opinion is that they would be better pleased with a vote of this kind if it were expended. I was told last year it was for the want of a proper dredge to do that work, as a lai'ge amount of work had to be done. The government is right in saying it is an immense work for it is required for the benefit of the shipping of these ports. I speak without boasting when I say that the ports of Lunenburg and Bridgewater are two of the most important ports in the whole province. Lunenburg owns a larger amount of shipping than the whole of Halifax. Bridgewater has a very large amount of shipping also, and of heavier tonnage going in and out of that port. And why both of these ports should be hampered in the way, and that for years for want of a proper dredge to do the dredging, I can not understand. The Minister of Public Works and the Minister of Finance were at these ports three or four years ago. They came in a steamer measuring about fifty tons.
They happened to be there at low tide, and had they remained fifteen minutes longer they would have been compelled to remain until the return of the tide, some twelve hours. The boat turned up the mud as they went out of the harbour, so shallow was the water near the pier, and that shallowness of water extended all over the harbour. The banks of the harbour are alluvial, and the wash from the repeated rains carry the debris into the harbour and fill it up from year to year. Now to show the necessity for that dredging, I will say that last year, had we not used smaller vessels, we would have been deprived of the opportunity of importing salt from across the ocean in large steamers for the want of a sufficient depth of water. We are compelled to confine ourselves strictly to smaller vessels in order to bring in that
comioxs
nos
supply. The shallowness of water also deprives us of the industry of ship building of heavy tonnage. This year we built something like thirty odd vessels of a fair size, averaging from one hundred to three hundred and fifty tons, and they require a considerable depth of water to float them.' Now these amounts have been In the estimates for a long time, and has not been expended, I would ask when is this going to end ? By delay they are discouraging the industry of shipbuilding. I venture to say that the coming year there will scarcely be any vessels built, for they will not be able to come into those ports on account of shallow water. When that industry of shipbuilding is interfered with the consequence is an interference with the industry of the woodsman supplying the timber and the carpenters as well engaged in construction. It interferes largely also with the traders.
Now, when told last year that for the want of a dredge this money was not expended in either Bridgewater or Lunenburg, I took it for granted that I had an Indirect promise that dredges were being built, and that in a little while these dredges would be in service, and would be placed at work in those two ports. A dredge was built, as I understand, and has been in use the past year. Will the Minister of Public Works say that there has been no dredge in Nova Scotia during the past year ? I do not think he can say so, for I have learned that a lot of dredging has been done during the past year; but why Lunenburg and Bridgewater should be overlooked and other ports of less consequence cared for, I cannot for the life of me understand. I am here to! represent the interests of the people, and I claim that work as a right. I feel satisfied that the government are doing themselves a serious injury, they are injuring the industry of ship-building, and are indirectly hurting other industries as well by not giving us those dredges. Bridgewater requires a large amount of dredging, because it is a navigable river for about twenty miles. The bar requires dredging as weil as the upper parts of the river, where there has been a large amount of sawdust deposited as well as refuse from the banks of the river. But I ask the minister in all seriousness that he will not look upon this request as of small moment, but that he will give it the recognition it deserves. I hope that this year dredges will be placed in service at Lunenburg and Bridgewater and Mahone Bay, and I feel satisfied that if the minister will consider the case for a moment, he will be convinced of the absolute necessity of this work, unless he wants to stop the navigation of those waters entirely.


Robert Lorne Richardson: We passed a similar item to-night with regard to an appropriation for Bridgewater. We pass these appropriations from year to year and still we have no assurance that any work will be undertaken this year any more than it has Mr. KAULBACH.
been done in the past. I think we should have some assurance from the Minister of Public Works that something will be done, that these harbours will be dredged. It seems to be useless to pass these votes from year to year without we have an understanding from the Minister of Public Works that some progress will be made.
Mr. IvAULBACH. I am waiting for an answer from the Minister of Public Works with respect to the request that I have made for an expenditure at those two ports.


The MINISTER OP FINANCE.: Before my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works answers, I want to say a word on the subject myself. If the presence of this vote in the estimates is offensive to my hon. friend from Lunenburg (Mr. Kaulbach), we will get over that matter very easily by striking it out. When he alluded a moment ago to the policy of keeping this vote on the book in order to deceive the people, and so forth, if he is serious, I think we will accommodate him by striking it out. But I venture to say that if we did strike it out he would be the first to complain, and to ask why we did not revote it. It is a fact that all along the Atlantic coast of Nova Scotia \ve are experiencing difficulties in the matter of dredging. We have one or two little dredges of an inferior pattern which are doing a little work, but we are not weil equipped with dredging plant. In the case of the great lakes, where the government have no dredges available, it is sometimes found possible to hire private dredges. We are willing to hire dredges for the coast of Nova Scotia if they could be found. When I interested myself in the matter, and asked the late Minister of Public Works to make an inquiry whether we could obtain dredges, I know he did make an inquiry, and he was not able to obtain dredges from any quarter. They are not to be found, they are not available. We are now building a couple of dredges, but they are large works, and the construction proceeds slowly. But as soon as these dredges are completed, we hope that some of these important works can be attended to ; but if we cannot get the dredges, if we cannot hire them or get them constructed in a short time, then it would be useless for us to make a promise to my hon. friend that we will do this work. I am as anxious as he is to have the work done. I appreciate the importance of Lunenburg and Bridgewater, and I heartily agree with him that Lunenburg is the most important point on the whole coast as regards the deep sea fishing industry. I sympathize heartily with him, but I do not think his case was as urgent as some other cases, for Lunenburg has a fine harbour. It is beginning to suffer, and I appreciate his desire that it should be dredged. If dredges are used in some other cases, it is because the work for the moment seemed more urgent. There are some cases

where the work was more urgent for the moment, though not of more importance. Then with respect to Bridgewater particularly, there is no dredge that we have in the maritime provinces which is at all suitable for that work. If it is a question of transferring a dredge from one place to another, I am sure that I am correct in stating in the hearing of the late Minister of Public Works and of the present minister and of the engineers of the department, that we have not a dredge in the lower provinces which is capable of doing the work at Bridgewater. We do not want to withdraw the vote, my hon. friend would not desire us to do so. Even though we are not in a position to guarantee the doing of the work, we leave it there as an evidence of good faith ; and if we can buy, or build, or hire dredges, we are as anxious as lie is that this work and other works along the coast of Nova Scotia shall be provided for.


Joseph Israël Tarte: What is the depth of water at Lunenburg ?


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: At low tide it would be little more than nine feet, and our smallest schooners draw that amount of water. In regard to the remarks of the hon. gentleman, I know he is inclined to be generous, but, still at the same time, I did not like to hear a remark made by him in regard to the withdrawal of the vote.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I do not think my hon. friend is serious in pressing it.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I did not refer to it in any disingenious way at all. If there is any difficulty in obtaining dredges for work of that description I will ask the hon. Minister of Public Works if he will permit me to get parties to construct dredges and place them at the service of the government at a certain rate per cubic yard. If so, I will be prepared to get parties to construct dredges that will do all the dredging required.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I know the hon. Minister of Public Works does not hear my hon. friend's question as he is engaged in conversation at the present moment, and under these circumstances I will presume to answer it. I think my hon. friend is mistaken when he says that he can obtain dredges so readily. The construction of a modern dredge is not by any means so simple a matter as some suppose. I do not think my hon. friend can get any dredges, but if he knows anybody who has a dredge available and suitable to the work along the Atlantic coast and would place that party in communication with the hon. Minister of Public Works I am quite sure he will have ample employment at dredging at fair and reasonable rates. As to the particular places to which the dredge should go first, I am sure my hon. friend will agree
with me that while he mentioned Lunenburg and Bridgewater they are not the only places that are complaining. If he knows anybody who is prepared to place a dredge at the disposal of the government on the Atlantic coast at a fair and reasonable rate, I am quite sure he will have an ample opportunity for employment.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I am not anxious to encourage the introduction of dredges from across the border, but I can get dredges in the United States that will go to work in the course of a very little while and do the work necessary at so much per cubic yard and I think it can be done quite as cheaply as by constructing dredges by the government and employing parties to do the work. I do not approve of going across the border and bringing workmen or dredges here, but at the same time, I approve of the government insisting that this work shall be completed at the earliest possible moment.


Robert Laird Borden: I think it is really unconstitutional to go into supply at all on Mondays but I have not objected to It. We had better stop now.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am pleased with the progress we have made and I shall be glad to meet the views of the Committee.
Some resolutions reported.



ADJOURNMENT-BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved the adjournment of the House.
Robert Laird Borden: There were some papers to be brought down in connection with the Redistribution Bill-correspondence with the government of New Brunswick.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE (Hon. Charles Fitzpatrick).: I have the correspondence here but it is in such shape that I would hardly like to put it on the Table of the House. I will have it arranged and bring it down to-morrow.


Robert Laird Borden: What business will we take up to-morrow ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We may take several bills including, I think, the Rt. Hon. Prime Minister intended, the Redistribution Bill for the second reading, and if we get beyond that, Supply.


Robert Laird Borden: The Rt. Hon. Prime Minister mentioned that matter to me personally. I do not know whether we will have these documents down sufficiently early to enable us to go on with the Redistribution Bill.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Did my hon. friend mention it to the Prime Minister ?


Robert Laird Borden: I did, and he said that if any difficulty of that kind arose lie would not insist upon it.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Whatever arrangement the hon. gentleman has made with the Prime Minister will be carried out. In that case we may take some of the Bills on the Order Paper and then supply.


Robert Laird Borden: We really want to look at this correspondence before the second reading, because, if any discussion arises in regard to this matter, it will be on the second reading. Therefore, we should have these documents a reasonable length of time beforehand. I hardly think at present we will be justified in going on with the discussion to-morrow.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: If my hon. friend has had an understanding with the Prime Minister I have nothing to add. It will be carried out.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 11.35 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, April 7, 1903.