1903-10-07

Mr. WILSON asked :: 1.	What amount of bonuses or subsidies have been voted by parliament each year to railways during the years 1900, 1901 and 1902 ?
2.	How much of the said bonuses or subsidies has been paid during the said years, and up to 1st September, 1903 ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: This question, and also questions 5, 6 and 8, which relate to either railways or finance, I would ask the hon. gentlemen to let them stand, and I will have the information on the next question day.



RURAL MAIL DELIVERY.

Mr. WILSON asked :: Is it the intention of the government to give any relief to the people living in the rural districts, by giving to them rural mail delivery ? If so, when may the people expect the said service to commence ? If not, why not ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Sir William Mulock).: This question is engaging the consideration of the government.



MEMORIAL FROM NORTH-WEST POSTMASTERS' ASSOCIATION.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaRIVIERE asked :
1.	Has the following memorial and supplement to the same, from the Manitoba and North-west Accounting Postmasters' Association been considered by the Honourable the Postmaster General ?
* Winnipeg, Man., February, 1903.
To the Right Hon. Sir. William Mulock, Postmaster General, Ottawa.
Dear Sir,-We, the undersigned, accounting postmasters of Manitoba, beg to bring to your attention the following statement of facts regarding our work, which goes to show that the remuneration is most inadequate, in the hope that you may be able to grant us substantial and immediate relief. We do this the more hopefully in view' of the stand you have taken on the question of hours of labour, &c., of the workingman.	1
Hon. Mr. FIELDING.: 1. The postmaster is responsible for the safe handling of many important letters and valuable parcels. In this country large amounts of money, formerly sent by express, are now sent by registered mail to wheat-buyers to enable them to carry on their business. In many places the branch banks remit to, or receive from, the head office large sums of money. This increases the postmaster's responsibility, and where help- is employed, necessitates care in the selection. The money-order business necessitates the handling of large sums of money for the miserable pittance of 26 cents per $100. The amount of stamps kept on hand must always be large with the source of supply so far away. In no other line of work would persons be held responsible for the proper handling of such large amounts, with the same possibilities of irregularities and losses, without remuneration at least from five to ten times greater than the postmaster receives for his money-order work. In many cases there is added responsibility through the handling of customs parcels, for which there is practically no remuneration. The postmaster is expected to provide a roomy, centrally located office without any regard to the rental which that office would command if leased for other purposes. The necessity for the correct aud prompt despatch of all mails, regardless of hours of arrival and departure, is in many instances a very grave responsability. Understanding that the present basis of remuneration has been in vogue for a quarter of a century or more, we would respectfully point out various increases in work which clearly show that, although it may have been sufficient then, it is utterly inadequate now.
Firstly.-In connection with newspapers and periodicals, we think it is a conservative estimate to assume that a family will now receive an average of six or eight times as many periodicals as a family would be receiving twenty-five or thirty years ago.
Secondly.-The use of the mails a,s a means of distributing advertising matter is a practice of recent years entirely, and- the quantity handled is simply enormous and constantly increasing. These increases affect both local distribution and the sorting of matter for forwarding to outside offices.
Thirdly.-The recent reduction in the rate of letter postage necessitates (in the matter of Canadian and United States postage) an increase of fully fifty per cent in the number of letters handled before an increase of revenue can accrue, or an increase of salary be hoped for. In the case of British, an<j some other lines of foreign postage, the increase in the number of letters must be 150 per cent before we have established a basis for any possible increase in salary. A working out of the figures in this connection will establish that the postmasters are bearing from thirty to forty per cent of the expenses of the reduction so appreciated by the public. This appears to be an altogether undue proportion.
The introduction of the postal note system has increased the amount of labour out of proportion to the revenue attached. This method of remitting small amounts (chiefly to the city offices) has largely curtailed the sale of stamps, which were formerly used. At offices where customs parcels are handled and distributed by mail to smaller offices, stamps are usually sent in payment of duty, and cash is remitted to port of entry, again curtailing

the sale of stamps received from the department.	...
2.	An examination! into that method of handling customs parcels and the remuneration (even where any is allowed) will reveal the fact that the work actually required to be performed, which is considerable, is practically unpaid for. This is one of the points which we desire to bring to your attention, that unremunerative work of this sort is being multiplied, while the revenue of the office is being held down by reduced rates of postage.
3.	In a number of the offices, besides keeping the office open throughout the regulation hours, the postmasters are compelled to await the arrival of a late evening train, and again in some instances have to get up at five or six o'clock in the morning to despatch a mail, thus imposing unduly long hours of service, without any allowances for any class of assistance, to say nothing of a competent assistant. In some offices, owing to the arrival of several different mails, the public is entitled to call and demand individual attention several times during the day, whereas the basis of remuneration makes no special provision for this. In places where tri-weekly trains carry the mails, the postmaster is compelled to remain (if he would give the public anything approaching satisfactory service), to provide, for a portion of three days a week, one or more duly qualified assistants. His allowance is inadequate for his own support at present cost of living, thus providing nothing for the payment of assistants.
4.	In view of the amount of mail matter to be re-sorted and forwarded, the forwarding allowances do not begin to pay for ^ the work done or the extra office room required. Another department with a deficit.
5.	The allowance for rent, fuel and light is decidedly inadequate. In practically every town where the post office is kept in a separate compartment, the room occupied could be leased for a rental in excess of the full allowance for rent, for heating and for lighting. In the town of Morris, the postmaster is allowed $100 for rent, fuel and light. For less space in the same building he receives from the Merchants Bank $350- a year for rent alone. At Melita the postmaster cancelled a lease bringing him a net annual rental of $180 to use the building for post office purposes on an allowance of $125 for rent, fuel and light. Other similar examples could be cited. Fuel and light are costly here.
fi. In the matter of securing proper assistants, we would point out that labour readily commands far larger remuneration in any market than it did a few years ago. To have experienced help available is a severe drain upon the limited exchequer of the postmaster who is unfortunate enough to require it, as nearly all do. Even where help is not regularly required, competent assistance must be had, if the postmaster is ever to seek recreation or relief from duty.
7. There is another matter which affects postmasters in the west more particularly, namely, the increased cost of living. This has frequently been brought to the attention of yourself and colleagues in various ways, and we note that already you have conceded the point, as in the case of the 20 per cent increase allowed the letter-carriers of Winnipeg. In our opinion, this does not represent the actual amount of difference, but is a recognition of that difference. In all lines the cost of living has advanced during
the past few years, while the postmasters are receiving less pay for more work.
8. A comparison with salaries paid in other departments of the public service, and even in other departments of the postal service, give an idea of our disadvantages. For example: First-class railway mail clerks receive $960 and mileage; second-class clerks, $880 and mileage. In the city of Winnipeg, the assistant postmaster gets $2,000 ; first-class clerks, $1,500 ; second class, $1,320 ; third class, $880, and letter-carries, $720. We do not think these are too highly paid, but an office with a revenue of $2,000 not only absorbs all of one person's time, but requires an additional c)erk at least a portion of the year. The postmaster of such an office receives for salary, commissions and allowances an average of less than $700, or less than half the amount received by a first-class city clerk, $100 less than a second-class railway mail clerk, and a trifle less than is paid to the city letter-carriers, and out of this modest income he must employ whatever additional help is required, and furnish a suitable office and office equipment. In most cases, his hours are longer and his responsibilities greater than those of any of the officials referred to. In one town, where the train arrived late and departed early, the postmaster until recently received $3.50 per month for overtime, while the railway agent received $19 a month extra.
In view of the conditions and facts set forth above, we would respectfully suggest the following changes, as tending to bring about a redress of our grievances :-1st. That the straight salary allowance be based on 50 per cent on the first $1,000 worth of stamps sold, and 40 per cent on all additional sales. This would barely offset the loss resulting from the reduction of letter postage. 2nd. That in Manitoba a special increase of at least 20 per cent be allowed to cover extra cost of living. 3rd. That the allowance for rent, fuel and light be doubled, so as to provide a reasonable rent for the office, and a provision for the cost of fuel and light in this country. 4th. That the money-order system be simplified, so as to lessen the amount of work to be performed for the small remuneration allowed, and also to increase its popularity with the business public, who now object to the restrictions hedging it round. 5th. In addition to the regular and general scale of allowances, we would request that a special allowance bo granted for each extra mail which tends to bring the public again before the wicket for individual attention during the day ; that the forward allowance be materially increased to distributing offices ; that a special allowance be given to postmasters who are compelled to work before 8 a.m., or after 7 p.m. Among the mechanical industries the special allowance for overtime is very marked. That in the case of offices where mails are so infrequent as to have large quantities of mail matter delivered at the office at one time, so that the public convenience really requires the employment of one or more assistants, an allowance be given towards the payment of such assistant or assistants.
6th. In addition to the above, we feel that there are a number of cases of special minor grievances which we cannot enter into in detail, but in which we tljink that a little investigation would show that redress could be effected, so as to relieve the postmasters concerned, without in any way impairing the efficiency and safety of the public service, which grievances have probably continued to exist

because they have not been brought to your honourable attention.
And we would respectfully urge that the above matters be duly considered, and that a large measure of redress be granted in the very near future.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.



MANITOBA AND NORTH-WEST ACCOUNTING POSTMASTERS' ASSOCIATION.

[Stage Direction]
Supplementary suggestions passed by Executive.
1.	That all accounting offices be given an allowance for rent, fuel and light.
2.	That twine, mucilage, pens, ink', pencils, &c., for post office use be furnished by the department, and not at the expense of the postmaster, as at present.
3.	That the department make it more clear to all publishers that newspapers must be suitably folded and that they must be addressed plainly. That where labels are used, they must be in large, clear type, and that if possible, uniformity of colour in labels be secured.
4.	That a full list of ' Suggestions to the Public ' be printed by the department and supplied to all postmasters for display in their offices, as tending to make it clear that certain regulations are found necessary by the department, and are not based on the caprice or convenience of the postmaster. For instance, that stamps and money-orders may be purchased during the distribution of a newly arrived mail, and that money-orders and postal notes are not available for purchase after the registered mail closes for an outgoing mail. Also, some suggestions as to the age of children who are to be considered as proper persons to receive mail from the wicket.
5.	That when instructions are sent out for the weighing of all mails, that facilities for such weighing be afforded by the department.
6.	That in view of the large sums of money at times in the mails in this country, and hence often stored in the post office, and in view of the value of the stamps and the importance of the books now to be kept, that safes ' be provided for accounting postmasters, or an allowance be granted to pay for use of same, when provided by the postmaster.
2. Is it the intention to accede to the request of the association ?
The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Sir William Mulock).: This memorial has been received, and when the supplementary estimates for the post office are under consideration I will be prepared to discuss this question.



MAIL CONTRACT-BALACLAVA TO OWEN SOUND.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. THOMSON (Grey)-foy Mr. Taylor-asked :
1.	Who has the contract for conveying the mails from Balaclava to Owen Sound ?
2.	What is the contract price ?
3.	Was it the lowest tender ? If not, why was not the lowest tender accepted ?
The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Hon. Sir William Mulock).: The answer to this question is prepared, but I do not find it in my desk. Speaking from memory, the con-Mr. LaRIVIERE.
tract for conveying the mails from Balaclava to Owen Sound was made with the old contractor at the contract price of $250 a year. The next tenderer, whose name I am not sure of


Mr. TAYLOR.: Better let the question stand.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I think I am giving the whole information. The second tenderer and the lowest tenderer was, I think, a man named Hill, at $250. The next one above him was the old contractor at $270 odd. The department decided to accept the lowest tenderer, and in accordance with the usual .practice the papers were handed to the officer to be completed. But on inquiry it was found that the lowest tenderer was a man advanced in years, about 73 years of age, and reported upon as decrepid and becoming too feeble properly to discharge the service. Accordingly the service was offered to the former contractor at the price of the lowest tenderer, and he accepted it. Therefore, the contract was made with him.



WEIGH MASTERS FOR GRAIN.

[Stage Direction]
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) moved that to-morrow the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution :
Resolved, that it is expedient to amend the General Inspection Act, and to provide for the appointment of weigh masters for the weighing of grain in any inspection district east of the inspection district of Manitoba, and for their remuneration by fees or otherwise.
Motion agreed to.

The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) moved :: That when this House adjourns on Friday next, it stand adjourned to the following day (Saturday) at 11 a.m.; and that the order of proceedings will be the same as the order for Fridays. That this House will sit in the same manner on all subsequent Saturdays to the end of the session.


Mr. R. L. BORDEN (Halifax).: As we are already sitting from eleven o'clock in the morning until one o'clock the next morning the addition of Saturday to these labours seems rather unusual. Could the right hon. gentleman (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) say what his proposition is in regard to the hours of sitting on Saturday ? Is it proposed to sit from eleven o'clock in the morning until twelve o'clock at night on the ensuing Saturdays ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: We are now approaching the conclusion of the seventh month in the session, and I suppose the time lias arrived when we might think of prorogation. Therefore, that is the end we

have in view in following the course of preceding sessions by sitting on Saturdays. To-morrow, probably, I shall be able to make a communication to the House as to the legislation that is still to be brought to the attention of the House, and the orders on the paper that may be dropped. In the meantime it is our intention to sit all day Saturday unless the sentiment of the House is overwhelmingly on the other side.


Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).: A number of members, not anticipating that Saturdays would be taken inasmuch as we are sitting in the mornings, have oiajle arrangements for leaving town next Saturday. If the right hon. Prime Minister would make it the following Saturday, I think it would better suit the convenience of the House.


The PRIME MINISTER.: No, I hope that hon. members of the House who have made arrangements to spend Saturday elsewhere will make arrangements to spend one Saturday in Ottawa.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. O. E. TALBOT (Bellecliasse).: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are called, I beg leave to rise to a question of privilege. On Wednesday last, Mr. Speaker, I drew your attention to the fact that 1 had serious doubts about the authenticity of the signatures of certain petitions which were presented in this House in opposition to the construction of a new transcontinental railway. You were kind enough to tell me and tell this House that the hon. members who presented these petitions assumed in so doing full responsibility for everything in connection with these petitions. 1 had them published in the newspapers of the district in order to make sure whether my doubts were founded or not. I am now in a position to prove to this House and to the country that a very grave abuse of the honour and dignity of this parliament has been committed, and


Mr. CLANCY.: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order.
Mr. TALBOT-the wholesale forgery


Mr. SPEAKER.: Order.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman (Mr.-Talbot) has no right to read anything from newspapers reflecting upon the proceedings of this House or contradicting any statement made by any hon. member.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I do not understand that the hon. gentleman is reading from newspapers.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: These are notes of my own written by my own hand-and the wholesale
forgery has been committed by over zealous partisans urged by unscrupulous though important newspapers of Montreal. These petitions contain the names of mere boys, names of people who live in the United States, names of people who have been dead for years, names of people who are in lunatic asylums, names of people, who, owinig to their advanced age, are absolutely irresponsible, names of people who knew nothing of these petitions and names of people who when asked to sign positively refused. In view of these facts which I am in a position to prove, I beg, Mr. Speaker, to submit a motion to the consideration of the House. My reason for doing so is that I consider that the right of petition is sacred, and I do not question for a moment the right of the gentlemen who signed the petitions to present and emphasize their objections to the government policy on this transcontinental railway question in that way if they chose to do so, but for my part, and I feel sure that this honourable House will endorse me, I must enter my most solemn protest against this audacious and monstrous attempt to impose upon the good faith of parliament and the country, by seeking to create the utterly false and erroneous impression that the people in the province of Quebec at least are opposed to this great national undertaking, and I say that it is a screaming farce and a most shameful departure from all principles of honour and dignity due to this parliament to present such petitions.


Mr. SPROULE.: I want to ask your ruling, Mr. Speaker, as to whether this is a question of privilege or not. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Talbot) has a right to raise a question of privilege, but I do not understand it is a question of privilege.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: If some documents had been brought before the House, which documents were supposed to be petitions, but which turned out to be forgeries. I suppose It would be within the privilege of the House to inquire whether these documents were genuine or not.	.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It is only an allegation that the hon. gentleman is making.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I understand the hon. gentleman is making a statement, and that he proposes that this statement shall be referred to some committee of the House.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: I sincerely hope and trust that a thorough inquiry into this matter will be granted by hon. members on both sides of this House. I beg to move as follows :
Onfisiphore Ernest Talbot, member of the House of Commons for the county of Belle-chasse, having declared from his seat :
1 That a petition of James V. Cote and others, of Cap St. Ignace, county of Mont-magny, in the province of Quebec, has been

presented and deposited by Mr. Alcorn, M.P., in the House of Commons, on the 30th September, 1903, asking that a Bill, now before parliament, concerning the new Transcontinental Railway, shall not become law ;
2.	That the said petition was read and received on the 2nd October, instant ;
3.	That on the 29th September last a petition of Thomas Coulombe and others, of Ber-thier, in the county of Montmagny, in the province of Quebec, had also been presented and laid on the Table by Mr. Alcorn, M.P., to the same effect ;
4.	That this latter petition was read and received on the 1st October instant ;
o. That these two petitions contain false signatures. that several persons, whose names appear on the said petitions, never signed them nor ever authorized any person to sign them and that the said petitions contain the names of persons who have been long since dead ;
6.	That by reason of these facts the dignity of the House of Commons has been outrageously offended :
Mr. Talbot moves, seconded by Mr. Carbon-neau, that these petitions be referred to the Committee of Privileges and Elections, for investigation into the validity of the signatures which they contain and the circumstances regarding the preparation, fabrication and presentation of the said petitions ; with power to the said committee to send for persons, papers and records, and to examine witnesses upon oath or affirmation, and that the committee do report in full_ the evidence taken before them, and all their proceedings on the reference and the truth of their inquiries.


Robert Laird Borden: If any petitions have been presented to this House, purporting to be signed by persons who have not signed them, I at once agree that it is a matter which must be investigated. I cannot however congratulate the hon. gentleman (Mr. Talbot) who has made the motion, on the judicial spirit in which he has presented the matter to the House. It seems to me that he has not acted as one who is desirous of upholding and maintaining the dignity of this House. His language did not impress me in that way. He has presented it apparently, in the belief that he could obtain some partisan advantage from proving certain facts in connection with these petitions, and he therefore seizes upon this occasion to indulge in very strong and violent language for party ends. With these observations. I desire to say that so far as this side of the House is concerned, we have not the slightest objection-in fact,
I concur heartily in the proposal that this matter should go to the Committee on Privileges and Elections.


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: I am glad that the opposition have no objection to offer to this motion. Indeed I cannot see what objection could be offered, in the face of the statement made by my hon. friend (Mr. Talbot) j that lie has reason to believe that the dig- I nity of the House has been seriously infringed on, and that an attempt has been made by Mr. TALBOT.
false pretenses, to create a wrong impression. My hon. friend from Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) may pei'haps have spoken warmly. He does not belong to the legal profession, and he is not perhaps trained to control his feelings as the members of that profession may be. But, as there is an impression growing very strong in the country, that in fact there has been an attempt at a conspiracy to impose upon this House, I am perfectly willing to excuse my hon. friend's language.


Robert Laird Borden: How many of these petitions have been referred to by the member from Bellechasse ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: He has referred to only two, but I think he could refer to several, and perhaps to all.


Robert Laird Borden: Then I am perfectly willing to widen the motion and to enable an investigation to be made into every petition that has been presented. If the right hon. gentleman suggests that all these petitions are of a fraudulent character, let us by all means have an investigation into all of them. I am prepared to support a motion to that effect, if the right hon. gentleman moves it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It would be an insult to the intelligence and the honesty of the electors of Canada, to select a few of these petitions and examine them, and on the strength of that to allege that they are all of a fraudulent character. If any particular one so selected' is to be regarded as typical of the whole, then it is a matter of the greatest importance that all of them should be scrutinized. I believe that a great many of these petitions can in no sense be characterized as having been obtained by any impropriety. If one petition goes before this committee then I suggest that all of them should be submitted.


Mr. W. H. BENNETT (East Simcoe).: A few years ago in this House, there was presented the spectacle of hon. gentlemen from the province of Quebec, introducing affidavits and other proof to show, that there bad been most gross frauds perpetrated in the taking of a census in that province. At the time, it seemed rather black, that if a fraud has been, perpetrated, it should have remained for hon. gentlemen opposite to accuse their own compatriots of such frauds. This morning we have had a petition of that from an hon. gentleman opposite, who seems to he quite willing to be selected to make the charge; because nobody would blame the hon. gentleman for having moved of his own motion in the matter. The charge now made is : That in the province of Quebec, apparently it is a usual thing to commit forgery and to commit crimes of this nature.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh.


William Humphrey Bennett: I congratulate the hon. gentleman from Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) that he thinks he is fitted to be selected for the performance of the duty of making such gross accusations against his compatriots. A little time ago, when that celebrated plebiscite vote was taken in the province of Quebec, I regret to say that there were frauds perpetrated, and the people of Ontario will now have the statement of one member at least from the province of Quebec, that frauds of this kind are perpetrated in that province. We had it that deliberate frauds and disgraceful frauds were perpetrated in the plebiscite vote and that charge will go before the people of Ontario, backed up by this evidence of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Talbot).
I congratulate the hon. gentleman on having been selected to assail, as he has assailed, his own compatriots in the province of Quebec. I can tell him furthermore, that in the constituency I have the honour to represent, there is a large French Canadian vote, and I invite him most cheerfully to come up there and assail his French compatriots in that riding as he has done in this matter.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE (Hon. Charles Fitzpatrick).: The French Canadians of the province of Quebec will be able. I thoroughly believe, to appreciate the attack that has been made upon them, and they will be able to distinguish between the responsibility of my hon. friend (Mr. Bennett) and that of my hon. friend from Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot). The hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennett) has just referred to the plebiscite vote in the province of Quebec


Samuel Hughes: Have they stopped voting yet ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Does my hon. friend from Simcoe (Mr. Bennett) refer to an affidavit presented by a man named Parent from Rimouski ?


William Humphrey Bennett: I refer more particularly to the fact that more votes were cast in certain polling places than there were names on the voters' lists.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: That is not the case in the province of Quebec.


An hon. MEMBER.: He is talking about Ontario.


William Humphrey Bennett: And some of them in the city of Quebec.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: I would like my hon. friend (Mr. Bennett) to particularize, because if my memory serves me he must base his statement on an alleged affidavit of one (Parent) of Rimouski. That was the only affidavit we had referring to such a matter that I can recall, and the result of the making of that affidavit has deprived this country of one citizen who
has become a necessary resident of the United States.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


William Humphrey Bennett: I relied on the returns which show that in many polling places more votes were cast than there were names on the lists.
Some lion. MEMBERS. No.
Mr. E, HACKETT (West Prince). I presented a number of these petitions and I challenge the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) or any other hon. member to say, that I am not responsible for the names on these petitions. I endorse these petitions. Has it come to this, that in this free coun-ry of ours, the right to petition parliament and our King, the highest right of the people is to be assailed in this way, and that we are to be draggged before a committee of parliament to be held responsible for the names on these petitions. Have things come to this pass in this free country ?


Mr. COWAN.: Yes. You presented some very low class matter.


Mr. HACKETT.: That individual over there is of a very low class himself. Sir, I stand here as an old resident of this country, I stand here as one who has represented the people for some twenty-five or thirty years, and I have never seen before such an exhibition; that the government of this country are endeavouring to prevent the people of this country from the right to petition parliament. It is a most disgraceful thing, and I would ask the hon. member from Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) to withdraw his motion and to have nothing more to do with this matter.
M. GEO. TAYLOR (South Leeds). I had the honour of presenting several of these petitions from my county. I scanned them carefully and I am certain that every name on them was genuine. I believe that these petitions should be included in the motion of the hon. member from Bellechasse. He has selected just a couple of these petitions and if any signatures on these are found not to be genuine, then an effort will be made to create the idea that all the petitions are of the same kind. That is not fair. Now, I "want this motion to be broadened so as to include all the petitions that have been presented. Those from Quebec which were handed to my hon. friend from Prince Edward (Mr. Alcorn) were presented by him in tiie belief that they were genuine. It is possible that my hon. friend from Bellechasse sent some gentleman down there with one of these blank forms, knowing that this country from one end to the other


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: The hon. member has no right to say that a member might have been guilty of forgery.


George Taylor: I did not say anything of the kind. I said that it might he possible that my hon. friend from Bellechasse might have procured these blank petitions and sent them to some friend down there.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Take it back.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: The hon. gentleman lias no right to make such a statement against a member of this House.


George Taylor: Mr. Speaker, 1 take it back; but I must say that in view of his having-risen in his place and singled out two of these petitions from among those that have been presented here, it at least looks a little fishy, and as if there might be a job at the bottom of it; and unless he will broaden his motion sufficiently to include in it ail the petitions that have been presented here, there can be no other inference taken. Therefore I suggest that all the petitions which have been presented be referred to that committee-and I am anxious to have those from my own constituency referred- because I know that the country from one end to the other is alarmed at the enormity of tlie scheme proposed by^the government, and tile people rose in their might and sent in genuine petitions, asking the governement to stay their hand until they investigated he matter.


Mr. D. HENDERSON (Haltou).: When the hon. member for Bellechasse read his statement in the House, I did not give very much attention to it. Evidently the hon. gentleman was selected by some pre-arranged plan to do something that possibly no other member would have done. But when the right hon. the First Minister enlarged the charge made by the hon. member for Bellechasse. and said that the same insinuation applied to all the petitions that had been presented,
I began to consider the matter as very much more serious. I may tell the right lion, the First Minister that the imputation lie has thrown out against many of my constituents ' who have sent in petitions will not be very kindly received by them ; and I may say that amongst those petitioners are warm political friends of his own.


An hon. MEMBER.: Not one.


David Henderson: An hon. gentleman says not one. He is making a statement which he has no right to make, which is not in accordance with the truth ; because I saw the right hon. gentleman's own political friends signing the petition. 1 think the right lion, gentleman has gone too far in making this broad statement, and I think it is his duty to have .this investigation enlarged so as to make it apply to all petitions which have been presented, or else to withdraw the statement he has made.


George Taylor: 


Mr. E. F. CLARKE (West Toronto).: My hon. friend who has just taken liis seat has anticipated what I intended to say; but in order to give the right hon. gentleman, who is the guardian of the honour and the integrity and the privileges of this House, an opportunity of making good the insinuations which he threw out in replying to the hon. leader of the opposition, I propose to move, in amendment, seconded by Mr. Huglies (North Victoria) :
That the words ' these petitions ' be struck out and the following words be substituted therefor : ' All petitions presented during the present session relating to the National Transcontinental Railway.'
If the right hon. gentleman is so jealous of the honour of parliament, and if he is possessed of any knowledge or information that any attempt has been made other than that alleged by his follower from Beile-cliasse, to impose on the privileges of the House, he will surely accept this amendment, and give an opportunity to those who presented petitions to demonstrate their bona tidies.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Carrkfl.


Edward Frederick Clarke: If the hon. gentleman who says ' carried ' is the fountain of justice, I wonder that he did not move in this matter himself.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Because when a specific charge of forgery is made,
I like to deal with that specific charge. My hon. friend will find that there are others.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I hope the hon. minister will make good that statement.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: I will. I
refer to the case of petitions from Bagot.


Samuel Hughes: I second the amendment with the greatest of pleasure. I had the honour of presenting some petitions from friends in my own riding, and I want to tell the Prime Minister that a number of Liberals signed those petitions. I never asked one of them to sign, but the signatures are genuine.


Mr. BELCOURT.: That is not the charge. Nobody disputes that.


Samuel Hughes: The statement was made in the House that no Liberal lia-d signed One of these petitions. The hon. member for Bellechasse stated that the petition presented to the House to-day contained the names of idiots and lunatics. If that is so, I venture to say that friends of hon. gentlemen opposite were instrumental in having those petitions signed in that way in order that they might be presented to this House and be exposed. If that is the case, individuals will prove that the men who had that done were instigated by friends of lion, gentlemen opposite. 1 wish to say that a very prominent man in the province of Ontario, who had the offer of a Liberal

nomination in the election for the last parliament, signed one of these petitions, and the name of a gentleman who has the refusal of a Liberal nomination to-day will also be found in one of them, signed not by another hand, but by his own strong right arm.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I consider this a much more serious matter than it at first appeared to be. The allegations made by the hon. member for Bellechasse were so sweeping in their character and so specific in their nature as to demand prompt . action to either establish or refute these charges against the petitioners, and the first minister alleged that the bulk of these petitions presented were of the same character, make this his charge a very important one for this House to consider. Following him, the right hon. the First Minister insinuates that all the petitions against the railway were of a similar character. Under these circumstances, it becomes a matter of the gravest importance that the inquiry should be of the very widest and most general character. From what I know of the signers of some of these petitions, I believe them to be men of high integrity and of sterling character, and so far as I know the petitions are truthfully and honestly signed. But the stigma cast upon these petitions by the right hon. First Minister applies to every petition which has been presented to this House, and therefore it involves the necessity of bringing the individual signers before the committee ; and I demand, in the interest of justice and fair-play, and for the vindication of the character of the Reformers as well as the Conservatives who signed these petitions, that they be brought before that committee to give their testimony. It is too important to allow it to pass in that way, after the specific allegations of the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) that the signatures to these petitions were forgeries or signed by lunatics or aged people or people 'who were dead, especially we have the statement of the right hon. the First Minister, immediately following, that the petitions generally were of the same character. Such statements call for a most searching inquiry. The signers of these petitions should be brought from every part of the country, so that they may have an opportunity of vindicating their character.


Mr. E. BLAIN (Peel).: I have had the honour of presenting a few petitions from the province of Ontario and I have some others which I have not yet presented. The right hon. the Prime Minister has insinuated that a very large number of the petitions have been falsely signed. I wish to say that I would like to have an investigation into the petitions which I presented from the electors of my county, and I would insist that the scope of this investigation be sufficiently wide to allow every man who signed
one of these petitions to come here and make a declaration. I did not go closely into every petition which I presented, nor was it my duty to do so, but I have sufficient confidence in the electors of my county to feel assured that no signature is other than genuine. That is the way we do business in Ontario. Hon. gentlemen opposite laugh. They do not seem to care how long the session may last and I suppose we need not worry very much about it. I wish to say that I am in favour of the motion moved by the other side in so far as it goes. I am in favour of a complete investigation into this whole matter, but I am still more in favour of the resolution introduced by the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Clarke), that every petition presented to this House shall go before this committee and there shall be a complete investigation, so that the people will understand whether or not any of these signatures are false. I regard this as a most important question. Even at this late stage of the session, whether it should take several months or not, it is in the interest of the public that we should have an honest and complete investigation into the signatures to the petitions against this government project of a transcontinental railway.


Mr.   M.. K. RICHARDSON@South Grey: I had the honour, Mr. Speaker, of presenting several petitions. The first petition which I presented was accompanied with a letter stating that I would find on examination that it had been signed by Reformers and Conservatives alike. On glancing over the names, I found that statement correct, and I believe the same remark would apply to all the petitions I presented to this House.


Mr. G. O. ALCORN (Prince Edward).: As it is concerning some petitions which I presented that controversy has arisen, I wish to state, Mr. Speaker, that I presented these petitions in the utmost good faith and belief that they were perfectly regular. And, Mr. Speaker, apart from the utterly unsupported statement of the hon. njember for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) we have no evidence whatever that there is anything irregular about them. In presenting these petitions I submit that I was certainly more warranted in assuming that the signatures were bona fide and genuine than the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) was in making use of the outrageously extreme language he has. After a reference which had been made by that hon. gentleman to these petitions in this House on a former occasion, I had a conversation with him, in which t called his attention to the fact that if some of the signatures were apparently written by the same hand, that gave no one any right to assume that they were not written in good faith at the request of the people who were not able to write their own names. In the rural parts of our provinces, it is not unusual to find electors who can-

not sign their names, and we are entitled to assume that the signatures of such electors to these petitions were written by people who were authorized to sign for them. Hon. gentlemen know that the most solemn document a man signs in the course of his life (his will) is not necessarily signed by his own hand. He has a perfect right to ask his friend or neighbour to sign it for him. The excuse made by the hon. member for Belle-cliasse was that in each such case there should have been a witness who should have made a statutory declaration affirming that he was present and saw the signature made by 1he person who was requested to make it. Well, Sir, I am not aware that there is any procedure laid down in the rules of this House requiring any such thing to be done, and the House will well understand that it would not be practicable. It seems to me that, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, this House is bound to assume that the signatures were genuine. Until some direct evidence is produced showing some fraud in the affixing of signatures, no one has the right to challenge their authenticity. Until evidence is produced before the committee of investigation, under oath, establishing fraud, we are bound to assume that everything is absolutely regular. I do not propose to make any statement with regard to these petitions now if they are to go before a committee and be investigated ; but so far as I am concerned, I take this opportunity of cordially inviting any investigation into any connection I have had with these matters. Every hon. gentleman on this side is most anxious that all the facts and proceedings should be investigated in the fullest manner. If the hon. member for Bellechasse means to insinuate that I had reason to suspect or believe that there was anything appearing on the face of either of the petitions I presented which should have led me to investigate into their genuineness, then I throw that insinuation back to the hon. gentleman with the scorn it deserves. So far as I am concerned, X repeat, T invite tl,ie fullest investigation.


Mr. ALFRED A. LEFURGEY (East Prince).: I had the honour to present a number of the petitions


Mahlon K. Cowan: Apologize now.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Cowan) will keep quiet for a moment, he can have his turn when I get through. I was saying that I had the honour to present a number of petitions from my own constituency, aud among the names appended to those petitions, especially those from my town of Summerside, quite a number were those of leading Liberals of that town, men who have been leading Liberals for years. I know the signatures of these gentlemen, and I can say that the best business men in the town signed these petitions. I was astounded at the language of the bon.


George Oscar Alcorn: leader of the House insinuating that the petitions presented to this parliament with regard to the Transcontinental Railway Bill were forgeries or that the signatures were those of people acting from ulterior motives. In the interest of the country and out of deference for the high standing of a great many of the men whose names are on the petitions I presented, I desire that the fullest investigation should be held, so that the stigma cast upon the reputations of these men by the leader of the House may be removed.


William Humphrey Bennett: When, a little while ago, I mentioned that certain frauds bad been perpetrated in the province of Quebec in connection with the plebiscite vote, I was rather challenged by the Minister of Justice (Hon. Mr. Fitzpatrick). That hon. gentleman, as I understood, alleged' that the only evidence in support of these charges of fraud was to be found in the statements of a man who, in consequence of those statements, was placed in such a position that he had to flee the country. I said I did not rely on the evidence of any man who made affidavits, but on something more tangible-the returns of the plebiscite vote. Under whose auspices was that plebiscite taken ? Every man appointed to a position in the taking of that plebiscite


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I would draw the attention of the hon. member (Mr. Bennett) to the fact that, a few minutes ago, when lie referred to this question of the plebiscite, I understood that he merely wished to illustrate his argument before the Chair; but I am afraid he is discussing


William Humphrey Bennett: I would have finished with my illustration.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I would recall the
hon. gentleman's attention to the fact that the question of the plebiscite or of the census is not germane to the question before the Chair.


Samuel Hughes: It is used illustratively.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I thought the hon.
gentleman (Mr. Bennett) wished simply to make an explanation of what he had said previously.


William Humphrey Bennett: That is what I mean.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I would invite the bon.
gentleman not to make an argument.


William Humphrey Bennett: I say, Mr. Speaker, that I do not rely for evidence of fraud in the plebiscite vote in the province of Quebec, upon the statement of any person, but upon the returns themselves. These returns prove that frauds of the grossest kind were perpetrated. Why, what happened in the city of Quebec itself ? In one polling division, in which there were only 115 names on the voters' list, no less than 114 votes were

recorded. No man is so idiotic as to believe that, in such a polling division, 114 electors actually presented themselves and voted. In another division of the city of Quebec, I find that 111 votes were polled out of 114 names on the list. And, with a zeal worthy of their masters in the province of Quebec, where they were trying to get a negative vote on the plebiscite, in Quebec Centre, they did the magnificent work against the cause of temperance of polling 105 votes where there were only 101 names on the list. And you can take the province of Quebec county by county, and find evidences of such frauds as are exposed by the figures I have just read.


Mr.   .TOHN D. REID@South Grenville: I am much surprised at the right lion. Prime Minister (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Lau-rier) backing up so strongly the resolution of the hon. member for Bellecbasse (Mr. Talbot). When these petitions were being presented to the House day by day, signed by men of both parties throughout the Dominion, the Liberal papers all over the country tried to create the impression that the petitions were only from members of the Conservative party. They tried to make the petitions fall flat. Now, when this Grand Trunk Pacific Bill was being put through this House, we on this side felt it our duty to do everything we possibly could to prevent it becoming law without an opportunity being afforded of discussing it before the people, so that they might be educated on the question and understand what was before them. If the right hon. Prime Minister will actually carry through this investigation that has been proposed- I for one do not believe that he has any intention whatever of doing so-he will find that this Grand Trunk Pacific Bill is being opposed by leading Liberals from one end of the country to the other. If that investigation is properly held, I am satisfied that leading Liberals from every constituency of this Dominion will declare themselves opposed to the Prime Minister's policy, and in this way he will gain some idea of the effect that this Grand Trunk Pacific Bill will have upon his party at the next general election. I feel, for one, that this is the opportunity of our life to show to the people the folly of having the Grand Trunk Bill pressed through the House during the present session. I hope, therefore, that the right hon. Prime Minister has not had this motion proposed as a sham, but that he will give us the very fullest investigation, even if we take another six months to carry it out.


Mr. T. I. THOMSON (North Grey).: It is quite clear that the government are at sea, perfectly at sea, as regards public opinion in the province of Ontario on the subject of this proposed transcontinental railway. I may say that one of the petitions sent to me was accompanied with a letter from the sender stating that every man he asked to sign it had signed1 it cheerfully, and there were as many Liberals as Conservatives on the petition. I am satisfied that every name on the petition is right. And I ask yon, Mr. Speaker, why should not any man, no matter what his politics, be glad to sign such a petition? The most important request in that petition is that the construction of this road should not be proceeded with until proper surveys had been prepared. Why, the exMinister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair), whom I am glad to see in his place, stated that one of the chief reasons why he broke with his colleagues on this question was this very reason. And if that hon. gentleman thought this of sufficient importance to be one of his chief reasons for leaving the government, why should any Liberal in Ontario or any other province, object to signing these petitions. I think the government have not realized their position in this matter, but an appeal to the people which I hope they will soon grant, will convince them of the opinion of the country.


Mr. W. J. ROCHE (Marquette).: As one of those who had the honour of presenting some of the petitions referred to, I desire, in the strongest possible manner, to resent the imputation cast upon the signatures of these petitions as not being genuine, by no less a personage than the right hon. Prime Minister of this country. The hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) presented a petition signed by 800 residents of the province of Manitoba against the railway rates on cream and other products. The hon. gentleman (Mr. McCreary) assumes responsibility for the genuineness of that petition. He has faith, as I have, that the signatures are genuine. We who are representatives are only doing our duty in presenting these petitions to parliament, and we cannot be responsible for every single individual name that is on them. We cannot answer for the genuineness of all these names, but at any rate, we in the province of Manitoba feel such confidence in the integrity and in the honesty of our inhabitants that we know well that they would resort to no such despicable methods as those which the member for Bellechasse states were resorted to in connection with the signing of those petitions in the province of Quebec. Now, I do not know so much about the inhabitants of that gentleman's province as he knows himself, but certainly, coming as I do from the west, I believe it to be beneath my dignity to cast such aspersions upon the inhabitants of Quebec as have emanated from that hon. gentleman himself. The most amusing thing, Mr. Speaker, in connection with this whole affair, is to see the dignity of parliament being looked after by the hon. member for Bellechasse, who now constitutes himself a champion of the dignity of parliament I would say, to use a vulgarism,

tliat it was enough to make a horse laugh, if it were not so serious a matter. I think that no other gentleman on that side of the House could be found who would use such violent language and make such a serious charge against the gentlemen who have attached their signatures to these petitions. But I am not so much surprised at that hon. gentleman as I was at the Prime Minister, when he actually stated that no doubt these two petitions were samples of what prevailed throughout the whole Dominion. I say that it is my duty to rise and resent on thh part of the people of Manitoba, such an aspersion upon those who have attached their signatures to these petitions, and who, in sending them in, distinctly stated that they would have been much more numerously signed had they had time to circulate them a while longer. Now, Sir, like hon. gentlemen on that side of the House, we are in favour of an investigation, and we Insist on a full investigation, and are quite willing to stay here the balance of the year to get that investigation. The right hon. gentleman need not think that he can confine his investiation to two or three of these petitions, and then go through the country and raise a doubt of their genuineness, and proclaim that they are a sample of what took place in almost every province of the Dominion. It is, I say, an aspersion cast upon the inhabitants of our country who, though Conservatives in their politics, were they to-morrow to go over and give their support to the government on this transcontinental road or on their general policy, the Prime Minister would say that ' nothing would be too good for them,' as he said in regard to some of his colleagues in the past ; but when his colleagues left the administration and refused to support him on this railway question, now nothing is too bad for them. I say the mere fact of a man being a Conservative does not change his character to that extent that he becomes a forger immediately, and then as soon as he joins the Liberal party he becomes one of the best citizens of the country. I think we will find that this is a mere device on the part of the hon. member for Bellechasse, who no doubt, acting under instructions from the government, wanted to break the force of public opinion that has expressed itself against this Trans-Canada road and its prosecution under its present auspices. But I think the Prime Minister will find that he has mistaken public opinion when he attempts to gag and to stifle the opinion of this country by asserting that these signatures were not genuine, when as a matter of fact they would have been far more numerous had time and opportunity been given.


Mr. W. F. McCRBARY (Selkirk).: As'representing a portion of the west, I think we should concur in this investigation and make it as wide as possible. I looked over some of those signatures obtained in the city of Mr. ROCHE (Marquette).
Winnipeg and I must say I do not think some of the signers have beein long resident in that city. Looking at the two petitions that came from Winnipeg, I would say that they were signed in a certain bar-room on a certain street, and I am sure that many of the people who signed that petition have not been residents of Winnipeg for more than a month, and that the price of signing it was about a glass of beer and a cigar. Why, the spurious character of the signatures is evident on the face of those petitions, because several signed their names as residing in Michigan, Kansas City, South Dakota. Now, I submit that though they may not be forgeries, those petitions should have very little weight with this House, for after a residence of about twenty-five years in the city of Winnipeg, I venture the assertion that not fifteen per cent of those names belong to people who have votes, or who are known in the city of Winnipeg as labouring men or business men. I have not bad time to scrutinize the petitions coming from other parts of the province, but certainly they are representative of only a very small minority of the people of the province of Manitoba. To show the absolute ignorance of the parties who sent up that petition, I may mention for instance that one of those presented by the hon. member for Marquette as coming from the county of Selkirk, was as a matter of fact signed at Baldur and Melita, a hundred miles west of the county of Selkirk-absolutely ignorant of the geography of the country.


William James Roche: I do not think the member for Marquette presented any at all for Selkirk.


William Forsythe McCreary: Then it was some other gentleman, I don't know. I know they were presented, and the county of Selkirk was marked on the petition. I said to the hon. member for Macdonald (Mr. Boyd) :
' These cannot come from the county of Selkirk,' because when I examined the petitions I found that they were alleged to be signed at places a hundred miles beyond the old county of Selkirk, and beyond the present county. So, I think the investigation should be as wide as possible.


Mr. MARCIL (Bonaventure).: Was it the same petition that was signed in Quebec ?


William Forsythe McCreary: Yes, and some of the men who signed in Winnipeg were men who had merely dropped into Winnipeg. There a re a large number of speculative people there at the present time buying land, and no doubt a good percentage of those people who signed in Winnipeg were picked up in the hotels and around the markets.
Mr. EDWARD COCHRANE (East Northumberland) I had the honour of presenting petitions to this House, and I want to say that those coming from the county of East Northumberland were

genuine. For my part, I care very little wliat the member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) may say in reference to the electors of the county that I have the honour to represent, and if they all knew him as well as I do, the electors would care very little about him, but they don't. Therefore, I want to protect them from any misleading influence that the hon. gentleman's assertions may have in this House or elsewhere. I want this question to be thoroughly investigated, and not balked as other questions have been by the right hon. gentleman and his friends. I was surprised to find that the leader of this House, the Premier of the Dominion of Canada, would lower himself in the estimation of the electors of this country by pinning his faith to the statements that were made by a gentleman who, I think, was put up by the government to make these assertions, and to asperse the good name of the electors of the province of Ontario as well as of the rest of this Dominion. I tell the right lion, gentleman that there is many a Reformer in the riding I have the honour to represent who signed these petitions and who won't thank him for the insinuations he made about them. Tiie hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) says he has lived in the city of Winnipeg for twenty-five years. Well, he has improved liis time. He knows just where these iniquities are perpetrated. I think lie must have got some of the petitions signed, for he says that all the signers wanted was a glass of beer and a cigar. X compliment the hon. gentleman on knowing where the dignified positions are in the city of Winnipeg. I am sure the electors of his constituency will be very proud of the man that represents them in this House, when they learn that he is so familiar with the places where they can get a glass of beer and cigars. I would like his constituents and the people generally of that noble west of ours to know that they have got a representative in this House who would so lower the dignity of the men who sent him here as to say that he is thoroughly acquainted with the city of Winnipeg, and knows all the dives and just where to get petitions signed at the price of a glass of beer and a cigar. I think if the hon. gentleman reads his speech in 'Hansard ' he will be very much ashamed-


William Forsythe McCreary: I will not take it back. I know all about it.
Mr. COCHRANE-to see that he has heralded it to the world that he knows all about the dens of iniquity in the city of Winnipeg.	[DOT]


Mr.  R. A.@: PRINiGLE (Cornwall and Stormont). Mr. Speaker, I had not the honour to present any petitions in reference to this Transcontinental Railway. However, I listened attentively to the statement made by the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot), and, if I understood him rightly, he stated that these petitions were signed by dead 416
people, that they contained false signatures and that they were signed by insane people. If the remark's had ended with the hon. member for Bellechasse X do not think I would have been called upon to say anything, but when the right bon. leader of the government (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) [DOT]practically insinuated that the statements made by the hon. member for Bellechasse in regard to these two petitions were also true in regard to all the petitions filed, I feel that it is my duty to say something in regard to that statement. Now, is it to be said that the people are insane because they have signed a petition, the second clause of which states that :
Your petitioners are of the opinion that it would be unwise and imprudent to take definite action until the government and parliament are fully possessed of the information essential to a proper decision of the question?
The hon. member. for Bellechasse says that insane people have signed that petition in which that statement is embodied. He might as well have said that the hon. exMinister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair) was insane when he made this statement :
But I am not in favour of impetuously rushing into the construction of a transcontinental line from Quebec, through an unknown country to .Winnipeg and west until we know something about it-until we have the fullest information about it. The project is one of very great magnitude and it should be dealt with only after the maturest deliberation.
The 'lion. ex-Minfeter of Railways and Canals has put it in very much stronger terms than the language of this petition. I think the amendment moved by my hon. friend from West Toronto (Mr. Clarke) is a proper amendment, and now that the right hon. Prime Minister has intimated or insinuated that all these petitions have false signatures, that they have been signed by dead men and have been signed by insane people, we have the right to have all these petitions thoroughly investigated, no matter how long it may take us.


Mr. S. E. GOURDEY (Colchester).: Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of presenting some of these petitions, and when the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) attacked two of them, I thought it was very proper to do so if he had reasonable grounds. But of the hundreds of petitions that have been presented there is not the slightest charge that there is any informality or incorrectness in them, with the exception of these two. For the right hon. Prime Minister (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) to arise when only two petitions were attacked, and these two in reference to some three or four names, and make the wholesale charge which he heralded against the hundreds of men who had signed all of the other petitions without a scintilla of evidence, is one of the most extraordinary things that I ever heard of. I think the right hon. gen-

tlemau should, he a man of more discretion and judgment than to be carried away by a momentary impulse to make a statement of such a startling character. The right of petition is one of the most sacred rights that we have. Everybody has the right to come to this parliament and present a petition. It is one of the most cherished rights that we have, and a right to secure which wars have been waged in England. I agree that a member of parliament must be responsible for his petitions, but I say that he must be responsible in a reasonable and intelligent manner. If a petition is sent from my county professing to be signed by the electors of the county, I would present it in the utmost good faith, believing that everything was correct and honourable. The hon. member for Bellechasse has made the most extraordinary charge against this government that has ever been made since I have been in parliament. According to his own story, so unpopular and hated has this government become in the province of Quebec that men leave their graves and walk abroad to sign petitions against it. Even the asylums have been invaded by the awful terror of the existence of this government, because the crazy men in the province of Quebec have been frightened by the intolerable methods of this government into moments of sanity and lucidity, when they apparently petition this House to save them from the recklessness of this government. It strikes me that the hon. member for Bellechasse has levelled the most deadly blow against this government that has been levelled against it, when he says that men who have left the cares of life and sought quiet in the grave rise up to enter their protest against the infamy of this government. Why, Sir, the right hon. Prime Minister, if he had been an astute man, would have at once repudiated the language of the hon. member for Bellechasse, and asked him to desist, because he was pointing to a state of affairs which showed that petitions ought to be levelled by every live man against this measure when the dead have risen from their graves to protest against it. Now, gentlemen-
*Some hon. MEMBERS. Order.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Now, Mr. Speaker-hon. gentlemen opposite are so extremely polite and courteous that an hon. gentleman cannot be permitted the slightest deviation from the rule, even if he does happen to be a young member-this method of attacking petitions should have the reprobation of this House. The charge should have been levelled against one, or two, or three names; the charge should have been specific ; because, when you attack the general right of petition, you strike at one of the most sacred rights and privileges of the country, and while I agree that no man should offer to insult this parliament by pretending to


Seymour Eugene Gourley: petition it when he does not really sign his name or agree to somebody else signing it, while I concur that it was a most serious matter for any man to present a petition containing a single name that he does not know to be genuine, I think when petitions are presented here they should be assumed to be regularly and honestly signed, because it would be a serious attack upon the reputation and decency of the people and upon their intelligence to fancy that anybody in the country could be wild and bad enough to obtain the signatures of men improperly ; and, secondly, when obtained that they should be presented to this parliament. Therefore, when the hon. member for Bellechasse attacks these petitions he charges, first, that there was some man in this country bad enough to go round and ask men to sign their names to petitions, and when they would not .do so to sit down deliberately and commit forgery. That is a charge against the honour and honesty of the people of this country that does not apply, I am glad to say, against the province of Nova Scotia. If it can be applied to any other province, I can tell the House that there is not a man in the province of Nova Scotia bad enough to do that kind of thing, and when an hon. member makes such a charge in regard to the province of Quebec, I say that he insults the province of Quebec. I repudiate it on behalf of the province of Quebec. I do not believe there is any man who would be bad enough in the province of Quebec to go around and forge the signature of his neighbours to a petition and to send it to this parliament to have it presented. For my part, on behalf of the province of Quebec, I refuse to believe that a single name to these petitions was signed improperly. Therefore, when the hon. member, knowing the sacredness of the right of petition, made his Charges, he should have particularized what names he believed to be bad, so that the whole character of all the petitioners should not have been assailed. It is an extraordinary and an incredible position for the government to take. The Prime Minister should have been the first to denounce this attack upon the honour of thousands and thousands of the electorate of this country. It is impossible to believe that thousands of our citizens are tainted with forgery, fraud and criminality. I refuse to believe if, and the Prime Minister should have been the first to refuse to believe it. The member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) has a perfect right to make the charge, but he ought to make it with the utmost gravity, the utmost care, the utmost particularity, and he should not have cast a slur on the whole body of the citizens of Canada who signed these petitions.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: In one petition, out of twenty-four names, there are seventeen bad.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: And what is seventeen out of thousands ? There are three or four

hundred criminals in our penitentiaries, but does that asperse the high moral character of all the citizens of Canada ?


Mr. LOGAN.: Seventeen out of twenty-four.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: And supposing it is true that seventeen are bad, I will decline to believe that because that is the case all the citizens of Quebec, who signed these petitions, are guilty of fraud and forgery. The hon. member (Mr. Talbot) should have been most guarded to confine his charges simply to the names which he thinks are bad, and the Prime Minister should have himself guarded the reputation of the people of Canada by demanding that these charges should be particularized. Even if some names should be found to be bad, then we must assume that the person who had charge of the signatures for that petition was not careful in having it signed. That is all it would amount to. I support the amendment of the hon. member for Toronto (Mr. Clarke) that all of these petitions be brought before this committee, in order that the fair name of the people of Canada may be safe from the serious charge made against them, and which charge has been endorsed by the Prime Minister.


Mr. R. JOHNSTON (Cardwell).: I had the honour of presenting some of these petitions, and I desire to say that so far as I know, I believe the signatures to them are genuine in every respect. I do not wonder at an attempt being made by the Liberals in this House to discredit those who petitioned against the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, in view of the manner in which they have attempted to discredit a late minister of the government whom they supported, who had the courage to protest against the ridiculous idea of building this railway without plans, and without necessary information. These gentlemen opposite have endeavoured in every way to belittle the ex-Minis'ter of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair), and I have not the slightest doubt they would belittle him more if they were able to. The hon. member for Bellecbasse (Mr. Talbot) is put up to this scheme to try to blackmail the petitioners all through this Dominion of Canada. It is no wonder, I repeat, that they try to blacken the character of the petitioners, just as they tried to blacken the ex-Minister of Railways, who they said was not fit to unloose the shoe-laces of the Prime Minister. Although I did not see the signatures upon the petitions which I had the honour to present, I believe that every name on them was legitimately put there with the knowledge of the persons who signed. I want all the men who signed this petition in tire county of Dufferin, to be summoned down here, so as to give them an opportunity of stating before parliament, whether they signed these petitions or not. If there is any fair-play in the matter, the government will afford these petitioners this opportunity.


Mr.  C. B. HE YD@Brant: We have not been treated this morning to a very edifying spectacle in connection with the charge which has been made by our friend from Bellecbasse (Mr. Talbot). Because he has stated that there was corruption and fraud in connection with these petitions, a general desire has been expressed by our friends on the other side, that every one of the petitioners should have a free ride down to Ottawa in order to say whether they signed these petitions or not.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Mr.  C. B. HE YD@Brant: That would be a very nice thing for the constituents of our friends on the other side, but it is not necessary. A distinct charge has been made that fraud has been committed with regard to certain of these petitions, and I hope that it will be investigated. We have heard this morning about the sacred right of petition. We acknowledge the sacredness of the petition to parliament. We know that it has existed from time immemorial. It is because it is the right of the humblest of His Majesty's subjects that we so highly regard it, and therefore we say that when our friends on the other side, for political purposes, have prostituted that right of petition-


Mr. BELL (Pictou).: I rise to a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. HEYD-have caused petitions to be circulated throughout the length and breadth of this country


Adam Carr Bell: I have risen to a point of order.
Mr. HEYD-not to express the grievances of the people, but in order to promote the political interests of their party-


Adam Carr Bell: I have risen to a point of order. I beg to call attention to the fact that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Heyd) has accused the gentlemen on this side of the House of prostituting their rights.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I did not catch the word.


Adam Carr Bell: He distinctly accused gentlemen on this side of the House of having prostituted their rights.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I presume that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Heyd) will withdraw the word ' prostituting.'


William Humphrey Bennett: Take it bSck now.


Mr.  C. B. HE YD@Brant: His inference is entirely erroneous ; his mind and my mind are running in a different groove


Some hon. MEMBERS: Order.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: The hon. gentleman is in order in making a personal explanation.


Mr.  C. B. HE YD@Brant: I do not know what hon. gentlemen opposite are driving at.


Adam Carr Bell: I say the hon. gentleman- I presume he would like to be considered

an lion, gentleman-lias applied the word ' prostituting ' to members of this House, and I think the dignity and honour of this House requires that that expression should be withdrawn.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I understand that the hon. gentleman was explaining what he intended to say, and was willing to withdraw the expression.


Mr.   HEAD@: Mr. Speaker, I will withdraw any expression which our hon. friends on the other side think is offensive ; but I will go on to say that when the sacred right of petition is prostituted for political purposes-that is what I said, and that is what I say still. If certain disaffected people anywhere in this country have a grievance, they have a perfect right to petition this House to have that grievance removed. But when in a newspaper office, or in a gathering of politicians somewhere or somehow in the darkness of tlnj night, a scheme is set on foot for petitions headed in a certain way to be sent throughout the length and breadith of this country, to create the idea that these petitioners have a grievance; and when these petitions are being hawked about from pillar to post; and when, as is represented here, they are fraudulently signed; when the dead, as our hon. friend says, are brought from their graves and others are brought from lunatic asylums, when all other conceivable methods are used to get these petitions signed-what is it for ? Not because these people have a grievance, but to give our hon. friends opposite a political card to play in the coming elections; because they want to trump up the idea that there is a great protest against this railway throughout the country. I erxcuse our hon. friends on the other side from knowingly presenting these fraudulent petitions. They could not possibly know who signed them or how they were obtained. I have not the slightest doubt that if one had reached me from my own constituency, I would have presented it in good faith. But do not let our hon. friends opposite run away with the impression that they are going to convince the public that there was no fraud in any particular instance.


Adam Carr Bell: There is no doubt that our hon. friend from Brant (Mr. Heyd) maintains a very lofty view as to the character of the citizens of this country and the members of this House. He seems to have no higher opinion of them than to assume that the citizens of this country are on the lookout for a cheap ride to Ottawa. I congratulate the hon. gentleman on showing that be possesses those qualities of statesmanship which justify his presence in this House. I hope it will not be presumed that the members of this House generally are represented by the hon. gentleman. I would like to think that he represents himself alone in speaking in the way he has done. With that remark. I think I might let the Mr. BELL.
opinion of the hon. gentleman go to the oblivion to which it properly belongs. I may say that several petitions in connection with this matter were presented to this House by myself in perfect good, faith. I do not know that all the signatures attached to them were put there by the parties who purport to have signed them, and I do not know that the Prime Minister would ask any member of this House to give any such assurance in presenting a petition. But I do think that the right hon. gentleman, in making the charge which lie has made in his place in this House, against the people of Canada generally, and against the citizens of his own province, spoke much too hastily and without much reflection as to the importance of the words he uttered. There was in the right hon. gentleman's remarks the implication that possibly a large proportion of the signatures on the petitions presented to this House were forgeries ; which implied such a charge against the people of this country as no Prime Minister of Canada should ever dare to make in the House of Commons. The right of petition belongs to us ns British subjects ; and how are our petitions to be presented except through the representatives of the people who have seats in this House ? If it can be shown that in some cases that privilege has been abused, I am sure the right hon. gentleman will find that no men in this House are more anxious to discover the wrong and have it rectified than the gentlemen sitting on this side of the House. But we decline to allow the right hon. gentleman to put up one of his followers on the back benches, with a prepared case, to cast discredit on hundreds and thousands of these petitioners, and to decline to allow a more general investigation to be made. If the right hon. gentleman feels that he can accuse the people of Canada generally of this kind of wrong-doing, we will declare on our part that the people of Canada must have the right of rebutting that charge, and throwing it back in the right hon. gentleman's face. The intention of hon. gentlemen on the government side of the House, is to cast doubt on the whole series of petitions.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Adam Carr Bell: May I ask the hon. member for Essex (Mr. Cowan), who says ' hear, hear,' who was the first man in Canada to attach his name, in a most effective fashion, by his speech in this House, to this petition against this gross outrage on the part of this government ? It was Andrew G. Blair, ex-Minister of Railways and Canals, irecent-ly a colleague of the right lion, gentleman, who not only, to all intents and purposes, signed his name to the petition, but enforced it in a powerful arraignment of the government, which I may say has not to this moment been replied to by any member of the government. Hon. gentlemen oppo-

site attempt to belittle the protest of the people of Canada against this outrage ; but that attempt will fail, and fail most effectually. This attempt on the part of a government, which has sat here month after month without submitting to parliament in response to inquiries one reason or one shred of information on which a proper judgment of this contract could be based, is destined to lamentable, ignominious and complete failure. It is a very small trick on the part of the government to put up a gentleman who in the early part of the sess-sion


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Order. The bon. gentleman has no right to accuse members of this House of a trick. -


Adam Carr Bell: Well, I am anxious to keep myself within the rules of order, and I will say that it was a very low proceeding to take a gentleman who early in the session was clamouring for a subsidy for the Trans-Canada Railway, and who is now, no doubt, in consequence of some settlement that has been arrived at between himself and the government


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Order. The hon. gentleman has no right to impute motives to any members of this House.


Adam Carr Bell: I am not imputing any motives. I presume that some arrangement has been made or something has transpired. If the Speaker rules that out of order, I have great pleasure in withdrawing it.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: There is no doubt that no member of this House has a right to impute any motive, or to cast any suspicion upon the motive of a member of this House.


Adam Carr Bell: I do not desire to cast any suspicion. I merely suggested what I thought was a very obvious fact-that something must have transpired. If my remark in that very mild form is objectionable, I am willing to withdraw it. But you find the government compelled to resort to these efforts to try to weaken the attack made upon them in the only way in which it can be made by means of petitions. I have a petition from the county of Cumberland, which I am assured by the gentleman who sent it to me, would have been signed by 80 per cent of the electors, if he could only have had sufficient time to present it for signature. There are petitions which as we will be only too happy to prove, have been signed by men who, in other respects, are supporting the present government, but who, so far as this most grotesque railway project is concerned, are opposed to the government. If the right hon. geutleman wants to weaken the force of these petitions, he is not going to do it by attacking one here and there, but he must treat the whole together. What was the course taken by hon. gentlemen opposite last session when they sought to throw discredit on the census
returns of the province of Quebec ? The right hon. gentleman laid on the Table a great mass of evidence intended to show that there was an improper computation of the population of the province of Quebec in the census of 1891- He was challenged by this side not to rely solely ou such evidence as he could procure from his partisans throughout that province, but to submit the whole matter to the investigation of some competent authority. Did he do it ? No, Sir, he did as he did in the case of the West Huron election frauds. He refused to have the matter investigated by a competent tribunal. Just as he does in every difficult situation in which he finds himself, he managed to make use of some subterfuge and creep out when challenged. But if now, after he is challenged to have a full inquiry, he prefers to shirk his duty, he can only do so in defiance of the protest of the opposition.


Hance James Logan: ' There can be no doubt, Mr. Speaker, about the fact that the opposition have lost their self-control.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


Hance James Logan: They have made their last throw and lost. A few weeks ago, with the aid of a Canadian newspaper they determined to put forth a propaganda which they thought would sweep the whole country. They were going to submerge this House with a deluge of petitions and completely overpower the government. But what has been the result ? After trying their utmost, after canvassing constituencies, after begging the people to sign, they have induced less than four per cent of the electorate to sign petitions against the government railway project; and among that four per cent are lunatics and dead men and men who are not living in the country at all. They have ignominiously failed to get the petitions signed, which they have been hawking around for weeks. My hon. friend from Pictou (Mr. Bell) says that he could have had eighty per cent of the people in some districts of Cumberland to sign the petition which he presented. Let me tell the hon. gentleman that there are 40,000 people in that constituency, and that his friends who went through it from house to house got just 151 names out of these 40,000. Does that look like 80 per cent of the people? I was down in my constituency a few weeks ago, and during my stay I did not find one Liberal who did not approve of the government scheme, and I met many Conservatives who said they were ashamed of their party, once led by such men as Sir John Macdonald and Sir Charles Tupper-a party which then had the instincts of government, but which now has sunk so low as to oppose our national development. I can tell my hon friend further that he might tramp the county of Cumberland from end to end, and he would not get one per cent of the people in the

Liberal ranks to sign any petition in favour of the alternative scheme of the leader of the opposition. These lion, gentlemen opposite have tried to use the ex-Minister of Railways to bolster up their case, but we know that that bon. gentleman has freely expressed his opinion that the alternative proposition of the leader of the opposition is absolutely ridiculous and would not be entertained by* the people. Have any petitions been presented in favour of that alternative scheme ? Not a single one. My hon. friend from Belleehasse (Mr. Talbot) has presented specific charges regarding certain petitions and has been answered by a volume of abuse, and no doubt I shall be treated in like manner. These hon. gentlemen resort to the old dodge of abusing the opposing attorney in default of argument. In one of the petitions there are thirty out of thirty-four names written in the one handwriting. Let me tell the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Bell) that although I do not believe that there was forgery in my con-' stituency, these 151 names were not signed by 151 different hands. There are several in the same handwriting. What are the facts ? These gentlemen opposite prepared these petitions in conjunction with a certain newspaper and sent them broadcast over the country. Did these petitions ask the people of Canada to declare that this road should not be built ? No, Sir. I have in my hand a copy of two of them, one prepared to circulate in the east and one for circulation in the west, and the one differs from the other as black from white. Here is the petition from the east, which was presented for signature in the county of Cumberland. It sets forth :
That your petitioners are of opinion that it would be unwise and imprudent to take definite action until the government and parliament are fully possessed of the information essential to a proper decision of that question.
That a project of such magnitude should not be undertaken without the most complete and accurate surveys, under the direction and control of engineers of standing and repute.
But you will uot find any such paragraph with western petitions.
That such surveys should be in the hands of the government and of parliament before the credit of the Dominion is committed to an enterprise which involves enormous obligations.
That, however, the most competent men are of opinion that the cost of the projected line between Winnipeg and Moncton will reach the enormous amount of upwards of $120,000,000.
That, on the contrary, it is to he greatly feared that by pledging the credit of the country to such a vast extent, the government will make it impossible to carry out works better calculated to meet the transportation needs of the country.
This is equivalent to saying that if the government go ahead with this project, there will be no public money available to build other railways. Then it proceeds to say : Mr. LOGAN.
That the government, parliament and the taxpayers should hanve an opportunity to learn the results of the investigation of the said commission ; and to examine the evidence upon which such results were arrived at.
That is the eastern petition. Let us now look at the western petition. It starts out by stating that transportation facilities are necessary and then proceeds to say :
. That the over capitalization of transporta-tiou companies is one of the most important conditions leading to unduly high rates, and should be prevented.
That a railway system designed to move the products of the west should not be burdened by the addition of costly and needless sections ; that the proposed eastern section of the Grand Trunk Pacific would be of value chiefly for the purpose of colonizing the territory it traverses ; and that western lines should not be obliged to impose rates fixed with a view of providing for the annual fixed charges upon such section, between one and two thousand miles long, built many years in advance of settlement in the James bay basin.
That the company should not be committed to the construction of the eastern section.
This is the petition presented to the west.


William James Roche: The hon. gentleman accuses members on this side of circulating two petitions^-one for the east and one for the west.


Hance James Logan: Yes.


William James Roche: I know and can tell more about those western petitions than the hon. member for Cumberland. I placed that petition on 'Hansard' the other day. There has not been one petition circulated in the west coming from hon. gentlemen on this side. They originated in the west and were circulated there by the people themselves and sent here to their representatives in parliament.


Hance James Logan: Will the hon. gentleman tell me that the heading of the petition, a copy of which I have in my hand, was not printed in Ontario or Quebec ?


William James Roche: So far as I am aware

Some hou. MEMBERS. You do not know.


William James Roche: I will undertake to say this, that not one single petition circulated in the west was printed in the east.


Hance James Logan: I asked the hon. gentleman if the headings to the petitions were not printed in the east.


William James Roche: I do not deny that, but there is no point in that.


Hance James Logan: That is all I have contended for. This petition goes on to say :
That the proposed western section of the Grand Trunk Pacific, from Winnipeg to Edmonton should be constructed as an additional line opening up new- territory ; and that the Grand Trunk Pacific Company should not be allow-ed to purchase the Canadian Northern

Railway line instead of constructing an additional line.
That is something new that they have imported into this proposition. Then it concludes :
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Transportation Bill now before parliament be not passed in its present form, but that it be altered to provide for the above-mentioned conditions, and that the commission on transportation should consider the whole question of the proposed eastern section and report, and that complete surveys and estimates should be made.
Mr. Speaker, the petition which was presented in the House from the eastern part of Canada, and which they failed to get signed by any material part of the population of that part of Canada was put upon this ground-the people were asked to sign it on the ground that 8120,000,000 would have to be paid for the construction of this road, that this would be taken out of the treasury, and that the effect of its expenditure would be to prevent facilities being provided which were required in that part of the country, in the petitions presented in the western part of Canada this was not mentioned, but signatures were sought to the petition on the ground that the road would be too heavily bonded and would be compelled to charge too high rates. I charge that these petitions were prepared in Eastern Canada, either in the city of Montreal or in the city of Ottawa; that one form of petition was sent to the eastern part of Canada [DOT] to be signed and the other sent to the western part of Canada to be signed; and not four per cent of the electorate of Canada signed either one petition or the other.
At one o'clock, House took recess.
House resumed at three o'clock.


Mr. E. A. LANCASTER (Lincoln and Niagara).: Mr. Speaker, as I am one of the members of the House who presented petitions in regard to this much vexed and much discussed railway project of the government, I desire that this discussion shall not close without a word from me on the subject. I should not have troubled the House at all if the matter had ended with the remarks of the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot). But, when the Prime Minister, undertaking to represent the whole country and standing for the advisers of His Ex-1 eellency the Governor General in all administrative matters carried the argument to the distance he did this morning in the few remarks with which he favoured the House, I feel that it is incumbent upon me not only on my own part, but out of respect and consideration for the electors whom I represent who have hitherto supported this government and voted against me in the last election, to say a few words. I say it is my duty, not speaking alone for members of the opposition, or even for those in my county who are in the habit of voting for
the Liberal Conservative party, but speaking for those who have hitherto voted for the so-called Reform party and the government now in power, to say a word in refutation and repudiation of the insinuation thrown out by the right hon. Prime Minister. The hon. member for Bellechasse undertook, from information which he seemed to think satisfactory-and perhaps he is to be excused, fox-, as the Prime Minister said, the hon. gentleman is not a lawyer and does not know the value of evidence-to find fault with one or two ixetitions in regard to this matter which has come from certain places in the province in which iie resides. The hon. member for Bellechasse attacks certain parts of that province in attacking the petitions which come from it. He undertook, as I say, on the strength of information which satisfies him that there is something wrong in these petitions io ask an investigation in regard to these two-I believe there were two-petitions to which he refers. It might well have stooped there, and I think it ought to have stopped there. The hon. member for Bellechasse might or might not have been entitled by the evidence which he presented to prolong the session of this House and have an investigation cai'ried on. While I notice that the hon. member for Bellechasse was very anxious to have an investigation, he based his demand for it largely upon the fact that several signatures in the petitions were in the same handwriting. As the hon. gentleman (Mr. Talbot) is not a lawyer, I might be permitted to point out that this of itself is not a piece of. fraud. His province, no doubt, is in the same position as others in this matter. There are men who cannot write, or men who do not put their own names to petitions, but l'equest another person to sign for them. There are persons who cannot write their names legibly and, if they wish to petition parliament or petition a municipal body or any other authority must have their names written by others. It may be that the hon. member for Bellechasse will find that this is the mare s nest he has discovered. But that is not the most serious part of it, nor would the remarks of the hon. member for Bellechasse with regard to petitions from his own province have caused me to feel it my duty to speak, But I rise, as I have said, to repudiate the insinuations thrown out by the right hon. Prime Minister against all the petitions that have been presented against this measure. The petitions from the county of Lincoln were presented by me in good faith. They were signed by persons whom I know. I read every signature and I can assure the Prime Minister and every member of parliament that several names, in the petitioner s own handwriting, are the names of gentlemen who have never voted against the party of the present government, but who will not be the more inclined to vote for that party by the insult of the Prime Minister,

-4L
is supposed to have got his signature is involved, the honour of the man who sent the petition to me and asked me to present it to this House is involved and I say that these men must come down here, whether they have a free ride or not, as the hon. member for South Brant (Mr. Heyd) states, and say where these petitions came from. Therefore, I say the investigation must be as wide as that which has been suggested by my hon. friend? from West Toronto, and it is the right hon. gentleman's fault if it does take time and involves expense.
I have just a word to say in regard to the hon. member for South Brant. He had the temerity to stand up and say that the idea of presenting these petitions was conceived in the darkness of night. I wondered when he said that if he thought that the project which the hon. ex-Minister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair) had condemned and which had caused him to leave the cabinet was conceived in day-light. Was there so much of the noon-day sun that the people of the country understood it ? Was it not because there was no light upon the subject that these petitions were presented here ? In spite of all that the opposition could do, representing the best interests of the people of Canada, to get information upon the subject that Bill was railroaded through this House as fast as they could put it through. Notwithstanding the fact that the opposition used every means in their power to get the information to try and And out -what obligation this was going to impose upon the country, they were unsuccessful, while at every step the evidence seemed to preponderate against the wisdom of the scheme. In spite of all that, in spite of the fact that Cox could not wait, in spite of the fact that the government were apparently bound to put it through, what did the people of Canada do ? In each county, wherever they could within the short time at their disposal, they prepared and sent petitions down here saying that:	If the government do not
think the members of the opposition were right in what they said, we ourselves petition as ordinary voters and ask you to delay until you get more information. The hon. member for South Brant should have reflected as to where and how this scheme originated. He ought to have asked himself whether he and other hon. gentlemen behind him had as much light upon the subject as they desired when the scheme was first announced ? Does he not know that several hon. gentlemen who voted for the government were at the beginning utterly opposed to it ? Does he not know that lots of the supporters of the present government in the country were waiting anxiously to have placed before them the merits of this question and that they have not yet received the light upon the subject that they ought to have received ? Does he not know that the men signing these petitions have declared that there is not the day-light upon Mr. LANCASTER.
the question that there ought to be before the country was involved in the enormous expenditure that this scheme will entail ?
The hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan) had a few words to say before one o'clock and he read a lecture to hon. members of the opposition as to what, from his standpoint, should be their duty in this House. He said that we on this side of the House, having no case, were abusing the members of the government. He said that having been disappointed in our last effort to impose our conclusions upon the government we were abusing the attorney representing the government on this question.
I do not think that we have been abusing the members of the government in this matter, but, I think that the government have abused the people who have signed these petitions. I do not think they have been fairly treated in the measure which has been meted out to them in regard to these petitions. He says that this is the opposition's last resort. It may be the opposition's last resort at the present time but it is not the opposition's last resort because the opposition's- last resort is the people's last resort. If the government have the courage to go before the country the hon. member for Cumberland will find that the opposition's last resort is to make the appeal that they shall make against the government, and he will find that the people's last resort will be the strongest condemnation of this project. The hon. member for Cumberland also said that the difference in the petitions which came from the east and from the west showed that there was something wrong about them. Does he not know that there were so many objections to this scheme that you could have fifteen or twenty petitions in opposition to it and if you were to put them down in ordinary sized [DOT] print you would have a petition as long as from here down to Wellington street. Does the hon. gentleman suppose that three dozen petitions could in any ordinary sized print represent all the objections that there are to this scheme, and does it not strike him, that, when the people of the west enumerate certain objections to this scheme, although they are not the same as those which the people of the east have, nevertheless, they are good objections ? Does it not also strike him that if there are so many different objections urged to this scheme by the people in the west and the people in the east there is an accumulation of evidence against it, and that there is an additional reason why the government should get more information instead of merely insulting the petitioners ? I do not know that I shall trouble the House any longer with the matter. I have said as emphatically as I can, and I wish I had language in which to say it more emphatically, that I resent and I think the people of Lincoln will resent as an insult, the words used by the right hon. Prime Minister to the effect that these



Y, 1903

[Stage Direction]
petitions are not bona fide and that therefore the government should not pay any attention, to them. The people have the right to appreciate the efforts of the opposition if they think that those efforts are well directed. What makes the government angry is that they find that not the hidebound supporters of the government but the independent Reformers so to speak as well as the Conservatives are unanimously saying that the contentions of the members of the opposition are contentions which they strongly endorse, and that they find that their party are losing strength in the country and are going to get into trouble. A few of the most important objections against this policy are set forth in these petitions. The signatories, in pursuance of their inherent right as British subjects, have petitioned the House of Commons, and asked the government to pause before the country is irrevocably committed to this scheme. Speaking as the representative of the county of Lincoln, and speaking generally of the duty of a member of this House, I say that the government should have accepted these petitions in good faith, and should have considered them in the proper spirit. If this investigation is to be made by the Privileges and Elections Committee, it must be of the widest character, and notwithstanding that the member for Brant (Mr. Heyd) has accused us of wanting free rides for. our constituents to Ottawa, I say, Sir, that the petitioners must be allowed to come before parliament and to give their evidence that they have presented these petitions in proper form.
George Taylor: A little before three o'clock this afternoon the hon. member for Prince Edward (Mr. Alcorn) went to the record room, where the petitions are supposed to be kept, and asked for the two petitions to which the member for Belleclaasse referred this morning. The clerk in charge stated they were not there, and he said that the member for Bellechasse had taken them away. I want to know from the Minister of Justice or the Prime Minister, if it is proper that petitions supposed to be in charge of an officer of this House, may be peddled all over the country and left lying around on desks, and names added to them, and then have them referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections ? These petitions are not now in the custody of the proper officers, and the members who presented them have no opportunity of seeing them. These petitions are supposed to be under lock and key, in the custody of the Clerk of this House, so that any member of this House may have access to them, but we now find that they are out of the possession of the Clerk, and presumed to be in the possession of the hon. member (Mr. Talbot) who made the charges.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: The Officer who allowed thtese original petitions out of his custody should be immediately brought to the bar of
the House and punished, and some proceedings should be taken against the member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) for his conduct. These are original records of parliament, and any man who takes them from the custody of the proper officer infringes on the criminal law of the country. We should have the Clerk summoned before this House, and dismissed, and we should pass upon the conduct of the man who attempted to take them from the custody of the clerk. It is an outrage, that the records of parliament should be peddled about in that way.
Amendment (Mr. Clarke) agreed to, and main motion (Mr. Talbot), ns amended.. agreed to.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it not necessary that there should be an Order of the House, to send these petitions before the committee ?


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I think the motion provides for that. All documents of the House are always at the disposal of the members of committees, and of the members of the House also.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am of the opinion that they should be referred to the committee by Order of the House.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I think that is provided for in the motion.



PAYMENT OF EMPLOYEES ON RIDEAU CANAL.

George Taylor: I had a letter this morning from a merchant, stating that the employees on the Rideau canal, in my county, have not yet received their pay for the month of August. What is the reason for this ?


The MINISTER OF TRADE AND COMMERCE.: I should think we would have to inquire from the Auditor General, why a credit has not been issued.


George Taylor: These employees are suffering great inconvenience ; they have exhausted their credit in the country stores, and the government should explain why they are not paid.


The MINISTER OF TRADE AND COMMERCE.: I will draw the attention of the Minister of Railways and Canals to the matter, but I apprehend, it is because a letter of credit has not been issued.


George Taylor: Now that the Minister of Finance has come into the House, I wish to ask the hon. gentleman why it is that the labourers on the Rideau canal in the north end of the constituency I represent, have not received their pay for August, nor any pay since then ? I have a letter from a merchant of the locality stating that their credit is about exhausted, and 'that some of the store-keepers will not supply them until their cheques come. Some of the men are really in need of money in order to get the necessaries of life.


Tlie MINISTER OF FINANCE.: A good many persons in Canada liave been obliged to wait for their money because tlie Auditor General declines to facilitate the usual method of payment.



THE KING VS. CARVER.

Robert Laird Borden: I have received a communication as to the commutation of sentence in the case of King vs. Carver. It would seem that the commutation of this sentence has provoked hostile criticism, and at the instance of my correspondent I would ask the Minister of Justice, if there is no objection, to lay upon the Table of the House the papers connected with this case. If there is any report of the judge, or any reasons assigned Tor commutation, or any petitions asking for commutation, it would be desirable, if there is to be a discussion, that these documents should be made public.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: A motion has been passed in the Senate asking for the production of these papers. I have hesitated up to the present to comply with that order, because it is contrary to the practice of this House. I have a memo, made by Sir John Thompson in which he refused to produce the papers in a capital case. I am, however, considering the matter with respect to this particular case, and I will let my hon. friend know in a day or two what the decision of the judge is.


Robert Laird Borden: Would the decision of Sir John Thompson cover all the documents in connection with such a case ? It would not, I suppose, cover the Order in Council.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Perhaps not.


Robert Laird Borden: The Minister of Justice gave a memo, to ihe hon. member for Montmorency (Mr. .Casgrain) in connection with this subject, but 1 confess that I did not read it very carefully. I suppose there would be no objection to producing the documents which are not covered by any precedent. I think there was the same opinion on the part of my hon. friend (Mr. Casgrain) and myself, that these precedents did not go as far as seems to be indicated in the memo, which my hon. friend the Minister of Justice was good enough to send to us.



ST. JAMES DIVISION, MONTREAL.

Robert Laird Borden: I would like to ask the government whether any decision lias been come to with regard to issuing the writ for St. James division, Montreal ? The matter has been brought to the attention of the House on several occasions by the hon. member for Jacques Cartier.


The MINISTER OF TRADE AND COMMERCE (Rt. Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright).: 


George Taylor: Will the hon. gentleman repeat the question when the Premier is here ?


Robert Laird Borden: Very good. When is it likely that there will be an opportunity of renewing the question ?


The MINISTER OF TRADE AND COMMERCE.: The hon. gentleman may do it by consent at any time.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
House again in Committee of Supply.
British Columbia-Columbia river above Golden-new hull for pile driver, &c., $4,500.
["Any discussion with regard to the facilities which Prince Edward Island has now for telegraphic service is entirely out of order. This question will come up under the heading of the Finance Department and it will then be in order to discuss it.\nAt six o'clock, House took recess.\nAfter Recess.\nHouse resumed at eight o'clock."]
Robert Laird Borden: Why do you have the votes for dredging divided up in this way ? This is not dredging ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the object of this pile driving ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The banks on these rivers have to be pro- [DOT] tected in many places, and we require the use of a pile driver.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It seems to me that it would be better if you kept the estimates for your dredges, scows, pile drivers, and all other plant separate from the estimates for the actual work done.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think there might be an improvement in the classification. I may say that in going over these matters I found the same difficulty the hon. leader of the opposition did, and I think it would be well to have a reclassification in our estimates in that direction. It would be more convenient for this House, and still more convenient for the department.
Columbia river above Golden-opening channel from river to site of- proposed warehouse at Wilmer, $1,000.


Samuel Hughes: What warehouse is this ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Mining developments are going on there, and the products of the mines are shipped by boat. An application from Mr. Hammond, of Osier & Hammond, -who is largely interested, represents that a large amount of money has been invested in mining industries there. Therefore, I feel that this expenditure is warranted in the public interest for the purpose of improving the navigation in this river.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is that dredging ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This will be hand dredging.
Columbia river-improvements between Upper and Lower Arrow lakes, $12,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I may say that a small dredge has been
13306

built by the department and placed on this river, and this vote is for the maintenance of the dredge and its working expenses during the year.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the dredge doing ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is dredging the Columbia river. We do not require a separate item for dredging there. We own the dredge, and this is for its maintenance and operation.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why do we vote $12,000 to maintain and operate a dredge in this place and $10,000 to maintain and operate a dredge somewhere else ? Would it not he better to have a general vote, out of which these dredges might be kept going, instead of having a separate vote for each place ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I agree that that would be better. In this particular case the dredge is built specially. It can get neither off nor on that river. $12,000 is the total cost of the work being done. Lin I agree with my hon. friend, and if I have anything more to do with preparing the estimates, they will be prepared in that way.
Columbia river between Arrow lakes-to pay balance due on dredge machinery, $4,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a dredge that was built by the department under contract. It will cost altogether $6,000 with the machinery.
Fraser river-improvements, $25,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This work is done under the supervision of Mr. Keefer, the engineer of the department in the province of British Columbia.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Where is this work done?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: At Nicopin island. It consists of mattrass-ing and pile-driving for the protection of the banks of the river.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Do they use the government pile-driver ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, we own all the plant there. It is all done by day labour.
Hardy Bay-wharf (revote), $2,100.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to complete the payment for this wharf, which was let by contract.
Quatsino city-wharf, $5,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a new vote. It is proposed to provide wharf accommodation for steamers and other vessels. This is a city in the north of Vancouver island, and it is a mining district.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How much is this work expected to cost when completed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The total cost is estimated at $5,000. The work will be let by contract.
Williams Head quarantine station

extension of wharf at eastern .end, &c., $5,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have a government wharf there, and this is for small extensions and improvements.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will this complete the improvements ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That is the intention.
Victoria Harbour-additional amount for dredging and removal of rocks, $10,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have both government dredges at work in that harbour, and the work was carried out very successfully. We desire to complete it, and I am informed by the engineer that this $10,000 will complete it this season.


Samuel Hughes: Is this for the inner or outer harbour ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: For the inner harbour.
Public works-chargeable to income-Yukon Territory-Lewes and Yukon river improvements, $30,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This vote of $30,000 is proposed to apply as follows in connection with the Lewes and Yukon improvements, viz :	(a) Maintaining the training piers, dams, &c., built at the head of Lake Laberge, the object of directing the whole discharge of Lewes river into one comparatively narrow channel on the south-east side of the river which can be used by steamboats of from four to five feet draught at the lowest stage of the water ; (b) Closing the gap. of about 400 feet left in the centre of the brush and stone dam of which already 3,250 feet lineal have been built on the north-west side of the contracted artificial channel formed at the head of Lake Laberge. (c) Removing boulders from Thirty Mile river, (d) Completing some further blasting required on the rocky ledge which runs across the waterway at Five Finger rapids, in order to improve the navigable channel so as to permit of the easy and safe passage of steamboats of about four feet draught at the lowest stage of the water without having to use a cable, (e) Blasting some rock off dangerous points, &c., at the Rink rapids, (f) Improving the channel at Hellgate. (g) Increasing the depth of water over bars in the Yukon river below Selkirk and Ogilvie.


Edward Hackett: Have we a representative in this House from that section of the country ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we have.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Will this wol'k he done by contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This work is being carried out under the .advice of the local council at Dawson city.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Municipal council or the government council ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The government council.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: I regret that, because we have an experience of that "body already, as I understand. It will be remembered Mr. Chairman, that it cost $50,000 merely to plug a hole in that country. If this money is to be expended by the same people as had control of that work, I do not think the method is a good one. It seems to me it would be better and more satisfactory if the matter were under the control of the department.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We found it would cost more to maintain a staff of engineers in that country such as would be necessary for these works than to carry out the works under the advice of the council. That council are coming in -contact with the representatives and the shipping interest, and so have the best means of learning how the money can be most advantageously spent in the public interest in improving navigation. My hon. friend (Mr. Thomson, Grey) will admit that there are none who know more of the situation than the representatives of the shipping interest, and none who are more anxious that the work should be properly done. Since the present system was adopted, we find we get much greater value for the money expended than before. Of course, we have an engineer representing the department, who reports on these works..


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I did not hear the whole of the minister's explanation, and may have misunderstood. Did he say that this money was spent by the transportation companies ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I said the money was expended under the advice of .the Yukon council.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This is in addition to the amount placed at the disposal of the council itself ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, with this feature-that they make a report to us, and the accounts are sent here and we pay them.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Who initials the accounts ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The accountant of the Yukon.
*fu ^


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In keeping the accounts, would this amount be included in the expenditure of the territory ?


Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND.: 


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is entirely under the charge of the Public Works Department here. The hon. gentleman will remember that I mentioned seven or eight points at which improvements were to be made, and I explained that the work could be done more efficiently and cheaply than by maintaining our own engineers in that country.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Can they carry out the work and charge what they like, or does the department's engineer there employ the men ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They make a report to the department-and we scrutinize the accounts. But they employ the men to carry out the work.
Harbours and rivers generally, $3,500.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is this for ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is the usual vote.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What can be done with this small item ? What kind of improvements can be carried on with this ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is for contingencies and different small accounts. It has been voted annually for a long time.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It always seemed to me that the voting of these small general amounts is absurd. We have accounts for each locality for dredging, and then a general account ; accounts for repairs to dredges, and a general account. And here we have another of these small Items. I suppose this $35,000 applies to the whole Dominion, and can be used anywhere. But what can be done with an amount like this I cannot understand.
The 'MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS. It is because we take special votes for dredging here and there, instead of having one vote, which I think would be better, that a general item like this is needed. There are incidental expenses in connection with all the works-stationery and other contingencies-to be met out of this general item.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I could understand a vote of some size, but I cannot see what is the use of voting $3,500.


Edward Hackett: I desire to bring to the attention of the hon. minister the fact that in the year 1900 a public work was commenced in a place called Skinner's Pond, in West Prince, P.E.I.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Was it before or after the election ?


Edward Hackett: Immediately before the election. I would like to ask the minister if he intends to drop that work after having expended $2,000 on it, or does he intend to continue it ?


William Forsythe McCreary: Will the hon. gentleman say where Skinner's Pond is?


Edward Hackett: It is just as good a name as Pile-o'-Bones creek, or any other.
I would like to ask the minister if he intends to prosecute this work at Skinner's Pond, where $2,000 have already been expended.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have no information with regard to this matter. I do not find anything in the estimates for any work there. What kind of work was commenced there, may I ask the hon. gentleman ?


Edward Hackett: The hon. gentleman ought to .know, he has the facts before him. It -was cutting a channel through the sandbar into the land near Skinner's Pond, in a region where there are many other points on the coast of Prince Edward Island. It was supposed to be a great advantage. Now the minister has the chief engineer at his elbow, who should be able to tell us what is going to be done now that the elections are coming on.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not know that the chief engineer is intersted in elections. He tells me it was opening up a small channel, and was reported to give satisfaction.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Surely it is not the intention of the department, after commencing this work on the eve of the last election, to drop it immediately after the election. Is it the intention, now that another election is coming on, to go on and complete the work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have no knowledge whatever. The chief engineer says $2,000 was spent there.


Edward Hackett: Do I understand the minister to say that he will make further inquiries ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I will be pleased to give instructions to have the local engineer make a report with regard to this work.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I think this item better stand until we get full information.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, let it stand.
Item allowed to stand.
Dredging-including salaries of engineers, superintendents and clerks. Dredging-Maritime provinces-additional amount required, $28,500.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is an additional amount required for carrying on dredging operations in the maritime provinces.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: In the moneys provided for public works in the maritime provinces, I notice that there are no items
under the head of dredging alone, but they are all for the construction or repair of dredges. It seems strange that this item should be in the former class.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is a general statement as to how the money is to be used.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: I think it would be better to place it under the head of rivers and harbours generally than to place it where money is required for building and repairing dredges. It is not a proper classification. Every other item is for the construction of dredges, here it is for dredging, a different matter altogether.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not know that the department is responsible for this classification.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: The amount of money that is appropriated for improvements in the maritime provinces is so large that a portion of it had better be under some other head.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We send the items over to the department, and when they are printed we find them in this way. I imagine that is being done with the items of the other departments. There is no intention to cover up anything. That money cannot be used for any other purpose than dredging in the maritime provinces. .


Edward Hackett: Could the minister tell me what dredging has been done in the province of Prince Edward Island in connection with this vote ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: If the hon. member will wait till that item comes up in the estimates, I will give him a list of what is being done there, or I will give him the information now.


Edward Hackett: What has been done at Cape Tormentine and Pointe du Ch6ne in regard to dredging ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No dredging has been done at Cape Tormentine this year. The dredging at Pointe du Chene was completed early this season and the dredge left there some months ago.


Edward Hackett: At about what time ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Some time in July the work was completed.
air. HACKETT. Where was the work done at that particular place ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Along the base of the pier.


Edward Hackett: What depth of water is there now and what space has been dredged ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: About seventeen feet at low water.


Edward Hackett: What space ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I cannot remember the figures sufficiently well to give my hon. friend correct information, but I will be very glad to bring down a report showing the hon. gentleman just what space has been dredged.
New dredging plant, British Columbia, to replace snag boat 'Samson' and dredge 'Mud Lark,' $10,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Are these out of service or what has become of them ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is the commencement of a somewhat important vote. The snag boat has become unfit for use, worn out and the ' Mud Lark' is in the same position. They have been doing some work but they have been reported ns being unfit for work, and it is desirable that we should renew the plant. The new snag boat is estimated to cost $20,000 and the dredge to replace the ' Mud Lark ' $30,000.


Edward Frederick Clarke: This is the first vote ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is the first vote in an expenditure of some $50,000.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Will a contract be let by tender ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Where is it proposed to build this new snag boat and dredge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They are generally built on the const. They have been built in the past by companies from Toronto or Montreal.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What about the ' Samson ' and ' Slud Lark ' ?


The SIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They are generally disposed of by public advertisement.
New tug for dredge ' Manitoba,' $10,500.


William James Roche: Is this for the province of SInnitoba ?


The SIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is the total cost of the new tug required.


Samuel Hughes: Where is it to bo placed ?


The SIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: On Lake SInnitoba. This is an entirely new tug. a strong one and more competent to do the work that is required of it.


Sir. ROCHE (Slarquette).: Was there a vote last year for the construction or purchase of a new dredge for that province ?


The SIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, the chief engineer informs me that there was a vote last year and that a dredge was purchased.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


William Roche: There is no item for dredging at the mouth of Slossy river. I noticed that there was a vote last year. Has that work been finished ?


The SIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I put the item in the main estimates.


William Roche: Has any work been done there yet ?


The SIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


William Roche: Is it going to be done this year ? There is a large sandbar which prevents boats coming in and going out at low water and this work is very necessary.


The SIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The chief engineer informs me that it is difficult 'to get the dredge up. It was the intention to take it up during high water. It cannot be got up at all times. Perhaps the hon. gentleman will know that is the reason why the work was not carried out for which a sum was voted last year.
Hydraulic self-propelling dredge for maritime provinces, $40,000.


Edward Hackett: What is the name of this dredge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It has not been christened yet. This is a vote of $40,000 for the purpose of building a new self-propelling dredge for the maritime provinces.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What is the total cost ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think the hon. members of this committee will agree with me that we require some better plant for spending the money that we have voted. We have voted money for dredging at important points from year to year and no work has been done. We either should not vote the money or else we should have some good plant to carry out the work in a satisfactory manner. There are several important harbours in the maritime provinces where we have no plant to do the work. Some of the dredges that we have are small and could not do the work at these harbours. The intention is to build or purchase a new plant. The total cost will be about $120,000.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What will be the capacity of the dredge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a suction dredge with a capacity of about 1,000 yards an hour.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Who is the builder and how is it to be built ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We will have to advertise for tenders. It will be built by contract.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: I entirely agree with the government's policy in construct-

ing these dredges. The only thing X regret is that there are not more public moneys appropriated for a similar purpose. I am satisfied that if the government owned more dredges and did the work themselves the work would be done for one-half what it costs now by letting it to outsiders who have dredges for this purpose. I am confident that it will meet with the approval of the country.


Edward Hackett: Might I ask the hon. minister where this new dredge will be constructed and what will be the total cost ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Specifications will be prepared in the department for the kind of dredge that we want and we will advertise for tenders.
New dredge for Prince Edward Island, $25,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The old dredge in Prince Edward Island is very unsatisfactory. The expectation is that we can have a dredge to do satisfactory work in Prince Edward Island at a total cost of $25,000.


Edward Hackett: It is quite impossible that you can get a dredge to do the work around Prince Edward Island for $25,000. The old dredge was taken over from the local government at confederation ; it is thirty years old, and it originally cost over $40,000. It is a small thing for the government of Canada to propose to replace her by a dredge that will only cost $25,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am informed by the engineer that you can build a better dredge now for $25,000 than you could for $40,000 when the old one was built. The engineer has some experience, and he knows that my instructions are to give the House full information so far as he can as to the cost of these things. I may say to the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hackett) that the first cost of the old dredge was about $23,500.


Edward Hackett: She cost $40,000.


Edward Frederick Clarke: How will this work be done ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Tenders will be advertised for.


Edward Frederick Clarke: May I ask the minister if any dredges are being built at Sorel ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am informed that they have more work on hand at Sorel than they can attend to.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What are they doing ?
The MINISTER OB' PUBLIC WORKS. They are building two or three large dredges and scows, &c.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: I may say that $25,000 will build a splendid dredge, as good a dredge as we have on the upper lakes, and she is a very good one having a capacity of from 800 to 1,000 yards daily.
In the main estimates, on page 55, there is a vote of $5,000 for harbours and rivers generally, and in the supplementaries there is a vote of $3,500 for the same purpose. That is additional to the amount In the main estimates ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: In the main estimates you have an item : ' New dredging plant, maritime provinces ; new hydraulic dredge, $200,000.'


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That is a different kind of dredge altogether ; that is for the * W. S. Fielding ' that is being built at Sorel.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Is the material for these dredges obtained by public tender ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: So far as I know, yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will this dredge lie built in Prince Edward Island ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We will have to build her wherever the most satisfactory tender comes from. I dare say that the contract for the hull may be in Prince Edward Island, and the contract for the machinery might toe separate, or the contractor for the hull might buy the machinery, according to specifications, from the different manufacturers.


Richard Blain: How many dredges have you at the present time ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The deputy thinks we have 19.


Richard Blain: How many under construction ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: One.


Edward Hackett: How long before this dredge for Prince Edward Island will be completed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We will advertise at once for tenders, and there is no reason why it should not be completed during the next season. There are urgent demands for dredging from different parts of the Dominion, and I believe that this dredging work is necessary for the improvement of our harbours and the development of the trade of the country. We wish to secure this plant at the earliest possible moment. We have made inquiries with regard to purchasing plant, but we have had no suitable offers, or I would be quite willing to accept them. We want a first-class, up-to-date plant that will give satisfaction. As soon as this vote is passed we will advertise for tenders for the Prince Edward Island dredge.


Samuel Hughes: When the minister says that he will advertise, he means in the public press of the country ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Mr. KAULBACH.: As there are so many dredges now under construction, I would ask the Minister of Public Works to make a red mark on the wall with respect to my appeal for dredging to be done in the county of Lunenburg.	.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I may say that the appeal of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Kaulbach) is one of the principal reasons which has convinced me as to the necessity of getting more dredging plant. We have no dredge at the present time that [DOT]can satisfactorily do that work.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I will look forward with a very great deal of expectation and hope that this appeal of mine, which I have made so frequently, will be acceded to at the earliest possible moment. I hope it will be the first appeal attended to.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I would not like to make any rash promise that it will be the first, but I will see how the hon. gentleman (Mr. Kaulbach) behaves 'himself. However, seriously speaking, that is the intention, and this is one of the most important works that we want this new plant for.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: From the amount of money voted for dredging in the maritime provinces, I do not see why our hon. friend from Lunenburg (Mr. Kaulbach) should not have all the dredging he requires in his constituency. I find in the main estimates, at page 55, tha,t $87,000 is voted for dredging in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick, and in these supplementary estimates $28,500 more is voted. These amounts far exceed the amounts voted for the upper provinces, so that I think the hon. member for Lunenburg should have the dredging he wants done in his constituency to his entire satisfaction.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: If my hon. friend from North Grey (Mr. Thomson) looks more closely, he will find a special vote for dredging in the hon. gentleman's constituency ; but, as I have explained, no matter how much money we vote, we have not any dredge to do the work.
'Mr. KAULBACH. 1 may inform the hon. Minister of Public Works that I shall be satisfied with the dredge he has on hand at present until he Can get a superior one, and then of course we shall expect to have the remainder of the work completed.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am perfectly willing to make a bargain with my hon. friend; but the chief engineer of the department and the hon. gentleman between them decided that the dredge could not do the work, and therefore if I sent it there, it would not be very satisfactory.


Samuel Hughes: 


William Roche: The harbours in the constituency of Halifax have not been dredged for three or four years, and we have been waiting with a good deal of patience until a dredge could be procured. There are a number of harbours in that county which are suffering because the dredges are occupied elsewhere. But I would point out to the hon. minister that before any promise is made to the outlying counties of Nova Scotia, he should remember that the promise has been made for some time that the harbours of Halifax county would be attended to, and the people of that county would be unwilling to see any outlying counties take precedence. I would like to have this impressed on the hon. Minister of Public Works.


Edward Hackett: 
Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I wish to emphasize the statement in regard to the fishermen which has just emanated from my hon. friend who has just taken his seat ; because no better class can be found anywhere.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Is it a fact that the hon. junior member for Halifax (Mr. Roche) has made the statement here that the fishermen live on the outskirts of civilization ? Is that true ?


William Roche: About as true as a great many of the statements made on the other side of the House-made out of whole cloth. I never stated any -such thing. I may have stated that they lived on the extreme verge of the country, that is, nearest the ocean, but if anybody thinks the fisherman is a greenhorn or is outside the limits of civilization, he makes a great mistake. Mistakes of that kind will arise in Ontario ; that is where half truths emanate from ; but they do not emanate from the member for Halifax. I wish the hon. gentleman to understand that I am not in the habit of making rash statements of that kind. What I do say I am quite willing to stand by on every occasion. I never disparge any one,

either friend or foe. I am not such an idiot as to do that.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Will my hon. friend tell us what he did say V
Mr. ItOCHE (Halifax). It is in ' Hansard.'


Edward Hackett: I do not wish to make a statement which I can corroborate or supp jrt, and I have here the words of the hon. gentleman as he uttered them-that the fishermen of Nova Scotia


William Roche: What page ?


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: I must draw the attention of the hon. member to the fact that he cannot read from a former debate.


Edward Hackett: I am not reading. I am simply stating the words of the hon. gentleman as he uttered them, that the fishermen of Nova Scotia lived on the outskirts of civilization. I simply took down the words of the hon. gentleman as he uttered them, and I repudiate the statement.


William Roche: Is the hon. gentleman quoting from ' Hansard.' If so, from what page ?


Edward Hackett: The hon. gentleman is very desirous of having pages, but, I am quoting his words exactly as he uttered them. Now, I resent that on the part of the fishermen of Nova Scotia.
pretation he pleases upon his own remarks in regard to people in his own locality. There is no resemblance whatever between the fishermen in the hon. gentleman's constituency and the fishermen in my constituency.


Peter Macdonald: I must draw the attention of the hon. member to the fact that this discussion is out of order.
New dredging plant, British Columbia-one tug, steel hull, and two hopper scows, $36,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Here is another illustration of what I- spoke about. Just a little above, you have another item for dredging plant at British Columbia, $10,000. Why not put all the dredging plant in one item in each province, so that we may know how much is spent in each province.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I agree with the hon. gentleman and I am sorry these items are entered in this way. It is inconvenient for me, and I would prefer to have them altogether.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the estimated cost ?
. The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS. The tug will cost $20,000 and the two steel hopper scows $8,000 each.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will they be built in British Columbia ?


Mr. JOHNSTON (Cape Breton).: I rise to a point of order. The hon. member for West Prince (Mr. Hackett) has attributed certain observations to the hon. junior member for Halifax, who has denied having uttered them. I submit that in view of the fact that the hon. gentleman is not prepared to state the authority from which lie quotes, he has to accept the denial of the hon. member for Halifax.


Peter Macdonald: The rule is quite clear. When a certain statement is attributed to an hon. member, and when the hon. member says he did not make any such statement, then the whole thing has to cease. The statement of the hon. member who has been charged must be accepted in good faith.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Will; you permit me, Mr. Chairman, to repel any such insinuation with regard to the fishermen of the province from which I come. They are not living on the outskirts of civilization, but they are well-to-do citizens, who earn more money than the average merchant or professional man or farmer, and they are as respectable a class of people as we have in Ontario. To say that these people live on the outskirts of civilization, or that they are not as competent to do business as the rest of our people, is something that I must repudiate.


William Roche: If the hon. gentleman wishes to make remarks, he is at perfect liberty to do so ; he may put any inter-417*


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: If there are any firms in British Columbia able to do this class of work and I understand there are-they will be given an opportunity to tender.
New dredging plant, Ontario and-Quebec-additional amount, $78,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In the main estimates we asked for a vote of $75,000 for new dredging plant for Ontario and Quebec. That is the way moneys have been voted since confederation for this dredging plant. We purchased the ' International ' plant, a large steam dredge and scows belonging to Mr. Connolly the contractor. This plant cost originally, $180,000. There was a dispute between the Connollys and the government when this plant was offered for sale, and I asked Mr. Stevens, one of the most competent men in the service at Halifax, to examine and report on the plant. On his report and that of Mr. Howden of the department, we concluded that it was a good purchase and that by purchasing it we would save two years, which it would take us to procure a plant at all equal to this in order to carry on the works for which money was voted. The whole purchase price was $123,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What was included in the purchase ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have not the particulars, but speaking generally it includes a dredge, a good tug,

four scows, all the duplicates, &c. I am satisfied that the department has now a first-class deep water dredging plant.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the capacity of ' the dredge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: About 6,000 yards per day. It was built at Kingston, Ontario, in 1894. It has a steel hull.


Mr. REID (Grenville).: Where is this dredge to be used ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: At all the deep water points in the province of Quebec, down in the St. Lawrence. This plant may be used in salt water and will dredge anywhere from fifteen to sixty feet.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Was this dredge purchased after examination and estimate as to value ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The first thing I did was to get Mr. Stevens of the Marine Department, who was reported to me as the most competent man in the Dominion to examine machinery of that kind, to examine it. Then we have the report of the officers of our own department, especially Mr. Howden, who has been in the service some twenty-five or thirty years in connection with this work, and who is said to be a man of very high character and a very efficient judge. From the reports of these men we decided to make the purchase.


William Roche: Mr. Stevens, the government inspector of machinery in Nova Scotia, is one of the most competent men in Nova Scotia.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will the minister bring down these reports ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, I will have them brought down and lay them on the Table.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then, it is understood that we can discuss this item further.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Certainly.


Adam Carr Bell: May I ask to go back to the item for the hydraulic dredge in the maritime provinces ? I would like to know what is the character and capacity of that dredge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The capacity will be about 1,000 yards per hour.


Adam Carr Bell: Will this $40,000 cover the cost ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Oh, no. The chief engineer estimate's the cost at $120,000.	-


Adam Carr Bell: Is anything included in that estimate besides the dredge proper ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.	I


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


Adam Carr Bell: In what 'depth of water will this dredge be able to work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: As deep as thirty or thirty-five feet.


Adam Carr Bell: In how shallow water can she work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: She is a suction dredge ; she will have a draught of about five feet, and can work in about eight feet of water.


Adam Carr Bell: If only $40,000 is voted and the total cost will be $120,000, I am afraid we can scarcely expect to see that dredge in operation next year. At what time is it expected to be available for use ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I cannot say definitely. Of course, I could not procure the plans until I had the authority of parliament. I am making all the speed I can, and, so far as the department is concerned, there will be no delay that can possibly be avoided.


John Dowsley Reid: I suppose there is no intention of proceeding next year with making the channel by the Canadian route between Gananoque and Brockville. I understand the government rnadfe a complete survey of that channel. There is not so much dredging to be done.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not intend to proceed this season. I have not taken any special vote for the improvement of that channel.


John Dowsley Reid: I might suggest to the hon. Minister of Public Works that some time, when he is taking a trip up the river St. Lawrence, he might take a look at a rock or shoal in the narrows at Brockville. I brought the matter to the attention of the minister two or three years ago, and a buoy was placed there but the channel is very narrow, and buoying does not obviate the difficulty. It is merely a large rock, I should say, lying tlieTe in eight or nine feet of water, and I think it would not take very much money to clear that obstruction and make a first-class channel through the narrows. The American government have removed all obstructions on their side of the channel, so that, on the route between Cape Vincent and Ogdensburg, this is the only real obstruction that might cause accident. It is only three or four years since a large steamer with her consort struck this rock, and very great loss resulted. I mention the matter so that the minister might kindly look at it and see if it would not be possible to have this obstruction removed.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Some day, when the hon. gentleman (Mr. Reid, Grenville) has his yacht out, I shall be glad to accept his invitation and take this trip. But the,survey ha* been made, and the engineer has the plans in the department, and an estimate is being made up which I

shall be prepared to submit to my hon. friend.
Roads and bridges ' Hull slide ' union bridges and roadway approaches-repairs, alerations and additions, &e., $6,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to replace sidewalks, roadway and approaches destroyed in the great Hull and pttiiwa fire. The total cost of the work is estimated at $12,800.
Ottawa city-Dufferin and Sappers bridges over the Rideau canal-repairs, alterations and additions, $10,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I thought this work was finished.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to cover the cost of road, sidewalk and approaches, granolithic or asphalt, including, if necessary, iron girders. This work is being done on the recommendation of the officers of the department and will cost $15,600.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There was a considerable expenditure on these bridges, and I thought we were done with them for a considerable length of time ; but the work is hardly finished before we commence again.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That is exactly how the matter struck me, but I am informed that the work done was merely temporary work. But the work is to be' done now in a first-class and permanent manner.


Mr. BIRKETT.: When it is considered that nearly all the traffic between west and east in the city of Ottawa passes over these two bridges, it will be seen that the work is necessary. But I question if the minister can carry out the necessary repairs and improvements for this amount.


John Dowsley Reid: Is this an iron bridge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBDIC WORKS.: Yes.
Bryson bridge-reconstruction of piers and approaches, $10,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is over the Ottawa river at Bryson.


Edward Hackett: Is this an interprovincial bridge ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, it is a wagon bridge across Calumet Island in the river. There are two bridges. I think, one from the Quebec side and one from the Ontario side.


Samuel Hughes: Does the government build wagon bridges ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They must have built this one.


Samuel Hughes: Then we are doing a work that belongs to the Quebec
government. I think the minister bad better look into this.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I know that the bridge is government property. Representations have been made to the department about it, and I inquired why the Dominion government had built the bridge. I have made arrangements with the county that they are to take possession of the bridge and relieve the Dominion of any further expense in regard to this matter, and this vote was given upon that condition. It is for renewing a bridge built there some years ago. The total cost of the bridge was $15,500. It is a steel bridge, but it was built on wooden piers that have become undermined.


Samuel Hughes: I thiulc that belongs to the province of Quebec; that island is entirely within that province.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 1 think that probably it is a provincial work, legally. But the government did some years ago build this bridge, and are responsible for it. We are to put it into good shape, and the county is to maintain it hereafter.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This other bridge at Ottawa, the union bridge, is that an interprovincial bridge ?	*


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am not very well posted. It is government property and we get considerable revenue.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am speaking of the interprovincial bridge between Quebec and Ontario at Hull. Has it any connection with what is called the slides that are in the city of Hull and belong to the province of Quebec ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No the slides are Dominion property. There are two bridges over the slides that are Dominion works, and we maintain them.
Moisie Post road-improvement of, $700.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to keep up a road in connection with our Dominion telegraph lines along the north shore of the St. Lawrence, for a distance of about 300 miles. There have been improvements made from time to time in order to carry on the telegraphic work, to remove obstructions in order to enable material to be carried across a rough country.


Samuel Hughes: It is the duty of the province to keep up that road. The government is not taking any grants to build a roadway along the Yukon telegraph line, and why do you build a road down there ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This line was built in 1886. It runs from the east shore of the Saguenay along the shore of the St. Lawrence river down to Belle Isle.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then the item ought to be under the head of telegraph lines.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I agree with the hon. gentleman, so far as my judgment goes. It is ridiculous to say that this is for the Moisie road. It is a vote for the maintenance of telegraph lines. I heg to move that the words * Moise post road' be struck out and that the words ' North Shore Telegraph Line ' be inserted in lieu thereof.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Edmonton bridge over the Saskatchewan river -renewal of flooring, $1,650.
["I agree with the hon. gentleman, so far as my judgment goes. It is ridiculous to say that this is for the Moisie road. It is a vote for the maintenance of telegraph lines. I heg to move that the words * Moise post road' be struck out and that the words ' North Shore Telegraph Line ' be inserted in lieu thereof."]
Samuel Hughes: Trains and teams have to cross over this bridge on the same level as it is both a railway and wagon bridge. It is not wide enough for the two, aud I think that the traffic in the near future will require that an additional bridge shall be constructed or an enlargement of the present bridge at one side or the other for the use of teams shall be made. I took the liberty once before of pointing out to the hon. minister, that, wherever a railway bridge across a stream or river in the Northwest Territories is constructed, beside or under the railway track there should be a wagon road. I am satisfied that it would be of incalculable benefit to settlers if that should be brought about. There should be a separate wagon road instead of having the wagon road and the railroad together.
The MINISTER OB' PUBLIC WORKS. The matter has been brought to the attention of the department and the engineer is looking into it.
To open a pack trail from Peace river to Pelly river $25,000.
The MINISTER OB' PUBLIC WORKS. At the request of the Department of the Interior it is proposed to open a pack trail 650 miles long from the Peace River landing to the head-waters of the Pelly river.


Samuel Hughes: There was a good deal of money expended and of course it had to be expended in haste at the time of the Yukon excitement in building the Atha-baska trail to Peace River landing. They took that trail over the worst possible route that could have been selected for a trail. It is not necessary as a matter of fact to have a trail into that part of the country as yet, because the water-ways are available and one can get to Peace River landing much more readily by water than by land, but in case the trail is constructed it should be kept more to the west than when the old Athabasca trail was constructed. In building the trail through the Peace River valley by the route proposed, it will be found to be a very difficult one. Yrou would find1 it as easy to follow the Liard river route rather than the route which has been outlined. I think you will find it necessary to construct the old Athabasca Landing trail Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND.
to Peace River over again, as it has all grown up and is almost impassable.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Who is going to do this work and how is it going to be done ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The former work was done by the officers of the North-west Territories. I dare say that probably the best way this money can be expended is to expend it under the direction of the officers of the government of the North-west Territories.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Under the officers of the government of the North-west Territories ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The district is far away and inaccessible and these people are interested in getting value out of the money.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You mean the North-west council ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Samuel Hughes: I may say in regard to the last trail constructed that the money was very well expended. A young officer named Chalmers, who was afterwards shot in South Africa, had charge of the work on the frail. He gave very careful supervision to the work and did it excellently.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am not objecting at all to the way in which the work was done, and I am not saying that it was inefficiently done, but we have been voting a great many items for the North-west Territories, and I would like at some time during the passage of these estimates if the hon. minister could give us the various items together with the aggregate amount that we have voted for this purpose.


The. MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is practically a grant to the Northwest Territories.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We have passed several items of this kind already. Then, there is another thing. Do these gentlemen in the North-west Territories receive pay for doing this work? They get their salaries as they are under contract to do police work. Do they get extra for this work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, they receive no extra pay. The officers to whom I referred are the officers of the North-west council.


Samuel Hughes: I think I may have misled my hon. friend (Mr. Sproule). This officer had been formerly in the police, but I do not think he was an officer of the police at the time he took charge of this work for the North-west council.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This will be done by the North-west Council ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a long way from Ottawa, and we have to consider the best way to get value

for the money. The North-west Council are extremely Interested to satisfy the people that they should get the most value for this money, and they will do the work and send vouchers, properly certified, here. They have men of special experience for this kind of work.	[DOT]


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not object to that.
I heard a rumour that Mr. Charleson was to go out there to do this work, and I do not think that the country requires a second experience in the near future of the manner in which he expends money. I assume that the North-west Council will make every dollar go as far as it can, but if it were to be spent by some commission sent out, Including Mr. Charleson, I certainly would object to it.
Assistance towards extension of telephone line from Chatham to Tracadie, N.B., $2,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is a grant we are giving to a private company to connect a line with the Lazaretto.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Do you get any return for this grant ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The deputy tells me that we have not made any contract, but I suppose there will be a condition as to certain government messages going free.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You ought to have that understood beforehand. If the money is voted, the company is likely to try and get out of any bargain of that kind.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I agree with my hon. friend, but this is a small matter, and I think we may leave it with the deputy minister to arrange proper terms.
Telegraphic connection between Deer Island and Eastport, Me., $3,503.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is an extension of our own line for 10 miles.


John Dowsley Reid: Doees it cost $350 a mile ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There are two miles of cable which will cost $1,200, and the cost of the land line is $110 a mile.
Anticosti Island-renewal of line wire between Fox Bay and Bescie river, $7,360.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is for a renewal of 60 miles of our present line.


Samuel Hughes: What stations have tlie government on Anticosti ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There are seven stations.
To pay for Marconi wireless telegraph apparatus at Chateau Bay and Belle Isle, $4,100.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What success has attended this Marconi system ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The report of the officer in charge is that since July this station has been working very satisfactorily. This line extends for 22 miles.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have we not a station for ocean telegraphic purposes ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This station is not used for communicating with ships as yet, but it can be so used.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We voted $80,000 last year for the Marconi system.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That was for erecting a station at Glace Bay.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Yes ; and we see it announced in the press, from time to time, that the system has been a success and so on. Can the minister give us any information about that 1


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The arrangements in that regard have been carried out by the Department of Finance, and my hon. friend will be able to get the information when the Minister of Finance comes into the Chamber.


John Dowsley Reid: Could not this station be made to work for outgoing or incoming vessels ? If we had had a station there somewhat similar to what they have in New York, it might possibly have prevented some of the accidents which have happened, and perhaps some of the large steamers now going to Montreal which have not the system on board would adopt it.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have an expert in the department who is at the head of the telegraphic business, and I will endeavour to obtain any information which he may have on this subject.
Telegraph line-Murray Bay to St. Catherines Bay. second wire, $1,640.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is for a second wire on our own line betw'een these two points.


Edward Hackett: What is the distance between these points ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Forty-one miles.


Mr HACKETT.: Might I ask what the hon. gentleman is doing to establish a telegraphic service between Prince Edward Island and the mainland ? It is a matter that has been brought up frequently, and the minister said he would consider it ; and I trust that he will see his way clear to place an amount in the estimates to wipe away what is called a monopoly down there.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend knows that some arrangement was made with the company which has the telegraphic system between the is-

land and the mainland, and the Dominion granted it a subsidy. Legal questions have arisen, however, and if the hon. gentleman would take my advice, he would ask us to cancel the subsidy until the company afforded a satisfactory service. With the improvements in wireless telegraphy, we may be able to establish a couple of Marconi stations on the island, and in that way do away with this monopoly.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Does the government control the rates ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, I think the arrangement was made between the Island government and the company previous to confederation.


Edward Hackett: That is correct. I insist on having some answer from the government in this regard. Some years ago we were told by Sir Louis H. Davies, who was then a member of the government, that there was no monopoly, and since then nothing has been done. The people of Prince Edward Island are insisting on this accommodation every year, and I, as one of their representatives, stand here again to insist on having justice done to the island. We find in these estimates a vote of $3,500 for telegraphic communication between Deer island and Eastport, Maine, while nothing has been done for the people of Prince Edward Island. I would ask the minister seriously to consider the conditions that now exist, and to do something in the near future to relieve the people of that province from the incubus of this monopoly, which has weighed so heavily upon them for the last fifty years.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 1 am not going to express any opinion; but 1 shall be pleased to do anything I can to help my hon. friend. If the people of the island would take my advice, I think they would get better arrangements with the company. If not, I suppose parliament would have power to bring in legislation to remove the monopoly.


Edward Frederick Clarke: There is a great opportunity now, to meet the wishes of the hon. gentleman and the people of the island. We have just passed a grant to aid a press cable service, and I understood, when that matter was discussed, that the Minister of Finance promised to see that the papers on the island should have the benefit of the service as well as the papers on the mainland.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have no doubt that there will be a discussion on this matter when the question of the cable service comes up.


John Dowsley Reid: Can the minister give any idea of what revenue he expects from these lines ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I do not know that I can ; but the revenue is very small.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


John Dowsley Reid: It is not equal to the amount spent annually in keeping them in repair ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, nothing like it ; but a large number of people are benefited by it.
Mr. REID (Grenville)'. About $40,000 is spent annually in keeping these lines in repair, and there appears to be less than $20,000 per annum of revenue ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Having made a little inquiry the other day, l am pleased to be able to tell my hon. friend that I find that our revenue in the North-west from these lines more than doubled last year ; so that in course of time it may be that with the development of the country, we shall obtain a revenue that will pay for the service.


Edward Hackett: Is the hon. Minister of Justice in his seat ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No.


Edward Hackett: I would like to have his opinion, and have it made public, whether the Anglo-American Company have a right to monopolize the telegraphic system between Prince Edward Island and the mainland ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There will be a vote on which this matter will come up for discussion, when the Minister of Justice will be present, and when lie will be able to give my hon. friend more information than I can.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Would it cost much to establish some stations under the Marconi system on the island, to compete with this monopoly which my hon. friend speaks of ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think the wireless telegraphic system at the present time is somewhat expensive; but the result might be good in the end.


Edward Hackett: The great difficulty is that the government tell us from time to time that they are going to do better next time. If they cannot break up this monopoly, I would ask them to institute the Marconi system.


John Dowsley Reid: Would the govern-men have any objection to placing a telephone service between Prince Edward Island and the mainland ? If this monopoly cannot be interfered with by the government, perhaps the hon. member would approve of a telephone service.


Edward Hackett: I would be only too pleased to vote for any competition, whether by telephone or by the Marconi system or by any other method, which would relieve our people from this monopoly. We are a small population, about 20,000 people, but we are up to date.


Samuel Hughes: You are not on the confines of civilization.


Edward Hackett: No, we are right in the centre of civilization, and I would ask the government to insist on a telegraph service being given us which would satisfy the people and. do away with the necessity of our complaining every year to parliament. There is not an hon. gentleman in any of the other provinces who does not desire to see justice done to this small sister province, and I am certain that I will have the support of hon. gentlemen from the other provinces in insisting on proper telegraphic communication being afforded us.	.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It would seem a desirable place for testing the Marconi system. That system is being worked to the Magdalen islands, some twenty-three or twenty-five miles distance, and surely it could be worked easily to Prince Edward Island. It is not a very costly system to install and this will be a splendid place to try it.


John Dowsley Reid: I am very much surprised that hon. members from Prince Edward Island sitting opposite have not raised their voice in favour of the island.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That matter is not before the House at present. If the hon. gentleman had been in parliament as long as I have, he would have heard this question discussed over and over again by lion, members on both sides. It is a legal question to a very great extent. The hon. member for Grey (Mr. Thomson) made a very pertinent question with regard to the Marconi system, but to discuss the contract and the subsidy is now out of order.


John Dowsley Reid: But I am talking of a telephone service.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: A discussion on the telegraphic system of the island is out of order.


John Dowsley Reid: I am appealing on behalf of the island to have a telephone system installed between it and the mainland.
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS Will the hon. gentleman tell me whether or not under the contract between the island and this company, this government could install a telephone service between the island and the mainland ?


John Dowsley Reid: I say it can. At the time of confederation a telephone system was not thought of. If the hon. minister J would bring in a vote to install a telephone j system between the island and the main-, land. I am satisfied that even hon. members in the opposition would support it.
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS All the lawyers put a different construction on the contract.


Samuel Hughes: I would recommend the government to lay a cable across.


Peter Macdonald: We are not discussing a contract between a certain company and Prince Edward Island or the advisability of establishing any line between the mainland and Prince Edward Island.
I would ask the committee to come back to the point.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Are not the committee in order in discussing this item and comparing the telegraphic facilities on the island with those in other parts of the country ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Supposing that could be brought under discussion, it would be far better to bring it up when the proper estimates are under consideration, and we have the proper officials here.


Edward Hackett: I desire' to insist on the rights of Prince Edward Island.


Peter Macdonald: Any discussion with regard to the facilities which Prince Edward Island has now for telegraphic service is entirely out of order. This question will come up under the heading of the Finance Department and it will then be in order to discuss it.
At six o'clock, House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.



[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 264) respecting the Ottawa Valley Railway Company.-Mr. Etbier.

[Stage Direction]
House again in Committee of Supply.
['1 will give that information on the Yukon vote. Mr. Chairman, we have done a little work at any rate, and perhaps we had better rise.\nSome resolutions reported.']
Edward Hackett: May I ask the necessity for this second wire from Murray Bay to St. Catherine's Bay ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In 1902 the Great North-western Telegraph Company laid a special wire from Quebec to Murray Bay to afford better connection with the North Shore Line. The second wire of the government is provided with the same idea, and so supply local offices. Generally, I may say, it is to improve the telegraph communication between these two points.
Telegraph lines-Quebec-Island of Orleans, land line, extension to Ste. Famille, $1,150.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is an extension of seven miles, and the vote is estimated to cover the cost.


Robert Laird Borden: Has any explanation been given on any previous item as to the working of the Marconi Telegraph System ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, there was considerable discussion on that point. I suggested that the general discussion on the Marconi System would be more in order when the estimates of my hon. friend the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding) are under consideration, and as he is more familiar with the matter, nil communications with respect to it having taken place under his department.


Robert Laird Borden: As I pointed out last session, there is this observation to make, that if the system is capable of being worked at all it should be capable of being utilized for certain short distances around our own coasts. As we have granted some assistance, it seems to me the government should be in a position to give some definite information as to the prospects of making it successful along our own coast.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend was not present when we had a discussion on this item. I read a paragraph from the report of the engineer a short time ago showing that the line from the coast to Ste. Famille had been working very satisfactorily. That is about all the information I could give.
Land line-Ste. Anne du Saguenay, to Des-cente des Femmes, $1,500.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This line is 22 miles long. The total cost will be $2,640.


Robert Laird Borden: Are these lines solely for the purpose of the government, or are they open for use by private individuals ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They are used as a regular public line. The revenue in this district is about 50 per cent of the cost. That district is settling up very well in some parts, and the settlers require more means of communication.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the principle adopted by the government in the construction of these lines ? Do they construct them only in cases where the government require the service, or do they construct them in cases where the public may be served as well as the government ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There have been some cases which covered both principles. I imagine some of these extensions have been made where the government had no particular use for them, and they were made chiefly for the public.


Robert Laird Borden: That means that we have in some portions of the country a government system of telegraphs, not more for the requirements of the government than for the people at large. Is the hon. gentleman in a position to say how many miles of telegraph lines of that kind we have ?


Robert Laird Borden: 


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think we have 5,720 miles under government control.


Edward Hackett: Before recess we were discussing the telegraph line connecting Prince Edward Island with the rest of the Dominion of Canada, and I asked the Minister of Justice if he would give his opinion regarding an alleged monopoly in connection with that telegraph line.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: A gentleman interested in the telegraph company recently prepared a statement which was submitted to the Prime Minister and by him forwarded to the Department of Justice, in which I understand they claim that they have got some monopoly or some privileges which are being interfered with by legislation passed during the present session of parliament. I have not had an opportunity of looking into the memorial, and do not intend to until after the session. But so far as this parliament is concerned, we have hitherto proceeded on the assumption that there is no monopoly.
Telegraph line on north shore of St. Lawrence-land line from Bersimis to Godbout, $12,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to make provision for substituting an all-land line, about 80 miles in length, for the present cable connection between these two points. The cable seems to be always out of order and is very unsatisfactory.


Robert Laird Borden: Would the hon. gentleman explain the necessity for this work V


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The cable has been down about seventeen or eighteen years and is completely used up, and is now useless.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Bersimis and Godbout are two important stations on the north shore of the St. Lawrence below Tadousac. There are on that coast several indentations and deep bays. Instead of building the line originally around these bays, they extended it across through the water, laying cables for the purpose. I understand that these cables have been very much interfered with by ice in spring and by the tempests, and the proposal now is to lay a land line in substitution for these cables around the bays rather than across them.


Robert Laird Borden: Have the cables ceased to be operated ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: I think they are spasmodically worked, but they are used very little. This is the line which connects Belle Isle with Quebec, and it is the line upon which the shipping of the St. Lawrencei depends to communicate with Quebec.


Robert Laird Borden: They have what my hon. friend from Colchester (Mr. Gour-ley) calls lucid intervals ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Eucid intervals.
Chicoutimi-St. Charles telegraph line, branch from Ste. Anne to Lac Clair, $1,800.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is proposed to construct a branch line fifteen miles in length from Ste. Anne to Lac Clair, at a cost of .$1,800.


Edward Hackett: Before we conclude with this vote of $40,000 for Dominion telegraph lines, I would like to ask what is being done to relieve the people of Prince Edward Island from the telegraph monopoly under which they suffer ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: As my hon. friend, who is an old parliamentarian, and a resident of Prince Edward Island, knows this matter has been under discussion for many years. It was brought to my attention this session, and I have taken it up in earliest. As the hon. Minister of Justice has just stated to the committee, legal qirestions have been raised, and they have been referred to the Justice Department for their opinion. The company have made a statement of their claims to the Department of Justice, and we will have their advice in regard to the matter. We are proceeding upon the assumption that there is no monopoly. I think my hon. friend (Mr. Haclcett) will see that the discussion might more properly take place when the item for the subsidy is under consideration. It will be more proper and the information would be far more satisfactory, as I am not prepared at the present time, not having any item in reference to Prince Edward Island before me, to give the information that I would like to give to the hon. gentleman and to the committee. If my hon. friend would be kind enough to bring this question up when the question of the subsidy is under discussion, I am sure that he will find that the government will be ready to discuss it and to give him all the information.


Edward Hackett: That is quite correct, but I consider the remarks made by the hon. Minister of Justice as being very unsatisfactory in regard to Prince Edward Island. I would like to ask him as the legal adviser of the Crown If he thinks Prince Edward Island is subject to this monopoly ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: This is a question that arose previous to confederation, and results from legislation that was enacted at that time. I understand that parliament has in recent years proceeded on the assumption that there is no monopoly, and as a result of legislation that was introduced this session, the company have thought it proper to make certain representations to the government which representations amount to the statement that they enjoy a monopoly under the legislation that they have. These statements have been referred to the Department of Justice, but I only received the memorandum from the company yesterday. My hon. friend will see that to give a matter of that importance the attention which it requires so as to enable me to give an opinion to the House that would be of any value would take much more time than it is possible at the present stage of the session for me to give to it. I have no desire whatever to make light of the pretensions of Prince Edward Island. If there is a monopoly it seems to me that it would be proper for the government to interfere and to endeavour in some way to get rid of it, but the hon. gentleman cannot expect me to make a statement as to the legal position of the ease or as to the policy of the government without that knowledge which would enable me to make a statement that would be of any value.


Edward Hackett: I am very thankful for this explanation of the hon. Minister of Justice. I know that he is sincere and honest, and I trust that when he looks at the papers which he says only came into his hands yesterday, that he will give the benefit of any doubt that may arise to the province of Prince Edward Island.
Petite RiviSre-St. Agnes telegraph line, $2,500.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This Is a vote of $2,500 to provide, accords ing to an estimate submitted by the general superintendent of government telegraph lines, for the construction of two lines of telegraph in Charlevoix county, so as to connect St. Agnes, St. Urbain and Petite Riviere.


Robert Laird Borden: Are these new lines or are they in substitution for lines already existing ?	.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: These are new lines, but extensions of the present lines.
Mr. MORIN* Does the hon. Minister of Public Works know where Petite Riviere is ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: St. Urbain is about midway between Baie St. Paul and St. Agnes. Petite Rivi&re St. Francois is some distance west of Baie St. Paul.
Telephone line to Edmonton Indian agency,


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to connect Edmonton with the Indian agency, 14 miles distant.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Where is the agency V


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is 14 miles from Edmonton.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What is the name of the place ?


Tlie MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is tlie Indian reserve at which Mr. Gibbons is the Indian agent.
Telegraph line between Edmonton and Athabasca landing, $15,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to make provision in accordance with the estimate of the superintendent general of government telegraph lines for the Edmonton-Athabasca line, the distance between the two places being estimated at 100 miles. The total cost of the work for 100 miles is estimated at $150 a mile, making $15,000.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Are the mounted police at Athabasca Landing ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The mounted police are exercising authority at Athabasca with a number of isolated detachments, and they can only communicate with Edmonton by using the road. The line is principally for the mounted police, but, of course, my hon. friend knows that the country is settling up. There is no railway communication and there is a very considerable number of settlers going In. This has been urged very earnestly by the local authorities at Edmonton, and also by the mounted police. It will be constructed by tender an'd contract.


Mr. BROCK.: What leads the minister to decide as to the necessity for such a work as this ? It looks to me that $15,000 is a small sum with which to build 100 miles of telegraph line in such a country. Has the minister the report of an expert ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My experience is that the superintendent there is a very competent and energetic officer, and this vote is based on his estimate. It is on his report that I ask for the sum, and I have no reason to believe from my past experience of him, and his general ability, but that this will complete the work.
Loop line from a point on the main line near Victoria Alta, to connect with Aedrews, $600.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is for the construction of four and a half miles of line, the residents agreeing to supply the poles. There is unite a settlement there.


William Rees Brock: That costs more than $100 a mile.
Extension of telegraph line from Wood Mountain Post to Willow Bunch, $7,600.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is for thirty-eight miles of land line. There is some difference in the cost in different localities, but that depends on the distance that they have to haul the supplies. This estimate would make it $200 a mile. I may say that our representative from tlie west was here a short time ago. and on looking into the matter I found that the re-Mr. CLARKE.
ceipts have increased fifty per cent last year, so that if they continue at that ratio of increase, the receipts would soon be equal to the expenditure and maintenance.


Richard Blain: What rates are charged ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Tlie rates average from twenty-five cents for ten words to forty-eight cents, according to the distance. They are not unreasonable rates at all.


George Taylor: Are Mr. Charleson and Mr. Rochester up there superintending the construction of telegraph lines ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They are not. They have not been in this part of the country at all. This work is done under the supervision of the department, and the officer in charge is Mr. McDonald. Mr. Rochester is still in the Yukon, and is in Vancouver at the present time, and Mr. Charleson has just returned to Ottawa.


William Rees Brock: The cost of one of these lines is $100 a mile; of the other $150 a mile, and of this last one $206 a mile.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In one case the poles are being supplied by the settlers.


William Rees Brock: That is where the cost is $150 a mile, and it makes the discrepancy all the greater.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I should point out that one of these is a loop line, a double line. The very fact that the officer in charge does vary his estimate according to the locality, shows that he knows what he is doing. It will be easily understood that where you have to cart poles a distance of a couple hundred miles, it might easily double the cost.


William Rees Brock: Is this work let by contract ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is let by contract as a rule.


William Rees Brock: Have you any means of checking whether or not you are charged too much ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Oh yes; there are men accustomed to do that sort of work and I think we get a very low price. My difficulty is that the contractors are complaining that they have lost money in some cases. On the short lines, where the settlers find the poles, our own men string the wires.


Mr. MONK.: Was the Canadian Pacific Railway Company asked for an offer to extend this line from their own line at Moosejaw ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: In these sparsely settled districts "on the



[Stage Direction]
north shore of the St. Lawrence, and up in the west, we cannot get the companies to extend their lines. Where settlement is coming in a telegraph line is found to be a great convenience, as the settlers are a long way from the railway and other conveniences.
Frederick Debartzch Monk: There is no doubt that telegraphic communication should be established, but I question whether the receipts are sufficient to indemnify the government for the expenditure. If the receipts are as considerable as my hon. friend says, it is probable that the Canadian Pacific Railway Telegraph Company would have been prepared to undertake to build this line without any expenditure whatever to the country. My hon. friend is aware that the telegraph line to the Yukon cost us a considerable sum. Indeed, there were rival companies competing for the privilege of building that line, and offering the most favourable conditions to the government, including the control of rates and free transmission to the government itself. Under these circumstances, it was a very questionable step.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend will see that this is not analogous to that. My hon. friend is perfectly right in saying that it would pay the 'company to extend a line here, but they will not do so. As I said before, owing to the increase of settlement in the country, the time appears to be arriving when the expenses will commence to be met by receipts.
Kamloops-Nicola telephone line, re-setting of poles and general repairs, $1,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This vote is called for by the general superintendent of telegraphs to provide for the resetting of poles and general repairs on this line, which is sixty-seven miles long.


George Taylor: Is Mr. Charleson superintending this line ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, he has just returned to Ottawa from the Yukon.


George Taylor: He is still in the employ of the government ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.
Vancouver Island-Salt Spring Island telephone line-extension, $900.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This vote is to provide for estimates submitted by the general superintendent of telegraph lines to construct this line 'eight miles further on Salt Spring Island. He reports that if the line is exftnded as proposed, it will be so much utilized ns to prove self-sustaining.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I would like to know from the hon. minister if there is any idea on the government side of the House that
the Anglo-American Telegraph Company hold a monopoly of the telegraphic communication between Prince Edward Island and the mainland ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend the Minister of Justice has stated that the government assume that the company have no monopoly, and have been acting accordingly during the present session of parliament, that the company have filed a statement with the government claiming under the contract that they have a monopoly, and that the matter is now under the consideration of the Department of Justice.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Does the government propose to take any action to redress the grievances of the people of Prince Edward Island to which we have been calling attention several times during this session, and for years past ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: I made a statement in reference to this matter a few minutes ago, and perhaps it would be as well for my hon. friend to bring it up again in a day or two, when there will be an opportunity ; and in the interval I will look into the papers as far as possible, and if I can make a statement of any value to the House, I shall be glad to do so. I have not yet been able to look into the papers.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I might refer the hon. Minister of Justice to a speech delivered by the Hon. Senator Ferguson in the Senate a few days ago, in which he reviewed the situation from the beginning.


Peter Macdonald: I would draw the attention of the hon. member to the fact that the discussion on this question is quite irrelevant to this item. He cannot go into a discussion of the monopoly in Prince Edward Island under an item in reference to Vancouver Island.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I understood that w*e could discuss any system of government telegraphs under the question of government telegraphs, which is now before the House. I do not wish to go into a lengthy discussion of this Prince Edward Island telegraphic communication, as the Minister of Justice says he will look into the matter, and we shall have an opportunity to discuss it later on. But I wish to refer to the fact that Senator Ferguson took this matter ut>
in the Senate a few days ago and dealt with it from the beginning, throwing a good deal of light on the contract and on the decision given in regard to the monopoly, on an appeal from a Bill which was passed in this House regulating marine telegraphs in 1874, when the English authorities discountenanced any idea of a monopoly between the island and the mainland. If the Minister of Justice will bring the matter up at a later date during this session, and will let us know what the intention of the govern-

ment is in regard to it, we will let it drop for tlie present.
Arbitrations and awards, including payments authorized, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Civil Service Act, $5,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is to enable the department to pay the expenses of investigations and necessary arbitrations in connection with claims. We find that we can often settle these claims by having some of our own officials or outside experts to arbitrate between the parties, and in that way save a great deal of money.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the reason of this reference to the Civil Service Act ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Some of the officials of the government might be more competent to undertake this work than outsiders, and out of this money we will pay their expenses when they are sent away from headquarters.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Extra pay besides their salaries ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Hardly extra pay. If these disputes can be settled by our own officials it will be very much cheaper to use them than to engage outsiders.


Richard Blain: Are there any cases pending at the present time ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am sorry to say there are some claims. These are often small matters, but they give a good deal of trouble. There are continually disputes between the architect, the engineers in charge and the contractors. I am sure that by having an item like this, we shall save a good deal to the country.


Uriah Wilson: Does this cover the commissions to investigate ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: A small commission will be paid out of this.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the nature of the dispute ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Questions of constructions of contracts and specifications. My hon. friend will know from experience that difficulties are continually arising, and it saves a great deal of trouble and expense to have these matters amicably settled.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: If this is not to be a gratuity to the civil service but merely to cover expenses, when they are employed on investigations, wliy do you insert the words ' notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Civil Service Act.'


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Very often the disputes are left to the decision of a man of experience in another department, and a small allowance would not Mr. LEFURGEY.
be out of the way for the trouble and expense.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Will this amount of $5,000 be paid to nobody else but civil servants ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Occasionally we may go outside the service. The contractor might think that a government employee was biassed, but we find it less expensive to employ a civil servant, when the contractor will consent.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: For my part, although this is a vague vote, I would not object to having it employed in remunerating the civil service if necessary.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have the same vote every year in the Railway Department, and we find that it has worked to advantage.
Chief engineer's office-salaries of engineers, draughtsmen, and . clerks, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $14,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is an additional amount required for 1903-4. The reason the words ' notwithstanding anything to the contrary of the Civil Service Act ' are inserted is because a great many of these civil servants are technical officers and do not come under the Civil Service Act.


Mr. COCHRANE.: If they do not, why insert these words ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Because under the Civil Service Act we could not pay over $400 a year, and these technical officers have salaries averaging from $1,000 to $3,000 a year. Even the chief engineer of the department comes under this vote.


Edward Cochrane: I thought the hon. minister informed the committee that these were officers who did not come under the Civil Service Act.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They do come under the Act unless the vot% is taken with this provision. The Auditor General would not pay them unless they had the vote taken in this way. The chief engineer could not draw his salary otherwise.
Surveys of headwaters of the Ottawa river and tributaries with a view of devising a scheme for the regulation of the water levels of the upper reaches of these streams so as to afford increased facilities for navigation purposes, the descent of timber, &c., $20,000.


Edward Frederick Clarke: On whose recommendation is this expenditure being made ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: A large deputation of the parties interested waited upon the Premier and the government some time ago and made representations with regard to this matter. In this connection I may say that the Dominion

received very considerable revenue which would be increased if the works would be carried out as urged by this deputation. A survey was promised with the view of devising the scheme for the regulation of the water level on the upper reaches of the stream.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: What is the estimated cost of the work ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is estimated by the chief engineer of the department that this is the lowest amount for which the work can be done. It is a very important question, and the information to be gained is stich information as the public should have.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What is it estimated that the total cost will be ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is estimated that the cost will be covered by this vote.


Edward Hackett: Is this the first appropriation of this kind ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: So far as my information goes, this is the first appropriation for this purpose.


Edward Hackett: What is the need for It?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The country receives a very considerable revenue from these water-ways, and representations have been made to the government by the parties interested that very great improvements should be made. Qualified engineers will be sent out to see whether or not this is a practical proposition.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What counties is this in ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Principally, I think, in Wright, Pontiac and Renfrew.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It seems to me I heard that at the time the representatives of the lumbermen waited on the government they submitted a scheme which would render surveys unnecessary and merely call for the execution of certain works.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The chief engineer informs me that they did not submit any detailed scheme. In a general way they pointed out the advantages to be derived if a scheme could be devised to carry out the idea they proposed. The chief engineer reported to me that it was necessary to make the surveys, and this estimate is to defray the cost.


Edward Hackett: This seems a very large amount. Can the work not be done for less ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There is a good deal of territory to go over, and much time will be spent by a considerable staff of engineers. The chief engineer
Informs me that it will require at least four parties to do the work in one season, so my hon. friend (Mr. Hackett) will see that this is not a large estimate. I have no personal knowledge of the matter, but this is done on the recommendations of the officials of the department.


Edward Frederick Clarke: When did the deputations wait on the government ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The last deputation was on the 30th of May.


James Clancy: Has the hon. minister any estimate of the probable cost of the undertaking Contemplated ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No. The object of the survey is to obtain the levels, because it would be a great mistake to go into any of these works until we have a fair knowledge whether it is practically as represented, and what advantage we shall derive, and what the cost is likely to be.


Richard Blain: Will these surveys be conducted by officers of the department ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That was my intention, to send out the best officers we have in the department at the head of these parties. This I would do for two reasons. First, because they have some knowledge of the matter ; and, secondly, because we should have their services at a less cost than that of others.


Richard Blain: May we expect the report of the surveyors at the next session ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, it will be a year from next session probably before we have the report.


Mr. OSLER.: Have the government no knowledge on this subject now ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No information. My hon. friend (Mr. Osier) knows that the districts to be surveyed are a long way from headquarters and in the unsettled parts of the country.


Edmund Boyd Osler: How does the matter come up now ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There is a great deal more use for the power than there was.


Edmund Boyd Osler: This is to devise ' a scheme for the regulation of the water levels, so as to afford increased facilities for navigation purposes, the descent of timber, &c.'


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend is aware that at certain seasons, when the water is low, the city of Ottawa, for instance, is very much interested in the question of this water-power. It is important to see that we have water enough for navigation and still use water to provide power.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Wliat stretch of country is it proposed to cover ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I would not like to say off-hand, but, speaking under correction, about 175 or 200 miles.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Have any of these water privileges been disposed of by the government within the last twelve months ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: So far as I am aware, they were all disposed of years ago.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I speak of the privileges far up on the river. Have any of these been disposed of ?	.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Not to my knowledge.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I would like to get a little more light on the subject. Is it to aid the lumbermen that these expenditures are made ? Is it to develop and make more permanent the water-powers, the privilege of which has been secured by private parties ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That is one of the


Edward Frederick Clarke: Is it not an extraordinary thing for the House to be asked to vote $20,000 to improve these privileges that do not belong to the Crown ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They belong to the Crown, but have been leased to these parties.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Will the lessees pay an increased indemnity to the Crown because of the work contemplated ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: If we went on with the work, certainly. If we did not receive an increased revenue, we would not go on with the work.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I understand the minister to say that this vote is asked for the purpose of making surveys and obtaining the levels of the river with a view to constructing works to give a more equable supply of water in the Ottawa river ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, for regulating the water.


Edward Frederick Clarke: If this is done primarily to advantage private persons, I think they ought to contribute some of the cost.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: For general navigation also. It is a proper work for the government to undertake when they are to receive a revenue from it. The discussion now going on would be in place if it was proposed to go on with any of these works.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Is this .$20,000 to be expended entirely on surveys ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


Edward Frederick Clarke: I still think that if these powers have been leased, the expense of the survey ought to be paid partly by those who are to benefit by the construction of the work.


George Taylor: I understood the minister to say a moment ago that we derived large revenues from these works. I have looked carefully into the public accounts, and fail to find one of these works that produces any revenue. They appear to be like the canals, it costs two or three dollars to collect one dollar of revenue that you get from any of these timber slides and booms. I would like the minister to point out a few of these works that are producing a revenue over and above expenditure.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think we receive at the present time between $70,000 and $80,000 per annum from the works to be affected by these improvements.


John Dowsley Reid: I see by the Auditor General's Report, page W-51, that a sum of $700 has been paid to Henry A. F. MacLeod, civil engineer, for completing unfinished plans and profiles of the Ottawa river survey, made in the autumn of 1900 and the winter of 1901. That would lead us to believe that there had been a survey going on of the Ottawa river.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That has nothing at all to do with the object of this vote. That was in connection with the Georgian Bay canal.


John Dowsley Reid: I see also that we voted in main estimates, under the head of miscellaneous surveys and inspections, $50,000. Now, I understood at the time that that was to cover all surveys of any kind that would be made by the Department of Public Works. Now, that $50,000 is a very large amount. I understand that the department has a regular staff that does this work, and therefore I suppose that the minister would simply take a staff away from one work to another; or is it the intention to employ an outside staff independently of those that have been employed in the department for some time ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: That survey as was explained at the time, was part of the ordinary work of the department. We could not apply any part of that money for special work of this kind. We would utilize the staff we have now in the department so far as we could. But to undertake a work of this kind requires some extra assistance.


John Dowsley Reid: If the hon. minister sent an engineer and a few men to make a survey of any work under his department, not only in the Ottawa river but in any other part of the country, I see no reason why they should not be paid out of that $50,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have work in the department that requires all that vote, we could not undertake this work under that item.


John Dowsley Reid: If he is going to employ an additional staff of engineers to do this work over and above the regular staff, I can quite understand that he requires a certain amount. But it did seem to me that $20,000 was a large amount for surveys.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I cannot offer any opinion as to that. 1 have asked for this amount on the careful report of the engineer, endorsed by Mr. Gobeil, the chief of the department. There is no object in asking for a vote greater than is required.


John Dowsley Reid: Have there been any petitions presented asking for this to be done ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, I have stated several times that a deputation waited upon the government on the 30th .of May last, composed of certain of the largest business men in this district, men interested in the Ottawa Valley. I cannot give their names at present, but they are well known in this district. They made such representations about the importance of this work that the Premier asked me to make provision for this survey.


Mr. AVERY.: Were these men on the deputation lumbermen ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Principally lumbermen, including Mr. Booth, Mr. Edwards, and others whose names I do not remember. I was present only for a few moments myself, on account of another meeting I had to attend. But it was certainly a very large and influential deputation and after hearing that deputation the right hon. Prime Minister asked me to make provision for having this work carried out.


Edward Cochrane: Would this scheme interfere with the Georgian bay canal ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It would not interfere, but it would afford very valuable information if it was thought necessary to undertake that scheme.


Edward Cochrane: I do not think it would hurt the Georgian bay canal scheme, but could this project of raising the levels of the upper. Ottawa be carried out as well as the Georgian bay canal scheme ? Could you interfere with the levels of the Ottawa river if the Georgian bay canal were constructed ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It could not possibly injuriously affect it. My hon. friend has asked if this scheme can be carried out if the Georgian bay canal should prove a practicable proposition. The chief engineer says, yes, that it will help it.


Melzar Avery: How far up do you intend to survey the tributaries of the river so as to form basins to regulate the*level of the water ?	*


Richard Blain: Is there such a work as this constructed in any part of Canada or in any part of the United States ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There is a work on the Trent river, and there are works in the province of Quebec which they have found to be of great advantage in connection with some of the streams there. They are under the jurisdiction of the provincial government.


Melzar Avery: Would it not interfere with some of the lumbermen above the Ottawa river where they have slides and booms made to bring their logs down, by raising the water, and thus causing it to back up so that they could not get a sufficient flow of water 1


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My object in getting this information is to know whether it would interfere with any one's rights. The question will have to' be considered as to how it will affect any rights that may exist. It would not do to make improvements if they were going to injuriously affect interests upon other parts of the river.


Richard Blain: What success has followed the investment of capital in similar works on the Trent river ? Have the parties been satisfied with the amount of money that has been received from the investment ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: These works were erected on the Trent river some years ago and they are under another department. I was asked the question as to whether there were any similar works in existence, and I just recollected these on the Trent river.


Edmund Boyd Osler: I am a great believer in having an investigation made before money is expended, and I am very glad to learn that in one small case at all events the government are of that opinion. It is a wise and proper thing to have a most thorough investigation made in connection with the waters of the upper Ottawa, but the hon. minister made the statement just now that a deputation composed largely of lumbermen had waited upon the government and that it was at the instigation practically of these gentlemen that this item had been put in the estimates.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I said that I understood it was as a result of the representations they had made.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Yes. The Minister of Public Works also said that he thought that the government derived a revenue of $70,000 a year from the lease of these water-powers. I would like very much indeed to


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I gave the information furnished by the deputy minister.


Edmund Boyd Osler: I think it would be very interesting if we had the details of that. Perhaps the hon. minister could not give them now.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, but I would be very pleased to ask that a statement be made out, and I will bring it down probably in a couple of days.


Edmund Boyd Osler: If the government make this investigation it would be very useful to the lumbermen and all those who are interested in the trade of the Ottawa river, although I hope the government are not going to give these lumbermen or any one else the use of the valuable privileges that may be ascertained to exist there as a result of this survey, without putting them up to public competition ; because, if they do, I think it will show that this is merely a scheme to enable some individual lumbermen to pay the expense of enabling them to acquire cheaply the valuable water-powers of the Ottawa river. The government should let these and other water-powers by tender, and only for a short time. These water-powers are going to be enormously valuable. I hope the government will not consider for a moment the alienating of any of the water-powers that exist on the upper Ottawa.


Edward Cochrane: Would the hou. minister tell us where those works on the Trent river are ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: At the head-waters of the Trent. The matter came before me in connection with some claim of the Gilmour firm some time ago. In regard to what my hon. friend from West Toronto (Mr. Osier) has said I quite agree with the position he has taken. If as a result of this survey, it is found that a great improvement can be made, I think every consideration should be given to the question as to how these water-powers should be disposed of. .1 agree with the view of my hon. friend that the country is entitled to see that it gets the greatest possible revenue that is to be had from these water-powers in open competition.
Mr. REID (Grenville. I think it is necessary to have a survey of the river, and I am surprised to learn that an investigation of this kind has not been undertaken before now. I would like to ask the hon. minister if it is really a fact that we have not a chart of the Ottawa river for navigation purposes up to the head of the river. Suppose I went into the department to get a chart


Edmund Boyd Osler: I in order that a steamer might be run to the head waters of the Ottawa, would the department have to admit that there never had been a survey made, and that they could give no information whatever as to the depth of the water on the upper Ottawa ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We have some information as to the stream itself, as far as navigation is concerned, but no regular chart. I am told by the deputy and by the chief engineer, who have been for many years in the department, that we have no information of that kind.


Edward Hackett: What does the minister mean by the ' head waters of the Ottawa river.'


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I understood by looking at the maps that it might be somewhere around Mattawa. I do not know how much further north it goes.


Edward Hackett: The minister displays a good deal of ignorance about the head waters of the Ottawa river. Twenty years ago I travelled twenty miles beyond that, and did not reach the head waters. What scheme lias the government in mind with regard to this matter 7


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I cannot hear the hon. gentleman.


Edward Hackett: Then there is the peculiarity that I cannot hear the Minister of Public Works and he cannot hear me. What part of the upper Ottawa does he intend improving 7


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend from Nipissing (Mr. Mc-Cool), says that we can go 500 miles before we get to the head waters of the Ottawa.


Edward Hackett: It is above Slattawa then 7


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes, a long way. I was speaking as the crow flies, but it is a very winding river, and anyhow I do not think that so far as this vote is concerned, that distance makes much difference. Requests have been made to the department for extensive improvements on the Ottawa river, and its tributaries for the purpose of navigation, and to maintain the water-power. I have asked for this vote on the advice altogether of the technical officers of the department. I submit that it would not be a business-like proceeding to ask parliament for any considerable amount of expenditure without having surveys made, and if possible the estimated cost.


William Rees Brock: Why do you not appiy that principle to the Grand Trunk Pacific 7


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: One at a time ; I am responsible for this.


William Rees Brock: These surveys are to benefit the lumbermen, and these improvements would no doubt increase the value of the timber limits. As the timber belongs to the provinces, I contend that an expenditure which would increase the value of the limits should be made by the provinces. It is said that surveys for a railroad through a new country cost about five per cent of the value of work to be undertaken, which would make this expenditure $400,000. Of course it will take a much greater sum than that to carry out the improvements the minister has in view, because these are days of very large enterprises, which have to be rushed through, as we have been given to understand that even time does not wait, and, that we cannot say to-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow. It should be remembered that the government have appointed a transportation commission, and would it not be well that that commission might inquire into all these things ? The Ottawa river runs some 500 or 000 miles beyond Ottawa, and I presume that the government are not going to get to its head waters with this survey. There is a vote lower down for a ' transportation commission ' which, I take it for granted, is not the transportation commission which the government has announced with such a flourish of trumpets. I contend that before you go into this expenditure, this matter should be brought before the commission and it should be made one of these things that the government would deign to refer to it, so that in years hence when we come to improve the navigation of the Ottawa river we may have this information in the report of the commission. If the transportation commission is to have nothing to do with our large railways, and with expenditures on our harbours, surely something might be referred to it. I contend that this is one of the things which it would be well to leave in the hands of this transportation commission. I can assure the hon. minister that it will relieve him wonderfully. Instead of having to answer questions for an hour or an hour and a half, lie can with one sweep of his hand say : There is the report of the transportation commission ; read it. It will be of great benefit to the government this session, and to the government that will follow next session. I hope wTe shall be able to make good use of this transportation commission, which the government at present seem to be ignoring.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend has given another strong argument, which I had not thought of, in favour of gathering this information. It was intended to be in connection with the navigation of the river, but it is possible, as my hon. friend says, that in the near future the information may be of great service to the country in connection with a greater scheme of navigation.
41 SI


George Taylor: I have no doubt that this item was put in the estimates for the hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. MeCool) and the deputation he may have come with. No doubt he is acquainted with the district, and can give us some information as to the probable result of the gurvey, and as to whether navigation on these waters can be benefited.


Mr. McCOOL.: I may say that I was not present with the deputation which the minister speaks of, but I know the object of the vote, it is not to build dams alone, but is for a general survey of the river. There is a large body of water at Lake Temiscaming, and it would be difficult to erect a dam there. Then there are Quinze and Expanse lakes, where a very short dam would control the water and give a basin of 100 square miles. At Lake Victoria there are about 200 square miles of water, and the outlet is very narrow. There are good high banks in both cases, so that a very small expenditure would control the water. The dam would hold the water during the spring freshets, and by means of gates its flow could be regulated, so that during the dry summer season there would be a good flow. The lumber industry would be benefited by having a fair flow of water at all seasons for driving purposes. Navigation would also be benefited and a great deal of the expense that has to be borne at present for dredging would be done away with. There is a dredge on Lake Temiscaming at the present time which would not have been necessary if this scheme had been carried out. There is sufficient water at medium height ; but in spring it is higher than is required, while during the dry summer season the water recedes so that it is impossible to get near the shore. I think this is a very wise and necessary expenditure. A survey of the Ottawa river from here to Mattawa was made about fifty years ago by Mr. Walter Shanley. That was the only survey, and it was very carefully made. I read the report of it in the library a short time ago. From Mattawa west there has not been a survey made at all. On Lake Temiscaming, which is really an, expansion of the Ottawa river, there are eight or ten boats, which carry a very large quantity of freight.


Mr. RICHARDSON.: I do not propose to offer an adverse criticism to this appropriation ; but where large public works are contemplated, it is necessary that the fullest information should be given by the government. This grant for surveys evidently contemplates a possible outlay at no distant date of a very large amount of money for improvements on the Otttawa river, and I would like to know what is the net revenue derived from the various franchises that would be benefited by these public works ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: At the present time I am informed the rev-

enue is between $70,000 and $80,000 per annum.


Charles Arthur McCool: If the records are looked over, they will show that though there has been a considerable amount of money spent on building slides and dams on the Ottawa river and its tributaries* the expenditure has been repaid to the government twenty times over. They have been one of the greatest sources of revenue the government have had in the past, considering the amount of money expended.


Robert Lorne Richardson: What would be the probable increase in the revenue from the proposed expenditure ?


Charles Arthur McCool: It is decreasing.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I cannot give any opinion as to the probable increase. The expenditure on these improvements, I presume, would be very large. Before making that expenditure it was thought advisable to have a careful examination and report made by qualified engineers.


James Clancy: We have had a very rosy assurance from the hon. member for Nipis-sing (Mr. McCool) that this is not only a good thing for the country, but a profitable investment. If I understood him correctly, the expenditure has paid its way over and over again. I have not taken the trouble to go over the Auditor General's Report for past years, but I presume that last year would be a fair sample.


Charles Arthur McCool: No, last year would not be. I said the revenue had been falling off.


James Clancy: In the first place, we had the statement of the Minister of Public Works that the revenue last year was some $70,000 or $80,000. I find on page V-394 that the revenue for the Ottawa district was $37,923.23; for the St. Maurice district, $13,565.48 ; and for the Newcastle district, $5,847.22, or, instead of being $70,000 or $80,000, it was $57,335. The expenditure on these services last year was : For the St. Maurice district, including staff and repairs, $51,727 ; for the Ottawa district, $42,182 ; and for the whole service, $201,958. It would seem that hon. gentlemen have been groping in the dark in regard to this question.


Charles Arthur McCool: I did not include the St. Maurice river at all. It did not enter into my calculation. I know nothing about the St. Maurice and am speaking about the Ottawa river, and if you take the accounts that are to be found in the department for the last twenty-five years, you will find that my sstatement is absolutely correct.


James Clancy: If I take the Ottawa river, the hon. gentleman is in the same difficulty, because the expenditure largely exceeded the receipts last year in the Ottawa district alone.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


Charles Arthur McCool: One year would not be a fair test because they may have had large extra expenditure in rebuilding improvements, which I know to have been the case.


James Clancy: I am afraid my hon. friend has been speculating in that way very generally. I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Public Works to state just how this vote came to be in the estimates. Is there any portion of this work which should be properly done by private enterprise ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: On the 30th of May last a very large and influential deputation waited upon the First Minister and represented that the public was very much interested in having some work done there. We felt in the department that we had not the necessary information to ask the House to grant a vote, and for that reason we have suggested that a survey be made and an examination by qualified engineers into the practicability of carrying on the work, and also as to its cost before spending a dollar in connection with it.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman seems to be more cautious in small matters than in large. We have had an expenditure involving some hundreds of millions of dollars undertaken, and the government did not think that the same precaution should be used in both cases. I would ask if the deputation made any financial representation regarding the cost of the work '!


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I think that I might divide the representations made by those people under three headings. First, the regulation of navigation of the river; second, regulating the water so as to bring down the logs; third, regulating the water-powers which are of such great value to this district, supplying, as they do, this House and city with light and water.


James Clancy: Has there been any undertaking by those persons to pay higher rental and to recoup the treasury for its outlay ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, the representations made were solely in the public interest. It will be for us, having charge of the work, to say upon what terms any advantages should be given to parties outside of the general public.


Edmund Boyd Osler: The demand of the deputation was not for surveys but for the expenditure of a large sum and it was the government which suggested that the survey should be first made.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Yes.


Edmund Boyd Osler: What amount was it contemplated that the work would cost ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No one was in a position to make an estimate, but we all know that at that distance the cost would be very considerable.


George Taylor: I understand from the hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. McCool) that only a couple of dams are required, one at the foot of a lake 200 miles long, and another at the foot of another lake one hundred miles long. It would certainly not cost much to put in a couple of dams, but does not the hon. member know that if the water is raised at these outlets, great damage will be done to surrounding land ?


Charles Arthur McCool: Not at this point, because there are no settlements there except a few lumber camps. I repeat that the expenditure will not be very much, though of course the cost of putting in a dam and bringing out supplies will be heavier than in the case of a dam built in this neighbourhood. But the expenditure would not be very large because the mouths at the outlet of those expansions are not very wide or very deep. Then, another point is the Kippewa lake. That, I presume, is another hundred miles. As I am on my feet, I might mention that I have a memorandum showing that the receipts of the Ottawa slides and booms for last year increased by $8,100 over the previous year. I was surprised to learn this as I thought the receipts were falling off year by year. Still another point is that this survey should include work with a view to using the power of the different falls along the Ottawa up to its head. Take, for instance, the Chats, Portage du Fort, Rocher Fendu. Des Joachim. Roches Capitaine, and othgr rapids and falls. I suppose that between here and Lake Temiskamingue, it would be possible to develop 300,000 or 400,000 horse-power.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I was inclined to look favourably on this vote, but since the explanation given by the hon. member for Nipissing, it occurs to me that it is utterly misapplied money. From what I saw when I was in the district of Nipissing a year ago, I think it would be far more useful to spend money in improving the roads for the settlers of that district than in such a work as this. There are other improvements far more needed in Nipissing, such as wharfs, railway facilities and others. If I understood my hon. friend (Mr. McCool) correctly, it is to dam the Ottawa river in such a way as to keep the level of the river higher, this being particularly for the advantage of the lumbermen. The wants of that district are not confined to the lumbermen, and I venture to say that far more useful employment could be found for this money, and the benefits of its expenditure much more generally extended among the inhabitants of the district. My hon. friend knows that the lumbermen are not a penurious class of people. They want improvements so as to
ensure the better floating of their logs, and so they came to the government. If these gentlemen wish to make larger profits out of their business by having a more uniform water level, and wish to saddle the government with the construction of the dams, why should not they bear a certain share of the expenditure by having these surveys made themselves and a reasonable plan placed before the government of the improvements they require ? There is another point, and one to which I would ask my hon. friend's particular attention. If the object is merely to dam certain indicated portions of the Ottawa river, surely it does not require $20,000 for that ? If the minister will inquire in the city of Montreal or, no doubt, in the city of Toronto, he will find competent engineers who will make a report as to the work necessary for damming the river and the cost of that work for far less than $20,000. The survey is not going to be made this winter, and there will be plenty of time if the money is voted next session. I understand that we are going to have a session in the early part of the winter to repair some of the mistakes of hon gentlemen opposite. Then we can vote the money with a better knowledge of what we are doing. But I say that for one-quarter of this sum the minister will find engineers to carry out the surveys for this work as the hon. member for Nipissing has explained it. Under the circumstances, it seems to me that this is not only an expenditure for dams, but a damnable expenditure.


Charles Arthur McCool: The hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) seems to be under the impression that I have some special interest in this vote. I tell him frankly that I did not know even that it was in the estimates until this evening. And, as to benefiting Nipissing particularly, that is not the case. Not one of the dams referred to wouid be built in Nipissing, but most of the work would be done in the hon. gentleman's own province, for nearly all the dams I hav e spoken of are in the province of Quebec. But this is a national work. The hon. gentleman need not imagine that I am advocating it because it is only going to benefit Nipissing or any friends of mine.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: If the work is to be done in the province of Quebec, the river being between Quebec and Ontario, it must extend into Ontario also. But if the work is to be confined to the province of Quebec, I can tell my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works that we have engineers in the city of Montreal, qualified under the laws of the province of Quebec, who will be able to make a .full and complete report on this subject for less than $5,000. So, what is the use of spending $20,000 ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Had the hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) been

present lie would have heard me explain that this estimate was based on the report of the engineers of the department. It is a question for the Committee to decide whether to take the advice of my hon. friend, who knows practically nothing of the work to be done, the miles to be covered, or the time likely to be occupied, or that of the experienced officers of my department. The hon. gentleman may be right, but for my part, I would rather act on the report of the engineers of the Public Works Department.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Is this money expended with a view to ultimately adopting the Ottawa and Georgian bay canal scheme ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The information gained might be used in connection with that scheme, as suggested by the hon. member for Centre Toronto (Mr. Brock). But no such idea was in( view at the time of preparing this estimate.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: The hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Murray) has on several occasions presented the claims of the Ottawa and Georgian bay canal in a way that enlisted my sympathies to a certain extent. And I have often wondered why the people in Ontario did not insist on opening up the Ottawa river with a view to determining its value in connection with the transportation routes of Canada. If this is a mere local expenditure made on .behalf of the lumber interests in Ontario, I should be opposed to it. But if it is intended to bring information to this House to enable us to know whether the Georgian bay canal is feasible in the interests of the' whole of Canada, the expenditure might be justified. The minister has said it will be useful in this connection only In an indirect way. In that case the expenditure ought not to be made, for it could not be made intelligently with a view to getting that information, unless the engineers were so instructed. To go up the Ottawa and build certain dams which will yield only a certain benefit to the lumber interest, is a thing, I think, we should not be called upon to do. But if, in the larger interests of Canada, it would help to solve the transportation problem, I would support the vote. I have on many occasions, in listening to the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Murray), while speaking of the Georgian bay canal, been struck with the importance of the Ottawa river as a means of communication. I think it should play a very important part in the transportation route .from the Georgian bay to the seapoi'ts, and if the money were voted for that purpose, and engineers were instructed to develop that idea and give us the latest information, I yyould feel like incurring the vote. But if. on the other hand, it is merely in favour of a local interest, I think we ought not to make the expenditure.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Certainly very valuable information will be given in connection with that project.


John Dowsley Reid: When I read this item I supposed it was to make a complete survey of the Ottawa river, and I asked the minister if that was the intention, and the minister replied that it was the intention to get a chart of the Ottawa river. Now the hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. McCool) stands up and assures us that this is for building dams on the Ottawa river.


Charles Arthur McCool: The hon. gentleman is ascribing words to me that I never uttered. I did not say that the money was for that purpose, I said that it was the intention of the lumbermen who urge this survey, to ascertain the best means of regulating the spring freshets. I gave my own opinion that that could only be accomplished by dams at the points I named.


John Dowsley Reid: Then the member for Nipissing states that this money is to be expended merely for surveys in view of building dams, and not for the Ottawa river at all.


Charles Arthur McCool: I did not say that at .all.


John Dowsley Reid: Did lie not state that this money was to be expended for surveys for dams ?


Charles Arthur McCool: No, I did not.


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. gentleman has just stated that the lumbermen wanted it.


Charles Arthur McCool: That was their intention.


John Dowsley Reid: That this money was to be used for surveys for dams. *


Charles Arthur McCool: I did not make any such statement. I said this money was appropriated for the purpose, as stated by the Minister of Public Works, of surveying the Ottawa river. The deputation asked for some improvements to regulate the flow of the water, and that is what induced the minister to put this amount in the estimates -to make a complete survey of the Ottawa river.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It looks to me worse and worse. It seems this money is required to get from experts a report as to the best places in the upper stretches of the Ottawa where the river may be dammed, and the only men who are going to get the benefit of this are the lumbermen, they are going to get all the benefit of these expert surveys upon which the government will be asked to make a large expenditure for dams They will get the benefit of all these researches as to the best places where the river may be dammed. These people know exactly where the best water-powers will be, and so the whole of this expenditure is for the lumbermen on the upper Ottawa. Their

trade will be benefited and they will have water-ways of great value. This is not a proper application of public money.


David Henderson: I confess I have had some difficulty in ascertaining the exact purpose for which this money is asked. However, from what 1 learn in this discussion,
I take it for granted that the object of this vote is to devise some system of constructing dams, booms and slides on the river Ottawa and its tributaries, for the purpose of aiding the lumbermen who may go up there and purchase large tracts of timber and float it down the river. Now, if the timber that is to be floated down the Ottawa and its tributaries is still vested in the Crown, still belongs to the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, I think these provinces should construct these improvements for the purpose of making an outlet for the timber which belongs to them. If the property has passed out of the hands of the provinces into the hands of private individuals, who bought it with all these obstructions in the way of navigation, all these difficulties iu the way of getting out their timber, and consequently would buy this timber at a very much reduced price, I do not see that we are called upon at all to improve the river Ottawa and its tributaries for the sole advantage of the men who have purchased the timber at a low price when these facilities were not provided. Now, there is the larger question, to my mind, of provincial rights. We are told that these booms and slides are a profitable investment. If they are, very possibly we may find the provinces complaining that we are trespassing on their rights by constructing these slides and booms and taking away the revenue from them. The provinces are at the present time very jealous of this parliament. We noticed that in the chartering of a railway a short time ago between the cities of Hamilton and Toronto, when they thought their rights were invaded. I think we should be very watchful not to invade the rights of the provinces. In this instance I fear we would be invading their rights, more especially if they are going to obtain a revenue from these improvements, as I understand from the hon. member for Nipissing that they will be a profitable investment. I have some doubts about that. I have looked at the revenue derived from booms and slides that have been constructed. Reference has been made to the St. Maurice river and the amount of money that accrued to the government last year from the large expenditure on that river. But we forget that we are yearly expending large sums of money in order to get that small amount of revenue.
I think that during the present session we have voted 850,000 for improvements and boom works to facilitate the floating and storage of logs on the St. Maurice district. That is about four times as much as the
revenue that was derived last year from that district. I very much fear that the prophesies of the hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. McCool) will not be realized if the results are no more gratifying than they have been in the province of Quebec on that river. But, I think, first, that the whole question just depends upon what the object of this expenditure is. Who is to be benefited V If the province of Ontario and the province of Quebec are to be benefited, if their timber is to be increased in value by reason of these improvements, then let Ontario and Quebec construct these works for the purpose of giving increased value to the timber which they own. If we construct these public works at the expenditure of $400,000 or $500,000 it will practically be an additional subsidy given to the provinces, and we will get nothing at all for it. If the property has passed out of the hands of the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and belongs to private individuals who bought it with all these obstructions in the way of getting it out, and bought it at probably one half of what it would have been worth if these improvements had been made, let these men pay for these improvements, and not ask us to spend the money of the people to benefit private individuals. The hon. Minister of Public Works told us that a large deputation had waited upon the government. I would like to know who composed that deputation. I think if we had the names of the gentlemen who composed that deputation we would find that it comprised the names of many gentlemen who are large holders of timber berths, who purchased these timber berths with these difficulties in the way, and who expect the government to use the money which belongs to the people of the whole Dominion simply to provide improvements to assist them in getting out the timber which they purchased at a low price by reason of those difficulties and that this proposed expenditure is to personally benefit themselves. I do not see the propriety of voting this appropriation at the present time. Although the sum was asked for the purpose of getting information, I think it would be well for the government to wait and see whether it is wise to go any farther. I think we had better consider whether there is any reasonableness in the inquiry which it is proposed to make..


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: These are Dominion works. These works were transferred to the Dominion at the time of confederation, and they are under its jurisdiction. The Dominion is charged with the maintenance of these works, and collects the revenue from them. My hon. friend (Mr. Henderson) knows very well that Ontario and Quebec do not collect the revenue. Could we undertake any great national work which is not for the benefit of the people of Canada 1 The people of

Ontario and Quebec form a part of this Dominion, and a great national work such as this, I think, would he for the general benefit of Canada. My hon. friend refers to those who may own the timber limits, and he says that they should pay for these improvements. They complain that the fees are too high now. How that may be I do not know, but certainly we do collect a very considerable revenue. My hon. friend im stances the work at the St. Maurice river. Probably if the same care had been taken beforehand to make a survey such as we propose before the work was undertaken, we might have had better work for less money. I am not saying that is so, but it is always better to have information before undertaking a work of this description. I think, having removed the fears of my hon. friend as to who owns these works, and having pointed out the good results that will flow from such an expenditure as we propose to make, he should withdraw his opposition. I could understand the criticism if we were asking for a vote to carry out any of these improvements. Then it would be for each ho'n. member to express his opinion as to whether the improvements were of such a national character as to warrant us in going into them. But we are not doing that to-night. Here is a large question affecting the navigation of the Ottawa river. We hear the hon. member for .Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) hour after hour declaiming about the great necessity for improving water navigation, yet, when the slightest effort is made in that direction, it is denounced as a damnable expenditure. It shows that we have hon. gentlemen in this House who have not given the matter very much consideration, and that there is on their part a great deal of talk with very little action. This is a work of great national importance, covering a vast area of territory, and I submit it to the committee, and if the majority think differently from me in regard to the question, they can refuse to pass the vote. This investigation should Ire made at the earliest possible moment, and it will depend on the report of the engineers as to whether in the opinion of parliament any expenditure should be undertaken upon the improvement of the river.


David Henderson: If. I thought the object of the vote was to improve the navigation of the upper Ottawa. I would think more kindly of it.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 1 would not come to parliament and ask for a vote without saying that it was for a specific purpose. If the report of the engineers is such that the amount involved is greater than the benefits to be derived, that will be a question for parliament to determine, but certainly it would be a great advantage to have that information, if we Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND.
are asked to undertake any of that work in the future.


David Henderson: I do not object to that, but I understand that the object of the expenditure even if it is recommended by these engineers, will not be to improve the navigation of the upper Ottawa, or of its tributaries, but to obstruct it by the construction of dams across it, so that instead of the river


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend is misinformed. The conclusion to be derived from the hon. gentleman's remarks is that we are asking for the money under false pretenses. The statement in the vote itself shows that the improvement of the facilities for navigation is one of the objects in view. The second object, the descent of timber, is incidental thereto, and surely the improvement of the river is in the interest of the country.


David Henderson: I do not insinuate that the hon. gentleman was asking for the money under false pretenses, but as the discussion has gone on, I have learned that it is not so much for the purpose of improving the navigation of the river as practically to obstruct the course of the river in such a way as to destroy it for the purposes of navigation, and that these obstructions will be used in the interests of private individuals. As I said before, in so far as I know, they have acquired large interests in that section of the country which will be vastly improved in value if this expenditure is made.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: When application is made to the Department of Public Works, such as it is necessary to make under the law by private individuals or corporations, to make certain improvements on this river, how is the department to know whether they shall be allowed to do so or not if it has no knowledge as to the waters that are to be affected ? This is very important and very necessary information to be acquired by the Dominion of Canada looking to the protection and improvement of this great river.


David Henderson: I am not finding fault with the hon. gentleman taking this step, but what I do doubt is the propriety of doing anything even after he has obtained the information. I have very great doubt as to the propriety of the Dominion government expending public money there at all. In this matter we are invading provincial rights. We are interfering with works that ought to be undertaken by the provinces. If the property has passed out of the hands of the provinces, and has been acquired by private individuals at a time when no improvements were made on the river stretches, and at low prices on account of the difficulties of getting that timber out, then I do not see why we should be called upon to spend large sums of money for the

purpose of making valuable the property that was purchased at a very low price.


Edward Hackett: On which of the tributaries of the Ottawa are these improvements to be made ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am not able to give that information. If my bon. friend is in earnest, he must know that there are a great many tributaries of the Ottawa that have never been surveyed, and I suppose not even named. The improvements will depend upon the report of surveyors. I do not say that any improvements will be made at all, but it is important that we should have information before we expend any money.


Edward Hackett: I have been asking for a survey from O'Leary station to the west shore of the island which would cost only $1,000, but I have always been refused. While you are spending this $20,000 to survey an unexplored country, you might make that survey in Prince Edward Island and build a wharf there too.


James Clancy: The Ottawa river and its tributaries have had improvements many years ago, and they have served the purpose since. What new conditions have arisen which call for further improvements V


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The Ottawa river works were started forty or fifty years ago and we have urgent applications for different works, and we want to get information. The new conditions are the general development of the country. J


James Clancy: I understand that an interprovincial river, as the Ottawa is for some distance, would come within the jurisdiction of this parliament, but has the minister considered how far it devolves upon us to undertake work in any province ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: We would not think of intruding on provincial territory without arranging with the province.
. Mr. CLANCY. I have no doubt that the provinces would not object to an expenditure of money by the Dominion.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Has the hon. gentleman any doubt that the improvement of navigable rivers is under the jurisdiction of this parliament ?


James Clancy: As I understand it, this is not a navigable river, but it is proposed to make it so.


The AIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is navigable now.


James Clancy: What is the draft of the boats that ply on that river ?


The AIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Aly information is, that the Ottawa is navigable for 40 miles above Ottawa where we have made improvements. Some of the boats draw from six to eight feet more or less.


George Taylor: The minister should take the advice of the hon. member from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Alonk) and drop this vote for the present session, because he does not purpose sending surveyors out this time of the year.


The AIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is just the time.


George Taylor: The hdn. member for Nipissing (Air. McCool) and the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Murray) who are sitting beside the minister, know all about this region, and they can give the minister more information than he will get by sending out a band of surveyors, costing $20,000. Probably these gentlemen accompanied the deputation that wen't to the minister to ask for this vote.


The AIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The hon. gentleman should accept the word of the hon. member for Nipissing (All*. McCool) that he did not accompany the deputation, and did mot know the vote was in the estimates until to-night.


George Taylor: I accept that, but perhaps the member for Pontiac cannot say so much. The hon. member (Mr. AIcCool) knows these waters very well, and lie can give all the information that the minister wants. I would like to hear what the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Alurray) has to say.


Mr. AIURRAY.: I may say, that like the hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. AIcCool), I did not accompany any deputation. I am not specially interested in the vote before the House ; but I do know, from my experience as a business man, that the lumber industry is very much interested in these improvements on the upper Ottawa. The hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat knows as well as I do that the lumbermen have to go further back to the various tributaries to get out their lumber ; and they get it out late in the season, when the water is low. I do not think there should be any objection to the government expending the appropriation for the purpose named.


George Taylor: The hon. member for Nip-issing (Mr. AIcCool) says that the construction of two dams would do the whole business ; and $20,000 which the government are proposing to spend on surveys, if spent on the work itself, would probably construct those dams.
To provide for expenditure in connection with a transportation commission, $25,000.


The AIINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There has been so much discussion with regard to this transportation commission that I do not know that there is any further information which I can give upon the subject. Perhaps the commission would have been-organized before this but for the long delay in getting the vote before the House. Every member has a copy of the Order in

Council providing for the commission. I am of opinion that good l-esults will come from the investigation.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The government, having dealt with the transportation problem before getting the information have done away entirely with the need of a commission, and now I do not know what it is required or expected to do.


David Henderson: I understand that this sum of $25,000 is not to pay the salaries of the commissioners, but only to provide for the expenditures in connection with the inquiry. How long is this supposed to last ? Will it pay for a full year or only a portion of a year ? I think we are entitled to some explanation as to when the commissioners are expected to begin their work, and what its scope will be.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I would ask my hon. friend to read the Order in Council, which states better than I could at this time the scope of the inquiry. They will necessarily gather statistics and information at various points in the Dominion from the Atlantic ports to the ports on the lakes, and this vote is to cover the expenditure that they may find necessary for secretaries and for technical and statistical information.


David Henderson: I read the Order in Council of the 19th May last, and I thought that one special object of the appointment of this commission was to deal with the question of transportation from the great west to the east. The question has now been settled by the government themselves, and we do not want a commission to deal with it. They have agreed to spend from $100,000,000 to $150,000,000 in constructing a transcontinental railway to dispose of the whole problem. Consequently if that was the object of appointing the commission, I do not see why $25,000 should be appropriated when the work of the commission has been actually taken out of their hands. I am not going to oppose this vote. I think it is very desirable that the work of this commission should go on. I think a great blunder was committed in not having the commission set to work months ago. If that had been done, possibly many millions of money would have been saved to the people of this country. So let us not hesitate now to appropriate the funds that are necessary to set the commission to work, trusting that good will come from it. I wish not to offer the slightest opposition, but only to express my regret that the government did not take action in this matter many months ago, so that they would have had the recommendations of the commissioners before they had entered on the construction of the transcontinental railway.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I regret that I cannot agree with the hon. member who has just spoken. In view of the action of this par-


Robert Franklin Sutherland: liament on the transportation question during the present session and the fact that we have no scheme before us, I cannot see the need of this commission, nor what work there is for it to do. It seems to me that if there ever was a time when we needed a commission, it was before we took the step which we have taken this session ; but that step having been taken, and the transportation problem having been dealt with. I venture to say that there will be very little change from what has been outlined. It is true, we shall be likely to go on and improve our canals, harbours and waterways to some extent ; we shall have to do that of necessity ; but what other great seheme is to be hatched out by this commission I cannot understand, and I think if we go on with it at present, it will be so much money thrown away.


Mr. LENNOX.: I absolutely oppose, at the present time, the appropriation of one dollar towards this transportation commission. We were all of one mind some months ago as to the desirability of having a transportation commission for the purpose of solving the great transportation question which was then coming up. But after having committed ourselves to an enormous expenditure for the construction of a transcontinental line, after having taken out of the hands of the commission that pressing problem, it would be injudicious to expend this money. It may be quite true that we have many public works in the way of transportation which still require our attention, but there must be a halt called some time in the public expenditure, and in the face of the fact that we have committed ourselves to the construction of a railway which will cost anywhere from one to two hundred million dollars, I do not see why we should go on and spend money on a commission to inquire into the transportation problem which the government has determined to solve without the advice of any commission.


John Dowsley Reid: Like the hon. gentleman who has just sat down, I object to this item. Had the railway Bill not passed, I would not have objected to it, but now7 that the whole question is really settled


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am glad the hon. gentleman is1 so easy to satisfy with regard to the transportation question.


John Dowsley Reid: The government have settled that question in so far as the construction of a railway is concerned.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am glad that the hon. gentleman is pleased with our railway policy.


John Dowsley Reid: I did not say I was, but that the question has been settled and, so far as this item is concerned, I would move that it be struck out.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am disposed to support that motion. Had this commission gone on and done the work intended that it should do when it was promised in the speech from the Throne, I would have said that we were doing the right thing in voting the money, but after the government have committed themselves to an expenditure of $125,000,000 to $150,000,000 for the purpose of effectively dealing with the transportation question, I can see no use for this commission. To vote this money would be locking the stable after the horse is stolen. When we add the salaries of the three commissioners and other expenses to this item, we will find that we will have to pay some $75,000 in the near future to keep these men going, and we will be doing that after the only object for which this commission was intended has been settled. We are practically appointing three men for no purpose whatever and at great expense.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: What will be the salary to each of these commissioners ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is not the intention to pay them any salary, but there will be some allowance paid for their services, depending on the time they will be at work. They will not be salaried men in any sense. The class of men we have appointed are not looking for salaries and never considered that a salary would be paid them.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No doubt somethingl will be paid them for their services.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I suppose some honorarium or something of that kind, but no salary.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: There will be a chairman and two commissioners. What is it intended to allow the commissioners as compensation for their services ? Have any arrangements been made with them ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No, when they meet an arrangement will be made, but I have no idea of considering a salary or that they would ask for a salary -only some allowance to cover their expenses and for the value of the time they give.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not think my hon. friend should play on words. We are now voting an expenditure on this commission which will certainly cost $100,000, at the very least, if it sits one year. And, surely, before we vote that money we are entitled to know some details of the proposed expenditure. First and foremost, we are entitled to know what amount should be paid to the commissioners, whether you call it salary, solatium, indemnity for services, compensation for lost time, honorarium, or anything else.


William Humphrey Bennett: Is it proposed to make a per diem allowance or to pay a Tump s"um 1


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: As I stated, the commission have no;t met and organized. But some sum will be allowed. I do not expect that it will be paid, except as I have stated. This is to cover the expenses of the commission, and it is not my intention to incur a large expenditure in connection with it without further consulting parliament.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But the trouble is that we commence the expenditure. If, later on, we object, we shall be confronted with the argument, as we have been over and over again in other matters, that we should have objected before. That being the case, this is the time to endeavour to stop this expenditure. The minister says he does not intend to allow the commissioners any salary. To use a common expression, that is entirely too thin.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: My hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) misunderstood. I said that no doubt an allowance should be made in accordance with the services rendered. These men would gather certain information and prepare the report.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The country never employs men for such work without paying them handsomely, and no doubt these men will be remunerated on a scale commensurate with that given for similar work. We might as well recognize that at the beginning. But the question with .me is as to the wisdom of paying out this money after having dealt with the transportation question as we have done. It is simply a vote of $25,000 as the beginning of an expenditure that will run up to $100,000. We might as well recognize that that is what we have to face.


John Dowsley Reid: I do not think that any member would object to this or a larger sum if it were necessary to have a commission on the transportation question. But we know that the government have been telling us for months that they have solved the whole transportation problem. If so, what is the use of this commission ? It cannot change the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Bill ; that is settled. I cannot, for the life of me, see what there will be for the commission to do. I believe that this item was put in to hood-wink the people and make them believe the government are carrying out the promise they made early this session to have a commission to solve the transportation question. They think that if they did not put this in they would not be able to defend their action on the Grand Trunk Pacific. Under the circumstances, I have no hesitation in moving that the item be struck out. The motion may not carry, but I believe that it is not fair to vote this item now that the Grand Trunk Pacific legislation has passed this House.


Thomas Murray: This is a preliminary provision for the transportation commission. Hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House laid great stress on this commission, and said that the Grand Trunk Pacific Bill should have been kept back until the report of the commission was received. Surely, these lion, gentlemen will not say that the only transportation question for the country is the Grand Trunk Pacific question ? Is there not the question of transportation by the St. Lawrence water-way ? Is there not the question of transportation by railways other than the Grand Trunk Pacific ? Is there not the question of the Ottawa and Georgian hay canal, in itself sufficient to occupy the attention of a commission ? For my part, I must say that I never took much stock in the idea of a commission, for it seems to me that the people's representatives should settle questions. But the strong opinion of the House seemed to be that there was a need for a commission. Good men have been selected, and this is a preliminary vote to pay for their services. It is not a large amount, considering the character of the work expected of them.
Amendment (Mr. Reid, Grenville) negatived ; yeas 22, nays 40.
Government of the Yukon Territory-additional amount required for expenses in connection with the administration of the Territory, $15,000 ; amount required for the maintenance and construction of roads and bridges in the Territory, $113,490 ; grant to administration of Yukon Territory for construction and maintenance of public buildings for local purposes and settlement of claims in connection with the construction of roads, $113,500-$241,990.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The latter item of $113,000 is really that for which I am asking a vote here. The money of these three items is paid out through the local council of the Yukon.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Has the money been spent already ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: No. This is an allowance to the Yukon council for constructing the works set forth here. My hon. friend will remember that an arrangement was made by which we voted this money to the council, with the understanding that it would be administered better under the local authorities, since the council has become partly appointed and partly elected, than by the department here.
Pelly river bridge at Lethbridge-reconstruction of-to recoup the government of the North-west Territories, $55,000.
Old Man's river bridge at Maeleod-reconstruction of-to recoup the government of the North-west Territories, $29,000.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Both these bridges were carried away by a freshet in May, 1902. and application was made to the department to rebuild them. An examination was made by the engineer, and


John Dowsley Reid: it was thought better to erect more permanent structures than had previously existed. There was some correspondence between the local government and the Dominion as to how the money should be charged, and it was understood that the bridges were to be built by the Dominion.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The item says :	' To
recoup the government of the North-west Territories.'


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 'The construction of these bridges was urged upon us by the local government as a matter of immediate necessity, and they agreed that we should expend the money out of their vote, to be recouped by this government.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: On another item I asked a question this afternoon for a statement of the various items which appear in the different estimates of grants of money for the North-west Territories. We do not know what we are voting in the aggregate, and it is time that we should know that.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The hon. gentleman's request is a very proper one. The deputy made a memorandum, and to-morrow he will have this account made up.
Telegraph lines, British Columbia-working expenses-additional amount required, $2,500.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Are the telegraph lilies self supporting ? Excepting this amount for working expenses, what is the original amount ? What are the telegraph lines costing to-day for maintenance over and above their earnings ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: 1 will give that information on the Yukon vote. Mr. Chairman, we have done a little work at any rate, and perhaps we had better rise.
Some resolutions reported.



ADJOURNMENT-BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved the adjournment of the House.
Frederick Debartzch Monk: Before the House adjourns I would like to state that when the House goes into committee, either to-morrow or on some future day before long, a motion will be made in regard to the expenditure in connection with the taking of the last census. What business does the minister intend to take up to-morrow ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We will continue in Supply, taking Public Works, and after we finish them, Militia.


Samuel Hughes: There was an arrangement that the Militia estimates should come up to-morrow morning. There was an understanding to that effect with

tlie Minister of Militia and Defence. If the lion. Minister of Finance will be good enough to keep his rank and tile in better control than they were this morning we will get on very much more expeditiously with the estimates than we have done to-day.
I would like the arrangement to be carried out to take up the militia estimates tomorrow.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Arrangement with whom ?


Samuel Hughes: With the Minister of Militia.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am most willing and anxious to oblige hon. members. I think there was one item allowed to stand affecting the Yukon and there are some small votes for Quebec which I think we can easily dispose of in the morning and then go on with the militia estimates in the afternoon. If hon. gentlemen want any particular item to stand for discussion I shall be perfectly willing, but, unless there is some object I would like to proceed with my estimates because there have been a great many days during this session taken up with the Public Works estimates.


George Taylor: The hon. Minister of Militia and Defence came over last night and said that he wanted to know if we started his estimates the first thing in the morning it would be possible to get through with them before six o'clock as we are going to adjourn in the evening. My hon. friend from Victoria (Mr. Hughes) said that he had a statement to make and although some other hon. gentlemen also desire to offer some observations, we thought that it would be possible to get through with these estimates in one day if we started early.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: If it will oblige any hon. members, while it causes a great deal of inconvenience to myself, I will agree that the militia estimates shall be taken up.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The hon. Minister of Militia and Defence mentioned to me that he desired to make such an arrangement and I left him to arrange with the hon. Minister of Public Works. Very good: let it be understood that the Militia estimates will be taken up to-morrow.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 11.30 p.m.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. WILSON-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
1.	For how many miles of railway have bonuses or subsidies been voted by parliament during the years 1900, 1901 and 1902 ?
2.	How much money would it amount to each year, figured at minimum rate of $3,200 per mile ?
3.	What amounts of the said bonuses or subsidies have been paid for each of the above years, and up to September 1, 1903 ?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: I think that questions No. 1 and No. 3 are practically the same. No. 3 is perhaps the more comprehensive of the two, and I will answer that :
1.-
New Vote Revote. Total.
Miles.
1900	 S55J
1901		 58S
1902	 Nil
2.-.
1900, 835 miles at $3,200.. .. 30	"	2,500.. ..
9J 865 517	1,103
Nil . Nil
. $2,672,000 00 .	75,000 00
1901,	1,103 miles at $3,200	
1902,	Nil.
3.-
1900-	1901	
1901-	1902	
1902-	1903	
July 1, 1903 to September 1, 1903.. ..

$ 525,371 ''5 218,800 00 578,404 9S Nil.


$1,322,576 73 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE FOR 1903.
Mr. CLANCY asked :: 1.	What was the total amount of revenue collected for the fiscal year 1903, so far as has been ascertained ?
2.	What was the total expenditure for the fiscal year 1903, so far as has been ascertained?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. AV. S. Fielding).: Mr. Speaker, the returns for the last fiscal year, though not exactly and finally closed, may be regarded as practically complete, because any figures that occur later are not likely to make any material change, and therefore I think the statement that I am able to give may betaken as a substantially correct statement of the operations of the year :
Fiscal Year 1902-3.
The returns to 30th September, 1903, show : Revenue on Consolidated Fund..$66,034,108 32
Expenditure on Consolidated Fund. 51,707,172	89
Surplus	$14,326,935	43
Capital expenditure, including railway.
Subsidies, bounty on metals	$10,367,163	01Sinking funds bought	
2,620,588	46

Thursday, October 8, 1903.
Decrease of net debt on the operations of the year	
Further decrease of net debt through adjustment of provincial accounts


$6,580,360 88 3,305,450 24