1903-10-14

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).: The hon. gentleman's question is covered toy a more comprehensive one which is on the Order paper, and to which I will reply in an answer which will contain all the information, except as respects the period from the 1st of July to the 1st of September in the current year. The question of the hon. member for Brant (Mr. Heyd) deals with the years mentioned. But no payments were made between the 1st of July and the 1st of September.


Mr. WILSON.: Out of that particular grant ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: No payments for railway subsidies.


Uriah Wilson: From any source ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: For railway subsidies, no payments have been made between the 1st of July and the 1st of September. All the other information asked for by the hon. gentleman is covered by another question which I will answer.
Mr. HllYD-by Mr. Talbot-asked :
1.	What is the total amount per annum of railway subsidies granted for each of the past ten years ?
2.	What Is the total amount paid per annum on account of railway subsidies for each of the past ten years ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) :: 1. -
Total
Year.	Amount.
1893		
1894		
1895		
1890	
(992-17 miles at 1897 -[ minimum	 ^Specified	
Iggg	
f 1417-91 miles at 18991 minimum .. .. V Specified	
.$ 1,052,088 .	4,659,160
No Grants.
$3,200	$3,174,944
	 4,509 544	'

 7,684,488
	No Grants.

..	..$4,537,312
.. .. 2,670,175

 7,207,487
| 835 miles at $3,200 minimum	$2,672,000
1 30 miles at $2,500 .. ..	75,000
^Specified	 725,000
3,472,000

f 1,103 miles at $3,260 mini-
1901- mum'	$3,529,600
(.Specified	 35,872

 3,565,472
1892	No Grants.
Total
2.-
1893-	4	
1894-	5	
1895-	6	
1896-	7	
1897-	8	
1898-	9	
1899-	1900	
1900-	1	
1901-	2	
1902-	3	
..$27,640,695

Total



$15,203,500 37 IMPORTS FOR YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1903.

Mr. HENDERSON asked :: 1.	What was the total imports entered for
consumption in the Dominion of Canada for the year ending 30th June, 1903, and the duty collected thereon ?	.
2.	How much of such imports came in under the preferential tariff ; and what was the total amount of duty paid thereon ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. William Paterson) :: 1.	The total imports entered for consumption in the Dominion of Canada for the year ending 30th June, 1903, were $136,796,065 dutiable, $96,994,451 free, and the duty collected thereon was $37,110,354.59.
2.	$37,614,505 of such imports were entered under the preferential tariff, and the duty collected thereon was $7,069,692.42.



PER CAPITA REVENUE FROM CUSTOMS AND EXCISE.

[Stage Direction]
work of a staff of thirty men, who worked for months on enumerators' accounts, was thrown away ?
2.	Was a year's work done by a large staff on mortality tables, condemned and burned ?
3.	Has a staff of about thirty persons been engaged in altering and amending enumerators' returns, changing forest lands to pasture, and fallow lands to pasture, and in making other alterations ?
The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE
(Hon. Sydney Fisher) :
1.	There was no new basis applied, there was not a staff of thirty men working for months on the enumerators' accounts and none of the work was thrown away.
2.	There has not been a year's work by a large staff on mortality tables and none of the work has been condemned or burned.
3.	There has not been a staff of about thirty persons, or any other number, engaged in altering or amending the enumerators' returns, changing forest lands to pasture and fallow lauds to pasture, or in making other alterations.

Mr. CLARKE asked :: What are the names of the officials who have been recommended by the government to receive the imperial *service decoration and medals ?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: No recommendations are made by the government of Canada. Such recommendations are made by the Governor General in consultation with bis ministers. I do not think it would be advisable or at all constitutional to bring down these names.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What revenue per capita was derived from customs and excise taxation for the fiscal years ending 30th June, 1896, and 30th June, 1903, respectively ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS (Hon. William Paterson).: The revenue derived from customs taxation for the year ending 30th June, 1896, was $20,219,037.32, and for the year ending 30th June, 1903, $37,109,075.72. The census of 1901 shows a population of 5,371,315 in Canada, but as the population has not been definitely ascertained in 189G and 1903, the customs revenue per capita for these two years cannot be stated with accuracy.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Mr. Speaker, the lion. Minister of Customs (Hon. Mr. Paterson) has not answered the portion of the question relating to excise.


Mr. SPEAKER.: The portion of the question in regard to excise stands.
Question allowed to stand.



THE CENSUS, 1901.

[Stage Direction]
Sir. HEYD-by Mr. Talbot-asked :
1. Was there at any time, in the prepar^ion of the census, a new basis applied, so that the ' Hon. Mr. FIELDING.

Mr.   I@: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are called, I desire to call the attention of the government to the following cable which appeared in1 the Montreal ' Star ' of last evening :
London, October 13.-Though the Canadian government has made no formal declaration regarding Mr. Chamberlain's proposals, Mr. Fielding is to-day reported in the ' Morning Post ' as emphatically pledging the ministry to support Mr. Chamberlain on one condition. Arthur Gill, a correspondent of the ' Post,' declares that the minister who will probably he the next Liberal leader, that is, presumably Mr. Fielding, expressed himself thus verbatim :
' We are ready to go to the country in support of what I understand to be Mr. Chamberlain's scheme and carry the election on that platform, provided no rider is tacked on to it about a contribution to imperial defence. With such a rider added we could not'defend it successfully.
I desire to ask the government if there is any truth in that statement.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: I am glad to be able to say that I gave no interview on the subject to any newspaper correspondent, and i have

not used these words attributed to rue iu conversation with anybody whatsoever.



WITHDRAWAL OF ALLAN LINE STEAMSHIPS FROM ST. JOHN.

Mr. G. W. FOWLER (King's, N.B.).: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask if the government is aware that any steps are being taken by the Allan Line Steamship Company, or by any person or persons on their behalf to reduce the number of sailings of the vessels of that line from the port of St. John during the coming season, and if so what is the intention of the government in respect to any such action if any such demand or request has been made ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: Mr. Speaker, I think, perhaps, in the absence of the right hon.* Minister of Trade and Commerce (Rt. Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright) who has charge of the arrangement, that it would be better that I should not make a full statement of the case at the present time. There have been some negotiations between the government and the Allan Line in regard to the winter business at St. John and if my right hon. friend is not in his place to-morrow I will endeavour to have the information.


Mr. TAYLOR.: I thought to-morrow was Thanksgiving Day.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: On the following day. I have a general knowledge of the matter, but in the absence of my right hon. friend I prefer not to make a statement.



THE PILOTAGE ACT.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Raymond Prdfontaine) moved the third reading of the Bill (No. 201) respecting the; pilotage district of Montreal and the port and pilotage district of Quebec.
Mr. T. CHASE CASGRAIN (Montmorency).: Mr. Speaker, before this Bill is read the third time I would like to ask my hon, friend (Hon. Mr. Prefontaine) if he still persists in taking from the pilots of Quebec the Saguenay river ? I am sorry that I was not here when the Bill came up for its second reading or when the Bill was referred to the committee. If I had been I would have moved that the clause of the Bill which takes the River Saguenay from the pilots for Quebec and below, be erased from the BUI. I cannot see how my hon. friend is .going to make the Bill workable, because, as everybody knows, the pilots for the harbour of Quebec and below start their work at Bic in the county of Rimouski. Is it the object of the Bill, for instance to have one pilot to take a ship that is coming from Chicoutimi in the Saguenay river down to the mouth of the Saguenay, and then have another pilot take it from the Saguenay river to Bic ? The pilots will require to
have a station at the mouth of the Saguenay if the assumption that I have just referred to is right. If not then the pilot who tabes the ship from Chicoutimi or any other point in the Saguenay river down to Bic will have to be acquainted not only with the River Saguenay, but also with the part of the St. Lawrence river from the mouth of the Saguenay down to Bic. It seems to me that the plan proposed by the pilots is a sensible one and one which should have been adopted .by the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries, namely, that pilots, if they are found not qualified now to navigate the River Saguenay, should be given a chance to qualify themselves ; but, as far as my information goes, the pilots without any exception are perfectly qualified to navigate the Saguenay river. It is true that this summer one accident has taken place at the mouth of the River Saguenay. But this as far as my information goes, is the only accident that has taken place in a considerable number of years that is attributable to the pilot. The accident which occurred to the steamer ' Carolina ' could not be attributed to the pilots, because the pilots had nothing to do with it, but the accident which took place at the mouth of the Saguenay river is the only one that has occurred in a number of years that can be attributed to the pilot. In this case it was certainly an act of negligence on the part of the pilot. Under these circumstances I really believe that the hon. minister should drop that part of the Bill which relates to the Saguenay river. As has been pointed out by the pilots in their memorial which was read by the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Talbot) the remuneration which they get is being reduced every year. Some time ago a decision was rendered in the vice-admiralty court in Quebec which was confirmed by the Exchequer Court by which barges in tow are not obliged to take pilots. This, of course, has also decreased the money earned by the pilots. Now, by taking away from the" pilots the Saguenay river-


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We do not intend 1o take away from the pilots of Quebec the pilotage in the Saguenay river. The intention is simply to regulate the pilots and to see that they are duly qualified.


Mr. CASGRAIN.: I cannot understand when my hon. friend says he does not intend to take away from the pilots of Quebec the pilotage of the Saguenay river, but that he only intends to regulate them, how he is going to carry out that intention. I cannot understand how he is going to regulate the pilotage on the Saguenay rivex-, apart from the pilotage between Quebec and Bic. Is he going to have one authority sitting in Ottawa, directiixg the pilots navigating the Saguenay, and another authority dii'ecting the pilots who navigate from Quebec down to Bic ? I call the attention of the minister to these facts, because I do not

think that the Bill, as presented to the House, can be made workable.


Mr. O. E. TALBOT (Bellechasse).: (Translation.) Mr. Speaker, before this Bill is read for the third time, I wish to lay before the House a memorandum submitted to the Quebec Harbour Commissioners, and to draw the attention of the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries to its contents. That memorandum is dated Quebec, September 10, 1903, and reads as follows :-
Quebec, September 10, 1903. James Woods, Esq.,
Secretary-Treasurer of the Harbour Commissioners,
Quebec.
Dear Sir,-At a meeting of the Board of directors of Pilots, held yesterday, the letter from the deputy minister of Marine and Fisheries, dated 24th ultimo, was duly considered, and I hasten to acquaint you with the conclusion arrived at by my colleagues and myself
In the first place, the right of the pilots, granted by law, to act in the river Saguenay is recognized.
Inquiry is made as to whether the pilots object to the Marine Department assuming control.
In answer to that question, it is a matter of serious doubt whether the shippers, agents< consignees, &c., would gain much by having to deal with a government, whoever they may be, in order to obtain, even in a general way, a thoroughly efficient pilotage service. In our humble opinion, the pilots should under no circumstances be the creatures of a government. What is required primarily from the sailor is a thorough knowledge of his craft, such as will render him altogether reliable. Now, where are these competent men to be found ? We hear it stated over and over again that the unlicensed pilots of the firm of Price & Co. have not met with serious accidents in the river Saguenay. That may be true ; but we should not lose sight of the fact that these men have had to pilot only sailing ^vessels drawn by a tug, the 'Thor,' under the command of an experienced sailor. Now, the trade on the Saguenay river is carried on mainly by steamboats. These unlicensed pilots, who have never been out at sea, who have never served as sailors, who cannot even use the compass, would not be of much use in any emergency, such as occurred in the case of the ' Mersey ' or the ' Carolina,' &c. The Price men who act without a license are not liable in case of any accident, and do not come under the control of your board. We have already prepared a tariff, which was approved by your board, but it was pigeonholed at Ottawa. The members of the board respectfully suggest that the Department of Marine should place at the entrance of the Saguenay licensed pilots, known for their long experience of that river. There are, to say the least, about fifteen who are well qualified. As only two or three are required for that service, it is a very easy matter to attain the desired end. We have the pilot Boulanger, who keeps the Saguenay station, and who has already twenty-five years' experience and practice on that river. His ability cannot be denied by any one, and he has been requested more than once to replace those connected with the firm of Price & Co. See copy of letter attached as proof of this.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: I shall not read that letter, as it is not important.
Thus the corporation of pilots is prepared to enter into the following agreement : Two pilots, recognized as having a long experience on the river Saguenay, and whose ability nobody could deny, would have the exclusive charge of piloting vessels on that river. The licensed pilot Boulanger, who has already -a practice of twenty-five years on that river, would train the pilots in turn for some time, in order to qualify them thoroughly, and put them' in a position to replace later on those who would retire on account of old age or otherwise. The pilot Boulanger would, on board his yacht, survey the river from one end to the other, in all directions, with assistants, make soundings, and ascertain the best places for anchorage, &c.
No others but pilots appointed and salaried by the b<jard of directors would have a right to pilot, or have a charge of any vessel on the river Saguenay.
Some coalers have been taken away from the pilots : but the company, be it said in passing, have lost more than they have gained owing to the great waste of time ; as might be easily shown. The pilots are anxious to retain the rights they enjoy under the law, and are especially desirous of showing that they are in a position to fully meet, in all respects, the requirements of the shipping trade I remain, sir,
Yours very truly,



LOUIS F. MORIN,

[Stage Direction]
President of the Corporation of Pilots.
May I be allowed to draw the attention of the Minister of Marine, to the very wise suggestions contained in this memorandum. As this law is about to be passed, I wish the minister would defer its enforcement for some time in order to enable the pilots to put in practice what they suggest in this memorandum, and what will give to the trade and to the country as a whole all possible assurances as to safe navigation on the River Saguenay.	[DOT]
I hope that the hon. minister will consider my suggestions, which X submit in good faith, and though realizing the serious responsibility which rests on those who are entrusted with the safety of the travelling public on the rivers Saint Lawrence and Saguenay. But I must say that I would take exception to any discrimination being made as regards the River Saguenay, when the pilots are thus prepared to offer every guarantee with a view to ensuring public safety.
Mr. S. DELISLE (Portneuf).: (Translation.) ' Mr. Speaker, the great majority of the pilots reside in the county of Portneuf, and for that reason, I take a particular Interest in the legislation which is now introduced by the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries. I must say that I do not know of a class more worthy of consideration than that of the pilots. They are leading and influential citizens, who qualify themselves

by close application to carry on their work, and who, in the exercise of their functions, incur heavy responsibilities, since they are entrusted with the lives and property of individuals. When a pilot takes charge of a ship at Quebec or Montreal, he becomes responsible for the whole ship, for the lives of the passengers and crew, and for the rich cargo on board. It is obvious that a clear mind and great ability are required to lead safely ships of 10,000 tons, four or five hundred feet long through the channel, from Quebec to Montreal, a channel which is no where wide, and which, in places does not exceed 300 feet in breadth. It often occurs that the channel is only one or two feet deeper than the actual draught of the ship. So that the slightest sheering of the ship, the least mistake in steering, may bring about some fatal accident. Besides currents and winds are to be taken into account, and difficulties must be constantly overcome.
Mr. Speaker, if I make these observations on the life of the pilot, it is to show that all legislation relating to pilots and pilotage cannot be considered too seriously. The public should be protected by laws imposing on the pilots reasonable obligations ; and on the other hand, the pilots should be duly protected when it comes to pass judgment on their conduct and liability.
The pilots in the province of Quebec are divided into two classes : Those who take charge of ships on the lower Saint Lawrence from Quebec to Pointe-au-P6re, and those who do the same service between Quebec and Montreal. Those on the lower Saint Lawrence have long since secured the right of managing their own affairs, parliament having granted them an Act of incorporation.	?
The Bill under consideration refers to the pilots who are doing service between Quebec and Montreal. It is by far the most difficult part of the river. They have applied to parliament for an Act of incorporation, but that favour has been refused them. They have heretofore been under the control of the Montreal Harbour Commissioners, and it is easy to understand, Sir, why that system has not given full satisfaction. That body is apt to change often, and is made up of members who are not all conversant with the art of navigation, and who, consequently, are not all qualified to lay down safe rules for the settlement of difficulties which may arise between the pilots and the steamship companies. I may add that several of the commissioners are directors of companies whose interests in some cases come in conflict with those of the pilots.
I am glad to see the Department of Marine assume the control of pilotage and of pilots, for several reasons, and the principal is that the change has been advocated by the pilots themselves. However, I venture to suggest a change which I consider essential ; I think that two or three experienced pilots should be called upon to stay on duty, during the season of navigation, in the Department of Marine, here, in order to be in a position to supply the department with the necessary information and give them the benefit of their advice and their experience.
The government, in 1890, appointed a commission to inquire into matters relating to pilotage ; and in going over the report of that commission, I find, at page 8, that the commissioners take the ground that in all questions concerning the pilots, their duly selected representatives should be heard.
At page 9 of the same report, I read the following
As regards the grievances of pilots, set forth and detailed in the preceding pages, your commissioners beg to recommend the following :
The pilots are not judged by a competent tribunal.
We are of opinion that, proceedings against pilots on account of accidents happening to ships when navigating the waters covered by the pilotage between Montreal and Quebec, under the care of pilots, should be taken before a maritime court, made up of three experts, one of whom would be appointed by the harbour commissioners, another by the pilots (although it may not be necessarily a pilot doing actual service between Montreal and Quebec), and the third appointed by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. But if later on an admiralty court was established in Montreal, then such proceedings should be taken before that judge, with the assistance of two nautical assessors.
That report of the pilotage commission contains, Sir, a fair statement of the position of the pilots, and some suggestions, which, I hope, will be given effect to by the department of Marine and Fisheries.
I entertain the hope that the interests of the pilots will be safeguarded and that the public.will be benefited thereby.
Motion agreed to ; Bill read the third time, and passed.



CIVIL SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
The POSTMASTER GENERAL (Sir William Mulock) moved the third reading of Bill (No. 257) to amend the Civil Service Act.
George William Fowler: Before this Bill is read a third time, there are one or two things to which I wish to call the attention of the House. Under the Bill, provision has been made for the promotion of, and increases of pay to certain clerks in the civil service; but other officials, namely. the officers of this House and certain others, have been singularly ignored. I wish to direct the attention of the Postmaster General to that fact.
For instance, the librarians of parliament, who are officers of parliament, who are not members of the civil service in the strict acceptation of the term, are to have their

case attended to, while other officials of this House have been ignored. I do not think this is right, and I wish to call the attention of the promoter of the Bill to the fact. Officers who take precedence of deputy heads are left at their present salary, which is considerably below the salaries of the other gentlemen to whom I have referred. The clerk of this House, the clerk of the Senate, the clerk of the Privy Council, take precedence of deputy heads of departments. I understand that some provision is being made for the clerk of the Privy Council ; his salary is being increased ; but the salary of the clerk of this House has not been increased, nor have the salaries of the other officials of this House. As I pointed out when the Bill was in committee, the salaries of the officials of this House are very much less than those of the officials of the Senate, gentlemen who do not perform one-quarter and in some instances not one-tenth of the duty performed by the officials of this House of Commons, * It seems to me that is a thing that should be remedied. If these gentlemen in the Senate are receiving too much, there should be some way of reducing their salaries. If they are receiving no more, and it is to be presumed that they are receiving no more than their services entitle them to receive, the honour and dignity of this House demands that its officials should be put on an equal footing with the officials of the other chamber. It seems to me that this is a matter of importance that ought to be considered, and that fair play and justice should be extended to all the officials in the service of the country. The same argument which the Postmaster General has used to justify an increase in the salaries of the officers who are affected by this Bill, can be used with equal force and effect in the case of the.officers to whom I have referred. The office of clerk of this House is a very important position. It is necessary that the incumbent of that office should be possessed of very high qualifications. There is no position on the bench of this country that requires higher qualification in its incumbent than the clerk of this House. I am glad, Mr. Speaker, to know that we have in the person of the gentleman who occupies that position today a worthy successor of the gentleman who so honourably and ably filled it in the past years. I .see no reason why the clerk of this House should not receive equal consideration with the deputy heads of departments. particularly when the onerous duties he has to fulfil are considered-duties which are in excess of those performed by gentlemen who have already received consideration at the hands of this government. In saying this I am speaking for myself ; I have had no consultation with any of my friends on this side of the House on this matter ; but I believe I am voicing the sentiments of the greater proportion of them when I say that we are desirous of having I


George William Fowler: the officials of this House and the officials of the country generally paid reasonable and proper salaries. We do not believe in cheese paring along these lines. We think there is extravagance in the public expendi-dures, but we do not think there is any extravagance in properly paying the officials in the service of the country. We should have good officials, and we should pay them good salaries. I hope the Postmaster General will take these matters into consideration, and refer this Bill back and have it so amended as to include all these officers from the highest to the lowest. From the messengers up, there should be on increase of pay. Even the 'Hansard ' reporters should have an increase, this year at least, on account of the long session, which has been a great detriment to them.


Mr. S. HUGHES (Victoria).: I wish to draw the attention of the Postmaster General to an omission from the Bill of provision for the officers of the Militia Department who are not regarded as coming under the Superannuation Act or the Pension Act which applies to the militia. I do not know whether the minister's attention lias been drawn to the matter or not, but I think, he should give it his consideration. Will he kindly look into it, or has he looked into it ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: With reference to the point raised by my hon. friend from King's, New Brunswick, (Mr. Fowler), no doubt the government have to plead guilty of the charge of being careful of the finances of the country in regard to increases of salary. I understand that we are accused of cheese paring. It is not an altogether unpardonable offence, although perhaps it is unwise to underpay any person. However, in accordance with the character which is assigned to us of being extremely careful in the administration of the public funds, we must go slowly even in dealing with salaries, because the expenditure on salaries is a very large item. My hon. friend will find that there is a measure before parliament dealing with the salaries of the librarians. Perhaps his absence from parliament accounts for that oversight.


George William Fowler: I have attended this parliament more than the hon. gentleman has ; and besides, I referred to what is proposed to be done for the librarians. The hon. gentleman must have been asleep, as he usually is when in this House.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: With reference to the other point which the hon. gentleman raised, that this measure should embrace the employees of the two Houses, I may say that that question has been before this House and has been discussed ; and I have already said that the government do not wish to interfere with the privileges of the two Houses. It is their privilege, we understand, to regulate the salaries of their

officers, subject of course to the power, if the government choose to exercise it, of modifying or carrying out or not respecting their views. However, this is not a Bill dealing with the salaries of the officers of parliament; it is a Bill dealing with the salaries of those in the civil service. That is the reason that subject would not properly find a place in this Bill. As to the question raised by my hon. friend from North Victoria (Mr. Hughes), that the Bill does not deal with the officers of the Militia Department, I would point out that the measure does not pretend to deal with the status or the salaries of all the officials of the government. It is less pretentious than that. It applies chiefly, almost exclusively, to those who are classified. There are some slight exceptions, as in the case of the outside service in the Customs and Inland Revenue Departments. The subject of the militia officers has not before been brought to the attention of the House, and it would be too late, I think, to reopen this question this session, if the measure now before the House awaiting its third reading is to become law this session. The subject is worthy of every consideration, and I have no doubt that my hon. friend having brought it to the attention of the House, it will in (j,ue time receive careful consideration.


Mr. C. E. KAULBACH (Lunenburg).: I have listened with interest to the remarks of the hon. member for King's, New Brunswick (Mr. Fowler) with reference to the salaries of our public officials, and I cannot see why there should be any discrimination With reference to tlios'-e who by chance do not come under this Bill. I refer particularly now to the clerk of the House. It is delicate for me to offer a remark in reference to that gentleman, he being in the chair. I may say I have known him for a number of years and consider that he is a very worthy successor to his predecessor ; and in my opinion, although he does not come under the Civil Service Act, he and his staff should not be discriminated against as respects increase of salary but be given similar considerations as the others. I believe that my hon. friend the Postmaster General, who has charge of this Bill, has the same disposition as myself in this respect, and I hope that when the opportune time arrives he will look after the officials of this House and recognize their claims for services well rendered.


Mr. LEMIETJX.: I concur in the remarks just made by my hon. friend and would like to have them apply to the assistant clerk of the House.
. Mr. WM. ROCHE (Halifax). I wish to endorse the remarks of the hon. member from Lunenburg'(Mr. Kaulbach). The clerk of our House is well known to us all. He lias been a member of parliament many years and is eminently well qualified to fill
the responsible position he now holds. I would therefore urge on my hon. friend the Postmaster General that, in increasing the salaries of other civil servants, we should not leave out of sight the clerk of the House. My acquaintance with our worthy clerk has extended over forty years, and my experience of him is that he has creditably tilled every position he has occupied and is most certainly, in his present position, the right man in the right place. He therefore should be treated as regards salary on an equality with other officials.


Mr. T. S. SPROULE (East Grey).: The other evening I drew attention to the fact that there were one or two classes in the outside service, concerning whom no provisions were made with regard to salary.
I pointed out that the preventive officers in the Customs and Inland Revenue branches were not provided for. In reply the Postmaster General referred me to subsection 2 of section 37, but that only provides for their appointment without examination. It does not stipulate what their salaries will be. It seems to me that they are as much entitled to an increase, according to length of service and faithfulness in the discharge of their duties, as any other class.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE (Hon. M. E. Bernier).: These are temporary officers not subject to examination, who can be removed at any moment.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But they are usually kept on permanently.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: These men may pass an examination and will then be subject for promotion, but at present they are not subject to any\ examination and they are not classified. I am simply following* the custom which has been in force for years.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I did not quite apprehend the reason given by my hon. friend the Postmaster General why the salaries of the officers of the House have not been taken into consideration ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The Bill before the House is one dealing with the civil service and not with the officers of the House of Commons and the Senate. It is the privilege of these two Houses to deal with the salaries of their officers and employees, and the government does not desire to encroach on that privilege. It is open to this House, through its committee, to bring up the question of salaries in a report presented to the House, and if that report should be adopted, of course the government would give proper respect to the decision of the House. No such procedure has been adopted and the government do not feel warranted in taking from the House that ancient privilege. The government are extremely pleased to hear the expressions of opinion on all sides as to the

wisdom of the selection of the clerk of the House, which, I am positive, time will confirm. Although nothing is done on this occasion, the House will understand that the non-interference of the government is not to be regarded as in any way an indication that the government do not share the opinion of hon. members regarding the claims and merits of the gentleman selected for the high office of clerk of the House.


Mr. N. A. BELCOURT (Ottawa).: As the Civil Service Bill must be the subject of the attention of the government at an early date, I would like to point out that in the commonwealth of Australia the officers of both Houses of parliament have been placed under the Civil Service Act and are treated in the same way as the other permanent employees. The reason which has been advanced by the Postmaster General may be a good one, but 1 might point out to him a recent instance where, under conditions very similar to those which prevail in this country, it has not been considered a sufficient reason, and the contrary course has been adopted ; the clerks of both houses in the commonwealth of Australia have been put under the civil service list and treated in the same way as the rest of the officers of the commonwealth. I should think that that was a proper course and I cannot see why the officers of this House and of the Senate should be treated differently from the officers of any other department, under the control of either the House or the executive. The same reasons apply for putting the officers of the House or Senate under the permanent list, for providing them with superannuation and the other advantages of permanency in the service that apply to the different departments of the service. I hope when the matter is again under consideration that the precedent which I have cited may receive the attention and consideration of the government.


Mr. E. HACKETT (West Prince).: 1 desire to emphasize the remarks of the hon. member for King's, N.B. (Mr. Fowler) as well as those of the Postmaster General (Hon. Sir William Mnlock), and the hon. member for Lunenburg (Mr. Kaulbach), that the servants of this House are deserving of the same consideration as any other branch of the civil service of Canada. The hon. gentlemen referred to the Clerk of the House, who has performed his duties in a very able manner ; he referred to the assistant clerk, to the messengers, to the pages ; we are all proud of them. But. Sir, there is one who is above and beyond all these in the importance of his duties, and that is yourself, Mr. Speaker, if I may refer to you. You have presided with the greatest dignity and with great ability over the deliberations of this House, and I trust that in considering matters of this kind, the govern- : merit will take into consideration the right : of the hon. the Speaker of this House to


Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.: have an increase of salary. I say this, Mr. Speaker, with great delicacy and with great moderation ; but I cannot forget that during the three sessions that I have been in parliament you have presided over this House, not only with great ability but with great impartiality. We are proud of the fact that we have in Canada a young Frenchman who can take the Chair at the head of the House of Commons and ably preside over its deliberations, not only with tact but with firmness. When any of us have departed from the established rules of debate he has at all times been prompt to check us and to preserve the decorum of the House.


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

[Stage Direction]
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) moved that the House again go into Committee of Supply.
['We will proceed with the remaining supplementary estimates, probably with the railway estimates first.']
Mr. R. L. BORDEN (Halifax).: I understand that it is not convenient for the Minister of Trade and Commerce to be here to-day, and therefore I have arranged not to proceed with the motion respecting the Fast Atlantic Service, of which I gave notice last evening. I might say to my right1 lion, friend the Prime Minister that I would like to proceed either on Saturday or on Wednesday. Believing that this session would have ended before this, I made an engagement for Monday, which will necessitate my absence on Monday and on Tuesday until ten o'clock in the evening ; therefore,
I would be prepared to go on on Wednesday or on Saturday, as may be most convenient.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I am exceedingly obliged to my hon. friend. I am sorry that the Minister of Trade and Commerce, who we all know has not very good health, is not able to be here to-day. But whether my right hon. friend the Minister of Trade and Commerce is absent or present, we will make it a point to give the hon. leader of the opposition an opportunity of moving this motion on Saturday.


Robert Laird Borden: As I expect to have to leave on Saturday afternoon at four-o'clock, I would like, if convenient, to have it fixed as early in the day as possible.


The PRIME MINISTER.: We shall make it three o'clock.



Mr. T. O. DAVIS (Saskatchewan).: Mr. Speaker, before you leave the Chair, I desire to bring to the attention of the government and of the House a matter which affects a large portion of the population of the community in which I reside, and which

I have the honour of representing in this House. X have had the honour of bringing this question before the House on other occasions, but up to the present time nothing has been done in the matter. I refer to the claims of a great many settlers in the Saskatchewan district arising out of the rebellion of 1885. After the rebellion, the government of the day appointed a claims commission who were sent up to the Saskatchewan district with the idea of settling the claims of the settlers for losses incurred in that rebellion. The government of that day, apparently in a fair spirit, saw fit to appoint on that commission a resident of the district who was well known in that part of the country. The commission was appointed on August 25tli, 1885, and sat until January 6th, 1886, a period of 135 days. They brought in a report, which 1 have here, in which they recommended the payment of a certain number of claims. A Short time after that, as the election of 1887 was coming on in the near future, and as there was a great deal of dissatisfaction with reference to the unsettled claims, the government saw fit to send the same commission to settle the balance of these claims. On March 15th, 1886, this commission resumed its labours and apparently was employed until August 9th, 1887. During the summer of 1886, this commission took evidence in a great many cases and reserved (judgment as to what should be done in the matter of paying or not paying, and that is where the grievance comes in. One of these commissioners, a gentleman appointed from my district, came up to the Saskatchewan district in the fall previous to the election of 1887, and started to work as an agent in the interests of the government of the day. He attended public meetings and spoke at public meetings and worked among the people for nearly three months, until the election of March 15th, 1887.
Mr. 1,a RIVIERE. Would the hon. gentleman give the name ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: Mr. Thomas McKay, now a member of the local legislature. He spoke at these meetings and canvassed and worked there until the election took place. At * that time we had an open vote, and it was possible to know just how each elector voted. This gentleman, being in charge of the organization of the Conservative party in that district, was in a position to have access to the poll-books and everything of that kind and knew exactly how every man polled his vote at that election. When the election was over and the commission made its award, it was found that the gentlemen who had voted against the government of the day had received cold justice, while those who supported the government of the day were in some cases paid twice the amount that was legally due to them. The worst feature of the whole thing was-and I have the record under my hand-that during the three
months that Mr. McKay canvassed and worked and addressed public meetings in the interest of the Conservative party, he was receiving from the Dominion government $15 a day as claims commissioner and $5 a day for living expenses, and in addition his travelling expenses from here to Hie scene of rebellion and back again.
Now, I ask you, Mr. Speaker, is it possible that justice could be rendered to these people in a case of that kind ? Here was a paid official of the Dominion government who was getting $20 a day as claims commissioner going up and attending political meetings, and after he had attended the meetings, after these people had refused to vote as he wanted them to, this man is authorized to sit as a judge on their claims ? Could they expect justice in a case of that kind? They could not expect justice in a case of that kind ? They could not expect it, and they did not get it. These people have been agitating ever since, getting up petitions and sending letters, and they are not going to be satisfied until at least some steps are taken to investigate their grievance, and to see that the gross unfairness of the award of that commission has been rectified. Why, there are cases of men that we know of ourselves who were drawing $13,000 and $14,000 for losses of goods that one man could have carried on his back, while other men, bona fide settlers who did lose their all, got nothing or scarcely anything. I have all the reports here, the awards made, the amounts claimed, the amounts paid, and everything of that kind. I am not going into that, but I have briefly placed the facts before the House, and I would ask that some steps be taken to look into the mattter and see that these people get justice, because they certainly did not get justice at the hands of that commission; and every member on both sides of this House will agree with me that they could not expect to get justice from a gentleman who was paid $20 a day by the government for stumping up through Saskatchewan and who was afterwards sitting as a judge on the claims of these people.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It seems to me extraordinary that the hon. gentleman has sat in this House ever since he came here, and it is only at this late date that he brings this subject before parliament.


Mr. DAYIS.: I want to draw attention to the fact that if the hon. gentleman goes through 'Hansard' he will find that I have brought the subject up several times in this House.


Mr. SPRO  JLE@: For several years there has not been a word from the hon. gentleman, but now he gets up, in the dying days of a long session, when it is expected there will be an election in the near future, and brings this subject to the attention of the

House, without notice of any kind. Now, whether this Mr. McKay did or did not act as a political agent during that time, it is impossible for us to say, at least it is impossible for me to say.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I have made a speech here in parliament showing that the people in my district know well whether he acted as election agent or not, and here is a return from the department which goes to show that he was paid for the time during which he was acting as agent. I think the proof is absolutely clear that he did.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman, in my opinion, should have gone further, and he should have shown us from his records whether this gentleman did any work as a commissioner during that time, becanse if he had proven by the records which are in the possession of the department that he had not done any work at that time, then it might be assumed that he was acting only as a political agent, and was improperly paid for the time he was doing no work. But the hon. gentleman has not done that, and we are not in a position


Thomas Osborne Davis: Will the hon. gentleman allow me for a moment I make this statement, if he wants to know, that for two or three months after this gentleman was appointed claims commissioner he acted as political agent of the Conservative party in Saskatchewan, that he spoke from platforms, and he canvassed, and he did everything that an organizer had to do in Saskatchewan and he was paid $20 and travelling expenses by the government of the day while he was doing all that.


Mr. POPE.: Did he sit as a commissioner ? Mr. DAVIS. Certainly not.


Rufus Henry Pope: Then sit down.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Certainly he was not sitting on cases when he was electioneering.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Of course, we are obliged to accept the bon. gentleman's word, in the absence of any proof. I suspect, however, that if the records of the department were looked into it would be found that during the time the election campaign was going on he was acting as commissioner and not as a political agent, and doing his work as commissioner, and that from day to day.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I want to tell the hon. gentleman that he is absolutely wrong. He was not in the district and I was.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then, it is a very strange fact that for several years, he has said nothing about it, although this must have been known by the hon. gentleman, because he says he brought it to the attention of the House after the last election in 1900. Now, we are in 1903, and there has not been a single word heard from the hon. gentle-


Thomas Simpson Sproule: man since his own friends were in power. They had it in their power to give redress, if redress was required. Why did they not attend to this ? They have remained all this time perfectly oblivious to the injustice done to these people, until we are supposedly upon the eve of a general election, and then he gets up and makes this plea and shows that nothing has been done for these poor people. It seems to me, to use the language of the street, a little too thin. It looks more like an election dodge than anything else.


Thomas Osborne Davis: The hon. gentleman must not measure me from his own standpoint.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Well, I have seen so many efforts from that hon. gentleman along the same lines that I can now catch on to them pretty rapidly. They are well known. Now, with regard to these claims having been often discussed in this House, from my personal remembrance they have not been discussed frequently, and in my judgment, there never was a single instance where a good case was made out where the government were not disposed to do justice. But if justice was not done while his own friends have been in power for the last nine years, -and surely during that time


The PRIME MINISTER.: The time seems long to my hon. friend since he has been in opposition.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Well, nine years in the life of a government or in the life of a nation surely ought to be long enough to allow of these cases being brought to the attention of the government, and for them to do justice where injustice has been done. But the hon. member represented that constituency during all that time, and knew that injustice was done to these people-if his allegations be correct. Therefore, I say it is a strange fact that he has not secured justice for themi during all this time that his own friends have been in control. They have done -nothing but turn a deaf ear to his pleading ; so it does not seem to be exactly an appropriate time to bring it up now, but I suppose it answers the hon. gentleman's purpose.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Like provincial autonomy yesterday.


The PRIME MINISTER.: My bon. friend from Grey (Mr. Sproule) is altogether astray in stating that my hon. friend from Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) has been tardy in bringing this question to the attention of the House and of the government. He has brought it more than once to the attention of the House, and he has brought it repeatedly to the atttention of the government. The circumstances with regard to these complaints are not new to me. I heard them when I was In opposition, and I have heard them since this government took office. The old government appointed a commission to

look into the losses which had been experienced by a good many residents in the North-west, and they made compensation for those losses. I know that some parties complained that they had not been fairly dealt with by the commission. These complaints were brought to me several times when I was sitting on the other side of the House, and they have been brought to my attention since this government was formed -repeatedly brought to my attention by the present member for the Saskatchewan district (Mr. Davis). It is always difficult, however, to re-open a matter of this kind after it has been closed for so many years, and the government did not see their way clear to have a further investigation into the mattter. The only thing I can say is that the government will look into the matter, but I will not pledge myself to anything more than that at the present time.


Mr. N. BOYD (Macdonald).: Mr. Speaker, the matter that has been brought to the attention of the House by the hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis), as has been stated by the hon. member for Bast Grey (Mr. Sproule), would indicate the expectation of an approaching election. That is the view I would take of it. When we see the way in which that hon. gentleman has attacked a gentleman outside of this House, and when we observe the method he has used in order to injure a gentleman, who, I understand, is spoken of as very likely to be his opponent, we can readily understand why he has brought this question so forcibly to the attention of the House. The hon. gentleman has been a supporter of this government for seven years, and if he was not able to use his influence to do something for the people, who, he claims, have been so badly treated, I think this little speech that he has made in this House will not have a tendency to further their case to any great extent. I would not expect any hon. member of this House to attack a man who has no opportunity of defending himself. Anything may be said in this House under the cover of the privilege of the House against a man outside of it.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I made this attack upon the public platform. Mr. McKay could have come to my meeting, but he took the other road and never came.


Nathaniel Boyd: The fact remains that if this gentleman has such a reputation as the hon. member for Saskatchewan would lead us to believe he is worthy of, it is a strange thing that he represents the people in the local assembly at Regina. Therefore, he cannot be so low in the estimation of his fellow citizens as the hon. gentleman would lend us to suppose he is. I can see pretty plainly what the intention of the hon. gentleman is, but if he is deceiving the people around Saskatchewan he is not deceiving 437
the people around this House. I have had some experience in supporting a government and I always found that if I could not induce the government by my own personal persuasions, with the assistance of my friends, to do a certain thing, I was very much less likely to do it by getting up and making a stump speech in this House. I would suggest to my hon. friend that he bring his persuasive powers to bear upon the government, that he surround himself with the members from the North-west Territories, Who are not backward in expressing their opinions, have an interview with the right hon. leader of the government (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) and see if he cannot induce him to give a promise, and thus by his actions, which should speak much louder than his words in this House, show to the people of Saskatchewan that he is succeeding in doing something for their benefit, instead of getting tip and attacking a gentleman outside of this House who has no opportunity of defending himself.


Mr.   R.@: Xj. BORDEN (Halifax). Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to my hon. friend from Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) that if he desires to have a matter of this kind intelligently discussed he should give some notice to the House, as I have no doubt he has given notice to the government, of his intention to bring it up. It is obvious that he could not have expected any very great benefit from the discussion, otherwise he would have adopted t he course that is usual. I do not know whether we have really gathered very much of importance from my hon. friend's remarks, except a suggestion that my hon. friend's presence on the platform terrified Mr. McKay so much as to deter him from going near him.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I think the hon. gentleman (Mr. Borden, Halifax) is going a little astray in that statement. I was charged by the hon. member for Macdonald (Mr. Boyd) with having attacked in this House a gentleman who did not have an opportunity of defending himself, and I stated that I had made the same attack on the platform, in the district where the parties were interested, and that Mr. McKay knew that I was going to do it, and that Mr. McKay did not turn up.


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. gentleman said that Mr. McKay immediately took the other road.


Thomas Osborne Davis: He was not there.


Robert Laird Borden: He was not only supposed to have run away from the meeting, but to have immediately taken the most rapid means of transportation in an opposite direction, so that he might not be within range of my hon. friend's eloquence.


Thomas Osborne Davis: He has been within range of it more than once.


Robert Laird Borden: I think he has not suffered from it. I am reminded of the fact that my hon. friend has sometimes had his suspectibilities wounded by attacks made upon gentlemen outside of this House. I think I have seen him displaying a great deal of feeling about references which have been made to officials of this government in the Yukon and elsewhere. But, in the remarks which my hon. friend has made to-day he seems to have entirely overlooked the considerations which influenced him at such times.


Thomas Osborne Davis: This gentleman is not an official; he is a public man.


Robert Laird Borden: He is a public man, but my hon. friend has made the deliberate charge against this gentleman


Thomas Osborne Davis: Which I am prepared to prove to this House.
Mr. BORDEN (Halifax)-that he corruptly denied justice to these people. He said that being in receipt of some remuneration from the Conservative government, the people of the territory could not expect justice from him, and that they did not get it. This is a charge of a deliberate and corrupt denial of justice. Whether my hon. friend has proved it or not outside of this House it hardly seems to me to be a very courteous course to make the charge under the circumstances under which he has made it here. If there has been a corrupt denial of justice, it seems to me that it would have been the duty of this government upon coming into office, in 1896, to have investigated this matter, and I am surprised that my hon. friend, during the last seven years, has not brought it to the attention of the House in a more forcible way than he has to-day. There is no statute of limitations against a corrupt denial of justice, and if that has taken place it is a matter than should have been investigated long ago.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into Committee of supply.
Amount required for additional building at Banff. N.W.T., $10,000.
The PRIME MINISTER.: At the National Park at Banff, we have several buildings which have been in existence for some years and which enable visitors to have the benefits of the mineral waters. This vote is to build a bath house to replace that which was destroyed by fire last spring.


Robert Laird Borden: Is there any revenue derived from it ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes, there is a fee charged to visitors, but I do not think the revenue is sufficient to maintain It.


Robert Laird Borden: I should think that a very excellent bath-house could be built for a smaller sum.


The PRIME MINISTER.: We have the report of the resident engineer at Calgary, and I see that it includes a cottage for the caretaker.


Robert Laird Borden: The right hon. gentleman was recently rather horrified at the idea of the government owning hotels and, sending agents to canvas for freight throughout the country, but he seems to have no objection to the government undertaking to operate a bath-house. Will the right hon. gentleman point out the difference between the government operating an hotel and their operating a bath-house ?


Mr. COCHRANE.: The bath is to wash away their iniquities.


Robert Laird Borden: If there is any difference between the government operating a bath-house and a government operating an hotel, I would like my right hon. friend to explain.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I can only explain that we do not go into this undertaking for business purposes ; it is simply an expensive luxury.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. I suppose it is on the principle that as you own the bath you must have a house over it.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Perhaps.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. Is this building to be erected adjacent to the basin ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: The bath-house itself is to be a special building.


George William Fowler: What is the salary of the caretaker ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: I cannot tell what his salary is, but he has no revenue outside of it.


George William Fowler: Has he any duties in addition to attending to the bath ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Yes ; the caretaker, Mr. Douglas, has a general supervision of the whole park and of the public buildings which we have there. What I would consider one of the most important of his duties is that he takes care of the animals. We have a valuable herd of buffalo, which now numbers -forty head, and which is steadily increasing I am glad to say. We have some moose and some wapita, and he looks after these.


Mr. REID (Grenville).: Is this building to be erected by contract, and will it be given to the lowest tenderer ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: That is a question which might be asked the Minister of Public Works, but I should think he will answer in the affirmative, because it will cost over $5,000, and that is the law.


John Dowsley Reid: Will private circulars be sent around, or will it be advertised in the newspapers ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: 


Tlie PRIME MINISTER.: Not in the newspapers of Banff, but elsewhere.
Amount required for the expenses in connection with the Alaskan boundary commission, $140,000.


The PRIME MINISTER.: $50,000 has
been already voted, and this will make a total appropriation of $190,000.


George William Fowler: How is the cost arrived at ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: It will cost a large sum of money, because lawyers are expensive-my hon. friend belongs to the profession, and he knows that by experience. The class of lawyers we have had to employ must be paid high fees. Then we have had a very large staff in the preparation of the case, and my hon. friend will agree with me, if he has read the case, that it has been prepared with great care, and reflects credit on those who had charge of it. I do not yet know what will be the result of our efforts, but when the details are brought down I think it will be found that the money lias been as economically expended as it could be.


George William Fowler: There is no doubt that able counsel were selected on the Canadian side and that a good selection was made. I do not know that I am able to say so much for one, at least, of the commissioners, if the statements attributed to him have been correctly reported. I do not wish to say anything at this stage reflecting on this gentleman. I understand that he has made some sort of a denial of the report, but not such an absolute and emphatic denial as we would have expected. If that gentleman has been correctly reported, he certainly has given expression to very unwise utterances for a man occupying such a high judicial opinion. This is not a party question, and we do not want to make it a party question ; we are all alike interested that the honour and dignity of our country should be maintained to the highest degree. It is a matter of peculiar regret to me, as a member of the same profession to which that gentleman belongs, that the report should be sent broadcast through the world that he should so far forget his duties and responsibilities as a member of that very high tribunal ; perhaps no higher tribunal has ever been created in the world of a judicial character than the tribunal of which that gentleman is a member. It is a most unfortunate incident if that gentleman is correctly reported.


The PRIME MINISTER.: For my part, I do not believe that Mr. Aylesworth has given any such interview as that which has been reported. The misfortune is that such a report should ever have got into the press, but my hon. friend (Mr. Fowler) is aware that it would not be the first time that false reports have been published in the press, at-437i
tributing statements to public men, and which reports had not the slightest foundation in fact. Not later than yesterday I had to give the negation of no less a person than the Lord Chief Justice of England, who stated that a certain report made about him was a pure fabrication. The undue liberty that has been taken with the name of the Chief Justice of England may well have been taken also with the name of Mr. Aylesworth ; but I am sure that my hon. friend will readily believe that Mr. Aylesworth would be unable to so far forget himself and his duty to his profession as to be guilty of such an indiscretion as that. When a man has been at the bar the length of time that Mr. Aylesworth has, even though he has not attained Mr. Ayles-worth's eminence in his profession, he would not so comment on a matter before the judges, especially when he is one of the judges himself. For my part, therefore, I absolutely discredit the report.


Robert Laird Borden: The only thing that would seem to lend some possible credence to what has been suggested in the press is that the report of the proceedings of Monday seem to have been cabled to London; and, while the government have a telegram from Lord Alverstone denying the interview with him, Mr. Aylesworth has not seen fit to send any contradiction. Perhaps I should not attach too much importance to that, because it may be that the telegram to the London newspapers has not been brought to his attention. If it had been, and if the interview was uot as reported, it would have been a prudent and wise thing for Mr. Aylesworth to have followed the example of Lord Alverstone and sent a telegram to this government denying what I would call the impropriety of granting an interview of that character, with regard to a subject which is not only under the consideration of a tribunal of which he is a member, but which is also a matter of political controversy in the mother country at the present time. I would like to ask the government what the arrangements are with regard to the British counsel to represent Canada, Sir Robert Finlay and Sir Edward Carson. Are these counsel paid by the government of Canada, or are their services given ex-officio as law officers of the crown ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: Sir Robert Finlay has been selected by the British government, and, so far as my memory serves me, he is to be paid by the British government itself. I do not think this would apply to Sir Edward Carson, who was selected by us to replace Mr. Blake, who unfortunately became ill and had to give up. his position.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not think the cases and counter cases submitted on behalf of the two governments have been laid on the Table of the House.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I do not think they have.


Robert Laird Borden: There is a claim and a counter claim and a ease and a counter case, and there are appendices to these documents, and I think a set of atlases which accompany the case and the counter case. It seems to me that it would be well to have these laid on the Table of the House, and also a print of the proceedings of the committee from day to day, if my right lion, friend has it, either during the present session, or in another session, so that they will be available for reference by the members of the House. I do not know whether it is proposed to print any portion of the proceedings of this committee for distribution among the members of the House or to form a part of the sessional papers. I think that matter might well be taken into consideration by the government, as sometimes it is not convenient to get them in any other way. For example, I do not know where one can get at the proceedings of the Behring Sea tribunal except by referring to the one set of the proceedings which is in the library.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I am not aware that the proceedings of the Behring Sea commission were ever printed by this parliament. The only edition of these proceedings, so far as my memory goes, was that issued by the committee itself, a copy of which is in the library. I will take care that all the proceedings of the present tribunal be laid before the House. They will be too voluminous to print, but a good selection of them will be made for future reference, and will be referred to the committee on printing.


George William Fowler: Has the Prime Minister had any communication from Mr. Ayles-wortli since these statements were made V


The PRIME MINISTER.: No, I have not had any.


George William Fowler: That in itself would seem to lend some colour to this report. I am very loath to believe that a member of the bar, and so distinguished a member of the Canadian bar as Mr. Aylesworth, should make the statements which he is reported to have made. But the fact that these statements have been published, not only in the press of Canada but in the English press, must have called his attention to the fact of these statements having been circulated. Not only that, but I understand that a legal friend in Toronto, as soon as these statements appeared in the Canadian press, at once communicated them to him in England, assuming that they were not published there, so that a prompt and emphatic denial of them should be made by Mr. Aylesworth; and it has not been made. It seems to me that the First Minister should take some steps to ascertain from Mr. Ayles-


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: worth himself, by communicating with him, whether or not he made these statements. This matter concerns not only Mr. Aylesworth but the whole people of Canada, whose special representative he was on that committee. Therefore it does seem to me that we should at once, if the gentleman did make those statements, take some means of bestowing upon him censure for having so far forgotten himself.


The PRIME MINISTER.: For my part, Mr. Speaker, I am not prepared to take the view of my hon. friend. My hon. friend himself, I think, would hesitate to take that view. He has been in public life for some years, and he knows that life is too short to give attention to everything that is published in the newspapers. If we were to do that, I suppose there would be nothing to do but to write items in the newspapers and give contradictions to them. I rather think that a man of Mr. Aylesworth's eminence knows his business, and knows it too well to have committed himself in that way.


George William Fowler: It is not a case of ordinary misrepresentation-not that sort of misrepresentation which a man who is in public life is able to ignore. There is a class of misrepresentation which we do ignore. If we did not, we would be constantly defending ourselves from attacks which are unworthy of notice; but this is not a case of that character. I am loath to believe that these statements were ever made by Mr. Aylesworth but it was his duty, as representing Canada, to at once disclaim having made any such statements. Lord Alver-stone considered the matter of sufficient importance to wire the right hon. the First Minister denying that he had ever said anything which would lead Mr. Aylesworth or anybody else to the conclusion that he proposed to sacrifice Canada on behalf of the United States. If Lord Alverstone deemed it necessary to send such a denial, was it not more important that Mr. Aylesworth should also send a disclaimer ? Nothing having been heard from Mr. Aylesworth would lead one to conclude that there might be only too much truth in the report. I am loath to believe it, because Mr. Aylesworth is a distinguished Canadian, and because I am an humble member of the same profession to which he belongs. But I cannot understand his silence


Rodolphe Lemieux: I can well understand the silence of Mr. Aylesworth. If he has any duty to perform at present it is to take no notice of the wild rumours published by the reporters in London. It is his only duty to stand by his own country and try to convince his fellow commissioners that our contention is right.


George William Fowler: That is a reflection on Lord Alverstone, who is a much more distinguished man.


Tile MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: He referred to the matter because it was brought up in the House of Commons in England.


Robert Laird Borden: The telegram which was sent referred to the discussion in the House of Commons, not only with regard to Mr. Aylesworth, but to Lord Alver-stone.


Mr. GOURLEY.: These unfortunate telegrams give rise to the necessity for his House to question whether we have pursued a wise policy in giving $15,000 a year for our Canadian press service. The Yankee service is bad, but if it is always twisted it is clear. There is some sense in its telegrams. They have a Yankee colouring but are intelligible. Since we have had this new7 service, I have read with utter disgust the nonsense that is telegraphed-utter and absolute nonsense, and I was in no particular surprised that this despatch relating to Lord Alverstone and Mr. Aylesworth should have been sent. At the same time I think that Lord Alverstone did the correct thing. It would be very extraordinary indeed that a British chief justice, acting in a very high capacity, would say the tilings attributed to Lord Alverstone. However, while members of the House of Commons would not believe it, other people, who have not the same training, possibly would.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Some members of the House of Commons seem to be the only ones who want to believe it.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Undoubtedly there are hundreds of thousands in Canada who believe it.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The hon. gentleman is mistaken. Only a few- members want to believe it, and nobody outside.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: There are many people in the United States who believe it. The chief justice did the correct thing. When this statement was given world-wide publicity there was no other course for him to take than the one he did. Mr. Aylesworth should follow his example more particularly because there was considerable circumstantiality in the nonsense attributed to him. It was circumstantial in every particular. While I regard the despatch as utterly unfounded, still I was amazed at the circumstantiality which the correspondent put into it. In ordinary matters, no doubt, Mr. Aylesworf h's course would be the correct one, but this is not an ordinary matter. It involves national relations. The thing is world-wide, and it seems to me that the right hon. the First Minister would be well advised to suggest to Mr. Aylesworth to make a contradiction in equally wide terms as that of Lord Alverstone. I regard this Alaska boundary question as of great consequence to the future welfare of Canada
and the British empire. If anything untoward or anything which would give rise to a suspicion of unfairness should occur, it will shake the confidence of the Canadian people in British jurists, diplomatists and statesmen for all time. Therefore I would like these men to put themselves right in the eyes of the public, in order that there should be no feeling of any kind in Canada, previous to the making of the award, -which might lead to a charge of impropriety afterwards. Parliament voted $15,000 for a press association service, so that we are in a measure responsible for the cablegrams we get from England and ought to exercise control. and the man who sent that stuff should be summarily dismissed. He is not fit to be out of a lunatic asylum.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I should certainly not feel inclined to follow the suggestion that I should wire Mr. Aylesworth for a denial of the words attributed to him.
I want hon. gentlemen sitting here to remember that we should have some regard to what is the duty and the character of a public man. Public men to-day on whatever side of politics are simply the victims of the mad craving for sensational articles which characterizes modern journalism.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I believe that.


The PRIME MINISTER.: For my part.
I refuse steadily to deny things attributed to me without foundation. A year ago when I left New York for England, I found that the New York papers were filled with interviews attributed to me with regard to the Alaska boundary, whereas, as a matter of fact, I always denied every interviewer who called on me. As I came on deck, these men waylaid me without any shame and asked me to give them an interview. And, although I said I would not be interviewed, still interviews with me were published. I would not take the trouble to deny such things. They were not true. It is time that public men should not be held responsible except for what they utter themselves otherwise some time or other they will have to take this position. They will have to deny responsibility for anything attributed to them in the papers unless it bears such a character as makes it sure it comes from them. The chief justice, in my opinion, in the abundance of his caution, went out of his way to deny the statement attributed to him. Nobody thinks more of him because of that denial; no one would have thought the less of him if he had not made it. Nobody would have thought him capable of such an indiscretion. He thought it worth while no doubt to make a denial because there had been persistent statements in the American press to the effect that he was going to give away the case. Even the Canadian papers have been indiscreet enough to repeat such statements which have been continually in the American press the last two months. Perhaps on that ac-

count lie thought he should at once take this opportunity of nailing down such a calumny, but he had no call to do so for everybody knows the statement was false.


Rufus Henry Pope: The right hon. the Prime Minister has said that no one believes Lord Alverstone was going to give away our case. He must have forgotten his Canadian history. He must have forgotten that practically every Canadian case was given away, and there is a very strong suspicion


Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.).: What about the fishery award ?


Rufus Henry Pope: In nearly all cases. My hon. friend knows his history as well as I do, because he began reading it a long time before I did. That is a fact, and when this appeared in the public press there was a great deal of anxiety in the minds of ordinary Canadian citizens far and wide, and it afforded pleasure to the people and showed great wisdom on his part that Lord Alverstone sent that message. Not that any one who knows Lord Alverstone, not that the Prime Minister of Canada or any citizen who really considers the position Lord Alverstone occupies, thinks that that message would make any difference in his decision, but if his decision were to be against Canada, it is fortunate that he sent that message, and if it is for Canada, it is fortunate he sent it, because it will help to allay that unfortunate feeling of unrest that exists in the minds of the public of Canada, when they think of the manner in which they have been used in the past in treaty matters.
At one o'clock, Committee took recess.
Committee resumed at three o'clock.


Robert Laird Borden: When we rose at one o'clock, Mr. Chairman, we were discussing questions arising out of certain cablegrams respecting alleged utterances of Mr. Aylesworth. For my own part, I am still inclined to take the view that language of this kind could not be uttered by Mr. Aylesworth, although I appreciate the force of what has been said by some hon. gentlemen in this House that a little uncertainty is created by the fact that he has not followed the example of Lord Alverstone. I appreciate, of course, what my right hon. friend has said as to the impossibility of men in public life giving attention to every case in which they are misrepresented ; I have said twice during this session that any public man who would undertake to do that would not have much time for anything else. But a situation of this kind is a little out of the usual course. We are dealing with delicate international relations, and possibly it might be a case, in fact it is a case, where the rule to which my right hon. friend has referred might have been departed from by Mr. Aylesworth, if this telegram has been brought to his attention.


Wilfrid Laurier: We must not, of course, overlook the fact that he possibly knows nothing about this telegram. Since we rose at one o'clock, I observe a telegram from London from which it appears that Lord Alverstone has made some reference to discussions in this House. The language of the telegram is as follows :
Lord Chief Justice Alverstone in replying after referring to the death of Sir Michael Herbert. said that though the tribunal was not an illustration of arbitration it was 'an honest and patriotic attempt to solve by mutual discussion subjects which might become serious. I have no fault to find with anything that has been said and done. We have proceeded with great unanimity and I only wish that those who do not understand the motives of the tribunal would abstain from attributing motives to its members which do not exist.'
This open reference to Canadian criticism of Lord Alverstone's supposed pre-disposition towards the American case caused no little sensation. It was followed by Lord Alvestone somewhat passionately declaring that in a long public career he had never objected to criticism after he had taken a certain course of action but he did bitterly resent criticism beforehand.
So far as this parliament is concerned- and the reference by Lord Alverstone seems to me to matters that have been mentioned in this parliament-I think that all the members of this House should agree with me that not the slightest attempt to criticise Lord Alverstone has been made here. The only reference to him was made by the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Bell) who brought to the attention of the government a certain telegram which was sent out from a reputable source in London, and on being assured by the right hon. the Minister of Trade and Commerce that in his opinion no attention should be paid to a rumour of that kind, my hon. friend (Mr. Bell) made no further reference to the subject and accepted as absolutely satisfactory the view of the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce. I think it is perhaps right for us to say this lest there should be any impression in the mind of Lord Alverstone or any one else that there has been in this parliament the slightest suggestion of criticism upon any action which his Lordship has taken since he was appointed one of the commissioners to sit on this tribunal on behalf of Great Britain.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I certainly endorse every word of my hon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax). Nothing has been said which reflected in any way upon Lord Alverstone. For my own part, I still persist in believing that even the report which has just been read by my hon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax) of the remarks of Lord Alverstone have been highly coloured.


Robert Laird Borden: Very likely.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I repeat that I cannot believe Lord Alverstone could take offence at anything that has been said here.

Additional amount required to assist in defraying coat of the publication of documents issued by the Canadian Mining Institute, $2,000.


The PRIME MINISTER.: 
Robert Laird Borden: Might I ask whether or not the proceedings of the institute are distributed ? Are they sent to members of parliament or to any public bodies ? It is a very desirable object, I believe, to assist this work, although the increase is a very substantial one. Possibly it would not be impossible to make some condition as to the distribution.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Speaking under correction, but I am sure that I am right,
I may say that these reports to which we are now contributing this sum are sent to all public libraries, and I think they are also sent abroad.
Amount required to cover expenses connected with land slide at Turtle Mountain, $8,000.


The PRIME MINISTER.: This grant is made necessary in order to undo the great damage which was caused by the flood at Frank. The House will remember that during the present session, I think it was in the month of May, in consequence of a very serious flood after great rains which took place at Dead Man's river, a part of Turtle mountain was thrown into the river, which accident threatened the collieries at Frank, and we had to send a force to that place in order to remove the debris and make a passage for the water. This is to cover that expenditure.
Additional amount required for expenses of the Assay office in British Columbia, $1,000.


The PRIME MINISTER.: 
The PRIME MINISTER.: 
Robert Laird Borden: I think I understood from the right hon. gentleman the other day that the real effect of this was to give an increase of $100.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I was mistaken. It is an increase of $400.
Dominion Lands-charge-able to income-further amount required for salaries of the outside service, $10,000.


The PRIME MINISTER.: This is to provide for an increase in the outside service, and chiefly for clerical work in the different land offices in the North-west Territories. The clerical staff has to be increased on account of the great increase of work which has taken place in the various land offices. I was asked to give some information upon this subject the other day. During the first nine months of 1902 the number of free homestead entries was 15,983. For the same nine months of the present year the number of free homestead entries has risen to 36,882. The arrivals during the first nine months of 1902 were 68,802, and the arrivals during the first nine months of the present year were 108,014.


Samuel Hughes: Bast year I drew attention to the fact that a great many of the settlers coming in and taking up homesteads were unmarried men. You cannot force a man to marry, but you can encourage him to marry. I want to say that it is my opinion, based on careful observation, that a married man two years in that country is worth a single man half a dozen years


The PRIME MINISTER.: So he is everywhere.


Samuel Hughes: Much more so there than anywhere else, because in other localities the young fellows have an opportunity of brushing up, they are under the influence of women in the older settled districts more than they are in the remote regions of the North-west. I think the Prime Minister could do a good service to the country by giving a man his homestead after two years provided he is a married man, and making it five years if he is a single man.


Mr. McCREARY.: Why does not my hon. friend go further, and say that spinsters may take up homesteads, the same as in the United States ?


Samuel Hughes: I think that should be a law, too.


The PRIME MINISTER.: I would go back to the practice in my own province and provide a free homestead for every man who has children.


Rufus Henry Pope: I would like to ask the right hon. gentleman if there has been any provision made for the increase in the salary of Mr. Bennett at Strathcona ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: There has 'been no increase.
Excise-salaries of officers and inspectors of excise. &c.-further amount required to provide increase in accordance with the proposed amendment. schedule B, Inland Revenue, Civil Service Act, $12,000.


John Dowsley Reid: Will the Minister of Inland Revenue (Hon. Mr. Bernier) give us an explanation V


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE (Hon. M. E. Bernier).: Mr. Chairman, the main estimates were made up at the beginning of the year, and this sum is to meet the increases provided for by the Bill amending the Civil Service Act which was passed to-day. I propose, with the consent of the Committee, as four mbnths of the current year have elapsed, to reduce the amount to $8,000.


John Dowsley Reid: Give us a list of the officials who have received the increases.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: When the list was originally prepared provision was made for increases totalling $12,528.13. The collectors were to receive $2,205, the deputy collectors $1,467.50, accountants $460, special class excisemen $930, first-class excisemen $3,910.63, second-class excisemen $2,782.50, third-class excisemen $772.50. This money is divided by inland revenue districts as follows :


ONTARIO.
[Stage Direction]
No. of
District.	Officers.	Amount.
Belleville			$305 00
Brantford			318 75
Cornwall			40 00
Guelph			747 50
Hamilton			946 25
Kingston				265 00
London			593 13
Ottawa			225 00
Perth			190 00
Owen Sound			67 50
Peterborough			75 00
Port Arthur			40 00
Prescott			462 50
St. Catharines	
3	132 50Stratford	
4	380 00Toronto.. 	1,885 00Windsor	
16	1,177 50Total	128	$7,850 63
Mr. McCreary.

[Stage Direction]
Joliette..			130 00
Montreal.			1,802 50
Quebec..			355 00
St. Hyacinthe				137 50
Sherbrooke				225 00
Three Rivers	
1	60 00Total	
48	$2,710 00NEW BRUNSWICK.	St. John.	415 00NOVA	SCOTIA.	Halifax..	567 50Pictou..	40 00Total	
12	$ 607 50PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND.	Charlottetown	
1	60 00MANITOBA.	Winnipeg	
7	477 50BRITISH	COLUMBIA.	Vancouver	9	160 00Victoria..	
4	247 50Total	
7	$ 407 50I ask	that the amount shall be	reduced
from $12,000 to $8,000.
Mr, FOWLER. May I ask the hon. minister whether provision is made for raising the salary of his secretary ?
The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: No.


George William Fowler: How many private secretaries has the hon. minister at the present time ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: I have one secretary-Mr. Bourgault. He will receive the same increase as the other officers of the inside service under the Bill.


George William Fowler: Do I understand that the minister has only one>
private secretary, although the civil service list credits him with three ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: There is only one private secretary ; Mr. Bourgault, of St. Hyacinthe, at $600.


John Dowsley Reid: Would the minister give me the names of those who received increases at Prescott, and their present salaries ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: Subject to a deduction of one-third in the figures I give, the following are the increases : Mr. Keilty, collector, salary $1,600, increase $200. Mr. Gerald is a special officer and he will receive no increase. Mr. Melville, increase $100 ; Mr. Macdonald, increase $60 ; Sir. Keeler, increase $42.50. Mr. Johnston is asking for a superannuation, but lie would be entitled to an increase of $30. and Mr. Marshall gets an increase of $30 also.


Hon. Mr. HAGGART.: Would the minister give the increases in the office at Perth ?


The MINISTER OP INLAND REVENUE.: Mr. McLenaghan, increase $70 ; Mr. Mason, increase $70 ; Mr. Goodman, increase $50.


John Dowsley Reid: Are these increases given according to length of service, or on what are they based ?


The MINISTER OP INLAND REVENUE.: The increases of salary are based on the following plan : officers who have not yet reached the new minimum receive an increase that will bring their salaries up to that minimum as fixed by the new amend-mont to the Civil Service Act ; officers wlirr have passed the new minimum and are receiving a regular increment of 5 per cent will receive an additional amount beyond that provided in the main estimates, which makes the annual increase 5 per cent on the new minimum.


John Dowsley Reid: What is the present salary of Mr. Melville and Mr. Gerald ?


The MINISTER OP INLAND REVENUE.: Mr. Melville's present salary is $1,200, and Mr. Gerald's $1,600.


John Dowsley Reid: In so far as the increases of salary at Prescott are concerned, a more unfair proposition could not be submitted to this House. Personally, I am glad to see these officers getting an increase of salary, but here is Mr. Gerald, who has been in the department for twenty years and who is one of the best officers in the Dominion of Canada without doubt, and who has passed his civil service examination and he gets no increase, while Mr. Keilty, who is not capable of taking the position which Mr. Gerald occupies, gets an increase of $200. Mr. Melville, whom the minister only appointed a few days ago at a salary of $1,200, gets an increase of $100 per annum, and Mr. Gerald, who has been so long in the service, gets no increase. The best man in the service to-day is Mr. Gerald. He is the most competent man in the office. Working right alongside him is Mr. Macdonald, who gets an increase of $60, and Mr. Gerald gets none. The minister tries to get out of this by saying that Mr. Gerald is a special officer, but he has passed all examinations and he is the chief excise man there, and there is no question that he is one of the best men in the Dominion of Canad to-day. It may have been that Mr. Gerald's brother, who is the deputy minister, has hesitated in recommending an increase, but it is a most unfair thing that the other officers should get increases and that Mr. Gerald, who has been twenty years in the department, should get no increase. I do not object to these other gentlemen getting increases, and I am glad to see that they do, but there should be fair-play all
round. While on this point, I wish to express regret that the Minister of Customs has not taken a vote to increase the salaries of his officers at Prescott, because they are all hard-working officials and they should have got increases. I appeal to the Minister of Inland Revenue, to add to this vote an increase of $200 for Mr. Gerald, and I may say that there is not a Liberal in the town of Prescott who would not recommend that being done.


The MINISTER OP INLAND REVENUE.: I am free to admit that Mr. Gerald is one of the best officers we have in the province of Ontario. He had an increase of $100 in his salary from the 1st of -Tnlv and lip hns-received every year $150 of what we call duty pay in addition to his salary. Though Mr. Gerald is a very capable man, the law does not allow us to give him more. The list was prepared by the deputy of the department. He knows the law, and I am informed by him that we could not do better than we have done. With regard to the deputy collector, he is, of course, a new man ; but he has received the salary to which be is entitled under the law. There is a minimum, and maximum fixed, and it is the custom of the department to give a fair remuneration to the officers. These increases have been given in order to raise the minimum of each class as it is prescribed by the amended Act.


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. minister is now leading us to believe that in giving the deputy collector this increase, he is doing what is fair all round. Why did he not deal with the officers entitled to an increase in the town of Prescott ? He had a deputy collector in the town of Prescott before he appointed the present one five or six days ago. Why was his salary not brought up to the salary of the present deputy collector ? This man is ahead of the other, so far as promotion is concerned; but the other was appointed to evade the Civil Service Act, and he has since passed the examination. One of these deputy collectors in the town of Prescott has received an increase of $100, though appointed less than a month ago, and has $1,300 per annum. Will the hon. minister explain why he dis-' criminates between the two ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: The hon. gentleman refers to Mr. White. He was appointed deputy collector class B. He has not passed his examination, and therefore it is not in our power to raise his salary. If I were to increase the salaries of all the deputy collectors in class B in one locality, I woud have to do the same all over the Dominion. I have tried to equalize the salaries as well as I could. It is no fault of the department if Mr. White had not taken the precaution to qualify j himself. I have nothing to say^ against 1 him ; he is a good officer ; but he is not in

a position, to perform the duties of deputy collector in class A, or those of Mr. Gerald.


John Dowsley Reid: When Mr. White was appointed two or three years ago, he was appointed deputy collector to evade the Civil Service Act, and at the present time he is filling the position of exciseman. In this way the law is evaded. Was the collector in class A when he was promoted ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: Yes, he was collector in class A, and he had passed the promotion examination.


John Dowsley Reid: In the list of increases which the bon. minister has read, is there any deputy collector in class B who has any increase?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: No, none.


George William Fowler: I asked the minister a question respecting private secretaries. He stated that there was only one, Mr. Alphonse Bourgault. I see that the civil service list gives his name and two others, Napoleon Potvin and Robert Peter Yetts. Besides, I understand that the minister has an assistant secretary, Miss Chevrier, one of the famous Chevrier family who are so numerous in the civil service. Will the bon. minister say why he has these three private secretaries ?	.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: I am not responsible for misprints. Mr. Alphonse Bourgault is my private secretary, but the others are messengers. Napoleon Potvin has never been my private secretary, and Mr. Yetts is a messenger. He has never been a private secretary.


George William Fowler: It is strange that there should be any misprints. In the first place, I do not sete why this office should require three messengers.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: There were three in the department, and one was transferred to the laboratory branch.


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. gentleman states that Mr. Johnston has applied for superannuation. Has that been . granted yet ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: No, but I have prepared a recommendation for it at his own request.


John Dowsley Reid: Has any other gentleman been recommended for the position ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: No.


John Dowsley Reid: I understood that another officer had applied for superannuation.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: No. Mr. Ferguson was superannuated at his own request about three months ago.


Hon. Mr. BERNIER.: 


John Dowsley Reid: Has Mr. Bisset passed the examination ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: No, he is a temporary officer.


John Dowsley Reid: Is he likely to hold that position permanently if he does not pass the examination ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: No. He has been told, like everybody else in the department who has not complied with the law, to present himself for examination in the month of November next.


John Dowsley Reid: Suppose he fails in the examination ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: Then I suppose we shall have to keep him there for a certain time, and he will run his risk.


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. minister is evading the Civil Service Act; and when i brought the fact to his attention, he tried to make out that there was nothing in it. He has appointed a man to that position who never passed the civil service examination and never will. The hon. minister admits that if he fails next November to pass, he will still be kept on. And if he should fail the following November, he will still be continued in office indefinitely. I have heard it discussed throughout the constituency that the hon. gentleman has agreed to appoint preventive officers and promote preventive officers to collectors without any examination whatever. That is unfair to those who have passed their examinations.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: The hon. gentleman has gone a little too far. I have said already that there were two doors open by which appointments could be made without the applicants passing an examination. One is to appoint deputy collectors and the other temporary officers. These temporary officers are not appointed by Order in Council but by letter sent to the collector, telling him to employ a man temporarily at a stated salary. If my hon. friend is so anxious to have the law respected, he should go back some twenty years and he will find that almost every department had then and has still men who never passed their examination. This Mr. Bissell was appointed just the same as other temporary officers. He was not appointed to fill the position left vacant by Mr. Ferguson, but if he qualifies himself he will be entitled to take that position. If he does not do his duties properly or if he cannot pass the examination, he will have to resign; but if that rule be applied a great many officials, who are friends of the party opposite and who were appointed by them, would have to be dismissed.


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. gentleman asked me to go back twenty years,

but we are dealing with the present, and I am not referring to any constituency but the one I represent. I challenge him to name one instance in the county of Grenville, while the Conservatives were in power, in which the law was evaded. What I am asking is not unfair. If he appoints any person to a vacant position and that person cannot pass the civil service exami-tion, he ought to withdraw and give the place to someone who can pass it. The hon. minister proposes to let that man go on indefinitely, whether he passes or not. The hon. minister will have an Order in Council passed appointing the man as preventive officer. Will he say that if this man to whom I refer should fail in his ex animation, he will not continue in office 1


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: If I were to apply the law the hon. gentleman would find it would hurt his own supporters more than anybody else. There are many gentlemen who support the party opposite who have been years in office but for one reason or another have never passed the examination; and if the hon. gentleman wants the rule to be applied to all departments he takes the responsibility of urging that perhaps 200 or more temporary officers, who have been in the service many years, will be dismissed. I am not not ready to say that there is one in the constituency represented by the hon. gentleman who has not complied with the law ; but should there be one, it would not be prudent, or in the interests of that gentleman, that we should bring his name forward, because he is exactly in the same position as many others who are not disturbed.


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. minister led us to believe that he was going to have a better staff and make improvements and have everything in better shape. Is it a sample of his improvements that he will appoint men to positions who cannot pass the examination ? Because that was done in the past is no excuse for doing it now. 1 understood from the hon. minister that he was going to stand by the Civil Service Act, and I think it is a very poor excuse to say that because his predecessors made appointments of this kind, he is going to continue the same thing. I am not asking for the dismissal of any officer who has been in the service for years, but I do not want him to appoint men on the staff whether they can pass the examination or not. There are plenty of men in my constituency who have passed the examination and who are just as good Liberals as the man you have appointed. If the hon. minister is going to continue a policy of this kind, there will be no object for young men to pass the civil service examination, because all they will need to get positions will be a recommendation from the Liberal committee, even if they cannot read or write.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: Is the hon. gentleman able to give me the name of a man in Prescott who cannot sign his name ?


John Dowsley Reid: I did not say that there was an officer in Prescott who could not write his name. I say that if any man in the county of Grenville can secure the recommendation of the Liberal committee to a vacancy in the Inland Revenue Department, whether he can write his name or not, the hon. minister will appoint him and evade the law.
To increase the salaries of the inspectors of distilleries, inspector of bonded factories, inspector of tobacco factories, and-inspector of malt houses and breweries, not exceeding $300 in any one case, $1,200.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: As the Committee will see, no increase in salary was provided for the inspectors in the different divisions of the Dominion. We have -eight of those divisions in the Dominion-one in British Columbia, one in Manitoba, three in Ontario, two in Quebec and one in the lower provinces. Before the position of assistant commissioner was abolished three years ago, the gentleman who held that position, the present deputy minister, acted at the same time as inspector of tobacco, manufactories, distilleries, breweries, &c. Since the positions of commissioner and assistant commissioner were abolished the duties of the deputy minister were such that he could not attend to the duties required from the inspector. Mr. Barrett, of Winnipeg, is inspector of breweries and malt houses ; Mr. Kenning, of Windsor, is inspector of dis-stilleries ; Mr. -Stratton is inspector of bonded factories. The inspector of tobacco factories has not yet been appointed, but he will be chosen from the best qualified district inspectors in the province of Quebec, and probably Mr. Lawlor will be appointed as such inspector. The jurisdiction of these inspectors will be over all Canada, and the increase will take effect from January or sooner. The present maximum salary of the inspectors is $2,500.


George William Fowler: It seems to me that these gentlemen are well provided for now with $2,500 and expenses. Why are the words added :
Not to exceed $300 in any one case ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: We are not bound to give all of that increase in the same year, that will be the maximum of their salaries. We have amon-g these gentlemen some who have not yet reached the present maximum of their salaries. '


George William Fowler: By this provision you are taking into the hands of the minister power to do just the thing to which objection has -been taken, -give increases on

grounds of favouritism to men who have not fulfilled the conditions which, under the Act, entitles them to an increase. These increases should be statutory and should not be at the discretion of the minister, subject, I presume, to the recommendation of the deputy minister. I make no reflection upon the minister or his deputy. I assume that these gentlemen are the same as ordinary mortals, with the same infirmities, moved by the same impulses, and I say that you are putting that power Into the hands of the minister of the deputy to discriminate between officers who may ibe equally worthy. It gives an opportunity for a great deal of unfairness, and should not be sanctioned.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: These officers, Mr. Kenning, Mr. Barrett, Mr. Stratton and Mr. Lawlor, are officers of long standing and capacity in the department.


George William Fowler: I am not saying anything against the officers. I do not know anything about these gentlemen, I assume that they are worthy men.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: I give this information, because some persons might suppose that undue favour was being shown to these officers. Mr. Lawlor has been in the service as collector at Montreal for fifteen or seventeen years. Last year he was promoted to the office of inspector, with a salary of $2,300. whereas he was only getting $2,200 as collector. The position of inspector may be transferred from one man to another man. The first gentleman appointed inspector was Mr. Gow. Some two years ago he retired and was superannuated, and was succeeded by Mr. Kenning who was collector at Windsor, and one of the oldest officers in the department. Mr. Stratton held a similar position for many years, as did also Mr. Barrett. Wlfen another man is appointed he will be entitled like these gentlemen to receive an additional $300. If any of these gentlemen were to retire or were to be replaced by some others, their salary would be reduced, because the salary is attached to the position and not to the person himself. This $300 is given to the gentlemen, whoever they are, who fulfil the duties of inspector of breweries, distilleries, tobacco manufactories and so forth.


George William Fowler: If that be the case why does the hon. gentleman want power to make a distinction ? If the salary belongs to the office and not to the incumbent, why does he want to make a distinction ? Toil say these four men are to be selected from the eight officers who are now fulfilling certain duties. What additional service do these four men have to give in order to entitle them to receive an increase over the other four men who are left behind ? Is it because they are travelling inspectors that they require more salary ? That is a reason against it. because if you pay, this Mr. FOWLER.
man's expenses, if he is travelling all the time you pay all his living expenses. He is not at the expense of living at home. If he were at home he would have to pay his own board. The person who remains at home really requires more salary than the officer who is constantly travelling. I can not see any justification in anything the minister has said in favour of this increase.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: This practice has prevailed ever since I have been at the head of the department. These special inspectors will be chosen among the best officers, and we consider the best officers are those whose capacity and long training have fitted them for the first positions in the service, that is to say, district inspectors. Of course, there will be four men who will not benefit by this special allowance, but there has been no discrimination shown. I had to appoint two, Mr. Kennie and Mr. Lawlor, and they were chosen among the oldest officers on the staff.	The
other four will wait until these gentlemen disappear by death or otherwise. It may be said that it is not fair to choose between them. But we hold out an inducement for those who aspire to be district inspectors to qualify themselves to fulfil the duties of an inspector for a special industry. The hon. member must remember that these gentlemen must possess not only qualifications of a special character which enable them to fulfil the duties of inspector in their own division, but they must go all through the Dominion and inspect all these various manufactories, and inspect the books. There fore they must possess a technical knowledge. I do not see that there is any injustice in saying to these inspectors who are younger : Wait for a while until these gentlemen who are now your superiors disappear, and then, if the same salary is still provided by parliament, you will have your opportunity of rising and getting the $300 additional. This $300 is only a small reward for those who receive no increase of salary. I find by looking at the schedule of salaries that the salaries of the inspectors have not been increased, they remain at $2,500, while the other officers, the collectors and deputy collectors, accountants and so forth, are receiving increases.


George William Fowler: The minister says it is uot the intention to give the salary to the man but to the position. Supposing the inspector of a distillery was removed and went back to his old position, then he would lose the additional salary which is attached to the former position.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: He would lose a portion of the $300.


George William Fowler: If it be the case that the salary goes to the office and not to the individual. why should there be that discrimination between the positions ? Is not the position of inspector of distilleries as impor-
13977	OCTOBEE 14, 1903	13978
tant as that of inspector of bonded factories, of tobacco factories, or malt houses and breweries ? Why, make any distinction between the positions in respect to salaries ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: There is no discrimination with regard to salaries. I have stated that we can do one thing or another. The intention is to give these gentlemen $300, and we ask for that amount, but we are not bound to give it. I have explained that there is no discrimination, that in the case of Mr. Lawlor, for instance, he is inspector of the largest and most important districts in the whole Dominion. He is the inspector, lint, as he in fl-new officer, he is only receiving $2,300. I said that we proposed to give him $300, which would make his salary $2,600, and the other gentlemen would be entitled to the same amount of increase ; that is to say, $300.


George William Fowler: 
The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: That is not what I propose. I say that we are not bound to give $300 to all of them. We. might begin at $100, or $200, or we might make it $300, but if one receives $100 the others will receive $100, and there will be no discrimination.


George William Fowler: And no more ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: And no more.


George William Fowler: That is satisfactory. The hon. minister did not say that before.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: We cannot change the scale of salaries now paid to those officers who are occupying positions as inspectors. We do not propose to change the salaries of those who receive $2,500. I have taken the case of Mr. Lawlor, because he is only receiving $2,300, as he was recently appointed, and if we give $100, $200 or $300 to one, the other three will receive the same increase.


George William Fowler: As the hon. minister has made that statement, as far as the division of the money is concerned, it is perfectly satisfactory. At the same time, I protest against the increase at all, because I do not
think there should be an increase. I do not think the fact that they are travelling men should entitle them to an increase.


John Dowsley Reid: As far as Prescott is concerned, I would make one more appeal to the hon. minister. Mr. ICeilty receives $1,300 and Mr. Gerald $1,500. The hon. minister states that Mr. Gerald is to receive $1,600 and that Mr. Keilty will receive $1,600. Mr. Gerald is a special officer, he has a large family to support, it is very expensive living there, and as I think he should have an increase I would be very glad if the hon. minister could see his way clear to give nim one. We could pass it now. He is a special officer, and there is no reason why he should not get an increase with the rest. He is really the head of the staff at Prescott. He is the main officer there and he is entitled to a little increase. If the hon. minister would consent to give him an iuerease I do not think it would be unfair, and I think every officer in Prescott would be glacf to see him get an increase with the rest. I hope the hon. minister will see his way clear to grant him an increase.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: I regret that I cannot change the law, although I am ready to appreciate that Mr. Gerald is one of the best officers in the service. Mr. Gerald is entitled to a $100 increase from the 1st of July. He received it. Next year he will be entitled to $100 more and he will receive it. I cannot change the schedule of the Act.


George Taylor: And he has $150 from another source.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: Yes. I think he is entirely satisfied. My authority for speaking in that way, is that the gentleman who applies the law is a brother of Mr. Gerald, of Prescott.


John Dowsley Reid: I am very sorry, but I understood that the law was such that in the case of a special officer the department could give him any salary they wished. I think, if the hon. minister could see his way clear to evade the law in other instances, he could have seen his way clear to have got around it in this case.


Edward Hackett: What salary has Mr. Nash, the inspector of Inland Revenue in Prince Edward Island ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: One thousand two hundred dollars, and be will receive $60 of an increase according to the amended schedule that forms part of the Civil Service Act.


Edward Hackett: I desire to bring to the notice of the hon. Minister of Inland Revenue the fact that I spoke to him a few days ago in regard to the claim of Mr. O'Rielly, whose factory was burned and whose tobacco had to be supplied from the

139S0
outside. Will the hon. minister state if Mr. O'Rielly is to be compensated ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: I am told by my deputy that this claim was discussed, and that there is no legal ground for entertaining the same.


Edward Hackett: There may be no legal grounds for it, but there are moral grounds. Mr. O'Rielly's tobacco factory was destroyed by fire after the place was stocked for the winter season. The hon. minister will find that the revenue derived from this factory this year was more than the previous year, and I trust that he will see that Mr. O'Rielly is compensated for the loss he sustained in the fire.


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: I would not like to pass judgment on the case of Mr. O'Rielly. The facts are these : There was a certain quantity of tobacco destroyed by fire. I presume that this gentleman had some insurance on the premises and on the goods, but the law says that no refund can be made on goods destroyed by fire after the duty is paid. The goods were in store in Mr. O'Rielly's factory. They were destroyed, and we are not able, because thei law prevents us, to give any refund to the gentleman. I presume this has been discussed somewhere, and although the department would be willing to help Mr. O'Rielly to the best of its ability, we cannot do it under the law as it is now.


Edward Hackett: Have you not already allowed Mr. O'Rielly a certain amount of compensation for this loss ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: Yes, but the cases are quite different. In one instance he was allowed to pass a free entry to cover goods destroyed in bond but when the goods have been entered and the duty paid we are not allowed to refund the money.


George William Fowler: Were these goods destroyed in the bonded warehouse or in the factory?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: In his tobacco factory.


George William Fowler: There is a bonded warehouse which is a part of each factory. Were these goods in that bonded warehouse or outside of the bonded warehouse in the factory ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: If the goods are destroyed before duty is paid he has not to pay the duty ; but. when the goods were destroyed in his factory or warehouse as was the case in Prince Edward Island, they were his property and should have been insured.


George William Fowler: They were not in the bonded warehouse ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: No.
Salaries and contingent expenses of the several ports in Canada-additional amount required for salaries (including pay for overtime of officers, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act), $100,000.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: When the main estimates were under consideration I explained that the government would in future pay officers who are engaged for extra service at railway stations and such. This has been a charge on the transportation companies hitherto, and for many years past they have been representing that it should be a charge on the revenue of the Dominion.


George Taylor: The minister fully explained this before.


Rufus Henry Pope: This vote is well worded when it speaks of working ' overtime ' and the ' outside service.' Would it include the salary of H. L. Pelletier, who is employed hi the customs house in Montreal, and who works overtime canvassing for ' Le Canada ' ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: There is a gentleman named H. E. Pelletier in the Montreal office.


Rufus Henry Pope: That is the gentleman. Does the minister know he is canvassing for ' Le Canada ' in the country districts and that he has been spending some three weeks in the county of Chateauguay in that mission ? Would that come under the heading of 'overtime' or 'outside service'?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No. This is the first I have heard of that matter, but I can assure the hon. gentleman that Mr. Pelletier will not be paid out of this vote. I do not know whether Mr. Pelletier may have been doing some work during his holidays.


Rufus Henry Pope: I understand that Mr. Latour, an officer of the Public Works Department, got six months leave of absence on account of ill health, his son taking his place, and that he is also an agent for ' Le Canada ' through the province of Quebec. I have often heard the Minister of Customs in his eloquent and able and sometimes loud manner. denounce public officers for doing political work, and if Mr. Pelletier, who is drawing a salary from the government is canvassing for a political organ like ' Le Canada ' will the Minister of Customs take his political head off and dismiss him?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I do not know anything about the circumstances of the case, but they will be inquired into. He is a permanent officer and gets three weeks leave of absence.


Rufus Henry Pope: When did he have his three weeks leave ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The collector arranges that, and we have no means


Edward Hackett: of knowing. X do not think that the collector at Montreal would give Mr. Pelletier extra leave to go on a mission of that kind.


Rufus Henry Pope: Do I understand that a permanent officer can devote himself to political work when he is on his holidays ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Is canvassing for a newspaper ' political work ' ?


Rufus Henry Pope: Canvassing for a government party organ.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The interference of officials in politics is not favoured, buL does canvassing ror a regular established journal come under the head of political work ?


Rufus Henry Pope: What is the opinion of the minister on that ? During the last seven years we have had a great many dismissals "because some officers interfered but slightly in political matters, and there is no doubt that when a man is canvassing for a party organ he is probably making as much political capital as he can out of it. I know of no better introduction to a house for political work that the canvassing for a newspaper. I would like to know If the minister thinks this man has a right to do that work in his holidays ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I would not like to express an opinion on what a man might or might not do in his holidays. As to a man being connected with a newspaper, I think complaints have been made of that in my department, and it has been recognized that we must not draw the line too strictly in that respect. As the hon. gentleman says1 he has done the work in his holidays, I would not like to say offhand that he had done wrong. I would like to inquire into the matter first.


Rufus Henry Pope: Certainly, I would not ask the hon. minister to condemn him without inquiry. That he was canvassing there is no doubt. During his holidays he would be drawing his salary, as he is a permanent officer. Under these circumstances, how-can the minister have any doubt as to his doing partisan work ?
The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS, I am not putting it on the ground of partisan work. I am putting it on the ground that the hon. gentleman says he has been canvassing for subscriptions to a public journal. It seems to me that there is a distinction between a case of that kind and the case of an officer going out and canvassing to have votes cast for a political party. I think the hon. gentleman must see the distinction.


Rufus Henry Pope: I would see a distinction if it were an ordinary magazine or paper that was not absolutely wrapped up in politics. But I think the minister must agree with me that a paper published as a mouthpiece
of a political party is different. If a man takes- that paper into his household, I think it is a pretty strong temptation for him to begin to canvass and talk politics for that paper. I think it is the strongest evidence that that gentleman has been working for a certain party through a certain journal ; and if it be found to be true that Mr. Pelletier was going through the country canvassing for ' De Canada,' which is recognized in the province of Quebec as a political paper published in the interest of the Liberal party, the minister should tell us whether he considers that work political work or not, and whether he intpnfis to investigate the case ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: All our papers, I suppose, might be called political papers, as they are supposed to represent the views of one party or the other. I do not want to say anything about the matter, as this is the first time that it has been brought to my notice; but the hon. gentleman having brought the matter up, I will ask the collector for a report upon it.


George Taylor: Had not the hon. gentleman better allow this item to stand until he communicates with his officer in Montreal, and ascertain the facts ? My hon. friend says this man spent three weeks in Chateauguay county. If he has spent three weeks in every county in Quebec, he has used up all his holidays and more. The information is that he is travelling around the country doing this kind of work. The hon. minister had better ascertain when he took his leave of absence, to see whether it corresponds with the time that my hon. friend says he spent in the county of Chateauguay. Then, he brings up the case of Mr. Latour, an employee of the Public Works Department, who has been granted leave of absence and whose son has been put in his place, in order that he might become the head travelling agent for * Le Canada.' It is said that he goes to every postmaster in the country and demands from him the names of all the subscribers to Conservative newspapers which go to that office and if the postmaster refuses to give the names, he threatens him with dismissal. The government gives this man six months' leave of absence to go out and do this work: and the hon. minister now wants this vote to give this man an extra allowance for doing this political work.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I think my hon. friend is not serious in that. This vote has nothing to do with Mr. Pelletier. He is a regular officer on the Montreal staff, and is being paid out of appropriations already granted by parliament. As I have explained, the larger part of this vote is for the pay of extra officers who have previously been paid by the transportation companies.


Edward Cochrane: Ts not Mr. Pelletier under the pay of the department?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes.


Edward Cochrane: So this has nothing to do with the circumstance, because this vote does not appertain to his payment.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: His pay does not come out of this ; therefore, I think there would be no necessity of letting the item stand. I will make inquiries, and if he will bring the question up on concurrence, I will tell him then what I have learned about it. The estimates of the Department of Customs are generally prepared with that regard for economy which should meet the approval of the House, and they generally go through without any very disparag ing comment.


Edward Cochrane: It is all very well to talk about the estimates being prepared with due regard to economy, but the hon. members on the back benches must laugh in their sleeves when they hear the ministers discourse in this strain. We were told by these gentlemen that they would not allow the civil servants to indulge in any active partisanship and they made that the excuse for dismissing a number of them without trial, yet here we have a case of an official going through the country doing party work, and when it is brought to the attention of the hon. minister he treats it very lightly. I should like very much to find one instance in which these hon. gentlemen opposite have kept their word. Here is a case of offensive partisanship, and I ask the hon. minister to treat it as the government did the cases of many Conservatives. They dismissed any number of officials, without even giving them an opportunity of defending themselves. Yet here is a flagrant case of political partisanship and they refuse to act. Here is an official who went around the country doing the political work of his party, and he is to be paid, not out of the pockets of hon. gentlemen opposite, but out of the revenues of the country. The farmers are bled white paying officials for running around doing work which the ministers ought to do themselves. We have the Minister of Customs now, a full fledged minister, although the party he supported said that the position he holds should not have been created, and that there were too many ministers. But no sooner did they secure office than they appointed more ministers.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The hon. gentleman who 'brought up the case is satisfied with the assurance that I have given that it was the first I heard of it and that I would inquire into it.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I regret that I am not satisfied with the plea of the hon. minister.
I would have thought that, from his long training in opposition, he would have had a very live mental apprehension of what political partisanship meant and would not have found it necessary to take time to


Edward Cochrane: ascertain whether a man who goes around canvassing for a political paper is a partisan or not. The hon. gentleman appears to be losing his mental intuition in these matters. I would regard it as a flagrant case of partisanship that an official should introduce among my electors a Liberal organ. What I find extraordinary is that the hon. minister could have any doubt about it. I would not mind an officer taking the stump for weeks during a violent political campaign because men's feelings are then aroused and you cannot then make a man change his political creed, but when you introduce, in times of peace, a political organ among the people, if it is intelligently written, you are introducing a very dangerous element against the party it is opposing, and I would regard the agent of that organ as a violent and a very astute political partisan. What I find extraordinary is that the minister should have any doubt.


John Dowsley Reid: Is there in that $100,000 any increases in Prescott ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes. The whole vote will be taken up with the payment of overtime and a little extra amount for the salaries of some officers we think are deserving.
Mi-. REID (Grenville). I understand that many officers have been getting quite a little sum from the Canadian Pacific Railway for overtime at night. I think they average something between $30 and $40 which they divide amongst themselves. Has that been taken away now ? Does the government receive the revenue and then pay these officers ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: It will be paid by us and not the Canadian Pacific Railway. The Canadian Pacific Railway used to pay that sum to the collectors at the various ports who paid it to the officers for extra work. The House is now assuming the payment of these officers for overtime. We require the transportation companies still to pay something where we consider the work entirely for their own benefit. For instance we require the services of a customs officer outside of Canada at the request of the railway companies they are accommodating. They ask that for their own convenience. The Canadian Pacific Railway may ask for a Canadian customs officer at Boston, Portland or Chicago, because it is a convenience to parties passing over that road, and they can secure passengers by having that facility. We have officers in attendance on frontier highway bridges and ferries during certain seasons of the year, to be regulated by the collector, subject to the approval of the department, and then such other customs services of a special character or class as may be required on the approval of the minister himself and on the applications of the par-

ties accommodated. When a company gets the services of an officer for its own special benefit and not for the benefit of Canada, we still require them to pay. In all other cases, if parliament consents to this vote, all extra services rendered by officers, which have hitherto been defrayed toy the transportation companies, will be defrayed out of this vote.


John Dowsley Reid: I hope that the two officers who have been dividing the time and receiving about $40 a month will continue to receive that, either from the railway company or from the department. They are in receipt of small salaries, and that is quite an item to them.


The MINISTER OP CUSTOMS.: Yes, that is the intention. In cases where officers' salaries have been supplemented by this extra service we will continue that, and they will be paid that amount, provided the hours of their day's duty before that has not been too long. We require the officers to give us the full day's time, and all services rendered after that will be paid for at 25 cents an hour. It may be that In some of the large ports which the commissioner has visited we may have to use some of this money to add an extra man or two, as it may be advisable to have night men, and we are asking for a little latitude in order that we may get this system into proper order.


Edward Cochrane: Is a collector of customs at a port supposed to be in his office a certain number of hours per day ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Yes, certainly ; offices are generally open from nine till four ; but we require all our officers to be on duty from eight to six, if business calls for it.


Robert Laird Borden: The Minister of Customs tells us, in a somewhat soothing tone, that every one seems to be perfectly satisfied about the charge made with respect to Mr. Pelletier, tout I hardly think we ought to be satisfied with the very vague remarks of my hon. friend with regard to that case. It seems to me a most extraordinary thing that an employee of the Department of Customs should, while drawing a salary from government, be engaged in canvassing for any newspaper, and I would think that my hon. friend himself would suggest that an item in his estimates referring to Mr. Pelletier should stand until an investigation had been held and definite and accurate information on the subject obtained and given to parliament and the people. My hon. friend seems to suggest that Mr. Pelletier had been canvassing while he was on a holiday. Would my hon. friend inform me whether or not this gentleman has any definite period for holidays ; and if so, at what season of the year ?
43S


The MINISTER OP CUSTOMS.: No, there is no definite three weeks in the year to which officers of the different ports are entitled. The collector arranges so that they may go away one by one, or two at a time, as he can spare them.


Rufus Henry Pope: The hon. minister said that I was quite satisfied with what he said ;
I am satisfied that he should investigate the question, and so far his reply was encouraging to me ; but I received no other information, and the balance of his reply gave me no satisfaction whatever. I still think that the minister should not permit such a violation of the proper conduct of an employee of his department. We know that many dismissals have taken place in the public service for alleged political actions by employees, and sometimes we can scarcely find a reason for dismissals that have taken place. Many of these men, some old and some young, have had to seek new ways for getting a living, and are suffering in consequence of either the high ideal of the hon. gentleman and his colleagues, or of the meanest sort of political ambition. I think we are entitled to know on which of these principles such dismissals have taken place. Personally, while I do not believe in officers taking any part in politics, there have been instances in my own knowledge in which the government have gone a very long way in seeking a reason for the dismissal of employees. I think the hon. minister should hold an investigation in this case, and that we should know whether the government is going to permit the employees of the departments to use their energies, while they are receiving government pay, to canvass for political newspapers ; for we know that a man who thus sows the seeds of a particular political faith in families is doing the most telling work in promoting the interests of a party. The hon. gentleman would not like to be held to the statement that there is no election in sight. He is not himself yet positive whether or not there is an election in sight. He does not know whether the government can or can not afford to have an election in the near future. The ministers have vacillated in their opinions as to the holding of an election ever since we came here on March 12th. The man who goes about as a canvasser for a political paper is doing the real work of a political organizer.
I do not know what my hon. friend thinks of the work of a man who goes out on that business. Of course, it is not the work of a man who goes forth to buy votes. But I know of no better way of spending money, if you wish to prepare a constituency, than to see that the proper newspapers which preach your political doctrines are circulated among the people in the constituency. I am not alone in having discovered that. I think the Minister of Customs is possessed of that fact as well as I am. It is well



known that every party makes a desperate effort to see that its own political organs take the place of others. Here we have a man going about for that purpose who is paid by the government-for I understand that Mr. Pelletier was in the permanent service-going about and asking the postmasters and others to give him a list of the people who get mail at their offices, and of those who take the opposition newspapers, in order to discourage the taking of the opposition papers and to encourage the taking of government organs. In my judgment this gentleman is doing most efficient political work. If he has been doing it he should be dismissed. I am satisfied the minister is going to investigate it. I wish I was going along with him, because I would be more certain how the investigation is going to be conducted. I trust he will make a complete investigation that will either *clear Mr. Pelletier or put him where he belongs.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I do not know that any one has been dealt witli by this government, certainly not in my own department, in a harsh way for doing nothing more serious than what the hon. gentleman alleges has been done in this case. The hon. gentleman surely would not ask me to pronounce judgment upon a man before he has been heard in his own defence. If there be something wrong in the matter-and I confess that canvassing for a great public journal, if he is doing it in his own time, is not a very serious matter- but if he has been guilty of any partisanship, he will be dealt with. Parties have been dealt with who had shown violent partisanship in using the power of their office in order to induce people to vote in an election. In my opinion a civil servant should abstain from anything like partisanship. But the hon. gentleman will allow that he should be heard in his own defence, he will allow that I ought to ask the collector at Montreal what the circumstances were. In cases of people 'dismissed from my own department for political reasons, there was in every instance an investigation, and when the report came it was dealt with. The rule was not stretched in any case in order to inculpate any one. It was more pleasing to me to find that there were reasons that might justify the retention of the accused officer. Simply because a man had perhaps inadvertently taken part in an election, did not appear to be sufficient reason for dismissing him. There have been cases where complaints were made that men were writing for the papers, and even editing papers, which the department were able to overlook when all the circumstances were inquired into. However, I recognize the fact that the hon. gentleman wished to bring this matter before the House and the public, and as it appears that there is another *officer in another department against whom


Rufus Henry Pope: a charge is made, we might pass this item, and the subject can be brought up again. 1 am fully impressed with this case, and I will look into it.


Robert Laird Borden: As relating to this subject, I may inform my hon. friend that a man in my own constituency, who was employed in the Department of Inland Revenue, was dismissed without investigation merely because he asked a question in a public meeting. I would consider that not a greater offence than canvassing for a public journal. It is desirable to have great public journals, of course, and those great journals can be conducted more economically if they are canvassed for by officers of the government. It is an advantage to the journal from its own standpoint, but from the standpoint of the public the arrangement might not be so advantageous as my hon. friend would seem inclined to regard it.


Mr. BELL.: I would like to call the attention of the Minister of Customs to a matter which I may not have another opportunity of mentioning-a case in which the Bank of Nova Scotia was charged with the sum of $204 customs duty upon a safe which was made in Canada, exported to Newfoundland, and afterwards re-exported to Canada. The article was entirely of Canadian manufacture, but having been exported and having remained outside the country for a term exceeding three years, I think, upon its return to this country they were compelled to pay duty upon the whole of the original value. Possibly the minister has some remembrance of the case.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I do remember it. I think it was out of the country more than three years, and the tariff law which parliament passed, and which we only administer, says that if goods the manufacture or produce of Canada are exported to a foreign country and return unimpaired and unaltered within three years, they may come in free. In this case the safe was more than three years out of the country, and parliament has passed a law which takes away from us the power to admit such an article free. In this case there was no desire to deal in an exceptional manner. Any one could have appealed to the treasury board, and if the appeal had been reported favourably upon by them and adopted by council, the duty could have been remitted. But as I say, the department only administers the law, parliament makes the law.


John William Bell: In this ease it would appear that the safe which was in existence for a long time and which originally cost $680 was charged duty at the rate of 30 per cent upon the original value when it was_ returned to the country. It would appear as if it were a very extreme charge.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It was improved by the sea voyage.


John William Bell: 1 do not suppose that safes are like ale or beer that is supposed to be improved by a sea voyage or even like port wine which I understand occasionally is improved by a sea voyage. The safe went out of the country by sea and came back in a few years. I would suppose that there must be some authority or power in the Department of Customs to deal with such a case. I have been asked to bring it to the notice of the hon. minister.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: It could only be dealt with in the way I have pointed out. It is beyond the power of the department to do it. All the department could do would be to submit a case to the treasury board of the Privy Council.


Rufus Henry Pope: I want a little more information. I am sorry to be bothering the hon. minister but he is laying down the principle, in so far as I under-stand it, that he does not think it any violation of the privileges of a member of the civil service in his department, a man being paid in a public department, a permanent officer like Mr. Pelletier, or any other man, to engage in the circulation of newspapers. The hon. gentleman has no objection to his doing so. Do I understand that to be the hon. minister's view of the matter ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I said that I was reserving judgment, until I knew the whole facts of the case.


Rufus Henry Pope: I do not ask the hon. minister to judge the man. I have no positive eviuence to produce before him. I recognize Mr. Pelletier's absolute right to be heard and to be dealt with most leniently, but providing that the hon. minister finds out that he has been employing himself in circulating the newspaper,* Le Canada,' I want to know whether the hon. minister thinks this is justifiable work ? In the hon. minister's department and throughout the country there are many political friends of my own and of others on this side of the House and if the hon. gentleman's friends have the right to circulate * Le Canada ' our friends have the right to circulate some other papers. We are paying taxes and the hon. minister will realize that. Although we are not in power, although we are a minority as far as this House is concerned, I think, we have still our rights of citizenship. Hon. gentlemen are going forth now to prepare for an election which is going to take place at a more or less early date. I can understand that the supporters of the government as they return from different parts of the country after having visited their constituents are not very urgent for an early appeal and of course ministers of the Crown must listen to those people as they return from the different parts of Canada, they will not have any very great encouragement to give 438J
them to have an early election. However, circumstances must govern ministers irrespective of their supporters. Although they may imagine that they are making a very wonderful impression on the country, if circumstances compel an appeal to the people they will find that they have not made any impression at all. These are the conditions which the cabinet must deal with. The work is to be done. The distribution of party newspapers and literature is of great assistance in the organization of a party and I think the hon. minister should now decide that principle. He does not condemn Mr. Pelletier. If he has not been doing that work he is not punished by the hon. minister and if the hon. minister decides that he m'ay do it he will not be punished. But, if lie may do it at all the other officers in his department may also do it.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I see that paper sometimes but I cannot read it as clearly as some others can. I judge that sometimes there are articles which favour the government but I do not wonder at that. But, to deal with the point that is put by the hon. gentleman, I think he is stretching the thing perhaps a little too far because he will remember that the Audit Act does not prohibit employees of the government from engaging in duties other than their own outside of office hours provided their salary is not over $1,000, and it is thus that you have civil servants outside of office hours engaging in the insurance business and in other kinds of work.


George Taylor: What salary does Mr. Pelletier draw ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: They are not prevented from doing that by the Audit Act, and therefore, if this gentleman were, upon his own time, engaging in something which was remunerative, it would have to be considered. I think the hon. gentleman is pressing the point rather far when he says that a man shall not, during his holidays, engage in any other work. If the hon. gentleman wants my opinion as to whether an officer, paid out of public money and during the time of his service to the country, should engage in other work which interferes with his duties, of course, there is only one answer-he should not do it.


Rufus Henry Pope: The question of salary does not arise at all. I know what the Audit Act is. A permanent officer is always under pay whether he has a holiday or not. His salary is always going on.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: He cannot get his holiday unless the collector gives him permission. It is provided for under the statute, but I suppose the collectors try to oblige their officers. I suppose if this officer went upon his holidays and engaged in doing some other work he did it with the view of earning something beyond his salary not in the time of the government.

I do not know tlie facts but I suppose this official, during liis holidays and upon his own time, lias been endeavouring to supplement his salary and he may have been canvassing for other papers at the same time. But, as I said, I do not know anything about that. I do not think we need uwell upon the matter any longer. I cannot say anything more than I have said.


Rufus Henry Pope: I am sorry the hon. minister has not seen fit to lay down some guiding principle in this matter, not that I expect him to get on his feet again because as he says perhaps we have discussed it enough. I have not much confidence in any investigation he is going to make. He has thought of one hundred and one excuses for Mr. Pelletier by which lie can escape. He says that he may have been on his holidays and that he may have been canvassing for half a dozen papers. He should trot out one of these newspapers as evidence of the statement he makes. He has not, however, answered the question which I put to him.


Edward Cochrane: I would like to ask the hon. minister if the Audit Act prevents a man after office hours from going to a public meeting and making a speech or asking a question ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No, the Audit Act would not come in then.


Edward Cochrane: Well then, why do you refer to it in connection with this gentleman ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I was simply pointing out-


Edward Cochrane: Yes, pointing out to evade the question. The hon. minister can not dismiss it with the bland smile which appears upon his countenance now. He never had that smile when he was in opposition ; he has assumed it since he got a big salary. I do not say that the Minister of Customs was particularly bad in dismissing Conservatives, and he may excuse himself because he has not been harsh, but he is part and parcel of the government that has been harsh, and he is responsible. I can tell him that the officials on the Murray canal were not accused of partisanship, but they were dismissed just because they voted Conservative in a gentlemanly fashion. I now want the few Conservatives who are left in the department to understand that they can go and canvass for ' La Patrie ' or any other Tory paper.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Edward Cochrane: I had ' La Patrie ' in my mind, but perhaps it is not a Conservative paper, it is ' Le Journal ' I refer to. Is the principle laid down by the Minister of Customs that when a Conservative official is on his holidays, he can go and canvass for the ' Mail and Empire ' or any other Tory paper ?


Hon. Mr. PATERSON.: 


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: No.


Edward Cochrane: Do I understand that a Conservative official can canvass for the ' Mail and Empire,' and that he won't be dismissed ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: If a gentleman like the member for Compton should report to me, that an officer in the public service was out canvassing for the ' Mail and Empire,' I would say that I would inquire into the matter.


Edward Cochrane: You would not dismiss him ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: It is very doubtful ; I have not dismissed many.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I was not present when the Minister of Customs gave an explanation with regard to the rights and immunities of public- officials, after office hours. Do I understand that it is permissible for officers in the civil service, who do not receive a salary in excess of $1,000, to canvass for insurance, for example, after office hours or before office hours, or during their holidays ? I had a complaint made by a business concern in Toronto during the present session, that an officer in the civil service. was canvassing their customers against them for certain goods. I made a complaint to the department, because I thought that such conduct was not justified by the law. It would seem rather extraordinary that officials should be permitted to engage in outside business under such circumstances.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I dare say the hon. gentleman knows the Act as well as I do.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I do not, that is why I ask the question.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: It does not forbid an officer who is in receipt of less than $1,000 a year from engaging in some work that does not interfere with his duties. If he is in receipt of $1,000 or over, it does absolutely prohibit him.


George Taylor: What salary does Mr. Pelletier get 1


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Five hundred dollars.


Edward Hackett: Why was Mr. James Currie, collector at Charlottetown, dismissed ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: He was superannuated.


Edward Hackett: Why ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I do not remember, but I think it was on account of age.
Mi;. HACKETT. That can not be possible, because the very same day that Mr. Currie i was dismissed, a man of the same age was

appointed in St. John, N.B. What is the [DOT]explanation of that ? Why was Mr. Geo. Conroy, sub-collector at TIgnish dismissed ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I have no recollection. When did that take place ?


Edward Hackett: It took place immediately after the Grit government came to power.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: That was a long time ago.


Edward Hackett: It is only about seven years ago, and we all have occasion to remember it with i;egret.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: I will look into the matter.


George Taylor: Was there an investigation in Mr. Conroy's case ?


Edward Hackett: No.


George Taylor: What did they dismiss him for ?


Edward Hackett: Simply because he was a Conservative.
Miscellaneous-amount required to pay for services of Thomas Kilroy, acting customs officer at Windsor. Ont., 360 days ending March 29, 1894, at $1.50 per day, $540.


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: Mr. Kilroy was employed as a temporary empolyee [DOT]at Windsor, prior to 1893, but at the close of that year his services were dispensed with, on the ground that the staff was sufficient without him. He was re-employed as temporary officer at that port during the months of March, February and April, 1893, by order of the then Controller of Customs, the Hon. N. C. Wallace. From the 1st of April, 1893, the collector of customs at Windsor was notified that Mr. Kilroy's services were to be discontinued, but it appears from an investigation made by Chief Inspector 5. W. MacMichael, that the then collector, Mr. Geo. E. Martin, did not notify him of the action of the department. The chief inspector's report which is dated 17th of October, 1900, clearly says that Mr. Kilroy was actually on duty at the port of Windsor for 360 days after the collector was notified of the discontinuance of his employment. This case was exactly similar to that of Mr. Jas. Gibson, who was employed at the port of Windsor at the same time, under the same circumstances. Mr. Gibson's case was provided for in the supplementary estimates, 1901-2, but Mr. Kilroy's claim could not be disposed of then for the reason that the late collector at Windsor had during the time Mr. Kilroy was without pay from the department, paid out of his own money $691.04 for groceries and supplies to Mr. Kilroy, [DOT]during the period covered by the claim.
Acting upon the advice of the Department of Justice, Mr. Kilroy, having made a petition of right to obtain payment for bis services, the Department of Customs refused to ask parliament for a vote to pay
the claim until such time as the late Mr. Martin's account had been properly adjusted. In the month of October, 1902, the executor of the estate of the late collector gave a release of all demands, discharging Mr. Kilroy from all claims; and on the same being submitted to the Department of Justice, they decided, in a letter of the 9th of May last, that the claim was one which the department might reasonably settle without reference to the courts.	These are the
circumstances of the case. The late collector sent word that he had dispensed witli the services of these two men. The collector never notified them, and they went on and rendered the services for the whole year, and claimed that having rendered the services they should be paid. Parliament paid Mr. Gibson's claim two years ago, and Mr. Kilroy's claim would have been dealt with at the same time, but the collector had advanced him so much out of his own pocket and the department would not pay his claim until a settlement had been made with the collector. In May last he brought a release from the executors to the Department of Justice.


George Taylor: Would it not have been fair to make the collector lose that money when he failed to give the notice ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: The poor man is dead now and the matter is settled. However, these officers rendered the services and they claim that they should be paid. The mistake was on the collector's part.


Edward Hackett: I wish to ask why Mr. John P. Brennan was dismissed from his position as sub-collector at Alberton ?


The MINISTER OF CUSTOMS.: That is some years ago, and I cannot remember what the cause was. No doubt it was deemed sufficient at the time.


Edward Hackett: It is not very many years ago. I regret that the hon. minister is not able to give me an explanation. I think the people of our province are bound to resent the action of the government in cutting off the heads of the best men because they are Conservatives and placing inferior men in their places.
Post Office Department-to transfer from the temporary to the permanent staff-nine messengers and packers, inside service, employed under the provisions of the amendment to the Post Office Act. 1902, $5,814.
Mr. LaRI VIE RE.	Before we enter into
the Post Office Department estimates, I want to know if now is the time for the hon. Postmaster General to give us some information with regard to the request of the accounting postmasters in Manitoba and the North-west Territories, as promised when these estimates would come before the House.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I think this would be a very appropriate time for me to make the remarks which I intend to make in answer to my hon. friend's inquiry; but it is almost six o'clock, and perhaps it would be more convenient to pass this item, and I will make the explanation on the next item.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Have you a list of the gentlemen who are to be placed on the permanent staff ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The names are W. G. Smith, P. Green, A. Smith, P. Braceland, J. H. Jones, O. May, E. But-terwortb, S. Dawson, P. S. Dodd. There are three messengers and six packers.
At six o'clock, Committee took recess. After Eecess.
Committee resumed at eight o'clock.
To pay provisional allowance at the rate ot $10 per month to Mr. J. W. T. Dixon of the dead letter office, Winnipeg, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act to the contrary, $120.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: This officer is in Winnipeg and a provisional allowance is made to the officers of the department at Winnipeg. He is included in this. He is in the inside service but could not have the benefit of the provisional allowance except in this way. He has $400 per year. He was appointed temporary writer on the 1st of January, 1903, and was transferred to the Winnipeg dead letter office on the 13th of March. 1903. He was appointed to the inside service at Ottawa and was moved from Ottawa to Winnipeg.


Rufus Henry Pope: Does the hon. gentleman not think that this sudden surprise will injure him ?	[DOT]


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I think he will be able to stand it.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. Could nobody he found in Winnipeg to fill that office ?	'	[DOT]


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The Dead Letter Department is in the inside service. Until the last four or five years ail dead letter matter was dealt with at Ottawa, but by the legislation of 189S permission was granted to decentralize in order to save time, and dead letter branches of the main office at Ottawa were opened at Winnipeg and at other points remote from the centre here. But the officers appointed at the dead letter branch have always been men who have served here first and have become trained in the method.
To provide for eight additional junior second-class clerkships in the inside service, $5,800.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Some years ago third-class clerkships were abolished and a large number of clerks entered
Mr. LaRIVIERE.
the service as juniors in the capacity of temporary writers. Some sixty to seventy temporary clerks were appointed, some by the late and some by the present government, commencing at $400 and increasing at the rate of $30 per year. These are prizes which will be distributed wisely to those that-are deserving.


George Taylor: What salary' djo they start with ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The junior second clerks start with $600 and the maximum is $1,000. Under the Civil Service Bill which passed to-day, they will enter at $700 and the maximum is $1,100.


George Taylor: $5,800 would give the eight clerks $725 each.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. How many clerks are already employed in that office besides those six who are to be made permanent ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The explanation of that $5,800 is this. There are some offices in connection with the international money-order branch who have a different status. It is intended to transfer them to the status of junior second class at the salary they now enjoy. There are five in that position and three new appointees at $600. The other five have gross salaries of $4,000. There are live transferred from one class to another and three new appointees. In fact this item is not large enough if the Civil Service Bill becomes law because the three new officers will begin at $700 and we are only providing for $600.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. Were not these $4,000 voted in the main estimates ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: That might be, but it would not be applicable to them under a technical construction of the vote. Money voted for the payment of the salary of a man filling one position is not available for the payment of the salary of that person if put in another position. These five were formerly engaged as clerks in connection with the money exchange office at Montreal. We had to make an international exchange at Montreal on account of our business with the United States. But owing to some changes being made in connection with our international business, those men are to be made junior second class clerks at their present salary. The money voted to pay them in their former position would not be available to pay them now, because the money is not voted to pay the individual as such but as the occupant of the office.


George Taylor: Is the hon. gentleman to fill the positions of those five ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: No, the offices are abolished.


George Taylor: A junior second-class clerk lias been in the service for some time ; he started at $600, and iby statutory increases his salary has become $700 beginning on the 1st of July last. How will this Bill affect a junior second-class clerk who is in that position ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: It will not have any effect upon such officers, they will continue junior second-class clerks if they -reach $700, which is the minimum, and at the expiration of each year they will be eligible to another increase of $50. A second-class clerk who, at the time this Bill goes into operation, is in receipt of a salary not less than the minimum is not affected by the Bill, except that when he reaches $i,000, the present maximum, he will still be eligible to go on to the $1,100.


Rufus Henry Pope: I have -been absent from the House for some time, and I am not conversant with the application of the Bill which has recently passed this House. I am interested in the welfare of the civil servants, and I would like to ask if by this Bill they will receive the annual increases which they were led to expect in joining the service ? In many instances civil servants have not received- these ircreases to the extent they were le-d to expect. I have in mind particularly some mail clerks who have served many years and who have not received their promotions from one class to another, nor the increases to which they are entitled. I would like to know if that would be remedied by this -Bill ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: My hon. friend says that he is particularly interested in the welfare of the civil servants, and yet lie was absent during the discussion of 'this Bill, which has now passed out of this House. I do not like to return to the discussion of a measure which has gone to the Senate. The Bill speaks for itself. I would remind the hon. gentleman that a measure which lias been passed through this House and become law this session deals with the status of railway mail clerks, and I do not think he will find one railway -mail clerk in Canada who will say he has been unjustly dealt with by the present government.


Rufus Henry Pope: I am not speaking of the present government ; I think I can find mail clerks who think they have not had the promotion to which their length of service entitled them and which they anticipated when they joined the service.


Tlie POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The measure that passed in August last is of great advantage to the railway mail clerks of Canada, who have not hesitated to so express themselves. It has given them a much more satisfactory status than they ever before enjoyed, and they have expressed themselves to that effect in many ways to me.


Edward Frederick Clarke: How many officers of the service are eligible for promotion under this clause ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There are sixty or seventy clerks who would be eligible. Others of these may -be appointed from time to time if the number of junior seconds had increased.


Edward Frederick Clarke: You are now appointing three ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Yes. The hon. gentleman will remember that we have provided for the advancement of all these temporary clerks from the position they now occupy to be third-class clerks, and by the Bill which passed this House they can all be made third-class clerks, the minimum and maximum of which grade are $100 more than the minimum and maximum of the class to which they now belong.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Sixty or seventy are eligible for promotion to this junior second-class position, and- the minister is now taking a vote to provide for eight additional junior second-class clerks. He has explained that five officers will be taken from the exchange branch at Montreal. Then there will be only three vacancies while sixty or seventy are eligible ?
The POST-MASTER GENERAL. I told the hon. gentleman that it would be possible to appoint sixty or seventy. I suppose there are sixty or seventy temporary writers, and they have all passed a qualifying examination. I have stated that 1 trust that a liberal use will be made of the Bill which has passed this House in respect to these temporary writers. If that policy is adhered to, these temporary writers will receive a great advantage in being put into a class, the minimum and maximum of which are $100 more than that of the class to which they now belong.
To pay O. Higman for investigating the pneumatic tube service in the United States and reporting thereon, notwithstanding anything in the^Civil Service Act, $324.15.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The pneumatic tube service is a system that obtains in many cities of the United States for the rapid transmission of mail .matter to different places in the city. It has been tried for some years in New York, Washington, Philadelphia and majiy other cities, and I hope that 'in the not* distant f uture we will be able to adopt it in Canada. I sent Mr. Higman, who is an officer in. the Inland Revenue Department, to the United I States to examine and report upon this sys-I tern, and he made a very valuable report,
' which will be useful when we come to conI si-der the question of adopting the system to the Canadian post office.


Rufus Henry Pope: Does the government expect to confer any advantage on the public by the adoption of that system ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Nothing has been decided. The first step is to study the system and to consider whether it is applicable to Canada. I think that the report is a very valuable one. I have given some study to it, and I think that it might _ be usefully adopted for distributing mail matter in large cities. It affords a very excellent method of rapid delivery.


Rufus Henry Pope: I suppose in a city like Montreal you would have a central office from which you would distribute the mail matter by this system. It does not mean that you are going to run a tube into every man's house.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The pneumatic tube system is this : You have underground steel pipes, perhaps 8 inches in diameter. In the United States they have [DOT]three different sizes of 8, 10 and 12 inches in diameter. Then there is what is called a carrier which travels inside this tube, a cartridge shaped structure, perhaps 30 inches long, and as large as the tube will allow. This is filled with mail matter, closed up, and forced by pneumatic pressure from one place* to another connected by the tube. The mail matter distributed by that system starts from the 'post office or from some central point, and thence is distributed throughout the city wherever the system reaches. Where the public thoroughfares are thronged with traffic which occasions delay in the transmission of mail matter by vehicles, this system is found to afford very rapid delivery.


Rufus Henry Pope: It only carries mail matter from the central office to branch offices ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Yes.


Rufus Henry Pope: It does not interfere with the ordinary mail carriers or distributors ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: It would not affect letter-carriers.


Edward Hackett: Over how great a distance would this pneumatic system be feasible 1


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I am afraid it would not go under the Straits. I think it would carry two or three miles. If you renewed the power at different points you might send it an indefinite distance, but I do not know how you would continue the pressure.


George William Fowler: Is this the total cost of the investigation ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Yes.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What is the cost per mile?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I cannot say from memory. The cost of installation involves more than merely putting the pipe under ground. You have to have an engine, for instance, and in a large city like Toronto that would involve the acquisition of a site for operations, where you would need to build a station and an engine house. Then at other points there would need to be some more machinery.
To increase the salary of F. H. Smith, first-class clerk, to $1,750 from 1st July, 1903, and arrears from 1st July, 1901, notwithstanding anything in the -Civil Service Act, $150.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Mr. Smith was formerly assistant inspector at the Soo. He was transferred to the inside service on his former salary as an inspector. I think he was at the maximum of his class of assistant inspector. After a year or so it was suggested that he should be given a different status, and I made him a first-class clerk, and proposed to treat him as a first-class clerk from the time of his transfer, and that is the reason we are giving him tills small increase. He is a very worthy officer indeed. He is a son of the late Postmaster General the Hon. Sydney Smith.
To provide for the appointment of an assistant post office inspector in the Vancouver division, $1,500.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: That sum is to provide for the payment of Mr. [DOT]T. R. N. Greenfield as first-class clerk, having a salary at the present time of $1,500 a year. He was appointed to the inside service here on the 1st of July, 1883. He was transferred to the post office inspector's office, Victoria, on the Gth of July, 1893. He was made first-class clerk on the 5th of October, 1894, and on the 19th of December, 189S, was transferred to the office of inspector at Vancouver. Formerly there was only one inspector for the province of British Columbia, stationed on the island at Victoria. That was found inconvenient, and I laid the foundation for the creation of another inspectorate at the city of Vancouver' upon the mainland, and appointed Mr. Dormer to the office after he had been tried a while as to his qualifications. For a time he continued in Vancouver as first-class clerk, conducting his office as a branch of the Victoria office. But this involved delay, and it was deemed advisable to have an independent branch at Victoria, so he has been appointed an inspector. Mr. Greenfield is the chief clerk there. Mr. Greenfield is a most capable man and deserving of this promotion. He has been in the service for many years, he is thoroughly efficient and highly recommended as being well qualified for the position of an assistant inspector.


Rufus Henry Pope: Have you only one inspector there ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Only one on the mainland.


Rufus Henry Pope: How many assistants ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: This is the only assistant the inspector has in his office.


Rufus Henry Pope: To provide for an additional senior class *clerkship in the office of the post office inspector at "Winnipeg, $900.


Rufus Henry Pope: What is that for ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: It is intended to promote Mr. E. R. A. Stevenson. He is a senior third-class clerk, and he has "been at the maximum of his class since 1900. He was appointed on the 1st of July, 1887.
To provide for the appointment of the undermentioned temporary employees in city post offices as fourth-class clerks, from 1st July, 1903, at their present salaries, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act to the contrary :
Montreal post office-C. Martin	$ 547
"	"	N.	Nadou	
547"	"	P.	St. Jean.... 547"	"	J.	Lyons	
547[DOT]"	"	C.	V. M. Murray..	547"	"	J.	A. Mayrand..	..	547Kingston post office-E. C. Hiseoclc.. ..	456Winnipeg post office-N. Gouin	
580


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: By the Act of last August a new class, a class of fourth-class clerks, was created and these men occupying lower positions are now being placed on the permanent list as fourth-class clerks. They were temporaries before.
Increases of salary for post office inspectors, assistant post office inspectors and assistant post office inspectors and superintendents of the railway mail service, $2,950.


Edward Frederick Clarke: How is this money intended to be distributed ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: These are increases authorized by the Act of last August and they go to various officers in the service, as follows :
Inspectors.-N. R. Colter. St. John ; A. Bolduc, Quebec ; J. W. Bain, Montreal ; F. Haw-ken, Ottawa ; J. Henderson, Toronto ; H. G. Hopkirk, London ; E. H. Fletcher, Victoria ; W. H. Dorman, Vancouver.
Assistant Inspectors.-D. Stewart and A. Costley, Halifax ; W. C. Whittaker, St. John ; S. T. Green. Quebec ; D. Nelligan and J. P. Chi lias, Montreal ; C. P. LeSueur and J. Cham-ard, Ottawa ; P. H. Macarow, Kingston ; C. E. Fisher and D. Maloney, London ; A. W. Cairns and H. H. Phinney, Winnipeg.
Superintendents of the Railway Mail Service.-F. B. Bent. Halifax ; G. M. Ryan, St. John ; O. Talbot, Quebec ; F. Briegel, Montreal ; C. Plumb, Ottawa ; J. E. McLeod, Toronto ; A. G. McWhinney, London ; C. E. Kav-anagh, Winnipeg ; and J. G. McLeod, Vancouver.
They come in automatically under the measure.


Edward Hackett: Before this item is declared carried, I would like to ask the hon. minister if he has heard from Prince Edward Island in regard to the illness of the Hon. Mr. Breeken, who is inspector there ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Yes, I am extremely sorry to say that it is worse than a case of illness. Mr. Breeken died this morning. At least I received a despatch early this morning announcing his death. Mr. Breeken was at one time a member of this House, and there are some present who will remember him. I am sure they have a very kindly recollection of him. He proved himself an admirable officer, faithful and efficient, and the country has lost a capable officer in the death of Mr. Breeken.
To provide for Increases of $50 each to fourth-class clerks recently promoted from the class of stampers and sorters, such increases to date from the times when they would respectively become entitled to Increases if they had remained in their former class, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act to the contrary, $3,950.


Rufus Henry Pope: Before we proceed with this item, as I see we are approaching the close of the supplementary estimates, if there is not another leaf to be attached which is not already down-possibly there may be-I would like to bring a question to the attention of the lion. Postmaster General in connection with certain reports which have come to me, I think fairly well-founded, that a Mr. Latour who was Postmaster in tlie Public Works Department in Ottawa, owing to ill-health, has received six months leave of absence. Is that correct ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I really do not know.


Rufus Henry Pope: And that he has been replaced by his son, which is a matter of indifference to me. Whether he has been replaced by his son or by the son of some other son, does not make any particular difference to me. But, I understand that this gentleman has had a six months leave of absence. I suppose that would imply that his salary is continued ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I made some inquiry in my department, and I find we never had an officer of that name in the department.


Rufus Henry Pope: He is postmaster of the Public Works Department.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I have not inquired throughout the service, but we never had an officer of that name in the Post Office Department. Thou canst not shake thy gory locks at me. Thou canst not say I did it.


Rufus Henry Pope: I suppose that when a man was a postmaster he was connected with the postal' service.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: No, we have no such officer.


Rufus Henry Pope: Do you mean to say that I will have to turn my attention to the hon. Minister of Public Works ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I heard the hon. gentleman say before six o'clock that he thought this officer was in my department and my hon. friend the hon. Minister of Customs desired to transfer the discussion to me. I made inquiry in the department, and I find that we have no such officer.


Rufus Henry Pope: I am making the usual effort of gentlemen who are dealing with the government, and they are shifting from one position to another. The hon. Minister of Customs, the head of the collecting department of this government, this afternoon referred me to the hon. Postmaster General. But, of course, he did not know what he was talking about. I thought he did not know this afternoon.


The TOSTMASTER GENERAL.: You should not let him escape.


Rufus Henry Pope: I did not like to let him escape- but he assured me he was not smiling and consequently I considered he might be serious when he said that when the hon. Postmaster General's estimates came up, I would have an opportunity of discussing the matter. However, the question I have to raise is that a public officer of the government has been granted leave of absence and is now in the employ of ' Le Canada,' newspaper, which is the leading Liberal organ in Quebec, and is travelling through that province being the head agent of that Liberal organ, seeking subscriptions for it. More than that, he is going about through the various post offices which do come under, I presume, the hon. Postmaster General. We find that he goes to the postmasters where he thinks he can frighten and control them and asks them to furnish him with a list of people who receive at these offices papers that are favourable in their editorial departments to the opposition members of this House.
Does the Postmaster General think it right that any government official should be guilty of such conduct ? I have this information from a source which I do not feel at liberty to use, but it is a source from which the Postmaster General has no doubt got information, and I think he would acknowledge it as a reliable source. I do not think that the Postmaster General would take the same view, outside the cabinet of course, as his colleague the Minister of Customs, who stated this afternoon that it was not partisan work to disseminate the seeds of Liberalism by canvassing for a Liberal party organ. I look upon it as partisanship of the highest order, for there is nothing which can so much redound to the benefit of a political party as that the faithful should read daily the organ of that party. Seven years ago the Prime Minister decided that any official guilty of partisan conduct should leave the service. What is be going to do with Mr. Latour ? I am informed Mr. POPE.
that he is .postmaster of the Public Works Department.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He cannot be postmaster of the Public Works ; they have no postmaster.


Rufus Henry Pope: That is his description. Of course, in the country parts our information may not be absolutely correct about these officers. They may come down and boast amongst us in order to make themselves out great men amongst the ignorant agricultural community, so that their partisan works may bear greater fruit than if they came down simply under their own name,, without such a high-sounding description. But that is the way Mr. Latour represents himself in the country parts, and he is represented as having been replaced by his son, at a salary of $1,200 a year, and he is cut loose on the province of Quebec to spread ' Le Canada.'


George Taylor: On sick leave.


Rufus Henry Pope: 
The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: When my hon. friend was discussing the estimates of the Minister of Customs this afternoon, I was not giving very great attention to the discussion ; but when I heard it stated that this man was an officer of the Post Office Department; I was not in a position either to affirm it or deny it; and when the House rose at six o'clock, I asked the officers of my department if there was such an officer, because if there had been, it would have been my duty to have looked into the case. I did not learn until eight o'clock that there was no such officer in the Post Office Department. In whatever branch of the service he is employed, my hon. friend says that he has been applying to the postmasters throughout this country for the names of subscribers to newspapers. My opinion is that the names of the addresses of mail matter, newspapers, and all other kinds, is confidential information, which no postmaster is warranted in revealing to any person. No postmaster will be allowed to do that with impunity, so long as I have anything to say in the matter ; and if the hon. gentleman is aware of any postmaster having so far forgotten his duty as to disclose to any one the names on newspapers, or any other mail matter, without the authority of the addressees, it will be my duty to call that postmaster to account. If my hon. friend will furnish me with that information, I will at once proceed on the line I have mentioned. But it
would be rather unfair to ask me to proceed to discipline or to find out who may have transgressed, among the large number of postmasters. I am sure my hon. friend would not ask that. I do not know what department the official is in.


Edward Hackett: I would ask the Minister of Finance if there is not a man named Latour in the service of the government in Prince Edward Island ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I have made inquiries with regard to a man named Latour. There is no postmaster in the Public Works Department that I know of, but there was a man named Latour in the temporary employ of the department. He has not been in the employ of the department for some considerable time.


George Taylor: On sick leave perhaps.
The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS No, he is not drawing any pay from the department. This may be the man who is canvassing. I agree with my hon. friend the Postmaster General, that if he were in the employ of the government in any way, his conduct would be quite irregular and improper.


Rufus Henry Pope: What salary was he getting.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: Two dollars a day. I think. That is all the information I can give.


Rufus Henry Pope: I think that is the bird we are after.


Edward Hackett: I have no proof with regard to the conduct of Mr. Latour ; but I can assure you that during the election of 1900 he was very active in the county of Prince, in the province of Prince Edward Island. When the judge of the county court called in, under the authority of the law, the ballot boxes from the different polling divisions, one was missing, and we alleged, and can substantiate the fact, that this Mr. Latour was the means of getting that ballot box out of the way. I tell you further that if this Mr. Latour places a foot on the soil of the iwovince of Prince Edward Island, he will find himself in a very hot box.	*


Edward Frederick Clarke: The hon. member for Compton (Mr. Pope), in discussing some of the other items of. the Post Office Department. asked if any provision was being made in these estimates to pay the men who were deprived of their statutory increases for two or three years, the sums they were then deprived of ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The hon. gentleman presents the question as if what were known as statutory increases were legal liabilities of the Crown to those officers. That is an erroneous view to take. It is discretionary with the government to pay these statutory increases or not. Therefore it cannot be said that if a man does

not get the statutory increase, lie has anything coming to him, or there can be any arrears owing to him.	,


Rufus Henry Pope: We have often considered this matter in this House. We are not wrong in assuming that these people are [DOT]entitled to a certain annual increase, according to the statutory arrangement of the department or the government. A man [DOT]commences at $400, and he is entitled to an increase of $50 a year. It is plain that he is entitled to it, or you could not give it to him. The particular man is not named, hut the inducement is held out to every young man who enters the service and who is worthy of being kept there. If he is not worthy of being kept there, dismiss him. But if he is an efficient officer, he is entitled to his increase. Were he in the employ of a private corporation or individual and did not get the increase to which he was entitled, he would go on strike and the Minister of Labour and the deputy would go down to see whether they could not induce his employer to give him the extra $50 or $60 which he had earned. When we have a Minister of Labour in the government itself, he ought to be able to exercise on the cabinet that authority which he sometimes *exercises in private matters. The ministers tell us that it is not they but the deputy heads who select - those they consider deserving of an increase. No doubt if we had the deputy heads here, they would shift the responsibility on to the chief clerks. It is very difficult to believe that in the selection, politics rather than merit have not an influence. It would be a great relief to members of parliament if our civil service were put into the hands of a commission, as it is done in England, and thus remove all opportunity for the exercise of political favouritism. That would be better for the public life of Canada and we would have more even handed justice dealt all around.


Mr. AVERY.: Some weeks ago I asked the Postmaster General Why the postmaster at the village of Enterprise was dismissed. This man kept his office in good condition, took no part in politics, and gave general satisfaction, and it is difficult to understand why lie should be dismissed and another man put in his place. The right hon. gentleman who leads this House said he would Mismiss anybody in the employ of the government who took part in polities. That was not the course adopted by the late Sir John A. Macdonald. I remember that when Mr. G. W. Dawson was postmaster in Addington, he stumped against the Conservative [DOT]government and was not dismissed. He kept the office until he resigned to run as a candidate. He was elected and after be was subsequently defeated, he was appointed inspector of prisons. But this man at Enterprise took no part in politics, and Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.
I would like to have an explanation why he was dismissed.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The postmaster at Enterprise was dismissed on account of his mismanagement of the office. He was charged, among other things, with sending out his own business letters through the post unpaid.


Samuel Hughes: By transmitting them through other offices than Enterprise ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: J cannot tell that, I shall read the memorandum winch I have from the department and the hon. gentleman can satisfy himself.
With reference to the change of postmasters. There had. been very great laxity in the conduct and management of the office. The postmaster made a practice of sending out book accounts to his customers through the post office in sealed envelopes not prepaid or stamped with the date stamp of the office, thus prejudicially affecting the revenue of the department. It was also shown that unauthorized persons were permitted to enter the inside compartment at any and all times and take out mail matter, presumably to their address. In consequence much dissatisfaction and complaint existed in the neighbourhood.
These were the reasons why the postmaster
was changed.


Melzar Avery: Who made the investigation ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Inspector Merrick, who made a report on the 6th of October, 1902.


Melzar Avery: What is the postmaster's explanation ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The report states that the postmaster refused to make auy statement unless he was compelled to do so in court.


Melzar Avery: Who laid the information against the postmaster ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: It would not he proper for me to say who laid the information ; any information against a public officer is confidential information.


Edward Hackett: Will the hon. Postmaster General be good enough to inform me what he intends to do in regard to the opening of a post office in the settlement of Portage, West Prince, Prince Edward Island ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: An application was received for the establishment of a post office to be called Portage. That application, in due course, was transmitted to the inspector for his repoi-t and, on receipt of that report a post office was opened some weeks ago and it only awaits the

appointment of a postmaster to go into operation.


Edward Hackett: Thank you.
To provide for promotions in city post offices- seven first-class clerkships, five senior second-class clerkships, 22 junior second-class clerkships, and 30 senior third-class clerkships, $3,900.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Might I ask if these officers have yet been selected ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Under the new Bill these are to be distributed about as follows :	To the city of Toronto, three
1st class, four sr. 2nd, sis jr. 2nd, six sr. 3rd ; to Montreal, one 1st class, four jr. 2nd, four sr. 3rd ; Winnipeg, three 1st class, one sr. second, one jr. 2nd, four sr. 3rd, four, jr. 3 ; to Hamilton, two sr. 2nd, two jr. 2nd ; to London, one jr. 2nd, two sr. 3rd ; to Ottawa, two jr. 2nd, two sr. 3rd ; to Halifax, two sr. 3rd ; to Quebec, one jr. 2nd, one sr. 3rd ; to Kingston, one sr. 3rd ; to Vancouver, one jr. 2nd, one jr. 3rd ; to Windsor, one sr. 3rd ; to Charlottetown, one sr. 3rd.	[DOT]


Edward Frederick Clarke: Have the officers yet been selected ?	[DOT]


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: No choice has been made.


Rufus Henry Pope: Why do you limit the number ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Mr. Ross of Toronto, the chief inspector of the city p st. offices, has made this request. He visits ail of the city post offices in the Dominion and is at present in Vancouver. 1 am sure that any one who is at all familiar with his work wiil say that he is an excellent officer. He is assisting the leading city post offices with great zeal and encouraging them in every way and it is entirely on his recommendation that I am now acting.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Will he make the nomination ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: He will recommend, of course subject to the opinion of the postmaster ; he will consult the postmaster. I would not for a moment say that he would supersede the postmaster. The system will probably be that the postmasters will go through their lists and make their selections and recommendations. They will doubtless consult with Mr. Ross and I have no doubt that there will be concurrence of opinion. But I suppose that we will act really upon the recommendations of the postmasters. I would not wish to weaken the authority of the postmasters by allowing the staff to suppose that there was any person beyond the postmasters to deal with their merits anid demerits, although I would think it very proper for the postmasters to consult with Mr. Ross.


Edward Hackett: Will the Postmaster General be good enough to inform me why Mr. Jerome Buote of Little Tignish was dismissed from his office ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Could the hon. gentleman tell me when that event took place ?


Edward Hackett: About two years ago, and I would like to have some explanation.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: If my hou. friend will repeat the question on concurrence, I will give him the information then. My deputy has no recollection of it. I fancy it must have happened more than a year ago.


Edward Hackett: I would like to ask why Mr. Thomas Keith, postmaster at Al-berton, was dismissed ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Perhaps my hon. friend will repeat that question on concurrence. We have no knowledge of it at present.


Edward Hackett: The Postmaster General should have all this information at his fingers' ends. Mr. Thomas Keith, the late postmaster at Alberton, is a gentleman we should be proud of, and he was dismissed because he happened to be a Conservative.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: My bon. friend from Toronto asked me what the increases under the new Act would amount to in my department. They may amount to a sum in the vicinity of $80,000.
Additional amount required for salaries and allowances in outside service, $50,000.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: This item is to make provision for increasing the salaries of letter-carriers who may elect to accept positions under the amended Act of 1902, and also for increases to railway mail clerks who accept the provisions of the Act of the present session of parliament.


Edward Hackett: Does the minister intend to establish free delivery in the city of Charlottetown, P.E.I. ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There is no provision in the estimates for the establishment of a letter-carrier system in tlie city of Charlottetown. There are a number of centres of population throughout the Dominion that are desirous of having the system extended to them, but no conclusion has been reached.


Edward Hackett: I desire to call attention to the fact that Charlottetown is the capital of Prince Edward Island, and there should be some consideration given to it with regard to mail delivery. I trust tlie lion, gentleman will see his way clear to

establish free mail delivery to the people of that town.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: What is the population ?


Edward Hackett: About 12,000. I think that is a sufficient number.


Mir. ROBINSON (Elgin).: I think ithe Postmaster General ought to try and give ail towns of 12,000 inhabitants free mail delivery.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Has the hon. gentleman ever made an estimate ns to what would be the cost to the post office service ?


Jabel Robinson: The Postmaster General would have a better knowledge of that than I have.


William Forsythe McCreary: Under this item I would like to make a remark with regard to one class that do not seem to have received any attention. The letter-carriers, the mail clerks, the accounting postmasters and town postmasters have all been assisted, their salaries have all been increased, and I am sure that during this growing time we all appreciate that fact. But a large majority of the postmasters, the men who render the best service for the smallest amount of money, the country postmasters, have received no increase whatever. I do not know how it is in the east, but in the western country they generally get from $12 to $50 a year. When a man or some member of his family has to stay at home for half a day to attend to one post office, and to keep it open for the convenience of the public, it becomes a hardship when labour is so expensive as it is during the summer months in our country. In the county I have the honour to represent I think there are from six to ten post offices that have been closed this year because the Postmaster General cannot get any one to accept them at the miserable salary offered. I spoke upon this subject last year, and I said that if the Postmaster General could not bring down * some systematic measure to give these country postmasters more salary, in the new districts their salaries should be charged up to the immigration fund. One of the greatest drawbacks of keeping immigrants in the country is the want of postal facilities, next to schools. Last year I cited a case 28 miles. from Swan river, in the Thunder Hill district, where a family had come from the north of Ireland with eleven children. They had neither school nor post office. Finally he wrote me saying that he would leave and go back home within three months unless he got some place where he could educate his children, and get some postal facilities. He was able to get a school, but a post office has only recently been established. That is a sample case of a good many others.


Edward Hackett: 


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The hon. gentleman knows of no case where a post office recommended by the inspector in Manitoba or the territories has not been opened.


William Forsythe McCreary: I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon, I did not say it had not been opened, I said a post office had been opened now in the place I mentioned. That is not in my county, and it was when I was commissioner of immigration that the post office was opened. But I am explaining that the postmasters do not get sufficient salary to pay them for keeping the post offices open. There ought to be a minimum salary of $40 or $50 a year assured before a post office is established. I do not contend that the postal system should be a revenue producing branch of the department. I believe that the public convenience should be considered first, and then if it is afterwards self-supporting, well and good. I submit that the hon. minister, who always takes an interest in seeing that people are properly paid for their services, might seriously consider whether some new means cannot be devised by which, if a rural system cannot be made practicable, the country postmaster shall be paid for his services in a better manner than he is at the present time.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Perhaps, since my hon. friend (Mr. McCreary) has made this observation, I may make known now some views I have on this question, and also comply with the request made of me at an earlier stage in' the session to make a statement as to the progress of the department, I think it will be agreed that one cannot in expenditure disregard the case of the taxpayers of this country. To comply with the request which was made of me I will very briefly give a few figures. The work of the department has proceeded in the last few years with the object of enlarging the organization, developing the service, increasing the number of post offices and improving the facilities for the transaction of post office work, so as to make the post office more available for the people. I know of no branch of the public service that is brought more directly into touch with the people than the post office, and it seemed to me that it would be in the public interest, as far as possible, to increase the number of post offices, to increase the frequency of the service and to enlarge those other functions of the post office service such as the transmission of money, providing post office savings banks and so on. The department has followed out that policy. I shall make a comparison now covering the period of seven years since the present government have been in office, or between the fiscal year ending the 30th June, 1890, and the fiscal year ending 30th June, 1903 :

1896.	1903.	Increase.	Increase per cent.9,103	10,150	1,047	1230,551,083	35,509,412	4,957,729	171,310	6,181	4,874	372755	934	- 179	24116,028,000	234,991,000	118,963,000	1-02$ cts.	S cts.	$ cts.	13,081,860 62	28,904,096 92	15,822.236 13	120242,619	336,012	93,393	38126,442	167,023	40,581	32$ cts.	$ cts.	$ Ct8.	28,932,929 68	44,255,326 95	15,322,397 27	52Post offices in existence	Number of miles mails carried	
!
Money order and postal note offices in existence...
Post office savings banks	
Number of letters carried through Canadian post
offices	!
Total amount of money transmitted by money order!
and postal note	j
Number of savings bank transactions, receipts and
payments	,	
Number of accounts opened in post office savings
banks	
Amount of money deposited by the people in post office savings banks	
I should say that there was no postal note system In 1896. The postal note system lias since been established, and it lias proved a very ready and cheap means for the transmission of sums of money up to $10. Thus far I have given the committee the increases. I have to break in upon this line of argument, and I now take up another biancli, not dealing with increases. For many years prior to the 30th June, 1896, the revenue of the Post Office Department failed yearly to meet the expenditure by very large sums, and for the fiscal year ending 30th June, 1896, the revenue of the department fell short by $781,142.19 of meeting the expenditure. There was a. loss on the working of the department for that year of over three-quarters of a million dollars. As hon. gentlemen will remember, in 1898-9 there was a very material reduction in the revenue of the department caused by the reduction of the letter rates, both Canadian and imperial. On Christmas Day, 1898, the letter rate from Canada to the United Kingdom fell from 5 cents to 2 cents. Subsequently the same reduction took place on all letters from Canada to various parts of the empire, and to-day 2 cents takes a letter from Canada to every part of the British empire. That reduction in the rate of from 5 to 2 cents seemed to indicate a loss, unless followed1 by an increased volume of business, of a considerable amount of revenue. It will be recalled that on the 1st January, 1899, the rate on domestic letters was reduced from 3 cents to 2 cents per ounce. On the same day we reduced the rate on letters from Canada to the United States from 3 cents to 2 cents per ounce. It is impossible to tell definitely what effect these great reductions have had upon the revenue of the department, but the late Minister of Finance, in speaking in the House a year or so before 1896, indicated that a very considerable loss of revenue would follow from a reduction of the domestic letter rate. The late leader of the opposition, Sir Charles Tupper, placed that amount of $1,000,000. The late Minister -of Finance, Mr. Foster, I think, placed it
in the vicinity of a million dollars. Whab ever view you may attach to the effect of the reduction, it certainly is a fact that so far as it goes it leaves in the pockets of the people the percentage of the postage which they otherwise would have had to pay had they transmitted through the post office the volume of letters which! we have carried since this reduction went into force. It is not unreasonable to say that these reductions have left in the pockets of the people at least $1,000,000.
We had a balancing up for the fiscal year ending June 30th, 1902, and the result was that for that year, the revenue met all the expenditure of the department, with the exception of the cost of operating in the Yukon, and left us a surplus of $5,109.14.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: What was the deficit in the Yukon ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I do not remember it for that year, but I will give it to you for this year in a moment. The reason I omitted the Yukon service in the public accounts up to the present, has been, in order that it might be possible to institute a comparison. There was no Yukon mail service prior to the present government assuming office, and therefore we could not compare it with anything which had gone before. Taking the year that has just closed, I will give the figures both including the Yukon and excluding the Yukon, so that hon. gentlemen may draw their own deductions. There will always be a deficit in the post office service of the Yukon because they must have the same rate of postage in the Yukon as in the other parts of Canada, while there is no prospect of the cost of labour there coming down to the level of cost of labour in older Canada- there may be approaches to equalization, but that will be in the distant future. If we had had no Yukon expenditure and no Yukon deficit to pay, the working of the department this year would have resulted in our having a surplus of $395,316.31.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Omitting the deficit in the Yukon, I say that the Post Ottice Department to-day hands over to the treasury of Canada 5395,316.31 for the year's work.


Mr. CLANCY.: What was the deficit in the Yukon ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The deficit in the Yukon was $102,614.31, and paying the deficit in the Yukon, and paying all the expenditure of the post office service in every part of Canada, and including and charging against us the deficit in the Yukon, we have to-day a net surplus of $292,702.23. of revenue over expenditure for the year ending June 30, 1903.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: For the year ending the 30tli of June, 1896, we had a loss of $781,162.19, and we have wiped out all that loss and we have today a surplus over and above our expenditure, amounting to over three quarters of a million dollars; and the people have in their pockets a million of dollars or so each year, in reduced rates which I presume they would not have had if the higher- rates were charged.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: But leaving aside the reduction of rates, then so far as the taxpayers of Canada are concerned, there is a change from a deficit of $781,152.19 in 1896, to a surplus of $292,702.23, which means a total change in the accounts of $1,073,854.42.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The minister will not pretend to say that was all from revenue of the Post Office Department, because the money we voted a few years ago to wipe out that $700,000 did not come from the post office at all.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The hon. gentleman evidently thinks that that $781,000 is a cumulative deficit.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Yes.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Then he is entirely in error. The sum of $781,152.09 is the result of the operation simply of the one fiscal year ending the 30th June, 1896, taking all the revenue collected for that year and making the expenditure for that year within these twelve mouths only. There was a complete commencement and closing of accounts for that year, and to carry on the service for that fiscal year, without any part of any other year, and without any balance from any prior year, for that one year of 365 days, it cost Canada $781,152.09, more than the gross revenue, to carry on the service.
For this past year, we have paid the whole expenditure for the service from the first to the end of the year, and Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.
have on hand a surplus, excluding the Yukon, of $395,316, and paying the deficit of the Yukon we have a surplus of $292,702, It means a change from the deficit to the surplus in the ledgers of Canada, amounting for the year to a betterment of $1,073,854.42 since 1896.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Well, Mr. Chairman, I am asked, what it is proposed to do with this fund. I agree with hon. gentlemen that in a country like Canada we should -not treat the post office service as a money making service. If it can be made to take care of itself, that I think would be satisfactory to the people of Canada, and it is but right that those who are engaged in the carrying on of the service, should, when circumstances will warrant it, be remembered. It is in view of that fact and in view of what seems to me to be the satisfactory position of the department, that I have been able of late to propose to parliament-and which parliament has been good enough to give effect to-recommendations having in view increases of salary to those in the service. Legislation has been passed during last year and this year, improving the salaries here and there. I shall not enumerate what has been done in that respect, as it is within the knowledge of hon. gentlemen. But my hon. friend from Provencher (Mr. Lariviere) and my hon. friends on this side of the House, have from time to time been pressing the department to consider the position of the country postmasters. I would be only too pleased if I were able to consider these gentlemen even more favourably than I now can, but so far as the present is concerned. I will give you the conclusion at which I have arrived. There are many postmasters throughout Canada whose offices may serve ten, or a dozen, or twenty immediate neighbours, and these postmasters are only paid a nominal sum for the trouble of keeping the office. That scale of payment did not originate with the present administration, and I am not aware that it originated with the prior administration, nor does it make any difference. It has been acquiesced in by both parties, and without any blame to either side. The exigencies of the country, our sparse population compared with our vast area, made it necessary to adopt some means to give postal facilities, and thus this system grew up in our broad Dominion. The question is, how can it be bettered ? At present, where the revenue is merely nominal, amounting to perhaps $10 or $20 a year, it has been the practice to pay postmasters a minimum fee of $10, going up to $12 or $15. I propose that from the first of July last all this class shall receive a minimum fee of $25.
A petition was presented to me last spring on behalf of a certain other class of postmasters, called accounting postmasters, ask-

ing for increases of pay and allowances. They asked that these allowances and increases should be made applicable to the territories and Manitoba. There is a great difficulty always in discriminating between one class and another, one locality and, another; and if what they asked for were granted, not merely to those in the western country, but to the same class in all Canada, it would involve increased expenditure exceeding $1,000,000 a year. I therefore shrank from meeting such a large demand. The system at present in Canada, which has been handed down to all succeeding governments ever since we have had a post office in Canada, and from pre-confederation days, has been to pay the postmasters a salary based upon the revenue of the office. There are a few exceptions to this scheme ; but most of the postmasters of Canada to-day are being remunerated on the basis of the old system which has prevailed for so many years, namely, a percentage of the revenue. With regard to them, I propose to increase their remuneration by 10 per cent of the amounts that they would derive according to the existing scale, that 10 per cent to be paid to them, not only in respect of their salaries, but in respect of what are known as their forward allowances, which form a considerable item in the gross expenditures of the Post Office Department. These increases will make a substantial inroad upon the revenue of the department. Added to these the increases in salaries which are authorized by legislation will make a much greater demand upon the treasury. But I have no doubt that we shall be able to meet them successfully, and I trust without having to face parliament with the statement that the department, even for the current year, has been administered at a loss.
In referring to the organization and development of the department, I omitted to say that a little more than a year ago the department opened negotiations with the United States for the purpose of simplifying the money order system between Canada and that country, enabling the Canadian people to remit small sums of money through the post office to a very much larger number of places throughout the United States than the former arrangements made possible. Those negotiations were successful, and an international arrangement was made by which the number of money-order offices in the United States upon which we might remit was greatly increased. The actual increase amounts to over 28,000. Up to the time I speak of, we could only send money-orders payable, in the United States at. something like 5.900 post offices ; but by the arrangement made, which was mutual, we are now able, for the convenience of the Canadian people, to remit money to no less than 34.000 post offices in the United States. A corresponding convenience is afforded to the people of the United States in remitting to Canada. The 439
practical working of this, so far as the volume of business goes, is as follows. This system has been in force now two clear years. For the year prior to its going into force the total number of money-orders remitted by Canada to the United States was 204,053 for sums of money aggregating $2,11S,295.33. For the year just closed the number of money-orders sent by Canada to the United States was 344,605, representing in money $3,682,189.96, being an increase of 72 per cent. The United States, in like manner, have remitted to Canada a much larger sum through the post office than under the former system. The figures of the return business are as follows : For the last year under the old system the number of money-orders sent from the United States to Canada through the post office in 1901 was 137,611, representing the sum of $1,909,168.74, and the amount of the year ending the 30th of June, 1903, was 270,779, representing in money $3,783,925, or an increase of 98 per cent.
The department has had negotiations with the United Kingdom for an extension of our money-order system on the same basis with that part of the empire, but up to the present time we have not been able to make that arrangement. We have also extended that system lately to Newfoundland, and| we have negotiations for its extension to many other parts of the empire and other countries. For example, negotiations are on foot at the present time to extend it to Bermuda, Barbadoes, Jamaica, the Leeward Islands, Tobique and British Guiana. We have also during the year completed arrangements for the extension of our money-order system to Norway, the Transvaal, Cape Colony and Trinidad ; and negotiations are pending with Austria-Hungary and Sweden. These are all conveniences to the Canadian people for the transmission of small sums of money to the various parts of the world. I might also say that at the postal convention, held in London last July, the following resolution, on the motion of Canada, was adopted :
That it is advisable to adopt the principle of cheap postage between the different parts of the British empire on all newspapers, and periodicals published therein, and the Prime Minister desires to draw the attention of His Maiesty's government to the question of reduction in the outgoing rate. They consider that each government should be allowed to determine the amount to which they may reduce such rates and the time for such reduction going into effect.
Acting upon this resolution, the Canadian Post Office Department put itself in early communication with various parts of the empire in order to obtain permission for the public in Canada to forward their newspapers and periodicals to all parts of the empire at the domestic letter rate, and already that permission has been granted in respect of the following countries : The United Kingdom, Balia-



mas, the Barbadoes, Bermuda. British Honduras, Cyprus, Ceylon, Falkland Islands, Cambia, Hong Kong, Leeward Islands (including Antigua, &c.), New Zealand, Transvaal, Sarawak, Sierra Leone, Turk's Island and Zanzibar. To all those countries to-day Canadian publications pass at the same rates as are charged for their transmission throughout Canada itself. And considering the very cheap rate of transmission of newspapers, periodicals and other Canadian publications throughout our own country, I think it may be said that no country in the world enjoys to-day as cheap a rate for the transmission of its publications, dealing with our own life, giving people outside of our country the. knowledge of our affairs, as does Canada.


George William Fowler: Are there not some corresponding increases ? Has not the rate on parcels been increased and city deliveries?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There was an increase in some of the parcel post regulations. In 1897 there was a rate imposed upon newspapers of a half a cent a pound, but even that rate has been almost cut in two by legislation this session. The legislation of this session has reduced the newspaper rate from half a cent per pound to one-quarter cent a pound on all newspapers to he carried 300 miles.


Mr. JOHNSTON (Cardwell).: 
The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I do not know what the hon. gentleman means by 4 per cent; the increase is 10 per cent.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. The hon. gentleman said 10 per cent on the actual salary they are getting. Supposing the income of an office is $100, then the postmaster would be

entitled to 40 per cent of that, which would be $40. But you allow 10 per cent on the $40, which is $4.' Well, it is only 4 per cent of an increase they are getting.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I say the emoluments of the postmasters will be increased by 10 per cent. I am not taking 10 per cent on other things. A postmaster who gets $1,000 will get $100 more under this scheme. He has 10 per cent on his original salary, which is increased by that much.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. If be had $40 he would get $4 additional.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: And if he had $1,000 he would get $100 more.


Robert Johnston: Will the Postmaster General say that he will look into the case of these villages I mentioned ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The deputy has made a note of the hon. gentleman's remarks, and the subject will be carefully looked into.
Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) I cannot allow the present opportunity to pass without complimenting the Postmaster General on the very excellent showing he has made this evening in the conduct of his department. It must be gratifying indeed to parliament and to the country to know that the management of the Post Office Department has produced such excellent results. Many of us, indeed all of us on this side of the House, have been pressing on the Postmaster General for the last few years the advisability of increasing the salaries or remuneration which the rural postmasters have been receiving. The Postmaster General promised to look into the matter, and that just as soon as the revenues would warrant him in doing so he would take that very deserving class of public servants into consideration. He has done so, and I consider that the minimum remuneration the Postmaster General now finds it in his power to give to the rural postmasters of $25 a year, is very satisfactory indeed, and I am sure this very deserving class of public servants, whose services are so useful in keeping these small post offices, will be well pleased and will appreciate this increase in their remuneration. So far as the accounting postmasters are concerned, to which reference has been made by the hon. member for Provencher (Mr. LnRivi&re), he has said that a man who has been receiving $40 a year, under this arrangement will receive $4 a year more. That is true, but a postmaster who has been receiving a salary of $1,000 a year will receive an increase of $100 a year.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. But that does not affect a $40 affair.
Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.) It must be a small office indeed where the salary is 439}
not more than $40. I know several accounting offices where the salaries range from $500 to $700 a year, and these men will receive $50, $60 or $70 increase per year, which is a very substantial increase, and will be much appreciated by these men. But the most satisfactory feature of the whole case is that after these increases are made the revenue will still meet the expenditure. I am sure the people of this country will congratulate the Postmaster General upon his management of that de partment for the last seven years.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I think it is unfortunate that the hon. gentleman from Prince Edward Island (Mr. Hughes) should throw this note of discord into a happy family such as we are at this moment. I say it is unfortunate, because it makes me angry when I hear a man making false claims. Now, the Postmaster General made no claim to being a party to this prosperity in that particular, and I think _he was wise. I think he followed the example of the young man we read of the other day in England, the young Marquis of Salisbury, who inherited his father's magnificent estate. Some American correspondent called upon him, and looked over this magnificent pile of buildings erected by his ancestors two or three hundred years ago, the old Cecils, who had won it for the modern Salisburys, who for the last 30 or 40 years had never put a brick to the castle or added an acre to the estate. But the Yankee blusterer commenced to congratulate the young man upon being the owner of this great estate. The fellow was abashed by the candour of the young man, who sat there clothed with humility and sorrow, and who replied : ' I am ashamed to inherit this magnificent estate, in building up which I have done nothing ; it is the work of the great Cecils of two or three hundred years ago.' The Yankee blusterer turned away, he had met an honest and noble-minded man, such as are many of the better classes in England. Now, I think the Postmaster General-or shall we call him the Minister of Labour ? Which title does the hon. gentleman prefer ? I do not know what to call him. I do not wish to hurt bis feelings, because he may have a preference for one title over the other. I think he should be called the Postmaster General and not the Minister of Labour, because bis ample proportions do not fulfil the poetical idea of a Minister of Labour. I think a Minister of Labour should be thin and lank, and show the evidences of a laborious life. He should be lean and hungry-looking like Cassius, rather than the robust gentleman he is, who seems to have been reared in the lap of luxury and to have lived there all his life. However, apart from that, I hope the Postmaster General is too modest to accept all this honour that has been thrust upon him by the hon. member for Prince Edward Island.

I am proud on belialf of Canada to see this splendid showing, to know that our post office pays. I assume that our post office pays $202,000 of surplus into the treasury of Canada. I understand from the hon. Postmaster General that we pay all the bills In connection with the post office for Canada and for the Yukon, and that we have then $292,000 to pay into the treasury of Canada. If that is the statement it is a creditable showing for Canada, but it is only what might have 'been expected. There never was a country the foundation of whose administration in every department of government was laid with such wisdom as that of the administration of Canada as laid in 1867 and from that time down to 1896. These hon. gentlemen have inherited one of the most perfect systems of government that was ever developed in the British world. All the great public works had been built. The post office system had been extended all through Canada, and these hon. gentlemen had only to sit down and see the revenues flow in. They had not to turn their hand in any department to help Canada, and until this scheme bf the transcontinental railway was brought forth they never had added one thing to the public life of Canada or secured one dollar of revenue for Canada. They have been heirs to a magnificent estate, and I have never heard these hon. gentlemen in the course of this parliament attempt to claim credit for the great progress that Canada has made. They do not deserve it, and I will appeal to any hon. gentleman in this House to say whether in justice and fair-play, apart from political partisanship, he can wake any claim for this government, except that they had the luck to inherit a magnificent estate, at a very fortunate time, when the great public works had been constructed and when we had been waiting for the development which was bound to come in consequence of these great public works. We had settled the principles of government, we had constructed the great public works, and we had said to the people of Canada : Wait, the Intercolonial Railway, the Canadian Pacific Railway and the canals cannot produce this great wealth and progress in a day. We said that this development would come. It came in due time, and it came when the great public men of Canada had pointed out that it should come. In the vicissitudes of fortune these lion, gentlemen opposite came into power and inherited the results of the splendid achievements of others. I was glad that the hon. Postmaster General did not make any claim to the credit for any of these great results. I always say in the country, of course, that Canada is prosperous and that Canada must become a great nation, because the party that had been in power for eighteen years had laid well and truly the foundations of national greatness. It was at the time that they had completed


Seymour Eugene Gourley: the work that these hon. gentlemen came into power. After they had been criticising the Conservative party for eighteen years, they came into power and they paid a splendid tribute to our policy by adopting it, because, as sensible men, they could do nothing else, although I believe there were some hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House who would have been reckless enough to have adopted some other policy had not public opinion been so strong. While I congratulate hon. gentlemen opposite on the progress that Canada is making, I would say that it is only the progress that I have been predicting for the last twenty years. I used to say : Wait, this country will be great; wait, the people's railway will pay an enormous revenue ; wait, immigration will pour in ; wait until we break down the prejudice against Canada ; wait until we get the Liberal party to cease reviling and slandering Canada, and then her wealth will be increased. Whenever I made the declaration that this progress would come, the Grit party were howling that Canada would be broken. The right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Rt. Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright) was reviling us down below, describing us as the shreds and patches of Canada and insulting every portion of Canada. I have no doubt this progress would have come years ago if, when our Finance Minister went to England a few years ago to float a loan, he had not been met by the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce and by the financial papers which the right hon. gentleman controlled, in an attempt to break down the credit of Canada by one of the meanest, the lowest political conspiracies that ever disgraced any country. Even in war there are honourable principles. A man must fight fairly even in war, if he is to be regarded as a generous and decent foe, and those same principles must be applied to political warfare. The Conservative party stood up for eighteen years and fought for Canada just as much as if a foe had invaded Canada, because the Liberal party were just as much an invading army as if Canada had been invaded by Americans or Mexicans. That was what always angered me. I have always taken the view that I have no right to oppose my political opponents by saying one word which will hurt Canada. If I differ with the party or the policy of lion, gentlemen opposite I will attack them as vigorously as I can, but I will never say a word against my country. It is my bound-en duty, as a citizen of Canada, to say words of praise for my country or to hold my tongue. No man in this opposition, the only loyal opposition that ever stood out in defence of the whole country, in all the debate on the transcontinental railway, has uttered a word except in praise of Canada. Yet, when hon. gentlemen opposite were opposing the great Canadian Pacific Railway, the country rang with slander from

end to end, until no man believed himself safe to live in this country for twenty-four hours. The lion. Minister of Customs (Hon. Mr. Paterson), with that sweet, low voice of liis, charmed the people of Ontario with the most reckless slanders against the people of Canada that were ever uttered by any public man. There never was an occasion on which a more reckless stream of slander was wer poured from any human throat than that which flowed in a continuous stream from the lion. Minister of Customs. That party kept back the progress of Canada for twenty years by this continuous flow of slander. It is bad enough to see these men occupying the treasury benches. It is the Irony of fate that the Conservative party should sit here after we have made this country, and see hon. gentlemen opposite occupying the treasury benches. They wear the robes that they never won ; they wear the chaplet to which they are not entitled. They never won the race, and yet they want the bay. They want the plume, and yet they never won the race. The Conservative party have always been anxious for the success of Canada. We want to see this country great. I feel that I want to be a Canadian in any part of the world. The old Roman used to say in every part of the world : ' Civis Romanus sum.' I want the magic wrds ' Civis Canadensis Sum ' to be more attractive even than the old boast of the Roman. I can sit here at any time and see these hon. gentlemen go along with their estimates. I can help them to vote their estimates, until they claim that this progress is due to their party or to their policy. I commend the hon. gentleman for his modesty to-uight, because I remember that in the' earlier part of this session, when he was making a speech in regard to post office affairs, he took occasion to rake up some old matters that had better have been left alone at the present time. I noticed a change in his manner to-night, and I was delighted to see that he is improving. The improvement mav not be very marked, but in him it is worthy of commendation. On this occasion the hon. Postmaster General has absolutely disclaimed any connection with the result which he has been able to show. So he says : I have had nothing to do with this, I am only a little pipe through which the water is running, and I take no credit for it. I have no fault to find, and I say it is a creditable showing on behalf of Canada. If hon. gentlemen opposite take that position, I have no fault to find, but whenever the Liberal partv of Canada attempts to claim one iota of credit for the development of this country, they make a false claim, and they must be accused of false pretenses.


Mr. GALLERY.: I understood from the Postmaster General that the minimum increase granted to postmasters would be $25. Now. if a postmaster receives $40 a year, would he get $65 now, or would he only get
10 per cent on the $40, which would make his salary $44.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I stated that a large number of postmasters in Canada now receive salaries amounting from $10 to $20 per year, and in future the minimum salary of these gentlemen will be $25. As to the postmasters who are paid by commission, they will hereafter receive an increase of 10 per cent on that commission, be their salaries small or large. On the revenue of the office they will receive 10 per cent more than they formerly received.


Nathaniel Boyd: I have sat in the House for some days listening to the increased votes which have been granted to the various departments, and in the interest of my constituents, I often felt like making a strenuous protest. If the Postmaster General, who had charge of the Bill granting increases to civil servants, and if many of his supporters were on this side of the House, I can imagine what protests they would have made in the interests of the farmers who in the days of adversity, they professed such an affection for. However that may be, let me point out that the country postmasters receive under this proposal the smallest increase of any of the civil servants whose salaries have been increased this year. The hon. member for Provencher (Mr. LaRiv-iere) has proved that to a demonstration. I was much amused that the member for Colchester (Mr. Gourley) should expect any modesty from the ministers of the present government. My remark may not apply to the Prime Minister and it may, but, it certainly is a fact that all the other ministers from first to last, are anxious to avail of every possible occasion to make a stump speech to their own glorification. The Postmaster General to-night has claimed great credit for the success of his department, but he has failed to show that he has inaugurated anything which would bring about that success. We know that this prosperity of the department is largely, if not entirely, due to the prosperity which has prevailed of recent years throughout Canada, and for that matter throughout the civilized world. He told us that the number of post offices had increased during the Liberal regime at the rate of 149 per annum, but if he looks back to 1891, or even to 1871, he will find that each year up to the coming into power of the Liberals, there was an increase of 149 in the number of post offices, and possibly more. I rose more particularly to bring to the attention of the House the case of the accounting postmasters. I had the opportunity of meeting the Postmaster General in company with the deputation of accounting postmasters who waited upon him, and I shall read the memorial which they presented, and which shows that the decrease in postage from three cents to two cents has been largely taken out of their income. In order that I may quote their case

properly, I propose to read their petition, so that it may be recorded on ' Hansard.'


Mr. SCOTT.: It is on ' Hansard ' twice already.


Nathaniel Boyd: Then I will put it on three
times, so that you will not have to hunt so far back for it. Let me say in the first place, that some years ago the matter of an increase in the remuneration to these postmasters, was urged by the member for Cardwell (Mr. Johnston). To-night we have the member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) making a display, and no doubt he was advised as to what was coming from the Postmaster General.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: He was rehearsing.


Nathaniel Boyd: Certainly, but it is to the member for Cardwell (Mr. Johnston) that the postmasters have to be thankful for pressing their claims upon the government. Here is the petition to which I refer :
Winnipeg, Manitoba, February, 1903. To the Right Hon. Sir William Mulook, Postmaster General,
Ottawa.
Sir,-We. the undersigned, accounting postmasters of Manitoba and the North-west Territories, 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 the hours of labour. &e., of the workingman.
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 25 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 and prompt despatch of all mails regardless of hours of arrival and departure is in many instances a very grave responsibility. 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.


Nathaniel Boyd: You see, they knew the Postmaster General was also Minister of Labour, and they thought they would appeal to him on that score.
Firstly. In connection with newspapers and periodicals we think it a conservative estimate to assume that a family will now receive an average of six to eight times as many periodicals as a family would be receiving twenty-live years ago.
'Secondly. The use of the mails as 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 he hoped for. In the case of British, and some other lines of foreign postage, the increase in the number of letters1 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.
That proves what I have already said, that the reduction in the postal rate from three cents to two cents, has, to a very great extent, been borne by the postmasters, owing to the fact that a very large number of them are remunerated by way of commission.
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 the method of handing 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 (he 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 5 or 6 o'clock in the morning to despatch a mail, thus imposing unduly long hours of service without any allowance for any class of assistance, to say nothing of a competent assistant. In some offices, owing to the arivai 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 eleven hours a day for six days a week and provide (if he would give the public anything approaching satisfactory service) 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 Impost office purposes on an allowance of $125 for rent, fuel and light. Other similar examples could be cited. Fuel and light are costly here.
6.	In the matter of securing proper assistants, we could 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 post-master 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.
And I see that they get a greater increase by tips new Act and the $50,000 which is voted in these estimates for the outside service.
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, $800 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-carriers. $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 clerk 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 trills 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.	[DOT]
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.
As I said before, these gentlemen understand how to properly make this calculation; and, instead of meeting that request, the Postmaster General gives them an increase of only ten per cent.
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 lignt in this country. 4th. That the -money order system be simplified so as to lessen the amount of work 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 be 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.
I may say that in our western towns the express company to a very great extent is cutting into the business of the money-order office, almost doing the entire business, for the reason that a man can go to the express office, get his receipt a-nd do the business in one-half the time that it takes the postmaster to accomplish the same business; and I think it is as cheap or possibly cheaper. This is a matter in which I hope the Postmaster General, when he next addresses the House, will be able to show that he has done something to better the system.
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 think that a little investigation would show that redress could be effected so as to relieve the postmasters concerned without in any way iraparing 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.

Now, they have been brought and placed on ' Hansard,' and the .Postmaster General will have them before him, and the members of this House can refer to them.
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.
Here is another small paragraph :
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.
S. 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 an 1 moneys orders may not 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.
Now, I think these are very important suggestions which have been made by these accounting postmasters, and they should receive the close attention of the Postmaster General and his assistants. The hon. gentleman referred in his speech to the prosperity which has attended the department; but at ihe same time he failed to show us by what policy or by what changes, he has caused this improvement in the working of the department. Here even the postmasters make a number of practical suggestions to him which he might have thought of or acted upon. He gives $80,000 to officials, many of whom are well paid to-day, many of whom would not be able to earn the same amount of money in any other capacity in life many of whom thrown on their own resources would scarcely earn one-half of what they are getting; and yet these postmasters, the men who are bearing a great part of the burden and who have brought about this prosperity, are paid the Mr. BOYD.
small pittance of ten per cent. The hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) says that that matter has been on ' Hansard ' before. Well, if it has, why was not something done before ? It was not because the hon. minister did not know that the country was prosperous. He could have satisfied those people and saved them the expense of coming here to lay their case before the House and demand redress. I think that I am within my rights in bringing to the attention of the hon. minister this matter, which he has failed to meet, although he has looked after a class which has not done anything to bring about the prosperity of his department. The men he has overlooked are the men who have brought about that increase, and they should have the support of the hon. minister, but instead, these other men, many of whom .are now receiving more than they could in any other capacity, are looked after to the tune of $80,000.


James Clancy: I am sure that the Committee listened with much attention to the statement of the Postmaster General. It is quite evident that the whole thing was very well arranged. As an hon. gentleman has said, there was a little rehearsal to-night, and an opportunity given the hon. minister of making the statement be did. He said that there are $292,000 to the credit of the Post Office Department after paying the whole service. That is not a difficult matter. If the hon. gentleman has additional receipts it is because he has increased the burdens of the people. True, there has been a decrease in the postage on letters, but there has been ah increase on other mail matter, and therefore it is not difficult to see how the hon. gentleman, for the first time since he has been in office, has been able to show a surplus of $292,000. What is the history of the department during the six preceding years from 1897 to 1902 ? The hon. gentleman had a deficit every year during that period and a total deficit of $2,991,896.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: It will take some time to pay that up.


James Clancy: Yes, the hon. gentleman has starved the service. He is not giving the supply of post offices to the rural districts and elsewhere which they should have had. Let me prove this. The number of post offices that were opened between 1890 and 1896, for a period of six years under Conservative rule, was 1.190. That was a period of great depression, but take this period of phenomenal expansion from 1896 to 1902, under the administration of the hon. gentleman, and we find that instead of the post offices being increased 1,190, the increase is only 855. Could you find more conclusive evidence that the hon. gentleman has increased the burdens of the people and starved the service at the same

time ? Under such conditions, it is not difficult for the bon. gentleman to have a surplus. What was the cost per head in 189G for the postal service ? It was 93 cents, and in 1902 the cost was 90 cents per head. I need not pursue the case any further. That conclusively proves that the hon. gentleman has not kept up with our increased prosperity by giving rural districts the postal service to which they are entitled. While the postage was lowered on certain classes of mail matter, it has been, on the other hand, increased to such an extent that the cost per head to the people is larger in 1901 than it was in 1890. The hon. gentleman seeks to impress upon the people the idea that he has given Canada a better service, but the fact that the post offices have not been increased in the same ratio during his regime as they did during the previous regime disposes of that claim. It is clear that the hon. gentleman has not met the wants of the people, and that being the case, he has not very much to boast of. But what he has proved1 is that he has taken more money from the people and given them worse service.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There are certain things one would require to know before determining whether it is to the good management of the Post Office Department that we owe this increased revenue. I see in the hon. gentleman's report, at the end of page 4, appendix A, the statement that for the year ending June 30th, 1902, the net revenue of the Post Office Department was $3,888,126.10 being an increase over the revenue of the previous year of $466,933,91, or 13'64 per cent. The increase in expenditure was $45,040.78, equal to 1T9 per cent. There was evidently a process of starving going on there, because that increase of expenditure was not an increase commensurate with tiie development of the country. Evidently those who carried the mails and the postmasters were not paid very extravagantly for their work. There was an item last year, which I presume is the same this ' year, that is about the automobiles used in Toronto? Are they in use still?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understood last year that they were not charged to the Post Office Department?	.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: They are now, but the change does not amount to anything.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: They are taken into account in tlie statement. There are steamship subsidies for mail service, are these taken into account?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: They are treated as they always were. 1 think most of our mails go to England by the United States. We have to pay the transit charges.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But we give large subsidies for mail service on the steamers. That is not, however, a matter of any great importance if treated in the same way as it was before. I see here, in the report which the Postmaster General has submitted to the House, that there was a surplus of revenue over expenditure up to 30th June, 1902 for the first time.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: That was omitting the Yukon. There is a special reference to it in the report.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Yes, you have both omitted and put it in in this instance, and with the cost of the Yukon taken out, there is still a surplus of $292,702. I do not know whether I took down the hon. gentleman's statement correctly, but I understood him to say that in 1890 there was a deficit of $781,152. I think that was wiped out by an item put in the estimates.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The department, for the fiscal year ending 30fli June, 1896, had a deficit, as I have already explained, on the operations of that year, of $781,000. They failed to take a vote from parliament for that year sufficient to pay the working expenses ; and when I took office I found there were about three-quarters of a million dollars of unpaid accounts for the fiscal year ending 30th June, 1896, for which there was no parliamentary appropriation. I reported the matter to the Finance Minister, and in the succeeding year I took an item wherewith to pay these accounts.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then after everything was paid you started afresh ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: It is the policy of the department to pay up everything each year, to have no arrears after the 30tli of June. Last year there was a slight error, that policy was not lived up to as it ought to have been, and there was an error through the department having failed to estimate the amount correctly. They were $22,000 short, and that amount had to be carried over in the report of that year, and in the fiscal year of 1903 we paid that shortage of the preceding year. Therefore, by that amount our showing is that much worse this year. But with that exception, the policy I have mentioned has been lived up to, and >ve close up the year's accounts and take a vote from parliament each year, so that there can be no accumulated deficit, as was the practice for many years in former times. I say in frankness that that practice prevailed under both Liberal and Conservative governments down to 1896.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then there must have been a much larger deficit than $7S1,000, because there was an overlapping that was brought down.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: It is true there were a lot of errors, and two


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I wish to say that the policy of the Postmaster General in increasing the salaries of the postmasters throughout the country is in my judgment in the right direction. The only complaint that I have to make is that he has not gone far enough. We are not now troubled so much in hunting up postmasters since the present government came into power, lie-cause they generally leave that responsibility upon others. But I do know that I have been obliged to hunt up postmasters many times, and it was difficult to get them to take the position at all for a salary ranging from $12 to $25. As they used to say, it did not pay them for scrubbing the floor. I said at one time that the minimum salary should be $25. I think now it should be higher, I do not think any one should be expected to keep a post office for less than $35 a year. What principle does the Postmaster General follow now in striking salaries above that ? I understood him to say that they get 10 per cent more than they got before.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: They are paid on the same scale, but we add on 10 per cent.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Since there is a surplus now, 1 would suggest to make that increase about 20 per cent.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: The hon. gentleman would land me in a deficit at once. The various increases already provided for are very near the surplus I have spoken of.


Edward Cochrane: When the hon. gentleman reduced the postage on letters, what effect did it have on the pay of the postmasters throughout the country ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: No postmaster had his salary reduced, because of the reduction in the rate. The salaries were allowed to remain at the rate at which they stood before the reduction. Preceding governments had reduced the rate without regard to the compensation of the postmasters. Many in this House will remember when the letter postage was five cents, perhaps more than that. But the commissions were left the same.


Edward Cochrane: I still think that a great many rural postmasters are underpaid. Take the case of the postmaster in my own township of Edville. There is a daily .


William Mulock: mail, for it is a populous section of country. It is five or six miles from the villages of Colborne and Brighton. He is attentive to his duty, the office is kept open from morning till night, and the postmaster only gets $30. If he had not his daughter there to attend to the post office he could not keep it open. I have heard it stated here to-night that men often keep a post office to draw custom. Well, they must have a store for that purpose. But there are many post offices in our section that have no store in connection with them. I think these gentlemen should be paid something more. I am not an advocate of extravagance, but i am favourable to a reasonable expenditure where it is necessary to pay men for attending to an office like that. I am satisfied that the amount hardly pays that man. I am at the office frequently, and I am satisfied that the amount of money will hardly pay for the wood that is consumed in keeping the place warm. I think these are men who are underpaid. They are doing what is very beneficial to the rural districts. It is a great pleasure for men living in the rural districts to realize that they can get their mail and know that they are not circumscribed as to hours, but that they can get it any time in the day.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: When the hon. minister was devising ways and means to make his revenue and expenditure he changed the system which before that time allowed all papers and parliamentary documents of the legislative assembly to go through the post office free.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: No, there has been no change.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am quite sure that I am not in error. I have evidence of it in my hand. Here is a letter from a clerk of the peace.
Gffice of the Clerk of the Peace for Leeds and Grenville,
Brockville, September 14, 1903.
Dear 'Sir,-I beg to inform you that I have received the Ontario Statutes, for 1903, for distribution. If you wish them sent to you by book post send me 33 cents in postage stamps to prepay postage and sign and return me the enclosed receipt.
(Sgd.) M. M. BROWN,
Clerk of the Peace.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There never was a time in the history of the country when provision was made by which clerks of the peace could transmit papers through the post office free. The Post Office Act says what may and what may not be mailed free. The Post Office Act says what local parliamentary papers may go free. The Act that was in force when we took office is in force to-day. There has been no change whatever in the application of the Act. Whatever went free then goes free to-day.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am quite sure that there was a time, whether it was in the time of the Postmaster General or not, when these books went free. I am sure there was a change made. I remember it distinctly.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: If every official of the local government, or if clerks of the peace all over Canada, could frank matter where would be the end of the franking privilege ? It.may be that in days gone by such a practice prevailed but it has not for many years or long before we came into office. The hon. gentleman surely would not urge a policy of that kind.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am talking quite properly in connection with my rights. I am not urging the policy of that kind but I am drawing attention to a complaint that is made. I am not prepared to say that the fault, if fault there is, lies with the hon. Postmaster General or that there was free delivery of this matter before through the post office. But I know that my impression is that other papers used to go through the post office free which do not now.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There was no cutting off


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. Postmaster General may say that there was no cutting off but my memory is just as good as his and I make the statement that there was a cutting off. I have a distinct remembrance of having a controversy with the postmaster in our own locality in regard to what he should allow to go through the mails free and I know that in that case there was a cutting off.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: Not by me. If such a state of affairs existed in days gone by I know nothing about it. There has been no change in that respect under my administration.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I was about to say that in many of these lines the additional postage put on, such as for instance, the additional postage put on newspapers has helped to give the additional revenue that we have to-day, and I have no doubt a great deal was made up from the increased correspondence carried on on account of the larger amount of business done. For everything that the hon. Postmaster General has done he is entitled to credit, but I do not know whether it is in order to throw as many bouquets as the hon. member for King's, Prince Edward Island (Mr. Hughes) desires to present to him because that hon. gentleman desires to give him credit for a great deal of what he did not accomplish as well as for a great deal that he did accomplish. For anything that he has accomplished he is entitled to credit. He is entitled to credit for increasing the number of post offices which I think is a step in the right direction. He has also increased the mail service. That,
I think, is in the right direction as well, but I think there has not been that expansion that there should have been in the pay of the mail contractors and of the small postmasters throughout the country. I think the postmasters in the towns and cities did not fare so badly, but in the small villages throughout the country where postmasters are obliged to keep the offices for anywhere from $25 to $35 there is room for improvement.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I must congratulate the hon. Postmaster General upon the generous heart he has shown towards the country postmasters in giving them an increase in their salaries. The amounts they have been receiving in the past have been very inadequate for the services they have rendered. I know several postmasters that I have had a great deal of difficulty in persuading to remain in office because of the small pittance they have been receiving, amounting to $12 a year. I am very glad to know that their salaries are now being increased. They are deserving of that increase and I would have liked if it had been still larger. I would like also if the hon. Postmaster General could see his way clear with the revenue that is now afforded to his department to allow newspapers to be distributed free. This is literature that should pass free as its distribution is advancing the knowledge of the country not only in political but in other matters. Whilst I am on my feet I may say that uje have a post office on the Cornwall road at New Cornwall, with John E. Hallimore as postmaster. An application on behalf of the people in that district has been made for a tri-weekly instead of a weekly service. It is a very thickly settled district and one that is deserving of a more frequent mail service. I believe that the hon. Postmaster General, from what he said when I had an interview with him the other day, will make an arrangement to give a tri-weeldy service to this parish from Mahone Bay. We have a railway passing through my county and I can see no reason why the mail could not be dropped at the different places along the line once a day instead of weekly. There is one office that is only receiving a weekly mail although the train passes by daily. Very often letters are delayed either in transit to or from the various points for want of a daily mail.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: What is the name of the place to which the hon. gentleman refers ?


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: Block House, between Mahone Bay and Bridgewater, on the main line. If a tri-weekly mail is granted to New Cornwell from Mahone Bay that office can be served tri-weekly by the courier that would serve the office at New Cornwall. This is a reasonable request and I feel satisfied that the hon. Postmaster General

will see it in tlie same light and give it favourable consideration.


Mr. BLAIN.: In looking over the report of the hon. Postmaster General, I see that the deficit for the first year of the hon. gentleman's administration ending the 30th June, 1897, was $586,540; in 1898, a deficit of $47,602 ; in 1899, a deficit of $457,420 ; in 1900, a deficit of $553,242 ; in 1901, a deficit of $512,014 ; in 1902, a deficit of $82,376. In these six years there was a total deficit of $2,239,194. The Postmaster General claims a surplus for the year ending June, 1903, of $292,702, so that this would leave a total deficit during the hon. gentleman's administration of $1,946,492. May I ask if that includes in each and every year the figures of the deficit with reference to the Yukon ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: We commenced the Yukon mail service in 1897, I think, but of course it has developed very much since. In each annual report since we established the Yukon service, the hon. gentleman will find a special reference to that service. It has been the policy of the department up to the present to show separately the revenue and expenditure on the Yukon service, apart from the general service for the rest of Canada.


Richard Blain: Will the minister state the deficit in the Yukon postal service from its establishment up to the present ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I cannot give you that to-night.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: What increase does the minister purpose to give to the town postmasters, and how will he distinguish between the town and the village postmasters ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: There is no distinction between town and village. All postmasters who are paid by commission will now receive an increase of 10 per cent over what they were receiving before.


Rufus Henry Pope: I congratulate the Postmaster General upon realizing his ambition of having a surplus. I trust it will not become a fad with him to go on increasing these surpluses until he wipes out the deficits that have accumulated under his administration of seven years. If he attempted such a thing the post office service would be starved to death. I congratulate the Postmaster General on the prosperity of the country which has made it possible for him to realize that surplus. I have been spending a fewT weeks in the sparsely settled districts of the North-west, where the people are coming in so rapidly, and where for distances of over sixty and seventy miles which I have travelled, they have no mail service. I can quite understand that when the Postmaster General thought of the expense of carrying the mails into these out-Mr. KAULBACH.
lyiug territories, and wishing to have a surplus, he would not venture to give them an adequate mail service. I would impress upon the Postmaster General, the absolute necessity of dispelling from his mind any idea of making the Post Office Department pay in the immediate future, seeing that we have so much development of that service before us. Those who have been used to living in closely settled communities iu Europe or eastern Canada, find it very lonely when they settle on the western plains. Railway development has been very slow in that territory of recent years, and settlement is going long distances away from any centre of communication. The settlers are naturally desirous of being able to communicate with their people at home, and nothing stimulates immigration so much as the giving of facilities for that purpose. Any one who visits these communities and sees the anxiety with which the people await the coming of the mail, will appreciate that fact. In the district I refer to, there were only three settlers three years ago, but now there are more than fifty families. The mail is carried in by any one who happens to be able to take it by accident, and it is tumbled about from one house to another until a store is established, when that is made the central point of distribution. The Postmaster General must see how unsatisfactory such a system is. Let me say, that while I am perfectly satisfied that the Postmaster General should increase the salaries of country postmasters, I do' not know that I am so very much wrapt up in that idea, as other hon. gentlemen on both sides of the House, perhaps I am not so much dependent upon them. While I have no objection to the Postmaster General increasing the salaries of these gentlemen, yet I certainly would not desire that his doing so should lead to the starvation of the mail service in western Canada, because I look upon the development of the mail service in the west as being absolutely essential to the satisfactory settlement of that country. Believing as I do, that the development of the west is more important to us than the increasing of the salaries of country postmasters, so far as I am personally concerned, I hope that the Postmaster General will see that whatever increases in salaries he makes, they will not be taken from the mail service of the west. I trust that in the future the Postmaster General will not let a few hundred dollars expense interfere with the development of our postal service.


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: I quite appreciate the importance of giving to the people who are coming into our North-west, the best possible mail service. When an application is made for a post office that application is referred to the inspector and he makes a report. I think I am strictly within the facts when I say, that in no instance has there been any refusal to estab-

lish a post office which has been recommended by the inspector. Indeed, in many instances I have established post offices where the inspector recommended they were not necessary. If the inspector recommends it, the office is established, and it may be relied upon that Mr. McLeod, the inspector in that territory, a capable and intelligent man will make recommendations wherever there is reasonable justification. I think no one can complain that we have not liberally extended the post offices throughout the territories.
To provide fbr an appointment oi. seven additional railway mail clerks-$3,500.


Rufus Henry Pope: What is this for ?


The POSTMASTER GENERAL.: In Manitoba and the North-west Territories.
Telegraph lines, Yukon system-working expanses, $62,000.
The MINISTER OI<' PUBLIC WORKS. This is for the maintenance and operation of these lines.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the experience of the working of these lines ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The operation costs $179,000 in rbund numbers, and the receipts this year, judging by the nine months, will amount to about $120,000, leaving a deficit of a little over $50,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is the deficit growing smaller or larger every year ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: The construction account was closed only a few months ago. The revenue is increasing. Last month it was $14,000, which is a couple of thousand dollars larger than ever before. The rates had been perhaps prematurely lowered. The expenses can be cut down after this year, I think, to some extent, so that I imagine the deficit will decrease every year.


Nathaniel Boyd: What does the minister mean by the rates being prematurely lowered ? Last year the Minister of Public Works promised to test the question of lowering the rates.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: They were lowered some months ago from $4.50, I think, to $3 for ten words, and the press rate has been reduced from 3 cents a word to 4 cent a word.


Samuel Hughes: What means has the minister for repairing the lines ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There are linemen at stations along the lines. This expense increases the cost of operating these lines beyond the ordinary lines.	.


Nathaniel Boyd: I understand that the increase of revenue has come about since the reduction in rates ?
The MINISTER OB' PUBLIC WORKS. Of course, the line was not completed. The large branches which have been added to the line contribute to the deficit, as they do not yield much revenue.


Rufus Henry Pope: Where do these branches run ?
The MINISTER OB' PUBLIC WORKS. The longest runs to Port Simpson. The prospect is that the revenue will improve and the expenditure will decrease.


Richard Blain: Can the minister give us the figures of the total construction account to date ?


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: It is a little less than $900,000.


Richard Blain: Can he give us the amount paid on construction account during this year ?
The MINISTER OB' PUBLIC WORKS.
I cannot tell my hon. friend. The construction account is now closed.
Some resolutions reported.


MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR GENERAL-FURTHER SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES.
[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE presented a message from His Excellency the Governor General.
Mr. SPEAKER read the message as follows :
Minto.
The Governor General transmits to the House of Commons Further Supplementary Estimates of sums required for the service of the Dominion for the year ending 30th June, 1904, and in accordance with the provisions of ' The British North America Act, 1867,' the Governor General recommends these Estimates to the House of Commons.
Government House,
Ottawa, 14th October, 1903.
On motion of the Minister of Finance, the Message and Supplementary Estimates were referred to the Committee of Supply.
The MINISTER 'OF FINANCE moved the adjournment of the House.
Thomas Simpson Sproule: Can the hon. gentleman give us any information as to when the resolution regarding the Quebec bridge will be brought down ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I hope the matter will be ready for presentation at the next'sitting of the House on Friday.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What will be the business on Friday ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We will proceed with the remaining supplementary estimates, probably with the railway estimates first.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 12 o'clock midnight.
[Stage Direction]
Friday, October 16, 1903.