1903-08-24

Mr. A. A. WRIGHT (South Renfrew).: Mr. Speaker. Before the Orders of the Day are called, I wish to call your attention to a number of incidents that took place at the Canadian Pacific Railway station in my own town of Renfrew yesterday. I do this to attract notice not to the incidents themselves but to the alleged causes of these incidents. I was taking a short stroll yesterday morning on one of our residential streets in Renfrew, in the neighbourhood of the Canadian Pacific Railway station, when 1 heard a tremendous cheering in the direction of the station. As our town is rather noted for its quietness and orderly conduct, especially on the Sabbath day, I thought it very strange and as the noise continued and the cheering became more boisterous, 1 went to the station to see what was the matter. As I approached I could see a train standing there and people running in and out of the rear end in a hurried manner, like bees from a hive, and when I reached the station, the train was moving out. I went on the station platform and as 1 reached it our village constable and a driver came up and having alighted the constable said that it was no use trying to stop the train then or trying to do anything when it arrived at Pembroke because you could not tell who the culprits were, and it might be dangerous to go in to arrest any one on the train. I was told that the trouble was Mr. HACKETT.
that a number of the passengers who came off this train which was the second train going through that morning, got off the train in search of water, and not finding any at hand went across the street to an ice house belonging to a townsman and undertook to take the ice out in order to melt it down. Three or four men went up into the ice house and threw down the ice and three or four others got the baggage trucks and commenced hauling it to the train, while others carried it into the car in order to provide themselves with water. A number of others seeing a pile of dressed lumber there, belonging to Mr. McDougal, a brother of the Auditor General, came to the conclusion that it would be a good opportunity to improve their sleeping facilities in the car, so they took four or five hundred feet of the lumber into the car while the others were taking the ice. There was also a car on the siding in which a man was preparing to ship a horse and a number of these passengers took out the hay and straw and carried it into the cars in order to make beds for themselves.
I would wish to draw attention particularly to the alleged fact that the origin of all this trouble was that there was not sufficient water in the train for the passengers ; it seems to me that something should be done to prevent a recurrence of incidents of this kind. As another train was expected to pass in fifteen minutes our town constable came to the* conclusion that he had better remain and see that no trouble occurred on its arrival and I thought that 1 would remain also. In about fifteen minutes another train came in and immediately upon its arrival a very well dressed lady and gentleman came out of the train and wanted to know if there was any place where they could get water to drink. They were shown into the ladies waiting room and they got water. Then half a dozen more came out and wanted to know if they could get some. I pointed to a pump across the way, and they went across with tins and all manner of dishes. Seeing that they were really in need of water I went through the cars one after another, and I found that not one of the tanks had water in it. I went to the conductor and asked why there was no water in these cars for the passengers. 'Well,' he said I cannot tell you how it is but it has all disappeared, and I do not know what we are to do.' I said, ' but there is an abundance here.' He said. * It would never to do to leave this train here and there are no hands to put in the water, but I will telegraph from here and see that arrangements are made at Chalk River, the divisional point, to supply the train with water. Furthermore, after I leave here I wish you would go in and see that the operator sends this telegram. After the train passed, I went in and asked the operator if he had telegraphed and he said he had. I wish to inform the House that these gentlemen

945S
treated me in the most courteous maimer, both the conductor and the operator, but they said they were utterly helpless to do anything. It seems strange to me that a train like this, leaving Ottawa at live o'clock in the morning and reaching Renfrew at 8.30 and not likely at the rate it was travelling to reach Chalk River before ten or eleven o'clock, should not be supplied with water. I believe the attention of the House has been drawn to this matter before and I think it is best it should be drawn to it once again, in order that we may see if the Canadian Pacific officials cannot be induced to do something to remedy this evil.
There is another thing to which I wish to draw the attention of the House. On Friday about forty-five persons from our town and the vicinity wished to go west, and went down to the train, but when they got there they found the train was filled and it was impossible for a single individual to get on board. They waited until Saturday and then went down again but again found the train was crowded. A number did get on but the conductor told them to get off. While some of them were being put off the train others got on at the other end and the majority of them got on board. Now, it seems to me that this is an evidence that it is time we had some more facilities for getting out into the North-west than we have now, and that it is a good argument in favour of a transcontinental railway-that, as the right hon. the Prime Minister said, this is not the time for deliberation but this is the time for action, and every one of the people there who wanted to get on that train said the same thing. I move that the House do now adjourn.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: I presume the hon. gentleman does not suppose we can do more than draw the attention of the Railway Committee to the matter to which he has referred.
Motion to adjourn negatived.



IMPERIAL CONFERENCE CORRESPONDENCE.

Mr. R. L. BORDEN (Halifax).: Before the Orders of the Day are called I would like to draw the attention of the House to a press despatch that appeared on Saturday to this effect:
Correspondence on the subject of the publication of the proceedings at the colonial conference of last summer has been issued. In reply to a telegram from Mr. Jos. Chamberlain, Lord Minto, on behalf of the Canadian government, objected to any departure from the arrangement previously made that the proceedings should he considered confidential. Newfoundland, and Cape Colony took the same positon. New Zealand had no objection to the publication of the discussion on the trade question, while Australia favoured the publication of a full report
and Natal replied that that government had no objection to publication in full.
I would like to ask the government whether or not this statement is correct so far as the Canadian government is concerned, and whether or not the correspondence will be laid on the Table of the House V I suppose there can be no further objection to that as the papers appear to have been placed before the imperial parliament.
The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir
Wilfrid Laurier). Some time ago, the attention of the government was called to this subject and I informed the House at that .time that there had been some correspondence concerning it, but, that we were not at liberty to lay the papers on the Table of the House, and would require to have some further communication with the Colonial Office. We have had that communication, and have permission to lay the papers on the Table, which will be done,to-morrow.



TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION.

Robert Laird Borden: Before the Orders of the Day are called I would like to ask the government whether or not any further steps have been taken with regard to the proposed transportation commission. On the last occasion when I brought the matter to the attention of the House, the right lion. Premier (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) informed the House that a letter had been received from Sir "William Van Horne stating his inability to become a member of that commission. I think the right hon. gentleman was good enough, on that occasion, to hand me a copy of Sir William Van Horne's letter. Has the First Minister any thing further to communicate with regard to this matter ?


The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).: I will try to give further information on this subject also to-morrow.



QUESTION.


Mr. BLAIN asked :: How much was paid to James Cummings for remuneration, and how much for expenses in connection with his trip to South Africa ?
The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) in the absence of the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Rt. Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright). I beg to answer the hon. gentleman's (Mr. Blain's) question as follows :
The payments made to Mr. James Cummings in connection with his trip to South Africa were, for remuneration, $3,600 ; for expenses, $1,852 ; total, $5,452.



THE NATIONAL TRANSCONTINENTAL RAILWAY.

[Stage Direction]
House resumed adjourned debate on tlie motion of Sir Wilfrid Laurier for tlie House to go into committee on a certain proposed resolution respecting the construction of a National Transcontinental Railway, and the motion of Mr. Puttee in amendment thereto.
Mr. EDWARD HACKETT (West Prince).: Mr. Speaker, before addressing myself to the question before the Chair, I desire to thank the Minister of Militia and Defence (Hon. Sir Frederick Borden) for his kindness in agreeing, as leader of the House on Friday evening, to adjourn the debate at an early hour. It is what I should have expected from an old friend, and as he said that he extended his courtesy to me as an old friend, I thank him for his kindness on that occasion.
When a question of such magnitude as as the one now before the House comes up for decision, it becomes the duty of every hon. member who represents any portion of the people to state his views. Therefore, representing, as I do, an important constituency, I make no apologies when I rise, to speak on this important question. Sir, we are asked now, towards the end of a very protracted session to deal with this question which involves the expenditure of scores of millions of the people's money. This session began on the 12th of March, and it was not until the 30th of July that this measure was tabled. It is only now, after the session has lasted nearly six months that we are called upon to express our opinions and give our votes on the subject. I believe that a question involving such vast consequences to the people of this country should not be decided without being submitted to the people at the polls, for their opinion and their decision. We heard nothing of this question in the last general election. It was only on the 24th of November last, when Mr. Hays, in an interview with the correspondent of the Toronto ' Globe,' stated that It was the intention of the Grand Trunk to build a railway from North Bay to the shores of the Pacific, that we had the first intimation of this project. But we now find at the end of a session lasting, as I have said, nearly six months, that the government is to come to the aid of this company, and not only assist them to build the rail way, but actually build that expensive portion, 1,S00 miles long, from Winnipeg to Moncton, an undertaking which must cost over $100,000,000. This proposition comes before us without due information. The leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden, Halifax! day after day and week after week asked for information with regard to it, but no information was vouchsafed him until the 30th of July, when the Bill was placed on tire Table by the right hon. Prime Minister. Now, as showing the rights of the Hon. Mr. FIELDING.
people in a matter of this kind to have the question submitted to them I desire to quote a very high authority, one that I know will be accepted by hon. gentlemen opposite, and certainly will be approved by the right hon. leader of the House. I have here a speech delivered by Mr. Laurier, in 1880, in this House speaking to a motion made at that time he said :
It is the basis of all free government that the acts of the administration should be judged by the representatives of the people. In this case the same rule, it must be conceded, should apply. It is a well-known principle, that the people have a right to judge, not only of the honesty of those entrusted with the manage-met of their affairs, but even of their judgment in action. The people have a right to say they have erred in judgment. How are we to deal with or decide this question, or whether the government have accepted the best offer. It is impossible for the country to say ; we have only the word of the government. I am quite disposed to take the word of the government, as an individual, but not as a member of the House. As a representative of the people, I thiiik every one of us has a right to say the acts of the government should be done in broad daylight, so that every elector may have an opportunity of judging whether or not the government and every individual member was right, not only in motive, but in judgment. This is the reason of the motion, and I think it will be the duty of every member to affirm its principle, that nothing should be concealed from the representatives of the people.
Is this being done in broad daylight ? Have the elements of this measure been worked out in broad daylight ? Why, I remember when Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson was asked in the Railway Committee : Are you going to receive aid from the government 1 His answer was : That is a matter for consideration. The government would give us no information, and we certainly had no information from the directors of the Grand Trunk Railway Company. It is only now. after we have been thus long in session, that we are placed in a position to even consider this very important measure.
It is said that the questions involved in the building of this railway are not materially different from those involved in the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway. I shall show you, Sir, that the questions are entirely different. The Canadian Pacific Railway was the pioneer railway of the west. For years the government had been endeavouring to secure a company to build that railway. 'The hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) the other day read from a law placed upon the statute-books of this country by the Mackenzie government in 1877 inviting companies to tender for the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway, laying down the broad principle that there should be a bonus of land and a bonus of cash. In accordance with the statute, notices were inserted in botli the newspapers of Canada and of the United Kingdom, and in the leading periodicals

on the continent of Europe. What was the result of that ? After these notices had been given for a year the government received one tender, and. that tender was of no value, it was simply a mockery, and nothing was done. In 1880, when Sir John Macdonald. Sir Charles Tupper and other gentlemen, who were then at the head of the government, received this offer from the Canadian Pacific Kailway Company to build this great transcontinental line, it was in accordance with the statute placed on the statute-books of our country by Mr. Mackenzie, and that had not been acted upon by the Liberal party. The Conservative government succeeded in securing a company to build this railway. But the project was met with the greatest opposition on the part of hon. gentlemen now sitting on the treasury benches, then sitting on this side of the House. The most strenuous opposition that it was possible to give any measure was offered by these gentlemen to that great measure. I can well remember, because I had the honour of being a member of this House at that time, how clay after day, night after night, they rose in their places and denounced this measure as one antagonistic to the interests of Canada ; as one that would eventually place the country in the hands of a great syndicate. and would ultimately result in disaster to this country. Well, Sir, what do we find to-day ? The Conservative government succeeded in carrying through this great project. The Liberal-Conservative party, under the leadership of the late Sir John A. Macdonald, having as his lieutenant and Minister of Railways Sir Charles Tupper, Baronet, having also as his colleague Sir Hector Langevin, from the province of Quebec, and Sir Leonard Tilley, from the province of New Brunswick-those gentlemen, being at the head of affairs, called parliament to meet on the 9th day of December. 1880. There was no concealment, everything was done in broad daylight. Parliament assembled on the 9tli day of December, and on the 10th day of December Sir John A. Macdonald placed before parliament this resolution. He did not wait for four or five months, tampering with a company, selling the rights of the people to a company that would ruin the country. But on the second day after the meeting of parliament he laid on the Table of this House a resolution empowering the company to go on and build this railway.
Sir. these gentlemen were not satisfied, they believed that something more should bo done. They assembled their friends, and they said : We are going to obtain an offer from anothel" *syndieatej. Sfo they brought other gentlemen here, and after they got here it was found out that their offer was only a bogus offer, it was only an offer on paper, made by parties who had not the necessary means, who could not produce (he cash to enable them to go on and construct this great work. So their
unpatriotic effort failed. Well, now, we heard the hon. gentleman who addressed the House a moment ago (Mr. Wright), speaking of the great difficulty he had in the town of Renfrew yesterday with regard to immigrants I suppose, or perhaps parties of harvesters for the North-west, and he said that their experience showed that they wanted another transcontinental railroad. The police officials in the town of Renfrew, or in the township, were not sufficient to keep order, and they must have another transcontinental railway, without which there would be confusion, rebellion, riot, murder and destruction in this country. They must have another transcontinental railway in order that these poor people leaving Ottawa in the morning and arriving at Renfrew in three or four hours, might have water to drink on the train.
Now, Sir, reference has been made to What has been done by the Canadian Pacific Railway for this country. I want to quote you a few words from a speech delivered the other evening by the hon. member for Burrard (Mr. Maepherson), a very good speech, a very sensible speech, in which he bestowed the highest praise on the Canadian Pacific Railway Company and indirectly on the Liberal-Conservative'- party, which had pushed that project through. I wish to read from it at length, because some of his words should be written in letters of gold all over this country, as showing what that great railway has accomplished for Canada. He says :
I wish to show the House what has been accomplished by the construction of the great Canadian Pacific Railway.
Prior to the advent of this railway, British Columbia was a country isolated from eastern Canada, having nothing in common other than devotion to the old flag and yielding hommage to the same soverign. It was a country which, from its isolation, had no national aspirations. But its people were men of courage and determination in that small and isolated community, and they recognized the great future of British Columbia if it could only get a railroad carried through connecting the eastern part of Canada with the west. The building of the Canadian Pacific Railway has made what was once the fishing hamlet of New Westminster a large, thriving commercial and populous city. It made a new province for Canada, one of the brightest gems in the Crown of confederation.
Remember. Mr. Speaker, that I am quoting the words of a gentleman who is no doubt a strong Liberal, but who is honest enough to state his views iu this way :
It made the men who, while proud to say that they are British Columbians, still prouder to say they are Canadians. It made what was in 1883 a primeval forest into our present great city of Vancouver. It made it possible where 20 years ago stood only the Douglas fir and the British Columbia cedar, that a city of 35,000 people live to-day. Where not one dollar of customs revenue was collected 20 years ago, where the past year the sum of $1,388,709 was collected. It made possible, where banks were

unknown, where to-day stand six of the leading banking institutions of Canada. Where bank clearances were unknown, to where during the first six months of the present year the clearances amounted to nearly 29 millions dollars. It made the great seaport of Vancouver and created what last year was the fourth largest port of customs collections in the Dominion. Where ships were unknown practically 20 years ago, to-day in the harbour of Vancouver boats flying almost every maritime flag in the world can be seen loading and unloading. It has made and created a new trade with the Orient. It made and created a new trade with Australia and New Zealand. It has made and created a new trade with the United States. It made and created a new province whose inhabitants are a happy and contented Canadian people. It made possible the development of a section of our mining country, which only goes to prove that we have greater than has been found. It made it possible for us to produce in the last 16 years 31,640,203 ounces of silver, valued at $18,475,882 ; it made it possible for us to produce 280,200,845 pounds of lead, valued at $10,447,540 ; it made it possible for us to produce 92,652,480 pounds of copper, valued at $12,333,200 ; or a total value of silver, lead and copper of $41,256,603.' And prior to the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway this condition of things was unknown in British Columbia.
Sir, no greater tribute could be paid by any one to tbe benefit of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and to tbe wisdom of the great Liberal-Conservative party of Canada, that party which have been untiring in their efforts to promote the interests of the people of this country, notwithstanding that hop. gentlemen opposite preached the blue ruin and the desolation which would overtake this country by the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway, which nevertheless has accomplished all that has been stated by the hon. member for Burrard. The hon. gentleman has not only paid a compliment to the Canadian Pacific Railway, but he has also paid a tribute to the energy, ability, integrity and honesty of the Liberal-Conservative party. This proposed railway is a differenet affair altogether. At the time the Canadian Pacific Railway was undertaken, it was undertaken by a company receiving, it is true, large bonuses in land and money, but it was undertaken as a pioneer railway. It was to open up those great fertile western plains that were lying unknown as a sealed book as far as the people of Canada were concerned, known only to the Indian and the fur trader. Now we find that owing to the construction of this railway, owing to the great work done by the Liberal-Conservative party 100,000 settlers have been taken into that country, each year and yet hon. gentlemen opposite endeavour to take the credit for the present tide of immigration. It was said by a leading member of this House some years ago that they were only flies on the wheel and as far as immigration is concerned, they still are only flies on the wheel. It was the great Liberal-Conservative party that opened up Mr. HACKETT.
this country by building this railway through those fertile plains and thus enable people from the congested centres of Europe and the United States to go in there and create for themselves happy homes on the soil of Canada.
One great objection I have to the resolution is that it contemplates the building of a railway without this parliament knowing at all what are the conditions of the country to be traversed by this railway. The most complete information the right hon. gentleman can give us was the statements of missionaries and explorers whose information has been gained some two hundred years ago. He had no recent surveys to guide him. We do not know the conditions of the country through which this railway passes. I am in hopes that we have as promising a country as that which has been described by hon. gentlemen opposite, and as that which has been termed by the hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) a great northern empire, but before we throw away millions of dollars of the people's money on building a railway, we should have some data, some facts, some surveys, something to guide us as to the nature of the country, something to show whether the country can only produce forests of spruce, pine, cedar, &c., or whether it is capable of the production of grain crops upon which the people may subsist. The hon. member for North Renfrew (Mr. Maekie) stated the other evening that he had gone over a large part of the country to the north of us. The hon. gentleman does not address this House very frequently, and I listened with much pleasure to his statements, because I am sure that he made them in sincerity and honesty, but the most he told us in regard to the agricultural capabilities of the country was that he saw cabbages and turnips growing. He did not know whether the country was capable of growing wheat or not, but he was certain that it could grow vegetables. It may be possible that, when the timber is cleared away, if you have a good clay soil, and if you have no early frosts, you may be able to produce wheat, but if the season is short you may only be able to produce short lived vegetables. The hon. gentleman said another thing that he may also have considered to be true, but, if it is true, it is miraculous. He said that the rivers flowed up hill in that country, that a great plateau existed extending for hundreds of miles-1 think he said that he had explored 500 miles of this tremendous plateau-and that the rivers flowed both ways upon it. We have no further data than that. We have nothing further to show us whether we would be justified in expending such an enormous amount of money to build this railway. What we insist upon, and what the people of this country, I am certain, will insist upon, is that this question shall not be pressed with undue haste through
9465	AUGUST 24, 1903	9466
this parliament, but that time shall be given for its consideration, that a matter of two or three months will not be sufficient and that after threshing it out in this parliament and after every phase of the subject has been considered by the representatives of the people, the matter shall be submitted to the people at the polls for consideration aird decision.
The hon. member for King's, P.E.I. (Mr. Hughes) has made a computation of the cost of the building of this railway. The hon. gentleman is no doubt a good business man and you would think that when he was dealing with figures he would have some regard for the accuracy of the estimate he made. He has made a singular estimate. He has estimated the cost of the line between Winnipeg and Moncton at $65,000,000, and of the line west of Winnipeg at $15,000,000. Thus the whole cash payment and liability incurred by the people for the road, according to that hon. gentleman, will be $80,000,000. Then he tells us that that liability in seven years will amount to 15 cents per head of the population. Even taking his own figures, and he was far away from the correct figures, because, a-s 1 stated at the beginning, the liability will be at least $150,000,000, he tells us that the interest charge on even this large amount will only entail on the people of this country a liability equal to 15 cents per head of the population. That is a most singular statement. If it is true that we are only going to expend $80,000,000 upon this great project, and if it is only going to cost the people 15 cents per head for seven years, we should make the hon. gentleman Minister of Finance, and let him carry on the affairs of the country, because, if he could do it as advantageously as his estimate would lead us to believe, we would all support him. But, there is another side to this question. The interest, as the hon. gentleman will see on this $80,000,000, at 84 per cent, which is about the lowest rate at which he can borrow money in the money markets of the world, would amount to over $3,000,000 per year. We have a population in this country of about 6,000,000, and if we divide 6,000,000 by 3,000,000 we will find that the interest charge will represent 50 cents per head of the population per year instead of 15 cents per head, which for a family of six people means an annual tax of $3. An estimate of six people to a family in Canada is a moderate one. We have families ranging from six to fifteen but if we place it at six and base our estimate on the amount which the hon. gentleman says the railway will cost, it will mean that the man living on his farm who has to work long hours to maintain his family, to clothe and feed them, will be called upon to contribute, in addition to his other taxes, to maintain municipal institutions and schools for the education of his children, to the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway 50 cents
per head, or $3 per family per year. This is a matter that should be seriously considered by the people of this country. The farmers of Canada have not riches to throw away in that direction. It is a matter to ponder over seriously as to whether the country can afford to undertake such a project as this. We have now two lines of railway running west of Winnipeg providing the best means of transport from the fertile plains of the west to Port Arthur. Let us then utilize our great water-ways and afford facilities such as has been suggested by the leader of the opposition. Accommodate the people of the country through means of utilizing the Intercolonial Railway and extending it to North Bay, and thus afford transportation facilities that will be equally efficient and will not cost one-fortieth part of the amount that the government are going to contribute to this Grand Trunk Pacific Railway scheme.
I heartily approve of the proposition of the leader of the opposition. It views the affairs of Canada from a broad standpoint, and it is a statesmanlike policy. Why did Mr. Blair resign ? Why did the late Minister of Railways and Canals resign a lucrative and honourable position in the cabinet ? It was because he could not conscientiously hold his position and support a measure of this kind. Mr. Blair had a strong conviction that where the people of Canada have expended from $71,000,000 to $72,000,000 in the construction of a railway from Halifax and St. John to Montreal ; while they were paying large interest on that amount year after year ; while it meant a large addition to the taxation of the country ; he could not conscientiously support a measure that would parallel that railway for the greater part of its length and render it almost useless from the point of view of carrying freight. My hon. friend from King's, P.E.I., (Mr. Hughes) told us the other night that this Grand Trunk Pacific Railway was going to be a great military line. The hon. gentleman got mixed up in his figures, because one time he told us that it would cost only $2.80 a head, and another time he told us that it would cost us 15 cents a head. I don't blame him at all for mixing up his figures because the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hughes) was seized with a fit of military enthusiasm. _ He imagines himself a Roberts, or a Kitchener, or a Wellington, or a Napoleon, standing somewherei at the eastern terminus of this great railway and looking along a line 3,000 miles in extent, seeing it carrying on its trains, soldiers, and guns, and armoured cars, and everything of that kind. It is no wonder he should forget Ids figures. Speaking of this great project, he said :
But there is something else which commends this proposition to roy approval.
This great military .man ; this great warrior for King's, P.E.I. !

If the time should ever come, and It will come through no fault of ours, when we may have to stand shoulder to shoulder in defence of our country, our institutions, and our laws, just think what a sense of security this continental railway extending from the impregnable fortress of Quebec, to a fortified port on the Pacific Ocean will give us. Our troops

Just think of his strategy; what a strategist the member for King's, P.E.I., is ? He spoke about conveying our troops 3,000 miles.
Our troops could easily be transferred from the west to the east and from the east to the west, and placed at any intermediate point. Should that day ever come, is there any man in Canada who would begrudge this contribution of 15 cents a year for fourteen years, for the power and security which such a line of communication could afford.
Sir, there was the spirit of military enthusiasm inflaming the hon. member for King's, P.E.I., but what do we And ? Only last Saturday evening in the good old city of Montreal, the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) who sits almost at the same desk with the hon. member (Mr. Hughes), denounced imperialism, denounced spending one cent of the people of Canada for imperial purposes or for imperial defence. How can these two gentlemen reconcile their position, and each support the same government. The hon. member for I.a-belle called Chamberlain almost an idiot and the Earl of Minto a second to him. While this great military strategist from King's, P.E.I. (Mr. Hughes) is going to build this railway for military purposes extending from the impregnable fortress of Quebec, as he says, to another impregnable fortress on the Pacific coast; while he is willing to spend millions of money for this, his confrere from Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) denounced the spending of one cent of public money for the purpose of defence in Canada. That is the kind of following the government has on the other side of the House.
I suppose, Sir, that after all that one thing which is expected from a member in this House is to speak in favour of the province whence he comes. I have said pretty much all I have to say in connection with this transcontinental line and I repeat again that the people of Prince Edward Island will expect some consideration from the government, and they will also expect that I should make reference to their claims.
I had the honour of moving an amendment a few days ago advocating that Prince Edward Island should be connectel with the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway. I presume this Grand Trunk Pacific Railway will be carried out. I do not know that our protest will have any effect on the government to prevent them from carrying out their views. It was my intention, if at all possible, to have the province of Prince Edward Island connected with this system of Railways. For years' we have been suffering in this island province for the want


Edward Hackett: of communication in the winter time. In summer time we have facilities for transporting our produce and developing our industries, but the great drawback is that when the ice forms in the Straits of Northumberland, Prince Edward Island is to a certain extent isolated and shut out from communication with the rest of the world. In 1873, when Prince Edward Island entered confederation, the government of Canada guaranteed that continuous steam communication would be established and maintained between Prince Edward Island and the mainland. Very little has been done to carry out that treaty. We have two winter steamers it is true, one of which is getting pretty old and will have to be replaced soon by a better one. The Postmaster General told us that this great railway scheme of the government was going to be a great transcontinental national railway which would unite all the provinces of the Dominion together, and I thought, now was the time for Prince Edward Island to assert herself and to show that if it was going to be transcontinental and national the little province of Prince Edward Island should not be neglected. I moved an amendment to the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Bill asking that the company should acquire the branch of railway from Sackville to Cape Tormentine, placing suitable steamships on the route between Cape Tormentine and Carleton point, constructing a pier at Carleton Point, and thus giving Prince Edward Island connection with this transcontinental railway.
While we have unexcelled fisheries around the coast of Prince Edward Island, these great resources remained undeveloped for the want of this communication with the mainland. Consequently, our young men are obliged to leave their homes in the autumn season and go to the lumber woods of Maine or New Brunswick for employment, although the waters of their own province contain this teeming wealth. Last winter a large portion of the products of the fisheries, after they had been frozen and prepared for the American market, remained at Georgetown until the month of April, owing to the fact that the government steamers were fast in the ice. As a result of that, our young men, who spent their money and their time in the fisheries, lost some $5,000 or $0,000 in cash. A petition was sent to the government asking the government to recoup them for this loss, inasmuch as it was occasioned by the want of government steamships for keeping up communication with the mainland ; and I hope that the government will see their way to reimburse these people, who are endeavouring to prosecute an industry of great value to the province and to the Dominion, in the loss they have sustained, and thus encourage them to continue in the industry for another year, and keep them from going to the United States. Is it any wonder that our popu-

lation has fallen off 5,000 or 6,000 in the last ten years when our young men have eo little encouragement to stay at home?
Referring again to my amendment, I was astonished to meet with the opposition of the lion. Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding). When he was in the province of Prince Edward Island he was very generous. When he had a candidate contesting an election, he would promise the people all kinds of things; but when he is asked to do anything in this parliament for the people, he forgets all his promises and pledges, and will not do anything at all. But, surjn'ised as I was at the action of the Minister of Finance, I was amazed at the conduct of the hon. member for King's, P.E.I. (Mr. Hughes), who said it was an unreasonable thing to ask that Prince Edward Island be connected with the mainland- that it was an unreasonable proposition that a pier should be built at Carleton Point, and that boats should be placed on the route between Carleton Point and Cape Town entitle. Sir, the fathers of confederation, the gentlemen who, on behalf of Prince Edward Island, negotiated the terms of union with the Dominion of Canada-the late Senator Hawthorne, the Hon. Alexander Laird, the Hon. James C. Pope, the Hon. George W. Howlan, the Hon. T. Heath Haviland- were all unreasonable men when they asked for this communication; and my hon. friend opposes them. I am almost ashamed to mention it, but I can only leave the hon. gentleman to the tender mercies of his constituents.
Another proposition was the building of a third steamer. I have already told you that one of the steamers, being some eighteen years of age, is growing old, and will shortly be unfit for the service, unless she is repaired. The other boat, the ' Miuto,' is a newer and better boat. But we want a third steamer. The people of Summer-side and of the western part of Prince Edward Island desire a steamer in that section of the country. We do not wish to deprive our friends in the east of their communication between Pictou and Georgetown; but we insist that between Summer-side or Carleton Point and Cape Tormentine communication should also be kept up ; and that cannot be done without another steamer. I was told by the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries a few days ago that the government had no intention of building another steamer for that service; but I do trust that while they are expending hundreds of millions of dollars in western Canada. they will see their way clear to do something for Prince Edward Island.
There are some other matters which I would like to bring to the notice of this hon. House, especially the right hon. leader of the government, whom I see in his place, and also the energetic and able Minister of Public Works (Hon. Mr. Sutherland), who is sitting beside him. I would like to see
a branch railway built from O'Leary Station, on the main line of the Prince Edward Island Railway, to the west coast of the island. I brought this matter to the notice of the hon. ex-Minister of Railways and Canals some time ago, and he gave me the answer that the question was under consideration. O'Leary Station is only twelve miles from Cape Wolfe, on the coast, which is about eighteen miles from the coast of New Brunswick, at the terminus of the Kent Northern Railway, which is operated from Richibucto to the Intercolonial Railway. I am informed by the gentlemen who own and operate that railway that if these twelve miles from O'Leary Station to the coast are built, they are willing to put on a steamship in the summer season between Prince Edward Island and the mainland, and thus to furnish another connection between tlio island and the Intercolonial Railway.
Another branch that is required is from Wiltshire, on the main line of the Prince Edward Island Railway, to Victoria Cra-paud, on the west shore of the island. We also require a branch from a point on the railway to New London on the north shore. These are sections of the country that require consideration in the way of improvements.
Sir, it lias been said by our opponents : You are making the same mistake that we made in 1880, when we opposed the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway; you have not learned by experience, and in opposing this measure you are opposing the best interests of the country. Sir, I deny that As I have already said, the Canadian Pacific Railway is the great pioneer railway of the North-west. At the time the fertile plains of that country were opened up, it was the duty of every man in Canada to see that the railway was assisted. But we have an alternative proposition made by the hon. leader of the opposition. That proposition is to utilize the Intercolonial Railway, which has cost the people of this country $71,000,000 or $72,000,000, and which is now extended to the city of Montreal; to extend it to North Bay on the Canadian Pacific Railway, and to the Georgian bay ; to provide proper terminal facilities there and at Port Arthur, because those who have studied the transportation question know that the largest quantities of wheat and other products of the west are carried by water; to nationalize the Canadian Pacific Railway around the north shore of Lake Superior, and make it a common highway for all railways. In this way, with a small expenditure of public money, you will place the farmers of the Northwest in direct communication with the people of the east, and make Montreal and Quebec the summer ports of Canada. Improve the terminal facilities at Montreal as well as at Quebec. Do the same thing for St. John and Halifax as winter ports, and yon will have Canada enabled to take her

position among the nations of the world with a moderate expenditure of public money, but do not pledge the credit of our country to this enormous expenditure while we have these facilities.
I oppose this resolution and the building of this railway on the following grounds : The government has no mandate from the people of Canada to build this railway. They are not authorized by the people of Canada to build it or to expend this large amount of public money in that way. If they desire to consult the people of Canada let them dissolve the House and go to the country on this question and we are not afraid to meet them in any part of Canada on this important point. I oppose it also because no surveys, or explorations, or estimates of the cost have been made. You know nothing of the mountains you will have to pierce,' or the rivers you will have to bridge, or the valleys you will have to traverse, in building this railway. It is not a business proposition that you should undertake a work of such great magnitude without first having estimates and reports by competent surveyors. I oppose this measure too because the House had been in session from the 12th of March until the 30th of July before this resolution was placed on the Table. It was not hi the form of a consultation with hon. members of this House, it was simply a contract binding hard and fast the people of Canada to an agreement. I oppose it, Sir, because it is the dying kick of a moribund government, of aj government that is falling to pieces day by day. What have we seen within the last year, or within the last six months ? Two of the leading members of that government resigning their portfolios and going into the cold shades of opposition. The hon. member for St. Mary's Division, Montreal (Hon. Mr. Tarte), resigned because he was not in accord with his colleagues upon the great fiscal questions of this country, because he believed in protection for Canadian industries, because he believed in Canada for the Canadians and he was forced to resign his position and to leave this government. The hon. member for St. Mary's division was at the' head of one of the most important departments of the government and was looked upon as one of its ablest members ; it was said of the right hon. the Premier that he said : * Anything that is not good enough for Tarte is not good enough for me.' Mr. Tarte was forced out. A short time afterwards, the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair)-also at the head of an important department of the government of this country-because of his honest convictions, because of his honest desire to serve the best interests of the people of Canada, knowing, Sir, that these tricksters-if I may use the word in a parliamentary sense-knowing that this government in its dying days was about to bring to its support the Grand


Edward Hackett: Trunk Pacific Railway and to endeavour, by boodle and by promises of boodle, to obtain a few more years of support and power in this country, felt as an honest man, having strong convictions on this point and anxious to protect the interests of Canada, felt it his duty to resign his position, one of great honour, which lie had acquitted with credit to himself. I am surprised that formerly these hon. gentlemen were willing to laud him to the skies ; as soon as lie resigned, they commenced to pour abuse on him. They chided us upon this side of the House because we applauded the hon. the ex-Minister of Railways and Canals. Yes, Sir, we applauded him, and are always pleased on this side to applaud an honest man, always pleased to give credit where credit is due and where an honest man, because of his own honest and sincere convictions, felt it his duty to resign an honourable and lucrative office and stand alone in this parliament, I say it is an honour to this side of the House if they applaud such a man. Now, I do not know that I should detain you any longer, and I will bring my address to a conclusion.


An hon. MEMBER.: Hear, hear.


Edward Hackett: My hon. friend says ' hear, hear,' it cannot be possible he wants to hear more of it, because if he does I am prepared to give him a great deal more, but I think it is better that 1 should stop. As an old member of this parliament, representing as 1 do an important constituency in Canada, knowing that this is a crucial time in the history of our country, knowing that our rights are about being sold-if I may use the word-that our liberties are about being tampered with, that the government of this country is binding the people of Canada to such an enormous expenditure that it will grind them down for years to come, knowing that the government, iii making this agreement with this company, ore bestowing upon it vast franchises and great privileges-privileges so great that it is going to be a question in the future who are to rule in this country, the government of the day, the peopte of Canada, or the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway. I think it my dutv to rise in my place and, although I may never speak again in this parliament, raise my voice against what 1 think a most iniquitous measure.


Mr. O. E. TALBOT (Bellechasse).: Mr. Speaker, it is with a certain amount of diffidence that I rise on this occasion to address the House upon the very important resolution which has already been the subject of an interesting and prolonged discussion. The hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat has quoted at length from tlie speech made by the hon. member for Burrard (Mr. Macpherson), in which the hon. member was praising highly the undertaking of the Canadian Pacific Railway and the immense things that the realization

of this project had done for the country. Does any hon. member believe that what was done twenty years ago and what is now resulting from the construction of that immense railway undertaking cannot be now and in the future repeated by the construction of another trancontinental railway. He says also that nothing is known of the country through which the projected railway will go.
I hope, that before 1 resume my seat, I shall have convinced even the hon. gentlemen himself that a great deal is known about that country. He also tells us that the farmers have no money to throw away, suggesting, I suppose, that by the construction of this road, the farmers of this country will be impoverished. Representing, as I do, a rural constituency, I know as well as does the hon. gentleman that farmers are too sensible to throw away their money. But 1 never knew a farmer who would object to investing fifty cents if he thought he could make five dollars by it. And I consider that this undertaking, although I admit that the comparison is hardly possible, will, in the same proportion, do immense things for Canada. He quoted also from the speech of the hon. member for King's, P.E. I. (Mr. Hughes) that hon. gentleman expresses his views with regard to the military value of this proposed road. I had not intended to say anything on that point, but the remarks of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hackett) brought to my mind a conversation I had in Quebec last winter, on the subject of the Trans-Canada, with an American gentleman whom I afterwards found to be a military engineer. He told me that the Trans-Canada, built as it was proposed to build it in the northern part of the country would certainly be a great advantage to Canada in a military sense. He said :	In case any trouble should take
place between our country and yours, it would be the easiest thing in the world for a party in a small vessel to cross Lake Superior, blow up the bridges on the Canadian Pacific Railway on the shores of the lake at Jackfish bay and Heron bay, and, this done, the whole of the North-west Territories and Manitoba would be in our hands. This is the weak point of your country. The weak portion of the human system is in the small of the back, and it is the same way with Canada. I consider that the construction of the railway will be of the greatest possible benefit to Canada from a military point of view. It will run away north of the shore of Lake Superior and will be of great advantage for the transportation of troops should such a thing at any time, be necessary. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Hackett) also referred to the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) mentioning the hon. gentleman's speech made yesterday in Montreal on the subject of imperial defence. I am not here to defend the hon. member for Labelle ; that hon. gentle-297
man is well able to defend himself. Nor do I hold the same views as that hon. gentleman in every instance. But there is one point upon which he and I are agreed. I believe, I sincerely believe, that it is far better for Canada to spend its money in developing its own resources and building railroads such as this than in taking part in the wars of Great Britain all over the globe and wasting its energies and its resources. The hon. member for West Prince (Mr. Hackett) makes a strong appeal for more branch railways in Prince Edward Island.
I know the value and the importance of Prince Edward Island ; I know that that province is a terrestrial paradise, not only because of the fertility of its soil, but because of the works of improvement which ' have been carried out by its intelligent and energetic people. But if we study the history of railway administration in that part of the country, I think, we shall find the appeal of my hon. friend is not very strong in one respect at least. When we find that it costs $135 for every $100 which the railways in Prince Edward Island bring to the country we cannot but feel that this is a fact to be considered. And it seems to me that this fact is an answer to the argument in favour of government ownership and administration of railways in Canada. This is about all that struck me, Mr. Speaker, in the speech of the hon. member who has just taken his seat.
Very interesting and very instructive have been some of the speeches made on this question. Very wearisone, lengthy and misleading, to say the least, have been some others.	Nevertheless, I am
of the opinion that the government has everything to gain by this long discussion. The undertaking is an immense one and its importance and necessity grow from day to day in the minds of the people.
I shall be brief, Mr. Speaker, for I shall limit myself to matters concerning my own province, and with which I am somewhat familiar. The other parts of the Dominion interested in the construction of the transcontinental road have been very clearly dealt with by hon. members on this side of the House who are more familiar than I am with their local wants and details. As to the legal aspect of the contract between the government and the Grand Trunk Pacific, nothing that I might say could make it clearer than the luminous and frank explanations that have been so profusely given about it by the best legal authorities in this House.
I should say, however, Mr. Speaker, that since last fall I have devoted a good deal of my time, scanning maps and reading reports of all kinds concerning the northern portion of our vast and rich Dominion. It was also my good fortune to make a very interesting and pleasant trip, during the past winter, through Manitoba, the north-west Territories and British Columbia. In the in-



terests of the Trans-Canada Railway Company, I addressed, in the principal cities and towns of these provinces, several meetings attended by the most influential and representative business men of the different places which I visited. I am somewhat surprised, Mr. Speaker, when X hear hon. gentlemen on the other side of this House say that the government is hasty and premature in its present action, that no demands or expressions of opinion have come from any part of this Dominion asking for the construction of this new transcontinental road, that, in fact, the people of this country know nothing of the immense region through which this proposed line of railway is to pass. I am not aware of any city or town of importance where boards of trades or municipal councils have not framed resolutions, giving emphatic expression to the necessity of this construction. Columns after columns of the most important newspapers of Canada have been filled with the most minute descriptions of the vast and magnificent area of country to be developed by this new undertaking. There is hardly a citizen of Canada who does not, at the present time, possess a very fair knowledge of the northern and valuable portion of our Dominion. The Trans-Canada Railway Company alone has distributed many ihousands of copies of prospectus and reports of the physical features and of the resources of a great portion of the territory tributary to this projected railway.
May I be permitted here, Mr. Speaker, to say that much credit is due to the promoters of the Tra us-Canada Railway Company- for the very effective missionary work they have perfoimed in this connection. The gentlemen composing this company have spent considerable money in important surveys and have devoted considerable time to gathering valuable and numerous data and have published a very interesting compilation of reports from engineers, missionaries, explorers and Hudson's bay officials. Several thousand copies of this compilation, accompanied by maps and profiles made by one of the best engineers of Canada, a graduate of the Royal Military College, and second Sir Percy Girouard in railway construction, have also been freely distributed. Much credit is due to these gentlemen, for they have traced the way for a great portion of an undertaking which is now attracting the attention of the people of Canada and indeed of the whole world. For Canada, although small in population as yet, is forging its way ahead with sure and gigantic strides. I still hold the strong belief that, by the time this Grand Trunk Pacific Railway is completed, the necessity of shortening the line by building north of Lake Winnipeg will be strongly felt, and instead of an immense curve of 300 miles to the south, the population of northern Saskatchewan, of northen Alberta
and of southern Athabasca, will render it necessary, in my humble opinion, for another railroad to be built on the line of the Trans-Canada project.
May I be allowed here to take strong exception to certain statements that have been made in and out of this House that the Trans-Canada Railway Company have sold out to the Grand Trunk Pacific. Looking over the list of names of the promoters and shareholders of that company should be sufficient to prevent any one from making such a ridiculous and unqualified statement. The Trans-Canada Railway Company still believes in the merits of its undertaking, and in its realization in the near future. Let me quote a few words from the acting manager of the Trans-Canada Railway Company, the active manager of the Quebec and Imke St. John Railway, and the exmanager of the Great Northern Railway, which is now placed in the hands of the Canadian Northern. I think every one in this House and out of it will admit that Mr. J. G. Scott is a good railway authority, and I am not afraid to pit his knowledge and his authority in railway matters against those of the hon. member for Hamilton (Mr. Barker). Last week Mr. Scott was interviewed on the subject Of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, and was asked by a reporter of the Quebec ' Chronicle ' what he thought. Here are his words, Mr. Speaker, quoted in the Quebec ' Daily Tele-grapli ' of August 10 :
Mr. Scott declined to express any opinion as to the policy of the government in assisting the Grand Trunk, but said that although the Trans-Canada directors are deeply disappointed that their line, which is the shortest, and, in their opinion, in every way the best for the country, has not boon adopted, nevertheless he personally could not but admit that the proposed government line from Quebec to Winnipeg would be of very great advantage to this city, especially if a level location is selected.
Further on Mr. Scott gives his opinion as to the possibilities of grain transportation by an all-rail route, and here again I think his opinion will rank favourably with that of any other railway expert in this House :
Although some high authorities think that an all-rail route cannot compete with the great lakes and canals for the transportation of grain from the North-west, he is firmly convinced that if the government select a level location with grades not exceeding thirty feet to the mile, they will not only be able to compete with the water route, hut will soon cut down freight rates very considerably, and save a great deal of money to the western farmer. People are apt to forget that the water route is only open for about two months after the crop is harvested, whilst a railway is open all the year round. They also forget that although you can send a vessel from Duluth or Fort William to Buffalo or Parry Sound, drawing eiehteeu feet of water and carrying 7,000 tons of grain, you can only send a vessel drawing fourteen feet and carrying about 2,000 tons through the Welland and St. Lawrence canals to Montreal or Quebec. This is what makes the


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: water route to the St. Lawrence ports expensive, and when to that you add the inland railroad freight from the interior to Lake Superior and the cost of elevating and transhipment, it will make it possible for a railway with good grades to compete readily for the transportation.
This, Mr. Speaker, I consider a very high opinion coming from a recognized authority on railway matters in Canada. Now, Sir, much has been said in this debate that might have remained unsaid by lion, members on the other side of the House. If every vestige of shame has not been destroyed in them by ardent partisanship, they will blush when, in a few years, they read of the things they have spoken during this debate of a part of our country of which they admit they know nothing. How can hon. gentlemen who, after all, occupy responsible positions, so far forget themselves, for no other motive than the advancement of their party, as to utter such absurdities and, offer such ridiculous assertions ? Self-esteem and the consideration of their fellow members, the dignity of this parliament and the respect of the citizens from whom they hold their mandate, should have been more than sufficient to prevent them from placing themselves on record with such exhibitions of extravagance and want of good faith. Mr. Speaker, I shall now deal with a few facts and figures in order to refute some of the very lame arguments advanced by hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House. First of all I shall devote a few moments to the hon. member for North Victoria (Mr. Hughes). According to this hon. gentleman's own autobiography he was at one time engaged in the honourable profession of teaching. He also, according to his own statement written by his own hand, devoted a good many years to the development of his muscles, giving his time to athletic training. Here is what he says about himself :
As teacher an 1 lecturer in history, language and literature. I was a recognized success. There is none whose students have taken higher standing or are filling higher places than mine, and there is none with better record or who is more beloved by his students than I am. . . . My athletic and political victories, my successes as educationist, writer on history and geography, and railway developer, have hot been the result of chance or mere blind doggedness. The head, heart, nerve and muscle have each and all been taxed, and their forces judiciously combined.
If his knowledge at that time was not any more accurate about the geography of the country he should love and know more about, I pity the pupils he has formed. It is true that my hon. friend, as well as some other hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House, coming from the so-called banner province of Canada, do not think it is worth their while reading about this part of the Dominion for which they seem to have had deepest contempt, and which is called the province of Quebec. It 297J
it very preciptible that what galls them in this new project is the fact that the province of Quebec will receive from it considerable benefit through relief being afforded to old settled townships and villages, and the immense development which will follow the opening of a new part of the province. They would prefer that the northern part of Ontario should remain a wilderness than to see the province of Quebec deriving auy advantage from this undertaking. One can readily gather that, had the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway started from Gravenhurst or North Bay, it would have met with their unanimous approval, for they cannot reconcile themselves to the idea of Quebec and the maritime provinces securing any immediate and considerable advantage from this policy.
It shall be a somewhat arduous task to follow the hon. member for North Victoria, who, thanks to his athletic development and elevated opinion of himself, traverses the province of Quebec over the tops of the Alle-ghaney mountains, jumping from summit to summit, and builds a railway without any trestle work to fill the gaps between them. He so often mentions the word ' air-line ' in his descriptions of the country, that one would imagine he was constructing an air road without a flying machine. I notice, however, reading the unrevised edition of ' Hansard ' reporting his speech, that he has thought prudent to eliminate certain figures which he had mentioned in the ifonse in relation to distances from points of the Intercolonial Railway to imaginary points of this new government construction. He said that 8 miles from Trois Pistoles was the starting point of the central route described by the hon. Minister of Finance, when in reality Trois Pistoles, by as straight a line as the crow flies, is 44 miles to the nearest point of the projected railway. Then he gives us what he calls the border line across the counties of Temiscouata, Kam-ouraska, LTslet, Montmagny, Bellechasse and I.evis.
The figures I shall now give will simply corroborate the statement made by the hon. the Finance Minister as to the actual distance by an air-line' from the nearest stations on the Intercolonial to probable stations in a southerly direction along the new projected line :
Miles.
From River Du Loup the distance	is	 25
From St. Pascal the distance is	 17
From Ste. Anne the distance is	 17
From St. Jeanport Joli the distance is

	25
From LTslet the distance is	 25
From Montmagny the distance is	 20
From St.Valier the distance is	 25
From Anselme the distance is	 20
With the exception of the last station, which is along the Quebec Central Road, tlie others are stations served by the Intercolonial, and the closest to the projected railway. This will answer the question

94S0
raised as to the point of paralleling the Intercolonial.
The hon. member for North Victoria was also good enough to tell us, when he gave us the different elevations in feet of the different summits of the range of mountains back of which the proposed line of railway is to pass, that he was taking an opportunity of placing on record from official reports of the surveys of the United States survey department, a statement as to the topography of our country. This House must bear in mind that this double range of mountains, between which runs an almost continuous valley, follows a direction from west to east through this part of the province of Quebec, but the unfortunate mistake that the hon. member for Victoria made was to give to this House the summits for passes. What he describes are cross-sections of these mountains taken at different points running north and south. He gave the summits as follows :
Elevation.
Ft.
Woodbridge	 1,878
River Verte	 2,231
Painchaud Centre	 1,936
Chapais	 1,868
Garneau	 1,898
Patton	 1,720
Montmagny	 1,727
Roux township	   2,358
Roux township	 1,972
Ware township	 1,995
I have only given some of those mentioned by the hon. gentleman. There is on the wall of the Railway Committee room upstairs a complete profile of the entire route made by an eminent engineer, Mr. Hoare, and if you follow that through the entire country, you will find that the highest altitude which this railway will have to surmount is 1,450 feet. Of course, it is the report of an American surveyor that the hon. gentleman has referred to. I am sorry that the hon. gentleman has made use of it In this House, because we have Canadian engineers who have reported upon this country, and if he had taken the trouble to read their reports, he would have found that it would have been more satisfactory to himself, more satisfactory to this House and more satisfactory to the country to quote from them.
I should have thought, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. gentleman would have refrained from alluding to the construction of the St. Charles branch of the Intercolonial. The cost of this construction is a scandalous monument to the memory of the former administration. The $2,000,000 paid for the construction of that branch was not caused by the difficulties in the construction of the railway, but are due to exorbitant prices for rights of way paid to friends of the party. I fail to see, Mr. Speaker, why the hon. member for North Victoria made use of an American engineer's report, when so many surveys have been made by good Can-Mr. TALBOT.
adiau engineers over this part of the province from the boundary of New Brunswick to Chaudi6re Junction.
The hon. member for South Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart) referred to one made by Mr. Davey. He took advantage of that survey to exaggerate the difficulties to be encountered by the government in the construction of its new line. The hon. member for Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) showed clearly that Mr. Davey's line was a diagonal one, and had no relation whatever with the new project. The same hon. gentleman referred to a line run by Mr. Crawford from Rivifire Ouelle. This one is of the same nature, and also meets with the same objection. The only explanations and locations to be considered of real value are the ones made by Mr. Tetu in 1S89 and 1S90, and one made by Mr. Hoare in 1891. They cover the entire territory from St. Francis river, N.B., to St. Anselme, in the county of Dorchester. I shall refer more particularly to these two. I may also add that two more explorations have been made ; one by Mr. Sullivan, beginning at St. Claire, in the county of Dorchester, and the other by Mr. Light, starting from a point four miles west of St. Charles Station on the Intercolonial Railway. All of these surveys and explorations cross at a given point.
Now, in order to make this particular part of the undertaking clear to the people, and to show how possible and practicable it is, I shall read from Mr. Tetu's report, page 29, taken from the general report of the Commissioner of Public Works of the province of Quebec for 1891. These were the instructions received by Mr. Tetu from the Hon. Pierre Garneau, Commissioner of Public Works, before Mr. Tetu started this exploration :
Sir,-A portion of the information required by the report of the Committee of Agriculture, &c., adopted by legislative assembly on the 14th June, 1886, being already in the possession of the Department of Crown Lands

Hon. gentlemen will remember that this report was adopted after a prolonged and interesting debate, in which some 15 or 20 members of the Quebec legislature took part.
-the main object of the exploration with which you have been entrusted by letter of the 31st of August last, should be to discover an easy line for a railway and to prepare a sketch of the level from St. Anselme to Lake Etche-min, and from Lake Etehemin to the frontier, passing through St. Justine. You should also explore from Lake Etehemin, taking a northeasterly direction to the frontier of New Brunswick.
At the same time, while preparing these sketches, with a view to the eventual construction of a railway, that is to say, in keeping account of the grades and curves to he overcome or avoided, &e., &c., you should take note of your observations on the value of the soil and on the different kinds of forest trees you may meet with in the course of your expedition.

Should you discover indications of mineral deposits, you should also take note of them and bring back specimens of the minerals, whict you will deposit in the Department of Public Works.
The House will see that these instructions were very clear, and that they were given for the purpose, and the only pur pose, of ascertaining the possibility of the construction of a railway in this very part of the country. I will read a few extracts germane to the question, anl as briefly as possible, from Mr. Tetu's reports. He made three different surveys and three different reports, and in his general observation, here is what he says about that part of the country :
Soil.-The soil in these townships is exceedingly fertile and most suitable for agricultura' purposes, the forests well wooded with merchantable timber, while almost the whole extent of ground contained in my tracings shows only much more stony land, due to its positior in the near neighbourhood of the mountains.
Grade.-Although, owing to the proximity of the mountains, I was sometimes obliged to go round, I always maintained an easy grade, never exceeding one foot in a hundred, with the exception of one-half mile, where I war obliged to allow 18 inches to the hundred feet.
He goes on to describe from the first mile, giving a general idea of the country and speaking very highly of the country until he strikes that part between the S5th and the 100th mile, as to which he says :
At this point, I am at the height of 1,450 feet above the level of the sea, in a region of mountains, but the line which I have followed is in a fertile valley, well wooded with maple birch, &c., through which run numbers o" small streams, tributaries to the lake.
From the 85th to the 100th mile, I followed the valley of the River Noire (which is th< discharge of Lake Violon) for a distance of about 10 miles, always keeping on the nortl slope of the hill. The lay of the land here permitted of my running the line for a distance of 15 miles almost perfectly straight, through a forest heavily wooded with spruce timber of large size, together with a small quantity of pine. On each side of the high lands are magnificent forests of maple.
This is a general description of that part of the country over 130 miles of that line running all the way from the Etchemin river to Lac du Loup, the source of the Riviere du Loup. That was the limit of Mr. Tetu's survey, and there he was met by Mr. Hoare. Here is the information furnished by Mr. Hoare in 1890 in bis letter to the Hon. Mr. Garneau :
Quebec, August 24th, 1891.


Hon.   P.@: Garneau,
Commissioner of Public Works,
Quebec.
Sir,-Acting upon your letter of instructions, dated September 29th, 1890, for the completion of the exploration surveys authorized by the legislature, for the purpose of ascertaining the possibility of constructing a railway line through the counties of Ldvis, Dorchester, Bellechasse, Montmagny, L'Islet, Kamouraska &c. I have the honour to inform you that I
have completed the surveys and plans for everything comprised in the four sections in your letter of instructions, and to report as follows on each section, in the order that the work was conducted in the field :-
A railway located only to satisfy the requirements of the country through which it passes, without regard to the position that it might take in some' important through-route, when it can be so placed, will not be as successful, unless the local resources are abundant. Upon these principles the surveys have been made. Any line up the Etchemin valley to the boundary line can be constructed at reasonable cost r there are no bridges to build at any size, the crossing of the Abenakis river being the longest, which would take a span of 100 feet. The crossing of the Etchemin beyond Standon can be made with a less span. The other streams are few in number and can be crossed on low grades with 30 or 40 spans. The rise from St. Anselme to the summit is gradual, by following the River Etchemin and tributaries The summit is reached at the head of Lake Etchemin, 38J miles from St. Anselme, at an elevation of 762 feet above the Quebec Central Railway at St. Anselme, or 962 feet above the Intercolonial Railway at St. Henri. The descent to the boundary line is very easy. The maximum grades shown are 49 feet to the mile, but with a small additional expense, they can be reduced to 40 feet. 1 started from the Etchemin valley line, 8 miles south of St. Anselme, and half a mile from the north bank of the Abenakis river, following the same side of that valley as far as Lac Vert, then crossing over to the opposite side and following the 60Uth shore of that lake to Lac Godbout, thence the north-west branch of River du Sud, following that river to its head, then crossing over to River aux Pins, connecting there with Mr Light's Short Line survey, then continuing in the direction of the Chemin Tache, till a connection was made with Mr. Tfitu's litie near Lac Boilard.a distance of 40 miles from St. Anselme. This line passed through the partly settled parishes of Notre Dame de Buckland, St. Philemon, St. Damien and St. Paul de Montmagny, passing the church of the latter parish, 20 miles from the mouth of the Abenakis river.
This is what Mr. Hoare says, after having gone over the same territory that Mr. Tetu had covered two years before. I shall now quote what he says about the route connecting the line surveyed by Mr. Tetu with the Temiscouata Railway :
The line follows the valley of the Cabano to the head of Long lake, then along the St. Francis valley to the foot of Lake Pohenego-mook, passing at a point close to the United States boundary line. The line so far proved to be very good for grades and alignment, the country along this course rises so gradually that no grade need exceed fifty-three feet per mile.
This covers the most difficult part of the country, of which I have here a map showing mountains running north and south on both sides of Lake Pohenegomook. Further he says:
.Although the surveyed line may not have the advantages as a through route, by its position it is admirably adapted to colonization purposes and it would get a share of foreign business without a doubt.
I And he goes on :

To determine more exactly which is the best combined colonization and through route, closer surveys are required of the river Noire line.
These are the reports of two first-class surveyors-reports which are very complete, and which were at the disposal of my hon. friend from North Victoria ; and if he had read them, they would have saved him the trouble of sending to the United States for reports of the surveys of American engineers. Here are the figures given by Mr. Hoare as to the distances between Ed-muudston and Chaudifere station :	From
Cliaudiisre, via Intercolonial Railway and Quebec Central Railway, via St. Anselme, 2074 miles ; from Chaudiere direct, via St. Anselme, 2051 miles ; from Chaudiere via Intercolonial Railway by St. Charles, 2024 miles ; from Levis via Intercolonial Railway and Quebec Central Railway, via St. Anselme, 2091 miles ; from Lfivis via Intercolonial Railway and St. Charles, 2054 miles : from Chaudiere via the Intercolonial Railway and Quebec Central Railway, via Eteliemin valley through the state of Maine, connecting with the St. Francis branch of the Temiscouata Railway, 190 miles : from Chaudiere via direct line, 186 miles. This is the line I am now discussing. From Chaudiere to Edmundston, via the Intercolonial Railway and the Riviere du Loup and Temiscouata Railway, the distance is 199 miles. This is the line to which the hon. member for South Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart) alluded to. These are the distances from Edmundston to Chaudiere, as given in the reports of the very best engineers we have, who have made a complete and th rough survey of that country.
At one o'clock, House took recess.
House resumed at three o'clock.


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: big paying freight rate on their lines between Montreal and Quebec.
The sailing craft of the whole Atlantic seaboard, and of the world for that matter, can *come to Quebec with unfurled sheets, but they must be towed to Montreal.
I appeal to the representatives of the Dominion at large, from Halifax to Vancouver, to take an impartial view of the matter, and they must decide in favour of Quebec.
Yes, let the St. Lawrence route be improved and equipped on the same scale as that of New York, which can be done at comparatively small cost, from Quebec to the ocean, and with a .shortening of six or seven hundred miles In our favour even with the great city of New York, which the Americans are proud to call the ' Hub ' of the world, shall not long outstrip ns In the race for supplying the European markets with the breadstuffs of our country.
So much for the advantage of Quebec as [DOT] a seaport. Now, as to the northern country from Quebec and on to Lake Winnipeg. 1 shall quote further from the reports of Mr. Henry O'Sullivan, and the admiral reports of Mr. Doucet, the eminent engineer to whom I referred this morning. From these you will see that the statement of our hon. friends on the other side that we know nothing about that country are not correct. I shall read first from the report of 1895, which is contained in the sessional papers of Quebec for that year departmental reports, page 113. This is the report of an exploration of part of the Hudson's bay slope, made by Mr. Henry O'Sullivan, inspector of surveys. He begins his report which is addressed to Hon. E. J. Flynn, Commissioner of Crown Lands, Quebec, as follows :
Sir, in accordance with instructions of your department, dated Quebec, 16th August, 1894, I *have the honour to inform you that I have completed the survey intrusted to me, north of the Ottawa river, and have also explored a considerable portion of the country drained by the rivers flowing into Hudson's or James bay, on which I have now the honour to report as follows.
He then goes on to give a very elaborate description of the rivers and lakes in the country through which he travelled, and he winds up with the following general observation :
There can be very little doubt, from what 1 have seen, that there exists beyond the sources of the Ottawa a fertile region several thousand square miles in extent, where there is an abundance of merchantable timber, principally tamarack, of which there is a sufficient quantity to supply sleepers for all the railways in the Dominion.
Roughly speaking, this vast region extends over about three degrees of latitude, and five degrees of longitude, containing about 50,000 square miles, or 32,000,000 acres ; equal in area to the whole of England, and one-third larger than Ireland.
That such an extent of country should remain unexplored and unknown at the end of the nineteenth century appears hardly credible. Still, the fact is, that with the exception of what was learned from the explorations of my Mr. TALBOT.
esteemed old confrere, Mr. John Bignell, in 1872, at the heads of the St. Maurice, Gatineau, Mekiskan and Ottawa rivers, and his subsequent expedition to Lake Mistassini, and the conflicting reports of the same, the government had no official data regarding that northern region.
Now follows the report of the same gentleman of 1898, addressed to Hon. Mr. Tur-geon, Minister of Colonization :
In accordance with instructions from your department, authorizing me to make an exploration of the country beween Lake St. John and James bay, and to examine the shore line and take the necessary measurements and soundings to find the most suitable harbour there ; to take notes of the general topography and geology of the country : soil, timber, climate, &c., and to furnish your said department with a plan, profile and report of the same, showing the obtainable grades and alignment, in view of future railway construction, for the development of that vast region, I have the honour to submit you the following report. . .
The country between Lake Chamouchouan and the height of land is a sandy loam, well wooded with black and gray spruce, tamarack, bouleau, &c., from 8 to 16 inches in diameter, a vast improvement on the country between there and the surveyed townships of the Lake St. John basin, which is mostly all second growth, since the conflagration of 1870. . . .
We passed through several large and beautiful lakes unknown to geography on the nameless river we followed from the height of land down to its junction with the discharge of Lake Chibougamou. These will be more fully described in a subsequent report, as soon as my plans and profiles of that section are completed.
One of these lakes is about 32 miles in length, with many winding bays and beautiful islands.
Its shore line measures over 200 miles, and is generally well timbered with large white and black spruce, tamarack, poplar and bouleau, Ac.
Some of the spruce here is over 2 feet In diameter, and from 75 to 90 feet in height. . . .
The distance from the height of land to Was-wanipi by our canoe route is about 150 miles, and the difference of elevation from the lowest summit above mentioned is 325 feet. The country is level, or gently undulating ; very few mountains can be seen in any direction, and the fall is pretty evenly divided over the entire distance ; therefore, any desirable grades and alignment can be had for railway construction throughout this section. . . .
The main object of the expedition, as far as the practicability of constructing a railway from Lake St. John, over the height of land, to Was-wanipi, was successfully ascertained, and before any line from there to the seaboard could be chosen, some point on James bay where, according to my instructions, ' vessels of sufficient draught for the navigation of Hudson's bay could enter,' should be decided on. .	. .
At Waswanipi post, about midway between Lake St. John and James bay, it is surprising to see the fine vegetables and grains that Mr. Baxter, of the Hudson's Bay Company, has grown. I never saw better cabbage, carrots and turnips, and he gave me samples of wheat which he had grown from seed raised there the year before, and other wheat which he had grown from seed obtained from the agricultural farm at Ottawa. They are equally good, and can compare favourably with wheat grown in other parts of the province.

The surrounding country is all level, rich clay land, and Mr. Baxter is clearing up a piece of ground, not far off, that will certainly give still better results. ...	[DOT]
Myself and assistants had a swim in Lake Waswanipi, on the 9th September, and we found the water warmer than we find that of Lake Chigobiche it the middle of August. . . .
About 40 miles above Moose Factory, we passed through splendid beds of gypsum.
I regretted being unable to remain longer at Moose, as much for the kind treatment I received there, as for the interesting information they were ready to impart on every side. The Right Reverend Dr. Newnham, resident bishop ; Mr. Broughton, the Hudson's Bay Company's head factor, and Captain Taylor, who has been navigating Hudson's and James bay for the last thirty years gave me every information they could, and did everything in their power to make my sojourn there as pleasant and agreeable as possible. I was pleased to see the interest the Lord Bishop has taken in farming and gardening.	.
Here is a list of some of his garden stuff, which the right reverend gentleman gave me in his own hand-writing, with full liberty to use it as I pleased :
' Splendid celery, tomatoes, vegetable marrows, 15 to 40 pounds each ; salsify, kohl rabi, carrots, parsnips, turnips, beets, pease, beans, all kinds of cabbage, cauliflower, rhubarb, red and black currants, lettuces, radishes, herbs : all a good size, some not to be beat anywhe.re.'
We have a big country to develop, and our knowledge of it is very limited.
Up to 1894, the resources of all that region bounded on the north by the Rupert river, on the south by the height of land dividing the St. Lawrence from the James bay waters, and on the west by the province of Ontario, embracing an area of 50,000 square miles, was practically unknown.
Now, I shall read from the report of 1901, ' Second report of progress and exploration in the country between Lake St. John and James Bay.' In this report, Mr. Henry O'Sullivan has divided the entire stretch of country into sixteen sections, and gives a description of them in turn. I will not weary the House with all these details, but will content myself with summarizing these accounts. Mr. O'Sullivan first quotes from Mr. Lowe, and says :
Mr. Low says spruce for pulp wood is seen along the East Main river all the way up, and that areas of the same extend beyond the northern limit of the province of Quebec. He also says that new Quebec will be found better than new Ontario for agricultural purposes, and that no doubt rich minerals will be found in the northern areas of our province as well as in Ontario.
Then he goes on saying :
Many routes have been suggested and more or less advocated to reach James bay and Hudson's bay, at least seven in the province of Quebec
and nrobaly as many more in Ontario	
Having had occasion to examine more or less during the last twenty years the country traversed by the different proposed routes, I have prepared a table of the distances of the seven possible lines, which is herewith submitted, giving the number of miles of railway already in operation that may be used, and the
number of miles to be built to reach
James bay by each route	I
take it that in spite of all opposition Quebec must become the principal shipping port of the St. Lawrence, and that the future transcontinental imperial trunk line of the Dominion must pass close to, or touch the southern extremity of James bay, and I have therefore taken these points as terminals for the accompanying table of distances. I will now endeavour to give an outline of each route in numerical order from east to west as shown by the red lines on the accompanying key plan.
I will not read the description he gives of these different routes, I will merely go over what he says of the two principal ones :
Route No. 1 follows the Quebec and Lake St. John Railway, from Quebec to Roberval, 192 miles, and thence via the Chamouchouan and Nottaway valleys to James bay.
This route was surveyed and reported on by me in 1897 from Roberval to Waswanipi and thence via Little Nottaway and Lake Namuska to Rupert House. The portion of the Great Nottaways from Gull lake to James bay was only surveyed in 1899, and the description of that section is given in the reports transmitted herewith.
With the exception of a few miles along the Chamouchouan river, there is no difficulty in getting a good line on this route. Quebec and Lake St. John summit 1,535 feet ; Lake St. John and James bay summit, 1,200 feet above sea level. Total distance 622 miles, 430 to build.
Route No. 2 follows the Quebec and Lake St. John Railway about seventy-seven miles to the mouth of the River Jeanotte, thence follow the Jeanotte and Algonquin valleys westward to Latukue ; thence following the St. Maurice to its source and westward over the height of laud to the old Mekiscam Hudson's bay post, and down the Mekiscam valley to Lake Matagam ; and thence direct to James bay.
I surveyed the Jeanotte and Algonquin waters and traversed from there to the St. Maurice below Latuque in 1891-2, and in 1899 I followed the St. Maurice valley from Latuque to Kikin-datch, Hudson's Bay Company post, and thence over the height of land ; and the region between the Mekiscam post and James bay was explored by me in 1894 and 1899.
I do not apprehend any trouble in getting a good railway line over this route with the exception perhaps of part of the distance between the Algonquin waters and Latuque. My line passed through'Lake Wayagamack and the fall from there to the St. Maurice is too sudden to overcome with ordinary grades, but I think that by keeping farther north towards the mouth of the Bastonnais river better ground aud easier grades may be had. The highest summit of this line would be between 1,300 and 1,400 feet above sea level. Total distance 557 miles, 480 to build	
Taken as a whole, a comparatively easy line can be had throughout this section and owing to the enormous distance that timber would have to be driven in following the Ottawa waters, a railway through here would secure an immense lumber traffic. Part of this line would likely be followed by the Quebec and Lake Huron projected railway.
The highest summit on this line is only 1,000 feet above sea level, the total distance 640 miles, 545 to build	
Reviewing the different routes above described. route No. 1 as a colonization road takes

first place, but as part of a future transcontinental railway system, first place must be given to route No. 2, and for the development of lumbering industries, first place must be given to route No. 2 also.
And lie gives the different lengths of these routes :
In distance route No. 2 has the advantage over all the others as follows :-
Route No. 2 is 65 miles shorter than No. 1
"	83	"	"	3'*	170	"	"	4223	"	"	5'[DOT]	253	"	"	6443	"	"	7
You can easily see, Mr. Speaker, that this part of the country has been pretty well surveyed, and that we have a very fair general knowledge of it, and sufficient data to justify the government in its present action. I shall now refer briefly to another magnificent report of this part of the country made by Mr. Doucet. Mr. Doucet has subdivided this entire portion to Lake Winnipeg into seven sections; the first section from the height of land, from the 375th mile to the 447th mile; the second section from the 447th mile to the 557th mile, and so on, until the 1,237th mile. Here is what Mr. Doucet says :
From Roberval to the western limit of the province of Quebec, is a distance of 375 miles. The line runs through a good farming country, the soil being chiefly clay.
Then from the 375th mile to the 557th mile, he says :
The country presents excellent facilities for railway construction. On the north side of the height of land no rock cutting is necessary, very little cutting and filling would be required, and, owing to the level nature of most of the country, the gradient would be easy. Tamarack for ties and sand ballast are to be had in abundance. The rivers and streams, more especially the Mattagami and Kapuskasing rivers furnish numerous valuable water powers with falls from ten to twenty-five feet, which can be utilized in the development of mechanical industry.
He goes on with this section from the 557th mile to the 637th mile :
Generally speaking, the climate is similar to that of Manitoba, the weather in midsummer being equally hot. No destructive frosts are experienced until the end of September and rains are frequent but not excessive.
Between the Missinaibi and Kabinakagami rivers, from mile 557 to mile 637, a distance of eight miles, the land as a whole is level, rising slightly along the water courses where it is rolling. The soil Is clay and sandy loam, covered In the lower levels with boggy peat and moss, varying from two to four feet in depth. .The country can be easily cleared, and for farming purposes the soil will be equal to the best in the older portions of the province. Much of the area which is at present swampy will secure natural drainage when the country is cleared, owing to the incline of the land.
The mixture of clay forming the prevailing sub-soil with the surface soil will prove rich ami productive. This district is well watered by numerous rivers and streams, some of which are Mr. TALBOT.
well stocked with fish. This district is heavily timbered with spruce and tamarack interspersed with other varieties. Owing to their density of growth, the spruce and tamarack are for the most part too small for any other commercial use than pulp wood, not being proportioned to the height they frequently attain. In some places, however, they are of larger dimensions. The spruce will yield in some places 40. 50, or even 60 cords to the acre, especially in the country along the Kabinakagami river. There is also a heavy growth of spruce along the Mattawishgwani river, which will produce from 20 to 35 cords to the acre. The dense spruce and tamarack forests of the Moise river basin are of great value and cover an immense area.
Now comes a description of the country from mile 637 to mile 687, from the Kabinakagami river to the Albany river, a distance of about fifty miles :
About half of the territory comprised within this distance is good arable land, not found in large continuous areas, but principally in the neighbourhood of streams. The trees growing along the river banks have usually attained a fair size. The best timber district is between the Kanakasha river and Lake Eskyanaga, where extensive groves of spruce and tamarack up to 36 inches in diameter are found. The poplar which grows everywhere along the river is singularly free from ' black heart ' which renders it of value for pulp wood. At Pine lake on the Kenongami river, iron pyrites occur in considerable quantities, though it carries only small traces of gold, nickel and copper. The climate is similar to that part of the North-west, being in the same latitude. Frost is unusual during the summer season and all the ordinary garden vegetables are raised without difficulty. Barley and,oats can also be matured successfully.
Then the report gives a description of that portion of country along the Ogoki river, and you will see what a beautiful part of the country it is

The total area of arable land ten miles inland on each side of the Ogoki river, for a distance of 140 miles, is estimated at 1,500,000 acres. There are great quantities of excellent pulpwood throughout the district, the principal varieties being spruce and jack pine. From the mouth of the Ambabika river to the Albany river, the land, exclusive of brule, will yield 38 cords to the acre, or a total of 56,346,400 cords. The Ogoki river country will average 44 cords to the acre, making a total estimated output of 78,846,000 cords, being 135,194,400 cords in all from the territory tributary to these two water-courses.
I think this is sufficient to prove to any bon. member of this House wliat a valuable country that is and bow quickly we should develop it. Now, comes a portion of the country 250 miles in extent. The exploration of that portion has not been completed. Last spring, when the Trans-Canada people found that their undertaking was not meeting with the approval that they were hoping for from the government, they suspended further explorations which were then under the direction of Mr. Vaughan Roberts. But here is a description from a

point beyond this 230 miles to Lake Winnipeg. Then the report proceeds :
Prom mile 937, opposite the Severn river, to Mile 1112, opposite Gunisac lake, the following description is taken from a report made by Dr. Bell in 1879 on the country around God's and Island lakes :-
The land about Island lake is level and has an average elevation above Qie water of apparently less than 50 feet. The level of Island lake itself is 900 feet above the sea. The woods in the neighbourhood are mostly green. The proportion of soil to rock is also much greater than in the neighbourhood of God's lake. Large areas of low sandy land occur on Oxford and Hare lakes, especially on their northern sides. The soil is very good indeed, being generally clay of a light brownish colour, mixed in most places with a little fine gravel. In nearly every case where explorations were carried on inland from Island lake the rock seen along the lake shore disappeared or was covered with soil, and the trees were of a larger and better growth than near the water. There is a very good garden at Island lake post, and certainly I have never seen potatoes look better than they do here.
The other varieties of soil noticed in the district include clay, sand, vegetable loam and sandy gravelly loam. Spruce is the most abundant wood everywhere in this region. Next in order comes aspen, white birch, tamarack, balsam, poplar and banksian pine. In many places the spruce attains a very good size and is used in the form of logs and beams for building purposes. It is also sawn into planks and boards for all sorts of carpenter work. The tamarack and banksian pine sometimes have a diameter of 20 inches. Balsam fir is common and of good size around Island lake, some of the trees measuring nearly 4 feet in circumference. The rowan and mountain ash is to be found at Island lake, as well as ground maple.
Mr. Doucet concludes his remarks on that part of the country by saying :
1.	That no obstacles of a serious nature, as regards construction, exist throughout the whole route.
2.	That the amount of rock work is inconsiderable.
3.	That the gradients will be easy as the country is so level.
4.	That the soil, composed mostly of clay or of clay formation, is fit for agriculture for the greater part of the distance.
5.	That there are valuable areas of timber lands on the route.
6.	That the lands and the timber will assure to the railway an immediate return in produce, lumber and minerals.
I do not think I need refer any further to this matter because I do not wish to weary the House any more than is necessary, but I was very anxious to give these facts. I was very anxious that no other lion, gentleman on the other side of the House would be able to offer the excuse that this information was not obtainable although it is in the library and although the government of the province of Quebec has published complete reports. I am firmly of the belief that we have discovered sufficient data to enable us to go on now and complete the surveys and that we will be in
a position to start with the construction of this road within this year.
You will pardon me, Mr. Speaker, if at this stage of the debate, I have been somewhat lengthy. My excuse for thus trespassing1 upon the indulgence of the House is because of the fact that even the hon. member for Jacques Cartier, in order to make capital for a party which has no following in the province of Quebec, has so far forgotten himself as to belittle his native province by calling the part of the country .1 have just described, a subarctic region. Having heard such an expression of opinion from an lion, gentleman who should know better, is it a surprise to any one, if the eloquent and fluent member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule), his voice choked with tears, and his genial face distorted with the expression of the deepest sorrow, exclaims in the most pitiful tone that once again the great province of Ontario is being bled to death in order to increase prosperity in Quebec and in the maritime provinces. Ontario, said he, will not view this undertaking with pleasure. If the Grand Trunk Pacific should be a success, the Grand Trunk, the Canadian Pacific and the Canada Atlantic shall become impoverished. It will destroy the prosperity of our harbours, towns and villages, and 435,000 families will be loaded with a new incumbrance of $45,000,000. Jeremiah could not have been more tragical in his tone and more heartrending in this description. This new scheme, said the hon. member for Jacques Cartier, will not in any way help immigration and colonization, and prevent the exodus which is as large as ever. In answer to this statement I can say without fear of contradiction that where the exodus was the rule during the former administration it is now the exception, and far more people are coming from the States into Canada than going out of it.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the government on this broadminded policy. The government may proceed promptly and fearlessly with this great enterprise. The contract is a good one, and is surrounded by all possible precautions against fraud and default. And in answer to the challenge of the hon. member for East Simcoe (Mr. Bennett), I may tell him that no hon. member on this side of the House dreads going to the country with this project.
The amount of the country's credit temporarily engaged in this undertaking is very small when compared with the immense and permanent benefits that Canada, as a whole, will derive from the construction of this new transcontinental road, and the opening of these immense areas of arable and timber land, and mineral resources. It will greatly broaden the belt under cultivation, fill in the gap w'hich separates the east from the west, afford relief to the farmer of the western prairie, in giving him lower rates for his exports and imports, and thus

create greater demands for the articles produced by the eastern manufacturers.
And last but not least, it will stimulate better relations, social and commercial, between the inhabitants of the different provinces by means of freer intercourse and greater facilities of communication.


Richard Blain: Mr. Speaker. I do not propose to make any extended reference to the speech of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Talbot) who has just taken his seat. I may say, however, that I was a little surprised that a gentleman coming from the province of Quebec should make such an unkindly reference to the distinguished leader of the Liberal Conservative party in that province. More especially when we remember that the Liberal Conservative party polled 100,000 votes in Quebec at the last general election does it not come with bad grace from the hon. gentleman, to say that the Liberal-Conservative leader and his party have no following in the province of Quebec. I noticed in the course of his remarks the hon. gentleman told us that up to last summer his opinion of the northern part of the country through which this railway is to run was that it is a wilderness. I think it fair to say that the hon. -gentleman being a resident of the province of Quebec and very likely born in that province, and now having the distinguished privilege of representing a constituency in this House-I think it is quite fair to assume that the hon. gentleman learned more of the northern part of Canada up to last summer, than he has learned since and down to the time he presented his facts to the House this afternoon


Onésiphore Ernest Talbot: I do not think the hon. gentleman wishes to misquote me. I do not think the hon. gentleman will find in anything I said that I stated that up to last year the northern portion of Quebec was to me a wilderness.


Richard Blain: I said the northern portion of Canada through which this transcontinental railway was to run, and if the hon. gentleman will look at ' Hansard ' to-morrow he will see what I said was correct.
Mr. Speaker, the resolution which we are called on to discuss reads as follows :
That it is expedient, in connection with the Bill now before this House, respecting the construction of a national transcontinental railway. to ratify the agreement set forth in the schedule to the said Bill, entered into on the 2Sth of July, 1903, between the government and certain persons on behalf of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company, a company to be incorporated by parliament at the present session thereof, and to authorize the government to do whatever is necessary to give full effect to the said Bill and agreement.
When this resolution was submitted to the cabinet by the distinguished Prime Minster, the Minister of Railways and Canals differed from his colleagues upon this ques-Mr. TALBOT.
tion, but not to the extent that he thought well to resign his portfolio. I read from his letter and his statement made in the House, a very special request made to the Prime Minister and the government in connection with this transcontinental railway project. The Hon. Mr. Blair made no threat against the government; he had no disposition to leave the party ; no desire to differ from his colleagues with whom he had been working for years, but he makes this special request, and I ask the House to consider if it was not a fair and reasonable request. Here are the words of the. Hon. Mr. Blair :
That parliament be asked for an amount to enable a thorough exploration of the country to be made, so that it might be possible to judge whether or not a suitable traffic producing route could be found through this district, and its cost and the character and conditions of the country through which it is to pass ascertained.
Is there an hon. gentleman on either side of the House who will consider this an unreasonable request coming from the Minister of Railways and Canals and asking his colleagues to stop to consider before they ask the people of Canada to expend $100,000,000 in the construction of a transcontinental railway. The hon. Mr. Blair in making this request did his duty as a representative of the people in the cabinet, and after the Prime Minister and his colleagues refused to listen to him, he sent in his resignation, and I take these words from his statement made in the House :
I am not in favour of impetuously rushing into the construction of a transcontinental line from Quebec, through an unknown country , to Winnipeg and the west, until we know something about it-until we have the fullest information about it. The project is one of very great magnitude, and should he dealt with only after the maturest deliberation	
The only cause which has led me to take that regretable step is because I have been unable to justify to my mind, to my own conscience, and to my own duty to my people, the support of the proposal which the government have decided upon making to this House and the asking of legislation to pass with respect to the project known as the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway.
And he makes a conclusive reference to this matter which is as follows :
The step which I have taken, Sir, can only be justified in respect of my duty to my constituency ; of my duty to the party ; of my duty to this House and of my duty to the country, upon the clearest and plainest and strongest grounds.
That Is what was said by the distinguished gentleman who was taken into the cabinet to take charge of the Department of Railways and Canals. From 1886 down to the moment he tendered his resignation. I have heard hon. gentleman opposite applaud him, for what reason ? Because for seven years he had applied himself to gath-

ering information in respect to the railway interests of this country and the transportation question generally. When any railway question came up for consideration in this House and his opinion upon it was given, lion, gentlemen opposite applauded. 1 wonder what has happened ? What has that lion, gentleman done to cause these hon. gentlemen so suddenly to change their minds? I have read the request he made to the cabinet ministers to stop and consider before they plunged the country into this enormous expenditure. I have also read what he said after he sent in his resignation. I leave hon. members of this House on both sides and the people of the country, to consider whether, in the statements be made to the House in respect to the dispute he had with the government over this question, there is anything that throws any discredit upon that hon. gentleman, or whether he has not cautiously prepared every word in speaking out on behalf of the! people of Canada.
I come from the province of' Ontario and, while I do not say that we have any right to discuss this question from a provincial standpoint, yet I think it is my duty to say something as a representative of that province. I ask myself first, can the people of Canada afford to enter upon the construction of another transcontinental railway? I answer that question by a statement which has been prepared by hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House. I find that when they came into office in 1896 the debt of the Dominion of Canada was for the last year given, 1895 $253,074,927. The debt has grown under this this splendid business government, until in 1902 it reached $271,829,090, or an increase in these seven years of $18,754,163, a little too much, Mr. Speaker, for a party who promised the people that they would reduce the national debt. Now, what proportion of this debt does the province of Ontario bear ? It has been stated by an hon. gentleman occupying a distinguished position on the other side of the House that on a close calculation the province of Ontario bears 40 per cent of the whole debt of the Dominion of Canada, and pays 40 per cent of the taxes. Therefore, it is not unfair or unreasonable that we who come from that province should have something to say when there is a proposition before the House to expend $100,000,000 of the people's money. If the parties holding the bonds and mortgages against the Dominion of Canada were to ask this afternoon that these bonds and mortgages be paid, the people of Ontario would be asked to contribute $108,731,636. If this Grand Trunk Pacific scheme goes on. and $100,000,000 is expended-and that is a reasonable estimate of the cost of this great work-there will be added to the debt of this country to be borne by the people of the province of Ontario $40,-
000.000 more, which will bring their share of the debt up to $148,731,636. With that state of affairs before us, I think I have a right to ask that the government of this country, no matter what itbeir political complexion may be, to stop and consider whether or not a new transcontinental railway is wanted, and, if it is, what route it should take from ocean to ocean.
One reason given for the construction of this road is that it will assist the western farmers to bring their grain down to tide-water at Montreal or Quebec. Last year, according to a statement given to this House by the hon. Minister of the Interior, the total amount of grain of all kinds brought from Winnipeg was 39,264,407 bushels, of which 5,826,000 bushels, or 13 per cent, went out by allrail routes. Here is a distinction between the two parties in this country upon this transportation question. The men who are best posted on this question state emphatically that it is not possible to move the grain from the west as cheaply by an all-rail route as it is by a route part rail and part water. Then, I ask, how is it that this government are willing to expend such an enormous amount of money for the construction of another railway for the purpose of bringing wheat from the west to the seaboard ?
Many of the papers have discussed this transcontinental question; but I will quote one, and one only. It is the ' Farmers' Sun,' published in the city of Toronto. It cannot be said that this paper is a supporter of the hon. leader of the opposition or his party. It heads an article ' The AllCanadian Falacy,' which reads as follows :
There is an encouraging revolt in parliament against the plausible argument that Canadian produce should be sent by an all-Canadian route to the Atlantic. To carry Canadian grain around through the maritime provinces would be as absurd as to carry it twice across the continent	The object of every scheme of
export transportation should be to get the grain to the British market with the least expense	There is no justification for
imposing such a burden on the farmers of Ontario and the west. They have grain to sell. They must sell it in Britain. Nothing could be more natural nor more profitable than that they should seek their market hy the cheapest route.
That is the leading farmers' journal of the province of Ontario, and I leave it to the hon. gentlemen on both sides of the House to consider whether that opinion is valuable or not. I notice that hon. gentlemen opposite frequently quote the ' Farmers' Sun.' and that is why I direct their attention to this article. Many quotations have been given in this House, from time to time, from business men of the country, in respect to the proposition that is now before the House. I will quote one, that of Mr. E. C. Whitney, who says ;
In my mind the Grand Trunk Pacific project is a most unbusinesslike proposition and I can-

not find any reason why such a proposition should he supported by the business men of the country.
This is said by Mr. E. C. Whitney, the managing director of the St. Anthony Lumber Company, and a leading lumberman of eastern Ontario. This is the opinion of a business man of this city who represents a leading business firm in the province of Ontario.
Following up the question of grain rates, I think it would not be unfair for me to quote the opinion of the hon. the Prime Minister of Manitoba, who speaking in Toronto the other day, is reported as follows :
Sir Wilfrid Laurier had said in the House of Commons that by the expenditure of $100,000,000 of the people's money the government proposed to add to the value of every farm in the Northwest by carrying the products thereof cheaper to the markets of the world.
Now, the hon. Prime Minister of that province gives his opinion, which ought to be valuable in a discussion of this kind, as he has just come from the people of that province with a handsome majority at his back, the people of that province having endorsed his railway policy. He says :
The rate at present that had to be paid on grain from Winnipeg to tide water at Montreal over the Candian Pacific Railway by way of Port Arthur was nineteen cents a bushel. With regard to this haul the Canadian Pacific Railway management declared that they had carried it absolutely and positively at a loss, therefore they did not want the business, and very little went that way. How then did the produce of the west get to the markets of the world ? It went to Port Arthur and was there transferred to steamers and carried either to Buffalo or to Georgian hay and there it was leshipped and sent on to Montreal or New York as the case might he. The rate for this journey under present conditions was less than fourteen cents a bushel as against nineteen cents by the all-rail route or a saving of five cents a bushel on the wheat. 'Now,' he continued, ' Sir Wilfrid Laurier may be more patriotic than I am but I want to say that patriotic as we are in the west are we not willing to build a railroad with the people's money and then allow our produce to be forced through a channel for shipment at a loss of five cents a bushel to us. You can understand the farmers of the west would not tolerate it.
This is an up-to-date statement made a few days ago by the Prime Minister of that province, that lie is not in favour of the construction of a road of that kind, saying that that road would not be of any more advantage than any other road going into the province of Manitoba, and he points out that the farmers of that province will not thank tills administration for the expenditure of $100,000,000 that will not benefit them one cent in respect to their sending wheat from the west to tidal waters.
The hon. the Minister of the Interior is an important representative from the west, and the other evening, in the course of a long speech in this House, he advanced


Richard Blain: some rehsons why, in his opinion, the government of this country should construct this transcontinental railway. I have not time to go over all the points in his address, but I propose to refer to one or two and to point out to the House and to the people of this country how weak is the argument of this hon. gentleman, who among all the members of this government, should speak for the west in reference to transportation questions. In the course of his speech he said :
Grain was carried from Kansas City to Chicago at five cents per 100 pounds, a distance of 188 miles.
When that statement was made in the House, gentlemen who are conversant with this question thought it was an alarming statement to be made by a distinguished representative of the government, so telegraphic communication was entered into with the result that it was found that today's rate between the points mentioned, from Kansas city to Chicago, is not 5 cents per 1.00, but 14 cents per 100 pounds. With this condition of things, Mr. Speaker, I ask this House and the country whether that is a fair proposition for the hon. the Minister of the Interior to place before the representatives in this House, calling upon them to support this railway because a special rate from Kansas city to Chicago was only 5 cents per 100 pounds. He gives that as a reason, and there can be no other reason for his making this statement than to convey the idea to the members of this House that grain is now carried 488 miles at 5 cents per 100 pounds, when to-day's rate is 14 cents per 100 pounds between these two cities.	[DOT]


Mr. SCOTT.: Does the hon. gentleman deny that grain has been carried between Chicago and Kansas city at 5 cents per 100 pounds ?


Richard Blain: I thought some one from the west would rise in rebellion, because some of them are always in rebellion. I quoted the hon. minister's statement in this House. It is to-day we are asking the people of Canada to construct this road, and would not the hon. gentleman regard it as a fair thing for me to give to-day's rate upon wheat ? Would the hon. gentleman like me to give him another rate-a bargain day rate, such as the Minister of the Interior gave us? Is that the kind of rate the hon. gentleman would like the people of this country to base tlieir decision on as to whether they should expend $100,000,000 or not ? Let me give tlie hon. gentleman an illustration. 1 called up the Canadian Pacific Railway ticket office in this city tills morning, and I asked them : What is your passenger rate from the city of Ottwa to the city of Winnipeg ? The agent replied :	The ticket
would cost $36. I said :	Have you not
been sending out men at a very cheap rate ? He said : Oh, yes ; last Thursday

we had a harvesters' excursion. I asked him how much the fare was, and he said $10. In the discussion of this question, do you think it would be fair for hon. gentlemen to urge that because the Canadian Pacific Railway on Thursday last took men from Ottawa to Winnipeg for $10, that with an expenditure of $100,000,000 people would be carried to Winnipeg for $10. when to-day's rate is $36 by the Canadian Pacific Railway ? I do not think it is fair for the 'ion. gentleman to bring up some special bargain day rate in order to induce people to vote for this expenditure. The hon. Minister of the Interior was going to teach the people of Ontario why, in his opinion, they should vote for this expenditure of money. I would; like the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) to listen to this argument also, because I would like him to answer it when he speaks upon this resolution. He told us that the people of eastern Canada, and particularly the people of Ontario, should be willing to vote for this measure for the reason that the new road would carry a large number of lean cattle up from the east to the west to fatten them on the grazing lands there. This is what he says:
Why, Sir, it Only needs to be stated tor us to understand what a profitable business it would be for the farmers of the eastern provinces, who can raise cattle, but who are not able, on account of the want of pasture facilities, to finish them for the English market.
So, the hon. gentleman called upon the representatives of the people in this House to be satisfied with this for one reason among others that there will be a splendid carrying trade on lean cattle from the provinces of Ontario, Quebec and eastern Canada to feed on these splendid grazing lands of the west, and further he says :
We have in that business a large and important item, which will prove a great and substantial source of revenue to the new railway when it is constructed.
This is the promise to the people of Ontario. I would like to investigate that for a moment from the point of view of the representatives of the west. I have read about this matter for a good many years, and a short time ago I had the opportunity of making some personal investigation into the question. Is it likely that the people of the province of Manitoba and the territories should be willing for all time to buy their cattle from eastern Canada, or is it not more reasonable to suppose that the farmers of ' the west will breed tbeir own cattle V 1 notice that the former premier of that province, Mr. Greenway, has a splendid herd of well-bred cattle. Every day farmers who went to the west to settle there are coming back to buy thoroughbred cattle to take to their farms in Manitoba or the territories. The hon Minister of the Interior (Hon. Mr. Siftou) should have known that this business of sending lean cattle to the west is not
likely to continue, in fact, I understand that to-day it does not amount to very much. But, even if there is such a trade to-day, is it to be supposed that it will grow, or even that it will continue ? Do the farmers who have sent their sons to populate and develop that country propose that these young men who learned the breeding of cattle in eastern Canada will be content to bring cattle from the east to be fattened V I am within the hearing of farmers representing constituencies in Ontario on both sides of the House, and I am within the hearing of the hon. Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Fisher), and I venture to say neither the hon. gentleman nor any of his supporters will dare to contradict me when I say, that the time is coming, and is almost here, when the farmers of Manitoba and the North-west will breed their own cattle, and when there will be no traffic of this kind between Ontario and the west. And we were told that many other things would happen. Listen, for instance, to what the hon. Minister of the Interior said for the city of Toronto, tile very heart of the province of Ontario :
If you take the route by the Canadian Pacific Railway

That is the route now constructed and regularly in use.
-from the city of Toronto to Winnipeg, you find that the distance from Toronto to North Bay is 226 miles, and the distance from North Bay to Winnipeg is 1,060, or a total of 1,286 miles, as against 1,200 miles by the projected road. So that, making a fair allowance for deviations, the length of the new line will be substantially the same as that of the Canadian Pacific Railway.
There is a promise to the people of Toronto and Ontario. Coming, as I do, from the very centre of that province of Ontario, I ask myself what has been the trouble in communicating with the west V Have the farmers' sons who have left Ontario for many years past to go to Manitoba had any difficulty in getting there 7 You know very well, Mr. Speaker, and the House knows well, that they have had no difficulty whatever; for the reason that in earlier days the Liberal-Conservative party constructed a national highway to take the farmers of eastern Canada to the west to settle that country and now we have a promise held out, and what is it 7 Is it that this proposed expenditure of $100,000,000 will bring the city of Toronto nearer to the west than it is at present 7 Why, the hon. gentleman himself does not pretend that it will shorten the distance. The route will be a roundabout route as compared with the one we have now. The hon. gentleman's promise will hardly appeal to the farmers of Ontario. Will it appeal to the manufacturers who are sending their goods to Manitoba? Where is the manufacturing done in the province of Ontario ? It is done in the city

of Hamilton, in the city of London, in the city of Stratford, and in the east, the city of Belleville, and the city of Toronto itself. Have the manufacturers of this country any trouble in getting their goods to Manitoba, the North-west Territories and British Columbia ?


Thomas Walter Scott: Yes.


Richard Blain: ' Yes,' says the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott). Why, such a statement is unworthy of the hon. gientle-man or of any representative of the west. I read an article in the hon. gentleman's newspaper condemning the Canadian Paciflc Railway and calling upon them to spend millions in putting on more rolling stock. And what was the text of the hon. gentleman's condemnation of the Canadian Pacific Railway last year in this House V Was it because there had been a call from the west or from his own town for another railway ? It was not, and the hon. gentleman knows it well. His appeal, like the appeal made at that time by the hon. Minister of Agriculture, and joined in by all the gentlemen from the west on both sides of this House was, not that they required a new transcontinental railway, but that, owing to the business being brisk in Canada at this time, as it is all over the world, and owing to the Canadian Pacific Railway being taxed to its utmost to carry traffic, there was a scarcity of cars. And the Minister of Agriculture made a statement that it was not a new railway that was wanted-and I have his statement here-but what was required was the railway companies should spend money in providing new cars and engines. Of course, things have changed since then. And I think I should have referred to the fact that the remarks of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Talbot) who has just taken his seat- and very well prepared remarks they were- were prepared not to support this railroad at all. The hon. gentleman told us that he had travelled through the west and that resolutions had been passed by city councils and boards of trade in support of tbe TransCanadian Railway which has disappeared so suddenly. But these resolutions did not refer to the railway now under discussion. The hon. gentleman's influence was not so powerful as that of this new company, which is not yet even incorporated, and which is going to have a new road at a cost of $100,-000,000-to the people of Canada.
I want to say one thing further in respect to the province of Ontario. That was an appeal made by the Minister of the Interior to the farmers of Ontario. I have answered that in the short time at my disposal, and I propose now to answer it on behalf of the manufacturers of the province of Ontario, and of the province of Quebec, and of eastern Canada as well, because there is no distinction in that respect. One would almost think that for all time to come cattle


Richard Blain: were to go from eastern Canada to the west, and manufactured goods too ; one would think this condition was going to prevail for ever in that country, to hear hon. gentlemen opposite talk. I think it is a fair question to ask if that condition of things is likely to continue, and if the manufacturers of eastern Canada will always want so many cars to carry their products up to the west. Sir, the time is coming when the province of Manitoba and the west will manufacture a great deal for themselves. I wrote to a leading manufacturer of the city of Winnipeg since this House opened, and received an answer dated the 5th of May. I asked him something about his business, and his answer will show the House whether the people of that province are likely to be able to manufacture goods for the wants of the people of the west. I will read only a portion of the letter :
In reference to hands, all told, we employ about 225 in our business in the city of Winnipeg. We are' now doubling our capacity for manufacturing at Winnipeg and Calgary. We buy our leather principally in Ontario, but we import some from the United States, especially our saddle leathers, and a little from England. We have ten retail stores, all our own, two wholesales and1 two factories. Our retail stores are situated at Macleod, Calgary, Prince Albert, Strathcona, Edmonton, McGregor, Portage la Prairie, Selkirk, Winnipeg and Rat Portage.
All these stores doing business in different towns of Manitoba and the North-west Territories. Where are they getting their supplies ? From the province of Ontario and eastern Canada ? No, but from the province of Manitoba, manufactured in the province of Manitoba, in the City of Winnipeg. Wbat was the output last year, I asked the gentleman wTho represents this House in the city of Winnipeg, and he replied that they sold $1,000,000 worth of harness and saddlery, all manufactured within the province of Manitoba, and almost every dollar of it sold within that province, the Northwest Territories and British Columbia. Last year, I notice, there was a binder twine manufacture established in the city of Brandon, and an agricultural implement manufactory. I could name a number of other manufacturing establishments that have sprung up in the city of Winnipeg in the last two or three years, for making articles that are used throughout the Northwest country. I mention these things as showing what the people of Ontario and eastern Canada may expect very soon. Notwithstanding the great increase of population going into the west, a fact of which the Liberal-Conservative party are very proud, the time will come in the near future when neither Ontario or Quebec, or the lower provinces, will have as great a market In the west as they have at the present time for manufactured goods, for the reason that the people there are beginning to manufacture their own goods, and will be able largely to supply their own wants.

Now, Sir, we are told that this new road is to go through the province of Ontario. I have heard hon. gentlemen opposite say, how is it possible that any member from the province of Ontario can vote against this scheme ? One would imagine, to hear these hon. gentlemen talk, that there is at present scarcely any railway communication in the province of Ontario. I have here a statement from the Minister of Crown Lands of the province of Ontario. Indeed I wondered myself when 1 heard so much about this clay belt in northern Ontario. In view of the fact that a Liberal government in Ontario have been for the last 25 years expending so many thousand dollars of the people's money in surveying northern Ontario, I wondered how it was that they found this wonderful clay belt only just a little while' before the last general election. Of course, as a native of that province, I hope to find that we have a splendid clay belt up there, and magnificent timber limits, and everything that will tend to make that pro-1 vince increase in wealth. Now, starting from the western boundary of Quebec, and going up to the eastern boundary of Manitoba, we find that country divided into four parts, one called the Nipissing district in the east, the next the Algoma district, then the Thunder bay, and the Rainy river districts. Those are the four districts through which this transcontinental railway is to go, if it is ever constructed. Let us see what the Ontario Minister of Crown Lands says about that country, whether there is any railway communication now, or whether the people are suffering for the want of it. First, he speaks about the agricultural lands:
The great clay belt running from the Quebec boundary west through Nipissing and Algoma districts and into the districts of Thunder bay. This region is watered by the Moose river, flowing into James bay and its tributaries, the Abitibi, Mattagami and Missinabie, and by the Albany and its tributaries, the Kenogami and Ogolre. Bach of these rivers is over 300 miles in length, and they range in width from 300 to 400 yards. They are fed by numerous smaller streams, and these, in turn, drain numberless lakes of larger or smaller size, so that the whole country is one network of waterways, affording easy means of communication with long stretches fit for navigation.
This is the condition with respect to that district. Hon. gentlemen opposite do not claim that it is all agricultural land, they say there are timber limits. Now let me ask them what those who are engaged in the lumber business require. They require lakes and rivers, such as I have read about in the statement prepared by the Minister of Crown Lands. What do we find to-day in this very capital of the Dominion ?[DOT] Why we find logs floating down the Ottawa river by the hundred thousand. Why has not a railway been constructed long ere this if it is so necessary for the lumber business 7 Simply because the natural water-courses 298
sufficient for the purposes are found in the northern parts of Ontario, and these afford the best means of getting the logs down to the mills. Now here is a statement in respect of railways. The Commissioner of Crown Lands says :
The southern boundary of this great tract of fertile laud is less than 40 miles from Missinabie station, on the Canadian Pacific Railway.
So, with the Canadian Pacific Railway main line running westward and eastward, and the clay belt lying forty miles north of this main line, what would the natural man say was wanted to develop that country? Would he say another transcontinental railway ? Would he not say just what the provincial government of the province of Ontario have said : We will construct a line of railway up there to tap the clay belt, and give the people who are settled there an opportunity of getting down to the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway ? Where would they naturally want to go ? Would they want to go to the city of Quebec or the city of Montreal, or down to the seaboard, or away up to Manitoba, the North-west Territories or British Columbia?. Would a man living in that part of the country want to go in those directions ? I ask this House that reasonable question. Every man can answer it, and every man on both sides of this House if he were asked that simple question would say : No, what the people want is to give access to that country, and it will not take seven years to build 40 miles of railway up there. What the people want in that clay belt, if that clay belt is so large and productive as hon. gentlemen opposite would lead us to believe, are colonization railways running up through into northern Ontario to bring the products of the people down to the centre of the province of Ontario, where they are required, and to take back the supplies which they need. I will briefly touch upon the different districts of that northern country. The first is Nipissing, and I will read a statement concerning it from the provincial government's report, as follows :
Nipissing is the most eastward district of New Ontario. It is bounded by the Ottawa river tributary waters on the east, separating it from the province of Quebec, and extends to the district of Algoma on the west. Several towns have grown up in the eastern portion of this district. Mattawa, on the line of the Canadian Pacific Railway, is the principal one, and there are other smaller settlements reached by railway and steamboat. There is a branch line to Temiscamingue on the lake of that name, and in this neighbourhood a number of townships have been surveyed and are ready for settlement.
Do they need another railway ? There is already a railway constructed in that locality. There are several townships surveyed, unoccupied at the present time, and waiting for settlers to go in and occupy them.



At North Bay on Lake Nipissing, a point of junction of the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Grand Trunk Railway, there is an important settlement, and from this point a railway is to be built due north, towards and eventually terminating at James bay-the southern sweep of Hudson bay-which will open a very desirable country in which a settler can find immediate remuneration for his labour, in the sale of the timber -which he cuts on his holding, as well as for his farm produce. A person, desiring to reach Nipissing can do so either by the Grand Trunk Railway to North Bay-north of which there are a number of surveyed townships -or by the Canadian Pacific Railway to the same place, or to Mattawa on the Ottawa river, from which town he can choose the direction in which he will go to take up land. This is the route to Temiscamingue, where a number of people have recently gone to settle. The railway and steamboat fare from Toronto is about $13, and from other places in proportion. Arrangements can be made with the railways for the carrying of settlers' effects by the carload.
Is there any demand from that section of the country for another transcontinental railway? They have a railway now, so the Ontario government say, and the Ontario government have entered into a contract for the construction of another railway to reach the northern part of that province. Turning now to the district of Algoma the report says :
Algoma extends from the western boundary of Nipissing to the eastern boundary of Thunder Bay district. In this wide expanse of territory there is a great variety of timber for nearly all of which there is a market at the railway stations or with the buyers for pulp mills.
That is the condition of things in Algoma -a splendid market for everything they have to sell at the railway stations on the Canadian Pacific Railway.
Sault Ste. Marie, the point at which Lake Superior empties into Lake Huron through the St. Mary's river, is in Algoma, and is one of the rising places of the west. It attained its first importance from the canals around the rapids, hut recently a wealthy syndicate have established a very large pulp mill and other works, and are about to build a railway north into the interior.
Not with government aid, not a transcontinental railway, but a railway running north to carry supplies to places to be settled.
There are a number of surveyed townships open to settlepient in this district, and near the Sault Ste. Marie-commonly called * The Soo.' The factories established at the Sault, as well as the other enterprises pending, will insure markets for everything that a farmer can raise as well as for the timber he may out. There is a- great deal of mineral in this district that has been very slightly exploited, but the construction of the Algoma Central Railway and the new life which has been imparted to that section by the extensive works at Sault Ste. Marie will result in these minerals being worked at an early date. Algoma is served by the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway and the branch which runs from Sudbury Into the Cana-Mr. BLAIN.
dian North-west, and in adition by the lake steamers.
That is the report on this part of Algoma about which there is so much talk in this House, and which is already served without the construction of another highway. Then comes the Thunder Bay district :
Thunder Bay district lies between Algoma on the east and the Rainy River district on the west. The country throughout is well timbered and watered, and possesses several water powers near the hay that will have considerable commercial value, though at present unused. The commercial centre of the district is created by two towns on the bay, about four miles' from one another. Fort William is the summer lake terminus of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Here are three immense grain elevators through which pass the greater part of the exported wheat grown in Manitoba and Western Canada. It is the divisional point of the railway and a town of increasing importance.
Port Arthur is the other town on the bay. It is the terminus of the Canadian Northern Railway, which runs through this and the Rainy River district and through Manitoba into the North-west Territories, apparently intending to reach the Pacific ocean.
These two points are also the termini of the lake steamers which run between Owen Sound, Collingwood, and ports on the United States shores of the lakes, carrying passengers as well as freight.
The Thunder Bay and St. Joe Railway will run from Port Arthur north through a country of great wealth in timber and minerals as well as through sections affording good farming land.
That is how the northern part of Ontario Is being opened up at the present time. Lastly :
Rainy River district is west of the Thunder Bay district and extends to the eastern confines of the province of Manitoba. This is a lumbering, mining, and farming country. The chief town is Rat Portage, at the outlet of Lake of the Woods into the Winnipeg river. This is the chief commercial centre of the whole district, though some saw-mills and the large Lake of the Woods flour mill is at Keewatin, practically a suburb of Rat Portage.
A little distance eastward of Rat Portage is Wabigoon, the centre of a mining district, but recently found to be in the middle of some excellent farming country. The government here established an experimental farm as a guide' and assistance to the incoming settlers, and as a standing testimony to the quality of the land. Wabigoon, Rat Portage, and Keewatin are od the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and from their end of the lake is a steamboat service across the lake and up the Rainy river to the falls at Fort Francis. Beyond these are other steamers for points in the interior. The Canadian Northern Railway crosses the Rainy river on its way to Manitoba, and forms another outlet for produce to the markets east and west.
Now, touching upon these four districts, which comprise the northern part 'of the province of Ontario, I have given the report, not of the Liberal-Conservative party, but the report of a Liberal minister in the Ontario legislature, which points out that

with the present railway communication is very good, the policy of individuals who are interested in that northern country is not to build another trancontinental railway, but to build roads to the north in order that the timber and minerals shall be brought down to the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway.
I just want to say a word or two and then I shall conclude, about the Intercolonial Railway. I am free to say that, living in the province of Ontario, I do not understand so much about it as those who come from eastern Canada, but I have listened to some discussions in this House in regard to the Intercolonial Railway during the last three sessions, and I will give a statement, not*of my own, but the statement of the hon. ex-Minister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair, and this is a statement that X want the farming representatives, the representatives of the province of Ontario and the representatives of every part of Canada where the Intercolonial Railway does not touch, to listen to. The ex-Minister of Railways and Canals said this in respect to the freights that are now charged on the Intercolonial Railway :
I had a careful study, made and a careful statement furnished to me by the traffic officers of the Intercolonial Railway as to the general traffic of tolls and freight charges which governs on the Intercolonial Railway and those which govern on the Grand Trunk Railway and the Canadian Pacific Railway ; and the result of that statement, keeping well on the safe side, is that the rates upon those two railways are from fifty to one hundred per cent higher than those upon the Intercolonial Railway.
That is what the people of this country have to bear for the Intercolonial Railway. That is not my statement, but it is a statement endorsed by the hon. gentleman from Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson), who is coming into the cabinet to take the place of the ex-Minister of Railways, and it was endorsed by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Emmerson) in his speech in this House. The exMinister of Railways says further :
The gross earnings of the Intercolonial Railway on its traffic, not including passenger traffic, for the year 1902 were $3,900,000. Add fifty per cent to that and you get $1,950,000 of addition. In other words, if we could have collected on the Intercolonial Railway the minimum rates charged by other railways, we would have had $1,950,000 more freight collected than we did. and this would have brought our total earnings up to $7,600,000, including passenger traffic. Deducting working expenses, wo would have had a surplus for 1902 of $2,046,000. These figures cannot he gainsaid.
I quote this statement for one purpose, and for one purpose only, and that is to show the people of the province of Ontario and the other parts of Canada who are not served particularly by the Intercolonial Railway, how cheap their freight rates are. We are not complaining about it, but I say that we are not served particularly by the 2984
Intercolonial Railway, and if the government is going to put a burden of $400,000,000 on the people of Canada to build a line paralleling the Intercolonial Railway, then it is not unfair for the people of Canada to say that the people of the maritime provinces through which the Intercolonial Railway runs for about 1,500 miles, should pay the same rates that are charged to the rest of us who have to ship our goods on the Grand Trunk Railway and the Canadian Pacific Railway. The Intercolonial Railway has cost us $70,000,000, and the deficits on its operation have been borne cheerfully by the people of Ontario and other parts of Canada, in order that we shall maintain our splendid confederation. But if the people of Ontario and the rest of Canada are to continue to do that, surely we should not be asked to construct another line of railway which will take away the little traffic which is now carried by the Intercolonial Railway.
One word about the policy of the leader of the opposition, and as to that perhaps it is as well that I should give, not my own statement, but the statement of a reform newspaper which is a supporter of this government. I refer to the Ottawa ' Journal.'


Mr. HOLMES.: You do not call that paper a supporter of the government.


Richard Blain: Does the hon. gentleman say that the Ottawa ' Journal ' is a supporter of the opposition ?


Robert Holmes: I say its editor and proprietor is a well-known Conservative who was formerly on the staff of the ' Mail.'


Richard Blain: Did you ever see a Liberal-Conservative editing a reform paper ?


Robert Holmes: If you quote the ' Journal ' as a reform paper you are not quoting right ; that is all.


Richard Blain: Neither the Postmaster General nor the Minister of Agriculture, who are present, will deny that the Ottawa ' Journal ' is a supporter of their administration. That being so, I place tbe opinion' of the Postmaster General and the Minister, of Agriculture alongside the opinion of my hon. friend from West Huron (Mr. Holmes) and the House will be able to draw its own conclusion. The Ottawa ' Journal ' says :
Mr. Borden's Policy.


Mr.  R. L.@: all transportation business and rates in Canada. Practically, it seems to us, the Liberal government is for a railway scheme which may gain nothing for the people for fifty years save some local convenience along a route a great part of which is barren ; and moreover a scheme which meantime will inevitably hinder early redress of transportation grievances by any other plan of government action.
Let me quote a little further :
In brief, and apart from the many interesting details of Mr. Borden's ideas, the main thing is this : He is for immediate control by the people of Canada of the transcontinental outlet from the west, where the Liberal government is merely for control fifty years hence.
Mr. Borden says in effect Let us have at once-and it can be had at once-a government road from Halifax to Port Arthur, the head of the great lakes : let us arrange-and it can be done-for immediate control of running rights from Port Arthur to Winnipeg; and at Winnipeg let us offer transportation facilities east 1o all western roads, ready and able advantageously at any moment if desirable to carry a government road clear across the continent.
This is Mr. Borden's alternative to the government plan which would build a road from Moncton to Winnipeg to lease to a private company for fifty years, and offer enormous aid to the same private company to build further west for itself.
( That is the statement of the Ottawa 'Journal.' Let me quote another paper for my hon. friend from West Huron (Mr. Holmes). I refer to the Montreal ' Witness.' The hon. gentleman will not deny that this paper is a supporter of the present administration. Here is the opinion of the Montreal ' Witness ' :
Mr. Borden's proposal has the merit of business sense as compared with that of the government.
Let me quote again from another paper Which no Liberal in this House will deny is a supporter of the present government. I refer to that king of supporters, the Toronto ' Globe.' It says :
Quite naturally the next extension of this Intercolonial Railway system would be from Montreal to the Georgian bay.
Quite naturally, the ' Globe ' says. That is the statement of the leading reform journal on the policy that is announced by the leader of the opposition.
1 have not much further to say, Mr. Speaker, only this, that in my humble opinion proper surveys of the country should be made' before this railway is constructed. In my humble opinion, when the House Is in session at least, and when a large proposition of this kind is before the people of Canada, the members of the cabinet, instead of making a binding bargain on behalf of the people of Canada without consulting this House would come forward and say- We propose to construct a line of railway. And after having made that statement, before they sign and seal a bargain for the work, they should come and ask the people's representatives whether the time has arrived when the people are prepared to spend


Richard Blain: $100,000,000 to construct a new transcontinental line of railway. I say that the members of the cabinet have taken upon themselves more power in this matter than, was intended to be given them by the British constitution which governs this country. I think there can he no justification for this government pledging the people of Canada to an expenditure of $100,000,000 without first consulting the representatives of the people of Canada in parliament assembled. For myself, speaking for the province of Ontario, I say, whether my opinion is valuable or not, when I examine this contract and see how little this transcontinental railway will do for the province of Ontario; when I am told by the hon. Minister of the Interior that it will not bring the province of Ontario one mile closer than it is at present to the west or to the east, when this and other statements are made, I have arrived at the conclusion that the people of the province of Ontario, regardless of party, will say that this government should he condemned for the expenditure of $100,000,000 to construct another transcontinental line of railway.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE (Hon. Sydney Fisher).: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Blain) who lias just taken his seat has spoken from such a narrow and provincial standpoint in dealing with this scheme of a transcontinental railroau, which is essentially a national undertaking, broad and far-reacli-ing, and embracing in its scope the whole of our great Dominion of Canada from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The hon. gentleman has brought forward one or two points which in the course of my remarks I will allude to ; but, at present I prefer to take up one or two matters which I think have not yet been brought out prominently in this debate.
Hon. gentlemen opposite have alluded to what they call the inconsiderate haste and pressure with which this scheme of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway has been brought before the House. I take exception to that characterization of the proposal of the government, because, although this particular proposal has not been long before the country in its details, it has been the undoubted feeling of the people of Canada for some time past-certainly for one year, and probably for two years-that the condition of affairs in our North-west is such as to require another outlet for the products of that country ion the near future. And when I say in the near future, I want to draw attention to the fact that this scheme, or any other scheme which may he put before the people of Canada, for relieving the pressure on the railroad systems of our country, must necessarily take some years for its completion ; and that if to-day we lay the foundation for such a scheme, it will he several years, to say the least* before the congestion of freight traffic in

our North-west Territories can he relieved. I need not dwell upon the many evidences of that congestion. I would point, however, to one which I think is authoritative, although I believe it has been alluded to already in this debate ; that is, the resolution of the Winnipeg Board of Trade, passed last winter, urging upon the government of Canada the necessity for immediate and prompt action to relieve the congestion of traffic from Manitoba and the North-west Territories to the Canadian seaboard. Those who are not responsible for the conduct of affairs in this country may think that the congestion is not a matter of great consequences ; but to the government of the country, whose duty it is not only to provide for present necessities, but also to look to the future and see that the growing needs of the country are provided for as they arise, I contend that it is a crying duty to provide for the future trade of our country. By the scheme which is proposed we do provide for the creation of another transcontinental channel of communication, which will be ready for operation five years hence. Were we to delay the inception of this work, I venture to say, withdut fear of controversey, that we would delay it too long. If within the next five years such a channel of trade were not created, I venture to say that a condition of affairs would arise in the country which would be a menace to our national existence. We have in Canada to-day two great corporations managing the railroads of eastern Canada-the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Grand Trunk Railway. The Cnadiau Pacific Railway has an entry into our North-west Territories, and it is able to bid for the traffic of those growing territories; but the Grand Trunk Railway has no such entry through Canada, and it is therefore hampered in. the carrying on of its eastern traffic. Everybody concedes that it is right that the Grand Trunk Railway should get an entrance into the North-west Territories, and should be able to take a share in handling the products of that growing country. If we do not provide a means by which the Grand Trunk corporation may be able to get an entry into the' North-west Territories, through our own country and under our own flag, we all know that the Grand Trunk Railway has its connections with the railroads	of the western states of
America,	and that it will obtain
an entry by means of those roads into our North-west, and will bring down a large portion of the traffic of that country through American territory and by American lines of communication instead of through Canadian channels of communication. It is the duty of the government of this country to see that an evil of that kind shall not arise in the near future ; because we know that the interests of the people follow the channels of traffic ; and if a large portion of the people of our North-west
Territories are looking to the great railroad corporations of the American union in alliance with the Grand Trunk Railway of eastern Canada, they will be looking towards the American union for other purposes ; they will be buying the necessaries of life in that country instead of buying them in eastern Canada, who can rightly and properly supply them. With this in view, it is a crying and immediate necessity that the government of Canada, supported by the parliament of Canada, should immediately arrange that the Grand Trunk Railway corporation should have an entry into the North-west Territories, and that in doing that we should provide a new and better line, the shortest and the cheapest means of communication for these territories, not only with eastern Canada but with our seaports so that their produce may be carried to the natural market of our food products, the mother country.
In this connection let me say a word upon the development of the North-west Territories. In all the discussion of this question the carriage of wheat has been brought prominently forward, and it has almost always been treated as the only product that would have to be carried by this railroad. That is one of the greatest mistakes that it is possible to imagine. While wheat is an important product of our North-west, and one of the greatest freights which will be carried by this road, and which has been carried by the Canadian Pacific Railway, I venture to say that in the near future, when the North-west Territories and the province of Manitoba are developed in the same way as the states of the Mississippi valley and the (great north-western states have been developed during the last twenty-five or thirty years, the carriage of wheat will become an insignificant portion of the freight that will have to be carried out of the western country to our seaboard and across the Atlantic to the natural markets of our food products. I have made a little calculation in regard to the development of our North-west. In taking the census a couple of years ago, it was my duty to look into this development, and if it will not weary the House, I would like to lay before the members a few actual figures in regard to this development, and what I think may be taken to be a conservative estimate, well within what may be fairly and justly expected, of the probable development of that country in the decade between 1901 and the Jaking of the census in 1911. In 1891. in Manitoba and the North-west Territories as now organized, there were 31,800 farms, occupyling 8,140,000 acres, while in 1901, ten years later, there were 54,600 farms, occupying 15,400,000 acres. The remaining unoccupied land in these territories has an extent of 213,600,000 acres, or enough to make 758,000 farms of the average size of the farms in 1901.
The area of improved land in this decade

went from 1,403,000 acres in 1891 to 5,590,000 acres in 1901, and during the same period the area of land under crops was increased from 1,421,000 acres to 3,600,000 acres.
1 will now take the area of the main staple crops in these two years-the main staple crops only. In 1891 there was 1,010,000 acres in wheat, in 1901 there were 2,-
495,000	acres in wheat. In 1891 there were
64.000	acres in barley, in 1901 there were 162,500 acres in barley. In 1891 there were
318.000	acres in oats, and in 1901 there were 833,000 acres in oats.
I also desire in this connection to make a statement in regard to the 'live stock of those territories, and later on I will draw the attention of the House and the country to the importance of this industry in comparison with that of the production of the crude grain or the crude crops taken off our lands.
In 1891 there were 147,700 horses in the North-west Territories, in 1901 there were
305.000	horses. In 1891 there were 120,000 milch cows, in 1901 there were 228,000 milch cows ; and of other cattle, in 1891 there were 343,000, and in 1901 637,000, showing a splendid development of the live stock industry.
In 1891 the population of the territory was 219,000 and in 1901 it was 414,000, being a growth in ten years of 195,000, or 89 per cent. During the same period the growth of rural population was from 178,000 to 305,000, or 70 per cent.
The records of the Department of the Interior show that in the period between the taking of the census of 1901 and the 30th of June last, 48,858 homestead entries were made in the territory, and that 158,658 settlers have gone into it. I have had a calculation made based upon these figures and upon the records of the last two years, and I have discovered, taking an absolutely conservative estimate, not dealing with any exceptional years, but going over a term of years, taking averages, we may confidently expect that when one-half of this decade has passed, in 1906, we may count upon having 970,000 souls in Manitoba and the North-west Territories, and that in 1911, when the next census will be taken, we may confidently count upon 1,638,000 souls iu Manitoba and the North-west Territories. Should the growth of the North-west Territories continue throughout this decade as it has begun, this estimate will be greatly exceeded, and we may be quite sure that the figures I am here giving are well within the mark. Now, Sir, I wish in all this calculation to keep well within the mark, but I think that the figures I shall give will be abundantly 'Sufficient to justify a confident hope in the enormous increase in the production of that western country, and in the greatly increased demand for transportation facilities which that production will cause. The result is that it is absolutely necessary for us to-day, now, without the


Hod. Mr. FISHER.: loss of a single week or a single month, to take steps to bring about the building of a new railway which will make the facilities for that transportation much better than they are to-day.
Sir, I say that these estimates are very conservative. In a country like this, new and growing, and with conditions changing very rapidly, we cannot make estimates in the same way that we can in an old and settled country like those of Europe, but in these calculations I have taken that arithmetical progression of increase in population which is taken in Europe and under conditions such as prevail there. Were I to make an estimate based on the conditions in Canada during the last few years, the figures, as I shall show in a minute, would be far, far under the mark. Supposing we had taken the trade of Canada in 1896 to estimate for the following eight years what the trade of Canada would be for the next eight years and had based that estimate on the history of preceding eight years, what would the result have been ? In the period preceding 1896 the volume of our imports and exports was, in round numbers, $1,733,000,009. In the latter it was $2,713,000,000. That is an increase in the latter period over the former period of $979,000,000, or an average increase per year of $122,000,000.
In other words, the trade of Canada during the last eight years has averaged $122,000,000 greater than it did in the eight years preceding 1896 ; and, if we had based an estimate in 1896 of what was going to happen in eight years during which this government has been in power, on what had happened during the previous eight years of the former administration, we should have been too low by $122,000,000- I have taken the lower estimate in the figures I have given. I have not based my calculations of the future on the geometrical progression which Canada has shown during the last few years, but simply on the arithmetical progression, believing that in the next few years it will be at least as great as it has been in the immediate past. I think, therefore, that the estimates I shall give are conservative estimates. In 1901, we had
2,495,000	acres in wheat. In 1906 we ought to have 3,700,000 acres in wheat, and in 1911, at the end of the decade, we ought to have 6,200,000 acres in wheat. In 1901, we had 162,500 acres in barley. This, we may expect to increase to 250,000 acres in 1906, and to 432,000 acres in 1911. In 1901 we had 833,000 acres in oats. In 1906 we may expect to increase to 1,300,000 acres in oats, and in 1911, 2,200,000 acres. Now, take the average production. I do not base my estimate on any exceptional or particular year, but on the average production of five years before and after the last census. On this basis I think it is fair to believe that, as Manitoba and the North-west Territories produced 63,310,532 bushels of wheat in 1901, we can safely count on 70,300,000 bushels

of wheat in 1906, and on 117,800,000 bushels in 1911. Of barley, that country produced 7,331,255 bushels in 1901. This, I expect, will increase to 8,000,000 'bushels in 1906, and to 13,824,000 bushels in 1911. In oats, our produce of 38,909,654 bushels in 1901 will increase to 58,000,000 in 1906 and 81,400,000 in 1911. Taking live stock, and basing our calculations on exactly the same principles,
I And that we had, in 1901, 418,542 [DOT] horses, and I estimate that in 1906 we shall have
750,000	and in 1911. 1,240,000. Of milch cows, we have not the figures for 1901, but I expect that in 1906 we shall have 560,000,'and in 1911, 920,000. Of other meat cattle, we may expect to have in 1906 1,560,000, and in 1911, 2,500,000. These figures are important because on these figures we shall have to base our calculations and expectations of what the railroads and other means of transport will have to carry out of the North-west Territories and Manitoba between 1906 and 1911.
According to the contract that Is before the House to-day, the new road ought to be built five years after the contract is signed. In 1908, then, the road should be built. We may safely believe that it will be a year or so after its construction before it is at its best in the carriage of freight. What we have really to do, therefore, is to provide for the needs of the country in 1911 ; and the figures I have given will indicate to some extent what we shall have1 to provide for. I said a few minutes ago that these estimates are what the railroad would have to do, but I have not gone quite far enough in my calculations. A certain amount of wheat, barley and oats will be needed for food and seed in Manitoba and the west; only a certain number of the animals in the west will be exported. I estimate that the surplus of wheat for export in 1906 will be about 60,000,000 bushels, and in 1911, 100,000,000 bushels. We may expect also that oats will be exported, either in the form of grain or in the form of meal, to the extent of 28,000,000 bushels in 1906, and 40,000,000 bushels in 1911. As to cattle, we may expect that in 1906 about 156,000 head will be available for export, and 250,000 head In 1911. Reducing these export carloads, we find that in 1906 we may fairly expect that, in wheat, oats and cattle, there will be available for export in Manitoba and the Northwest Territories 120,000 carloads, and in 1911, 165,000 carloads. In other words, In 1906 there will be an average of ten trains a day of thirty cars each for every day in the year, and in 1911 fifteen trains of thirty cars each for every day in the year. We can see what this means when I say that, according to the last census, for three years the average had been about 120 cars per day, or four trains of thirty cars each for every day in the year. In other words, in 1906 we ought to have two and a half times as many train loads come out, and in 1911
nearly four times as many carloads of these products of the North-west Territories coming out that we have to-day. Now, lion, gentlemen opposite, and the leader of the opposition amongst them, have pinned their faith to the advantages of lake and rail transportation as against all-rail transport.


Mr. HENDERSON.: Hear, hear.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) says, ' hear, hear.' I have no doubt he pins his faith to that of his leader, whatever it may be. Nevertheless, though the leader of the opposition pinned his faith to water and rail transportation, he proposes to provide for all-rail transportation and many hon. gentlemen on the other side have discussed that very favourably. The argument in favour of water and rail transportation is supported almost entirely by statements in regard to the transportation of wheat and wheat alone, upon the fact that wheat may be carried by lake and rail more cheaply than it can be carried all-rail. My hon. friend the leader of the opposition, in the course of his statement of programme announced that he favoured the acquiring of the Canadian Pacific Railway track from Sudbury westward to Fort William, and then nationalize the track from Fort William to Winnipeg. This must be for the purpose of providing an all-rail route and shows that the hon. gentleman appreciated the importance of that route, and sees that the water and rail route is not sufficient for the needs of our transportation. I can quite understand, if the hon. gentleman depends on the Canadian Pacific Railway line north of Lake Superior, that the argument that the all-rail route cannot compete with the lake and rail route has a good deal of force, because everybody knows the impossibility of the Canadian Pacific Railway north of Lake Superior competing with the lake and rail route. We are all aware of the fact that that railroad has grades on it of one per cent; we are all aware of the fact that, spend as much money as you like upon it, do what you choose to improve that road you never can make it, from the nature of the country through which it is going to pass, a portion of a great transcontinental railroad which can and ought to carry freight at the lowest possible figure.
But, Sir, 1 will take the hon. gentleman's contention that we must have a lake and rail route. Nobody on this side of the House objects to that route during a portion of the year, in summer. But I want to point out this, that while grain alone, and especially wheat, will probably be carried when the lake and rail route is available, chiefly by the lake and rail route, wheat is not by any means the only product that will be carried I out, in fact is not the greatest product that,

in the near future, will have to be carried out from the North-west. My hon. friend from Peel a few moments ago alluded to the argument of my hon. friend the Minister of the Interior about the carriage of cattle into the North-west Territories from the east by this railroad route. My hon. friend perhaps is not aware of the extent of that trade. This last season over 25,000 head of store cattle were carried from eastern Canada beyond Lake Superior into the Northwest Territories, for the purpose of supplying that country with stock; and my hon. friend is not aware of the fact perhaps that at the same time there was no less than
40,000	head of cattle came from Mexico into our North-west Territories. Why V Because there was not a convenient route by which to take them at a low rate from eastern Canada into the North-west. Now, Sir, I venture to say that while the 25,000 head that went into the Northwest Territories last year and an almost equal number that went in the year before, came largely from the province of Ontario, in the near future the maritime provinces and Quebec, and even that northern country through which the Grand Trunk Pacific transcontinental road is going to pass, will be able to raise young cattle which can be profitably taken into our North-west Territories for the purpose of being fattened there and then sent back to the east to be exported to the mother land. My hon. friend shakes his head. Perhaps he forgets the fact that during the last few years we have been sending from eastern Canada into the states of the American west thousands of cattle for the same purpose. My hon. friend perhaps does not know that although the western states of the union have been the greatest cattle producing country in the world, notwithstanding that fact, buyers from the western states, from Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, Colorado and Nebraska, have been scouring the Dominion of Canada to get store cattle to take into the western states to be fattened there and then sent east to Chicago, to be re-exported to England. Now, Sir, if that condition of affairs obtains in the cattle industry of the western states of America which have been developing it for years, may we not expect that in the North-west Territories of Canada, as their cattle trade develops, the same thing will obtain.


Richard Blain: The hon. gentleman says that the export of cattle from Canada to the Unites States is increasing. Can he give us the figures for the last three years V


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: No, the trade has not been increasing. Why ? Because our own people have wanted all their cattle to reproduce in this country, they have been refusing to sell them to the Americans because they have found a new Hon. Mr. FISHER.
market for them in our own North-west. That is the reason why our cattle trade has been increasing. But it is not because the western states do not want them, it is not because the western states are not getting^ them, but to-day the western states are getting their store cattle from Mexico just as our people in the North-west are doing', because they cannot get them in Canada: and it is only because they cannot get them in Canada in sufficient quantity that they have been turning their attention to the south and they are getting them from Mexico.
But the hon. gentleman has entirely supported the view which I am expressing to the House. The hon. gentleman is quite right when he says that in the near future the people in the North-west will breed cattle for themselves. They are doing it to-day, and they are going to do it much more in the future. It is just as important, and indeed more important for the development of our North-west, that the cattle and stock industries should be developed than that wheat should be raised. The people of eastern Canada know well that the live stock interest is the basis of their prosperity. They know also that those people who have gone from eastern Canada to the North-west and Manitoba, while for a few years they do without live stock by reason of the virgin fertility of their soil and the ease with which they can raise great crops of wheat on the fertile prairies, in the near future they will have to adopt what is known as mixed husbandry and establish a live stock interest. When they come to do that the amount of animal products which they will want to send out of the North-west Terri-tornes will make the amount of wheat that is sent out pale into insignificance in comparison. Sir, we are going to have in Canada the same condition of affairs in the development of our North-west that the United States republic has had. When the people from the east went into that country and began to spread out over the Mississippi plains and further west, they began to raise wheat and corn. They afterwards took to raising cattle to such an extent that to-day Chicago is the centre of a far greater trade in animal products than it is of a wheat and flour trade. I venture to predict that while to-day the people of Manitoba and the Northwest are thinking of hardly anything else than wheat and flour, they will in the near future devote their attention to the animal industry in the shape of packing houses, in the shape of abbatoirs, in the shape of a live stock trade, which will cause the grain trade of our North-west to sink into insignificance. When that time comes, as it surely will come in the near future, no part of that trade in animal products will go by lake and rail but the whole of it will be obliged to go by rail, and can go in no other way. I emphasize this fact, because in all the discuss-

ion of the transportation question, not only-in this House but in the newspapers of the country, the problem has been held to hinge upon the grain trade, in comparison with which everything else seems to be considered of no importance.
I have some figures here which will show what the trade of Chicago is in reference to this matter, and I think we may fairly judge of what is going to happen in our own country by what is happening in the United States. Winnipeg is held to be the future Chicago of our country. Chicago is situated at the head of lake navigation. Winnipeg is nearly 500 miles away from lake navigation. If there is any place on the continent of America where lake transportation can advantageously compete with all rail, it is Chicago. When anything has to be sent from Chicago to the Atlantic seaboard it can only go by lake to Buffalo, and then rail from Buffalo, or by the Erie canal with only one transhipment, or it can go all rail from Chicago to the Atlantic seaboard without any transhipment at all. Now, anything that comes from Winnipeg-and Winnipeg must be in the future the centre for the gathering of all the products of our great North-west- anything that comes from Winnipeg, if it has to come by water as well as by rail, will have to come down to Lake Superior before it can reach the water. It will then have to be transferred into the ship, be brought down to some other point and there it will have to be transferred again either to the rail at the G-eorgian bay ports, or into the ocean vessel at the port of Montreal, or at some other of the seaports. In that respect water and rail transport is at a less advantage from Winnipeg than from Chicago. But, what is the fact as regards the transportation of the products of the west from Chicago ? I have some figures taken from the Chicago Board of Trade returns which show how the products of the great west whicb are assembled at Chicago go to the Atlantic seaboard. I fear I may weary the House-


An hon. MEMBER.: Go on.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: But these figures are interesting and important to the argument. The figures which I am going to quote are for the years 19001901 and 1902. In 1900 grains, including wheat, corn, oats, rye, barley, grass and flax seeds to the amount of 3,449,000 tons were sent from Chicago eastward by the water route, and grains amounting in quantity to 2,287,000 tons were sent eastward by all-rail. There were of flour alone
109.000	tons sent by water and 614,000 tons sent by rail. I will now take animal products. including barrelled pork, bacon, dressed beef, hides and wool, lard, cheese and butter, not live animals, but only animal products. By water there were sent
20.000	tons from Chicago to the east and by rail there were sent 1,445,000 tons. If you
take the three things together, grain, flour, and animal products, there were sent from Chicago eastward in the year, 1900, 3,579,000 tons by water and 4,347,000 tons by rail.


Mr. REID (Grenville).: Is that from Chi-cargo to the seaboard direct ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes, direct.	'


Mr. BELL.: Not all to the seaboard ports ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Not all to the seaboard ports. The return only shows what went eastward without specifying that which went to the seaboard, but the great bulk of it went to the Atlantic ports. This calculation does not take into account the shipments of the enormous quantities of grain which go through Chicago south and east and do not enter Chicago at all but which are sent straight on without any delay. The return which I am quoting are returns only of what goes to Chicago and is sent on from there and that which goes to south Chicago goes on by all-rail. I venture to say that there are ten times as much of these_ as of the quantities which I have given which do not go to the Atlantic seaboard. In 1901, taking the figures from the same source, we have of grain alone, 2,169,000 tons going by water and 2,439,000 tons by rail. We have of flour 89,000 tons going by water and 724,000 tons going by rail the whole way. We have of animal products 15,000 tons going by water and 1,444,000 tons going by rail. Taking the total of these products- and these are the same kinds of products which are going to go out of our North-west and which from Winnipeg must be carried to the seaboard for export to the old country-in 1901, 2,276,000 tons went by water from Chicago and 4,608,000 tons by all-rail or over double as much.
I shall go over the same figures for 1902, because I wish to show that this is no exceptional result, but that this is what takes place year after year. In 1902 we had of flour 105,000 tons shipped by water and 463,000 tons by rail, of grains 1,-
760,000	tons shipped by water, and 1,609,000 tons shipped by rail, the only time that more grain was sent by water than by rail. Of animal products 775,000 tons went by water and 1,269,000 tons by rail. Of the total during the year, 1,867,000 tons went by water and 3,342,000 tons by rail, or double as much. Now, I shall summarize these figures very shortly. Taking the total for the three years, we had of grain and animal products that went by water 7,720,000 tons, and by all-rail 12,298,000 tons, or a yearly average for these three years of 2,573,000 tons by water as compared with 4,099,000 tons by rail. The average yearly excess of shipments by rail is 1.525,000 tons. The statement is as follows :

Shipments by water and rail from Chicago, 1900.

By water.	By rail.	Total.*Tons.	Tons.	Tons.Flour	
Wheat	109,921 797,317 2,211,107 114,504 12,461 10,852 3,210	614,945 302,181 899,683 903,924 21,804	724,876' 1,099,498 3,110,790 1,318,429 34,266 137,736 35,945
Rye				
Barley	
Grass and flax seeds	126; 883 32,735	Total, flour, grain and seeds	3,559,384	2,902,158	6,461,5423,449,453	2,287,213	Barrelled pork	
Bacon, &c	
Dressed beef. Hides and wool .. Lard	
Cheese 	
Butter	
.	3,220 57 '' " 2,341 14,462 10 . 4	22,703 395,453 589,475 84,744 225,423 23,569 104,266	25,923 395,510 589,475 87,085 239,886 23,580 104,268Total animal products	20,094	1,445,636	1,465,731Total grain and animal products	3,579,479	4,347,794	7,977,273
Shipments by water and rail from Chicago, 1901.
-	By water.	By rail.	Total.Tons.	Tons.	Tons.Flour	89,579	724,188	813,762Wheat	945,661	419,797	1,365,458Corn	947,344	847,507	1,794,852Oats	258,038	1,039,752	1,297,790Rye.	11,196	24,842	36,039Barley. 	4,468	81,546	86,010Grass and flax seeds	2,487	25,779	28,266Total flour, grain	and seeds	2,258,770	3,163,410	5,422,180Grains alone.	2,169,191	2,439,222	Barrelled pork	2,515	16,805	19,320Bacon, &c	1.140	381,703	382,843Dressed beef	40	540,797	540,837Hides and wool ..	2,787	130,273	133,060Lard	8,713	224,263	232,976Cheese.. 	9	28,467	28,476Butter	
.	3J	122,540	122,544Total animal pro-	ducts	15,208	1,444,851	1,460,059Total grain and	animal products	2,276,979	4,608,261	6,882,240
Shipments by water and rail from Chicago, 1902.
*	By water.	By rail.	Total.Flour 	Tons. 105,966 660,857 857.081 174,986 59,761 7,224 840	Tons. 463,378 245,706 418,542 811,528 19,595 76,906 37,075	Tons. 569,345 900,564 1,275,623 986,514 79,358 84,130 37,915
Barley 	 Grass and flax seeds Total flour grain and seeds				
	1,866,718	2,072,733	3,939,452
	1,760,752	1,609,353	
			
		18,960 330,340 524,900 76,716 191,249 26,344 100,893	18,960 330,340 524,900 77,492 191,249 26,344 100,893
			
			
Hides and wool....	775		
			
			
Total animal pro-			
	775	1,269,405	1,270,181
Total grain and animal products			
	1,867,494	3,342,139	5,209,633
Shipments from Chicago by water and rail, 1900-1-2.
-	By water.	By rail.	Total.1900.	Tons.	Tons.	Tons.Flour, grain and seeds	
Animal products...	3,559,384 20,094	2,902,158 1,445,636	0,461,542 1,465,7311901.	Flour, grain and seeds	
Animal products...	2,258,770 15,208	3,163,410 1,444,851	5,422,185 1,460,0591902.	Flour, grain and seeds	
Animal products...	1,860,718 775	2,072,733 1,269,405	3,939,452 1,270,2811900-1-2.	Total grain and animal products	7,720,952	12,298,195	20,019,147Yearly average...	2,573,650	4,099,398	6,673,049The average yearly excess of shipments by rail is, therefore, 1,525,747 tons of grain and animal products.	.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: This shows clearly and distinctly that the arguments which might be brought up in detail, a little here, and a little there in the course of this debate, are not conclusive in favour of the water and rail route. I think this statement is a direct and complete answer to the statement made the other day by the hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden, Halifax) in his speech, when he said, quoting the words of a rail expert :
Not more than ten per cent of the wheat is caried by the rail route and it is so carried only in times of necessity when it is absolutely necessary to bring the grain forward at almost any cost. In the United States the rail and water routes carry over seventy-five per cent of the grain in the United States and it must be remembered that the rail competition there is over railroads which run through a thickly populated country having large commer [DOT] cial interests.
Sir William Van Horne is quoted as saying that not a single bushel of the grain can be carried along the north shore of Lake Superior.


John William Bell: I do not think Sir William Van Horne said that.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not know but it would be the most severe condemnation of the route of his own railway that could possibly be brought before this country and it would have no bearing whatever upon the argument on this question because the grades on the route which we are proposing are doubly as good as the grades along the north shore of Lake Superior on the Canadian Pacific Railway.


John William Bell: Is it settled what the grades are to be ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It is settled to this extent: We know that the grades of the Canadian Pacific Railway around the north shore of Lake Superior are as high as one per cent, and we know from the statements which are made in regard to the country through which this proposed road will go that instead of it being an extremely rocky and hilly country with high elevations and deep ravines, it is generally level country with a gradual slope the whole way, and I am informed that the Grand Trunk surveying parties who are now in the country have been able to secure as far as they have gone a route with grades as low as one-half per cent, or in other words, that it is double as good as the route of the Canadian Pacific Railway around the north shore of Lake Superior in the matter of grades. That is one of the weaknesses of the proposition of my hon. friend the leader of the opposition, because, in comparison with the route which we propose, the proposition which he puts forward cannot compete with the lake and rail transport and will not be able to do so. If we are going to provide facilities for transporting the grain products of our North-west we must provide for the construction of a
railway which can and will be able to successfully compete with the lake and rail transport, and the proposition which we have put forward will do that, and I believe that no other proposition which can be brought forward will be able to do it.
Now, Sir, I will allude to another fact in connection with the argument put forward a few minutes ago. I said that not only wheat and grain, but also animal products from our North-west must be brought forward. I will turn to the report of the Winnipeg Board of Trade and point out that in that report they draw attention to the remarkable fact that last year the Minneapolis millers obtained a concession from the United States government by which they have been able to get Canadian grain and grind it in bond for export to Europe. The board of trade says : that apparently the result was satisfactory, as it has been announced in the press that a large quantity of the Manitoba wheat of this season's crop has been shipped to Minneapolis millers for grinding. That means that a large proportion of the Canadian wheat crop, instead of being exported to Europe in the shape of grain, is being ground into flour by the enterprise of our neighbours to the south, and according to the statement of the Winnipeg Board of Trade they are making a profit out of it. Is it not reasonable to suppose, yea, is it not necessary to the proper development of our western country that our own people at Winnipeg, Rat Portage and other places in the west, shall grind the wheat of western Canada in flour, and send it as flour to the eastern parts of Canada as well as for export. I know that to-day the reason why so much wheat is brought from the west into eastern Canada to be ground into flour, is because there is no market in the North-west for the byproducts. The people of the North-west have not yet got into the way of feeding bran and middlings and shorts to their cattle and hogs, but when they get to be a live stock-producing country in the Northwest, and have an abundant market for the by-products of the wheat when it is ground into flour, then you will see in Winnipeg or somewhere else another centre like Minneapolis where to-day the wheat of the western states and of Canada as well, is ground into flour ; you will see the erection of enormous flour mills, and the products of our western plains will be shipped to the east in the shape of flour instead of in the shape of wheat. When that comes about, the flour will come from the west to the east by rail, and little or none will be shipped by the water and rail route. ^ Here we have another proof that an all-rail route is absolutely necessary. And that all-rail route must be the best possible one. The kind of route "which the leader of the opposition has spoken of will not do. He proposes to have it along the north shore of Lake Superior where the grades are

most difficult, and through Ontario and Quebec in a roundabout way, in contradistinction to the straight road proposed by the government, which will go through the hinterland from Winnipeg to Quebec in the most direct way. The leader of the opposition proposes to do this by buying the Canadian Pacific Railway around the north shore of Lake Superior; by purchasing the Canada Atlantic Railway; by building a long link ; and by improving the grades by some arrangement between Port Arthur and Winnipeg. The leader of the opposition presents to parliament a patchwork scheme, presents to parliament a patchwork plan, which will not accomplish the end desired, of a straight road with low grades and a direct course between two important points. The leader of the opposition proposes to carry out his plan by an expenditure of tens of millions of dollars; I do not know liow many tens of millions. He himself said that be did not object to free expenditure, and I must say that his plans show that he seems to delight in expenditure.
An lion. MEMBER. It would cost hundreds of millions.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It may, but I am not able to go into a detailed calculation at the present moment, although we know that the cost would be enormously greater than the cost of the government plan, which the Finance Minister has stated to the House and to the country will only cost us 813,500,000.
Some bon. MEMBERS. Oh.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: My hon. friends opposite laugh.


David Henderson: So well we might.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Do they laugh at the figures brought forward by the Finance Minister ? Let me tell them that neither in this House nor anywhere else in the country has a single figure ever announced by the Finance Minister been controverted or attempted to be controverted. More than that, in the seven years that my hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Fielding) has held the position of Finance Minister, he has year after year put before this parliament and before the people of Canada financial statements, and they have all been of so conservative a character that in no single instance have hon. gentlemen opposite been able to point to any error or misstatement in his calculations.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes, the reputation of the Finance Minister is so high in Canada that the people of Canada will accept his statements and will feel absolutely sure that the price which the_ hon. gentleman puts upon this great project is the outside figure it will cost the people of the country. I venture to say Hon. Mr. FISHER.
that never in the history of Canada has any plan of such transcendent importance been submitted to the people that involves such a mere bagatelle of a burden upon them.


Mr. TAYLOR.: The Minister of Finance found it hard to get money enough to pay the cost of taking the census.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The Minister,of Finance has been able, during the last year, to show to the people of the world that the revenue of Canada is so abundant that we have a larger surplus by double than ever was known in history before, and that notwithstanding the hon. gentleman's insisting upon the fact that the census has been expensive.
I do not wish to enter into the general terms of this debate. The question has been dealt with ably by gentlemen on both sides, and I compliment gentlemen opposite that they have put their best foot foremost and given their ablest and severest criticism to the plan of the government. But all they have been able to show is that the plan of the leader of the opposition has not the full concurrence of the gentlemen behind him. These gentlemen opposite have recognized that the hinterland must be developed and that Canada should be widened from north to south so as to get a firmer grip on our area for agricultural operations. The leader of the opposition states that he is willing to build a colonization railway from Quebec to Winnipeg. He is quite willing to do that after having spent millions after millions in acquiring the Canada Atlantic Railway and the Canadian Pacific Railway on the north shore of Lake Superior and improving the grades on the Canadian Northern Railway or the Canadian Pacific Railway from Lake Superior to Winnipeg. And after all these millions have been spent, he is willing to build a colonization road from east to west.


Mr. CLANCY.: When ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: In his speech.


James Clancy: At what time does he propose to do it ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Just as soon as the information can be obtained and as the information is now before the House and the country, no doubt the leader of the opposition wants to do it at once.


James Clancy: When the interests of the country demand it.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The hon. gentleman from Peel said that plan would not do, and the hon. gentleman from Jacques Cartier said that it would not do either, and that you did not want a railway from Quebec to Winnipeg, but that you wanted colonization roads to be run

from the old settled parts everywhere to the north. There is not the slightest doubt in the world that such roads would not develop the country as the plan which the government proposes. The plan promulgated by these gentlemen will not afford good and cheap transportation facilities for the products of the western country, but the plan which the government has proposed will without doubt render that blessing. By this plan we propose to give to that part of Quebec and Ontario one of the best railroads on the continent of America, a road which will be on the main line of our communication between the great west and our seaports on the Atlantic; a road which will be able to carry the products of our western country at the cheapest possible cost, and will, therefore, promote the colonization of that country to the best advantage. As I have pointed out, the hon. leader of the opposition proposes to a great extent to follow oifr lead. But his followers do not believe in his scheme ; they want to build the road in a totally different way. Sir, we make a clean-cut proposition embodied in a contract signed and sealed with a reputable corporation of great resources, which is going ahead with the project as rapidly as possible. In opposition to that and in contrast to that, my hon. friend the leader of the opposition proposes a scheme which involves dickering and bargaining with three or four railway corporations, each of them with its hand on the throat of this country, so that if his party were in power they would be committed to this scheme, and would be obliged to yield to their demands. We do not know, we cannot know, what that will cost. We do know, and the country knows, what our scheme will cost, and tiie cost is so ridiculously small that the difficulty is for the people to believe that so much can be got at so little cost.' But, as I said a moment ago, the people of this country have had experience of the work of the Minister of, Finance, and when he tells them, that this scheme can be put through at a cost of $13,500,000, they will believe him, and .will support and vote for the scheme. I for one, shall be glad to go before the people of the country and ask for their endorsation.
At six o'clock, House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. A. A. LEFURGEY (East Prince, P.E.I.).: Mr. Speaker, at this late stage of the debate, I would not have ventured to occupy the time of the House were it not that the importance of the subject makes it the duty of each one of us to pronounce upon it. Tiie hon. Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Fisher), who preceded me, promised that he would give us some new points to excuse
this scheme which the government are forcing upon the country; but in the course of the hon. gentleman's argument, I found that he was not dealing with the transportation question at all, but was giving us some very interesting figures about the development of the agricultural products of the west, and the bright prospects of that country for the future. I am sure that we are all very glad that the North-west is going to have the great future which we all predict for it ; but that has nothing w-hat-ever to do with the transportation question. The hon. minister quoted figures which in themselves, may be all right and proper ; but they had nothing to do with the issue before us on the present occasion. They show the real need of deliberation on this question. The hon. gentleman pointed out that in ten or twenty years hence the products coming out of the North-west would be enormous. That is all the more reason, Mr. Speaker, why we should pause now to get the right solution of the question of how to bring these products out by the cheapest outlet. But the hon. Minister of Agriculture is a docile follower of his leader, and therefore he did not wish to trench on the poor excuse which the right hon. leader of the government gave for bringing this project before the House, but contented himself with damning the whole scheme with faint praise. After telling us that the waterways afforded tiie cheapest outlet for the transportation of the products of our western country, he -went on to excuse the project of a railway to supplement them, without developing any comprehensive scheme by which our water-ways could be improved.
Now, this question of transportation is the most important question that can come before this parliament, in view of the place commercially which Canada is to take in the future amongst nations of the world. We have reached a stage in the history of the development of transportation in all parts of the world, that should cause us to pause and deliberate before we commit this country to a project which will probably keep hack the true solution of the transportation question in this country for years to come, and possibly place the country financially in a position that would put her capability of coping with this question and her ability to carry as cheaply as the United States entirely beyond our reach for an indefinite period. The struggle for supremacy in international trade continues at the present time in all its vigour. It is recognized in all commercial countries that that struggle is one of the foremost issues that confront them to-day. Not only is our international trade bound up in this transportation question, but the whole internal development of the country is involved in it. If Canada is going" to take commercially her place among the nations of the world, it is absolutely necessary that

the country should have transportation facilities equal if not superior to those of the nation to the south of us. Undoubtedly we are not prepared for the solution of this question at the present time. It is not without grave and thorough deliberation and ample knowledge, gained from all sources, that we can hope to find a solution of this question. This was the position of the government at the opening of the present session, for we find in the speech from the Throne these words :
The whole question of transportation and terminal facilities continues to occupy much attention, and my government will immediately appoint a commission of experienced men to report on the subject.
This shows the position of the government at that time. It shows that they were not prepared to deal with this question without having expert opinions upon it. Five months have since elapsed, and have we got that commission yet ? Mr. Speaker, I believe that not one member of that commission has been appointed, and no report on the subject has been brought in by the government. If further evidence were necessary, we have only to refer to the Order in Council passed on the 19th of May last, and subsequently brought 'down to this House, which contains some very interesting statements, in view of the project now before the House. This Order in Council has been read by several hon. members, but I think it is a good thing to bring it once more before the promoters of this scheme. The members of the cabinet apparently had a pretty comprehensive idea of what should be done in order to arrive at a true solution of the transportation problem. This Order in Council states :
That the development of North-western Canada has manifested the inability of existing Canadian transportation agencies to take care of Canadian products.
That our agricultural exports can only command the prices over seas to which their natural excellence entitles them when they cease to be confounded and confused with the inferior and often adulterated articles produced elsewhere ; and to preserve their separate Identity they must go through Canadian channels.
The minister further states that the questions to be considered are complicated and involved, including among the conditions to he sought the transportation of western products from place of production to the markets of the world.
It appears to me that with a statement of that kind, an acknowledgment by this government that expert opinion should be had in order to thoroughly investigate the different phases of this question, it is premature and ill-considered to bring down a scheme to this parliament three or four months after the opening of the House. The Order in Council goes on :
It is obvious that before any satisfactory conclusion can be reached upon these questions a thorough and comprehensive inquiry should he made regarding :-


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: The conditions of original shipment and the possibilities of improvement in the conditions surrounding such shipments.
The storage requirements of lake, river and ocean ports.
The harbour facilities of the inland lakes, rivers and Atlantic and Pacific ports.
The conditions with regard to the navigation of the St. Lawrence route, and, generally, any improvement, enlargements, of other matters affecting the more economical and satisfactory uses of any Canadian channel of transportation by land or water.
The minister further states that In making such investigation attention should not be confined to routes and facilities which are at present utilized, but, if necessary, new surveys should be made to determine whether any more economical and satisfactory channels of transportation by land or water can be opened up.
The forces operating against the attainment of all-Canadian transport, namely :-
Competition by United States railways;
Competition by United States vessels from Lake Superior ports;
Diversion of Canadian products through eastern outlets to Boston, Portland and other United States ports, should be investigated, and the best and most economical methods used by our competitors should he carefully studied and reported upon.
The minister apprehends that in these circumstances it devolves upon the Dominion government to consider and adopt the best possible means of promoting such measures as may enable Canada to control the transportation of Its. own products, and it is thought that the most efficient method of conducting such an inquiry and obtaining the required information is by means of a commission of competent and experienced experts who may he appointed and authorized under the provisions of chapter 114 of the Revised Statutes of Canada.
Now, it would not be supposed, having this view at the opening of parliament, having enunciated this view and having brought it down to the House on the 19th of May, that this government would plunge into a scheme of this kind without having any thorough or well-considered plans, surveys or Information to present to this House.
The hon. the Minister .of Agriculture -said that this was not introduced hastily, that the country had really been considering it for two years. Well, if the country has been considering it for two years, how-is it that the government had not a scheme to present to this House at the opening of parliament ? How is it that they brought in these different resolutions and finally at a very late period of this session brought in the present scheme. The minister quoted the Winnipeg Board of Trade to help out-his argument, but what do we find the Winnipeg Board of Trade saying :
That a thoroughly qualified expert In the management of railways be appointed to make a report on existing conditions, and what, in his opinion, would make the Intercolonial a paying concern and of the greatest benefit to the country, and also to study and make recommendations on the following alternative schemes for the consideration of the government and the people.
The hon. minister apparently forgot to

quote that part of the recommendation of the Winnipeg Board of Trade. But we have not only this resolution, we have further the opinions of a man whose life has been devoted to railroad and transportation questions, and who, I believe, was asked to take the chairmanship of this proposed commission, a man who has pronounced against this scheme as a means of solving the transportation question of the west. Sir William Van Horne spoke as follows :
The Canadian Pacific Railway, the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, or any other all-Canadian route will never voluntarily carry a carload of wheat by the all-railway route around the great lakes to an eastern Canadian port for shipment abroad, for the simple reason that It will never pay any road to do so. Nor will the transportation problems in the west ever be solved by the construction of an all-Canadian route from coast to coast.
Now, Mr. Speaker, this House and the country well know the reputation of Sir William Van Horne. They know his connection with the Canadian Pacific Railway, and they know very well that if any means could be devised by which the Canadian Pacific Railway could carry their grain to the eastern ports over their own line, they certainly would not use lake transportation.
One might also say that we have the opinion of another man who is considered perhaps an equally good authority on the transportation question in the estimation of hon. gentlemen opposite, the manager of the Grand Trunk Railway, Mr. Hays. When this scheme was first brought forward the Grand Trunk Railway had no idea of building a transcontinental railway through from coast to coast via Quebec and Moncton. Their idea was to go in by Grav-enhurst or North Bay in order to tap the wheat fields and to establish their line in the North-west Territories. Why the government departed from this and adopted this last scheme, by what means they were pushed into this, is beyond my comprehension, unless it was to satisfy the call of their political grafters. The ex-Minister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair), who, among the members of the government, had the widest experience in connection with railway matters, and to whom one would naturally suppose his colleagues would look for information and guidance on this question-why was he not taken into their confidence at an early date, and why were his opinions not listened to ? We find that this minister, whom we naturally should have looked to. leaves the government because he does not agree with this scheme as a solution of the transportation problems of the west, and in a masterful and well-considered speech which up to the present time has not been answered by the government or its supporters, absolutely condemned this proposed scheme. But it seems to me that we do not even have to point to such high authorities as I have mentioned for the
condemnation of this scheme in the light of the experience of one hundred years of the transportation problem in the United States. The scheme is condemnatory in itself. There is indeed not one point of merit in the whole scheme to recommend it. It is true that the right hon. the Prime Minister announced that it was designed for two purposes. First, to transport grain from the west to the seaboard ; and, second, to protect Canada in case the bonding privilege should be taken from us by the United States. In all fairness, except from this announcement it must be said that one would not judge that it was designed for any such purpose, but rather that some ulterior object was to be served in running a line into the country where for years to come there will be absolutely no traffic to warrant such an expenditure. Surely we have never had a scheme proposed in the history of legislation in Canada which was supported by such weak and flimsy arguments as those which were advanced by the hon. the leader of the government. The bonding privilege ! The hon. the leader of the House grew eloquent over the fact that the bonding privilege was going to be taken from us : the commercial advancement of Canada was to be stopped if we did not devise some means of freeing ourselves from dependence on the bonding privilege. Let us look for a moment at the annual report of the Inter-State Commerce Commission of 1S92, about the time that the fears of the hon. the leader of the government were awakened in this regard. The report says :
The ' foreign transit trade ' has also been a great mutual benefit to the two countries. The statistics indicate that the ' foreign transit trade ' of Canada through the United States is very much greater than that of the United States through Canada, hut that the reverse Is the case as to the ' domestic transit trade ' of the two countries. In both the ' foreign ' and ' domestic transit trade ' the merchandise of each country is permitted to pass through the territory of the other without payment of duty, and the continuance of this commerce and the conditions on which it is to be conducted are dependent on mutual concessions, good will, and fair dealing.
Now, there is just as much fear of war with the United States as there is of the bonding privilege being taken from us. No man can suggest any reason for the bonding privilege being taken away, except the event of war with the United States-and we all know that that is a very distant prospect. Moreover, I firmly believe, that, even if the bonding privilege were taken from us, the only effect would be to throw us on our own resources. In one or two years, if we used the means at our disposal to improve our lines of transportation, this loss of the bonding privilege would be found to be more of a bugaboo even than it is now. But this is not the only occasion when this bonding scare has been brought in to excuse schemes of the government. A few years ago it was

brought forward to frighten parliament and the country into the acceptance of that Yukon steal. On several other occasions, the leader of the House and his colleagues have grown eloquent over the bonding privilege. This excuse for unwise actions on the part of the. government should be worn pretty thin by this time.
Now, generally, what are the pressing-needs with regard to transportation that call for the construction of the eastern division of this proposed line ? Surely, there is none in New Brunswick. None have been pressed upon us during the last three or four years since I first became associated with the work of this House. I am pretty well acquainted with the maritime provinces, and X can fairly say that I have never heard any distinct demand from the people down there for a new railway in New Brunswick. And, surely, if there is any possible need for opening up more territory in New Brunswick and spending millions of dollars there, we could afford to folloW'the course of the government at the opening of this House in recommending that proper surveys be made and expert opinion had that a comprehensive scheme would be laid before us. As to the line from Winnipeg to Quebec, there is absolutely no excuse for it at present. It is advocated as a colonization road, but it seems absurd to decide to build a colonization road for 1.300 miles before a survey is made, especially in view of the fact that we have millions of acres of land available in the western part of this country known to be superior to any in this section and awaiting only proper settlement to turn it into profitable wheat fields. In the North-west Territories alone we have 150,000,000 acres of land fit for the cultivation of wheat. Will anybody argue that the less fertile lands between Winnipeg and Quebec can be properly settled while these western lands are opening, with railways already built and others rapidly extending ? And on the other hand, I feel sure that even in the old-settled portions of Ontario and Quebec, we can find thousands of farmers who are upwards of forty miles away from any railroad centre. The construction of this road from Winnipeg to Quebec involves a useless expenditure of public funds and anticipates any possible need for the opening up of that country by fifty, sixty or even seventy years. The idea of a new colonization road in a large, sparsely settled country like Canada, with railways built into territory not yet settled or even a vestige of habitation, is certainly opposed to all ideas of economical and fruitful development of the country. The few scattered settlements which will grow up along this line of 1,300' miles will do much to retard the progress of Canada, to increase the cost of the government of Canada, and to interfere with the settlement of the transportation question by pandering to colonization railroads when our plans should be to serve the coun-Mr. LEFURGEY.
try by a great trunk system across the continent. YVhat do we find in the United (States ? Do we find them, in the history pf their development, rushing railways into every unsettled portion of the country ? It is only a few years ago that Oklahoma was! settled, and even then the government didl not aid railways with large bonuses. The! settlement of the country had gone forward until Oklahoma could be opened up. People were awaiting for the opportunity to gb there. We find there now a most prosperous state of affairs, the territory having a population of 500,000 souls. Only when the question of diminishing returns from the! fertile plains of the west arises or population so increased that the good lands are taken up, will there be any necessity for opening up this large territory from Winnipeg to Quebec.
Now, with regard to the west, some hon. members on the other side apparently forget that we have a transcontinental line build-' ing through there. If what the Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Fisher) tells us is-correct, that the government have known about this need for two years, how is it that for two years Mackenzie & Mann have not been aided to push the Canadian Northern through the Saskatchewan country through to Edmonton and so on to the coast ? If they have known it for two years, how is it that this road was neglected and not pushed forward for two years ? And how is it, let me here remark, that the running rights reserved by the government over railways aided by the government as the Canadian Northern has just been aided to the amount of ten million of dollars, are not utilized to tide over the crisis which the leader of the government appears to think is upon the country at the present time ? Now, this Canadian Northern is opening up a large belt of fertile country that it will be impossible to settle in less than ten years from now. The reason for pushing new lines through that country is beyond my comprehension.
The leader of the government has told us that this is a time for action and not for deliberation. But during the seven years he has been in power and while the west has been growing, how is it that the needs of the country with regard to transportation have ' not impressed themselves _ upon the government, and why has not a comprehensive scheme been formulated and brought before this House ere now ? Hon. members on the other side have been getting up year after year and talking about the transportation ques-* tion. This government has not made any substantial efforts-except such as have been made by some individuals who are out of the government now-to bring before this country a comprehensive scheme to settle this question. And yet they have the audacity to bring before this parliament and to herald in this country a-

scheme that on the face of it and in the light of all statistics on transportation that we can get, is an ill-considered and ill-advised measure. As to the eastern section, regarding it in the most favourable light, if it were needed, for colonization purposes, it could be constructed by easy stages through the most inviting portion of the country. That is the usual method of colonization-not to rush through 1,300 miles of territory, but to construct by degrees along the easiest routes and through the most inviting portions of the country. As to the west, its needs are not so much more railways, but more facilities, more rolling stock on existing railways in order to get the products out of the country. The west wants cheaper transportation and control of, rates. That is the cry of the west.
1 had the pleasure of going through the west last year with the hon. the leader of the opposition, and I did not find any great cry of more railways. The cry was for cheaper transportation, control of rates, more facilities, more rolling stock, for getting the grain to the great lakes. The west wants cheaper transportation and control of rates. This scheme will certainly not fulfil the needs of the west for grain shipments to ocean ports, as it does not touch the present wheat centres, and relief can only come to them from the free use and increased equipment of existing outlets. Perfection of our lake service, the building and enlarging of our canals, the establishing of elevators at both ends of the lakes, the improving of the St. Lawrence route and ocean carriage, is what is wanted at the present time.
Every country rightly regards transportation outlay as expenses to be reduced in every possible way. The wisdom of getting surplus products to outside markets in the cheapest possible way is so obvious that no other country has ever questioned it, and to subordinate this proposition to the bugbear of the bonding privileges, is certainly unworthy of statesmanship and of the leader of the government of this country. The Americans, wedded to every form of protecting their own internal interests, are prepared to cross Canadian territory to the north or Mexican territory to the south, or adopt any other method so long as they can lessen the cost of reaching markets. All Canadians are certainly desirous of shipping through Canadian territory and using Canadian resources. But why get away from the inevitable factor of cheaper water transporta-ion ? You cannot force transportation out of the course of least resistance, that is, the cheapest route. It is contrary to every principle of economy or reason, and by adopting a scheme such as this, to meet the transportation of the west and allay a vague suspicion in relation to bonding privileges, is to sacrifice a certain part of the return of every farmer's crop. No individual would do this, but apparently this government, to 299
satisfy the calls of political grafters for subsidies, are willing to sacrifice the farmers and shippers of this country, and in fact to threaten the commercial development of all Canada. We want a true solution of the transportation question. We want an all Canadian route if possible, and it is possible if we only use the means at our disposal and not minimize the greatest inland waterways in the world. The only way to have the cheapest and best transportation system and to hold it as an all-Canadian route to cement together the interests of the east and west is by utilizing our great waterways and canals.
There is surely no problem of more importance than that of transportation to the west. The west must have cheap transportation, but this transportation question is one in which the future of the east is also at stake. Mistakes made now by too much haste may retard the problem as to the west, but it will eventually reach its true base. You cannot throttle traffic out of its true, its cheapest, course. You may as well try to turn back the tide; you may retard but you cannot keep it back. The east, therefore, in the event of mistakes of this kind, will eventually be the main sufferer. A worse plan for carrying the manufactures of the east to the west than the Grand Trunk Pacific, could hardly be devised. The line which the government proposes to build touches not a single manufacturing centre in Ontario and none in Quebec until it reaches the city of Quebec. It goes clean over the heads of the industrial districts of both provinces, and can reach them only by branches. It is 200 miles north of Montreal; 300 miles north of Toronto, and still farther from Hamilton, Brantford, Galt and other manufacturing centres. There is already one all-rail route much nearer to these manufacturing centres than the new one, and it is not overburdened with traffic, either eastbound or westbound. It may be found necessary some day to build another but at present the case is not urgent.
There are two important points to bear in mind, the necessity of obtaining the cheapest possible effective outlet for western produce and the necessity of obtaining the cheapest possible inlet for its supplies, with regard to the development of the east. As to the first, as I shall later point out, this scheme does not meet the necessities of the case, as you are trying to force traffic from its points of least resistance-water transportation-and you are surely, as to the second, getting farther away from the source of our western supplies, the manufacturing centres of the east. Now, the only reasonable way to hold the western markets is to deliver at reasonable rates to compete with United States goods, and this they cannot do by any scheme of political coercion. Protection by means of giving our products cheap transportation is just as important to



the development of this country as protection by a customs tariff. This proposed scheme is too far north to fulfil this requirement. It cannot provide an economic transfer to the west from the leading manufacturing centres of Quebec and Ontario.
Knowing these conditions is it not idle to think that we can serve these provinces by any consideration of merely local traffic and a colonization road. The local traffic of New Ontario and New Quebec has little in common with the through-traffic of the east and west. There is no satisfactory reason for sacrificing the all important purposes of a trunk line to what is at best, only the secondary interests of the local and colonization traffic. It cannot be but a great mistake to spend millions of the public money on a road which does not directly connect the west with the water highways of the great lakes, or with Montreal, the geographical as well as the commercial distributing point of the east, or which does not make as close connection as possible with the great industrial centres of Ontario. The Canadian Pacific Railway is far superior in this regard to the present scheme, for it is much nearer the manufacturing centres of Ontario and Quebec, and touches many of them.
Again, seeing that the Intercolonial, the Grand Trunk and the Canadian Pacific already have their connections from Montreal with Quebec to the lower provinces and the seaboard generally, while the Canadian Northern is establishing similar connections, it is an unaccountable waste of public money to add a totally new line, whose proposed directness will be more than likely offset by other physical defects owing to the nature of the country through which it will pass, it will certainly have as many windings and other physical difficulties as the Canadian Pacific Railway ; while, to be of any degree of success it should be more economic in its operation than existing lines. The Canadian Pacific Railway admirably located for serving the needs of an all-rail route is far from being taxed to its capacity, as the operation is too expensive to compete with the water route. The average traffic over the Canadian Pacific Railway from North Bay to Winnipeg is not more than a train and a half per day, and as the hon. leader of the opposition pointed out, if we spent a small portion of the money that this government proposes to expend on this new scheme to perfect the Canadian Pacific Railway, we could equip it so that its capacity would be equal to ten or fifteen times the present capacity of the road. The road would then be an economic saving to this country because there is no economy in building the line through a territory in which you have existing lines serving the same purpose. With the government in possession of such a trunk line, with the other leading railways granted running powers over it, as proposed by the hon. leader of the opposition, there would then be every possibility


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 
Merchandise ..: .. .. 153 00 612	21,250	63,750These figures	show at' a glance the	enormous advantages of the water route over rail route, and they also show the almost prohibitive cost of freighting on the common road which is 33 times more expensive than by rail and about 100 times more expensive than by water. The Minister of Agriculture said that wheat was only a small portion in the products to be taken out of the west, but we all know' that at the present time the transportation of wheat is tlie importafit factor that we have to consider and the government themselves admit that what they are after is to provide facilities for transporting wheat. If we can take our wheat from the west to the east the other products can wait until some comprehensive scheme is presented to this House. The hon. member for King's, Prince Edward Island (Mr. Hughes) said in his speech :
Would there be any objection to having transcontinental freight go over the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway, and at the same time making it a colonization road.
The hon. gentleman (Mr. Hughes) tried to make out that the Independent-Liberal organ, the Charlottetown ' Guardian ' did not comprehend the situation, but the only thing he succeeded in proving was that he himself has not the faintest idea of what this government project Is, or for what purpose1 it is intended, because he confounds a colonization road with a system of transportation which is intended to convey to the seaboard the products of the west in the cheapest possible manner. Taking the comparative rate on wheat in cents per bushel Mr. Haupt gives the following figures :
1868-	Cents.
Lake and canal	 16'23
Lake and rail	 20'76
All rail	 30-49
1897^
Lake and canal	,..	4-35
Lake and rail	 7-37
All rail	 12-32
Therefore, in 1868, the rates by all water were nearly half of those by all rail, and in 1897, notwithstanding the great economies introduced on railways, the ratio was still

further reduced to about one-third in favour of the all water route. The benefit of our water system in giving us cheap transportation affects all industries and classes, and is clearly manifested in the case of the prime necessities of life. It is well set forth by Mr. Haupt whose opinion and accompanying statistics will be interesting for gentlemen on the other side of the House. Mr. Haupt says :
Thus low rates create traffic ; and whatever tends to this results, provided there be a profit, is beneficial to the railroads as well as to oth?r interests. Deep-water competition is an important element in securing this end. Its influence on the general prosperity of the country is amply shown by the following extract from the Senate report of the Committee on Commerce, made by Senator William P. Frjre, in 1892, when, in speaking of the commerce of the great lakes, he said :
No other distinctive type of commerce has contributed more to our industrial development. It has created a means of transportation costing to-day only one-ninth the cost of the same
service by rail	The ton-mileage of
the lake marine for 1890 was 18,849,681,384 ton-miles, or about 27'5 per cent of all the railroads of the United States,
The Minister of Agriculture quoted figures to show the comparative amount of tonnage carried over the railways as compared with lake and rail transportation. But we find here that 27-5 per cent of all the ton mileage of the United States railroads was carried over the lake and canal system :
At the average rail rate, say, of nine mills it would have cost $169,647,132 ; but at the lake rate of 1-2 mills it was approximately $22,619,617 or a saving of $147,027,514.	.... The
total expenditure for water improvements of the lakes has amounted to about $30,000,000, or approximately one-fifth of the annual saving effected in transportation. .	. . Our waterways have acted as the most powerful regulators of rates. . .	. When it is considered that a
diminution of the freight charges of one mill per ton on the railroads of the country effects a saving of nearly $100,000,000 to the shippers in transportation, the value of this restrictive power cannot he overestimated.
By such statements of fact the general benefit of the waterway Is established.
The only idea the hon. gentlemen opposite can have in forcing this scheme upon the people without giving them an opportunity to speak their wishes, is to glorify themselves in their dying moments by building monuments to themselves in order to try and hide their -shame and their conduct for many years in decrying the Canadian Pacific Railway which was built by a Riberal-Conserva-tive government. Now they are trying to -immortalize themselves by building a tombstone, but they fail altogether to take 'into consideration the benefits which our waterways system would confer on the people of the west in the matter of cheap transportation rates. In order to show the range of prices and the influences on the prices of prime necessities. I quote the following from Mr. Haupt's article :


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: For example, in 1901 Kansas had 5,355,638 acres of wheat and produced 99,079,304 bushels, while Nebraska, its neighbour, planted 2,456,543 acres, yielding 42,006,885 bushels. The yield per acre in Kansas being 1-4 bushels greater than in Nebraska, the price in the former state under the law of supply and demand, should be lower ; on the contrary it is five cents higher. The principal shipping point in Nebraska is Omaha, on the Missouri river, 492 miles, by rail, from Chicago, and 412 from St. Louis, on the Mississippi, whence the rate on wheat in bulk by water to New Orleans is but one mill per ton-mile. The principal port of Kansas city, also on the Missouri, but about 230 miles lower down. From this point to Chicago by rail the distance is 458 miles, and to St. Louis 285 miles. Kansas city therefore has a shorter rail haul to Chicago by 34 miles, and to St. Louis by 129 miles, and it is 230 miles nearer the low water rate to the gulf. As the yield per acre was 18'5 bushels, this grain of five cents would represent a revenue of 92-5 cents over the price in Nebraska ; and had the entire state been sown in wheat this profit, due to proximity to water routes, would have aggregated nearly $50,000,000.
On the actual wheat crop it was $4,953,965. Kansas only has the advantage of nine cents per bushel oh her corn crop of 61,506,034 bushels, giving a gain over her neighbour, on the yield of $5,535,543. For her oat crop she received, in 1901, six cents more per bushel than Nebraska, so that her increased revenue from this source was $1,039,944. On these three products of the soil, therefore, had they all been shipped abroad, Kansas would have saved on her freight hills $11,530,000 in the last year. Conversely, at the same differences per bushel on the farm, Nebraska would have lost on the value of her crops about $14,267,000, because of her geographical position. This, if capitalized at three per cent would, it is, believed, exceed the total expenditures on our rivers and harbours. Yet the Missouri river commission was abolished because the results secured did not appear to iustify the appropriations.
Noty, Mr. Speaker, I am going to take up the subject of the Erie canal for a few moments. This waterway, extending .from Buffalo to Albany, a distance of 352 miles, was opened in 1826, with a capacity of 5,000,000 tons. The products were first carried in 76-ton boats ; but the canal has been improved from time to time to meet the growing trade. Its present capacity is not at all sufficient to cope with the demands of trade, and it is proposed now to spend $100,000,000 on this canal-to -construct practically a new canal, as large an enterprise for this day as the old ditch was at the time it was built in 1826. But its worth has been demonstrated, and the political parties are a unit in its favour, and have pledged themselves to enlarge the canal to accommodate the largest sized boats. The fact that the political leaders would not divide their parties on the question is evidence of the popularity of the enterprise. And so there would have been unanimity in this country and in this House if the government had carried out their first proposition, and had appointed a commission to look into the transportation question and present to this House a reasonable and

practicable scheme, instead of rushing headlong to meet the political wishes of their friends. The history of the Erie canal, from a statistical standpoint, is given in an article by Mr. Wilner in the ' American Monthly Review of Reviews ' for July, 1903 :
Canal versus Railroad as a Freighter.-The most attractive arguments, however, are not historical, hut statistical. The estimates of engineers put the cost of carrying a ton of freight from Buffalo to New York in barges of 1,000 tons capacity at 26 cents. Compare that with the $100 a ton from Buffalo to Albany previous to 1825, and with the $10 per ton that was paid originally for canal transportation. This rate of 26 cents a ton is equal to '8 of a cent for a bushel of wheat, or "52 of a mill per ton per mile. On the present Brie canal the cost of transportation averages 87 cents a ton, or 2'62 cents for a bushel of wheat, or 1'9 mills per ton per mile. The cost of railroad transportation from Buffalo to New York for the last few years has averaged about 6 mills per ton per mile. The cost of carrying wheat, which is the principal article is competition between the railroads and the canal, has been considerably lower, but it has still kept in the neighbourhood of 3J cents a bushel, or $1.17 per ton, or 2i mills per ton per mile. Arithmetic is dry reading, but no one who appreciates the importance of commerce in developing the prosperity of a commonwealth can fail to be interested in these figures. The contention is incontrovertible that, with such a reduction in freight rates between New York and Buffalo as this canal would cause, New York would again become master of the trade of the west as absolutely as when the cost of carriage from Buffalo to Albany was cut from $100 to $10 a ton. The difference between '52 of a mill and 2j mills per ton per mile is as great for this age as was the difference between $100 and $10 per ton for 1825.
The traffic that awaits the development of the Erie canal and that awaits the development of our canals and transportation system is immense. You will also find in this article statistics showing the immense tonnage that comes down through the great lakes :
The traffic which passed through the canals at Sault Ste. Marie in 1901 amounted to 28,403,065 tons, of which 23,087,742 tons came east.
This would seem to conflict somewhat with the statements of the hon. Minister of Agriculture :
The Suez canal, in 1901, passed 10,823,840 tons. And the trade that comes down from Lake Superior is only a part of the grand total which concentrates in Lake Erie. Almost as great a quantity originates in Lake Michigan ports. Of grain alone, flouj reckoned as wheat, the port of Buffalo received, in 1902, 119,534,437 bushels, and the figures have reached as high, in 1898, as 262,912,849 bushels. That represents only a little of the great price for which the people of New York are reaching in building this canal.
While we, in adopting a scheme such as the one the government have brought before us, are putting back for an indefinite period any possibility of Canada participating in this great traffic thfit is coming down
through the Sault canal, and that is rapidly growing every year :
In 1901, the rail rates were so high that Pittsburg tried successfully the experiment of shipping its steel to Conneaut, on Lake Brie, transhipping it by lake to Buffalo, and then by canal to New York. Cleveland also has tried the experiment of shipping steel in canal boats to Buffalo, and thence to New York. It is obvious that, if a water route is of such vast importance to iron manufacturers, a locality which can combine the advantages of allwater transportation both for the raw materials and the finished products, affords exceptional attractions.
The same writer says :
The price o< wheat is now made in Liverpool. The New York price is, roughly speaking, the Liverpool price, less the cost of transport across the ocean, and the Chicago price which controls the west is the New York, price less the cost of transport from Chicago to New York. Wheat is now brought from Chicago to Buffalo by lake often for as low a rate as 12 cents a bushel. The average for 1902 was 1-5 cents. It costs about 3J cents a bushel to send the grain on from Buffalo to New York. The new canal is calculated to take 2j cents off this charge. Whether this means a higher price to western farmers or a lower price to eastern consumers is a matter for argument. But if it causes a higher price, New York farmers will benefit by it too, and if the consumers get the saving, New York has more of them than any other state.
I have pointed out these figures to show you how the people of the United. States have, with an experience of over a hundred years, viewed the question of transportation, with reference to utilizing their waterways in every possible way ; and they have now come to the conclusion that water transportation is so vastly superior to transportation by rail, and that it leaves such a large proportion of the profit in the hands of the farmers and producers, that they are willing to spend upwards of $300,000,000 on these inland projects alone.
Now, let us look at the situation from the standpoint of present rates in order that we may understand the position of this new project as a competitor for carrying grain from the west, using the rate from Fort William to Winnipeg as a basis, we would have the rate on wheat over the new route as follows :
Per Bushel.
Cents.
Wheat, 'Winnipeg	to Quebec	19'98Wheat, Winnipeg	to St. John	26'97Wheat, Winnipeg	to Halifax	28
It is true the Canadian Pacific Railway carried grain from Fort William to Montreal and St. John for twelve cents which would mean eighteen cents from Winnipeg, but this was under exceptional circumstances and really was compulsory in order to supply their vessels with ballast and as Sir Wrm. Van Horne pointed out could not and would not be done again under any other circumstances. Now, what have we on other rates V Wolvin

& Company have been carrying wheat from Duluth to Quebec by water for from 3 to 31 cents per bushel, and wheat is now being carried from Fort William to Montreal via Depot Harbour for 3J cents, which would mean from Winnipeg 9| cents. From Fort William via Port Colborne, to Montreal, it bas been carried for 3 cents, which would mean from Winnipeg, 9 cents; so that our cheapest rail transportation by the new route would be Winnipeg to Quebec, 19 98 cents, or Fort William, 13 98 cents. By water and rail to Montreal, 9i cents via Depot Harbour, or from Fort William 3f cents. Against these rates along Canadian routes we have a rate through the United States by the Grand Trunk Railway, Chicago to New York of 10-9 cents per bushel, under the most fierce competition; by rail from Chicago to Buffalo the rate is 7$ cents, and by water from Chicago to Buffalo it is 11 cents, or a saving by water of 57-10 cents over the prairie route; from Chicago to New York by water and rail it is 5-89 cents, and from Chicago to New York by water and canal, 5-26 cents, or a saving by the latter of 63 cents.
In the report of the United States Industrial Commission, the all-rail route from Chicago to New York is given as 12 cents in 1898, and the lake and canal rate with charges at Buffalo, 4'45 cents. Taking it at 5 cents the average price of 1902, with proposed changes by enlargement of the Erie canal, it will be reduced to 21 cents. The lake and rail over the same route would be 5-54 and the all-rail 9-88 cents.
These figures serve to show the absolute worthlessness of the new route as a means of solving this problem with regard to our present use of the lake and rail or canal service, and the necessity of using every means in our power to perfect the transportation along these latter lines if we are at all to cope with the rates over the United States service and preserve not only our own tonnage from the west, in grain and other products, but also share the large increase of tonnage that will come from Lake Superior and Chicago ports. Haw can we hope to get our fair proportion of this great traffic if we do not use the opportunities at hand to develop our resources, and if we are to use up our credit and resources on an ill-advised, ill-thought-out and unworkable scheme. I have been pointing out the experiences of the United States with the transportation question, and the conclusions they have come to, and the immense traffic that awaits the country that provides the cheapest transportation, in the hope that mayhap in conjunction with the light that has been thrown upon it by others, it may be possible to induce the government yet to pause in their mad course. There is a feeling throughout this whole country that this may yet be done and that the government may deliberate on the best and most feasible methods of solving the transporta-Mr. LEFURGEY.
tion question. There is yet time for the course to be changed and I cannot understand that the government will continue on in this course and place this country in a situation from which it will take years and years to recover. The hon. leader of the government seems to think there is a crisis at hand but on the other hand he does not seem to realize that he is adopting a method that will take from five to eight years to overcome the difficulties and that will be useless in the end. Well, we have only to call his attention to the most excellent scheme outlined by the hon. leader of the opposition, which will meet any possible glut in the transportation of the west and will afford a fair solution of the transportation question. It will meet all the present exigencies besides giving the western people cheaper transportation and control of rates owing to the existence of a government line to Depot Harbour and Scotia Junction and thence by North Bay to Winnipeg, the proposed scheme of the government, while not affording relief to the western people absolutely takes out of our hands any possibility of giving voice to the growing popular idea of government control for at least fifty years or more by handing over this line to the complete control of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway. We do not even know whether it is being handed over to the Grand Trunk Pacific people or not for we have received from the government no distinct statement as to whether the control of this great project is going to lie with the Grand Trunk Pacific or with the Grand Trunk Railway.
This sentiment that the government should hold some control of the transportation of this country has been growing for years and has been more acute in the west where the people have been complaining of unjust and unreasonable rates. The feeling is now strong throughout Canada for government ownership and operation of the transcontinental line in order that the control of rates may be in the hands of the government, and now is the opportunity for the government to act in the matter. We have been granting subsidies and have practically built the whole railway system of the Dominion of Canada, and handed it over to private corporations. We have surely reached the time now when, if railways are to be built and public moneys expended, the country should hold control of the situation. Competition in railway rates will not bring the desired relief to the west. The controlling factor of water and a government owned and operated line is necessary. The remedy of building one railway and handing it over to a corporation and then trying to remedy the evils of the situation by building another and giving it to another corporation is absurd. Nor is this duplication of railways desirable or economic. It is a mere waste of public resources and the public pays the cost.

As to the successful operation of state owned lines ample proof by statistics and otherwise are available ; it is no new theory. Prussia, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, Austria-Hungary, and the Australasian colonies, are operating state owned roads with marked success. With reference to the Intercolonial Railway its earnings have been steadily increasing. In 1896-7 they amounted to $2,866,028, while in 1902, they had increased to $5,671,381, and substantial surpluses have been claimed for the last few years.
Besides, if we make a fair comparison of rates on the other railway systems of Canada with those on the Intercolonial Railway, we shall find that they show strongly in favour of the government owned line. The charges for freight per train mile on the Intercolonial Railway is only 98 cents compared with the $1.51 on the Grand Trunk, while the operating expenses are a great deal less on the Intercolonial Railway than on the Grand Trunk. This comparison of operating expenses on government-owned lines and privately owned lines holds good not merely for Canada but for European countries as well. And the freight rates over the state-owned lines on the continent of Europe are very much lower than are those on the English railways which are owned by private corporations.- The Intercolonial Railway, mile for mile, is equipped equally well with the Grand Trunk, though It has only half as much traffic, and its operating expanses, including the maintenance of the line, buildings, &c., would not be greatly increased by an increase in [DOT] the traffic. At very little additional expense that road could handle double the traffic that it has at the present time. The possibilities of this road under proper management, if it were placed in the hands of a commission independent of politics would be greatly improved. During the jrast seven years we have spent upwards of $15,000,000 on the Intercolonial Railway, all with a view of extending it westward in order to reach the wheat fields of the west. But now it is proposed to spend $100,000,000 to undo the work of the past seven years, and prevent the realization of the objects which the ex-Minister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Blair) with the approval of his colleauges has been striving to attain since he first had the honour of holding the portfolio of Railways and Canals.
Now, as to the cost of this project, it is variously estimated at from $120,000,000 to $150,000^000. And I believe that one gentleman, the lion.' member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) who has had a great deal of experience in railway matters, says that the cost will be upwards of $280,000,000. That is, he points out that during the first twenty-five years' operation of a railway, the improvements that are necessary double the original cost. Suppose that this railway cost originally $120,000,000, it will double
in the first twenty-five years of operation to $240,000,000, and, at the end of fifty years we shall find the cost nearer $500,000,000. To put a moderate estimate on the present cost of the road, the figures will come out in this way. Estimating the eastern section from Winnipeg to Edmonton at 1,800 miles, and $40,000 a mile, we have $72,000,000 for that section. Interest for ten years at 3i per cent would be $25,200,000, and the difference between 3 per cent and 3i per cent for forty ears, $12,640,000. For the mountain section, interest on bonds for tern years $7,200,000. This makes a total of $117,040,000. This does not take account of interest that should be legitimately charged to capital account for the time the road is building-or probably $4,000,000 or $5,000,000 more. Then there is the guarantee on the bonds which will easily put an incumbrance on the credit of Canada of $30,000,000. or $40,000,000. Besides which we have the Quebec bridge which will probably cost the country some $5,000,000. So that the estimate with which the right hon. First Minister tried to mislead the House and the country, that the cost of the road would probably be only $13,000,000, is absurd. The Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Mr. Fisher) is the only member on the other side who had the temerity to say that this estimate of $13,000,000 was a ridiculously low one. But as I said before, the Minister of Agriculture is a docile follower of his leader.
Now, I do not want to trespass on the time of the House, nor do I want to trench on any provincialism in connection with so vast a problem as this. But, since the leader of the House has brought down a project that has no inherent good qualities ns a transportation system to recommend it to the country as a whole, as this is evidently a project to serve the political purpose of hon. members on the other side and their friends, and is giving additional rail facilities to every province at confederation except Prince Edward Island, I think I may fairly ask why Prince Edward Island has been left out of any consideration, and would say just a few words for railway needs in Prince Edward Island and in support of the proposition brought down by the hon. member for West Prince (Mr. Hackett) some time ago, and voted down, that we should at least receive some consideration in the way of transportation facillities in Prince Edward Island. On this point I am quite ready to agree with the right hon. leader of the House and say that this is a time for action and not for deliberation. There has been long, long deliberation in the case of improving transportation facilities in Prince Edward Island, and now we want action. As this House knows, we have been labouring under a great disability in regard to transportation between Prince Edward Island and the mainland. I do not want to enter again into a history of the terms of

confederation, but it is well known that the Dominion government bound itself to provide continuous steam transportation between the island and the mainland, winter and summer, thus putting the island in direct communication with the railway system of Canada. Now, that the transportation question is the uppermost in all our thoughts, and now that the government is trying to satisfy all the other provinces, it seems to me that something should be done to satisfy the legitimate requirements of Prince Edward Island. I have already pointed out the deplorable condition of affairs last winter by which a large number of our shippers lost heavily and which loss I trust this government has seen the justice of redressing. I do not wish to present a large array of figures on this question, but it would be easy to show the great disparity between the treatment meted out to Prince Edward Island and that meted out to other provinces with regard to the expenditure on transportation facilities since confederation. Take this scheme that is now before us. Prince Edward Island will be obliged to contribute one-fiftieth part of the expense. That will amount to somewhere in the neighbourhood of $2,000,000. The railway in Prince Edward Island was built entirely at the expense of the province, being charged to us at confederation at a valuation of $3,144,214, or an average of $32.50 per head of the population. Since that time there has been spent in public improvement on the island $1,485,090. But only one small branch to Cape Traverse has been built until the last year or two, when the branch was built to Murray Harbour. Now, Mr. Speaker, we in Prince Edward Island have not been getting our fair proportion of railway improvements. This was recognized by the late Conservative government, but unfortunately too late to remedy, and this government, although urged repeatedly to build branches to meet the requirements have turned a deaf ear and now suggest an immense scheme, touching all the provinces of confederation, but absolutely ignoring the most pressing needs of transportation with Prince Edward Island and mainland and the railway branches in several parts of the island much more thickly populated and whose needs are more pressing in order to open up unknown territories with unknown resources.
I have on several occasions brought forward the necessity of a branch from North-Wiltshire to Crapaud and there are lines of equally pressing necessity in western parts of the island-namely at or near O'Leary station to west shore of the island.
All we want is fair reasonable treatment, and while not objecting to any reasonable scheme and expenditure for our great and rapidly growing west we want to keep in mind our older provinces.
A comparison of railway mileage according to population will show that Prince


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Edward Island has much coming to her aside from the facts of her actual wants. The following figures speak for themselves : Take railway mileage according to population.
Population. Ry. Miles, per cent, per cent.
Ontario	
40-16	37'84Quebec	
30-60	18-26Nova Scotia	
8'44	5-57New Brunswick	
6-09	7'65


Prince Edward Island ..: ..	1-88	I'llManitoba	
5-01.	11-28North-west Territories..	..	4-29	11-02British Columbia	
3-53	7-27
When you take into consideration the fact that out of $4,629,304 spent in Prince Edward Island, $3,144,214 was paid for by Prince Edward Island, or charged against her at confederation the comparison is odious, so small has been our portion. The Cape Traverse branch was built with a view to offering some relief by maintaining transportation across the strait in winter as well as in summer.
But the government has seen fit to abandon us, and we are very much in the situation that we were when we entered confederation in this regard. Now that they have at their disposal means and opportunities of relieving the situation, they ought to put us in direct communication with the railway system of the Dominion of Canada, and for this purpose they could well acquire the New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island Railway, leading from Sackville down to Cape Tormentine. They would then have only seven or eight miles to cross by steamer, and, as I have pointed out several times in this House, it is the natural and shortest route between the island and the mainland as an alternative route when the ports of Summerside and Charlottetown are not available. If they would put on a proper steamer at these points, if they would give us more facilities, facilities for which the people have been petitioning year after year by making a pier and affording landing facilities on the island side, they would do a great deal to relieve the transportation problem in Prince Edward Island.
But transportation is not our only grievance. There is the matter of telegraphs, about which we have been petitioning this House, and in respect of which the government is under obligation to provide us a reasonable service. We have down there a company that has been claiming to possess a monopoly of the situation, and has been charging us exorbitant rates, while only giving us a twelve-hour service. This question came up the other day in a committee of the Senate, and it was clearly pointed out that no monopoly existed, and the Senate, in reply to an amendment brought forward by the attorney of the Anglo-American Company, asking that right to establish a cable be not granted the Dominion Telephone and Telegraph Company's Bill, threw out the amendment and virtually

declared that no monopoly existed. It remains now for this government to act and provide us an up to date service.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I have pointed out what I consider the means at the disposal of this parliament for solving the transportation question of this country. As I said at the beginning, it is an all important question which will put Canada in the foreground as a commercial nation. We should utilize our great water-ways, and we should supplement those water-ways with the most easy and natural means to reach our ocean ports. The scheme outlined by the leader of the opposition presents, as I said, a comprehensive and easy method, and I trust that the government will yet pause in its mad career and consider this question anew.


Mr. WM. ROCHE (Halifax).: I agree with the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lefurgey) who has .iust taken his seat that it would be almost impossible to offer anything new on this subject, and in view of the great accumulation of information that we have before us. it would be perhaps in vain to attempt to add anything to it. As you and I, Sir, generally sway the opinions of others in the House, and as you, I believe, are go-1 ing to form your own judgment in regard to this question, permit me to remind you that we have been exhorted by my hon. friend from South Simcoe (Mr. Lennox) to approach this subject in a judicial manner. In order to do that, I would suggest that we should, first of all, determine for ourselves what has been proved and admitted on this question. In the first place, it is proved that it is the duty of the country, as represented by the government, to assist the North-west. What was the condition of Manitoba ? We have been told that there was an accumulation of produce, notably of grain, and that the people of that province had no facilities for obtaining the full value of their products by taking them to market at a reasonable cost. Who advocated the railways ? Who represented that condition of the country ? The gentlemen who represent public opinion in the North-west. The press complained of the accumulation of produce, the members from Manitoba in this House represented truthfully that the inhabitants of that territory were sadly injured by the lack of proper facilities, and the House believed the testimony that was given on their behalf. Now, Sir, the government-assuming this to be correct, and there has been no one to gainsay it, no one to refute it-agreed that to provide for the present and future there should be some facility for relieving that accumulation of produce and benefiting the people who inhabit that territory. They agreed that that facility should be the shortest, the best and most economical means of transportation between the west and the east, in the form of a transcontinental railway. In the second place, as the cost of furnishing this facility is great, and as the
whole country has to contribute to the payment. it is admitted to be right and proper that all the provinces of the Dominion who contribute to the accomplishment of that desired end should participate in the advantages accruing from the transport of the produce of the North-west and should share in the benefits of the productions of that land. In addition to that, it is provided that the carriage of these commodities should end at our own ports. Therefore, in view of these considerations, we have the government proposing to build a railway from Moncton to Winnipeg and to aid in the construction of a railway from Winnipeg to the coast. Let us see whether this proposal accomplishes the ends we have in view, and whether the cost will be too great in proportion to our resources.
I have taken the liberty of suggesting that that facility should be a railway, and I do it with great deference to my hon. friend from Prince Edward Island who has just addressed us .and for the following reasons: First of all, that a canal is a very expensive work. Secondly, it is unfortunate that we have no rivers flowing from that country, and that the construction of a very expensive work like a canal, where there is no water in the country, does not afford much facility for the carriage of produce. Against this proposal what does the opposition contend ? Among other things, they contend, firstly, that the government cannot economically build the road. I might ascribe the assertion of that proposition to my hon. friend from Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart). Secondly, that the government will not build the road. I think, on the other hand, we may safely attribute the defence of that proposition to my hon. friend from Hamilton (Mr. Barker). Thirdly, that the government will build the road at an enormous cost. Without any hesitation whatever, I think the House will attribute the sponsorship of that proposition to the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule). Fourthly, that the Grand Trunk Pacific will not operate the road, that traffic will not go over it (a) from natural causes : (b) by some great treachery on the part of the government; (c) by some hocus pocus on the part of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway ; and, fifthly, we have the proposition of the hon. and learned leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden, Halifax).
The first hon. gentleman who attracted my attention on coming into the House was my hon. friend for Hamilton, whom we on this side regard as a mild and modest gentleman who comes into the House at times from a sense of duty only, and presents us with some calculation or argument which has been omitted, or suggests that there is some view of the question which has been overlooked or some item in the calculation which has been eliminated. But, on this occasion he passed beyond his usual attitude in the House, and the usual language

that lie adopts. He exhibited himself continue to route these goods wherever I to our admiring gaze as a verbal artist of t {think it is best because I have the obligati o mean pretensions. I think no hon. member of this House could excel in the description of the locomotive rushing over the muskegs and through the desolations of that country to the north of Lake Superior and in the northern part of Ontario and belching forth fire and smoke from the consumption of the jack pine. Indeed it was a most graphic picture-and no cattle-guards. The next picture was that of an heroic billing clerk. There he sat in his office in Manitoba with his panama hat on, with perhaps a cigar in his mouth and the flies buzzing about his head calmly and heroically discharging his duty by billing the traffic in the direction that he thought would best suit the interests of the company he served. When Nelson was at Copenhagen it was reported to him by his signal man that the commander in chief, Sir Hyde Parker, had sent a signal for him to retire. Nelson took the spy glass out of the hands of the sailor and putting it to his blind eye, said : I do not see the signal, keep my signal for close action flying still. The heroic billing clerk keeps on at work taking no notice of the fact that he is not carrying out the instructions and that the traffic is not being billed over the line which has been prescribed. Sir. Wainwright rushes into the office, Sir. Hays rushes into the office, Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson rushes into the office, and say this to the clerk : You are violating the solemn contract which has been entered into with the government of Canada and you are creating a great risk. It will be very detrimental to our interests. Upon which he will say : It is very true that there is a contract that:
At all times during the terms of the said lease, the company shall continuously and efficiently operate both divisions of the said railway, giving due and sufficient service for the accommodation of all traffic to the satisfaction of the government.
It is quite true that in clause 42 :
It is hereby declared and agreed between the parties to this agreement that the aid herein provided for is granted by the government of Canada for the express purpose of encouraging the development of Canadian trade and the transportation of goods through Canadian channels. The company accepts the aid on these conditions, and agrees that all freight originating on the line of the railway, or its branches, not specifically routed otherwise by the shipper, shall, when destined for points in Canada, he carried entirely on Canadian territory, or between Canadian inland ports, and that the through rate on export traffic from the point of origin to the point of destination shall at no time be greater via Canadian ports than via United States ports, and that all such traffic, not specifically routed otherwise by the shipper, shall be carried to Canadian ocean ports.
I admit what you say to be true but to me the interests of the company are paramount and notwithstanding that I shall


William Roche: tion upon me of doing what I think best in the interests of the company. I am afraid the heroic clerk would soon take up his residence in a foreign clime.	'
The hon. member for Hamilton declared that it would be impossible to operate the railway up in that locality because there was no coal. I say that one of the great causes of the operation of the railway, that one of the great resources that the railway will have, and one of the great sources of revenue will be that the railway will be able to carry coal not only for the consumption of the locomotives but for the use of the inhabitants in those localities from places in the lower provinces where coal Is abundant, that the carriage of that coal will afford a revenue to the railway from the fact that it does not exist in the neighbourhood and that the railway will be employed in carrying It in the cars that otherwise would be empty and that are to be returned from the places at which they originally started. Not only will the railway carry back coal but heavy commodities of all kinds and we are also in hopes that it will carry back the products of the lower provinces to the west, and that it will be able to carry them at extremely low rates in consideration of the large trade that will ensue to it as a result which the provinces will be benefited by the construction of this road. But, Sir, if it should be discovered that the directors and managers of this road were either openly or covertly allowing the diversion of the trade which ought to pass over this road through our country to the maritime ports, wq could invoke a source of interference by which the. House might bring to bear upon them a pressure which would compel them to observe the terms of the contract. We have abundant resources in the pecuniary penalty which they have Incurred from the fact that the original loans made by the government and the provinces have multiplied by interest and compound interest until they now amount to the very respectable proportionate sum of $58,000,000.


Mr. THOMSON (Grey).: Would the hon. gentleman tell us what amount of trade he expects to pass over the eastern division of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway ?


William Roche: Yes. The Grand Trunk Pacific Railway will start from a maritime port. Are we to nave no connection whatever with the w-est and will the west receive none of our products, and are we to be content for ever that the trade shall all be downwards and none of it upwards ? And do you think that the resources and requirements of that country, when developed, will not require commodities from Europe, and will they not come through maritime ports V Do we not import a large quantity of British and other European goods, and is it not preferable to

bring these goods through maritime province ports than through Boston, and Fort-land, and New York, whence they are coming now. Are we to take all from the west and imagine that the west will take nothing from us'.' When they have products that we require and we have products that they require, will not mutual interchange result iu benefit to both ends of the country ? Are we to look for nothing in the future or are the hopes and expectations of the people in both ends of Canada to be realized that there would be an exchange of products, that commerce will increase, thac traffic will be multiplied and that the people will be bound together not only by sentiment and not only by two steel rails, but by the exchange of values and by participations in the benefits which will be mutually derived from each other.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Ask another question now.


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: He did not answer my question.


Mr. JOHNSTON (Cape Breton).: He answered it too well.


William Roche: We had a speech in this debate by the ex-Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair), and another by the ex-ex-Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Hag-gart). As you are aware, Mr. Speaker, 1 entertain the highest respect, and I may say almost admiration for the ex-Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair). His conduct in this House; his mastery of the details of business; the successful manner in which he has piloted railway legislation through the House command our admiration and respect. I have no desire, even if I lut'd the ability, to belittle in the slightest manner or to the slightest extent the reputation of the hon. gentleman. I only regret that he has left the government at this time when his experience and services would be most valuable to the country in assisting in the passage of this most valuable measure. But although the ex-Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair) was a most valuable administrator of railways, I possess no knowledge of his ever having constructed a mile of railway, and although his opinion as an operator of railways would be perhaps as valuable as almost any administrator, still on a question of the location, or the construction, or the practicability of a railway, I would prefer to take the evidence of an engineer, or of one who had to do with the practical construction of a railway. Now, Sir, we are not at a loss for the opinion of a railway engineer of eminence, Sir Sandford Fleming, the most celebrated engineer in Canada, or perhaps in America, who has just completed the great project of a Pacific telegraph cable from Canada to Australia, and who has an intimate knowledge of the whole of the country to be traversed by the trans-Canada, was interviewed by a reporter when
it was announced that the Grand Trunk Railway contemplated building a transcontinental road. His opinion, which follows, is a remarkable confirmation, by the greatest known authority, of the wisdom of the selection of the route provided for In the Trans-Canada charter :
I am inclined to think Mr. Blair is on the right track in proposing to extend the Inter-colnial Railway to the Pacific. It seems to me, however, that it would he a mistake to try to form a new transcontinental line in a haphazard way by connecting various fragments of railway which have been located without any general plan. The effect would be to lengthen the whole line and unduly lower its engineering character, and almost certainly give it features which would be for ever regarded1 as blemishing to a great transcontinental line. To realize Mr. Blair's conception of a new national railway, it should, in my judgment, begin at the Quebec bridge, now building, where it would form a direct connection with the Intercolonial, and it should extend from Quebec by the most direct route to Port Simpson on the Pacific. Prom what I know of the general character of the greater part of the intervening distance I believe a line with splendid engineering features cculd. with ordinary care, be secured. It would pass away to the north of the rugged shore of Lakes Huron, Superior, Nepigon, and Winnipeg, through a vast region reported generally of alluvial soil, with abundance of wood and water.
First-The Quebec bridge is in progress, that structure I have always favoured, hut it would have been a bold man to have proposed such a work a quarter of a century ago. The Quebec bridge will give the needed connection with the Intercolonial as well as the Grand Trunk Railway, and along with a junction with these railways access and egress to and from Atlantic points at all seasons
Second-The greater part of the vast region through which the new line might pass between Quebec and Port Simpson is woodland, and we have ta-day a new value given to the timber, which was undreamed of twenty-five years ago. The territory to be traversed is the natural home of pulp wood, and in this vegetable substance the unoccupied regions of Quebec and Ontario have an inexhaustible crop ready for harvesting. A crop of a perennial character, which, in extent, I venture to say, Is unsurpassed in the North American continent-perhaps in the whole world.
I have already expressed my doubts as to the wisdom or expediency of proceeding in a haphazard way to establish a new transcontinental railway. I regard the. shortest line obtainable between the tide-waters of the two oceans as quite long enough. For that and other pogent reasons I would advocate the most favourable route which can he had between the port_ Quebec and Port. Simpson for a new Dominion Grand Trunk line, and at the same time to have in view the establishment of railway service with all desirable points by branches judiciously laid out. By having regard to these leading principles, great advantages would, ^ in my judgment, result. It seems to me there is ample room for the new railway. It would in no way interfere with any other line, and it may he regarded as a natural development of the railway system of Canada. I am satisfied that it Is possible to establish a splendid national railway on the route proposed with the best ocean ports at its terminal. With a Rocky Mountain 1 passage very much lower than that of any

railway yet constructed across the North American continent, and with general engineering features even more favourable than those obtained on the Intercolonial Railway, such a line would give breadth to Canada and admit of settlements and profitable industries where such are not now possible. In the far Northwest it would open up for ranching the rich plains of .the Peace river and Northern British Columbia, and render the more distant gold fields more easily accessible at all seasons.
When the day arrives to open the railway as a through route it will be found to possess advantages, in respect to distances, as compared with the route via San Francisco and New York. From Yokohama to Liverpool the passage across the Pacific ocean would he 605 and across the Atlantic 195 nautical miles less. While the land distance would he 502 statute miles less, making a total saving on the whole distance of about 1,423 statute miles.
Regarded simply from a Canadian standpoint, I cannot conceive any public undertaking which would better meet the wants of the New Dominion, throughout its whole extent. I rejoice to know that it has so soon in Canadian history been brought up for serious consideration.
That is the opinion of Sir Sandford Fleming, and my friend from Prince Edward Island (Mr. Lefurgey) is to the contrary.
The next gentleman who attracted our attention in this debate was the ex-Minister of Railways and Canals, my hon. friend from South Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart). Although my hon. frien'd was supposed to have had great experience in the construc-Ion of canals, his experience In the construc-lon of railways was quite as limited as the experience in that respect of the ex-Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair) ; and although I cannot compliment him in the same terms as I can the ex-Minister, on the economical and satisfactory administration of his department, I must admit that his experience In the operation of a railway is far greater than his experience in the construction. But I have often admired my hon. friend. He comes into this House charged with the subject upon which he is going to speak, and he employs all his vehemence and positiveness of manner. When he is right, he is irresistible ; he bears down on his opponents like a frigate with all sails set. and guns out on both sides. I am free to admit that when he is wrong-and he is wrong very often he is equally positive, and if possible more vehement; he will not listen to any reasons to the contrary; and, by vociferation, assertion and obstinate adhesion to himself, though he is in the wrong, he hears down all opposition, and comes out triumphant in the end. My learned friend, tile regulator of the opposition, sent to my hon. friend and called him to come to this House to curse Quebec and defy Nova Scotia, and he carried out that request with the utmost circumspection. He took up his parable like the prophet of old ; and, when he began to curse Quebec and to defy Nova Scotia, he turned his face to the wilderness, and what did he say ? He said that a railway through that country was positively impracticable ;


William Roche: that it was a region utterly unfitted for a railway to pass through ; that it was rough; that it was full of jungles, abounding in muskegs, and traversed, by granite ridges throughout its length. Well, a gentleman who has passed through that region declares that this is one of the reasons why people in a certain state of mind are subject to hallucinations. This is what is said by Mr. O'Sullivan, who was employed by the transcontinental railway people and the government of Quebec to survey that region during the winter of 1897-98 :
During the winter of 1897-98, I left a party at Rupert House who surveyed the shore line and the estuaries of, the rivers In that locality, and in March and April traversed in a direct line across country from Rupert House to Lake Abitibi, imd thence homeward via Lake Temis-caming. A, proof of the favourableness of that country for railway construction, no obstruction of any kind was encountered on this traverse, but an optical illusion was often experienced, for in the morning when they would strike an open plain, they would perceive ahead of them what appeared like mountain ranges in the distance at right angles to their course, but continuing their march day after day without changing course they never came to them- it is all a gently rolling plain.
If the government should send out their surveying parties-and they will send them out-and if they should find geysers, uphill torrents, glaciers, crevasses, serbonian bogs
Like that 'twixt Ida and Mount. Cassius old
Engulfed whole armies,

them; who are familiar with them and who declare unhesitatingly that a line of railway can be successfully carried through that district. They say that it is most valuable for purposes of cultivation and that it possesses resources of the most valuable and rich description.
The next hon. member who addressed the House in my hearing was the hon. and learned leader of the opposition, and I sympathized with him in this struggle between his party and the constituency which he represents. That difficulty was apparent throughout the course of his speech because after he had criticised the proposition of the government, after he had denounced it, after he had found fault with it, he took it up piece by piece and in detail and he,told us that he approved of most of the parts of it, that is that he was ready to give his support to any proposal which would give a better fighting chance to the lower provinces; that he would help by his vote to assist in the consummation of the desired results, but he would not support this proposition. He was ready to build a railway from Winnipeg to the coast, if necessary, but not in connection with this project. He was ready to build the road from Winnipeg to Quebec, but not in connection with this. And, in excess of all that, he was willing, as a last resort, to favour the construction of a railway from Quebec to Moncton, if he could see satisfactory evidence that it was for the benefit of the lower provinces. My hon. friend in the course of his remarks asked : What will the government do with its 1,600 miles of Intercolonial Railway; and how much of it will be used V He was speaking in answer to the argument of my hon. friend from Hants (Mr. Russell) who had addressed the House on the subject of government ownership of railways, and he said :	If you do away with the
governmental ownership of railways, what will you do with the Intercolonial Railway; will you sell it, or how will you dispose of it ? My hon. friend is sufficiently acquainted with the use of language, and when he talks about disposing of the ownership of railways and asks whether the government will sell this railway, he knows how to draw the exact distinction; he knows that this is mere popular conversation and is not an accurate expression of the question that is before us. How much of the Intercolonial will be used ? The Intercolonial would be used from Halifax to Moncton; it will be used from Moncton to St. John; it will be used from Halifax to Pictou and Sydney; it will be used from Levis to Montreal ; it will be used from Moncton to Levis and back for freight and passengers. And its use will be most beneficial in connection with the Grand Trunk Pacific. For, as the grades on the. Grand Trunk Pacific will be more favourable for traffic passing from Quebec to Moncton and the lower provinces, while the Intercolonial Railway will afford better 1


William Roche: grades for the westward haul, it will be more profitable to use the Intercolonial Railway in carrying cars back, either empty or loaded with the productions of the lower provinces. The hon. leader of the opposition intimated that he was prepared to discuss with the Minister of the Interior whether we should hand over the Intercolonial to the Grand Trunk Pacific. No doubt, if a discussion of this kind should take place the leader of the opposition would be a most formidable champion. But, unfortunately for him, in entering into that conflict he would have to bear the weight of Saul's armour in the shape of his past utterances, particularly speeches by himself and Mr. Kenny, in St. Patrick's Hall, in Halifax ; previous to the campaign of 1900, as reported in the Morning ' Herald.' Now, Mr. Kenny needs no introduction in this House. He is one of the most highly esteemed citizens of Halifax; he has been a representative here of the county of Halifax, and is known to many of the older members of this House. The Morning 1 Herald ' is also well known. My hon. friend the leader of the opposition has his office in the ' Herald ' building, and some say that the * Herald ' has its office in his. But along the hall near my hon. friends office, there is a passage. In printing offices, sometimes there are very dark and narrow passages. But this is a very broad passage. I am sure that when my hon. friend passes a certain door in that passage he always turns back to it. Why 1 Because in the room you enter through that door is the Tory Machine. There, this very day the committee sat who are deciding who shall be personated in the next election-which they think will come off on the 14th of October-and who shall be satisfied, and the names will be placed on the list. Those who are dead will be taken up and voted in the approaching contest. And to-morrow morning, from the room downstairs, there will come out a most moral and most affecting article describing the improper and mischievous doings of the Grit machine up in tlie wicked city of Toronto. Well, the question that is discussed in these speeches recorded in the 'Herald' is one which touches very closely upon the question before the House, and that was the ownership of the Intercolonial Railway, ' the people's railway,' which is now so precious in the eyes of my hon. colleague the leader of the opposition, but which at that time was not considered such a very valuable asset, for it was proposed by his colleague and himself to hand over what they now call the people's railway to the management and control of the Canadian Pacific Railway. The proposal was that the Canadian Pacific Railway should get running powers from St. John to Moncton in return for similar privileges for the Intercolonial for trains between Quebec and Montreal. On October 13th the Morning ' Herald ' authoritatively announced as a declaration before the electors by these
.AUGUST 24, 1903
gentlemen the granting to the Canadian Pacific Railway of similar running powers from St. John to Halifax. We know that the term ' handing over the management ' of a railway means no more than the granting of running powers, for it participates in the use of the track for traffic, purposes. But before the populace and when it may excite some prejudice against an opponent, this is spoken of as handing over the railway to the control of another corporation. In St. Patrick's Hall, on October 26tli, 1900, Mr. Kenny, the colleague of my hon. friend and my hon. friend himself appeared before the electors, and this is a report of what was said :
Mr. Kenny-The Canadian Pacific Railway, if it had been offered just arrangements, would have commenced at Halifax and would go right through Canada to British Columbia. Now, Sir, if the Canadian Pacific Railway had a fair business arangement, if it had such running arrangement such as exists between railways in the United States, or even between some railways in Canada, if we had such arrangement, between St. John and Halifax, an immense business would accrue to the port of Halifax. Today, the Minister of Railways says it must stop at St. John ; I won't carry the freight unless it is done in the way I wish it. The Intercolonial Railway is stopped at Montreal ; the grain is gathered west of Montreal.
Mr. Borden expressed satisfaction at what had been so far begun. The tide was certainly with us, but we must beware of the Grit machine.
This is the proposition which, the Canadian Pacific Railway made to the Intercolonial Railway. What did the ex-Minister of Railways say ? Let me read :
Carleton, N.B., October 27, 1900. Mr. Blair declared the fight was the outcome of politics on the one hand and inordinate greed on the other, and that now an election was pending pressure would he used to get friends of the Canadian Pacific Railway something to which they were not entitled as a matter of right.
After explaining the Canadian Pacific Railway's contention that they should be allowed to solicit business in Intercolonial Railway territory and have it delivered to them in St. John, Mr. Blair pointed out that if conceded this would result in the Canadian Pacific Railway year by year taking away from the Intercolonial a large part of business to which it was entitled and on which it depended for success, making the line from Moncton to Montreal little more than a branch. No surrender to Canadian Pacific Railway. The question to him was whether he ought, as Minister of-Railways, to surrender business advantages and Interests that belong to the Intercolonial Railway in order that greater advantages and benefits would accrue to the Canadian Pacific Railway, and that he had not been able to say that it was his duty to act in manner detrimental to the best interests of the people's railway.
Upon what reasonable ground, he asked, could the Canadian Pacific ask us to haul our cars hack to Montreal empty in order that more of their cars may go back full ? After referring^ to the Intercolonial Railway's largely increasing business since its entry into Montreal, Mr. Blair declared that he never would have extended the line had he thought of acceding to the Canadian Pacific Railway's demand.
My hon. friend, figuratively speaking, rolled up his sleeves and put on his most severe forensic look, and defied the hon. member for Hants to go home and declare to his people whether he was prepared to hand over the Intercolonial to the Grand Trunk Railway or to the Canadian Pacific Railway. Now, we will have to contest this election. We have been defied, and this scrap must come off in Dartmouth, Queens-bury rules, and may the best man win. ' Go tell the people of Nova Scotia,' he said, * if you propose to give the Intercolonial to the Canadian Pacific Railway or to the Grand Trunk Pacific.' Now, the ex-Minister of Railways was pronounced by hon. gentlemen opposite to be incompetent, and to have done the things which he ought not to have done ; but now they pronounce him to he the ablest administrator. In the discussion which took place in Dartmouth, When Mr. Kenny and the leader of the opposition appeared before the electors, the leader of the opposition poured out upon the head of the ex-Minister of Railways one of the most withering invectives which was every pronounced upon a criminal in a court of justice, and he treated him as such. Now they are taking sweet counsel together, and I think I can hear my hon. friend say,
' It is true I called you a boodler, it is true also that I said that you took part in the Drummond County deal ; but, my dear sir, I assure you it was all political, I assure you that I personally entertain for you the highest respect, and that I have no animosity against you.'
' Weil. Mr. Kenny opened the ball, and he announced that the Intercolonial stopped in Montreal, that it was unable to obtain traffic from the west, and that an effort should be made to bring the traffic over a railway which would go right up to the farmers' homes in the west, and would carry the produce of the west uninterruptedly down to the ports of the maritime provinces. He announced to the electors that they had been defrauded of their just rights in participating in the labour which that railway would afford, owing to the obstinate conduct of Mr. Blair in trying to prevent the Canadian Pacific Railway from having running powers over the Intercolonial. He said that the labourers and the merchants of Dartmouth, and the inhabitants of the county, were deprived of their just rights by the conduct of this individual in hanging on to the Intercolonial. My hon. friend sat and heard that all announced, and he offered not one word of dissent. He did not then speak of the people's railway, he did not then speak of the evil of handing it over to the Grand Trunk, or to the Canadian Pacific Railway, or to any other railway. This was the language of Mr. Kenny:
It is our interest, irrespective of party, to do what we can to get the Candian Pacific Railway

into Halifax, and I fear we can never do it so long as Mr. Blair is Minister of Railways.
That was on October 30th. The leader of the opposition said :
It was desirable that the port of Halifax should he connected with the Canadian Pacific Railway.
Whence this new-born zeal for the Intercolonial ? Why this assertion of its being the people's railway ? Why is it that everything is to be sacrificed to the Intercolonial? As the Prime Minister observed, the Intercolonial was for the people and not the people for the Intercolonial. Then my hon. friend the leader of the opposition said that we ought to wait, that this railway should not be immediately constructed, that the benefits should not be obtained for the people of the North-west. He wanted the opinions-of the experts of the Intercolonial before deciding whether the railway should be built or the location chosen. I want to ask, except the Deputy Minister of Railways, what official of the Intercolonial could give the desired opinion as to the territory over which the railway should pass, or of the mode in which it should be constructed, or could give a decision to the government and parliament which would warrant them in taking immediate steps for its construction ? Then he went on to speak of a crisis. ' What crisis took place between the 19th of March and the 30th of July, in those ninety-two days?' As if a crisis could not take place in a shorter period that months and1 years. Why, Sir, the greatest events have taken place in the shortest time, have come without any announcement, like thunderbolts out of a clear sky. Think of the great events that took place.in the hundred days between the landing at Grenoble and the overthrow at Waterloo. Think of what took place in the thirty days between the first conflict of Strasbourg and the occupation of Paris, not very long ago. Statesmen see clearly and distinctly at once what ought to be done in the premises, and when they see it is desirable to make a bold stroke, to do something that should be formative in the destinies of the people, the government have the courage to act promptly, to avail themselves of the opportunity to perform an act beneficial to the people, and which will make them grateful to such a government for ever.
My hon. friend went on to cast some ridicule upon the selection of the route at no greater distance than two miles from the American border, and he also ridiculed the old bogie of the abolition of the bonding privilege. We know that the bonding privilege enables Canadian railways to run trains through American territory and to American ports, and we know that this railway will not pass through American territory. is it not sufficient if it passes half a mile from the American border ? A track's kr^Jth away from the American border is sufficient to relieve the railway from pass-


William Roche: ing over American territory. In times of peace that would be satisfactory, but in times of war we cannot say what distance will be satisfactory. The hon. leader of the opposition then went into a most elaborate argument on the subject of water stretches and canals and on this branch of the subject he was preceded by the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Hughes), who went into statistics most voluminously and most exhaustively to prove that canal carriage for ocean borne traffic in the United States was cheaper than we could carry goods and produce over a railway in Canada. My hon. friend from Bast Prince (Mr. Lefurgey) this evening gave us a similar argument to prove that canal carriage in the United States was cheaper. Unfortunately for us, we have no canals stretching throughout the entire length of the country between the east and west. A canal is a most valuable work when it connects great waterways, but it is a most expensive work. For a short distance connecting great waterways it affords facilities for cheapening transportation, but it is a most enormous work. Unfortunately our rivers run through the length of the country instead of running south, as the American rivers do. Therefore, in that species of internal transit we never could rival the United States, and we never could participate in the carriage of the products of the west if we relied upon that means of transportation. We would have to abandon all our hopes as to this trade and hand it over to the United States if we had not a facility to rival the facilities of the United States. The only facility which we do possess is our railway, because our rivers are frozen during winter. At the time these products are to be brought out from the west we must employ the only facility at our hand, and it is the long haul upon the railway where there is no interruption of the traffic, where there is no transhipment, where there is no transmission to canal boats or to elevators between the place where the grain is obtained in the fields and the place where it is shipped to its destination in Europe. It is carried in one continuous line, affording cheap and uninterrupted communication and that is the only facility which will rival the canal and river system of the United States. But, here is. the dilemma of my hon. friend the leader of the opposition. He thought to himself : If I should advocate any plan like that, if I should advocate cheap transportation on the canals, what would my constituents say ? They want the spending of the money, they want the transport of goods through our own territory. I have my last year's speeches that I must atone for. " I must meet the government on this proposition and I must go one better. I believe the hon. gentleman deliberated for some time because the plan that he proposed to the House showed marks of alterations. But a happy thought was suggested to him, I think if

must have been in passing through a museum where he saw the skeleton of ichthyosaurus and he saw the great bones of the skeleton representing his schemes. The long tail with its joints represented the joints of his proposition. One of the flappers on one side and one on the other represented the colonization roads and as the one on the lower side might suggest the diversion of the traffic to the United States, he seemed to argue that it would be better to cut off the lower flapper and put it on the upper side so that he should have two colonization roads. Suppose my hon. friend is in the city of Montreal and that he has received that mandate which he says is coming from the people to carry out his proposition and to reject and relegate to the realms of darkness that which is proposed by the government. Whom will he take with him lo carry out his proposition ? He cannot take the lion. ex-Minister of Railways and Canals, because that would offend the hon. member for Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart), and he cannot take the hon. member for Lanark, because that would offend the hon. member for Hamilton (Mr. Barker). Therefore, he would have to take his faithful purse-bearer, the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule). He would start from the city of Montreal and he would find that he could obtain no traffic. The people who have brought down the goods from the west will not give any of it to him to carry over his railway. They want it for themselves and they want to take it to American ports. So, he says : I must obtain traffic and to do that I must carry my railway further west in order that I may command it. He builds a road from Jacques Cartier Junction to Ste. Rosalie, thirty-seven miles long, at a cost of $2,000,000. Then, he says : I must go farther, I must command the traffic, and he says to his purse-bearer : Can we afford it ? I will buy the railway extending to Depot Harbour, 342 miles long, and I will pay $20,000,000 for it. His purse-bearer groans but he goes on and when he arrives at Depot Harbour he cannot obtain any grain there. It is being carried past him. Those who have brought it from the west carry it by so as to compete with him. He sees in the distance a dark object, as the bold Sir Bedivere saw the enchanted boat. And as it drew nearer he sees it is a long dark steamboat vomiting clouds of black smoke. When she draws into the pier, in place of the dusky queens robed in stoles of darkest samite there comes ashore a crowd of summer girls in white jackets and red roses in their hats and after them a crowd of men in overalls and plug hats who vent forth strong expressions that are not contained in any book of poetry I wot of. When he got on board the boat he exclaimed : Quid times ? Csesarem vehis. When he arrived in Port Arthur with his $2,000,000 boats, he found that there was no grain there for him. He found the grain was being carried from Duluth down to Port-300
land, and down to Buffalo and that he could obtain no grain there unless he went further west. He found he would have to go further, and so he buys the road to Depot Harbour 342 miles long which cost $12,000,-C00, and from Depot Harbour to Sudbury he buys or constructs a line of 120 miles, at a cost of $30,000 a mile which amounts to $3,500,000. And when he arrives there he finds that he is no nearer to controlling the traffic, and so he goes to the Canadian Pacific Railway and says :	I
want to participate in the trade of the west; I want you to give me running powers over your railway. But the directors of the Canadian Pacific Railway say ; No, Sir, we constructed that line for our own advantage; we are not here for our health; if you want that road you will have to pay us for it. Perhaps the leader of the opposition has his blood up by this time, and he says : I will have the road in spite of all consequences. Perhaps he expropriates that road, and he expropriates 80 miles of road from North Bay to Sudbury, and he expropriates from Sudbury to Port William 450 miles more, and we are told that that railroad cost the-Canadian Pacific Railway $80,000 a mile, and they will take good care to make the government pay for it, and so we have a further expenditure of $45,000,000. And when he gets to Port William with that railway he finds that the traffic is not there, and he buys from Fort William to Winnipeg a distance of 426 miles at $50,000 a mile, and there is $21,000,000 more. And thus for his 1,500 miles of railway the leader of the opposition has laid out a sum of $96,000,000. 1 dare say that at this point his puFse bearer from East Grey (Mr. Sproule) would leave him and go home. And when the leader of the opposition gets there and is now able to control the traffic he looks around and then he says : I must go further ; I have not consulted the people of British Columbia; I have not consulted the popular voice there, I must go further. And then he builds a road from Winnipeg to Edmonton 900 miles at $13,000 a mile, which means $12,000,000 more. And then he must build from Edmonton to the coast 400 miles at $18,000 a miles which means $7,000,000. And then there is the mountain section 480 miles at $40,000 a mile which means $19,000,000, and then he finds that he has 3,340 miles of railway for $115,000,000. And now the leader of the opposition is monarch of all he surveys, but he is not satisfied with his transcontinental road. He now begins to see that there is something in the Northwest and he wants two colonization roads. He begins to see that that valuable territory would be a great adjunct to the Dominion and he builds two colonization roads 500 miles each at $18,000 per mile which means $20,000,000. And now that this government has proposed to build from Quebec to Winnipeg the leader of the opposition thinks that he would also like to build from

9571 .

Quebec to Wininpeg and there he would have 1,475 miles more at $28,000 a mile which would mean $42,000,000 additional. Then the leader of the opposition would build his elevators as he has promised in all parts of the country, and we might put that down with the other incidentals he has promised at $20,000,000 more as a moderate estimate. Then there are improvements to the harbours in Montreal, Halifax, and St. John, and terminals in all these places and free ports and the enlargement of the canals, and the improvement of waterways, and all other facilities which we might put down at the moderate estimate of $50,000,000 more. Thus we have a total of 5,815 miles of railway for $247,000,000, or $542.83 and 22-455 of a cent per family for every family in Ontario. That is what the scheme of the leader of the opposition amounts to. But the defect in that scheme is that at every link in it the trade could be diverted to United States ports. The defect of that scheme is that it adds no new railway to the existing facilities for getting our grain and produce from the North-west Territories. The government railway is to be utilized for all the railways to have running powers over it, but the railway of the leader of the opposition gives no more power to transit than we have to-day, even if it has been procured at an enormous expense. It is a railway deficient in grades and modern character; it is a most expensive road to work; and it gives no further accommodation to the business of the country. On the other hand you will remark, Mr. Speaker, that the government railway first takes up the produce of Manitoba and the North-west and carries it continuously over territory which is new, territory which is being exploited by ft, and it carries it from the farms in the Northwest right to the seaboard in a direct line. It is not a diagonal course; it is hot a traffic which can be diverted, but every mile of that railway carries the western produce uninterruptedly to its destination and lands it on shipboard. I would ask my hon. friend from Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee) if he wishes his amendment to be attached to the proposal of the hon. leader of the opposition '! Does he consider that proposal an embodiment of his resolution ? Does he consider that his proposition of government ownership of railways is carried out and given effect and shape in the proposal of the leader of the opposition, involving an expenditure of $247,000.000 ?
Now, Sir who approves of the government scheme ? Is it acceptable in the country 7 British Columbia approves of it. The members representing that province have spoken in its favour. Manitoba approves of it; all the members from that portion of the country have recommended the railway and supported it. Ontario approves of it; the members from that province regard it as an enterprise which will produce great results for that province in developing the Mr. ROCHE (Halifax).
north country, which has been explored and found to be most valuable. Quebec approves of it; the eloquent members from Gaspe, Bonaventure, and Belleehasse have spoken on its behalf ; they know that it will be of great advantage to the labourers and the inhabitants of the country, that it will create a demand for materials required in its construction ; that its cities, its merchants, its partisans will be benefited New Brunswick approves of it ; its members have spoken on behalf of the enterprise. The route through the northern portion of New Brunswick has been declared to be most favourable, although at the outset of this debate it was thought that the country and the grades would be difficult. St. John will be benefited. It will be brought nearer to the west. It is already the terminus of one transcontinental railway, and it will be brought within easy communication of another. The province of Prince Edward Island will be benefited from this enterprise ; some members have told us that that province gives its adhesion to this scheme. Nova Scotia will be benefited. Although not one mile of the railway is to be built in that province, still we hope that the traffic brought over the line and sent to the city of Halifax will result in benefit to the labourer and the merchant, and to the city at large, which has been long suffering from neglect and from the want of facilities for communication with the west, and for the passage of the products of the west through its portals. I say that the province of Nova Scotia will be benefited. We trust that its iron for bridges, car-wheels and structures, and its lumber for the construction of cars, houses, and other purposes, will be required. The manufacturers will be benefited ; the car builders will be benefited ; the agricultural interests of the province will be benefited ; all classes of people will be interested in the consummation of this most valuable scheme. I would like to know why the hon. leader of the opposition applied such a buffet to my hon. friend from East Grey. The hon. member for East Grey was on the economical tack, and described the dire effects of a great expenditure on this railway. Yet the hon. leader of the opposition submitted a mixed programme which calls for an expenditure of about $250,000,000. M,v hon. friend from East Grey announced that he would go through the province of Ontario, and inform the farmers that the consummation of this government project would involve a mortgage on their farms and would mean so much taken from their earnings. On the other side of the line, in the states of Vermont and New Hampshire, and other states on the border, the people are proud of describing the sacrifices which their fathers made in the war of the revolution, when their sons and their brothers left the bloody prints in the snow at Valley Forge, when they carried on the war midst the horrors

of that campaign. They describe with satisfaction the contributions of the villages, and the homesteads, and the efforts made by the women to keep their fathers and brothers in the field. They pride themselves on the toils and sacrifices of the past, and they have their great land before them as the result of those toils and sacrifices. But my hon. friend from East Grey will tell the farmers: ' Oh, your hoards lying in the banks will be diminished by twenty cents a year of interest, it may be, as a consequence of this great loan that will be fastened upon you. The money will be spent in the country. It will not be spent for munitions of war ; it will be spent among the people for commercial purposes ; it will not be wasted; it will be for the development of the country for a hundred years to come.- I would urge the government to press on. There are those who call upon the government to stop, to pause. I would say, press on; heed not those siren voices which call opon you to pause. Listen to the nations that are coming into that country-the Swedes and the (Norwegians, the fair-haired races of Europe, who will see that land like their own, and will be ready to go in and possess it. The inhabitants of the overcrowded regions of Europe will come to it. Let the government lead the van, and carry into that country civilization and empire

To the regions of the home-wind,
Of the North-west wind Keewaydin,
To the islands of the blessed,
To the land of the hereafter !


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of being one of the latest arrivals in this House, coming fresh from the moulds of the people ; and from the fact of a large subsidy to a transcontinental railway line having been discussed from every platform during that election, I think that X would not be doing my duty to my constituents if I failed to give expression to the mandate I received from the people of North Grey seven months ago.
I have listened with a great deal of pleasure to the remarks which have fallen from the lips of the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Roche). He reminds me very much of Falstaff, his imaginings are so vivid and his juggling with figures so remarkable. He stated that Canada could not compete in the matter of transportation with the United States. I regretted to hear any hon. gentleman, no matter on which side of the House he may be placed, make such a statement as that. Canada occupies a position which gives us by the lakes and the River St. Lawrence the greatest highway to the markets of the world for the grain of the wheat fields of the west. Now, Sir, the hon. gentleman, speaking of the transportation proposition as outlined by the leader of the opposition, said that he never! heard of American grain coming to Depot Harbour, and that there would be no freight there, for the Intercolonial Railway, if extended 3001
to this point. The hon. gentleman is not very well posted, concerning the routes) by which the grain of the west seeks the seaports, because millions of bushels both last year and this year! have come to Midland, Depot Harbour, Owen Sound and Meaford, and from there been transported to Montreal and the seaboard. I may tell him that more grain has passed through the canals of Canada this year than in any previous year up to this time, not less than from eight to ten million bushels have already passed through our canals. When these waterways are perfected, I have not the least doubt but that this will be the great highway by which the grain of the western states and of our North-west will find its way to the seaboard.
Gulliver's Travels is not to be compared with the hon. gentleman's speech, when he talks about that country lying between Quebec and Winnipeg, away to the north of us. the country that this road is likely to traverse. The hon. gentleman described this is a splendid agricultural country, abounding in splendid timber, minerals, fertile land and everything in fact to make a peo-prosperous and happy. Now, Sir, I am surprised at this statement, two ex-ministers of the Crown-one a gentleman who had been Minister of Railways in the late government for a great many years, and also the gentleman who has withdrawn from the present administration, are men who have given it a great deal of consideration, who have conversed with parties passing through this country and who have given a great deal of time to the study of these questions, who have given opinions as regards the character of the country through which this road will pass from Winnipeg to Quebec ; and yet, both of these differ materially from the opinion of my hon. friend from Halifax, and the difference is so great that one cannot understand from what source or sources my hon. friend from Halifax gets his information. Both of these gentlemen described this country as being composed of granite rocks, muskegs and lakes, and my hon. friend the ex-Minister of Railways in the late government, the hon. member for Lanark (Hon. ,Mr. Haggart), stated that there was a large tract of country lying north towards James bay that was fertile to a certain extent, particularly for vegetables, barley and rye. He was not, however, prepared to say that wheat could be grown there. He also stated that this line did not go within fifty miles of this region fit for cultivation, so I gathered from this that it is not a country fit for settlement. From the class of timber that they say grows in abundance it is evident that the soil is not fertile, and that it is not a country fit for settlement in the ordinary sense of the term. I asked the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Roche) what they intend to carry on this road between Winnipeg and Quebec or Halifax. He replied that the

merchandise imported from Great Britain and elsewhere would be landed at Halifax and shipped to the -west over this road. Why, Sir, we have already a line from St. John, a short line going to the west, and I do not know that this road is overburdened with what it has to carry to the west. But, Sir, the government has stated that this road is being constructed to relieve the congestion of the west. Why did my hon. friend not state that ? The figures presented to this House by the different speakers all go to prove that the Grand Trunk Pacific if constructed from Winnipeg to Moncton could never carry grain at a profit in competition with the rail-water haul. I believe that is clear to every member of this House ; I believe it is clear to the country, and when I ask the hon. gentleman what he expected; to carry over that road, he did not tell me that it was the grain of the west or anything going from the west, but, speaking from a provincial standpoint, in order to make himself right with the people of Halifax, he told us it was being built because the ocean steamers would come to Halifax to unload the merchandise for the west, and that this merchandise would be carried to the west on this Grand Trunk Pacific. Now, Sir, if they cannot present a better argument for the construction of this road, I do not think the people of Canada will endorse the construction of that line.
I was very much struck with some remarks which fell from the Minister of Agriculture with reference to carrying freight from Chicago partly by rail and partly by water. He wanted to prove that there was a far larger amount of freight sent from Chicago to the east by rail than by water. He did not tell us to what points in the east it is shipped. When asked the question, he said he could not say that much of it was freighted to New York. That is quite evident, because he must be well aware that very little of the freight sent by rail from Chicago east goes to New York. If the hon. gentleman will look on the map he will find that Chicago is situated at the foot of Lake Michigan, about 225 miles south of the most northerly part of Michigan, and a vessel leaving Chicago must pass away around the state of Michigan and go down the lake to the St. Clair river. 450 or 500 miles out of the way. Hence, if grain is not shipped by water, it leaves Chicago and gets to the water at Buffalo, or Toledo, or Detroit. But Port Arthur, the Canadian port, lies at the head of navigation, hence grain coming from Winnipeg to this point and passing from there by water to the market is being sent by the shortest possible way by which it can go to the seaboard. Now, Sir, I am going to give the Minister of Agriculture a conundrum. If it requires two pages of the pamphlet issued by his department to explain to the farmers how to wring the neck


Thomas Inkerman Thomson: of a chicken, I would ask him how many pages would be required to convince the farmers that it costs more to haul grain by water than by rail, and also to satisfy the farmers that the construction of the Grand Trunk Railway will only cost the farmers of this country $13,000,000 ? That is a conundrum for the Minister of Agriculture to solve. But I would not ask him to deal with it until he has finished his one-million-five-hundred-thousand-dollar census. After he has done with that, he may explain to the farmers these little points to which I have referred.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the people of Canada have made great sacrifices in order that the provinces may be bound together and a great Canadian nationality built upon this north American continent. When it was agreed that Nova Scotia and New Brunswick should confederate with upper and lower Canada, a part of that agreement was that the Intercolonial should be constructed at the expense of the new Dominion. And the Dominion of Canada made great sacrifices to construct that road. At a later period, the province of British Columbia came into the confederation, one of the terms of the arrangement being that the Canadian people should construct a line of railway across the continent in ten years. At this time it became known to the best informed of our people that we had a splendid heritage in the North-west. Many of our farmers were flocking to the prairie lands of the western states in order that they might find cheaper lands for their children. The fact presented itself to the minds of the Canadian people that it was necessary to open our western country so that the people of the older provinces, instead of going to a foreign land, would be able to find cheaper homes for their children under the flag beneath whose folds they were born. And, with this consideration in view, the government of Canada went to work to construct a line across the continent. In 18S0, or 1881, the government entered into a contract with the Canadian Pacific Railway Company to construct this line in ten years, for which the company were to receive 25,000,000 acres of land, $25,000,000 in cash, and that portion of the road which was constructed or under construction, which cost the people of Canada $34,000,000. In all, the Canadian Pacific Railway cost the people of Canada $84,000,000. And the people at that time felt that they had made a great bargain. It was a great undertaking for the company to build that line across the continent. The hon. gentlemen opposite had magnified the financial burdens to be borne in constructing this road. They said it would cost $300,000,000, and the picture they gave of British Columbia and the north-western country, of which they now speak so highly was enough to dampen the ardour of the people of Canada. It is no wonder, therefore, that

when the government found a company ready to construct a road on these terms, the people felt that a great burden had been taken off their shoulders. We all felt that the government had made a great bargain. And I think that that is borne out by the fact that the first $25,000,000 of Canadian Pacific Kailway stock that was placed on the market only brought twenty-five cents on the dollar, while the whole $85,000,000 of stock realized only $50,000,000. The people who invest their money in these stocks are the best judges of the merits of an enterprise of this kind. There were a few people at the head of affairs who had confidence in Canada, who had confidence that the road would ultimately pay. The result was that the Canadian Pacific Railway was constructed not in ten years, but in six years. In 1886 the first train passed over the road to Vancouver. And, Sir, after seventeen years of operation of that road what is the result ? The gross earnings of the Canadian Pacific Railway last year were no less than $43,000,000, a larger sum than the money received for customs throughout the whole of Canada. The $85,000,000 of Canadian Pacific stock which had been sold for $50,000,000 in the market of the world, was worth, a few months ago, no less than $125,000,000, or $75,000,000 more than was paid for it in the first instance. This company for years has paid on its common stock no less than 5 per cent, and this year it is declaring a dividend of 6 per cent. I say that the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway was one of the greatest financial achievements in our history, in fact it was the greatest financial success ever achieved in this country. 1 say that if the people of Canada supported the construction of a road under these conditions, I ask why should the people of Canada to-day, with the different conditions, with trade waiting for the railway, a trade which must make the road profitable from its inception, be called upon to saddle themselves with an expenditure of from $150,000,000 to $250,000,000 in order that we may have a fresh batch of multi-millionaries at the expense of the people ? I would present this as the strongest fact, the fact that the Canadian Pacific Railway has been a great financial success, and that the conditions for railway construction and operation are much more favourable than they were. The company constructing a road across the continent to-day will find it a profitable undertaking if they never receive a dollar from the people of Canada. The fact that the people of Canada assisted in building a railway for the purpose of cementing the provinces and uniting the Canadian people, as well as to develop sections of the country at that time unopened, is no reason why we should be called upon at this late day to add this immense sum to our national debt in order to construct a railway to which these reasons cannot apply.
Now, I should like to say a few words with regard to this eastern division. I know that a great many figures have been plac'd before the House, but I have my own ideas, and my own opinions, which I desire to state. In my opinion, whatever justification there may be for constructing the road from Winnipeg westward, there is positively no justification for constructing the road from Winnipeg to Moncton. I believe it is a waste of the people's money. And we have the statement of the ex-Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair) to the effect that the road from Winnipeg to Moncton will cost from $70,000,000 to $75,000,000. In making up his estimate of the amount, that hon. gentleman did not take into consideration the interest on the money during construction. Then we are to pay interest on this indebtedness for ten years after the road is finished. Then we hand it over to the Grand Trunk Pacific, and they pay us 3 per cent for the balance of the period of fifty years. There is something about this agreement still more unsatisfactory. When I first heard of the contract, I was under the impression that the earnings of the whole line would be placed under contribution to pay the interest of 3 per cent on this section, which is the lean and unprofitable portion of the road. But I find that this agreement does not carry that out, that only the earnings of the eastern section, the unprofitable section, are taken into consideration when they pay this 3 per cent. That is, we have the unprofitable end, we have constructed the eastern division; and there is no railway expert in Canada will tell you that the eastern division in 25 years will earn its working expenses. Set this is the portion of the road that we expect to receive 3 per cent upon after it has earned its working expenses.
There is another feature in connection with this matter more disagreeable still. After having built this road and handed it over to the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company for 50 years, according to this agreement we have to pay everything for the betterment of that road, and we do not know where this expenditure is going to end. Everything for the betterment of that road must be paid for 50 years by the people of Canada. I ask you to go back and look at the Intercolonial, a railway which originally cost this country $21,000,000. Inside of 15 years, the betterments of that road, everything in the way of permanent improvements. had cost more than the original construction; and railway men everywhere say that in ten or twelve years after the construction of a road the betterments, or the permanent improvements put on it, will cost quite as much as the original construction. Now, this line of railway from Winnipeg to Moncton is to cost this country $75,000,000 at first; then, according to the precedent of the Intercolonial, it will cost us $150,000,000. and we are handing this road over to the company to operate it

without the least prospect of ever receiving a dollar in return. I ask you. What is there to warrant such an expenditure as this ? We are sending out settlers to a country which can never become a desirable country to live in. A few may exist there, but it must for ever remain an unattractive country for settlers so long as we have these fertile lands in the North-west; and I ask you why should we send our people up among the jack pines, the spruce and the birch in northern Quebec or in northern Ontario, while there are millions of acres of fertile prairie lands in the west open for settlement ?
Now, Sir, I wish to say a few words as regards the probability of this road ever being able to relieve the congestion in the west. If there is anything in connection with the construction of this line that must affect every ratepayer in Canada, it is that this eastern section never can by any means carry the cereals of the west to the seaboard. The distance from Winnipeg to Port Arthur is 425 miles. We have two lines of railway, the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Canadian Northern, both stretching from Winnipeg to Port Arthur. Both have low gradients and small curvatures, both are in a position to carry an immense number of cars loaded with grain, at the least possible cost. This is proved by the action of the government of Manitoba, who, on gaining control of the Canadian Northern, immediately fixed the rate of grain from Winnipeg to Port Arthur and from the west to Winnipeg, at the lowest possible cost to the farmer, so that in the shipment of his grain lie would receive as much as possible after deducting the cost of carriage. I think this is the best evidence that the amount that is charged for carrying grain from Winnipeg to Port Arthur is the least rate at which it. it is possible that the grain can be carried. Now, Sir, to-day they are charging twelve cents per 100 pounds, and I understand that on the 1st of September they are going to try to carry that grain for ten cents per 100 pounds, equal to about six cents per bushel from Winnipeg to Port Arthur. If it costs ten cents per 100 pounds to carry grain from Winnipeg to Port Arthur, a distance of 425 miles, and I have shown that is the least rate at which it can be carried over that distance, I ask you what will it cost to carry 100 pounds of grain from Winnipeg to Quebec, a distance of 1,600 miles ? It is true that by a straight line it is 1,400 miles, but if you add ten or fifteen per cent for curves, you get 1,600 miles as the shortest distance that it will work out. Well, now, if it costs ten cents per 100 pounds from Winipeg to Port Arthur, at the same rate over the 1.600 miles, it will cost just thirty-six cents per 100 pounds, or twenty-three cents per bushel. Now, the cost of'carrying a bushel of grain from Winnipeg to Montreal by rail and water haul is only about eleven cents per bushel-eleven cents Mr. THOMSON (Grey).
against twenty-three, or a difference of twlve cents. If the farmers of the west were to ship 100,000,000 bushels of grain over this road which the government propose to build, it would cost them $12,000,000 more than by rail and water. Do you think a farmer is going to pay twelve cents more to ship his grain over this road than he could ship it by rail and water route ? Not by any means. He will hold his grain till navigation opens. We are told this road is only to carry grain when navigation is closed. But do you mean to tell me that after navigation is closed the farmer of the west will sell his grain for twelve cents less in order that he may ship over this special line to be constructed by the government ? No, he will borrow the money on his grain, and he will hold it until spring in order to save twelve cents a bushel. I think that is clear as noonday. I do not hink that grain ever can be shipped over this road, and if this road is being built in order to afford the farmers relief, it will prove to be a perfect failure.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I wish to say a few words in support of the splendid policy which has been enunciated to this House by the leader of the opposition. It is quite evident that the leader of the opposition has given a great deal of study to this problem; I have no doubt that he has also had the assistance of experts in the preparation of this scheme. Let us look at this problem for a moment. He tells us that we can acquire the Canada Atlantic Railway. Remember that the Canada Atlantic Railway to-day is a paying institution. If we purchase the Canada Atlantic Railway we have got an asset that is .worth the money that we pay for it. Now, if it is paying to haul grain from Depot Harbour to Coteau, I >ask you : Would it not be equally profitable to carry grain from Depot Harbour to Montreal by all-rail ? I see no reason why we could not acquire running powers over the Grand Trunk railway from Coteau to Montreal, and then we would have a railway from Montreal to Depot Harbour, which will prove the very best security and a paying road. In addition, this proposition extends the Intercolonial from Halifax to the foot of the great lakes, which will make the Intercolonial Railway a much more valuable property than it is to-day, while it would not cost the people of Canada one copper. I say that this is a masterly, a splendid proposition, and I ask you to compare it with the scheme of running a road up through northern Quebec and northern Ontario, a distance of 1,600 miles, in order to canny out the grain of the west.
My hon. friend stated that if the policy of the hon. leader of the opposition were adopted : the extension of the Intercolonial Railway to the foot of the great lakes, what freight would it haul ? He did not know that there were over 29,000,000 'bushels of grain shipped from the lower ports

of the Georgian bay last year and that this year the quantity will be still greater. If we acquire the Canadian Pacific Railway from Sudbury to Port Arthur what position are we in? That has been an expensive road and we will require to spend more money to put it in proper shape, but when we have purchased that road we will give running powers to the Grand Trunk Railway, to the Canadian Northern to the Canadian Pacific Railway and to the Intercolonial Railway and the receipts or rentals from these companies having running powers over the line (because it would be taxed to its fullest capacity where it has now but one-tenth of the business it could do) will pay the interest charges, and the road is ours. The House will remember that the proposition of the hon leader of the opposition was that these roads should acquire running rights over the Canadian Northern and the Canadian Pacific to Winnipeg and they will have to pay for them. What is the use of hon. gentlemen opposite dealing out figures as to the cost of the scheme which has been proposed by the hon. leader of the opposition V The only cost that would be the cost of acquiring these roads and when we have acquired them they are ours and they become a paying property the moment we have acquired them. This proposition if carried into effect would tremendously enhance the value of the railway property of the people of Canada. It would give the Grand Trunk Railway Company immediate access to the wheat fields of the west. The Grand Trunk Railway has a magnificent network of railways, a splendid railway property in Ontario and Quebec. There is not a dty, town or village of any importance in the province of Ontario that it does not touch and hon. gentlemen can imagine the importance it is to this line to have immediate access to the wheat fields and carrying trade of the west. If the policy propounded by the hon. leader of the opposition were to go into effect to-morrow the stock of the Grand Trunk Railway would advance fifty per cent in thirty days. This is the scheme worthy of the traditions of the Conservative party and we are proud of the traditions of the Conservative party, which, as the hon. leader of the opposition has said, is the party that had the heart to construct the Intercolonial Railway and to construct the Canadian Pacific Railway which have done so much for the development and consolidation of Canada and it is the party that is prepared to solve this difficult problem that is before us to-day. I ask the right hon. leader of the government to appeal to the people on this question. Let the people have an opportunity of expressing their views and I believe if such an opportunity is given them it will be the best thing that could be done in the interest of Canada to-day. If the right hon. gentleman does not appeal to the people
he should at least abandon the scheme and thereby save the honour and national credit of Canada.
On motion of Hon. Mr. Ross (Victoria, N.S.) the debate was adjourned.
On motion of the Minister of Finance (Hon. W. S. Fielding), House adjourned at 11.40 p.m.

Tuesday, August 25, 1903.