1903-09-30

[Stage Direction]
Certain petitions praying that Bill (No. 235) to provide for the construction of a
[Stage Direction]
National Transcontinental Railway should not become law ; having been read by the Clerk at the Table.
On the question-Is it the pleasure of the House to receive these petitions ?
Mr. O. E. TALBOT (Bellechasse).: I wish to ask, Mr. Speaker, if hon. members who present petitions of this kind in the House are responsible for the authenticity and genuineness of the signatures attached to them. I notice that on one of these petitions presented yesterday by the hon. member for Prince Edward ; out of twenty-live signatures, there are twenty-one written by the same hand and in the same ink, and without any evidence as to the witnessing of these signatures. Are the members who present these petitions responsible for that ?


Mr. SPEAKER.: It certainly would be irregular that the signatures on petitions presented to this House should be signed by the same person. Petitions should be signed by those whose names are supposed to be attached to them. Rule 84 says :
Petitions to the House shall he presented by a member in his place, who shall be answerable that they do not contain impertinent or improper matter.
The petitions were received.	.



QUESTIONS.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. CLARKE-by' Mr. Taylor-asked :
1.	On whose recommendation were the Imperial Service Orders and medals, recently issued to members of the Dominion and provincial civil service ?
2.	Under what system was the selection made in each case ; and is the same authority responsible for all decorations and medals issued ?
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: The Imperial Service Order is a new order created by His Majesty the King for rewarding long and faithful performance of duty in connection with the civil service in different parts of the British empire. Of course, 1 need not say that the conferring of the Order is a prerogative of His Majesty the King, after advice is tendered to him by His Excellency the Governor General, who has previously consulted his ministers and who are responsible.


REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE, 1903.
Mr. CLANCY asked :: 1.	What was the total amount of revenue collected for and during the fiscal year 1903 ?
2.	What was the total expenditure for the fiscal year 1903 ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: The final figures for the fiscal year recently closed have not yet been made out.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: 


MR. F. L. CHEVRIER-MISS EDNA CHAR-BONNEAU.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. FOWLER-by Mr. Lancaster-asked :
1.	Is F. L. Chevrier, son of Mrs. L. D. Che-vrier, employed in the Customs Department in Montreal ? If so, what salary does he receive ?
2.	Is Edna Charb'onneau, niece of Mrs. L. D. Chevrier, employed in the Printing Bureau ? If so, what salary does she receive, and on whose recommendation was she appointed ?
The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. Wm. Paterson).: I do not know who Mr. F. L. Clievrier's mother is, but there is an officer of that name employed in the Custom's Department in Montreal, who receives a salary of $900 a year, and I consider him a very efficient officer.


The PRIME MINISTER.: With reference to Edna Charbonneau. I have no information that she is the niece of Mrs. L. D. Chevrier, but she is the daughter of a widowed mother with four children. She is employed in the Printing Bureau and is paid $5.50 a week. She was appointed on good recommendation.
DIRECT IMPORTATION BY GOVERNMENT. Mr. OSLER-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
1.	What classes of goods, and what value,, have' been imported direct by the government of Canada in each fiscal year for the three years ending 30th June, 1903 ?
2.	If duty had been collected on such imports by the government, what would have been the amount of the duty collected on such imports in each year specified above ?


The MINISTER .: OF CUSTOMS (Hon. Wm. Paterson.) The value of ' articles imported by, or for the use of, the Dominion government, or any of the departments thereof, or by and for the Senate and House of Commons ' free of duty during the undermentioned fiscal years are respectively as follows : 1901, $1,046,337 ;	1902, $2,007,004;
1903, $1,407,060. The inquiry cannot be further answered at present. A special classification of invoices at various ports of entry, requiring time for its preparation, would be necessary before all the information asked for could be furnished.


TRENT VALLEY CANAL.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. PORTER-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
1.	Has W. McLeod, C.E., made his report upon the work assigned to him in regard to the location, feasibility and cost of construction of the south-eastern terminus of the Trent Valley canal, to determine which route is preferable, that proposed to terminate at Port Hope or that at Trenton ?
2.	If such report has not been made, when may it be expected to be made ?
3.	Will such report, if made or when made, be laid upon the Table of this House ?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: 

1.	Mr. H. A. F. McLeod lias reported on the feasibility and cost of construction of the south-eastern terminus of the Trent canal.
2.	Answer to No. 1 disposes of this question.
3.	Yes.


CANADIAN NATIONAL GALLERY.
Mr. HUGHES (Victoria) asked :: 1.	How much has the government already expended within the last seven years lor pictures, paintings, and other works ol art lor the Canadian National Gallery, or lor other purposes ?
2.	What sums have been expended lor the works ol Canadian artists ?
3.	Under whose supervision are these works ol art selected ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS (Hon. James Sutherland) :: 
THE DISTURBANCES AT SAULT STE. MARIE.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN (Halifax).: Before the Orders of the day are called, I would like to ask the government whether they have any further information as to the disturbance at the Sault, which would seem to have been of a somewhat more serious character than was anticipated by my right hon. friend yesterday. I observe from the newspaper reports that two men were shot, one named Dault, from Lake St. John, Quebec, and another named Grenier, from Ottawa. The report states that Dault was shot in the neck and Grenier in the leg. Another report indicates that one of these men was very seriously injured. It has even been reported-I do not know with what truth that he has died. It would also appear that some portion "of the permanent force of the country has been called out. I would like to ask my hon. friend what is the total force, whether permanent or militia, now engaged in subduing the disturbance, and under what circumstances they have been called out. There is a further newspaper report to the effect that a bulletin has been placed on the door of the company's offices in the following terms:
Officers and employees of the Consolidated Lake Superior and Subsidiary Companies : The president and directors in New York have been unable to raise money to pay to-day the wages and salaries now due the men and officers of the company. Advice received from New York this morning indicates that our president and directors have a plan to raise the money to no'. only pay the men, but to start up the works.
that seems to promise success. The plan has the endorsement and promise of support of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Premier of Canada, and the Hon. Geo. W. Ross. Premier of Ontario, and it is expected to produce the necessary money within thirty days. While we regret very much the inability of the company to pay to-day, the fact remains that there is not money to pay with. There seems to be only one thing left for the men to do. and that is to accept the offer of work elsewhere, leaving their checks with friends, responsible attorneys, or business men, to collect and send to them when the company pays them. Bear in mind that your wages will have to be paid ultimately, and constitute a just obligation against the company, which all the property and other assets of the company will ultimately be liable for. Any men who cannot get free transportation to new work can no doubt get enough money advanced on their time checks by business houses to pay their way to their new work.
There are just these points on which 1 would like my hon. friend to give information. What is the situation in Sault Ste. Marie with respect to this disturbance 1 What portion of the permanent force lias been called out ? What portion of the militia force is also on duty there V At whose instance have these forces been called out '/ And what truth is there in the statement affixed to the door of the company's offices that some plan has been proposed to the government, which has the endorsement and the promise of the Prime Minister, by which it is expected the necessary money will be obtained to pay the men their wages ?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: The statement which my hon. friend has read with regard to a plan for raising money has not been submitted to me, and I do not know exactly what it means. I have only to say that no plan of any kind for raising money has been submitted to me, either directly or indirectly. With regard to the condition of things at Sault Ste. Marie, the last information that I have personally received is from Mr. Dy-ment, a member of this House, who wired me late last evening to this effect:
Trouble here has somewhat subsided. Don't anticipate further rioting after arrival of troops to-day. Many arrests made. Policemen injured and two rioters shot, but not fatally. Troops now guarding government canal and allied companies works.
As to the other question, it will be answered by my hon. friend the Minister of Militia. '


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE (Hon. Sir F. W. Borden).: The municipal authorities at Sault Ste. Marie applied, under the clause of the Militia Act providing for such a contingency, to the senior military officer there, the colonel of the 97th regiment, for protection. The company at the Sault was accordingly called out by that officer, and I think a company was brought from the adjacent village of Tbessalon. Finding the matter more serious

than he thought he could cope with, the senior officer applied to the district officer commanding, at Toronto, Col. Buchan. Col. Buchan notified the Adjutant-General here that he considered it proper immediately to despatch sixty of the permanent force to the Sault, which, I presume has been done, and that he had given orders to draft some two hundred men from regiments within the city of Toronto. That is all the information which I have to give. I have had no report as to the shooting ; but from what 1 gather from the newspapers, I believe the shooting has been done by the police officers, and not by the militia. All the proceedings have been done in the regular way, under the clause of the Militia Act, to which 1 have referred, through the senior officer at the Sault, and the district officer commanding at Toronto.


Robert Laird Borden: Does the Militia Act provide for the calling out of the permanent force in that way ?


The MINISTER OP MILITIA AND DEFENCE.: I believe it does.


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. gentleman may be right ; I was not aware of it. Of course, I am not very familiar with the provisions of the Act, but my recollection was not in accord with that. The hon. gentleman has not stated how many of the active militia are on duty there outside of the' permanent force.
The MINISTER OB' MILITIA AND DEFENCE. I think about 100. I think there are four companies in the 97th regiment, numbering about 200 men. Two of the companies were called out, but they did not turn out in full strength. I am not aware that the 200 men who have been drafted from the different regiments of the eity of Toronto have yet been sent forward. They are held as a reserve in case of emergency.


Mr. BENNETT.: I may say that they went up yesterday afternoon. I saw the train pass at Orillia.


DOMINION ELECTIONS ACT.
Robert Laird Borden: Before the Orders of the day are called, I would like again to call the attention of the government to Bill (No. 3) to amend the Dominion Elections Act, 1900, which was introduced by my hon. friend from North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) and was referred at the instance of the hon. Minister of Finance to* a special committee. I believe that a good deal of work has been done by the committee in re-drafting the Bill ; but it wall he absolutely impossible for it to be dealt with this session unless it is removed from public Bills and orders and placed among government orders. As the Bill was referred to a special committee at the instance of my hon. friend the Minister of Finance, I Sir F. W. BORDEN.
had expected that it would have been transferred to the government orders before this. I would like to ask the intention of the government with regard to it.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I have already intimated, in reply to a question that was asked a day or two ago, that it is the intention of the government to bring the question forward, in order that the committee may present the measure to the House and the House may have an opportunity of discussing it. It will be placed on the government orders for that purpose at an early day.


NATIONAL TRANSCONTINENTAL RAILWAY.
[Stage Direction]
House resumed adjourned debate on the proposed motion of Sir Wilfrid Laurier for the third reading of Bill (No. 235) to provide for the construction of a National Transcontinental Railway.
Mr.  E. A. LANCASTER .@Lincoln and Niagara: kept wondering and undecided whether they are dealing with the Grand Trunk or Die Grand Trunk Pacific. It is not necessary to weary the House with a further discussion, for this matter lias been debated both on the second reading mid in Committee of the Whole, so that the people are in possession of the facts and discussion in the country cam go on. And I most say that the more the discussion has gone on among the people, the more the people have said the opposition are right and the government wrong. The opposition is perfectly right in determining not to leave the job so long as there is any opportunity left of setting right in any particular this contract which the government forces upon the country.
Amendment (Mr. Lancaster) negatived.


Robert Laird Borden: Lost on the same division.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Lost on the same division as last recorded yesterday.


ORDER IN THE HOUSE.
Robert Laird Borden: If I may be permitted, I would like to asic my right lion, friend (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) to co-operate with you Mr. Speaker, in maintaining better order during this forenoon. I do not think it is in keeping with Ike decorum of this House that when an lion, gentleman on either side is speaking, six or seven others should be carrying on conversation almost at the top of their voices, as lias been the case for some minutes past. I think that my right lion, friend, and you, Sir, in particular, must see to it that there is a little better order kept in the House, i refer at this moment particularly to hou. gentlemen on the other side of the House, although, as I said on a previous occasion, I have noticed the same thing on this side, and I deprecate it as much here as there. But during the last fifteen minutes when my hon. friend from Lincoln and Niagara (Mr. Lancaster) was speaking, I noticed at least half a dozen gentlemen carrying on conversation in tones almost as loud as those of my hon. friend in addressing the House. I do not think we should conduct the business of the House in that way. Some restraint should be put upon lion, gentlemen; and I, for my part am prepared to support you, Mr. Speaker, to the utmost of my power, so far as this side of the House is concerned, in putting a stop to this undesirable condition of things. I trust the right hon. gentleman (Rf. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) will support you with regard to the other side.


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: I am afraid the sinning is not all on one side


Robert Laird Borden: I have said so.


The PRIME MINISTER.: And my bon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax) acknowledges Mr. LANCASTER.
it. I have no hesitation in saying that, for my part. I shall be glad to co-operate with him, and with you, Mr. Speaker, in preserving order. I suppose that if we maintain order we shall reach prorogation all the sooner-and it ought to be sufficient inducement for us all to beliave. If my hon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax) says that he will take care of his own side. I will try to take care of ours : and you, Mr. Speaker, will take care of both.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know that I said I would take care of my own side ; I do not know that they require much care. But I said that I would endeavour to support you, Mr. Speaker, so far as my own side is concerned, and that is what I suppose you would desire.
Mr. SPEAKER, For my part I will do my best to maintain order.


NATIONAL TRANSCONTINENTAL RAILWAY.
Mr. RICHARD BLAIN (Peel).: Before the third reading of this Bill is carried. I wish to occupy the attention of the House for a very short time to move an amendment, which applies to section 8, it is as follows ;
That all the words after the word * that ' to the end of the question be left out. and the following be substituted therefor : ' the Bill be referred back to a Committee of the Whole House with power to amend section 8 by adding thereto the following words :-
'Provided, however, that the surveys and plans, showing the most favourable route and the best practicable grades and curvatures that can be obtained, together with an estimate of the cost based thereon, shall be first submitted to the parliament for approval.'
It seems to me that this is an amendment that should meet the approval of both sides of the House. When this Bill was first introduced by the Prime Minister, tlie leader of the opposition challenged the government to state within ten million dollars what the cost of this work would be. I listened with great attention to the whole debate, lasting many weeks, and I have not heard any member of the government attempt to answer or to solve that question. I am quite sure that the people of Canada will regret very much that the parliament of Canada propose to expend in the neighbourhood of one hundred or one hundred and twenty million dollars without first laying upon the Table of the House some closer estimate of what this work is going to cost, and some estimate of its length, within a few miles, and the character of the country it is to traverse.
During this discussion a large number of petitions have been presented to the House coming from every section of Canada, coming from the farmers of this country, who ask that, following ordinary business principles. the government should lay upon the Table some estimate of the cost. Surely,

there must be some duty resting upon the government in respect to the expenditure of the people's money. It is all very well to say that we have prosperous times now, it is all very well for the Finance Minister to say that we have a flowing treasury-that is ail very acceptable, and is appreciated by the people of Canada. But notwithstanding that, Mr. Speaker, the people of this country expect that their money should be expended in a business-like manner, and with that in view they have spoken out in very loud tones, I think, judging from the large number of petitions that have been presented1 from day to day, signed by hundreds and hundreds of electors belonging to both sides of politics. I think it is proper that a copy of these petitions should be placed upon the [DOT] Hansard,' and I propose, with the kind indulgence of the House, to read it. It deals with the subject of the resolution which I have moved, because it asks for an estimate of the cost of this proposed railway.
To the Honourable
The Senate and House of Commons of Canada, In Parliament assembled.
The petition of the undersigned electors of the Dominion of Canada humbly showeth :
1.	That a wise and prudent solution of the great question of transportation is of the utmost importance as regards the future of this Dominion.
2.	That your petitioners are of opinion that it would be unwise and imprudent to take definite action until the government and parliament are fully possessed of the information essential to a proper decision of that question.
3.	That the country is not possessed of such information ; that the government has appointed a commission to investigate and report upon the whole subject of transportation. .
i. That, a project of such magnitude should not be undertaken without the most complete and accurate surveys, under the direction and control of engineers of standing and repute.
5.	That such surveys should be in the hands of the government and of parliament before the credit of the Dominion is committed to an enterprise which involves enormous obligations.
6.	That those obligations cannot properly be estimated before such surveys shall have been made.
7.	That, however, the most competent men are of the opinion that the cost of the projected line between Winnipeg and Moncton will reach the enormous amount of upwards of $120,000,000.
8.	That no evidence has been adduced so far during the long discussion that has taken place to establish that such a large expenditure of public money will cheapen the freight rates for the products of the west, or establish more satisfactory communication between the different parts of the Dominion.
9.	That, on the contrary, it is greatly to be feared that by pledging the credit of the conn-try to such a vast extent, the government will make it impossible to carry ont works better calculated to meet the transportation needs of the country.
10.	That the government, parliament and taxpayers should have an opportunity to learn the results of the investigation of the said commission ; and to examine the evidence upon which such results were arrived at.
Your petitioners, therefore, humbly pray that the said Bill now before parliament may not now become law ; but that its further consideration by the government and by parliament shall be deferred until such full and accurate information shall have been obtained and laid before parliament.
That is a copy of the petitions that are being presented to this House by the hundreds within the last few weeks. Some little effort lias been made on the other side of the House to cast reflection upon the genuineness of the signatures to some of these petitions. I may remind our lion, friends opposite that from every section, almost from every county, have come petitions from the farmers who have put tlieir names to these documents, making the reasonable request that before their money is expended the government should apply to this enterprise the same business principles that any private company would apply to its own business.
I have no hesitation in saying that the electors who signed these petitions are responsible citizens-we have seen them coming from the great metropolis of Montreal this morning signed by 5,000 electors of that great city-surely these deserve some consideration by the government.
We are asked" to construct this road without proper estimates. The right hon. first minister has laid upon the Table a Blue-book, that has been occasionally re^ ferred to in this discussion. I do not propose to make any extended reference to it, only to read one short paragraph in respect to the timber. It has been frequently alleged in this House by hon. gentlemen opposite that this road ought to be constructed through the northern part of the provinces of Quebec and Ontario for the purpose of developing timber limits and the timber resources of those regions. Here is a paragraph from the report of Sir. Ogilvie, D.L.S., 1891, addressed to the Minister of the Interior, in which he makes this statement :
II the timber on all the other rivers flowing into the bay is no more important than that I saw on the Abitibi, I would hesitate as to the timber resources of that district being valuable; for though it is all thickly wooded, only a small percentage of it (along the river at least) is large enough for merchantable lumber.
So you see that this gentleman says that the timber limits of that section of the provinces of Quebec and Ontario to which reference is made in this Blue-book, are not so valuable -as tlie members of the government would lead us to believe. Now, in so far as the transportation of wheat is concerned, I wish to give one short quotation from a speech of the First Minister when discussing the transportation question last session. On page 958 of the 1 Hansard ' of 1902, I find he made this statement;
But, unfortunately, there is a rugged section along the shores of Lake Superior which hardly admits of wheat being commercially carried through.

When the First Minister was discussing the transportation question in the last session of parliament, with all this information in the hands of the government-because doubtless there is no information of more recent date than that they possessed last session-with all the information at his disposal with all the knowledge the right hon. gentleman has been able to obtain as First Minister for the purpose of solving the great transportation question during all the time he has been in public life, during the seven years he has been Prime Minister of this country, I say with all this information, the right hon. gentleman stood up in this House last session and said that the carriage of wheat from the west would be a failure as a commercial enterprise. I do not quite understand what change has come over the hon. gentleman's views. Surely the rocks that were there last year are there still ; this rugged country that he referred to last session is still as rugged as ever. The hon. gentleman has not given us any information more recent than that. And yet the First Minister is prepared to say now that a road can be constructed through that country that would be of commercial value.- It does look as if some unknown person had stepped in to the counsels of the government and demanded a speedy solution of this question in the interest of the Grand Trunk Railway. I do not quite understand what the right hon. gentleman means. We are expected as a Canadian parliament to 'conduct our business in a businesslike manner. The government of Canada, by reason of owning and operating the Intercolonial Railway has the advantage of knowing something about the cost of railway construction, inasmuch as it has expended an enormous sum ranging from seventy-five million upwards upon government roads in this country.
It has been expended, not by private enterprise, but by the government themselves. The government of this country, year after year, have been expending vast sums in the purchasing of cars, and of steel rails, and of locomotives, and of railway ties, indeed, in the purchase of everything that enters into railway construction, ahd the government, therefore, should have been able to lay before the people of this country a fair estimate of the cost before they would) undertake such a gigantic work, notwithstanding the government has this advantage, they are now In the railway business themselves, notwithstanding that they have been equipping the Intercolonial Railway by taking down the old bridges and replacing them with newer and up-to-date bridges,) notwithstanding that they have told the people of this country that they have practically equipped anew the Intercolonial Railway by the construction of better roadbed, by the purchase of better freight cars and better passenger cars-notwithstanding all this, the people of this country are asked to pay this enormous amount of money


Richard Blain: without the Railway Department coming forward and laying upon the Table of tbe House a statement of what, in their opinion, would be a proper estimate of the cost of this road. Further than this, It would not be an unreasonable request for the people of Canada to ask some leading railway man, either in this country, in the United States or in England, some man who has a reputation as a x-ailway expert, who has constructed railways in this country, like Sir William Van Horne, to give an opinion upon the cost of the building of that, road before we are asked to vote the money. As it is, we are asked to do so, without haying the opinion of any great railway man in this country excepting that of the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton), and I noticed the other day that the right hon. the First Minister rather shoved him aside and did not put quite so high an estimate on him as a railway expert as when be introduced the Bill.


Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.).: Has the hon. gentleman read Sir Sandford Fleming's report ?


Richard Blain: I may say to the hon. gentleman of many years, that I have read Sir Sandford Fleming's report, and! that it has1 been read in this House over and over again in the absence of my hon. friend during this discussion. Sir Sandford Fleming's report, in so far as it refers to the province of New Brunswick, and that gentleman states that the northern part of the province of New Brunswick, where this government propose to construct the road, is a very rough country, so rough that he would not recommend the government of earlier days to construct the Intercolonial Railway there. That is what he said in the report which is in the possession of this House at the present time.
Just one word in conclusion in respect to the country through which this railway is to pass in the province of Ontario andi in the province of Quebec. My hon. friend the Minister of Justice (Hon. Mr. Fitzpatrick) made a statement in this House the other day that there was a very large area of good land in the northern part of the province of Ontario amounting to millions of acres. If that statement be correct, and perhaps it is correct, then I say that the people of this country would expect the government to tell them $vitliin twenty or thirty or fifty miles, through what part of that country this railroad will he constructed. Why do they not tell this to the people of Quebec and of Ontario and of New Brunswick, because the electors in these three great provinces are interested in this matter, as they will have to pay some portion of tbe taxes of tills country like all other citizens-and they are not complaining on that point-but they do expect that the government will lay before the people of this country data sufficiently accurate to enable them to judge within 100 miles where this rail-

way will be constructed in these provinces. Is that an unreasonable request ? I do not think it is, and I do not wonder that as the people come to understand this matter, information which the newspapers with their splendid facilities and enterprise, are circulating throughout the country, that we are heseiged day after day with petitions from the electors saying something must be done by this government to furnish informa-i tion before they pledge the people of this country to an expenditure of at least one hundred millions of dollars.
I move the resolution which I read, seconded by Mr. McGowan, and I would earnestly hope-although perhaps it would be too much to say_I expect-that the government will lay before parliament such information as will enable the electorate of this country to vote intelligently when they are asked to authorize the expenditure of so many millions of dollars.


Mr. A. E. KEMP (East Toronto).: I desire to say one word in reference to this resolution, which appears to me to be one of the most reasonable that has been placed before the House in connection with this transcontinental railway project. The resolution asks that the information obtained by the government from time to time in regard to the surveys and estimates of cost shall be placed before this House. It is evident that this railway cannot be built before the House meets again; the surveys and the reports of the engineers cannot be completed before that time. Is it not, therefore, as reasonable a proposition as ever was made in this House that the information thus obtained should be placed before the House before we pass final judgment ? The government, perhaps, might not then be disposed to adhere to what they j had stated in regard to building a first-class railway, with one-half or four-tenth per cent grades' through this country in order to carry the products of the west to the seaboard in a more economical way than by the existing routes. This country, under such circumstances, would not be under any ob-*igatiou to the Grand Trunk Pacific, because parliament would have an opportunity to say whether the road shall be constructed or not. The only reports that have been placed before this House are reports of geologists, who were not instructed to investigate the regions through which^ they travelled for the purpose of building a modern railway, and I submit that then report is of no value when it comes to building a modern up-to-date railway. We have absolutely no information before the House from first-class competent engineers as to the suitability of that country for the building of a railway for the purpose foi which this is being built. I would not have spoken on this resolution, but I wisnea to ask the Prime Minister a question. I read to him the other day a report from
one of the Toronto newspapers that the Grand Trunk Railway themselves were making surveys between Winnipeg and the Que-< bee boundary. The right hon. gentleman will remember the contents of the article to which I am now referrng. I asked, why did not the government make the surveys for this government road, instead of the Grand Trunk Pacific, and also asked why it was that the information obtained by these surveyors was given to the press before it was submitted to this House. I think the Prime Minister would have replied to me the other day were it not that the chairman called ' carried,' and the resolution was hurried through. Surely^ the Prime Minister can give the information to the House now.


The PRIME MINISTER.: What is the question ?


Albert Edward Kemp: The question was in reference to the surveys. I will again read what was said by the Toronto ' News ' ;
The Grand Trunk has been exploring the country. Its officials to-day are in possession of their own surveyors' reports. These reports cover the country from Winnipeg to Lake Abitibi. These reports state that from Winnipeg to the eastern border of New Ontario a grade of four-tenths of one per cent-about twenty-one feet to the mile-is perfectly practicable. The standard of the best wheat-carrying railways of the United States can be attained.	.	,
More than that, the fall of almost every grade is to the east. This is an immense advantage, for it means that the road will practically run down hill from Winnipeg for the thousand mile stretch in eastern Manitoba and New Ontario.
This is a splendid start. For the first thousand miles at least the trains will roll down a continuous gentle slope. Extraordinary economy of operation should he practicable. The limit to the size of the trains will be the number of cars which a single crew can handle, rather than the hauling power of the engine. We must insist on equally good grades all the way through Quebec. It may prove the case that the height of land in Quebec will make an up hill grade necessary. The ideal road, would he down hill every foot of the way from prairie to ocean. The ideal seems to be assured for one thousand of the fourteen hundred miles.
I wish to know why the Grand Trunk are making these surveys, and if they are going to be accepted by the government ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: The hon. gentleman asks me, if it is true that the Grand Trunk Pacific are making surveys ?


Albert Edward Kemp: On the government line ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Between Lake Abitibi apd Winnipeg. The hon. gentleman also asks, if the government will avail of these surveys. I understand that the Grand Trunk have been making surveys since last fall ; that they started when they first thought of this Grand Trunk Pacific scheme. I do not know for a fact whe-

tlier they have done so or not. It is impossible to say what the government will do with regard to these surveys. The only thing I can say is, that we shall have surveys of our own when the commission is appointed, and these surveys in proper time will be laid before the House.


Mr.   H.@: It. EMMERSON (Westmoreland). I would be very sorry indeed to take up the time of the House in prolonging this discussion, but there has been some reference made to the petitions presented, asking that there should be delay, because there is little knowledge of the section of the province of New Brunswick, through which this road is to run. I do not think that there is very much significance to be attached to these petitions, but there is this significance :	That
while they have been very carefully prepared. I have no doubt, by lion, members opposite and printed and sent throughout the country and signed in their respective constituencies it is quite apparent-at all events judging of the signatures with which I am familiar-that they are signed by friends of lion, gentlemen opposite almost exclusively. There is one very strange thin? in connection with the contents of these petitions, and that is, that though they have been prepared with so much care by lion, gentlemen opposite and circulated by their political agents, there is no reference in these petitions to the alternative proposition of the leader of the opposition.


Mr. SPROULE.: The alternative proposition is not about to become law, and there is no reason to petition for or against it.


Mr. EMMERSON.: This fact proves, that the great body of the Conservatives, in my province at any rate, are no more in sympathy with the alternative proposition of the leader of the opposition, than are some of the hon. gentlemen's own friends in this House, who have devoted the whole time during this debate to speaking of the government proposition, and have hardly raised a murmur in favour of the proposal of my hon. friend (Mr. Borden). The hon. gentleman (Mr. Blain) who moved this amendment, has stated that there is little known of that part of New Brunswick through which this road will run. The fact that he stated that it was going to run in the northern part of the province, shows that he is ignorant of the geography of New Brunswick. I have in my hand a pamphlet issued by the board of trade of the town of Woodstock, which is situated in the county of Carleton, represented by my hon. friend opposite (Mr. Hale), and this road will run almost entirely through that rich and flourishing county. Just wliat portion of the county it will run through, I have no doubt will be determined by the engineers, but in order to show the resources of that county, I will read an extract from the circular to which I refer. Here is a statement of the yield of crops in Carleton county, in ^)02 :


Wilfrid Laurier: Acreage.	Bushels.	Yield Per Acre.2,951	62,945	21-342,982	1,428,325	33-2372	10,718	28'910,751	267,597	24-83,329	336,802	101-1
Variety.
Wheat	
Oats	 42,982
Barley	
Buckwheat.. .


Potatoes .. .: Hay-25,000 tons were shipped over the Canadian Pacific Railway, valued at $250,000.
Cheese.
Pounds. Value.
Manufactured In county.. .. 294,307 $29 430 70 Exported	 210,450 2R450 00
Butter.
Pounds. Value.
Manufactured iu county .. ..	124,229 $24,845 SO
Exported	 115,052 23,010 40
A county that can present such a record is not to be treated in the way in which the non. gentleman who last spoke referred to it. This does not by any means represent to the fullest extent the resources of that very flourishing county. There are many other crops which have not been mentioned. It is a splendid fruit cotintry, as my hon. friend will testify. This statement has reference only to the settled portions within sight of the valley of the St. John There are undeveloped sections of that country, to the development of which this railway will contribute, which I am sure will be equally productive. This is only a slight evidence of the richness of other sections of that portion of New Brunswick through which this railway will run, and I could not allow to pass unchallenged the remarks of the hon. member for Peel. There appears to be on the part of some hon. gentlemen opposite an antipathy to that section of the proposed railway between Moncton and Quebec which is unwarranted by the circumstances and by the past political history of this country. My bon. friend the leader of the opposition was quite willing that such a line should be constructed. He was not quite certain as to the time when it should he constructed; but he recognized its value to this Dominion, and he recognized the fact that it brought his own city of Halifax nearer to the other cities of the Dominion and clasped the different sections of the Dominion altogether. He was willing to aid in accomplishing this desirable object-desirable by his own admission ; but his colleague sitting beside him, the hon. member for South Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart), declared the proposition to build a shorter line between Levis and Moncton to he an absolutely senseless proposition. He declared that such a line was not required, and that even though it was proposed in this Bill, it would be generations before it would be an accomplished fact. How many generations we would have to wait for it if hon. gentlemen opposite had the control of the matter, I am not in a position to say ; but I do say that until we have this shorter line, until the several parts of the Dominion are brought together in the way- pro-

posed by the terms of this Bill, there cannot be that interchange of trade, commercially, politically, and socially, that there should be. I am sure that the cities of Halifax and St. John are suffering, and have been suffering since this country became a Dominion, for the want of that interchange. Certainly the province of Nova Scotia has been suffering in a way that cannot be adequately de-{ scribed here. The province of New Brunswick has had advantages which the province of Nova Scotia has not enjoyed. The city of St. John has been connected through the state of Maine with the city of Montreal by a short line ; but the other sections of the province of New Brunswick and a great section of the province of Nova Scotia have not enjoyed that advantage. Now, there is no doubt that the antipathy and antagonism shown by lion, gentlemen opposite is injurious to the interests of the maritime provinces. The hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule), yesterday afternoon, in a spirit which was most sectional and narrow, and in a way indicating a small-bore idea *of the needs of this Dominion, complained of the disadvantages of the province of On

tario. That province has had advantages and has enjoyed them, and she certainly should not now complain if other sections of the Dominion are to have some advantages. Under these circumstances, the amendment of the hon. member for Peel, based as it is upon his antagonism to the line through New Brunswick, is unwarranted, and I have a right to assume that his objections to the other sections of the line are *equally faulty.
Mr. 1<\ IT. HALE (Carleton, N.B.). Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to take up the time of this committee, and I did not intend td rsay anything on this subject ; but in view of what my hon. friend from Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) has quoted from the -pamphlet he had in his hand, I desire to say a few words in regard to the county of *Carleton, which I have the honour to represent. It is well known that Carleton county is one of the most fertile districts in the Dominion of Canada, and all that the hon. gentleman has read from the pamphlet is no doubt correct. It is a very productive county, but I am sorry to say that not one pound of the produce of that county will ever be carried over the proposed road. It will pass so far to the east and through so poor a section of the county that it will be impossible for us to reach it. I am sorry that the government propose to locate this road where they do. In that location it will' never be of any use to the county of *Carleton or to the province of New Brunswick. It is a great pity that the road, if it is to be built, is not to be taken down the valley of the River St. John, where it'would be of some benefit to the people of New Brunswick, and where it would find a good outlet in the harbour of St. John. I am *sorry that this road is to be forced along
without any survey or any knowledge of the country through which it is to go. I can *speak from personal knowledge of the section of the country through which this road is to go. So far as the county of Carleton and the county of York are concerned, it is going where it will never be of any use to that section of the country.


Mr. W. J. ROCHE (Marquette).: The hon. member for Westmoreland has just stated that these petitions do not make any reference to the alternative policy of my hon. friend the leader of the opposition. One would surely expect that a prospective cabinet minister would be intelligent enough to see that in a case like this, the alternative policy submitted by the leader of the opposition is not usually referred to in petitions against the legislation introduced by the government. However, the hon. gentleman has evidently not read all the petitions. He has probably taken up one of them and concluded that all the others were counterparts. But if he had looked at some of the petitions he would have found that not only is the government scheme condemned in unmeasured terms, but that practically the scheme of the leader of the opposition is endorsed, and parliament is asked to take it up instead of the other. I happen to have a petition which is the same as that which is being circulated throughout Manitoba.


Henry Robert Emmerson: It is not the same as that circulated in the eastern provinces.


William James Roche: I am speaking of the petition circulated in that portion of the country which this projected railway is particularly supposed to benefit. It is that portion of the country to relieve the congestion of traffic and lower the freight rates this government measure was introduced, and it is the people there who are protesting against the government scheme and asking, in effect, that the scheme propounded by the leader of the opposition be adopted in its place. Let me read the petition :
The petition of the undersigned electors of the Dominion of Canada humbly showeth :-
1.	That western Canada is vitally interested in questions of transportation and that its progress win he checked by inadequate facilities on the one hand, or, on the other, by excessive transportation charges.
2.	That it is of the utmost importance to the prosperity and development of western Canada that transportation facilities be afforded at the lowest possible rates, upon both products exported and merchandise imported.
3.	That in this connection it is absolutely essential that the combined rail and water routes to the east should receive proper development.
The people of the west realize that it is by the combined rail and water routes they will get the required relief.
4.	That ample and extensive railway construction in the west should be, and can be,

secured upon such terms as will safeguard the public interest in low rates and abundant car supply, and will thus avoid the recurrence in the territories of the grave public injury and discontent formerly caused in Manitoba by excessive charges.
5.	That the over capitalization of transportation companies is one of the. most important conditions leading to unduly high rates, and should be prevented.
They see the significance of the $45,000,000 of capitalization in connection with this road, which I referred to yesterday, and which, in connection with the bond issue, will make the fixed charges so very high that it will he impossible for the company to give low freight rates.
G. That a railway system designed to move the products of the west should not be burdened by the addition of costly and needless sections ; that the proposed eastern section of the Grand Trunk Pacific would be of value chiefly for the purpose of colonizing the territory it traverses ; and that the western lines should not be obliged to impose rates fixed with a view to providing for the annual fixed charges upon such a section, between one and two thousand miles long, built many years in advance of settlement in the James bay basin.
This is the very scheme propounded by the leader of the opposition.
7.	That the country should not be committed to the construction of the eastern section over the proposed route until full information is obtained as to distance, grades, cost and the possibilities of local traffic.
Exactly as propounded by the leader of the opposition.
8.	That the effective exercise of government control of rates upon the lowest practicable basis must be the object of government policy.
Notwithstanding this, the government voted down a resolution which would place the control of the rates absolutely in the hands of the government and make the maximum rates not greater than those charged by the Canadian Northern Railway, whose rates are controlled by the Manitoba government.
9.	That because of the effect it would have upon the rates and general facilities the Intercolonial should he extended to Georgian bay, with party politics excluded from its administration and its management made non-partisan and business-like, and that under these conditions its field of operation should be extended to Manitoba and ultimately across the cont'n-ent.
Almost the identical words of the leader of the opposition in his speech formulating his policy.
10.	That the arrangement in the Bill now before parliament by which the government is to build the section between Winnipeg and Moncton. at a large cost, and then lease it for 50 years, is unsatisfactory, because so large a pledging of the public credit as would be required may prevent the undertaking of more effective transportation measures ; and also because! there being no option of purchase on the western division, the government at the end of 50 years would not have the alternative


William James Roche: of obtaining a complete transportation system under government operation.
11.	That the proposed western section of the Grand Trunk Pacific from Winnipeg to Edmonton should be constructed as an additional line opening up new territory ; and that the Grand Trunk Pacific Company should not be allowed to purchase the Canadian Northern Railway line instead of constructing an additional line.
The government has refused to incorporate a clause to that effect. I had the honour of introducing one myself to prevent amalgamation with the Canadian Northern Railway, but the government absolutely refused to accept it. As regards tbe opening up of new territory, the government do not know where the road will be located west of Winnipeg. They cannot say whether it will be north of tlie Canadian Northern Railway or south. Unless it be north, it will not open up the new territory referred to in this petition.
12.	That provision should be made in the Grand Trunk Pacific agreement for an outlet from the Grand Trunk Pacific's western lines to Lake Superior.
The people of the west realize that no matter how many railways they may have, the grain will travel by lake and rail.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the transportation Bill now before parliament be not passed in its present form, but that it be altered to provide for the above-menti :ned conditions, and that the commission on transportation should consider the whole question of the proposed eastern section and report, and that complete surveys and estimates should be made.
It seems to me that this petition is a complete endorsation of our leader's policy, just as much as it is a severe condemnation of the government's policy. And I merely rose for the purpose of drawing the attention of the House, and particularly of the hon. member for Westmoreland (Mr. Em-tnerson), to the fact that the people of the west generally are opposed to the scheme propounded by the government.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: With the hon. gentleman's permission, I would ask him if he is aware that in the province of Quebec agents are going from house to bouse getting signatures to these petitions, and that notwithstanding the very strong representations they have made, they have not so far got ten per cent of the people of these parishes to sign these petitions ?


William James Roche: I am not personally aware of that fact, but would require a little stronger testimony than that of the hon. gentleman to make me believe it.


Mr. S. HUGHES (Victoria).: The hon. member for Westmoreland endeavoured as usual to bring in the locality question. He said he was surprised to see the antipathy displayed by the opposition to that section

of country between Moncton and Quebec. ( I want to .Joint out to bim that the policy of the opposition is not to (belittle one part otf the country as compared with another. But when hon. gentlemen on that side claim they are going to get a line 140 miles shorter from Quebec to Moncton -via the Btchemin valley and the Maine border, they do not know what they are talking about, or are endeavouring to deceive the electors. Take the figures given in the report of the engineer of the Quebec government. They show that with grades almost as low as 53 feet to the mile, and some of them rising as high as 71 to 79 feet, that road surveyed between Quebec and Edmundston is 209 miles in length.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: If my hon. friend (Mr. Hughes, Victoria) will permit me, I would say he is mistaken in his figures. He will find several reports, which give it at 186 miles following the railway showing that it can be done within thirty days.


Samuel Hughes: If my hon. friend (Mr. Talbot) will read the report, he will see that that line is across the state of Maine.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: No, Sir.


Samuel Hughes: I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon. He cannot find an airline of 186 miles around the point of the state of Maine.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: I will get it and read it to the hon. gentleman.


Samuel Hughes: I shall be glad if the hon. gentleman will do so. What we want is to have the facts of these lines referred to by the hon. member for Belle-chasse, one goes by the Etchemin and Daagnam rivers and down the valley of the St. John across Maine, while the other is still further to the south. Now, it is for me to go into these elevations and grades, which are given in my former remarks at page 11951 and succeeding pages of ' Hansard.' I have pointed out the report of the engineer of the Quebec government which says :
I again took up my work which I had left oft at the west of Lake Long, behind St. Paul de Montmagny, distant sixty-three miles from the original point of departure at St. Anselme in the county of Dorchester.
And he goes on to say :
I should here observe that Long Lake is really only thirty-eight miles from St. Anselme in a direct line.
That is, the line has to cover a distance of 63 miles in order to reach a point distant 38 miles in a direct, line. And he points out that the grades are about 53 feet to the mile, being about the old standard one per cent grade.	.
And he points out further on, with regard to the grades on this line :
I started from the Etchemin valley line, eight miles south of St. Anselme, and half a mile from the north bank of the Abenakis river.
The grades on this line can be made 52 feet per mile and under for a distance of 6J miles, after which there is a continuous grade of 79 feet per mile for 4J miles, rising to Lac Vert, hut by lengthening the line and increasing curvature by actual location, that grade could be reduced to 53 feet per mile.
But our lion, friend the expert, the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) tells us that no road need hope to secure a share of through-traffic unless its grades are reduced to twenty-five feet to the mile. This would stretch the line out still longer. So, for every one of these grades, where it is from seventy-five to seventy-nine feet to the mile, you must multiply the distance by three in order to give you the one-half per cent grades. Here is a distance of sixty-three miles and you must multiply it by two in order to get your mileage. Taking these elevations and gradients with an admitted length of line of 205 or 209 miles these are the extremes and hon. gentlemen will remember that I took the middle distance of 207 as my figures, in order to get grades of one-half per cent, I venture to say it will be nearer 300 miles than 250 miles between Quebec and Edmundston. A little further on, this engineer points out that near the foot of Lake Pohenegomook the grade rises at the rate of 71-28 feet per mile for a distance of nine miles. Multiply that by three as will be necessary in order to secure the one-half per cent grade, and you get a distance pf twenty-seven miles, instead of nine miles. Then he goes on :
In that next four miles the summit between the Smoky and Noire rivers was reached with a grade of 65 feet per mile, at an elevation of 1048 feet above the initial point in the Temis-couata Railway.
Multiply that by three again, and instead of four and a half miles you get thirteen and a half miles.


Henry Robert Emmerson: That is not the route.


Samuel Hughes: What does the hon. gentleman propose, then ?


Henry Robert Emmerson: The frontier route.


Samuel Hughes: That is what I am quoting.


Henry Robert Emmerson: No.


Samuel Hughes: I can tell the hon. gentleman that lake Pohenegomook comes within one inch of the Maine border. The road will have to cross at the lower part of the lake in order to get round. Now. I come to the hon. gentleman's (Mr. Bmmerson's) own province. Between the Salmon and Tobique rivers the line proposed by the hon member -for Annapolis (Mr Wade)-though I believe the hon member (Mr. Emmerson) takes the same route-rises in five miles from an elevation of a little more than 366 feet to 1,000 feet, to the



summit pass of Tobique mountains, a rise of 634 feet in five miles. If, instead of climbing straight up the mountain you allow for one-half per cent grade you must cover a distance of 25-66 miles in order to make the same elevation. How will the hon. gentleman get the one-lialf per cent grade in any other way ?


Henry Robert Emmerson: I do not wish my hon. friend to misrepresent me. I said that in the choice of routes there, if the grades did not permit me to cross the divide, the road will necessarily take the valley of the St. John which is the route I personally prefer.


Samuel Hughes: I am delighted with that explanation. Then there is no quarrel between us. The hon. gentleman must admit that the road will be, as I am convinced it will be, longer. It will certainly be longer from Quebec to Moncton by the St. John valley if he secures one-half per cent grades. That five miles is drawn out to 25-66 miles. Then, on the other side between the summit and the Tobique river with a fall of 684 feet, that stretched out so as to give the one-half per cent grade instead of nine and a half miles it makes 27'36. miles. The hon. gentleman cannot avoid it. He does not propose to go through the mountains, so he must go around them or over them. I am following point by point the line proposed by the hon. member for Annapolis. I believe that the hon. member for Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) and the hon. Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding) have lines of their own.


Henry Robert Emmerson: The line will be located by engineers.


Samuel Hughes: The hon. member for Annapolis was the only gentleman who undertook to give definite points, and I understood that he voiced the opinions of the hon. member for Westmoreland. From the Tobique valley to the next summit easterly to a distance of only ten miles it passes to a height of 1,206 feet. In order to secure the half per cent grade you would have to extend that to 33-64 miles. And yet, in the estimates furnished by these hon. gentlemen, they counted only ten miles. Going down on the other side of course involves a corresponding extension. We do not object to the road going through. Hon. gentlemen who sat on this side, years ago voted for bonuses for the road from L6vis out through the Etchemin valley through the Pohenegomook district to Edmundston and on through New Brunswick. We are quite prepared to support that policy but wo are not prepared to have these hon. gentlemen deceive the House and the country, willfully or otherwise, "by saying that there will be a saving of 140 miles, or even ten miles, as compared with the Intercolonial. I trust the hon. member for Westmoreland will live to see the survey made. But I am sure that Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).
he will never see this proposed line from Levis to Moncton with a much less mileage than the Intercolonial. Such a line does not exist and cannot be made unless you tunnel the mountains.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: I will read from a report made to the Commissioner of Public Works of the province of Quebec, 1891, to prove that the figures given by the hon. member for North Victoria (Mr. Hughes) are all wrong, and that I was right when I made the correction. These figures are given by Mr. E. A. Hoare, the engineer who went over that part of the country several times :
From Chaudiere via Intercolonial Railway and Quebec Central Railway, via St. Anselme, 2071 miles ; from Chaudiere direct via St. Anselme, 205J miles ; from ChaudiSre via Intercolonial Railway by St Charles, 2021 miles ; from Levis via Intercolonial Railway and Quebec Central Railway via St. Anselme, 2091 miles ; from Chaudi&re via the Intercolonial Railway and Quebec Central Railway via Etchemin valley, through the state of Maine, connecting the St. Francis branch of the Temis-couata Railway, 190 miles ; from ChaudiSre via direct line

*
This is the line which is now proposed.
-186 miles.
That is not 209 miles.
From Chaudiere to Edmundston by the Intercolonial Railway and Rivibre du Loup and Te-miscouata Railway, the distance is 199 miles.
Further on Mr. Hoare quotes Mr. Henry O'Sullivan's report, in which the latter describes a favourable route for the railway between Quebec and Edmundston. Mr. O'Sullivan says :
That line would give access to a vast area of cultivable and well-timbered lands in ihe counties of Bellechasse, Montmagny, L'lslot and Kamouraska, and by touching the River St. John at its confluence with the St. Francis would bring the forest wealtL of 3,000 square miles of United States territory, drained by the River St. John and Allaguash, a tributary, to Canadian markets, and to the port of Quebec. The distance between Quebec and Edmundston by this route is estimated at 156 miles, or 30 miles shorter than by the Etchemin valley.


Mr. HACKETT.: I wish to make a few observations

At one o'clock, House took recess.
House resumed at three o'clock.


Edward Hackett: Mr. Speaker, before you left the Chair at one o'clock I was endeavouring to explain some features of the great undertaking proposed by the government and was endeavouring to show that this large expenditure of public mouey would be forced upon the country without any knowledge of what would be obtained in return for it or whether this country through which it is intended to build will be a country available for settlement. We have received no information from the government in that regard ; they simply say :	We will go on
and build this railway

and the people of

the whole of Canada are asked to pay $125,000,000 for its construction. I desire to say a word in reply to the statement of the hon. gentleman from Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) that this railway will open up a large area for settlement in the province of New Brunswick. That was replied to pretty well by the hon. member for Carleton, N.B. (Mr. Hale). There is no gentleman in this House for whom I have a higher respect than for the hon. member for Westmoreland, but we have before us the fact that an hon. gentleman who represented the province of New Brunswick in the cabinet the late Minister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair) was forced to resign an important seat in the cabinet, carrying with it much influence, because he could not accept the proposition of the government, and yet we now have a gentleman who has been a protege of the hon. the ex-Minister of Railways and Canals coming forward and saying that he approves of everything. Can it be true that the hon. member for Westmoreland, who is living in expectancy and is hoping to be a member of the government, at some future day, will endorse everything, while the hon. ex-Minister of Railways and Cauals resigned his position because he could not accept what was proposed by the government. I desire to say a word or two in connection with the petitions that are being presented to this House. 1 have presented many of these myself and I accept the responsibility, of saying, as a member of this House, that every petition presented by me, having my name endorsed on it is a right and a proper petition. In addition to that, while I take the responsibility of endorsing these petitions, I say that it is an insult to the people of Canada to say that they would send a petition to this parliament which is not properly and correctly signed. The hon. gentleman for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) made a remark this morning in connection with a petition presented by my hon. friend from East Prince (Mr. Lefurgey). I can assure the hon. gentleman that his statement is not correct.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon. I referred to the hon. member for Prince Edward (Mr. Alcorn), not to the hon. member for East Prince.


Edward Hackett: I accept the hon. gentleman's apology. I would not for one moment have stated that the people of East Prince or of West Prince who attach then-names to any petition of this kind are doing it by fraud. They are honest and straightforward, and I would say in addition to that that there is not one man whose name appears on the petitions either from East Prince or West Prince or from Queen's or from King's who is not the equal of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Talbot).
Now, Mr. Speaker, I have no desire to delay the proceedings of this House. We 3994
have been here for many months threshing out as far as possible the rights of the people and endeavouring to ascertain the views of the government. We have been charged by our friends on the other side of the House with obstructing public business. Sir, what are the facts ? During a period of four months and a half, from the 12th of March until the last day of July, although the House was in session this important measure was not placed before parliament. Can you blame the representatives of the people, who are charged with doing their duty to the country, because they opposed by every means possible a measure which is brought down four and a half months after the opening of the session when it would be supposed that we were to prorogue and go to our homes ? The hon. gentlemen, for some reasons of their own, withheld this proposition until the last day of July when the House had been in session four and a half months, and then they charge hon. members on this side of the House with obstruction. I heard the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) make a charge a feu-days ago that the opposition were obstructing.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Order. The hon. gentleman has no right to refer to a previous debate.


Edward Hackett: It was in connection with this debate ; it was part of this debate.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I am afraid that this discussion of delay is not germane to the question before the House. The subject now before us is the third reading of this Bill, with the amendment thereto proposed by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Blain).


Edward Hackett: Mr. Speaker, I accept your ruling, 1 submit to it, and I trust that the amendment offered by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Blain) will be accepted by this parliament, because it is an amendment in the right direction. It is an amendment that will not allow the passing of this Bill until full information has been obtained by the people of this country ; until after 'he people have had an opportunity of raising their voice and speaking through their representatives in parliament, and have had submitted io them at the polls this question of building a railway, costing over $100,000,000, from Quebec to Moncton. My first intention was to say one word in connection with the remarks made by the hon. member for Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) who has gone back on his benefactor and who has not acted fairly by the hon. ex-Minister oT Railways and Canals (Hon. Air. Blair). I want to say in connection with the late Minister of Railways and Canals and fo say it honestly and fairly that so far ns the province from which I come is coneejnrd, I found the hon. ex-Minister of Railways and Canals progressive and up to date and

I believe that when he found it his duty to resign as a minister of the cabinet he was conscientious and that he felt he was doing his duty to the people of this country.
Some eight months ago, before the meeting of parliament, a meeting of the electors of West Prince was lieldi in the town of Tignisli, and they unanimously passed a resolution congratulating the ex-Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair) on what he had done for the opening up of that part of the country, and especially for running two trains a day between Summerside and Tig-nish. I desire to convey to the hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Blair) the thanks of that meeting, and at the samei time I trust that the acting- Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Fielding) will continue the good work initiated by the ex-Minister (Hon. Mr. Blair). Now, Mr. Speaker, I desire to say that, before the government undertakes such a large and expensive project as is included in this Bill, proper surveys should be made, and estimates of cost should be obtained and we should not have to rely on explorations made 25 or 50 years ago for another purpose altogether. I am in favour of opening up our country, but I do believe that while we have in the North-west 150,000,000 acres of the most fertile lands in the world awaiting settlement, it is a mistake to throw away the money of the people of Canada on such an undertaking as this.


Mr. J. D. REID (Grenville).: Had it not been for the member for Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) and the member for Belle-chasse (Mr. Talbot) prolonging this debate this Bill would have passed the House before one o'clock. I have a question to put to the Prime Minister, which has not yet been answered so far as I know. It is reported that the reason why the Winnipeg-Moncton section is tacked on to this project by the government, is, because the member for Victoria, N.B., (Hon. Mr. Costigan) is interested in a railway from Quebec to Ed-mundston, part of which has been built, and that pressure has been put upon the Prime Minister to absorb that line of railway. It is also reported that the Quebec Bridge is to be absorbed, and that the government intend bringing down a subsidy of some $4,000,000 for that Bridge Company, of which Mr. Parent, Prime Minister of Quebec, is the president. In addition to that, there is the Trans-Canada Railway from Quebec to Winnipeg, of which Mr. Parent is also president, and that also is to be absorbed by the government, and these parties are to i-eceive a large amount for their charters.. Perhaps the Prime Minister could give ns some information as to these rumours.


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: I have no objection at all to answering my hon. friend. Although we do not share all ideas in common perhaps the hon. gentleman (Mr. Reid) will Mr. HACKETT.
take a piece of advice from me, and that is, that he will do well not to be too credulous, and especially not to credit reports which are without even a semblance of foundation or common sense. The member for Victoria (Hon. Mr. Costigan) is, I believe, interested with other parties, in a charter for a railway over the territory which will be traversed by the government line from Moncton to Quebec. His charter which I think had some value some few months ago, will in consequence have no value whatever to-day. As to the rumour that the Prime Minister of Quebec is president of a transcontinental railway company to which some subsidies are to be given ; this is the first information I have had on that.
I am not aware that the Premier of Quebec is interested in any such road, and at all events the government has no such intention, nor has it received any application with regard to it. There is a company known as the Trans-Canada, which had a charter, and wanted to build a railway practically over the same ground which is to he covered by the railway contemplated by this Bill. As to the Quebec Bridge Company, there Is an application for further aid to that company. It was assisted by the government some two or three years ago, and there is an application for further aid.


John Dowsley Reid: That bridge would be absorbed by the new road ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Well, legislation will be necessary on that subject.


Mr. G. W. FOWLER (King's, X.B.).: I would not have spoken further in connection with this Bill, were it not that the member for Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) has I am told attempted to cast a reflection upon the members for New Brunswick- especially those who sit on this side of the House-by saying that they were not doing their duty to their province in opposing this railway.


Henry Robert Emmerson: If the hon. gentleman understood that, he certainly was misinformed. Those who heard me will acquit me of having made any reflection whatever upon any hon. member from New Brunswick or any other province.


George William Fowler: I am very glad to hear from the bon. gentleman's own lips that he did not make any such statement, but I am informed that what be said was that be was surprised at their antipathy against that section of the country between Moncton and Quebec. If the hon. gentleman uttered these words he cast a reflection upon the gentlemen who are opposing this Bill, because he insinuated that they had an antipathy, not against the railway itself, hut against that section of the country between Moncton and Quebec. I do not know bow else his language can be construed. Speaking for myself-and in this respect I can speak for

every member on this side of the House-we have no antipathy against any part of this Canada of our. We are Canadians before we are provincialists. The fault I find with the member for Westmoreland and others of his friends is, that they are provincialists and not Canadians. The hon. gentleman from Westmoreland (Mr. Emrner-son) said that the hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Hale) should support this railway because it goes through his county. Are we to be told that a member of this House should support a national transcontinental railway as it is called, simply because it runs through a portion of his county ? Are we to take such a narrow view of national questions ? Are we to consider only the interests of the little district in which we live, and mot the interest of our country as a whole ? As a member of this parliament of Canada, I protest against being asked to take any such narrow view as that. We are here as Canadians, expected to legislate for the best interests of Canada, amd not to narrow our minds by local considerations when the good of the whole country is at stake.
No man in this House will stand up for the particular district he represents more strongly than I will if it is being interfered with or is being injuriously affected in any way. But what we are to look to is the good of all Canada, the good of the greatest number. Is this proposed railway going to do the greatest possible good for Canada ? That is the first question for us to consider. Afterwards we may consider how it is going to affect the particular district in which we live or the particular province from which we come. I say I object to this railway on broad grounds, because I do not believe that if will do what its promoters claim it will do. I do not believe it will prevent Canadian freight going through Canadian channels to American ports. That could have been prevented ; but the very men who are promoting this railway, the very government which is pinning its faith and pledging its existence to this scheme, have by their contract failed to prevent that being done, notwithstanding the objections which have been urged from this side of the House. I am opposed to this scheme because it will to my mind destroy as a trunk line the Intercolonial Railway, on which $70,000,000 of the public money of this country has been expended. I am not alone in that view. The leading man on the government side of the House from the province of New Brunswick, the hon. ex-Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair)-a powerful member of the government he was too-felt so strongly on this point that he abandoned his office and resigned his seat in the cabinet rather than agree to this scheme.
Let us for a moment contrast the conduct of that hon. gentleman with the conduct of the hon. member for Westmoreland (Mr. Em-merson), and see which shines the brighter by the contrast. The hon. member for Westmoreland was just as strongly opposed to interference with the Intercolonial Railway as was the hon. ex-Minister of Railways, if we can judge of the strength of a man's position by the strength of the language he uses ; and that is the only way we can test it until we find that his acts do not harmonize with his language. The hon. gentleman urged strongly in the Railway Committee the extension of the Intercolonial Railway to Depot Harbour. But now we find that the hon. gentleman has abandoned that position entirely. He has swallowed this Bill holus-bolus, although it was too severe a dose for the ex-Minister of Railways. Why has the hon. gentleman gone back on his professions ? Why has he changed his view ? Does he put his party before his country ? Surely he was honest and sincere when he was advocating so strongly the extension of the Intercolonial. He waxed most eloquent. I was pleased to hear him, because the language he used was entirely in accord with my own view, and I contributed to the generous meed of applause which his remarks received in the Railway Committee ; and a man has to be pretty eloquent to get any applause there. So you can judge of the strength of the language the hon. gentleman used on that occasion. Since then, as I say, a change has taken place in his views. Has he seen more light ? What is that light ? Is it the bright reflection of office 1 Is it that he sees an office In the distance ? Does he hope to rise by the fall of his former benefactor and chief ? Is he willing to give up his principles ? Is he willing to go back on that which he so strongly urged, and which be claimed was required in the best interests of Canada, because he sees, forsooth, an opportunity of becoming a member of this cabinet, and this is the only way he can reach that desired goal ? I do not like to impute motives. I am not imputing motives ; I am merely asking the question. I do not say for a moment that that is the case. It may be that some miraculous intervention of Providence has taken place. It may be that there has been a miracle as in the time of old, when a great light broke in upon a benighted man and he saw clearly what he had not seen before. It may be that that is the case with the hon. gentleman. If so, I am afraid that the light that has broken in upon him is not a. light from heaven, but that he is being deluded by a false light.
What is the great reason given for the building of this transcontinental railway ? The reason is the freight congestion in the west. One of the reasons why I oppose this road is because it will not relieve the present congestion in the west. This proposed road cannot be built for many years ; but the freight congestion is acute to-day, if we can believe the statements of western people. And so, if you are only going to apply your remedy to a deep-seated disease ten years hence, I am afraid your pa tient

will be dead before the remedy can be applied. I believe in applying the remedy at once, when the patient can be relieved. I am opposed to this road, and I believe the people of New Brunswick are also opposed to it. The hon. member for Westmoreland will find that the people of New Brunswick are opposed to this railway irrespective of politics, apart from the heelers aud the hot party men. I am not using the word heeler in an offensive sense. I am only using it to indicate those men who are always prepared to swallow anything their party puts forth. Then, there are a certain class of men supporting the government, who have no party fealty, but whose sole idea is to get what they can, by whatever means they can, out of the public treasury. That class of men will support this Bill, as they will support anything that the government brings forward.


Henry Robert Emmerson: Will my hon. friend pardon me if I ask him a question ?


George William Fowler: With pleasure.


Henry Robert Emmerson: I want to ask him if it is true that when the Grand Trunk Pacific Company proposed to have their line stop at Quebec, he, in conjunction with the hon. member for Carleton, N.B. (Mr. Hale), sent a telegram to the St. John Board of Trade to this effect:
Important that civic bodies take immediate, united and strong action re Grand Trunk Pacific Railway. Apparent intention is to make Portland winter terminus ; and if maritime provinces are to reap reward for past services, a fight to the finish must be made.


George William Fowler: Yes, I sent that telegram, and I endorse it to-day. Let me tell the hon. gentleman that I do not pursue so sinuous a course in politics that I have to take back to-day what I said yesterday. I sent that telegram, and I stand by it to-day. What does that telegram say V It says it is evidently the intention to make Portland the winter terminus. Has that intention been changed ? Why, that is the very fault I have to find with this whole scheme-that under this contract between the Grand Trunk Pacific and the government, the Grand Trunk Pacific are enabled to send their freight originating along this line, by way of the American routes to American ports.
That is the very ground that I take now and that I took then. The alternative proposition of the leader of the opposition is the very thing that will prevent that. It is the very thing that my hon. friend proposed in the Railway Committee when he spoke so strongly and eloquently in favour of the extension of the Intercolonial. That extension I was in favour of then as I am to-day.	He was in favour of it then,
but is opposed to it to-day. And why ?	By the extension of the Intercolonial you would prevent most effec-Mr. FOWLER.
tively the making of Portland the winter terminus of the Grand Trunk Pacific. That is one feature which will appeal particularly to the electors of the east when called upou to pronounce their verdict. By extending the government system until it taps the wheat fields of the west, we would ensure to the people of the east the certainty that the sacrifices they have made for the development of Canada were not in vain. We will ensure to them their share in the trade of carrying the grain and other products from that great western country to the markets of Europe. I stand by every word of that telegram, and I defy any one to construe it in any other way than I am construing it now. But the hon. member for Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) cannot square what he said in the Railway Committee with what he has been saying here. There is just this difference between us. The one is guided in his career by patriotic motives, by eudeavouring to do what is best for the country, whereas the hon. gentleman is evidently guided solely by what he thinks will be most to his own advantage. [DOT]
Another objection to the transcontinental railway scheme is this, that by expending so much money yon will restrict your capacity to spend in other directions. You are about to incur an enormous expenditure of over $120,000,000, which is the lowest estimate of cost, and you are to build a road with gradients of four-tenths per cent, according to the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) over which you will be capable of hauling trains of 2,000 tons. I am confident that there will be no such grades on that road, nor will you be able to haul trains of more than 250 tons, and you will prevent us from Obtaining the proper transportation facilities which are so necessary in the east in order to handle the immense trade we expect to develop between the west and the east. When you tax the country to the extent of $120,000,000 and over, you will find it more difficult to get the necessary millions to construct the great work required at Montreal, St. John and Halifax, and the other ports which it is necessary to develop on the maritime coast. Yon should do these things first, and then when you have obtained the requisite information, build your transcontinental. But do not take a leap in the dark. First develop our ports, make them free ports so that we will be in a much better position to compete against American ports, and after we have obtained full information about the character of the country through which it is proposed to build this line, will be time enough to build it. We object to this scheme on the ground that we have no definite information on which to base it. What have we ? Nothing but guesses. We have no information such as business men would require before they took one step forward. It is all very well for the hon.

member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) to make glib statements about the condition of that country, which he knows no more about than the man in the moon. I have never yet seen an hon. gentleman who possesses such a vivid imagination. He can imagine almost anything, and then he will speak with such an air of candid sincerity that people almost believe him. But we want something more definite than the mere statement that a man has tramped on foot over a certain portion of this territory, when the snow was three feet deep, and then gave his opinion on the fertility of the soil. We want something more definite before we spend $150,000,000. That country may be the most fertile part of Canada. I am not saying anything against it. But I am opposed to your proceeding before you have definite information regarding the character of the country, and before you know whether there will be any local trade developed there or not. As to the gradients that may be obtained, of course, you can go through a mountain if you have money enough. But then comes the question whether or not the cost would be so great that the freight rates would be too heavy to enable freight to go that way. All these things have to be considered. There should be full information on all these points before we undertake this responsibility. That is what the people of New Brunswick are saying. What the hon. member for Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) suggests is that the people of New Brunswick are so venal as to be bribed to vote against their conscience and what they believe to be best simply because there is going to be a railway down there through some portion of the province. A suggestion of that sort would come fittingly from the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Rt. Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright), who described the maritime provinces as the shreds and patches of confederation, but I cannot understand an hon. gentleman who is a son of New Brunswick, who has had the honour of being premier of that province, making such an insinuation against it, more particularly when that province has done much better by him than he deserved. He has tried to lead the House to believe that we in New Brunswick are to be bought, simply because a railway is going to be brought down to our country. Bet me tell hon. gentlemen opposite that we are not that kind of people in New Brunswick. There is no part of Canada where the Canadian spirit burns more strongly. We look first to the interests of Canada, and then to those of our province.


Some hon. MEMBER.: Good.


George William Fowler: I can quite understand how the hon. gentleman can say ' good ' in his sarcastic tones. That sort of thing does not appeal to little minds. I have heard that particular hon. gentleman before in this House, and can quite understand how
anything of that kind would appear absurd to him. But there are men to whom that sentiment would appeal. They are the sort of people we have in New Brunswick, and are not to be dragooned into the supporting of Bills simply because you are going to throw a sop by building a line down there.
I would not have taken up the time of the House had it not been for the hon. member for Westmoreland. I do not know why he spoke. Surely he must have received the same instruction as the rest of the rank and file on the back benches. Surely he was told as well as they to retire into the cave of silence and remain there. Did the ministers not speak to him ? Is_ it because^ he is just standing on the tfireshgld of a cabinet portfolio that he was not spoken to? Perhaps he did not get his notice and was dragged into the debate. But I understand it was whispered around the corridors that one minister was deputed to spank the hon. gentleman for having interfered in this debate. I hoped the hon. gentleman had enough manliness to resent that and prevent the Minister of Customs from giving him that spanking.
Amendment (Mr. Blain) negatived, on the same division.


Mr. GEORGE TAYLOR (South Leeds).: I notice, in reading the 42nd section of the agreement between the Grand Trunk Pacific and the government, that it is very ingeniously worded. I am not a lawyer, but I will submit my point, and will challenge any legal gentleman in this House to controvert the statement I make. That 42nd section reads as follows :
It is hereby declared and agreed between the parties to this agreement that the aid herein provided for is granted by the government of Canada for the express' purpose of encouraging the development of Canadian trade and the transportation of goods through Canadian channels The company accepts the aid on th-se conditions, and agrees that all freight originating on the line of the railway, or its branches, not specifically routed otherwise by_ the shipper, shall, when destined for points in Canada, be carried entirely on Canadian territory-
From that point it goes on as follows : -or between Canadian inland ports, and that the through-rate on export traffic from the point of origin to the point of destination shall at no time be greater via Canadian ports .than via United States ports, and that all such traffic, not specifically routed otherwise by the shipper, shall be carried to Canadian ocean ports.
That makes provision only for traffic for export. But what provision is made in the agreement for the Canadian manufacturer In eastern Canada, or the Canadian shipper from Manitoba or the North-west ova- this line ? Suppose a manufacturer in the eastern provinces wants to ship to Winnipeg over this line, there is no provision that his goods shall be carried as cheaply as by lines running over American territory.

I propose to amend this section by putting in the following words :
That all freight originating on the line of the said railway or its branches, not specifically routed otherwise by the shipper, if destined for points in Canada, shall be carried entirely on Canadian territory or between Canadian inland ports, and that the rate for such carriage shall not be greater than the rate charged between the same points by any route not wholly Canadian ; and if such freight be for export, it shall, unless otherwise specifically routed by the shipper, be carried to Canadian ports, and that the through-rate on such export traffic from the point of origin to the point of destination shall at no time be greater by way of Canadian ports than by way of any other ports.
I want this to apply for the benefit of the Canadian manufacturer or the Canadian shipper. Suppose a Canadian shipper has a carload of cattle, or a carload of hogs or a carload of butter or cheese, that he wishes to send to Montreal, this clause makes no provision for his case. Suppose a miller in Manitoba has sold a carload of flour in Prince Edward Island. That is not export trade, and there is no provision that this road shall serve him as cheaply as the road that runs partly over American territory. There is nothing to prevent the Manitoba miller from shipping over the Canadian Northern and Northern Pacific to Boston, and so to Prince Edward Island, and he may get a much cheaper rate than on this proposed route under this agreement. I wish to make provision so that the Canadian shipper, whether in the east or in the west, shall be able to ship over this line at as cheap a rate as over a partly American route. There is not a member of the government, there Is not an hon. member supporting the government, particularly among those who come from the west or from the manufacturing towns in eastern Canada, but will see the necessity of the condition I here propose.
Before I formally place this resolution in your hands, Mr. Speaker, I desire to refer to a matter that was up for discussion yesterday. The right hon. Prime Minister, just before the House rose, took occasion to refer to a debate which took place in the afternoon in which I criticised some remarks of his with reference to the route proposed by the hon. leader of the opposition. Here is the statement the right hon. gentleman made: [DOT]
-I come now to the main proposition of my hon. friend. He proposes to acquire the Canada Atlantic Railway as it exists to-day. But though the government may acquire the Canada Atlantic Railway, it certainly could not operate it.
And he goes on to explain why :
How could you expect that a Canadian government could possibly, with any advantage to the country, operate the Canada Atlantic Railway. It Is within the knowledge of everybody that at this moment three-fourths at least of the business of the Canad-.-rn Pacific Railway Mr. TAYLOR.	, f
and three-fourths the business of the Canada Atlantic Railway is American business. It is business connected with the western states and carried to its destination in the eastern states. The Canadian government could not compete for that business if we were to acquire that railway.
He does not explain why. Why would not the government be in a position, if the scheme of my hon. friend the leader of the opposition was carried out, and this road operated by a commission entirely apart from politics, to operate that railway the same as any company .would operate a railway ? But the right hon. gentleman goes on :
At present the manager of the Canada Atlantic Railway has connections and agents in Duluth, Milwaukee, Chicago and other points in the west, and in New York, Boston and other cities in the east, collecting freight in the east for the western states and in the west for the eastern states. Now, would It be possib e for the Canadian government to maintain those agents in American cities and keep connections there in order to collect that trade now passing over our territory ?
Why not ? Has not this government a horde of immigration agents in the United States trying to collect immigrants in that country, and does it not pay these agents large sums of money ? Wherein would it be inconsistent in this government, operating this railway through a commission, to have its freight agents in every city of the United States bidding and competing for the trade of that country ? But the right hon. gentleman went further, and I presume he has had a number of telegrams from the marine interest of this Dominion this morning telling him that the statements he made yesterday in the House 'Were not in accordance with the facts. Remember this, that I am about to quote the statement of the right hon. Prime Minister to the people of this country :
There is something more. The fleet maintained on the lakes for the purpose of supplying traffic to the Canada Atlantic Railway is composed in part of American bottoms. It would be impossible to have the trade we have to-day unless it was carried in American bottoms. We can carry Canadian freight in Canadian bottoms, but you cannot take freight at Duluth, Chicago or Milwaukee or any of the western ports and bring it to Depot Harbour except in American bottoms.
There is the statement of the Prime Minister that we cannot take freight in Chicago, Duluth or Milwaukee and bring it to Depot Harbour except in American bottoms.


The PRIME MINISTER.: If destined to American harbours, certainly.


George Taylor: There is where the right hon. gentleman (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) is wrong again. It is being done every day. Since this discussion took place I have had a conversation with a prominent officer of the Canada Atlantic Railway, and

he explained to me that they have part of their fleet American bottoms anid part Canadian bottoms. The Canadian vessels go to Chicago, Duluth; or Milwaukee, take a cargo and bring it to Depot Harbour. The reason for having part American bottoms is so that if they have no business for Depot Harbour they can load at Chicago, Duluth or Milwaukee for Buffalo or any other point on the American side, which a Canadian bottom cannot do. But the Canadian bottom can load at an American point and carry to Depot Harbour exactly the same as an American bottom. Then, to contradict my statement, the right hon. gentleman read the law. I challenged the Minister of Customs to deny my statement last night, and he said that the Canadian boats could do just what the law allowed them to do. The law is the same on the Canadian side as on the American side. Will the Minister of Customs tell me that I canuot do what X am doing every day, shipping goods to Winnipeg routed by the Grand Trunk Railway to Collingwood or to Sarnia, loading them there on American boats, taking them to Duluth and shipping) thenv over the Northern Pacific and the Canadian Northern into Winnipeg ? Is there anything in the laws or bonding privileges of the United States to prevent that being done ? Nothing, We are doing if every day, so is every manufacturer in eastern Ontario shipping by the Grand Trunk and by the water route, going partly through American territory in bond ; and the Americans are doing the same in our country. The law passed in the United States is for this special purpose, it was passed in February, 1898, and the Prime Minister read it last night:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House ot Repesent.atives of the United States of America in congress assembled, that no merchandise shall be transported by water

routed otherwise by the shipper, il destined for points in Canada, shall be carried entirely on Canadian territory or between Canadian inland ports, and that the rate for such carriage shall not be greater than the rate charged between the same points by any route not wholly Canadian ; and if such freight be for export, it shall, unless otherwise specifically routed by the shipper, be carried to Canadian ports, and that the through-rate on such export traffic from the point of origin to the point of destination shall at no time be greater by way of Canadian ports than by way of any other ports.
I may say this whole clause provides, in case of freight carried from the west or elsewhere, if it is for export, that they must comply with the requirements and not charge a greater rate ; but if the grain, or cattle, or cheese, or butter is shipped from any point in the west to any point in eastern Canada, they can charge whatever they please for it. We want to say this to them : You have received aid from the government of Canada, and you shall carry these goods as cheaply as they can be carried over any competing line, whether partly in Canada and partly in the United States' or not.


The MINISTER OP CUSTOMS.: One word about a subject not directly concerned in the amendment, and that is with reference to the misunderstanding that seems to exist between the hon. member for Xeeds (Mr. Taylor) and the Prime Minister with reference to the law of the United States. He asked me last night what I had to say, and being busily engaged at the moment in conversation, I did not hear what he said, and gave the answer that they could do whatever was permitted by their law. Now, the law of the United States that was passed in 1898 is this :
Ee it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in congress assembled, that no merchandise shall be transported by water, under penalty of forfeiture thereof, from one port of the United States to another port of the United States, either directly or via a foreign port, or for any part of the voyage, in any other vessel than a vessel of the United States.
Then the hon. gentleman argues that if merchandise is shipped from Duluth destined, we will say, to Boston


George Taylor: For export.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: It has to take that voyage from Duluth to Boston, we will say. This section reads that if on any part of the voyage it is carried in anv other vessel than a vessel of the United States it is subject to forfeiture.


Robert Laird Borden: Does he say that the United States have construed the'word 'voyage' as including transmission by railway trains ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: There is reciprocity in the bonding arrangements as Mr. TAYLOR.
far as railways are concerned but not with reference to coasting.


George Taylor: No one denies that.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: But I have read the law which says these consequences may arise out of this and if they did not arise I do not think it would be our desire or duty to call attention to it. I understood the hon. gentleman to say it is done now, that it is perfectly legal to do it and that he has the authority of the Canada Atlantic Railway for stating that it is possible for a merchant to ship goods say from Boston by way of the Canada Atlantic Railway destined for Chicago, that they may be put on a Canadian vessel at Parry Sound and landed from a Canadian vessel in Chicago. Does the hon. gentleman (Mr. Taylor) say that the Canada Atlantic Railway can do that ?


George Taylor: If the hon. minister is quoting me, I said nothing of the kind.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: What did the hon. gentleman say ?


George Taylor: The hon. gentleman said : that what we are doing in Canada to-day is shipping goods via the Grand Trunk Railway by rail to Collingwood or Owen Sound; that they are there placed in a Canadian or American vessel and are landed in Duluth ; that they are there taken by the Northern Pacific, carried through the United States, handed over to the Canadian Northern Railway, and taken again through Canadian territory. Will my hon. friend admit that this can be done under the United States law ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The question was one of United States law and we do not here interpret United States law. If the United States law is more liberal than we thought we are delighted to know that, because we would like to have all the advantage we may have, and therefore I would be pleased if I correctly understood the hon. gentleman to say that he has the authority of the Canada Atlantic Railway for saying that merchandise may be shipped from Boston over a Canadian line of railway, say to Parry Sound, and there be placed on a Canadian vessel and be delivered from that vessel at its destination in Chicago. I again ask the hon. gentleman if he has the authority of the Canada Atlantic Railway for saying that ?


George Taylor: I did not say that the Canada Atlantic Railway made any such statement. The statement I made about the Canada Atlantic Railway was that they are to-day carrying grain from Chicago" and Duluth by both Canadian and American vessels to Depot Harbour, then putting it in cars and shipping it out from there ; that there is no difference between Canadian and American bottoms.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Grain is merchandise and I understood my hon. friend to say that grain may be shipped at Duluth, consigned to Boston, in a Canadian vessel, majr be taken in a Canadian vessel to Depot Harbour and then be carried from Depot Harbour on to the port of Boston.


George Taylor: For export.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: You are qualifying it now.


George Taylor: No, I said it from the first ; the hon. gentleman wants to misrepresent to the House every statement 1 made.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Not at all, I am only trying to understand.


George Taylor: I have interpreted the law and I challenge any legal gentleman in the House to disprove my interpretation of it. The hon. minister cannot do it himself.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I am not going to define the meaning of American law.


George Taylor: The law against coasting applies to carriage altogether by water ; it does not refer to carriage by part water and part rail.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I would be very pleased if it did so ; I wanted to ascertain from the hon. gentleman if he had the authority of the Canada Atlantic Railway for the statement that they carry grain from Duluth in Canadian vessels and that it is being shipped out by Boston ; that they can carry American grain in Canadian vessels to Depot Harbour destined to Montreal for shipment is of course very evident, but the question is whether they can carry it from one port in the United States to another port in the United States. As I said I will be very glad if that will be found to be the case but I will say to my my hon. friend that perhaps the Prime Minister can interpret a law fully as well as my hon. friend and he interprets it that this can not be done. The commissioner of customs also does not think It can be done.


Hon. Mr. HAG  GART@: Does the hon. Minister of Customs take the ground that if a cargo of wheat billed from Chicago to the port of Boston is taken in a Canadian vessel to Depot Harbour, there transhipped to the Canada Atlantic Railway cars and taken from Depot Harbour to Boston, it will come within the law of the United States prohibiting the participation of other than United States vessels in the American coasting trade ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The officers of my department think that is the interpretation which the American government place upon that law ; if they do not do that we will be very pleased to know it.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I made a statement yesterday with regard to American traffic originating in the United States and ending in the United States, for instance a bill of lading from Chicago to Boston or to any inland town of the United States, and said that that cargo, in order to get the benefit of the bonding privilege on the Canada Atlantic Railway, would have to be carried to Depot Harbour on American bottoms.


George Taylor: Not at all.


The PRIME MINISTER.: That is the statement I made and I hope I am wrong and that the Canada Atlantic Railway can do that, but, I am not going to admit that I am wrong at this moment. I was not guided by my own interpretation of the law, I do not undertake to interpret American law, but I was acting on the impression I have had for some time. I made the statement yesterday ; I make it to-day ; I may be wrong, I think I am right, but I shall look into it and give the result of my investigations to the House.


Robert Laird Borden: Whatever question there may be about the matter which has been raised by the hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Taylor) there is no question at all that the Prime Minister was wrong yesterday as I shall show him in a moment. If the officers of the Department of Customs say that the United States courts have interpreted the word ' voyage ' in the United States statute as including transmission by rail, I say no more because I have had no occasion to investigate or to interpret this statute ; but I would be surprised to learn that the United States courts had interpreted that section in that way. The clause is dealing with vessels, and it uses the word ' voyage ' and there does not seem to be anything in it which would include or appear to take into consideration transportation by railway. It is a matter for the United States courts to determine. Have they determined that the law in the United States is as the Minister of Customs says ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I did not say that. I asked the commissioner of customs if there had been a decision on this question and he said he thought there had been but he had not it handy and he is looking it up.


Robert Laird Borden: That is a perfectly fair statement. The point we were dealing with yesterday was, whether or not grain taken at Duluth and brought to Depot Harbour for the purpose of transmission through a Canadian port, could be carried in a Canadian bottom, There is not a scintilla of a doubt about that. Does my right hon. friend say there is a doubt about it ?	.


The PRIME MINISTER.: What I said yesterday, was, that the business of the

Canada Atlantic was chiefly American business from American port to American port, and I stated yesterday, that that ..business could not be carried, so far as water transportation is concerned, except in American bottoms.


Robert Laird Borden: Does the Prime Minister or the Minister of Customs say that there is anything to prevent a Canadian bottom carrying grain from Duluth or Chicago to Depot Harbour, for transmission jthrough a Canadian port to Great Britain ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Certainly not. I referred to American business.


Robert Laird Borden: Then why did the right bon. gentleman raise the question, that we were extending the Intercolonial Railway for the purpose of sending grain to American ports ? What we want to do is to send the trade by Canadian ports. The right hon. gentleman has American ports too much in his mind ; it is Canadian ports that we are thinking of. Our object is to bring that grain from Duluth or Chicago to Depot Harbour, and to transmit it, not by American but by Canadian ports. The right hon. gentleman now admits that there is nothing in the United States law that could by any possibility interfere with a project of that kind. Let me point out to my right hon. friend, that if we acquire the Canada Atlantic Railway system there is no reason why the 20,000,000 bushels of Canadian grain that now go via Buffalo through an American port, should not be brought by the Canada Atlantic Railway system, and sent to Europe through Canadian ports. The Canada Atlantic Railway carries a very considerable portion of Canadian grain now. My recollection is that it carried some 8,000,000 bushels of Canadian grain last year, and if 8,000,000 bushels of grain can be carried by the Canada Atlantic Railway, I do not see any reason why, with proper development, it could not carry 28,000,000 bushels to the ports of Quebec and Montreal in summer, and to the maritime province ports in winter, as set forth in the letter of Mr. Meighen, thus giving to the ports of Canada a greater share of the western business than they have at present. If you are going to acquire the Canada Atlantic Railway to take grain from Chicago or Duluth to Depot Harbour, and then send it to Boston or Portland, there may be a doubt; but my proposal was that you should acquire the Canada Atlantic Railway for the purpose of sending traffic to Canadian ports, and in that respect the point raised by the hon. gentleman has no bearing at all.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I presume that the Canada Atlantic Railway could develop Canadian business, but the point which 1 made against the project of the hon. gentleman was, that if the government were to acquire the Canada Atlantic Railway they would destroy the American business which Sir WILFRID LAURIER.
the Canada Atlantic Railway has at this moment. You might improve the Canada Atlantic Railway business, but that .business could be done by any other company just as well as the Canada Atlantic Railway. If the government undertook that, it would destroy the American business of the Canada Atlantic Railway, and as I stated, three-fourths of the business done by the Canada Atlantic Railway is American business ; that is to say business originating in the United States and ending in the United States.


George Taylor: Does the right lion, gentleman say that three-fourths of the business of the Canada Atlantic Railway commences and ends in the United States ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: That is my information.


George Taylor: Is that grain sold in Boston or is it taken there for export V


The PRIME MINISTER.: The Canada Atlantic Railway is doing not only a grain business but a large package trade in return freight. I stated that this freight could not be carried except in American bottoms upon the lakes, and I maintain it. That is what I stated yesterday, and if I am wrong I will admit it. I will investigate it, and give the House the benefit of my investigation. I say that the business commencing in the United States and ending in the United States, has to be carried in American and not in Canadian bottoms. I had occasion to look the matter up some years ago, and that is my impression about it, although it may be that my recollection is wrong.


Robert Laird Borden: So far as the origination of grain traffic in the United States is concerned, my right hon. friend may perhaps not be very far from the mark. My recollection is, and I speak only from recollection, that about 20,000,000 bushels of grain were carried last year by the Canada Atlantic Railway, 12,000,000 bushels of which were American grain, and 8,000,000 were Canadian grain. The hon. gentleman is right so far as that goes, but I was not aware until the right hon. gentleman stated it, that when that 20,000,000 bushels got to Montreal, it went, not from the port of Montreal but from United States ports. Upon that I have no direct information, except the impression I have gathered from reading the reports of a recent commission in the United States, which seemed to indicate that grain brought by the Canada Atlantic Railway not only from Canadian points, but from American points, went by the St. Lawrence route. Has the right hon. gentleman any information which would indicate that any considerable portion of the grain brought to Montreal by the Canada Atlantic Railway, does eventually go by American steamship routes ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: What I bad in my mind was not only the freight eastward

but the freight westward, and a good deal of the trade of the Canada Atlantic Railway is package freight from American cities to other American cities in the west, and which would have to be carried in American bottoms.


Robert Laird Borden: My right hon. friend is, X think, right in saying that a portion of this, westward freight is package freight from the United States ; and as to that7we will have to investigate the question as to the intrepretation which the United States authorities put upon this statute.


William Humphrey Bennett: I have lived for many years in the town of Midland, where there is a large quantity of grain handled, and 1 know that Canadian vessels bring corn to Midland from Chicago, transfer it to the cars, and these cars are sealed by a United States officer, wiio is kept there for that purpose during the summer months. This grain goes to the United States and is shipped from Portland. I notice from the ' Marine News,' in this newspaper that a boat called the ' Ottawa ' has passed Mackinaw. That boat comes from Chicago loaded with grain. She belongs to the Booth line, and is going to Parry Sound. When that boat arrives at Parry Sound her grain is shipped eastward, and it is possible that it may be shipped at a Canadian port. There is no doubt that numbers of Canadian vessels arrive at Midland with grain in the summer months when the Canadian North-west grain is not moving, and then these vessels go into the corn trade between Chicago and Midland, and that corn is ultimately shipped from United States Atlantic ports.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Is it for export or does it go into storage ?


William Humphrey Bennett: I am quite positive that it is shipped from Portland to points in Great Britain. There is no doubt that the United States government keep an officer at Midland, whose duty it is to have these cars all sealed, so that they will not pass to any ports of Canada.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Under the bonding privilege.


William Humphrey Bennett: Under the bonding privilege they go to the United States and on to Portland. The grain cannot be used for local consumption. It must be exported.
making of this bonding treaty with the American government in 1898; and the interpretation which the government place on the American law must be the same as that which the Americans place on the Canadian law. If such is the case, our Canadian vessels have been running great risks; and they are doing so now if they carry cargoes from an American port in the way the hon. Minister of Customs speaks of.
I suppose that if this new railway is built, or if the government acquire the Canada Atlantic Railway, and if goods are shipped over the government railway, they will have to be loaded into Canadian vessels at Depot Harbour, if consigned to a Canadian point in the west. If American vessels carried those goods they would *be violating the law of this -country, as the Minister of Customs construes it. I rose to refer to this matter because I think the press should let marine men know the position they are in, so that if there is any misunderstanding of the matter it can be remedied at the earliest possible moment.


Samuel Hughes: Mr. Speaker, the remarks which I have to offer on thi* motion will partly cover the remarks which I addressed to the House this morning. I was pointing out the length of the road from Levis to Edmuudston. The hon. member for Bellecbasse (Mr. Talbot), who was in the House a few moments ago, and to whom I gave notice that I was going to correct! his statement, has gone out. When that hon. member this morning stated that the distance was only 186 miles by a direct line, I stated that that was through United States territory; and the hon. member for Belle-chasse contradicted me point-blank. I will read from the same report that he read from. The first heading is: ' To Edmunds-ton by lines surveyed via Cabano river and Temiscouata Railway.' The next heading is :	'To Edmundston via Etchemin valley through state of Maine, connecting with St. Francis branch of Temiscouata Railway.' Then it goes on : * From Chaudifire via Intercolonial Railway and Quebec Central Railway, 190 miles.' The hon. gentleman quoted this and the next line to make it appear that it was not through the state of Maine, though it is under the sub-heading which says that it Is through the state of Maine. It Is from Chaudifrre via direct line, through the state of Maine, 186 miles.


John Dowsley Reid: Hon. gentlemen have been speaking entirely of American laws. I suppose that these bonding privileges are mutual, and that our Canadian laws regarding them are the same as those of the Americans. If such is the case- and this arrangement was agreed to between the two governments when this bond-iug treaty was made-there should be- no misunderstanding about it. The Minister of Customs must have been a party to the I


The PRIME MINISTER.: What report is that ?


Mr. HUGHES (Vctoria).: This is a report to the Quebec government by Mr. Henry O'Sullivan. Then, here is something that he did not read :
It can be seen by the table that tor a through line to Edmundston within Canadian territory, as regards length, the Intercolonial and Temiscouata route ranks first. Any line passing in the

interior is lengthened by loss of distance following river valleys whose course is often out of direction.
This report the hon. gentleman had before him this morning ; and yet he sought, I will not say intentionally, to mislead the House by saying that the route he was speaking of did not run through the state of Maine, when it is here stated in plain black and white that it does run through the state of Maine. This was also before him :
The summit on the Temiscouata Railway is 235 feet lower than the lowest summit of the line surveyed. There is a possibility of reducing this by 100 feet by changing the position of Mr. Tetu's line, and that part of it between St. Paul and the township of Painehaud might be shortened by a closer survey.
This was also before him this morning, and he failed to read it when he tried to make out that there was a direct route 186 miles in length without going through the state of Maine :
Although the surveyed line may not have the advantage as a through route, by its position it is admirably adapted to colonization purposes, and it would get a share of foreign business without a doubt.
This was also before him this morning, and he failed to present it to the House :
The maximum grades on the rew survey for this line need not exceed 53 feet per mile, excepting at Lake Pohenegomook, where the only long continuous grade of 71'28 feet per mile occurs. I am not able to give the maximum grade on that part of the old survey made use of for this route, not being connected with that work.
Then follows the statement which the hon. gentleman read from Mr. Henry O'Sullivan's report. Yet, with that report before him, the hon. gentleman attempted to mislead this House by saying that that route did not go through the state of Maine.
Now, Sir, a word to the west. As I have already said, I at first regarded the notion of a transcontinental railway with a great deal of favour; and if the right hon. First Minister had brought down a scheme which, to my mind, was in the best interests of Canada, or nearly the best interests of Canada, it would have had my hearty en-dorsation. He knows that I supported bis project for a railway to the Yukon, with certain amendments, a few years ago. But this measure I regard as nothing more nor less than one to give the Grand Trunk Railway Company, not the Grand Trunk Pacific Company, a through-line to the Pacific via Chicago, Minneapolis, Winnipeg and the Canadian Northwest from Portland. If some one will waken up the expert from Norfolk, I would like to have his attention.


Mr. CHARLTON.: I am listening to the hon. gentleman.


Samuel Hughes: As has been previously pointed out, the part from Winni-Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).
peg eastward is to be built and owned by the Dominion government, but is to be operated by the only railroad in Canada that should not operate it.


John Charlton: It is to be operated by any railway company.


Samuel Hughes: The hon. gentleman will pardon me. The Bill does not say so. Perhaps he has something from behind the' scenes which other people are, not in possession of. The Bill says it is to be operated by the Grand Trunk Pacific.


John Charlton: With running powers to other railways.


Samuel Hughes: That is not operating, as the hon. gentleman knows, if he knows anything.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Order.


Samuel Hughes: Am I out of order ?


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: The hon. gentleman should not accuse a member of not knowing anything.


Samuel Hughes: I used the hypothesis :	I said if he knew anything. I
would not like to accuse the hon. member of not knowing anything, no matter what I think. Knowing that he knows something on some matters, Christian Endeavour and that sort of thing, 1 know that he knows that this railway is not to be operated by any other company, but is to be operated solely by the Grand Trunk Pacific Company. Therefore we have that eastern section of the road from Winnipeg built and owned by the government, but operated by the Grand Trunk Pacific, and we have the section from Winnipeg west assisted by the government, but owned and operated by the Grand Trunk Pacific. Speaking generally, the mileage is 1,600 from Winnipeg to the Pacific coast, and 2,000 and a little over from Winnipeg to the Atlantic ocean. The Grand Trunk Railway is to receive $25,000,000 of the common stock of the Grand Trunk Pacific. The total stock of the Grand Trunk Pacific is to be $45,000,000, so that the Grand Trunk Railway will have the controlling interest, it will elect the president and the directors, and be master of the situation. It will absolutely control the Grand Trunk Pacific from Winnipeg to the Pacific ocean, and will control the management from Winnipeg east. Let us review the transport of freight over that road. A carload of freight leaves the Pacific coast over the Grand Trunk Pacific, 1,600 miles to Winnipeg and 2,000 to the Atlantic ocean. Let us say that the freight is $360. The share that will belong to the Grand Trunk Pacific will be $160, and the share that will go to the government section east of Winnipeg will be $200. The Grand Trunk Pacific proper will only get $160 out of it. There is grave doubt as to whether the earnings of the

eastern section will be sufficient to pay 3 per cent interest on the cost of the construction during the forty years, and we may easily set apart all the freight on the eastern section to meet the interest and maintenance of way, so that there will be nothing available for dividends or general maintenance. Then let us take a car starting from the Pacific coast over the Pacific Railway to Winnipeg, and thence by the Grand Trunk Pacific from Winnipeg down to Minneapolis, Chicago and on through Sarnia or Detroit eastward to Portland. The distance covered will be a few miles over the 3,600, but in round numbers exactly the same. The freight we will say is $360, which will net $160 for the Grand Trunk Pacific and $200 for the Grand Trunk Railway. In other words, the whole of the $300 will pass into the treasury of the Grand Trunk Railway for the benefit of its own system. And inasmuch as there is not a line in this contract, and there cannot be a line in the contract, that will force that management of the Grand Trunk Pacific to send its freight- by the North Shore instead of via Chicago, is it at all likely that the Grand Trunk Railway will not give the preference to its own route ? Undoubtedly every car will go over its own lines from the Pacific coast to Winnipeg, and thence to Chicago and Portland, and in such case the Grand Trunk Railway wrill get every dollar of freight, whereas by the other route it would only get $160. Take another illustration. Suppose you start a car from Toronto. The distance to North Bay over the Grand Trunk Railway is 200 miles ; over the Ontario government road it is 200 miles to Lake Abitibi, from that point to Winnipeg it is 1,000 miles, and to the Pacific coast 16,600 miles. Then send another via Chicago and the Grand Trunk Railway. Let us say that the freight is $300 to the Pacific ocean. The Grand Trunk Railway will get its share on 1,400 miles hftulage, or $140 to Winnipeg, and the Grand Trunk Pacific will get $160. The entire amount will go into the pockets of the Grand Trunk Railway. But by the other way the Grand Trunk Railway will get .$20 as far as North Bay, the Ontario government road will earn its $20, the government road from Winnipeg east will earn $100-all of which $100 is supposed to go for the maintenance of way and equipment and government interest-and $160 will be the share of the Grand Trunk Pacific from Winnipeg west, so that this $160 and the $20 from Toronto to North Bay are all that really the Grand Trunk Railway will get. Under these conditions, I have never been able to see why the government does not operate as well as own the line from Winnipeg east. If that road is to lie built, either let the government operate it themselves or let some other company than the Grand Trunk Railway operate it. The Prime Minister may be determined that some regulation shall be made to bring the traffic over this northern road, but if he were accustomed to the handling of freight on railways he would know that in 99 cases out of 100, the shipper will send his freight by the way he thinks will best suit the railway over which he is primarily shipping. I would suggest to the Prime Minister that it is not yet too late to amend this Bill. No doubt the Grand Trunk Railway will be more than delighted to carry their traffic through the United States, but there is one great objection to that. It is generally understood in railway circles that the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway and the Grand Trunk Railway purpose using Duluth for their lake port in the west. I would again seriously impress on the First Minister the necessity of insisting on a guarantee that the Grand Trunk Pacific will run to a Canadian port on Lake Superior, so that there will be a lake route from a Canadian port to Midland instead of from Duluth to Midland. If the Grand Trunk Railway choose to go to Duluth, I do not see how he can prevent them. Unless he gives liberal assistance for a line to a Canadian port, it will be in their interest to go to Duluth. If the right hon. gentleman will not accept the proposition of the leader of the opposition, then let him not only build the road and own it, but also operate it from Winnipeg to Quebec. There can be no earthly intention of ever building the line from Levis east. A colonization road through that country, as the hon. member for Dorchester (Mr. Morin) pointed out, from LSvis east, should receive the endorsation and assistance of this country, and would undoubtedly open up a track of country which is very badly, off for railways.
But if he will not do that, let him abandon the northern scheme ; let him hand it over to some company-any one of a dozen companies that will take it-on a guarantee of bonds giving them the same as is given the Grand Trunk Pacific Company through tile mountains, and he will find that a road will be built through that region that will not cost much over the interest on the bonds during the period of construction. In other words let him give the same privileges that are given to the Grand Trunk Pacific Company through the mountains and there will 'be any number of opportunities to relieve the government of the construction of the road to the north. Then we will have enough money left over to develop the transportation needs of the country. Ports on the Atlantic and Pacific can well be developed. The Ottawa and Georgian bay canal can be built, and I would much like to see that work completed. It is not necessary to make it a canal of a depth of 21 feet. There is plenty of water in the French and the Ottawa rivers to provide for long locks. Let the locks be built so that the capacity of the barges can be in length rather than in depth, and I

am satisfied that the canal would be a great factor in the problem of transporting the grain from the west. The city of Buffalo finds that its grain trade is not satisfactory, and the people of New York proposed last year to tax themselves some $30,000,000 to improve the Erie canal, and I see that it is now proposed that the American government shall spend $100,000,000 on the Erie, Oswego and Lake Champlain canals, so as to enable them to hold the traffic of the great west, which they find the Canadian routes are taking from them. There would also be sufficient money to provide better grades on the existing roads in Ontario, so as to allow of reduction of rates for the 'benefit of the people in this province. I have already stated in this House that the rate from Lindsay to Montreal was higher than the rate from Winnipeg to Liverpool, and infinitely higher than the rate from Chicago or central Iowa to Liverpool. By some such arrangement the government could control the freights from inland centres, and thus benefit the whole community. I trust it is not too late for the Prime Minister to take this matter up. If he thinks it cannot be decently done in the House of Commons, I trust he will give a hint to the Senate that it may see to it that the scheme is remodled in the manner I have suggested.
Amendment (Mr. Taylor) negatived on the same division.


William Humphrey Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move :
That the said Bill be amended by adding thereto the following clause, and that for such purpose the same be referred back to the committee :-
' That no contractor or sub-contractor on the said railway shall employ any Asiatic labour or workman in the construction of the said railway. Any contravention of this section shall render the person so contravening liable to a penalty of	dollars in respect of every
such person so employed for each day during which he shall be so employed.'
Before the motion is put I have only a word to say in addition to what I said the other night in support of a similar amendment. I wish to accentuate the statement of the hon. member for Burrard (Mr. Mac-pherson), that there are to-day in British Columbia some 35,000 of the Chinese and Japanese people. I remonstrate on behalf of the labouring men and others in the province of Ontario that on this road, which is practically a government road from Winnipeg to the sea-board, this foreign element should be allowed to participate In the work of construction.
Amendment (Mr. Bennett) negatived.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: On the same division ?
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier),- I would not have this on the same division as last reported yesterday, because I do not know the views of Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).
some members and how they would vote, so it would not be fair to them to have them on record as voting the same as on another amendment.


Robert Laird Borden: Very well.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Lost on division.


Mr. S. BARKER (Hamilton).: X beg to move the following amendment:
That all the words after the word 'That' to the end of the question be left out and the following substituted therefor :-' the Bill be referred back to a Committee of the Whole House with power to amend the same as follows :-
Should the government be of opinion that at any time during the continuance of any obligation of the government In respect of the western division, or during the said lease of the eastern division, that the earnings upon the traffic interchanged between the Gran 1 Trunk Pacific Railway Company's system of railways and the system of railways of the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada, have not been properly apportioned between the said two companies, the question of such apportionment shall be determined by arbitrators to be appointed by the government and the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada in like manner as is proviaed with regard to arbitrators by paragraph 47 of the said agreement, or he determined by the board of railway commissioners as mentioned in section 19 of the said agreement. And the government shall have the right to inspect all books of account, statements, contracts, correspondence, vouchers, waybills and all other papers and documents of the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada, the inspection of which may he considered necessary for the purpose of investigating or determinyig any question, matter or thing arising out of the said agreement, or the said lease or the provisions of this Act, or connected with the obligations or undertakings of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company entered into pursuant to the said agreement, or. lease, or to this Act.
The object of this amendment is to enlarge the scope of section 19 of the agreement. The government in that section endeavours to protect itself against a possible unfair division of the earnings on the' Grand Trunk Pacific Railway. The Grand Trunk Pacific Company will own the western division of the line and it will be lessee of the eastern 'division. Its liability in certain years to pay rent upon the eastern division depends, under the contract, upon whether there shall foe net earnings in those years. It might, therefore, be to the interests of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company to so divide the earnings as between the western division and the eastern division of the railway that all its profits would go to its own property, the western division, and that there should be no net earnings upon the eastern division, and thereby the company would escape, in certain years, any liability to pay rent. The government very properly saw that this might arise, and, under section 19, they protected themselves fairly enough against it. The provision of that section is :
' "t

The company shall keep separate accounts of the earnings and expenditure of the eastern and western divisions, and, for the purposes of this agreement, the earnings from through traffic shall be apportioned between the eastern and western divisions, according to the usual practice of connecting lines of railway operated by two separate companies ;

Then it goes on to provide that, in case of a dispute between the government and the railway company in that regard the matter shall be left to arbitration, or, in the event of a board of railway commissioners being appointed, the board of commissioners shall deal with the dispute as between the company and the government. All that is fair and reasonable and would be expected in such a case as this. But the government seem entirely to overlook the very important consideration that the very thing they are protecting themselves against as to the western and eastern divisions of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, may occur as between the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway and the Grand Trunk Railway. A very important portion of the through-traffic will pass over both the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Grand Trunk Railway, and there will be through-earnings on that traffic to be divided and apportioned between the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Grand Trunk. Now the Grand Trunk, it is quite clear, will control both systems, and it will be quite possible for that company, by taking too large a proportion of the through-earnings to itself in respect of its own railway, so to lessen the earnings upon the Grand Trunk Pacific that they will accomplish the very object tha't the government in this section 19 have endeavoured to prevent. Therefore I propose by this amendment to provide that wherever there may be a question as to whether the Grand Trunk is taking to itself, for its own railway, a larger proportion of the through-earnings than it ought to take, the government can intervene, and if the parties cannot agree, can ask that the matter shall be referred to arbitration, so that the Grand Trunk Pacific shall get its due share of the earnings, and that in consequence the government will be certain to get its rent. The Minister of Finance the other day seemed to think that the government was sufficiently protected because the Board of Railway Commissioners might intervene. But that is really a mistake ; there can be no question about that. The Board of Railway Commissioners can only intervene to settle questions where two railway companies differ about a division of their through-rates. But there will be no such difference here, there is no possibility of a difference between the Grand Trunk Railway Company and the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company. No one will ever hear of a dispute between these two companies as to the apportionment of the earnings, and unless there is some dispute, the Board of , Commissioners cannot intervene. They can, 400	'	'
however intervene if it is made part of the bargain between the government and the companies; while if we are left to the statutory provision that the Board of Railway Commissioners can settle disputes between two railway companies as to the apportionment of through-traffic, such a dispute will never arise. Therefore it is that I move this resolution, which I will not take up further time in discussing, because the proposition seems to be perfectly plain. The government have shown by their own agreement that they contemplate the possibility of an unfair division between the eastern and the western sections; that unfair division could only take place for the purpose of avoiding the payment of rent, and having provided against such an emergency, the government is bound to go further and prevent the same trouble arising from an unfair division between the Grand Trunk and the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway.
Amendment (Mr. Barker) negatived on the same division as yesterday.


John Charlton: X question the propriety of declaring this lost on the same division as yesterday. Some members are here to-day who were not here yesterday and others were here yesterday that are not here to-day, and I think it would be better merely to declare it lost on division.


Robert Laird Borden: I understood yesterday that our arrangement was to have the same division recorded on the other amendments.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I did not understand that we should have absolutely the same division recorded. At all events, there can be 'no difficulty, for if five gentlemen wish for a division they can have it.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know that it makes any difference.
Jin'. TAYLOR. The hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) was not in the House yesterday, and he was recorded as paired.


John Charlton: I was not speaking exclusively in my own interest but merely as a question of policy.
Mi-. BARKER. I would prefer that a vote should be taken than that it should be declared lost on division, because I would like to know how bon. gentlemen are going to vote on this amendment.


John Charlton: Let it go on yesterday's division, I have no objection.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Call in the members.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Carried.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Lost.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Lost on the same division ns last recorded yesterday.


Mr. HENDERSON.: Even at this late hour of the debate, I do not consider that an exnEVISED EPITJOX

cuse is necessary for offering another amendment to this Bill. When we consider the very large sum of money that is involved in this Bill I do not think it is necessary to offer any apology for the amendment which I propose to place in your hands. Never during the history of Canada has any question of so far reaching importance been brought before the attention of this parliament, not even the Canadian Pacific Railway, as the question now under consideration in this Bill. Consequently the greatest care should be exercised by the government in dealing with the moneys to be expended on this undertaking, and every safeguard should be adopted to secure the proper and legal expenditure of every dollar of the money.
Let us look for one moment at the authority on which the money is to be expended. When work is done or a service performed it has to receive the approval of the commissioners appointed under this Act. Then, on the approval of the commissioners, certified by the chairman of the board, the Minister of Railways and Canals recommends to the bon. Minister of Finance that payments be made and payments are consequently made from time to time on the recommendation of that minister. First parliament appropriates the money by a vote, then the commissioners approve of the work and of the services performed, the Minister of Railways and Canals recommends to the lion. Minister of Finance payment and payment is made accordingly, but it is made without any audit of these accounts by any officer of this parliament until after these moneys have all been expended. The commissioners, we understand, will be appointees of the government. The Minister of Railways and Canals is a member of the government and so also is the hon. Minister of Finance. But who is to guard the rights of the people of this" country-!1 Who will represent the people in this vast expenditure of the $100,000,000 or $150,000,000 ? Even if the cost of the railway does not exceed $125,000,000, if the work is continued over five years it will result in the expenditure of $25,000,000 per annum. And yet this work under the Bill is to go on from day to day without any audit of it, such as is necessary for the protection of the people, being made. I am aware that under section 31 of the Act it is proposed that an examination and audit shall take place, but, I desire to remind the House that this examination and audit does not take place until after the money has been paid and consequently will prove to be of very little value or importance indeed. It would be better that the ordinary course be pursued and that all the safeguards that are exercised over our ordinary expenditure should be exercised in this case, where such a vast amount of money is to be paid out. Therefore with a view to making it imperative on the government that such an audit should


David Henderson: take place I propose to move an amendment to section 22 of the Act and I trust that the House will accept it. I may say for the information of the House that section 22 as I have already stated provides :
The Minister of Finance and Receiver General may, on the recommendation of the Minister of Railways and Canals, from time to time pay such claims and accounts for work done or services performed in the construction of the said eastern division as have been approved and certified by the chairman of the commissioners : Provided, however, that no money shall be so paid until a sufficient appropriation has been made by parliament for the purpose.
I now beg to move, seconded by Mr. Wilson :
That section 22 of the Bill be amended by adding thereto the words ' and that the making of such payments shall be subject to the provisions. regulations and requirements of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit ^ct.'
Amendment (Mr. Henderson) lost on the same division as recorded yesterday.


Mr. A. C. BELL (Pictou).: I suppose it is scarcely necessary at this stage of the question to repeat all the arguments that might be advanced against the Grand Trunk Pacific project and I shall not even attempt to repeat the majority of them. There is, however, one feature in the Bill which is of great importance to the people and parliament of Canada and particularly to the people of eastern Canada, that is, that it should be so carried out as to realize for that part of Canada all the benefits which I understand, the right hon. the leader of the government and his colleagues anticipate from its completion and operation. In order that that may be accomplished it is necessary, in the opinion of some persons who are not quite so sanguine in their hopes in respect to this matter as some others are, that the parties who are entering into the contract with the government to build and operate this road should be so bound and held that they would faithfully operate it and thereby realize all the advantages that in the course of time may be expected to result from its operation. It has been shown very clearly in the course of the discussion that the real party of the second part is the Grand Trunk Railway and it has been just as clearly brought out that the Grand Trunk Railway is not a contracting party in the ordinary sense of the word. Nor is it our opinion that they are held and bound to the fulfillment of all the agreements in the contract, or under any penalty whatever if they fail to execute these contracts. The Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company has undertaken to secure certain action on the part of the Grand Trunk Railway Company but it would apparently be better if the Grand Trunk Railway Company itself were held and bound by the contract. In the opinion of hon. members upon this side of the House the contract is secured by a very slender provision

so far as the Grand Trunk Railway Company is concerned. It is admitted that the financing of the new corporation is to he largely the work of the Grand Trunk Railway Company, still it is held that there is not sufficient strength in the contract so far as the Grand Trunk Railway Company is concerned to ensure that that company may not at some time refuse to carry out its part of the contract and that the penalty which may be exacted under the terms of the contract would not be of sufficient strength or weight to prevent that company from forfeiting, from violating its agreement and refusing to carry out what they had undertaken. Therefore, with a view to improving the condition of affairs in that regard I am about to offer an amendment to the House and to ask the government to adopt it, or at least,to endeavour to secure the assent of the House to the proposition that there should be some further security than that which is contemplated in the agreement as we understand it. The only security which the government have is a claim upon $5,000,000 worth of rolling stock, a property which in the course of time must depreciate very rapidly so that its value will diminish to a point far below $5,000,000. It is quite easy to realize and to understand that the moment may come, and may come perhaps in the not very far distant future, when the Grand Trunk Railway Company, which is really the contracting party, would consider it a good business operation to forfeit and abandon that.property which is held as security for the fulfilment of this agreement. We believe that the government of the country should have some further hold upon the contracting company in order to secure that the operation of this road be continued, and that it be not thrown back to us, as it may be, In a depreciated condition. Therefore, with the view of trying to improve the security held by the country, and to furnish a much stronger guarantee that this road should be operated, and that whatever good results from its operation by the Grand Trunk Pacific as represented therein by the Grand Trunk Company, shall be more fully and more thoroughly ensured to the people of this country ; I move, seconded by Mr. Kemp, the following, as an additional clause to the Bill.
The railway and the property and equipment . of the said western division, and the equipment of the eastern division shall be charged, subject only to the mortgage obligations in the said agreement mentioned, with the payment of all rents that may become payable to the government under the said lease of the eastern division to the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company, and with the payment of all claims of the government against the said company under any and every covenant or obligation or condition of the said lease and agreement, and the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company shall enter into and make all proper and sufficient mortgages, agreements and covenants with the government for that purpose.
400}
1 do not think it is necessary to occupy the time of the House at greater length just now. I think I have made it perfectly clear that the purpose of this amendment is to endeavour to improve the security held by the government and by the country.
Amendment (Mr. Bell) negatived on the same division.


Mr. MORIN moved :: That the said Bill be not now read a third time, but that it be recommitted to the Committee of the Whole House, with power to amend section 8 by adding the following thereto :-
Provided that the said railway in its course through the province of Quebec, shall run from the Quebec bridge on the St. Lawrence river, in a south-easterly direction, through the counties of Levis and Dorchester, following the course of the Etchemin river up towards Etchemin lake, and thence easterly through the province of Quebec towards the city of Moncton.
Amendment negatived on the same division.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Before fore you put the motion, Mr. Speaker, I desire to draw attention to the fact that on the second reading of this Bill, I raised a point of order as to the irregularity of the course pursued by the government in introducing the Bill. I drew attention to the fact that the Bill had reached its second reading, and although it was a Bill which involved a charge on the revenue of the country, it was not introduced by resolution, as it should be, nor had the announcement been made in the House that the consent of the Crown had been given to the Bill before its introduction. You then intimated, Mr. Speaker, that you would give your decision later on. In the meantime I presume that you have had an opportunity to consider the question, and I would like to have your ruling on it now.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I have prepared my opinion on the question whch was raised by the bon. gentleman, not on the second reading, but on the first reading. That, however, does not make a great deal of difference. This is my opinion :
A point of order has been raised as to the propriety of proceeding with Bill (No. 235) ' An Act to provide for the construction of a National Transcontinental Railway,' because that measure has not been previously considered in a Committee of the Whole, and has not been recommended by the Crown. That question is a very important one, as I had occasion to state when it was raised on motion for leave.
The rules which govern the case are Rules 80 and 88. Rule No. 86 reads as follows :
By the 54th section of the Imperial Act, 30 Vic., c. 3, 'The British North America Act, 1867.' it is provided that the House shall not adopt or pass any vote, resolution, address or Bill for the appropriation of any part of the public revenue, or of any tax or impost, to any purpose that has not been first recommended by

a message of the Governor General In the session in which such vote, resolution, address or Bill is proposed.
Rule No. 88 is couched iu about the same wording. It requires that no motion can be made in the House for any public aid or charge upon the people unless it be considered in the Committee of the Whole House. I need not refer to the importance of 'the principle embodied in Rule 86. It gives, as we see, the initiation of money votes to the Crown, and was adopted in Canada as a necessary remedy against the numerous and glaring proposals made by private members to make grants of public money, as Mr. Gladstone once said in parliament (vol. 182 ' Hansard,' p. 598).
The principle of Rule 88 is perhaps of not as great importance. In fact, in England to-day they are in the habit of introducing Bills where appropriations of public money are provided for, with the reserve, however, that the clauses which give the public aid or charge upon the people are inserted in italics, and considered as blanks until the House has considered those clauses in committee on a separate resolution. They have a standing order to that effect. Those clauses, however, are so well considered as being part of the Bill, that if they are adopted in committee the Bill is not reported with amendments.
It was decided in England by the ltt. Hon. Mr. Peel, in 1894 :
Provisions imposing charges in a Bill involving charges on the revenue are printed in italics and technically form no part of the Bill, but the discussion thereon Is not irregular. The chairman in committee would nit put any question on those clauses unless the charges to be imposed by them were previously sanctioned in a money committee, and the motion setting up that committee could not be put unless a minister of the Crown signified the Queen's recommendation to such charges being incurred. As the government were not prepared to sign this recommendation, the debate therefore is of the nature of an academical discussion, as no effect can be given to it, but the debate is not irregular.	1 [DOT] - i
In this country we have been following the same procedure. Bourinot says, at page 597 :
It often happens that Bills are introduced with certain clauses providing for salaries or other charges on the public revenue, and in that case the Bill may be introduced directly on motion, while the clauses in question (which should be distinguished by italics or brackets) are considered in the shape of resolutions in committee, and when agreed to, referred to the committee on the Bill.
When the motion for leave was made the other day, I suggested that the debate be adjourned. The House, however, went on to consider the motion for leave, and it was adopted, and the Bill stood over for the second reading on the next day. Since that time a resolution has been put on the Order Paper, having for its object the approval of the contract mentioned in the said Bill,


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: and, for the purpose of authorizing the government to do whatever is necessary to give full effect to the said Bill. Moreover, the House has been informed of the fact, that the Crown has recommended the said resolution to the House. It has since been adopted and referred to the Committee on the Bill. If at one time the question could have been raised, whether this Bill was properly introduced I do not think that at the present stage of the proceedings it would be a proper question to discuss. We are now aware that the recommendations of the Crown have been given to the money clauses of the Bill, and that they have been considered in Committee. It is perhaps an opportune time to call the attention of the House to a very serious difference which exists between our rules, and those governing the English House of Commons with respect to grants of public money Bills.
Before 1866, the rules 396, 397 and 398 of the parliament of Great Britain and Ireland provided :	That the House could not proceed upon any motion for granting money, or, for any public aid or charge upon the people, unless upon the recommendation of the Crown, and in Committee of the Whole.
It was found, however, that those rules had not the effect desired, and that members were in the habit of having Bills passed contemplating demands upon the public purse, and containing a clause which provided that the necessary expenses should he defrayed out of money hereafter to he voted by parliament. In 1866 it was decided to amend those rules, and to declare that the restriction would apply not only to actual aids and grants, but also to grants and charges payable out of moneys to he provided by parliament.
The debate on that question is very interesting, and will be found in vol. 182, pp. 591, ail'd following. These English rules are now to he found in Standing Orders 57, 58 and 62, as printed in 1901.
In the Bill under consideration, it is provided in clause 22, that no money will he paid until a sufficient appropriation has been made by parliament for the purpose.
Applying to this case the English precedent," as it was before the amendment of 1866, I have come to the conclusion that there was in that respect no violation of our rules 86 and 88.
As to the western section of the road,, the government pledges public credit by guaranteeing the bonds of the company. Could that part of the Bill have been introduced without a previous recommendation of the Crown, and without the consideration of the matters in Committee ?
I find in Blackmore (p. 26), a decision on that point which is to this effect :
A Bill which pledges the public credit for any loan to be raised may be introduced without the preliminary committee, for the introduction of money Bills under the standing orders provided.

that the clauses referring to the raising of the money area guarded by being passed through preliminary committee of the whole House.
Tlie Committee, having adopted a resolution, as required by that decision, and the recommendation of the Crown having been announced, I am of opinion, that the House may proceed to debate, and to adjust the motion for the third reading of the Bill.
We have a precedent in this House in the procedure adopted with regard to the contract with Messrs. Mackenzie & Mann. On the 8th of February, 1898, that contract was laid before the House. At the same time a motion for leave to introduce the Bill confirming the said contract was granted, and before the second reading of the Bill, the House passed a resolution, on the recommendation of His Excellency, providing for the construction of the railway mentioned in the contract. The resolution was reported and referred to the Committee of the Whole, on the Bill.
Journals House of Commons, pp. 25, 37 and 88.
Motion agreed to ; and Bill read the third time, and passed, on the previous division reversed.


STEAMBOAT INSPECTION ACT AMENDMENT.
[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 237) to further amend the Steamboat Inspection Act, 1898, read the second time, and House went into Committee thereon.
On section 1,
Robert Laird Borden: What change in the law is effected by this ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The explanation of this Bill is very simple. A Bill passed the House and the Senate this session amending the Steamboat Inspection Act. By an inad-vertanee an omission was made from it. A petition had been presented on behalf of people owning or running boats on the Yukon river, and some other rivers in the west, asking permission to use coal oil as fuel. I was under the impression that it could be allowed ; but after looking through the law and studying the precedents, I came to the conclusion that such permission could not be granted legally. Coal oil as fuel has come into very general use, and the officers of my department report that when it is properly stored and guarded it is perfectly safe.


Robert Laird Borden: Would the hon. gentleman be kind enough to say what subsection 1 of section 27 really does enact ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The portion of subsection 1 of section 27, to which this refers, reads as follows :
No coal oil lamp shall be used between decks on any passenger steamboat in which any inflammable material is carried; nor shall any coal oil which will not bear a test of 300 degrees Fahrenheit without taking Are be used on any passenger steamboat.
It is proposed to add at the end of this section ;
Provided, however, that in any case where oil is used as fuel for the production of motive power on steamboats, oil which will bear a test of two hundred degrees Fahrenheit without taking fire may be accepted if properly stored with safe and suitable provisions as to safety and to guard against fire and explosion from such oil to the satisfaction of the steamboat inspector.


Robert Laird Borden: You are changing the test from 300 degrees to 200 degrees ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES :: Only when it is: used as fuel for motive power.


Robert Laird Borden: Does uot the danger which was previously guarded against still exist ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Section 27, as regards the oil to be used for lighting purposes, is left the same. This deals with cases where the oil is used as fuel for the production of motive power. It provides that oil which will bear a test of 200 degrees Fahrenheit may be accepted if properly stored to the satisfaction of the steamboat inspector. Besides, I know as a fact that the insurance companies will not permit the use of the oil for motive power except under special rules and regulations.


Robert Laird Borden: Unless the conditions to which the hon. gentleman refers are statutory, we cannot rely on their being enforced or made effective. I understand that the hon. gentleman depends to a great extent on the conditions imposed by insurance companies, but I would not consider that a good principle in legislation. Some of these steamers may not be insured, and if you were to have an accident and loss of life resulting from the absence of safeguards, that would be a very unfortunate condition of affairs.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I have referred to the insurance companies' conditions only as an additional safeguard. Myjion. friend will see that there is provision at the end of this Bill for the taking of proper precautions. The oil must be properly stored, with safe and suitable provisions as to safety and to guard against fire and explosion, to the satisfaction of the steamboat inspector. The test is the same as in the United States, and it is considered perfectly safe, under certain conditions, to use that oil for fuel for motive purpose. The boats on the transportation companies between San Fran-

cisco and Dawson are using that oil at present, under the laws and regulations of the United States, and considered perfectly safe. The officers of my department report that under the conditions imposed by this Bill, there will be no danger.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


SWING BRIDGES AND FERRIES.
[Stage Direction]
House went into Committee to consider the following proposed resolution :
Resolved, that it is expedient, in the interests of navigation, that the Act respecting certain works constructed in or over navigable waters be amended so as to better control the working of swing bridges and ferries worked by cable, rod. chain or other device.
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Raymond Prfifontaine).: This resolution has been brought before the House on the recommendation of several members of the North-west. Since a few years there has been increased communication between points on the shores of lakes and rivers in the west, and a great many ferries are operated, which are run by cable. Under the existing laws, we cannot make any regulation for the protection of life and property, and frequent accidents have happened and lives have been lost owing to these ferries not being properly managed. It was suggested that the Marine and Fisheries Department should make the necessary regulations. The same remarks apply to draw bridges which are not regulated.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If the Bill which is to follow does not give more information than we have in the resolution, we will not have much to go by.


Robert Laird Borden: The point made by my lion. friend from East Grey (Mr. Sproule) is that the resolution seems to be-of a very vague and indefinite character. It simply informs the House that ' the Act respecting certain works constructed in or over navigable waters should be amended so as to better control the working of swing bridges and ferries worked by cable, rod, chain or other device.' I do not see any great object in proceeding by resolution, when the resolution is of so vague a character. Of course, Bills of this character should be proceeded by resolution, but I should hardly think that a resolution of this kind would fulfil the condition made necessary by the rules of the House.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Borden, Halifax) will allow me I can give him a general idea of the Bill. I did not frame the resolution myself, and I know that it does mot cover all that the Bill is intended to cover. For instance the Bill explains that:


Hon. Mr. PREFONTAINE.: No person shall lay, stretch or maintain any ferry cable, or any rod, chain or other device for working a ferry across, over or under any navigable water in Canada, without a license from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries ; and the said minister may make rules for regulating the applications for such licenses, and may fix the fees (not exceeding the sum of five dollars each to be paid therefor) and any ferry cable, rod, chain or other device for working the ferry laid, stretched or maintained without a license may be removed and destroyed under authority from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries ; and any person laying, stretching, or maintaining a ferry cable, rod, chain or other device for working a ferry without a license shall be liable on summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding one hundred dollars or to imprisonment not exceeding thirty days, and, in addition thereto shall pay the cost of removing or destroying such cable, rod, chain or other device.
2. The Governor in Council may, for the purpose of this Act, make regulations to govern the use of ferry cables and to regulate the maintenance, use, opening and closing of swing or draw bridges, other than railway bridges, upon any navigable water in Canada, and for the maintenance of lights and other precautions of safety in connection with ferry cable and bridges, and may impose a penalty, to be recoverable on summary conviction, not exceeding in any case fifty dollars and costs, or imprisonment not exceeding ten days, for the breach of such regulation, and, in case of continuing the breach, a further penalty not exceeding ten dollars and costs for every twenty-four hours during which such breach continues, or imprisonment not exceeding twenty days ; and in the case of ferry cable license the Minister of Marine and Fisheries may cancel the license upon any conviction for breach of the regulations. Every such regulation shall be published in the * Canada Gazette.'


Robert Laird Borden: 1 must compliment tbe bou. gemtleman (Hon. Mr. Pre-fontaine) on the speed with which be got through that. The result of it all does not seem to be very much information, but I suppose we shall be able to read it in ' Hansard ' to-morrow, and so we shall be able to get an idea of what the hon. gentleman was imparting to us. I think the hon. gentleman made a record in his reading.


Mr. COCHRANE.: We generally have a resolution to explain a Bill, but the hon. minister read a Bill to explain a resolution.


George Taylor: Is this law going to be retroactive ? Will it apply to ferries already established ? Because, in my section, from Howe island to the township of Pittsburgh, we have two cable ferries that the farmers have established there for their own convenience and that have been running for years. If the Bill is to be made retroactive it will apply to these.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It will apply to all.


George Taylor: It may be intended to apply only to new ferries. Then, on the Rideau river we have a number of swing bridges that are not railway bridges. Why should

the Department of Marine and Fisheries take charge of the bridges across the Ri-deau ? And why should the Department of Marine and Fisheries interfere with these ferries? As I understand it the Department of Public Works gave permission to have them placed there, and now the Department of Marine and Fisheries interferes.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
House went into committee to consider the following proposed resolution :
Resolved, that in the interests of the navigation of the River St. Lawrence, between Montreal and Quebec, and the River Saguenay below Quebec, to amend the Pilotage Act, and the Acts relating to the Montreal Harbour Commissioners, and the Quebec Harbour Commissioners, so as to place the pilotage of these districts under the control of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries.

The Minister of Marine and Fisheries.
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. R. Prefontaine).: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why apply to one part of the country only ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We have not been able to get the shipping interests in Quebec proper to consent to it. And the harbour commissioners of Quebec and the corporations of pilots themselves do not want it at present. After many consultations with them, I came to the conclusion that we would try the plan of bringing under the control of the department the pilots of the port of Montreal as well as those of the Saguenay river. We will see if it works any better. If it is found to be an improvement, probably these gentlemen in Quebec will consent to an extension of the system. The' Bill covers the upper Saguenay. The reasons are these : There have been serious accidents in the Saguenay river, due to the incompetence and ignorance of some of the pilots. The pilots could not agree with the harbour commissioners of Quebec as regards the pilotage of the Saguenay. The harbour commissioners allowed all pilots to pilot vessels in the Saguenay river, instead of appointing only those who were well acquainted with the river. This resolution is introduced on the recommendation of the shipping interests and the boards of trade of Montreal, who think it would be in the public interest to have the Saguenay river put under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, which, while keeping control of the pilots in the district of Quebec, will require from them such examination as will afford the necessary guarantee of efficiency to the shipping interests.


Robert Laird Borden: What body has control at Quebec and Montreal, and between the two cities, at the present time ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The harbour commissioners of Montreal control the pilotage between that city and Quebec, and the harbour commissioners of Quebec control the pilotage of that city and down the gulf to Bic.


Robert Laird Borden: Does this Bill remove the pilots between Quebec and Montreal from the jurisdiction of the Montreal harbour commissioners ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It is proposed to remove the pilotage authority from the harbour commissioners of Montreal to the Department of Marine and Fisheries as concerns the river between Montreal and Quebec.


Robert Laird Borden: Does that comprise the pilots at Montreal as well ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: The resolution does not make that very clear. What you mean hy the resolution is this, that the pilots above Quebec and up to Montreal are placed under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: And the pilots at Quebec and below as far as Bic are to remain under the control of the Quebec harbour commissioners V


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: Will there not be something of an anomaly in the government exercising control over the pilots on part of the river and not over these on another part of the river V


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The principle is the same. At the present time pilots from Montreal to Quebec are under the control of the Montreal harbour commissioners, and the pilots from Quebec to the gulf are under the control of the Quebec harbour commissioners. It is now proposed to change that system, and to take the control over those in the Montreal district from the Montreal harbour commissioners and vest it in the Department of Marine and Fisheries. This is done with the unanimous consent of the pilots themselves, who are not incorporated between Montreal and Quebec. But between Quebec and the gulf they are incorporated, and that is why they persist in making their own regulations. From Montreal to Quebec they are not incorporated, and are administered by the harbour commissioners of Montreal, and it is desirable to make some further regulations governing those pilots. The harbour commissioners of Montreal are quite willing that this control should pass to the Department of Marine and Fisheries, the pilots themselves are unanimously willing, and the boards of trade and the shipping interests have been asking for this amendment for years. The Act will go into effect on the 1st of January next, after regulations have been prepared and submitted to the different bodies interested, so that the interests of every one will be fully protected.


Mr. GALLERY.: What is the reason that the pilots between Montreal and Quebec are not Incorporated ? What is the difference between those below Quebec and those above ?*


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Those between Montreal and Quebec asked two years ago to be incorporat-Hon. Mr. PREFONTAINE.
ed, and presented a Bill for that purpose. It was opposed by the boards of trade and those interested in navigation, and the Bill was killed in the Senate. That is the reason why they are not a corporation.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But if there is any need of putting the control of the pilots under the Department of Marine and Fisheries for one portion of the river, the same argument will apply to all.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The hon. gentleman may be right in theory, but we do not want to put any compulsion upon the pilots at and below Quebec, who are now making a strong opposition to coming under the control of the department, and the shipping interest in Quebec are supporting them. So we have concluded to take only those of the Montreal district under our own control, and to make such regulations as will be satisfactory to the public and to the pilots themselves. If these work satisfactorily, as we expect they will, we will then be justified in saying to the pilots of the Quebec district, whether you are-willing or not, you must come under the control of another authority. But for the present we are not ready to do that.
At six o'clock, Committee took recess.
After Recess.
Committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Daniel Gallery: I would like to get some information from the hon. minister in reference to this Bill. It appears to me that it is just as important that the pilots between Montreal and Quebec should be incorporated as it is that those from Quebec to the coast should be incorporated. I would like to know why it was that the pilots between Quebec and * Montreal were not incorporated. They made an application for incorporation some time ago.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Two or three years ago when a demand for incorporation was made on the part of the pilots between Montreal and Quebec it was opposed by all the shipping interests, by the Board of Trade of Montreal, by the Corn Exchange and by everybody connected with shipping. The reasons given for that opposition were discussed by the Senate, before whom the matter was brought up, and they came to the conclusion that these pilots should not be granted incorporation, that they should remain as they were, under the control of the harbour commissioners of Montreal.


Daniel Gallery: Do I understand from the hon. minister that the pilots between Quebec and Montreal are a different body altogether from the other pilots ?


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

air. GALLERY. What is the difference 7


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The difference is that the pilots from Quebec to the gulf formed an incorporation many years ago and that incorporation has continued in existence. The harbour commissioners of Quebec and the Quebec Board of Trade, seem to be inclined to keep the corporation alive and not to allow it to be under the control of the government, through the Marine and Fisheries Department. The sentiment in Montreal is quite the contrary. Everybody admits that the pilots between Montreal and Quebec should be under the control of the Marine and Fisheries Department, and they have asked that this should be the case, and the pilots themselves have unanimously concurred in that demand.


Daniel Gallery: So far as I can gather from what the hon. minister says, the pilots between Quebec and Montreal are not as good as those between Quebec and the gulf.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Nobody says that.


Daniel Gallery: Is it not as important to have the pilots between Montreal and Quebec incorporated as to have the other pilots incorporated ; that is the point I wish to get at. It seems to me that this is a very important matter, and that the members of this House should consider it well and should not deal with it in a hurry. The success of the whole transportation system of Canada rests on this question of pilotage, and if we are now going to change any part of the system we should change the whole system and not deal with only a part of it. Since six o'clock I have been speaking to a couple of the harbour commissioners of Montreal, and as far as I can see they would very much like to have the matter deferred for a day or two.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The harbour commissioners of Montreal have unanimously passed a resolution in favour of government control of these pilots. The board of trade and the shipping interests have also expressed themselves in favour of it, so I do not see where tlie difficulty comes in. The harbour commissioners of Montreal desire to get rid of the control of the pilotage between Quebec and Montreal, and under the circumstances I do not see where any objection can be raised.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: The difference between the pilots on the river between Quebec and' Montreal and those from Quebec down to Bic Station is easily explained. It was only a couple of years ago that the pilots of Montreal moved for incorporation ; their system is entirely different from that of the other pilots and is almost voluntary, giving the shipping companies the privilege of choosing whom they liked out of the
number of pilots. There are about seventy-five pilots between Montreal and Quebec and the best authorities say that about twenty-five or thirty could do the work. As to the pilots between Quebec and Bic, I may say that they form a body which has existed over one hundred years, and as a corporation for forty-three years. I think it is generally agreed that we should move slowly in this matter, that we should experiment first and find out if the new plan works well between Quebec and Montreal before we go any further with it. I want to read you a few extracts which I hold in my hand as to the history of the pilots of Quebec :
The branch pilots for the lower St. Lawrence, the sea pilots, were incorporated in 1860. At that time, the pilotage authority was the Trinity House. Later in 1875 this was replaced by the harbour commission. (Vide chapter 82.) Our corporation has been in existence for over 43 years, so that it has had a long experience in pilotage matters as well as in all that concerns the management of the pilots under its control and direction. It is perfectly well posted as to the services of the different pilotage stations such as~Bic and Father Point, as well as what is necessary in handling the ocean steamships, and the vessels called colliers. Besides this, our corporation has a considerable advantage, by its constant communications with the captains of the pilot-boats who are themselves branch pilots always cruising day and night to Bio and other stations. In brief, its duty is to see that the service is as effective as possible. This year the number of pilots on official list is 114, but the effective number is, in reality, 106.
I may say, Mr. Chairman, that at the time of incorporation the number of pilots was between 240 and 250, and in order to explain this diminution, I may say that it is now admitted that probably seventy-five or eighty pilots could do all the work between Quebec and Bic, owing to the change which has taken place in the system of navigation, owing to the introduction of steamships. At one time all of the vessels were sailing ships which moved very slowly, but with the more rapidly moving steamships the same pilot can do five times as much work as he then could.
The pilot office is open the year rcund. During the season of navigation, that is to say, from April 10th to December lOih, our office Is open day and night. The night watchman is himself a licensed pilot, always ready to give all the information asked for at any time. He has always on hand some pilots ready to board a vessel the moment she arrives in port, be It a sailing ship or a steamer, whether she comes from Montreal, or Three Rivers, or whether she is ready to leave our port for sea.
The ship-owners, their agents, the captains or masters have the right of selecting their pilots in the port of Quebec or at the pilotage stations at Bic or Father Point. Every spring I the large companies choose the pilots they wish I to have and our board readily accede to their request, reserving the right, however, to com-i mand their withdrawal if the general interest

taught to them otherwise. This would cost very little to the government and would make the'navigation of our river safer. These apprentices could then make the necessary soundings, under the direction of a licensed pilot._ The pliot hoard should be authorized to examine at least once a year, during the summer all the apprentices. This would give us the opportunity of seeing the progress made by them in the study of their future profession. Special notes would be kept in a particular book to that effect? I cannot repeat too often that the profession is open to every one. It is, therefore, unfair to say, as is said in some quarters, that the profession is limited to certain persons only. We have actually on our board, a pilot who has been several years president of our-corporation, and whose father was never a pilot. Some say: it is only the pilot's sons who can enter the profession. Does it not happen often that a young man becomes a lawyer, or a doctor because his father belonged to the profession. He undergoes the influence where he lives. It is the same thing with the pilot's sons ; from their tender youth they hear navigation talked of ; they Live small boats, which they command with their comrades and, little by little, the taste developes for navigation, and they become pilots. Where is the evil in that ?
According to the new law the apprentices are admitted to be indentured with the corporation of pilots only after permission is obtained from the pilotage authority as to the number. These apprentices are presented to the pilot board, according to their seniority, by licensed pilots, after the manner which has now been made law. They are afterwards presented by the board of directors to the pilotage authority who has a right to accept or refuse them. These apprentices are then seemingly under the government control, because all the by-laws, even those of the pilots before coming into force, have to be published in both languages in the newspapers, and receive the sanction of the pilotage authority established by the government.
The tariff.-The pilotage tariff go is as far back as 1803. It has 100 years of existence. It is only in 1882 that we succeeded in getting its lightly modified. We were then granted an increase of 7J per cent ; the harbour comm's-sion have unanimously and according to law, recommended 5 per cent. Besides we had from the Hon. Mr. McLelan, the then Minister of Marine, the promise that in the following year our tariff would be based on the tonnage, in all the Dominion. This manner is undoubtedly the most rational. Several of the ministers who have preceded you at the head of the ministry, have admitted the principle, but that is all that has been done ; it has been a dead letter.
You will admit that the conditions of life have singularly changed. Every thing costs dearer, and we are still with an old tariff 100 years old, slightly changed in 1882. But the lawyer's anl the notary's, and the salaries of the judges, have been changed on the ground that the cost _ of life has much increased. We are mortals like all these men, and we suffer from the increase in the cost of living as they do. Would it not be just to remodel our tariff ?
It is a fundamental principle that an employee has a right to such remuneration, in proportion to the responsibility he assumes. Does a lawyer entrusted with a $100,000 case charge the same fee as for a 100 case ? Evidently not. Well,
why not apply this rule to us. If it is just for some, it ought to be just for others.
Allow me to call your attention to the fact that we have lost, partially at least, what was granted to us in 1882, by the exemption of colliers from pilotage (vide R.S.C., chapter 80, section 59, (C) and by 2 Ed. VII., chapter 27). Some of these colliers take pilots, but some take pilots only when the captains fear that they could not easily pilot the vessels themselves or believe that they would save time by taking a licensed pilot. We have already verified the incompetency of these unqualified mariners, especially when crossing another ship in the river in different places. Our pilots know what to do being constantly exposed to these crossings, they-know how to give the necessary spice, because they are certain of the depth of the water they have on either side of the river. There is loss of time for both parties and those inexperienced pilots put our pilots in difficult positions.
The pilot, to have a right to take charge of any vessel, must be a branch pilot. That is to say, he must have served an apprenticesh p of seven consecutive years, made eight trips over the Atlantic, have passed an examination as to the river, and as to his sight, hearing, &c. When an accident happens to him, his branch is taken from him for a longer or shorter period, if not for life. As to those colliers, said to be exempted from pilotage, any one can take charge of them without having passed an examination, or having proved that he had a sufficient knowledge of the river, and yet he has no responsibility, as there ie no law governing such a case. We keep license! pilots at the pilotage stations on the pilot ^boats ready to take charge of these vehsels. We believe it would be better to repeal that law. After all, the pilots have never refused service, so conscious are they of the responsibility of their position.
The whole is respectfully submitted.
(Sgd.) L. E. MORIN,
President of the corporation of pilots for and below the harbour of Quebec.
I may add that some 35 or 40 years ago, when we had only wooden sailing vessels, the pilots were paid so much per foot draught. In those days the largest sailing vessels carried a cargo of from 1,200 to 1,500 tons. To-day vessels on the St. Lawrence carry from 8,000 to 10,000 tons. Then, wooden vessels sailing down the St. Lawrence might go aground five or six times without any injury, while the vessels of to-day, being constructed of iron or steel, will be smashed by the least shock. Then, the wooden vessels usually had only the wind for their propelling power, while the vessels of today are steamers. Therefore, the responsibility of the pilots is to-day much greater than it was formerly.
This paper, in a few words, describes the action of the pilots on the Lower St. Lawrence. No one who has bad any knowledge of the navigation of that river from Quebec down will deny that the corporation of pilots is composed of excellent men. They are all men of experience who have bad a thorough training as sailors, who know all about the compass and the business of navigation, and who have been over the seas In many parts of the world. There is no doubt

that in the last few years great improvements have been made on the St. Lawrence river, but some things yet remain to be dione. It is admitted that there are more pilots now belonging to the corporation of pilots from Quebec down than are able to And employment. As the steamship companies have their choice of pilots, it would be a very good thing if the Department of Marine and Fisheries employed the balance to take constant soundings across and up and down the channel. They would be able to make complete reports from year to year, which would certainly be valuable aids in the navigation of the St. Lawrence, aud would tend to diminish the chances of accidents.


George Taylor: I fail to see what the argument of my hon. friend from Bellecliasse (Mr. Talbot) has to do with the resolution now before the House. I agree fully with what he says with respect to the great body of the pilots; and some legislation may be necessary at the proper time on their behalf. But the resolution now before the House is to amend the Pilotage Act and the Acts relating to the Montreal Harbour Commissioners and the Quebec Harbour Commissioners. I fully agree with my hon. friend from St. Anne's division, Montreal (Mr. Gallery). The government should move slowly in disturbing existing arrangements on the St. Lawrence. It is very singular that after the House has been in session for nearly seven months, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries should have the Order paper covered with four resolutions which he is introducing at this late date, and on which Bills will afterwards be founded. What time is there for the harbour commissioners of Montreal andi Quebec and the general shipping interests to protest against this resolution if they do not approve of it.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: They have all demanded it.


George Taylor: We have not seen any evidence of that demand, and we have the hon. member for St. Anns (Mr. Gallery), who represents one of the districts most largely Interested, protesting against it. But there is a sting in the closing words of the resolution, ' so as to place the pilotage of these districts under the control of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries.' Are we to take this as carrying out in part the pledge which the hon. minister made to his constituents before his election, when he said to them : If you will elect me, I am going to take control of a great portion of the public Works Department? If he made that speech With the sanction of the government, why does not the government come down with a Bill to divide up the Department of Public Works, instead of bringing in resolutions by piece-meal to transfer portions of that department from the Minister of Public Works to the hon. gentleman ? We have here a resolution to take this pilotage system and Mr. TALBOT.
put it under the control of the Marine Department. The hon. minister violated a cabinet secret in making the announcement he did, and afterwards denied that he had made any such declaration, but we find the announcement verified by this resolution. I should think that the words of the hon. member for St. Anns would have some weight with the government, and that the government would hesitate before disturbing the existing regulations. The present system has been in force for years, and I fail to see what necessity there is for changing it. f this is in part accomplishment of the bargain made by the government with the hon. minister before he accepted office, namely, that they would transfer a certain portion of the public works to his department, they should come down with a Bill and do it in the light of day, and not slip in half a dozen little resolutions taking this part and the other away by piece-meal from tire Public Works Department and transferring them to the Department of Marine and Fisheries. I would advise the government to let this Bill lay over until we hear from the pilots, and the shipping interests, and the harbour commissioners. They are under the Public Works Department now, do they want to come under the control of the Marine Department ? These interests connected with navigation should either be in one department or the other, and not be split up piecemeal-a part in Public Works, a part in Marine and Fisheries and a part in Railways and Canals. The government should settle on some well defined plan and place them under the charge of one department, so that the people would know with whom they were dealing.


Daniel Gallery: The tea son I raised an objection was because I think the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal are just ns well able to manage their own affairs as are the Harbour Commissioners of the port of Quebec. I fail to see why the pilotage system and the pilots below Quebec should be treated differently from the pilotage system and pilots between Montreal and Quebec. I have been speaking to a couple of Harbour Commissioners since the House took recess at six o'clock, and I find that they are of the same opinion as myself, and would like to have the matter held over for a day or two.
I am not at all implying that my hon. friend the Minister of Marine has any object to serve in doing this. I believe that he is simply acting according to the wish of the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal, but I am not inclined to see the matter in the same light as these gentlemen. In my opinion we would be taking a retrograde course, if we were to take this matter out of their hands and give it to the control of the Marine Department. It would be better that the resolution should be held over a day or two in any case, so as to give us time to think over it.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not quite approve of the way in which my hon. friend the Minister of Marine approaches this question. He says that because a certain public body has no objection to transferring to the Department of Marine and Fisheries, the contrql of the pilotage from Montreal to Quebec, this should be done, and because a certain other public body does not want the pilotage from Quebec down to be interferred with, no change should be made. It seems to me that the real question is what is the most effective way of dealing with the pilotage question. If the most effective way is to put it under the control of the hon. gentleman's department, then let that be done for the entire pilotage from Montreal down to Bic. If it is best to let matters remain under the present control, then make .no change. I do not see why this matter should be dealt with upon any consideration other than the consideration of what is best in the public interest. But the only reason which my hon. friend gives for the change is that certain men, who are exercising certain functions in Montreal, are willing that the pilots under their' jurisdiction should fall under the control of his department. Is there any sound principle in that for the administration of public affairs ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The principle involved is the same in the two cases. I entirely agree with my hon. friend that the whole of the pilotage should be under the control of the department.


Robert Laird Borden: I did not say that it should be under the control of the department, but that we should come to a conclusion as to what would be the best plan, and when we came to a conclusion apply that to the whole river.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Who is going to judge ?


Robert Laird Borden: Why the government.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: On the advice of whom ?


Robert Laird Borden: On whose advice does the government act with regard to public affairs generally ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Public opinion.


Robert Laird Borden: Is there one public opinion for the river above Quebec and another below ?
The -MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES. Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: That is not my conception of public opinion. If my hon. friend means that there are local opinions in each case, each of which differs from the other, I can understand him. But that is not public opinion. Further in matters of administration. I do not agree with
the hon. minister or my hon. friend from Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) that you are to be guided entirely by public opinion. The government ought to have some opinion of its own. Surely my hon. friend does not propose that, if public opinion this year is favourable to dealing with this question in a certain way, he will deal with it in that way this year, and, if public opinion in that particular district veers around, he will veer with it and deal with the matter in another way next year. I know that public opinion controls the policy of the government in very many cases; it controls it much more than principles do. But I do think, so far as an administrative matter of this kind is concerned, no safe guide is to be found in the mere question of local public opinion in one locality.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: But, when we find among those interested a unanimous opinion in favour of a change in the way suggested by this resolution, I think the government is perfectly justified in accepting the suggestion of those who know something about the matter. For instance, the shipping conference of Montreal is composed of men representing the different steamship companies. That conference have represented time and again that the pilotage system between Montreal and Quebec should be under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, and that there should be an improvement in the management of this important part of the St. Lawrence transportation system. That has been their opinion, to my knowledge for the last ten or fifteen years. An investigation took place some years ago, the 1'esult of which was that the recommendation that the pilotage should be put under the control of the government. It was not done because the government wanted to have the consent, as much as possible, of those who are directly interested. There were the board of harbour commissioners of Montreal and the pilots. The pilots are an important body of men. Most of them have made sacrifices in studying navigation and becoming proficient for the woTk they are called upon to do. After becoming Minister of Marine and Fisheries I took hold of this question, because I knew something of it before I was in office, having been a member of the board of harbour commissioners of Montreal for four years. I knew the difficulties in connection with this part of the navigation of the St. Lawrence. The board of harbour commissioners came to the conclusion that they would be relieved of part of their duties by handing over the control of pilotage to the Department of Marine and Fisheries, and they unanimously passed a resolution in that sense. The pilots themselves discussed the question for quite a long time before coming to a decision, and. finally, they came unanimously to the decision that they should be under the control of the department. The

Board of Trade of Montreal also favours the change. These are all public bodies and must know something of what is in the public interest and in the interest of the navigation of the St. Lawrence, that part of it at least. But we have not succeeded in convincing the Harbour Commissioners of Quebec or those specially interested in navigation in Quebec that they should concur in this Bill. They have a corporation of pilots, and that corporation hold to their privileges and advantages, believing that the severe laws and regulations under which they work are sufficient. They have not consented to come under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries. Why should we coerce them ? Why should we take them by the throat and force them to come under the control of the department when, after all it is a debatable question and a question which, even when it is decided in the sense in which the government have decided it up to this point, will involve some difficulty in working out so as to make sure that it shall be to the general advantage ? The Harbour Commissioners of Montreal are convinced, the pilots themselves are convinced, the board of trade and all the shipping interests are convinced that the pilots should be under the control of the department, because then they would know whom to blame in case of an accident or in case incompetent pilots are employed. Under these circumstances, the government have prepared this Bill. Delay is suggested. I do not know how anybody can complain about haste when everybody agrees to this measure and demands it. It is very well for the hon. member for Ste. Anne, Montreal (Mr. Gallery) to voice the after thought of some members of the harbour commissioners in asking for a day or two more. But surely this hon. gentleman is not serious any more than the hon. member for Leeds (Mi-. Taylor) is serious in his remarks. Because, when everybody wants something to be done, and all have agreed that it should be done, I would like to know if the objection is well founded when it comes from outside. Who knows better what is proper for the pilotage between Montreal and Quebec than the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal ? Who knows better than the pilots ? Who knows better than the representatives of the shipping interest ?


George Taylor: If they are left to themselves. But the hon. minister stated that he had not been able to convince the harbour interests of Quebec that it would be in the interests of navigation. So, it is evident that the department has been trying to influence public opinion. The framing of public opinion originated with the Department of Marine and Fisheries by the hon. minister's own story.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: That would indicate powerful influence on the part of the department. I Hon. Mr. PREFONTAINE.
stated a fact that was well known, and with regard to which I defy contradiction, when I said that for over ten years the shipping interests of Montreal had been asking for what I propose in this Bill. Who are more interested in the safe navigation between Quebec and Montreal than the shipping interest ? They are unanimous on the subject. Why should the hon. gentleman say that we had framed public opinion in that sense ? We have not framed it. Their opinion of the shipping interest on this question was formed ten years ago and it has never changed. But the pilots themselves were not at first disposed to favour the change. Lately they have convinced themselves that it would be better in their own interests that they should be under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries. The board of trade have passed a resolution in that sense and so has the harbour commissioners. So, opinion among those interested is unanimous. Outsiders certainly cannot be supposed to know more than those who are especially interested in a satisfactory settlement of this question.


Robert Laird Borden: My hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Prefoutaine) has hot assigned a very high function to my hon. friend from Ste. Anne's division (Mr. Gallery) when he says that everyone is asking for this Bill and demanding it.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Every one interested.


Robert Laird Borden: Is not my hon. friend from Ste. Anne's division a ratepayer of Montreal ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: He is not interested in shipping.


Robert Laird Borden: Is not the hon. gentleman (Mr. Gallery) representative of one of the most important divisions of Montreal ? The Minister of Marine and Fisheries practically tells us that the hon. gentleman is not to be considered, because though he stands up and objects to this proposal, the hon. minister says that everybody demands it.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Every one interested.


Robert Laird Borden: I should have thought that my hon. friend from St. Anne's division, being representative of a very important division of the city of Montreal, might be regarded as being interested, to some slight extent at least. I do not know how many constituents my hon. friend has,' I suppose, 35,000 "or 40,000, for whom he speaks in this House, and yet he is not interested in this measure, which affects the interest of the city of Montreal to a vital extent. Well, no one is talking about forcing the pilots, or doing them anv injustice, either at Montreal or Quebec. The' pilots at Montreal and Quebec must be

subject to the law. The passing of an Act regulating the control of these pilots would not necessarily result in any injustice to them. Is it to be supposed that the pilots coming under the control of a department of this government would thereby be subjected to some injustice ? Would it disturb their corporate rights in any way ? Would they, by being subjected to an Act of that kind, be treated any more harshly than any railway or telephone company, any bank, any company having public officers in its employ, is treated by being made subject to the law, and to regulations devised by the government under the law ? This is not to be spoken of as coercion, this is to be spoken of as a regulation in the public interest, such a regulation as will protect the public interest on the one hand, and will also do justice to the officers engaged in the performance of public duties on the other hand.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: I think the point under discussion as to the different position occupied by the Quebec pilots and the Montreal pilots, should be made clear. The hon. member for Bast Grey (Mr. Sproule) doubted whether the memorandum I read from the pilots' corporation of Quebec was germane to the question. I began my remarks by saying that they were unanimously of the opinion in Quebec, the pilots the harbour commissioners and the shipping interests, that things should remain as they are now, whilst in Montreal they are just as unanimously asking for a change. The pilots of Quebec are differently organized altogether from those at Montreal. In the latter district they have a system of go-as-you-please, each one is independent of the others: whilst in Quebec they are under stringent rules, being bound by their Act of incorporation. Besides that, the Quebec pilots are making strong efforts every year to improve the St. Lawrence river in order to make the navigation more efficient. The change they ask for is contained in that memorandum. All the pilots are interested in preventing accidents as far as possible, because their lives are at stake in the performance of their duties, and the welfare cf their wives and children is at stake. When a man takes a steamer and is on duty 12 or 15 hours, he may run into a fog and meet with an accident. Well, you may say, he hadi no business to run into a fog. But he must suffer the consequences, and in any case he is set aside by the steamship company, whether he was blameable or not. 'mat man is certainly interested in seeing that everything possible is done for the improvement of navigation, he is interested in seeing that every facility is given to the safe navigation of vessels.


Robert Laird Borden: Do steamship companies have the selection of their pilots in going out and coming in ?


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: Are they not obliged to take the first pilot that hails them on coming in ?


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: No. Each steamship company in Quebec has an agent or a representative, who goes to the pilot corporation and says : We require so many pilots this year, and we want you to give us the names of those whom you think are the best pilots, and we will take our choice. The company keeps these pilots on trial a number of months, perhaps a year. Indeed some of these pilots have been forty years with the same company, who are satisfied with their services and who employ them all the time. When an agent gets a telegram notifying him that a steamer is coming in, he asks the pilot to go down to Father Point and take charge of the vessel. The agent has the choice of the pilot.


Robert Laird Borden: I should think that is a very serious state of affairs, because, according to my hon. friend's statement, it appears that the steamship companies have the choice of their own pilots, and if these pilots are not willing to violate the law by running into a fog, or runniug at an excessive speed, they are put to one side and others are put in their places. That indicates that some be.tter regulations are needed in the district of Quebec.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: It is not the fault of the pilots, because if the pilots were left to themselves they would prefer throwing out the anchor than to move on under dangerous circumstances. But they have got to move in their own interest.


Robert Laird Borden: I agree that, under these conditions, it is not the fault of the pilots, but it is the fault of the system, and indicates that some different regulations are required. I do not say that the system which prevails in Halifax is a perfect one, but it is a different one. I have a little familiarity with the system prevailing there. Vessels coming into the harbour of Halifax are obliged to take the first pilot that hails them. But the pilots are under strict regulations. No pilot receives ai license unless he is perfectly competent, and they are employed only so long as proper discipline is maintained among them, and every case of wrong-doing is properly punished. We have a pilot commission inj Halifax that attends to these matters. Then when a vessel leaves the city the same pilot that brought the vessel in is to be on hand to 'Sake her out, and if he is on hand the vessel is obliged to engage the service of that same pilot for the voyage out.


Henry Robert Emmerson: Under the system in Halifax, the pilot who does no work, is he not entitled to as much compensation as the pilot who does work ?


Robert Laird Borden: The pilots are obliged to be on duty; they are obliged to be on hand when vessels are likely to come into port. A vessel is bound to take the pilot that first offers, as I understand the regulations, and that pilot has the option of taking that vessel to sea himself. He is bound to be on hand when she goes out, and if he is not, he is subject to censure and punishment. I think there is some system by which the pilots, although they do not happen to meet a vessel in the first instance, nevertheless receive some consideration for the time they have spent, and for the risk which they have run in going out to the mouth of the harbour in all kinds of weather to pick up vessels that are coming in. I think they also have a provision by which some portion of the common fund is set aside as a superannuation allowance for those pilots who are no longer able to perform their duty. But I think the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) will agree that it is not in the interest of the pilots themselves that any such system as that which he describes should prevail, and it seems to me one of the strongest arguments why some better regulations should be made respecting pilotage affairs in the district of Quebec. Whatever else we may differ about we are all agreed that there should be no such system as will place temptation in the way of pilots to violate the rules which are laid down for the proper guidance of vessels. If a captain of a vessel desires to run the risk of violating the regulations in order to get to sea a little earlier, I say that the pilot should be in a perfectly independent position, and be at liberty to disobey the captain and to say that he will not violate the regulations; he should be able to do that without the slightest fear of penalty. I think the Minister of Marine and Fisheries will agree with that. If the system to-day be as described by my hon. friend from Bellechasse, it is certainly the best argument in favour of better regulations.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: In answer to the hon. the leader of the opposition I may say that after a pilot starts with a vessel he may anchor the vessel if he wishes whether the captain is willing or not. While the pilot is in charge of the vessel he is the master, but there is this consideration that the captain looks after his own interests ; he has so much expense for delays, Ac. for which he has to account. The company want him to make time and he is urged to make time and to save expenses so that the pilot is indirectly under that influence. The one body that should see that a vessel comes to anchor in cases of that kind is the insurance compafly. It is they who suffer the risk and the' loss and they should see to this matter. They know all about the situation and know that this occurs for the very reason that the pilots at Quebec always take their steamers at night. The naviga-
Mr. EMMERSON,
ti m between Montreal and Quebec is carried on during the day time and the steamer arrives at Quebec about dark so that the Quebec pilot has to do his work in the night.


Robert Laird Borden: My hon. friend will see that it is the public who suffer in the end, because as the result of this, accidents occur, insurance rates are put up and the St. Lawrence route is discredited.
Resolution reported, read the first and second time, and agreed to.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES. (Hon. Raymond Prefontaine).: Moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 261). *especting the Pilotage District of Montreal and respecting the Pilotage District of Quebec.


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

[Stage Direction]
House went into Committee to consider the following proposed resolution ;
Resolved, that It is expedient, in the interests of the harbour of North Sydney, Nova Scotia, to amend chapter 30 of the statutes of 1879, intituled : ' An Act respecting the Harbour of North Sydney In Nova Scotia,' by strik-ink out the word ' four ' in the last line of section 8 of the said Act, and substituting therefor the word ' five ' ; and by inserting the words ' after deducting five per cent for his remuneration ' after the word ' shall ' in the fourth line of section 10 of the said Act.
Robert Laird Borden: Would the hon. gentleman be good enough to explain.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I am perfectly willing to give all the information but I really cannot give more than is contained in the resolution. It appears that the harbour commission of North Sydney, Nova Scotia, have more work to do than they used to have and their secretary will not remain in office with a salary of $400. The department lias been requested to amend the law so as to give a salary of $500. The second section provides that the collector of customs, who has been collecting harbour dues, will have a commission of five per cent of these dues as remuneration for his services.


Robert Laird Borden: Is there any remuneration provided for the commissioners themselves either at Sydney or North Sydney ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I do not think they have any remuneration.


Robert Laird Borden: Is my hon. friend quite sure of that ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND IISHERIES.: The commissioners have no>
remuneration whatever. With that commission of five per cent the collector of customs will probably receive $150 a year.


Robert Laird Borden: Has my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries considered the question of giving some moderate remuneration to pilotage authorities in cases where the duties which they discharge make very large demands upon their time ? I know the question has come up a good many times within the last ten or twelve years in connection with the pilotage authority at Halifax and I believe it was under the consideration of one of the predecessors of my hon. friend, Sir Louis Davies. I do not know whether my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries has himself taken the question into consideration.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No requests have been made of me in regard to that, but, I will inquire into it.
Resolution reported, read the first and second time, and agreed to.
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Raymond Prefontaine) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 202) to amend the Act respecting the harbour of North Sydney, Nova Scotia.


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

[Stage Direction]
House went into committee to consider the following proposed resolution :
Resolved, that with a view to facilitate investigation into shipping casualties, it is expedient to amend the Shipping Casualties Act, 1901, by inserting the word ' stranded ' after the word 'abandoned' in the first line of paragraph (a), and by inserting the word ' stranding ' after the word ' abandonment ' in the first line of paragraph (d) of section 3 of the said Act by repealing section 8 of the said Act, and substituting therefor the following section :-
' 8. The minister may appoint any officer of the government of Canada, or any judge of the Superior Court of the province of Quebec, or any judge of a county court, or any local judge in Admiralty of the Exchequer Court of Canada, or any stipendiary magistrate, to be a commissioner to hold formal investigations, and a commissioner shall for such purpose be a court.'
By adding the words ' or default ' after the word ' misconduct ' in the second line of paragraph (b), in the first line of paragraph (c) and in the second line of paragraph (d) of subsection 2 of section 8 of the said Act ; and by adding the words ' provided, however, that no formal investigation of any case shall be held until it has been ordered by the minister,' after the word ' bound ' in the last line of paragraph (e) of the said subsection ; by repealing section 12 of the said Act, and substituting therefor the following section :-
' 12. When the minister, at the request of 'any person, orders a formal investigation, it shall 401
be the duty of such person to render such assistance to the court as is in his power.'
By striking out the words * before the commencement of the investigation ' in the fourth line of section 15 of the said Act ; by adding the words ' or engineer ' after the word ' mate,' in the third line of section 17 of the said Act ; by repealing section 21 and subsection 2 of section 21. of the said Act, and substituting therefor the following sections
' 21. The certificate of a master, mate or engineer may be cancelled or suspended by a court holding a formal investigation, if the court finds that any loss or damage, or the abandonment or stranding of any ship, or any loss of life has been caused by the wrongful act or default of such master, mate or engineer ; or if it finds that any master, mate cr engineer is incompetent, or has been guilty of any gross act of misconduct, drunkenness or tyranny, or that in a case of collision he has failed to render the assistance, or to give information required by law. Provided that in a case of a shipping casualty the court shall not cancel or suspend a certificate unless one at least of the assessors concurs in the finding of the court.
' 2. A certificate shall not be cancelled or suspended by a court under this section unless a copy of the report or a statement of the case upon which the formal investigation has been ordered has been furnished to the holder of the certificate, and he has had an opportunity of making a defence.'-The Minister of Marine.
Robert Laird Borden: Would the hon. gentleman he good enough to say what is the exact effect of the amendment on the first paragraph of the resolution ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The word 'stranding' is added to the existing law and it gives us-power to hold an investigation in the case where a vessel is stranded, and if the evidence is against the officers, they may be censured. This Bill is introduced on account of representations made by the British Board of Trade, and it is almost word for word with the English law. The idea is to make our investigations into shipping casualties uniform with the English procedure on the subject. Mr. Salmon, chairman of the board of examiners of masters and mates has made these suggestions, and he believes that in the future we will be in a position to give complete satisfaction to the insurance companies. In every case where an accident has happened we will lie able to hold an investigation, and to discover who is responsible. Perhaps it may be well for me to read Mr. Salmon's report to the deputy minister. He says :
While holding an investigation into the casualty to the ss. ' Manchester Trader,' several omissions and deficiencies in the present ' Act relating to Shipping Casualties ' became r-p-parent. Some of them are of so much importance. that, with deference to your opinion. I venture to suggest that they should be amended as soon as possible.
A recent letter from the Imperial Board of Trade, urgently- requests the department to hold investigations into every shipping casualty occurring in the Dominion of Canada, and I think


R. SALMON,
[Stage Direction]
Chairman of the Board of Examiners. Masters and Mates.
I may say that this is signed by a special officer who was appointed to replace the late Captain Smith, who died three or four years ago.
Robert Laird Borden: There does not seem to be any objection to the first para-Hon. Mr. PREFONTAINE.
graph, except that I do not think it adds anything to the Act to insert the word
*	stranded ' ; because a vessel can hardly be stranded without being damaged. With regard to the second resolution, there seems to have been a mistake in drafting it, because it first repeals section 8, and in the next paragraph amends the section that has been already repealed. The draughtsman has evidently overlooked the fact that section 8 contains two subsections. This should be amended so as to read as follows : 'by repealing subsection 1 of section 8.'


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I move to add after the word
*	repealing,' in the sixth line, the words, ' first subsection of.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Robert Laird Borden: The language of the first subsection of section 8, as now proposed to be enacted, is very different from the language of the first subsection at present on the statute-book. Is there a recommendation of the British Board of Trade that it should be enacted in this form V


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I have not submitted this draft amendment, but it is introduced in consequence of the British amendment. But this is largely a domestic measure. Its object is to render more effective these investigations by authorizing them to be held at any place or at any time the minister Ide-cides.


Robert Laird Borden: Section 8 at present provides that if it appears to the minister that a formal investigation is necessary, a formal investigation may be held. The section as proposed to be enacted simply provides that the minister may appoint certain officers to hold formal investigations which have not previously been mentioned in the statute. It would seem possible that this subsection might require a little further consideration ; but as the hon. gentleman is to introduce a Bill, and that Bill can be amended in the committee if necessary, I merely make the suggestion for the consideration of the officers of his department. I wish to make another suggestion. We have discussed more than once in this House the form in which amendment to statutes should be made. I agree with the hon. Minister of Justice that when you are amending a section of a statute, it is far better to repeal the statute and to re-enact it in full with the amendments than simply to specify that a word is to he inserted in place of another here and there.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I think the Bill is to be introduced in that form.


Robert Laird Borden: I suppose section 21 is designed to carry out the recommendation of the British Board of Trade ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: Is the recommendation of that board available ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. When the House goes into committee on the Bill, I will furnish all the information required.


Robert Laird Borden: If the hon. gentleman could place it on the Table of the House or place it on ' Hansard,' so that we could see it in the meantime, it would be of great advantage.
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. I will try to lay it on the Table of the House to-morrow.
Resolution reported, read the first and second time, and agreed to.
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 263) to amend the Shipping Casualties Act, 1901.


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

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved that the House go again into Committee of Supply.
['The orders are so reduced in number now, that it is very easy to make a selection. We might take up some Bills which have already been discussed, and we will perhaps go on with supply. That is as definite as I can state at present. If we go on with supply we will proceed from the point at which we left off.']
Robert Laird Borden: When may we expect the railway subsidies ? We were promised them during the past week, and afterwards we were toldi that they would be laid on the Table the early part of this week. We have been now six and a half months in session, and it is high time we should have them. The same observations would apply to supplementary estimates.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Although we have been a long time in session, the hon. gentleman will bear witness to that fact that there has been no lack of business occupation for us all. -The supplementaries I hope to lay on the Table to-morrow morning, and the railway subsidies at a very early day. They may be down Friday or Monday.



John Charlton: Before you leave the Chair, Mr. Speaker, I wish to offer a few remarks to the House With reference to a matter which is one, in my estimation, of considerable importance, the consideration of which has been delayed until this stage of the session. Naturally the House will not be disposed to devote much time to it at present, and I shall certainly not trespass to any extent on its forbearance. We discussed last session the propi-iety of making a grant for a polar expedition, and I think that the general feeling of the House was in favour of a sufficient grant being made for that purpose. At an early date in the session, a very large 401}
and influential deputation waited upon the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, accompanied by Captain Bernier, whose explanation of the plan he intended to adopt was evidently quite satisfactory to the minister, and it was expected that some action would be taken on his application. I do not know what the intention of the government may be, but it certainly has not moved in that direction up to the present. The importance of this expedition, I think, is very great indeed. A successful expedition to the pole would give to Canada a very prominent place among the maritime states, and the discovery of the Pole would give us a standing with regard to territorial acquisition in the north between the Pole and the north-rn coast of the continent, which we would not otherwise have. A successful expedition would be worth much more than it would cost, and an unsuccessful one would entail no disgrace, because the discovery of the North Pole has been the dream of nations for many years, and each failure to reach the goal has only been an incitement to a renewed attempt. Captain Bernier reminds me, in his persistence of Columbus going from court to court in Europe in the 15th century, seeking for a patron to put him in possession of the means of making his coveted voyage of discovery to the west. For several years Captain Bernier has been in pursuit of this project. His persistence is worthy of all praise, and the traits of character he has evinced in the prosecution of his mission would lead us to suppose that he has the dogged pertinacity and courage which would staud him in good stead, if he ever be placed in command of a Canadian Polar expedition. He has peculiarly good qualifications for this position. He is now fifty-one years of age. He commanded a vessel at the age of seventeen, and has been a commander of 40 vessels. He has crossed the ocean 174 times, and he is a navigator possessing a record. This question of Arctic exploration has engaged his attention the last twenty-four years. He has been a diligent student of all the facts that have been elicited with regard to Arctic matters. He has studied the question of the Arctic currents and the proper methods to be followed in order to make progress towards the North Pole, and his speculation and knowledge have been availed of by Arc-tie explorers, among them Nansen and Baldwin. The route which Captain Bernier proposes to take is to enter the Arctic ocean from the Behring straits. The Japan current strikes the west coast of America, and one portion is deflected to the south and another passes through the Behring straits to the Arctic sea. It has been discovered) that the ice pack in the Arctic ocean moves to the eastward from the western side of the ocean reached from the Pacific ocean, through Behring straits. In 1879 the ' Jeannette ' entered the Arctic ocean at Behring straits, and entered the ice pack,

and while the expedition was disastrous, a portion of the crew reaching the coast of Siberia, the relics of the vessel were afterwards found between Greenland and Spitz-enburg, showing that the ice carried it across the Arctic sea. Captain Bernier proposes to place his vessel in the ice pack, between longitude 170 and 175, entering the Arctic ocean through Behring straits, and trusting to nature for the driving of his vessel as near as possible to the Pole. The old theory about an	open	sea around the	Poleis an exploded one. It is certain now that	if there	is not land	there,the North	Pole	is	water covered	with
ice.
Captain Bernier belongs to a race eminent as exploiters in the early history of this country-a race of adventurers, a race of men filled	with	the	spirit of adventure.
While the English were quietly settling along the sea-board of the Atlantic in the thirteen colonies, and penetrating no farther than the Alleghany Mountains, the French inhabitants of Canada penetrated the far west, established trading stations on _ the upper lakes and on the Upper Mississippi, extended their explorations far beyond Manitoba even, and entertained dreams of the creation of a French empire in that country of the possibilities of which they alone were aware. The captain is thoroughly imbued with that spirit ; and, if he is entrusted *with the charge of this expedition, I have not the slightest doubt that he will be able to give a good account of himself.
One feature of this matter which possesses some degree of significance is the fact that Lord Strathcona endorses the captain's theory with regard to the proper course to pursue in polar explorations. Lord Strathcona has promised to give the Captain a subscription of $5,000, and, by this course and by his statements made to the Captain, has endorsed the plan that Captain Bernier has adopted. This is significant because of the fact that Lord Strathcona is intimately [DOT] acquainted with Arctic matters. He was early in the service of the Hudson Bay Company, has been in the far north, and has a knowledge of that country of a character which makes him peculiarly a judge of the proper methods to be employed in such an expedition as this.
The prize of the discovery of the North Pole is one that any of the great marine powers would gladly win. Several expeditions are even now afoot, as expeditions have been set afoot from time to time, none of which have been successful. It is not an unworthy object of ambition for us to seek to snatch these laurels from other competitors. The Captain's plan is to have the vessel built and owned by the government. This vessel, if she returns from her voyage of exploration, will he of service to the government. She would be the kind of vessel that would be exactly wanted in patrolling Hudson bay, in making voyages Mr. CHARLTON.
among the islands north of Hudson bay* and taking possession of newly discovered lands in that region. The government could easily find useful and profitable employment for such a vessel. The cost of such a vessel as the Captain proposes would be about $80,000. In addition there would be certain instruments required, which, it is supposed, the government has in its possession and could loan along with the vessel, for the purpose of this expedition. In addition to the cost of the vessel and the instruments, about $70,000 additional would be required for the expedition. This the Captain would furnish himself; that is, he would secure it by contribution from the public. About $00,000 has already been secured, and there would be no difficulty in collecting the balance if the government would make the appropriation necessary for the construction of the vessel and would embark upon the scheme as the Captain proposes.
Of course, this vessel would be one of peculiar construction. In the first place she would be built of wood, for a wooden vessel is infinitely better in contact with ice than steel or iron. She would be a vessel of great strength, braced with heavy timbers, and would have six water tight compartments. She would be a vessel of 300 tons register, 120 feet in length, with 35 feet beam, a depth of 18 feet, and would draw1 14 feet of water. She would have an engine of 200 horse power. She would have a ten foot wheel, and would carry 300 tons of anthracite coal of which she would burn 34 tons in twenty-four hours. In every way the vessel would be thoroughly adapted to the navigation of the ice-bound sea. She would carry a spare wheel and a spare rudder. She would carry a diving apparatus, which, I believe, no previous Arctic expedition has carried. She would have 100 tons of provisions-six years' supply. These provisions would be of a character to provide against that drpadful disease of Arctic exploration-scurvy. The provisions would include vegetables of various kinds done up in fifty pound cans; and generally the provisions would be of such a character as to ensure the crew against the ravages of scurvy. She would be-which is a new feature-lighted and heated by electricity. For this purpose she would be furnished with two windmills and two dynamos which would be run by the windmills. The electricity would be used for lighting and heating and also for medical treatment of certain maladies among the crew as, for instance, rheumatism. The vessel would carry a doctor and apparatus for the medical treatment of disease where it might be necessary. This provision with regard to heating and lighting is a matter of very great importance. Of course, the burning of oil. or the combustion of fuel, consumes air, while electric lighting and heating would consume no air. So that keeping the air pure would be much easier by this method of lighting and

heating than by the burning of oil or coal. The vessel also would be kept cheerful and dry, overcoming a great difficulty of former Arctic expeditions, that of dampness in the vessel. The vessel would carry an apparatus for the distilling of water. In most cases, Arctic explorers have depended upon melted snow, which is often found to give a supply of water that is impure and deleterious to the health of the crew. The vessel would carry a wirelesss telegraph apparatus and could maintain communication with some point upon the shore of America, and, when well advanced on the exploration, with some point in Norway. But the great advantage of the wireless system would be that the communication could be maintained with the sledge parties sent out from the vessel. It is the intention of the Captain, as he drifts towards his destination, to send sledge parties fifty miles from the vessel on each side and take soundings at intervals and make other investigations. These sledge parties would be in communication, by wireless telegraphy with the vessel, so that they would know the location of the vessel and the vessel would; know the location of the sledge par-, ties, and the sledge parties -could keep up communication which would be of the greatest importance in -case of emergency of any kind. When the vessel approaches the pole-it might be one hundred miles or two hundred miles away; Nansen, I believe reached within 280 miles of the pole and the nearest has been 250 miles-when the vessel is at its nearest point to the pole a sledge party would be sent out with the most ample and up-to-date provision for making a successful journey over the ice. Among other things, the Captain proposes to have an automobile motor with either a reservoir of electricity or an engine run by gasoline. They would take frames and canvas for boats that could be set up readily for transportation across the open stretches of water. The expedition would set up bamboo rods with small flags every mile, and every ten miles they would place a hollow cylinder with records. Every ten miles also they would leave a supply of provisions, so that the return could be made with greatest speed and safety. And all the time communication with the vessel would be maintained by telegraph.
The Captain proposes to carry a crew of 15 men. and the arrangement with regard to this crew is one to secure efficiency and economy. I will give, from the statement made last year, as to the composition of this crew :
The crew will consist of fifteen men. There will be the commander himself, without pay. There will be two officers, captains of experience. who can take the wheel, go to the masthead and look-out, or perform any duty regarding the navigation or care of the ship in case of the captain being Incapacitated. There will be a first mate who will he what is termed an ice master, a man who is thoroughly conversant with everything pertaining to the dangers of ice and of being caught between the ice floes. There will be two engineers ; one will be a machinist who can do any work in connection with the machinery or apparatus, the telegraph apparatus or fixtures ; while the other will he an electrician and wireless telegraph operator. Two men will be surveyors and astronomers who will also serve on sledge journeys or in almost any other capacity on the vessel. There will be one doctor who will be a botanist and seaman. There will he one naturalist, who will be a botanist, photographer and artist and assistant to the surveyors and electrician, and who also will go on sledge journeys. There will be one cook, who, in addition to being a cook and steward will be an able seaman. There will be one seaman who will be a whaler and sealer and stoker, and who will combine the qualifications of all three and be able to serve in almost any capacity. There will be a carpenter who will also be an able seaman, and one stoker who will also he an able seaman. These will he his crew of 15, men combining the qualifications and different kinds of capacities that, if confined in each case to one man, would require a crew of 50 or 60 men, an efficient crew, and yet a compact crew of small number.
This is the arrangement that Captain Bernier proposes to make with regard to his crew. His scheme for provisioning liis vessel, fitting it out, and the conduct of his expedition, all has been carefully thought out. He has brought to bear upon the arrangement of his plans the experience of a navigator of over thirty years, and his experience as a navigator with regard to Arctic matters extending over more than twenty years. Undoubtedly Captain Bernier possesses qualifications for the task he desires to undertake at least equal to those possessed by any living nautical man. He does not know but deems it advisable to buy the celebrated vessel the ' Fram,' which is for sale, and can be bought at a less price probably than he could construct a vessel. It might be possible to buy the German vessel, the ' Gosse,' which is just returning from an Antarctic expedition. But whatever course may be taken with regard to a vessel, the government is called upon, if it embarks in this scheme, to supply not more than $80,000. It will be an investment in a vessel which will belong to itself, and which will be available in subsequent years for other purposes. I think, Mr. Speaker, that the feeling of the House last session was unmistakably in favour of giving Captain Bernier the means that are necessary to prosecute his cherished purpose of making an expedition to the North Pole. I feel confident, from my investgations into this matter, that if Captain Bernier secures the outfit he requires, he may enter the ice pack east of Behring Straits, and that he will drift past the Pole, and will locate the Pole, and that we will in all probability have the credit of making that discovery. I think his plan is one that is calculated to secure, success. and Canada certainly could have no prouder distinction than to step in and

discover tlie North Pole after all the at-ternps that have been made by Americans, by English, by Norwegian, by Swedish navigators and others. I trust that the government will look favourably upon the application which Captain Bernier makes, and that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries will urge upon his colleagues the appropriation of the necessary sum of money to carry the Captain's purpose into effect.


Adam Carr Bell: I presume this is not a matter which has at all any party Significance. I feel very much disposed to lend my support to the argument made by the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton). From the statement made by him it would appear that Captain Bernier is contributing resources that he has accumulated by a very long and patient effort in this direction, to the extent of something like $70,000. This the Captain has collected, or has secured the promise of, by very patient, persistent devotion to a subject which is of course of very great interest. Now, it would appear that the government of Canada is asked to contribute about an equal amount; and surely if one enthusiastic citizen of Canada is prepared to contribute half the capital required, and his own services for a great many years, not only in preparation for this adventure but in carrying it. out .to a successful completion, which I hope he may succeed in doing, it is comparatively a small matter that all the other citizens of Canada collectively should contribute merely one-half of the total sum required. There can be little doubt as to the great value of the search that Captain Bernier intends to make. The discovery of the North Pole, while it may seem to a great many people to be a visionary project to which no material advantage can attach, is unquestionably one which has engaged the attention and aroused the enthusiasm of all the maritime nations of northern Europe in succession. Our cousins in the United States have made repeated efforts to discover the Pole, and I think if any people in the world should look upon it as their peculiar business, and finally succeed in making that discovery, it is the people of Canada, because the North Pole when discovered will unquestionably form part of this country. It would be an exceedingly inconvenient and unfortunate thing for us if some representative of another power should, with less advantages, beginning from a more distant point, succeed in finding the North Pole, and planting the flag possibly of some other country upon that point of the earth's surface. I think we have more reason to look upon this as particularly a Canadian object than have the people of any other nationality in the world.
There can be no doubt at all that there is a certain amount of scientific interest attached to this effort. There can be equally no doubt that it may be of great material advantage to Canada to establish finally and Mr. CHARLTON.
indisputably her claim and title to all the lands lying on the north part of this continent. Now it is possible for us at this moment to look upon this enterprise as being of no importance. It is not a long time since the whole of the north-west portion of the continent now owned by the United States, Alaska, was regarded as a country of no importance whatever. Any one looking at its position on the map would not suspect its character or importance. To-day that country is proving to be possessed of great wealth. Our own territory lying adjacent to Alaska is at this moment perhaps attracting more attention to Canada than any other part of our territory, and in this far northern region is just as likely as anywhere else to find great and valuable stores of mineral wealth. There can be no question that there are great and valuable stores of coal in those northern regions, and while they are at present inaccessible, and we have other supplies more near at hand which satisfy our requirements for the moment, we cannot tell what scientific discoveries may do in the course of a year or two. The access to that northern region, which is now almost impossible, may become, through some scientific discovery, comparatively easy, we may be able to derive from these northern portions of our possessions great wealth, great stores of mineral value. There can be of course no prospect of anything outside of minerals, but there is no reason to doubt that in those extreme northern regions,- as well as in any other portion of this northern half of the continent, may we expect to find richly mineralized lands. I know very well that Canada, while making great progress in many other directions, has depended quite as much, if not more, upon her largely increased exports of minerals for her enormously extended foreign trade, as upon any other portion of her resources. Therefore these extreme northern regions, While possessed of no agricultural value, may prove to be capable of largely expanding our exports and of adding to our national wealth. So while we may admit that national pride and scientific interest should impel us to enter at once upon an undertaking. that can be carried out at such a small cost as $80,000 or $100,000 we must recognize in addition that if we succeed through this expedition in increasing our knowledge of these regions, unpromising as they may seem at this moment vie may in the end derive benefits that will repay us tenfold or one hundred fold for any outlay we may make. I think that the enthusiasm and energy that the Captain has shown in his long continued effort to foster this child of his fancy and to carry to completion the course which he has marked out for himself and has pursued despite every kind of difficulty and doubt and disappointment, should incite us to turn with warm sympathy towards a Canadian who is willing to undergo every

discomfort and hardship that the frozen north may present, in order to accomplish the object he has set before him and should induce us to assist him in his enterprise.


David Henderson: I do not wish this occasion to pass without availing myself of the opportunity of expressing my hope and confidence that the government will not permit the appeal made by the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) to be lost sight of. Several years ago, when 1 first had the pleasure of hearing Captain Bernier deliver a lecture on this polar expedition and explain his views in regard to the northern hemisphere and the surroundings of the pole, I became interested in the work which he has so much at heart, and I believe that if the north pole is ever to be discovered, it will be discovered either by Captain Bernier or by some one following a course similar to that which he has marked out. He told us that he is following nature, getting nature to assist him. Instead of following the course pursued by navigators who have gone from Europe and America, he proposes to enter the ice in a different way and to follow the direction of the current which is flowing towards the pole and southward instead of going over ice which, is flowing away from the pole. In this way he has great hopes that he will discover the pole. It seems to me to be common sense reasoning that if another man has come within 200 miles of the pole and has passed it by, there should be no great difficulty in Captain Bernier coming within fifty or one hundred miles, of It, or even passing over that coveted point of the earth. It may seem something like a wild cat scheme to many in this country to talk about an expedition to the north pole ; they see no financial advantage to be gained by spending money in that way, hut to my mind the contrary is the case. Even in the matter of immigration, of making Canada known in every home in Europe, I do not believe that $100,000 could be better spent than in assisting Captain Bernier to fit out an expedition to discover the pole. Even if he fails so much would be written in the newspapers about the expedition that Canada would become a household word in every home throughout Europe, and if he succeeded in discovering the pole Canada would be known in the heart of China as well as in the heart of every European country. My suggestion is that we should provide the $100,000 which Captain Bernier requires out of the money which we have been appropriating for purposes of immigration. I believe that in that way it will accomplish a great deal more than if r. was spent on newspaper advertising or eve, in sending agents to the continent of Europe and Great Britain to solicit imm, grants to come to this country7. My object is to make Canada known, and by fitting out an expedition to the pole, whether it proves successful or not, we will
secure the aid of every newspaper in the old land in advertising Canada. That is just what we want to do ; it is by advertising Canada and making. this country known throughout Europe that we are going to get immigrants. To my mind nothing will do that more cheaply or successfully than the fitting out of such an expedition, and that is one reason why I think we should assist Captain Bernier in his very laudable purpose. The hon. member for North Norfolk has referred to another point which I think is -worthy of consideration by the government. Not long ago I saw in the newspapers that the Americans are talking very loudly of some possessions to which they propose to lay claim, away to the north of this Dominion which properly belong to the Dominion of Canada. Now, if Captain Bernier succeeds in locating the pole and planting thereon the British flag, taking possession of whatever there is in land or sea, we will certainly have a right to claim possession in the name of the King of England of everything that lies between the north pole and the now known Dominion of Canada. We will then not be troubled in the future with any Alaska boundary disputes in that direction, but will have the first claim to everything lying between what we now know as the Dominion of Canada and the North Pole. I hope the lion. Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Hon. Mr. ITefontaine), who will no doubt take an interest in this enterprise, will deeply concern himself about it, give attention to it and encourage Captain Bernier in his expedition. I hope that he will persuade the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding) that the Dominion of Canada is patriotic enough and rich enough to supply the funds necessary to meet the needs of Captain Bernier's expedition. I am not at all afraid to advocate this scheme; I think it would be a great thing for the Dominion of Canada to have it said that one of her citizens was the first to plant the flag of his country upon the pole. And if the pole is ever to be discovered-and I believe it will be discovered some day-every citizen of this country would feel proud in the thought that a citizen of Canada was the first to plant the British flag upon the pole. I trust the hon. Minister of Finance will not be backward in providing a sum of money even if it is taken out of the vote which is ordinarily given for immigration purposes. I would say again : Let us devote $100,000, less to immigration and give $100,000 to Captain Bernier to fit out his expedition. If we do that I am quite sure that at the end of two or three years we will have accomplished a great deal more in the way of attracting immigrants to this country than if we had spent the sum in the ordinary way.


Mr. R. HOLMES (West Huron).: At the ris- of perhaps being the only member who *will speak in opposition to this project, I

desire to say a few words. I have no hesitation in saying that I am entirely opposed to the project of the Dominion of Canada granting any considerable amount for this purpose. If I am not mistaken, this is the second or third time the matter has been before the House, and1 has to certain extent received the approval of the members of this House. The attempt to discover the North Pole is a very fascinating subject, which has engaged the attention of mariners for many years. Expeditions have been fitted out in past years, and almost unlimited wealth has been expended in the attempt to discover the north pole. Nevertheless, we can safely say that the result of these expeditions has not furnished us with even sufficient information to warrant us in spending money for such a purpose. We have heard a great deal in this House recently about lack of information, but there is nothing in the world about which there is less definite information than there is about the North Pole. Those who have read the history of polar expeditions know that many lives have been sacrificed, and that wealth has been poured out lavishly without any definite result having been accomplished. It is simply a matter of sentiment, and if you should be disposed to look upon it from a commercial point of view, there is certainly no commercial advantage to be reaped. If the North Pole is ever discovered, I would be very glad indeed that it should be discovered by a Canadian, but in view of the fact that so many expeditions have failed, I have grave doubts that the North Pole will ever be found. The statement of the member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) that this expedition would be a good advertisement for Canada is to my mind rather far-fetched. When the Coldstream Guards band played here the other night, I met in the audience the gentleman who signs himself ' the wandering Yankee,' and he told me that when he first came to Canada he brought his furs along in the summer time, thinking he would require them, as he had formed his ideas of this country from the pictures sent abroad of ice palaces and winter scenes. I do not think it particularly advantageous that we should spend $100,000 to let the world know that the North Pole is in Canada. I believe we could spend $100,000 to much better advantage in advertising Canada in another direction. The hon. member for Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) has told us that for 24 years Capt. Bernier has made this matter a subject of very deep concern. I would not for a moment think of detracting from the merits of Capt. Bernier. I esteem him as much as any one, and I believe that as a navigator he is entitled to much credit. But if for 24 years he has been following this visionary idea without any greater success than he has achieved, it is pretty nearlt time for him to think of something else. I believe that the House will be endn'sed


Robert Holmes: by the public at large if it once and for all sets its face against this proposition. One of the functions of government is to spend, money to the best advantage for the good of the country, but we must not think that because we have an overflowing treasury, w-e can take $100,000 from it and spend it for some impractical purpose which will bring to us no beneficial results. The hardheaded farmers of Ontario and the business people of Canada generally, would not have much sympathy for a government that has no better use for $100,000, than to spend it in chasing a chimera. For some years past they have been fitting out polar expeditions in the United States and in European countries, and I believe that the navigators of these countries are just as likely to find an easy way to the North Pole, if easy way there be, as Capt. Bernier. The simple fact that Capt. Bernier belongs to Canada, and will-start out on a new tack, does not to ray mind give an assurance whatever that be will be successful. My opinion, based upon the reports of polar expeditions in the past, convinces me that this expedition, if it be undertaken, is doomed to failure, and that the money expended for it will be absolutely thrown away.


Mr. S. E. GOURLEY (Colchester).: I am very happy to support the views of the member for North Norfolk in this matter. It is very proper that the objection to this exi>edition should come from a gentleman representing a constituency in Ontario, which is the home of all the narrow ideas in Canada.


Robert Holmes: And Truro is the home of the narrow men.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: For 24 years Capt. Bernier has pursued this ambition, but we know that Columbus besought. the court of Ferdinand and Isabella much longer than 24 years before he got a vessel to discover the American continent. I am not embarrassed by the statement that Capt. Bernier has besought this country for 24 years without success, but I trust that as the name of Ferdinand and Isabella are immortalized because of the aid they gave Columbus, so this country will be immortalized on account of the aid which it will give to the discoverer of the North Pole. The hon. member (Mr. Holmes) fancied that there was something derogatory to Canada in the possession of a cold but delighted climate. I am here to say that the climate of Canada is her glory. I desbe to propagate the idea that we possess a cold climate, and I shall not attempt to minimize it in the slightest degree. Any gentleman who is acquainted ivith the history of the great forces that have made, and are making this world, recognizes the benefits of a cold climate.
I desire this country to be known as a northern country. All of the [DOT] countries

of the world that have matured high civilizations have been northern countries, Germany and Russia are north of the fiftieth parallel, and they are great, dominating, world powers, while southern countries, like France, and Italy, and India, and China, are the dying nations of the world. Therefore, to be a northern country is to be a dominant and a growing country, and in that view I boast that Canada possesses the North Pole. A northern country has but one frontier to defend, and hence a northern country is most dominant in the military sense, being almost impregnable. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Holmes) peculiarly illustrates the genius of Ontario, when he says that this is a commercial question. I wonder that the people of Ontario can never rise above some little tu'penny-ha'penny consideration in the discussion of great questions. Ontario, instead of being the dominant and leading province of Canada, has almost lost her influence, because she has permitted her-i self to be influenced largely by petty commercial considerations. Gladstone and John Bright undertook to rule the British empire on those lines in Exeter Hall, and one of them had a little bit of paper, on which was figured out the cost of an insult that had been offered to England by France or the United States. Some little fellow got up and said: It will cost us five million nine hundred and twenty-six dollars and twenty-six and a half cents to avenge that insult, but, if we let the insult go and take the kicking, it will cost 36 cents less ; therefore let us take the kicking and the insult. That was the commercial argument; that is the Ontario argument. That kind of argument reduced England from a first-class power to a third or fourth-class power. Thank God, the day for that kind of argument is past, the men who made it have gone into oblivion, and we have in England to-day a dominant people who would face the world and spend every dollar they possess rather than take an insult. We have got past the commercial idea in England, and I hope we have in Canada. There are much more important ideas than the commercial idea when we are dealing with imperial questions. Sentiment rules this world, and mere figures are a secondary consideration with the great, dominant powers of the earth. Let me say one word more. Some hon. gentlemen seem to think that there is going to be a great sacrifice of life and blood in the proposed expedition. Well, what of that ? You cannot build up a nation of high civilization without the sacrifie of life and blood. That is the price any nation pays for building up a great civilization. Little Switzerland, the most civilized country in Europe, has defied the whole of Europe because it has been willing at times to sacrifice its best men and to defend its independence with its life-blood. That is the price you have to pay for high civilization and dominant political feeling. The life that would be sacrificed in this enterprise would be a noble example to the people of Canada. We want self-sacrifice. What is the good of a lazy loafer who is not prepared to make any sacrifice ? Of what value are such people to any nation ? We want men and women who are capable of selfsacrifice. The mother who tells her sou to go forth and fight for his country is the only kind of woman who is worth her salt. You want men and women who are willing to sacrifice themselves and their children, if need be, on the altar of their country. That is the only basis of high national life, and we want that sentiment in this country.
I am surprised, when the duty of selfsacrifice is mentioned, that any hon. gentleman should be averse to self-sacrifice in the direction of noble duty. The railways of the United States kill 70,000 or 80,000 people a year, and whoever hears a word of that. In the South African war when 200 or 300 people were sacrificed in a battle everybody held up their hands in horror, and said. What a terrible thing war was. But, when the trains of the United States kill that many every week, nobody says a word about it. Why, Sir, the sacrifice of life in war is the noblest way in which life can be sacrificed ; and yet you find weak writers, weak ministers, and sometimes weak members of parliament deprecating the shedding of blood. I will deprecate tire shedding of blood if it is shed for no purpose ; but if blood is shed in the best interest of the national life, there is nothing to regret. What are flesh and blood given to this world for ? At eighty years of age when life is spent, man is thrown into the earth and covered up ; is it not better at thirty or forty years of age, when life is keen and the blood is strong, to throw it away in the defence of some noble principle ? So far as I am concerned, I will support this proposal, because I do not think there is the slightest doubt about Canada owning every foot of territory from here to the North Pole. It is contiguous to Canada, and we own every foot of it by right of discovery and exploration. But if there is any doubt about it, and if we have to take physical possession of it, I am ready to support Bernier in taking physical possession of it. What we ought to do in this parliament is to husband our resources. I hear that Greenland is in the market., and if so, we ought to buy it to-morrow. Alaska was in the market a few years ago, but England did not take advantage of the opportunity to buy that country. Since then we have had enormous difficulties in consequence, and we shall continue to have difficulty in regard to Alaska until we get strong enough to ask the United States to hand over that country for a fair price to

us, as we certainly shall. If Canada succeeds in this boundary arbitration, as I hope and believe it will, the United States will still own a narrow coast line of almost 400 miles that should belong to this country. No maritime people will ever put up with a deprivation of that kind. No maritime people will ever permit a neighbouring country to own a thin strip of 400 miles of its coast; and if the United States will not sell us that territory for an equivalent sum of money, the day will come when we will take it, in spite of all the resources of the United States. It is an insult to a maritime people to be deprived of 400 miles of their coast line, and England deserves the reprobation of the Canadian people for letting Alaska go. While I am an imperialist, and while I am in love with the traditions of England and the English people, I have nothing but reprobation for the stupid diplomatists who gave away 400 miles of our coast line on the Pacific. I make a distinction between the people of England and the few men who attempt to play the role of diplomats and statesmen of England. I support Bernier's proposition, because we are the vikings of this continent. Nansen, who attempted a few years ago to reach the North Pole, was the heir of the old vikings of Norway and Sweden, who illustrated the genius of the human race on the continent of Europe ; and if the English people and the French people are great races to-day, they owe the fact to the brave old vikings, who, without compass or any of those mathematical instruments which make sea-faring safe today, went out on the turbid ocean to battle valiantly with wind and wave. No inland people can ever be a dominant people. You must have a race of men fond of the sea, battling every day with dangers to life and limb, to become a bold and dominant race. Therefore I favour this search for the North Pole. In that way we shall keep up in Canada that spirit of the vikings, the going out on unknown and sonny seas in pursuit of exploration. That makes a bold and intrepid race, which is the sort of race we want in Canada. Therefore, without figuring this matter up, according to the Toronto or Hamilton or Ontario notion of making five or ten cents profit, I support this project, because it tends to arouse and keep alive the old sentiment for life on the sea, and those feelings of high courage and enterprise that makes a noble race.


Mr. A. W. PUTTEE (Winnipeg).: I very much fear that the country will question the sanity of this House when it finds that after sitting here for seven months we have nothing better to talk about than discovering the North Pole. On behalf of Manitoba, let me say that there are a great many things which ought to be attended to by the government as soon as possible. The St. Andrews Rapids work has been at a stand-Mr. GOURLEY.
still for upwards of a year. In Winnipeg business is almost paralyzed for the lack of room in the post office. And I am not ready to spend money on the North Pole until more immediate necessities such as this are attended to. I have been doing my best for some weeks past to get a sufficient amount of confidence in the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) to accept his curves and gradients, which he says may be obtained in that country to the north, of which he alone seems to know anything. But I cannot follow him when he goes to the North Pole and shows us exactly by what currents and curves and grades you can get there. It seems to me that the hon. gentleman ought to be content to wait and see how some of his prophecies will come out regarding our own northern country before he asks us to accept his statement about the passage of the North Pole. As to 1100,000 being spent out of the immigration grant for that purpose, that would be most absurd. We have been spending money trying to abolish the idea among Europeans that Canada is an annex of the North Pole, and our increased immigration is due to the fact that we have to a considerable extent dissipated that notion. I should therefore be opposed to our spending money in a direction which will tend to foster it.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Raymond Prefontaine).: I do not propose to detain tiie House at any length, but as this matter came under my consideration early in the session, I would like to say a few words concerning it. It was brought under my notice by a large number of members of the House of Commons and Senators, and Captain Bernier gave at that meeting a complete exposition of his plan. Last year his proposition was that we should vote him purely and simply a certain amount for the purpose of his expedition. His proposition was that we should give him from $100,000 to $120,000 to organize an expedition and carry it out. But the plan he submitted at tire meeting to which I have referred was quite different. It was one which should really commend itself to the attention of the House and the country. His proposition was that the Department of Marine and Fisheries should provide a boat, to be constructed in Canada and be loaned to him, and he would, by means of public subscriptions, get the crew and all the provisions necessary. That would entail an expenditure of about $60,000 or $70,000. Acting on that idea, Captain Bernier with commendable courage and energy succeeded in getting nearly $40,000 subscriptions. among which was a subscription of $5,000 from Lord Stratheona, and he would certainly have succeeded in getting the full amount had he been in a position to say that the Canadian government was ready to endorse his scheme. If he has succeeded in getting subscriptions to the amount of $40,-

000 without the aid of parliament, no doubt, he would with that aid, succeed in getting all the money necessary from public subscriptions. The boat to be constructed by the government would remain government property and be used for fishery protection and other purposes on the Pacific coast, provided Captain Bernier ever returned with the boat. Such a scheme should certainly commend itself to the serious attention of business men. There is not only sentiment in this matter. Of course we feel -a good deal of pride in having one of our fellow-t citizens, at Captain Bernier's age, plucky enough to undertake this perilous expedition. A great many would treat the question as just an idea without anything at the back of it. If Captain Bernier has sufficient courage to undertake this expedition at the risk of his life, that is certainly commendable even as a question of sentiment, but there is a practical side to this matter. We have organized many expeditions, most of which have been successful and given great returns. No doubt until ten years ago the territory of the Yukon was almost unknown except for two explorations made and organized by the government. Ten or fifteen years ago, if any one had stated on the floor of the House that the Yukon Territory would some day be producing from $10,000,000 to $25,000,000 of gold, people would have laughed at the idea. But how the fact has been established. The Yukon Territory to my personal knowledge-I was there a year ago-has not yet been scratched. It has not been opened really for mining in the proper sense of the word, and I have no doubt that there is an immense future for that country. Captain Bernier has held many conferences in which he has been considered a very serious man, who knew what he was talking about, and what he said about his project was taken seriously by all those who took the trouble to listen. If his proposition be simply and purely to loan a boat for the expedition, personally I do not know that there would be much objection. I understand perfectly well that this country, in developing itself so fast, requires large sums of money for things that are absolutely necessary, but that does not mean that we are going to fold our arms and let our neighbours take advantage of us. At the present time an expedition has left for the northern part of Hudson bay. And why ? Simply to organize that territory, to protect our interests in it and keep it for Canada. We have an immense territory in the direction of the North Pole, and that territory has been but little explored. It is reported, however, to be rich in minerals of all kinds. If by risking the sum of $80,000 which would be the cost of the steamer to be built for the expedition, and which could be used for something else when it returns, the exploration of that territory could be helped on, I think, personally and as a member of this House,
that the people of this country would approve of it. Of course, speaking as Minister of Marine and Fisheries, though personally quite favourable to the scheme, I must say that question has not yet been considered, because there have been so many important matters demanding the attention of the government that this question has not been specially taken up by the cabinet. But, surely if the government thinks that it should be encouraged in the way that has been suggested, I am sure that the people of the country would agree with it. And it certainly would be a credit to Canada if a Canadian should achieve the discovery of the North Pole, which nobody has been able to achieve up to the present time.


Edward Hackett: We have been debating a region of frost and ice. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries is very anxious that assistance should be given to Captain Bernier. I desire to call his attention and that of the govern-, ment to the province of Prince Edward Island, which is not near the pole at all. That province has been deprived of the communication with the main land which the Dominion, at the time of confederation, undertook to keep up. The minister speaks in very glowing terms of the possibility of discovering the North Pole and what Captain Bernier may do in that direction. But I wish to impress upon him the fact that the government undertook with the province of Prince Edward Island to maintain communication during the winter between the Island and the mainland. Before the hon. minister undertakes to spend $80,000 or $100,000 to discover the North Pole, he should provide us with another boat to keep up this communication. The hon. gentleman says that if this boat we loan to Captain Bernier returns from the North Pole, it will be of some service. But, so far as the province of Prince Edward Island is concerned, we do not want to depend upon a boat of this kind from the North Pole. I am not opposed to this expedition. I would like to see Captain Bernier bring back enough of the North Pole to make a snuff-box. But, while I say that, I say that the government should, in the first place, carry out the terms of confederation and give to Prince Edward Island the communications that they were guaranteed at the time of confederation. And when this parliament are ready to carry out the terms of confederation in that respect, they may think about the North Pole.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to. and House went into Committee of Supply.
' The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding). I invite the attention of the committee again to the estimates of the Department of Railways and Canals. When we last had these estimates under consideration, two or three items were held over and
[Stage Direction]
these items I now ask the committee to take up. I refer to the main estimates, page 42:
Railways and Canals-chargeable to capital- Intercolonial Railway-increased accommodation at St. John, $84,800.
Mr. LEFURGEY.: I think that the hon. member for Hamilton (Mr. Barker) and the kon. member for icing's (Mr. Fowler) were making inquiries about this item. I see that these lion, gentlemen are not in the House. If we could take up the Prince Edward Island items in the meantime, these kon. gentlemen might be with us later on.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I do not think that there is anything that tile lion, gentlemen would object to in this item. I shall be glad to give any information asked for, and, if the items are adopted, that shall (not shut off discussion. With regard to this item for St. John, I may explain that we had an appropriation for this service last year of $90,500. That amount was expended, and a little more, including the purchase of some land under a judgment given by the Exchequer Court. The actual expenditure was $3,000 odd in excess of the appropriation. We ask here for an appropriation of $106,000, of which a one-fifth has already been voted. We shalll ask in the sup-plementaries to lie brought down a further sum of $5,000. So we shall have for expenditure on the works at St. John $111,000. I gave the details of this on a previous occasion, but I may summarize them now. The sum of $41,355.50 is to pay the balance of the contract for the engine house and machine shop; $10,000 for coal shed ; $10,000 for boilers and engines, and $10,000 for grading and track laying, and various small items.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Are these manufacturing shops ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The engine house and machine shop are for repairs. The manufacturing is done at Moncton.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it anticipated that there will be a greatly increased trade by adopting St. John as a winter iiort ? And is that why we need to make this heavy expenditure ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The larger portion of the winter port business is done by the Canadian Pacific Railway on the other side of the harbour. But the general business of ,St. John has grown very much, and it is necessary to make these improvements for its accommodation. The work is now in progress, the contract having been let for the engine house and machine shop.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But, if the Canadian Pacific Railway is doing the major portion of the work and the Intercolonial is not, what justification can there be for this Hon. Mr. FIELDING.
greatly increased expenditure ? Is the business of the Intercolonial Railway increasing rapidly in St. John of late ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: In what I said regarding the Canadian Pacific Railway doing business, I did not imply that the Intercolonial is not doing any, but the Canadian Pacific Railway is doing a winter port business, Which is handled on the western side of the harbour. But the general business and trade at St. John are decidedly increasing, and we desire to increase the facilities for handling that business. An engine-house is also rendered necessary by the fact that we are now using engines of much larger size, and we require larger engine-houses. The modern engines cannot get into the old engine-house.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: A few years ago we were told that the roadbed was in first-class condition, and afterwards) it turned out when the new engines were purchased that it was dangerous to take them over the bridges.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The hon. gentleman knows that there has been quite a development in railroading. You have to build larger engines, heavier cars ; and the equipment of railways is different from what it was a few years ago.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It was contended on this side of the House that the road was not suitable for the heavier rolling stock, and unless it was made more substantial this rolling stock could not be used to advantage. Now, with regard to the engine-house, if you require to expend over $100,000 in one place for an engine-house, it seems you must either be expecting greatly increased trade there in future, or else your old engine-house must have been very inferior in the first place.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The old engine-house was part of the original construction of the road, and was built before confederation, and naturally was not adapted to the conditions which exist at present.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Could the minister tell us what quantity of winter freight is being carried, and whether much grain is carried to St. John in the winter ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: A very small quantity of grain passed through the elevator, but the general business of the Intercolonial is increasing at St. John.
Increased accommodation at Halifax, $83,600.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We had a considerable appropriation for Halifax last year, but a large amount of it was not expended, and we have to revote it now, with some additional sums. The appropriation last year was $143,000, of which we expended $75,174. So there is a balance of last years's expenditure to de carried forward, in the form of a revote, of $67,826.

The revote here is stated to be $104,500. That estimate was made some months ago, and is now found not to be correct. We are taking in this item an additional sum of $36,674, making the sum of $104,500 which is accounted for in the main estimates. We have, however, other works on hand in Halifax which we shall have to provide for in the supplementary estimates, and which will make the total appropriation for the year, including these revotes of last year, $229,500. The details of this sum are : Land for engine-house and yard, $20,000 ; laud at Cornwallis street, $20,000 ; grading and other work in connection with the proposed engine house, $20,000 ; to complete improvements at station, $7,500 ; construction of quay wall of crib-work, $37,000 ; wharfs and freight shed, $125,000. A part of the sum wie are asking will be included in the supplementary estimates. With regard to the land for the engine house, we have not yet determined on the location, and we shall be obliged probably to go outside of the city limits, where we have some land in our mind's eye. It is not wise at present to state where it is. We have, of course, in view two or three different locations, and we think we shall be able to acquire the land at a moderate cost. We wish also to acquire a small amount of land south of the elevator at Halifax, partly because it is likely to be applied to other purposes if we do not purchase it, and also because we shall need it if we are to do any business at all with the elevator, to allow tracks to run through the elevator, so that the cars may pass through and go off on another track. At present there is not a great deal of that kind of business done at Halifax nor at St. John. But for any business that may be done at the elevator, the cars at present have to go in and then back out again, which makes considerable delay. It is desirable that we should purchase a small quantity of land on the other side of the elevator so that, tracks may be laid down on which the cars may pass through the elevator, while others come up behind. These, together with wharf improvements, are the changes and operations which we propose to carry on.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: After this new transcontinental road is built, do you expect to need all this heavy expenditure to accommodate the trade that you are likely to get over the Intercolonial at Halifax and St. John ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Well, I differ with my hon. friend on that point ; but to my mind, after building this railway, there will be more business at St. John and Halifax than there is now. The Intercolonial buildings will all be required, and probably more. However, even without the transcontinental railway, we require this accommodation at Halifax :	and we also
require, apart from the elevator, which will
only be used for the grain traffic-but leaving that out of the question, for the business of the Intercolonial we undoubtedly need the greater accommodation in land and buildings, both at St. John and Halifax.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not object to the expenditure if it is needed. But it does seem a little suspicious. We expended a large sum for an elevator at St. John some time ago for the purpose of handling grain on the Intercolonial, but we have never had any grain to handle. That was not a wise expenditure. To-day you propose to purchase more land to run cars through the elevator, but there is no grain to handle, and according to the outlook you are not likely to have any grain to handle in the future. It seems to me to be providing accommodation for a trade which we have not yet got, and that the money expended in it will not be earning any interest. I do not think that is wise ; in fact, it is very unwise, but if there is clearly indication that the trade requires it, I for one do not feel like Objecting to the expenditure. .


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think that if we should take the position that we should first get the trade and then build the elevator, instead of building the elevator so as to be prepared to handle the trade, we would be reasonably and justly open to criticism and to be asked : How can you expect trade when you provide no facilities ? As to additional land to be purchased near the elevator at Halifax, for which $20,000 is asked, I may say that this land is close by the deep water terminus in the centre of the north part of the city. We had some reason to believe that this property was about to be purchased and a costly build-i ing to be placed upon it. Then, if in a short time we should require that ground, we would have to buy it with the buildings added, and we thought that as the buildings now on it are of a very poor character, we should buy it now. It was thought wise by the railway authorities to purchase the land. We have not yet purchased it, because the parties who own it are not willing to accept the price we offer, and we may be obliged! to go into the Exchequer Court.	We-have made an offer which they
do not wish to accept. I may say that in these purchases .of property we do not wish to go into the Exchequer Court, because it is an expensive proceeding.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What portion of these works are now under contract or under con-* struction ?	.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: There is some costly work to be done on one of the old wharfs, and it is proposed to build some new wharfs further north. It is proposed) also to buy some land outside the city to put up an engine-house. I think that only a small amount of work has yet been under-

taken; in fact, it is a subject of criticism that they have not done more with it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it intended to do these works and to put up these buildings by tender, or does the government propose to do the work by any other means ?


The MINISTER OP FINANCE.: Works of this character are usually done by tender.
Mr. SPItOULE. I think the minister has an idea whether he will or will not do this work by tender, and his answer appears to me to be an evasive answer.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It was not intended to be an evasive one ; I have no intention of doing it otherwise than by tender, but at the same time if any reason should arise why, in my judgment, or in the judgment of the government, it appears better that it should be done otherwise, I would wish to be free.


Mr. LEFURGE  Y.@: Have tenders been asked for any part of it yet ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: For the Halifax work tenders have been asked for creosoted piles for one of the wharfs ; that is the only work that has yet been started. Owing to the difficulty of obtaining the land the work has been delayed.
Increased accommodation at Pictou, $29,200.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We had an appropriation last year for this work of $70,000, and the work in that case also, owing to some difficulty in obtaining the land has been delayed, and we have not been able to make as much progress as we expected. The actual expenditure out of that vote has been $12,155.10, so that the unexpended balance at the close of the year which is to be revoted, is $57,884,490. This sum of $57,884, carried over from last year with $40,355, which we shall have to add, makes a total of $98,200, which Is the amount that we expect to be authorized to expend in Pictou this year. Of this we are taking $30,500 in the main estimates, and we shall have to ask in the supplementary estimates for the balance of $61,700. This $98,200 is made up as follows : Land, $27,000 ; piles and trestles, $10,000; new station, $30,000. There are also various smaller Items, making up the total of $98,200. Pictou is the point at which a large part of the business with Prince Edward Island is carried on ; the station buildings are somewhat old and we are desirous of making considerable improvements. We have selected some land, but it has not yet been purchased, because the price asked is higher than we feel disposed to give, but we are now negotiating and hope to obtain the property at a lower price.
Improvements at Little Metis station and diverting public road, $3,200.


Hon. Mr. FIELDING.: 


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: When this item was before the committee the other night, I was asked to explain what portion of it went for land and what for the road, and other improvements. I find now that the estimated cost of the land is $300 and the cost of building the road $1,200, making $1,500. Then, there are the expenses of moving the station and tank and enlarging the station, which is estimated at $2,500. These items together make the $4,000 for which the vote is asked. Little Metis is the principal summer resort on the Intercolonial Railway, and is visited by a large number of people from various parts of the Dominion, particularly from Montreal and vicinity, and this improvement seems to be very necessary.
Prince Edward Island-to widen wharf and to provide coal sheds at Summerside, $1,600.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is proposed by this expenditure to increase the size of the coal shed so as to afford more shed room on the wharf. We made some expenditure last year upon the other side of the wharf, but this further expenditure is deemed necessary, especially for the accommodation of the coal trade.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Summerside railway wharf is the only place where goods can be landed for transit throughout the Island, and there is only one side of the wharf at which a vessel can get accommodation. At a meeting of the maritime board of trade held recently this question was considered and the following resolution adopted :
That better facilities should be provided at the railway wharf at Summerside to accommodate the steamers landing freight for transportation over the Prince Edward Island Railway.
Most of the freight coming through Prince Edward Island from the west, is brought to Summerside, and it has to be stored in the warehouse before being shipped. There is also a very extensive shipment of goods from different points on the Island to the railway wharf. Increased accommodation is badly needed there. Only one steamer can lie at that wharf, and other steamers have to land their freight at private wharfs, so that the goods have to be trucked across the town at increased cost. I trust that both the wharf and warehouse accommodation will be improved there. I have seen the warehouse so overcrowded, that flour and other merchandise had to remain outside.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The improvements contemplated by this vote will I am sure be appreciated so far as they go. I shall give careful consideration to the representations made by the hon. gentleman.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: This work contemplates an improvement to the coal slied, and that is all right so far as it goes, but the other improvements are of great necessity.

Murray Harbour branch and Hillsborough bridge, $600,000.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: This is a large item, but as lion, gentlemen know, we have undertaken quite a costly work in the extension of the railway from Charlottetown to Murray harbour, inasmuch as a very expensive bridge has to be provided for. In the main estimates we ask for $750,000, a portion of which has already been voted, and we are asking the balance now. In the supplementary estimates we shall have to ask a further sum of $480,000, so that the expenditure which we expect to make on that work during the current year, including the bridge, will be $1,230,000. There was expended on this work up to the 30th June, $1,492,525.47, so that if we take the expenditure to the 30th of June, and the amount we shall have to ask for the current year, these sums make the cost of the work, as estimated up to the end of the current year, $2,795,113.19. The road is already constructed as far as Murray river, and it will take six miles more to carry it down to Murray harbour, which extension is included in the estimate which I have given for the year, and which will have to bo provided for in the supplementary estimates. There is also a wharf to be built at Murray harbour, where navigation is open four weeks earlier in the spring and four weeks later in the fall than at Murray river. AVe propose to carry the road down, as the Act contemplated, from Charlottetown to Murray harbour. The total expenditure for the whole work completed will be about $3,-000,000 in round numbers. The bridge is a very costly bridge.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: What is the tender for the bridge ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The tender is on schedule prices, and the estimated cost of the bridge is $1,494,097.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Is the estimated cost likely to be increased or decreased 7


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I do not think there will be any change which would increase the cost of the bridge. It was known from the beginning that it would be a very expensive undertaking. I may say in reply to a question put to me some time ago, that there is a contract between the Dominion and local governments, by which the local government is to contribute to the Dominion the sum of $9,750 per annum for this bridge, and the local government reserves the right to levy tolls on the highway portion of it, if they should see fit to do so.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: For how long are they to pay that ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is a permanent charge which is to be deducted from their subsidy, or any payment that may be due them.


William Stevens Fielding: 


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: On what basis is the schedule of prices for the building of the bridge arranged 7


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is the usual method of taking tenders for a work of that character.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I thought you said you could not give the exact cost of the bridge, because it was based on schedule prices ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: There is a lump sum for the superstructure, and the schedule price applies to the masonry, &c.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: How much has been expended on the bridge up to the present time ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The expenditure on the substructure and approaches up to the 30th June, 1903, is $733,101.99.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I understand that the work on the bridge lias not been proceeded with as rapidly as the government promised and that the contractor lias been very little on the ground, pushing the work, this year. When does the minister expect that the bridge will be finished and open for traffic V


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The work, like most large undertakings of the kind, has not gone on as rapidly as we might desire. The probable date of the completion of the substructure of the bridge is fixed at the 31st of December of this year, and the probable date of the completion of the superstructure at the 30th of June, 1904.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: You say the railway has been completed from Charlottetown to Murray river. How many miles would that be 7	'


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Forty-four miles to Murray river, and G1 miles further to Murray harbour, making 501 miles for the whole length.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: AAras this 44 miles tendered for ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yes, in the first instance ; it was awarded to a party who did not take it. It was then passed to the next tenderer. At a later stage the subsequent portion of the work was given to that contractor at the same rate as the tender price.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Who was the contractor ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Mr. Willard Kitchen.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Is he the contractor for the bridge 7


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: No; the contractor for the bridge is Mr. M. J. Haney.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: The 61 miles of railway was not contemplated at the time the contract for the 44 miles was let 7

[DOT] 12832


The MINISTER OP FINANCE.: No. The contract was let only to Murray river, and we propose to build the railway to Murray harbour.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Has the contract for the 6J miles been let ?
of the railroad, people who have some little idea of the construction of railroads, and they report that the culverts along the line from Charlottetown to Murray river are not fit to be under any railroad or tramroad, as they are not properly constructed.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: No.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Is it proposed to let it by tender V


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We have not given that any consideration. We have no intention to build it otherwise than by public tender; but if there are good reasons why we should not do that, I would like to hold myself free.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: What is the estimate for the wharf at Murray harbour ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The estimate is much larg<A' than I thought it should be, and I have been asking the engineers if it can be reduced. I have included in these figures an estimate for crib-work, which is to cost something over $00,000. It is a question whether we can reduce this figure. The place is very much exposed, and we may have to build a wharf there of a very substantial character, and the estimate for that is, I think, $09,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Do you charge the building of that wharf to the capital account of the Intercolonial Railway ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is there any distinction between building that wharf and building wharfs all over the county and charging them to harbours and rivers ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Wharfs built as part of the terminal facilities of the Intercolonial Railway are all considered to be part of the railway, and are charged to capital.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: What is the cost of this railway per mile ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is difficult to make an estimate of the cost of the railway per mile without the bridge. I do not think we have the figures in that form.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Is there any standard to which this road has to be built ? Is it to be built as well as the Grand Trunk Railway between Montreal and Toronto, apart from the double track ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: No. I think it will be as good as the railway from Charlottetown to Murray river. We like to have standards which the people can see. When the Canadian Pacific Railway was built, the standard fixed was some railway in the United States that the people of Canada knew nothing about. We want a standard which the people can see.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I have had several communications from people in the locality Mr. LEFURGEY. *


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am bound to take notice of what my hon. friend says, but I can only say that no such representations have reached me. Of course, the island railway is a narrow gauge road, and does not require to be built according to the standard of a larger road. But we do want good and substantial work ; that is what we are paying for, and if we are not getting it, there is something wrong. But the work is constructed under competent engineers, and I cannot think that they would accept work of the character my hon. friend describes.


Edward Cochrane: Why would it not be easy to arrive at a calculation of the cost of the railway per mile apart from the bridge ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I did not say it would be difficult to arrive at it. I said I did not happen to have the figures before me. The deputy minister informs me that it cost $21,500 per mile without the bridge.
Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) I was somewhat surprised at the statement made by my hon. friend from East Prince (Mr. Lefurgey), to the effect that the character of the road was so poor. My information is just the opposite.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 1 did not say the general character of the road. I said the culverts.


James Joseph Hughes: That is a part of the road and a very important part. It is very strange that if that is the case I have not heard anything about it. I live pretty near that part of the country. If the railway does not run through the district I represent, it runs close to it. As a matter of fact, I have been speaking to some railway men, who belong to the Prince Edward Island Railway and who would have no interest in misrepresenting the matter in any way.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: You do not suppose I would.
Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) No. But I do not know the men who gave my hon. friend the information. I do not mean to say for one moment that he would misrepresent ; but possibly the matter may have been misrepresented to him. The men I have been speaking to ou the subject are practical railway men, and they have told me that it is an excellent road, a much better one than the older part of the Prince Edward Island Railway was when it was built.


Edward Cochrane: Were they contractors?


James Joseph Hughes: No, and they have no interest whatever in the contractors. They are Prince Edward Islanders, who would be interested in having a good road.


John Dowsley Reid: Are they brakesmen ?


James Joseph Hughes: No ; they are men who have been engaged in the construction of railways.


John Dowsley Reid: Then they have been contractors ?


James Joseph Hughes: No, they have been employed with contractors in railway work. They have no interest at all in Mr. Kitchen's contract, not the slightest, no more than my hon. friend.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: The information came to me in several communications, and I have given it to you as I got it. I only call the attention of the minister to it in order that it may be looked into. I would like to know how this amount of $9,750 which the provincial government is to pay has been arrived at ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am afraid I can hardly answer that question. It was originally fixed at a larger sum, in the earlier negotiations. The estimate for the bridge was less than was thought in the first negotiations, and this sum was fixed by Act of parliament in the year 1901 confirming the arrangement made with the government of Prince Edward Island,


Edward Cochrane: What are we to understand by a narrow gauge road ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The railway on the island is not the standard gauge, but three feet six.


Edward Cochrane: What is the lay of this country ? I always understood that it was level.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is not level, but there are no very high mountains. It is a rolling country.


Edward Hackett: I am satisfied with the plan of the hon. minister with regard to the substructure of the bridge. But how will the superstructure be carried on ? Are we to have some of the old bridges on the Intercolonial taken across and placed as a superstructure on that work ? The people of the island, according to the statement of the hon. gentleman, are paying $9,750 per year for this accommodation.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Mr. Haney's contract is for the substructure, $1,218,000. The superstructure represents $275,000. We are not to have any played-out bridges, but some good, strong bridges, suitable for the island, are to be taken from the Intercolonial.


Edward Hackett: From what part of the Intercolonial are those bridges coming ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: From the Miramiehi river.


Edward Hackett: The south-west or northwest branches ?	.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The chief engineer thinks south-west, but not very positive.


Edward Hackett: What is their age ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: They were built in 1872.


Edward Hackett: Did not the hon. min-' ister a few days ago give a bridge of the same age to be used as a traffic bridge between Quebec and the province of New Brunswick, without charging anything at all for it ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We are not charging this to the island.


Edward Hackett: Yes, you are compelling the province to pay $9,750 per year for this superstructure, where there shall be a carriage way alongside, and I think that it is strange that a present should be made to the rich province of Quebec and the province of New Brunswick, while you insist upon Prince Edward Island paying the last farthing.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think, in view of those large figures, that my hon. friend will hardly get a great deal of sympathy when he complains that the island is badly treated. Over the Restigouche there was a bridge for which we had no use. If we could have used it on any other part of the government system, we would have done so, but there was no place for which it was adapted, so that it was practically worthless. We offer it to the provinces of New Brunswick and Quebec as our contribution for an iron bridge between the two provinces, but the municipalities or the provinces will have to provide considerable expenditure in the making of that bridge. We occasionally grant . sums for interprovincial bridges, and we deal with new Brunswick and Quebec as we deal with other provinces between which there are interprovincial bridges.


Edward Hackett: I am not objecting at all to what is being done at Restigouche, but I object that, while the provinces of New Brunswick and Quebec are dealt with in one way, Prince Edward Island is dealt with differently. What doles the acting minister intend doing in connection with the building of a railway station at Charlottetown ? That has been in discussion for many years, and the present railway station is not at all fitted for its purpose. Does the hon. minister intend now to build a proper railway station in Charlottetown ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We expect to provide for some improvements in Charlottetown in the supplementaries.


Edward Cochrane: What is the cost per mile of that road ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: $21,500 per mile. It is a narrow gauge road through a hilly country, with a considerable amount of rock.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If the bridge cost a million and a half and the whole expenditure was $2,795,000, the railway, being 45 miles in length, must have cost $28,000 a mile.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That would include the bridge.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is 50i miles over the whole line-44 miles to Murray river and 6J miles from Murray river to Murray harbour.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That would make it about $28,000 a mile.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I would like to ask the acting Minister of Railways and Canals if he has had any communication from any source, inside or outside this House, with regard to a line to Elmira ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I have had communication verbally and, I think, in writing-at any rate, I know that a desire has been expressed for one or two extensions. But I do not remember the name of Elmira. Perhaps the bon. gentleman (Mr. Lefurgey) has better information than I have.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Among the lines very much needed in Prince Edward Island is one to Elmira. I think my hon. friend from King's (Mr. Hughes) will explain that point somewhat fully. I have here a resolution passed by a public meeting held on the 27th, of February, at which speeches were made by Messrs. John McLean, M. L. A., J. J. Hughes, M.P., and others. And the following resolution was passed :	.
Whereas a survey for a branch line of railway was made in the year 1882 by the then government of Canada ; and whereas
The government of 1895 promised to construct several branch railways on Prince Edward Island, among which was the Elmira branch ; and
Whereas a delegation from Elmira had a promise from Sir L. H. Davies when Minister of Marine and Fisheries that upon the completion of the Murray Harbour Railway he would use his influence with the Minister of Railways to cause a survey to be made and estimates prepared and submitted to parliament for the construction of a branch line to Elmira ; and whereas
Since that time largely increased expenditures for railways and other public works have been made in nearly every part of the Dominion ;
Therefore resolved that the residents of East Point and vicinity, in meeting assembled, Mr. HACKETT.
strongly urge upon the government the necessity of commencing this important work at an early date, and also request our representatives in parliament to press this matter upon the Minister of Railways during the coming session.
It seems to me very strange that the acting Minister of Railways and Canals had not heard fully of this branch line to Elmira, seeing that the hon. member for King's was one of the prominent speakers on this occasion. But if the hon. gentleman has not spoken of it, I wish it to be borne in on the hon. minister on this occasion that there are other places in Prince Edward Island that need railway facilities; and, while I do not know so much about this railway to Elmira, I have on several occasions brought to the notice of the government the promise that was made to the people of Prince Edward Island that a brunch line was to be constructed from North Wiltshire to Crapaud. On two occasions, I think, petitions were presented to this House largely signed, by persons irrespective of politics, for branch lines through that thriving settlement. It would run through a country from 15 to 20 miles away from railway communications, and would be of great service to the people there. There are also several much shorter lines in the western part of the province to which, I think, the attention of the government has been called on several occasions. I think we have the right to expect some promise or some indication of wbat the government's intentions are as to these branch lines.
Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) My hon. friend from East Prince (Mr. Lefurgey), speaking of the branch line to Elmira, said he did not know much about it I am quite convinced of that fact. He does not know much about it, or he would not have mentioned it. I did not intend to make any remarks about this matter, and would not but for the ill-advised statements of the member for East Prince. I should be sorry to refer to any matters in the hon. gentleman's district while he is a member of the House and present. I take it that he is quite able to take care of his own district, and I think that I am able tol take care of the part of Prince Edward Island which I represent. The facts are, that while the hon. gentleman's friends were in power a survey was made from Harmony, near Souris, to Elmira, just on the eve of an election. But when the election was over nothing further was done. And so the people were deceived. In fact, they were deceived twice by running a survey over that part of the country. After the first survey the stakes were allowed to rot, and when the next survey was made they were not to be found. As a supporter of the government, I would not ask the government to do anything of that kind. Tlie hon. gentleman has referred to a meeting

at Elmira, or rather at Lakeville, near Elmira. If he has a true report of that meeting, he will find that I stated that, until the road to Murray harbour was completed,
I would not take this matter up, as I thought the government was doing fairly well for Prince Edward Island in the matter of building railways. And I think so still. I ha#e told the people that I would not bring this up as an election dodge, nor would I bring it up until the Murray harbour road was completed. But, when that road is built, I shall bring this to the attention of the government upon its merits as a fair and reasonable commercial proposition. I think my hon. friend (Mr. Lefurgey) was ill-advised when he brought this matter up. I did not intend to refer to these old subjects, but I could not avoid it in view of the fact that his party, when in power, deliberately twice deceived the people of the eastern part of King's county, in the hope of affecting an election. I would not ask the government to do anything of that kind, and if I did ask them, I do not think they would consent.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I am sorry the hon. member for King's (Mr. Hughes) got so excited over this matter.
Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) I am not excited, but I have stated some facts that are not palatable to the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lefurgey).


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I have brought this matter up on several occasions, and intend1 to bring it up again until I get some satisfaction as to the intentions of the government with regard to these lines. The hon. member (Mr. Hughes, King's) may be very well satisfied with the work going on in the eastern part of the province, where they are getting fifty miles of railway built, while the people of the western section have none. He may well be quiet for a year or two. I have simply taken occasion to remind the government of a promise made by Sir Louis Davies that on the completion of the road now under construction, the road to Elmira would be looked after. But merely because one road is under construction, is that any reason why the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hughes, King's) should not press his claims on the government. Is he too bashful ? Well, I can tell him that, while I am in this House I consider myself as a representative not only of my own district, but of his district as well, which is in an integral part of the Dominion, and I am a representative of the Dominion. I do not intend to keep quiet, even though the hon. gentleman does get excited; and if he does not see St to ask for more railway communication for the eastern part of the island, I shall do so myself.


Edward Hackett: Can the minister say that a new station will be built in Charlottetown within a year ?
402$


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I will ask my hon. friend to be patient, because the supplementary estimates will be down to morrow. I cannot promise that they will satisfy him absolutely, but they will be encouraging.


Edward Hackett: There is another matter I desire to call to the attention of the minister, and that is the construction of a new station at Alberton, in the county of West Prince. The station there is really an old ramshackle, one of the first erected on the Island, over thirty years ago.


Mr. CAMPBELL.: Leave something for Ontario.


Edward Hackett: You are asking us to vote away over $100,000,000 for building a railway from Moncton to Winnipeg.


Archibald Campbell: Do you have to pay for it ?


Edward Hackett: We have to pay our proportion of it, and we insist upon receiving our share of the public moneys of the Dominion of Canada. Now might I ask the minister again if he intends to build this station at Alberton, in the county of West Prince, within a short time ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think my hon. friend will have to have some faith and not cross examine us too closely. I will not say ' wait till you see us next year,' but wait till you see the supplemen-taries.


Edward Hackett: There is another matter I desire to bring to the attention of the minister, and that is the building of a branch line of railway from O'Leary Station to the west shore of Prince Edward Island. There have been petitions sent asking for it, and many meetings held advocating it. The people are desirous of having this branch line constructed. While my hon. friend from West York (Mr. Campbell) appears to be very indignant because we insist upon having our rights in the expenditure of public money, he is quite willing to vote away a hundred million dollars of the public money, while he would not give us a hundred thousand dollars in the province of Prince Edward Island to complete out-railway system. I hope the minister will see his way clear to do something in connection with a branch from O'Leary to the west shore of Prince Edward Island.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am sorry to hear that my hon. friend from West York is not willing to give Prince Edward Island a hundred thousand dollars, because I am asking my hon. friend from West York to vote $1,230,000 for Prince Edward Island in this one item alone.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How many tenders did you receive for the substructure of this bridge, and who was the lowest tenderer V

12S40


Tlie MINISTER OF FINANCE.: This contract was let to Mr. Haney on the 25th of August, 1900. We expect the bridge will be finished at the end of the calendar year, and we hope the whole work will be finished by the 30th of June, 1904.
Mr. SPItOULE. Will the minister bring down the information regarding this contract, the parties tendering and the amount of each tender ?


John Dowsley Reid: Is tills superstructure to cost $275,000 over and above the bridges that are taken off the Intercolonial Railway ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: No, a value will be put upon the bridges and credited to the Intercolonial account. The $275,000 will include the price which will be paid to the Intercolonial and also the cost of erection.


Edward Hackett: The minister brushed aside the remarks I made very easily. But he must remember this first, that while we are voting this large amount for the construction of this bridge, the government and people of Prince Edward Island are bound to pay $9,750 in interest upon that sum. Now if you are voting a million dollars or so, you are obliging the people to contribute that much. I shall make no apology for bringing up the matter in this House.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: With regard to the people of Prince Edward Island paying this sum of money, I do not wish the hon. gentleman to offer an apology, but unintentionally he has omitted an important fact. This bridge is being constructed for two purposes, partly for a railway bridge and partly for a highway bridge. The Dominion of Canada is paying every copper of the cost so far as it relates to the railway, and the local government are contributing a share towards the bridge in consideration of the fact that it provides a highway for them, and It is their business to provide a highway.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What valuation do you put on these bridges that are taken from over the Miramichi river ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The value placed on the bridges for the purpose of being credited in the Intercolonial Railway accounts is $64,000. The remaining portion of the value placed on the bridges represents the cost of transportation and erection.


Edward Hackett: Will the bridges be sufficient to cover the distance between Southport and Charlottetown ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yes, the bridges will be quite sufficient for the purpose.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 


Edward Hackett: In addition to that you have to. provide the carriage way by the side of the bridge ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That is included in the figures I gave.
Increased accommodation at Kensington, $500.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE, One-fifth of this has already been voted.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: This is for increased accommodation at Kensington. I have a letter from one of the chief business men in Kensington in regard to these improvements and for the benefit of the acting Minister of Railways and Canals I wish to read this in order to give him an idea of what is required there. He says :
A memorial asking for a new station building here was sent to Mr. Blair a few days ago from the committee appointed at a meeting of the patrons of the station here held on October last. And since then we see that $1,000 is in the estimates for repairs of the old one presumably by Mr. Sharpe's plan. Now, ow ng to increased business, both freight and passenger lately, and especially as it is here the summer tourists for Malpeque and New London take and leave the train, decent and if possible attractive accommodation should be had. At present it is the very reverse. The change proposed by Mr. Sharpe would be very little better, whilst it would stand in the way of getting a new building for some time. For instance, he proposed taking a portion of the old freight-shed (ceiling 8 feet 6 inches), under a flat roof and saturated with oil, petroleum and other things and converting it into a ladies' waiting room, and all his other changes according to that. We had some differences with Mr. Sharpe and now he is getting square with us. He could not say but the old building as you know, with only one waiting-room, where every class of persons have to wait for hours at night waiting for belated trains as is very common, yes, from, wealthy, refined Americans and other tourists down to Indians and drunken toughs, is not fit for use. But he wants to patch it up in any shape and punish the public for the criticism offered to him about the present state of affairs.
Now, this section is one of the principal shipping points between Charlottetown and Summerside, possibly the largest town between these two points, and it is a place of considerable commercial importance, as the writer slates here it is a point where a great many tourists coming to Prince Edward Island leave and take the trains to go to the watering places and they have had but tlie one station where Indians, ladies and all congregate to wait for trains which at this point are necessarily late leaving Summerside and arriving through from Charlottetown. When $1,000 is being spent to make repairs in this station it seems to me that at a point so central as this the government might very well spend a little more, a thousand or two, whatever is necessary and build a suitable station. I merely 1 want to call the attention of the minister to

this before any expenditure is made upon it in order that he may have an opportunity to investigate. I wish also to say that their freight accommodation and the plut-form arrangements for passengers are very deficient and require some attention. Before sitting down I would also wish to put in a word for the improvements at Charlottetown and to say that I am entirely in accord with what Mr. Haekett said that the station is an old and dilapidated affair and the people there certainly need a new station. They also need increased accommodation along their water-front for the different private wharfs. There is no way of- getting at the freight in these places unless you cart it straight across the town to Charlottetown station.
To improve the water service, $19,200.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: At present they use wells on the Prince Edward Island Railway, and we propose to place upon the system a modern method of supplying the railway with water from tanks.
To provide additional accommodation at Kin-kora, $640.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Is it intended to make this a booking station ? Unless it is made a booking station the residents of that section of the country extending from Emerald and Albany to Kinkora, will not be able to [DOT] get their goods without sending their money to Emerald. Trains pass this station late at night and early in the morning, and the booking station is an absolute necessity.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We propose to erect a building forty feet by twenty feet, in which there will be a waiting room and baggage room. The business at the station is not very great, and I think probably it will have to be a flag station for the present.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: The business of the station cannot be great when you do not afford accommodation.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: At all events this is a step in the right direction.


Edward Hackett: ICinkora is a very prominent point on the line from Emerald to Cape Traverse, and I would urge the minister to have a regular booking station and telegraph office there.
New stations at Northam and Richmond, $800.


Edward Hackett: Will these buildings be erected before the winter V


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We will try. I cannot promise.


Edward Hackett: Will these stations be similar to the stations at Elmsdale and Conway, and have a fire and caretaker, without being regular booking stations ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The station will be similar to that at Kinkora.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We have now passed the railway estimates, and as it is after twelve o'clock, we should adjourn.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think the request is reasonable.
Some resolutions reported.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE moved the adjournment of the House.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What business will be taken up to-morrow ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The orders are so reduced in number now, that it is very easy to make a selection. We might take up some Bills which have already been discussed, and we will perhaps go on with supply. That is as definite as I can state at present. If we go on with supply we will proceed from the point at which we left off.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House adjourned at 12.25 a.m. Thursday.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, October 1, 1903.