1904-04-21

[Stage Direction]
Mr. HACKETT-by Mr. Sproule-asked :
1.	What engineer made survey and
with regard to the construction o£ a pier Ts. Point Prim, Queen's county, Prince Edward 1 land ?	.
2.	When was the survey made, aud what 1 the date of the report ?
3.	Did the engineer making the survey re commend the construction of this work ?
4.	What is the depth of water where the
is to be built ; and of what nature is the tom formation, rock, mud or sand ?	.
5.	Will the construction of this pier e 0
advantage to the shipping interests ?	.,
6.	What is the estimated total cost of sal pier ?
Hon. .TAS. SUTHERLAND (Minister °{ Public Works) :: 


Mr. BELL.: 
REGULATIONS FOR ACTIVE MILITIA.
[Stage Direction]
'* Bell-bv Mr. Sproule-asked :
A* ir- the practice of the Department of 5a and Defence to reimburse officers who
have been required to procure certain uniforms, when ihe style and colours of such uniforms are afterwards changed by regulation, thus necessitating a change of dress ?
2	Are khaki uniforms still worn in the active militia ; and if so, in what regiments, and under what conditions ?
3	What dress regulations exist at present for the active militia ?
ISir FREDERICK BORDEN (Minister of Militia and Defence) :
1.	No.	,	.2.	Khaki uniforms are regulation for permanent and city corps, and will be issued as supplies become available. It has been decided not to issue this dress to the rural corps for the present, but officers of these corps who have got the dress will be permitted to wear it out.	_3.	Dress regulations are contained ill Regulations and Orders, 1898, and such changes as have been made since then have been pro.-mulgated in General Orders.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. CLARKE-by Mr. Osier-asked :
1.	Has any contract or order been given by the Militia Department for forage caps, or head gear, for the regular or militia forces, within the past three months ?
2.	If so, to whom has the contract or order been given, and on what terms ?
3.	Were public tenders or bids asked for from Canadian firms generally ? If not, from whom were tenders procured, and what were the figures of each of the tenderers ?
4.	When was the order given, and when are the goods to be delivered ?
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN (Minister of Militia and Defence) :: 160S
1.	What is the number and at what date was the last grazing license issued in Assiniboia or Alberta ?
2.	To whom was it issued, and tor how many acres ?


Hon. CLIFFORD SIFTON (Minister of the Interior).: The last lease issued for grazing lands in Alberta or Assiniboia was numbered 1919 and covers an area of 1,921 acres, designated as ranch No. 2657. Date of lease, 19th of April, 1904. The name of the lessee is Robert H. Roe, of Medicine Hat, Assiniboia, isr.w.T.


POSTMASTER AT PUGWASH, N.S.
Mr. BELL asked :: 1.	Who is the postmaster at Pugwash, N.S. ?
2.	How long is it since the death of the late postmaster ?
3.	Who is now doing the work ?
4.	Is it the intention to appoint the postmaster ?
5.	If not, who is to be appointed ?


Hon. JAS. SUTHERLAND (Minister of Public Works).: On behalf of my kon. colleague the Postmaster General I beg to reply :
Mr. Peter McLean, jr., is postmaster of Pugwash, county of Cumberland. The death of the late postmaster was reported to the department on the loth September last. The work of the office is being performed by the postmaster. -


ELECTORAL LISTS-PROVINCE OP QUEBEC.
Mr. LEONARD asked :: 1.	How many of the electoral lists, revised last September, for the province of Quebec, have been printed by the King's Printer ? And what lists have been so printed ?
2.	How many have been distributed, and to whom ?
3.	What system does the King's Printer follow in the printing of electoral lists ?


The Rt. Hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIER (Prime Minister) :: 1.	The following lists for the province of Quebec have been distributed Bkjnaven-ture, Bertliier, Beaukarnois, Bagot, Ckateau-guay, Gaspe, Huntingdon, Hochelaga, Jacques Cartier, Kamouraska, L&vis, L'lslet, Maisonneuve, Montmorency, Missisquoi, Montmagny, Pontine, Portneuf, Quebec East, Quebec West, Quebec Centre, Rouville, St. James, Montreal ; St. Antoine, Montreal ; St. Lawrence, Montreal ; Ste. Anne, Montreal ; Ste. Marie, Montreal ; Shefford, St. Hyacinthe, Terniscouata.
2.	Twenty copies have been sent to the sitting member and twenty copies to the defeated candidate of each constituency.
3.	The lists are taken up and printed one after the other as fast as they can be done.


CHIEF JUSTICESHIP OF NOVA SCOTIA.
Mr. FOWLER asked :: 1.	Is the office of chief justice of Nova Scotia vacant ?


Mr. REID (Grenville).: 2.	If so, how long has it been vacant . _jj
3.	Is it the intention of the government
that office before the end of the present sion ?	. th8
4.	What is the cause of the delay in fllluiS
said office ?
5. Has the government any difficulty 111 c?ept curing a suitable and qualified person to a .e said office ?


Hon. CHAS. FITZPATRICK (Minister *g .istice).: I beg to say that the Hon. Jc VUe
tune
Macdonald sent in his resignation some. ago. It was the intention of the govern to fill the office at the earliest possible ment, but at the same time the filling 0	-
office will depend to some another position held by the m<-= ~n0er Justice, that of judge of the Excli 1 Court in Admiralty.
extent uP.0lJ late
Ciuet


I.C.R.-MARITIME EXPRESS-
Mr. GERVAIS asked :: 
Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Miuister Railways and Canals) :: 
P-E.I.RY.-MURRAY HARBOUR BRANCH.
[Stage Direction]
t Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals). The other day when 'be following question was put by the hon. member for East Prince (Mr. Lefurgey),
1- What was the estimated cost of the first ®'.even miles of the Murray Harbour branch of me Prince Edward Island Railway from South-pon east ?	.
1 gave a reply, in which I stated, through a clerical error of the department, that the cost was $45,628.95. The reply should have been :	.
I'be estimated cost of the first 11* miles the Murray Harbour branch of the Prince Llward Island Railway from Southport Rast was, $145,028.93.
gRand trunk pacific railway.
in
House again in committee, on the follow-
' resolution :
, 1'bat it is expedient to ratify the agreement etween His Majesty the King and the Grand *r«nk Pacific Railway Company, dated the SjShth day of March, 1304, transmitted by His excellency the Governor General to this House, "(,his message of March the eleventh; and .Rich varies in some respects the provisions of /5e agreement between His Majesty and Sir Varies Rivers-Wilson and others, representing said company ; a copy of which forms the ^hedule to the Act, 3 Edward VII, chapter 71 :
A	. . .	. -	____A A _ ,3 ~ -rrrVi o I
q.	UI LJUC iVUl, O UUVVW11A .	

a	-
to authorize the government to do what-er is necessary to give full effect to the first Rationed agreement.-Sir Wilfrid Laurier.
A*1'- SAM. HUGHES. I understood, Mr. ^airman, that the Prime Minister was |l. 11JS to make a certain statement. I was ,."opes that after the exhibition of the 'aeies in/ the resolution and agreement,
fali
jjRch was made during the very excellent . bate we have just had, and In view especi-'V of the fact that the right hon. gentleman J1? unable to obtain the assistance of any fa . colleagues, in view also of the further jCt that but a very few members of his f Hy>
and those gentlemen who do not t P^seut the public sentiment of the coun-m/' came to his assistance-in view of all jVjfse facts, I was in hopes that the Prime th ^fer would rise and inform the House y be proposed withdrawing this resolu-1„ b. The right hon. gentleman pointed out A I" year, with a great flourish of trumpets, A1' this Bill provides for the establishment ''°rd naG°nal transcontinental road. Well,
[Stage Direction]
w,. -* are very easily uttered, expecially ep required to cover up the defects of a oni*8u«s and mislead the public. Into this 1 lStion °f a national character of the road, c;i. ;l!'ll not enter at present further than to tp fbe language of one of the right hon	 'b'man's own followers, who took the a ..''bd that this proposed road is In no sense Cati°nal one. We find that one of his fol-hi(,Ars' who is accustomed to dealing m ST|l v'Va.ys, not only upon this mundane ere but also In a superior region, pointed 53*
nut fatal defects in the claim of this project considered national. I refer to the non member for West Huron (Mr. Holmes), on a "occasion not very long since that gen-Heman pointed out that this road was not tlemau I	^ great national railway.
s^eUdng before a certain body, within the iSt six months, he used this language :
For some reason or other, not known to all ,, Lmhm of the committee, some members ofthTs commutee from the lower provinces have evidently compromised on Moncton They seem to lose sight of the country as a whole m preference for those of the lower provinces. Now it seems to me this railway is being bmlt for the country as a whole. If ther® is. 0ae question on which the Liberal party has lam basted the life out of the Conservatives it was in reference to the terminus of the Intercolonial Railway. It landed nowhere and now this railway is going to land at an interior poin .
Thus, from the month of one of the premier's own friends, the transcontinental as-uect of his road is condemned ; it lands nowhere. It might just as well connect with the Intercolonial to Quebec or Montreal as with the Intercolonial at Moncton. It has to connect with the Intercolonial, therefore I was in hopes that the arguments which have been advanced by hon. gentlemen on this side, as well as the calm reflection of the right hon. the Prime Minister himself-because we would not like to charge him with being under the hypnotic influence of any evil disposed person with designs on Canada-had dissuaded the right hon. the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) from pursuing this measure. We were in hopes that he would rally and allow his name to be perpetuated in connection with a genuine national transcontinental railway, built, owned and operated by the people of Canada. We were in hopes that the right hoir the Prime Minister was going at the last minute to assert his manhood and obey the mandate of the great mass of his own followers at the same time that he would meet the wishes of the Liberal party of Canada, and take that course. I was, in hopes when a pause occurred at the beginning of this debate, that the right hon. the Prime Minister was going to rise in his place and frankly tell the House and the country that owing to the fact that he had not the endorsation of his colleagues and his own party following in the House-and he dare not call a caucus of his followers.
Mr. CAMPBELL.: Order.


Mr SAM HUGHES.: Did I hear the musical voice of my hon. friend from West York (Mr Campbell) ? He is always ready, always aspiring to a position in the cabinet r Which his colleagues say he will never attain, always ready to dance when any one touches the button to have him interiupt, always ready to be a hewer of wood and carder of water for his party. The horn gentleman, however, can never attain to


Mr. BENNETT.: For highwaymen.


Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: 
Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: Perhaps you think I should do it now ?


Samuel Hughes: 
Mr. COWAN.: No.


Mr SAM. HUGHES.: Excuse me; I was not addressing myself to the distinguished gentleman who comes from the suburbs of Detroit ; I was addressing myself to the First Minister.


Wilfrid Laurier: I would give you the same answer.


Mr SAM. HUGHES.: The last gentleman ir the world I would think of asking foi [DOT]i legal opinion or a sensible opinion on anything, would be the hon. gentleman lor Essex (Mr. Cowan). Of course our friends who are interested m the Quebec bridge would be anxious to have that load pressed on to Quebec. I have looked m lain in the Bill and in the resolutions foi anything that guarantees the construction of the eastern division. In spite of all the protestations made by the First Mnns-ter last night, and in spite of all the inspiration and Dutch courage he enthused into his followers, I do not believe that the First Minister believes that that eastei section will ever he complete! ,	*'
events, within the lifetime of an ordimuy man. There is no guarantee that the east ern division will be constructed, and there
any "penalty1 'imposed on the Grand Trunk Pacific in case it undertakes to operate it
nlTheUright lion, the First Minister must i Th? ri ft and why he has allowed these Semen to get the start of him I fail to
see1 But the most important part of afi^t e
part that is intended to tickle the fai y


Mr. MORIN.: He is on the strike.


Samuel Hughes: 
Archibald Campbell: 
An hon- MEMBER.: The Campt>e11 coming.	calBp-


Samuel Hughes: 
Ron. Mr. BLAIR.: All they would have to give us or all that they might give us.
Then a gentleman of the name of Talbot says :
.hut suppose they were not anxious to give u to you ?


Ron. Mr. BRODEUR.: 
Mr. FOWLER.: I would like to ask Mr. Hays if he would be willing to have incorporated in this charter a clause to the effect that all the Canadian trade developed along the route of the Grand Trunk Pacific should go through Canadian ports-that is, all the freight which is intended for export ?


Mr.   HAYS@: Railway that is going to determine that, they have to carry it just where I send it. If the people of the Northwest choose to send their wheat via Portland or New York, how could the Grand Trunk prevent it ? It is the shippers that control the route by which the freight goes, and so the whole question comes down to the shippers. A firm wishing to ship wheat or flour will certainly always send it by the route that will carry it cheapest.
That car of flour, let me say, is shipped over this government road and , reaches Quebec. I would like the First Minister, or any other minister, or any man in this House or out of it, to point out how that, flour is going to be sent to the maritime provinces in preference to taking it, by a haul of 150 miles less, to Portland. There is only one way, and that is for the government to operate the road, if they are going to build it by Quebec. And so I again appeal to the First Minister. I know that he knows X am sincere in my confidence in him. I again appeal to him to stand up in his place and make as energetic-I am glad to see our dear old friend the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir Richard Cartwright) is getting some life in him. This Is the first time I have seen a smile on his countenance for weeks, much less observed him mutter a word as prompter, to the First Minister. I say, I again appeal to the First Minister to stand up and make one of these sentimental speeches such as only he can make, but on the reasonable lines I suggest. I venture to say, there is not a man of his following but will support him. And, wild as was their enthusiasm last evening, they will be infinitely more enthusiastic over such a speech, because their hearts will be in it. They will be glad to hear that the government has determined to throw aside this scheme of a line under Grand Trunk Pacific ownership from the coast to Winnipeg and under government ownership from Winnipeg eastward. I know right well, and the country knows right well, and these lion, gentlemen themselves know right well, that they are whipped into line. Do we not recollect how, when the First Minister rose to present these resolutions-and we were glad to se? him in such good health-the chill of the reception accorded him by his own followers. Throughout his whole speech he was applauded only three times, and then very, mildly. The Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) came on a little later. There is more the master hand about him. He .is the ring master in the circus, so tc speak. He told the government's following :	Look here, you terriers, fall into
line and cheer as you never cheered before, or not a man jack of you who is looking for judgeship or a collectorship of customs, or any other good place need expect to warm the office chair he is looking for.
Mr. Deputy Speaker left the chair and R was taken by Mr. Archibald Campbell.


Samuel Hughes: 


Samuel Hughes: 
Mr. EMMERSON.: 
Mr SAM. HUGHES.: Minister back from tliose [DOT]who have this unfortunate influence over him, and that he is endeavouring to make the Prime Minister repudiate such an iniquitous measure. Let us look at the eloquent words uttered by the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan) on that occasion :
Coming to the winter shipments, they say: We will give it over to the Intercolonial Railway if we can- make a satisfactory arrangement with the Intercolonial Railway.
We know that the Grand Trunk Pacific will have but a short haul from a point on its main line north of North Bay to North Bay, where it will make connections with the Ontario system of the Grand Trunk Railway. When the Grand Trunk Pacific have their traffic at this point, is it conceivable that the Grand Trunk shareholder who bosses the directors is going to allow that traffic to be hauled over the Intercolonial. from which he will not receive one dollar of return from the freight rates ? Is he not going to force the directors to send that freight down over the Grand Trunk system to Portland, in order that he may gel a dividend from it ? I endorse this language of the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan. He proceeds :
Is any man so childish as to believe that if the Grand Trunk Pacific has a car of wheat at North Bay it will take it through to Quebec and hand it over to the 'Intercolonial when they can take it right through to Portland. It is absolutely ridiculous to make such a suggestion.
' I endorse in its entirety this noble language of the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan). Why then did we find him last night bowing to the party lash, to the demand of the Minister of the Interior and to the sentimental appeal-and I do not know what other influence-of the First Minister ? Why did he sacrifice the first principles of responsible government by go-* ing back on the noble language he used a year ago, and fall into line behind these men at the beck of the party lash ? Let us hope it is because of a determination to privately win the right hon. the Prime Minister over from this scheme.	.
I regret that the right hon. the Prime Minister was absent while I was reading the noble language of the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan), but as he is now in his place I shall read it for him.


Wilfrid Laurier: I will take it as read.


Samuel Hughes: 
Wilfrid Laurier: on the same hinge as I am.


Samuel Hughes: 
Mr. COCHRANE.: 
Samuel Hughes: 
Samuel Hughes: 

is adopted. I would like to ask th>.
*prime Minister, whether he is aware of any meeting of the Grand Trunk shareholders, at which the original agreement was presented to them and rejected. I refer to a remark made in the course of the debate bv mv hon friend from; Haldimand (Mr. Thompson), who used this language :
Has anybody in this House impeached the sin-Mr Hays or of Sir Charles Rivers-wusmi when they made that promise ? Not at an1 They went to their shareholders and they said everything in their power to induce them to meet their views ; they had to pat up this money in order that that contract might be carried out as it was originally framed. But the shareholders point blank refused to do so.
T asked :
Might I ask the hon. gentleman when this meeting of the .shareholders took place to which he has referred ?
And the hon. gentleman (Mr. Thompson) dismissed me with a somewhat lordly wave of his hand in this way :
I have not got the exact date, but I can supply the horn gentleman with it after I have finished my speech.
I have not yet had any intimation of the date at which that meeting was held, ,mr was I aware, until the hon. member irentioned it. that such a meeting had been held Can the right hon. gentleman give me any information on the subject .


Wilfrid Laurier: I am not tint there was any meeting of tlie SiKS Grand Trunk WW other than that which took place on the 8th cf March.


Mr R. D. BORDEN.: Then the original agreement was never submitted to any noting until the original and amended agreements were submitted 10 tins meeting.
oj;,. wiDFRID DAURIER. My hon. friend from Haldimand may have information as t ,int but perhaps these words do not cover exactly what he meant, as sometimes happens. Perhaps he meant to say tha the shareholders had been canvassed. But m my horn friend (Mr. R. L. Borden) has asked me a precise question, I am bound to give him a precise answer. I am noaware of any other meeting.


Mr R D BORDEN.: My right hon. me-a JOT
stated that 1 was	lnt0 my requotations which I iut^di m&y dQ him n0
marks, and m ,, jjiS own course and injustice let me toUow m ow Ry ^
VS let	in passing	while niy
line last night.


Wilfrid Laurier: Sometimes.


Robert Laird Borden: X think that with a little practice he will soon have about nine-tenths quotation, and one-tenth his own speech.


Wilfrid Laurier: Perhaps the bad example has affected me.


Robert Laird Borden: I must say that I was a little surprised, that after we heard on this side of the House, that the right hon. gentleman was only going to make a few remarks, he came in with a carefully prepared speech, and spoke for nearly, an hour. He surpassed our expectations in that regard. But my rig-lit hon. friend was in very good form, and we were very glad indeed to hear him. My right hon. friend spoke first of great masters of debate, using quotation, and then he went on to state that I had used quotation, and that I had dropped into poetry. Here is the right hon. gentleman's language.
There is this difference, however, between my hon. friend (Mr. R. L. Borden) and these English masters of debate, that he did not quote from the classics, but from his own poetical effusions and perhaps it may be pleasing to him if I should read his verse. Here it is :


POETRY.
[Stage Direction]
To-morrow and to-morrow and to-morrow Creeps on this petty pace from day to day, And all our yesterdays have seen the route Unknown and .unsurveyed.
Well, Sir, my hon. friend assuredly reached a climax -when, in a grave discussion of this character, bristling with figures and intended to be serious, he so far relaxed as to introduce into this debate this effusion, of which in a moment of weakness, flirting with the spirit of the muse, he had become the guilty progenitor.
I must not take this compliment. Mr. Chairman. Let me refer my right hon. friend, who seems to be in doubt about this, to act 5, scene 5 of Macbeth-I dare say t:e may have heard of the author of that play.
Wilfrid Laurier: Oh, yes. I rm familiar with the quotation.


Robert Laird Borden: Well the right hon. gentleman did not seem to be so familiar with it last night, because lie attributed the quotation to me :
To-morow and to-morrow and to-morrow Creeps in this petty pace from day to day, To the last syllable of recorded time ;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death.
I changed seven words at the end, adapted them, and my right hon. friend gives me credit for the whole. Might I quote the passage further :
Out, out, brief caudle !
Life's but a walking shadow ; a poor player, That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more : it is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.


Wilfrid Laurier: Bay to Halifax by the Intercolonial at a good profit. There is no doubt about that. The figures are there a,nd I shall not go over them again. I gave them when I previously spoke on this subject. Therefore, if my right hon. friend is so solicitous, as he says he is, about the maritime ports of Canada, there is just one way to preserve the trade for those ports, and that is to extend the Intercolonial to the shores of Georgian Bay, and by that means absolutely control the traffic which will come from the west and be gathered at the shores of Georgian Bay by whatever railways may be there to reach out for it.
I have not very much more to say about the speech of my right hon. friend last night, because it was very fully and ably answered by my hon. friend from Pictou (Mr. Bell), but there is just one other matter to which I would like to refer, and that is the report of the proceedings at the meeting of the Grand Trunk Railway shareholders. My right hon. friend reproached us for having disclosed to this House a report of the proceedings at that meeting. I would like to know why these proceedings should not t(e disclosed ? Is there anything private about them ? Wer6 they not published in the newspapers? Has not the ' Railway News ' given a report of the meeting, which is, to all intents and purposes, the same as that which I quoted? Why does my right hon. friend say there is anything improper in disclosing these proceedings ? Was there anything secret about that meeting ? Was it intended that there should be anything transacted at it which the people of Canada ought not to know ? I do not understand the suggestion of my right hon. friend in that regard, and lest I should do him an injustice, let me quote his words
My hon. friend quoted from a private report of the meeting of the shareholders of the Grand Trunk Railway Company, but we had not come to the end of this debate before he himself recognized that in so doing he had taken a course which should not be followed in this House or in debate.
I recognized nothing of the kind. I say that we are entitled to have the proceedings of the meeting of the Grand Trunk Railway before this House. Their proceeding's have been published In the public press, and there is no possible reason that I am aware of why they should not be printed and distributed to the country.
But my right hon. friend also referred to another matter. He referred to the mem-* orandmn of Mr. Blair, to which some reference has been made in this House. Let me say a word or two on that point. It seems to me that my right hon. friend is much more sensitive on this subject than he was in times gone by. I recollect very well when he did not seem to be so particular. When it was the object of hon.


Robert Laird Borden: 
Mr. INGRAM.: That is not the way it s done.


Wilfrid Laurier: 
Wilfrid Laurier: Yes, Sir.
SPROULE. That is all the House 'bs f0r.
HAGGART. Where does the right tij ' Gentleman get his information that t0 1Papers were brought down in answer a motion for correspondence ?
5q


Wilfrid Laurier: I do not know how they could have been brought down otherwise.


Mr. HAGGART.: Not at all.


Wilfrid Laurier: I do not see how they could be brought down otherwise. If they were not brought down in answer to a resolution of the House, will the hon. gentleman tell me how they were brought down ?


John Graham Haggart: They were brought down by the Postmaster General off his own bat, without any request at all.


Andrew B. Ingram: Published in every Grit paper in the country.


Samuel Hughes: Pure malice aforethought.


Wilfrid Laurier: Here is the
reference :
Correspondence relating to certain mail contract, sessional papers of 1896.
I shall inquire further how they were brought down, but they were brought down as an official correspondence and were taken from the files which were in the department of the Postmaster General. It cannot be anything else. Wherever a motion for papers is made, it is always understood that those papers which are confidential are not to be brought down ; the papeis which are confidential to the minister alone are not put on file. Some of that correspondence is of a confidential nature, and 1 it is of a confidential nature to himself it is not put on file. It may happen that a confidential paper is of a public character and such a document must be put on file in order to have something like an intelligent record. Under such circumstances if an officer of the department places Private papers on the file because they relate to the matter in hand, then such papers become public property. I do not thin^ ]t would be possible to transact public busi ness otherwise, or to carry on the correspondence in any. other way than this. I believe the opposition would be the first to blame the government and to attack it it they did not bring down all the papers on [DOT] record in relation to the question for which papers were moved.


Robert Laird Borden: Does WrWjtlm friend (Sir Wilfrid Launer) say that tne bringing down of private, papers depends on the accident of their being put on file by an mo officer of the department .
r WILFRID LAURIER. I did not say , were placed there by accident. My friendP(Mr. Borden) will understand : although a letter is marked private it r be necessary to have it become ps i nublic record because if that letter is included, the record will not be com-

plete, the transaction will not be intelligible.
X assume that these papers were brought down upon a motion.


John Graham Haggart: No.


Wilfrid Laurier: If they were not brought down upon a motion, I snail have to correct myself. I assume they were brought down in the ordinary course or business and if I was wrong I shall have to say that I was in error. I shall look at the record however, as to how they were brought down.


Robert Laird Borden: I would like to ask what justification there was for their production if there was not an order for a return ?	'


Wilfrid Laurier: 
Robert Laird Borden: I would 1^e1t0coU-if there is not something further " iniiig sidered besides Mr. Blair and the re par-members of the government. Are	0wliament and the country interested m	0f
ing the exact causes and all the cau Mr. Blair's resignation ?


Wilfrid Laurier: 
Some hon. MEMBERS: No.


John Graham Haggart: Before you can accuse a person of being the receiver of stolen goods, you must first prove that the goods have been stolen. Nobody has charged that the document was stolen, except the Finance Minister. There are a hundred ways in which the leader of the opposition might have got it, and when he has it in his possession, he is the judge of his own honour, and he is the person to say whether the seal of 1 confidential ' should be removed or not. This is a document that it was in the public interests to publish ; it is a document that should be published. But the First Minister says that the ' tu quoque ' argument should not be applied. These gentlemen opposite are very fond of giving advice and lectures on the rules of propriety. It is so nice to think that such great authorities on honour are kind enough to draw attention to subjects of this kind. But let us look at some of their own little lapses. What do they think of the confidential documents that were published by the Postmaster General in his report ? The excuse of the First Minister is, that the House ordered these documents to be brought down, and that the Postmaster General had no option. AI-though this publication by the Postmaster General was undignified and dishonourable and in the worst possible taste, it was justified by the right hon. gentleman.
Now, as a matter of fact, these papers were published without a motion of the House to bring them down. Let us see what the Postmaster General himself says about it ? Here it is published in his report:
In explanation of the supplementary report, it may be proper to state the circumstances which call for, it.
That is all off his own bat.
Shortly after entering upon my duties as Postmaster General information reached me from persons who had tendered for mail services hut who had not been awarded the contracts to the effect that their lower tenders had been passed over, and the contracts awarded at higher prices, and I accordingly called uoon the officers of the department to produce and enter in a register all tenders so passed

over. This was accordingly done, when it appeared that tenders for 330 services had not been considered when the contracts were awarded, and in upwards of 100 instances the department, at the time of awarding the contracts, had received tenders to perform the services at lower rates than those at which the contracts had been awarded.
The Postmaster General goes on in that style, and he winds up tor the information of. parliament:
I heg to submit the foregoing statements and certain correspondence in connection with various contracts referred to, as a supplement to the Departmental Report for the fiscal year 1895-96.
These are the reasons which induced the Postmaster General to bring down letters marked ' private ' ; bearing the impress of privacy upon them, and addressed to myself and to Sir Adolphe Caron. I did not know that I had left one of them in the department. My instructions were that every private document and letter was to be taken off the file, and a memo, placed there instead. Here we have it announced that Mr. Ingram says that he recommends a postmaster for a certain place, and adds that he is a good friend of ours, and a strong supporter of his. Letters in that direction writen by Col. Tisdale and others were published, and they even went to the private file of the Deputy Minister, and his private copy book must have been ransacked for the purpose of publishing private letters which were addressed to the minister by different members of parliament. Not only that, but in the debate that took place, the right hon. gentleman who talks to the leader of the opposition about propriety, justified the course of his Postmaster General. And the Finance Minister, who has been reading a lecture to the leader of the opposition ; we all know what he did. A confidential memo, prepared for my colleagues containing an estimate, based on all the applications, no matter from whom, that had been made for subsidies for different railways and sent by me to council, was used openly in the House, and the statement was added, that I had submitted to my colleagues a certain estimate for financial requirements which was greatly in excess of that brought down by the Finance Minister himself. Not only did they make use of a private memo, which was prepared for council, but they justified it and falsified it too. I hope we will hear the last of this from such gentlemen. The correct principle is, that if a person is in possession of a document which appertains^ to the public interest, he can make it public without committing any impropriety, and the person in possession is the best judge of whether he ought to do it or not. The principle is well known, and it has been done a hundred times in England by ministers of the Crown. The responsibility is with the person who reads the document, without him being open Mr. HAGGART.
to the accusation of his being a thief 01 receiver of stolen goods.


Andrew B. Ingram: 
Some hon. MEMBERS: 
Ul OC Kf
[Stage Direction]
the Post Office Department - a y*- * ;he file, and when they come act blBit ite and confidential letter, to'	^ Tk
:o the House. I deny'that statem
prlT;
**705

[DOT]____

:
has never been done during the time I have been a member of this House, unless h may have been under an order of the fl°use that some member of the opposi-*ut obtained. If hon. gentlemen opposite ®ould take advantage of hon. gentlemen on *his side they were not very particular, so as they could serve the party interests, out I deny that any private letter written by a Conservative member to the Conservative -government was ever brought down to this Wouse during the time of that government. Ihey reserved to themselves the right to say Miether they would produce such a document or not. Now, I wish to call attention to *he debate which occurred the other day, "'lien the Finance Minister got livid and h'hite in the face with rage on account of Jhe hon. leader of the opposition submit-this memorandum to the House. But I expected that the ex-Minister of Rail-mays was going to speak on that occasion,
1 Would have referred to the very incident to J-lUch the exiMinister of Railways has re-;'eH'ed to-day. I was going to point out that llle Finance Minister himself was guilty of a Worse charge than the leader of the opposition. il have been long enough in .this Mouse to know that when hon. gentlemen °fiPosite howl about purity and morality, all that sort of thing, that is the time to veeP an eye on them.
Mr. CLANCY.: 
Wilfrid Laurier: 
Samuel Hughes: Not on a motion made in this House.


Wilfrid Laurier: 
Ireland ; which letter was read in the House of Commons by Mr. Hume and other members. The unauthorized publication of this letter was stigmatized as ' a most foul and scandalous breach of confidence.'
There can be no doubt that whatever passes between members of an administration in the conduct of the affiairs of government, is privileged and sacred, covered even by the oath of secrecy, which oath cannot be removed except with the sanction of the representative of the sovereign himself.


Robert Laird Borden: What difficulty would there have been in getting permission of the Crown to bring down this memorandum and make it a part of this correspondence ? The same permission of the Crown would have been granted with regard to this which was already granted with regard to the correspondence produced by Mr. Blair. But my right hon. friend, who is to-day so punctilious, has not given us any justification for the printing of the private correspondence of the Postmaster General of the late Conservative administration, which was ordered by his successor in the present government. Let us have my right hon. friend's views with regard to that, since we are going into the question of ethics. The reason my right hon. friend first gave why this correspondence was brought down was that the House had ordered it. I do not think that that would have justified the publishing of that correspondence in the eyes of my right hon. friend, if it had consisted of letters from his own followers, but it evidently was complete justification in his eyes when the correspondence was from hon. gentlemen on this side of the House. But the right hon. gentleman finds now that the correspondence was brought down by his honourable colleague the Postmaster General of his own motion-private and confidential correspondence. The only ground, therefore, which he offered to the House in extenuation of the conduct of his own colleague and himself, for he is equally responsible, is one which has now disappeared. If we are to have a discussion of the ethics of this matter, if we are to go into this question exhaustively so as to guide our conduct in the future, let us have some justification for this extraordinary conduct in 1897. Let my right hon. friend state his view of the action of the Postmaster General and his own on that occasion, when the Postmaster General brought down this secret and private correspondence.


Mr. SPROULE.: 
Mr. GEO. W. FOWME.: 
George William Fowler: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: His photograph


Mr FOWRER.: 
Robert Laird Borden: 
Some hon. MEMBERS: 1711
I do not want to minimize that, hut the fact that it was a confidential letter is mentioned as a reason why it was a great impropriety to publish it. Now I referred to at least thirty confidential letters, some of them written by one member of the cabinet to another. I think Dr. Montague was a member of the cabinet at the time he wrote to Sir Adolphe Caron, and I think one of the letters from Colonel Tisdale, was written to a member of the cabinet. Several of them were addressed to members of the cabinet, and they were all marked 'private' and ' confidential.' And the extraordinary course was taken of publishing a letter from the Hon. Thomas White, then eight years in his grave, a private and confidential letter written by that gentleman respecting a matter not of a very public nature, but more a matter of party patronage. We had the extraordinary course of having that letter published. Well, it would almost seem to me that political animus ought to stop at the grave at least, and that when the Hon. Thomas White had been dead eight years before this letter was found on the files of the department, even if the letters had to be published, that letter might at least have been excepted, because there could be no object in publishing it except to cast discredit upon his memory, and in that way incidentally to injure the Conservative party. I 'think Mr. White was regarded by my right hon. friend as a fair and generous opponent in his lifetime, and even if he were not so, one would think that after he had been eight years in the grave his private letters might have been spared. I would like to ask my right hon. friend in all sincerity to tell me what his opinion now, upon reflection, really is with regard to the publication of these letters, because if I am to receive instructions from him in what is right in public life, I certainly am at least entitled to know what his views are as to these confidential communications. I think I have a right to say this to my hon. friend across the House, and I think he will recognize it.


Wilfrid Laurier: 
Robert Laird Borden: 
Robert Laird Borden: 


Robert Laird Borden: * Just the latter part of it.


Wilfrid Laurier: It was purely metaphorical and in that way some latitude
111 Wittfregard to the reference which I made yesterday to the member for West Toronto T mav sav tbat I had no intention of saying anyUiing offensive to him. I applied to him an expression employed by Sir Walter Scott in a famous letter which was PuB^Bed in newspapers some few months ago. Su w ter Scott had been made a director of an assurance company, and lie wiote ithat b had found himself in the company moneyed men and owned men. I aPPBed that to the hon. member for Toronto (M . Osier) and it was far from my mind to say anything offensive to him or to any one else. If the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) has the good fortune to be a wealthy man tbat is not a crime or a fault. If i had any feeling in the matter, it would be rather one of envy than of anything es. I may err in matters of this kind, as m many others, but if I err my hon. friend (Mr. Boi-den) will not find me wailing if I am take to task for my errors.


William Humphrey Bennett: 
Mr. McCREARY.: Where did the hon. gentleman get the information that 1,300,000 bushels of corn were shipped from Duluth.


William Humphrey Bennett: Not from Duluth, but from Fort William. I will send the report of the Buffalo Chamber of Commerce to the boll, gentleman, and it contains the information.


Mr FITZPATRICK.: Where did the hon. gentleman find the report of the proceedings of the Grand Trunk Pacific shareholders, that this line is not to be built east to Moncton. I have the report here, and I cannot find the reference. *


William Humphrey Bennett: It says :
In the official memo. I read that the 500 miles


Charles Fitzpatrick: From whose speech are you quoting ?


William Humphrey Bennett: From Mr. Allen's letter.
In the official memorandum 1 read that the 500 miles, Quebec to North Bay, is probably premature.
It was evidently stated in this document that was handed to Mr. Allen, one of the directors of the Grand Trunk Pacific Company, that no construction of the road would be continued to Quebec, at least o the present.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Mr. Allen was not ai; the meeting at all.


William Humphrey Bennett: It was Mr. Allen's son, as I understand.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I have his words here ; will my bon. friend read them .


William Humphrey Bennett: 
Mr FITZPATRICK.: It is the gentleman who resigned, who is alleged to have made that statement.


William Humphrey Bennett: Yes, but be is quoting the exact words that appear in a document that was issued by tbe directors to tbe shareholders, and as I understand it, Mr. Allen was one of the directors.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Let me see that [DOT]document.


William Humphrey Bennett: I will hand it over.
Mr. McCarthy. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennett) stated, that a monster expenditure was being made by the Grand Trunk Railway Company at North Bay. Is he certain of that fact ? I was there on tSunday last and I saw a great lot of improvements being made, but I understood that they were being made by the Oandian Pacific Railway. Whether my information is correct or not, it can easily be ascertained who is making the expenditure. I believe, however, that at present it is being made entirely by the Canadian Pacific Railway, as the place is used as a terminal point by the Grand Trunk.


William Humphrey Bennett: I have not been to North Bay for about a year, but I have repeatedly heard from people who have been there that large improvements are being made, and I assumed that they were being made by the Grand Trunk Railway Company. But there is no doubt that they have been doing work there, which shows quite plainly that they intend to carry an immense quantity of grain over that line to Montreal and from Montreal to Portland, as they have done in the past.


Robert Laird Borden: That report, to which reference has just been made, has been criticised more or less on the other side of the House, and more than one hon. gentleman, from ministers of the Crown down, have cast discredit on its genuineness. One hon. gentleman went so far as to call it a fake report, and to allege that it was a mere pretense to say that a reporter had been at that meeting ; and he practically charged gentlemen on this side of the House with having produced as a genuine report of that meeting a document which they knew was not a genuine report. Under these circumstances, I think I shall have to ask the ministers of the Crown who are present, or whomsoever is leading the House, to say whether or not they persist in that assertion, or whether they regard that as a fair and genuine report of the meeting. Because, if not, 1 must have a report from an unbiased source spread on the pages of ' Hansard,' in order that there may be no doubt about it.


Charles Fitzpatrick: So far as I am con cerned, I know nothing of the report in question. I have never challenged it or referred to it in any way. But the report of the meeting of shareholders does not bear *out the statement that it was not the intention of the company to proceed further than North Bay. Mr. Allen is reported in Mr. BENNETT.
f
this document to have said, in a rather bazf way, speaking of the disbursements :
This may mean an additional heavy Now, what is there to pay this ? In an om memorandum I read that the 500 miles U to North Bay-1 is probably premature c that the 1,000 miles from North Bay to ' is not throughout the country.'	_
Hon. gentlemen may make what they 9^. out of that; I cannot make much or but I do not find in it any justification the statement made by my hon. friend.


William Humphrey Bennett: Perhaps I did not T&* myself plain. I understand that Mr. AJ * senior, was a director of the old UIYad Trunk Railway Company, and that lev received a circular as a member of tbe d ^ and that in that circular, in order to a; A the feeling of opposition that existed this proposition, it was stated, among things, that the question of construct from Quebec to North Bay is probably V mature.	...


Charles Fitzpatrick: My hon. friend admit that that is a mere assumption oi ., part. It is not in the document. ina my point.


William Humphrey Bennett: I can only say that i . marked as a question from the circu * and I infer that that was the case 1 ^ certain remarks which dropped from n s. gentlemen in this House during the di* sion.


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: 
William Humphrey Bennett: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: 
William Humphrey Bennett: 
Mr FITZPATRICK.: It is true that lira in' was carried last season to Quebec from Duluth for three and a half cents a bushel but the result was that the company which carried that grain became practically insolvent last autumn and has gone out of business. That company was the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Transportation Company. It has removed all its business to Montreal, and the reason it carried that grain to Quebec at that figure was because it carried that freight merely as a makeshift all the way down. What it really came down from Duluth for was to g pulp wood at Quebec, and carry it back to the1 mills at Niagara. That is the reason whv it carried the grain at this low freight last year I do not pretend to be an expert on freight traffic or transportation, but there-are certain geographical conditions which everyone can take into account. When we compare an all-water route with a mixed rail Pand water route, there are questions which experts on traffic arrangements alone can decide. I cannot put myself up as an [DOT] authority against my hon. frle"d' makes the very emphatic assertion that grain cannot be carried by an all-rail route Is against a mixed rail and water route but? can put against him the authority of Sir Sandford Fleming, who says that it ca be done.


William Humphrey Bennett: Do I understand my horn friend to say that grain can be earned from
Halifax to Winnipeg at a less rate tha have mentioned ?


Mr FITZPATRICK.: My hon. friend must' not endeavour to obscure the issue. The question is as to whether an a 1-rail route can compete against a mixed rail anc water route, and Sir Sandford Fleming says that a mixed rail and water route is at a disadvantage as compared route. Let me endeavour to illustrate this to my hon. friend. Assuming that th s line will be built from Winnipeg to Quebec, my hon. friend says that the grain l b brought down to North Bay and go from North Bay to Portlanffi i W nations against there aie S^og P Bay tQ QUebec py the that. i Dom . k Railway route is 657 PT? Fram North Bay north to where ml1	r Jr, will be made with the proposed
as
St "S eu? rs?
Grand Trunk Pacific, the distance is oOO

miles, so that you will have an advantage by this proposed line of almost 300 miles of direct communication compared with the route by the way of North Bay over the Grand Trunk Railway to Quebec. I have this on the authority of gentlemen connected with the Grand Trunk Railway, and if my hon. friend wants to verify it, all he need do is look at the time table of the Grand Trunk Railway. If my figures are accurate, the advantage is with the projected line of the Grand Trunk Pacific, because it is the shortest. In so far as water-borne traffic is concerned, it is possible my hon. friend is right when he says that the line from Winnipeg to Port Arthur will carry a large amount of freight and from Port Arthur to Midland. If I would care to express a personal opinion, I would say that the line from Winnipeg to Port Arthur, from Port Arthur to Midland and from Midland to Montreal, is the route that would be commercially preferable in the season of navigation. But the other question remains. What is to become of the freight that has to be carried during the winter months ? If you have a short line from Winnipeg to Quebec, why not utilize it ? If a train will go by way of North Bay, what is the objection to giving the line from Quebec to Moncton a fair opportunity to compete with Portland ? That is all we ask. We have no desire to compete with the Ontario ports.


George William Fowler: Is there any difference in the distance between Quebec and Halifax or Quebec and St. John or between Quebec and Portland ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Very slight. I speak from memory, and I must say perhaps that my memory is not very good. But the line from Quebec to Portland is 311 miles.


Robert Laird Borden: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: There are two lines which might be taken, and I think my hon. friend has in mind the line to Richmond.


Robert Laird Borden: Yes.


Charles Fitzpatrick: And then around by Richmond down to Portland, but there is another route by the valley of the Chaud-i&re and out by the Maine Central, which would shorten the distance some six miles. I think that the distance to St. John is a very little greater than that. It is provided by the contract that where the grain is not routed it must go by Canadian ports. My hon. friend said a moment ago that there is no provision which will force grain over this route. Of course there is not. No express provision could be made which would force a shipper to close a particular route, Why should we try to do it ? After all, we must bear in mind that every farthing added to the cost of transportation comes out of the pockets of the farmers of the Northwest. What we want to do is to create facilities Mr. FITZPATRICK.
such as will enable Canadian ports to c pete on equal terms with American P01 ' and we have provided for that by creaj;ate geographical conditions which will in favour of Canadian ports. We have serted, therefore, in this contract a cl' to the effect that when grain is not rou ^ then the carrier will be obliged to bring [DOT] to Canadian ports. What more can we ._ If the shipper is silent, then it is the o gation of the carrier to carry the * through to a Canadian port.


William Humphrey Bennett: Does that ever happen/


Charles Fitzpatrick: That is the obb, gation of the carrier, and it will be the a. of this government, whether it be in hands of Liberals or Conservatives, to that that obligation is carried out.


Edward Cochrane: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Edward Cochrane: 
An hon. MEMBER.: No, you are W Mr. COCHRANE. Some think that bodv is right but themselves.


Mahlon K. Cowan: That is yourself.


Edward Cochrane: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: 
William Humphrey Bennett: 
Mr BENNETT.: Of course we all have
",.eat admiration for Sir Sandford Flemings ability- But, as against what he says lot me mention one fact in modern transmutation Now, I believe the railways muth of Lake Erie are as perfect as money will make them. They have been constructed for quick carrying and also with a view to carrying cheaply. Yet, the reports of the Buffalo Board of Trade show that every tear grain is brought by rail to Toledo, and there it is taken from the cars, placed in vessels and taken to Buffalo, where it is elevated, transferred to the cars and so taken to New York. Now, I do not know the exact mileage from Toledo to Buffalo, but I should think it would be not more than 200 miles-probably not more than 150 miles. If there are such advantages in handling grain by rajl, how is it that the grain is handled twice in order to make this trip of 150 or 200 miles by water ? last year no less than 5,000,000 bushels of gmfn were received at Buffalo from Toledo. The men in Toledo who owned the grain must have found it to their advantage to send it by this rail and water route.
Mr MCCARTHY- How much of that would he circulated for consumption in New York state ?


William Humphrey Bennett: That is easily answered If it were intended for consumption in' New York state why would they not take it through in the cars froni Toledo to its destination ? Apparently, however, this grain was for export.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I do not think that ends the controversy. Let me state another fact for the benefit of my hon. friend (Mr. Bennett) If this all-water route is so abitv of Sir Thomas Shaughnessy were car ried from Port Arthur and Fort William to Buffalo, there to be put on cars, though you have the magnificent stretches of ^the St. Lawrence to carry it to Montieal .


Mr BENNETT.: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: How about Montreal and the intervening distance .
Yf.. RENNETT. When the grain reaches the head of Lake Superior at Fort William or Port Arthur, there is the option given, theAmerican carrier may go on and take it
to Buffalo, or the Canadian carrier m|Y come
in and take it to some pointsion the Georgian rpLci4- tbP reason tlie Liana J-LLUm

172S
were not able to compete by the all-rail, route, and they were obliged, I suppose regretfully, to hand it over to the American vessel carrier who took it on down to Buffalo.


Robert Laird Borden: What does the Minister of Justice understand by the northern route to which Sir Sandford Fleming refers ?
A railway built on the northern route would be the shortest line between the two oceans.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Along the TransCanadian route, which would be practically, so far as the country north of North Bay is concerned, the same as the Grand Trunk. Pacific. The point in dispute was as between an all-rail route and a mixed rail and water route.


Robert Laird Borden: Not at all, my hon. friend is absolutely mistaken. I will read on and see what Sir Sandford Fleming says :
A railway built on the northern route


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes. I refer the speech of the member for West t te(j (Mr. Osier), and to the cheers which *
it.	a


Mr.  R. L.@: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes I was.
and


Robert Laird Borden: 
Mr. BROCK.: By way of Halifax.[DOT]	, c0*


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: That has r existin| to existing conditions, that un<1<lry conditions the company cannot .CcomPetir,s
from Montreal to Halifax in
with Portland. That is what I said-not fair to misrepresent me.	.
It

J


Robert Laird Borden: Let me see if I am bbsrepresenting my hon. friend.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I am entitled to the Page of the reference the hon. gentleman is reading. I want to see what my statement Was.


Mr.   R.@: l. BORDEN. I am reading from the reference before me, I will send out to room and get the page of the reference.
1 will show my hon. friend that it is literally correct. Does he know how far it is from Quebec to Halifax by these lines which he is advocating ? Does he know at this moment ?
. Mr. FITZPATRICK. Is St. John in the
interval ?


Robert Laird Borden: 
Mr. FIELDING.: No doubt they would make bi)0/6 money by carrying the traffic to Portland, it do not intend to permit them to carry


Robert Laird Borden: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: I do not know it.


Mr R L BORDEN.: He ought to know it if he does not. The Grand Trunk Railway is not a party to this contract, and therefore is not bound by any stipulations in it, and the Minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick) ought to know that. It was argued out here at great length last year. How is it possible that the Grand Trunk can be bound by any stipulation in the contract to which it is not asked to be a party ? I would like to ask the Minister of Justice that. How can he ivAtend that any action or proceeding can le takeu against the Grand Trunk Railway mon a contract to which it is not a paity. t is not the Grand Trunk Pacific that will >e carrying freight from Quebec to Poit-md but the Grand Trunk Railway, and that :ompany is not bound by any stipulation in hS contract, although last year we urged iver and over again, and moved resolutions n this House asking that the company bould have imposed upon it all the stipula-ons imposed in this contract upon the Grand Crunk Pacific. These resolutions were not i ted by the Minister of Justice uur. Sitrickj, who was leading the House on wPside with regard to that particular assert of the case. We argued the matter over nd over- again, and I have not previously
leard any hon. gentleman on the oppos^ fide take such a position as that which m#
ion friend seems Inclined to take to nigm
IS llOt U. ptilty.	[DOT]>
. Pnnafla eVGTl
Tivp to the maritime ports or oanaua eve
the feeble protection which would be conferred by the stipulations of this contract, he Should have made these stipulations Mndin- not upon the Grand Trunk Pacific inlv, but upon the Grand Trunk Railway as well. The reference which I save is to found at page 9014 of 'Hansard of last
year.	.
Aii* Tv FAIP I would like to ask the Min Mi. KEMP. i seriously contends now ister of Justice if be senous y	.
that grain can be carried to Quebec by
route in the summer tinm as^cne	^
can be carried ttbe	water route
Montreal or at QueDec >'.y or water and rail loute .



necessary to add to the number.. I will, however, make .a few statments of facts. At the present time the Canadian Pacific -Railway carry grain from Winnipeg to Port Arthur. They have a line from Port Arthur to Montreal, but I have it on the authority of the president of the Canadian Pacific Railway that last year, notwithstanding the fact that there is direct water communication between Port Arthur and Montreal, 15,000,000 bushels of grain were carried from Port Arthur to Buffalo and from Buffalo by rail to New York. That is a fact. If the water rate is so cheap, I would like to know why the grain did not go direct to Montreal. That is the first question I would submit. The second is the expert opinion of Sir Sand-ford Fleming, who says :
An all-rail route can compete on advantageous terms with a water and rail route.
Now, I do not give my opinion as against the expert opinion of the hon. gentleman from Bast Toronto (Mr. Kemp), but I put against it the expert opinion of Sir Sandford Fleming, and leave the people of Canada to judge between them-. I do not put my opinion against his.


Mr. KEMP.: I do not claim to be an expert, because I am not; I do not ship any grain. I merely judge from such things as , the Minister of Justice would form his opinion from. In' respect to the shipments of grain by the Canadian Pacific Railway via Fort William and Port Arthur, I may say that all of this was carefully gone into last year. There were about 15,000,000 bushels shipped from that point, but I think if the Minister of Justice looks more carefully'he will find that part of that grain went to Ontario points for milling purposes and part to St. John.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Not one bushel of that went by Canadian ports.


Albert Edward Kemp: I have very full information on that subject, and I have no information at all with reference to any grain shipped from Port Arthur to Buffalo. I think the Minister of Justice will find he is mistaken, as this was discussed last year.


Charles Fitzpatrick: It could not be discussed last year, as these were last year's shipments.


Albert Edward Kemp: The grain that went to Port Arthur in the winter went partly to St. John and partly to Ontario points for milling purposes.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Sir Sandford Fleming says :
Dqes not a large bulk of Manitoba grain now find its way through the United States to be shipped from United States seaports ?
That is clear, is it not 7


Albert Edward Kemp: That is clear enough.


Charles Fitzpatrick: 


Charles Fitzpatrick: He continues :
According to reliable authority, six, ten million bushels a year have been so Sir Thomas Shaughnessy stated to few weeks ago that last -15 million bushels and it
ped
Canadian Club a few weeks ago that last J early 15 million bushels and i; be expected that this transfer from Canau^^
it reached nearly
to United States channels will go on increasir with the increase in the total yield. ,
There is no question about that, it is in ' summer time.


Albert Edward Kemp: 
Albert Edward Kemp: I cannot see that Sir San ford Fleming states anything of the kin *


Charles Fitzpatrick: My hon. friend &a better read it again.
that concin'
dfoi'd


Albert Edward Kemp: 
Robert Laird Borden: Let me see the book.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Oh, yes, you can find it all there.


Robert Laird Borden: The Minister of Justice seems a little excited.


Mr FITZPATRICK.: Not at all. When the hon. gentleman tells us that we oug to know this, and we ought to know that and we ought to know the other thing , it is time for some of us to think that w know a little of something-not very much, but a little.
Mr R L, BORDEN. The Minister of Justice said that the terms of this contract were binding on the Grand Trunk Railway Company.


Mr FITZPATRICK.: I never said anything of the sort; except in so fai as the guarantee is concerned.


Robert Laird Borden: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: I don't admit a y-thing of the sort.


Robert Laird Borden: My bon. friend does not admit that 7


Mr FITZPATRICK.: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: No, but there is on the Grand Trunk Pacific.


Robert Laird Borden: Oh, yes, there is on the Grand Trunk Pacific, and I had always supposed that it was the Grand Trunk Railway Company that ran from Quebec to Portland.
Mr, FITZPATRICK My hon. friend is supposing things that are not in the contract.


Robert Laird Borden: Am I ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, you are.


Robert Laird Borden: Oh, indeed ; the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company then, is to run from Quebec to Portland ; that is my hon. friend's position ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: That's nonsense.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know what he means ; I am trying to understand my hon. friend ; I suppose it must be my fault.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I am sure it is.


Robert Laird Borden: The Minister of Justice is good enough to compliment himself ; no one else is doing so at present. I repeat, that there is not one line or one stipulation in that contract which prevents the Grand Trunk Railway Company from taking that freight at Quebec, and carrying it to Portland. And if the Minister of Justice can point to one line or stipulation in that contract which does prevent that, I will pause and give him an opportunity to do so. He knows he cannot do it; he knows that the Grand Trunk Railway Company is not a party to that contract, and that it is at perfect liberty to take every pound of that freight, and carry it to Portland, and he himself has stated in the passage to which I refer-I will read it again.
.How can you get out from Montreal in winter except by way of Portland or Boston or New York ?


William Rees Brock: By way of Halifax.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Haliftx competing with Portland ? It is double the distance practically.


William Rees Brock: What is the use of talikng ?


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: What is the use of talking ? Can we shut our eyes, to geography ? Can we shut our eyes to facts ? How much of the trade of Montreal has gone to Halifax ? How much grain has gone from Montreal to Halifax or to St. John ? How much of our food products have gone that way ? Invariably they have gone to Portland or to Boston or to New York. As Portland is to the Grand Trunk Railway so Boston is going to be to the Canadian Pacific Railway.
In that passage the Minister of Justice seems to entirely ignore the maritime ports.
I have been trying to urge upon this government that if there is any value in these


Robert Laird Borden: stipulations, which were paraded before t country as the acme of statemanship, up , which the right hon. gentleman relied a as to which he has not been able to & any better explanation than has been gw by the Minister of Justice to-nightI endeavoured to point out over and o again that if these stipulations are to * of any service at all, we must make tn binding on the Grand Trunk Railway Co pany. The government, for some rea-known to itself, absolutely refuses to ^ that; it prefers for some reason which one can comprehend, that the Grand -pi' Railway Company shall be at perfect lib ^ to carry this freight to Portland insteaa g to Canadian maritime ports. And tu _ hon. gentlemen opposite from my own V vince, and from New Brunswick, who 0f so solicitous with regard to the interests our maritime ports, stand up and _,er against any amendment which we 0 Ja, for the purpose of inserting these stl?aVe tions in the contract. And then, they b"ge the inconsistency to stand up in the U ~ and pretend before the country, that opposition is not prepared to do justice to ,g ports in the maritime provinces. Ther only one effective way of controlling sending of the western products tbrou* our Canadian maritime ports, and ^aX,e0tg-extend the Intercolonial Railway to G ^at ian Bay, where it can get a share of gf traffic. My hon. friend the Ministe . j Justice knows that as well as I do; my hon. friend the Prime Minister knows as well as I do


Wilfrid Laurier: No.


Robert Laird Borden: 
Robert Laird Borden: Quite so, and when the Grand Trunk Pacific has carried the freight to Port Arthur, it has performed everything that it is required to perform under the contract.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The words of the contract are ' a Canadian ocean port.'


Robert Laird Borden: The Minister of Finance did not say a Canadian ocean port, he said a Canadian port. Quebec happens to be closed during part of the year, and the freight must be carried somewhere else. The point I am making is that the Grand Trunk will be at liberty to carry it to Portland. However, I am quite willing to act on the suggestion of my right hon. friend. We cannot move amendments to this resolution in committee, because it is a single resolution relating to the whole contract. We can move amendments by and by, when the Bill is in Committee of the Whole.


Mr. LOGAN.: May I ask the hon. leader of the opposition a question ? Suppose a car of grain came from the west in winter time unrouted by the Grand Trunk Pacific, the railway being built into the maritime provinces. Does he say that that car of grain could be handed over by the Grand Trunk Pacific at Quebec to the Grand Trunk Railway to be taken to Portland without violating any part of the contract 1


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know what my hon. friend means by unrouted. I do not see how a carload of grain can be carried on the Grand Trunk Pacific and be unrouted.


Hance James Logan: Uurouted by the shipper. Suppose it were shipped to Liverpool.


Robert Laird Borden: If it were shipped . Liverpool, it would be routed. I do not now what my hon. friend means. Will ^	himssplf olear ?


Hance James Logan: I will try to make myself fiear. If a car of grain were shipped from the west to Liverpool, and it were carried to Quebec by the Grand Tru.uk Pacific, does the hon. gentleman say that the Grand Trunk Pacific could hand that -ar of grain to the Grand Trunk Railway .o be carried to Portland without violating my part of their contract ?


Robert Laird Borden: Well, that is a -ather remarkable question. If it be routed, t must be routed by some particular line, [f it were routed by the Giand Tiunk ic to Moncton or Halifax, it would have to rQ that way. If it were routed to Liver-fj by the Grand Trunk going to Portland, it would go that way.


Air FIELDING.: Suppose a car of grain s committed to the Grand Trunk Pacific
rnivf moists
at any point in the west on a through Bill to Liverpool, but not specifically routed, does my hon. friend claim that the Grand Trunk Pacific Company could send that carload of grain over the Grand Trunk line to Portland without violating their contract ?


Mr.   R.@: [DOT] L. BORDEN. I do not understand that that is the practice. I understand that the line is always designated. If not, I would ask my hon. friend to give me some proof of that. If it were routed by the Grand Trunk Pacific, and there were no other stipulation in the Bill of lading, I would say that the Grand Trunk Pacific would very likely be found to carry it to Moncton or St. John or Halifax. That is not the point I am making at present. What I say is that the Grand Trunk can always control the traffic, and see that it is routed to Quebec, and that when it is delivered there it shall be handled over to the Grand Trunk, which can carry it to Portland without violating any provision of this contract.


William Stevens Fielding: I differ from the hon. gentleman's statement that the Grand Trunk can control the traffic. The traffic can be controlled by the shipper of the grain. It is his right to ship it by any route he chooses, and we cannot deprive him of that right. No legislation we can devise could interfere with his right in that respect. If a man at AVinnipeg says, I want my grain to go by Portland, his decision must be respected. But, if he does not specify the route, then the Grand Trunk Pacific is obliged to carry it over Canadian soil to a Canadian ocean port.


Robert Laird Borden: I say that the Grand Trunk Railway, controlling as it does the policy of the Grand Trunk Pacific, can so manage that the grain will be routed to Quebec ; and when it is once routed to Quebec, the Grand Trunk Railway can take possession of it there and carry it to Portland in spite of any stipulation in the contract.


William Stevens Fielding: 
Robert Laird Borden: And when 8 ap(i that these important, comprehend ^ po effective words should be made bino ^ tp only on the Grand Trunk Pacific, b frieL Grand Trunk Railway itself, my h, '^a t*3 stood up in this House and voted amendment.	rhe&e
scbest-


William Stevens Fielding: Because this\- ^
contemplates traffic originating uj 0f
. - 


James Clancy: What does that mean ?


William Stevens Fielding: 
Mr CLANCY.: Does the hon. minister say that ' after the traffic reaches Winnipeg the Grand Trufik will not follow their own interest and offer better inducements for the traffic to go to Portland ?


Mr FIELDING.: The shipper must have absolute control over his own products, and no legislation that this House can devise can or should interfere with his right to ship it as he pleases. We do not profess to interfere with the rights of the shipper. So far as the Grand Trunk Pacific is concerned, which company will have possession of the trade, receiving it in the west, it can not make any arrangement to divert that traffic from Canadian ports without violating the conditions of this contract.


Mr CLANCY.: And the Grand Trunk, though it does not nominally go into the west, will control this freight from the very day it is taken.


William Stevens Fielding: No, the Grand Trunk Pacific.


James Clancy: If my hon. friend will wait a moment he will understand what I am saving. The traffic will be controlled m name by the Grand Trunk Pacific, in fact bv the Grand Trunk. This will be the ease from the first day an officer is placed in the west. Now, does the minister think >t will be a matter of business, according to evervdav practice, for the Grand Trunk Railway, controlling this traffic, to send it in a way that would not be advantageous to themselves ? If it can be done this traffic will be diverted to Grand Tiunk lines.


William Stevens Fielding: I say it cannot be done.


Mr OLANGY.: I will not ask the hon. minister to assent to that. But wherever they can do it, they will seek to draw the freight over their own line. The hon. minister will admit that ?


William Stevens Fielding: It is a selfish world, 1 will admit.


James Clancy: to take the traffic to their own terminals. They are not going to spend money to carry it further than is necessary. Now. tins instance from Quebec to St. John is 4S9 miles. From Quebec to Portland it is only 316 miles. Does the hon. gentleman pretend to say that the Grand Trunk and the Grand Trunk Pacific together will not send the traffic to Portland, rather than to St. John ? It is absurd, it seems to me, to argue that such a thing could take place in business ; and it does not and will not. As the hon. gentlemen knows, if there were no Grand Trunk Railway terminals in the city of Portland, the hon. gentleman might say: We have nothing to do with binding the Grand Trunk. But the Grand Trunk is a railway with its terminals in the city of Portland. And it is a railway at the city of Quebec ready to take that traffic. And they have all the advantage of the shorter lines as a means of competing, and, if their competition is successful they can carry the traffic to Portland. They are not going to carry a pound of freight to St. John if it costs them more to take it there than it costs to take it to Portland. It is pointed out to me by an hon. friend that the Grand Trunk Railway controls the policy of the Grand Trunk Pacific. That is perfectly clear. And, of course, the Grand Trunk will control that policy to the benefit of the Grand Trunk, and not to the benefit of the country. Very often the interest of the Grand Trunk and the interest of the country are at variance. The hon. gentleman knows that arises every day. And the hon. gentleman says, in effect, that in this case men will act differently from the way they act in every day affairs. Is not that a strange position to take ? If the hon. gentleman could point out that, by the construction of this road and by entering into this partnership, there is greater reason than already exists why Canadian products should be carried to Canadian ports, I could understand that. Does the hon. gentleman pretend to tell us that he has overcome this difficulty of going to Portland because the city of Quebec is eighteen or nineteen miles further from Portland than the city of Montreal-does he mean to say that that is a factor in railway traffic and will induce the Grand Trunk to send the freight to St. Johu any more than they did before ?	.


William Stevens Fielding: I think the contract contains every provision to that end.


James Clancy: But I ask, apart from the contract. Is there any inducement ? Is there any substantial difference whether freight is landed in Quebec or Montreal as determining whether it will go to Portland or St. John ?


William Stevens Fielding: I am afraid I do not understand my hon. friend.


James Clancy: 


James Clancy: 
William Stevens Fielding: 
James Clancy: 
Mr. HE  YD@: Won't self-interest bind them?
1111. BENNETT. It bound them to send **900,000 bushels last year to ' Buffalo.
, Hr. CHANCY. I will answer the hon. gen hernau in the words of the Finance Minis-I?1'- He says the Grand Trunk is in and of ... ! Grand Trunk Pacific, that the Grand ^'l>uk and the Grand Trunk Pacific are ,lle and the same thing-the same reddled boy.


Mr. HEYD.: 
Charles Bernhard Heyd: 
Some hon. MEMBERS: No.


William Stevens Fielding: 
Mr. POPE.: When you try to bind us all you get ' nos.'


Mr FIELDING.: I -am not binding my hnn friend ; it was the hon. membei for Fast Hastings (Mr. Northrop) who was r l.lto I was lectured by the hon. member ^for Hamilton (Mrf. Barker) because when some things were said by hon. members I did not get up and quarrel with them, but hon. gentiemen sat in their seats
while the hon. member foi Hastings (M.r Northrop)


Rufus Henry Pope: I did not.


William Stevens Fielding: I do not know about the hon. member for Compton (Mu Pope),
but scores of them sat in	Hastings
applauded the hon. member foi Hastings
(Mr. Nertlirup).


Mr FOWLER.: We would generally be out if we followed your example.


Mr FIELDING.: I go out of work.


An hon. MEMBER.: We get good evidence


William Stevens Fielding: I give good evidence of it


Mr. TARTE.: You do not give it away.


William Stevens Fielding: I do not give it away, that is quite true. The hon. member for East Hastings (Mr. Northrup) was quoting a speech of Sir Rivers-Wilson which has frequently been referred to. Sir Rivers-Wilson had made some reference to the opposition which the Grand Trunk project had encountered in this House, and after quoting from that speech the hon. member (Mr. Northrup) proceeded :
And encountered from whom ? Not from His Majesty's loyal opposition, for we always to a man have been in favour of the original proposition of the Graind Trunk Company.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Read on.
Mr. FIELDING (reading)-
All the difficulties, all the trouble of which he complains, and to which he refers the premier, and on the successful overcoming of which he congratulates him, every one of these troubles and difficulties came from the colleagues of the Prime Minister in his government, from his supporters in the caucus, from his followers in this House, and not from the members of the opposition.
We are told at one stage of this discussion that the government have given to the Grand Trunk everything they want : all they have to do is to ask something and they get it. Then a member like the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) spends half an hour in proving that the Grand Trunk Railway Company wanted something different and that this government forced upon them a scheme that they did not want at all. How you are going to reconcile these two views is not clear to me. I continue to quote :
We never had a chance to express our views on this point, any further than to announce that we were in favour then, as we now are

Of course that was three or four days ago, and we must make allowances for changes.
-of a Grand Trunk lihe from North Bay to the Pacific, as the Grand Trunk itself wished.
Think of the action of my hon. friend from King's (Mr. Fowler) who before the Railway Committee of this House badgered the Grand Trunk day by day and said that on no condition should they be allowed to have that scheme as they wished, but we are told by the member for East Hastings (Mr. Northrup) that the opposition to a man, every one of them, including the hon. member for King's (Mr. Fowler), including the member for Compton (Mr. Pope), including them all to a man, were in favour of the original scheme of the Grand Trunk Railway.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Read on.


William Stevens Fielding: 
William Forsythe McCreary: 
Mr. NORTHRUP.: 
James Clancy: Where is the hon- Se man's comfort in that ?	. jg


William Stevens Fielding: My comfort in ^ in a fact that when that passage occ .. this blouse, we had not the ' no, n0' ve got to-night when hon. gentlemen '* g not this pressed home to them, tt g a ' no, no,' it was ' yes, yes.' Tbei elDbef storm of applause, and the	hon.	ajjze<J
for East Hastings (Mr. Northrup!	pis
that the applause was a confirm*10 utterance for he proceeded :	(Jjr.


William Barton Northrup: 
Mr. LEFURGEY.: 
William Humphrey Bennett: What is the colour o lLe ink ?


Mr LEFURGEY.: 
Wilfrid Laurier: That is against the rules.


William Stevens Fielding: I have been refused th privilege.


William Humphrey Bennett: 
William Humphrey Bennett: The printing houses are
all burnt up.
. t FFTTRGEY. I am glad that some
"sssrjs'si"
The ordinary halt '	h^lfaTthe
the proprietors of th s ra fgd Maroil gth,
OB ' president in the cha.r.


Mr FIELDING.: Has my hon friend got the name of the hotel correctly ?


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I think so.


William Stevens Fielding: Our report is defferent, we have another hotel.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Was it not the Terminus Hotel ?


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: The President-Mr. Norman will now read the notice convening the meeting.
The Secretary (Mr. H. H. Norman) read the notice accordingly.
The President (who was received with applause)-Lajlies and gentlemen, it has been our agreeable duty at many general meetings to report that the operation of each half-year show. ed an augmentation of the prosperity of the company. Our report upon the half-year, terminating 31st December last, proves to be no exception, for we can again say that the revenue and profits are in excess of those of any previous year. (Applause.) I trust that you will not allow the satisfaction you must naturally feel at such a result to be diminished by the inauspicious opening of the year 1904. The large falling away of the revenue during the last two months is solely attributable to the extraordinary severity of the weather which has prevailed both in Canada and the United States, in Canada with a continuity hardly ever known within the memory of man. A state of things so abnormal and transitory affords not the least reason for the discouragement which it seems to have caused to some shareholders. (Applause.)


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 
William Stevens Fielding: 
Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 
Wilfrid Laurier: My hon. friend s a very poor reader.
, Mr. CLARKE. I would suggest that the 10>i. gentleman might commence again.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Wilfrid Laurier: I rise to a ')0,nt of order. I insist that the report be by the reporters, and my hon. friend
hst read so that they can hear him.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 
Stfir WILFRID LATJRIER.: 
Mr FIELDING.: My hon. friend may not have'meant to, but I can assure him he skipped some.


Mr LEFURGEY.: I beg the Finance Minister's pardon. I have read all that is on this page so far. Perhaps my hon friend is measuring me by his own bushel-by what he would do under similar circumstances.


William Stevens Fielding: Yes, I would skip the whole of it.


Wilfrid Laurier: I will insist on the report being taken down as my hon. friend reads it, and no correction will be allowed unless the reporters say it is what they heard ; but they will not be allowed to copy from that book.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: The right hon. Prime Minister is rather arbitrary.


Wilfrid Laurier: That is the rule.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: We are allowed to make corrections In ' Hansard.'


Wilfrid Laurier: Not to that extent. If anything in the report is found to be incorrect, the speaker can change a word here and there to make his meaning clear ; hut my hon. friend knows that it is one of the rules of the House that the reporters are not allowed to insert in the report anything that they do not hear, and I will insist on that rule being observed.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: The reporter is paying attention to this.


George William Fowler: I rise to a point of order. It seems to me that the right hon. the First Minister cannot be stating the rule correctly when he says that there can be no correction of a quotation simply because the reporter might not happen to hear it. As the hon. member says, he is reading every word, and should the reporter not happen to hear some sentence, does the right hon. gentleman say that a correction cannot be made ?


Wilfrid Laurier: The reporter knows his duty, and I expect him to do it.


George William Fowler: The right hon. gentleman raised a point of order, and I expect you, Mr. Chairman, to decide it.


James Clancy: It seems to me that the First Minister is laying down a new rule. I have noticed that when hon. gentlemen read extracts the reporters follow them closely, but as a matter of convenience to them, and in order that there may be no mistake, they are allowed to s,ee the original. But my right lion, friend is now laying down the rule that the reporter is not to see the original at all.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER The reporter
knows his duty, and I do not want to dictate to him.


James Clancy: Then the right hon. igentleman should not have seen fit to dictate to him.	. .


Mr LEFURGEY.: 
Mr. SCOTT.: The hon. gentleman is reading the statement at a faster rate than it is possible for any stenographer to follow, and I rise to a point of order.


Archibald Campbell: I am afraid that is not a point of order.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 
Mr BRODEUR.: Do I understand that thS words do not appear in that hon. gentleman's copy which appears in the cop. which I have in my hands
A VOICE.-I hope it is now.
-are these words included, or not ?


Mr LEFURGEY.: I think it was pointed out to the House in a previous debate that

those words were not in this copy, but that that copy was the earlier copy. That is the authentic copy.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Which one ?


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: The paragraph taken from there is authentic, and, what you would possibly call the unrevised.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Do I understand, then, that the copy which the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lefurgey) is reading from is not a correct one ?


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: We will be willing to abide by any of the changes which you will find in that record.


Mr. CLARKE.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Lefurgey) is reading from the ' Railway News,' published in London.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 
REVISED
[Stage Direction]
but the country and its facilities for railroad construction are well known, and we are advised there can be little doubt that an excellent line can be built at a figure not to exceed more than $20,000 per mile. The balance of the cost of construction, that is to say, one-fourth, will be provided by an issue of bonds by the Grand Trunk Pacific Company on a second mortgage to be guaranteed by the Grand Trunk Company. Passing as it will do through the most fertile and most promising belt of country in the whole of the Northwest Territory, there cannot be the slightest doubt that this portion of the road, built, as I have said, under such favourable and economical conditions, will immediately produce excellent results, and will by itself more than justify the adoption of the scheme in its entirety. (Applause.) The mountain section, as its name implies, naturally presents features of greater difficulty and cost, but here again although the survey parties have not completed their work, the country has been quite sufficiently explored to enable us to say that its general features are well known, and our advisers are satisfied that the cost of laving -the road will be considerably less than that of other roads traversing these mountains, and notably, the Canadian Pacific which passes through the same range of mountains under conditions of far greater difficulty than are presented by the more northern route. The government surveys which were made prior to the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway under the auspices of the government, and conducted by their distinguished engineer, Sir Sandford Fleming, afford conclusive evidence to this effect, and if the Canadian Pacific Company chose a more southern and more expensive road, it was, I believe, for the reason that the location was considered at that time to be much more advantageously situated, especially on account of its close proximity to the American frontier than that of the routes by the Peace §nd Pine River passes. I need only add that tile maximum elevation by way of the Peace River or Pine River routes

one of which we shall probably select as the route of our line is only 2,400 feet, that by the Canadian Pacific Railway 5,299 feet, the Great Northern Railway 5,202 feet, and the Northern Pacific Railway 5,567 feet. The maximum gradients both east and west by way o( the proposed Grand Trunk Pacific route are estimated at 91 feet in the mile, as contrasted with 116 east and 237 west on the Canadian Pacific, and 116 respectively on the Great Northern, Northern Pacific and Union Pacific. You will, therefore, at once see by contrast the favourable conditions under which the proposed new road will he built. The financial conditions under which the mountain section will be constructed are that the Canadian government guarantee 3 per cent interest on the bonds to be issued to the extent of 75 per cent of the cost of construction, the remaining 25 per cent being obtained by bonds to be issued by the Grand Trunk Pacific Company and guaranteed by the Grand Trunk Company. For the first seven years, however, after completion of the mountain, section, the government will pay the interest on the bonds guaranteed by them, without recourse to the Grand Trunk Pacific Company, and during the next succeeding three years only so much as may be earned over working expenses towards making up 3 per cent will be paid by the Mr. LEFURGEY.	,
Grand Trunk Pacific Company, so that tion for the term of ten years from the c	g(;ern
of the line-or, assuming that the g eXdivision should not be completed unt years piration of the full period of	0f 1$
allowed .by the agreement, for a t a;nst years from now-no claim will ar . respeot the Grand Trunk Pacific Company 1 .,,uction-of three-fourths of the cost of con enter-(Applause.) It is natural to most ne.,on are prises that the earlier periods of o ^largely not likely to be immediately_ 01 par-productive, and this remark applies w aoter tieular force to one of this special °,eveiop' and magnitude. However rapidly the. " cer-ment of the country may proceea, tain amount of time must elapse ect to Grand Trunk Pacific Company can e. i in reap any substantial	measure of o	.	the
respect of a considerable portion	8n(i
country to be traversed by the new r ' ^ern-this view has been, recognized by the s ferment accordingly. As you will have jn res" ed from	my preceding	remarks, neither	°rpect of	the lease of	the eastern thy1	theany of	the sections,	nor in respect	west'
working of the mountain section of t ern division, will any charge for ren eregt one case, or, in the order case, for trlIctio° on three-quarters of the cost of con paCjfic be imposed upon the Grand Trunk c0m-
Company for a period of ten years
rOotirvn Ac roccirdB	TYfairiS
the
pletion. As regards the prairie	wou*-
government, n.ot unfairly, held that corople-be self-sustaining from the day of it t0 c oh' tion, and in this view w-e are willihs t0 the cur. (Applause.) I alluded just no pacific obligation imposed on the Grand TruLicence , Company of making a deposit as e t0 be its bona fldes. This deposit which ' [DOT] gf the made within 30 days of the pa®sl0f government Act, was to consis1	j ah'
000 in cash or government securir*®®' waS a* bound to record my opinion that tn eagonabL extremely unnecessary and_ unr,ntrast 1 demand, and I may, in passing, uPon t*1, with the similar obligation imposeu .on 0 Canadian Pacific Company at the i ^ to their undertaking, which was eon pproVe deposit of $1,000,000 in cash or ^ gUp securities, without having behind that . port of a powerful corporation * ora the company which is promoting Hon Wa=' Tninlr Papifin flnrrmanv. Th6 ObliS nf tfa
Id
Trunk Pacific Company. The
of
however, reluctantly accepted 111	esserd'
concession required by us on otn that t points. It must have been obvl°. ,, nad Grand Trunk Pacific Company, wnm poSjtio® even been organized, was not * t0 ®a , within the limited period exact [DOT] pany, h, the deposit, and the Grand Trun^iq*ance 'v>t course, was unable to afford ass ,ts shat out first obtaining the sanction	requ'r„„d
holders, for which a certain time	0f go
In order, however, to show no _ and , faith on the part of the prom	'contra^
order to satisfy the conditions	was
an interim and conditional d°p°- £l,000,' by the Grand Trunk Company	t t0 Ini
4	per cent guaranteed stock, ° hojders. a p subsequent approval of the aha appr°pjse confirmation by parliament.	that pr® ^
however, of the arrangement >
firand Tr form by the shareholders of tn ire(i, aim dy Company will not now be 2 s(0ck a|pere-condition deposit of guaratite	,.on * ,,tal
made will be cancelled. In BubstiW* lexaent of, it is now provided by the ® *

Res
greerneat that the deposit shall be made in jash or approved securities, and the Grand J'Unk Company will-subject to your approval *hake the necessary arrangements for oom-''ying with the requirements of the agree-e<lts. The deposit itself will be released as 0,°" as the rolling stock for the equipment the road has been provided, and there only Qjhtaing £1,000,000 required for the completion t the western division. I must not forget thention that in return for the support which
"ill
.ask you to accord to the Grand Trunk " Company, the Grand Trunk Company

retain a controlling interest in that comand will become the possessors of the of the common stock, amounting to Wi?°-000>
or £5,000,000.
se'"iat may be the prospective value of that vty, or when it may acquire a substantial Ue, I cannot precisely predict, but you must ot I mind the certain and rapid development *Ha) 6 Northwest on the one hand, and the ac-ha and very profitable results on the other >
which have attended the working of other trj r°ads operated under conditions and in dis-fopts not dissimilar from those contemplated I i the Grand Trunk Pacific Company. I think at/!ave now enumerated the essential features fea c°nditions of the agreements, and you will (, "Sonably ask what we calculate will be Gp! ''ability which may be incurred by the Trunk Company. (Applause.) The obli-Tr, 0n Proposed to be assumed by the Grand to nk Company, is, as I have explained, limited of Guarantee of bonds representing one-fourth "'itt cost °£ constructing the western division, tip-? .the reservation that in respect to the e >"'e section-inasmuch as the government Com-aatee is limited to $13,000 per mile-the Oil the
of SoA distance of 1,000 miles, to he at the rate
Oiip ®a"y's guarantee may somewhat exceed the the ^°orth proportion. Assuming, therefore, "Ve COst of construction on the prairie section Of i a distance of 1,000 miles, to be at the rate byT-0,000 per mile, the amount to be guaranteed 57 oAe company will be of bonds at the rate ot ^I'tnn ')er mile, and in the whole $7,000,000, or dijp.. ",000. Interest on this amount at 4 per cent at , S the period of construction may he taken Snap168,000, making a total principal to he ®liai nteed of £1,568,000, representing an an-c0J interest of £62,720. Assuming again the W. of building of 500 miles on the mountain is l°a to be $50,000 a mile, or $25,000,000. that
aw L0 Raw PET AAA AAA	oil tho Olie-fOUrth
fay, £5,000,000 *u «,**,	....
of bonds to be guaranteed by the com ihgy "'ill be £1,250,000, or, adding interest dur-<00 (ift?nstructi°n, say>
£150,000, a total of
carrying interest at the rate of £56,000 1 h!?r- If you have followed tbo figures which *Wn8 3"st mentioned, you will find that the shows an r mount of principal bonds to ^Deo'A'anteed in respect of both sections of '"00, and of annual interest of £118,720, hut 6>Haii ih's	interest liability, comparatively
t>lpa,i as it is. nee(J not accrue until the es-of eight years-the period allowed for
all, the
aty,	eigni years-uie ptnvu	
'irp, .."ction-the interest on cost during con -hhopp 1011 being provided for out of capital. This, constitutes the responsibility of the r'S'w Tru"k Company, and I hope this state-°6en 'T'" allay the apprehensions which have *"Sy a'ready expressed by a few critics, who NWo?1 llave sufficiently studied or accurately I*JeaV!t?°d the provisions of the agreements.
]hear.) As fairly as I can, and without Va ati"S, I have stated to you, on the one !NnJhe r'sk which the Grand Trunk would *?, ' a,"t, 0" the other hand, I have pointed
nut the certain accretion of a great and valua-traffic to our company in the future, and the almost equally certain loss of existing traffic should the connections, which might be peroA'ntlv ours, pass into the hands of rivals and competitors, who would promptly occupy the ulace which is now offered to us. We claim nr fhe schfeme that it is a fair and business-hke arrangement, most carefully thought out,
1 a Grounded bv every safeguard that pi u-"J,™	!suggest for the* protection and enha cemeni rftbe interests of our shareholders, we consider it alike as a measure of necessity, aid as affording an opportunity which, if neglected will never again occur of assuring and improving the fortunes of our company and as such your board unanimously and confidently commend it to your approval. (Applause.) X shall have to present two resolutions covering the matters which I have been speaking of. lhe first resolution is the ordinary resolution approving of the reports and accounts for the last half-year, and then I shall ask you to vote upon the special resolution affecting the question of the Grand Trunk Pacific road. Therefore, m the first instance, I will ask you to vote upon the following resolution ' That the report of the directors and the accounts for the half year ended December 31, 1903, now presented be and the same are hereby approved and adopted, and that the following dividends be paid, nan'e'3'' to the holders of the four per cent guaranteed stock of £2 10s. per cent, to the holders of the first preference stock of £2 10 s. per cent, to t e holders of the second preference stock of £2 10s. per cent to the holders of the third prel-r. ence stock of £2 per cent.' I will ask Mr. Smithers, our vice-president, to second that resolution. (Applause.)
Mr Alfred Smithers-I beg to second the resolution with regard to the report and accounts and the payment of the dividends.	. ,
The President-I will just ask the share -ers who are present, if they have any remark to make upon this resolution to kindlv confine their remarks to the reports and accounts of the half-year, so that we may'not	°
a general discussion upon the other question. After I have put the resolution with regard to the Pacific Company, we shall discuss that y
UMrf- seal referred at some length to the to-
JsTZTr.d ^SformouT~es in revenue to be attained without some additiona increased expenditure.
Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Will the hon gentleman permit me ? In the copy I have here. which was furnished by the hon. member for We Toronto (Mr. Osier), there* is a whole
lie holds exactly as it is punt t .


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I am reading it word for word.


Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER.: I would draw the attention of the hon. member (Mr. Le-f ruev to what I think is an abuse on his part of the privileges of the House, in read-
I7fi7

176S
ing continuously and for so long under the rule which permits the reading of extracts.


Rufus Henry Pope: What is the limit ?
Mr. DEPUTY' SPEAKER. I think that is largely in the discretion of the presiding officer. A case came up in 1885, and a decision was then given by. the late Speaker (Mr. Kirkpatrick), who said :
I think it is an abuse of the privilege when a member occupies the greater part of his speech by reading a whole essay on the subject. It is taking up the time of the House contrary to the meaning of the rule, and to the interpretation which I would put on the rule, prohibiting the reading of newspapers except as extracts. It is an abuse of the rule which I shall endeavour to stop.
Further on he says :
I have ruled that the hon. gentleman is entitled by the rules of the House to read extracts, but to read continuously I consider an abuse of the rules.
If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Defurgey) concludes the reading of the extract, he will be in order, but to continue reading for the whole length of time which he has been reading, is an abuse of the rules of the House.	'


Rufus Henry Pope: What is your decision ?


Peter Macdonald: My decision is that this is not an extract; the hon. gentleman purposes reading the whole article, and if I understand the meaning of the word ' extract,' it is only a portion or part of an article ; for the hon. gentleman to continue reading and to detain the Committee for an hour or an hour and a half, is surely an abuse of the privileges of the House.


James Clancy: It is evident that in the case to which the Chairman has referred, the member was reading his whole speech, but the Speaker then distinctly stated that there is no objection to reading an extract. The hon. gentleman has been reading an extract.


Peter Macdonald: He is reading the whole article.


James Clancy: The whole article is an extract.


Peter Macdonald: An extract is a part, but not the whole. An extract does not include the whole.


James Clancy: Why not ?


Peter Macdonald: Because then it would not be an extract. The hon. gentleman will not argue that point.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I may say that I intend reading the balance of the extract now, and as I am


Peter Macdonald: There is no special rule which will apply to the extract. If the Committee is willing to sit and listen to the reading of long articles of that kind, Mr. LEFURGEY.
Bourinot
or
rtide
there is no particular rule from which I can apply ; there is only	*JeaCl)
ment which I would bring to bear 111 }ni0u3 particular ease as it arose, and the p given by other presiding officers.


James Clancy: 
Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: This is not	ycplai
of a general character, but of a |'-eCt W character and germane to the si der consideration.	^3


Mr. HOLMES.: Before you rule UP011 point of order, may I say

*	?


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Have I the &o ^


Peter Macdonald: 
Robert Holmes: 
Peter Macdonald: 
Robert Holmes: 
James Clancy: The chairman ral point of order himself.	apd


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 
The PRESIDENT.: 
APKIL 21, 1904 1769
[Stage Direction]
>ou -which I dealt with in my statement. The 'Solution is as follows :
, That the agreement dated July 29, 1903, be-"oea the government of Canada and the pro-r;oters of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Com-twy as amended by a supplemental agreement (c .to dated the 18th day of February, 1904. ,°Pies of which agreements are now submitted o this meeting), be, and the same is hereby j,j®roved and the directors are hereby author-^0 and empowered to carry the same into atfect so far as the said agreements relate to'or e°t this company, and in particular the actors are authorized to make such arrange- hts as they may think fit with the government
and the Grand Trunk Pacific Company for ''iding or securing deposit of $5,000,000,
er in cash or securities and are further em-
[Stage Direction]
eith,
ton?1'6'* to guarantee the second mortgage Dan S of- the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Com-koth for principal and interest to be issued atlrjSllant- to the provisions of the agreements to, to enter into any contract or contracts thereto.'
'''hi v!1 is the resolution, ladies and gentlemen, 'vhiv I have the honour to propose to you, and t0 lch I will ask Lord Welby to be good enough , Secon,3
l°rd WELBY.-Ladies and gentlemen, I am iojo that every citizen of the empire has re-
OiG^i	cVti V UUZ-cu vyx.	

 - ~
>t id times past at the rapid development
?hre
i
na<3a, and it is evident to anybody who lon„ s the question of Canada that her deve-li^ht is in rapid progress, and that the great
,°t the development will be along the prairie
r6afl°n, to which allusion has been made al-iita.y- The government of Canada has decided Hit,.;.'*16 time has come for the further develop-°£ that enormous belt of wheat-growing
'ry. They have decided that a line should ths„,Sae' and practically, they have made us 4is„.i"er of carrying out that development. The tt)0nSs>°n which has taken place at your board hfig the subject has been long and most anxi-1 can only assure you, ladies and gent.o-that the board are deeply alive to the re-MaCj "Uity which they incur when they are this scheme before you. The fact of the
ofF is' that we have arrived now at the part-1 i * the ways. You have to decide whether in - uture you think it best to restrict youryou tmnK it pest to restrict yuui-'oti0® to the comparatively limited sphere of ^ * which your railroad is now operating, i'tiito th®r, in view of the development which is ft rjJP'ace towards the west, you will think to obtain your share in that develop-,°Ur '?s I hope and think, we may fairly trust Can are in the great profits which will accrue v'a<Ja- Well, the offer is placed before you, PU (°u have to decide to-day whether or not Ls Co* accept it. The government of Canada Vo,®1® to a provisional arrangement, subject N'o, r approval, with the board. If you say there is very little doubt that there are j>t>Bort°thers ready to avail themselves of the fjjhlty, and we have every reason to _be-/ fleoin the government of Canada has entire-e<i that it will carry out this new line, you refuse to do it then other parties, :h<i any doubt, are ready to come forward the work which is offered, and the fot.) ubity will pass away from you. (Hear, J,°4rq it is under these circumstances that the 1 say, with the fullest sense of their -°ti ,, 'hility to you. have come to the conclu-a^ the wisest course, the most prudent ' and the right course for them to pursue is to submit this scheme to you for your ratification. With regard to the risk that is Incurred-and, of course, when a great work If Th s kind is in progress there must be some risk-the board think that that risk is really i,	a minimum. From every source of
Information which they can obtain there can he bS little doubt, first of all, that the carrying out of that part of the line which runs over !5f nrairie section is a line that can be easily mid cheaply made, and from the information that we can derive from that is going on all Cnidus there-because that prairie section has lardfv been iratched, I may say, as yet-from Ihe influx of the Americans into that country, and from the fact that the Americans themselves with their immense increase of population are already, to a certain extent, limiting their grep.t supplies-or will be limiting them within a few years-of corn, which they have to place at the disposal of the old countries of Europe, the consequence is that we may confidently and absolutely expect that the supply of grain of this country and of the old countries of Europe will within a very few years be in a large measure derived from Canada. Hear, hear.) That being the case, when we ask you, *so far as this prairie section is concerned, in laying this scheme before you, we are speaking of a certainty that, from the time the lme is accomplished, it will produce a very considerable revenue, and that from the.„r	/nl
men-t of the country, which will follow the establishment of the line it will within a very few years, be a very profitable lme. So far as that is concerned, your directors have not the slightest hesitation in submitting to your acceptance that part of the scheme. Qf course the question-of the mountain section is a more difficult one, but, as I think you will hear from Mr Hays, and as you have heard from the pre sident, there are many circumstances which make even this part of the undertaking, the subject at all events, of a reasonable estimate even at the present moment. You will have heard first of all. that the passes over which the line will go are really not more than half the height of those over which the more southern runways have gone, and we know, at all events, that	"° hav^
got one indispensable condition connected with ft 1 as the result of the long and intricate nego-iktions-the Canadian government has become absolute partners with us in the expenditure on that mountain section ; that means that we have made their interests one with ours, and we are, therefore, assured of their hearty cooperation and assent to any reasonable proposition on their part. On these grounds we think we are entitled to place that part of our ocheme before you for ratification. And, now, I have to repeat to you the
of our own responsibility to y [DOT]	Hirerback to nine years, I think ££ board of direc tors, with their very able man;ag<m	y ^
tuIhIorfhIl,pre°s£eSrthe confi-years as jusuiyi s* v generously reposed in
n^^ule ) The situation of the Grand Trunk at the present moment, it must be evi Lit to every one, is a very different one to what it was in 1895. (Applause.) Now your Hereof nr ^ and your general manager are not like-Iy"o j£pSrtlE lightly that result, no.' the confidence' you have reposed m them. Wethink that you will, at all events, give us credit for
[Stage Direction]
this, that, haying seen what has been the action of the board, and what have been the results during the past nine years, you will be convinced that we have entered seriously and most carefully into the proposition which has been laid before us, that we have conducted these negotiations with a rather hard taskmaster the Canadian government-entirely with a view to your interests, and it is only because we are satisfied that the Grand Trunk Railway would be losing a very great opportunity of profitable development in the future, and would be limiting itself to a degree which we think the shareholders would in a very few years repent, that we have come to the conclusion" that we are justified in laying before you the scheme which we confidently recommend to your acceptance. (Applause.)
Mr. ALLEN read a statement on behalf of his father, George Allen, a late member of the board setting forth his reasons for objecting to the scheme. He had objected from July 24 last to proceed further with the Grand Trunk Pacific scheme without having a great deal of necessary information afforded to the board, and believing firmly, as he did, that the scheme, if carried out, will gradually ruin the Grand Trunk. There are two courses open to them now : (1) To reject the agreements altogether ; (2) to postpone the consideration of the agreements until the board and the proprietors have sufficient facts before them to enable them to form an opinion on their merits. (Applause.)
Mr. ALLEN concluded by moving an amend ment for the postponement of the further con sideration of the agreements until the board had been supplied with certain information specified in the amendment.
Mr. MERLYN seconded the amendment.
Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Has the hon. member react the amendment ?


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: That is all that Is here.


Mr.   BRODETJR@: Will he read it again if he pleases ?


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I don't think we have come to the amendment yet.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No,*I think the hon. gentleman began to read the amendment


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 
Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 
Peter Macdonald: to a
member is in perfect order in r, t1fe Uop' point of order ; but I do not think -el. jn member (Mr. Lefurgey) is out or 11(jing-speaking from where he is now *
lat?


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: to be. You take the price of rails, the price of ties, the price, of labour ; it is not a mathematical problem at all what the cost will be. It may be varied by deflections one way or another, but you can tell within a very close amount what it is going to be. Then, in addition to the advantages of grade, location and so on, the line will be shortest one between the east-China and Japan and all of that country to which we must look for our future development-the road is 1,500 miles shorter from Montreal to Yokohama than via New York and San Francisco. It is 500 miles shorter than the Canadian Pacific route to Victoria. We will have taken a passenger half-away across the territory, before he could be far on his way by other routes. In all these great auestions arising to-day in connection with Russia, Japan and all that territory, the importance of the shortest route must be apparent to you. There are many of you here to-day who will live to see the Grand Trunk Pacific hauling as much of its grain towards the Pacific for consumption in China, Japan and that territory as will be hauled in this eastern direction. The route will give the Grand Trunk Railway control of the rapidly growing business of the Yukon territory. That traffic all goes down now either bv Vancouver, Seattle or the southern coast towns, and there is takes steamer some 2,000 miles. We shall have shortened that distance by rail in that neighbourhood by 1,000 miles. One shareholder a minute ago, in speaking of the obligation the Grand Trunk was to assume in this conection, seemed to have the impression that his interests, whatever they may be in whatever class of securities, were jeopardized from the outset, and I fear that there is a general impression arising entirely from this misunderstanding. The .Grand Trunk Railway is not going to be called upon under its guarantees for one cent for eight years after this enterprise is started-after the construction of the line is commenced-the cost of the line during construction being added to capital and provided out of capital, and the securities which the Grand Trunk will guarantee will not be issued for eight years, and then after that eight years have rolled by, you have seven years yet on the mountain section, a part on which there seems to be some doubt. There can be not the slightest doubt as to what the returns will be from the prairie section, but on the mountain section you have seven years without any claim at all, three years after that only a claim on what is earned, making, therefore, before the mountain section becomes anything of a burden on the railway, eighteen years. All I have to do is to to ask you to look back at meetings and discussions which took place of a similar character in connection with the Canadian Pacific, where it was freely prophecied by gentlemen who were doubters, as we have doubters here to-day, that it would not earn the axle grease. (Laughter.) The gentlemen who were fortunate enough to buy the securities from those who held that impression have profited. We are going into the territory which was originally selected as the route of the Canadian Pacific. The surveys were made by the Canadian government who spent $3,000,000 in determining and selecting what was^ the most easy and direct route for a transcontinental line. This route was selected, hut a change of government took place just about the time the report was made, and the idea was abandoned. A lower route was taken through a less desirable country than that which we are now taking, so that we are simply Mr. LEFURGEY.
confirming the judgment of fifteen or t''e te>
years ago as to the desirableness of the 1	'
and the character of the country we are s through. To my mind it is difficult to_ c0_\Uorne
it is ainicuit.	,ienie
that there can be any objection to this s ^ which promises so much to the Grand Railway, and which links its fortunes with of the government of Canada in a way t*1 heIie-two must work together, not only for the uj. fit of the. country at large, but for t?eTrunlc benefit of the country and the Grand t0 Railroad. Gentlemen, I shall be very S pave answer any other auestion, but I think	n0t
covered the whole ground. The question	opt
what is going to happen to you if yoo' ;f this enterprise, but what is going to hgP 1 you do not adopt it. (Loud applause.) jyjr, A shareholder-I should like to *
Hays if he will tell us something ahou climate of Port Simpson.	tjje
Mr. Hays-The gentleman asks about { climate along the proposed line and ai Simpson. You will all understand _ tna jy question of climate and its severity is yhicii one of elevation. The country through ' r(jg we are going commences to slope down to Hudson Bay-the trend is all towards all Hudson Bay. The waters of that p5>rtl uth-drain to the north instead of to the y0n, Our line is on a very much lower ele r-Ig0-and therefore there is a very much less rous climate than that followed by tn not only south of us in Canada, but qqq, United States, which reach elevations o' ' 0f 6,000 and 8,000 feet. In the neighbourly' ^ Edmonton where some of our officers we gn0W-. winter, there were only six inches ot snoV/ They rarely have six or eight inches o n0t through all their territory. They "7. njpeg begun to have the snow west of "	g in
this year that we have had on our n ^ye Ontario where the storm centre seems ginlp-been located principally. As to Port meson, there are several ports in
BUIi, L11CIC ClIC OC\cidI	'*'J *"	fnF l-11
diate vicinity which may be adopted fflent final terminal of the road. In the as ff0Uid we speak of Port Simpson, but that eJ,a0t cover a radius of fifty miles, but location of the terminal would he dot jjaf-by anchorage facilities and advantages rareiy bourage. The climate at Port SimPso ,.g It exceeds a mean temperature of 50 to	peis on a degree of latitude about mia tween that of London and Glasgow. ^
A shareholder-Is it an open port .
Mr. Hays-Yes.	ish to


Mr.   A@: 17S0
of ' All.') Those of the contrary opinion. The resolution is carried. (Loud applause.)
The retiring directors and auditors having been re-elected, the proceedings terminated with a vote of thanks to the president and directors.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased with the attention the hon. leader of the House, the Finance Minister, the Minister of Justice and the hon. member for London (Mr. Hyman) and the other members of the government have paid to this very important document. I can only say that I hope they will read it over again very carefully, with more leisure to consider the different clauses than they have had to-night, I think they will profit by the reading.


William Stevens Fielding: I think we ought to say that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lefurgey) has contributed the most interesting statement that has come from that side of the House on this subject.
Resolution reported, read the second time and agreed to.


Mr. TAYLOR.: I suppose the House will rise now.


William Stevens Fielding: We will just introduce the Bill and take the first reading.


George Taylor: We should only proceed one stage to-day.-


William Stevens Fielding: That is all-the introduction of the Bill usually follows the resolution.


George Taylor: Introduce the Bill to-morrow. When it is introduced it will probably provoke discussion.


William Stevens Fielding: Not on the introduction.


George Taylor: It may. There are one or two hon. gentlemen 'who are absent now but who had purposed saying something before the resolution passed.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: On the second reading of the Bill full discussion can take place. The usual course is, after the resolution is reported the Bill is introduced.


William Stevens Fielding: But not proceeded with.
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 72) to amend the National Transcontinental Railway Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.
George Taylor: Is the Bill printed 7 Is it to be proceeded with to-morrow 7


William Stevens Fielding: I understand that it is printed and will be distributed to-night; and, if there is no objection, it will be proceeded with to-morrow. The Bill is a very small one, and is no substantial addition to what is already before the House.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 


ADJOURNMENT -BUSINESS OF xHB HOUSE.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. FIELDING moved the adjournmen of the House.	. t-js
Thomas Simpson Sproule: It would be forcing ^ Grand Trunk Pacific measure throu*n ^ House very rapidly to proceed witn ^ morrow. We must have some time
sider U-	nhiectiou


William Stevens Fielding: If to-morrow oDje ^
is taken, no doubt the Prime Minis -0)?e meet the views of hon. gentlemen. iliess he left this evening. I asked what o _ gaj(i would be taken up to-morrow, and jf we would proceed with this Bill. t lie anjr suggestion is made I have no o will readily agree to it.	Be(j


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjo at 12.10 a.m., Friday.
[Stage Direction]
Friday, April 22, l9°4' _ . f rrin*e*2