1903-10-10

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Mr. Demers (St. John and Iberville), House went into committee to consider the report of the Joint Committee of the Senate and the House of Commons for the purpose of revising Rule 51 of the House of Commons and Rule 49 of the Senate, and making them agree. (Votes and Proceedings of House of Commons, August 18, 1903.)
Mr. DEMERS (St. John and Iberville).: I beg to move :	.
That the report of the Select Committee appointed to confer with a similar committee of the Senate, for the purpose of revising Rule 51 of the House of Commons and Rule 49 of the Senate, he amended by striking out the words ' oyer the name and address of the solicitor for' the applicant,' in the 8th and 9th lines, and inserting in lieu thereof the following ' signed by or on behalf of the applicant, with the address of the party signing the same.'
This will make rule 51 read as follows :
All applications to parliament for private Bills of any nature whatsoever shall be advertised by a notice published in the 1 Canada Gazette.' Such notice shall clearly and distinctly state the nature and object of the application, and shall be signed by or on behalf of the-applicant with the address of the party signing the same. And when the application is for an Act of incorporation, the name of the


Hon. Mr. FIELDING.: proposed company shall be stated in the notice.	-	.
.This has the consent of the Senate. Amendment agreed to.
On section (a), subsection 4,
In addition to the notice in the ' Canada Gazette ' aforesaid, a similar notice shall also be published in some leading newspeper, when the application is for an Act to incorporate a railway or canal company. In the principal city and town or village in each county through which the proposed railway or canal is to be constructed.


Mr. SPROULE.: On behalf of the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Clarke), I beg to move the following amendment:
That at the end of the first paragraph thereof the following words be added :-
And if the works of any company (incorporated, or to be incorporated) are to be declared to be for the general advantage of Canada, such intention shall be specifically mentioned in the notice ; and the applicants shall cause a copy of such notice to be sent by registered letter to the clerk of each municipality which may be specially affected by the construction or operation of such works, and also to the secretary of the province in which such works are, or may be located ; and proof of compliance with this requirement by the applicants shall be established by statutory declaration.
That is for the purpose of giving notice to municipalities interested when in any Bill it is declared that the work is for the general advantage of Canada.


Louis Philippe Demers: I understand that this has also been agreed to by the Senate.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On section (b),
(b.) When the application is for the purpose of amending anv existing Act :
1.	For the extension of any line of railway, or of any canal ? or for the construction of branches thereto :-In the principal city, town or village in each county or district through which such extension or branch is to be constructed.
2.	For the extension of the time for the construction or completion of any line or railway, or of any canal, or of any telegraph or telephone line, or of any other works already authorized :-In the place where the head office of the company is, or is authorized to be.
3.	For the extension of the power of a company (when not Involving the granting of any exclusive rights) ; or for the increase or reduction of the capital stock of any company ; or for increasing or altering its bonding or other borrowing powers, or for any amendment which would in any way affect the rights or interests of the shareholders or creditors of the company :*-In the place where the head office of the company is situated.
All such notices, whether inserted in the ' Canada Gazette ' or in a newspaper, shall he published at least once a week, for a period of five consecutive weeks ; and when , published in the provinces of Quebec and Manitoba, shall

be in both the English and French languages ; and marked copies of each issue of all newspapers containing such notice shall be sent to the Clerk of the House, endorsed * Private Bill Notice ' ; or a statutory declaration as to due publication may be sent in lieu thereof.
Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why not have that private Bill notice in duplicate ? The notice must be considered by the Senate as well as by the House of Commons.


Mr. SPEAKER.: The Senate have the same rule.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: These are rules agreed to by the Joint Committee of the House of Commons and Senate.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Yes, but they are to be rules of the House of Commons. They are not rules of the Senate, though the Senate will have the same rule.
On proposed rule 51c,
No petition praying for the incorporation of a railway company, or of a canal company, or for the extension of the line of any existing or authorized railway or canal, shall be considered by the Standing Orders Committee, until there has been filed with the committee a map or plan, showing the proposed location of the works, and each county or district, through which the proposed railway or canal, or any branch or extension thereof, is to be constructed.


Louis Philippe Demers: The applicants are obliged to furnish the Railway Committee with a map. We want to have a map before the Standing Orders Committee, in order that we may know that the notices have been given where they should be given. Of course, the same map can be used before the Railway Committee.
Resolutions reported, read the second time, and agreed to.



RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved that the House do on Monday next go into Committee of the Whole to consider the following proposed resolutions :
That it is expedient to enact as follows :-
1.	The Governor in Council may grant a subsidy of $3,200 per mile towards the construction of each of the undermentioned lines of railway (not exceeding in any case the number of miles hereinafter respectively stated) which shall not cost more on the average than $15,000 per mile for the mileage subsidized, and towards the construction of each of the said lines of railway, not exceeding the mileage hereinafter stated, which shall cost more on the average than $15,000 per mile for the mileage subsidized, a further subsidy beyond the sum of $3,200 per mile of fifty per cent on so much of the average cost of the mileage subsidized as is in excess of $15,000 per mile, such subsidy not exceeding in the whole the sum of $6,400 per mile:-

[Stage Direction]
Miles.
1.	To the Tilsonburg, Lake Erie and Pacific Railway Company for a line of railway from the present terminus at Ingersoll to Woodstock, not exceeding 9 miles, in lieu of subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1899, item 26 of section 2	
92.	To the Lindsay, Bobcaygeon and Pontypool Railway Company for a line of railway from Burketo® to Bobcaygeon, not exceeding 40 miles, in lieu of the subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1899, item 11 of section 2	
403.	To the Toronto, Lindsay and PembrokeRailway Company for a line of railway from Golden Lake to Bancroft, not exceeding 51 miles, in lieu of subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1901, item 6 of section 2	
514.	To the Central Ontario Railway for a
further extension of its railway from a point at or near Bancroft to a point on the Canada Atlantic Railway at or near Whitney, not exceeding 40 miles, in lieu of subsidies granted by chapter S of 1900. item. 5 of section 2, and chapter 7 of 1901, item 16 of section
2.	respectively	 40
5.	To the Strathroy and Western Counties
Railway Company for a line of railway from a point at or near Caradoc Station on the Canadian Pacific Railway to Strathroy and from Strathroy northerly to Forest, Thedford or Park-hill, not exceeding in all 31 miles, in lieu of subsidies granted by chapter 7 of 1899, item 4 of section 2, and chapter 8 of 1900, item 2 of section 2, respectively	 31
6.	To the Montfort and Gatineau Colonization Railway Company to extend its railway from Arundel to a point in the municipality of the United Townships of Preston and Hartwell, not exceeding 30 miles, in lieu of subsidy granted by chapter 8 of 1900, item 31 of section 2	
307.	For a line of railway from Jonquifires to La Bale des Ha Ha, not exceeding 20 miles, in lieu of subsidy of 12 miles granted by chapter 7 of 1899, item 21 of section 2	
208.	For a line of railway from Lime Ridge
northerly through the county of Wolfe into the county of Megantic, not exceeding 50 miles, being a revote of subsidy granted by chapter 4 of 1894 50
9.	For a line of railway from Joliette to or
near Lake Mar'vn, a distance not ex-ceding 60 miles, being a revote and in lieu of subsidies granted by chapter 4 of 1897 and chapter 8 of 1900.. 60
10.	For a line of railway from St. Eustache to St. Placide in the county of Two Mountains, not to exceed 18 miles ; from St. Eustache to Sault au Recollet, 12 miles; and from St. Placide to St. Andrews. 8 miles, not exceeding in all 38 miles, being a revote of subsidies granted by chapter 24 of 1887 and chapter 5 of 1892, respectively.. 38
[Stage Direction]
. Miles.
11.	For a line of railway from Roberval
westward towards James Bay, not exceeding 60 miles, in lieu of subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1901, item 25 of section 2	 60
12.	For a line of railway from Yamaska to
LotbiniOre, a distance not exceeding 70 miles, in lieu of the subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1899, Item 27 of section 2	 70
13.	To the Ottawa, Northern and 'Western
Railway Company for that portion of its line from a point at the east end of the Hull station yard of the Canadian Pacific Railway to a point of junction with the Interprovincial bridge approach in the city of Hull, not exceeding one mile; and for a line of railway into and through the city of Hull from a point on the Ottawa and Gatineau Railway, now the Ottawa, Northern and Western Railway, not exceeding 4 miles, in lieu of the subsidies granted by chapter 7 of 1899, section 2. items 12 and 39 respectively	 ,. A. 5
14.	To the International Railway Company
of New Brunswick (formerly the Res-tigouche and Western Railway Company), for a line of railway from the western end of the ten miles of its railway, as already constructed from Campbeilton towards a point on the St. John river between Grand Falls and Edmundston, not exceeding 67 miles, being a revote, and in lieu of subsidies granted by chapter 4 of 1897, chapter 7 of 1899, item 42 of section 2 and chapter 8 of 1900, item 22 of section 2	 67
15.	For a line of railway from Woodstock
to the International boundary, not exceeding 26 miles, being a revote of the subsidy granted by chapter 4 of 1894	 26
16.	To the St. John Valley Railway Company for a line of railway from a point on the Canadian Pacific Railway at or near Welford or Westfield or between said two points to Gage-town. not exceeding 30 miles, being a revote of the subsidy granted by chapter 4 of 1897	
3017.	To the Shediac and Coast Railway Company for a line of railway from Shediac to Sheonogue and towards Cape Tormentine. in Westmoreland county, not exceeding 38 miles, in lieu of subsidy granted by chapter 8 of 1900, item 25 of section 2	
3818.	To the Mabou and Gulf Railway Company, Limited, for a line of railway from Mabou Coal Mines to a point at or near Glendyer, thence to Orange-dale on the Intercolonial Railway, not exceeding 34 miles, a revote of subsidy granted by chapter 4 of 1894, and in substitution of the 25 miles subsidized thereby from Orangedale toBroad Cove..	.,	
34
William Stevens Fielding: Miles.
19.	To the Nova Scotia Eastern Railway Company, Limited, for a line of railway - from New Glasgow to Cross Roads, Country Harbour, thence to the town of Guysborough, and thence to the strait of Canso ; with a branch from Cross Roads, Country Harbour, aforesaid. down the Country Harbour river to the Deep Waters thereof, not exceeding 116 miles; in lieu of the subsidies of 40 and 80 miles granted by chapter 7 of 1901, items 4 and 1, respectively, of section 2	11620.	For a line of railway from Debert station on the Intercolonial Railway to Debert Coal Mine, not exceeding 4J miles, in. lieu of the subsidy granted by chapter 8 of 1900, item 29 of section 2	
a21.	For a line of railway from a point onthe Joggins Railway near River Herbert Railway bridge to the village of Minudie, not exceeding 6 miles, being a revote and in substitution of subsidy granted by chapter 4 of 1894..	622.	To the Middleton and Victoria BeachRailway Company, Limited, for a line of railway from Victoria Beach to Middleton, not exceeding 41 miles, in lieu of subsidies granted by chapter 8 of 1900, section 2, item 28, and chapter 7 of 1901, section 2, item 21	
4123.	To the Halifax and South-western Railway Company for the following lines of railway:-
(a.) for a line of railway from a point at or near Halifax to a point on the Central Railway at or near Mahone Bay, not exceeding
68 miles	 68
(b.) for a line of railway from a point on the Central Railway at or near Bridgewater towards Barrington passage not exceeding
77 miles	 77
(c.) for a line of railway from a point at or near New Germany on the Central Railway to a point at or near Caledonia, not exceeding 22 miles	 22
(d.) for a line of railway from a point at or near Caledonia to Liverpool, not	exceeding 29 miles.. 29
The subsidies to the said lines of railway being granted in lieu of the subsidies granted by chapter 7 of 1899. items 17, 18, 35 and 36 of section 2. by chapter 8 of 1900, items 26 and 40 of section 2, and also chapter 7 of 1901, items 5 and 23 of section 2, respectively.
24.	To the Inverness Railway and Coal Company. formerly the Inverness and ' Richmond Railway Company, Limited, for 8 miles of railway between Point Tupper and Broad Cove ; and for a line of railway not exceeding 37 miles, from Cheticamp to a point on the line already built between Broad Cove and Point Tupper, being a revote and in substitution of the subsidy granted by chapter 4 of. 1S97 45

Miles.
25.	For a line of railway from a point at
or near Wollville or the Dominion Atlantic Railway to the government pier on the basin of Minas, not exceeding one mile, in lieu of the subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1901, section 2, item 19	 1
26.	To the Nicola, Kamloops and Similkameen Coal and Railway Company for a line of railway from a point at or near Spence's bridge on the Canadian Pacific Railway to Nicola lake, not exceeding 45 miles, being a revote of subsidies granted by chapter 5 of 1892 and chapter 4 of 1894	 45
27.	For a line of railway from Winnipeg
Beach or Teulon to a point on Icelandic river by way of Gimli, not exceeding 35 miles, in lieu of subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1901, section _ 2, item 26	 35
28.	To the Edmonton. Yukon and Pacific
Railway Company for a line of railway from the town of South Edmonton, N.W.T., to North Edmonton, and thence westerly towards the Yellow .Head Pass, a distance not exceeding 50 miles, in lieu of subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1899, section 2, item 41	 50
29.	To the St. John Valley and Rivi&re du
Loup Railway Company for a line of railway from Fredericton, N.B., to Woodstock, not exeeding 59 miles, in lieu of the subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1899. item 5 of section 2	 59



NEW SUBSIDIES.

[Stage Direction]
30.	For a line of railway from Hawkesbury, Ontario, to South Indian, not exceeding 35 miles, in lieu of subsidy granted by chapter 7 of 1899, item 22 of section 2	
3531.	To the Tilsonburg. Lake Erie and Pacific Railway Company for a line of railway from Woodstock northerly to a point on the Grand Trunk Railway at Berlin, or from Ingersoll to Stratford, or to any point on the Grand Trunk Railway between these places, not exceeding 35 miles, being in addition to. and continuation of the nine miles mentioned in item one of this section	
35
Miles.
35.	To the Thunder Bay, Nepigon and St.
Joe Railway Company for a line of railway from Port Arthur northeasterly, not exceeding 50 miles.. 50
36.	To the Temagami Railway Company for
a line of railway from a point at or near Sturgeon Falls in a northwesterly direction to a point on the westerly shore of Lake Temagami in the district of Nipissing, not exceeding 50 miles	 50
37.	To the Bay of Quints Railway Company
for further extension of its line of railway, from the northern terminus thereof, commencing from a point at or near Actinolite. thence in a northwesterly direction via the villages of Queensborough and Bannockburn to a point in the township of Marmora or lake in Hastings county, not exceeding 20 miles in all	 20
38.	To the Bruce Mines and Algoma Railway Company for a line of railway from the end of its line, as subsidized by chapter 7 of 1901, northerly, not exceeding 19 miles ; and for a line of railway from Bruce Mines to Bruce Mines junction, not exceeding 2 miles. 21
39.	To the James Bay Railway Company for
a line of railway from Toronto, via the east side of Lake Simcoe, Parry Sound and Sudbury, towards. James Bay, not exceeding 265 miles, in lieu of two subsidies granted by chapter 8 of 1900, of 35 and 20 miles respectively, from Parry Sound towards James Bay	265
40.	To the Quebec and Lake St. John Railway Company for one mile of railway from Roberval to the government wharf at Lake St. John	
141.	To the Montfort and Gatineau Colonization Railway Company for the extension of its line of railway from Morin Flats to St. JerOme to connect with the Great Northern Railway, not exceeding 22 miles	
2242.	To the Interprovincial and James BayRailw-ay Company for a line of railway from Lake Temiscamingue at the present terminus of the Canadian Pacific Railway line, in a northerly direc-* tion. not to exceed 50 miles	
5032.	To the Irondale, Bancroft and OttawaRailway Company for a line of railway from the present terminus of its railway, near Bancroft, easterly to a point at or near Renfrew, not exceeding 75 miles	
7533.	To the Nepigon Railway Company for a
line of railway from Lake Superior to Lake Nepigon, and from a point on the North Shore of Lake Nepigon northerly, not exceeding 80 miles.. 80
34.	To the Manitoulin and North Shore
Railway Company for a line of railway from Little Current on its present line, to Sudbury, and thence towards the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, not exceeding 30 miles, in lieu of the subsidy of 21 miles granted by chapter 7 of 1899, item 38 of section 2	 30
43.	For a line of railway from Waltham station to Ferguson Point, in the county of Pontiac, not exceeding 20 miles.. 20
44.	For a line of railway from Lake Nominingue to La LiOvre, not exceeding 35 miles	 35
45.	For a line of railway in extension of
the line from Lime Ridge into the county of Megantic to the bridge over the St. Lawrence at or near Quebec, not exceeding 30 miles	 30
46.	To the Quebec Central Railway Company for an extension of its line of railway from St. Francois to St. George, not exceeding 9 miles ; also for a railway from Scott Junction to the Quebec bridge, not exceeding 22 miles	 31
[Stage Direction]
Miles.
47.	For a line ot railway from the station
of Lac Bouchette on the Quebec and Lake St. John Railway to St, AndrS, not exceeding 13 miles	 13
48.	For a line of railway from Quebec towards Seven Islands, not exceeding 200 miles	200
49.	For a branch line from a point on the
Canadian Pacific Railway at or near St. Philippe d'Argenteuii, thence in a northerly direction, passing through the village of Brownsburg, not exceeding 3 miles	 3
50.	To the Orford Mountain Railway Company from a point on its main line between Lawrenceville and Eastman to Lake Bonella, 5 miles ; from Kingsbury to Windsor Mills, 10 miles ; and from Eastman to the town line between township of Bolton, east part, and township of Potion, 12 miles, not exceeding in the whole 27 miles	 27
51.	To the Atlantic, Quebec and Western
Railway Company for a line of railway from Gaspd to a point at or near Causapscal on the Intercolonial Railway, and from that point to Edmund-ston, N.B., not exceeding 260 miles ; and for a line of railway from Pas-pebiac to GaspS, as near the shore as practicable, not exceeding 102 miles.. 362
52.	For a line of railway, in addition to
and in extension of the line mentioned in subsection 11, from Rober-val towards James Bay, not exceeding 40 miles	   40
53.	For a branch line from a point near the
bridge at River Trois Pistoles on the Intercolonial Railway in a south-easterly direction to Mackenzie and Re-nouf Falls, River Trois Pistoles, not exceeding 2h miles	 21
54.	To the Matane and Gaspe Railway Company for a line of railway from a point at or near St. Octave, on the Intercolonial Railway, to Matane, not exceeding 30 miles	 30
55.	To the Chateauguay and Northern
Railway Company for a line of railway from a point on its main line at or near L'Epiphanie, passing by way of the parish of St. Jacques l'Achigan to the village of Rawdon, not exceeding 16 miles,	  16
56.	For a line of railway from the line of
the Montreal and Atlantic Railway Company at St. Guillaume to the River Yamaska to join with the South Shore Railway, a distance not exceeding 12 miles	   12
57.	For a line of railway from La Tuque
on the St. Maurice river to a point on the Lake St. John Railway near the River Jeannotte, not exceeding 35 miles	 35
58.	To the Montreal Northern Railway
Company for a line of railway from a point at or near Ste. Agathe des Monts station towards the township of Howard, in the county of Argen-teuil, passing near Lakes St. Joseph and Ste. Marie, in a southerly direction, a distance	not exceeding 15 miles. 15
William Stevens Fielding: Miles.
59.	To the International Railway Company
of New Brunswick for a line of railway, in addition to and in extension of the line of 67 miles mentioned in item 14 of this section, to a point on the St. John river between Grand Falls and Edmundston, not exceeding 33 miles	 33
60.	To the Beersville Coal and Railway
Company for a line of railway from Adamsville, on the Intercolonial Railway, to a point at or near Brown's Landing or Beersville, not exceeding
7 miles	 7
61. To the York and Carleton Railway Company for a line of railway from its present terminus westerly, not exceeding 5 miles	 5
62.	To the Mabou and Gulf Railway Company (limited), for a line of railway from a point on the Intercolonial Railway at or near Mines Road station to the wharf at Caribou Cove, not exceeding 4 miles, being in addition to subsidy mentioned in item 18 of this section	 4
63.	To the Nova Scotia Eastern Railway
Company (limited), for a line of railway from Dartmouth through the Musquodoboit valley to a point at or near Melrose, to connect there with the railw'ay mentioned in item 19 of this section, not exceeding 120 miles. 120
64.	To the Midland Railway Company
(limited), for a line of railway from Truro northerly towards Brule, not exceeding 34 miles	 34
65.	For a line of railway from St. Peters
to Louisburg, not exceeding 50 miles. 50
66.	To the Kootenay Central Railway Company for a line of railway from Golden to the international boundary line, via Windermere and Fort Steele, and crossing the Crow's Nest Railway at or near Elko, not exceeding 106 miles	106
67.	To the Kettle River Valley Railway
Company for a line of railway from Grand Forks to a point 50 miles up the north fork and west fork of the
north fork of Kettle river, not exceeding 50 miles	 50
[DOT]68. For a line of railway from Wellington
to Union bay, not exceeding 55 miles. 55
69.	For a line of railway from Midway to
Vernon, not exceeding 150 miles....150
70.	To the St. Mary's River Railway Company for a line of railway from Spring Coulee, crossing St. Mary's river to Cardston, 16 miles, and from a point on this line to or near the intake of the irrigation canal, about 16 miles, in all not exceeding 32 miles	 48
71.	For a line of railway from Dawson City
to Stewart river, passing at or near Grand Forks, not exceeding 84 miles. 84
72.	To the Canadian Pacific Railway Company for a branch line from a point on the main line between Moosomin and Elkhorn, north-wTesterly to a point in the neighbourhood of the Pheasant Hills, not exceeding 136 miles	136

Miles.
73.	For a line of railway from a point at or
near Medicine Hat, on the Canadian Pacific Railway, to the coal fields in or near townships 12 and 13, range 6, west of the fourth principal meridian, not exceeding 8 miles	 8
74.	To the Great Northern Railway of Canada for a line of railway from Gar-neau Junction to the Quebec bridge, not exceeding 70 miles	
7075.	To the Halifax and South-western Railway Company for a line of railway to Barrington Passage, in addition to and in continuation of the 77 miles mentioned in item 23 (b) of this section, not exceeding 35 miles	
3576.	To the Lake Superior, Long Lake and
Albany Railway Company for a line of railway from Peninsula harbour in a northerly direction, not exceeding
10 miles	 10
77. To the Cumberland Railway and Coal Company for a line of railway from Parrsboro' station to Riverside wharf, not exceeding 1 mile	 1
78. To the Indian River Railway Company for a line of railway from a point at or near the north end of Lake Megan-tic, thence southerly along said lake to a point on the international boundary, not exceeding 19 miles	 19
2. The Governor in Council may grant the subsidies hereinafter mentioned towards the construction of the bridges also hereinafter mentioned, that is to say :
1.	Towards the construction and completion of a railway bridge and approaches over the Nicolet river at Nicolet. in lieu of a grant under chapter 8 of 63-64 Victoria, item 39 of section 2.. $15,000 00
2.	Towards the construction of the
steel superstructure of a railway bridge on the St. Francis river, in the county of Yamas-ka. in lieu of a grant under chapter 8 of 63-64 Victoria, item 38 of section 2. but subject to the same conditions as expressed therein, payable to the Canadian Bridge Company of Walkerville, as their claim may appear for work already done on said bridge	 50,000 00
3.	To the Canadian Bridge Company
of Walkerville. To strengthen and complete the foundation and approaches to the bridge over the St. Francis river subsidized to the South Shore Railway Company by section 3, chapter 7, Victoria 62-63, a sum of $35,000. which amount shall remain the first charge on the road, and to be recouped to the treasury out of subsidies earned or to be earned	 35,000 00
4.	To the Chateauguay and Northern
Railway Company. In addition to the subsidy for the Bout de L'lle bridge granted by chapter 8. section 33, Victoria 63-64.. ..	50,000 00
3.	In these resolutions, unless the context otherwise requires, the expression ' cost * means the actual, necessary and reasonable cost and shall include the amount expended upon any bridge, up to and not exceeding $25,000, forming part of the line of railway subsidized not otherwise receiving any bonus, but shall not include the cost of terminals and right of way of the railway in any city or incorporated town; and such actual, necessary and reasonable cost shall be determined by the Governor in Council, upon the recommendation of the Minister of Railways and Canals, and upon the report of the chief engineer of the Department of Railways and Canals, certifying that he has made or caused to be made an inspection of the line of railway for which payment of subsidy is asked, and careful inquiry into the cost , thereof, and that in his opinion the amount upon which the subsidy is claimed is reasonable and does not exceed the true, actual and proper cost of the construction of such railway
4.	The subsidies hereby authorized towards the construction of any railway or bridge shall be payable out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada, and may, unless otherwise expressly provided in this Act, at the option of the Governor in Council, on the report of the Minister of Railways and Canals, be paid as follows:-
(a.) upon the completion of the work subsidized; or
(b.) by instalments, on the completion of each ten-mile section of the railway, in the proportion which the cost of such completed section bears to that of the whole work undertaken; or
(c.) upon the progress estimates on the certificates of the chief engineer of the Department of Railways and Canals, that, in his opinion. having regard to the whole work undertaken and the aid granted, the progress made justifies the payment of a sum not less than sixty thousand dollars; or
(d.) with respect to (b) and (c), part one way, part the other.
5.	The subsidies hereinbefore authorized to be granted to companies named shall, if granted by the Governor in Council, be granted to such companies respectively; the other subsidies may be granted to such companies as establish to the satisfaction of the Governor in Council their ability to construct and complete the said railways respectively ; all the lines for the construction of which subsidies are granted, unless they are already commenced, shall be commenced within two years from the first day of August, 1903, and completed within a reasonable time, not to exceed four years from the said first day of August, to be fixed by the Governor in Council, and shall also be constructed according to descriptions, conditions and specifications approved by the Governor in Council on the report of the Minister of Railways and Canals, and specified in each case in a contract between the company and the said minister. which contract the minister, with the approval of the Governor in Council, is hereby empowered to make. The location also of such subsidized lines shall be subject to the approval of the Governor in Council.
6.	The granting of such subsidies, and the receipt thereof by the respective companies, shall be subject to the condition that the Governor in Council may at all times provide and secure to other companies such running powers, traffic arrangements and other rights, as will afford to all railways connecting with those so

subsidized, reasonable and proper facilities in exercising such running powers, fair and reasonable traffic arrangements with connecting companies, and equal mileage rates between all such connecting railways ; and the Governor in Council shall have absolute control, at all times, over the rates and tolls to be levied and taken by any of the companies, or upon any of the railways hereby subsidized.
7.	Every company receiving a subsidy under this Act. its successors and assigns, and any person or company controlling or operating the railway or portion of railway subsidized under this Act. shall each year furnish to the government of Canada transportation for men, supplies. materials and mails over the portion of the line in respect of which it has received such subsidy, and, whenever required, shall furnish mail cars properly equipped for such mail service ; and such transportation and service shall be performed at such rates as are agreed upon between the minister of the department of the government for which such service is being performed, and the company performing it, and, in case of disagreement, then at such rates as are approved by the Governor in Council ; and in or towards payment for such charges the government of Canada shall be credited by the company with a sum equal to three per cent per annum on the amount of the subsidy received by the company under this Act.
8.	As respects all railways for which subsidies are granted by this Act, the company at any time owning or operating any of the railways shall, when required, produce and exhibit to the Minister of Railways and Canals, or any person appointed by him, all books, accounts and vouchers, showing the cost of constructing the railway, the cost of operating it, and the earnings thereof.
9.	The Governor in Council may make it a condition of the grant of the subsidies herein provided, or any heretofore authorized by any Act *f parliament as to which a contract has not yet been entered into with the company for the construction of the railway, that the company shall lay its road with new steel rails, made in Canada, if they are procurable In Canada of suitable quality, upon terms as favourable as other rails can be obtained, of which the Minister of Railways and Canals shall be the judge.
He said :	His Excellency the Governor
General having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution recommends it to the consideration of the House.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: Before the Orders of the Hay are called, I beg to say that on Monday next I will make a statement to the House as to the further business of the government to be introduced during the present session.



PETITIONS AGAINST NATIONAL TRANSCONTINENTAL RAILWAY,

Mr. R. L. BORDEN (Halifax).: I desire to ask the right lion. Prime Minister (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) if any action is Hon. Mr. FIELDING.	-
being taken with respect to the motion passed a day or two ago concerning alleged irregularities in petitions presented to the House ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: I have not conferred with the Chairman on Privileges and elections in this matter. Nothing has been done so far.



SHIPPING CASUALTIES ACT AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OP MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Raymond Prefontaine) moved the third reading of Bill (No. 263) to amend the Shipping Casualties Act, 1901.
Robert Laird Borden: I have looked over the memorandum furnished me through the kindness of my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries with respect to the provisions of this Bill. I find that my hon. friend was not exactly accurate in the statement he made to the House that this Bill is introduced in accordance with suggestions of the British Board of Trade. I find, however, that the amendments have been made and are introduced upon the recommendation of Captain Salmon, a newly appointed officer of the department, who takes the place of the late Captain W. H. Smith. If I had not supposed that these amendments were in accordance with the suggestions of the British Board of Trade, I perhaps, would have scrutinized them a little more carefully. However, as they have been made upon the suggestion of an officer who is said to be a very capable and efficient man, and as, of course, my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries and the government as a whole take full responsibility for the introduction of this measure, I shall not detain the House at the present time with any further criticism of the provisions of the Bill.


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

[Stage Direction]
House went into committee on Bill (No. 3) to amend the Dominion Elections Act, 1900.
Mr. CHARLTON.: The question of coping with the tendency to increase the electoral corruption in Canada is one the importance of which I need not dilate upon. Such corruption does exist to some extent, and to the extent to which it does.exist it is detrimental to the interest of our country, and threatens the integrity of our institutions. The Bill with reference to this question was referred to a special committee some weeks ago. That committee was composed of five members of the government side and four of the opposition side, and it entered upon its labours with a

sincere desire to report a Bill which would be serviceable to Canada and in the public interest. Such a thing as political feeling was not manifested in this committee in the slightest degree. Every member of the committee gave his best efforts to perfecting a Bill which we had reason to believe would be acceptable to the House and in the interest of the country. The committee had the aid in its labours of the Department of Justice. One of the officials of that department attended the meetings of that committee regularly, and acted as counsel in every legal matter. It had also the assistance of the law clerk of the House of Commons. The members of the committee were unanimous in their approval of the provisions of the Bill now submitted to the committee except on the one point, that one with regard to compulsory voting.
The provisions of the Bill as now submitted received the unanimous approval of the special committee, with the exception of the clause with reference to compulsory voting. We had the benefit during some of the sittings of this committee of the services of the Minister of Finance, and they were invaluable to us; and the feeling that characterized the members of the committee in their labours and at the conclusion of their labours, was most agreeable, pleasant and satisfactory, and gave augury, I trust, of the acceptance of this Bill by the House. The Bill we now proceed to commend to the consideration and the judgment of this House. If it is the opinion of the House that any other provisions of the Bill should be dropped, ol' course the committee is in the hands of the House in that respect, and it may be, from the fact that there was not unanimous concurrence on the part of the special committee with regard to the provision about compulsory -voting, that it will be prudent and desirable to drop that provision. I leave the House to consider that question. I will now describe very briefly the provisions of the Bill-. The first provision is with regard to compulsory voting, or penalty for non-voting. By a provision of the Bill, an elector failing to vote is disfranchised for a period of six years ; but if he is absent from the riding, if he is ill-


Hon. Mr. HAGGART.: How do you disfranchise him ?


John Charlton: Prevent his voting for six years, he is not eligible to cast a vote for six years.


John Graham Haggart: By what mode or manner ?


John Charlton: By the fact that he refrains from voting, and his name does not appear on the list. But as I was saying, if he shows that his failure to vote was due to absence, and that absence was not by design for the purpose of abstaining from
voting, if it was due to illness, if it was due to having voted in some other riding, then he is exonerated from the provision of the Bill. This provision, as I say, did not receive the unanimous approval of the committee, and that is the only provision which did not receive unanimous approval. Section 11 of the Election Act of 1900, is amended. The section as it stands on the statutes provides that :
The person to whom a writ is addressed, as hereinbefore provided, shall be the returning officer at the election to which such writ relates ; provided always, that if the person to whom the writ has been addressed refuses, or is disqualified or unable to act, the Governor General may appoint another person to be such returning officer.
This section is repealed, and the following substituted for the same :
Section 11. The writ shall be addressed to the sheriff or the registrar of deeds, or to one of the sheriffs or one of the registrars of deeds, for the electoral district or some portion of the electoral district for which the election is to take place, and he shall be the returning officer at the election.
2. If, from any reason, there is no sheriff or registrar to whom the writ can be addressed, or if the sheriff or registrar is disqualified or unable to act, or if any other person to whom the writ has been addressed refuses or is disqualified or unable to act, the Governor in Council may appoint another person to be such returning officer.
No more than one writ shall be addressed to the same returning officer at one time. The object of this provision is to place the office of returning officer in the hands of sheriffs and registrars so far as that may be possible, and I think this is a provision which will commend itself to the judgment of the House. These are officers of high standing, -not likely to he influenced by political considerations, and corrupt motives in making tlieir appointments will of course be absent. The next change in the Bill is an amendment of section 13. A subsection is added to this as follows :
Any person who, when he is disqualified under the provisions of this or of any other Act, acts as returning officer, election clerk, deputy returning officer or poll clerk, shall be disfranchised for a period of seven years, and shall be guilty of an indictable offence, and shall be liable to imprisonment, without the alternative of a fine, for a term not exceeding twelve months and not less than six months, with or without hard labour.
A section is added to section 12 as subsection (i) :
Persons other than sheriffs or registrars of deeds holding any public office either Dominion or provincial

Are also debarred from acting as returning officers. Section 21 of tbe Act is amended by inserting after tbe word 'lists' in tbe third line thereof, the words ' and of an abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act.' This is the result of a previous

Bill which requires that an abstract of all the penalties under this Act shall be sent to the returning officers to be posted up at two polling places, as notices of election are, and a subsequent provision also provides that an abstract of the offences and penalties under the Act shall be sent to the returning officer and mailed to each elector in the division of which he is returning officer, and shall pass through the mails free of postage. There is added to the provision about the lists, a provision for distributing this copy of penalties and offences under the Act. Section 26 of the said Act is amended by inserting after the word 'proclamation' the same provision as In the first , line thereof the words ' and the abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act.' The Act as it now stands reads thus :
The returning officer shall cause such proclamation and writ

Simply adding to that provision the list of the offences and penalties under the Act. Then section 26 has a subsection added to it which is as follows :
Within the shortest possible time after the reception of the writ, the returning officer shall send by mai] to each elector upon the voters' list a copy of the abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act, which abstract shall be carried in the mails post free ; and in the province of Prince Edward Island the returning officer shall send a sufficient number of copies of the said abstract to each postmaster within the electoral district, and it shall he the duty of the postmaster to deliver a copy to each elector to whom any mail matter is delivered.	,
This provision with regard to Prince Edward Island is in consequence of there not being any voters' lists in that province. In section 41, section 1, subsection 1 is repealed and another is substituted therefor. Paragraph (f) as it stands at present relates to the directions for voters. The paragraph substituted for it is as follows ;
(f.) Furnish each deputy returning officer with at least ten copies of printed directions in the form L, for the guidance of voters in voting, and at least ten copies of the abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act, which printed directions and abstract the deputy returning officer shall, before or at the opening of the poll, on the day of polling, cause to be posted up in some conspicuous places outside of the polling stations, and also in each compartment of the polling station.
The object being to have posted up in different places the law in reference to penalties and offences. There is a provision in connection with section 26 as to the mailing of these abstracts of offences and penalties to voters as follows :
2. Any postmaster who wilfully neglects or refuses promptly to deliver to the electors any such abstracts shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding fifty dollars and costs to any person who sues therefor: provided, however, that this penalty shall not be imposed more than once for each election at which such neglect takes place.


John Charlton: Subsection 8 of section 9G provides that.no ballot paper shall be displayed, that voters shall not be induced to display ballot papers, that the numbers on ballot papers shall not be disclosed, that the votes shall not be disclosed and that secrecy shall be maintained in respect to the counting of vote0
Subsection 8 of section 96 is as follows :
Every one who violates any of the provision.! of this section shall be guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a penalty not exceeding $200 and to imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months, with or without hard labour, in default of payment of such penalty.
The subsection substituted for this is as follows :
8. Any person who violates any of the provisions of this section shall be disfranchised for a period of seven years and shall be guilty of an indictable offence, and shall he liable, if he is a returning officer, election clerk, deputy returning officer, poll clerk or other officer engaged at the election, to imprisonment, without the alternative of a fine, for a term not exceeding twelve months and not less than six months, with or without hard labour, and if he is any other person, to a tine of not less than one hundred dollars and costs and not exceeding two hundred dollars and costs, or, in default of payment of such fine and costs, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months and not less than three months, with or without hard labour.
Paragraph (i) of sectiou 108 is repealed and another paragraph substituted for it. Paragraph (a) of section 108 refers to giving money, &c., to procure votes, paragraph (b) to giving or promising employment, paragraph (c) to gifts or promises in order to obtain money of any person, paragraph (d) to procuring return in consequence, paragraph (e) to advancing money to be used in bribery, paragraph (f) to demanding bribe of candidate or agent, paragraph (g) to receiving money, &c., before or during an election and paragraph (h) to receiving money after an election. Paragraph (i) which refers to bribery of candidates which is repealed is as follows :
(i.) Every person who, to induce a person to allow himself to be nominated as a candidate, or to refrain from becoming a candidate, or to withdraw, if he has become a candidate, gives or procures any office, place or employment, or agrees to give or procure, or offers or promises to procure, or endeavours to procure any office, place or employment for such person or any other person.
The following lines are also repealed :-
And every person so offending is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months and shall also forfeit the sum of two hundred dollars to any person who sues therefor with costs.
Provided always, that the actual personal expenses of any candidate, his expenses for actual professional services performed, and bona fide payments for the fair costs of printing and advertising, shall be held to be expenses lawfully incurred, and the payment thereof shall not be a violation of this Act.

Paragraph (i) and these lines are repealed and the following substituted for the same :
(i.) Every person who offers, promises, gives, or procures or agrees to offer, promise, give or procure, or endeavours to procure any money, office, place, employment or other valuable consideration to induce any person to allow himself to be nominated as a candidate, or to refrain from becoming a candidate, or to withdraw if he has become a candidate, and any person receiving or agreeing to receive any such offer, promise or gift for the purposes aforesaid. *
Then two new subsections are added :
(j.) Every employer of labour who, within the ninety days next preceding a general election, pays any employee his wages or salary in a pay envelope, or puts up or otherwise exhibits in the shop, factory, establishment or place where his employees work, or in any place adjacent thereto, any handbill or placard, upon which pay envelope, handbill or placard is written or printed anything which contains any threat, expressed or implied, intended or calculated to influence any such employee in the exercise of his franchise at such election, or which contains any notice or statement that the wages or work in such shop, factory, establishment or place will be affected by the success of any candidate of any political party, or by the success of any political party ;
(k.) Every person who, being an officer or employee of Canada or of any province thereof, directly or indirectly pays or promises to pay, or induces or compels, or attempts to induce or compel any other person to pay or promise to pay, or who receives from any other person, any subscription, contribution, or assessment for political purposes, or who prepares or makes, or takes any part in preparing or making, any political assessment, subscription or contribution ;
And every person so offending shall be disfranchised for a period of seven years and shall be guilty of an indictable offence, and shall be liable, if he is a returning officer, election clerk, deputy returning officer, poll clerk or other officer engaged at the election, to imprisonment, without the alternative of a fine, for a term not exceeding twelve months and not less than six months, with or without hard labour, and, if he is any other person, to a fine of not less than one hundred dollars and costs and not exceeding two hundred dollars and costs, to any person who sues therefor, or, in default of payment of such fine and costs, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months and not less than three months, with or W'ithout hard labour.
The next and last provision of this section is one which will be of interest to the members of this House and to the country :
Provided always, that the actual personal expenses of any candidate, his expenses for actual professional services performed, and bona fide payments for the fair cost of printing, advertising, bill posting and rent of halls or rooms for public meetings, or for meetings of committees, or for expenses for speakers at public meetings, or for canvassers or organizers-which canvassers and organizers in electoral districts situate wholly or in part in cities shall not exceed ten, and in other electoral districts shall not exceed three-shall be
held to Be expenses lawfully incurred, and the payment thereof shall not be a violation of this Act.
Section 108 has added to it the following as section 108a, in addition to the provisions preceding.
108a. A person offending against any provision of the next preceding section shall be a competent witness against any other person so offending, and may be compelled to attend and testify on any trial, hearing, proceeding or investigation : provided that if such person has answered truly all questions which he is required by the court to answer, he shall be entitled to receive a certificate of Indemnity from the court, which may be in the form FF, and the testimony so given shall not thereafter be used in any prosecution or proceeding, civil or criminal, against him.
2. A person testifying and obtaining a certificate of indemnity shall not thereafter be liable to any action, indictment, prosecution or punishment for the offence with reference to which his testimony was given, and may plead the said certificate of indemnity accordingly, in bar of such action, indictment or prosecution.
This provision is, of course, one of very great importance, and the friends of this measure rely largely on it to stamp out the evil of electoral corruption. It places the briber at the mercy of the person with whom he tampers ; it makes the business of bribing eminently unsafe. It is not a mere experiment for it has been tried in some of the United States and found to be effective. The objection was raised and discussed that there was a probability of blackmail being levied, but it is impossible to avoid the chance of blackmail where prosecutions may be made by a private person. In practice the plan has been found to be satisfactory and efficient. And the evil of electoral corruption by the purchase of votes at the poles has been stamped out.
Section 113 is also amended. Section 113 relates to the conveying of voters to the polls and the penalty and the disqualification of voters offending in this regard. The provision that follows is also one of great interest and one which will meet the approval of the House. It was fully discussed and it is admitted that it has been found impossible in practice to prevent the doing of that which this provision makes legal.
Section 113 is amended by adding the following proviso :-
Provided, however, that nothing in this section shall he held to make it illegal for any candidate or other person to hire bona fide for any purpose and for the ordinary and reasonable price, any horse, team, carriage, wagon, cab, sleigh or other vehicle belonging to, or in the usual and ordinary employment of, any regular cabman or livery man.


John Graham Haggart: What is in section 113 ?


John Charlton: I shall read section 113. It is as follows :
The hiring or promising to pay or paying for any horse, team, carriage, cab, or other vehicle,

by any candidate or by any person on his behalf, to convey any voter or voters to or from the poll, or to or from the neighbourhood thereof, at any election, or the payment, by any candidate or by any person on, his behalf, of the travelling and other expenses of any voter, in going to or returning from any election, are unlawful acts ; and every candidate or other person so offending shall forfeit the sum of one hundred dollars to any person who sues therefor ; and any voter hiring any horse, cab, cart, wagon, sleigh, carriage or other conveyance for any candidate, or for any agent of a candidate, for the purpose of conveying any voter or voters to or from the polling place or places, shall, ipso facto, be disqualified from voting at such election, and shall, for every such offence, forfeit the sum of one hundred dollars to any person who sues therefor.
With this amended provision applying only to conveyances belonging to regular cabmen or liverymen, the committee were unable to see, after a full discussion of this matter, where any criminal intent or any consequences that would be corrupt in its character would follow the hiring on election day of the conveyances of a liveryman or cabman for the purpose for which they are uniformly and universally employed at every election. This simply makes legal what has been done with a great degree of impunity without such legislation.


John Graham Haggart: Does this legalize the hiring of cabmen or liverymen during an election day ?


John Charlton: Yes, but it does not legalize the hiring of farmers' rigs or others than those of liverymen.


Mr. DAYIS.: What happens in the case of a rural constituency where there are no cabmen and no liverymen ?


John Charlton: In such a case no rigs can be hired. If they could be hired you would have all of the farmers wanting to have tlieir rigs hired.


Thomas Osborne Davis: That legislation is for cities.


John Charlton: This legislation is for cities. It is in the judgment of the House whether it is proper legislation or not; it is in the knowledge of the House that in cities it is the universal custom to employ cabmen and this cannot be avoided.
Section 117 is also amended. Section 117 relates to voting by persons who are not qualified. The amendment is as follows :
Any alien or any other person, not being a voter, who resides outside of Canada, who canvasses for votes or works in any way to secure the election of any candidate, shall be guilty of an indictable offence and shall be liable to a fine of not less than one hundred dollars and costs and not exceeding two hundred dollars and costs, or, in default of payment of such fine and costs, to Imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months and not less than three months, with or without hard labour.
We have had in elections in Canada the evil of touters and election workers from the Mr. CHARLTON.
United States who are brought into Canada and who travel up and down violating the election law'. But the day after the election or the night of the election they are gone beyond the jurisdiction of the Canadian courts. Under the provisions of this law they are prohibited from doing this, and by a provision to which I will refer later they can be arrested.
Then we have :
Form U in schedule 1 to the said Act, as enacted by section 12 ef chapter 16 of the Statutes of 1901. is repealed and the following is substituted therefor :
This is a provision with regard to compulsory voting. If the provision for compulsory voting is retained this wdll be retained ; if it is not this will be dropped. I do not know whether it will he necessary to read it. It is merely a provision for the person who is disfranchised in consequence of having failed to vote, securing his vote if his absence is unavoidable or for sufficient reason.
Section 131 makes provisions with regard to civil and criminal procedure ; with regard to the recovery of penalties and forfeitures and a new' section, which is added to is as 131a, is as follows :
If a person is charged with any Indictable offence under this Act, and it is feared that' he will endeavour to avoid arrest, It shall be sufficient to charge generally that he has committed an offence under ' The Dominion Elections Act,' without specifying the nature of such offence. The information in that case may b<^ in the form GG, and the justice receiving any such information shall thereupon issue a warrant in the form HH. Upon such person being arrested and brought before a justice, the justice shall state to him the particular offence with which he is charged and thereafter the case shall be proceeded with in the usual manner.
This provision enables a summary arrest to be made without specifying the nature of the charge for which the prisoner is arrested. These specifications will he made when the case comes before the justice of the peace. This law will enable the authorities to arrest such people as these workers from the United States or any person 'who is suspected of transgressing the provisions of this law. The mere fact that there is power to make such arrests, or the making of two or three arrests will have a deterrent and salutary influence and will also enable , the prompt administration of justice in the case of such offences. These are the changes and provisions in this amended Bill, and 1 repeat what I said at the outset, that with the exception of that referring to compulsory voting, they received the unanimous approval of the special committee. The gentlemen on that committee were thoroughly competent for the work they had to perform ; they were men wTho took a broad and critical view of all the questions discussed. These questions wrere discussed fully, with the utmost freedom and the greatest parti-

cularity. I do not suppose that a discussion of the character held by that committee could be excelled by a discussion in Committee of the Whole, or perhaps equalled ; because the members of the committee sat down quietly to the discharge of their duties, with a sincere desire to arrive at the facts and at a proper conclusion. They had no political purpose to serve ; they had no such thought in their minds. Their object was to perfect a Bill which would be beneficial and salutary to the Dominion of Canada, which would tend to cure evils of a growing and threatening character ; and- I commend this Bill to the judgment of the House.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: As the promoter of the Bill has gone over its salient points, as proposed, we had better now take it up section by section.


Mr. HACKETT.: What protection is provided for the ballot boxes after the voting has taken place ?


John Charlton: The same protection that exists at present. The election law of 1900 is not superseded.


Edward Hackett: There is no change, then, in that respect.


John Charlton: No.


Edward Hackett: Then, I want to state that I was subject to great difficulty at one time by the stealing of a ballot box, and 1 would like to have in this Bill some protection for the ballot box after it leaves the returning officer's hands until it reaches the place where the boxes are to be opened, in case of a recount. The ballot box I speak of was actually stolen from the train in transit between Alberton and Summerside. I would ask the hon. gentleman to insert a clause in the Bill protecting the ballot boxes from the time they are opened until the recount takes place before the judge.


John Charlton: I am sure that the members of the committee would be delighted to accept any suggestion to further perfect the Bill. However, at this stage of the session, perhaps it would be wise to accept the Bill if it is good as far as it goes. We shall have another session-at least, I venture the supposition that we shall -and there will then be time to add other provisions which my liou. friend and other members may suggest. If we accept the Bill as it is presented to-day, I think we shall make a long step in advance, and shall be in a better position to consider other proposed amendments than we should be if no action were taken with regard to the Bill at the present time.


Edward Hackett: I think that in the Act referring to Prince Edward Island the postmaster is required to place in the post office a list, or something of that kind.
Mi-. CHARLTON. He receives a bundle of lists, which he is required to hand out to the electors who come for their mail.


Peter Macdonald: I would again suggest to the committee that we now take up the different sections, and hon. members can discuss these points under the respective sections to which they refer. Otherwise we shall not make any progress.


Mr. FOWLER.: I do not see why this Bill should be handled differently from any other. The custom is to have a general discussion first, and I do not think that is a waste of time. I fancy that men say what they have to say in a general discussion, so that when we get down to the particular sections they go through quickly. It strikes me that the chairman, by taking the step lie proposes, will cause more obstruction than there would be if he allowed the Bill to take the usual course.


Peter Macdonald: It is just the usual course which I wish to take. We commence the discussion of a public Bill witli the first section. In the case of a private Bill, the principle of it is discussed on the preamble. As the promoter of the Bill wished to make a general exposition of the changes proposed, I allowed him to go on. We can now deal with the Bill better by taking it up section by section.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The only difficulty is tills, that the promoter of the Bill is allowed to explain it in a general discussion, and then others are not allowed the same right.
Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER, If it is the general wish of the committee to have a general discussion on the first clause, I am perfectly willing.


John Graham Haggart: We can have a discussion on the adoption of the preamble at the close.


Mr. HOLMES.: * As I understand, the idea of bringing tbis Bill forward at this time is to take the sense of the House upon it, and I think you would arrive at that better by means of a general discussion than by taking the Bill up clause by clause. I have no idea that a Bill of this importance should be placed on the statute-book at this period of the session. There are several contentious clauses in it which will provoke discussion, and if it is not the intention to press the Bill at this time, I think it would he better to allow a general discussion of its various features.


Peter Macdonald: I am willing to be governed by the wishes of the committee.


John Graham Haggart: You should be governed by the rules of the House.


Peter Macdonald: I am governed by the rules of the House, and I think


Thomas Simpson Sproule: As the Gaelic of my hon. friend from Iberville was rather imperfect, I appeal to him to use the tongue we are accustomed to.


Louis Philippe Demers: I shall be happy to oblige my hon. friend, although I am afraid I will be still more imperfect in my English than in what the hon. gentleman describes as my Gaelic. Some of the members of the special committee appointed to consider this Bill were of opinion that we should not adopt this clause providing for compulsory voting. Since then I have had occasion to consult my colleagues, and I believe that public opinion, in the province of Quebec at least, is opposed, at the present, to any such law. As some of the newspapers have justly pointed out, we are, by this clause, taking a very peculiar position. Because a man did not vote at one election we are going to punish him by disfranchising him for six years. We say : Because you did not vote this year, you will not vote for six years to come. That is not the proper way to teach people to do their duty, if we consider it is their Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.
duty to vote. The question then presents itself : How and when is this man to be put back on the list after he has been disfranchised, and at whose expense ? If a man has not had the right to vote during six years, the probability is he will for ever be precluded from voting. I consider this a very harsh measure to adopt. In my opinion, a man should not be obliged to vote. There may be many reasons why he should not. The candidate who represents his opinions may be opposed by one of his relatives, and so on, and there may be delicate reasons, which everybody will approve, why a man should not vote. And if he went to the polls he would be suspected. It is not allowed to an English jury to refuse to say whether a man is guilty or not, but I am told that a Scotch jury may do so by returning the verdict ' not proven.' In many cases people should be at liberty to say that they do not know for whom they should vote. We are told that a man may be obliged to go to the polls, but he need not vote, because he can throw a blank ballot into the box. In my opinion, no one should be obliged to resort to such a subterfuge. No man should be compelled to make the pretense of doing a certain thing. If a man goes to the polls lie should vote, but he should have the right of deciding for himself whether he shall go or not.


Mr. PUTTEE.: This section is no doubt the most material in the whole Bill. I can see a good many things in it which should lead the majority of the committee to report favourably on it. It is probably a fairly good compromise with compulsory voting. I do not think it Is properly called ' compulsory voting,' but it is a pretty fair compromise. To that extent I endorse it. We have the right to insist that a man should vote when able to do so ; and if he does not take sufficient interest in public affairs to vote, in all probability lie would not be' much damaged by having his franchise taken from him ; and those who refrain from voting for corrupt purposes, as is frequently the case, should be disfranchised. It would appear to me that the committee have not studied this matter as deeply as they might. For Instance, there is no extension of the hours in which the polls are to be kept open, as there should J>e, if yon are going to make voting compulsory. At present the hours are too restricted. Either you should lengthen the hours or make the polling day a holiday. Nor should it be a sufficient reason to take before a judge that a man did not poll bis vote because he was at work or that he had not time during dinner to cross the city to cast his ballot. When we make compulsory voting a law, we should not allow it to be evaded by trivial excuses. There are, no doubt, many excuses which, while they would not appeal to those interested in elections, would he sufficient to prevent those who are not keenly interested from

going to any extra trouble. Take tbe city of Winnipeg during ani election in the/ middle of January. It is quite a feat for a man to go and cast a vote in the middle of the day, or between nine and five. The only time the workingmen really have Is after six o'clock at night. Men living a quarter of a mile away from their work, with the temperature twenty to forty degrees below zero, are not very much disposed to lose time in going to the polls ; and if we are going to make voting compulsory, we will have to extend the hours. I am decidedly in favour of the principle of compulsory voting, but I am not in favour of it with the restricted hours of voting that we have at the present time.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I cannot see my way to support the proposition. I think the people themselves are the best judges as to wlie-they they should vote or not. The amendment provides that a man who does not want to vote shall go to a judge and show that judge that he has ' good and sufficient reasons ' for not wanting to vote. If you carry that out, then, so far as the North-west is concerned, you will need to employ a good many more judges. And what are * good and sufficient reasons '? Supposing one member of a man's family is sick is that a reason that he could give before a judge to relieve him from the penalty of being disfranchised. Suppose a man is quarantined with his family on account of contagious diseases would that be * a good and sufficient reason ' ? Suppose a man has religious convictions against voting


An hon. MEMBER.: Oh, oh.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Yes, there are hundreds of men who do not vote on account of their religious convictions. And among them are first-class citizens. There are many of them in my own constituency. They are among the best citizens we have.


George William Fowler: Will the hon. gentleman (Mr. Davis) allow me to ask him a question? If these persons are disfranchised on account of religious conviction, why should ' they want to get on the list ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: The list in the hon. gentleman's (Mr. Fowler's) part of the'country is not the same as in ours. In his province they have a printed list prepared at a certain time by a revising officer. But in our country we have nothing of that kind, but lists made up by enumerators about ten days before the election. And these enumerators put on the list every person who is a citizen and entitled to vote.


Mr. BELCOURT.: That is the way the lists are made in Ontario.


Thomas Osborne Davis: A man's name may be on the list but he exercises his own judgment about voting. Our election laws seem to have worked very well for the last thirty years or so. and I do not think any good 425J
reason has been given for disfranchising a man at one election because he did not think it well to vote at a previous election or because, for any reason, lie did not go before a judge and give ' good and sufficient reasons.' It either disfranchises him or puts him to a lot of expense and trouble.


George William Fowler: As a member of the committee to whom this Bill was referred, I may	.say that there was
no clause of it to which we gave more attention than to this one. The committee tried to do their duty in the amendment of our election law as well as they could at the time at their disposal. It was late in the session before we got to work on this Bill, but when the matter was placed in our charge we worked faithfully and did our best to make such a Bill as would commend itself to the House. On the subject of compulsory voting we took a different view from that of some hon. gentlemen with regard to the fundamental question of the right to vote. While the right to vote is a privilege, it carries certain responsibilities, and one of these responsibilities is that the man shall exercise the franchise that is given him. It is not for the man who enjoys his privilege to say whether he shall exercise it or not. The committee felt that he should be obliged to fulfil the duties and accept tlie responsibilities of citizenship. Moreover, we felt that to make such a law as is here proposed would be to take a long step towards putting down the bribery which, we must all admit, is altogether too prevalent throughout this country. That is the object. And we made the period of disfranchisement six years so as to cover the next election. What the hon. member for Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee) has said with respect to lengthening the hours of voting might be necessary in cities, I can quite understand that. But it would not be necessary in rural constituencies, which of course, are the great majority of constituencies throughout Canada. That is a matter for this committee and the House to provide for by any further amendment which they may deem necessary. I think that subject was referred to in our committee, but we did not feel that we had much time to consider the distinction. The provision might easily be made covering the city constituencies, so that workmen would not be prejudiced by this clause. It seems to me that this could be very easily worked out. If a man does not vote there is no necessity to take any steps. If his name is upon the list it is tlie right of any person at the time of tendering his vote to object to the vote, and then he must take the oath. The point is covered by the oath and a penalty is imposed by this section. Any person representing either political party at the arranging and making up of the lists can object to a man's name being put on the list on the ground that he had not voted the previous election. There is no difficulty in arranging the matter.


Mr. HENDERSON.: Are not the lists arranged by the provincial authorities ?


George William Fowler: I admit that that is a point to be considered. We ran up against that contention in the committee.


Mr. HEYD.: That is the knock-out.


George William Fowler: It is a difficulty so l'ar as the making up of the list is concerned, but not so far as voting is concerned. Any one can object to a man voting. The hon. gentleman from South Brant (Mr. Heyd) does not know what a knock-out is. So far as the hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) is concerned, he tells us that there may be persons whose religious convictions may prevent them from voting. Well, how are they injured by being left off the list or refused the right to vote ? Unless we assume that these persons are going to change their convictions between one election and the next.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Something might arise to cause them to change.


George William Fowler: If so, then let them wait a little longer, until the next election, and then they will be able to vote. The principal idea that governed the committee with regard to the matter was to get at bribery and corruption, and we thought that if men were compelled to go to the poll there would be less object in attempting the bribery that is sometimes attempted. We felt that the privilege of voting carried with it the duties of citizenship, and that it was right to compel these persons to vote who, from indifference or any other cause refused to take part in the public work of the community.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I would like to ask the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fowler) a question. Provision has been made in the case of illness on the part of a voter. But suppose that some member of a man's family is sick ; suppose that one of them is dead. Must the man then be disfranchised ?


George William Fowler: That can be explained to the judge.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Well, he will have to go to the judge and explain ?
Mi-. CHARLTON. It will cost him nothing ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: It will cost him his time.


George William Fowler: Well, suppose a man's name is left off the list, he has to go to the judge to get it on. This is not a singular hardship. You cannot make any general rule about anything without having individual cases in which the law seems to operate harshly.


Mr. MACPHERSON.: It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that this is legislation run wild. That may be thought too strong language. If the franchise is a privilege I cannot quite understand how you can compel a man to


George William Fowler: use his privilege. But this compulsory voting does not seem to me to be consistent with British right and liberty, and I for one am against bringing in legislation of this kind. I may be too young a member of this House to be quite justified in declaring my opinion so bluntly, but it seems to me that legislative bodies sometimes forget that there is a possibility of over-legislating. I think that if a Bill were brought in to stop such a thing as canvassing in an election, you might do some good. But merely to make laws against corruption that are easily broken will not put a stop to corruption in our politics. When it is possible for men to be coerced into voting for individuals and at the same time, the voting is compulsory, I think it is legislation run wild, and, I for one strongly object to such a proposition. I think it is one that should be struck out, and let us go on with some other work that will be more advantageous to the country.


George William Fowler: The hon. gentleman talks about liberty, yet he is willing to restrict men from canvassing. I do not think that compelling a man to vote is half as much a restriction of his personal liberty as' to refuse him the privilege of eanvassiug. Yet the hon. gentleman talks dbout legislation running wild. He forgets that while we Jiave the privilege of voting, that privilege carries with it duties and responsibilities.


The PRIME MINISTER.: The privilege of canvassing also.


Robert George Macpherson: I merely made that suggestion, without intending to lay it down ns a principle.


Robert Holmes: The committee endeavoured to overcome a difficulty that prevails in all election campaigns. The idea no doubt was to compel a man who holds back his vote to about five minutes to five, to go and poll his vote in good time. Ai the same time, I think the thing is practically impossible ; you cannot carry out compulsory voting. It is an ideal system, over which there has been considerable discussion, yet I think any one who has had experience in election matters will know that it is utterly impossible to carry that out. Take for illustration the case of two candidates, both of whom we will suppose happen to be undesirable men.	A man may say to his
friends, or he may say to himself :	I am
not going to cast my vote for either of these men ; they do not come up to my standpoint of what a candidate ought to be, and I am not going to vote for either one of them. But this law compels him to go to the polls and vote ; if he does not, he becomes a criminal. Further than that, reference has been made to the fact that in the North-west Territories, and the same may be said of other parts of the country, there are in certain places men of peculiar religious convictions who do not desire to



IQ, 1903

[Stage Direction]
poll their vote. We know also that there are the Brethren who hold religious scruples against voting, and some of them do not vote. I understand that in the North-west there are also a number of Mennonites who hold that it is wrong to vote. Now, I think, as men have a right of individual action, this parliament has no right and has no power to compel a man to go forward and record his vote. I think every citizen of this Dominion, or anywhere else, has the individual right to do as he likes to a certain extent. I do not agree with the idea that the right of citizenship carries with it the duty of voting. I agree to some extent with what has been said by the hon. member for Burrard (Mr. Mac-pherson), that this is a privilege offered to a man to exercise if he desires, or to refrain from exercising if he feels so disposed. But I do not think it is within the province of this parliament to compel a man to go forward and record his vote against his will. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that in this respect the less we interfere with what might be called a man's privileges, so far as election matters are concerned, the better will we be consulting the interests of the community at large. There is such a thing as legislating too much. It is all right to legislate against improper practices in any respect that will be detrimental to the welfare of the community, but in respect to this particular form of legislation, I am satisfied that it will do infinitely more harm than good. You cannot imagine, if you were to carry out this principle, what might be the consequences in a community where, w*e will say, 40, or 50, or 100 men do not choose to go to the polls and record their votes. I do not know whether the Liberal party, I am very doubtful whether the Conservative party, would feel disposed to prosecute those men because they did not vote. If they did prosecute them, you can easily imagine the dismay that would exist in that community. I am satisfied that the outcome would be infinitely worse than if you left them to do as they please.
George William Fowler: There is no penalty except the loss of the right to vote, they are not prosecuted.


Robert Holmes: Very true, but in the eye of the law a citizen becomes a criminal if he does not vote, and is punished by being disfranchised.


Mr. LANCASTER.: I think the hon. member for Burrard (Mr. Macpherson) and the hon. member for West Huron, both misconceive the legislation, as I understand it. The effect of this legislation is that if any voter, entitled to vote in Canada, chooses to say :	I do not want the privilege of
voting, and therefore I wont't vote-you disfranchise him for six years. Now this man who refrains from exercising his right to vote is not being punished at all, he is only being told :	Since you have said that
you do not want to vote in this election, we won't let you vote for six years to come ; but if you change your opinion within the six years, you will be allowed then to vote. There is no punishment about it, there is nothing except an enforcement of the man's own exercise of his privilege to refrain from voting. He has now the privilege of voting and he says he does not care for that privilege.	1


Robert Holmes: May I ask the hon. gentleman a question ? He says he is not punishing the individual. Now is it not doing a great wrong to the individual who, on one occasion, will not vote, if the government compels him for six years after to refrain from voting ?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Well, if this man whom my hon. friend is so anxious to protect wants to exercise the privilege of voting, he has it; in his own power to decide whether he wants to vote or not for six years. He knows the law, everybody in Canada is presumed to know the law ; and if a voter knowing that law does not vote, and knows that he cannot vote again for six years, why, he decides his own case, and you are practically confirming him in his decision. He decides his status for six years, decides it deliberately, with all the knowledge of the consequences. He says to the government :	I declare, by staying
away from the polls, that I do not want to vote for six years. You allow him to decide his own case, and what harm are you doing him ? You cannot say to the Speaker of this House that you do not want to vote on such and such a measure, when you are present. Every man here has to vote unless he is paired. It is a duty to the state, here as in a political election. I am not so sure, however-and I do not want to be misunderstood-that the section as drawn will carry out the object in view. But I think that we can agree upon the principle that when a voter who declares by not voting that he does not want to~ vote, when he knows that by so doing he cannot vote for six years, we are not depriving that indivi-duai of a privilege by disfranchising him, we are in fact giving him the highest privilege we can give to any man, and that is the privilege of deciding the extent of his own rights for the next six years.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Supposing two undesirable candidates are before the electors, and that a clergyman, for instance, did not choose to cast his vote for either of them, thinking they were both undesirable, would the hon. gentleman disfranchise him for six years ?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I have always found that when there were two candidates there was one who was less undesirable than the other-if the hon. gentleman can understand that-and I say it is the duty of the clergyman, or

135S0
of any other elector, to select the least undesirable and to vote for him, that is, if he desires to vote at all. In my own county we have had to select between men neither of whom would be our choice if we had the right of nomination. The voter has got to come to a conclusion as to which of the two men, on all the evidence that he can procure, is the least desirable, or the most desirable, and he has to give the best decision he can. I think anything that will increase the responsibility of a voter will by so much advance the welfare of the general community ; and if we teach voters that a responsibility attaches to them, that they are under an obligation to inquire into the qualifications of the candidates and to vote for the least unfit-that is if they deside to vote at all-we will be legislating in the right direction. Let the voter pause before he decides not to vote, let him inquire a little further into the qualifications of the candidates, and perhaps a day or two later he will come to the conclusion that he does see a distinction between the two men, and that he will vote for the one he thinks the better man. I think a provision of this kind will cause the elector to be more careful, to search into the qualifications of the candidates with more care, and in that way the effect will be beneficial.


Mr. FRASER.: I agree with what the hon. member for King's, N. B. (Mr. Fowler) has said that voting is a privilege or duty. But who is to be the supreme judge of the exercise of that privilege or duty-is it the parliament or the individual ?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The individual.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: Then you cannot prevent him. I believe that he ought to be the judge of the exercise of that privilege and duty, and if he should be the judge of both, he ought to be allowed to stay at home if he thinks he is performing his duty thereby better than, under the compulsion of this parliament, going out and voting. Who is to be the final judge of privilege and duty V There is such a thing as parliament taking legislation into its own hands that it has no right to take, and I think it would be a grave mistake for this parliament to say that a man, who perhaps has studied a question just as much perhaps as this parliament has, shall exercise his franchise although he says that by refraining from exercising the privilege of voting he is serving his conscience better than if he went out and voted for one or othdr of the parties. He should be the supreme and final judge of that. A question may come up which may be a political question. It may be a direct party question. On one side we may take one view and on the other side there may be a different view. There may be an hon. gentleman on the opposition side who says that he agrees with the view which the government take, and there may be an hon. gentleman on the


Edward Arthur Lancaster: government side who may say that he does not agree with it. What are these men to do ?


Mr. COCHRANE.: They will be whipped into line.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: Not at all. A time comes in parliament on one side or the other when a man simply says :	I will abstain
from voting. I cannot vote against my party, but the fact that I disagree with my party in regard to the view which has been enunciated by it does not make it necessary that I shall sever my connection with my party.


George William Fowler: Then the hon. gentleman's argument is that a member representing the people is doing his duty by refraining from voting ?
Mr. FRASER, That gentleman as a representative of the people, must be the judge of what his duty is. I would like to see you introduce an Act into this parliament to provide that every man who is in Ottawa must vote or otherwise he cannot be a member of this parliament. There would be no difference between that and saying that a man who did not vote at an election should be deprived of his vote for six years. I remember a vote not long ago when a number of hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House were glad to go out of this House and refrain from voting. They had a right to do it. I have known occasions on this side when hon. gentlemen felt it their duty not to vote. In any case it would be dangerous to say to a member of parliament :	You must vote.
If lie is in his seat he accepts the responsibility of doing so, but he may abstain from voting. If you say to a man, you must vote or you lose your privilege, I venture to make the assertion that you will make a number of people in this country worse citizens than they are to-day. You cannot drive men. There is nothing like individual liberty in the world. It is the only thing that makes for stable government that a man shall be the judge as to whether he shall vote or not.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Does the hon. gentleman mean to say that increasing the responsibility of the citizen degrades citizenship ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: Mr. FOWLEIt. Quotation.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: We never say very mucli that is new, and if some bon. gentlemen understood that, they would not be so proud of what they do say. Feeling that, 1 would be very loath to say that because a man did not conscientiously think that on a given occasion he should vote he should therefore be told that he is not a good citizen, and that he cannot exercise that privilege. We do not cease visiting our friends because they may do something that we think they ought not to do. I do not think we should interfere with the liberty of the individual to decide for himself whether he is best discharging the duties of citizenship by voting or refraining from voting.
Hon. Mr. I1AGGART. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Fraser) seems to have forgotten the object of the Bill which is now before the committee. The statement of the hon. Minister of Finance (ITon. Mr. Fielding) and admittedly of every person in this House is that corrupt practices have been committed in the different ridings of this country, which both parties have resolved to Stamp out, What principle (is it most necessary to apply for the purpose of doing this ? The committee have applied, as a first principle, that of compulsory voting. That will do something to prevent the crime of corruption, if it does nothing else. But, I think they would have made it more effective if they had added another clause to the Bill-I know I differ from the great mass of the members of this House in reference to this-and that is a clause providing for open voting. If a man receives a bribe for depositing his vote his neighbours know what his convictions are, and he is ear-marked if he votes against his convictions. This would be a means of preventing that crime. There are only two ways of preventing bribery and corruption, and they a re by adopting the principle of open voting and compulsory voting. Talk about the liberty of the individual ! How is it infringing upon the rights of conscience to say that a man shall go up to the poll and deposit his vote ? There arc; lots of people who do not exercise their franchise, and who have not the right to do it. The party who has the right is the delegate of all the others, and if that right is delegated to him, he should exercise it. If no candidate is acceptable to him, he has the right to nominate a man who is acceptable to him. He has the right to vote, and the community have the right to expect that he will exercise the power which they have given him, because where there is power given to him it is his duty to exercise it. I have heard that principle advocated by perhaps the ablest Liberal who ever sat in
this House-Hon. Edward Blake. It has been advocated by Liberals in every section of the world. I think it is the correct principle, and I think the time has arrived in this country to compel every man, for the sake of decency in elections, for the sake of preventing bribery and corruption to exercise the right which parliament has conferred upon him. If the system of enfranchisement under the Act is not correct, let us have a correct one, but let us adopt the principle of compulsory voting, because It is one of those principles that will do more than anything else to prevent the crime of bribery and corruption.


Mr. ROBINSON (Elgin).: There is just one point in favour of the motion under discussion to which I wish to refer, and that is that more people are bribed to stay at home and refrain from voting than are bribed to vote. If they were compelled to vote then they would not stay at home, and if they went to the polls they would naturally vote as they felt. That is why I think that this clause is a step in the right direction. As for the charge that a man is injured by being compelled to vote it seems to me that he is only doing his duty by voting. Everyman who is enlisted as a soldier is compelled to take arms to fight his country's battles and here is a duty, the duty of preventing bribery, corruption and bad government, more serious than any that a soldier was ever compelled to perform. We want to turn out bad governments, we want to put down any bad thing in the government. We want to destroy everything that is bad in this country and it can be done only through the ballot box. I think it is right that every man should be compelled to vote and to register his name personally previous to the election in the section where he lives. It costs the municipalities hundreds of thousands of dollars to get people on the voters' lists. I heard it said only yesterday in the House that the lists were not prepared. The lists should be ready every moment. Every man should be compelled, as I have said, to register his vote just as he is compelled to register the birth of his child, the death of his father or a marriage ceremony. If the man is capable of walking he should be compelled to register himself; if he cannot walk he is able to talk and he should depute some one else to register for him. The enormous expenditure of putting people on the lists should be undertaken by this government. Not only should it be a duty to vote but there should be some one of the right sort for the people to vote for. It so often occurs that we have not the right men before us and so we are obliged to vote for a poor Liberal or Tory when we otherwise would not. You are obliged to vote either for a Grit or a Conservative when in nine cases out of ten, if you had your will, you would not do so. You are

obliged to vote for one of them simply because you have put a barrier in the way of an honest man being a candidate. You fine him $200 if he does not get one-half as many votes as the highest candidate at the election. This is what you should remedy, that $200 fine if the candidate does not get half as many votes as the highest number polled by a candidate. Then you would more often have candidates of the right sort in the field; you would have a great many working men and you would have more men in the House of my stamp. I tell you it would be no injury to this country to have more men of my stamp here and everybody in this country knows that. But the Grits and Tories will bring out their candidates and the old man will be left at home.
Some lion. MEMBERS. No, no.


Jabel Robinson: That is nothing to me. It is the people who will suffer, not me. Now Sir, I do not wish to make a burlesque of this, but I do hope that you will not amend this in the direction proposed but that you .will add another clause providing that no man will be allowed to contribute any money whatever to an election fund. That will do away with the bribery in this country.
At one o'clock, committee took recess.
House resumed at three o'clock.


The PRIME MINISTER.: As section 2 involves considerable discussion, and the House is very thin, I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that it be suspended, and that we pass to another.
On section 3-returning officers,
Mr. DAVIS, What is the object of having sheriffs and registrars act as returning officers ? ?


George William Fowler: The object is to have some official person who would be absolutely responsible.


Mr. THOMPSON (Haldimand).: Somebody as far as possible removed from the political struggle that is going on.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: I am afraid that whoever drew this section did not consider the matter very carefully, for there is no sheriff for an electoral district nor a registrar of deeds for an electoral district.


Andrew Thorburn Thompson: The second subsection covers that objection. It provides that if there is no sheriff or registrar to whom the writ can be addressed, or if the sheriff or registrar is disqualified or unable to act, another person may be appointed.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Every word in a section of a statute has to have a meaning, and there is no sheriff for an electoral district nor a registrar of deeds for an electoral district.


Jabel Robinson: 


George William Fowler: That can easily be amended by making it read : ' for the county in which the electoral district is situated.'


Thomas Osborne Davis: In the North-west Territories one sheriff would have jurisdiction over perhaps three ridings. For which would he be appointed ?


Robert Laird Borden: He could be appointed for any one of them. There is nothing more than a technical objection to any part of this section. The Minister of Justice is perfectly right in saying that you do not appoint a sheriff or a registrar of deeds for any area as an electoral district. But in the province of Nova Scotia there are seventeen counties which are electoral districts, and for each of which the sheriff is appointed. Therefore, you have the substance of the provision, although it may be necessary to make some slight correction in the words themselves.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: In my own district there are four sheriffs and four registrars of deeds. I think this Bill ought to bav(e received more consideration than it has, and more perhaps than there is time to give to it. Perhaps it might be amended so as to read in this way : ' The writ shall be addressed to one of the sheriffs or one of the registrars of deeds for the county, district or territory served by him and comprised in the electoral district.' I am not sure but that would meet the case of the North-west Territories.


Thomas Osborne Davis: No, it would not. This provision would necessitate the sheriff leaving his office to attend to this business, and no ordinary person could fill his position.


George William Fowler: Does he never leave his office for a day ?
Mi". DAVIS. It would take more than a day ; it would take three or four weeks. Suppose you addressed the writ either to the sheriff or the registrar of deeds, and he was not able to act. That would necessitate his notifying the government of that fact, and it would be necessary to issue another writ addressed to somebody else, and by that time it would be too late.


George William Fowler: You have to find out in the first place whether the sheriff or the registrar can act.


Thomas Osborne Davis: For instance, in the county of Huntingdon, in the province of Quebec, the writ was issued to a gentleman, who held it for some time, when it occurred to him that he wanted to become a candidate himself, and he sent the writ back.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The objection raised is overcome at the present time by the fact that every returning officer has an election clerk, who does most of the work. It very often happens that the returning officer does not leave his home, while the election clerk puts up the notices and distributes the other necessary papers.

Hr. holmes. Wliat would be the advantage of appointing a sheriff in my county, for instance, where there are three ridings ? The sheriff would have one writ, and in the others the writs would be sent to reputable citizens. If you also had a registrar, one of the writs would be sent to him, which would still leave one to toe sent to a reputable citizen ; and if you sent one to a reputable citizen, why not send the whole three to reputable citizens ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: In a very large constituency, 500 or 600 miles long, it is absolutely necessary to have the returning officer as near as possible to the centre of the constituency. If the sheriff or registrar happened to be in one corner of it, he would not be a fit person to act as returning officer.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Suppose you had no suitable person in the centre of your riding, what would you do ? Would you get the nearest man to the centre ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: We will assume that within a riding there are people sufficiently intelligent to act as returning officer.


Robert Holmes: I know a case in which it became necessary for the sheriff to leave his own riding and become returning officer of the adjoining riding. There was apparently no impropriety in this, but it gave rise to a good deal of acrimonious discussion.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Suppose you had a sheriff living in Saskatchewan and you appoint him as returning officer in another riding. If the election resulted in a tie, the people would not like the casting vote to be given by one who was not a voter there.


George William Fowler: The hon. member for Huron (Mr. Holmes) inquired why, if it is necessary in any case to appoint some reputable citizen as returning officer, such citizens, not office-holders, should not be appointed in every case. The committee took the view that it would be in the public interest to appoint registrars and sheriffs, because they are removed from political influences and have the confidence of the public. instead of appointing gentlemen directly interested in the contest and who, in some instances, might not be as acceptable and as well fitted for the position.


David Henderson: I fail to agree with the hon. gentleman with regard to the nonpartisanship of sheriffs and registrars. In Ontario, at any rate, these men are as a rule active partisans. No man is likely to be appointed sheriff or registrar in Ontario unless he has been a strong, active politician, and he is not apt to forget his political prejudices even after he has assumed office. We have had experience in Ontario, in connection with Dominion elections, of the law requiring the sheriff or registrar of deeds to act as returning officer, and we
have also had that position given to other reputable citizens. To my mind the elections were just as fairly conducted in the one case as in the other. Besides, why should a man receive an appointment of this kind simply because he happens to be the custodian of an office ? I would prefer distributing the perquisites of the government more widely rather than have them go to the fortunate men who chance to have been appointed sheriffs or registrars. It seems to me we are proposing to give away too many of our powers. We have already adopted the franchise of Ontario and its voters' list. We practically have nothing to say now as to how our lists shall be made up and who shall be put on or struck off. We have gone further. Under the Redistribution Bill we have practically handed over to the Ontario government the formation of our constituencies, because if, in any instance the Ontario government should choose to organize a new county, that becomes an electoral district of the Dominion. Now we are proposing to hand over to file provincial government the appointment of our returning officers. Very soon we will have nothing left. Everything will be done by the provincial government. I think we should keep some of these powers in our own hands and have something more to say as to the constitution of the House of Commons than we appear willing to do in this Bill. Although I take no exception to the sheriffs and registrars, I think we Should allow the government to name whomever they like, whether sheriffs or registrars or private individuals.


Mr. OLIVER.: I should think that the registrar would be the last man in the county to name as returning officer. If he has any duties, they call for his presence in his office all the time. If he has not, he has no business to be the registrar. The duties of the sheriff may leave him more free but, as far as my knowledge goes, in the west the duties of the returning officers are such as to take up the whole of their time and attention ; and if the sheriff has any duties to perform as such, he cannot at the same time act as returning officer. If there are exceptional circumstances or conditions, it is quite in order for the government to appoint a sheriff as returning officer, but to say he must be appointed is simply to say that, if he has any business to do as sheriff, he will have to neglect it while he is returning officer. In the constituency which I represent there are three sheriffs and two registrars. This constituency is to be divided into four, so that there will not be sufficient registrars or sheriffs to meet the requirements. In any ease, therefore, somebody else will have to be returning officer in place of the sheriff. It would toe very much better to leave the matter entirely in the hands of the government and let them appoint the sheriff where suitable, and somebody else where it is not suitable.


John Charlton: I should judge from the discussion and the opinion expressed by the Minister of Justice that this section does not receive that unanimity of approval which is desirable if it is to become law, and I am quite willing to drop it.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not consent to drop it at all. No reason has been advanced which should defeat the object of this section. That object is to take your returning officer from a class of persons in whom the people have confidence. If you do not have some provision of that kind, you will subject the government to the temptation of appointing ward heelers, and when irregularities take place they will be charged against the person who was selected as returning officer. The sheriffs in Nova Scotia are appointed by the local government and are Liberals for the most part, and they discharge the duties of returning officers fairly well. One or two have been charged with certain offences, and I am inclined to think that in one case the charge is well founded, but that was only one out of many instances. I believe it would be far better to name some class of persons from whom these returning officers are to be selected. So far as sheriffs are concerned, they have been doing this work in the province of Nova Scotia without any inconvenience so far as the public is concerned. I do not know about the registrars of deeds in the North-west Territories. But I do not think there would be any great difficulty in the province of Nova Scotia about having the registrar of deeds perform these duties. Because, in most cases, I believe, if not in all. they have some assistance in their offices and they could readily spare the time necessary to perform these duties. But it seems to me that in any case the intention of the committee is safeguarded perfectly well by subsection 2, which gives power to the Governor in Council in this matter. Wherever it is undesirable or inconvenient to appoint one of these officers the government must appoint some one else. But the government would have to make its choice from this class of officers or take a certain responsibility in going outside of their ranks, and it would be expected that if they did so, they would appoint men of similar character and men in whom the public would have confidence. That is the main point-that both political parties should have good reason to believe that the men selected will do what is right and just. You can do that better, it seems to me, by selecting your class, and then appointing, as far as possible, from that class.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I would draw the attention of the leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden, Halifax) to the fact that if you are going to confine the selection to the sheriffs and registrars of deeds, then, as has been pointed out there would be a shortage in the North-west Territories; there are not enough of these officers to go round. If it is ne-Mr. OLIVER.
cessary to have public officials you might include the land agent, the homestead inspector, the fishery inspector and the forest ranger.


Robert Laird Borden: You might do a great many things which do not seem to be at all necessary. If an officer cannot be found among those specified in the Bill, the Governor in Council lias power to appoint some other person. There is no need to make an exhaustive list such as the hon. gentleman (Mr. Davis) has referred to. It is not even necessary that the appointment should be confined to government officers. But it is not only desirable but necessary that the person appointed should be one in whose fairness and impartiality all the people would have confidence.


Thomas Osborne Davis: So far as our part of the country is concerned it would be better to insert the name of the land agent instead of the registrar of deeds because the land agent can get out at any time while the registrar of deeds in many cases cannot leave his office.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Stand.


Peter Macdonald: The section will stand.
On section 4,
Section 12 of the said Act is amended by adding thereto the following paragraph :-
(i.) Persons, other than sheriffs or registrars of deeds, holding any public office, either Dominion or provincial.


Thomas Osborne Davis: What does this mean ?


John Charlton: Section 12 of the Dominion Elections Act provides :
12. None of the persons following shall be appointed returning officers or deputy returning officers, election clerks or poll clerks ;
(a.) Members of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada or of the Executive Council of any province ;
(b.) Members of the Senate or members of the legislative council of any province ;
(c.) Members of the House of Commons or members of the legislative assembly of any province ;
(d.) Ministers, priests or ecclesiastics of any religious faith or worship ;	.
(e.) Judges of the courts of superior, civil or criminal jurisdiction, or judges of any county or district court, insolvent court or admiralty court ;
(f.) Persons who have served in the parliament of Canada in the session immediately preceding the election, or in the then present session of parliament ;
(g.) Persons who have been found guilty by the House of Commons, or by any court for the trial of controverted elections, or other competent tribunal of any offence or dereliction of duty in violation of this Act, or of an offence in violation of a provincial Act relating to elections, or of the Act to disfranchise voters who have taken bribes, being chapter 14 of the Statutes of 1894 ;
(h.) Persons who have been convicted of an indictable offence.

And to this will be added subsection I as given in this section 4.


Robert Laird Borden: This seems to depend on the previous section.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: I was just about to suggest that. If the Bill goes through it will be necessary to amend the previous section by adding ' prothonotary ' as suggested for the province of Quebec. The prothonotary with us is the clerk of the court. In a district such as the district of Quebec where we have one sheriff, you would have a prothonotary selected for one of the constituencies. That is the law with us. Thus, the government is limited to the sheriff, the prothonotary and the registrar of deeds, and it might be as well to extend the list of officers from which the choice can be made. If section 3 is to be amended this one will need to be amended also.


Robert Laird Borden: We have in our province an officer called the prothonotary.
I do not know whther he is the same as the officer of that name in the province of Quebec.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: He is the chief clerk of the court. I think it is the same office as in Nova Scotia.


Robert Laird Borden: Yes. I would not object to having the word ' prothonotary ' apply also to the province of Nova Scotia.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: We could make it general. Of course it would only apply where there is a prothonotary.


The PRIME MINISTER.: Stand.
Section allowed to stand.
On section 6,
Section 21 of the said Act is amended by inserting after the word ' lists ' in the third line thereof the words * and of an abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act.'
2.	Section 26 of the said Act is amended by inserting after the word ' proclamation ' in the first line thereof the words ' and the abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act.'
3.	Paragraph(ff) of subsection 1 of section 41 of the said Act is repealed, and the following is substituted therefor :-
(,f.) Furnish each .deputy returning officer with at least ten copies of printed directions in the form L for the guidance of voters in voting, and at least ten copies of the abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act, which printed directions and abstract the deputy returning officer shall, before or at the opening of the poll, on the day_ of polling, cause to be posted up in some conspicuous places outside of the polling stations and also in each compartment of the polling station.
4.	The following section is inserted immediately after section 26 of the said Act :-
26a. Within the shortest possible time after the reception of the writ, the returning officer shall send by mail to each elector upon the voters' list a copy of the abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act, which abstract shall be carried in the mails post free ; and in the province of Prince Edward Island; the returning officer shall send a sufficient number of copies of the said abstract to each postmaster within the electoral district, and it shall be the duty of the postmaster to deliver a copy to each elector to whom any mail matter is delivered.
2. Any postmaster who wilfully neglects or refuses promptly to deliver to the electors Nany such abstracts shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding fifty dollars and costs to any person who sues therefor : provided however that this penalty shall not be impo'sed more than once for each election at which such neglect takes place.


Thomas Osborne Davis: a copy to each elector to whom any mail matter is sent.
What does that abstract mean ?
Any postmaster who wilfully neglects or refuses promptly to deliver to the electors any such abstracts shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding $50 and costs to any person who sues therefor :	provided, however, that this penalty
shall not be imposed more than once for each election at which such neglect takes place.
Now that returning officer gets those abstracts ; suppose that ten days have elapsed -there are only 30 days, I understand, between the issue of the writ and the election-supposing a week or ten days have elapsed before the returning officer sends out his abstract to the postmasters. Well, the postmasters In the rural districts get them, but the people may not come very often to the post office, and very often it is the younger members of the family who are sent for the mail matter. Therefore the postmaster will have no opportunity of delivering to the elector this abstract, whatever it means, and then he will be fined if he does not do it There might be an elector in the district who did not receive any mail matter regularly, or a fisherman who seldom receives any mail. I see a great deal of difficulty so far as Prince Edward Island is concerned, and I imagine that no representative from that province could have been consulted by this committee.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I would like to know who is to pay the returning officer ? I think he receives the magnificent sum of $50 or $00 for his services. If you are going to impose this duty on him of sending out circular's to 10,000 electors, where is his pay to come from ?


The MINISTER OP FINANCE.: I think hon. gentlemen are magnifying the difficulties in the way. Whether the wording of the Bill is sufficient to carry out the objects we have in view, may be a matter of debate, but the object is that every elector in Canada shall, immediately before the election, have his attention called to the provisions of the election law, so that he may not remain in ignorance of it. It is useless for us to pretend that people understand all about the election law; there are thousands of honest electors in Canada who really do not understand the provisions of the election law, and who would not wilfully violate it, but who do violate it because of lack of information. The object of this proposal, even if it costs a little money, even if you have to pay the returning officer more-the object is to make the electors acquainted with the law under which they are to cast their votes, and that is the whole object. If it has not been effectually accomplished by the wording of this Bill, then let us try to amend it in' some way, let us try and cause the distribution of this abstract containing in brief the chief provisions of the election law
Mr. HUGHES (P.E.I.)
under which a man is going to cast his vote ; I cannot see any difficulty in doing it.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I would ask the Minister of Finance to answer me this question :	In
the North-west Territories there are no printed lists in some places, and how is the returning officer to get possession of those lists so that he may carry out the law '? What is he going to do when some of the electors are 400 miles away, and there is no mail ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I assume at once that under the peculiar conditions in the North-west Territories you cannot address this abstract. I assume that in the case of Prince Edward Island you cannot address it. But surely we can find some way by which to secure the public distribution of the abstract. That is what we are driving at, and if it cannot be done in this way, then take the best way available, in the North-west and in Prince Edward Island, for distributing this abstract.


Robert Holmes: Technically the position of the Minister of Finance is correct. But when he comes to the practical application of the provision he will realize the difficulty. Take for instance a riding where there may be 8,000 or 10,000 electors, in a rural constituency. You impose upon the returning officer tiie necessity of sending out circulars, putting them into an envelope and mailing them to 10,000 electors. Speaking from my own observation, I know that as a general rule the returning officer has all that he can attend to in the short time at ills disposal to see that the ordinary duties imposed upon him are properly carried out.


Mr. GOURLEY.: He may employ a clerk.


Robert Holmes: But suppose he does employ a clerk, as they do in the majority of cases, even then they find it very difficult to carry out the work imposed upon them.
I would call the attention of the government to a feature that is not in the Bill, but that we should consider, because it is the outcome of the last election. There were two or three additional [DOT] duties imposed upon the returning officer last year, for which no provision whatever was made for their remuneration. They were required to see that every ballot was numbered consecutively, and in my county they found it necessai-y in a number of instances to send thousands of those ballots from the town of Goderich to Stratford, in order to have them run through a numbering machine. The local office had not the equipment to do that work. AVhen they put in their bill for this work it was disallowed by the Auditor General, because there was no provision in the Election Act for paying work of that kind. There were two or three instances wherein the additional work and expenditure had been imposed upon returning officers for which no compensation was provided. I think the government ought to take that

into consideration, and to provide that where additional work is put upon the returning officer some further remuneration should be given him. The Auditor General himself told me in conversation at the time that there were a number of instances wherein the returning officers did not get what they should get for their services in doing extra work.


Robert George Macpherson: Apropos of .what the hon. member for Huron (Mr. Holmes) has said about the payment of returning officers, I have this remark to make : I look askance at all kinds of legislation which attempts to make me good, or attempts to make the public good. I do not think we can legislate along that line. But I want to call attention to this fact, that in our country we were obliged to send a deputy returning officer from Vancouver to Atlin, a distance of 1,500 miles, in the dead of winter last year. The personal travelling expenses of the returning officer were over $500, when he put in his bill to the Auditor General, after having paid this money out of his own pocket, the Auditor General refused to allow him any more than the $500 altogether. He was away two months. To my personal knowledge he is a straightforward man. He had to break the trail for 80 miles when the thermometer was irom 50 to 00 degrees below zero, and he had to remain in the hospital for two weeks after as a result of the exposure to which he had been subjected. Yet, the Auditor General, sitting in his well-furnished office, would only pay him the same rate that he pays men for serving in a similar capacity in the old settled ridings in Ontario. This matter has come under my own personal observation. I will not stand up for any man who is trying to loot the country, nor will I stand up for any man who makes use of his official position to keep back from a person that which rightly belongs to him.


Frank Oliver: I think it is proper in considering any proposition before the House that all features of it should be taken into account. While it may be said that this question of expense is only a detail in my humble estimation it is a detail that comes very close to the principle and certainly should be attended to. It seems to me that when the principle is being established the committee should be thoroughly aware as to what is involved in giving effect to the principle. The expenses being what they will be and the difficulties in giving effect to the proposition being what they will be, they should be provided for. In regard to tjhe requirement of sending information around to the electors to tell them how to cast their votes on election day, while I agree that it is very desirable that there should be the fullest degree of information, I think most of us will admit that in elections in the past there has been a fair amount of information current amongst the electors, that they have been fairly well informed as to how to cast their votes, and although they have not always marked their ballots, so the judges say, in the way in which they should have marked them, I think in many such cases the judges were rather in fault than the electors. The main reason for requiring this great expense to be undertaken is, first, the provision in the Bill providing for compulsory voting, and second, providing for the disfranchisement of any person who does not vote. That is the chief reason for the great expenditure which will be incurred in sending this information around and if that proposition is not adopted I thing there is no necessity for this clause at all.


Jabel Robinson: I do not think there is very much necessity for sending that information to the electors because the newspapers usually print all the proceedings of the elections and nearly always tell every elector how to cast his ballot. They even mark it for him and they mark it for the candidate for whom they wish the elector to vote. But, there is one point I wish to make. We have discussed the question as to the personnel of the returning officer. I do not think the deputy returning officer has been mentioned and I think there should be a clause in this Bill saying who the deputy returning officer shall be and providing that hie shall reside not only in the electoral district in which the election takes place, but in the polling division. We had a great deal of trouble in the county where I live owing to a clause of this kind not being in the Ontario Act at that time. But the Ontario Act now provides that the returning officer must be a resident not only of the electoral district in which the election takes place, but in the polling division. Then no stranger can be brought into the section to manipulate the ballots or to commit any wrong which neither party are willing to see carried out but which when committed they are willing to palliate. I want the law so changed that a man cannot act as a deputy returning officer unless he is a respectable man and unless every man who comes to vote shall know who he is.
t


Frank Oliver: I am afraid that would prevent an election being held in some constituencies.


Mr. BLAIN.: I agree witli the lion. Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding) on this question. I am of the opinion that any money expended by the parliament of this country to more fully educate the electors upon the law governing voting would be money well expended. It can not be very well argued, as my hon. friend from the west has said, that because this law will not be able to reach every elector that therefore the great mass of the people should suffer. I do not think that is a good argu-

ment. I think that in a large number of counties, in fact in all of the counties of old Ontario, it would be possible to carry out this law and I think that if a copy of the Election Act in so far as it may be obtained in a short, concise form, were placed in the hands of every elector it would be in the interests of the purity of elections. I think the clause should go still farther. I think that 200 or 300 extra copies of the law should be given to the candidates. In the election trials in Ontario, when the courts have investigated elections, many cases have been found in which the candidates themselves are entirely unfamiliar with the law of elections. If that be the case in many parts of Canada how can we expect the electors who are not taking such an active part in politics to be familiar with the law ? I agree with this clause and I approve of the expenditure of money for that purpose. I believe that the effect will be to purify the elections.


John Charlton: My hon. friend from *Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) had a difficulty about this question because he was unable to see from what source the expenses were to be met for the circulation of the abstract of the law, to furnish the returning officer with copies to send to the electors and with copies to be posted up. I would call the hon. gentleman's attention to section 21 of the Act, which says that :
Immediately after the issue of the writ of election the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery shall transmit to the returning officer a sufficient number of copies of the voters' lists, &e.
In the Bill we have a provision that :
Section 21 of the said Act is amended by inserting after the word ' lists ' in the third line thereof the words ' and of an abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act.'
So that it will be the duty of the clerk of the Crown in Chancery to send the lists to the returning officer and to send him the requisite number of copies of the abstract of the law for circulation. That difficulty then is overcome.


Richard Blain: Does it say that the candidates themselves shall have a specified number ?


John Charlton: No, the provision is that the returning officer shall have a snffi-cient number to post up ten at each polling place and to furnish each voter on the list with a copy. It would be his duty to have these copies mailed and they shall pass through the mails free of postage. The only failure to provide fully for the requirements of carrying this provision into effect, perhaps, is the lack of a provision a6 to the remuneration of a returning officer. It was held during the discussion of this matter In the committee that this would be an incidental expense which the returning officer would be entitled to charge, that he would be entitled to charge clerical expenses, and for Mr. BLAIN.
the directing and furnishing of the envelopes if they were not sent by the department. As far as the objection raised by the hon. member for Huron (Mr. Holmes) is concerned tha!t it will be a job so difficult that the difficulties will be insurmountable, I do not think there is anything In that contention. It is a plain simple matter to receive a sufficient number of abstracts of the law and to mail these abstracts of the law to the persons whose names are on the lists.	It is a simple question of clerical force and clerical work. It can be accomplished in a very short period. There is no difficulty about it and as the Minister of Finance has forcibly said this is a provision of the utmost importance. My hon. friend from Alberta (Mr. Oliver! says that there is among the electors a fair amount of information regarding the law. I venture to say that at this moment not one-tenth of the members of the House would be able to tell us the provisions of the Election Law in regard to corrupt practices, practices prescribed by law ; and the amount of information on such subjects current in the country at large is very meagre. In multitudes of instances voters transgress and violate the law through ignorance; they do it innocently and if just before an election, when they would be most likely to read it, they had placed in their hands an abstract of the Election Law, the infractions of the law would not be so frequent as they now are. If this provision of the present Bill passes, the elector would see that the benefits of infringing the law by corrupt practices would be very small indeed. I am surprised that there has been any opposition to this feature of the Bill. It semed to me and to the other members of the committee that if there was one provision of the Bill which would meet with universal concurrence it would be this provision for bringing to the attention of the electors of this country the actual provisions of the law. Whatever might be the difficulties, great or small, that stand in the way of putting this feature into operation these difficulties should not be allowed to prevent the accomplishment of the object in view. The difficulty of addressing 7,000 or 8.000 or 10,000 of these abstracts to electors is one that could be easily overcome, and if a returning officer is not entitled to charge to incidental expenses the cost of doing this, then all that is required is an amendment to this Bill which shall provide for his reimbursement for this service.


Thomas Osborne Davis: The hon. gentleman has not had the same experience with the Auditor General as we have had in the west or he would not propose to charge this to incidental expenses. In a case in my riding he actually refused to pay for sending out the proclamation and the gentleman who published the proclamation in the newspapers for the benefit of the people at large, in order that they might have the information,

has not yet been paid. The hon. gentleman has not taken up the North-west Territory view of the case at all. I have shown that it is impossible to carry out this provision in the North-west Territories. If you want to scatter information broadcast among the electors, to my mind the proper way would be to provide for the employment of men at each poll on election day whose duty it would be to hand a circular containing this information to each elector before he entered the polling place.


Charles Bernhard Heyd: Supposing the elector could not read 7


Thomas Osborne Davis: Then what would be the good of sending it to him by mail 1 If he received the circular three or four weeks before the election he would perhaps open it and throw it away and never look at it again. But if it was handed to him at the booth he would look at it and see what it was.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: He has probably got his money before that.


Thomas Osborne Davis: The hon. member seems to know more about the money part of the business than I do.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: We all do, be honest. We all do.


Thomas Osborne Davis: We are discussing a proposition now to place information into the hands and into the heads of the people witli reference to the election law and the best mode of doing that. The hon. member who has charge of the Bill suggests that the returning officer shall send out a Circular letter to every man whose name appears on the voters' list at a certain time. I take the ground that the better way to disseminate that information would be to hand out the circular at the polling booth on election day. So far as our part of the country is concerned, that is all you can do.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I would like to ask the hon. gentleman if there are no municipal lists in his part of the country ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: No, there are no municipalities.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What kind of voters' lists have you V


Thomas Osborne Davis: In our country we make up tile voters' lists ten or fifteen days before the election. The returning officer appoints enumerators. These go into each polling sub-division and enumerate the names of the people whom they find there who are, according to their judgment, entitled to vote. The enumerator has to post up in three conspicuous parts of the polling sub-division a copy of that list three days before the election. Then any person can object to any name that appears on the list or have his name added to the list if he is entitled to a vote. In that way the returning officer
has no lists; some polling sub-divisions are 300 miles inland with no railway communication and how is the returning officer to obtain the voters' lists in order to carry out the provision now under discussion V It cannot be done.


Robert Laird Borden: So far as the preparation of this abstract is concerned, the amendment proposed to section 21 makes provision for that, because the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery is obliged to send a copy to each returning officer and it will therefore be his duty to prepare aud print this abstract. That is an answer to one objection which has been urged. As to the expense of sending them out I believe that you can have envelopes addressed at the rate of about $2 per thousand and if you had in a constituency say 5,000 electors the expense for that purpose would be $10. I do not think that the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) would feel himself oppressed with an expenditure of that kind even in each electoral division of Canada, because with 215 electoral districts, even if you expended $15 in each of them you would have a total expenditure of only about $3,500. That would be a trifling expenditure if the good results that are expected from the distribution of this information would be at all accomplished. Then, so far as the North-west Territories are concerned, it seems to me a very simple matter to deal with them in the same way as we are dealing with Prince Edward Island, and probably the same rule might have to be applied to Ontario cities, where lists are made up a short time before election day. You could send the abstracts to the post office and have a copy delivered to any man receiving mail matter and I would add to that an amendment that the abstract should be also delivered to any elector demanding a copy. I am sure that by that method you will get information into the hands not of every elector in Canada but into the hands of the greater part of them. It would be too expensive to undertake to put a copy into the hands of every man but you would accomplish substantially the object aimed at by doing something of the kind suggested. I regard it as important that the people should have in their hands an abstract of this kind. The hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) said that not one-half the members in the House are fully acquainted with the portions of the election law dealing with corrupt practices. He might have gone further and said that not ten per cent of the members and not fifty per cent of the lawyers in the House could tell you, without reference to the law what its provisions are. Under these conditions you can understand what an extremely vague idea of the provisions of the law exists in the minds of the electorate at large. I believe that this will be money well spent and that the proposal should receive the support of this House.


Frank Oliver: I have no objection to the distribution of information about the election law; we all agree that that is quite desirable, provided the expense is reasonable. The objection is that the provision which has been made for the distribution is not practicable and it requirts to be amended so as to make it practicable.


Robert Laird Borden: What would the hon. gentleman think as to the suggestion I made with regard to distribution in the North-west Territories ?


Frank Oliver: What is suggested for Prince Edward Island would very likely measurably meet the case. Any means that will tend to a general distribution of knowledge in regard to the election law is quite acceptable ; but it is not desirable that the provisions of that law should be such as in the nature of things cannot be carried out. This fact, which is evident to every one in the House with regard to this particular provision, has been shown to exist with regard to every section of the Bill which has come before the House so far ; and I submit that it is not fair to the House at this stage of the session to place before it a Bill which, however good the intentions of its promoters may be, evidently has not been carefully thought out in its practical application. The time we have lost on this Bill so far is something that we cannot very well afford at this stage of the session, and we are not getting any closer to a decision with regard to it. For my part, I would be bound to fight the provision with regard to compulsory voting to a finish. I would respectfully ask the House and the mover of the Bill to consider the situation, and to consider whether any good object is to be attained by forcing on the discussion on the Bill, which, with all due respect, has not been carefully thought out in all its details. With regard to the distribution of knowledge on the election law, it is not the man who does not know who transgresses the law ; it is the man who does know. That is no reason why everybody should not be informed ; but the danger to the state is from the man who knows too much rather than from the man who is not thoroughly learned in the law. It is the man who knows all about the election law who burns the ballots and makes trouble, not the man who does not know7 anything about it. He is likely to keep within what he does know.


Mr. HUGHES (King's, P.E.I.).: There is another consideration with regard to Prince Edward Island. At the present time we find it difficult to get men to act as rural postmasters, the remuneration is so small ; and if you put greater obligations upon them and render them subject to a possible fine, I am inclined to think that you will find it more difficult still. If a postmaster fails to deliver the notices promptly, he is subject to a fine of $50. So far as the province of Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).
Prince Edward Island is concerned, I protest against that provision. I know that there will be trouble over it.


Richard Blain: He would only have to deliver the notices in the polling subdivision once every four or five years.


James Joseph Hughes: Well, as he is paid only about $12 a year, if he were fined $50 and costs, he would not have much left. That is one objection, but it is not the only one. There are many other objections.


David Henderson: I presume that it is scarcely expected that this Bill will become law- this session. Perhaps the object of this discussion is to point out the difficulties which confront any member who undertakes to draft a Bill of this kind. A good deal has been said about the clause requiring an abstract of the law to be distributed. Allow me to read the law as it will be in that respect if this Bill passes. Section 21 will' read :
Immediately after the i^sue of the writ for election the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery shall transmit to the returning officer a sufficient number of copies of voters' lists and of an abstract of the offences and penalties under this Act if there are any.
It seems to me there is something very much wanting there.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The expression ' if there are any,' must have reference to voters' lists. I am afraid that is bad drafting.


David Henderson: I think the attention of the Minister of Justice should be drawn to this. With reference to the distribution in Prince Edward Island, it seems to me there should be no difficulty at all. The abstract is to be given to the elector by the postmaster. But I would draw the attention of the promoter of the Bill to another difficulty, which may, however, be arranged. In the province of Manitoba the post office addresses of the electors are not given in the lists, and consequently it would be impracticable there to deliver these documents through the post.


Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.).: It is surprising what an amount of trouble we can surround ourselves with in dealing with matters of this kind. It would be much better to direct our attention to removing any objections that appear in this Bill, so as to make it practicable and useful. To give the notices out on the day of election appears to me to be most absurd. If you want to have information given to the electors, it should be in their possession for at least a week before. This Bill has been prepared by some of the ablest and best minds in the House, who have devoted a great deal of time and attention to it, and I do not see any reason why it cannot be put into operation even this session.


Mr. ERB.: I agree with those who claim that it is very desirable that the electors should be made acquainted with the election law. To do this will entail a certain amount of expense, which I claim should be paid out of the revenue of the country. To my mind the best way of distributing this information is to have it printed at Ottawa, where it would be printed in yery large quantities, and therefore more cheaply than it could be in each constituency. These extracts could be printed here, placed in envelopes by clerks, and held here in readiness until the election. I understand that the lists used throughout the country are printed here, and these envelopes could be addressed from here to the electors, at any rate, in those parts of the country where the addresses of the electors are given. In this way a considerable saving' in the expense could be effected. Special provision would of course have to be made for constituencies in the North-west and Prince Edward Island, where there are no voters' lists.
Section allowed to stand.
On section 7 :
Subsection 8 of section 96 of the said Act is repealed, and the following substituted therefor :-
Any person who violates any of the provisions of this section shall be disfranchised for a period of seven years and shall be guilty of an indictable offence, and shall be liable, if he is a returning officer, election clerk, deputy returning officer, poll clerk or other officer engaged at the election, to imprisonment without the alternative of a fine, for a term not exceeding twelve months and not less than six months, with or without hard labour, and if he is any other person, to a fine of not less than one hundred dollars and costs and not exceeding two hundred dollars and costs, or, in default of payment of such fines and costs, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months and not less than three months, with or without hard labour.


Hon. Mr. BLAIR.: I think it is well worth the consideration of the committee whether a clause of this kind should be adopted, when so many of the previous clauses, which involve important principles, have not been approved. It tvould appear to me also that the suggestion made by the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) *is entitled to a great deal of weight. We have before us some novel propositions, involving principles which are not, judging by the discussion so far, agreed upon ; and I am bound to say that in my opinion, even if we should affirm these principles, there is scarcely a clause of this Bill which will not require important amendment in order that it may adequately give effect to the objects we are seeking to attain. We are told that the Bill has been very carefully considered by some of the ablest men of this House, who are on the special committee. I am afraid that these gentlemen have not given it as close attention as it required, or perhaps as it has been alleged they have given 426
it, because the legislation-I say it with all due respect-is in many respects very lame and weak indeed, and in some very unmeaning. Why should the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton), at this period of the session, ask the House to revise work of such an extensive character, Involving so many considerations, and which has to be dealt with by experienced persons ? In my view, it would be only fair that the committee should be asked to rise and let the Bill stand over for further consideration. There are some features of this measure which ought not to pass, and which I am prepared to oppose as far as I can ; and everybody knows that opposition at this period must be fatal. I would have preferred myself that a general discussion had taken place on the general statement of the hon. member for North Norfolk. Then we would have had the views of the various members of the committee ; and if, at a later period, this question should be taken up again, we would be able to profit by the discussion which has taken place.


Robert Laird Borden: If the condition of affairs in this country is as was stated by the hon. Minister of Finance, when he made the motion for this committee, I do not think that we should delay passing this Bill if we have to remain here six weeks or two months longer. I do not see that the fact that we are now in the seventh month of the session is any justification for delaying an important measure of this kind. It is not too late to pass a law, and this law, or some similar law7, if the statements of the hon. Minister of Finance are to be believed, is most absolutely necessary. It is true that we have been here nearly seven months, and that the special committee appointed to deal with this Bill has made some delay in reporting it, and it is also true that for some weeks no steps were taken by the government to place it on the Order paper ; but even as it is, I think the time of the House could not be better employed than in dealing with the election law, and endeavouring to have our elections conducted on a purer basis and with less scandal than during several years past.


Frank Oliver: I must say while no member of this House admires more thoroughly the devotion to duty shown by the hon. the lender of the opposition, I cannot enthuse over his proposition to still further delay this session possibly three or four weeks for the purpose of discussing this or any other Bill. In this case he is right in theory, but I cannot agree that he is right in practice. Members of parliament are only human, and, speaking for myself and others, we do not belong to the leisured class. We have to either divide our parliamentary duties with our personal duties, or give up the one or the other. This session has lasted so long that it has come practically to be a question with some of us whether we



*Shall give up our business or our parliamentary duties. I do not think that it would be for the good of this country that men of business should be debarred from taking part in its legislation, but that is what it will amount to if the session is further prolonged. True, the legislation is important, but there is a great deal of other important legislation that will necessarily have to be done some time in the future. We do not do everything to-day in any line of life or business. We have been here nearly seven months ; and while I have no desire to become controversial and indicate Who is to blame, the conviction as to who are to blame is very deeply imprinted in my -mind, and I am looking in the direction of the offenders. But at the risk of being controversial, I propose to say this, that an opposition which can keep this House in session, through the efforts of some seven to fourteen members, week in and week out, is not doing its duty by the country in still further declaring its willingness to keep the House still longer in session.


Robert Laird Borden: As far as any delay is attributable to the opposition, I think they have a very clear conscience. There has not 'been any disposition on our part to unduly protract the session. A measure of the very highest importance was brought down by the Prime Minister on the 30th of July, after the House had been in session nearly five monthe, and since that time we have been mainly occupied discussing that measure. And outside of one evening, when some difficulty arose between gentlemen on the opposite side, I believe there has never been one hour of the discussion wasted, from the standpoint of fair, honest criticism. If that measure had been introduced at the beginning of the session the time occupied in this discussion would have been regarded as extremely moderate.


The PRIME MINISTER.: What about the time in which the House was busy dis-1 cussing something else ?


Robert Laird Borden: What else ?


The PRIME MINISTER.: The estimates, for instance. We spent four months discussing the estimates.


Robert Laird Borden: And the estimates amount to about $70,000,000. And I think that, if we contrast the time that was taken up in discussing those estimates with the time taken up years ago in discussing estimates amounting to about half as much, even my right hon. friend must come to the conclusion that no undue time has been occupied in dealing with the estimates this session. I do not pretend to any extreme devotion to duty, nor do I claim for a moment to belong to any leisured class. If my hon. friend from Alberta (Mr. Oliver) referred to me


Frank Oliver: I certainly did not.


Frank Oliver: 


Edward Cochrane: Whom did the hon. member refer to ?


Frank Oliver: The hon. member for Northumberland (Mr. Cochrane).


Robert Laird Borden: I may say to my hon. friend from Alberta (Mr. Oliver) that I think I have been absent from my home and business a good deal longer than he has. I have not seen my home -since the 20th of Februray last-a week and a few days less than eight months of absence. Well, I am willing to remain even longer, if necessary, to put through legislation which I regard as of very great importance to this country. And I would not claim to be exhibiting any great devotion to duty by offering to take that course.


The PRIME MINISTER.: There are evidently many clauses in the Bill that will have to be reca-st. What I suggest-and I think it will be the sense of the committee- is to go on with the Bill and see how far we can agree. And when we have seen the points involved in each clause, perhaps we can come to a better understanding.


Robert Laird Borden: I think it is a pity that my hon. friend the Minister of Justice (Hon. Mr. Fitzpatrick) was not named a member of the committee on this Bill. As one of the law officers of the Crown, he is responsible in great measure tor the form in which legislation comes to the House. As some of the paragraphs do not seem to meet his view-and I think, perhaps his view is in some instances correct- it is not too late for him to devote time to the consideration of the ideas that are sought to be expressed, and put them in shape to be laid before the committee.


Frank Oliver: I desire to say, iu explanation, that, if in my remarks I was understood to make allusion direct or indirect to the leader of the opposition as a member of a leisured class, or to say anything suggesting a failure on his part in attendance upon his duties or willingness to do his duty, I beg to say that such was not my intention. Nobody-even in his own party- honours the leader of the opposition more than I do for his ability, shown in his profession, and his devotion to his duties, shown as a member of parliament and the leader of a party. But what I do want to point out, and what I take the liberty of emphasizing, if I may have that liberty, is that when he -speaks of his willingness to stay here three weeks to pa-ss this legislation, he speaks on behalf of from ten to fourteen of his followers, and not on behalf of the party he leads.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: When this Bill was referred to the committee, it was suggested by the hon. Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding) that I should be a member of that committee. Unfortunately, I was engaged in arduous duties con-

nected with the redistribution, and I did not think I could be an effective member of both committees. 1 have, however, gone . over the Bill very carefully, have prepared a memorandum on every clause, and have formed my own conclusions with respect to all the clauses. 1 was anxious to hear what the members of the committee had to say before I expressed any opinion whatever oh the Bill. 1 may say that, in my opinion, with the exception of two clauses in the Bill-clause 2, which relates to compulsory voting, and clause 9-the Bill might be amended in such a way as to be of some value in connection with the Election Act. But to the first of these clauses, clause 2, relating to compulsory voting, I am opposed. I am absolutely opposed to anything in the Bill designed to make the exercise of the franchise compulsory-I am opposed to that on principle. Now, with respect to the other clause, clause 9, that seems to be absolutely unnecessary In view of the Canada Evidence Act, for that Act contains provisions of general application that meet the ease much more effectively than the clause here proposed.


Robert Laird Borden: As to clause 2, that relating to compulsory voting, I would point out the difficulty at which that clause is aimed. There are many people in this country who do not vote. They may be broadly divided into two classes. There are those who are indifferent, who do not take enough interest in public affairs to vote. The other class comprises those who, probably for corrupt reasons, do not go to the poll. There may be a few outside of these two classes, but, broadly speaking, these two comprise the people who do not vote. You may talk as much as you like about conscience and duty, about having control of one's duty and one's privilege. But when you bring it down to the real conditions that we have in practice, it amounts to what I have stated. Well, how are you going to deal with these men who do not vote ? It is desirable that the indifferent should have some stimulant to cause them to take part in the public life of the country. Our institutions are based upon the idea of representative government, government by the people ; and it is undoubtedly an evil if any portion of the people, from mere indifference, refuse to discharge the duties of citizenship which the law imposes upon them. Then, we have the other class to which I have referred, those people who from corrupt motives do not go to the poll. There ought to be some means, by legislation, of reaching at least some of these people ; and1 I cannot see any better way than the way suggested by wlrat I understand to have been a very large majority of the committee. If a better way is suggested, I am willing to consider it; but until that better way is suggested, I am prepared to advocate this. I have an open mind as to the best course to be taken, 426*
but I am clear that something should be done, and that we should not leave untouched the condition of affairs that exists at this time. In parliamentary elections some times not half the vote is polled. We know that death, absence, illness^ and sometimes other causes may account for some of the absentees ; but, even allowing for these, there is a very large portion of the people who do not go to the poll and vote, and it seems to me that legislation of some kind ought to be devised by this parliament to meet that condition.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: But my hon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax) must not forget that we are practically groping in the dark in proposing such legislation as this. There is no such law in existence, as far as I know, except in Belgium. It has been brought in under the new constitution of Belgium, and I am not quite sure that it has been found to work very effectively. I do not like to make a new departure without having thought the matter out very carefully. Such new departures should receive careful attention and should be seriously thought out and discussed. I have had occasion to look into the books dealing witli such questions. For instance, there is the work of Mr. Lecky, on * Democracy and Liberty,' which does not favour the principle. There is an article in the ' Forum,' on the same subject. As my hon. friend, no doubt, would like to read it, I give the reference-vol. 14, page 176. I have not been able-one simply cannot with the limited time at one's disposal during the session of parliament-come to a very satisfactory conclusion on matters of this sort. I am not sure that in a country where we have constitutional government and the people are divided into two political parties, as Is the case to-day in Canada, that if I did not belong to a political party I should be obliged to go to the poll and, because two men happen to have been selected by my neighbours, vote for one or other of them. I may not want to vote for either. I may have conscientious objections to both.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is to hinder you putting in a blank ballot ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: 
Robert Laird Borden: If we come down to abstract theories of citizenship as a

privilege, whether in this country or in any other, it is certainly a privilege which involves responsibilities. Some of those responsibilities are imposed compulsorily. For example, the obligation of taking up arms in defence of one's country is one of the responsibilities of citizenship, and I do not know that we go any further in saying that a man is under obligation to vote at elections if he is entitled so to do by law. I read Mr. Lecky's book some years ago. It takes rather a pessimistic view of the success of representative institutions. I do not think the condition of affairs in the countries which have parliamentary government is quite so bad as Mr. Lecky is inclined to imagine. I think he has looked on the worst side of democracy in the English speaking countries at least. Further than that, if I am not mistaken, when he was elected to parliament shortly after the publication of that book, he enunciated certain views in parliament which were not in accordance with the views promulgated In the volume to which my hon. friend refers. Now I do not minimize for a moment the objections which hon. gentlemen, more especially those on the other side of the House, have urged against this principle. I know that some of them have devoted a good deal of thought to this question. But I want them on the other hand to look at the conditions we have to face, and to ask them to say in all candor whether they do not thing that there is some reason why we should endeavour to apply legislation to these conditions. It seems to me there is grave reason why we should do so. I could not express the condition better than by repeating, if it were not taking up too much time, the language of the Minister of Finance when he spoke on this question before this committee was appointed. I would ask my hon. friend the Minister of Justice, when he comes to consider the clauses of this Bill, to see whether he cannot devise some legislation, either in the form of section 2 or in some other form, which will meet the unfortunate condition of affairs to which I have referred. It is beyond doubt, as hon. gentlemen have pointed out, that the power to bribe an elector to remain at home and not to cast his vote at all, is one which lends itself to a great extent to the continuance of corruption in this country. If an elector goes to the poll you cannot, except by means of certain fraudulent devices, or by means of some connivance on the part of the officers, tell how he votes. But if that man remains at home you know he has not voted. If he is a man who is likely to vote for a particular candidate,, then by bribing him to remain at home, you make sure that that vote has not been cast against the candidate for whom this act is done. So the fact that electors are permitted with impunity to refrain from voting, helps or lends itself to a continuance of corruption, which I think demands the intervention of this parliament.


Robert Laird Borden: 


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: In this very clause the evil which we seek to deal with is practically sanctioned by this Bill. For Instance, if an elector desires to stay at home, all he has to do is to absent himself from the electoral district, and he remains scot free.


Robert Laird Borden: 
Andrew George Blair: It appears to me that there is a want .of harmony between the argument which my hon. friend from Halifax (Mr. Borden) presents, and the object which he seeks to attain. The hon. member for West Huron (Mr. Holmes) threw out this morning a hint which struck me at the time as a powerful condemnation of that feature of this Bill. Now the hon. member for Halifax contends there is a duty resting upon every citizen of this country to exercise his franchise, and that that duty is of so paramount a character that the law ought to be appealed to in order to compel him to discharge that duty. Well, then my hon. friend comes to parliament for that purpose, and because there may be some influences existing which may affect the result of the elections improperly and corruptly. he asks parliament to say by legislation that you Shall prolong and emphasize that evil condition of affairs ; that is to say, that while it 'is a grievous injury to the state, if a citizen does not always feel it his duty to exercise his franchise, still if he fails in one instance to exercise his franchise, he shall be prevented from exercising it at all times during a certain number of years. If it is of such vital importance that every citizen should see his duty in that light we ought rather to remove the obstacles in the way of his exercising that right in the future than to create them. We should seek to compel him to exercise his franchise then by some other method than to say : You shall exercise your franchise and if you do not we will not allow you to exercise it. I cannot see any harmony between the argument upon which my hon. friend bases the necessity for this legislation and the legislation itself. . It is an unpleasant thing for any man to take any exception at all to legislation that is promoted for the purpose of putting down alleged corruption, and I have no doubt the actual corruption, which exists to a great extent in our country. No one likes to do it because I think I am not overstating the case when I say that the great majority of public men would like to see measures passed which would prevent the continuance of this condition of affairs. If you could give us some proposed means by
which corruption could be prevented in this country I think there would not be a discordant voice in regard to it, but that all members of this House would be in its favour. But we know that as long as human conditions, human inclinations and human passions are as they are you can place all the obstacles you like in the way of these things and they will still continue. You can legislate session after session but some method will be found whereby the legislation will .be evaded. You cannot bring about a perfect condition. You cannot prevent men from running risks who are sordid and degraded in their inclinations and no penalties that you can impose will achieve any such result. But you are running a risk, if you start in upon a proposition that is made simply in the hope that it will promote the purity of elections in the country without examination and consideration, of doing more harm than good while you are absolutely failing to accomplish the purpose that you have in view. Coming to this particular clause that we have before us I may say that I do not believe it is possible to compel people who do not want to vote to go to the poll and vote. You cannot compel them. They can go to the poll, acting the part of frauds, and they can put in a ballot which is not a vote. But my hon. friend says :	Look at the frightful conditions
which result from the possibility of men remaining aw'ay from the poll and declining to exercise their franchise, what opportunities it affords for the use of those corrupt practises. But, let me ask my hon. friend this :	Has he knowledge-and he has run
elections-of the existence of any such corruption .to any very large extent or to even any extent ? I have run as many elections os any man in this House and I cannot at this moment call to mind any considerable number of instances, nor can I call to mind any occasion which I was able to say that a great many people abstained from voting because corrupt means had been employed. They abstained from voting perhaps for fear of offending somebody or for some reason of that sort, but the buying of men to stay at home has not been very generally resorted to. as a means of exercising a corrupt influence. Even granting that it was a proper remedy. We have no very considerable evidence of the existence of corruption of that character to any great extent. How are you going to prevent corruption by that means ? It strikes me that men who are open to influences of that sort will be likely to go to the poll if compelled to. accept the bribe and pocket the benefits. I do not think you are going to stop corruption by any such expedient as that. This is only a theory, as the hon. Minister of Justice says, and his view corresponds with the result of my own examination of the subject, this is a theory that has not been applied anywhere for a

sufficient time to enable us from our experience of it to judge as to whether it will be effective in any such direction.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is my hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Blair) not aware that a good deal ott the corruption exists in hiring rigs to take electors to the polls and would compulsory voting not be the means of doing away with that means of corruption to a large extent ?


Andrew George Blair: While I do believe that there Is a great deal of money improperly spent at elections I am not one of those who believe that the money spent exercises any marked influence upon the electorate of the country. I do not believe that a very large percentage of the electors of this country, while they will accept money when they see it is going, will vote differently from the way they would have voted if there had not been a dollar placed in their hands.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I quite agree if the same amount is used by both sides. If the same amount is used it does not make a bit of difference.


Edward Cochrane: Does the hou. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Blair) not know that it does not require a very large percentage in most of the constituencies in Canada to control the election ?


Andrew George Blair: I will grant that it does not require a very large percentage where the parties are so equally divided. There is one remarkable fact that I think must have come home to the knowledge of every man who has been contesting elections in this country and that is that the careful canvasses that are made before the elections take place almost always are borne out by the results when the votes are counted. I know that In my own province I have seen calculations based on the result of the work of the canvassers and it has been perfectly amazing to see how accurately these calculations were made. If that is the fact what does it prove ? It proves that many influences which are exercised are vainly or ineffectively used and I do not think the case has been or can be made out to the great extent to which some lion, gentlemen think it has been made out or to an extent which calls upon us to adopt an entirely new iheory untried and unknown and the application of which would be to put a man who innocently, who for good reasons to his own conscience and interpreting his own sense of duty to his country, abstained from going to the poll on the same footing as a corrupt individual who had remained away because he had been paid to do so. To deprive him of hia franchise for six years who is innocent, absolutely innocent, mark me, and you cannot discriminate between the two, and to put him on the same basis as the other is to act in defiance of all principles of fair-play and I am decidedly opposed to the principle of the clause. While I am op-Hon. Mr. BLAIR.	'
posed to it I want to say with all sincerity that I am prepared to aid and support in any way in my power, any legislation which I believe would be effective to prevent spread of corruption or its continuation to the extent that now exists. But I will not vote for what I think would do more harm than good, for a clause which is indefensible or for measures which I am satisfied would be wholly inadequate and ineffective if passed. Like every man In this House I am entitled to exercise my judgment as to the efficacy of the remedies suggested, without being subject to the implication that I am not in sympathy with every proper and legitimate and honest means to put down what corruption does exist in the elections of this country.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: There is one point upon which perhaps, the committee have not been very happy in the' discharge of their duties, although in the main they have done much good work. I can praise them in this way the more readily because although I am a member of the committee I was not able to be at any of the meetings except the initial meetings and was not present when the Bill was drafted. However, as a member of the committee I take my full share of the responsibility for its actions. I think they were not happy when they described the clause as one for compulsory voting. They thereby antagonized many persons who on a fair consideration may have been disposed to support this principle. It is not compulsory voting in the ordinary sense of the word. I can well understand a man not being willing to have a penalty of fine or imprisonment in connection with compulsory voting, but the clause in this Bill is so mildly worded that it does not seem open to as broad criticism as it would otherwise receive. It is advanced legislation it is true, but we should not shirk from legislation because it is advanced. I do not think it is open to as much criticism and objection as has been raised by some hon. gentlemen. As to the general manner in which the Bill was drafted, there is one remark which I am led to make by my regard for the chair-. man of that committee (Mr. Charlton). It would be supposed from the criticisms offered that this Bill is very badly drafted. If that is the fact we had better withdraw it from the present committee and refer it to a committee of laymen headed by the hon. gentleman from West Elgin (Mr. Robinson) because this Bill was drafted by a committee composed chiefly of members of the legal profession. They were eminent lawyers, and being wise lawyers they realized that they did not know all about it-it is the man who does not know anything who thinks he knows ail-but these gentlemen knew enough to know that they did not know all and they sent to the Department of Justice for the assistance of one of the officials of that department. So you will see that

if this Bill is not all that it should be in the matter of drafting, it is certainly not for want of good legal advice.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: You must not forget that after all the Department of Justice is only there for the purpose of giving effect to the instructions received. The gentleman from the Department of Justice-
I have his notes here-simply had to give effect to the instructions received from the gentlemen of the committee. I had no connection with this compulsory voting, hut I think the Minister of Finance had something to say about it.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I am quite responsible, but I never saw the Bill.


Frank Oliver: If clause 2 is under discussion, and that clause is placed there avowedly as a means of preventing the corruption of the electorate at pr.esent existing.
I would say that the objections that I had to it before are intensified by the introduction of that idea. I did not know that the electorate of Canada was as corrupt as some bon. members seem to think. I presume they draw from their own experience. I have been before the electors for twenty years, and as far as my experience goes I have never paid a dollar directly or indirectly to secure a vote in my election, and so far-*-
Some lion. MEMBERS. Oh, oh.


Frank Oliver: Hon. gentlemen are speaking for themselves, that is their privilege, 1 am speaking for myself. I do not know of a dollar having been paid either directly or indirectly to secure votes for, and I have been almost as uniformly successful as any member of the House. Therefore, I do not know from my own experience and knowledge that there is necessity for such drastic legislation to overcome an alleged existing condition amongst the electorate of this country. I object to the implication, I say that so far as my experience goes it is not true and I do not believe it is true. If it is true, representative government in this country is a mistake; we need a despotism and not government by the electorate. In regard to the adoption of compulsory voting as a means of preventing corruption, I should say from my standpoint that what we want is an intelligent election; it is mot so much the number of men who go to the polls as it is the intelligence exercised by those who do go.


William Ross: What about the intelligence of those who do not go.


Frank Oliver: I am not saying anything about their intelligence. Judging by some of the representatives in this House-I do not wish to speak for myself-I should probably say they use more intelligence by staying at home than by voting. When we undertake to compel a man to go to the polls, we do not thereby put into his mind that intelligence or that good judgment or that freedom from corrupt influences which will ensure to us that he casts an intelligent and an unbiased vote. The effect of a biased vote cast at the polls is worse than the results from the bias which compels a man to stay at home. As to the general result if you compel a man to go to the poll and provide a penalty if he does not go. The provision is drastic and unreasonable and it is -bound to meet the same fate, if embodied in legislation, as all other unreasonable legislation does meet. The present law in regard to corrupt practices at elections is an instance. It is drastic and unreasonable in its present form and as a result it is not enforced and there is corruption in elections to-day, so every one here seems to say, just as there was twenty or thirty years ago, and the results and penalties 'are avoided by the principle of saw-off. I maintain that if this provision were enacted, the penalty proposed to be enforced against those who did not go to the polls would simply be settled by the principle of saw-off and there would be no penalty enforced on any one, the law- would be in disrepute and the parliament which passed it would be discredited. The hon. member for Guysboro (Mr. Fraser) drew a comparison between the position of a member of the House and an elector in the country, and he said it would not be very satisfactory to have a 'law which would compel members of parliament to vote on every occasion and that therefore it was mot desire-able to have a law which will compel electors to vote on every occasion. His argument was good as far as it went, but it was hardly fair because the conditions as between members of parliament and those who elect them are not the same in the matter of voting. A member of parliament is elected for the purpose of voting. He assumes an obligation when he stands for election in regard to that vote.


Mr. TALBOT.: Is not the elector created for the same purpose ?


Frank Oliver: No ; an elector is not created for the same purpose. The vote is a privilege, if you like ; it is a duty, if you like ; but it should not be a penalty, as it is proposed to be made by this Bill. The true condition is absolutely reversed when you provide that the privilege of voting shall become a penalty which shall be attached to the qualification of voting.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the penalty ?


Frank Oliver: It is disfranchisement for six years.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Is that a penalty for the man who does not want to vote ?


Frank Oliver: Yes ; the penalty is an extreme penalty, and is improperly applied. The sufferer from that penalty is the general electorate more than the individual ; and the same fault is to be found with the

present election law ; that is to say, instead of the -man who casts a corrupt vote [DOT]being punished, it is the electorate generally who are punished. In this case Mr. A is disfranchised for six years because, for one reason or another, he did not cast his vote, and the general electorate of the country is at the loss of the weight of his influence and opinion for six years in consequence. This is putting the punishment on the wrong shoulders. But in regard to members of parliament, they are elected for the purpose of casting votes. Their business is to vote on every question that, comes up. That is the under-taking which they made with their constituents when they were elected ; and it would be the height of absurdity, it would be one of the most ridiculous things that ever occurred in the history of any couritry, it would make this parliament a laughing stock of every elector in the Dominion of Canada, if this parliament, which, on the most important question that came before' the parliament of Canada for twenty years, showed a voting strength of only, I think, 36 on one side and 74 on the other-it did not even do that, but- that is the best construction we can put upon it-if this parliament, which was not present in half its number* on that occasion, should turn around to the electorate and say : Whether you are willing or able or not, you must go to the poll and vote or you will be disfranchised. Surely we have not taken leave of, our senses altogether to put ourselves in such a position before the people who sent us here ? If the electors who sent us here are under obligations to vote for or against us at the polls, surely we are under ten thousand times greater obligations to vote for or against the measures which come up for consideration in this parliament. When we have so mended our ways, when we have so advanced, if you will call it an advance, that we have passed a law that every member of parliament shall vote on every question that comes up or be penalized, then we may discuss, with some measure of reason, a proposition that will compel the electorate to go to the polls ; but, I submit, not till then.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I have listened with great pleasure to the debate up to this time.
I think it is well to have a little mild hypocrisy in life, as long as it injures no one


Frank Oliver: The hon. member speaks for himself, I presume.
Mr. COURT,EY. And we have had not an unfair amount of it displayed in this discussion. My experience is that we have ample laws in the country at the present time to give us a perfectly pure election if the electorate and the candidates observe them. Therefore, I have listened with great amusement to this discussion, because I do not think it makes a fig of difference Mr. OLIVER.
whether we pass this law or a thousand others; it would not help the purity of elections a particle. So long as the candidates agree to suspend all ideas of morality during an election and go in for a general picnic, we shall continue to have all the expenditure of money that we have at the present time. Down in my part of the country we have the most moral people to be found in the world ; but when an election comes around, they regard it as a splendid holiday, and the result is that while the candidates agree not to spend a dollar, the electors go in for a general picnic. They size up each candidate for what they can get out of him, and they generally run it up to the limit. We might as well be honest in this matter. I will tell you of a little experience I had which sickened me of the election law. Two or three years ago I was standing at a polling place during an election of a friend of mine. By and by I saw a young man who belonged to a strong Conservative family coming across the way. I waited for him. As he came his attention was attracted by a large poster containing a proclamation setting forth all the provisions of the law forbidding any man to take a bribe or do a corrupt act. This young man, in the full flush of youth and with all the ingenuousness of youth, was coming to cast probably his first or his second vote ; and as I saw him reading this proclamation I was delighted, because I had heard men around me talking in mysterious words about * stuff,' and about not being able to get along in this election without ' stuff.' When he had finished reading the proclamation he came over to me apparently filled with the enthusiasm and purity of youth, and I expected to have a satisfactory talk with him. When he came he said : ' Who gets up all these laws about elections ? ' I immediately fell into the trap, and endeavoured to insinuate that it was the Tory party who had got them up. 1 Well,' he said,
' that is all I want of the darned Tory party. I got into a scrape the other day, and I cannot get any help from them if they make laws like this-I will go over to the Grits, who have always lots of ' stuff.' Then he went and voted. From that time T crave up any confidence in election laws.
I have listened to this debate with pleasure as an academic discussion. If the electorate do not want money spent, it will not be spent ; if they do want money spent, it will be spent in spite of all the laws you like to make. That is the honest truth in this matter.


John Charlton: It may be that my hon. friend from Colchester (Mr. Gourley) takes the proper view of the case. He informs us that laws are of no use, that yon might just as well leave the door wide open and make no attempt to control except by appealing to the individual conscience of the elector. Be a good boy and do right. How-

ever, that is not the general impression in the public. It has not been the view accepted by our law-givers in the past, and our statute-book is proof of the fact that the legislatures of this country have realized , that such an evil exists, and have tried to cope with it. Some little time ago we determined to allow section 2 to stand, and discuss the other sections of this Bill ; but the temper and disposition of the House seems to be to revert to section 2, and discuss the question of compulsory voting to the exclusion of everything else in the Bill. I had hoped that we would go through this Bill, and pass such portions of it as we consider right, and I think if the disposition of the House were to perfect this legislation, if there be anything lacking in it, we could make good progress. But the House seems disposed to question even the fundamental principles of an electoral purity, to challenge every feature of this Bill, to challenge the competency of the committee, to challenge the character of its provisions, to belittle the matter from beginning to end. This Bill, as the hon. Minister of Finance has said, was referred to a special committee, upon which were able men and eminent lawyers. As a layman and member of that committee, I can bear evidence to the truth of that statement. There were men of the most acute minds on that committee, and we had there a representative of the Department of Justice, who did not coniine his functions to registering the decisions of the committee, but participated freely in its discussions, and gave shape to the action of the committee in many essential respects. He was very conscientious and painstaking in trying to keep the committee from making mistakes or entering upon courses that would have been inconvenient, improper, unconstitutional, illegal or unw'orkable. We went on with this work to the best of our ability. The committee has presented to the House a Bill. Certain circumstances prevented that committee from making its report at as early a date as could have been desired. There was some delay iu naming the members of the committee, there was some delay in having the committee called together and organized, and what would have been a late date in an ordinary question, was reached before the committee met. But the committee did not proceed in a hasty manner with its work. It went through the work carefully in a painstaking manner. We had not the advantage of the presence of the Minister of Finance for a great length of time, but we had every valuable assistance from that gentleman. We had a representative of the Department of Justice always able to cope with the questions, and we reported a Bill which, in my opinion, requires but slight modifications, if at all, to make it workable. Many of the criticisms, I think, are not weil placed. For instance, with regard to compulsory voting, the Minister of Justice says
that the provisions of the Bill will defeat its own purpose, because a person can simply leave the riding, and thus become exempt from the provisions of the law. But the provision of the law is that if he absent himself in order to avoid voting, or left the riding for any cause not sufficient, he was liable to the consequences imposed by clause two.


Mr. JOHNSTON (Cape Breton).: Who is going to determine the reasons for his leaving V


John Charlton: That will be a matter to be determined on examination, like every other. With regard to the propriety of interfering with what some of our friends deem a right of conscience, which compels an individual to abstain from voting, what is the privilege of the franchise ? What is the right of the franchise ? What is the possession of the franchise ? It is the freeman's safety ; it is the freeman's weapon by which he can maintain his liberty and the free institutions bequeathed by his fathers, and which his fathers gained with great difficulties and struggles, for which men have gone to the stake, for which men have been decapitated, which has caused bloody wars and untold miseries. That is the heritage which has come down to him and which he scarcely prizes at its cost, but which it is his great duty to preserve. A great poet has said :
The crowning tact, the kingliaet act
Of freedom is a. freeman's vote.
We want to impress on the elector the gravity, the magnitude of the trust imposed on him. We want to arrest his tendency to carelessness or unconcern by saying to him : If you do not think enough of the great privilege of voting, you will be deprived of that privilege for six years. That will attract the attention of the elector to the importance of exercising the franchise. It will impress upon him the fact that this is a privilege, a great, inestimable, precious right, which he ought to exercise, and if he is so indifferent to the character of this privilege as to refuse to exercise it, in my opinion it is proper that for six years he should be debarred from exercising it, in order that he may be brought to a consciousness of its importance. And once he realizes its importance he will be careful not to commit an offence which would deprive him of that privilege. Hon. gentlemen say that voting is a discharge of a duty. Well, if a duty rests on a man. there is no impropriety in making some provision to induce him to perform it. If duty rests on a man, obligation goes with it ; and if the duty is not discharged, it is proper to impose a penalty of some kind in consequence of his failure to discharge it. If a very large majority of the electors of Canada were so indifferent to the franchise privilege as to abstain from voting, we might be governed by a minority. As

it is, with the proportion that abstains from the polls, we are not governed by the majority. There has not been an election held iii the Dominion during the last three or four years, in which the party elected had a majority of the whole electorate. A sufficient number of voters have abstained from voting to put the control of our affairs into the hands of an actual minority on the voters' lists. The hon. member for St. John (Mr. Demers) says that we ought to remove the obstacles that prevent voting. That is what we are doing. One obstacle is indifference, another is the corrupt practice of hiring voters to stay at home. These are the two obstacles we want to remove, and there is no way of removing them except by the adoption of some such measure as this. The hon. gentleman tells us that if a remedy could be found, everybody would be happy. How are we to find a remedy ? If there is an evil, are we to declare that it is not proper to attempt to apply a remedy ?


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Get your preachers to preach good sermons.


John Charlton: Preaching ? Yes, that is a good thing. I like to hear preachers preach morality and patriotism and the obligations resting upon the citizen to discharge his duty. But I like also to see his duty discharged by the citizen, and, if he does not discharge it I am in favour of applying some remedy, sonje penalty, for not having done so. The hon. member for St. John (Hon. Mr. Blair) tells us that, so far as he is aware, money does not influence elections to any great extent, that it is a matter of very small consequence, indeed, that, in fact, there is a great cry raised about this matter and very little in the cry. I cannot agree with the hon. member for St. John. I know of ridings in this Dominion that are thoroughly debauched by the use of money. I know ridings where electors have lost all sense of honour, all sense of the sacredness of the trust reposed in them, who hold their votes for sale.


Edward Hackett: Name them.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: North Norfolk.


John Charlton: North Norfolk is a remarkably pure riding. No influences of that kind have been used in North Norfolk. But I am patriotically desirous of doing good to other ridings.


Alexander Johnston: I desire, Mr. Chairman, to ask what section of the Bill we are considering at the present time ?


John Charlton: There seemed to be a general discussion, Mr. Chairman. I am ready to drop at once any reply to criticisms of compulsory voting if


Peter Macdonald: The opinion of the committee has been expressed two or three times that they would like a general discussion.


David Henderson: I understand that there is a motion that the committee rise.


John Charlton: That is a motion, I believe, always subject to discussion. Now, Sir, I do not think we are likely, at this stage of the session, with the temper that the House manifests, to accomplish very much with this Bill. I remember an old adage, in use among housewives when I was a boy, that the proper time to set a hen is when she is ready. The House does not seem to be ready to incubate the provisions of this Bill at the present time. That I fear is quite evident. But that being the case, while I am sincerely desirous of promoting this Bill and believe it is essential to the interests of the country that its provisions should be incorporated in our statutes, and while I believe that the Bill contains provisions that will tend very largely to correct the irregularities and corruptions that exist, perhaps it would be too much to expect to see this Bill put upon the statute-book this session. I am in the hands of the government. Through the courtesy of the leader of the government this Bill has been placed on the government Orders. Without the exercise of that courtesy it could not have been reached this session. Under these conditions, feeling that I am indebted as promoter of the Bill and chairman of the committee exclusively to the courstesy of the leader of the government, I will allow my own wishes and feelings in this matter to stand aside, if the leader of the government has any wishes or views to express as to whether we shall continue to press the Bill or be content with the general discussion we have had, and let the Bill stand over for consideration at some future period-probably another session, which, I think we are certain to have before we have another election. Of course, my own individual desire is to press the consideration of the Bill. I am ready to stay here to that end and press it to the last. It will suit me to do so. But I am not in the position to ask that that shall be done under the circumstances under which I have the privilege of discussing the Bill to-day. I am not in a position to ask that privilege from the leader of the government at this stage. Expressing my unbounded confidence in the provisions of the Bill and my sincere desire to see these provisions enacted and become law, I must realize that, in the present temper of the House, it would take some time to do that ; and 1 can do no less than return the courtesy of the leader of the government in placing the Bill on the government Orders, and leave the matter in his hands.


The PRIME MINISTER.: There are in this Bill certain dispositions with which, for my part, I altogether agree, and which I think would be very valuable parts of our law. For instance, section 8, which is the next one, we would take up ' bribery of candidates,' ' bribery of employees by employ-


John Charlton: ers,' ' bribery by an officer of Canada, or any province'-all these, I think, are provisions as to which there can be no objection and that would improve the law. There can be no contention, possible, so far as I can see. with regard to some of these sections. The only part as to which there is a difference of opinion-and it seems to be; a very radical difference of opinion-is as. to what has been called and has even been called in the Bill, ' compulsory voting.' It has been remarked that this expression ' compulsory voting,' is not, perhaps, very accurate. What is proposed here is not, perhaps, compulsory voting, as we have understood it here, but, even this rather lenient disposition seems to be the subject of a very radical difference of opinion, not as between the two sides of the House, but as between hon. gentlemen on either side. We have had a very valuable discussion, and tire time has not been lost. I would move that the committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. And I would ask the Minister of Justice to give this matter his attention, so as to keep the clauses which we think ought to be part of the Bill. Then, with regard to the second section, which is the most contentious one, perhaps we can think it over and have a further discussion upon it at a later day.


Robert Laird Borden: I think that would be the best course for the committee to adopt. And, in this connection, I would make one Or two further observations with regard to the remarks of the hon. member for St. John (Hon. Mr. Blair). That hon. gentleman seems to think that this Bill excludes from voting for all time those who do not see fit to exercise the right of voting. While this Bill is intended as a deterrent. it is not intended to take away the right of voting from the people as a general rule. It is thought, rightly or wrongly, by those who have framed the provision that the very fact that a man will lose his right to vote unless he exercises that right, will cause him to go to the poll. The observations of my hon. friend from St. John seem to be illogical in that regard. He made some reflections upon the gentlemen responsible for the drafting of the Bill. I think these gentlemen have done their duty very well, it would be impossible in the time at their disposal, to frame a Bill that would not be open to criticism. But my hon. friend from St. John and any members of the government who criticise this drafting may recall the fact that the railwray commission Bill was, in the first place, drafted by a gentleman who was paid $2,500 for his work, and it then underwent Ihe supervision of the law clerks of the Department of Railways and Canals. Yet, in Committee of the Whole there were 1,500 or 2,000 amendments made in it, besides a number made in the Senate. Had the hon. member thought of this, surely he would not have found fault, because the Bill now before us requires a few
amendments. I desire to make an observation with regard to what the hon. member t'or Alberta (Mr. Oliver) suggested. He suggested that the hon. gentlemen who desired to see a law passed against corruption were making a charge against the electors of Canada. He seems to have been singularly free from any knowledge of conditions of that kind. The hon. gentleman is very fortunate. Without the slightest intention of saying anything offensive to the hon. gentleman, I may remind him of the words of the poet, ' The Lady doth protest too much, methinks.' Be that as it may, we are not making a charge against the electors of Canada by seeking to make provisions of this kind. Provisions for this purpose are already on the statute-book.
AVhen we pass laws against murder, we do not charge the people of Canada as a whole with being murderers ; when we pass laws against various indictable offences we do not charge the people of Canada with being criminals ; when we pass laws against electoral corruption we do not charge the electorate of Canada as a whole with being corrupt. Every one knows there are constituencies in which a certain number of people are capable of being influenced corruptly. In many of the constituencies I believe the number is very small, in others the number is greater. The Minister of Trade and Commerce some years ago said that in some constituencies which he named he, knew the people could be bought because he said he had bought them twice. There are testimonies of this kind found, not only in the mouths of public men, but in the court records, which show that in some constituencies there are a certain number of men who are capable of being influenced by unworthy considerations. AVhen w>e pass laws seeking to minimize conditions of that kind, we are not charging the people as a whole with being corrupt. I believe In that regard Canadians hold as high a place as any people in the world who have representative institutions such as we enjoy. There is one observation I might make with regard to what is almost a precedent for this clause 2 ; namely, that in one of the branches of this legislature a member who does not attend to his duties for two sessions, ceases to be capable of performing those duties. That is very much in line with the principle of clause 2 of the Bill. As my hon. friend from Bellecbasse (Mr. Talbot) very well pointed out while my hon. friend from Alberta (Mr. Oliver) was speaking, you create an electorate for the purpose of enabling them to exercise their franchise, just as you create a Senate or a House of Commons for the purpose of enabling them io perform the duties which devolve upon them. I would have been glad to see this Bill go a little further, I would have been glad to see some provision dealing with what is called ' saw-offs ' in election petitions. It is a very

simple thing to saw-off election petitions to use a common phrase; it is a simple matter, because, under the provisions of the Election Act all you have to do to get rid of a petition is to leave it for six months, do nothing with it, and the petition lapses of itself. Certain other provisions of the Act declare that you cannot withdraw a petition unless you go before a court and make an affidavit that there has been no collusion. The result is that no one goes before a court to make such an affidavit. You can get rid of it in a much easier way by not taking1, any step for six months, then the petition drops of itself. I think it would have been wise to make some amendment in that regard. I agree with what has been said by the hon. member for West Elgin (Sir. Robinson) as to the appointment of deputy returning officers, I think some provision of that kind might be well included. However, as my right lion, friend says there are certain provisions about which there seems to be no great difference of opinion. These will be put into a form more acceptable to the government, and the other clauses as I understand will remain open for consideration by the House. I think that is the best course to pursue under the circumstances, and I acquiesce in his suggestion that that course be adopted.
Progress reported.



MANITOBA GRAIN ACT, 1900-SENATE AMENDMENTS.

[Stage Direction]
Amendments made by the Senate to Bill (No. 232) to amend the Manitoba Grain Act. 1900, (the Minister of the Interior) read the second time.
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: My hon. friend from East Assiniboia (Mr. Douglas) has an amendment to make, and in order to make his amendment better understood, I will read the section which has been amended, together with the amendment made thereto by the Senate. This Is the original section of the Bill :
4. Any applicant who fails to load a car so ordered by him within twenty-four hours from the time the car is furnished by the railway company, shall lose his right so far as concerns that car ; and the railway agent shall thereupon cancel the order, by writing the word ' cancelled ' in the remarks column of the car order book, and award the. car to the next applicant entitled to it. If the applicant fails or is unable to commence loading a car awarded to him within the twenty-four hours specified herein, he shall, personally or by agent duly appointed in writing, so notify the railway agent in writing, who shall thereupon cancel the order in like manner as aforesaid, and award the car to the next applicant entitled to it. Any applicant who fails to so notify the agent as herein directed shall pay car rental at the rate of twenty-five cents per hour for each hour that the car is held for him by the railway agent, and the railway Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).
company may decline to furnish further cars to such applicant until such car rental is paid to the railway agent.
That is to say, that the Bill which passed this House provided that If an applicaut failed to avail himself of his privilege, he should lose his turn and pay a penalty. This was amended by the Senate, which struck out the section and substituted the following :
4. Each applicant, or an agent of the applicant duly appointed in writing (such agent to be a resident in the vicinity of the shipping point), on being informed by the railway a eat of the allotment to him of a car, in good order and condition, shall at once declare his intention and ability to load the said car within the next ensuing twenty-four hours.
In the event of such applicant being unable to so declare his intention and ability to load the car allotted to him, the railway agent shall thereupon cancel the order by writing the word ' cancelled ' in the' remarks column of the car order book, and shall a-ward the car to the next applicant entitled to it.
If the applicant, after declaring his intention to load the car, fails to commence loading such car within the twenty-four hours aforesaid, the agent shall thereupon cancel the order in like manner as aforesaid, and award the car to the next applicant entitled to it, and the applicant who so fails to load such car shall pay car rental at the rate of twenty-five cents (25c.) per hour for each hour that the car is held for him by the railway agent.
If the applicant, having commenced the loading of a car, is unable to complete the same within twenty-four hours as aforesaid, he shall pay car rental at the rate of twenty-five cents (25c.) per hour for each hour over the twenty-four hours aforesaid that the car is held for hiim to complete the loading. The railway company may decline to furnish further cars to such applicant until the car rental hereinbefore referred to is paid to the railway agent.
This amendment does not differ materially from the disposition of the Bill as it passed this House, but it has been put into four paragraphs. The burden of the amendment made by the Senate is to relieve the applicant who is in default of the penalty imposed upon him.


Robert Laird Borden: It would seem to me to be desirable, if these amendments from the Senate are of any importance, that we should have some notice of them upon our files.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Borden. Halifax) will find them at page 905 of the Votes and Proceedings.


Robert Laird Borden: In that case it would meet to a very considerable extent what I have said, although I think it would be wise to put amendments of this character on the files in the same way as our Bills are filed.


The PRIME MINISTER.: The amendments appear in the Votes and Proceedings. The suggestion of my hon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax) might be a good one

to be adopted next session ; tliat is, that these amendments should appear on the file with the Bills.


Hr. DOUGLAS.: Since this amendment was made in the Senate a good deal of discussion has taken place in the city of Winnipeg and at other points in the west as to the nature of this penalty which is imposed upon the defaulter under these peculiar circumstances. I would like to point out to the House that the change we propose to make is one which we think is reasonable and right. The individual who has been notified by the agent of the railway company, either in person or by the agent who has been appointed to act for him, has to signify his intention to the railway company to make use of the car within twenty-four hours, but in that country it is quite possible that even under these circumstances, and with the best of intentions, he may be prevented from taking hold of the ear at such a time as will enable him to finish the loading of it within twenty-four hours. If he exceeds the twenty-four hours he is liable to a penalty of $6 per day. The North-west members are in unison with me in making the statement that we object that a man living at a distance from the railway station should have this heavy penalty .imposed upon him. It is a penalty largely in excess of that imposed on any person using a rail-, way car under similar circumstances. Instead of 25 cents per hour, to be in keeping with the penalty imposed on other individuals using a car under similar circumstances, it should be something like 5 cents per hour. We think, however, that if he commences within twenty-four hours to load the car and he does not succeed in loading it within twenty-four hours he should be permitted by the railway company to complete the loading, subject, to the general Railway Act of Canada in the matter of demurrage, and that the railway company) should, instead of having it provided for in this Act, fallback upon the law as laid down in the general Railway Act of Canada, without imposing this extreme penalty. We are anxious to preserve for the railway companies the full benefit of their rolling stock, but at the same time we wish to protect the interests of those who may be prevented by the intervention of Providence, by a storm or a blizzard, or by distance, from being on the ground in time to finish within the allotted period given. There are men who live twenty! miles away from a railway station. Then there is the consideration of the mail. In some places there is only a weekly, or a biweekly, or a tri-weekly mail, and these conditions might give rise to circumstances that would prevent him from being on the ground within twenty-four hours. The amendment which we propose simply contemplates leaving the matter under the general Railway Act of Canada, and we propose to strike out this penalty and allow the railway companies to apply tile general Act in reference to demurrage in all such cases.


Hon.   H@: Suppose he does not commence to load at all. what means have you for collecting the demurrage ?


James Moffat Douglas: If he does not commence at all he loses his car and it passes to the next applicant. His order is cancelled.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: And there is no claim for demurrage 7


James Moffat Douglas: No ; in that case there is no demurrage. Then there is another hardship in connection with the matter. It may be said that this is not in the interests of the railway company. But we have to look at this point : Under the present condition of things, with an insufficient supply of rolling stock, many of these farmers are perhaps obliged to drive into town fifteen or twenty miles four or five times in order to secure a car. These men should be compensated for their loss of time when they are promised a car and it has not been placed on the ground, because they are sufferers to a great extent on that account. We think, under these circumstances, that where a farmer is prevented from completing his work within twenty-four hours on account of a storm or otherwise, he should not be obliged to pay such a large sum as $0 per day, when other people engaged in other businesses are only asked to pay .$1 or $2 per day. We think that the amendment which we propose is in the interest, not only of the railway companies, but of the people of the country generally. I therefore beg to move that :
The House do not agree with the amendment to subsection 4 of new section 58, in section 21 of the Bill 232 ; but do alter the subsection by striking out all the words after the words ' entitled to it,' in the ninth line, to the end of the subsection, and substitute therefor the words ' and if the applicant, after declaring his intention and ability as aforesaid, shall not have commenced loading the car within (he period of twenty-four hours from the time of the notice to himself or his agent, as herein directed, the railway agent shall thereupon cancel the order in like manner as aforesaid.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the demurrage now ou a car 7


James Moffat Douglas: From $1 to $2 per day, and in this case they propose to make it .$6 per day.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: You do not object to the demurrage of $1 or .$2 per day, as provided by the Railway Act 7
'Mr. DOUGLAS. No. This amendment provides for the usual demurrage under the general Railway Act of Canada.


John Graham Haggart: I rise to a point of order. A Bill lias been sent from this House to the Senate, the Senate makes am-

endments to It, and it comes down to this House. Then this House may not concur in these amendments or may move an amendment to the Bill reaffirming the same thing as was contained in the Bill which was oi'iginally sent to the Senate. Can we then introduce entirely new matter ?


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I did not read very carefully the amendments or the Bill, but I understand that we passed subsection 4 of section 21 of the Bill. This subsection 4 has been struck out by the Senate, and the Bill has now come back to the House as amended. It is now proposed to accept a part of that amendment made by the Senate and that is in order.


James Moffat Douglas: That is the position.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
On motion of the Prime Minister, the second amendment made by the Senate was concurred in.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Kecess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 261) respecting the Pilotage District of Montreal and the Port and Pilotage District of Quebec was read the second time, and House went into committee thereon.
On section 1,
Richard Blain: This Bill, I understand, is to divide the pilotage system between Quebec and Montreal from that between Quebec and the gulf.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES (Hon. Raymond Frefontaine).: It is purely and simply to put the pilotage system between Montreal and Quebec under the control of the Department of Marino and Fisheries, in accordance with the request made by the board of trade, the shipping conference, the corn exchange and the harbour commissioners themselves, who have had these pilots under their control, and also, strange to say, with the consent and at the request of the pilots themselves. The second clause of the Bill provides that the Department of Marine and Fisheries will take control of the pilotage on the Saguenay river. The pilotage on the Saguenay river is at present under the control of the harbour commissioners of Quebec. For one reason and another the harbour commissioners at Quebec have not been willing that the pilotage system on the St. Lawrence below Quebec should be under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, but they do not object to the department taking charge of the pilotage system on the Saguenay river, because they have not been able to grapple with the situation. During


John Graham Haggart: the last two seasons there have been very serious accidents on that rivei', due entirely to the fact that there has been no understanding and organization between the pilots and the harbour commissioners of Quebec. Therefore, the harbour commissioners of Quebec are disposed to allow the control of these pilots to be handed over to the Department of Marine and Fisheries, and the department will see that pilots properly qualified to pilot on the Saguenay river will be chosen for that purpose.


Richard Blain: Why not take the control of the whole pilotage system at Quebec as well as at Montreal.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: These things must all be done by degrees; we cannot do this as rapidly as we would like, we have convinced the pilots from Montreal and Quebec that they will get fair justice from the Marine and Fisheries Department, but the others are not yet satisfied that they would get such justice, and we do not intend to force them. We had better make this experiment, and if it goes on well, I have no doubt that, in view of the result, the others will come around. If they do not we will then have good reasons to force the matter, but for the present we think it is better to take half a loaf than to have nothing.


Richard Blain: Do we understand that the pilots as well as the commissioners at the city of Quebec oppose the government taking entire control ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I submitted this proposition to the pilots, as well as the harbour commission and shipping interests of Quebec. Unfortunately, they could not come to an agreement. I think the shipping interest would have been satisfied; but in the face of the opposition of the harbour commissioners and the pilots themselves, who constiute a corporation in Quebec, they came to the conclusion that it was better to defer action. In the meantime, this is satisfactory to every one concerned.


Richard Blain: It seems to be a step in the right direction; but I am not sure that it would not have been better to wait until the whole system was ready to come under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: My kon. friend is quite mistaken. What we are doing now meets with the approval of the corporation in question, and also the approval of the British Board of Trade, who have from time to time recommended this improvement. If this is adopted I am sure that we shall be able to devise regulations which will be so satisfactory not only to the shipping trade, but to the pilots themselves, that they will be willing in a

year or two to come under the control of the department.
On section 2-Saguenay not included in port or pilotage district of Quebec.


Richard Blain: What proportion of the pilots will that take in ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There should not be more than three or four pilots assigned to the River Saguenay. As the corporation of pilots of Quebec and, the harbour commissioners of Quebec could not agree among themselves, the pilotage of the Saugenay river was assigned to six or ten pilots. Some of them did not know anything about the river at all, and very serious accidents happened. That is the reason they do not object to this provision, because they think that the Department of Marine and Fisheries will make the proper choice among the pilots of Quebec, and have the pilotage of the Saguenay river as safe as any other. Until about three years ago the pilotage in the Saguenay river was done by pilots who had no special knowledge, most of whom did not know how to read or write, but who. knew the river well and scarcely any accident had happened during the time they were doing the work. But the harbour commissioners of Quebec and the pilots of Quebec represented that these people were not qualified as pilots, and asked that the pilotage of the Saguenay river should be put under the control of the harbour commissioners of Quebec. This was done, and only qualified pilots now perform the duty on the Saguenay river. It is now proposed, with the consent of the harbour commissioners of Quebec and the corporation of pilots, to make regulations for the special examination of pilots for the Saguenay river. When that is done, we hope that river will be piloted very safely.


Richard Blain: Are we to understand that under a system which allowed a man who was not scientifically educated to act as a pilot, there were fewer accidents than there have been after the change took place and a scientific examination was imposed on the pilots.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: To my personal knowledge, as regards Montreal, where I was on the board of harbour commissioners for four years when I had the honour of being mayor-and I think that Quebec is no better off in this respect-the examinations of the pilots are not at present what they should be; so that what we are doing now is in the right direction. We want to have the pilots well educated, both technically and generally, and we intend to have better examinations than we have had in the past. It is also our intention to have the apprentices examined before they enter upon their apprenticeship, so that they will not lose five
or six or seven years of apprenticeship and at the end be unable to pass the examination owing to bad hearing or bad eyesight or some other physical defect.
Mr.' SPROULE. I have always thought the pilots ought to be under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, and it seems to me that this measure will fail to accomplish as much as it would if the whole pilotage of the St. Lawrence were taken under the control of the deparment. We shall try this as an experiment, but I expect it will not be successful. I would suggest that you should take charge of the pilots from Quebec down, as well.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Really, I think we had better confine ourselves to the pilots between Quebec and Montreal for the present, and see how that works. If that experiment proves satisfactory, we may then take hold of the pilots from Quebec down.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You may find a conflict between the Quebec pilots and the Montreal pilots.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No, because they are not in the same district.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You might as well go the full length at once, and have them all under the one control, and then lay down qualification examinations, length of employment, &c., which would apply to them all.


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This is rather a difficult*question to deal with. When I was 'head of the Marine Department, I found great differences of opinion, and I think my hon. friend is taking the right way.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How many pilots in the three districts ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Between Montreal and Quebec, 65 ; but the limit is 75, and they complain that they are too numerous. In Quebec there are over 100, and they are too numerous. That is where the difficulty lies. The Quebec pilots cover the Saguenay at the same time, and they have appointed more pilots to the Saguenay river than they should have done. They sent to the Saguenay river some pilots who showed themselves perfectly ignorant of the currents and channels of that river. That was the cause of the accident there.


Edward Cochrane: Who controls the pilots now ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The Harbour Commissioners of Quebec control the Quebec pilots. The Harbour Commissioners of Montreal control the pilots from Montreal to Quebec.

By this Bill we are taking control of the latter.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In the aggregate the're are 175 pilots. I see no reason why the Marine Department should not take these 175 pilots under its control and allot them according to the requirements of each locality, and bring them up to a certain standard of efficiency. It seems to me that that would not be a very difficult task. All that is required is moral courage.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There is no lack of moral courage, but we are not dealing only with one special interest. And when the shipping interests of Quebec, those who are most interested In having good, safe pilotage between Quebec and the gulf, say that we had better not disturb the present arrangement for a year or two, I think I am perfectly justified in acting as I am doing.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I have heard a good deal about pilotage for many years. I had the same opinion many years ago that I have to-day, that if the government had been equal to the occasion and had taken control of these men and made the regulations for pilotage, and distributed the pilots according to the need of the service, the conditions would have been much better than they are to-day. This Bill is very well, but [DOT]my complaint is that it does not go far enough ; and I confess that I cannot see any reason to deter the hon. minister, If it is not a lack of moral courage. That may not be the reason, but it looks to me very like it.


David Henderson: Do I understand that when a pilot goes aboard in the gulf and takes charge of a vessel, he only brings it to Quebec and then another pilot has to be employed ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


David Henderson: It seems to me that that is too much of a tax to impose on the shipping interest, and that is the interest we are bound to protect. As has been suggested, the whole thing looks to me a case of lack of moral courage on the part of the minister. It looks to me like a case of the tail wagging the dog. I feel sure that the minister will find himself in a better position if he will show himself strong enough to deal with the whole question at once, instead of piecemeal as under this Bill. The minister is not showing himself in a favour-aide light. I believe he is strong enough, if he would but use his influence with these people to deal with this whole question at once, and it is in the interest of shipping, of marine insurance and everything connected with the shipping interest that there should be one system, and that system controlled by the government of the country.
Bill, as amended, reported.


Hon. Mr. PREFONTAINE.: 



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved that the House again go into Committee of Supply.
["We may take up first one or two Bills which stand in the name of my hon. friend the Minister of Justice, and then go into Committee of Supply. If the Minister of Trade and Commerce is in his place we will give his estimates priority, as he is not able to be present in the evening. I would like to be free, however, from this time to take anything in the estimates, because they are narrowed down to small limits.' I shall be glad to indicate those we prefer."]
Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand the right hon. Prime Minister to say that we would go on with the Railway Bill. I am not objecting


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I was not aware that the Prime Minister had made that statement.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: He did, but it is all right so far as we are concerned.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into committee.
Lighthouse and coast service-further amount required for agencies, rents and contingencies, including the establishment of a new agency at Montreal, $5,000.
['He did, but it is all right so far as we are concerned.']
Thomas Simpson Sproule: What makes necessary the change in Montreal ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Strange to say the most important port in the Dominion has no station and no marine agency. It has been thought proper that the engineer in charge of the [DOT]buoy service between Montreal and Quebec should have an office where he could meet the representatives of the shipping interests, and where those engaged in shipping could gain necessary information regarding the matters that concern them. Hitherto in Montreal there have been several officers scattered in the different parts of the city. The place, for instance, where the pilots meet was in one part. The cattle inspectors had a certain office. The inspect tors of hulls were in another place. And so on. We have thought proper to concentrate these offices, so that the officer in charge of the lights and buoys between Montreal and Quebec should have an office where he would meet people connected with that shipping interest. We concentrate the other office in the same place, and we have there a place where investigations can be held. Hitherto they have been held sometimes in one place, sometimes in another. The amount provided. $5,000, is not at all extraordinary. In some other places, for instance, in Quebec, the cost of the employees of the Department of Marine and Fisheries exceeds this amount.
Further amount required for maintenance and repairs to lighthouses, owing to the proposed establishment of gas lights and buoys above Montreal $15,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What condition is the St. Lawrence in now with regard to lights ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It is being improved every day. We shall have it in such a condition that I think it will follow that the rate of insurance will have to be decreased. This

extra amount of $15,000 is to cover expenses connected with the buoys on the St. Lawrence between Montreal and Kingston, including gas buoys for Collingwood, Georgian bay and Parry Sound districts, maintenance of new buoy depot, and lighting the river navigation. We propose to provide for the maintenance of additional gas buoys on the Georgian bay, also the maintenance of gas plant for Lake Erie and the Georgian bay. At the present time we are dependent on the courtesy of the United States government for keeping lights in Canadian waters. 1 think it is not creditable to the Canadian government that we should be dependent on the Americans for lighting our channels. We notified them that we were going to install these lights for our channel. The navigation companies have thanked us for these efforts to make business safer.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understood some time ago there were some lights needed in the Parry Sound district.
The MINISTER OB' MARINE AND FISHERIES. We are providing them as fast as possible, that is why we want .$15,000 more. We intend to put the whole system in such a shape that within the next two or three years there will be very little required except perhaps additional lights in some small ports. We are meeting-all the demands made by the transportation companies.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Are you supplying all the lights asked for ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Certainly, we are providing for all the demands which have been made.
Further amount required for construction and aids to navigation, including the purchase and equipment of boats for sweeping channels between Platon and Montreal and Montreal and Kingston ; and the substitution of compressed gas'for oil as illuminant for lighthouses, increasing the power of the lights below Montreal, and the establishment of a buoy depot for the upper lakes, $1S0,000.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: This is a large amount, and the committee will pardon me if I give a lengthy explanation.
The extensive improvements authorized in the lighting of the upper St. Lawrence comprise the introduction of compressed acetylene instead of oil in the lighthouses, and the use of acetylene for the buoy service instead of oil or Pintsch gas ; and fnrtlierm re, the use, as far as possible, of range lights instead of single lights and gas buoys.
Tlie re-arrangement of the existing system of lighting will be considered as soon as possible by commissioners. Tlie present lights were inaugurated for nine-foot navigation, and it is considered that they can be changed in places with advantage.
'	427
The following estimate of cost of converting the lighting of the river is given. The apparatus needed is not made in Canada, and it is procured from the Safety Car Heating and Lighting Company, of New York :
42 storeholders	$35,000
40 gas lanterns	 1'2,000
3 gas lanterns with automatic bell attachments for Lake St. Louis lightships	 3,000
Cost of piping, lights, labour	 6,000

Estimate is made provisionally for ten new range lights at a cost of $3,000 each, although -it may be found that to thoroughly light the river a larger number is required ; total, $30,000.
There is pressing need for a suitable buoy depot at a central point on tlie river between Dickinson's Landing and Prescott, where there should be ample storehouse space, dock room for buoy steamer, and land for storing gas. can. and spare buoys. The need of a suitable depot is more apparent when it is considered that it will be tlie centre for distributing charged gas buoys to isolated points and receiving and recharging the spent buoys. The Montreal-Kingston depot will also be tlie headquarters for assembling apparatus for the marine gaslighting service, and. if desired, tlie gas lanterns may be repaired at this point. The sum of $35,000 should be provided for this purpose, total, $35,000.
To provide for additional gas buoys to replace those removed from this division to Quebec and Halifax (12, at $1,600 each), $20,000, and five additional gas buoys, $8,000; and moorings, below Montreal, $2,000, total $30,000.
To provide for generators, compressors and sundry gas apparatus for ' Scout,' $5,000.
Summary.
Storeholders	$ 35,000
Gas lanterns	 12,000
Gas and bell attachments	 3,000
Labour and piping, &c	 6,000
New range lights	 30,000
Buoy depot	 35,000
Gas buoys and moorings	 30,000
Gas apparatus for 'Scout'	 5,000

Scotvs and appliances for sweeping channels below Quebec and between Montreal and Kingston	 24,000

The ten new ranges of gas lights will require no keepers, saving an annual charge of $3,000, and the proposed * conversion of tlie lights from an oii to a gas basis will enable the keepers to be dispensed with as opportunity offers, at a saving of $7,500 per year, or a total saving in cost of maintenance of $10,500 per year. It will also eliminate the cost of maintaining the keepers' dwellings, repairs to lighthouses, boat-


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have you any intimation from the underwriters that after doing all this you can effect a reduction in the insurance rates ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The shipping companies in the different interviews we have had with them have intimated to us that if these improvements are made, because all these improvements are made on their recommendation. they will be in a position, not to dictate probably, but to suggest to the representatives of the underwriters that something must be done to reduce the rate of insurance, and if it is not done it will be shown that an injustice exists, and some other means will have to be taken. As the committee will understand, the St. Lawrence has been labouring under difficulties for a number of years, not due, I am quite sure, to any want of exertion on the part of my predecessors, but due to the fact that these improvements cannot be accomplished in a day. Everybody knows there has been a great change in the tonnage of the vessels within the'last few years, and tliis fact, combined with the difficulty that we have experienced in providing the necessary aids to navigation in the channel, has contributed to give a very bad reputation to the St. Lawrence. We hope that the good reputation of the channel will be restored.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: 


Jabel Robinson: Have any calculations been made as to what it will cost to place electric lights along the channel ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: That question has been studied. Experiments have been conducted, which have shown that electric light is not a very safe light. It is not a continuous light. It is apt at certain moments to go out, and the consequences may be very serious. Up to the present time, it has not been found that electric light would offer the same security as gas light. At certain points it may be used, but it cannot be used generally. The Americans, who have tried it, have abandoned it, because their experience shows that gas light, and even oil light, offers more security.


Jabel Robinson: Where have the Americans tried it 5
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. At many places.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You depend upon acetylene gas for all these lights ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. Some of them.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Has acetylene gas been sufficiently tested to make it sure that it is a preparation that can be used ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. We have had acetylene gas under test for a whole year on certain portions of the channel, and the system which rve have used has given very good satisfaction, so much so that the engineer of the department recommends that Pintsch gas be replaced by acetylene gas at points where be thinks it will be advantageous to make the change.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I notice you are providing for some sweeping boats. What is their nature ?
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES, We have provided for the sweeping boats. We could not wait for the vote. It does net involve a very large expenditure. We have bought a boat and we are fitting it up with the necessary apparatus to sweep the channel. These sweeping boats have been recommended by the shipping interests and by the underwriters. There are two of them, one for the channel between Montreal and Kingston and the other for the channel between Montreal and Quebec and below Quebec. The boats are ordinary boats fitted with a frame which goes down to the depth of the channel and which extends to the width of the channel. It is an iron frame, and as the boat steams down or up it gauges the channel, and if it encounters any obstacle which should not be there, it is immediately noticed, a buoy is placed at the spot, and then the necessary dredge or rock-lifter is sent to remove the obstacle.



Mr. SPROU  LE@: Is it proposed to do that several times in a year 7


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes, it is proposed to do that as soon as possible after the opening of navigation, and then probably once during the summer or as often as it may be necessary to do so. Suppose there should be a heavy storm or something like that, it would be necessary, in the interests of navigation, to see that that was done.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have you any accurate knowledge as to the present depth of the channel between Kingston and Montreal 7


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We are safe in saying it is fourteen feet. I must say, as regards the channel between Montreal and Kingston, that there are still some difficulties to settle between the Department of Marine and Fisheries and the Department of Railways and Canals. We have taken over from the department about fifty lights that used to be kept by the Department of Railways and Canals at the entrance to canals, but there are still a few kept by the Department of Railways and Canals and we are in treaty to take them over so that the whole system would be under the control of the same department and people would make inquiries only from the one department.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You are proposing to establish a plant in Montreal for the manufacture of some of these lights 7


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No, not in Montreal. We intend to establish a buoy depot at some central point between Montreal and the lakes, but of course we could not say just where it is to be established or we would not be able to get property on reasonable terms. We will provide a depot of this kind and have competent mechanics to manufacture or repair much of this apparatus, holders, &c., so as to have them ready at any time when they are required.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You do not propose to absolutely manufacture them 7


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We will manufacture some things that we are now obliged to buy and we will keep on hand a supply of spare machines so that if one is dragged away we can replace it. This I think is a commendable plan and one that will meet the approval of the navigation companies in addition to reducing the cost of keeping up these lights.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will you import experts for this work.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I think we will be able to get suitable men here. I may say that our Canadian mechanics are as good as any in the world if they are properly directed.
42H
Further amount required for signal service for telephonic communication between Port Atkinson lighthouse, British Columbia and the city of Vancouver, $2,000.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It has been represented that it would be a great convenience to shippers and to the travelling public to have this telephonic communication made but there is not sufficient inducement for the telephone company to make this connection as there would be no business except government business.
To provide for the purchase of land and a wharf for buoy service in Halifax harbour, $20,000.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: This matter has been under the consideration of the department for quite a while and we have now come to a point where we must get this extra appropriation in order to have our depot in Nova Scotia at a proper point where we can have dockage for our steamers. We are obliged to leave the wharf we are at present using. The department has been very much cramped for dockage at Halifax. We require dockage accommodation for three ships, the ' Lady Laurier,' the ' Lansdowne ' and a fishery cruiser as well as storage accommodation for buoys, &c. Our present wharf is the property of the Railway Department and is required by them as terminal facilities for the Intercolonial Railway and we have received official notice to vacate the property. This, of course, will not be a public wharf at all; it is a wharf purely and simply for the use of the department.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: They really have no wharf at present. They are using a wharf in connection with the Intercolonial Railway terminals, and the Railway Department for two or three years have been warning them to get out as they require the wharf for their business. But it has not been found convenient hitherto, and the Minister of Marine and Fisheries is now endeavouring to get independent accommodation. My own judgment is that the accommodation he is getting by this vote will only be partial, and that he will have to get more later. However, this will give him relief ir the meantime.


Richard Blain: Is there no government wharf at Halifax 7


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: No, except the wharfs at the railway terminus. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries has been using one of these for several years at considerable inconvenience to the Railway Department.


Richard Blain: Is this vote to buy a wharf or to construct one ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: 1364&


Richard Blain: Has lie any property in view ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We have an offer.


Richard Blain: From whom ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: As I have not accepted the offer, I think I had better not mention the name.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I think I know the property which has been offered to my hon. friend. Were he to announce the name he would rather tie his hands in purchasing, and I think he had better be free.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is there an item in the estimates for commencing the wharf 1
The Mi....n'jlR OF FINANCE. No. The property which my hon. friend has in view has a wharf on it, though I do not think it is sufficient for his purposes. I think he would have to enlarge it.


Richard Blain: Is the wharf in good repair, or will a further amount be required to put it in proper condition ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The property, from the description and plans which I have of it, is susceptible of very great enlargement and improvement. The present wharf will not be sufficient for the dockage of all our boats, but it will be possible to improve and enlarge it to give all the accommodation we require.


Richard Blain: Will this amount of money do it ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I do not want to divulge the secrets of the department, but I think we shall be able to buy the property for $15,000, and $5,000 will be available for improvements.
For the equipment of wireless stations at Point Amour. Heath Point, Anticosti, Fame Point. Cape Race, Belle Isle, and Sable Island. $25,000.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: This is a very important vote. It does not mean only $25,000. As the members of the committee are aware, there have been for some years interesting experiments made in wireless telegraphy. The present government have spent about $80,000 in establishing one or two stations. The experiment has proved satisfactory, not only in Canada, but almost all over the world. It is proposed, on the recommendation of the shipping interest, to establish four stations in the interest of navigation. There is already one at Belle Isle. We intend to make the necessary arrangements with either the Marconi Company or the DeForest Company to establish these stations, paying them a certain proportion,


William Stevens Fielding: whatever is necessary to provide the machinery, and then to wait till the stations are completed and satisfactory to the shipping interest before paying the balance. We estimate that each station will cost from $10,0UU to $15,000. Sable Island will be for further consideration. We do not provide for it at present.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The other night, when a somewhat similar question was under consideration, I asked what information the government had regarding the success of this system ; because it seems to me the House has never been given much information yet of a reliable character as to whether the system is a success or not. We see a great deal about it in the papers, but it is not definite.


Mr. RICHARDSON.: From what information any of us who are watching the developments in connection with wireless telegraphy can gather, it seems to be yet in its experimental stage. It would be well for the government to make haste slowly in the expenditure of public money while tliis Invention is in its present stage. It is found to be fairly successful for short distances, but, even for comparatively short distances, it is meeting with some unexpected difficulties, owing to the interruption of messages. I understand that there is a difficulty experienced in connection with the direction in which messages are sent. It is much more difficult to get satisfactory results for messages sent westward than for despatches sent eastward. It is commonly believed that the Marconi Company have got about as far as they can unless there should be further discoveries made that will enable them to overcome the difficulties with which they are meeting at present.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We are moving in the line advised by hon. gentlemen. Had we come to the conclusion that this system was perfect, we would have asked for a larger amount, but we think proper to recommend that four stations only be constructed for the present, and these stations will only be established on condition that if they do not give satisfaction there will be no pay.


Mr. POPE.: Are these experiments being made by other nations ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes, in the States the navigation companies are installing the apparatus throughout their steamers as fast as they can be manufactured. At present the invention is not a complete success, generally speaking, but it has been a fair success in many instances. For fair distances, such as between these points ail'd the steamers. I believe it will work successfully.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What would you call a fair distance ?


The MINISTER OP MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Fifty miles.


Mr.   BRAIN@: I remember that when we voted the $80,000 in the session of 1900-1 the Minister of Finance stated that, as far as he knew, the experiment was not satisfactory. If I remember correctly the $80,-*000 has been all expended, and the works constructed out of that money we handed over last session to a private corporation, the government only retaining some instruments purchased by it.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: Does the hon. gentleman refer to the main station V


Richard Blain: Yes.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is hardly correct to say that it was handed over to a private corporation, because it was always in the hands of a private corporation, and the work was constructed by that company. Certainly up to this time, the station has not proved the success we hoped, but Mr. Marconi was here quite recently and is still full of hope and confidence. There is no douht that for short distances the Marconi and other systems have proved successful, but for ocean telegraphy they have so far failed. Mr. Marconi claims that he can send signals one way, and lie says occasionally lie lias sent them both ways, but not with the regularity necessary t >
commercial success. Although commercially it has not yet proved a success, I do not abandon it as hopeless. In the meantime we need not regret that we put that amount- into the encouragement of a great Invention which has gained Canada a great deal of credit and will give us still more credit if it should prove the success anticipated.


Richard Blain: I am not complaining of the investment. I think the expenditure was one which received the endorsation of both sides, but I doubt whether it is in the best interests of the country that the government should appropriate $25,000 more for work of a purely experimental character.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It is not an experiment, because they have offered to put the system up and not receive any pay unless it works properly. To show that this expenditure meets' with the approval of the large business bodies, let me read a letter sent to the department by tile Montreal Board of Trade, on July 30th :
I have the honour to communicate the following resolution adopted by the council of this hoard with regard to the desirability of the government installing the wireless telegraph stations in the gulf and to ask for it your favourable consideration :-
The council especially urges on the government. in the interests of the safe navigation of our national waterway, the great importance of providing for a speedy installation of wireless telegraph stations at the various lighthouse points in the gulf and the River St. Lawrence.
This is addressed to the Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, First Minister. I have also a letter from the shipping federation of Canada, dated July 29tli, strongly urging the establishment of these stations. It is upon these recommendations, and many others that I might read,' that the department has acted.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Do the vessels require to be equipped with a plant before they can communicate with the station ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: At the present time, I am informed, there are sixty vessels on the St. St. Lawrence route equipped with the necessary- apparatus for receiving messages.
Mr. SPROTJLE Are ocean vessels equipped generally ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Many are equipped and the number Is being increased as fast as possible. The British navy are adopting this system, and forty vessels are provided with the apparatus. I believe that about 200 steamships of the British merchant navy are equipped.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I am glad lion, gentlemen ou this side are discussing this matter, because this is the class of information that should be brought out. I regard this discovery of Marconi as the most important, for Canada, of the last fifty years, or one hundred years, if it is workable. I believe that, for a distance of 150 miles, it is absolutely workable. I was aboard a British man of war. in Halifax, last year, that was equipped with tills system. The apparatus did not look expensive. One of the masts is used, and, at the top. is the station, with tlie apparatus. The officer in charge told me that it was simply invaluable ; that they could easily speak with a vessel distant 150 miles.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In all kinds of weather ?


Seymour Eugene Gourley: He said that a storm made no difference. I had in mind a much more important case than that of the 'Kaiser Wilhelm.' An English man of war, operating in tlie north sea, probably in the same storm referred to by the hon. gentleman, was some 200 miles out. In the storm, she spoke to the people oil shore, assuring them that everything was well, though the report had gone abroad that she was stranded. Now. if tills is good for 200 miles in a storm, it must he invaluable on the St. La w-rence, where no distance greater than 100 miles will need to be covered. This discovery is of the greatest importance to this Dominion. The people of Canada must be a great sea people. We must get that into our minds. Unless we are a sea people we can never be a dominant people. Therefore, we must adopt every means to aid navigation. Now. it is a matter of the greatest regret that, for some years past, Lloyds,


Robert Lorne Richardson: We have been accustomed to hear wonderful tales about wireless telegraphy. I believe that it is yet in its experimental stage, and that the government has already made libeal contributions in aid of these experiments. Still, wireless telegraphy is at pesent little better than a scientific toy, and unless very important improvements are made in the Marconi system before long, it will be relegated to the toy department. However, wireless telegraphy is engaging the attention of electricia'ns all over the world today, and it may be that before long important developments will be made which will materially change the present system. Therefore it would be wise for the government to go a little slow in expenditures in this direction. I am informed that application has been made during the present week for a patent to protect some important discovery in the direction of improving the Marconi system of wireless telegraphy. It may be that in two or three years these difficulties which at present exist may be overcome. At present I am informed that an attempt to communicate between one vessel and another on the ocean has been interrupted, showing that the vibrations may be intercepted by some unknown vessel which may have a responsive receiving apparatus, and that the message will not be carried to its destination. That is an important difficulty which must be overcome.


Edward Cochrane: I understood the minister to say that this vote was not going to be expended unless the plans proved satisfactory. He read a communication, but I did not And that it proved that the money was not to be expended unless the plans proved satisfactory. What company is going to put the apparatus into operation, and if successful, is going to get this money ?
the MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES. At the present time there are two systems competing for public favour in Canada, the De Forest system and the Marconi system. I have sent Capt. Salmon to investivate these systems. I think it is established now that wireless telegraphy, for a distance of 50 or 100 miles, is just as safe and certain as commercial telegraphy. The two systems have been installed on several steamers, and are in working condition. The intention of the department is to have stations established at certain points, according to the recommendation of the shipping interests ; but we will not undertake to pay anything unless these stations prove perfectly satisfactory.
Mr, COCHRANE. Is the government going to establish these stations ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes, but we have made a c ntract by which it is stipulated that unless the stations prove perfectly satisfactory to the shipping interests we will not pay for them. That is well understood.


Mr. KENDALL.: Has any provision been made to erect Marconi stations at Sable Island, Cape Race, and other well known points ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We contemplate; establishing one at Sable Island and at some other points. But before these are established we will make a special study of the most favourable points, and have a conference with the shipping interests so as to make the stations as useful as possible.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Have you one at Cape Sable ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The minister proposes to have one at Sable Island, but not at Cape Sable.
Mr., SPROULE. I understood the minister to say that it would cost us $15,000. What percentage of the cost are we to pay ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There are two propositions before the department at the present time, coming from De Forest and the Marconi companies of wireless telegraphy. They have proposed to the government to establish a station, and not to ask a penny until they have demonstrated that their system works perfectly well. That is why the department does not ask for a larger sum than $25,000. With that we think we can do the preliminary work necessary to have a contract made with the proper company, but there will be no money spent by the officials of the department except what may be necessary and no money will be spent in connection with the establishment of these stations unless they prove perfectly satisfactory.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If they do prove perfectly satisfactory how much are we committed to by the contract ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We will be liable for whatever amount each station may cost. It is calculated that each station may cost $5,000 to $10,000. There will be besides that the cost of maintenance which will amount to $2,500 a year.
Mr. IvAULBACH. The three most important points on the Atlantic coast are Cape Sable, Sable Island and Cape Race. I think it will be admitted by everyone that these are points at which it is most important that the Marconi system should be established, in order to avert the shipwrecks that are occurring from year to year. There should be no hesitancy in providing sufficient money to make these

three points satisfactory to the mariner. In doing so you provide a complete guide for the fishermen in the summer time in foggy weather. Fishermen are a class who venture a very great deal. They have been very successful in moving around Sable Island. The water for a great distance around Sable Island is very shallow. At the north east there is something like thirty miles with only twenty fathoms of water, and the same condition exists at the opposite end. I certainly would urge in the strongest manner that an effort should be made to place stations at these three points.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: The lion. Minister of Marine and Fisheries is providing for two of the places that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Kauibaeh) has mentioned. These are Cape Race, which is in Newfoundland but which is in charge of the Canadian government, and Sable Island. The third place mentioned by the hon. gentleman is Cape Sable, which is sometimes confused with Sable Island but which is a long way from it. Cape Sable is the south-western point of Nova Scotia and forms a part of my own constituency. I hope that as this system is developed it will he found possible to have a station at Cape Sable, but the urgent need now is for the improvement of the St. Lawrence route and of the signalling stations on the St. Lawrence. Cape Sable and Sca-tarie, whicli have been mentioned, are good objective points but the need at these places is not so immediate as in the case of the St. Lawrence. Sable Island, though not connected with the St. Lawrence route, is a place which is particularly dangerous, and we have great difficulty in communicating with it. Sometimes in winter, vessels are wrecked there, and some weeks elapse before we can obtain any communication at all. Cases of wrecks have occurred in which a long time has elapsed before any knowledge of the wreck reached the mainland. The situation is so dangerous at certain seasons of the year that steamers are unwilling to approach the shore. Even the government vessels have to lie off and on waiting a favourable opportunity of landing. If there is any place where this system should be established I think it is Sable Island and I am very glad to know that even though the hon. minister is not providing at present for Scatarie and Cape Sable he is providing for the other points where the need is the greatest. The others. I am sure, will come in due course.


Mr. KAULBACH.: I am very glad to hear the hon. Minister of Finance express himself in tlie way he does. I think it is in keeping for me to make a reference to Newfoundland. Newfoundland should be very grateful to Canada for the efforts she -Canada-has put forward'from year to year in providing aids to navigation in the 1 way of lighthouses, fog horns, and fog


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: trumpets for the guidance of vessels around that island. In the past Newfoundland has not been as grateful as she might have been towards her sister colony, Canada. It is known that although we spend a large amount of money in keeping up these lighthouses on the island for the benefit of shipping, not particularly our own but for other shipping as well, we do not get that adequate return from Newfoundland which we should have. I will refer to it here and perhaps I will in a day or two refer to it at greater length. Our fishermen are compelled to pay heavy light dues in Newfoundland ports while they come iuto our ports and pay nothing except twenty-five cents for entry and clearance. They even charge us a duty on barrels. When our fishermen tak,e empty barrels for fish, not landing them but returned to the port from which they took their departure, they charge them a duty of twenty-four cents each. This I consider an iniquitous thing.


Mr. ROCHE (Halifax).: In the event of Sable Island being connected with the Nova Scotia shore where would the station be-at Halifax V


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: At Halifax.


William Roche: In the event of a large passenger steamer going ashore on the island with a large number of passengers there will be no accommodation and it will be of the utmost advantage that the Nova Scotia shore could be communicated with immediately.


Arthur Samuel Kendall: I do not wish to undertake to speak as an expert, but living down by the ocean and like most maritime men being more or less acquainted with the wrecks that occur on our coast, I endorse what the hon. member for Lunenburg (Mr. Kauibaeh) says as to the very great importance of having one of these stations placed at the entrance to the Bay of Fundy. The Canadian Pacific Railway and the Intercolonial Railway have made the port of Sr. .Tohn the Canadian winter port for the purpose cf the heavy freight traffic, and the steamers of the North Atlantic trade that come to Canada during the winter come into [DOT]St. John. We know that that locality during the last three or four years has become uri-enviably notorious for wracks. We have had a great many wrecks there and if by establishing one of these stations at this point we can do anything to reduce the number of wrecks, I think we might ask the hon. minister to consider the matter at once and to make provision for one of these stations at that port.
Steamboat inspection. $8,000.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: It has been reported to me that the work has so increased in the Toronto district that a boiler inspector re-

quires to be appointed there immediately. For a number of years attention has been called to the very small salaries paid to Inspectors, a number of whom were receiving less than engineers. It is proposed to have another inspector in Quebec. Out of this amount of $6,000, the salary of two inspectors, one in the Quebec district and one at Collingwood will be provided, and in addition to that I intend to look into the salary of each inspector now on the staff. I may say candidly to the members of the committee that some of the inspectors have tendered their resignations, because they thought that if they were to engage as steamboat engineers they would get better salaries than what they are getting from the department. As they were good officials, most of them were appointed by my immediate predecessors, who had done their duty carefully, I thought they deserved to be paid on the same scale as other men of equal ability would be treated, even if they were employed by the government.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What salaries do they get now ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The salaries range from $1,900, which is paid the chairman of the board, down to $1,000 per year. The majority receive from $1,100 to $1,200 per year. This inspection service has been the source of a handsome revenue to this country, but the government has decided, during this session, that the inspection fees should be abolished. The revenue which we collected from steamboat inspection amounted to $38,000, and the total expenditure was about $27,000. The services will still 'have t' be performed, but the fees have been abolished along with the tolls on the canals, because it was the unanimous opinion on both sides of the House that it would be in the interest of navigation to do so. The expenditure last year was $27,493, so that the revenue exceeded the expenditure by over $10,000. I may say that the two boiler inspectors at Toronto last year inspected 411 vessels in western Ontario. In eastern Ontario, one inspector at Kingston examined 167 vessels ; at Montreal two inspectors examined 1S3 vessels, and also inspected 430 vessels as regards tackles, loading, &c. At Quebec one inspector examined 159 vessels. He is also a hull inspector, and inspects at Montreal as well. In Prince Edward Island one inspector examined 109 vessels, in New Brunswick one inspector examined 110 vessels, in British Columbia one inspector examined 102. in the Yukon territory 144 were examined, and in Manitoba and the North-west Territories, 105.
To investigate matters respectihg sardine, herring and oyster fisheries and coast close season, $10,000.


Robert Lorne Richardson: What are the objects of this investigation ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: This vote is to meet the travelling and other expenses of the five commissioners who will be engaged in visiting the various points in the Bay of Fundy during 1903-4 to study and take evidence from fishermen, packers and others in the maritime provinces in regard to the matters which are menti ned in the item. They will finally make a report and recommendations regarding the best methods of preserving tlie herring and' oyster fisheries, the best means of dealing with the waste of fish due to seals, the steps necessary to promote oyster breeding, the proper close seasons, and similar matters. 1 should say that this is not a new venture on the part of tlie present minister. For years past the Department of Marine and Fisheries have been inquiring into this matter, and I may say that if the lobster industry has been saved to this country it is owing to the work of a commission which was appointed a couple of years ago, and which made a thorough investigation and a complete study of this whole question. At the present time the lobster industry in the maritime provinces is improving very greatly and its improvement we may consider due to the methods that have been adopted in consequence of the recommendation of the commissioners, which have proved very satisfactory. We intend to do the same thing with regard to the other branches as has been done in regard to the lobster fishery.


Rufus Henry Pope: What is the object of the investigation in regard to the herring and sardine fisheries ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: To ascertain the best regulations to be adopted in regard to close seasons, &c. It is a pretty difficult question to decide, and there are only a few people who can give to the department the information which will enable the country to reap the greatest advantage from this industry.


William Roche: I wish to call the attention of the minister to the condition of the fishing on the south shore of Nova Scotia. I have had letters in which it is stated that the sword fish and the dog fish have almost destroyed the fishing there; and I would ask the minister to take the matter into his consideration, and try to devise some plan by which these raiders on the fisheries may be exterminated or diminished. If something is not done, the nets and appliances of the fishermen which are put out will be destroyed. These pests seem to have multiplied at a great rate during this year, and the legitimate fishing along the coast is imperilled. Perhaps some bounty for the destruction of these pests in large numbers could be given ; or if some plan could lie devised for utilizing the oil from them in some way. it would be of great advantage to the fishermen.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: 1 referred to this matter a few evenings ago and was asked to allow it to remain over until the estimates for the fisheries came up. In the early part of this last winter petitions, numerously signed, were sent in asking the Minister of Marine and Fsheries to see what could be done to remove this terrible nuisance, dog fish, that is increasing in numbers every year on the deep seas. It is only some two or three years that these pests have been a menace to the deep-sea fishing. Formerly they frequented shallow water, and only the shore fishermen suffered ; but now both the shore fishermen and the deep-sea fishermen suffer inconveniences. They are really a tax on the fishermen, for they suffer the loss of their nets, head lines and other appliances. They are of the shark species which eat and destroy twine. Instead of being a tax on the fishermen, these fish could be made a source of revenue, for they are worth something like $16 a ton if utilized as a fertilizer. In the memorials or petitions sent to the government reference was made to the various ways in which they could be destroyed. Dynamite would not do, for the reason that it would destroy the other fish mingling with them in the waters. The only plan which I think would be feasible and practicable, and of benefit to the fishermen, would be to offer a bounty. It could be made a small one, and it would be some compensation to the fishermen for being deprived during a certain season of the opportunity of catching any other fish than dog fish ; and the latter could be utilized, not only as a fertilizer, but as food for cattle. Cattle are very fond of these fish when dried. The fish are thrown into pickle, as the fishermen say, and afterwards dried and put into bundles and fed to young cattle in the winter time.


Rufus Henry Pope: Wouldn't the bones bother the cattle ?


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: Not a mite. They eat everything ; there is no need of separating the bone at all. The fish are chopped up by the cattle as finely as if put through a bait-cutter. A great deal of loss is also occasioned in the deep-sea fisheries by the offal or the trimmings of the fish. The fishermen will anchor in the deep seas or the grand banks or where the fish are found and will lie there for a day or two fishing, when they have to leave good fishing to get clear of their debris or garbage by throwing it overboard. As this becomes the food for the fish and impairs the fishing and polutes the water, it should be disposed of in a different way. I suggest that it could be disposed of in this manner. Let a steamer be subsidized, with bait on board, to supply the fishermen who would rendezvous on these waters, and bring in return the fresh fish that are caught and place them in cold storage for transfer to the west, which is greatly in need of , that description of fish, Mr. ROCHE (Halifax).
and the trimmings as well can be preserved in lime and sand as a fertiliser. I also suggest that the oil, which is now dried out by the action of heat, aud under a system of decomposition, which renders it worth little more than 25 cents a gallon, would, if brought in a fresh state and put through a certain process, bring $2.50 a gallon, which would be a great advantage to the fishermen. This, I think, could be accomplished by giving a bounty to a steamer which would be a medium for the supply of bait to the fishermen and also for the transmission of the freshly-caught fish to some point of shipment. For instance, Canso is one point. The fish, when caught and kept in bulk for a number of months or even weeks, suffer very considerably in quality, and are not worth as much in the market as they would be if promptly transferred by a steamer. The fishermen could then sell them fresh, and the purchaser could ship them fresh, or prepare them as shredded or boneless fish, and pack them in neat and clean boxes to be sent to any part of the world ; or they could be shipped in cold storage. I therefore urge very strongly that the system of cold storage be adopted, and that Canso be made a centre of distribution, as it is midway between Cape North and Cape Sable, and is of easy access. Then, again, we want to make the fishing a success in the maritime provinces, and we want all the encouragement we can get for the fishermen. Unless they get that encouragement their industry must necessarily suffer. This year we suffered very materially for the want of bait. Had the deep-sea fishermen been able to obtain bait they would have secured valuable returns. Instead of that many of the fishermen. I am sorry, to say, will be deprived of the valuable living they have hitherto been enjoying. The bait supply is a matter of very serious consequence, and I am satisfied that the government could aid our fishermen very considerably by assistance in the establishing a system of chemical freezers. Not only would the government thus serve the fishermen, but indirectly serve the treasury as well. Our fishermen like to live well, and when they have a good catch of fish they are prepared to live on the luxuries of the land, and would therefore consume articles on which the government would receive a large customs revenue. With regard to the dog fish, which is a menace to the whole of the fisheries. I would suggest that a bounty be given the fishermen for the capture of these fish, which are indeed a nu'sance.


Rufus Henry Pope: How much ?
Mx-. KAULBACH. I would say $4 per ton. that would not be a very great deal, and be a benefit to all concerned.


Rufus Henry Pope: How much would that amount to ?



Charles Edwin Kaulbach: It depends entirely on wlmt they capture.


Arthur Samuel Kendall: What proportion would the tishermen be able to catch of dog-fish in the sea V


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: A large quantity. If they were to go out in the morning when the fish are plentiful, they could capture a couple of tons a day. They only last but a very short time, and everything depends on the weather. As we are on this matter, you will pardon me, Mr. Chairman, if I refer to the lobster question. A few days ago I showed how the-lobsters were being depleted on the Canadian Atlantic as well as on the American coast. In consequence of their depletion, a shell fish, known as the ' sea urchin.' which is the favourite food of the lobster has largely increased. They have become so numerous that they cover the whole shore, which formerly was covered by a coating of vegetable matter that supplied food for the other tisli, and also gave an excellent growth of kelp or sea-weed. This kelp or sea-weed was for the shelter of small fish what a forest is for birds. It gave them shelter and protection" from the larger fish. But now kelp lias all disappeared. These shell fish or little urchins, deposit a sort of saliva which covers the whole bed of the shore and becomes petrified matter, so that no vegetable matter will grow upon it. As a result the farmer must necessarily suffer. What I would suggest is to substitute the debris from the catch of the deep-sea fishermen, being the trimmings of the fish, which could he utilized as a fertilizer, and be worth about $16 per ton. when placed in a proper position as an article of merchandise, and I would strongly recommend that the government seriously consider this matter. I feel satisfied that in coming to the rescue of the fishermen they will not only benefit the fishing, but the farming industry in the utilizing of that debris because it will then be removed from polluting the waters of the deep-sea to another sphere, so to speak, where it can be utilized as a fertilizer for the farmers, so that the farmers and fishermen may receive a benefit which otherwise they would not be the recipients of at all. Therefore E would urge very slrongly on the government to give this matter its serious consideration, but by all means I ask, what I requested some three years ago, and have been asking for every year since, that a commission be sent fo the shores of the Canadian Atlantic to investigate and see what can be done in the interest of the fishermen.


Mr. COPP.: This matter is of great importance to the fishermen of Nova Scotia. We have not in Canada any sardine industry such as they have on the west coast of France. We have, it is true, what we call a sardine industry, but that is really a herring industry. You are aware of the
fact, Sir, no doubt, that the fishermen, in order to fish, must have bait, and that question of bait is one which requires to be investigated. The fishermen of Nova Scotia, particularly of St. Mary's bay and the Bay of Fundy, secure the most of their bait from Grand Manan, Campobello and Passama-quoddy bay. A very peculiar state of affairs exists there. Looking at our reports, you will see that the sardine or herring industry of Canada is a very small one, whereas as a matter of fact, the herring industry, _ which is the sardine industry referred to in this item, should be worth millions of dollars to the Dominion. But instead every dollar of that or the large portion of it goes to the United States. The herring industry of the United States is wholly in Canadian waters. To-day at Lubec, a seaport right on the American border, between New Brunswick and the United States, there are invested between one and two million dollars in machinery and factories owned by Americans for the manufacture of sardines. These sardines are caught in Canadian waters, taken over to the American shores, and there sold to the American canners. They are nothing more or less than the small herring. The sardines or small herrings canned, measure from four to six inches. Any one who has studied the herring industry knows that it takes three years for a herring to mature in order to bear young. The value of the sardines put up in these cans amounts to something like $3,000,000, from which Canada gets no benefit, except what it realizes from the sale of these small herrings which are less than three years of age.
The fishermen are sending tens of thousands of casks of herring out of Canadian waters across to the American side to be manufactured and sent throughout the world. And they are nothing more or less than the small herring which belong to us and ought to be secured as bait for our fishermen. Now, the question of bait is becoming a very serious one. If you are going to deplete the Canadian waters of bait, our fishermen cannot carry on their business. A few years ago I brought to the attention of the government the fact that our fishermen are actually prevented from buying herring in Canada by a syndicate of American canners. The ordinary price for bait is from $2 to $4 a hogshead. But certain factories in the United States wanted all the herrings that were caught. They formed a syndicate and bound the weir fishermen of New Brunswick not to sell a single hogshead of bait or herring to any one except themselves, and they would take all that were offered. The consequence was that, when one of our vessels went to get bait, the weir fisherman said he was not selling any. Why ? ' Well, I have sold it all to Mr. So and So, of Lubec. and he is going to buy all we offer ; but, if we should sell you a hogshead of

bait be would take none from us.' Therefore, though they had been offered as high as $60 a hogshead and were getting only $4 from the American canners, our vessels could not get a single hogshead of bait This is one of the conditions that the government, I am glad to see, are spending $10,000 to investigate.
These fish are caught in weirs. The government licenses these fishing sites and charges a license fee of $5 a year. I know of people living in New York who pay $5 a year license fee, and then sublet the site so secured for $2,500 a year. These websites are worth all the way from $1,000 to $4,000 a year, and they are nearly all in the possession of a few gentlemen-and I know of one lady, she being the one to whom I have just referred, ns receiving $2,500 for the sublease-who do not reside on Grand Manan or near the fisheries, who are not interested in the fisheries except as holders of these licenses, which they sublet to' parties who fish on these islands. This thing has been going on for years.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: Do I understand the hon. gentleman to say that these licenses are all held by Americans ?


Albert James Smith Copp: Oh, no. But I do say that the parties do not reside where the weir fishing is going on.


David Henderson: How long is one of these licenses good for ? '


Albert James Smith Copp: For a year, and the charge is $5 a year. Something should be done, and I am glad that the minister is investigating this matter in order that the license fee may be increased and the arrangement made different from what it is at the present time.
Now, the situation in regard to bait is becoming so acute with us that we have asked the government to erect bait freezers. I am glad lo say that the government have voted the money to erect these freezers in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. These have proved of tremendous benefit to our fishermen. We have in the province of Nova Scotia, I think, something like 40,000 men engaged in the fisheries. For a period generally of about six weeks in the summer they are unable to procure any bait at all. And, the season when this condition exists is the very best fishing season. The government, by erecting these bait freezers, have placed the fishermen in such a position that they can store bait when it is plentiful, and take it out during the season when bait cannot otherwise be procured, and so continue tlieir fishing, as they have not been able to do for some years past. The bait has to come from Grand Manan, where the sardines are caught. I congratulate the minister on deciding to have this question investigated.
The dog-fish referred to by one hon gentleman has become a serious menace to our Mr. COPP.
fisheries in Nova Scotia. If the problem is not dealt with in some way, it is going to seriously affect the fishery industry of the Dominion. I have here a copy of the Halifax ' Herald,' of October 3rd, which shows how the dog fish is helping to destroy this industry in Nova Scotia. This newspaper tells of ' Half a million shortage in our western fisheries.' ' It is estimated that west of Halifax'-that is, in the five counties of Lunenburg, Shelburne, Queen's, Yarmouth and Digb.v-1* the fishing catch is $400,000 to $600,000 below the average this year.'


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: It is all of that.


Albert James Smith Copp: And this newspaper says that the dog fish and the scarcity of bait are the chief causes. If, in one year we lost in five counties a sum equal to $400,000 to $600,000 through tlie dog fish and the scarcity of bait, hon. gentlemen can see what this means to the whole fishing industry of the maritime provinces. The bait question, I am glad to say, is one with which the government is dealing. And I believe that they are dealing witli it in the right way, and in such a way that, in a short time it will be satisfactorily dealt with.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Wbnt is the size of this fish ?


Albert James Smith Copp: From a foot to two feet in length.


David Henderson: W-hy are they called dog fish ?


Albert James Smith Copp: I do not know. They are a
species of Shark. They are very pugnacious and destroy everything that comes in their way.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: They are the most aggressive fish in the water.


Albert James Smith Copp: By long odds. Formerly they visited us annually, but remained for only a week or ten days. They struck in about May and would remain in the Bay of Fundy St. Mary's Bay and adjacent waters for about a week or ten days and then would disappear. While they were with us, of course, no fishing was done. The moment they struck in. the fishermen came ashore and remained idle. Of late years they are remaining the whole year round. If they are to remain with us in the future the fishing industry will become almost a thing of the past. Last year, strange to say. they made their appearance on the banks for the first time in the history of the bank fishery.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: They appeared three or four years ago.


Arthur Samuel Kendall: Fourteen years ago- in 1889.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: Not in any number, I think.


Albert James Smith Copp: The suggestion I have to make is in line with that of the hon. member for



[Stage Direction]
Lunenburg (Mr. Kaulbach). The only way in which to deal with this question of the dog fish is by a bounty from the government Whether it should be a bounty to reduction works or to the fishermen is a question we have to consider. Of course, 1 am in favour of a bounty to the fishermen. I think that a bounty direct to the fishermen would stimulate the fishermen to catch the fish, whereas, if the bounty were given to the reduction works they might take advantage of it, and the fishermen would get no | benefit from it. In the county of Digby last year. I had the representatives of a Philadelphia firm come down and they went to Tiverton and Briar Island with a view to erecting reduction works. The only thing they were afraid of was that they could not secure sufficient fish to keep the works going. They told us that if the government would agree to give a bounty on the dog fish, so that the fishermen would catch them, they would at once talk business with us j as to establishing the reduction works. If we had reduction works situated at three or four places in the province where they catch these fish and could sell them, it would be a profit to the fishermen and they would engage in that kind of fishing. As it is, dog fish does not seem to be worth anything. There is nothing we can get out of it unless we cut the liver out and extract the oil. But the oil that is taken from the fish is not sufficient to justify the fishermen in engaging in that fishery. I am going to ask the minister if it is not possible for him to add to the item now under discussion a clause that will enable the commission to investigate and report upon the dog fish nuisance. The sum of 810,000 is more than enough to pay all the expenses of investigation that is required in the Bay of Fundy, and all that is needed is to give the commissioners power to investigate the dog fish nuisance. Now, the lobster industry is referred to by the minister, and I must congratulate this government on taking that up and appointing a commission which has done this country immense benefit in the report they have made. It almost solves the lobster problem. Everyone knows that the lobster industry to-day is worth in the province of Nova Scotia alone 83,000,000, whereas thirty years ago there was nothing in it. I believe the same result in regard to dog fish can be accomplished through this commission that the minister now provides if it is properly conducted. Another thing I wish to refer to is the license taken out by American fishermen. Atnericans are taking fish in our waters, and before they can do so they have to procure a license and pay so much a ton. But they ton their vessels in the United States, and when they come to Canadian ports they pay a tonnage on the American register, that is not one-lialf as high as the Canadian register. Therefore a vessel that measures eighty tons by the Canadian register would only measure forty tons by the
American register, and when they come into Canada and take out this license to fish they purchase their license on the American register, which only shows forty tons whereas they should pay a license on our own Canadian tonnage. I think the minister should make a regulation which will compel them to pay this license on the Canadian register.
Mr. KAULBACH, I feel satisfied that it is better to give the bounty to the fishermen than to give it to reduction works. Let the bounty be given to fishermen as an inducement to them to engage in catching this fish. The reduction works can then come in and receive their profit by utilizing the dog fish as a fertilizer. The difficulty is to bring the dog fish in to shore in a proper condition to be utilized, but that difficulty can be overcome by using lime. They can take out a few barrels of lime with them, and by its use prevent the fish from decomposing or becoming offensive to the sense of smell. They can do the same with the debris that is taken from the trimmings of fish. It can be cured in such a way that it will not he offensive, and become solid matter by placing with it quantities of lime. In that way the reduction works will get the benefit in the end without any bonus being given to them by this government. But let the bounty be given as I already stated, to the fishermen directly.
The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: 
Charles Edwin Kaulbach: What has been the expenditure so far in the Behring Sea matter V


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: In 1901-2 the expenditure was 82,956; last year it was only 887. The whole expenditure is somewhat between 850,000 and 860,000.
Towards providing for a steamer to replace the ' Acadia,' a,nd one to replace the ' Petrel ' on the great lakes, $75,000.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: The Acadia was offered for sale some time ago, was she sold '!


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes, she was sold by tender, after all her fittings had been taken out of her, anything that was of any value. There were two tenders, one for 86,050 from St. John, and one for 80,000 from Halifax, the latter of which we accepted. She was sold about two months ago.


Richard Blain: Was any money expended on her last year ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes. to repair and put her in commission, but the vessel was perfectly useless. The vessel was condemned, and none of the officers would risk their lives on her. She had been kept up from year to year by repairs, until finally she became so old and useless that we thought we would get rid of her. I think what we took out of her was worth $5,000 or $6,000.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I did not catch the hon. gentleman's remark with regard to the amount that was realized on her.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: 


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What about the 'Petrel ' ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: The ' Petrel ' will be put to the service of the buoys. She is not considered fit for the service which she has been doing for the last two or three years. She is not fast enough. We are the laughing stock of the Americans and our fishermen complain that she does not afford the protection that is necessary. We want to replace her with a 15 or 16 knot boat so that we can catch those Americans who are poaching in our waters.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You are going to use her for another purpose ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have you bought any new boats to replace these ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: No, the 'Acadia' has not been replaced. The ' Petrel ' is doing service. We are asking for $75,000, but this is only a preliminary expenditure. To replace the ' Acadia ' by a 16-knot steamer we will require from $150,000 to $175,000. We can replace the ' Petrel ' with a boat constructed in some of the ship-yards in Canada at a cost of from $50,000 to $75,000.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Why do you not get a turbine ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. I hope we may some day.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: Will the boat to replace the ' Acadia ' be of	steel ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. Yes, and she will be armed as well.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: Don't you think wood would suit as well to traverse the shore ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then you are buying one and building the other ?
The	MINISTER	OF	MARINE	AND
FISHERIES. We do not intend to buy either. We intend to have the boat to replace the ' Petrel ' constructed here according to plans made by the department, and Mr. BLAIN.
for which we will get tenders from Canadian firms.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: And the other ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We will have it constructed on plans prepared by the officers of the departmen t.
Mr-. KAULBACH. Is it under the consideration of the government to grant a bounty to encourage steel ship-building in Canada ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: That has been talked of a good deal, but I am not in a position to state whether the government has considered the question or not.
Further amount required for building and maintenance of fish breeding establishments and lobster hatcheries and securing seed lobsters during the fish season for distribution, in depleted localities, $15,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I would like to ask the hon. minister if he has come to any decision regarding the application made last year for the establishment of a fish hatchery on the Beaver river in the county of Grey near the Georgian bay. It is in close proximity to where the fish ova are caught and would in. my judgment be a splendid place for a hatchery. I mentioned It last year to the hon. gentleman's predecessor.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: We propose to establish eight new hatcheries which will be provided for out of this sum, and the one to which the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sproule) makes allusion is provided for. The exact site has uot yet been decided by the department. The conditions of the place mentioned by the hon. gentleman as far as they have been ascertained by the officials entirely meet the requirements.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am sure the people of that section will be grateful for it as they have thought for a long time that this place was a very suitable one and a fish hatchery will be very useful there.


Albert James Smith Copp: I wish to ask the hon. minister if it is the Intention to establish a hatchery in the Bay of Fundy ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Yes. There are demands for thirteen new hatcheries, but. as I have stated, provision is made this year for. eight.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: How many are there for Lunenburg


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: There is one for the district combining the counties of Digby, Annapolis and Yarmouth, but the exact situation has not yet been decided on.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I would ask, Mr. Chairman, if the hon. minister does not think it is fair that the county of Lunenburg should have one ? It excels any other county In the industry of fishing. We have

a number of canneries in the county and I think we certainly should have a hatchery. Would the hon. minister reconsider and give us one ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I am not an expert in these matters, because I am a new hand at it, and when you ask me about sites for hatcheries I will have to depend a great deal on the officers of my department unless I can go myself and visit the places. It is very hard for me to fix on one place or the other unless my officials advise me.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: If my hon. friend will consider the record we hold in regard to fisheries I think he will see that it warrants him in giving one at least to the county of Lunenburg. I think I have a knowledge of the matter equal to that of any commissioner or of any one else he can send to make inquiry.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I would support my hon. friend from Lunenburg (Mr. Kaulbach). He has succeeded in taking the fishing industry away from Halifax to Lunenburg and it is the head centre of the fishing industry in Nova Scotia to-day. Besides, it is near the county of the hon. Minister of Finance and some benefit might overflow into Queen's But. I think in deference to the fishing industry, there should be a station in Lunenburg.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: In regard to the remark of the hon. member for Colchester (Mr. Gourley) that Lunenburg is the centre of the fishing industry I would say that in one sense only that is correct. Lunenburg is the centre of the deep-sea fishery, but it is not the centre of the lobster fishery which is the subject under discussion. I think I represent more lobsters than any body else in this House.


David Henderson: We think so on this side of the House.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: And I do not mean to call my constituents in all cases lobsters either. The lobster industry is a very important one in the counties that I represent. The hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries has been too modest in his statement. He has recently made some experiments in the eastern part of Nova Scotia in regard to the propagation of lobsters which have been remarkably successful, so much so that I question whether in the future it will be necessary for us to do as much in the matter of lobster hatcheries as in the past. The experiments that have recently been made by Mr. Barker at Foureliu in Richmond county have been remarkably successful.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: What is the nature of them ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: It is the creation of the lobster pound into which seed lobsters purchased from the fishermen
are thrown, and then, as the Irishman says, they let nature take its course. There were no special arrangements for conserving the seed lobsters and the fishermen were very apt to destroy them. Although the law forbids that, still you cannot always enforce these laws. The action recently taken by the minister was to offer a price for the preserving of the seed lobster. That was then taken to the pond and placed under proper supervision and the development has been very remarkable. Of course this work may be said to be yet experimental, but it has been so successful that I should think that in most parts of the country they would prefer this natural development of the lobster to the creation of lobster hatcheries. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries is to be congratulated upon the great success that has crowned his efforts in that direction.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I have been urging that suggestion for years, the use of natural pounds where there is a flow of clear fresh salt water at every' tide. We have several of these in my county, one east of Chester- where there is now a cannery at the town of Chester-and one at the mouth of the La Have river, and both are admirably placed for the purpose. I am satisfied to allow the minister to have a claw on a portion of the claim, but I would rather not see him obtain the whole of it. I want him to be as a friend generous in this matter, and 1 think my request is reasonable, and one which the Minister of Marine and Fisheries will see to be in the interest of the fishermen of my county. It is right for the fishermen there to have a claim to at least a portion of such benefits. The county of Lunenburg, from Queen's to the border of Halifax county is one continuous line of ' shore fishermen, and I will ask the hon. minister to look carefully into this matter and give me at least a hatchery for one of these pounds.


Albert James Smith Copp: I am perfectly satisfied that Lunenburg should have the credit of representing the largest fishing county in Nova Scotia, but I wish to warn him of one thing, that he has so little advantage in this respect that it is not very much to brag about. In Digby last year the total catch was $1,438,942, whereas in Lunenburg it was $1,484,000, or a difference of only $45,000 in favour of Lunenburg. I wish to draw his attention to this, that while the yield in Digby has been going forward by leaps and bounds, Lunenburg has gone behind. Therefore, unless there is a change in Lunenburg very soon, I shall have the proud distinction of representing the largest fishing county in Nova Scotia.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: I can easily explain that and show very clearly the position with regard to the catch of lobsters in my county. The lobsters captured in my county are largely taken from my county into the adjoining counties of Queen's and Halifax and

are counted as a catch for these counties, when in reality Lunenburg is deserving of all that credit.
To increase the salaries of R. N. Venning, $150 ; F. H. Cunningham, $100 ; D. H. Fraser, $150 ; J. F. Fraser, $450 ; F. Anderson, $150 ; J. M. Lalonde, $150 ; C. W. White, $100 ; J. M. McCharles, $200, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $1,450.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why do you require all these increases ? Have these men not been getting any increase in salary for some years ?
The ' MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES. Most of them have not got the ordinary increase, some of them for four years and some of them for less. I will enumerate the different officers. Take Mr. Venning. His salary is $2,050, and this increase makes it $2,200. He joined the service in 1869, and has been strongly recommended for the maximum of $2,400 for his special services in connection with the Behring sea arbitration and other international as well as intercolonial affairs. He is one of our most capable officers in the Fisheries Department. He lias assisted at these different commissions and rendered most valuable services, and I do not know how it was that he remained at such a low salary, and it has been thought proper to increase his salary by $150. As regards Mr. Cunningham, I may say that his duties have been increased very largely. He is a first-class clerk in the department, and is also inspector of fish hatcheries throughout the Dominion, a very important and growing work, which keeps him travelling a great deal. He has perfected a device for carrying fish long distances which has been successfully employed, for instance, in stocking the waters of British Columbia with bass, where the fish were canned 2,800 miles. Ho lias been twenty years in the service in all kinds of work, in connection witli commissions and special inquiries, and I consider him deserving of the increase.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: His present salary is how much ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: One thousand six hundred and fifty dollars. Mr. B. H. Fraser is a graduate and medallist of the Royal Military College and has been in the department since 18S9. He was employed in the office of the chief engineer, and in 1885 he was appointed assistant engineer in the absence of the chief engineer. I may say in regard to some of these officers, that if they were in other departments in the outside service they could get much larger salaries than they are getting, and some of them have tendered their resignations, because, as the members of the committee are perfectly aware, engineers or experts, men with a certain technical knowledge, are at present being looked for, and it is in view of this fact that I have thought proper to make Mr. KAULBACH.
these increases. Mr. J. F. Fraser is in a similar position. He has charge of all the buoys and lights on the upper St. Lawrence and the lakes, and down as far as the gulf. He is a capable engineer and we cannot really keep him at a salary of $1,550. He will leave the service if he does not receive a larger salary. He is also a medalist of the university.
Mr. Anderson is a graduate of the Royal Military College. He has been engaged in the hydrographic survey since his appointment, in October, 1893. He is receiving $1,050, anil it is proposed to place him at $1,200. He lias charge of the survey in .Manitoba and the North-west Territories. Mr. Lalonde has been receiving $850 and it is proposed to place him at the head of his class. He has been highly recommended by the deputy minister and accountant for his increase. He received no increase for years and years, and is a very capable officer in the department. He is one of those who would certainly leave the service if he did not get better remuneration for ills services. Mr. White joined the service in 1S93. Ii is proposed to increase his salary to $900. For the past year he has had very important work to do in connection with the revenue, and is a very painstaking clerk. Mr. McCharles joined the service in 1893 -and is receiving $700. It is now proposed to raise him to $900. He is a good stenographer and typewriter, and at present has charge of the work of despatching all mail matter, which was formerly done by a first-class clerk. He was strongly recommended for an increase by tlie deputy minister.
To promote Jules d'E. Clement from a second-class to a first-class clerkship, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $300.
To promote M. C. Doyle from a junior second to a second-class clerkship, $100.
To provide salary for A. M. Ross as a junior second class clerk, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $900.
To provide for the salary of F. H. Houde as a junior second-class clerk, $600.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: As regards Mr. Clement, I may say that he is my private secretary. He had been in the service as private secretary to the Minister of Public Works before he became my private secretary. It is proposed to make him a first-class clerk, which is the rank of nearly every one of the private secretaries to the ministers. He writes both English and French.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What salary would that give him ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: $1,400 and the amount which is allowed to him as private secretary, $000. He is a stenographer in French and English, so that I save the salary of an English stenographer. Miss Doyle is an old employee of the department, appointed in 1892-I mean she has been employed for a long time. She is assistant private seere-

tary, being an expert stenographer, and typewriter, and I think an increase of $100 to her is not too much.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is her salary now 1


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: $1,000. Mr. Ross has been in charge of the fisheries museum, and has also been employed in connection with fish' breeding. It is now proposed to put him in the Inside service at a salary of $900, being the amount he now receives in the outside service. Mr. Houde is a young clerk who enters at the foot of the ladder at $000. He is a stenographer, and a useful young man.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There are two new clerks appointed, then ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: To fill vacancies. There was one pensioned and one transferred. The private secretary of the former Minister of Marine and Fisheries, Mr. Hunter, was transferred to the Department of Public Works. That is the only appointment that was made.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. minister did not tell us when these employees got the last increase.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Mr. MeCharles was kept out of his increase for four years. Mr. Yenning was kept out of his increase for three years. Mr. Cunningham has $50 besides the regular increase. As I have stated, he is a technical officer.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How do you regard him as having technical knowledge, if he has been a clerk in the department steadily getting the regular increase ?


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: Mr. Cunningham is from the old country. He has special work to perform, and the experience he has acquired in the department entitles him to a larger salary. He is inspector of fish-breeding establishments, having made a special study of that branch of the work. What I say for one is applicable to the others ; that is, that these increases are either to correct an in* justice that has been done or to render justice to officials who, in any other department of the public service, would be entitled to the salaries that I have thought proper to allow them. I do not know them personally, except those with whom I come in contact, like Mr. Yenning, Mr. Cunningham and Mr. Clement. The others have been recommended by the deputy minister ; and, after considering their cases, I came to the conclusion to recommend the increases.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not wish to be understood as objecting to these increases ; [DOT]but I rise for the purpose of calling attention to the fact that we contended that 428
great injustice had been done to many members of the civil service for several years after the hon. gentleman's friends came in, by depriving them of the statutory increases to which they were entitled ; and now the hon. gentleman proposes to make those increases up. We have had sharp arguments on this subject in previous years, and I am glad that the ministers now recognize that they were wrong in the past. If they had followed the practice of their predecessors, it would not have been necessary to make such large increases at the present time. Most of these employees would have reached the salaries they are getting by means of the ordinary annual increases instead of getting these increases in a lump sum.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I do not cast any blame on anybody. I found the cases to be as I have stated, and I tried to deal with them to the best of my knowledge and judgment.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman will not try to fix the blame on anybody, but it is our duty to fix it on the parties who are blameworthy, and that is the hon. gentleman's friends.


William Roche: I would ask my hon. friend from East Grey (Mr. Sproule), if he considers that the Liberal party have neglected certain oflicials for- five years, what would he think of the former party, who neglected to give certain officials their statutory increases for eighteen years ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not know of any such cases. I think the hon. gentleman is drawing on his imagination for his alleged facts.


William Roche: I beg to correct the hon. gentleman. I can give the names of the individuals. I know them perfectly well.


David Henderson: Keep them till next week.
Some resolutions reported.
The MINISTER OF FINANCE moved the adjournment of the House.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What work are we to take up on Monday ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: We may take up first one or two Bills which stand in the name of my hon. friend the Minister of Justice, and then go into Committee of Supply. If the Minister of Trade and Commerce is in his place we will give his estimates priority, as he is not able to be present in the evening. I would like to be free, however, from this time to take anything in the estimates, because they are narrowed down to small limits.' I shall be glad to indicate those we prefer.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 11.20 p.m.
[Stage Direction]

Monday, October 12, 1903.