1903-06-04

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 194) respecting infectious or contagious diseases affecting animals.-Hon. Mr. Fisher.


Mr. BELL asked :: 1.	Of the twenty-four instances in which con-cilators have been appointed for the settlement of labour disputes, under ' The Conciliation Act, 1900,' in how many cases has a settlement of the dispute been arrived at as the result of the appointment of such conciliators ?
2.	In the case of such settlement, if any, in how many instances has the settlement sustained the claims of the employees ? (b) In how many instances has the settlement sustained the claims of the employers ?
3.	Of such twenty-four conciliators, how many have been officials of the Labour Department ?
4.	In the event of any settlements of disputes having resulted from the appointment of conciliators, why has not a memorandum of the terms of each settlement been Sled with the Minister of Labour, as suhselctton three of section four of the Conciliation Act requires ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Sir William Muloek) :: 1.	There have been fifteen instances of the settlement of labour disputes by a conciliator, under the provisions of the Conciliation Act, 1900. Two of these were cases of strikes averted as the result of the appointment of a conciliator under the Act. There was in addition, one case in which, the intervention of the department having been requested by one of the parties to a threatened strike, negotiations were subsequently suspended at the request of the same party, and the matter in dispute left for final adjustment to the parties immediately interested.
2.	In the case of the fifteen settlements referred to, three have been in favour of the emplovers, five in favour of the eni-


Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).: ployees, and seven the result of compromises and mutual concessions. Two of the strikes in question arose purely out of misunderstandings and were settled by explanations of the real situation.
3.	With the exception of the cases in which the Minister of Labour acted as conciliator, the conciliator appointed under the Act has invariably been an officer of the Labour Department.
4.	The cases of conciliation effected under the Conciliation Act have not been effected through the medium of boards of conciliation, or of representatives of the different parties, as contemplated in subsection 3, of section 4, but have been effected through the instrumentality of officers of the department, and in each case the settlement has been announced in the next issue of the ' Labour Gazette.'


CENSUS-RELIGIOUS CLASSIFICATION OF PEOPLE OF CARLETON AND VICTORIA, N.B.
Mr. HALE asked :: 1.	Has the attention of the census commissioner been called to alleged errors in the religious classification of the people of the counties of Carleton and Victoria, N.B., especially of the free Baptists ?
2.	Has the commissioner asked the enumerators. or any of them, in the counties of Carleton and Victoria, N.B., to revise their returns, with the view of the correction of errors in the religious classification ?
3.	Was such revision made, and what report did the enumerators of the counties of Carleton and Victoria make to the commissioner ?
4.	Has the commissioner corrected his compilation of the religions of the people of the counties of Carleton and Victoria, according to the corrections made by the enumerators ? If so. what changes have been made in the totals of the several denominations in those counties ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE (Hon. Sydney Fisher) :: 1.	The attention of the census commissioner has been called to alleged errors in the religious classification of the people of New Brunswick, with especial reference to Free Baptists, but not in particular to the counties of Carleton and Victoria.
2.	The enumerators of Carleton county have been asked to revise their returns.
3.	The enumerators of Carleton county have reported that the religions of the people were entered on the schedule, exactly according to the information given to them by the people at the time of census taking ; but that when the revision was made during the present year, they were informed of cases in which persons entered on the schedules as belonging to one particular sect of Baptists, or as Baptists simply, belonged or were attached to some other sect of the same denomination. The compilation was made according to the entries in the schedules, the correctness of which has been attested by the oaths of the enumerators.

4.	The tables were published before the revision in Carleton county was begun, and no changes have been made in the totals of the several denominations.



CENSUS-RELIGIOUS CLASSIFICATION OF PEOPLE OF SUNBURY AND QUEEN'S, N.B.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. WILMOT-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
1.	Has the attention of the Census Department been called to alleged errors in the religious classification of the people of the counties of Sunbury and Queen's, N.B., especially of the Free Bapitist denomination ?
2.	Has the commissioner directed the enumerators, or any of them, in the foregoing counties, to revise their returns, with a view to the correction of errors in the religious classification, if any ?
3.	If so, what report did the above enumerators make to the commissioner ; and will that officer be directed to correct the classification of the religions of the people in the above counties ?
The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE (Hon. Sydney Fisher).: :
1.	No, except generally for the whole province.
2.	Yes, concerning persons who were recorded as ' C. Baptists,' whose identical sect was in doubt.
3.	The revision showed that some persons so described were Calvinistic Baptists, and that others were Christian Baptists, and the corrections were made for the first volume of the Census Report, the Christian Baptists being counted as Free Baptists, and the Calvinistic Baptists as Baptists.
STENOGRAPHERS IN YUKON TERRITORIES. Mr. BENNETT asked :
1.	Has Mr. J. A. Valiquette been appointed stenographer for the Territorial Court of the Yukon ?
2.	Has he also been appointed private secretary to Judge Dugas ?
3.	If so, is the government paying him the same salary as the other official stenographer ?
4.	Is it the intention of the government to provide each of the three Yukon Judges with a private secretary ?
5.	Has the government received any intimation that the time of the court stenographers is not fully required in Their official duty?
The MINISTER OF JUSTICE (Hon.
Charles Fitzpatrick.)
1.	Yes, in place of Mr. Shepard, transferred to Gold Commissioners' office.
2.	No.
3.	Yes.
4.	No.
5.	No.



POST OFFICE EMPLOYEES-HOLIDAYS.

Mr. MONK asked :: 1.	How many letter carriers and post office employees, in Montreal, Toronto, Hamilton and Quebec, have been deprived of their holidays in the years 1896, 1901 and 1902.
12G4
2.	Is it the intention of the Postmaster General to grant the usual holiday to all men employed in the post offices of the above cities this year ?
3.	Can such a holiday be given to the Montreal post office employees in the present condition of that office ?
The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Sir William Mulock.)
1.	None so far as the Post Office Department knows.
2.	Yes.
3.	Yes.



MONTREAL LONGSHOREMEN'S STRIKE-PAYMENT OF MILITIA.

Mr. MONK asked :: 1.	Is the government aware that the city council of Montreal has unanimously adopted the following resolution :
1 Whereas the harbour of Montreal is recognized as the national port of Canada. Whereas the recent longshoremen's strike affected the trade and commerce of the Dominion of Canada. Whereas the Militia Act stipulates, in connection with such an emergency, that the pay of the force requisitioned may be advanced out of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada :	Be it resolved, that the Dominion government be humbly requested to pay the militia employed on the property of the harbour of Montreal during the said longshoremen's strike.'
This was carried unanimously.
2.	Is it the intention of the government to relieve the ratepayers of the city of Montreal from the payment of the cost of calling out the militia at the time of said strike ?
3.	What is the total amount of said cost ?
4.	Will the government treat the ratepayers of Montreal as well as it has treated the ratepayers of the town of Valleyfield ?


The MINISTER OF MILITIA AND DEFENCE. (Hon. Sir Frederick Borden).: 1.	The government is aware that the city council of the city of Montreal has adopted the resolution set out in the question, but it is not aware whether it was adopted unanimously or not.
2.	Under the provisions of the Militia Act the government has no power to do so.
3.	$18,850.42.
4.	The government has no power to discriminate as between ratepayers of the different communities.



NORTH-WEST LANDS-SCHOOL TAXATION.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. OLIVER-by Mr. McCreary-asked :
Are Canadian Pacific Railway lands in the North-west now subject to school taxation, as a result of the recent legal decision by the Manitoba courts ?
The MINISTER OF JUSTICE (Hon. diaries Fitzpatrick).: The government is so advised.



P-E.I.-WINTER. COMMUNICATION.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LEFURGEY-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
1. Is the government aware that the winter steamship ' Stanley ' is in such a condition as
[Stage Direction]
to render her unfit to perform the winter service between Prince Edward Island and the mainland ?
2.	Has it been reported to the government that the hull of the ship has been weakened and plates bent and indented by contact with the ice, greatly impairing her usefulness as an ic6 steamer ?
3.	Is it the intention to send SS. ' Stanley ' to a first class shipyard in Great Britain during the present summer for repairs ? If not. Why not ?
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Mr. Prefontaine).: 1.	The government is not aware that the steamship ' Stanley ' is in such a condition as to render her unfit to perform the winter service between Prince Edward Island and the Mainland.
2.	It has not been ofimially reported to the department that the hull of the ship has been weakened. There are some indentations in the plates, which must result from a service of that nature, but they are not sufficient to impair the usefulness of the ship. These indentations will be removed where possible and new plates placed where necessary.
3.	No, as work can he done here.



FAST ATLANTIC SERVICE.

Robert Laird Borden: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I wish to ask whether the Minister of Trade and Commerce is prepared to make an announcement with regard to the Fast Atlantic Service.


The MINISTER OF TRADE AND COMMERCE (Rt. Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright).: I hope, to-morrow.



ELECTRIC LIGHT INSPECTION.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE (Hon. M. E. Bernier) moved second reading of Bill (No. 187) to amend the Electric Light Inspection Act. He said : This amendment is simply to provide for the recovery of penalties from corporations when corporations are owners of electric plants.
Motion agreed to, Bill read the second time, considered in committee, read the third time, and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 186) to amend the Inland Revenue Act, read the second time, and House went into committee thereon.
On section 1,
The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: The change is in making the duties payable on the first instead of the sixth of the month. All articles produced by manufacture are required to be either warehoused or entered for duty at the close of each month. Any article produced during tin;


Mr. LEFURGEY.: month, if not placed in warehouse, was allowed to be held by the manufacturer until the sixth of the following month before the duty was collectable. At the present time very little goods are so held over, and in order that the accounts of the different divisions might be closed at an earlier date, the payment of duty is fixed the first day following the close of each month.
On section 3,


Mr. MONK.: Why is there a proviso that this subsection shall apply to all transactions subsequent to the 1st of July, 1902? Are there any questions in abeyance in connection with that ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: The change is owing to the fact that it has been determined that the quantity of fusel oil or other refuse removed from spirits produced from molasses is greater than that found in spirits produced from gram. Grain spirit is left at 3 per cent, and molasses spirit fixed at 4 per cent. The provision is made retroactive so as to cover the operations of the current fiscal year, and thus enable the manufacturers to take advantage of this law.
On section 4,


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: The only change is providing for the payment of the duty on the first instead of the sixth of the month, and is rendered necessary by the change in section 1.
On section 5,
The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE The only change is to make it clear that packages of cut tobacco weighing one pound do not require to have the gross, tare and net weight marked thereon, and to permit the removal of cut tobacco from one manu-factorv to another as raw material for the purpose of blending or further treatment before being packed and placed on the market. In fact, the only change is with regard to cut tobacco.
I wish to move the following as an additional clause :
That subsection three of section 241 of this Act as enacted by section 11 of 52 Vic., chapter 15, be repealed and the following substituted m
lieu thereof :-	_	, ,
3 When it is ascertained by the quarterly stock-taking that the standard of production established by or under this Act has not been reached by any bonded manufacturer, the duty on the quantity of spirits equivalent to the deficiency so determined shall become due and payable within one day of the close of each quarter, except that in cases where a deficiency has been found, and where the Minister of Inland Revenue, after a proper inquiry, is satisfied that such failure to reach the established standard was not due to any fraudulent dealings by the manufacturer, the quarter iu which the deficiency arose and the one immediately following may, for the purpose of computing the standard of production, be merged and dealt with as one period. The provisions of this section shall apply to all transactions subsequent to the first day of July, 1902.

The reasons for this addition are the following :	In many bonded vinegar manufactories, the standard of production (100 proof gallons of vinegar from each twenty-five proof gallons of spirits used) is not reached owing to the generators becoming defective and incapable of properly converting the alcohol into vinegar. In consequence manufacturers, at times when it was impossible for them to produce the required standard of production, have been compelled to pay an assessment to bring the production up to the standard fixed by the department. It is felt that, in cases where the cause for such deficiency in production is found to be beyond the control of the manufacturer, and not due to any fraudulent practices, the privilege should be granted of merging two quarterly periods into one. In the past the department merged one quarter with another, extending over three or four quarters : but a year ago we were advised that we had no authority to do this, though it had been the practice for many years, perhaps twenty years or over, and this provision is to limit the time to six months.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ACT.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 188) to amend the Weights and Measures Act, read the second time, and House went into committee thereon.
On section 1,
The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE iHon. M. E. Bernier). This section is new and exempts postal scales of a limited capacity from the provisions of the Act respecting inspection. Those small scales are used only to determine approximately the amount of postage payable upon letters or other articles sent through the mail. The true amount of postage is determined by the post office authorities. These scales are in many cases exceedingly small and of frail construction, and their inspection, which is now required by law, is not essential in the public interest, as the legal determination of the weight upon which postage has to be based is ascertained by the officials of the Post Office Department.
Mr. MeCREARY. I would ask the hon. minister to defer action until some members from the west are present who are aware of t'ne particulars. I think that the hon. members for Marquette and Macdonald wish to make a few remarks and have some suggestions to offer. I am not thoroughly acquainted with the practical working of the Bill myself. I notice that the hon. member for Lisgar is absent as well. I think it would be well to allow- this Bill to stand over until another day. I move that the committee rise and report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Motion agreed to, and progress reported.

[Stage Direction]
House went into committee on Bill (No. 174) to amend the Customs Act.-The Minister of Customs.
The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. William Paterson).: This is a Bill to define what is meant by the surtax, which is a new expression. It is not a Bill imposing the surtax, but a definition of what the surtax means.
On section 3, subsections 1 and 2,
The subsection added to section 4 of the Customs.Act by section 2 of chapter 22 of the statutes of 1895, is repealed and the following are substituted therefor :-
There shall be a Board of Customs, which shall consist of the commissioner of customs, or any officer for the time being acting a.s such, who shall he the chairman of the board, and such duly qualified officers of customs as the Governor in Council from time to time appoints; and the said board shall have such powers and perform such duties as are assigned to it by any Act of the parliament of Canada or by the Governor in Council ; and three members of the board shall form a quorum and be competent to transact the business of the board at any meeting thereof, whether regular or special, called by the chairman, of which quorum one member shall be either the commissioner of customs or the officer for the time being acting as commissioner of customs.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Would the minister please explain the additional expense that this organization will throw upon the country ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: So far as the alteration of the Board of Customs is concerned, It will entail no extra expense-perhaps lessen it. At present the Board of Customs is composed of an officer in Victoria, an officer in Halifax and officers in other outlying ports. The repeal of the existing section and the provision that there shall be a board, the members of which shall be nominated by the Governor in Council, the number of whom can be added to if the necessity arises, will enable us to summon meetings of the board more rapidly and at less expense. With reference to the subsection as to the assistant commissioner, that w-ill add $2,800 to the expense.
On section 3, subsection 3,
There shall he an assistant commissioner of customs, appointed by the Governor in Council, who shall hold office during pleasure, and shall have such powers and perform such duties as are assigned to him by the Governor in Council. or by the Minister of Customs.


Mr. SPROULE.: Has the hon. minister selected the assistant commissioner*?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes, Mr. John Bain.


Robert Laird Borden: Did tile lion, minister give the reasons for the appointment of an additional member of the staff

at the time when the resolutions were passed in committee ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Borden, Halifax) may recollect that the subject was debated when the vote for the salary of the assistant commissioner came up as one of the items in the estimates for my department. After discussion, the committee passed the vote. The appointment is made necessary by the growing work of the department. For many years there was an assistant commissioner, but, when. Mr. Watters left the service, no successor to him in the office was appointed.


Mr. TAYLOR.: When did Mr. Bain come into the service ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: In 1890.


George Taylor: Is he a first class clerk ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes.


Mr. INGRAM.: He is secretary to the minister, is he not ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes.


Andrew B. Ingram: This will necessitate the appointment of a private secretary to take Mr. Bain's place ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I am not, so far as I remember, taking a vote for any additional help.


Andrew B. Ingram: Will Mr. Bain fill both positions of deputy commissioner and private secretary 1	*


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: He may not be able to give the time to the duties of private secretary, as he will be under the direction of the commissioner, and will be pretty fully occupied with his duties as assistant commissioner. Much of the business for which I have to avail myself of a private secretary is of a public nature. So, I think, there will be no difficulty in getting on without increasing the staff.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it likely that Mr. Bain, considering the time that he has been in the service, will be as efficient an officer for this position as some member of the staff who has been longer engaged in the work V


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Mr. Bain has been a very efficient officer. I have no doubt that he will worthily discharge the duties of assistant commissioner.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: He has only been in the office a few years, and I presume he came in a new man. Then, again, does this not involve an injustice to others who have been in the department for a longer time and who, from length of faithful service, are entitled to promotion, as well as likely to be more efficient than Mr. Bain could have become in the time he has beeu in the office ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I think there is no difficulty of that kind. There Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).
is no one in the department who has any feeling about that-none that I am aware of.
The Customs Act is amended by inserting the following section immediately after section 4:-
The Minister of Customs may, from time to time, authorize the employment of such temporary or acting officers of customs in the second or outside division of the Customs Department as are required to carry on the work of the department ; but no such officer so employed shall receive a higher salary than he would be allowed if appointed permanently to the same rank or class ; nor shall any such salary be paid until voted by parliament.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I do not think that section really necessary. It has been the practice of the department since before I came into it to employ men in this way-the department could not be worked otherwise. An officer dies suddenly and his place must be filled. A temporary appointment like this is made. But, when Mr. Newcombe,. the Deputy Minister of Justice was looking over the Act, he thought that possibly it would be well to provide definitely in this way so that there could be no possibility of doubt.


Mr. CLANCY.: What is meant by saying that ' no such officer so employed shall receive a higher salary than he would be allowed if appointed permanently to the same rank and class ; nor shall any such salary be paid until voted by parliament ? ' As I understand it, there are no classes in the outside service. This, then, compares the position of a temporary appointee with a position that does not exist ? Perhaps the hon. minister will explain.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: There are ranks in the outside service-appraisers, chief clerks, clerks, landing waiters, tide waiters, &c.


James Clancy: How would their positions compare with the classes in the inside service ? For instance, does a chief clerk outside rank the same as a chief clerk in the inside service ? Surely not.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No.


James Clancy: How does the hon. minister reconcile that ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: It does not need reconciling. If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Clancy) will look at the Civil Service Act he will find the ranks or grades of the outside service of the Customs enumerated and a minimum and maximum salary fixed. The exact salary is not fixed, nor do these officers come within the class of those for whom the $50 annual advance is given-the inside service. So, if we appointed a landing waiter temporarily, he could not be paid a higher salary than if he were appointed landing waiter by Order in Council.


Mr. CLARKE.: Has the minister already power under the law to make these appointments ?
On section 4,


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: We think so, it has been done for years.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Then, what is the meaning of the clause in the Bill ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I explained that. There is a revision of the statutes taking place at the present time, and, in looking through the Customs Act the Deputy Minister of Justice, Mr. Newcombe, thought it would be as well that we should have the power stated here expressly. It is absolutely necessary for the working of the department.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I suppose this will be the finishing touch to the Civil Service Act ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No.


Edward Frederick Clarke: This will give it the coup de grace ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No, it will not affect it.


Edward Frederick Clarke: The hon. minister, under this, can appoint temporary officers and keep them there as temporary officers at his own pleasure, without it being necessary for them to pass any examination. Will that be the effect of this clause ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Then, what will become of the Civil Service Act ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes ; but they are appointed temporarily. We impress upon them the necessity of qualifying so as to be placed on the permanent staff. They are anxious to get on the permanent staff as soon as they can. For instance, where a collector dies it may be necessary to fill the vacancy at once at that port by some one who has not passed the civil service examination. We have to appoint a collector immediately, and there may be no meeting of the treasury board perhaps for weeks. In these cases we appoint them acting collectors, and as soon as we can we get their medical certificates, and at the first meeting of the treasury board they are made permanent.	.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Then these people need not pass the civil service examination, they may be appointed under the provision of this law ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes.


Edward Frederick Clarke: And they can remain in the service at the pleasure of the minister without passing the civil service examination ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: If then-services are required.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Then practically the Act is done away with.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No more than in the past.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Would it not be better to leave the custom that has prevailed heretofore ? Because if we pass this clause we will admit the principle that temporary officers may be employed contrary to the present law.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No, I would not say that.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Does not the minister interpret that clause as meaning that he may employ temporarily parties who have not submitted to the test of the civil service examination ? I know that has been done, it is being done now; but it would be a mistake to give it the sanction of the law. The minister himself said it was scarcely necessary to pass this law. But if he does pass it, he sanctions a complete departure from the existing law.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No, I would not say that. The Deputy Minister of Justice thinks it would be as well to have the practice put in this express language. It has been the practice of the department from the beginning, and it has been absolutely necessary to follow this practice to carry on the work.


Robert Laird Borden: The Minister of Customs said there were a number of so-called temporary officers in the service, some of whom might have been employed as long as twenty years continuously, and the reason they were not put upon the permanent staff of the department is that the time had passed by when they could very well take the civil service examination. There may be some force in his observations with regard to that, but does not this Act put that custom on a permanent basis ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No.


Robert Laird Borden: Will it not have that effect ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No.


Robert Laird Borden: It seems to me it will. Let us assume that we must continue these men who have been for a long time in the service, and who are not on the temporary staff, although to all intents and purposes they are permanent officers. Now, if the minister, in this clause, simply proposes to take power to appoint temporary officers of the department whose employment as such shall continue only for a limited period, it would be a different proposition, from that which is before us. But this provision is wide enough in effect to repeal the whole Civil Service Act so far as the hon. gentleman's department is concerned; because all he has to do is to appoint a man as a temporary officer, and he remains in the department receiving the salary, it may be up to the limit, as if he were a permanent officer. It puts upon a permanent basis that which is now only a custom, and is continued for

tlie reasons of expediency and necessity which the hon. gentleman mentions. If the provision were limited to the appointment for six months, or for such a period as would be reasonable, I could understand it; but I cannot understand the necessity of a provision having so wide a scope as til at which is presented to the House now.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: There are cases where we have to appoint them temporarily for the summer, when there may be a press of work. But there will not be the same danger that the hon. gentleman apprehends. Under the present law we can appoint any one in the place of a preventive officer and make him permanent at once; and the minimum and maximum figures that are fixed for the salaries would allow a very wide range. So there is no more danger than before, the department is getting at once more power than it has already, because we could appoint them permanently at once as preventive officers. But we do not wish to do^ that. We have to appoint them temporary at first, and then we urge upon them to pass the examination. But as I said, there is no more danger of wiping out tire Civil Service Act in doing this than under the present law, because all we would have to do would be to appoint them under that clause regarding the appointment of preventive officers and assign them to any duties we liked.


Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.).: After over fourteen years' experience as collector of customs in the port of Halifax, I may say that I do not know of a single instance where an officer in the outside service was required to pass the civil service examination. The outside service generally consists of landing waiters, tide waiters, lockers, &c., and they are appointed just because they are smart, active people. I do not think the service will be improved by compelling these people to pass the civil service examination. I know that all the time I was in the custom house the outside service were not required to pass the examination. There was no such a thing as a chief clerk, or a clerk at all. wanted for the outside service duties, because they brought their returns into the custom house, and records were kept in the custom house by the officers who were required to keep those records themselves. I think you will find that this is the practice in all the large ports.


Andrew B. Ingram: The other evening we brought this same question before the hon. gentleman. I am rather surprised that lie does not propose in this Bill to make the temporary officers permanent, clean up the sheet entirely, and see if this grievance cannot be remedied once for all. I mentioned the city of Windsor the other evening, where I find there have been ten preventive officers appointed since the hon. gentleman took hold of the department. There had been men appointed there as preventive officers Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).
years before that, and they are still on the temporary list, and I suppose all the new appointments are made permanent. That is what we complain of on this side of the House, that political influence is brought to bear, and men are put on the permanent list who are not entitled to be put on over men who have already been long in the service. If the hon. gentleman put these men on irrespective of their party politics, then perhaps there would not be so much cause for complaint.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I shall lie glad to have them all pass the examination, and in some cases they have passed, while in others they have not. But the hon. gentleman must not think that I am guided by political influence in making these appointments. There have been at least as many Conservatives put on the permanent list of preventive officers as there were under the old government. There were as many Conservatives put on the permanent list as there were others, or at least, as many as had been appointed by the old government.


Andrew B. Ingram: There are some Conservatives left.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: So that it would not be right to make recriminations in that way.


Andrew B. Ingram: I know of cases of men there who are not on the permanent list and they are as good officers as ever were stationed at Windsor. There are no complaints against them. This is growing to be a very serious complaint, and it will take up the time of the House session after session unless the grievance is remedied. I could see no injustice if there was something in the shape of an Act giving the hon. Minister of Customs power to put these men on the permanent list. Here is an opportunity now, and we could insert an amendment providing for that in the Bill now before the committee.


Mr. BENNETT.: May I suggest to the hon. minister that if it is the intention of the minister, in making these temporary appointments, simply to place these persons in a training school to prepare them for making an attempt to pass the civil service examination, he might do this by saying that such appointments made after this date shall only hold good for a limited length of time, say six months, and if they are not then able to pass the civil service examination their services will be dispensed with.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I think that is a very wise suggestion of the hon. member for East Sim-coe (Mr. Bennett). There is no doubt that under this clause the hon. minister can employ an officer who is not qualified and keep him employed. That is the intention. It is bad enough that the custom lias prevailed in the past. I do not think we should give 1 the sanction of law to it, and the way to

guard against that is to carry out the suggestion that has been made and which I have incorporated in the amendment which I am now about to read : ' Provided such temporary employment be not continued for a period of more than six months.' This would permit employees to qualify under the Civil Service Act, and would prevent such abuses as those which we know are occurring. I move to add to the section the provision that temporary employment should only last for six months. .


William Ross: The objection to that amendment would be that if you employed a person temporarily during the busy season of the year and you required to do the same perhaps next year, the person who had had so many months' training would be the very person the collector would want to put his hand on to continue the service for another year.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Could he not qualify in the meantime ?


William Ross: My experience lias been that in the outside service the qualification required in the inside service is not necessary, and it has not been the practice to ask for the examination of a man in the outside service. These men are in a good many ways more like labouring men with a good education than clerks who would suit in the inside service.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: In that case I think it would be better to amend the Civil Service Act directly, and not do it in this way.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes. I think that would be a better way than by pressing this amendment if it is considered desirable. In regard to what the hon. member for East Elgin (Mr. Ingram) says, I do not think we could make such an amendment to this Bill. The proposed amendment is one that could be introduced any year, but there would have to be a consultation, and the government would have to be agreed upon it. It is a subject that is on my mind, but I cannot deal with it this year. The suggestion as to six months employment, of course, will not work, because there is only a qualifying examination once a year. There might be an officer appointed very shortly after the examination that takes place this fall, and it would be a year before the board met again, so that six months would not do. If any time at all were fixed, it would have to be a year.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Make it a year.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Would it be fair to make a provision of that kind now ? I think there would be something like a moral obligation to put all officers on the same plane, and we would have to put away all the temporary officers we now have who have been employed for fifteen or twenty years, and who know their business just as well as any officers in the inside service.
It would not accomplish anything if there was any fear that the department would be worked in an impi-oper or unfair way. If there was any danger that political influence might be brought to bear on the minister and he might not hold the scales evenly, you do not obviate it by that, because, as long as there is that provision. I could appoint a temporary clerk and if he could not pass the examination at the end of six months, if I wanted to retain hiip, I could simply appoint him permanently as a preventive officer.


Edward Frederick Clarke: The department has power to do wrong, any way.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: It has the power. I do not think the hon. member for East Elgin (Mr. Ingram) will find that there has been any consistent course pursued of ignoring men because of the difference in their position, and I am sure there has not been in the cases he has mentioned. I could give scores of cases where men appointed long before I came into office have been put upon the permanent list.


Andrew B. Ingram: I think I can fairly complain in these cases I have quoted, because I know some of these men very well, passing up and down there very frequently, as I do. Of course, this side may change to the other, as I am confident it is going to soon, and the friends of hon. gentlemen opposite would be in the same position then as our friends are now. It is hard to explain why men who have been in the service ten or twelve years at least are overlooked, while those who have only been in a few years are made permanent.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I think there is no doubt that the hon. minister is right when he says that he could evade the law, any way; but I do not think that is an argument for us to change the law, because that is what we are doing in this section. In the amendment which I presented I intended to provide for the future only. I have no objection to stating that any amendment with that new disposition will apply to the future, but I think it does that without any such expression. I am quite willing to change the period of six months to a period of one year, but I think it is very desirable that we should not by this subsection change the general trend of the law in regard to qualification for the civil service. What the hon. member for Victoria, N.S. (Hon. Mr. Ross), said may be quite true also. It may be true that in the outside service examination and qualification are not necessary, but it is in the law, and I think we should leave it there.


William Ross: I think if the hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) would inquire at the port of Montreal, or Toronto, or St. John, or Halifax, he would not find a single instance where a preventive officer has passed the examination, or was requir-

ed to do so. The education of these men might be more practical perhaps than that of a good many whose education is designed to enable them to pass the civil service examination. The men in the outside service are more like workingmen. A locker receives casks into his warehouse, and he sees they are properly placed and delivered on warrant from the custom-house. These men do not require to pass an examination, and the chances are they would not be as good as they are if they did.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I believe the hon. gentleman is quite right in a good deal of what he says, but is it not the proper course to amend the Civil Service Act so that these gentlemen might be properly appointed.


William Ross: That is just what I want. I want to get them the increase of salary and promotion they would be entitled to if they did pass the examination.


Edward Frederick Clarke: This amendment does not accomplish that, and under it the minister can appoint any number of temporary clerks to remain there during his pleasure.


Mr. REID (Grenville).: If the position of surveyor of customs should become vacant, under this Act the minister could appoint an acting surveyor who had not passed the examination, and he could draw his salary and fill the position during the pleasure of the minister. Would not that make him virtually a permanent employee ? Suppose in the town of Prescott the position of chief clerk were to be vacant, and no doubt there would be a great number of applicants for it, perhaps the government might wish to appoint some one who did not pass the examination and they would appoint him as acting chief clerk. If be filled that position for a number of years he would virtually hold it permanently, although he was not appointed by Order in Council.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Until an officer has been appointed on the recommendation of the treasury board and sanctioned by the Governor in Council he does not become a permanent employee. He might be acting landing waiter and be paid, but he could not be appointed permanently to that rank until he bad passed his examination. and he would lose his time if he were ill and would not be entitled to holidays and so on.


John Dowsley Reid: We have a vacancy in the town of Prescott in the Inland Revenue Department which has existed for some time, and if the Minister of Inland Revenue were to introduce such a Bill as this he could appoint a person who had not passed the civil service examination. and the Minister of Inland Revenue knows that there is pressure brought upon him to do that now. Suppose lie should appoint a man as acting inland revenue collector and he remained in office for some years, he would be recognized by the public Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria)..
at least as a permanent officer, and in the case of a change of government or a change of minister even, it would be unfair to dismiss an officer of that kind. I think myself that a person should be appointed to such a position only until such time as he would have an opportunity of passing the civil service examination, and if he failed at first he might be credited with his percentage or something of that kind, but at all events there should be some limit. The public now believe that it is impossible for a minister to appoint a person to a vacancy until he has passed the examination and for that reason the minister is saved a great deal of trouble. If you pass such legislation as this there is no doubt that your staff will deteriorate in time.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: In reply to the member for Jacques Cartier (Mr Monk) I wish to say that this is no evasion of the law at all. The law at present provides that inspectors, collectors and preventive officers in the Customs Department may be appointed without examination and without reference to the rules for promotion prescribed. All that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) would accomplish by his motion would be that if a person were appointed, and at the end of the year he would not bo able to pass the civil service examination, he would be dismissed. The civil service examination is largely clerical and I venture to say it would trouble the hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) and myself to pass it now. I dare say we could pass it when we left school, and although I do not want to say anything against laws that are in vogue, yet when you come to a practical department like customs, the qualifying examination, in my judgment, is of very little avail. You want general knowledge, you want good judgment and in some cases you want a knowledge of the methods of trade. If a man proves himself to be a good officer, but could not pass the examination, we could then appoint him a preventive officer under the law. But 'wherever we can get them to pass the examination instead of appointing them preventive officers and saying: You discharge the duties of landing waiter, if he does pass the examination his title would be landing waiter or tide waiter or clerk or whatever he is. This makes the practice a little more regular, but there is no change.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Is not that exemption in the civil service law wide enough now ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: This does not make it any wider, but this permits the appointment of an officer temporarily. In some cases these appointments must be done in an emergency and sometimes you cannot summon a meeting of the Treasury Board and get His Excellency's assent in a day or two. There are times when, after a long session of parliament perhaps, some ministers are taking a well-deserved rest for a day or two, and you

might not be able to get a meeting of the Treasury Board or of Council; or His Excellency might be away ; and a month might elapse without anything being done. You must have persons to attend to these duties, and so you appoint them temporarily. The object of the Bill is not to discharge men from the service or get more men into the service without reference to the Civil Service Act. It is simply the result of a suggestion from the Department of Justice that it would be better to have this additional provision that when a person is temporarily appointed to a certain office he shall not receive a larger salary than is paid to a permanent officer of the same rank or class.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Has that been the practice ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No. In the case of preventive officers there is no limit at all.


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. minister knows that it is not customary to appoint a temporary officer to one of the high positions in the service, such as surveyor of customs ; and he would not appoint a man as a preventive officer, and then assign to him the duties of a surveyor. If he has done so, I think he has not rightly understood the law. Under the proposed provision. the minister could appoint any person to the position of acting surveyor, and virtually make him permanent. I understand the minister to take the position that he could appoint any person as a preventive officer, and then allow him to fill the position of chief clerk or surveyor of customs in the city of Toronto.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes, he could, but the appointee could not be styled chief clerk ; he would be acting clerk. A great many men who have been appointed preventive officers are taking entries, and are as efficient officers as we have. I think that I have shown that this is a proper provision, and it would be better for the hon. gentleman to withdraw the amendment.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not understand liow the hon. minister can say that this Bill which he asks us to pass makes no change. He stated, when we first took up this section, that it was almost unnecessary to pass it; and yet the fact is, if I am not mistaken, that the question having been referred to the Department of Justice, Mr. Newcombe, of that department, stated that the system at present was irregular, that the law was not being observed, and that it would be necessary to pass this amendment in order to regularize the position of these employees. I do not think there is any doubt that under this provision, if we pass it, the Minister of Customs may name a temporary officer, and employ him from year to year temporarily, without subjecting him to what the law requires-the qualifying test of a civil service examination. We had under discussion a day or two ago the estimates of the lion. Minister of Customs, which we now pass eu bloc. The evening before last we voted $129,000 for five or six branches of the Customs Department, and having had the money voted in that general way, the minister can keep a temporary employee continuously in his service without our knowing anything about it. We shall not even go through the form of voting his salary every year notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act. I do not say that the deputy minister of Justice was not right in making that suggestion to regularize the position of those employees ; but the object we ought to have in view is to improve our civil service, not to spoil it, as we have been doing for many years past by this custom. The hon. gentleman knows how in 1896 a very large number of civil servants were dismissed without any opportunity of being heard. I will not go back upon that; it was fully ventilated at the time ; but in my own aounty the number of civil servants who were dismissed without notice and without any opportunity of defending themselves was very great, and much hardship was incurred. Here we are at present still further mutilating our civil service organization. We are doing the exact opposite of what they have been doing in years past in the United States, where they had a deplorable civil service. Under the Cleveland administration a set of men undertook to improve conditions, and at the present moment for over five thousand employees of the government of the United States, there is no more trouble with the spoils system, and they cannot be dismissed. The United States are improving their civil service. England has a much better system of patronage and civil service than we have in Canada, and here we are opening the door to abuse. It has been said on this side of the House, and I think it is worthy of the consideration of lion, gentlemen opposite, that they are preparing trouble for themselves. We know how members belonging to the ministerial party are bothered with demands for employment. Under this section, if we pass it, there would be far greater demands, and members will not have the defence of saying that those who solicit employment will have to pass an examination, because under this proposed section they may be employed temporarily, so to speak, for ever. Under these circumstances, I think we ought not to give the sanction of the law to the unfortunate custom which has prevailed in all the departments in the past, and I think the amendment that has been suggested would be a protection not only to the public, but for hon. gentlemen opposite themselves, and particularly for those in charge of the government departments. We might modify it in the direction suggested by the hon. member for Grenville, so as to provide that

temporary employment will not last beyond the period fixed for the next civil service examination, and that this section will not apply except in the future, if that is necessary. I think all our efforts ought to tend to the improvement of our civil service, and not to its deterioration, and I think the hon. minister, on reflection, will himself acknowledge that we are readily helping him by this suggested amendment.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: I do not think the suggested amendment in any way adds to the appeal of the hon. gentleman who has just spoken. I think, on the contrary, that the amendment has for its object to cause some of the abuses that have existed for the last twenty years to disappear. My hon. friend is aware that under the Civil Service Act, provision is made for the appointment of officials to the civil service, first, after examination, and, second, on a special report of the deputy head of the department to the effect that the person has special qualifications. In addition to these two modes of appointment, we have, in subsection 2 of section 37, a provision that Customs inspectors, collectors and preventive officers may be appointed without examination and without any reference to the rules of promotion That is to say, you can appoint preventive officers without any reference whatever either to examination or to promotion. But there is no provision in the law defining the duties of a preventive officer. and the practice has grown up in the last twenty years of assigning preventive officers to the performance of special duties. The authority to do this is to be found in section 5 of the Act, which provides that the Customs Department shall have the control and management of the collection of customs duties and matters incident thereto. The result has been that preventive officers have been assigned to the discharge of duties, such as those mentioned in schedule B. for which the regularly appointed officials are paid a different salary. Take, for instance, the case of a clerk. Under the Act he would be only entitled to receive $400 per year, but the duties of clerk may be assigned to a preventive officer who will receive a much larger salary. This anomaly has suggested the amendment which authorizes the appointment of a temporary or acting clerk to perform the duties of a regular clerk, which are now assigned to a preventive officer. We wish to do away with the anomaly that exists at present, and if a temporary clerk is appointed, under this amendment he will not receive any larger salary than the regular official would who is appointed under section 50 of the Civil Service Act. It is for the House to say whether or not it is wise to amend the law which has been in existence all these years, giving authority to the Customs Department to appoint these officials without examination. If the law should be amended, if all these appointments Mr. MONK.
made in the past should be declared irregular, what will become of the service ? The proper thing is to get the sanction of this parliament to do what has been done in the past.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Is there any provision now in the Civil Service Act obliging these men who are appointed temporarily, to pass an examination in a certain period ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Not preventive officers unless they want to come into the permanent service.


Edward Frederick Clarke: They would remain on permanently although only temporarily appointed ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Then is not the suggestion of the hon. member for Jacques Cartier right that the trend of this legislation is to deteriorate the public service ? The hon. gentleman admits that one-quarter of the outside employees have never passed the examination.


Hon. Mr. HAGGART.: The principle of the clauses is this. Inspectors and collectors were not required to pass a qualifying examination, just the same as post office inspectors and postmasters, and for this reason, in order to be able to give such appointments to parties whose long political service was entitled to some recognition. Any person may be appointed to a department with special qualifications. Suppose the head of the department wants a chemist for analytical purposes, it would be absurd to require such a man to pass the civil service examination. Take a landing waiter, there is no necessity for his passing the civil service examination. But the Act never contemplated that such an officer could be transferred to the position of a clerk without passing the examination. It may be said that that has been done, but it has been done with the understanding that these parties would pass the civil service examination within the year or go back to their old positions. This amendment will justify these appointments in voidance of the Civil Service Act. There is no necessity at all for it. There are thousands of young men in the country, with all the qualifications necessary for any of these appointments, and who have passed the qualifying examinations, but because a person happens to be appointed a landing waiter, he is open, under this clause, to receive any appointment at all in the service.


John Dowsley Reid: As I understand the hon. Minister of Justice, he can, under the law, appoint anybody as preventive officer and then promote him to any other position without his passing the examination.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Under the Civil Service Act a man may be appointed without examination, a preventive officer. The law makes no provision for
4C25

the duties to be performed by a preventive | officer, so that the Minister of Customs can assign that preventive officer to any duties he thinks proper, and the practice has been in the past to assign them to certain duties.


John Dowsley Reid: What are they ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Some clerks, some lockers and all manner of duties. A great number of them are in the department, and this is to prevent that practice in the future, by providing that if a preventive officer is assigned to perform the duties of clerk he shall not receive a larger salary than would be paid a clerk regularly appointed.


John Dowsley Reid: My point is this : According to law, a person to be appointed a surveyor of customs must have a certain qualification. If you are going to appoint him permanently he must have passed the civil service examination. According to the law, section ten of the Civil Service Act :-
All appointments to the Civil Service shall be during pleasure, and no officer shall be appointed or promoted to any place below that of deputy head unless he has passed the requisite examination and served the probationary term heretofore mentioned.
If you have a preventive officer appointed temporarily you cannot legally transfer him to perform the duties of a surveyor until he has passed the examination. If the law will not allow you to put on an acting surveyor because he has not qualifications, how will it justify you in putting in another officer who has not the qualifications ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: It is possible that the law may have been violated ever since 1886. But, if it has, we desire to remedy that and prevent it occurring in the future.


George Taylor: 
John Dowsley Reid: With reference to the case mentioned by the hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Taylor) I may say that Mr. Gerald was superannuated and another gentleman appointed in his place who had not passed the examination. He was appointed a preventive officer. He had to take that minor position. The Minister of Customs knows that the gentleman appointed to fill the vacancy caused by the superannuation of Mr. Gerald had been looking for a much higher position for several years, but not having passed the examination, could not be appointed. According to this law, he could have been appointed to one of the higher positions, say as acting surveyor. Now, suppose that were done. If a change of government should take place, I do not hesitate to say I would do all I could to have all appointees under this administration retain their positions, if they had been appointed honourably-that is that they had not been appointed through the unfair dismissal of a supporter of the Conservative party, which, I must say, has not been done so far, and I am not finding fault in that way. If this gentleman were appointed chief clerk or acting surveyor. I would feel in duty bound to recognize the appointment as a permanent appointment. So, what I feel is that the minister is only going to give more trouble to himself and also make a great deal of feeling should a change of government take place.


William Ross: The surveyor ranks next to the collector in authority in every customs house, because he has control of the outside service, though he is not regarded as a deputy according to the Civil Service Act, I think you will not find a case in any port of Canada where the surveyor has been compelled to pass the civil service examination.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: To whom does the hon. gentleman (Mr. Reid) allude when he speaks of the surveyor ?


John Dowsley Reid: There always has been a surveyor until a short time ago, When the position of surveyor became vacant, the hon. gentleman established a chief clerkship instead. The hon. minister knows the gentleman who got the position is qualified. But there may be others who have not the necessary qualifications and could not receive the appointment, but who are recommended by the Liberal committee. Of course, not having passed the civil service examination, they could not be appointed under the law as it is. The person appointed is a first-class man-could not be better fitted for the position. i\ But he had

passed the civil service examination. The hon. minister knows that if this law had not been in force be would not have made the appointment he did, for influence would have been brought to bear upon him to appoint one of the applicants. But, I think that this clause will be unfair to those who have passed the civil service examination. A man can be appointed acting clerk, and so there will be no use in his passing the examination.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The effect of this section has been stated better than I could state it by the Minister of Justice. This amendment to the law will limit and circumscribe the powers that the department now has under the Civil Service Act.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No.


George Taylor: It was limited before.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: A preventive officer can be assigned to the duty of a clerk, the maximum salary of whose position would be $1,000 or $1,200 a year, and he could be paid $1,500 or $1,800 if the department thought fit. We do not do that, but it could be done under the law. If this section passes, that will be contrary to the law. Therefore, I say, the power of the department is circumscribed by this section. Now the argument of the hon. member for South Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart) was that it was not intended that preventive officers should be appointed and thus escape the necessity of passing the examination- they should pass it within a year, for, he says, if they do not pass it within a year, that is evidence that they are unfit for their positions. If the hon. gentleman will say that all temporary officers must pass the examination within a year or leave their positions, then, he will put out some three or four hundred men, some of whom have been in the service for ten, twelve, or fifteen years. They will all have to go. There would be no fairness in drawing the line if, because a man who is appointed now cannot pass the civil service examination at the end of the year, that is proof that he is unfit to discharge the duty; that reason must equally apply to the men who have been there ten or fifteen years. You cannot draw the distinction. If the purpose be to secure efficiency it must apply to all that are in that position. I *do not know that we need to be careful about this clause. If you strike it out you are leaving more power in the hands of the department than it has at present.


Mr. LENNOX.: I do not think the hon. gentleman is very logical in his conclusions. It has been suggested by my hon. friend from East Simcoe (Mr. Bennett) that after the temporary officer has occupied the position for a certain time, if lie has not then passed the examination, he should cease to Mr. REID (Grenville).
hold the position. That seems to be reasonable, and I think it is feasible. Perhaps it might be for a longer time than was suggested ; instead of six months the period might be made a year, when certainly it would be time for him to pass his examination. I think the minister could meet the difficulty by providing that a temporary officer should not occupy the position longer than six months, or at all events until the next examination. Now', with reference to the other part, which I think is really of more importance, it is argued that it would be unfair to those who have been in the position for several years as temporary officials. I do not think we should be guilty of any unfairness on this account. We have in this country recognized that vested rights must be respected, and it would be a serious injustice, one of which the opposition would never be guilty at all events, and of which I hope the government would never be the perpetrators. It would be unjust to say that after a man had been in that position for ten or fifteen years, he should now by reason of a new law, be subjected to an examination. We can prescribe that the period during which a temporary employee should occupy that position shall not exceed a certain number of months from the next examination, and that the rights of those gentlemen who have served well and faithfully, and growm old in the service, shall be protected.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The hon. gentleman says ' have served well and faithfully.' But to accept an amendment of this kind is to say that one who does not pass an examination cannot serve well and faithfully.


Edward Frederick Clarke: It would be a hardship for the men who have been in the service fifteen or twenty years and w'ho are not competent to pass an examination, to make it apply to them. But the case would be different with applicants for employment.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: This clause is for the purpose of restricting the scope of the Act as it has been construed in the past, because it is alleged to have operated to the detriment of the service. It would only be fair, if this amendment should pass, to make it apply to all those who are in the service as well as to those who are to be appointed. Why draw a line of demarcation between those who came in under an improper construction of the Civil Service Act and those who are brought in now ? Is there not a reason for the rule that has existed for the last twenty years ? I do not say the rule has been improperly established, on the contrary. I think it was properly established, and it has worked out well in results. I will show how it works out well. Take, for instance, a man appointed as an appraiser in the customs. That man requires to have had some actual experience of

business, and if he has been in the business for ten, fifteen or twenty years, lie has some value as an appraiser. But how many of these men who have been in the business during all these years are competent to pass an examination ? How many of them could pass ? How many of them would be disqualified simply because they could not pass Men perform the duties of an appraiser better if they come in after those years of service than if they had simply got that book knowledge which ,is required to pass the examination. It seems to me the rule that has been established by my hon. friend is a rule that operates usefully. But it is better to make the rule clear, to make is absolutely apparent to parliament what we are doing. I think it is better to restrict the Act and prevent what has been done in the past from being done in the future.


Edward Frederick Clarke: The Minister of Justice complains of abuses under the late administration. He will have an opportunity of making a comparison of the defects which existed at the beginning of the hon. gentleman's career and those which exist at the present time. The Minister of Customs has promised to bring down a statement of the number of the employees of the customs in Toronto, which will include a list of those who have been temporarily appointed during the last five or six years, and he will be shocked to learn what numbers of men have been appointed there temporarily, and have been there for years, without passing the examination at all. They are there in utter disregard of the requirements as regards qualifications and age. We heard the statement made the other night that one-fourth of the total number of the officers have never passed an examination at all. We say that if this Bill is passed it will open the door and there will be a larger percentage twelve months from now who have not passed the civil service examination than there is to-day.


Andrew B. Ingram: Do I understand the hon. minister to approve of the practice whicli has been in existence for twenty years of violating the Civil Service Act and that we should continue it ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: There is not a technical violation of the Act. The Act provides for the appointment of preventive officers without regard to the civil service examination. You can take any man whom you choose .and appoint him a preventive officer in the outside service. There is no Act in existence that I am aware of which defines the duty of a preventive officer. The practice in the department has been, as I am informed-of course I speak subject to correction-when a preventive officer has been appointed to assign him to the performance of these duties under schedule (b). The result has been that at times a man has been appointed as a preventive officer with a fixed salary and he
has been appointed to the performance of the duty of a clerk and while in the performance of this duty without being regularly appointed under the Civil Service Act, he has been appointed at a salary larger as a preventive officer than it would be possible to give him if he were regularly appointed under the Civil Service Act. My object in suggesting the amendment is to do with parliamentary authority what has been done in the past, to make it possible for the Minister of Customs to give temporary employment to a man instead of appointing him a preventive officer, assigning his duties at the time he is appointed, and thus provide that a temporary clerk shall not be in receipt of a sum in excess of the sum to which he would be entitled if he were appointed permanently. I think the hon. member for Toronto (Mr. Clarke) misunderstood me. What I meant to say was that if these are abuses the abuses originated before 1896, and they have been carried on to the present day. We are all responsible for them. I do not mean to apportion the responsibility. I mean to say that if these abuses are in existence we inherited them and we want to see how far we can restrict them.


Edward Frederick Clarke: There is no improvement up to the present time on the old order of things.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Perhaps only in the character of the individuals appointed.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: There are many men in the service temporarily who are good officers and. the hon. member for East Elgin (Mr. Ingram) thinks that they should be put on the permanent list. I agree with him and I might put them on as preventive officers. While the law gives me that power I try not to do that because I have invariably asked them to pass the civil service examination. If they do not pass it. in cases where I have felt that they were good officers, then. I have availed myself of that power. He suggested that there ought to be an Act passed whereby all in the service in that position should be placed on the permanent list. I do not hesitate to say that my own personal view is-I do not commit the government-that it would be a desirable thing to do, but the hon. gentleman will see that if I were to become a party to that, then. I would become a party to making a declaration that my firm belief was that His Majesty's service in the customs could be well and faithfully performed by men who had not passed the civil service examination. I would be recreant to my duty if I came down and proposed that we continue to take into the service of His Majesty men unfitted for it. But, according to the rule laid down by hon. gentlemen opposite, the very fact that these men have not passed the civil service examination is a declaration that they are unfitted for the service. I do not accept that. If I believed that I could not ex-

press my own individual view in favour of doing this by a specific Act and placing them all upon the permanent list. It is to be applied to men who cannot pass and if the fact that they cannot pass the examination is proof that they are unfit to hold positions in the service of His Majesty is it proof that the men who have been employed ten or fifteen years are unfit to serve His Majesty ? I do not believe it. It might be suggested that I am arguing against the Civil Service Act. Well, I am not careful to say that I am a great admirer of the Act in so far as practical benefits are concerned in the working of the outside service of the customs. I do not think it is an advantage. We cannot work the outside service without temporary officers. Hon. gentlemen opposite do not say that I should not avail myself of the services of such officers, but they say that they must pass the examination within a year. I would like to get them to pass it if they are equal in other respects. I would like them to pass before I appoint them at all, but my experience as a business man extending over a good many years, is that you may find a person who would have the literary attainments perhaps, or the knowledge. to pass this examination which is a literary one in relation to matters of geography and history of this country and other countries, that you might find n young man who has passed that, but when it came down to the discharge of the duties of an appraiser, or a clerk, or a landing waiter, where judgment has to be exercised, lie might not be the best officer by any manner of means. If you want to continue your Civil Service Act and apply it to your inside service where your work is largely clerical, all right. I am speaking of the outside department of the customs, and I do not believe that you are going to secure a better class of men if they do pass the civil service examination. So long as this is the law I endeavour to get all I can to pass it, but where I find men-


Edward Frederick Clarke: How have you been succeeding in Toronto in getting men to pass the examination who have been employed during the last five years ? Have yon made very much progress in getting these men to pass the examination ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes, I think so.


Edward Frederick Clarke: How many have passed during the last twelve months ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I will find out. I do not think many of the old appointments have passed, but I think some who have been appointed ginee I have had charge of the department myself have passed.


Edward Frederick Clarke: You are still urging them to pass ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: We are urging them to pass. The men themselves Hon. Mr. PATERSON.
are very anxious to be put on the permanent list for the reason that if they are on the temporary list and they lose a day through sickness, they lose their pay and they do not get their holiday. More than that, where a man is on the temporary list his services can be dispensed with by a letter from the minister. If he is on the permanent list an Order in Council must be passed to dismiss him. They feel that they are safer in their tenure of office upon being appointed on the permanent list, that a mere whim on the part of the minister, or an unworthy feeling, if the minister were capable of entertaining an unworthy feeling, could be exercised in an arbitrary way and they could be dismissed without any real cause. For that reason they want to get on. and they apply, and when they do, I say I will be happy to put you on and it will give me pleasure to do so, if you pass the examination. I say that to men who were years in the service before I was minister, men not in sympathy with me politically ; I treat them all alike. But there are some men who hesitate to try. and they tell me it is so long since they were at school that they could not pass the examination. but they would like to be on the permanent list. The only way we can do that is by appointing them preventive officers, and after they are appointed as such they are assigned to the duties thev have been doing for years and have been doing it well. This circumscribes the power of the minister instead of enlarging it.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) The fact seems to have been overlooked that no person over thirty-five years of age can present himself to pass the civil service examination.
Mr.i MONK. But they can be appointed preventive officers.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) And they are better qualified preventive officers than a great many who have passed the civil service examination.


Andrew B. Ingram: The minister says that he approves of putting old and tried officers on the permanent list, but in the next breath he told us that if he did that there might as well be no examination at all. He has put a large number on the permanent list, but he has not put others who are perhaps more entitled to it.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I said that if I entertained the views of gentlemen on the other side. I would not be in favour of putting these men on the permanent list who have been ten or twelve years in office, but I do not share the opinion of lion, gentlemen opposite that it is a disqualification for a man because he does not pass the civil service examination.


John Dowsley Reid: The point I am making is that this Bill will enable the minister to appoint a person to a higher grade than that of a preventive officer. It

is not the desire of any one on this side of the House to interfere with the appointment of temporary officers, but it is my opinion at least that those positions which now require the examination should be protected. If the minister passes this law he will have to take the nominations made by the political committees which is now done in many cases. Probably, as the minister says none of us could pass the examination off-hand, but I am satisfied that the minister or any of us could do so if we gave it a few months study. Suppose the minister should appoint an acting officer, then although that officer might not be as good an officer as one who could pass the civil service examination, yet if there was a change of government, I for one, would certainly be opposed to removing him from an office which he had occupied for years.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Does not this amendment leave the door wide open to the minister to appoint a person to any position in the service without an examination ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Under the present law we could appoint any person we chose as a preventive officer and continue him in the service temporarily and assign him to such duties as we may think proper.


Edward Frederick Clarke: And if this becomes law it will not be necessary to appoint a person a preventive officer, but he may be appointed to any position ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: You could appoint an acting landing waiter, but not a landing waiter.


Edward Frederick Clarke: We have the explanation of the Minister of Justice that the law now gives permission to the minister to appoint preventive officers without examination and assign them to various duties. If this clause becomes law the minister need not appoint a person as a preventive officer, but he can appoint him to discharge temporarily the duties of any position in the outside service of the Customs ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Then that leaves the door wide open and the minister should have the courage of his convictions and abolish the civil service examination altogether. I never myself could see why gentlemen should have to pass a qualifying examination to discharge the duties of landing waiters but, be that as it may, if the minister is logical the proper thing for him to do is to abolish the examination altogether.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: There are landing waiters, tide waiters, clerks, &c. We appoint a man acting landing waiter or acting tide waiter, or acting appraiser, and give him that title ; but if he wants to become a permanent officer, and have the title of the office, he must pass the examina-12T
tion. If he cannot pass the examination, we may appoint him a preventive officer permanently, and give him the position of acting land waiter, or whatever it may be.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I have no intention of doing what I think would be an injustice, that is, touching those who, by virtue of this abuse have been in the civil service for a number of years. There is no doubt that this amendment does, not touch them ; but in case it should be so interpreted by the Minister of Customs, I will not insist upon it. But let me point this out to the hon. Minister of Justice, that I think he is mistaken in regal'd to the abuse which he contends that this section cures. Will he look at this section and tell me if, after it is passed, it will not be still possible for the Minister of Customs to name a preventive officer, and then assign to him the duties of a clerk, for instance, in a division where such a clerk would be only regularly paid $400, while the preventive officer would be drawing a much larger salary. The Minister of Justice, I am sure, has no doubt about that, because there is no doubt. It will be open to the Minister of Customs to begin by naming a man a preventive officer, and then assign to him any duties or any position he chooses, except that of deputy minister, because, as the Minister of Justice pointed out, the law does not define the duties of preventive officers. The only thing that would happen is that the Minister of Customs, without reference to the character or qualifications of the preventive officer, would name him an acting officer in one of the classes refered to. I think there is no doubt about that.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: That is right.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: But he would continue to name him preventive officer, and give him any salary he chose, and assign to him any functions he deemed suitable. I do not wish to continue the discussion on this point. We are breaking into the Civil Service Act by this provision. The abuse has existed in the past, and we are legalizing it. It is sufficient to refer to the Civil Service Act, sections 47a, b, c, and d, to see with what care the legislature in the past, rightly or wrongly, has surrounded entrance into the civil service, providing that if a temporary officer is employed continuously, his salary must be specially voted by parliament. All this is done away with by this clause, and 1 do not think it will effect any good.
On section 5,


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Questions sometimes arise as to whether goods come under a certain designation and bear a certain rate of duty, and they are determined by the board of customs. They meet and give a decision, which, if approved by the minister, has the force of statute law, subject to an appeal of the Governor in



Council, which, however, is very seldom taken. A decision by the hoard might be contrary to what had been the practice in some ports for some time previously, and it might be that we had been collecting in some cases a higher rate of duty than that fixed by the board of customs, or in other cases a lower rate. In the former case there would be a refund, while in the latter case the importer would be asked to_ make another entry. This is to provide'that such a decision shall prevail in future, but [DOT] it shall not apply to previous transactions.
On section 6,


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The present Act requires that the invoice shall be made out in the currency of the country in which the goods are actually purchased. This permits the invoice to be made out in other currency. Then there is a provision to help us better to guard against frauds.


Mr. KEMP.: In what cases are goods not invoiced in the currency in which they are purchased ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The commissioner tells me that there are many cases in which the invoices of goods from the' continent are made out in sterling instead of in the currency of the country. He tells me that at times invoices are made out in Chinese or Mexican dollars.
On section 7,


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I explained when the resolutions were going through what that meant. This is to provide that when au article is composed of different materials, that that component part which is of the greatest value shall determine the rate of duty.
On section 10,


Mr. SMITH (Wentworth).: Why should damaged goods be destroyed when they cannot be sold for sufficient to pay the duty ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: If a person abandons goods and will not pay the duty, we destroy them if we cannot sell them for sufficient to pay the duty. The reason is that if we destroy them other goods will come in to replace them, on which we will get the whole duty.


Ernest D'Israeli Smith: You are at liberty to sell them if you get enough to pay the duty, not unless you do ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: The duty is supposed to take precedence of everything else.


Haughton Lennox: It is alright perhaps that the duty should take precedence. But if you can collect one-half of the duty by selling the goods, why not sell them ? The hon. minister gays that they are destroyed in order to induce the importation of other goods to take their place. That is not a good principle. Why should goods be vol-Hon. Mr. PATERSON.
untarily destroyed when their sale would realize a portion of the duties for the mere purpose of inducing other goods to be brought into the country.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I presume that the clause is all right, but I find it difficult to understand where three-fourths of the duty could be realized, the government should not sell the goods. Suppose the goods are worth $1,000 and the duty amounts to $250, according to this clause if the goods did not bring more than $225 or $200 they would have to be destroyed. I do not see why the country should lose in this way.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: That has been the law for years.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Evidently the hon. gentleman has money to burn.


Mr. HENDERSON.: In my opinion, the hon. Minister of Customs is right. It would be unfair to sell the goods for a portion of the duty. Suppose the goods are valued at $1,000 and the duty amounts to $200. If you were to sell those goods and they realized only one-half thq duty, they would go into the country in opposition to other goods which paid the full duty. We want to protect the public.


Ernest D'Israeli Smith: I cannot see any great difference to the public in selling the goods for $200 or $199. If you can get $200 then you can sell them, but if you can only get $199 then you must destroy them, because otherwise you will injure the public by throwing them on the market. The fact that this has been on the statutes for years, does not make any difference.
On section 14,
Section 65 of the Customs Act, as amended by section 15 of chanter 14 of the statutes of 1888. is amended by adding the following subsection thereto
3. All material imported to form medicinal or toilet preparations alone or with other articles or compounds, to be put up, labelled or sold under any proprietary or special name or trade mark, shall be valued for duty under the provisions of subsection two of this section. The Minister of Customs may, however, refer to the appraising officers for valuation such of the materials as have a fair market value in the ordinary course of trade.


Albert Edward Kemp: Is this section general or only applicable to specific articles ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: That and the next section are embodied in the Tariff Act.


Albert Edward Kemp: Does it refer to undervaluation generally-the original clause which it is supposed to amend ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No, not generally.


Albert Edward Kemp: The reason I wanted to understand about this clause more particularly was that when the matter was up

a few days ago, I referred the hon. minister to the law of the United States in relation to undervaluation. I had not, at that time, the clause of the American tariff under my hand, but I have it now, and with the permission of the committee I will read it. This is the Act of June 10, 1890, section 29 article 400 :
If any owner, importer, consigner, agont or other person shall make or attempt to make any entry of imported merchandise, by means of a fraudulent or false Invoice, affidavit letter paper, or by means of any false statement' written or verbal, or by means of any false or fraudulent practice or appliance whatsoever, or shall be guilty of any wilful act or omission by means whereof the United States shall be deprived of the lawful duties or any portion thereof accruing upon the merchandise or any portion thereof, embraced or referred to in such invoice, affidavit, letter, paper or statement, or affected by such act or omission, such merchandise or the value thereof to be recovered from the person making the entry shall be forfeited, which forfeiture shall only apply to the whole of the merchandise of the value thereof in the case or package containing the particular article or articles of merchandise to which such fraud or false paper or statement relates, and such person shall upon conviction be fined for each offence a sum not exceeding $5,000 or be imprisoned for a time not exceeding two years, or both in the discretion of the court.
That is the section to which I referred in discussing this matter, and I would press upon the minister some amendment to our Customs Act of a severer character than that which exists at the present time. And I would like to know if the department intend to recommend any amendment along the lines of what I have just read ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The Act now In force in Canada. It hardly goes so far as that read by; the hon. gentleman (Mr. Kemp), but I think it goes as far as the department would be inclined to recommend. It provides that, in case of smuggling or attempt to pass any fraudulent invorce or any attempt to defraud the revenue, the goods may be seized. The person fined the value of the goods, and also subjected to a penalty not more than 8200 or less than $50, or imprisonment for not more than one year or less than one month, or both fine and imprisonment.


Albert Edward Kemp: Does not the hon. minister think the government might approach nearer the United States law-perhaps not to the extent of a fine of $5,000, but something more than the fine already imposed, which is only $200, I believe ?
' The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS. We have had cases under this law in which the judge recommended that we should not claim the full penalty of the law, saying that he had not the power under the Act to mitigate it- you get the value of the goods and $200 for every separate entry-but the accused, he thought, should not be subject to such a penalty. I think our law Is sufficiently
strong. If we are weak, it is in there being fraudulent importations we have not been able to detect.


Mr. BLAIN.: I wish to draw the minister's attention to the large number of scales being imported iuto this country from Dayton, Ohio. I am informed of! creditable authority that these scales have been sold to the consumer for $60 or $70 each, and yet have been imported into this country at a valuation of $G or $7 each. I would ask the hon. minister if this has been brought to his attention, and if so what action has been taken ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The matter of scales has been before us several times, and the Commissioner of Customs tells me that he is having inquiries instituted. The hon. member for Deeds and Grenville (Mr. Lavell) mentioned it the other day, and I asked him to give any names or other information that would help us to find at what port these goods had been entered. Of course, it would be outrageous to allow scales to be brought in at $6 or $7 that were sold in the regular way at $G0 or $70.


Richard Blain: Have the scale manufacturers of Canada brought this before the department ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I find that there have been no letters with regard to the class of scales referred to by the hon. member (Mr. Blain). The manufacturers have two or three times In the last year reported to us that scales coming from the large manufacturers-large scales-were not properly valued, and we had a special valuations made. But there has been no complaint made recently, and no complaint at all of what the hon. gentleman has referred to. It was quite new to me when it was mentioned the other night. As I say, if hon. gentlemen, or anyj one conversant with the facts will tell us at what port the entry was made or will give us any clue I shall be glad to have the matter looked up.


Sir. MACLEAN.: Before the Bill is reported, I would like to ask the minister, as the word surtax appears in this Bill, if there is any information in the possession of the government that they can give to the House and country with regard to the attitude of Germany to Canada in connection with the surtax.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W.
S. Fielding). We have nothing official. Of course we have seen the statements in the public press which the hon. gentleman has seen, but we have nothing official.
On section 17, subsection u,
For reducing the duty on any or all articles *whether natural products or products of manufactures, used as materials in Canadian manufactures ; and any such materials specified In such Order In Council shall be subject to such reduced duty of customs and no other for the time and under the conditions therein nro-vlded.


James Clancy: The government, as you will see, Mr. Chairman, is taking very extraordinary powers by this subsection. This matter came up when the resolutions were being discussed at a former stage. Now I want to point out to the Minister of Customs that he is seeling here a very extraordinary authority. It is no answer to say that the present law provides that you may take the duty off altogether. That is a very wide power, I admit, but it is not near so wide as the power to say what shall be the duty, dr that there shajl be no duty at all. When the hon. gentleman proposes to take power to revise the whole list of articles coming within the meaning of that section, he is asking for a most extraordinary power. Why, the hon. gentleman can revise the whole tariff so ^ far as these articles are concerned, he can fix such a scale of duties as he may think proper.
I protest against such legislation, I think it is wholly unwarranted. If a deputation comes to the hon. gentleman for some additional protection because of unfair competition by a foreign country, he may say,
I cannot take off all tlie duties, because I must have a revenue ; but I will take off some of the duties, and I will give you relief in that way. I say it is a power no government ought to have, it may be improperly exercised.


Albert Edward Kemp: What particular class of manufactures is this proposed to affect ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: It is confined to manufactures. We have power now in the Act to deal absolutely, but it does not give the lesser power.


Albert Edward Kemp: I want to know what class of manufactures the hon. gentleman had in his mind that this would affect.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I have not any particular class. Some Orders in Council have been passed, but I have not any particular class in my mind. But cases might arise.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Could the hon. gentleman bring us down those Orders in Council, allowing this Bill to stand in the meantime V


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: It will stand for the third reading.


James Clancy: Why insert this section if no cases have arisen ? Why this urgency V Why is the hon. gentleman reaching out his hand for more power in that direction, when he tells the committee that no cases have come under his notice that demand such authority 1


Edward Frederick Clarke: I think it fortunate that our attention has been drawn to this clause, which gives the minister such extraordinary power. He says there have been Orders in Council, we should have a memorandum of them.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: There have been fifteen or seventeen.


Hon. Mr. FIELDING.: 


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We had a very full discussion of this question at an earlier stage of the debate, when the resolutions were in committee. The whole question was thoroughly threshed out. But before the third reading is taken my hon. friend can have these Orders in Council which have been published in the * Canada Gazette.'
Bill reported.
At six o'clock, House took, recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.



SUPPLY-IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved that the House again go into Committee of Supply.
["We will distribute some to the members of the House.\nIIou. Mr. TARTE. The American maps are very flue. They are among the best in the world, but if we can do as good work as they do we will not have much to complain of. We have no survey of the harbours and ports on the lakes. In past years the Department of Public Works and the Department of Marine and Fisheries were each of them doing their own work. If the Department of Marine and Fisheries takes over this work there is no objection, I suppose, but I call the hon. minister's attention to this deficiency.", 'Friday, June 5, 1903.']
Robert Laird Borden: Mr. Speaker, before that motion is adopted I desire to say that I gave notice on Monday last of the motion which I proposed to move at the earliest opportunity when the House should be moved into Committee of Supply. It was moved into Committee of Supply the next evening, but I had arranged in the meantime to proceed with the conference as to the Redistribution Bill, which was held that evening, and therefore I could not proceed on that occasion. I am ready to proceed with the motion now as far as I am concerned.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: If my hon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax) desires to proceed with the motion now, we quite recognize his right to do so, but I suspect hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House, and this side as well, have found that we have rival attractions to-night. I think the circus has proved to be a greater attraction than the hon. gentleman's motion, or my proposals. I hardly suppose he would like to go on with the present thin House, and we would certainly prefer to have all matters in connection with the tariff taken up in their proper order rather than on a motion in amendment to supply. However, if the hon. gentleman is content to postpone it and bring it up at his own convenience at a later day, we would gladly concur in the suggestion.


Robert Laird Borden: So far as I am concerned, I am quite ready to proceed with the motion now, but I am ready to meet the convenience of the government. If the hon. Minister of Finance thinks it more convenient to postpone it to a later day, I am content to allow it to stand until as late as Monday. Further than that I cannot say at present.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: All right.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into * Uommittee of Supply.

Ocean and river service-maintename and repairs to government steamers, $250,000.
['All right.']
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. R. Prefontaine).: Mr. Chairman, there is an increase of $25,000 in this item, and I suppose that is the reason why an explanation is required. It is easily explained by the fact that, although there was only $225,000 voted last year, there was spent this year $240,560. The increase is explained in the following manner : The following amounts were spent for repairs to vessels : ' Newfoundland,' $1,193 ; ' Contest,' $1,690 ; ' Aberdeen,' $14,784 ; ' Lans-downe,' $4,680 ; ' Quadra,' $1,896 ;	' Stanley,' $8,827 ;	* Minto,' $5,521 ; making a
total of $38,522. The increased expenditure Is also due to the increase in the price of coal. As regards the- ' Stanley ' and ' Minto.' it is easily understood how it is impossible to say beforehand how much the expenditure connected with the repairs will amount to. It depends entirely on the use they have had during the season.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: There are several items contained in this vote, such as investigation into wrecks, removal of obstructions on navigable rivers and the winter mail service. and I may perhaps shorten the work of the committee by asking the minister to state what is the policy of the government in respect to facilitating the approach of steamers to Montreal, such as lighting the St. Lawrence between Montreal and Quebec so that it may be navigable at night. The minister has been connected with municipal affairs and with the harbour board of Montreal, and he knows the interest taken in that question. What policy does the hon. gentleman intend to follow in that respect ? Then there is the important question as to the equipment of the port of Montreal itself as to which we expect an announcement of policy. The minister will remember that last fall he took an active interest in matters concerning the port of Montreal and he wrote to the harbour commissioners inquiring what works were necessary in order that the new wharfs might be fully equipped for the handling of freight. Does the hon. gentleman intend seeing that these improvements are carried out promptly at the national expense. May we expect from the policy of the hon. gentleman that we shall make of the port of Montreal a national port. We would like to hear his opinion on that before we pass this important item. There is an item for the removal of obstructions to navigation and investigation into wrecks. The minister can do a great deal to place the port of Montreal on a better footing as regards underwriting. He is aware that the port of Montreal is now discriminated against in the matter of marine insurance. What steps does the hon. gentleman intend to take in order to place the insurance rates of the port of Montreal on a parity with the rates in American ocean ports. Then there is the question of
winter navigation between Quebec and the sea. The hon. gentleman is aware that two or three winters ago an enterprising newspaper in the city of Montreal expended quite a large sum of money in experimenting with regard to this matter. It has been urged by experts that if we employed these large ice-breaking steamers which are used by the Russian government, the season of navigation would be extended for perhaps two months longer than at present. Has the minister any policy upon that question. These are matters which it is right and proper that the minister should enlighten the committee on before we pass this item.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The item under consideration does not cover the vast field which the hon. gentleman has exploited. We are considering an item for ocean and river service now, but the hon. gentleman has spoken of the lighting of the St. Lawrence, the question of winter navigation from Quebec to the sea. and the equipment of the port of Montreal, a matter which is not dealt with in the items of the Department of Marine and Fisheries as they are before the House at the present time. However, I have no objection to answer the hon. gentleman in a general way as regards the different questions he has put. The port of Montreal is now being equipped and I hope that within this season and next season it will be capable of handling the trade of the country. As regards winter navigation, that question has been before the people for the last twenty-five or thirty years. The hon. the Senate of Canada took the matter up as far back as thirty years ago, and there are voluminous reports on the question. It was also taken up by the harbour board of Montreal to my knowledge, and a further study made of it. I think the most pressing question at the present time, not only for the port of Montreal, but for the whole country is to have the harbours of the St. Lawrence equipped in such a way that they may be able to cope with the trade that is coming to them. It is admitted on all hands that the port of Montreal (and the port of Quebec as well, for that matter) is not properly equipped. Works are going on there now as fast as possible in consideration of the means and resources of the country. I will not undertake to speak of the port of Quebec because I know a good deal less about it than I know about the port of Montreal, but as regards the 'port of Montreal, I know that since 1898 the harbour board, as-assisted by the present government, have been going on with the works there as speedily as possible. I know that the harbour commissioners of Montreal decided in 1898 to have two shifts of men, so that the work should go on day and night; and since then, with the approval of the. present government, the work has been pushed ahead in that way much more rapidly than it could have been done under the old system. It has been published that to com-

piete the equipment of the harbour of Montreal would require an expenditure of about $3,000,000, besides something more than $1,000,000 which the harbour commissioners have still available under the law passed in 1899 and 1900. They have come to the government and have asked for authority to borrow this $3,000,000 in order that the work may be proceeded with as rapidly as possible. The policy of the government will be announced in a few days, I hope, when hon. members will be in a position to discuss it. The government are alive to the situation, and I know that it is their desire to have the necessary works for the equipment of the port of Montreal completed as soon as possible, that is to say, during this season and the next season. As regards the lighting, although I should not anticipate the next item, which is lighthouse and coast service, I may say that the intention of the department


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: I think probably it is just as well for me to make a remark here, as nearly all these items are becoming subjects of discussion. In order that the committee may make progress, I think it would be well for hon. members to confine the discussion as nearly as possible to the item under consideration. It is quite within the right of any member to discuss almost any question under the general item of ocean and river service. Sometimes the committee agree to discuss the whole item, and then take it up item by item; but I think hon. members should confine themselves: to the item.


James Clancy: This is a very large vote, involving a very large sum of money-$308,600. Did I understand the Chairman to say that we must confine the discussion to each item composing the general item ?


Peter Macdonald: No. The rule is that the committee may decide whether they will take up each item in succession and discuss and dispose of that, or have a general discussion upon the whole vote. The hon. member can remark upon any item in this vote, and after the general discussion is over, then the committee may take up each item.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Mr. Chairman, the vote is before you in the shape of one resolution, and I have a right to put any question concerning any part of this resolution.


Peter Macdonald: That is what I say. You can: put a question or discuss any of the items under this resolution.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: That is what I do. I furthermore stated that I had done this in order to shorten the time-not to have to get up on all the different parts of the resolution. But there is no doubt that I can discuss any of the questions which I have discussed, under the resolution before the Chair.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I would submit that some of the questions which my Hon. Mr. PREFONTAINE.
hon. friend has discussed are not in the resolution at all I agree with him that he can discuss any item under the resolution; but what I want to call the attention of the committee to is this, that we must take the resolution either item by item or as one vote. Our practice has been to take it up item by item. I submit that if we'do that we should confine the discussion to the one item before us. If we take the resolution up as one vote, and roam over all the items, we cannot after that take it up item by item.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I cannot agree with the hon. gentleman. Take the first item-maintenance and repairs to government steamers, $250,000. Does the hon. leader of the government contend that upon this item I cannot ask all the question which I have asked ? Surely I can ask what is going to be done about lighting the St. Lawrence, about improving the port of Montreal, about underwriting. Before we vote any money, we can bring up any question or grievance, and these are distinct grievances. If the hon. leader of the government wishes to fragmentize the discussion, it will take a longer time. Under any circumstances, it is all the one resolution.


Peter Macdonald: I will read the rule, so that it may be understood. I think that a general discussion may take place on the resolution, and after the discussion each item may be taken up and dealt with. Here is the rule :
Sometimes there are a number of items in a vote or resolution, and each of these may be generally discussed as forming a part of a single question. Each item may then, if the committee think proper, be taken up as a distinct question, and so discussed and amended.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The point I make, Mr. Chairman-and I do it only in the spirit that we may not wander too far-is that my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier has been discussing some questions which are not embraced in any of these items, and I hope that we shall all be confined to the subject which is immediately before us In the estimates.


Edward Frederick Clarke: In this connection, I would like to say that I have in imy room copies of the Weekly London 1 Times,' issued during the fall and winter, in which reference is made repeatedly to the unsatisfactory condition of things in the St. Lawrence; and I certainly anticipated, when my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier asked the question of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, that the answer of the minister would be as to-the condition of the St. Lawrence, and what was to be done to improve the very serious condition of affairs that now exists.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think that is quite proper.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: What I want the hon. minister to do is to indicate the policy of his department and of the government on these

matters relating to navigation, and then we can take up each item, having obtained that information on the discussion of the resolution. itself.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The hon. gentleman desires that there should be a general discussion as to the policy of the government on matters not touched in this resolution. For example, he wants the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries to declare what is the policy of the government relating to the public works in the harbour at Montreal and the equipment of that port and so forth. But not one of these matters is within the scope of. this resolution. Anything touching the navigation of the St. Lawrence pertains to this item, but there is nothing in this resolution which calls for a general discussion of the policy of the government with regard to the port of Montreal.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: The hon. gentleman is very severe in limiting discussion on a question raised in supply. I called the attention of the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries to the fact that while occupying his present position, he inquired by letter from the Harbour Commissioners of Montreal what improvements they considered necessary to complete the equipment of that port. Will the hon. gentleman pretend that, when we are called on to vote the sums asked by the department, I am not entitled to ask the hon. Minister of Marine what is the policy of the government on that particular subject ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: As not one of the items in this resolution lias any relation to the improvements of the port of Montreal, I think I may contend that the hon. gentleman cannot properly bring up that subject on this motion. All I ask is that the Chairman should see that we discuss, in a broad and liberal spirit, questions within the scope of the resolutions. Questions outside that scope, important as they may be, will come up in their proper order.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I am quite ready to accept your ruling, Mr. Chairman, and I will point out to you that I asked the hon. Minister of Marine if, at the time he made that inquiry of the Montreal Harbour Commissioners, he was really carrying out the policy of the government, and if at the present moment he is prepared to inform us what is the policy of the government as regards the improvements at the port of Montreal. If you, Sir, at the suggestion of the hon. Minister of Finance, rule that I am out of order, I shall bow to your decision.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I have not asked for any ruling against my hon. friend. But, speaking generally, expressed the hope that we would confine ourselves to the scope of the resolution.


Peter Macdonald: As the policy of the government with regard to the equipment of the port of Montreal is not embraced in any of the items of the resolution before us, my ruling is that hon. members cannot discuss that policy until we come to some item relating to it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is not the port of Montreal on the St. Lawrence ? And is not the equipment of that port part and parcel of the whole system of expenditure on the St. Lawrence ? And surely we are quite in order if we ask what is the government's policy, in the equipment of the St. Lawrence, with regard to the improvement of the port of Montreal.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: That will come up on the next item. The present resolution deals only with the ocean and river service. It does not touch at all the port of Montreal. I have no objection to answer any of the questions put, but I think we would shorten discussion if we would confine ourselves to the subject matter of the resolution before us.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This resolution includes a number of matters which are a part of t'he equipment of the St. Lawrence, and as long as we are asking for information regarding any one of these, we are quite within our rights.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I am quite ready to answer any of those questions which refer to these Items.


Hon. Mr. TARTE.: Would the hon. minister inform us under what system the repairs to the government steamers are made, where they are made, by whom, and are they made by day labour or contract ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The repairs are done sometimes by day labour and sometimes by contract. It depends entirely on their importance. Sometimes- they are done in the government shipyards at Sorel. We had some repairs made to the ' Stanley ' at the Sorel shipyards during last winter. When the department thinks it is in the public interest to call for tenders, we do so.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Is the hon. minister in a position to tell us how much he expects to spend this year on those repairs on our steamers ?	[DOT]


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I do not know what repairs may be necessary in the course of next year. We provide for a certain amount, taking into consideration what was spent in the previous year. We can never tell in adr vance the extent of the repairs that may be required on the fifteen or twenty steamers belonging to the department. The different repairs made last year were

The * Newfoundland'	$ 1,193
The ' Countess '	 1,690
The ' Aberdeen '	 14,754
The ' Landsdowne '	 4,608
The ' Quadra, '	 1,896
The [DOT] Standard '	 8,827
The ' Minto '	 5,521
Total	$38,522


Joseph Israël Tarte: How many steamers has the Department of Marine and Fisheries under its charge, and where are they located ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There are twelve-that is far the marine service. There are some other steamers under the Department of Marine and Fisheries, but they will come under another vote.


John Dowsley Reid: I would like to ask if the steamer ' Scout ' which was in charge of the Department of Railways and Canals on the St. Lawrence river has been transferred to the Department of Marine and Fisheries ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes, she was taken over by my department.


John Dowsley Reid: Was the transfer made for any special reason ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We took over their lights.


Joseph Israël Tarte: We are discussing the item of maintenance and repair of government steamers for which the hnn. gentleman is asking $250,000. I did not understand the hon. minister's explanation, and I would like to know what steamers this applies to ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The estimates for the ocean and river service for 1903-4 is as follows : The ' Quadra,' expenses, $31,000 ; the ' Lady Laurier,' $3,500-she is a new boat-the ' Aberdeen,' $45,000 ; the ' Lansdowne,' $30,000 ; the ' Stanley ', $35,000 ; the ' Minto $44,000 ; miscellaneous, $7,000.
Mr. REID Grenville). Where does the ' Scout ' come in ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: In the lighthouse and coast service.


Joseph Israël Tarte: What is the number of men, as a rule, employed on these steamers ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: They differ in that respect. For instance, the wages on the ' Quadra ' amounted to $13,680, fuel, $4,500, provisions, $5,300, ship chandlery, $1,800, &c. The wages on the ' Lady Laurier ' amounted to $13,000, fuel, $8,000, provisions, $5,000, &c. The average crew is between twenty and thirty.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I suppose that in this vote of $250,000 the expense of supplies is included. Are supplies purchased by tender ?
Hon. Mr. PRE^ONTAINE.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Are the tenders called for publicly, or is a note written to two or three parties asking them to tender for furnishing the supplies ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I do not think there is a call in the public press. That would entail more expenditure than it would be worth while to undertake. But those in the trade know that these supplies are needed every year, and that every one is free to tender. Of course, circulars are sent around calling for tenders.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I am afraid the hon. minister (Hon. Mr. Prefontaine) is like other ministers,-no better and no worse than the rest. It amounts to this, the department writes a note to some friends of the government, and the contract for the supplies for the steamer is given


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: To the lowest.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No, there is no such system. I have followed the vote in every department whose estimates have been under discussion so far, and there is no such thing as a system of tender publicly called for.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Yes.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No, I have asked the question with regard to every department, and I find we have no public calls for tender. I do not mean to blame the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries. He is no greater sinner than his colleagues are. I still cling to what I asked the hon. gentleman when we began this discussion. I do not pretend to say that the hon. gentleman has yet become familiar with all the details of his department. Still, it seems to me that the questions I raised were of such a general character, that the hon. gentleman, who has been a long time in public life and long a member of this House, ought to have a policy to declare to us on these subjects, which interest us in the district of Montreal particularly. But, at the suggestion of the Minister of Finance, I am debarred by your ruling, unfortunately-and, I respectfully claim, not quite justly-from obtaining from the minister whose estimates are under discussion a fair and categorical statement of his policy in regard to the port of Montreal. We are debarred from getting a declaration of policy on that most important point from the minister who represents our own district and who is now asking us to vote about a million of money for these purposes. It may be that the technicality is well founded, but it is not a broad interpretation of the rights of members of this House in Committee of Supply. But, in regard to the lighting, there is no doubt that my question is relative. What is the policy of the department with regard to that point, a most important one in connection

with the navigation between Quebec and Montreal. There is an item here for the removal of roek. Surely, it is relevant for me to ask the minister what steps he intends to take to equalize the rates of insurance between Montreal and Quebec with those existing in American ports ? Why are our Canadian ports discriminated against ? The hon. gentleman ought to have a policy on that question, and it is not a question of detail but a question of the utmost importance. The question of winter navigation I think, had already engaged the attention of the minister long before he took a seat on the treasury benches. It is not an answer to tell us that the question has been under discussion for thirty years. The hon. minister is now in a position where he can solve, at any rate in part, that question. What, then, is his policy on me subject ? Has he thought it out ? Is he prepared to make experiments ? I do not wish to retard the hon. gentleman in obtaining these his first estimates, but surely these are questions on which we may expect a declaration of policy when we are called upon to vote these large sums of money.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Would the hon. minister be good enough to explain the Work that these steamers have to do, and in what part of the country they are located ? The
*	Quadra,' we all know about, bat 1 would like some explanation with regard to the other steamers.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The ' Quadra,' as every one knows is on the Pacific Ocean. She is engaged in the service connected with the buoys, lightships, &c., and in aiding in the marine service. The ' Lady Laurier ', the new steamer is situated at Halifax. The ' Aberdeen ' is in Quebec in charge of the district below Quebec and the lighthouses in the gulf. The * Druid ' does the river service at Portneuf and further down. The
*	Lansdowne ' is in New Brunswick. The ' Stanley ' and the ' Minto ' are doing the winter service at Prince Edward Island.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Then the steamers on the St. Lawrence are attending to the lighthouses and so on ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes, and the fishery protection at the same time. They have 000 miles to look after.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: The ' Stanley ' and the ' Minto ' are engaged in some other occupation than the winter service, are they not ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Does the 'Stanley' attend to supplying the lighthouses ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: They help during the summer, as soon as the repairs are done.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Would the minister say what amount of this sum of $250,000 he proposes to put on the steamer ' Stanley ' in repairs the coming season ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I cannot inform the hon. gentleman until the report has been received. We have had the steamer examined by Mr. Stephens, and we expect the report in a day or two.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I understand, in answer to a question I had on the paper today, that the. minister did not intend to send this steamer across to the old country to have repairs made.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Has it not been found necessary to send her to some shipyard in order to make repairs ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Mr. Chairman, I want to inform you that last year and the year before, reports were sent into the government that this steamer did need to be sent aeross to a proper shipyard to be repaired, both as to her machinery and as to her plates and hull ; and this was not done.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: If the hon. gentleman will allow me, I am informed there was no official report to that effect.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I am informed there was a report made by engineer MacMillan, saying the ship did need certain repairs, but they were not done. At any rate, whether a report was sent in or not, I know, and people competent to judge whether a Ship is fit to be on the winter service to cope with the ice, know that the ' Stanley ' was certainly in an unfit condition to cope with the ice between Prince Edward Island and the mainland last winter, and partly by reason of the neglect of the government to have her put in shape the season before, was due the disaster which resulted to shippers in Prince Edward Island last year. Now, while the ' Stanley ' was off Summe-side harbour in the ice jam, I myself, with the port warden of the town and several others, went over to examine her, and the captain himself reported that it was almost impossible to operate that steamer in the ice, because, when she went into it head on her sides were so corrugated by impact witli the ice-she is now fifteen yeas old- that she could not back up, and the steamer, on account of these defects, could work stern foremost better than she could forward in heavy ice. That is one of the causes why such a bungle was made of the winter service last year. Now, I understand the minister does not intend to send this steamer across to be fitted up this year. I would like to know where we have a ship

yard on this side where these repairs can be made. The heavy plates on the side of the ' Stanley ' will have to come oft and be straightened, and I am sure she'will not be able to take up the winter service successfully until these repairs are done. The ' Stanley ' should now be on her way across to the builders to be put in shape for next season. I asked some time ago about the loss to the shippers of perishable goods of fish and meats that were sent down to Georgetown for shipment, and on account of the defects in these boats and their not continuing the service, these fish were spoiled and had to be thrown into the field. I asked if the government had received a petition regarding a refund to the shippers for part of their losses, and the answer was that they had, and they were considering the matter. Attached to these questions there was the following memorandum and letter which I shall read to this House :
A letter has been received from the Secretary of State Department inclosing a petition from residents of Prince Edward Island who were engaged in shipping smelts and eels, asking the government to consider their claims amounting in all to $3,180.17, for fish alleged to have been spoiled during the winter season owing to the fact that the [DOT] Minto ' became disabled. It is stated that the ' Minto - was taken off the route without any notice and sent to the assistance of the ' Stanley,' and that the ' Minto ' was ice bound and helpless between the 21st of February and the 17th of March, 1903.
It is alleged that it was impossible to dispose of the goods, and consequently all the smelts and eels held at Georgetown for shipment were totally spoiled, entailing a serious loss to the shippers.
The report of agent Lord on the subject of sending the * Minto ' to the assistance of the ' Stanley ' is as follows :
I acknowledge that the result turned out very disastrous, but when this action was thought best, in the conference held in my office at which Mr. Farquharson, M.P., Captain Finlay-son, Postmaster Breeken, and others with myself were present, the steamer ' Stanley ' was and had been for over twenty days on two meals a day, and by no other means could provisions be placed on board.
And here I want to say that the ' Stanley,' before she was carried away in the drift ice from Summerside, had been ten days in the ice with ample time to provision the vessel, but the captain never sent ashore for help, for fuel or for provisions for the vessel. She was carried off down the ice in the condition that this whole House is aware of, and the steamer ' Minto ' had to be sent to her assistance, and thus the loss occurred to shippers of these perishable goods.
Her coal supply was very low, and should she be left to her fate and drift out around Cape North into the open between Cape Breton and Newfoundland the consequences might have been serious for the department, and especially this agency. Captain Finlayson's prompt assertion that it was no use for him to try Pictou Mr. LEFURGEY.
as the whole waters from Pictou light down to the east end of Pictou Island and over to the mainland on a line with Arisaig, was completely blocked with heavy ice which no steamer could break through, it was considered the only right thing to do to save the lives of the crew of the * Stanley,' and perhaps the ship.
This last statement, I would like to remark, does not correspond with the remarks of the minister when this matter was up once before, for he left this House to understand that the failure of the service between Prince Edward Island and the mainland was because the steamer ' Stanley ' was on the Summerside route. That is certainly not a fair statement when we have the captain of the ' Minto ' saying that he could not get into Pictou as the whole water from Pictou light down to the east end of Pictou Island was completely blocked with heavy ice, and that was so for a long period of time. To go on with this report of Captain Finlayson :
After consulting with Mr. Lord at the agency office and with Mr. Farquharson, M.P., we decided that the ' Minto ' should go and try to relieve the ' Stanley,' and it was not possible to get to Pictou at that time on account of the heavy drift ice jammed in between Pictou Island and Pictou, which no steamer could break through ; so we filled the ' Minto's ' bunkers and took on board about 120 tons of coal and some stores for the ' Stanley.' On the morning of the 2Sth of February we left for the 'Stanley.'
We got to the 'Stanley' about ten a.m. Before we reached the 'Stanley' Captain Brown maiked the best place to begin to break. After butting at the ice for some time, we broke in about two lengths of the 'Minto,' when the three blades of the prop slier broke otf all at once close to the hub.
Under these circnmstaEces .it is quite clear that both the agent and Captain Finlayson considered It imperative to go to the relief of the ' Stanley ' and the statement of the petitioners that the ' Minto ' could have taken perishable goods on the 21st of February and would have had no difficulty >n getting into Pictou, is not substantiated, hut on the contrary Captain Fin-layson was of the opinion that Pictou eomd not be reached. That the port of Pictou would become clear of ice in a few days afterwards, could not be foreseen. As a matter of fact the ' Minto ' had been detained in Pictou harbour from the 3rd to the 10th of February. A barrier of ice had formed across the harbour entrance and the 'Minto* could not penetrate this barrier.
As a matter of fact part of the fish was shipped to Georgetown when it was known that the 'Minto' could not reach that port
The department last January issued a public notice which was posted in manv places in Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia, notifying the public that perishable goods would be at the risk of the shippers. While this was intended to refer to taking goods on board the steamers yet it was sufficient notice to the public that the department would in no way consider itself liable for perisho,bin articles and that all goods intended for shipment on board the winter steamers would be entirely at the risk of the owners.
It is generally recognized principle that *when a vessel is in danger, another vessel whether a carrier of goods or not will go to

the assistance of that vessel, where lives and property are in danger, in fact if the ' Minto ' had not gone with coal and provisions to the ' Stanley ' it is probaDle that the * Stanley ' would not have been released for some time after she was released and the consequences might have been serious.
(Sgd.) F. GOURDEAU.
I would just like to read the reply to that letter of Mr. Gotirdeau from the gentleman who is the deputy port warden of Summer-side, and who is more experienced in seafaring than the hon. minister or some of his advisers. The reply is as follows
Summerside, P.E.I.. May 27, 1S03. Jas. A. Morrison, Esq.,
Summerside.
Dear Sir,-In reiply to your favour covering Mr. Gourdeau's memorandum in re the case of the fish shippers claim against the Department of Marine and Fisheries about the steamship ' Minto,' for loss of fresh fisn, 1 have to advise you, that the claim set up by the Department of Marine, is not well taken.
The ' Stanley ' was in no danger that the ' Minto ' helped her out of, as is proven by the fact that the 'Stanley' saved the ' Minto,' the latter vessel had already supplied the ''Stanley' with coal ; food could at. any time have been supplied to the ' Stanley ' and there is absolutely no question about the fact, that due diligence was not used to take the perishable goods.
The notice ' at shippers risk' cannot be pleaded, as an excuse unless due diligence is exercised by the common carrier. There is no question in my mind, but had the ' Minto ' been a private vessel instead of a government ship, a suit in court would go in favour of the shippers.
Captain Finlayson's ' prompt assertion,' that it was no use for him to try Pictou, could, in the nature of things, only apply to the then present moment, as there were ever changing conditions and there is no doubt in the mind of any person who has the capacity to judge, that the * Minto ' could have taken the perishable effects over long before they spoiled and long before the ' Stanley ' and ' Minto ' were relieved, if she had not gone to the rescue of the ' Stanley.'
In going to the rescue of the ' Stanley,' who was deserting the shippers perishable goods to have saved the other government property, therefore, on the principle of a general average claim, the thing sacrificed, has to 03 paid for by the thing protected, in short, the crew nor the ship ' Stanley ' were at aDy time in danger that other means than the ' Minto ' could not have relieved her from, it was neglect to have her short of coal or provisions at any time, for she lay off Summerside for eight days where coal contracted for by the government, was in abundance and could have been put on board : and as for provisions, and two meals per day, that was silly nonsense, I have good reason to believe that the two meals per day was a matter of convenience to the cook and to the men, who by reason of their idleness, must have suffered by eating three square meals.
The propeller of the ' Minto ' was not, I am informed, broken by the ice pan in which the ' Stanley ' was imprisoned, but by backing against a clumpet detached from it.
The evidence of the men sent to use dynamite to relieve the ' Stanley ' goes to show that they were of no value, but, that they had to
get out of the steamers way when they let her work at full speed.
I have talked with Mr. Dunn the master of the ' Jubilee,' one of the three men sent, and he declares that the ice pan could easily have been broken by the * Stanley ' if they had tried her. for in no place was the ice two feet thick.
The last paragraph of Mr. Gourdeau's letter is misleading, as in the case of the ' Minto ' and the ' Stanley,' both vessels belonging to the same owners, the recognized principle of vessels going to the assistance of others, to the loss of a third party, does not apply ; in the one case the salvors are actuated by motives the very opposite of the other, the department undertook to save their own property to the detriment of their patrons.
Captain Brown was advised by the * Port Warden ' of Summerside, in the presence of A. A. Lefurgey, Esq., M.P., that where his vessel was, off Sea Cow Head, that ice would likely break off inside of her and she would go adrift, therefore, she should have been coaled up and provisioned so as to be in readiness for any emergency, when there would have been no necessity for the ' Minto ' going to her assistance.
The 'Stanley's' drift would have been identically the same, if the * Minto ' had never went to her.
The * Stanley ' had as much coal on board when she got to Pietou as the ' Minto ' had given her.
I remain.
Yours very truly,
(Sgd.) JOSEPH READ, Deputy Port Warden, M.D.A., &c.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I contend that the loss to these shippers was occasioned by the 'Minto' in returning to Georgetown after the first trip she had made to the Stanley,' and taking her provisions and coal instead of taking the perishable goods, as the shippers had requested the agent of the department to do, to Pictou. The ' Minto ' made this second trip to the ' Stanley ' when there was no need of it, when neither the lives of the crew nor the safety of the vessel was in danger. As a consequence, the ' Minto ' was disabled, and it was not until the ' Stanley ' took her into Pictou that the ' Stanley ' could go back and get these goods. By that time they were absolutely spoiled. I think, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. minister, as also his colleagues, will see that the people who suffered in this regard are certainly entitled to some recompense for the loss. The amount they are asking does not cover any more than the bare cost of the goods, and is in no way compensating them for the increased value they would have had if they had been able to market them at New York or Boston, where these fish were being sent. I would further say, before sitting down, that I consider that the action of tliTs department in not sending the steamer 'Stanley ' to the old country to have the necessary repairs to her hull made [DOT]will result next year in very much the same difficulties that we have had this year. Unless the department intend putting in their estimates an amount for the building of a new winter steamer, the result to the people of Prince Edward Island will he found to be still

more disastrous. We not only want the ' Stanley ' repaired ; it is not only necessary that we shall have the ' Minto ' and ' Stanley ' to carry on the winter trade of Prince Edward Island, but it is absolutely necessary that we should have a third steamer. The business has increased to a very great extent within the last fifteen years, and we have an increasing quantity of goods for shipment each winter. When we got the 4 Stanley ' she could not cope with the trade and we had to get the ' Minto,' and now these two steamers cannot handle at. I would like to hear from the hon. minister what policy the government has in regard to fulfilling the terms of union between the island and the mainland during the coming winter.


William Ross: I think it would be almost unreasonable to send the steamer ' Stanley ' home to Scotland, or England, to be repaired.


Mr. POPE.: Send her to Sorel.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) We have a dry dock at Halifax that is so large that the American government had to send the largest of its steamers there to be repaired. We have all the materials for strengthening and repairing the largest vessels sailing from Quebec to Montreal, and we have the men to remove the plates and repair the steamers as they are doing in several instances. If the ' Stanley ' requires to have her plates removed or to be strengthened it can be done in Halifax just as well as in England.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Although I am new to the department yet the general rules of business should I suppose apply all over. I am informed that we have two capable officials, Mr. Stevens and Mr. Hill. I do not know them personally, but I believe no one will contest Mr. Stevens' ability as an engineer competent to deal with machinery, and Mr. Hill is reported as a competent authority on hulls. These two gentlemen have been instructed to examine the ' Stanley ' and the department will have to be guided by their report. We will not take newspaper gossip or the statements of a certain Captain Reid- I do not know whether he is a ' captain ' or not.	,


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Yes.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I am told he has never commanded anything, but if the hon. gentleman says he has I will stand corrected.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Yes, and he is a very capable man too.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: This gentleman undertakes to give a lesson to Mr. Lord, the agent of the department at Charlottetown. I do not know, Mr. Lord, but he appears to have been appointed under the late government. He was considered until now to be a good official, but Mr. LEFURGEY.
we will inquire into the matter and if the facts alleged against him to-night are proved, of course there will be nothing else to be done than to dismiss him. Captain Finlay-son of the ' Stanley ' is an old employee, and he is reported as one of the most efficient officers of the department. The department relied on the advice of Mr. Lord and Captain Finlayson and Captain Brown, and if it is found that they are incompetent, of course we will have to consider what shall be done, but surely we will take the advice of some one more competent than Mr. Reid before we condemn Mr. Lord or Captain Finlayson or Captain Brown. We have ail the facilities in Canada necessary to repair the ' Stanley.' There is a dry dock in Halifax and another one in Quebec.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: And there is going to be one iu Montreal.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The dry dock in Montreal is not ready yet, but I hope it will be some of these days. I am informed that the ' Stanley ' will not even have to go into dry dock, and there is no use in making matters worse than they are. The trouble about this winter navigation seems to be due to the fact that for the last two years two steamers were put on two different routes, and if only one line had been maintained probably this accident would not have happened last winter. As It is well to profit by experience I can promise the hon. gentleman that next winter there will be only one route.


Joseph Israël Tarte: What route will that be.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We will decide later on.


Joseph Israël Tarte: We are entitled to know it now.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It will be probably Pictou and Charlottetown, and Georgetown.


Joseph Israël Tarte: 
Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I am sorry that the minister has come to such a hasty decision on the route for winter navigation.
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES I am open to conviction.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I am satisfied that when the minister is better acquainted with the circumstances which led to the disaster this last winter, he will change his opinion. If he consults his predecessor he

will be told, I think, that the Summerside-Tormentine route was most successful, as the Hon. Mr. Sutherland himself stated in the House. If the minister will take the trouble to read the speech I made some time ago he will find that it is quite certain that the miscarriage of the winter service between Summerside and Tormentine was due to the fault of the department. It is all very well to blame Mr. Lord or Mr. Finlayson or Mr. Brown, but the responsibility is on the department. Last winter was not the only winter in which the department was neglectful, but last year has been the worst under all circumstances since confederation. The breakdown of the iwiinter service was the fault of the department and- not of the route between Summerside and Tormentine. If the minister studies the facts he will not decide that Georgetown-Pictou is the only route. He will find that Captain Finlayson states in his report that for, I think, a fortnight it was impossible for any steamer to get into Pictou.
Now, the conditions which prevail to close up Pictou harbour leave Summerside and C'ape Tormentine open ; and, as I have pointed out to this House numerous times, the formation of the tides there, meeting and parting several times a day, leaves the ice always in a loose condition, and the only difficulty is in entering Summerside harbour. Suppose Summerside harbour is absolutely closed for two or three months of the year, we have asked the department to build a pier at Carleton Point; and if they do that, during the two months in the worst season, February and March, when Summerside cannot be reached, the steamer can run to Carleton Point. The distance between Summerside and Cape Tormentine is only sixteen miles, and the distance between Cape Tormentine and Carleton Point is only eight and a half miles, where the vessel can make several trips a day. So that the minister must see that the advantage is with the western route as against the Georgetown-Pietou route, where the distance is fourty miles, and where the steamer can only make one trip over returning the following day, except in extremely fine -wether. I trust that the minister will look ihto this matter this year, and that the petition for- a pier at Carleton Point will not), be left over from year to year, as ihas been done -in the past, but that the necessary amount will be brought down in the supplementary estimates for the construction of this pier. I would like to ask the minister what has been the report from the soundings taken there by the engineers just before the close of navigation.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I may say in answer to the hon. gentleman that if he has come to the conclusion that I have decided the policy of the government or the department for next winter, he is mistaken. I have expressed the opinion that, in view of the facts, it would probably be necessary to consider whether it would not be more advantageous next winter to have two steamers on the line between Georgetown and Pictou. The reason I mention this line is that it has been represented to me as the best of all the lines that have been mentioned. by one of the ex-Ministers of Marine and Fisheries, Sir Louis Davies. That is also the opinion of Captain Finlayson and Captain Brown. Under these circumstances,
I am unable to pronounce in favour of the western line. Before deciding anything, I will certainly go into the facts and circumstances, aud will moveover take the opportunity of visiting Prince Edward Island and judging for myself from the information that I gather from competent and well-informed men.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Might I ask how many trips the two steamers have made between Cape Tormentine and Summerside, that we may judge whether the trial has been fair or not ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I am sorry I cannot give the information to the hon. gentleman ; but I will obtain it.


Joseph Israël Tarte: It is very important, I think, that we should have such a communication, because the question is whether that line or the other line is the 'best. If a fair trial has not been made, perhaps it should be made, so that we may know exactly how the matter stands.


Mr. LEMIEUX.: While we are speaking about the steamer ' Stanley,' I may repeat the request which I made some years ago, and which I have made nearly every session since, for a trip at the end of December between the mainland and the Magdalen islands. I think Prince Edward Island is too selfish. It ought to give a chance to the Magdalen islands, which are shut out from communication with the mainland during five or six months of the year. I have been promised years ago that the trip I request would be made. It appears that Captain Finlayson is opposed to it. I am informed by the best captains of boats, and by some reports which I have read. in the Marine and Fisheries Department, that the trip can be made. During the month of December not only is navigation between the Magdalen islands and the mainland possible, but it actually exists between Newfoundland and Cape Breton all the year round. During the month of March also the sealers from Newfoundland are seen near the Magdalen islands. I would ask the hon. minister not to forget that there is a population of 6,000 souls on the Magdalen islands, and that they deserve the consideration of the department.


Mr. HACKETT.: The questions involved in the item before the committee are of

such great importance to the people of Prince Edward Island that I cannot allow the item to be carried without making a few remarks. The hon. member for Gaspg (Hr. Lemieux) has said that the people of Prince Edward Island are too selfish, and that they should be generous with regard io their fellow countrymen on the Magdalen islands. I want to say, Sir, that they are not selfish. We do not care if the hon. gentleman can secure a steamer for keeping up navigation with the Magdalen islands all winter. What we ask is that the terms guaranteed in the contract entered into between the province of Prince Edward Island and the Dominion of Canada shall be carried out, and that steam communication, winter and summer, shall be carried on continuously between the island and the mainland. While we do not insist on the pound of flesh, we do say that justice should be done to us, in accordance with the terms of union. With regard to the expense, we desne as much as the people of any other part of Canada to economize and save the public moneys of this country ;' but this communication is not altogether for the benefit of the people of Prince Edward Island. It has been the means of developing the trade between Prince Edward Island and all other parts of Canada.
At the time when the 'Stanley' and 'Minto' were fast in the ice, there were a hundred cars of freight at Pictou waiting to be carried across to the province of Prince Edward Island. This freight came from 1 oronto, Montreal, Quebec, Halifax and St. John, and at Georgetown there were some 80 or 90 cars of freight awaiting transhipment to die mainland. This shows the immense trade development in consequence of winter navigation having been instituted between the island and the mainland. I regret that the hon. gentleman is not disposed to send the * Stanley ' to be placed in the shipyard where she was constructed and there thoroughly repaired and refitted. It has been said that an official of the department reported in favour of sending the ' Stanley ' across the ocean for repairs. I am reminded by my hon. friend (Mr. Ross) of the facilities at Halifax for repairing ships. I may add that when crossing from Cape Tormentine to Summerside I had a conversation with engineer McMillan, who has been engineer of the ' Stanley ' the last fifteen years and who understands the condition of the steamer and the repairs required. He said that she required to go into the yard where she was constructed and where they had the proper facilities and understood what repairs were necessary She required to have her hull examined and to be thoroughly overhauled, and to have additional braces added to her frame and new plates, as the old plates were bent through contact with the ice. If these repairs were made, she would be in as good a condition as when first launched. The


Edward Hackett: government are practising false economy. Last year they spent nearly $9,000 on the repairs of the boat and she was still unfit for service. They will spend $25,000 perhaps this year on repairs again and eventually they will have to send her across to have her properly repaired in the yard where she was built. There are no facilities in Charlottetown for making the repairs. They may have them in Halifax and in Pictou and I believe that the best facilities are at Sorel. But according to Mr. McMillan, she should be sent to the yard where she was constructed and be thoroughly repaired. The hon. minister said off-hand that he believed communication will be maintained between Georgetown and Pictou next winter. That is contrary to the statement he made the other day. He said that he intended taking a trip to Prince Edward Island to view the situation for himself and then decide as to where the boats shall run. If he does that, he must arrive at the conclusion that one of the boats should be placed on the western route and the other on the eastern route. If he does that and if his captains used proper diligence and care, he will maintain a good service between the island and the mainland. Something has been said with regard to Captain Brown. It is well known that he made no efforts to extricate his ship from the position she was placed in off Sea Cow's Head. The people of Summerside walked out to the boat and asked the captain, after the boat had been only one day in the ice, what he was going to do. He said that he was not going to hire one man or pay one dollar to relieve the ship, but was going to stay there until March. This can be proved by dozens of people who boarded the vessel. Of course the ice accumulated around the boat and she was carried away with 'it and the service of the ship was lost to the people of the province. What is the result ? Claims are being made against the government for damages in connection with the frozen fish and fresh meat business. Large quantities of those products were awaiting shipment and claims have been made on tne government for about $6,000 damages on the ground, as can be proved, that the loss sustained by those shippers were largely due to the fact that proper diligence and energy were not shown in connection with thp government ships. While the amount of $6,000 may be a small sum for the government to pay as damages, to the poor men who lost their time and spent their money providing those products for market it is a considerable amount, and I trust that the government will see their way to reimbursing these men for their losses. Reference was made to Captain Reid, the port warden at Summerside. and the hon. minister rather sneered at him and would make it appear that he was a kind of a long shore sailor. Let me tell the hon. minister that Captain Joseph Reid has sailed ships on

almost every ocean, that he is a deep sea captain, that his experience and knowledge of navigation cannot he excelled by any captain either in Canada, the United State's or Great Britain, that he has the highest recommendations from the British Board of Trade, and stands first as a ship master in this country. In addition he has the confidence of at least the Liberals of the province of Prince Edward Island because they elected him to the local legislature to support the Liberal government in that province, yet the hon. minister would endeavour to east a slur on Captain Reid and the report made by him. This question is one of such importance to the people of Prince Edward Island that every effort should be made by the government to maintain winter communications. As has been pointed out by the hon. member for East Prince, the construction of a pier at Carleton Point only eight and a half miles from Cape Tormentine in New Brunswick, would obviate the necessity for another route, because it would be simply a ferry between those points, and winter and summer this communication could be maintained between Cape Tormentine and Carleton Point. There is, I understand, a measure before this parliament asking for the incorporation of a company to establish a ferry there, and pending what might be done by that company, the government should undertake to place immediately a sufficient sum in the estimates to construct a pier at Carleton Point. The engineer has been making surveys there during the first part of the winter and no doubt his report is in the department. I know that a petition from all parts of the province has been signed asking for the construction of that pier, and I trust that we will not have occasion again to discuss this matter here. I make no apology, however, as I said at the beginning of my remarks, because the question is one which not only affects the province of Prince Edward Island but the whole Dominion.


Richard Blain: I notice that this item was 9200.000 two years ago and last year it was increased to $225,000. This year the hon. minister is asking for $250,000. I notice that the revenue two years ago was $19,000 and that last year it had fallen off to $11,000, being a decrease of $8,000. Will the hon. minister be good enough to explain this decrease when everything was so very prosperous ?


The MINISTER OE MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The winter before last, the revenue from the ' Minto ' and ' Stanley ' was $11,308.55. Last winter, when the service was so very bad according to some bon. gentlemen opposite, the revenue was, from the ' Minto,' $11,111.57 ; the ' Stanley,' $4,178.40; total, $15,289.57. This is an increase of nearly $6,000 during last winter, though the service was impaired through the steamers being caught in ice. I am informed that the reason the revenue in the previous
year, that is three years ago, was only $8,000, was that the service began a great deal later in the season. Last year it began early, though it was interrupted, the revenue was more than the year previous and nearly double what it was three years ago. As to the increase of expenditure, I have explained that. This year we have a n additional boat, the ' Lady Laurier.' which has bad to be equipped.'


Richard Blain: I notice that in the discussion last year the minister said that he had purchased, or was about to purchase, two new boats, one to cost $184,000, and the other $207,000. In that discussion, it was suggested that these boats would require considerable repairs when they came over for service.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: These must have been the lightships.


Richard Blain: I understand not. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries last year said that they were purchased from Fleming & Ferguson, of Paisley, Scotland.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The ' Lady Laurier ' is one and the ' Druid ' the other. The ' Druid ' was in commission last year, and the ' Lady Laurier ' came in this winter.


Richard Blain: May I ask if there was any large expenditure on either of these .two boats after the full amount of contract was paid ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Only in fitting them up.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: In answer to the hon. member for West Prince (Mr. Hackett) the hon. minister said that he had come to the conclusion to put the boats on the Charlottetown, or Georgetown route, having consulted the ex-Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Sir Louis Davies) Captain Brown and Mr. Lord, I would advise the hon. minister to find out these things for himself and not depend on any statements of Sir Louis Davies, for there are other people on Prince Edward Island more competent to judge, and the trials proved that the hon. ex-minister was long enough in office to know the situation better and has been long enough out to realize his mistakes and prejudices and the work does not justify the position he has taken or that of the present minister and we trust he will not fall heir to the local prejudices that coloured the judgment of his hon. adviser. It is also known and believed by the people of Prince Edward Island that Captain Brown came up there with the understanding that he was to give that route a black eye ; and the actions of Captain Brown during last winter and the previous winter show conclusively that he was not using his best efforts to give that route a fair trial. We have also, the opinion of the hon. member for West Queen's (Mr. Farquharson) whose opinion

should he taken equally with that of Sir Louis Davies, and his opinion is that the route between Cape Tormentine and Cape Traverse is the natural route. That lion, gentleman advocated that route last year and has advocated it this year in this House. Moreover, the 'hon. member for St. Mary's (Mr. Tarte) has asked here to-night what was the result of the trial of the ' Stanley ' at Summerside during last winter. Now, I took occasion to give the facts with regard to that steamer on May 11th last, and, to refresh the memory of the minister, and in case he has not the report from his department, I may read it. The steamship ' Northumberland ' made the last trip on December 10th, 1902. The steamer ' Stanley ' should have begun plying, but not until the eighteenth did the ' Stanley ' arrive from Pictou. This is the record :
The ss. ' Northumberland ' made last trip from this port December 10, 1902.
December 18, 1902. The ss. ' Stanley ' orrived about 10 a.m., from Pictou. At 1 p.m., left for Tormentine in a snowstorm laid outside Summerside light all night. Next morning, 19th, proceeded to Tormentine (without returning to Summerside to take passengers that arrived on evening train, who had to stay in Summerside till the 20th), returning about 4.20 p.m.
"	20. Left for Tormentine with local
maih returning 21st without any mail.
"	22. Made round trip, returned about
1.15	p.m. No mail coming.
"	23. Made round trip, returned about
1.15	p.m. No mail coming.
"	24. Made round trip, returned about
3.15	p.m. No mail coming.
"	25. Made round trip, returned about
3.15	p.m. Mail both ways.
"	26. Did not cross. Went outside
harbour and returned.
"	27. Made round trip, returned about
4	p.m., with mails.
"	28. Sunday at wharf.
"	29. Made round trip, returned about
5	p.m., with mails.
"	30. Made round trip, returned about
3 p.m., with mails.
"	31. Made round trip, returned about
4.30 p.m., with mails.
January 1, 1903. Made round trip (change of time), leaving, returned 4.30 p.m. Mails.
"	2. Made round .trip (change of time),
leaving, returned 3 p.m. Mails.
"	3. Made round trip (change of time),
leaving, returned 3 p.m. Mails.
"	4. Sunday at wharf.
"	5. Made round trip, returned about
2.25 p.m. Mails.
"	6. Made round trip, returned about
3.30. Mails.
7. Did not cross.
"	8. Snowstorm, went outside harbour
and returned at 11 a.m.
"	9. Left at 9.30 a.m., returned to Tormentine over night. Returned rn the 10th about 11.15.
"	11. Sunday at wharf.
"	12. Left about 7 a.m., in a gale of
wind from west and very cold. Should have laid at wharf.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I
The circumstances that day were not such as to warrant the steamship leaving the wharf. The captain was advised by both his pilot and mate to stay in harbour. The glass showed that we were going to have one of the biggest storms of tbe year. Now. we have here the report of the working of the steamer that will show at no time since the Picton-Georgetown route was established, have they had more successful crossings than those of the period when tbe steamer was running between Summerside and Cape Tormentine. As I pointed out before, and if the minister will take the trouble to read this speech of May 11


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The hon. gentleman must know that all this is in the department.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: It may be, but while we are discussing this subject it is well that the House should know the situation of affairs. I want to say that up to the 12th, the time when that vessel was caught in the ice off Summerside harbour, tbe crossings at Summerside were the most successful in tbe history of the island since confederation; and had tbe captain used tbe due diligence that any private ship-owner would have used to get his vessel out of that ice, the service between Summerside and Cape Tormentine would have been kept up all winter. We have also tbe advice and testimony of competent persons who have removed vessels from Summerside harbour that were in as bad' a predicament as the ' Stanley,' that had proper means been used when that vessel was in the ice she could have been freed in two or three days. I cannot understand why the minister should say that it is the policy of the department to have Georgetown and' Pictou as the terminal of the winter route between the island and the mainland. I was glad to hear the minister afterwards retract those words, and state that he was going down to look into the matter himself. The people of Prince Edward Island will welcome the minister, and we trust he will look into this matter in an unbiased way, leaving out of consideration the reports of Sir Louis Davies and of Captain Finlayson, and will take the evidence we have of the tests between Summerside and Cape Tormentine, and weigh the matter carefully for himself.


Rufus Henry Pope: I am surprised that the minister should question the advice tendered him by my hon. friend who has just taken his seat (Mr. Lefurgey) in regard to possessing knowledge in reference to this question. The minister is paid to know these things. What else do we pay him for ? He is drawing now a stated salary to know something about his department in this service. We have applauded his appointment to the position he now occupies, not that we expected he possessed extraordinary knowledge in regard to marine and fisheries, but because

we expected that if we paid him a stated indemnity of seven thousand dollars a year, he would acquire special knowledge with regard to these various steamers and their running from the island to the mainland. Sir, I fancy that the hon. member for Gaspe (Mr. Lemieux) is entitled to have his request granted. It is not extravagant that a gentleman representing a coast so extravagantly large as the county of Gaspe should request that only once in twelve months communication should be had between some islands there and the mainland. I am surprised, Mr. Chairman, that since he says he has often made this request for the last two years, and has not been able to get even a single service during the year, he should still remain so faithful a supporter of this government when they are so mean and stingy as to begrudge him that service. Sir, I trust that this appeal of the member for Gaspe will bear some fruit, and that before the next meeting of this parliament the hon. minister will have acquired the knowledge that will to some extent entitle him to draw the special salary which this country is paying him. Now, Sir, the minister has said that he does not know captain so and so, that he does not know captain this and captain that. Again, Mr. Chairman, I say we pay him for knowing these people, the hon. gentleman should know these people. In fact, Mr. Chairman, I think these items would advance much more rapidly if the rules of this House permitted some gentlemen who are sitting near him to speak instead of the minister himself. In fact, I do not think he is a good telephone, I do not think he has taken a lesson from that history I gave in this House a little time ago about the parrot, I do not think he repeats well. He has close to him a gentleman who possesses all the knowledge in the department, the minister can whisper in the ear of his deputy and get the information that we want. Surely he ought to be able to tell us something about captain this and captain that and captain the other. But instead of that, Mr. Chairman, here we are at a loss, we landlubbers. I acknowledge I am not possessed of a knowledge of marine matters; but, as a farmer coming from the interior of this great country, I expect to get information from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. Now, Sir, I am going to ask him a question to find out whether he knows anything about his department. I would like to know from the minister how much supplies he buys for these steamers ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The allowance is mentioned in the item of $220,000. That comprises maintenance and repairs.


Rufus Henry Pope: Not at all, Mr. Chairman. That item of $220,000 is a bulk amount for the salaries and everything else, as I take it. for the maintenance of these steamers. What I want to know is the amount for supplies, provisions, corkscrews.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I read a moment ago the amount that is allotted to each steamer ; I will read it over again if the hon. gentleman insists.	.
' Quadra '-
Wages	$13,680
Fuel	 4,500
Provisions	 5,300
Ship chandlery	 1,800
Docking	 800
Coal oil, &c	 go
Miscellaneous	 1,400
Engine room repairs	 3^500
' Lady Laurier '-
Wages	
Fuel	
Provisions.. .. Supplies, deck.. Supplies, engine Repairs, hull.. Repairs, engine.
Uniforms	
Miscellaneous..

' Aberdeen *-
Wages	
Fuel	7 .7 7
Provisions "	
Painting and dockage	, 7 Engines and deck supplies .	..
Uniforms	
Repairs	7

' Druid '-
Wages	
Fuel	7. 7
Provisions	7
Painting and dockage	' 7
Engine and deck supplies.. ..
Uniforms	
Engine repairs	
Hull repairs	7
Miscellaneous	j



[Stage Direction]
' Lansdowne '-
Wages	
Fuel	7 7
Provisions	
Repairs, hull	
Repairs, machinery	
Ship chandlery	
Supplies, engine room	
Miscellaneous

[Stage Direction]
' Stanley '-
Wages	
Fuel	
Extra labour in winter.. .
Provisions	
Painting and dockage.. .. Engine room supplies.. .. Miscellaneous (repairs, &c.)
[Stage Direction]
? 9,100 9,250 2,000 5.000
2.500
1.500 3,650
1Minto'-
Wages	
Fuel	'
Extra labour in winter
Provisions	
Dockage and painting..

[Stage Direction]
Engine room supplies	$ 2,250
Shin chandlery	 2,000
Engine repairs	 2,000
*44,000
Joseph Israël Tarte: If I have been able to catch the figures which have been given,
I think that for coal and provisions the bon. gentleman will spend over $60,000. Is that about right ? I could not catch the figures very well but I think that is about it.
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. For provisions about $33,000.


Rufus Henry Pope: What about coal ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. We will require 14,000 tons of coal.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Is the coal bought by circulars or by tender ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. By tender. Sometimes a steamer is at a wharf and in want of coal and they buy a small quantity.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Has the department a store into which these provisions are put ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. Each agency has a store.


Rufus Henry Pope: What do you call an agency?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. There is a station at Halifax, one at Pictou, one at Sydney, one at St. John, one at Quebec and one at Charlottetown.


Rufus Henry Pope: Who is at the head of these agencies ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. They are under the officers of the department.


Rufus Henry Pope: Are these provisions that amounted to $35,000 purchased by public tender ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. I could not say they are
purchased by tender-


Rufus Henry Pope: I want you to say.
Some	lion. MEMBERS.	Oh, oh.The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. If you will allow me-


Rufus Henry Pope: Yes, I will allow you.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Do not be too fresh.
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. I cannot say they are procured by public tender. In different agencies circulars are sent out in order to know the market prices at which these provisions can be bought.


Rufus Henry Pope: To whom are these circulars sent ?


Hon. Mr. PREFONTAINE.: 


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: To the trade generally, I suppose.


Rufus Henry Pope: Exactly so. We have arrived up against the same point that we have in regard to all the purchases of this government. The system is absolutely rotten. There is no longer any public tender demanded.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: That is not the case.


Rufus Henry Pope: Not the case ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: No it is not.


Rufus Henry Pope: Well, the hon. Minister of Justice will have a chance to prove whether it is the case or not.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Yes. I will and I will do it too.


Rufus Henry Pope: You are not on trial.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: You are making statements which are not true.


Rufus Henry Pope: The Minister of Justice should not become passionate. The Minister of Justice ought to be able to balance the scales most accurately, while we see lnm exhibiting such passion, what justice can we expect from him as Minister of Justice ?


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


Rufus Henry Pope: The laughter and the cheer come. It 'is a cheap cheer. You can buy it from them. We have heard it in this House for years. It does not scare anybody nor does the hon. Minister of Justice frighten anybody.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: He does not try to frighten anybody and he cannot be frightened either.


Rufus Henry Pope: Pale as he may be under auger at this moment I am still not frightened. Now, perhaps, I may be permitted to address my remarks to the hon. minister in charge of these items. The question has been raised here, not alone by myself, but, by hon. gentlemen on this side of the House from year to year, in regard to the purchase of supplies by hon. gentlemen on the other side representing various departments of the government. They are buying supplies under a system of absolute fraud, a system that is permeated from beginning to end with fraud. In the first place, we find that when tenders are called the specifications are loaded with conditions saying that supplies to be furnished under these tenders shall be of a certain manufacture, or bear a certain brand, or be manufactured under a patent which is under the control of friends of their own. It is well known in Montreal. Toronto, Halifax ; In fact, there is not a cantre of commerce in Canada where this fact is not positively well known. The

friends of these hon. gentlemen are the selling agents of certain patents, certain brands of goods bearing certain marks that are useful in public works and in other directions and the tender goes forth that the tenderer shall supply goods bearing these particular marks. The minister does not know how the circulars are sent out or whether they are sent out to the trade generally or to friends of the government particularly, but he ' supposes.' He is paid to know the facts and not to ' suppose ' and he may recline in his chair if he likes, but he will have to give us the information. We did not ask him to bring his estimates before the House tonight, and there is plenty of time now for the minister between this and the early frosts of September to learn something about his department. We will give him thi^e months study and then he can come back and submit his estimates when he knows, something. Why should he make an exhibition of himself. A new minister should try to make a favourable impression and if he likes he has his deputy there and a number of clerks to learn from them The time is passed when the Minister of Marine and Fisheries or any other minister can ask the representatives of the people to vote hundreds of thousands of dollars of public money to be spent without public tender. If there was a particle of principle among the Liberals in this House they would be the first to denounce the letting of contracts without tenders, because they preached against it for years when in opposition. I feel to-night that there is in this House, notwithstanding the dumbness of the hirelings who sit behind this government


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Mr. Chairman. I call your attention to the fact that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Pope) refers to members of this House as hirelings.


Rufus Henry Pope: Do we not get $1,500 a year ?


Some hon. MEMBERS: Order, sit down.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: We have had enough of this sort of thing.


Peter Macdonald: It is unparliamentary to say that an hon. member is a hireling.


Rufus Henry Pope: It is unparliamentary.


Peter Macdonald: You will he kind enough to withdraw it.


Rufus Henry Pope: I am very glad you decided that it is unparliamentary, and I shall bow to your decision and withdraw the word ' hireling,' and I trust that the hon. gentlemen who so faithfully support this government and who applaud them when they violate all their principles will see the error of their ways. I trust the time will come when they will realize the full effect of applauding the men who sit in front of them for the violation of all their principles. I think we had better let this item stand. The minister does not know anything about it, and we want some information. I under-128i
stand that I have offended the Minister of Justice and I have even dived into the heart of the Minister of Finance, but I regret that because it always pains me when I offend great statesmen. No matter how humble a member on this side of the House may be, he must be pained when he finds he has occasioned passion in the mind of the Minister of Justice. Perhaps the Minister of Justice did not intend to exhibit that passion, and I suppose he will apologize when I sit down. You, Mr. Chairman, can remember better than I can when the Liberals in this House were loud in support of the rights of the people and loud fn denouncing the very thing that they now applaud. When we find' this government who say to the people of Canada : Observe us as to righteousness and purity, when we find them doing such things we have the right to object. We have here the Minister of Marine and Fisheries who has had his education in Montreal, an education that is well known throughout the length and breadth of this country, a man who denominated the public works of Montreal, a man who has put a stamp upon Montreal and left a reputation there that you can tumble into on the sidewalks of Montreal far and wide. When they call a man of that character to the Cabinet, we expect from him justice; such justice as he tendered to the city of Montreal, such justice as he is offering to the people of Canada in his department. The minister says he assumes, but we do not want any assuming ; we want facts. We want to know whether these circulars were sent to the trade generally or whether they were sent to special friends of the government.


Joseph Israël Tarte: The hon. minister has just stated that included in this item are ten or twelve boats. For these boats he must of course have supplies. If his department is not equipped in the way I am going to explain, with a store at each place, would it not be well to ask for tenders, as the Department of Public Works has done ? When the Yukon line was under way, and we wanted supplies, we called for public tenders. We got them, we opened a couple of stores, and from those stores the employees drew what they required, just as is done in the way of business everywhere else. I do not know whether the same rule is applied in the hon. gentleman's department or not; but when supplies to the amount of $40,000 and 14,000 tons of coal are to be bought, I think it would be a good rule to follow. Then each boat would draw from the stores what it required, as is done in any well organized business. I think that suggestion is worth looking into. Is the hon. gentleman in a position to tell us whether such a rule has been applied ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I am informed that the rule has not been applied at all, for the simple reason that the supplies are bought at the different

places as they are wanted at the lowest market price, and the provisions are ordered through the agent. Most of the coal required in the maritime provinces is bought at the mines.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I speak in a general way. The hon. gentleman, I have no doubt, would he in a position to ask his officers how much butter, how much pork, how much beans, how much flour, would be required for such and such boats. The captain of each boat would give the information. When these reports are in hand, would it not be well to ask for public tenders for so much beef, so much flour, and so on ? I think it would be a very good rule to follow if it has not been followed in the past. The goods for Halifax would be delivered there and the goods for Quebec would be delivered at Quebec. That was what the Department of Public Works did in the Yukon. We asked for public tenders, the goods to be delivered at Vancouver, at White Horse, and so on. I am just asking the hon. gentleman to follow a system which I followed myself. If it is not applied in his department, I think it should be applied there. These are pretty large amounts of money to spend for supplies, although I quite grant that if the coal is bought at the mines, he could not perhaps do better. But, all the same, when 14,000 or 15,000 tons are required, I think public tenders should be asked.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not think my hon. friend is right in assuming that there is any difference in the method of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries Department and that of the Public Works Department. When he speaks of public tenders, does he mean tenders by public advertisement ?


Joseph Israël Tarte: We did that for the Yukon.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think that to a certain extent my hon. friend is mistaken, for in some instances, for the supplies for the Yukon tenders were invited by circulars.


Joseph Israël Tarte: No, what took place was this. We asked for public tenders first. Prices were sent in, and goods were obtained for one year. Last year the contract was renewed at the same prices.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think ray hon. friend is mistaken if he implies that that was done by public advertisement in all cases. I am quite satisfied that his tenders for supplies were obtained by circulars.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Yes, for small amounts.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: There has been no change in the method of ordering supplies in the Department of Marine and Fisheries. The method is the same as Hon. Mr. PREFONTAINE.
that which prevailed in former years. The only question is whether the supplies have been obtained at fair and reasonable prices. That is a proper question for inquiry in the Public Accounts Committee. I am quite satisfied that every article has been ordered in good faith and under the fullest supervision, and we challenge the most thorough investigation in the Public Accounts Committee as to whether the prices paid are fair and reasonable. As to issuing public advertisements for tenders for the supply of coal, what would be the use of putting advertisements in the newspapers 1 There are only half a dozen mines in Nova Scotia, and when coal is to be supplied at Pictou, you would hardly bring it from Sydney or Cumberland. You would necessarily get it from the mines in the locality where it was wanted, and I am satisfied the prices are obtained from the various mines in that locality. So in every other case the effort is made to get the goods required at fair and reasonable prices.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Do I understand the bon. minister to say that he sends out circulars for everything required at the opening of navigation ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Joseph Israël Tarte: And that a price is then made ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Joseph Israël Tarte: And that price is the same all the year round ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes, all the year round.


Joseph Israël Tarte: If circulars are sent out in large numbers, the system is not as bad as it might be. Will the hon. Minister of Finance permit me to say that I am not far from the mark in stating that if public tenders were asked when large amounts of provisions are wanted, twenty-five or thirty per cent would be saved. In the Yukon we had the very same experience. We started buying, just in the way pointed out now. Later on we invited tenders, and prices went down. I was criticised in the Public Accounts Committee, as it was the right of the opposition to criticise me. I am not far from the mark in stating that if public tenders were asked, say for meat, tea, coffee, and a group of merchandise, to be delivered at Halifax, Quebec or elsewhere, the department would save trouble and criticism for itself, and save money for the country.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I can neither admit nor deny my hon. friend's statement with reference to the Yukon, because I admit that he has a better knowledge of that than I have; but, as respects these supplies, if he thinks he could save

twenty-five or thirty per cent, I am bound to say I differ from him. I do not think my hon. friend will say that when he ordered goods in the Department of Public Works by circular, we thereby lost from twenty-five and thirty-five per cent. No doubt he believed that by that method he obtained fair and reasonable prices, and if that were possible in the Public Works Department it is equally possible in the Marine and Fisheries Department. I know as a matter of fact that in some of the ports where these supplies are furnished, they are obtained at very moderate terms-so much so that people hardly care to compete for the furnishing of them. Take the case of Halifax, of which 1 have personal knowledge, the agent of the Marine and Fisheries Department there is a gentleman who has been in the service many years, and who has certified that every item in the account is charged at a fair and reasonable price. I am sure that he would not certify to items that were charged at from twenty-five to thirty-five per cent over what is fair and reasonable.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Would it not be worth trying ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Why more to-day than when my hon. friend was minister ?


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Joseph Israël Tarte: My hon. friends opposite say hear, hear, but two blacks do not make a white, or two whites a black. It is a question of business, and business men will, I believe, share in the views I have just expressed. So far as the Yukon telegraph is concerned, there was a large amount involved, and if I remember aright, some of my colleagues were of the opinion that public tenders should be asked, and I asked for public tenders. I remember very well that in the Department of Public Works at Ottawa, when small amounts were in question, we asked for prices by circular, but these were very small amounts indeed. However, I have called the attention of the minister to this point, and do not want to insist on it. Now that I am on my feet, might I ask the hon. gentleman whether he has made any inquiry as to the reasons why the ' Stanley ' could not maintain the winter service between Sum-merside and the mainland-whether there is any official report on that question.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The papers were all laid on the Table two months ago.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Will the hon. gentleman give, in a few words, the reasons why the efforts were unsuccessful ?
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND
FISHERIES. It is well known that the
failure was due to the weather. The question came before the House and all the facts were explained. The ' Stanley ' was caught in such heavy ice-as thick as four and a half feet-that it was impossible for her to move either one way or the other. That is why the ' Minto ' was called to her assistance, but unfortunately, she broke three blades of her propeller and was disabled. It was only after two or three weeks that the ' Stanley ' succeeded in extricating herself from the ice and she towed the ' Minto ' to the port of Pictou. It was an accident quite uncontrollable.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Statements have been made in the House that no efforts were made to work the boats. I was very much surprised, because to my knowledge the steamers of the Department of Marine and Fisheries are very well manned as a rule, and good discipline is maintained on board. I have visited them often and am glad to say that no steamers could be better kept. What I wanted to know was whether any inquiry has been held regarding the statements that the captain made no efforts.
The MINISTER OF MARiNE AND FISHERIES. He made every effort, and it is quite clear to the department that the accident was unavoidable.


Robert Laird Borden: I would like to suggest, in answer to what has been said by the hon. Minister of Finance, that it does not seem much of an argument against the advertising of the supplies that the ex-Minister of Public Works did not always do it. There does not seem to be much cogency in that argument. There would, however, seem to be more force in the statement of the ex-Minister of Public Works that having tried both systems, he thinks there will be very considerable saving if the system of advertising in the newspapers be adopted. If the supplies can be obtained in that way, what is the objection ? I have heard something in Nova Scotia about the way these circulars are sent out, and the information that has come to me is that they are given a very restricted circulation, much more limited than was the case under the late administration ; and as far as my hon. friend's observation with regard to the Committee of Public Accounts is concerned, he knows that if the committee sat every day, instead of once or twice a month, as it has been doing, it would not be able to make any such investigation of these items as would justify the removal of any public safeguard. Under the circumstances, I cannot see any force in the observations of m.v hon. friend or any possible objection to putting advertisements in the newspapers with regard to supplies required by the departments.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I believe that we have experienced no difficulty in the past in having investigations before the Committee of Public Accounts. During last

session a very considerable portion of the time of that committee was taken np in answering the criticisms of hon. gentlemen opposite on expenditures in the Department of Public Works, which were held to be rash and extravagant, just as the expenditures now being criticised are considered to-day. But upon full investigation, these charges were found absolutely unjustified, and I believe that an investigation to-day with respect to the Department of Marine would have precisely the same result. It is easy, in this House, to make general statements that purchases are extravagant, but these have not borne investigation successfully in the past and will not in the future, I am satisfied. As regards the method followed in former years, the government in former years purchased these supplies from their friends, and I presume the present government does so. Why should we not be frank on that subject ? There is no change in the system and the only question is whether the prices are fair and reasonable. If purchasing from friends of the government leads to excessive prices, that is an abuse which no practice in the past can justify, but unless the hon. gentleman can show that the prices are excessive and that these certificates given by men like Mr. Lord, of Charlottetown ; Mr. Parsons, of Halifax ; Mr. Harding, of St. John, and others, are false, it is not fair to assume that there is any extravagance in the prices.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I hope my hon. friend will not put in my mouth words that I had no intention of using. I never charged the Department of Marine with extravagance.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Others have.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I was speaking for myself. I have that right-the only one that may be left me. I did not want to make any change of the kind, but was speaking in a general way, and I spoke, I think, the language of a sound business man. The hon. gentleman says truly that the government have a right to favour their friends. But there are certain limits to that right. Governments should not go beyond these limits. For instance, it would be very pleasant to be able to give contracts for wharfs and lighthouses without tenders, but they do not do it. We ask for public tenders.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Why ?


Joseph Israël Tarte: Because the law is there. The spirit of the law is that when a large expenditure is to be incurred, as a rule tenders are publicly called for. I was simply speaking in that direction. Here is an expenditure of $40,000 or $50,000, and I suggested that perhaps the country would save money by publicly asking for tenders. But if the hon. minister is satisfied that Hon. Mr. FIELDING.
there is no money to be saved he is responsible for his statement. I am responsible for mine.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: There is no doubt but that the Minister of Finance is absolutely mistaken, and so is the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. When the Minister of Finance says that an investigation is necessary to show that we could save 25 or 30 per cent on these purchases he is mistaken. That investigation has been made, and we find the results in the Auditor General's Report for last year. If hon. members will take the trouble to consult that report as to the purchases of supplies for government steamers, they will be persuaded, not that we could have saved 30 per cent only, but that we could have saved 40 or 50 per cent at least upon provisions had we called for tenders publicly. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries says that circulars were issued, and that a comparison shows that fair market prices are secured. I shall not take the trouble to read the Auditor General's Report, but if hon. members will take the trouble to read it, they will find that the saving would be as great as I have said.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: They are not all bought in the same place.
Mi'. MONK. Because the hon. minister will not carry out the rule the adoption of which we are advocating. Take the case of groceries, for instance. Surely it would be possible for the minister to call for tenders for groceries to be furnished during the summer season to the government steamers. Here in the Auditor General's Report, beginning at page P-9, the hon. minister will find instances where groceries have been bought by the thousand pounds at as high prices as we pay at retail in Montreal. In the city of Montreal we have, as other cities have, large wholesale houses that would be glad to tender for these supplies, and-1 am speaking of groceries only-would be able to supply the country at a saving of 40 per cent on the prices that have been paid. How, then, can the Minister of Finance say we must make an investigation before the Public Accounts Committee to establish what is here proven ? The same thing applies to the furnishing of green groceries, and the same thing to hardware. I am not as conversant with hardware, but I venture to say that if tenders were publicly called for we would gain over 30 per cent. Why not let it be done 5 It is no answer for the minister to say it has not been done in the past. The public expenditure is increasing and we are here to call attention to the existence of wise rules. There can be no doubt in the mind of any reasonable man that in articles that are required in large quantities-cwlien it is a question of a few dollars' worth


Joseph Israël Tarte: We could not do it.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: We could not do it-but, in au expenditure of $40,000, we could save $15,000. I think that the hon. minister, now that he is just taking hold of his department, should apply this rule in purchasing supplies for the steamers. This is reasonable. Then why not do it 7


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: There is this difference between the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) and myself : When he says that 30 or 40 per cent could be saved on these purchases, he assumes that his mere saying it proves it ; on the other hand, I confess I cannot accept that reasoning at all.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I can give instances.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) cannot give instances, because he has no knowledge of the circumstances under which these purchases take place. What I do know is that in all these cases-I am speaking generally-reputable officers, many of them appointed under former governments, certify, with respect to these items, that the prices are fair and reasonable. This is the evidence of a man on the spot, a man whose duty it is to know the facts. My hon. friend from Jacques Cartier says that we must dismiss that and take his own statement to the contrary. I do not think that is fair.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I can cite one instance that came under my notice since I became a minister. Circulars were sent out in the city of Quebec for the purchase of provisions for two or three steamers there. We received about twenty tenders, and the articles which were lowest were chosen from the different tenders. Our agent there reported as to every article that he recommended to be bought from the different tenderers that the prices were reasonable according to the current market prices. Our officer has been there for thirty years, and is in a position to know the facts. Of course, there are articles for which tenders cannot be had, for instance, the articles the supplies of which are bought daily. In that case, our agent is directly responsible, because he must certify that the prices paid are not higher than the market prices. Two years ago, a great fuss was made about some bread furnished in Quebec for the steamers, which appeared in the Auditor General's Report as being double the price of bread bought in Halifax. After investigation, it was discovered that the loaves of bread in Halifax were a certain number of pounds, while the loaves in Quebec were double that weight, explaining at once the difference in price. Another point was made that brick had been bought at $40 a thousand when ordinary brick was selling at $7 or $8 a thousand. It was discovered that a few fire brick had been imported to repair a furnace, and they had been paid
for at the regular price in the market. As regards coal, as I have explained, it is bought in different places. In the maritime provinces, it is usually bought at the mines, and the prices are the lowest at which coal can be bought. In Quebec and other places where we are not near the mines, circulars are sent out calling for tenders. The prices are compared by the agent with market prices, and he takes the responsibility of certifying that they are fair and reasonable.


Mr. BELL.: Why does the hon. minister say that coal is bought at the mine ? Is it not delivered at the steamer's side ?
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND , FISHERIES. Delivered at the steamer. But bought from the producer. Take Pic-tou, for instance. The coal bought at Pictou was all got by tender at the mines for $3.75 fob on the wharf. At Sydney we paid $3.


John William Bell: How many steamers are coaled at Pictou ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It depends entirely on when they pass there. Sometimes they would coal two or three times in the summer. One may coal three or four times and another only once.


John William Bell: Is the contract invited for the whole season ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).: When the minister says bought at the mine, does he mean purchased from the mining company, or [DOT] purchased at the mine through some agent ? In other words, is there any commission on this $3.75 for coal at Pictou ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It was purchased from the Intercolonial mine by tender. At Halifax it was purchased for $4.75, there is no mention from whom it was bought. At Sydney it was bought from the Dominion Coal Company at $3.


Samuel Hughes: I do not know whether the minister is aware of it, but I have understood that sometimes in these public contracts the full weight of coal does not always materialize. What steps has the minister taken to see that the coal is delivered in proper weight ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I have not heard there is any deficiency in the weight.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: The Minister of Finance has made an argument that seems to me so puerile that it is not worth while answering. He says that when he has a certificate from an officer of the government that the goods have been delivered and that the prices charged are reasonable, that ought to be

sufficient, tender or no tender. Let me tell the Minister of Finance that if he will take the /last report of the Auditor General, at page F-9, he will find a purchase amounting to $580.57, made at Quebec for groceries, at prices for every article that far exceed the prices we pay in Montreal in retail stores, even the largest stores. Is the minister going to pretend that if he calls for tenders for large supplies of those articles giving every man in the Dominion who is in business a chance to tender, he would not get them cheaper ? I venture to say that that item of $588 would be reduced to less than $350. I can find numberless instances. For instance, here is coffee, 40 cents at one place, 35 at another, more or less at another; when we can get it for 30 cents, of the very best quality, in Montreal from wholesale grocers if they were allowed to tender. There is no question about the principle. The question is that the minister is asking us for $250,000, and he will not pledge himself that the citizens of this Dominion will have a chance to tender as the law requires.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I say there is no such law, that is my first point. In the second place, the hon. gentlemau quoting coffee at 40 cents a pound, does not prove anything at all. There is coffee and coffee, everything depends on the quality and on circumstances. No doubt many a man in this House pays more than 40 cents a pound for coffee, and does not consider that he is being robbed. Everything depends on the circumstances under which the goods are supplied, the quality of the goods, the condition of the market, and many other things of which my hon. friend cannot possibly have any knowledge. But if on any of these goods we have information that the prices are excessive, I am sure that on inquiry we will be glad to have his assistance in showing it. But we should not assume that the prices are excessive upon any such information as he has yet given us.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Can the Minister of Marine and Fisheries tell us whether he has asked tenders from wholesale men ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Joseph Israël Tarte: If the hon. gentleman asked for tenders by circulars from wholesale grocers such as Martin & Co., or Chaput & Co., there would not be great objection. But let me assure him that if he looks carefully into the report of the Auditor General he will find that on many occasions, not only in his department, but in others, things are bought at retail prices. That should not be done. Last year I was placed in that same position. I will mention one fact which the Minister of Finance will remember. We had asked for tenders by circular in British Columbia for the Yukon telegraph. Prices came down here that we regarded too Mr. MONK.
high. I applied to some wholesale grocers in Montreal, Martin & Co. and Chaput & Co., three or four wholesale grocers, and I found it advantageous to buy in Montreal and to ship the goods to Vancouver. The Department of Public Works has a record of that. Now the Minister of Finance should not lose sight of these facts. These are hard facts that no argument can gainsay; and my hon. friend is wrong when he lays down as a principle that when the certificate of a local man, of the engineer or the foreman, is on the paper, it should be taken for granted that the prices are right. I am speaking after an experience of nearly six years and a half as Minister of Public Works, and I state boldly that if the chief officials of the department here did not control the certificates of their local men, there would be abuses that the Minister of Finance has no idea of. He has no conception of the abuses that would prevail if the chief officers of the department did not control the certificates of the local men. I have been caught myself unwillingly, my officers have been caught unwillingly on several occasions. This is not a rule that should be followed, and I do not think the Minister of Finance means that it should be absolutely followed. If the Minister of Marine and Fisheries will follow my suggestion he will save money for the public treasury. Let him ask for prices from wholesale firms in several places. Every business man would ask for tenders from wholesale houses in several towns and cities, knowing that he would then get fair prices. My hon. friend said a moment ago that the price of coffee in Montreal is 30 cents. I am buying my coffee at this moment for 30 cents a pound, the best coffee in Montreal.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I do not like that coffee.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I can assure him that I know what good coffee is. For 30 cents a pound you can get the best coffee in the Montreal market.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: With regard to these certificates that prices are fair and reasonable, the hon. gentleman seems to assume that his officers in the Public Works Department kept their eyes on these certificates, and that there were no officers in the Marine and Fisheries Department who do likewise.


Joseph Israël Tarte: No, I did not mean that at all.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The Minister of Marine and Fisheries has officers to supervise these accounts, and if there seems to be anything excessive, either in the Public Works Department or in the Marine and Fisheries Department, undoubtedly it would be the duty of the higher officers to call attention to it. All I claim is that when you have that certificate from a reputable officer,
I

it is prima facie evidence that the prices are fair and reasonable until somebody shows to the contrary.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I did not accuse the officers of the Department of Marine and Fisheries more than any one else,' nothing of the kfnd. I am only laying down a principle that I believe is sound. I believe that the officers of the Marine and Fisheries Department are just as good as any other officers ; to my knowledge they are" honest men, and I have nothing to say against them, far from it.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) X know something about wholesale groceries in the city of Halifax, and I would say that in no instance can it be found that there is 5 per cent or 10 per cent overcharge. If the hon. gentleman will look at the prices in the city of Halifax he will find that the government has been supplied at as reasonable prices as would be charged any other buyer, because these purchases are made by men of the highest reputation. X know, that, in the case of hardware, some Halifax merchants stated to me that they would sooner not have supplied these goods that they would have done better by filling their own orders all over the country, because the prices have been reduced so low that there was no inducement for them to supply these goods to the government vessels. If you go minutely through the list of supplies that have been furnished at the port of Halifax you will find that in no instance has there been an overcharge. I know that coal is supplied by the mines of Cape Breton and shipped on board vessels to be carried here and there at the very lowest price. This year a case came under my own personal knowledge in which coal was supplied as low as three years ago.


Edward Hackett: My hon. friend from Victoria, N.S. (Hon. sir. Ross) says that hardware was bought at a very low rate in Halifax. I have under my hand the accounts for a quantity of goods known as software that was purchased for the ' Minto ' in the port of Halifax, and I would like to read it for the benefit of the committee :
James Scott & Co., Halifax : Soda water, ginger beer, apollinaris and lemonade, fourteen dozen, $14.10.
X would like to know if this is a fair price for soft goods in Halifax. As the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries is in the habit of issuing a circular inviting tenders he no doubt issues a schedule of quality stating the kind of goods required. I notice in the Auditor General's Report at page P-26 the following charge :
Sanderson & Co., Charlottetown, Turkish cigarettes, two tins, $4.75 per tin.
I would like to ask the hon. minister whether he received a tender for Turkish cigarettes, and if he would consider that was a fair price or not and I would like to
ask him in what way Turkish cigarettes are used in the navigation of steamships ? I think he at least must have added $2 a tin to the ordinary price of Turkish cigarettes on that occasion. I would like to know how many tenders he received for the supply of these cigarettes and if the offer of Sanderson & Co., of Charlottetown, was the only one received, and if this government vessel could not have proceeded on its voyage just as well without these cigarettes.


Rufus Henry Pope: The hon. Minister of Finance said that we would find a variation in prices in the different localities in which supplies were purchased. Of course, we may be critical in regard to these matters, but it is the duty of an opposition to ascertain the facts in connection with public expenditure. I would not say that for every expenditure of $500 the rule of advertising for tenders must be observed, but where it means an expenditure of a considerable amount of money the government must allow that it is open to criticism and at least to suspicion if tenders are not invited. It is not necessary for us to go through all these items that are contained in the Auditor General's Report. It is impossible for the members of this committee as a whole to attend the Public Accounts Committee. It is impossible for us to investigate. If we did attend the Public Accounts Committee, the expenditure of this government in all its departments, as it is represented in the report of the Auditor General, and if we were to follow the rule laid down by the hon. Minister of Finance, we would be confronted at once by the statement that we had got all these particulars in the Public Accounts Committee. I am sure the lion. Minister of Finance will not lay it down as a principle that we should not criticise any detail of the expenditure in any department unless we had investigated it in the Public Accounts Committee, because that would be a principle impossible to carry out. The Public Accounts Committee would have to .sit year after year and this House never would rise if we were to follow out that principle. Taking up the question of a single item, I will give the committee a comparison of the prices charged for the article of potatoes. I find that at Rimouski there was a charge of 40 cents a bushel, at St. Andrews, a charge of $2 a Bushel, at Shelbourne, 50 cents a bushel, at Souris, 33 cents a bushel, at another place 00 cents a bushel, at another place $2 a bushel.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) Would that not be $2 a barrel ?


Rufus Henry Pope: Two dollars is a little high, Mr. Ross, even under your administration. At another place 60 cents a bushel, at another place 78 cents a bushel, and so on all through you find this variation in connection with that article. Even if I had the long long years of training of my hon. and venerable friend from Victoria, N.S., I do not think

that I could accept a variation between 33 cents and $2 a bushel without making an inquiry of the hon. minister. I would not be expected to go to the Public Accounts Committee to warrant me in rising in my seat and criticising such items as these. Now, Sir, all this criticism and all this suspicion can be avoided if the better system were followed of calling for public tenders. 1 am sure that we would accept it from the hon. minister as being more or less satisfactory if he would say to-night that in future, he will adopt the system of asking for public tenders in connection with the general supplies required by this department. It is quite easy after the years of experience we have had in operating these steamers and it would be very businesslike also for the department to make an estimate based upon the expenditure of years gone by of what the requirements would be in the year to come in the various articles such as groceries, coal, &c. That is only business. It is done by every business firm in Canada or in the world, so far as that goes, and it is very easy for the hon. minister to make a reasonable estimate of the supplies that would be required and ask for a public tender for the quantity needed during the year. Let him advertise for these tenders and when he receives these tenders let him act upon them without any undue influence, which I am sure would not be exercised by the hon. minister and if he did this the duty of hon. gentlemen on this side of the House would be simple. It would be much easier and more satisfactory for all of us. When we look through these items and find the wonderful variation in price which no distance warrants we are certainly justified in protesting against such a system as this. There is no distance in all of Canada that warrants a difference between 33 cents and $2 a bushel.


Sir. MACKINNON.: Is it $2 a barrel or .$2 a bushel ?


Rufus Henry Pope: It is $2 a bushel.


Donald Alexander Mackinnon: It is six barrels at $2 a barrel.


Rufus Henry Pope: They may have been seed potatoes, but there is entered here one bushel at $2. If the hon. gentleman thinks he scored a bull's-eye, let him take his prize. The gentlemen on this side of the House would be absolutely derelict of their duty if they did not absolutely protest against the method of purchasing these articles and the prices paid for them. The minister is starting in a larger sphere as a responsible minister of the Crown, and it would be to his credit if he would get up now and state that in future these supplies will be obtained by public tenders. Is he going on with the old system of buying these supplies in future as in the past, or will he invite tenders ?


Some hon. MEMBERS: Carried.


Rufus Henry Pope: 


Rufus Henry Pope: No, it is not carried. I have asked a fair question, and I want an answer.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It is not my intention to change the system.


George Taylor: We paid F. X. Drolet, of Quebec, $6,663.51, and I want to know whether we bought from him by tender or if the prices he charged were what he thought fit to charge ? We have an item here for rope specially made for steering gear, 130 feet at 50 cents per foot. That is an outrageous price for a foot of rope.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I am informed that this party is a machinist, and that it is an account for the work and material he has furnished for the steamer in the regular way.
Mi-. TAYLOR. This work was not done by tender ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There could be no tender for such repairs as that.


Mr. CASGRAIN.: Who are the wholesale grocers in Quebec from whom he asked tenders ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. They are mostly all asked, but I know the firm of Turner.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: A very good firm it is. You say that tenders were asked from Whitehead & Turner ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. Yes, and they got part of the contract.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: Who were the other firms ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. There were twenty. As far as I can remember, there were amongst others Coleman, and Dion, and Thibaudeau.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: Dion is not a wholesale grocer, and Coleman is not a wholesale grocer, either.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Yes, he is.


Andrew B. Ingram: Do these boats carry passengers ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Those which do the winter service to Prince Edward Island carry passengers.


Andrew B. Ingram: There are many charges of luxuries of a very expensive character, and if they did not carry passengers and supply meals, these items would be very extraordinary.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The Prince Edward Island steamers supply meals.


Andrew B. Ingram: The expenditure on these boats is $452,526; now what is the revenue from these boats ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The revenue, as I have already given, from the ' Minto ' and ' Stanley ' was for 1901-2 $11,308, and this year from the ' Minto ' $11,111.57. and from the ' Stanley ' $4,178.40, making $15,289.


Andrew B. Ingram: So that while the total expenditure of the department on these boats is $450,000, we have a revenue from them of about $15,000. The hon. Minister of Finance approves of the principle of purchasing supplies laid down for years by both parties ; but I beg to differ from him with regard to that principle. I contend that a government party have a perfect right, when they ask for tenders, all things being equal, to give the contract to their friends ; but it is no answer to say that they have purchased supplies from their friends and paid a reasonable price for them. The only true principle is, first, to call for tenders, and then, all things being equal, to give the contract to your political friends. When the government go outside of that principle, they are not doing what I believe to be in the best interests of the people of this country. When you look over these items, notwithstanding the statement by the hon. member for Victoria that men are to be found who are so patriotic in spirit towards the Depai-tment of Marine and Fisheries. that they furnish things for less than cost


William Ross: I made no such statement. I repeat the statement I made. I confined myself to the port of Halifax, because I do business there, and know something of the character of the gentlemen who supply these articles.


Andrew B. Ingram: If the hon. gentleman will turn to page P-26 of the Auditor General's Report, he will find a large number of items there for which excessive prices were paid.


William Ross: By whom supplied ?


Andrew B. Ingram: By Sanderson & Company, of Charlottetown ; and by James Scott & Company, of Halifax.
Mr. ROCHE (Halifaxl. Give the prices.


Andrew B. Ingram: I do not wish to take up the time of the House unnecessarily ; but I will give a few : Bananas, 2 bushels, $5.75 ; fancy biscuits, 15 pounds at 20 cents ; pilot biscuits, 384 pounds at 7 cents ; breakfast and dinner biscuits, 13J pounds at 50 cents ; sugar and opera wafers, 1 dozen, $5.50 ; Turkish cigarettes, 2 tins, $4.75 ; crystallized fruits, 20 pounds at 60 cents ; figs in cordial, Indian relish, stuffed olives, truffles. I could quote many other things.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Go on.


Andrew B. Ingram: If the hon. gentlemen want me to take up a few hours here I will do so.


Some hon, MEMBERS: Yes, go on.


Andrew B. Ingram: Do the hon. gentlemen wish to listen to me for a few hours ?


Some hon. MEMBERS: Yes, certainly.
Mi-. INGRAM. I shall be very glad to entertain them if they wish. I did not rise for that purpose this evening. I would rather assist the Minister of Finance in getting through the estimates ; but on some other occasion I will be glad to entertain them.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: My hon. friend has mentioned the name of a reputable Halifax firm, and has conveyed the impression that that firm charged extravagant prices. I know the members of that firm, and I am satisfied that they would not charge a price that was not fair and reasonable, and if the circumstances are investigated, I am sure this will be established. It is not fair for hon. gentlemen to convey the impression that a reputable firm had charged extravagant prices unless they are prepared to establish it.


Mr. COCHRANE.: Does the hon. Minister of Finance think the people of Canada should pay for these luxuries to be furnished to the men employed to run these boats ? Why are we called on to furnish them with cigarettes ? I do not think this is a laughable matter at all. The question is why the ratepayers of Canada should pay for these luxuries; and when the price paid for coffee is pointed out, what answer do we get from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries ? A very jocular and laughing answer, that he did not drink thirty cents coffee. Weil, I am willing that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries or any one else should drink as expensive coffee as he pleases if he pays for it himself ; but I do not believe the ratepayers of Canada are required to buy the best things in the market


An hon. MEMBER.: Carried.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: No, it is not carried ; and the gentlemen might as well keep their mouths shut. I want to tell hon. gentlemen opposite that I represent a constituency, and I am not going to be bull-dozed by any of their horse laughs at anything I am saying. What I was saying is, why should we be called upon as ratepayers of the Dominion of Canada to furnish luxuries for the men working the boats on the St. Lawrence or the Atlantic ? I do not think we are called on to furnish cigarettes, these delicate waters, and all this other stuff to men in every-day life. I do not blame the hon. Minister of Finance so much, because he was not in this House, but he is advocating quite a different principle to-night from that which his party advocated when in opposition. If the prin-

ciple was not a good one when we were in power, can he say, in any fairness, that it is a good one now ? The hon. gentleman's friends strongly denounced this practice in the past, but those gentlemen are doing the very same thing now which they condemned then. They are doubly guilty- more than that, they are hypocrites. There is the Postmaster General, he remembers when he was in opposition.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Tell us what I said.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: I would not use the language you did in parliament. We never descended on this side to criticising items such as the washing of napkins and that sort of thing at Government House. We never criticised on this side of the House the Prime Minister's livery bill. Our criticisms are on a higher plane. I would not descend to criticise the washing of napkins at Government House when I was invited to dine there and helped to soil them. We are called on to furnish luxuries for gentlemen managing these boats. We are spending thousands and thousands of dollars in buying these luxuries, which the ordinary ratepayer of Canada is not able to purchase for his own table. As a representative of a rural constituency, I protest against this expenditure on luxuries, which the great bulk of my electors are not in a position to purchase for their own families. We had better call a halt on this line. Does it follow that because we made mistakes in the past and did not call for tenders, this business administration, which has been heralded all over the country as a business administration, should do the same thing.


Mr. RICHARDSON.: We have had the assurance several times during the debate that these prices must be all right because the officials of the government have certified to that effect, and we have been challenged over and over again to point out particular items of over charge. Let me call attention to a few items which will be found on page 22-P of the Auditor General's Report. On the very first line, I find, among supplies furnished to the steamer ' Minto,' 985 pounds of beef at 10 cents; six pairs of chickens at one dollar; 799 pounds of mutton at 12 cents. Hon. gentlemen from Summerside can say whether these are fair prices or not. Beef 10 cents per pound; eggs, 25 cents per dozen; Royal Baking powder at 55 cents, an article which is put up at 25 to 30 cents; sardines, two dozen at SI'90 per dozen; salmon, two cases at $7.75; vinegar, 75 cents per gallon. It is well known that the very best domestic vinegar can be bought at 4o cents per gallon, and give a handsome profit to the retailer. All through you have the evidence that these gentleman who certified to these prices are just figure heads and would certify to anv-thing.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: 


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: That is a very grave accusation. Very much depends on the circumstances under which these goods are ordered. It is not possible from the mere reading of the figures from the Auditor General's Report, to form any conclusion, without a knowledge of the circumstances. With regard to the luxuries, I know the circumstances under which the cigarettes were purchased and they cost $2 or $3, but the other articles are only such as would appear on the table of the commonest railway restaurant in the Dominion. You will find India relishes and things of that kind on the table of any restaurant and they are not luxuries in a ship which carries passengers.	[DOT]


Matthew Henry Cochrane: They do not carry passengers.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Yes, they do. They are not luxuries in the sense in which the hon. gentleman says they are.


Robert Lorne Richardson: I was quoting the prices of necessaries.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: My hon. friend who spoke before the bon. gentleman spoke of luxuries.


Robert Lorne Richardson: Here is a charge for beef, 985 pounds at 10 cents. I am informed that it is an article which can be bought at 0 or 7 cents. Mutton at 12 cents is surely an exorbitant price.


Andrew B. Ingram: Will any one pretend that we could not buy sugar in large quantities at less than five cents per pound. Here is one firm which charges five cents per pound. Everybody knows that that is an excessive price. Tea, coffee and sugar are staple supplies which you could buy in large quantities, and distribute to these vessels as required. I could understand your paying excessive prices at certain points for perishable articles such as bananas, but the staple articles you should purchase in large quantities and under contract. I do not care what the past system has been, the present system should be changed. The system of the past was a wrong system and there is no reason why it should be continued. If the government change the system there will be no reason for such complaints as have been made to-night. But, in relation to such a system as we now have, the criticism is perfectly proper. It is clearly in the interest of the country that the system should be changed.


David Henderson: There may be much in what the Minister of Finance said with regard to the condition under which the articles are purchased. But, when I find that in the city of Quebec a purchase of 984 pounds of sugar was made at five cents per pound, another purchase of 349 at five and one half cents and, from another grocer, 296 pounds at five cents per

pound, it seems quite evident that there is something wrong. The conditions at Quebec are much more favourable for the purchase of sugar than the conditions in western Ontario. Now, I speak of something of which I have practical knowledge when I say that in western Ontario thirty-five miles west of Toronto, after paying water freight and inland freight by rail, sugar one year ago-the time when these accounts were made up-was sold to the farmers of that section at a profit at four cents per pound. This was standard granulated No. 1, and I have no doubt that the sugar here referred to was not one whit better, for it is a standard article. It is evident, that, as the hon. member for Jacques Cartier said, in that item alone the price is from twenty-five to thirty per cent above actual value. With many other articles there may be differences. The hon. member for Grey (Mr. Richardson) referred to baking powder. That is sold at varying prices. He also referred to vinegar, the price of which is well known. I think the hon. gentleman is within the mark in saying that for such an article as would be required on board a steamer 30 cents or 40 cents would be a fair price, and it is astonishing to find an entry here of ten gallons of vinegar at 75 cents or five gallons at 60 cents. Now, take another article the value of which we all know-fresh water. In Charlottetown the government paid 50 cents per thousand gallons, while at GaspS they paid 50 cents per hundred gallons. Surely there cannot be such a difference in the conditions as to justify a price in one place ten times as high as the other. I believe they can secure fresh water at Gaspe just as cheaply as they can at Charlottetown.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: At Charlottetown they have a system of water works, while at Gaspe, I should suppose, they have not. That would make all the difference in the world.


David Henderson: And at another place the government are charged for 700 gallons at the rate of 50 cents per hundred gallons. Again, I find where it is sold by the ton. In one case ten tons at 81-12 a ton, and in another 65 tons at 56 cents per ton-one price exactly double the other, though there seems to be no difference in the conditions. It is manifest that there is something wrong with the system. I do not want to charge any one with giving an erroneous certificate. But there is so much in the Auditor General's Report that is not susceptible of explanation by the ordinary reader that I think the matter is worthy the attention of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries ; and, as he is starting out fresh in the business, I hope that he will make such changes that when we discuss the matter of supplies again, we shall not have to criticise his department in the way which it has been criticised to-night.


George Taylor: I understood the hon. minister of Marine and Fisheries, in spite of what has been said, to announce that he intends to continue the present system. When this government came into office, it was loudly proclaimed as a business government, one that would carry on public affairs on business principles. Is the hon. gentleman acquainted with the Ontario and Richelieu Navigation Company ? I am sure he is, for the bead-quarters of that company a^e in the city to which he belongs. They have a fleet of steamers, just as the hon. minister is entrusted with the fleet of steamers for the people of Canada. Will he copy the business methods of that company ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: If they are good.


George Taylor: That company furnish passenger steamers altogether, and they know the average price of every staple article supplied to those steamers.
Do they go to retail merchants in the various cities for their supplies ? No ; they receive tenders from wholesale houses and they buy the supplies wholesale and distribute them among their steamers. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries lias eight or ten steamers requiring large quantities of staple supplies. Yet, he buys from the retail man at exorbitant retail prices. One hon. gentleman referred to Scott, of Halifax. He said that was a reputable firm and would not overcharge. Let me give him a few articles. Rice, 25 pounds at seven cents per pound.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Where is that ?


George Taylor: Auditor General's Report. Page P-19.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) That is the ordinary price in Halifax.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Halifax, N.S.) That is the ordinary price for the best quality.


George Taylor: Then we have a charge of 25 pounds of currants at 12 cents. And everybody knows that you can buy three pounds at retail for 25 cents. Then I find at page P-17, Charles F. Francis & Co., St. John, charging for beans at 81.95 per per bushel and peas at 81-95 per bushel. Every farmer in the country knows that 81.95 for peas and beans is an outrageous price. If the government were buying these in a large quantity and delivering them to their several steamers, they could get much lower prices, and the same with all staple articles, such as sugar, rice, flour and so on.


Mr. TOBIN.: I suppose that the hon. gentleman is aware that last year-


George Taylor: When I get through, my hon. friend (Mr. Tobin) can answer me or can ask all the questions he likes. Or, if he

wishes to ask me a question now, I have no objection.


Edmund William Tobin: Is the hon. gentleman aware that the wholesale price for beans last year was from $1.80 to $2 according to the quality ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The quantity of peas and the quantity of beans bought In this case was one bushel each.
i Mr. TAYLOR. And the price was $1.95. The hon. member for Richmond and Wolfe (Mr. Tobin) cannot find that these articles were sold at such prices as he states in any market.


Edmund William Tobin: I bought them in my own line of business.


George Taylor: Let the hon. gentleman ask the hon. member for Essex who sits near him, and he knows the prices.


Mr. STEPHENS.: Beans were shipped from the county of Kent last season at about $1.75 per bushel. The farmers received from $1.50 to $1.60 per bushel.


George Taylor: Whether the system is right or wrong, I ask the government to do business on business principles, as they promised to do. I ask them to adopt the system followed by the Richelieu Navigation Company, and every other company in Canada having big steamers to supply, and who buy their staple supplies from wholesale firms by tender, or from some friends at wholesale prices. But do not go about the country to these little two penny ha'penny stores and buy at prices two or three times higher than they could buy at home in every part of Canada. There is not one hon. gentleman on the treasury benches who is paying the prices for goods in his own home that are charged here for the supply of these steamers. Every man on the other side of the House must know that some of the prices that are certified to are exorbitant and extravagant prices, that they would not pay for goods of the same kind to be used in their own homes.


John Dowsley Reid: I would ask the Minister of Finance one question. Shortly after the government came into power they adopted the system along the St. Lawrence river of calling for tenders for the supply of goods. That system was carried on for a couple of years, when they ceased doing that, and the last five or six years the supplies have been purchased from retail merchants along the line, and certified to, as I understand, by the officer in charge at the place where they are bought with the words * prices fair and just.' But the minister knows that that officer gets his instructions from the department that employs him, he has purchased his goods from a certain retail merchant in that town, and that officer knows well that if he did not certify to the prices as fair and just his head would Mr. TAYLOR.
be cut off within twenty-four hours, because that retail merchant would have him dismissed, there is no doubt about that. The head of the department would not stand that officer criticising the prices. Now why did the Minister of Finance change that system of calling for tenders and go back to the system that'is now being complained of?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am not aware that such change has taken place as the hon. gentleman alleges. Of course, that is a matter for the Department of Marine and Fisheries to attend to, but I do not think any such change has taken place.


John Dowsley Reid: I never said it took place.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: He says it has taken place in certain contracts, but my impression is that he is mistaken. As to the other point about the local officials, his statement is a very remarkable one ; I hope it would not have been true under the late government, I know it is not true under the present government. He stated that an official is obliged to certify to fraudulent accounts otherwise he would be dismissed. My hon. friend treats that as a light matter. He speaks as if he would have considered that the regular method under the old government. I trust that it was not done under the late government, 1 do not believe it was ; I know it is not done under the present government. I am sure that any officer who would report to the head of the department that the prices were too high and ought to be reduced, would be commended, as he ought to be, for the performance of his duty. But the suggestion that an official of this department, or of any other department, is obliged to certify to accounts which are not fair and just, is a very unfair one, and I am sure the hon. gentleman, on reflection, will not justify it. I know it is not justified with regard to these officials to whom I have referred, and who were appointed by the late government. I have only to say that if they were asked to give such certificates of prices being fair and reasonable when they knew they were not, they are manly enough to throw up their places at once rather than hold them on such a condition.


John Dowsley Reid: I would like to say to the Minister of Finance that under the late government that system was ngt required by the Auditor General until shortly before we ceased holding office, and it was on account of prices at different points being higher than he supposed they ought to be that he insisted on those words being put on the invoices. Now I know for a fact that officials who are in charge of certain works do and have certified to accounts such as I have mentioned, and I know well enough that if they did not certify to the accounts that were handed in, their heads would be cut off, and the ministers at the

beads of the departments know it too. Their officials are told to purchase from certain parties, and I know well that these same officials can purchase goods cheaper from the same parties for their own use. I am not finding fault with the officials, it is their bread and butter to hold their positions.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I do find fault with those officials. An official who will certify that a price is fair and reasonable when he knows that the certificate is false, has no right to be in the public service.


John Dowsley Reid: How is the official to know ? Does the Minister of Finance mean to say that if he has complaints made to him against this official for objecting to the accounts he would not be hauled over the coals and dismissed ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: He would be dismissed if he did not object.


Mr. BUREAU.: The hon. gentleman asks how the official is to know. He stated just now that the official bought goods for himself cheaper than he bought for the government, and that he certified to an account for goods bought at a higher price for the government.


Mr. BIRKETT.: The hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) stated in the fore part of the evening that certain lots of hardware had been purchased, and that ail the way from 20, 25 and 30 to 40 percent had been paid over and above the market value. I thought that was rather an extravagant statement, and my curiosity iuduced me to refer to the Auditor General's Report, and I find that the statement made by my hon. friend is well within the mark. On page P-9, I find there are 8,780 pounds of ordinary iron charged at three cents a pound. Now that iron at the time it was supplied to the government could be sold in those quantities by any wholesale hardware man for $1.95, or by any extensive retailer for about $2.10 or $2.25. That was sold at Quebec, and the prices I am- giving you are the prices at which you can buy it at Ottawa.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: What is the name of the Quebec dealer ?


Mr. BIRKETT F. X.@: Drolet. I also find an item for 994 pounds of zinc, equal to about two casks, and that zinc is charged at the rate of 15 cents a pound. When this was purchased, zinc by casks, was selling at GJ cents. I am speaking of something about which I know. To-day, zinc is higher than it has been for the last three years, and it is selling at 7 cents. If you buy it from a Tory you can get it for 7 cents. Iron is dearer than it has been for the last three years, but you could buy iron for $2.25 per hundred pounds in any retail store in Ottawa. I will sell you all you want for $2
per hundred. I find that the government paid 3 cents a pound. Another item is 93 pounds of Magnolia metal at 40 cents a pound. There is only one quality of Magnolia metal made and you can get any quantity you want of it for 224 cents a pound. Another item is machine steel of which 761 pounds were purchased at 6 cents a pound. That is retail. I cannot give the size because the size is not given here, but the standard size which is f inch is selling in any retail store for $3 per hundred. I could go through the list and point out many similar charges. I think I have shown sufficient to convince this committee that when the government are spending public money, supplies ought to be furnished by public competition. I do not go so far as some hon. members here who say that probably the heads of departments when certifying to these accounts as being fair and just do it without the information. Probably they may have done it without the information, but we have to bear in mind that their information is limited to the extent of these circulars. I suppose the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries will tell me that it is a machinist company which supplied these goods. I admit it is a machinist company that supplied these goods, but these are the prices that it has charged for the goods themselves. There has been no work put upon these goods because 2,369 hours of work is charged for at the rate of 35 cents an hour. The prices which I have quoted are the actual prices paid for these goods, and I have also given the prices which these goods ought to have cost if they had been purchased in any store in Canada.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Mr. Chairman, I knew that I was not far from the mark when I stated at the beginning of this debate that if some system of tendering were adopted- I am not accusing any one department more than another-we could save at least from 25 to 30 per cent. I passed through the mill. I changed the system in the Department of Public Works. We were buying in that department right and left, just as the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries is buying now. We opened a store in Ottawa and we have saved between 30 and 40 percent since that store has been opened. It is true it is not perfect, but since we have had that system we have, I repeat, saved between 30 and 40 per cent The hon. minister is just taking hold of his department, and I would suggest to him to adopt the same system. Let him open stores. Let him ask for tenders, even if he does not ask for tenders in the public press, but simply asks for tenders from wholesale merchants as big companies do. I am not inclined to go so far as some hon. gentlemen here who say that every time the government must ask for public tenders. If we follow the rule of asking for tenders from wholesale merchants we will save from 25 to 30 ner cent

every time. But, I insist specialty on this point, and I give this suggestion in no unfriendly spirit, that the hon. gentleman should open stores and let the officers from the different ships draw from those stores. If he does he will control the expenditure which is not controlled now. Before taking my seat let me say that I do not share the views of those hon. gentlemen who say that officers in the public service must not have some little luxuries. I went into that question when I was Minister of Public Works. Take the case of the commander and officers of the ships of the Department of Marine and Fisheries. They spend seven or eight months of the year on the water. They must have some little luxuries. When a case came before me I went to the Canadian Pacific Railway, president and managers, and asked them what their rule was. They told me that their rule was to give their officers mineral waters, Apollinards and so on. Cigarettes, of course, is going a little too far. Mineral waters and things of that kind, I think, should be allowed to public officers in cases such as we have been discussing. This country has no necessity to be mean. We are a very big country and we are growing bigger every day. Let us treat our officers as we deal with ourselves. They are gentlemen. Let us not allow them to make useless expenditures, but let us not go too far the other way. If the hon. minister takes the suggestions which have been made in the proper spirit, I think he will derive some benefit from what has been said. There is no doubt whatever that from 25 to SO per cent can be saved from the adoption of the plan which I have suggested. That system was adopted by my own department a year or two ago, and I found it not only very economical but more comfortable.


Samuel Hughes: Has the hon. minister submitted to the committee, or has he under his hand, a statement showing the cost per man per day on each of the government steamers for rations and pay ? There should be such a statement prepared regularly and it should be submitted to the House.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It cost 33 cents and a fraction per man per day.


John Dowsley Reid: I would like to say to the hon. Minister of Finance again in connection with the system of calling for tenders that shortly after the Liberal government came into power they advertised for tenders for supplies for the St. Lawrence canals. They did not say how much of each article they required but they gave a list of supplies that would be required.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We are discussing Marine and Fisheries now.


John Dowsley Reid: That may be, but I am pointing out that the system has been Hon. Mr. TARTE.
changed in connection with the St. Lawrence canals.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The system of the Marine and Fisheries Department is the one we are talking about now.


John Dowsley Reid: Before that they purchased their supplies the same way.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: They are not under discussion at all.
Mr. REID (Grenville), It is the same principle. The hon. minister states that there is no officer of the government who would certify to prices unless he thought they were fair and just. Take an instance of that kind. I want to refer to it although it is not in the Marine Department. On the St. Lawrence canals, tenderers were advertised for, and the officer had that tender to guide him that the price was fair and just, but that system has been abolished by this government. You will find now that at Cardinal, Mr. Stewart, the superintendent will pay 21 cents for coal oil, and five miles east he will pay 18 cents while if he bought it at Iroquois for 18 cents he could take it down to Cardinal at no cost whatever. The officer is told to purchase from certain parties in each town, and if the officer does not certify to the accounts he would not hold his position for forty-eight hours.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: My hon. friend's conception of Liberal government is entirely erroneous.


John Dowsley Reid: The facts prove I am right.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The facts do not prove it. The hon. gentleman says that if that officer did not certify to what is practically a fraudulent account he would lose his office. He has no warrant for that. If he could show any instance where an officer has lost his head because of that he would have good ground to go on. I suppose the hon. gentleman did not intend it as such, but it is a reflection upon every officer in Canada who certifies to these accounts, and it implies that these officers are forced by this government to certify fraudulent accounts. The hon. gentleman would not go so far as that, but that is a fair deduction from what he says.
Mr. REID (Grenville), I did not say they certified to fraudulent accounts, but they certainly have to accept the accounts of the parties who furnish them and the officer takes the word of the seller for it.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: If an officer certifies to an account as fair and reasonable the certificate is true or it is not true.


Mr. THOMSON (North Grey).: 
The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Regardless of whether they are fair or not ?


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: How does he know ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is his business to know.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: The officer has no choice in the matter. The hon. member for Ottawa (Mr. Birkett) *who is a hardware merchant tells us that fifteen cents a pound is twice too much for zinc, and if you go through all these estimates, you will find that the government is paying from 100 to 150 per cent more for these supplies than they could be purchased for in the ordinary retail way, and these accounts are certified to by the officer who is forced to go there by the Liberal member who represents that constituency. The member for Kent (Mr. Stephens) will be able to tell us that my hon. friend from Ottawa (Mr. Birkett), is quite correct in what he says.


George Stephens: The hon. member from Ottawa (Mr. Birkett) quoted the price of iron and he says this iron was supplied by a machinist. To my mind part of the work done on this machine steel and iron was done in the factory and charged with the price of the iron, which Is the common way of doing it in machine shops. The smaller the iron the more it counts, and the price he has quoted may have been for a smaller size of iron.


Thomas Birkett: Are the prices I gave on standard goods correct ?


George Stephens: We do not know whether this iron is common iron or whether it is Swede or Norway iron.


Thomas Birkett: We cannot buy Swede at any such price, and we know that the Quebec merchants are not in the habit of selling goods at much less than cost.


George Stephens: We do not know whether it is angle iron or round.


Thomas Birkett: That would not make any difference.


George Stephens: As a rule angle iron is more expensive than square or round.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: There is 761 pounds of machine steel at six cents a pound, and is not that 100 per cent too much ?
Mr, STEPHENS. There may have been workmanship on it and it may not have been too much.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: The workmanship is charged extra in every case.


George Stephens: You cannot tell from the statement in the Auditor General's Report whether it is or not.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: These accounts are for articles purchased two years ago, some of them, and I do not suppose that we can carry in our heads what the prices were then. The Auditor General's Report is so condensed that you cannot get a proper understanding of such matters from it. I do not remember as much about hardware as when I was a boy serving* in a hard-ware store, but the hoii. member for Ottawa (Mr. Birkett) is familiar with the trade, and he knows that Swede iron is very much more valuable than common iron. Now the Auditor General's Report is very much condensed, and it mav be possible that part of this is Swede iron and part of it common iron. When these accounts were examined two years ago there was a mystery about one of them, and we found it was another article altogether that was charged for it. The hon. member for Leeds the other night in going through the accounts of my department stated that certain prices were outrageous and I promised him that I would inquire into it. There is an officer in the department who has been in the employment for years, and I asked him next morning for an explanation, calling his attention to the remarks that were made. I must say that Mr. Bleakney, the officer in question, gave me a very satisfactory explanation. I asked him how he came to go to that place, as I had not told him to go to any particular place. He said that he had a letter from the private secretary stating that another house was entitled to a share of the patronage ; but he said he had bought very little there, because he could buy the goods cheaper elsewhere. I asked him if he scrutinized every account so carefully. He said most certainly he did. I suppose the other officers do the same. We cannot judge from the condensed report given by the Auditor General. It looks to me, from the price of sugar, as I know it, as if some of these prices might be a little high. 1 cannot carry my mind back to say how the sugar market was two years ago. Sugar fluctuates, and I know that iron and steel have varied very much within a few years.


Thomas Birkett: How many years ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I do not know, but I know that we had to raise the invoices tremendously.


Thomas Birkett: Oh, no.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes, in iron and steel in some cases 50 per cent. So it does not do to make sweeping reductions. I am sure that under the officer's of my de-



partment tlie prices will be found to be | right.


Thomas Birkett: I have no desire to misquote or misrepresent anything I find in the Auditor General's Report. I have given one item of which there is only one quality made, that is, magnolia metal ; and for that 174 cents a pound more is charged than you could buy it at any time in the last three years. There has been no change in that. With regard to iron, two years ago I sold it at $1.95. There has not been any great change in the price of iron or steel.


The MINISTER OP CUSTOMS.: Oh, yes.


Thomas Birkett: I beg pardon. . I am dealing in it every day. I know that sometimes the government will insist on an amended entry, on information which they get from the ' Iron Age,' which is their only authority. You might as well take the ordinary daily report in our newspapers. You can go to the manufacturers and buy iron at a price, but all you get in the ' Iron Age ' is the current retail price ; but the Customs Department, not only here, but in every other city, swears by that as by the Bible. There is where they make a mistake. So far as iron and steel are concerned, I am perfectly correct in the quotations I have given. The hon. member for Kent says nothing about zinc, which is worth from 4c. to 4c. a pound more to-day than it was last year, and it was still lower the year before. Here the government is charged for it 15 cents a pound, or 100 per cent more than it is selling at to-day, the highest price the market has reached in the last four years. With regard to iron, I gave the base price. Three-quarter inch is the base ; each one-sixteenth-inch less is 5 cents per hundred weight more until you reach three-sixteenth inch, so that even if it was the smallest iron that was produced, the price is extravagant. The hon. member for Kent said that probably this was Swede iron. These people in Quebec are not such fools as to send invoices for 5,800 pounds of iron, and not mention that it was Swedish iron if it was so. The accounts are prepared in such a way as to make the best show, and if it were put at a price basis to correspond with that of common iron, it would cost five or six cents a pound. The price'charged for steel is also 100 per cent more than it could be bought at if it was standard size. Wrlien I first mentioned the matter, I told you what size the iron or steel was ; but presuming that it was base size, the price of the iron is $1.05 more than should be charged for it, and for base steel 3 cents per pound, or 100 per cent more than ought to be charged for it.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I have given attention to the hon. gentleman's statement, because I know that he is engaged in the iron trade ; but what he has said has shaken my confidence.


Hon. Mr. PATERSON.: 


Thomas Birkett: I cannot help that.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: When he says that there has been no variation in the price of iron and steel for five or six years,
I cannot agree with him. I know that within a much less period than that we have raised the invoices from 25 per cent to 50 per cent, and I am not sure but 100 per cent. The hon. gentleman must know how steel and iron went up in price.


Thomas Birkett: The hon. gentleman is completely in error. Three years ago iron was cheaper than it is to-day.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The hon. gentleman is bringing it down to three years now. I was perfectly sure in what I said, going back, as he said, six or eight years.
I thought the rise would perhaps be within three years ; but I will make a point of looking it up and ascertaining when we had to call for these amended entries. There were many contracts given for future delivery, eight or ten months afterwards, and during that time the price went up 50 per cent, and in some cases more.


Thomas Birkett: I said that if the hon. gentleman would go back three years he would find that iron was cheaper three years ago than it is to-day. Iron is a thing that fluctuates. But when hon. gentlemen talk of twenty, fifty and in some cases one hundred per cent increase, no such change has taken place since the big change took place when fifty cents per hundred pounds was put on in 1878. Iron then went up very rapidly because it was nearly all imported, but I am quite positive that three years ago we sold iron at $1.85 and two years ago at $1,924, and last year at $1.95. I am quite within the mark when I say three years. The hon. Minister of Customs says that there is a price quoted in ' Iron Age.' If the customs officer says that black is white, the burden is on the importer, of proving that it is not. The customs officer says, we cannot accept that, and the importer has to prove why it should be accepted.


Robert Lorne Richardson: The hon. Minister of Customs has said that he is not well versed in the price of iron as he is in some other matters. He ought to be fairly well versed in the price of sugar, and if he will go back two years, that will not make the matter any better with regard to the quotation given by the hon. member for Hal-ton. Two years ago standard granulated sugar was lower than during the past year. Take another item in which the hon. minister should be well versed-the item of biscuits-the pilot or water biscuits are charged at different prices, from six to eight cents a pound. The hon. gentleman should have some idea whether that is a fair price. Mixed biscuits are charged at seventeen to eighteen cents per pound. It must be a pretty fine article at that price. I

did not look over tlie Auditor General's Report until this evening, and I find that there are columns of items at from twenty-five to thirty per cent higher than they could be got for by tender. We have been assured by the Minister of Finance that because these accounts were certified to by officials as reasonable and fair we should accept them, but evidently what would be reasonable and fair in any other business transaction does not apply to government supply. It is quite evident that these men know what they are certifying to, and that this debate has brought out the assurance that the contract would be given to friends of the government. I do not know whether this will be satisfactory to the country, but lam Inclined to think that it will not.


Mr. LAW.: Having had some thirty years experience in the business of tea and coffee, perhaps my silence would be taken as endorsing the criticism of the opposition. It seems to me most unfair that hon. gentlemen should attempt to criticise the purchases of these supplies by taking items out of the Auditor General's Report without knowing the quality of the goods. Take the item of tea. We have in our store at present, tea which we sell at ten cents, and also tea which we sell at fifty cents, and it is most unfair to criticise the price of tea without knowing the quality. The hon. member for St. Mary's division (Hon. Mr. Tarte) said that the very best quality of coffee can be bought in Montreal at thirty cents a pound. I do not wish to contradict my hon. friend, but if his statement is correct. you can buy coffee cheaper at retail in Montreal than at wholesale. We have a coffee which we purchase at Montreal and which costs us thirty-two cents per pound at -wholesale. I am positive that they do not retail that coffee at thirty cents.


Joseph Israël Tarte: The next time I come up I will send a pound to my hon. friend.


Bowman Brown Law: I do not wish to be understood as not believing what my hon. friend has said, but if he pays thirty cents he does not buy the very best coffee.


Joseph Israël Tarte: It is the very best quality and I know what coffee is.


Bowman Brown Law: There is the matter of baking powder, which can be bought at $2 to SO per dozen. How can hon. gentlemen opposite look at the price of that and judge as to the quality. As regards sugar, that is now in the hands of a combine, and whenever there is a change in price, a telegram is sent and the change must take place immediately. When a telegram is sent from the refinery every wholesale merchant must raise and lower his prices at once. The price of beans, $1.60 and $1.95 has been referred to. As a wholesale merchant I know that beans at $1.60 and $1.95 or even $2, anv time within 129J
a year and a half, is a very low price lower than they have been sold at in the western part of the maritime provinces at retail. With reference to currants at twelve cents per pound, there is a difference between ordinary currants and those put up in one pound packages. Personally I have had some little experience in supplying goods to the Department of Marine and Fisheries. Unfortunately I never had a chance of supplying very many goods, but when I did supply any, I never met sharper men than the shipmasters of the government, and it would be almost impossible for anybody to overcharge them. The hon. member for Northumberland thought that the captain and the crews of those boats were too well treated. If he had had the experience with captains that I have had, he would find that the best quality of goods is none too good for people that go to sea, and I do not blame them for getting the very best. Under all the circumstances, I do not see anything in the grocery list that shows any over charge.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: I would nice to make a few remarks with regard to this account of F. X. Drolet. The hon. member for Kent, in his defence of the charges in. this account, particularly in connection with the charge for steel and iron, stated that he could not give an answer to the question put to him because there might have been a certain amount of work put on this steel. Turning to page P-9 of the Auditor General's Report I find that that account reads ' repairing steam engine, making shaft, screw condenser keel "and steam connections to boiler, $250.' Going further down you will find time charged up by these parties : 387i hours at 50 cents ; 1,3364 hours at 40 cents ; 2,369 hours at 35 cents ; 4,909 hours at 30 cents ; 1,7174 hours at 25 cents ; 2,757 hours at 20 cents ; 160 hours at 15 cents. .Now, I think there was sufficient time charged to make all repairs necessary, and there is no doubt that this six cents was charged for steel. No amount of sophistry by the hon. Minister of Customs will get over that. Machinery steel, two years ago was not more than $2.75 retail. That would buy the best quality of hard machinery steel. Here we are buying almost half a ton at $6 per 100 pounds. Then zinc, which can be purchased in casks at from five to six cents is charged at fifteen cents. There are large qualities of zinc charged elsewhere at the same money. The hon. member for Kent (Mr. Stephens) knows that the magnolia is a standard article and retails everywhere at 224 cents, yet 40 cents is charged. Talk of ten, fifteen and twenty per cent advances, they are not in it with this. There is anywhere from 100 to 150 per cent overcharge here in hardware. I believe it would be in the interest of the department and the country if the minister would call for tenders for these articles rather than continue buying by this system.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Rut. i! a job is sent to a mechanic's shop, can you first get tenders for the materials, buy them at competitive prices and send them to the mechanic and oblige him to use them? If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Thomson, Grey) sends for the plumber to do work in his house ; will that plumber charge the hon. gentleman for materials at wholesale prices? Surely, the charge will include a profit. So, when you send work to a mechanic's establishment you must expect him to charge for material with a profit. It should be a fair and reasonable profit of course.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: I submit that the answer of the Minister of Finance is not satisfactory.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I hardly expected the hon. member (Mr. Thompson) to be satisfied.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: It will not be
satisfactory to the country. Here we find an article that when bought in small quantities sells at six cents, charged at fifteen cents per pound, though about half a ton was bought. At page P-32 of the Auditor General's Report, I find 225 pounds of zinc charged at 15 cents per pound, though it can be bought in quantities at five cents per pound and retail at six cents per pound. Now. these are facts, and it is for hon. members of the committee to take note of them and judge whether a system which leads to such charges is a good system or not.


George Stephens: There is no doubt in my mind that the explanation of these charges is that work was done on material furnished for repairs. As to magnolia, the hon. gentleman says that only one quality of magnolia is made. I believe that, as a rule, thnt is the case. But the hon. gentleman knows that they could make magnolia worth a good deal more money and It is likely that a special order was given for magnolia for this purpose. Hon. gentlemen talk about coal oil, which is bought at one place for 21 cents and another place for 19 cents. Hon. gentlemen know that coal oil fluctuates from one season to the other. _Ameri-can coal oil would probably cost 25 cents, while Canadian oil would be cheap at 20 cents. Then, take the case of iron pipe. I have no doubt that this is cut into lengths The iron bolts would be cut into lengths and turned in the lathes. The pipe, no doubt, was cut into lengths and threaded for the purpose of making railings and so on. This would explain the cost.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: We find 16 feet of one inch pipe charged. Does the hon. gentleman say that that is cut in lengths and the charge made in this way ?


George Stephens: It might be.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: What reasons has the hon. gentleman to believe that ?
Mr. THOMSON INorth Grey).


George Stephens: Because, in building a boat they would not use one length of pipe 16 feet. It is used in short lengths for railings, and so on. It would probably be cut into lengths, threaded and coupled up.


Mr. WILSON.: What is there in the item to lead the hon. gentleman to suppose that these charges include work ? When hon. gentlemen opposite were on this side they took a different view of the Auditor General's Report. The Minister of Customs did not take the same view that he takes tonight.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: You had it put then so that you could understand it.


Uriah Wilson: The item shows plainly that too much has been charged.


Thomas Birkett: The illustration of the plumber given by the Minister of Finance is a. fair one. But it does not apply altogether to this case. If you employ a plumber, he is supposed to buy his material at first hand, he Charges you the retail price. If that was all in this case, we should be quite satisfied. The hon. gentleman knows that the plumbers bill always comes in-so many pounds of pipe, so many pounds of solder, and so many pounds of everything else-even putty-and then so many hours of time. I am perfectly satisfied that the Minister of Finance in drawing his comparison with the plumbers' bill was perfectly honest. And it is quite fair to say that these contractors are entitled to retail prices for these goods. But, they are away in excess in their charges for iron and steel.


Richard Blain: I notice an item here of 28 pounds of solder at 40 cents a pound. The regular price of solder is 25 cents, as almost any gentleman in the House is aware. Here are two hammocks bought from M . C. Blakiston, Quebec, at $5 a piece. Page P- 21 of the Auditor General's Report. I find varnish, 17i gallons at $6 per gallon; 2 wheelbarrows at $7 a piece. There are several items here that I am perfectly convinced are at least 50 per cent and in some cases $100 per cent higher than they could be supplied to the government under contract. Now there is an important principle involved. The Liberal-Conservative party say that these goods should be supplied to the government by tender, the government say, no, these goods shall not be supplied by tender, and the minister now says that notwithstanding the criticisms that has been offered he will continue in that policy, and will refuse to ask for tenders for goods to be supplied to the government. I wish to remind the hon. gentleman that in the province of Ontario, from which I come, every municipal council gets its supplies by tender. If they want the minutes of council printed, though the expense is only $50 or $G0, if they want to make a purchase of nails or supplies for the corporation, they ask for

tenders. There is hardly any corporation who is purchasing supplies, no matter how small a quantity, but ask for tenders. When the Liberal-Conservative party were in power the hon. gentlemen opposite criticised the former government for not buying everything by tender. I do not say it is possible for the government in every case to buy every dollar's worth of goods by tender. But here is a line of steamers which are supplied with goods of the same class every year; they require so many pounds of sugar, so much varnish, so niuch iron-the same class of goods every year, the boats plying between the same places year after year. The minister knows very well that he will require the same goods every year, and I think it is only fair to the people of this country, when he is asking us for $250,000, on which only $15,000 revenue is returned, that he Should ask for tenders for the supply of these vessels. If there are some goods that cannot be bought by tender, I am willing he should buy them from his friends. That is fair play and the Liberal-Conservative party well understand it. For myself, I object to this large expenditure and the very high i>rices, extortionate prices in some cases, that have been charged during the last year. I say it is fair to the people and it is fair to this committee that the minister should now stand up and say that in future these large supplies shall be bought by public tender.


Donald Alexander Mackinnon: I think a good many of the criticisms made by hon. gentlemen opposite about the Marine Department are made under a misconception. So far as I understand it, the Marine Department, in all the leading articles it requires, has been in the habit of asking for tenders every year. But the debate has been going on under a different impression entirely. It is asserted that no tenders have been called for, and the kind advice is given to the new minister to call for tenders. If he has been doing that in the past and is doing it now, that advice is gratuitous. What if a few small potatoes for the crew, and a few scraps of iron for the use of the steamer are purchased without tender ? The officers must purchase these small things in the ports where they stop.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: There was one item of over $0,000.


Donald Alexander Mackinnon: For a number of articles included in that item, I think you will find probably that the minister called for tenders, he takes an offer from the person who is doing the repairs. I think that has been the practice of the department in the past. Now this debate has taken a wide range, and I wish to reply to some of the reflections that have been made on some of the dealers in Prince Edward Island. Some hon. members have referred to them as charging unduly high prices. I think you will find in Charlottetown as fair dealing
men as you will find anywhere else in Canada. They have mentioned bananas, and pease and beans, which I am sorry to say we have to bring down from Ontario. Articles like these may be charged a little higher price because they have to pay freight on them. For bananas and fruit, of course, the price is higher there because they have to be imported in small quantities. Reflections are made upon the Marine Department and upon the minister for paying too high prices. The agent of the Department of Marine in Prince Edward Island, Mr. Lord, 'has been there for a great many years. He has been employed under the Conservative administration, and is a most careful man. I do not think he would certify to any prices as fair and reasonable unless he really believed they were so. Many of the prices charged in Prince Edward Island are very moderate, they are not nearly equal to the prices charged in other places in Canada. A reflection has also been made on the officials in charge of the steamers because it is alleged some of them use cigarettes. or some of them did not do their duty in managing the steamers during the winter. I have not taken the trouble to speak on this subject, because if there is one thing more than another I dislike it is airing grievances, when those grievances are of a very flimsy character. Captain Brown has been specially named, the captain of the ' Stanley.' I know that there is no more capable, no more honourable and conscientious captain sailing across the Atlantic ocean to-day. There is not a man of any standing in Prince Edward Island who would reflect upon his character. Captain Finlayson of the ' Minto' has been for twenty or thirty years conducting the service aci-oss the straits, as captain of that boat. He is a capable, economical and faithful officer. Both of these men are exceedingly capable and prudent. I am sorry to hear reflections cast upon them and especially by hon. members from our own province, because these reflections that are cast upon these men should be directed towards those who are circulating stories and rumours against these officers. I must admit that there was a lot of trouble during last winter but it was caused by the fact that there was more ice in the straits of Northumberland separating the island from the mainland than there had been for twenty or twenty-five years past. We should not undertake to abuse these officers simply because nature was against us last winter. We were unfortunate in our effort to conduct this service simply because of the ice. There were three miles of ice around the ' Stanley ' and she was kept there month after month. It is a matter that we are all seeking to remedy, but there is no remedy in abusing the officers who are connected with the Department of Marine and Fisheries. We have capable men in the service and I think it is wrong to reflect upon them.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Are the quotations right that we have been giving you ?


Donald Alexander Mackinnon: I do not hear the hon. gentleman. I think we can remedy the difficulties down there and we have some plans by which we hope to provide a remedy. I am sorry to hear hon. gentlemen casting reflections upon our province. Its relation to Canada is the same as the relation of the eye to the body. If you injure the eye you injure the body. Prince Edward Island is a small part of Canada, and if you reflect upon Prince Edward Island and the business men of Prince Edward Island, you reflect upon Canada.


Andrew B. Ingram: Who did it V


Donald Alexander Mackinnon: I would not have made these remarks at all but for the attacks made upon the officers of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, who are good men, some of them Conservatives, and all men who have had a long experience.


Mr. AVERY.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Maclcinnon) who has just taken his seat, seems to find fault with this side of the House because we are criticising the extravagance of this government. I claim that this government has been extravagant in many ways and particularly because they have not adopted the practice of inviting tenders for supplies. There is no use in finding fault with us because we condemn such extravagance. We are here to represent the wishes of the people, and if the people are not satisfied with being robbed in this way it is our duty to protest against the system. I find, for instance, that beans have been purchased at from $2 to $2.25 a bushel, when we all know that beans have never been worth that. If they are to be purchased at that price, why not give the people throughout the country a chance to put in tenders for such supplies as these. It has always been customary to do that when furnishing supplies to county councils, cities and towns, and why should not the government carry out the same system ? The hon. member for Kent (Mr. Stephens) says that iron and machinery have been bought and work added to them. That is not the case, because I have been purchasing non and machinery in machine shops, and the rule is that they charge so much for the iron and they charge for the number of hours work that they put upon them.


George Stephens: Would the hon. member (Mr. Avery) say that iron is never partly worked up and not charged for ?


Melzar Avery: No, it is not customary for any machine shop to put work upon iron without charging for it.


George Stephens: Does the hon. gentleman say it is never done ?


Donald Alexander Mackinnon: 


Melzar Avery: It has never been done in my case. They charge for the number of pounds of iron purchased and they charge for the number of hours labour they put upon it, either round iron, or square iron as well as the metal they run. The hon. gentleman is only making a statement that he thinks to be so, but he has no proof. I have proof that they charge for the iron in its raw state and they charge for the work afterwards. I think it would help the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries considerably if he would adopt the plan of asking for tenders. It would relieve him of a lot of trouble.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The hon. gentleman is under an entire misapprehension. I said that tenders were asked for standard goods when a certain quantity was required at a certain point, but that there were articles for which we could not ask for tenders.


Melzar Avery: Would the hou. minister say that lie would ask for tenders from this out for whatever staple goods he required 7


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I have always done it. It has been the custom of the department for years. I found the custom of the department to be that, and I proceeded in the same way this season when the time came to put the steamers into commission. I did that in Quebec. I had twenty tenders for groceries alone.


Melzar Avery: Did the hon. minister advertise or send out circulars ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I sent out circulars.


Melzar Avery: Would it not be better to advertise and give the merchants of the country a chance to tender ?
The MINISTER	OF	MARINE	ANDFISHERIES. That	is a	question	of calculation. In a place where you wanted $200 worth of goods would you pay a newspaper $100, or $150, or $200 for advertising ? If you think that is good policy I do not think it is.


Robert Lorne Richardson: Would the hon. minister inform the committee if he asked for tenders for zinc ?
The MINISTER	OF	MARINE	ANDFISHERIES. The	hon.	gentleman	(Mr. Richardson) is not serious when he asks that ? Zinc and magnolia belong to a class of articles that are entirely different from staple goods. You could never ask for tenders for them. I would like the hon. gentleman to tell me how tenders could be asked for them ? Could you say iu advance that this vessal will require $500, or that vessel will require $300, or another vessel will require $100 worth of repairs to be made, and ask for tenders for these repairs?
It is impossible. No business man would do it in that way.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: There is no business man who would pay fifteen cents a pound for zinc.


George Taylor: Are we to understand from the hon. minister that he has advertised for all the staple supplies he requires for all the steamers ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I have not advertised. I have sent circulars to the trade.


George Taylor: All the supplies for these government steamers, the flour, the sugar, and the coffee, ought to be purchased in bulk and divided between the different steamers.
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. Of course, that is what I did for the standard articles that we are in need of at every moment.


George Taylor: What ports ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. Quebec, Halifax, St. John, Montreal, Victoria.


George Taylor: Will the minister bring down the tenders he has asked for and the replies ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. Certainly.


George Taylor: The minister says he has adopted this rule of advertising for tenders for all the standard staples, and he will bring down the tenders he received.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: At the different ports ?


George Taylor: The statement I made last night with reference to the customs accounts rendered by Charleson was that nail pullers were bought at $1.50 each and locks at $125 a gross, and I said that I bought as good a nail puller as could be bought for our factory for $1. He says these locks are sent out to the ports, but he can get one of them back, and let him produce it and lay it on the Table, and I will venture the statement that any hardware man will declare that it is an outrageous price for it.


Mr. PARMELEE.: Bring it up in the Public Accounts Committee.


George Taylor: I will


Richard Blain: How much was expended on supplies for these boats last year ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: $35,000 for provisions.


Richard Blain: Out of that $35,000 how much was supplied by tender ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Everything.


Richard Blain: Everything ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Except a few items, may be. If a boat put into port and wanted fresh butter or potatoes, we would not ask for tenders and wait eight days to get the tenders in.


Richard Blain: The minister takes issue with this side of the House, and answers our criticisms by saying that he has already adopted that policy.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Of course.


Richard Blain: Now, what amount of this $35,000 was supplied under tender ?
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND 1'iSHERIES. Nobody could carry all the details of these small items in his head, but I will get them. I will lay the statement on the Table of the House with the schedules.


Richard Blain: Would not this be a good time to have them ?


Joseph Israël Tarte: If the minister says he will bring it down, it is all right.


George Taylor: Was there a tender for sugar at the port of Halifax last year ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I am informed by the deputy that there was.


George Taylor: The lowest tender would be accepted for the supply of all the sugar at that port ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Certainly.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Did the minister receive a tender from Charles A. Parent, of Quebec ? At page P-12 of the Auditor General's Report I find the following charges made by him : 31 pounds of flax packing at 90 cents a pound, which should have cost about 35 cents ; 14 gallons of gasolene at 75 cents a gallon, which every hardware man knows retails at 35 cents ; 5 gallons of lavender paint at $2.50 a gallon, which costs from $1 to $1.10 a gallon. Probably the member for Kent (Mr. Stephens) can tell us whether this is perfumed or not.


George Stephens: That paint costs $1.40.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: There is a charge for 15 gallons of terra cotta paint at $2.50 a gallon, which should cost the same as the light lavender, namely, from $1 to $1.10 a gallon. I find in this account also 891 pounds of zinc at 15 cents a pound.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: That seems to be the current price.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Yes, they seem to have a fixed price for this department. -But I may inform the hon. minis-

ter that that gentleman had a profit of about $80 on that one item. If that is the case, you should have a different purchasing agent from the one you had last year. I could give you almost any item in connection with the purchase of supplies in the hardware line for that department, and show that it stands in about the same proportion. Prices are in most cases 100 per cent above the retail price. I think it would be well to have some change made in the system of purchasing these supplies. I would like to ask the bon. minister if tenders were asked?


The MINISTER OP MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Certainly, tenders were asked, and the accounts in Quebec are examined and passed by the agent there, Mr. Gregory, an employee of the department for the last forty years. If you put his honesty and capacity in doubt, it is a matter that will have to be looked into in the regular way, in the Public Accounts Committee. I would not take the accounts of the Auditor General. They are not the true accounts as rendered by the department. They are grouped in such a manner that they do not show the real price of the goods.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: I have an account of another department, and the reason I refer to it is that the hon. minister says the Auditor General's Report is not correct.


The MINISTER OP FINANCE.: I do not say it is not correct. I say it is not properly compiled.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: In this account of another department the prices charged are very much the same as those we have been referring to.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We do not undertake to say that the Auditor General's accounts are not correct; but we say that the method of grouping a number of accounts together does not enable lion, gentlemen to form a fair opinion of the prices without knowing the quality of the article and the circumstances under which the goods are supplied. We had just such general charges made a year ago, as we had made to-night, and in every ease when the matter was looked into, it was found that there was a satisfactory explanation, and I have no doubt it will be so in this case.


David Henderson: I must say that I do not think the way in which tile Minister of Finance has put the matter just now is quite fair to the criticism that has been offered from this side of the House. I can instance the case of sugar, in which there was no possible contention that the price was fair and reasonable, or that there were any conditions which should cause an increased price to be paid. Granulated sugar ought to be cheaper in the city of Quebec than in western Ontario ; yet I know of my Mr. THOMSON (North Grey).
own knowledge that twelve months ago standard granulated sugar was sold in western Ontario, inland, where railway as well as water freight had to be paid, at four cents a pound, when the government was charged five cents and five and a half cents a pound at Quebec. The conditions were altogether in favour of the government purchasing as compared with others ; and yet they were charged from 25 to 30 per cent more than a single barrel of sugar was sold for to the farmers in the country. I think the suggestion that has come from this side of the House ought to be adopted, that all these supplies ought to be purchased by public tender-not by circular but by public notice, so that every one would have an opportunity of tendering ; and if in any instance two tenders were the same, let the government certainly give the patronage to their own friends.


Robert Laird Borden: I think the Minister of Finance, who desired to hear of any items, in respect to which criticism might be made, ought to be pretty well satisfied with some of those mentioned to-night, about which there seems to be no question on the one side or the other, on the part of gentlemen familiar with the prices. For instance, I have not heard any one claim that 15 cents is a fair price for zinc, and it cannot be said that that is a material on which any work was done. If there are any special conditions which affect the price of these articles, then in justice to the vendors themselves, the information ought to be brought down by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries and furnished to the House at a later date. As to some of these items, we cannot have the slightest doubt that the price is very high. I do not know that you can attach much blame to these men, if the government are willing to pay the prices ; they will put them pretty high if they can pass the officers. I do not say, in the absence of proof, that there is any wrong doing ; but there is certainly material calling for some explanation. I do not ask that the item should stand; but I ask that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries shall bring down an explanation of these prices, if there is any.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am unable to agree with my bon. friend. The mere quoting of these prices from the Auditor General's Report, without any reference to the circumstances under which the goods were supplied, does not give us an intelligent view of the situation. I state that because that has been our experience in the past. Similar cases were brought before the House last year, they were looked into, the explanation was given, and the prices were found to be fair and reasonable; and I have no doubt, speaking generally, that if these prices were inquired into, they would be found to be in the main fair and reasonable. I would suggest to my bon. friend to take two or three of these items

and let us investigate them before the Committee of Public Accounts, and if it can be shown that the prices are excessive we have the same interest as my hon. friend in seeing that we are not imposed upon, and will join them very cordially in putting an end to any fraudulent practices.


David Henderson: Will the hon. gentleman make standard granulated sugar one of the items.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Even in the ease of sugar, I would prefer to know the circumstances under which the goods were ordered. I can imagine that if an order were given down in one of those ports to supply a certain quantity of goods and deliver them on board the ship, it might make a difference. I decline to form a judgment without the information.


Robert Laird Borden: Where you find a standard price of between five or six cents per pound, and the article charged at from twelve to sixteen cents per pound. I think that before we go to the Committee on Public Accounts, we should get an explanation from the department of the special conditions which warranted our paying such a price. Why cannot the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries see his officers and give an explanation to-morrow.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I have no doubt that in any case to which the attention of my hon. colleague is drawn, he will do his best to see that he is not imposed upon. I should think that my hon. friend's would desire to have an investigation, and if it be shown that any of these officials have certified that prices were fair and reasonable when they were not, it is high time that we made some change.


David Henderson: I understood from the hon. gentleman from Yarmouth that it was the captains of the vesels who made the purchases ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: In some eases.


David Henderson: I was rather surprised, but so understood him, and he spoke of the particular shrewdness of these men in making the purchases. As regards any one of these officials certifying to the fairness of the prices of all these supplies, it would be utterly impossible for one man to certify to the value of everything required on board a ship. He might be a good judge of groceries and know nothing about hardware. I would not accuse a man of making a false statement even if he did make a mistake, as it would be utterly Impossible for him to be an expert in every article. No doubt he acted in good faith, but perhaps was misled.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I might add with regard to the observations of my hon. friend from Yarmouth, that we can I
quite understand what he means. If goods are ordered at Quebec, they are ordered by the purchasing agent of the government who is there, but if ordered at Yarmouth, where there is no purchasing agent, the captain will buy what he requires and be the judge of the prices.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Some of the purchases we complain of were made at Quebec.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: That is what we want to investigate.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: I did not say that the captain is to blame nor the agent of the department, but it is the system that is wrong. A recommendation is made by the representative where these supplies are to be purchased, and the captain is compelled to purchase them at the price recommended, and at whatever price the merchant sees fit to charge.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I must take exception to the last part of the hon. gentleman's statement. It may be quite correct that the captain is directed to buy his supplies at a certain place, but it does not follow that he must pay whatever price is asked. He is only bound to buy at a fair and reasonable price.


Mr. JOHNSTON (Cardwell).: I understand that the supplies are asked for by means of circulars, but do all the merchants in certain towns get these, or are these circulars sent to only one or two ? In that case, it would be easy for the two merchants to combine and each charge his own price and divide up the order between them.
Tidal service, including the salary of an assistant clerk beyond $400 notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $22,500.


Robert Laird Borden: Why this increase of $15,000. ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: That is to provide for the maintenance of the steamer ' Gulnare ' which we require for the tidal service.


Robert Laird Borden: Why is it necessary to have a steamer ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The work was not done satisfactorily. Representations were made by the shipping interest and there are reports by Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper and Sir Louis Davies on the subject. I found that the British Admiralty had a boat doing tidal service, which was somewhat too small for ocean work. It was all fitted up for this particular work and could be bought very reasonably-something like $30,WO. The inspector at Halifax reported that the work could not be satisfactorily done without a steamer, and the work was an urgent necessity to the shipping interest.


Robert Laird Borden: Would the hou. gentleman say a few words about what the steamer does ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: She is in charge of Mr. Dawson and staff, and takes the current and the soundings in different parts, the facts being made the basis for a chart which is reported to the admiralty office and furnished to those interested in shipping. The work has been heartily endorsed by those interested.


Robert Laird Borden: This does not mean that the service will be increased annually by $15,000 ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No. There is no additional cost except the maintenance of the steamer.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: Is that $15,000 a year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: How does the minister explain an increase of $15,000 for the maintenance ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We have the steamer and we must maintain it. Other steamers cost about $30,000.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: Will the hon. minister give some details ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There are the wages of the crew, provisions, fuel, and the rest.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: What is the crew ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The salaries will be $2,400, and so on.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: That is not enough. What are the other items ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Say fuel, about $3,000, provisions about $2,000-


Robert Laird Borden: That is, if you buy them by circular ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I do not know how else they could be bought. Then you have ship-chandlery, docking, miscellaneous, making up about $15,000.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: That is a pretty big * miscellaneous.'


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Well, you have sliip-chaudlery say $1,000: docking say, $500; coal oil say, $20; miscellaneous say, $1,400. And then there are repairs.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: That makes about $10,000 altogether. The hon. minister is only about $5,000 out.


Robert Laird Borden: This seems a pretty large sum for the maintenance of a Hon. Mr. PP.EFONTAINE.
thirty thousand dollar steamer. But this is an important work in which Mr. Dawson is engaged, and any reasonable expenditure would be generally approved. But this seems a very considerable amount considering the size of the steamer and the amount for which she was purchased.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I was not present wrhen the item was called. May I ask if this will be a permanent service ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We cannot promise. It will be maintained as long as the department thinks it useful.


David Henderson: What is to be gained by this service ? What is really the purport of it ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The best way to explain it is to read what Sir Charles Hibbert Tapper said on the subject.


David Henderson: I heard that years ago.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I have nothing more. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Henderson) had better read it and refresh his memory.
Salaries and expenses of cattle inspection, $3,300.


Robert Laird Borden: There is an increase here of $500.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: That is for an inspector at St. John, New Brunswick.
Unforeseen expenses generally, $5,000.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I was not here for a time, and would like to ask as to the investigation into xvreeks. Fop instance, would the expense of an investigation into such a case as that of the 'Campana' grounding, come out of this item ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Of course.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Has any investigation taken place in reference to the grounding of the ' Campana ? '


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I am informed that she was got off without damage and no investigation was asked.


Joseph Israël Tarte: But if the hon. minister would allow me, I think this is a case of pretty large importance. Here is a boat drawing eighteen feet that grounds although the channel has a depth of between thirty-two and thirty-three feet. Evidently there is something wrong.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The Harbour Commissioners in Montreal are perfectly satisfied with the ex-

planation of the pilot. He mistook the light of a barge that was standing at a certain point for the light of the channel and so he went aground. He was out of the channel at the time. The Harbour Commissioners thought it unnecessary to spend money to investigate a fact that was admitted particularly when there was no damage.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I think that this is a case that deserves attention, and I will tell the hon. minister why. There was a steamer anchored in the middle of the channel as the ' Campana ' was coming up. The pilot mistook the light on that steamer for a light on shore, as the hon. minister has said. That is the best evidence that the light on shore is not what it should be. Instead of it being a fixed light it should be a revolving light, that no mistake may be possible. I believe that a small private yacht grounded near the same place for the same reason. So, I believe there is ground for an investigation and for a change in regard to these lights.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We have arranged to provide the lights suggested by the hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Tarte). They have not been installed- have not arrived yet. But they will be here within the next thirty days.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Very well.


Robert Laird Borden: It is now two o'clock, and I suppose we shall not take up another item at this hour.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: My hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries is willing to reserve any item that any hon. gentleman may wish to have reserved. I hope that my hon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax) will agree that we have not made much progress and we might make a little more advance before we retire.


Robert Laird Borden: We have been discussing matters of a good deal of importance, and going over the Auditor General's Report. I think we have done enough for to-night.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There are two or three items on which there will be no discussion.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: I do not think the hon. gentleman will gain anything by going on. It is now 2 o'clock. Of course, we have just as much endurance as our hon. friends have.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I should think my hon. friend ought to have, because he has not given us the pleasure of company for much of the evening.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: Well, I will now.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We might skip the item 175, and pass the other items.
Magnetic Observatory, $2,700 ; meteorological service, $82,803 ; hydrographic surveys, $35,000.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Where are those stations ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. The magnetic observatory is at a village near Toronto.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Where have the hydrographic surveys been made this year ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. On Lake Winnipeg and Lake Superior, for the present.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Who has charge of those surveys ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. Mr. Stewart. The captain is Mr. Zealand, a new appointment, who comes from St. Catharines.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the cause of this increase of $850 in the meteorological service ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It is caused by increases of salaries to different officers on the*survey.


Joseph Israël Tarte: Have you had any maps made of the surveys ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Hon.   M@: I have not seen any maps of the lakes prepared by the Ottawa government.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: AVhile I was in the department, the surveys made under the direction of Mr. Stewart were sent to the Admiralty in England, they were approved of and the letters returning them highly commended the work of the Canadian officers. The maps are printed and distributed, and include the work done by Mr. Stewart up to last fall.


George Taylor: By whom are they distributed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They are sold. They are distributed by the British Admiralty.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I am asking the question because I know that on the lakes nearly all the maps employed are American maps. I have not seen any Canadian maps of the lakes. These maps do not seem to be procurable anywhere. For the trip I took last year I was obliged to buy American maps.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It is to remedy this state of affairs that this department is being organized thoroughly.


Joseph Israël Tarte: I am just informed that there are Canadian maps, but I have not seen them.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We will distribute some to the members of the House.
IIou. Mr. TARTE. The American maps are very flue. They are among the best in the world, but if we can do as good work as they do we will not have much to complain of. We have no survey of the harbours and ports on the lakes. In past years the Department of Public Works and the Department of Marine and Fisheries were each of them doing their own work. If the Department of Marine and Fisheries takes over this work there is no objection, I suppose, but I call the hon. minister's attention to this deficiency.

Friday, June 5, 1903.