1904-04-22

[Stage Direction]
Mr. HAUGHTON LENNON (South eoe) moved for leave to introduce 73) to amend the Railway Act. tpAiVe Rt. Hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIEK l Minister). Explain.	_ JllUcli
Mr. LENNOX.: 
Mr.   I@: 
Mr. PREFONTAINE.: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

Mr. M. K.: COWAN (South Essex) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 75) to amend the Companies' Act, 1902.


Mr. R. L. BORDEN.: Explain.


Mr. COWAN.: The Bill is to amend section 10, chapter 15, of the Joint Stock Companies' Act. Under the section as it now reads you can reduce shares by by-law below the par value of $100. but if the shares are below par value there is no power to raise them up to $100 shares. This is simply td permit you by by-law to gioup^a number of shares and thereby raise them up to $100 shares.	,,	...
_ Motion agreed to and Bill read the hrs time.



CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT.

Mr.  F. B.@: WADE (Annapolis) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 70) to amen Criminal Code.


Haughton Lennox: Explain.


Mr. WADE.: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

Sir FREDERICK  W.@: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
.THE ESSEX FUSILIERS.
Mahlon K. Cowan: mine would be inadequate to express. I therefore move that the House do now adjourn.


Mr. CLARKE.: Might I ask the hon the Minister of Militia (Sir Frederick Borden) if the selection of this Fusilier regiment- and I agree with all that the hon. _ gentleman (Mr. Cowan) has said respecting it- has been made by the militia authorities .


Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.: No.


Edward Frederick Clarke: This regiment has not been selected by the militia authorities to represent the Canadian militia at St. Louis.


Frederick William Borden: No, no regiment so far as I know lias been selected for this duty.
Motion (Mr. Cowan) to adjourn, negatived.



THE TARIFF AND SHIPS' CABLES.

Mr. C. E. KAULBACH.: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I wish to draw the attention of the hon. the Minister of Customs (Mr. Paterson) for a few moments to a matter respecting the customs tariff which materially interests the fishermen of the maritime provinces. I observe that by tariff item 542, ships' cables are admitted free of duty, 'whilst fishermen's ships' cables are charged 25 per cent. The fishermen are a class who contribute very large-lv to the revenue of the country. They are a class who should be looked after very carefully. The farmer is cared for to the greatest possible extent, and his binder twine is admitted free. I do not see why ships' cables for fishing purposes should not be admitted free as well. I wish to ask the minister if he will kindly give this matter his attention and view it as favourably as he can in the interests of the fishermen. I would also ask that the hon. minister consider this matter carefully and give the benefit they desire at as early a date as possible, as many new vessels are being built this year and it would be a great advantage to the fishermen if their ships' hawsers for fishing purposes were admitted free of duty as ships' cables are. I cannot see why the difference should exist.


Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance).: My hon. friend (Mr. Kaulbach) is of course aware that his request would require a tariff change. It is pleasant to hear hon. gentlemen on that side of the House express the desire to have something admitted free. We promise to give favourable consideration to all these matters.


Mr. COCHRANE.: It must affect your heart I know.



GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY.

[Stage Direction]
Itt. Hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIER (Prime Minister) moved second reading of Bill (No.
Mahlon K. Cowan: 
William Stevens Fielding: 
Mr. SPROULE.: That is exactly what the minister said, but I understood to say that if any reasonable object were raised it would not be gone on wit [DOT]


William Stevens Fielding: The hon. gentfe0ian might present his objections.


Robert Laird Borden: I made more than one application to obtain a copy of the ^ but was unable to do so up to one o* to-day. I sent to the post office re. it was not ready, and I have not y. uBj-ceived, it, and therefore, under these ci . stances think the Bill should not D -ceeded with.	.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: Under SO^ circumstances I withdraw my motm >
c (g will say that I would like, if Possl %'t. take that Bill up again on Tuesday n -


Robert Laird Borden: That will be satisfactory.	_


Wilfrid Laurier: 
Robert Laird Borden: 
Wilfrid Laurier: 
Robert Laird Borden: We shall to go on with the Bill on Tuesday.
Motion withdrawn.



PETITION OP RIGHT ACT AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
„„ to tlie regularity of the ordinance passed bv the Yukon council, I have introduced this Bin sanctioning what they have done.
Hon. CHARLES FITZPATRICK (Minister of Justice) moved second reading of Bill (No. 38) to amend the petition of Right Act.	[DOT]
Mr HAGGART.: We do not know what the divisions are. Perhaps the Minister of Justice can let us have a report showing


Hon. Mr. HAGGART.: What is the effect of the Bill ?


Hon. Mr. FITZPATRICK.: 
John Graham Haggart: Explain.


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Mr. LANCASTER.: Has the Minister of Tustice an explanation to make to the House on tlie latter part of the Bill, in regard to the qualifications of voters ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: It refers merely to qualification as to residence. The council have the right to give the power to vote to any British subject who has resided in the district any time within twelve months prior to the time of voting. The ordinance of the Yukon council, No. 29, provides that, and has fixed the period of three months residence within the territorial district.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Does the minister intend that this shall mean that a person who was entitled to be a voter at any time within twelve months, even if he has left the territory, should still be entitled to vote at an election. Because that is what it means, taken literally.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The Commissioner in Council in 1902, by ordinance 28, provided for the division of the territory into electoral districts, and for the election of a representative from each district instead of from the country at large ; and by ordinance 29 of the same year, a person tendering his vote is required to swear that he is a British subject and Las resided for twelve months in the electoral district where he desires to exercise his right to vote. Since that time that period has been shortened to three months residence within the district ; so that in order that a man may vote in any one of these five electoral districts it is^ necessary that he should be a British subject, and if required, should prove that he has lived in the electoral district for three months immediately preceding the time of the election. ,


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, Bill read the second time, and House went into committee thereon, '
On section 1,
1. Notwithstanding anything contained in the rukon Territory Act, chapter 6
* 1898' °.r *" "J tounca''"^Sances
rTvffifnffor 4" divfsionT/the territory into
lectoral districts tor the purposes of the elecion of the representative members of the counu ef the territory, each of such districts to be enrLented by one or more o£ such members, ,nd ordinances prescribing, as a qualification ecessary to0 entitle any person to vote at an *lection 5of a representative member for an doctoral district, residence in the district at he time of the election or for any period not onaer than twelve months prior thereto , and my ordinance heretofore made by the Commis-
[Stage Direction]
sioner in Council in so far as it did or does so provide or prescribe, is hereby declared to nave been valid and effectual from the date when it was passed.
Edward Arthur Lancaster: This Bill practically makes but one qualification to	an.'"
one to vote,'and it is doubtful whether it therefore does not override the other provision on the same subject which my bon. friend says exists. We are prescribing what may be done by ordinances, and we are providing that a Commissioner in Council, may make ordinances prescribing, as a 'qualification necessary to entitle any person to vote at an election, residence in the district at the time of the election or for any period not longer than twelve months prior thereto. It seems to me that by this we are giving a chance for a very strong argument that we thereby exclude other qualifications. Suppose a person had been a resident for three months, during the twelve months prior to the election and then went away to Ontario, he could, under this Act, come back and claim the right to vote, notwithstanding the fact that lie liad given up his residence and gone to live somewhere else and he need not even be a British subject or of age.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The intention is to ratify and confirm the ordinances passed by the Territorial- Council of the Yukon. My Bill was drafted from the ordinance and my desire is to follow the words as closely as I can. I should yiot like to amend it without having the ordinance before me. My hon. friend's objection is that the quality of British subject and residence in any territorial district at any time within the twelve months prior to the election, would justify a vote by a person who may no longer be a resident. In order to avoid the difficulty, I would be glad to ask that the comlmittee rise for tile purpose of considering the objection and seeing how far I can meet it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Has there been any litigation ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I want to anticipate any trouble of that sort.
Progress reported.



EXCHEQUER COURT ACT.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 37) to amend the Exchequer Court Act (Mr. Fitzpatrick) read the second time, and House went into committee thereon.
On section 1,
1. Section 4 of chapter 8 of the statutes of 1902 is repealed, and the following is substituted therefor :-
4.	Notwithstanding anything contained in section 51 (as enacted by section 1 of chapter 35 of the statutes of 1890) or section 52 of the Exchequer Court Act, where the Crown is a party to any action, suit, cause, matter, or other judicial proceeding, an appeal shall lie on be-Mr. FITZPATRICK.	.
half of the Crowo from any judgment,	y
or order of the Exchequer Court- or judge thereof.
Mr. HAGGAIiT. What is the reason for this ?
Charles Fitzpatrick: When the Exchequer Court was first established, the j* * of appeal from it was given only 111 c ,e(j in which the amount at issue exce OI)e $500. Since then we have enlarged the of the Act so as to give the Crown ^ right to appeal, irrespective of the am subject to the control of a judge Supreme Court. We are now S'lV1'",pive right absolutely in all cases. We co that to be in the public interest. *oi stance, there may be cases in wine ^ amount involved is very trivial ana j principle at issue an important one, <	.
we desire to have the right to WI in all cases at the discretion of the mini


John Graham Haggart: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: He is not always the same man.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: 
Edward Arthur Lancaster: I do not know whether I am right or not-the minister can tell me. Is it not usual for the Exchequer Court judge to refer questions to some referee to ascertain the facts, the judge then deciding upon those facts ? If so, we have m the Exchequer Court practically an appeal within the court. The high court judges often leave questions of fact to the county judge or to some referee to decide the facts while the judges themselves apply the law. This' would be a guarantee against the mixing up of the law and fact. If this piac-Hee prevails in the Exchequer Court t seems to me it would be a fairly safe rule it being understood, of course, that the E chequer Court judge need not adopt the report of the referee, if lie thinks it not
right.


Charles Fitzpatrick: come across, in which it is held that there is no appeal under those circumstances because there is no definite liability ascertained. I am afraid of difficulty arising some day if some cute lawyer raises this objection. In order to avoid that I want to establish by statute what has been established by practice up to the present time, in regard to these railway appeals.
Section 1 agreed to.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I move to add the following' section :
Section 2 of chapter 8 of the statutes of 1002 is repealed and the following substituted therefor :-
2. The section substituted for section 51 of the said Act by section 1, of chapter 35, of the statutes of 1890, is amended by inserting after the word ' judgment ' in the fourth line of the said section, the words ' or with any judgment on any demurrer or with any judgment which determines the rights of the parties, although the amount of liabilities or damages remains to be subsequently ascertained or assessed.'


John Graham Haggart: Will this have any ex post facto effect ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Only for the future. I do not think it would be .fair to apply it to a lis pendens.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to, and Bill reported.
Mr. SPEAKER] When shall the Bill be read tlie third time 7
John Graham Haggart: The leader of the opposition is not here. He has a purview of all these Bills. I would like him to see it before the third reading.


Mr. SPEAKER.: At the next meeting of the House.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
House again in Committee of Supply.
Department of Customs, salaries, $57,160.
['If the hon. gentleffl*"t tbe at subsection 4, he will fi,Rl\nina tb/Ler-\n:ct and OP\nlook\nquestion of the right to construct\n\'\t"\'U 0f tlT\nand is left entirely in the hanas^ ^ t^e\na\'te on any highway, is\ndealt ffiui \n\n tl,e _______ _ __ hands\nmunicipality. It is only the\tsU,r\nl oad that is protected in this tv; 3 section 5.\t^ paS\nBill reported, read the third time, a sed.\nSECOND READINGS-\t^ ts\nBill\t(No. 05) respecting eertain\trj0j_\nof Lewis E. Curtis.-Mr. Ross 1\t>\'of\'\nBill (No. 06) respecting the them\tand Omineca Railway\nMr. Morrison.\tAc\'\nBill (No. 67) respecting the g. N0C\' cident Insurance Company. All-laren.\t]ie\nBill\t(No. 69) to incorporate\tos)er-\n* iveil Life Assurance Compani\'\' \'\n1S26\n182s\n\nfiiU (No. 70) respecting the Canadian acific Railway Company.-Mr. Douglas, j&ill (No. 71) respecting the Ottawa, rockviile and St. Lawrence Railway Com-MUly..-x,ogan.']
Edward Frederick Clarke: Are there any increases provided for ?


Hon. WILLIAM PATERSON (Minister of Customs).: Yes, you will notice in this item there is ah increase of $3,185 in the estimates for 1903-4. In the comparative statement of the clerical and other assistance under the estimates for contingencies last year, $5,625 are included in the vote for the permanent salaries this year. You will notice there is no corresponding item for clerical or other assistance in the contingencies this year, the reason being that these men have been made permanent employees. In a comparison of these two amendments added together there is an increase of $3,185, when you take it in that way.
Mi1. CLARKE. To whom are these increases to he given ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: 


William Paterson: This item dealsJJteS the inside service entirely, the es for the outside service come later.


Edward Frederick Clarke: 
William Paterson: Yes. Under tieg* sion of the Civil Service Bill of f the temporary clerks in the c'ePp, e poll-were appointed third class clerks. -** t!je gentleman will remember the chasse eS-law. On the 1st of January. 1904, jDg timates for their salaries, for the tjnneD' year ceased to-be found in the coi = cies.


Edward Frederick Clarke: How much ol u crease will that account for 7	j


William Paterson: Some $700 is Poised for increases. Mr. J. R. K. Bristol 1 js from $1,400 to $1,500 ; John A. Warn" gc0. raised from $1,400 to $1,500; Char froffi field from $700 to $800 ; Miss J. * 0VL?nr) to $000 to $800 ; William Wall from -W $800. That makes $700.	g


Edward Cochrane: 
William Paterson: receive'1


Edward Frederick Clarke: All of them have re
it ?	entitle*1


William Paterson: All who were to it. Some are at the maximum.	,ee


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
Edward Cochrane: They would h^ oUe. out of a job if you had not giv	^ pi


William Paterson: 
Edward Cochrane: 
William Paterson: 
Edward Cochrane: You are quite ingenious 1 framing excuses.


William Paterson: 
Mr HAGGART.: Not at all ; I am asking vou if you have the report of the deptuy head of the department approving of this and if you have the approbation of council.


Mr WILSON.: Is the commissioner the denuty minister of the department and did he participate in the raise given to the deputy ministers generally last year ?


Mr PATERSON.: Yes, the Commissioner of Customs is the deputy head.


Mr. WILSON.: What is his salary now ?


William Paterson: 


Uriah Wilson: That is a raise of $1,200. Mr. PATERSON. No.


Uriah Wilson: According to the Auditor General's Report.


William Paterson: The hon. gentleman will find that he appears before that. He got $800 as chairman! of the board of customs in addition to that The advance he actually gets is that while he had $3,600 before he now has $4,000. He gets that under the new Act that was passed.


Mr.   AVILSON@: In the Auditor General's Report his salary Is given for twelve months.


William Paterson: The hon. gentleman will find another item of $800 as chairman of the Board of Customs.


Uriah Wilson: Does he still get that $800 as chairman of the Board of Customs !
' Mr. PATERSON. No.


Uriah Wilson: It is all covered by the
14,000	?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: 
William Paterson: These are not granted ret [DOT] these are estimates that are not being irepared. Before these increases are passed by Order in Council of course there wi )(! a report from the deputy mmistei ie-lomiuending them.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: 
William Stevens Fielding: You must first get youi parliamentary authoiity.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No, no.
REVISED edition


William Stevens Fielding: I think so. I have not the Act at hand but I think these conditions must be complied with. The hon. Minister of Customs cannot increase any salary without first getting the money voted.	[DOT]


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You are now providing for the increases.


William Stevens Fielding: We are providing for increases which the hon. Minister of Customs proposes to make from the first day of July next.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I cannot understand how it could be as the hon. Minister of Finance puts it. We are asked here to vote the money on the faith of something that the statute requires to have been done. We should not be asked to vote this money unless the increases have been legally and properly brought about. This committee ought to know whether the conditions precedent have been observed, before we are asked to grant these increases. We have no power to pass this item unless the deputy head has recommended these increases and unless an Order in Council has been passed. How do we know that these conditions will be observed ? How do we know that the deputy head of the department is not going to* say : Out of respect to the House of Commons I will certify to these increases ? He is not obliged to do so and he ought not to do it for that reason. He ought to act upon his own opinion. He should not do it because parliament has given him an invitation to do so. I think we are beginning at the wrong end. The deputy head is supposed to say to parliament and to the country through parliament : In my opinion as the chief officer of these people, they are entitled to increases in salary. We give weight to his recommendation and vote money for such increases. We are supposed to give increases to officials because their superior officer, knowing their fitness and faithfulness, recommends them for increases.
tlr. FIELDING. I think my hon. friend has a mistaken conception of the situation, We are really not increasing the salaries of these gentlemen by this vote at all ; we are giving the department power to increase them, subject to the requirements of the statutes.


Edward Cochrane: No, no.


William Stevens Fielding: Before the Minister of Customs can effectively recommend these increases, the recommendation of the deputy minister must intervene, but the recommendation of the deputy and the minister would alike be worthless if parliament did not provide the money.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Are you proceeding in the usual course ?


William Stevens Fielding: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 


Edward Frederick Clarke: We are placing so niu<4 money, as I understand it, at the disp ' of the minister, but we have not tn commendation of the deputy and a be know to whom these increases are paid. Is it not reasonable when we asked to vote money, that we should ^ this recommendation of the deputy statement from the minister of the o 1 to whom it is intended to give the incie


William Stevens Fielding: 
Edward Frederick Clarke: Is not parliament entity to ask for that recommendation u voting the money ?	. n


William Stevens Fielding: I think the intentn^

 ______ : _me 1 " It get
is altogether the reverse. You mm ^.gt your appropriation of money .in 1 piaee.	m


Edward Frederick Clarke: It is in the el " v it department to ask for it. In the to is now being done, the minister ca ' * D
XiS	VV	


William Stevens Fielding: There nie so^ oJ.tlln; pr<
at nut
Mr. mmiinui. There are [DOT] proposals for increases outside <[DOT] pul ary form and these have to	.fiealb1-
I understand that we are 11 entirely with statutory increases


John Graham Haggart: 
William Stevens Fielding: I agree
change in staff can lie made t vealli' these reports, but they are
i red

before the money is asked from parliament.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I appeal to the minister this does not place the matter absolutely 111 the hands of the minister of the department: that the opposition have to go it blind ? All we are asked to do is to vote !1 lump sum.


William Stevens Fielding: Not at all.


Edward Frederick Clarke: We do not know to whom these moneys are being paid, and I think are entirely reasonable in asking for '^finite information as to who are to receive these increases.


William Stevens Fielding: My hon. friend (Mr. tlarke) is entirely wrong when he says we *te to go it blind. These are statutory inphases which are regulated by the statute.
understand the hon. minister (Mr. Pater-Jhh) to say that every man in his department who" is eligible is to receive an incase.	,
, Mr. CLARKE. Do the ordinary statuary increases exhaust the amount asked tor?


William Paterson: Seven hundred dollars ?[ the increase is accounted for by the fact *,at the minimum' salary was increased flOO by the Act of last year. With refer rlce to the $1,200, if the hon. gentleman has t r;lvii service list and will turn tp page P; he will And the names of all the officers r bo have been permanent in the department hitherto. Next year there will be some thore.	-


Edward Frederick Clarke: 
Mr PATERSON.: The real question is,
[DOT] m I doing it on my own responsibility or does the commissioner recommend these increases ?


Edward Cochrane: No, you are trying to e vade the question.


Mr PATERSON.: I am not trying to evade the question ; the hon. gentleman (Mr. Cochrane) does not understand what he is talking about


Edward Cochrane: I am glad the minister has wakened up. He did not know much until the Minister of Finance woke him up.


Mr SPROULE.: 
Mr ALCORN.: The Minister of Finance arguesthe matter as if it were dealing merely with automatic statutory increases. As I understand, there is an addition of eleven officers to the staff, and therefore that par, of his argument falls to the ground. Th^ Minister of Customs says that these are estimates now being prepared, but he is applying to parliament for an appropriation, an entirely different matter. From the moment this is adopted by parliament it becomes an appropriation and ceases to be an estimate ; and those in whose favour the hon. minister is asking for increases, or whom he is seeking to appoint, may, if this irregular proceeding is allowed, find themselves in the unpleasant position of tavin? the Auditor General hereafter say that th whole thing is irregular and he may letuse to issue cheques.


Mr FIELDING.: I must protest against this statement that the matter is irregular. U is perfectly regular in accordance JHi custom nractice and law. Ihese statu tor? increases can only be made when the deputy recommends them.


Mr ALCORN.: I must call the minister s attention to the fact that it is not only m regard to statutory increases.


Mr FIELDING.: The Act says you shall not create clerkships until you have done

certain things ; bnt you do not create them by passing this Act. You are simply giving authority to the minister, who must have the recommendation of the deputy after the money is voted by parliament.


Haughton Lennox: No.


William Stevens Fielding: The hon. gentleman had better read the Act.


Haughton Lennox: The Minister of Finance savs this is perfectly regular, as a matter of law and also as a matter of practice. As a matter of practice, it is perfectly regular, for year after year, for the last three or four' sessions, at all events, we have been calling the attention of the government to this irregularity, which, by long practice, they have attempted to make regular. That is what we object to. The Minister of Finance is entitled to great deference when he makes a statement on a question of law, although he is not a lawyer ; but I submit myself to the judgment of this committee when I read this section and endeavour to show that he is absolutely wrong :
A second class clerkship shall only be created by Order in Council passed on the report ot the deputy head, concurred in by the head ot the department, setting forth the reasons for creating the office, and after the salary has been voted by parliament.


William Stevens Fielding: ' After.'


Haughton Lennox: Yes, after the salary has been voted by parliament I wish to emphasize as strongly as I can exactly the point on which the minister proposes to hinge his argument. Now, what is perfectly clear to any reasonable intelligence is this, that before anything shall be done in the way of asking parliament to appropriate money for a position, it shall be ascertained, in a certain way defined by the Act, whether that office is necessary or not. The first step to be taken is that the deputy head i_s to report to his official head that there is a necessity for a clerkship. The next step is that that report shall be concurred in by the head of the department. If the deputy head does not take the initial step, you can not come before this House and ask for an appropriation. Something more than that is required. I argued last year or the year before that the report of the deputy head must be in writing. Hon. gentlemen opposite said that it need not be. T-hey are going a step further now. They want to argue that it need not be done at all before the money is voted. My reason for holding that the report must be in writing is that it must set forth the reasons for creating the office, so that when the minister comes to this committee and asks for an appropriation we. as representatives of the people, shall lie in a position to judge whether those reasons are good or not. If this committee grant the appropriation, then the government can create the office and appoint a person to the position, but not otherwise.


William Stevens Fielding: 


William Stevens Fielding: 
Haughton Lennox: You are asking us create them.	.. ia


William Stevens Fielding: 
Mr. CLANCY.: Do you not ffiink^ ^ parliament ought to be in possessio report ?	,	w jtb


William Stevens Fielding: I am not dealing g aS what ought to be, but with the	jaW
it is, and the practice followed is * t0 tin-'-and common sense and accorai * and view of the Department of Jl'*ll0wed. is one which has always been ^
Mr. I-IAGGART. Is it the view 0 Department of Justice ?	vjew


William Stevens Fielding: 
Mr. ALCORN.: 
Mr. HEYD.: Of course you do.


George Oscar Alcorn: 
William Stevens Fielding: The money must be 'U'st voted by parliament.


George Oscar Alcorn: The crucial point comes Precisely then. The whole thing turns on single word ' and.' I take it that after 5*e action of the Governor General in hUiieii is complete, then parliament is ask-u to vote the money.


William Stevens Fielding: That comes first and 4 * the other things come after it.
t Mr. ALCORN. The argument of my hon. .Rena from Simeoe is proved by the word
and.'


William Stevens Fielding: The important word is ot ' and,' but ' after.'
. tot- ALcoRN. In my opinion the word f ' shows that the argument of my hon. ri'e,l<] from Simeoe is correct, because ryerwise that WOrd would he wholly un. cessary. The section would then simply jhaa : ' Setting forth the reasons for creat-v* Rie office after the salary has been cm?'1 by parliament' But the section is 'bed into two distinct parts. First, the
;. the action of the department and of His Excellency, and then there is the voting of money' by parliament.
AIi- FOWLER. The statute prescribes three separate and distinct steps. First, the report of the deputy minister, which must he concurred in by the minister. Then there is the creation of the office hv the council, for parliament has no authority to create the office. Then the money nmsK voted by parliament, or the act of the council becomes ineffective.


William Stevens Fielding: We are asking parliament for the money now.


Mr. FOWLER.: But the statute prescribes the order in which the thing shall be done, and that is just the point. The initiative must come, not from the head of the department. but from his deputy. The report of the deputy must be concurred in by the head. Then after that is done and li'ns been approved by council, parliament i< asked for the money. But we have no report from the deputy minister, we do not know whether there is any such report in existence. If the initiative_ was taken by the minister and concurred in by the deputy, that would not be the propel wav The Initiative must come from the deputy, who makes a written report, in which the minister must concur. The minister comes down with that report, concurred in by him, and asks parliament for the money. Then the minister can go before the council and have the clerk appointed. It is absurd for the Minister of Finance to argue that you can pnt the cart before the horse and take the last step first. The statute prescribes what steps should be taken and in what order, and we have here the Minister of Justice, who S the law authority of the government.


John Graham Haggart: The Finance Minister is usurping his functions.


George William Fowler: My hon. friend the Finance Minister assumes to be the law authority but I do not 'know on what ground. Perhaps it is on the ground on which judges are appointed in Nova Scotia because of their lack of knowledge of law. According to what we heard from an hon. member the other day, that the qualification for which the last appo ment to a seat on the bench oftheSuiweme Court of Nova Scotia was lately made. Rut it seems to me that the government h-ffi better produce an authority who would cum-v more weight in the country on legal
cany more weig	Minister of Finance.
ThpStMinister of Customs asks us to vote ' money without out having anything to show that the preliminary steps have He says that his deputj is in accord with him, hut we want something 'CZ the mere word of a minister to

show whether these different steps have all been taken or not.


William Paterson: It seems to me that as hon. gentlemen opposite do not seem to understand this thing clearly, we might pass this item and they will have plenty of time to look into the matter and bring it up, if they choose, on another item. In the meantime, any information I can give the committee, I shall be pleased to give it. If there was any irregularity in what was being done here by us, it might be that what we considered necessary to submit for the committee's approval would be frustrated


John Graham Haggart: You ought to take your authority from the Minister of Justice.


William Paterson: If there was anything irregular the Auditor General, who so closely watches these matters, would refuse to sanction it. And as the Auditor General has sanctioned this course for the last thirty years under different administrations, I think that should pretty well settle it that this is the law. But if there is any information that I can give the committee I shall be glad to give it, and will pass on.


John Graham Haggart: Before the minister passes on, will he allow me to correct him and to correct also the Minister of Finance. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Paterson) speaks of a practice for thirty years. He says that this is the course that I always adopted when I was a minister. I never did anything of that kind.


William Paterson: Ho I understand the hon. gentleman to say that when, as a minister, he brought his estimates down to the House, he laid on the table the report of his deputy specifically recommending these things ?


John Graham Haggart: Does the hon. gentleman (Mr. Paterson) imagine that I said anything of that kind ?


William Paterson: I certainly so understood.


John Graham Haggart: 
William Stevens Fielding: Let us see.


John Graham Haggart: However, the cort pursued when I was a member of ornment was as I have described, nm standing what the Minister of says. It is very essential that the co ^ should have control over the clifTei'en1 r. partments, and that cannot be done n liament is to vote the money blindly- ^ then leave it to the deputy minister ana minister to make arrangements to spei tl>e You always should look forward to criticism of council and the criticism \\>e liament afterwards. I believe that 1 ^ hon. Minister of Finance will look ,.c-Privy Council he will find that there [DOT]1 jst gulations in regard to this particular r ce and how the thing is to be done in accoru with the statute.	.]jVj-


Edward Arthur Lancaster: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: Reference has been made to myself so frequently in the course of this debate that it might be considered an act of discourtesy if I did not say one or two words. 1 have been in charge of the estimates of the Department of Justice since 1896. For eight successive sessions I have brought the estimates here. When I came to the department I found there a deputj minister that had been appointed m 1893, when Sir John Thompson was Mmistei of Justice So far as the practice of my department is concerned, and which is in accordance with the practice suggested here by the Minister of Customs, whenn isounl necessary to increase the staff of the depai ment application is made foi an item in the estimates. That application goes to Council in the regular way, then we come to
& at* saWs-T?
then passes on the matter. That is the
K&re ** "\fi
IT.1.0OM Mlow [DOT]"! *'


Mr FOWLER.: Are you following that course in the present case ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK, This session I am creating a new position in the Supreme Court' and the practice I have mentioned has been followed with regard to it.


George William Fowler: Do you think that is in compliance with the statute ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: This is not a^new departure, it is a ffiacti h far as the events has been ^ ^fts concerned, ever Department of	d x aul certain
srJ a- s-s
arguments to	",ould haVe enter-

because this is rather a serious legal question anti X would like to follow out my argument.


George Oscar Alcorn: In regard to the question of practice, does the minister refer to an estimate for a specific sum or to a general sum ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, no.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Give me an opportunity of expressing my views. Now it is apparent to me that it is absolutely impossible to give effect to that section, to expect the Governor General to determine how many clerks he must appoint, and to be sure that the collective amount to be paid for them is not in excess of the vote of parliament, unless he knows what that vote of parliament is ; otherwise how can he determine the correct amount of the salaries ? It seems to me the section is absolutely conclusive on that point, and in so far as my humble opinion goes-and I give it with ail due deference to my hon. friends opposite-I say it is absolutely in accordance with the practice that has prevailed in my department for all tiiese years ; and I assume, and my hon. friends will admit, that the gentleman who is responsible for tlie preparation of the estimates under my control, knows what he is talking about, not only as the result of the long experience lie has had in that department, but also because of his eminent ability. I would not say that I Rave ever consulted him specifically upon that point. If my hon. friend


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Edward Arthur Lancaster: Take section b. thfl* does the hon. Minister of Justice ^ * v0t? parliament would know the am i ^ unless they first had this estimate .


Charles Fitzpatrick: Very simply following out what the hon.
Customs lias done. He comes to Pal for and says :	I want so much money
so many first-class clerks.
know
How do we
Mr. LANCASTER, amount ?	, g0


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Edward Arthur Lancaster: How does the tJj0ge ernor in Council know that he wa [DOT]
clerkS ?	f tUe Oov-


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Edward Arthur Lancaster: 
Sir RICHARD CARTWRIGHT.: 
John Graham Haggart: After the vote has been obtained ?	-


Richard John Cartwright: Yes.


Mr HAGGART.: 
John Graham Haggart: Yes, l am going to hunt up the debates on the subject an^ 11 prepared to show to the hon Munster ot Justice that the consmnas id P the House is in the dnecuon w I have stated.
*	a TRICK. I want to get the
optaion of a distinguished Minister of Justice. Do not forget that.
,fl. rr 4 GO ART. Yes, I will get you one.
question two or three sessions ago. It was

brought up in the House four or five sessions ago ; it has been debated in the House in preceding parliaments, and I never had a doubt as to what the law was on the subject until I heard hon. gentlemen opposite to-night. There is a possible way ot evading it. The Minister of Customs might have said : I have not taken these preliminary steps but I will see that they are taken before my estimates are passed. As a. rule the law requires that the estimate be prepared in the manner contended on this side of the House.


Edward Cochrane: Until the Minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick) took a contrary view I always understood that the law was based on common sense and justice. Mould not common sense say that it was absurd for the Minister of Customs (Mr. Paterson) to ask for a sum of money to pay the salary of an officer whom he has not in his employ and cannot have until the preliminaries are complied with ? As I understood the minister, he required a recommendation from his deputy minister for a certain number of additional clerks. The minister obtained an Order in Council creating that number of
extra officials, then would not common sense say that, until the minister has that recommendation from his deputy and an Order in Council based upon it, it would be deceiving the House-and if business has been conducted in this way before I must often have been deceived-to come to the committee
and ask for a sum of money to pay so many clerks when he had not the clerks in his em-plovment ? Hoes not the hon. minister see how easily an unsuspecting member like myself can be deceived ; he tells me he has four clerks, and that he wants a thousand dollars to pay for them when he has not these clerks at all and has not taken the first step to obtain their appointment.


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
James Clancy: I am endeavourmg ^
reach the common sense side or	nt 0(
How is the necessity for the appoin rjja. an additional clerk to be known Aation ment ? By not having the recornm ^ ijn. of the deputy are we not neglecting portant safeguard ?	.]ity


Charles Fitzpatrick: The respond 3er"e to parliament for statements mat ^ m does not rest on the deputy beau m;nis-department but on the minister.	tbe
ter is responsible to parliamen cierkS-statement that he requires so maui ^ Mr. CLANCY. Under certain coiidi Mr. FITZPATRICK. For the'.resV binJ-bility of that statement he cannot sn p0n-self behind his deputy ; he alone is bis sible to parliament and he cannot e. responsibility	. 0f


James Clancy: The mere responsiW't0 ^ a minister to parliament does not bettel sufficient ; parliament should ha rjlie information and a better safegu	tlie
minister may suffer afterwards,^ anj the
ireasury may suffer in the meantin iIlt safeguard for that is what I have *
>ut.	lah^h1


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Edward Cochrane: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: MX |30nsure. supplement what I said I ient an jtjj-session we pass Acts of	: '
put. in the Supply Bill the P geryice standing anything in the o

That is an amendment of the Civil Service
Act.


Haughton Lennox: I understand the minister to mean that when at the close of the session we pass the Supply Bill, that Bill 's absolute so far as it goes and so far as it conflicts with any other Act it supersedes the other Act, as in the case which he mentions : 'Notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act.' I do not understand that the minister will go so far as to say that it supersedes it for the purpose ot effecting the object it has in view.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Quite right.


Haughton Lennox: It does not prevail from Session to session, but is effective only for the purpose of validating what is provided 1,1 the four corners of the Act.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I agree.


Haughton Lennox: 
Mr LANCASTER.: 
William Paterson: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: afternoon was ever argued here. I ^ou'd ask mv hon. friend from East Grey to say if he ever knew of a minister in any government, who, when he brought down his estimates. produced more than I am iirodiMing now ? The deputy minister must he consulted in the preparation of the estimates. they know whether extra help is rcMiiiti'ccl or not and it is after conference with them that the estimates are submitted to council and then if approved, brought before parliament. If extra men and appropriations are asked for, hon. gentlemen are quite within their right in saying that the department is overmanned, and we are bound to explain why these extra appropriations are required.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Will the hon. gentleman tell us whether he and his deputy have discussed this question already ?


William Paterson: Certainly we have.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Then why has he not got the report of his deputy ? Such a report is necessary, and we are entitled to have it.


William Paterson: The report, after it is prepared, goes before council to be sanctioned. Then the substance of that report is found in the estimates submitted to the House.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: How can the substance of that report be found in the estimates unless it _ is made ? I am asking whether one has been made, as required by the statute. If it has, let the hon. minister say so.


George William Fowler: I wish to point out-


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I should like first to have a reply from the hon. minister.


George William Fowler: If my hon. friend will wait a moment


William Paterson: I only ask my hon. friend from Lincoln (Mr. Lancaster) to bear testimony to the fact that his hon. friend from Kings, N. B. (Mr. Fowler), will not allow me to reply. I mention this so that my hon. friend may not read me another lecture. If I do not answer, it is because I cannot.


George William Fowler: I want to point out that the Minister of Customs seems to have the right idea of what his duty is in the premises. He says that he has already had a report from * his deputy, in which he concurred, and that he laid it before council. So far he has followed the statute. But our pretension is that we should have that report itself and not merely its substance. We require that report in order to determine whether requirements of the statute have been complied with, and we should have it before being asked to vote this money.
That is tlie point at issue between the Minister of Customs and the gentlemen on this side of the House. I congratulate the Minister of Customs upon having followed the


William Paterson: 
William Paterson: 
George William Fowler: Oh.
,, Mr. PATERSON. That is what I think.
, he hon. gentlemen have read tune and ''gain


Edward Frederick Clarke: 
Mr PATERSON.: Don't you find that fact in the estimates themselves ?


George William Fowler: Not at all.


William Paterson: Why not ?


George William Fowler: If the minister chooses to bring down a certain estimate and we know that before he can bring it down he must have been to council, is it foi_usi to find out whether the necessary preliminaries have been gone through ? M e have not that confidence in the government of this coun try to promise that of them. The very fact that it1 had been recommended by this present administration would be sufficient to create a suspicion about it, the 'very fiac -their recommendation would be; an extra reason for us to scan most caiefully this estimate and the grounds upon which th estimate was made.
At six o'clock, committee took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.



[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 24) respecting the Canadian I ire Insurance Company.-Mr. McCreary.
heal -TATE JHLEmGaUARANTEE AND
House went	taf^Titie Guaran-
On the preamble.
. oproBLB. It seems to me that we K8**,S S the provincial	t.
[Stage Direction]
of Quebec, and now it is sought to extend the powers of the company to all the provinces. There may be something in the laws of Quebec, or the powers which this company has, not applicable to the other provinces. I know there has been a good deal of discussion in the past about taking up these provincial companies and giving them incorporation under the authority of this parliament.
William Stevens Fielding: This follows the charter we granted last session to the Royal Trust Company. The matter was thoroughly investigated at that time, and the Bill was changed and adapted to meet the views of the Department of Justice, and they advised us that it was an entirely legitimate and proper Bill. After careful examination in the department and in the Comuittee on Banking and Commerce the Royal Trust Company's Bill was accepted.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: And this is a similar case ?


William Stevens Fielding: Substantially the same, and follows what parliament has granted under like circumstances to the Royal Trust Company.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It was because I did not know whether it had been considered along those lines that I asked the question. I remember the discussion that took place last session, and some of the grounds on which it was concluded that it was proper to grant such power. If this follows the same lines-


William Stevens Fielding: I have had it examined with that view, and I am assured that it follows the lines of the other Bill.
Bill reported; read the third time and passed.


BRANTFORD AND HAMILTON RAILWAY COMPANY.
[Stage Direction]
House went into Committee on Bill (No. 22) to incorporate the Brantford and Hamilton Railway Company.-Mr. Calvert.
On the preamble.
Mr. HENDERSON.: I would like to ask the Chairman of the Committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines, what has been done about the clause that was to be prepared by a sub-committee consisting of the hon. member for Hamilton (Mr. Barker), the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Em-merson) and the chairman of the committee (Mr. Hyman) ? Has it been dealt with in accordance with the instructions of the committee ?


Mr. HYMAN.: In accordance with the instructions of the committee the clause^ was prepared, and when it is reached it will be read to this committee.
On section 7, subsection 5.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: This is a new clause, and it reads as follows :


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
Charles Smith Hyman: 
Edward Frederick Clarke: What is the object o subsection ?	__ geC.


Charles Smith Hyman: 
Edward Frederick Clarke: 
Charles Smith Hyman: 
Edward Frederick Clarke: What is clause ^ fl0 Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER. There change.	t	. in tbe


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
Charles Smith Hyman: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then,	W0lT
the word 'securities' would*	^exe '
gages and bonds whether tn [DOT] second or third preference.


Charles Smith Hyman: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
Charles Smith Hyman: Of course, we all underhand in the first place that the citizens of these municipalities are very anxious for the completion of this railway and it was fplt that if you put a clause in by which there was no possibility of their going on for six months, notwithstanding the fact that they might make an arrangement with We company, which, whether it is acknow-edgedTnot asserts a prior claim, it would be entirely unfair to say that for six months they should take no step to proceed, under this charter. Therefore this clause was adopted by the committee.


Mr SPROULE.: That was not the understanding in the committee.


Mr HYMAN.: I have no objection to the clause going; back to the Railway Committee. I mav say that the representative of the Hamilton and Ancaster Company saw this clause, and that it was in accordance with their desire in the matter. It is intended simply to permit tlie new company, if they make such arrangements as are satisfactory to the old company, to take action befoie the end of six months and to go on with the work.
Mr. ,CLARKE. The committee were certainly seized of the impression that the municipalities interested were desirous of having the work done, but havhig heard counsel for those who have the charter for the Hamilton and Ancaster railroad, they thought a case had been made out for some consideration and that a reasonable tirn should be given them to show then bona tides and to go on with the work. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Hyman) says that counsel for the Hamilton and Ancaster road and Mi I eslie who appeared on behalf of the company are both satisfied with the clause, so I am perfectly satisfied with it too.
,r twpr am I can testify to the solicito? and Mr Leslie both being satisfied. This Bill lias be remarkable feature of being fa sfactorv to both sides of the controversy. The only point I see deserving of comment is the clause providing that the Oidei in Council may issue before the 31st of October, and I can see a good reason why that should be so. Supposing on tlie 1st of October these gentleman had not Proeee -if- all Is there any good reason then "uy this Order in Conned should not = on the 1st of October ? It woulfll fJ^efavs
thing is satisfactory.


Mr HENDERSON.: The hon. member for
k;, z >* **"'

Order in Council on the 31st of October. As a matter of fact the road could not be completed within three months. If Mr. Leslie is a party to this arrangement and has concurred in this clause, I have nothing further to say.
On section 13b.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I would ask the hon. minister (Mr. Hyman) why this clause appears here now. When this Bill was under consideration I drew attention to the fact that it contained no time limit for beginning or ending the railway. His answer to me was that as the General Railway Act provides for this, it should not be put in the Bill. I am not objecting to it going in, but we should adopt either one course or the other and always either put it in or not put it in unless there is some special reason.


Charles Smith Hyman: There is this reason in this case that in the ordinary course an Act goes into effect from the time it receives the assent of the Governor General. But in this particular case the Act was brought into force at a subsequent date.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That does not make any difference.


Charles Smith Hyman: The hon. gentleman may be perfectly right ; I do not remember saying that in the Railway Committee. The secretary of the Railway Committee had this clause prepared and I had it before me, and I do not remember saying there was no necessity for the clause.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The Bill was reported without it.


Charles Smith Hyman: I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon. I had this clause before me, prepared by the secretary, at the time it was under discussion, and my understanding was that it was to be put in.


Mr. INGRAM.: It was understood in the Railway Committee that the secretary was to draft that clause, but I do not remember it being afterwards submitted to the committee as drawn up. It was well understood by the committee what the clause was to be.


Charles Smith Hyman: This clause is not in the exact wording of the clause in the Railway Act. This clause reads :
If the construction of this railway is not commenced and 15 per cent of the capital stock is not expended within two years from the issue of the proclamation.
On subsection 5 of section 7,


Charles Smith Hyman: 
Edward Frederick Clarke: It is the intention subsection to give the municipalities *
protection.	v
4-hnt ,


Charles Smith Hyman: It would seem tnaa cannot make direct application to tn way Committee.
fusal
tbeJ'


Andrew B. Ingram: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: The original 'go along or across'; but this 1 would apply only to a crossing-


Charles Smith Hyman: If the hon. gentleffl*"t tbe at subsection 4, he will fi,Rl
ina tb/Ler-
:ct and OP
look
question of the right to construct
'	"'U 0f tlT
and is left entirely in the hanas^ ^ t^e
a'te on any highway, is
dealt ffiui 

 tl,e _______ _ __ hands
municipality. It is only the	sU,r
l oad that is protected in this tv; 3 section 5.	^ paS
Bill reported, read the third time, a sed.
SECOND READINGS-	^ ts
Bill	(No. 05) respecting eertain	rj0j_
of Lewis E. Curtis.-Mr. Ross 1	>'of'
Bill (No. 06) respecting the them	and Omineca Railway
Mr. Morrison.	Ac'
Bill (No. 67) respecting the g. N0C' cident Insurance Company. All-laren.	]ie
Bill	(No. 69) to incorporate	os)er-
* iveil Life Assurance Compani'' '
1S26
182s

fiiU (No. 70) respecting the Canadian acific Railway Company.-Mr. Douglas, j&ill (No. 71) respecting the Ottawa, rockviile and St. Lawrence Railway Com-MUly..-x,ogan.



[Stage Direction]
Apartment of Customs-salaries, $57,160.
LENNOX. The consideration of this ,eth does not involve merely the amount j money, but a great constitutional ques-J011- From time to time it appears to me these constitutional safeguards are be-j*)8 infringed upon or dropped or beclouded the present administration ; and, im-iftant as it is in itself that His Majesty's ^Position should guard the interests of the jJ®°Ple of Canada in the matter of the ("Penditure of money, it is perhaps even th0l'e important that we should see that w®Se safeguards are rigidly adhered to. A°'v>
this is not a temporary question all: it is a question of far-reaching im-
?,°rtance, and the fact, if it is a fact, that (,j .safeguard provided has. been disregardth,
111 the past is no argument that it should ..disregarded at present or in the future.
though we sometimes forget perhaps the gjSes of parliament, I think we can con-yjl'date ourselves that we never forget 0f s important principle, that the statement a member of this House is accepted as ^bted and incontrovertible ; and when f0l, *mve the statement of the hon. member South Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart) as to the practice was prior to 189G under est, mitninistration, we may take it as a fact, tarnished beyond question, that that was it Practice that then prevailed. Whether [DOT] w*'s or not, however, is not fundamen-
1 r 1° the determination of this question. sBin?eat an<l 11 cannot be too emphatically tio^^iated, that there is a great constitute ,al safeguard of the people of Canada to^ue in the question we are discussing ilia!. ^kt. If hon. gentlemen who are fam-<Mth the laws and practices of parlia-' ^ill for one moment reflect, they will t three great safeguards stand out %plcil0us]y in the constitution of Canada.
c°ncerns the paying out of money of in ^ople of Canada. The great safeguard eference to that, which prevents the to a large extent, though nj>
i am sorry to say, from squanaer-" - °e resources of the people of Canada
S:
j'ot JPjftration ii)g .Oily, lam
resources of the people or uanaua, llif. ,oe institution of the Audit Office, and I'te^pOoministration of that office by the S|M<i O incumbent. Too much cannot be Olui efficient manner in which that of fk„rruin lias administered that office, and ,	® sturdy and loyal way in which he
iritis??? UP I°r the rights of the people is
.	[DOT] acts °* present administration.
,0° instances, in one instance that oc-'Hen? mind, into which I shall not go at large a sum as over half a million
dollars was saved to the people by the activity and loyalty of this officer. And even then he failed to accomplish all he thought should have been accomplished on behalf of the people. That is one of the safeguards which stands out conspicuously. Another safeguard is that when any impost or tax is to be put on the people, the first step to be taken by the government is to announce to the House that they have the consent of His Excellency to the introduction of a measure. That is a safeguard which, according to all constitutional authorities, is of vast interest to the people. In fact, too many steps cannot be taken in putting these measures through the House, so that the attention of the people's representatives shall be called to them in all their various stages. But this constitutional safeguard is one which has been more honoured in the breach than in the observance by the present administration. I do not mean that it is completely ignored. But in important questions, such as the building of the Yukon Railway and this new transcontinental line, this safeguard was not observed until its observance was forced on the administration by the activity of members on this side.
A similar safeguard of the interests of the people is involved in the question we are now discussing. The procedure as outlined in the Civil Service Act requires that there shall be first a report of the deputy head in writing, setting out the reasons why the additional clerkship is required. That safeguard is required because of the political influences that are apt to surround the head of the department. It is no secret in public life that ministers of the Crown are besieged by office-seekers, and it was thought wise that some one, removed from the political arena, and who has immediate supervision and control of the department, should be the one to recommend that an additional clerkship is required. Then, after the head of the department has passed upon the report and submitted it to council, and the council has approved of it, the final determination is left with parliament, the people's representatives in the House of Commons. It is said that the reason for the additional clerkship will be given after the vote is taken. But what possible benefit could there be in stating the reasons then. The deputy head would simply say that the money having been voted by parliament, all he had to do was to recommend the additional new clerk. The abuses that could creep in if such a course were followed are innumerable. I need only mention one. A minister of the Crown may have relatives,-which is something not unknown to the present administration,-he may have nephews, sons and others who would he of inestimable value to the public service in his estimation, but who would hamper and impede the administration of the department in the opinion of the deputy head, and they may be the last persons
[Stage Direction]
1S2'7
[Stage Direction]
whom he would think of recommending if he were consulted, as he should be, according to the statute. Then the next step is the concurrence in the report of the deputy head by the head of the department. Perhaps ministers of the Crown do not like to think that these matters have to^ originate with the deputy head, but, acording to the statute, they must be initiated by him.
If then, the head of the department concurs in the opinion of the deputy head, the matter is advanced another stage-a second step toward the appointment has been consummated. The third matter is one of the great safeguards to which I have referred and to which I will specifically refer now - and I hope I shall have the attention of the ministers of the Crown, because I believe that any deviation from the rule has been a matter of oversight rather than of intention. It is provided, in the first place, that this report shall be laid before His Excellency the Governor General. There must be a recommendation in writing, concurred in by the minister, and, as a third step, laid before the Governor General. This is a great safeguard provided by the statute. It is the duty of the Governor General, when this matter comes before him, to consider the propriety of having this matter brought down to parliament at all. Ministers of the Crown, from habit may conclude that they are sovereign in these matters, that of their mere will they can bring down estimates of such size and such a character as they may see fit. Reflection will teach them that it is the mandate of the Governor General, after this matter has been submitted to and considered by him, that authorizes the introduction of it iiito this House. This is the fourth step, and it is only after we have all these pieliminary steps, all these statutory requirements observed, that the minister of the Crown has the right to introduce the matter to the committee, or that, as representatives of the people we have the right to consider it. Do not forget this, because it is an important point, which we shall have to consider later on. Again I submit it as an undoubted fact, notwithstanding my high regard for the Minister of Justice, that not only is it true that the department cannot constitutionally and fairly bring down these estimates until these steps are taken, but the opposition are derelict in their duties if they allow these items co pass in that shape without, at all events, doing all they can to prevent their passing. Now, when all these steps have been taken, and when the committee have considered the reasons accompanying the application for this money, and if the reasons given by the deputy head seem just and fair, the funds are provided, and then the matter is in a position for the creation of the office. Now, it is not a question of production at all. It is immaterial whether Mr. LENNOX.
we have the original report as PrepatM by the deputy head, and sent through . proper channel to the Governor Geh®' j or not. But, it is our duty to see w* these steps are taken. We should h' ^ before the committee at least a copy m least a statement of what the reasons w upon which this vote is asked.	gll
The reason I have argued the question, this line is that this is one of three Sl constitutional safeguards of the people. -a matter vital to the interests of the cohh1^ namely the question of taxation. is no subject around which fiercer pass have raged than this very subject ot imposition of taxes. In Great Britain-] the old days the storm centre of Poll5,j# affairs, was the question which more m j, any other imperilled the safety of the Br-' empire this question of taxation. Of con I am not going to say what I do nor lieve-I do not think the question be* y us to-night imperils in any way the stadjw of Canada. But I say, a*nd say adviser ,, that it involves the same principle 11 ^ which these great agitations have riser ^ ilie past, and that the strict adherence the constitution is just as vital to the ^ servation of our rights now, as at any 1 in the history of the empire.
I have an object in reviewing to -' eji extent the line of argument that has " t. taken. I do not wish to delay unnecf" .,; ily the estimates of the lion, mini but I do not want to be understoo arrogating to myself great important ^ special knowledge when I say that I c' jjjjr accept the opinion expressed by the glister of Justice on this question, withstanding what I have heard from hon. gentleman, I am, if anything, convinced than I was before, I am * c0j)' utely convinced, that the true and 0, Lfi'el struction of the provisions I have re * [0 to is the construction I have vent in gO-place before the committee. In <3°*
I am paying a tribute rather than ^ 1 wise to the Minister of Justice, respect very highly, and for whose a I have the very greatest regard. is my faith in the ability of the of Justice upon most questions, ^ W seems clear to me that he must be * vU1. by what has been transpiring in ious offices since 1896. HW	tj1'."
must be so warped by prejudice UP subject that here is a clear case m ^
I can show that, upon this question1 events, my judgment is more \nStK even than that of the Minister of . tJJj
I hope I shall not be misunderstood .jtr
regard. I intend to look up the an jjfti that have been suggested, and we sna this matter discussed further. Bun at the various provisions of this "
I cannot but be impressed with the P j, ti ly apt and proper language in 'vlge<jti° \arious sections of it are couched,
[Stage Direction]
klch, by reason of their happy phraseology peculiar fitness for the purpose for '.ich they are intended, I venture to su'd. ?Tt, are in strange and striking contrast i, the puny, inconsequent and incongruous of the present administration.
Mr, sproULB. I would like to draw ^lention to one thing, that, it seems to must strengthen the conviction that s"e opinion expressed on this side is right, (hie years ago we passed an amendment " the Civil Service Act, and established , '"at was called a board. And that is part V?<1 parcel of the Civil Service Act to-day. in working out that Act, here is one
*	the provisions ; and it was in consequ-flnee of this that I drew attention to it toremembering the duty that was im-Se<l upon the deputy head :
in each . year, and not later than the ije e®nth day of March, the deputy head of each ha tment shall make and lay before the 0( through the Department of the Secretary cjes ate' an estimate of the number of vacan-yes likely to occur therein during the ensuing
(r- in the first division, in the classes of-
Chief clerks ;
,1 First-class clerks ;
, 1 Second-class clerks.
' To the number so estimated shall he added lee further number as the deputy head of the deems necessary to compensate for fen death, failure of health or other continsimilar estimate shall be made _ at the ocrre time of the number of vacancies likely to f in the second division to which promotions made.
this is intended to provide for the (jP-ceeding year. The number of vacan-44s. that have taken place on account of to k ' Promotions or increase of work, has owDe- before the 20th day of March, made tw ,ahd laid before the board through the foj, of the department. What was that th; ' . So as to enable the board to present the .^formation to the council, and upon Of .basis of that, to make the calculation tivi] v much money was needed for the f&iJ :service in that department. That iu-5*n was regarded as sufficient to Wthe council in putting in the esti-the items necessary to provide sal-0hIv tor those parties, and that was the lskedC&Se in wbich they had to do it. I the minister upon what data or bec„ t he has come here for so much money, *i0r6 . I notice that he provides three servants in one class than were ih class last year ; he provides eight. J'oar class that were not there last Jbw ®t all. i assumed at once that they
M nrYe t'een recommended by the deputy 't^nj t the department, or otherwise the eU, „ °uld not have found its way to coun-
«We w°nld not be providing the t, or ^ to-day. It is the initiatory ^0,1sibi3!l| * want to find out. Who is res® for making the recommendation to
the department, and through the department to the council, for this additional amount of money we are asked far ?
["FIELDING (Minister of Finance) delivered a message from His Excellency the Governor General.\nMr. DEPUTY SPEAKER read the message as follows :\nMinto. .\nThe Governor General transmits to the House of Commons supplementary estimates of sums required for the service of the Dominion for the year ending 30th June, 1904, and in accordance with the provisions of the British North America Act, 1867, the Governor General recommends these estimates to ' the House of Commons.\nMr. FIELDING moved-\t[DOT]\nThat the message of His Excellency, together with supplementary estimates be referred to the Committee of Supply.\nHe said : I may say that these are two or three items of emergency, but they are not the general estimates for the balance of the year."]
Mr. BARKER.: I was not here this afternoon "when this item arose, and would not now intervene were it not that I understand that the item contains the salaries of some new appointments such as a first-class clerk, or a second-class clerk, that did not exist before. Am I right, Mr. Chairman ? I understand that is the bone of contention now. Now, Sir, this question arose last year, and it was very fully debated, as will be found at page 2727 of ' Hansard.' On that occasion I took excep tion to the use that was being made by the government of the words ' notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act,' which little phrase appeared on almost every page of the estimates. It turned out that that phrase was being used by the government to repeal the Civil Service Act, and by some hocus pocus that nobody could understand, it not only repealed the Civil Service Act, but immediately afterwards the Civil Service Act took effect again. I called attention to it on that occasion, and I discussed the several provisions as to the procedure under which new offices were created, and the hon. the Minister of Finance answered, and he was replied to by the leader of the opposition. The whole subject was discussed very fully there, and I propose to read a remark or two on that occasion by the hon. the Finance Minister and one or two remarks made in reply to him by the leader of the opposition. I referred on mat occasion to the very distinct words in the Civil Service Act describing the routine, the order of procedure for the creation of these extra or new offices. To my mind then, and I think to every man's mind, there could be no doubt whatever as to what the Civil Service Act contemplated. Not only was 1 confident in my own mind on that question, but I was confirmed in my opinion by the admission of the Minister of Finance on that occasion. The hon. the Minister of Finance did not dispute that these offices could not be created by Order in Council except under the strict regulations and provisions of that Act. But the hon. the Minister of Finance said this, that the Civil Service Act was capable of amendment, and that when, in the estimates every year, something new was added that was inconsistent with the Civil Service Act, the very fact that the words were inconsistent with the Civil Service Act made them an amendment to that Act. Well, it was one of the most extraordinary remarks I ever heard from a gentleman in the position of a minister of the Crown. The hon. gentleman gravely stated that when there was an evasion of the Act, it was an amendment to the Act. The hon. gentleman assumed that the words introduced into the estimates could form an amendment to the

Act, and the amendment being enacted by this parliament, the instant the words passed the lips of parliament, their effect ended and the Act was restored. The argument only requires to be stated to show its utter absurdity. The hon. gentleman said :
Every Act of parliament is capable of being amended, and when we introduce into the Supply Bill the words * Notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act,' undoubtedly to the extent of these words, and in the case to which they refer, we amend the CiV'l Service Act.
The Act being amended it stood as it was before.


William Stevens Fielding: Not as respects that particular case.


Samuel Barker: Would it not have been wise to say, so that there could be no doubt what you meant ; that this item being passed the Act went back to the old condition ?


Edward Cochrane: ' It is automatic.


Samuel Barker: 
William Stevens Fielding: 
George William Fowler: I suppose the hon. Minster of Finance refers to the hon. Minister r Justice ?


William Stevens Fielding: Yes, I do.


George William Fowler: Well, the hon. Minister J Justice did not give ail opinion. He said a.at he would take the matter into consider-',tlon. Would the hon. Minister of Finance ptu'don me for a moment ?
have heard from the hon. gentleman from time to time, I do not think anybody would have very much confidence in his legal attainments or in any statement he might make as to the law of this or any other country. As to the moral law, I do not think we can draw a more favourable conclusion judging from the exhibition we had from the hon. gentleman the other day, and judging from the statement of the hon. exMinister of Railways and Canals as to his conduct in reference to some memoranda which he found in the Privy Council after the advent of this administration.


William Stevens Fielding: 
Samuel Barker: I understand the hon. Minister of Finance to say that there is some distinction between the discussion of last session and that upon the item now before the committee, because last session the words ' notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act' were used. Does that make, any difference ? The only point is that this is a further concealment of the intention to evade. The hon. gentleman is seeking to amend the Civil Service Act. He is creating second-class clerkships. What does the Act say ?
A second-class clerkship shall only be created by Order in Council, passed on the report of the deputy head.
Where is the report of the deputy head on which the Order in Council was based ? Does the hon. gentleman pretend that there is any .such report in existence ? If the hon. gentleman says there is the argument can cease at once. We have not another word to say. But there is no such order in council. The hon. gentleman in assuming to pass the order in council without the report of the deputy head is deliberately violating an express provision ot' parliament. It does not require a lawyer to understand that much, I hope. It is simply a matter of common sense. I will read the words again. I am afraid the hon. gentleman is so busy iu his department that lie does not read these Acts or that somebody in getting orders in council through, does not take the trouble to look nt the authority on which they pass the order in council.
Section 19 says :
A second-class clerkship shall only be created by order in council, passed on the report of the deputy head, concurred in by the head of the department, setting forth the reasons for creating the office, and after the salary has been voted by parliament.
So that before council can consider the question they must have the report of the responsible deputy the man who knows whether the office is needed. This report baying been approved by council then thej are in a position to have the money voted by parliament but not until then. What an absurdity it would be for us to pass millions of dollars for ministers when they do not know that they will ever get a report of the

deputy head ! If the deputy head should report that the office is not needed, what is the hon. gentleman going to do about it ? Parliament is gravely asked to vote money for an office which may not be created. As has been said the hon. gentleman is putting the cart before the horse. Why should we vote money to add to the obligations and taxes of this country including in these votes salaries for men whom they have no right to employ? It is absolutely folly even to take time to argue the matter.


William Stevens Fielding: Lest it might seem discourteous to the hon. gentleman not to reply to him, I may say that he was not in his seat when the whole question was thoroughly threshed out this afternoon.


Samuel Barker: You cannot thresh it out, there is nothing to thresh.


William Stevens Fielding: Hear, hear.


Samuel Barker: If the hon. gentleman says that the item includes salaries for second-class clerks who have not been recommended by the deputy head there is nothing to talk about.


William Stevens Fielding: Then why insist on talking ?


Andrew B. Ingram: The only explanation I could obtain this afternoon was the statement made by the Minister of Customs (Mr. Paterson) that the submission of an item by a minister should be a sufficient reason for that item passing. That is a very clever explanation, but there is not much information in it. This item is for $57,160, an increase of $8,810. We find on page 17 that there is an increase of eleven clerks, three junior second-class clerks and eight 'of the third-class. No explanation is given of what the three new junior second-class clerks are to receive, or what the eight third-class clerks are to receive. This is a very large increase and the House has a right to know before we pass these estimates the necessity for these clerks in the department and the branch of that department and the particular service that these men are to be employed in. Who are they and what are their duties ? I for one shall decline to vote for this item until this information is furnished. The argument this afternoon was as to whether the minister has a right to secure an order in council without a report being submitted to him by his deputy. I can readily see that the head of the department is open to political influence, and the fact of this check being placed upon him should be a great relief to him as when his friends come to him and put forth every effort to induce him to appoint unnecessary and incompetent men to office at good salaries, he can shelter himself behind his deputy and say : I require a report from my deputy, and I must concur in that before the man can be appointed. Of course we all know the usual eliestnut that such men cannot be appointed


Samuel Barker: 
William Paterson: 
Andrew B. Ingram: What becomes ^ltside items for their salaries in the service ? Will they lapse ?
t-hp o'!1'


William Paterson: 
Edward Frederick Clarke: 
William Paterson: 
Mr. PATERSON W. H.@: 
Mr PATERSON.: While it does not give the amount of duty, it giv"* the rates, I believe.
Mr. BARKER- The question we are discussing in committee is not about the particular 'value of the reports of the department, but as to the principle of the creation of these offices. That is what I would like to confine the minister to for the present. The minister tells us that these three gentlemen have been brought here from a distance, and have been performing their services here. Are they second-class clerks ?


William Paterson: No, they have not yet been appointed to those positions. We are asking for a vote in order that we may appoint them.


Samuel Barker: Has there been any report from the deputy ?


William Paterson: There will have to be before they are appointed.


Samuel Barker: I did not ask that. I asked if there has been a report from the deputy ?


William Paterson: The hon. gentleman is asking the question that has been discussed all the afternoon.


Samuel Barker: I would like a statement from the minister if there has been a report from the deputy that these clerks are required ?


William Paterson: It was the deputy head who brought these gentlemen in, as I understand it. If he did that, he must have considered that their services were required.


Samuel Barker: Is that the way the business of the department is conducted ? The deputy minister brings in these gentlemen and does not even make a report as to the necessity for employing them. This seems to be going still further away from the provisions of the Act. Last year we discussed all this and tried to get some rule of procedure adopted. The Finance Minister told us then that the estimates repealed the Civil Service Act. I hope he is not going to adhere to that. I am sure he will not seriously say that he is going to repeal the Civil Service Act twenty times every session. If the hon. gentleman claims absolutely the right to do this, let him say so. Last year he supported it simply on the ground that every time that appeared in the estimates, it was equivalent to an Act of parliament and was pro tanto an amendment of the Civil Service Act. We want to know just where we are in this matter These gentlemen are already established in the office, and there has ap-

parently been neither a report from the deputy head or anything else.


Andrew B. Ingram: Had these three men a I'oving commission ? The hon. gentleman did not say where they were located-those gentlemen who were collecting statistics.


William Paterson: They had been engaged in the statistics in the city here, and were brought into the Inside department. They had been there over a year.


Samuel Barker: They have been second-class clerks for a year and there is nothing to authorize their appointment ?


William Paterson: My hon. friend from Hamilton was not here this afternoon and does not know the discussion that took place. I am not on that point at all. These gentlemen are not yet appointed junior second-class clerks. Before they can be appointed, there will have to be a report from the deputy, concurred in by the minister, and the office created according to law.


Samuel Barker: But they have been here twelve months.


William Paterson: It cannot be done otherwise. If the hon. gentleman will only think for a moment, he will realize that the hundreds of clerks appointed during the past thirty or forty years were all appointed in this way. Will the hon. gentleman point to one who has not been legally appointed ?


Edward Cochrane: How do we know?


William Paterson: My hon. friend from South Simcoe says that we have constitutional safeguards. There must be the sanction of His Excellency, which is one safeguard, and we have another very valuable safe-guard in the Auditor General, who has to pass upon all these matters. In all these years, the Auditor General has sanctioned every one of these appointments. Not one of these men can be appointed if we vote their salaries now, unless the law be complied with. If any one of them is not appointed to the position according to the statute, he cannot get the money. The deputy head cannot recommend the appointment, the minister cannot concur in his recommendation, the council cannot take action until parliament has voted the money. After parliament has voted the money, then all the steps will be taken which are required by thej statute. If not, the Auditor General will refuse to sanction the payment. In every department the same rule is followed, but if hon. gentlemen want to amend the Civil Service Act-


Mr. PATERSON  .@: We do not, but we want you to carry it out.


William Paterson: Is it not an answer to say that it is being carried out as it has been for years ?


Edward Frederick Clarke: That is no answer.


Samuel Barker: 


William Paterson: Does the hon. man say that the Auditor General na passing salaries he should not ?


Samuel Barker: Yes, he has been com pelled to do it.


William Paterson: 
Samuel Barker: 
William Paterson: The hon. member for bouth Simcoe (Mr. Lennox) pointed out the constitutional safeguards we have. I do not remember the case my hon. friend refers to mat the Auditor General brought before the Mouse. But that case would hardly be a case where the exception proves the rule, because that might have been where there Were the words :	' Notwithstanding auything in the Civil Service Act.'


Samuel Barker: What difference does that
make ?


William Paterson: Because I have not mose words in the estimates I am submit-Phg now.


Samuel Barker: The hon. gentlemen left cut those words so that our attention might be called to the matter.


William Paterson: I am not asking for jhything outside the Civil Service Act. If t Were asking for that, and that was the ~hbject under discussion, the hon. gentleman's remarks would be in order. But I am My asking for money to pay the regular mtutory increases, that will permit me to Ij S' the temporary clerks on the permanent /pi and that will enable me to appoint tuer junior second-class clerks who, as I ave stated, are already in the service. If parliament was refusing to do that, I would mp]y pave to go on and use these men as ofG have been using them, paying them out On' outside vote as we have been mg. But I think it is more regular that, they are to be engaged in the inside ser-frn tlle money to pay them should be taken m the inside vote instead of the outside. *at is all I am asking.
Inf:11'- COCHRANE. But you cannot do it *egally_
tnj^r- PATERSON. Certainly, we cannot e money illegally, and if we could, I am tjj, '* the bon. gentleman would not think hoL t would do it. This is a matter of 'Vllls these officers. .1 may say to the hon.
member, we are just asking to give them what they are entitled to under the law, the money is being asked for within the law. There is not a single case this year, though it has not always been so in my department, there is not a single case in which I am asking for anything notwithstanding anything in the Civil. Service Act. This is all covered by the Act.


Andrew B. Ingram: I would ask the hon. gentleman for an explanation concerning the eight clerks. He said there, would be six provided by the department, and the department would likely have to get two more new men. If you are going to get two new men how are you going to do it ? How are you going to provide the money for them in the way you have described in this item ?


William Paterson: Because I am taking ati vote in that item not only to pay the six that have been paid out of contingencies, which vote is dropped in the contingencies this year, but I am asking $1,000 extra in order to pay for two new men that the department think are necessary to carry on the work, and that will have to be appointed during the ensuing year after July next.


Samuel Barker: I do not want to occupy the time of the House needlessly but this is not a small question, it is a question affecting the procedure in all departments of the civil service. Now this question was discussed last year on the very point that the Minister of Customs now takes up, as voiding the' statute. At page 49 of volume 1 of the Auditor General's Report of last year, there was this request sent by him to the Department of Railway and Canals. As I said, I think the officer concerned was Mr. Dixon, but no question was raised about the qualifications of Mr. Dixon, nor was any question raised as to the necessity of the appointment. We did not go into that. The only question was whether the government were doing their duty under the Act. That is the question now. Now the Auditor General wrote this to the Deputy Minister of Railways' and Canals-which will be found on page 2727 of the ' Hansard ' of last year :
I have the honour to request to be furnished with a copy of the report referred to in section 15 of the Civil Service Act, recommending the creation of an additional chief clerkship in your department.
'Now that letter was written in consequence of the department sending in a demand for the gentleman's salary. Then Mr. Jones of the Railway Department writes to the Department of Justice inclosing these letters, and he says :	[DOT]
I am to request that you will be pleased to advise whether it is necessary in this instance to comply with the provisions of section 15 of the Civil Service Act as requested by the Auditor General.



[Stage Direction]
Section 15 of the Civil Service Act reads as follows :
(a)	The deputy head has reported that such an offi'cer is necessary for the proper performance of the public business of the department, stating the reasons on which he has arrived at that conclusion.
(b)	The concurrence of the head of the department in such report ; and-
(c)	The salary has been voted by parliament.
That is the statement by the Deputy Minister of Justice of the provisions of the Civil Service Act. Then he goes on to say :
In schedule B of the estimates for the year ending June 30, 1903, there is an item :-
' For the promotion of F. A. Dixon to the rank of chief clerk, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $1,800.'
Parliament has thus voted the salary as required by paragraph 'c ' above, and it has done more, it has waived all the provisions of the Civil Service Act which affect the promotion.
Therefore the estimates have not been passed. No attempt has been made to alter the Civil Service Act, merely to pass the estimates. The Minister of Justice told the Auditor General that these estimates had been passed, it was a matter that did not concern him whether the provisions of the Act as to the report of the deputy had been complied with or not. Now we want to know just where the government are on this question. The hon. Minister of Finance said that that was an amendment to the Civil Service Act. We want to know whether that is the position the government are taking to-day on this question? If so, we will have to discuss in the committee everything that ought to be discussed by the deputy minister and his head, and laid before the cabinet. I think the government would find it very desirable to proceed according to the provisions of the Act, to obtain a report from the deputy head, to let the chief of the department pass upon that, and then they will know whether they want such an officer or not. But when we are told that, if we here pass an estimate for the salary that makes it obligatory upon the country to pay the salary whether the deputy head wants the officer appointed or not, I think it is about time we should inquire what the ministry are doing in this regard.
Mr. AD  CORN@: We are dealing here with certain sections of this statute relating to the appointment of certain classes of Clerks. A certain procedure is prescribed in these sections. The question of whether the appointment may be made legally or not, if the sequence of the various steps is not observed, is another matter. But it is admitted by the Minister of Justice that that procedure is not observed and the Minister of Justice this afternoon made the same admission-in fact, the Minister of Customs tells us now that he has no intention of observing it and will not observe it ip future. The statute provides that the deputy head Mr. BARKER.
shall make a recommendation, this shall b endorsed by the head of the department, i then goes before the Governor General, ai >
finally parliament is to be called upon vote the money.


William Paterson: These steps are
takeD
after parliament has voted the money. The deputy has to take the first step a*ict Jter minister has to concur in his report au the money has been voted by parliamen [DOT]


George Oscar Alcorn: I am pointing out tua the statute is the very opposite.


William Paterson: The Minister of has stated that the hon. gentleman's read is not a correct reading.


George Oscar Alcorn: 
William Paterson: That is it-after L salary has been voted by parliament.


George Oscar Alcorn: We have been arguing at. afternoon whether the head of the d ment has the right to invert-because ^ is what they have been doing-the 01. Ljred procedure laid down by this and k sections.


William Paterson: 
George Oscar Alcorn: would see how it is. He has taken the ground that the deputy head of the Customs Department could to-morrow, in the month of April, recommend to me the creation of three new junior class clerkships and recommend the names of men fitted to fill those positions ; that I might concur in that report and send to council ; that council could create these junior class clerkships, and that these men could be appointed? If appointed they have to be paid their salaries. But parliament has not voted the money. The Auditor General, then, would have to sanction the payment of money to men for whom it had not been voted by this Parliament. Does the hon. gentleman (Mr. Alcorn) as a legal man, take that position ?


George Oscar Alcorn: Yes. But the case the hon. gentleman speaks of could not arise, tor the simple reason that the statute lays down the manner in which appointment is to be made. If parliament does not vote the money, the money cannot be paid.


William Paterson: But if the men have been appointed ?


George Oscar Alcorn: It does not make any difference. If they are properly appointed, the minister is in a position to come and ask for the money to be voted. But he is hot in a position to come here until that has been done. But the minister has not answered my question I asked whether he could assign any other reason than the political reason why this practice has sprung dp and why it is to be maintained ?


William Paterson: 
William Paterson: It is the law.
. Mr. BARKER. Let me ask the hon. Minister of Customs a question. How does he dhow that these extra* clerks are required V


William Paterson: How would the hon. gentleman (Mr. Barker) know, if he were Conducting a business ?


Samuel Barker: I did not ask the hon-8entleman to ask me a question, I asked him now did he know? The statute says that he "dst get the report of his deputy stating the Masons.
,. Mr. PATERSON. My deputy asks me for
men.


Samuel Barker: That is not a report. The ^atute provides that he must make a report J' hd state his reasons. The hon. gentleman s creating offices, so far as he can, without through the preliminary of finding out ' bether his deputy will recommend appomt-djonts. The deputy must first recommend 0r|t the officers are needed and state the
reasons why they are needed, and the minister cannot move until he has that.


William Paterson: I can only answer as I answered before, and I do not see what good can be done by merely repeating it. My deputy could speak for himself if he were permitted. He asks for the appointment of these men. And what can you do when he prepares the estimates and proposes in them that provisions be made V


Samuel Barker: Do these estimates state that the men are needed and why they are needed ? The statute is specific.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The wording is this :
Once in each year, and not later than the fifteenth day of March, the deputy head of each department shall make and lay before the board


William Stevens Fielding: What board ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The board established under the amended Civil Service Act which is part of the Civil Service Act.


William Stevens Fielding: That refers to the board of examiners and deals only with questions of promotions.


Samuel Barker: I will read, if the hon. gentleman will allow me the clause which lias been cited by the Department of Justice. The Act provides that this office cannot be created until-
(a) The deputy head has reported that such an officer is necessary for the proper, performance of the public business in the department, stating the reasons on which he has arrived at that conclusion.
Does the hon. minister mean to say that because he had a chat with his deputy, he complies with the statute providing that he must make a report, stating the reasons on which he has arrived at the conclusion that such an officer Is necessary ? Parliament holds the deputy minister responsible for bis reports. We do not -want to trust to the political head of the department. There is a business bead of the department, the real head of the department, a gentleman who knows what clerks are necessary, what work is done, and we look to him to tell us liow many clerks he wants. He is a responsible man. He must state that be needs these clerks and why he needs them, and not till then has tlie hon. gentleman the right to say one word in this House. He can only confirm that report.


William Stevens Fielding: I am glad to agree with my hon. friend from Hamilton on one point, and that is that a conversation between the minister and his deputy is not a compliance with the statute. But, the time for that compliance, as we are advised, has not yet arrived. We differ from my hon. friend, but. we differ from him upon good legal advice, and with the practice of many joars to sustain us.


Edward Cochrane: I do not understand the hon. Minister of Justice to give any such advice to me or to this committee. He said that he had followed a very eminent man as Minister of Justice, that he has found that practice existing after that eminent jurist had left, and that he thought he was right in following it. But he refused to give his opinion until he Consulted his deputy. The absurdity which strikes an ordinary man is that in this case a minister of the Crown comes down and asks money to pay an officer whom he cannot appoint because he has not complied with the statute.


William Stevens Fielding: He certainly could not appoint him at present. That is correct.


Edward Cochrane: Yes, but you take the ground that the salary must be voted. I say that the deputy minister must first report, that the head of the department must confirm the report, that he must then get the order in council passed, and in the fourth place ask parliament to confirm it. Would not the same question arise as has risen before, when the Auditor General was told that the money had been voted and that therefore he ha,d nothing to say ? If we vote this money I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Finance, how do we know that these necessary conditions are going to be complied with? If the Auditor General refuses to .authorize the payment of the money would he not get the same answer that he got before, that is to say, that the money has been voted and that it is none of his business?


William Stevens Fielding: The case to which my hon. friend from Hamiltoii (Mr. Barker) refers is a case where a salary was voted to a gentleman by name, of a greater sum than was authorized by the Civil Service Act, and therefore, words were inserted in the vote which had the effect for the time being, if you will, of amending the Civil Service Act as far as that officer was concerned. Nobody said that the Auditor General had no business with it. The Auditor General was quite within his right and power in calling attention to it. The pijoper legal authority advised that tne Auditor General was mistaken and he was overruled. That is not the case here. We are not voting any sum in excess of that authorized by the Civil Service Act, we are not voting any sum to any person by name, but we are taking authority to appoint wo many clerks, and before they can be appointed the provisions of the statute must be complied with.


Samuel Barker: The hon. Minister of Finance is not quite accurate. The request of the Auditor General was not about a gentleman who was getting more salary than the clerkship to which he was appointed entitled him. The Auditor General formally wrote to the department as follows .


William Stevens Fielding: I have the honour to request you to me with a copy of the report required unae section 15 of the Civil Service Act recommen iug the creation of an additional chief Her ship in your department.
This is not a question of paying some gen tleman a little more money than the a authorizes ; it was the question of the ere t:'on of a clerkship and he wanted a copy of the report of the Deputy Minister [DOT] Railways.


William Stevens Fielding: 
Edward Arthur Lancaster: 
William Stevens Fielding: How would the P.^ ? arise on which we could overru	jn
Would the hon. gentleman P0lUt.0tice of what way it would come to the i the Auditor General at all ?	^


Edward Arthur Lancaster: 	- -*  

~-=P==
if he has given an opinion to the department which is to be binding, it will be in writing, and that we will have a chance to see it and to examine its wording. I still say that notwithstanding all the minister I says, the merits of this matter are with the contention of hon. gentlemen On this side. Not only is that the order of procedure as set forth, but I do not see how any other order could be adopted which would do justice to the people. Why should the minister ask to have money appropriated when he does not know that it would be required for the year ? If the deputy does not yet know whether it is to be required, then next year would be time enough to ask for it, after the deputy and the minister have recommended it and have had it approved by an order in council.


Samuel Barker: Quite apart from procedure and from the questions as to whether the order in council should be the last or the first step, the important thing is that parliament, after all, is the judge of the necessity and propriety of the! employment and payment of the particular officer. In order that we may judge of that the Civil Service Aot has provided facilities for us to obtain particular information ; the only trustworthy information is the report of one officer, the permanent deputy head of the department. Its is- only on his opinion that we can act. That gentleman is an officer who is responsible to parliament; if he gives improper advice, he does so at his own risk. We should have his report, not verbal but written, which cannot be denied or forgotten, but for which he is responsible, stating the necessity, in bis opinion, for the particular office. Even with this report it is our duty to consider whether we should grant the money, but without that report, which the Act of parliament declares an essential, we are not in a position and ought not to be expected to vote this money.


William Paterson: I can only repeat that my life and my legal training do not enable me to see tlie point, but, as a layman, 1 am absolutely amazed to find legal gentleman in this' House take the position which has been taken by tlie member for Prince Edward county (Mr. Alcorn) who states that it might have been possible for us away back in August last, if the deputy head of the Department of Customs reported that he required three junior second-class clerks, if he brought that report to me, and I concurred in it. and that report went to council, that the council could appoint these three men.


Samuel Barker: Nobody says that.


William Paterson: Yes, the member for Prince Edward county (Mr. Alcorn) says so. Then from August until the next July, three men, properly appointed according to lion, gentlemen opposite, are doing what 1 One

of two things, either drawing- salaries illegally which are passed by the Auditor General, who is paying money which has not been voted by parliament, or they have been working for six months for nothing. These are the two alternatives under the position! taken by legal gentlemen opposite. That is the argument of the member for Prince Edward county.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: No.


William Paterson: Yes, he distinctly stated that to-morrow, if the deputy head were to recommend the appointment of these three men and the recommendation should be concurred in by myself they could be appointed.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: But not that they could be paid salaries till parliament votes them.


William Paterson: That is, we can appoint them but they must work for nothing.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Yes, you can appoint them, their appointment to take effect when parliament met.


William Paterson: They can be appointed, but then they are members of the civil service. [DOT]


George Oscar Alcorn: The lion. Minister of Customs (Mr. Paterson) rests his argument on the period when these men are appointed. The regular procedure of the report by the deputy, &c., should be taken and then the salary could be voted.


William Stevens Fielding: In the meantime you have them working.


William Paterson: If the hon. member for East Elgin (Mr. Ingram), who is discussing the merits of the case, desires to ask any further questions I shall be pleased to answer him.


Andrew B. Ingram: I was not quite clear about the explanation about the three junior second-class clerks. I understood that they were taken in to the outside service and have been since engaged in the statistical branch of the Customs Department. I wish to know where they were employed before they were engaged in the statistical branch ?


William Paterson: Two of them came from the Toronto customs office and one was appointed to the Statistical Department in Ottawa at the time it was established.


Andrew B. Ingram: How long is it since the Statistical Department Office was established ?


William Paterson: About three or four years ago.


Andrew B. Ingram: And since that they have been temporary clerks?


William Paterson: They have not been for that length of time in the inside service, they have been on the outside work.


William Paterson: 


Andrew B. Ingram: As temporary clerks in the outside service ?


William Paterson: No, two of them were appointed permanently by order in counc [DOT]


Andrew B. Ingram: What are the names of the other six, and where were they employec [DOT]


William Paterson: Their names are Miss B-F. Sixsmith, Madame Jolivet, Miss B. D-Masson, Miss J. G. Low, Miss F. M. Bu and F. Lessard.' These are the six who we paid out of contingencies.


Mr. BLAIN.: When will their appointment to the inside service commence ? ** n salaries have they been paid, and what crease of salary will they be paid now [DOT]


William Paterson: They were appointed on the 1st of January, 1904, and at the lowing salaries:	Miss Sixsmith at [DOT]
Madam Jolivet at 8000, Miss Masson [DOT] $600 ; Miss Low at $600, Miss Burt at ^ and F. Lessard at $500, amounting a gether to $3,400.


Richard Blain: 
William Paterson: 
George William Fowler: Was any question raiser as to the payment of their salaries ?


William Paterson: 
George William Fowler: Will the minister expla111 the objection which the Auditor had [DOT]


William Paterson: It did not arise in my department, but in another departmen >
' gy after the matter was determined there, were paid.


George William Fowler: 
William Paterson: 
George William Fowler: There salaries were up along with the others ?


William Paterson: 
George William Fowler: But you have been y ^ i9 them all along out of contingencies, ,{ing in order to avoid that we are now ^ votes for their salaries. What , , question raised by the Auditor Go11 '


William Stevens Fielding: 
APKIL 22, 1904 1S54
[Stage Direction]
contingencies could be made available for the payment of these clerks when they were transferred to the permanent list.
Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
George William Fowler: It is rather strange that it is necessary for a gentleman on this side of tfle House to come to the rescue of the minister and supply the explanation that be Is apparently unable to supply, although be had the assistance of the self-constituted Wet-nurse near him. It is very kind on the part of the hon. member for East Grey, and I trust that the minister will properly appreciate it, to explain this 'point about which the Minister of Customs has just a faint glimmer in his mind. After the very bicid explanation which has been given by the hon. member for East Grey, he must "be perfectly satisfied that it was the correct one.


William Paterson: 
George William Fowler: I regret that the hon. minister is obstructing his estimates in this way. We had a full explanation from the hon. member from East Grey which was perfectly satisfactory. We want to pass the estimates ns rapidly as we can so as to shorten the session, and I regret that the hon. gentleman is obstructing the estimates by reading something which the hon. member for East Grey lias already read.


William Paterson: I beg pardon of hon. member for Grey. I was not listening at the time, but I am glad to have the support of his authority. It was certainly a valuable waste of the time of the hon. member for King's, that he should have been forced to listen to the same danse the second time.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That money is voted contingent on a compliance in every respect with the Act, and the Auditor General took the ground that the promotion was not according to the provisions of the Act.


William Paterson: I am sure my hon. friend from East Grey is perfectly satisfied that the argument advanced by this side meets the case. I do not think he would argue that the deputy head would recommend me to make a new appointment before parliament voted the money, because in such case either the Auditor General would have to sanction his payment when the money was not voted by parliament, or this man would have to work for nothing until the vote was passed.


Richard Blain: What would be the increase in salaries over the salaries which these different officers had been receiving in their former positions V


William Paterson: They get the statutory increase of $50.


Richard Blain: What I want to know is the salaries they had been receiving and the salaries now proposed to be paid them in their new position.


William Paterson: They are getting the same salaries as last year with the $50 statutory increase.


Richard Blain: I notice that the number of clerks in the department was 34 last year

and it is to be 45 this coming year, an increase of 11.


William Paterson: There is really not an increase of 11. Six of these were in the department and paid out of contingencies, and we 'are not renewing the vote for contingencies this year, so that there are only five more.


Richard Blain: Then the hon. gentleman is increasing the number by five over last year.


William Paterson: We propose to make junior second-class clerks of three who were in the outside service and are providing-for two additional third-class clerks.


Richard Blain: How many clerks were in his department when the hon. gentleman took office ?


William Paterson: I think there were 29 permanent, but I do not know how many temporary.


Richard Blain: Perhaps the hon. gentleman will bring a statement of that down ?


William Paterson: Yes. I think it was 29 permanent and something like < the same number that we have had in the temporaries.


Richard Blain: How many permanent now?


William Paterson: Thirty-one are on the list. There were 33, but one has died and Mr. Code has been - transferred from the Customs Department to the Department ot Trade and Commerce. Their places, of course, have been filled. For instance, Mi'. Code, who was a first-class clerk and assistant accountant, has been replaced in the Customs Department by , Mr. Frost, who was next to him in the office.


Richard Blain: Do I understand that the number of permanent clerks when the hon. gentleman (Mr. Paterson) took office was twenty-nine and the number now is thirty-one ?


William Paterson: The number now is thirty-four. When I spoke of the number being twenty-nine before, that was subject to correction.


Richard Blain: How many temporary clerks were employed when the hon. gentleman first took office and how many are there now ?
.Mr. PATERSON. I could not give that.


Richard Blain: Can the hon. gentleman give me the number now 1


William Paterson: There are six. But there will be none if the House votes the estimates as prepared, because the temporary officers will be made permanent. They go to swell this number of thirty-four.


Richard Blain: Will the hon. minister bring down a statement of the permanent clerks now and when he took office.


Richard Blain: 


Andrew B. Ingram: And add also the number of temporary clerks. I understand that he is now going to do away with temporal} clerks.


William Paterson: I understand the hon. gentlemen want the number of permanent and temporary clerks in the departmen when I took charge of it, and at the presen time. I will bring that down.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
William Stevens Fielding: I do not remember question having arisen as respects this i t and 1 would not like to answer vvi having had an opportunity to look mt matter more carefully.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am told that it m the fact. I have given the example ot tn ^ j partment of Railways and Canals. assume it applies to other department ,	^
not to all. So, it would appear all ai being considered equally.


William Stevens Fielding: I will make closei inquiry into the matter. I may say t aD(j intention was to have it work even not to discriminate.
ask wito


Richard Blain: I would like to ^ regard to the amount of money pam ^ guarantee companies for the officers Customs Department.


William Paterson: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it the custom c]vil the premiums on these guarantees servants ?


William Paterson: We pay but the amount is deducted from their salaries.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In all cases, and in all the departments ?


William Paterson: It is so in my department, but I cannot speak for all. I am not sure whether they have a different system in the Post Office Department or not. '


Andrew B. Ingram: Did I understand the Minister of Finance to say that it applied to all the departments ?


William Stevens Fielding: I think the Post Office department has a special Act, but I am not quite clear as to its operation, as to whether the money is deducted from the salaries or hot. The Post Office Act differs from the others and I would not answer definitely *without further inquiry.


Samuel Barker: Once or twice, the question was asked about the junior second-olass clerks, and I have not heard the answer. Where are these three extra junior second-class clerks ?
. Mr. PATERSON. Their work is in the inside service, but they are paid out of the vote for the outside service.
, Mr. BARKER. Are they employed as Junior second-class clerks ?


William Paterson: One is employed in the accountant's branch, one in check branch and one in the correspondence.


Samuel Barker: But are they junior second-class clerks ?
Mi-. PATERSON. There are no junior second-class in the outside service.


Samuel Barker: Then, they are not junior second-class clerks ?


William Paterson: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Are we dealing with the whole vote ? The member for Hamilton 'Mr. Barker) asked if these are second-class
clerks

. Mr. PATERSON. They are not appointed m the inside service yet. But the hon. gen-ycnian will see that I am asking permission i create three more junior second-class clerkships. And, when parliament votes the money, these men will become junior second-.'.ass clerks. At present, they are clerks in
I	he outside service but working temporarily
II	the inside service.
t Mr. SPROULE. It does not seem to me uit voting the money is creating the office. 1 one of the requirements of the law.


William Paterson: Vos. it is a preliminary Mep.
s Ali'. INGRAM. This allowance for private .ccrotary. $(500-1 think one of the officers of h' department was acting in a dual capa-Would the hon. gentleman give us the 'Oculars of that?


William Paterson: Yes, Mr. Bain, my private secretary, was made assistant commissioner. He remains my private secretary yet, but he does not draw any portion of the secretary's allowance. His salary is $2,800. In my office there are two shorthand writers. One of them, I am told, has her salary supplenjented by $150 and another by $100." The hon. gentleman will understand that they work very long hours, very often up till six o'clock and after.


Andrew B. Ingram: What are the special duties of the assistant commissioner, or has he any other duties than that of secretary ?


William Paterson: He acts under the commissioner. When the commisioner is away he takes the commissioner's place, and does such work as is assigned to him.


Andrew B. Ingram: Then I understand the duty of the assistant commissioner is sometimes the same as that of the commissioner?


William Paterson: In the commissioner's absence.


Andrew B. Ingram: In case the commissioner is busy at any time and the assistant can perform his duties, I suppose he is approached for that purpose ?


William Paterson: Yes.


Andrew B. Ingram: Are there any other duties the hon. gentleman knows of that the assistant performs now that are not in keeping with the duties of assistant ? Does the hon. gentleman know of any other duties Mr. Bain performs other than those of assistant commissioner and of private secretary?


William Paterson: No.


Andrew B. Ingram: The hon. gentleman never heard of that gentleman performing any other duties while engaged in this department ?


William Paterson: I do not know what the hon. gentleman refers to.


Andrew B. Ingram: The assistant commissioner is of a literary turn of mind, I understand.


William Paterson: Yes.


Andrew B. Ingram: Does lie at any time prepare any campaign literature for instance ? I put that plain question, because if he was appointed assistant commissioner and is performing other duties than those parliament pays him for. he is doing wrong. If he wishes to prepare campaign literature, I think he had better step down and out of his position, and go into the business with the rest of us. It is going entirely too far. If the young man is guilty of that-because I charge it as being improper- he is being paid by the money of both political parties in this country, and has no right, as long as lie holds the position of assistant commissioner, to perform that work. I am merely

drawing the attention of the minister to the fact, and ask him, if that be the case, that the hon. gentleman will see that he cease doing so.


William Paterson: Do I understand the hon. gentleman to ask if, while he is engaged in his duties, in business hours, he is engaged otherwise ?


Andrew B. Ingram: No, I say he is a civil servant and that he is paid quite a large salary for performing his duties as a civil servant in the Department of Customs. He is paid by this country, and no portion of his time should be given towards preparing political literature. When he does that kind of thing he should step out and come into the political arena with the rest of us. But he has no right to be on the pay-roll of this country and do that kind of thing, any more than any other civil servant.


James Clancy: The Minister of Customs sits there with great complacency in face of this startling statement, and does not even give a smile of dissent. We should have some declaration from the Minister of Customs whether there is a civil servant drawing .$2,800 and doing this thing, before or after hours. If he is able to perform the duties of assistant commissioner and private secretary of the minister, and as a sort of pastime writes campaign literature for the Liberal party, then it is a very grave matter. I think we should have some explicit declaration from the minister on this matter. We on this side of the House have very definite information that such is the case, and we Should like to know from the minister if it has ever come to his knowledge that such a state of things exist. I am sure he will acknowledge that it is an impropriety for a single member of the civil service to be pei>
mitted to engage directly or indirectly in work of that kind. I am sure the minister himself would not plead for him if he had done it during hours, or while he was engaged in his work, or during the hours that he is expected to devote in his office as private secretary or as assistant commissioner. I am going to ask the hon. gentleman to make the statement in full, if he would see any difference between that position and the position of a civil servant going out and taking the stump for the Liberal party. Now that is the privilege of every man in this country who is not by some other reason prevented from doing so. The committee, I am sure, will wait with much anxiety for a clear statement from the hon. gentleman on this question.


William Paterson: Well, if the hon. gentleman. asks me what his duties are and how they are discharged. I may say that I think he is a most efficient public servant, that he discharges his duty, his whole duty to this country in the position he fills. I do not think there is a better civil servant in the country than he is. one more attentive to his Mr. INGRAM.
duty, more courteous, and that gives stn attention to it. As to what he does in his spare hours, I do not know, but 1 pr think he neglects any public duty what, that is committed to him, and that ia comes within the sphere of the duty b e paid to perform. That I can say. ^ gentleman to whom reference is made no doubt see the remarks the hon. Se*Ler man has made and he may see fit to ans them. I can ask him with reference to t matter, whether his duties have . neglected in any way. But that is charged.


James Clancy: 
George William Fowler: That was to scare hi nr


James Clancy: 
George William Fowler: 
William Paterson: In what I have ft had no intention of in any way 1 *; ttxnt threat, but what was in my mind. pon-he would notice the remarks that bapiy gentleman has made and that he I ^rfiat would speak on the matter and tel he has done in reference to it.


George William Fowler: 
Mahlon K. Cowan: Oh.


George William Fowler: That is the hon. member ! 'ct South Essex


Mahlon K. Cowan: 
William Paterson: The hon. gentleman admits that it is only right and proper that I should ask him.


George William Fowler: The hon. minister did not say he was going to ask him, but he said that probably the young man would speak to him about it.


William Paterson: I think it is probable he will, but if he does not I will speak to him.


George William Fowler: If the hon. minister states to this committee that he will inquire into this matter and ascertain as to the truth of the charge then I have nothing further to say. He takes a perfectly satisfactory position as far as I am concerned if he makes that statement and carries it out and says that this young man, if he is guilty of this charge, will be punished.


James Clancy: I shall have to press for an answer from the hon. gentleman. I shall repeat my question to the hon. gentleman because he has been somewhat engaged by the hon. member for Kings. I wish to ask the hon. gentleman if it has come to his knowledge, directly or indirectly, that Mr. John Bain, private secretary and assistant commissioner of Customs, has been engaged in writing campaign literature for tlie Liberal party since he was appointed to the service on the 6th August, 1896.


William Paterson: I will speak to him about it.


James Clancy: But I have not asked the hon. minister to speak to him. Perhaps I have not made myself clear. I asked the hon. gentleman if he had any knowledge either directly or indirectly that Mr. Bain has been engaged in writing campaign literature for the Liberal party ? That is the point, not that the hon. minister will ask Mr. Bain.


William Paterson: What does the hon. gentleman call campaign literature ?


David Henderson: To make it stronger, for example, 1 would say that ' political pointers Xos. 1, 2 and 3 ' would be regarded as campaign literature. Some people would attribute this to a celebrated gentleman named Farrer. I have the statement, not under any oath of secrecy, and X have heard it rumoured around these rooms that Posters 1, 2 and 3' were the production ot this gentleman, I hope the hon. gentleman will understand what campaign literature is.


William Paterson: I do not know that I remember what 'pointers 1, 2 and 3' are just now.


Mr. HEX OKU SOX.: If the hon. minister discovers that his own officer is the author of these documents and they are properly government documents would he be kind enough to lay them on the table so that we can have access to them ?


Mr CLANCY.: I think the hon. minister is surely taking a very extraordinary position. The hon. gentleman instead of rising in his place and saying frankly : I have no knowledge in any shape or form that my private secretary has been engaged in writing campaign or any other literature in the interest of the Eiberal party-I am not going to haggle over words whether this was campaign literature or not-but I would ask if it is literature of any description written in the interest and for the use of the Liberal party. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Paterson) must feel bound as a minister of the Crown, to answer, unless he wishes to leave himself under a serious charge, because he is responsible for the work and the conduct of every servant in his department. The committee, the House and the country are entitled to an answer.


William Paterson: I have answered.


James Clancy: You have not answered. Does the hon. gentleman refuse to answer.


William Paterson: I have answered; 1 said I would speak with him.


George William Fowler: Do you know ?


James Clancy: Does the hou. gentleman know anything of the matter to which we are referring ?


William Paterson: I would like to know what you term campaign literature.


James Clancy: Does the hon. gentleman know of any literature being written by Mr. Bain in the interest or for the use of the Liberal party ?


William Paterson: Do I know any?


James Clancy: Does he know that Mr. Bain has been engaged in writing any literature in the interest or for the use of the liberal party ?


William Paterson: I know that Mr. Bain has prepared tables for my use.
Mr. PATERSON


James Clancy: That is
shufflin
llD' We are
worthy of a minister of the p'ovvn. r than entitled to a very much better an* tle,nan we are now receiving. The hop. 6 well does not} dare to deny it. It is Q been known in Ottawa that_ Mr. Bam [DOT] [DOT] iberal engaged in writing literature for tne ^ v,y party, that that literature is bem^ njater the Liberal party, and the non. i 1 himself knows it.	be


George William Fowler: And directed it t0 done.	. te(j


James Clancy: 
George William Fowler: 
William Paterson: 
William Paterson: What work.
f this


George William Fowler: 
William Paterson: 
Richard Blain: 
William Paterson: 
Richard Blain: Would not coffined, think It more correct to as^ ney is fgf to pass the item for what j-opriatp^gioh rather than pass it as an apP*, * c0n^9h n private secretary when

of the minister himself, it is not for that Purpose at all ? That is very misleading. I Accept the words of the minister that no part of the $600 is used for the purpose of a private secretary, that the salary of the private secretary is included in the $2,800 ; that he holds a dual position with that salary.


William Paterson: These ladies are engaged as my private secretaries in typewriting and doing stenographic work. They ho my correspondence and are to be regarded hi that light. They are employed in my own Personal department.


Mr.   BRAIN@: They are not the hon. gentleman's private secretaries, because he has already stated that the assistant commissioner is his private secretary.


William Paterson: They do the clerical
Work.


Richard Blain: Then put it in for clerical Work. Why does the hon. gentleman not *ay that this $600 is for stenographers in his department rather than for a private sSCretary, why not put the item in for what ihe money is paid for. [DOT]


William Paterson: There can be no objection to that although in all the departments mere is an item of $600 for a private secretary, but it is not all expended and this Will not all be expended this year.


Richard Blain: 
William Paterson: Oh, no.


Richard Blain: That is the point the committee want to get at.


William Paterson: 
Richard Blain: What are the names of the ladies to whom, this money is paid ?


William Paterson: * Miss Dawes and Miss Cram.


Richard Blain: And what are their total salaries ?


William Paterson: $800 for Miss Dawes and $450 for Miss Cram.


Edward Cochrane: Why the difference ?


William Paterson: Longer in the service.


Richard Blain: The $600 will not pay the total salaries of the officers ?


William Paterson: What they get is an addition to what I have stated.


Richard Blain: If the minister wishes to use the money for the private secretary when it is voted for some other purpose, I will not quarrel with him. What are the duties of the assistant commissioner ? When the office was created, I understood the minister to say that he was to travel through the country and visit certain custom offices. Is that his duty now ?


William Paterson: That was not what I said. I said that it was desirable that the commissioner should be at liberty to visit the larger ports at times. I thought it would have a good effect on the work of the department. He has been away not by any means his whole time, and in his absence the duty of the assistant commissioner would be to take his place. While here the commissioner is a very busy man, and many items have to be dealt with by the assistant commissioner. They have both got all they can do.


Edward Cochrane: What at ?


William Paterson: I could not tell what at, but the hon. gentleman must have some idea.


Edward Cochrane: The minister himself does not appear to have much idea of what they are doing. What is the fact, as it strikes an ordinary person ? We have an item of $2,800 to pay the minister's private secretary and assistant commissioner ; and when we ask what are his duties, the minister says he sometimes goes to outside places.


William Paterson: No.


Mr COCHRANE.: What do you shake your head for ? That is what you have been saying ; and when we ask what is his duty here, the minister says lie is a very busy man.


William Paterson: What I said was this


Edward Cochrane: I know what you said.


Peter Macdonald: Order, one at a time.


Edward Cochrane: Who are you talking to? I remember, Mr. Chairman, when you were on this, side of the House-


Peter Macdonald: I did not call the hon. gentleman to order. I called order when two were on the floor.


Edward Cochrane: I know what you meant when you looked around. What is the fact? We are deceived by these estimates. It is a perfect piece of deception for the minister to put a certain amount in for the private secretary when he does not get it at all. What is the fact ? He knows that the private secretary is writing campaign literature for the Grit party. They were contemptible enough to tell their officers that they could go and vote, and when they did not vote as they were wanted, very often they were turned out. We are voting $2,800 to pay the private secretary to write campaign literature, and when we ask what this $600 of allowance for private secretary is for, the minister says it is to pay the ladies while the secretary is writing campaign literature. When the hon. gentleman considers wlmt he did on this side of the House, he should blush instead of smiling.


An hon. MEMBER.: He cannot blush.


Edward Cochrane: No, they have too much brass in their faces. They have not carried out a principle which they advocated when in opposition ; and now the hon. gentleman comes down and deceives me by asking me to vote money out of the hard earnings of the people of this country, to pay a private secretary when he does not do a thing ; and he is hiring these, ladies to do the work of a private secretary while he is writing campaign literature. What part of this $600 does the lady get vrho receives $800 ? Can you tell me that ?


Mr. BRODEUR.: Order. Address the chair.


Edward Cochrane: I would like to look over the Auditor General's report to see how much you got for cab-hire and dinners. You had better keep still, instead of calling me to order. I would ask the Minister of Customs how much of this $600 goes to the lady who gets $800 ?


William Paterson: The hon. gentleman has a perfect right to ask, but I do not understand that a member has a right to insult the chairman or attempt to, or to insult the minister either. A question may be asked properly and a proper answer given. I have answered that question twice. I do not object to answer it again. Miss Dawes gets $100 extra above her salary out of this Mr. COCHRANE.
$600, and Miss Cram gets $100. I would have been perfectly justified, under the vote last year, when Mr. Bain was made -sistant commissioner, in appointing ano ^ person to act as private secretary, an(r' using the whole $600 for that purpose, not choose to do that. I thought Mr. ^ could still do what private secretarial w it is necessary for me to have him aa nls. discharge the duties of assistant corn jj sioner and relieve the commissioner ^	,
portion of his work at the same time , t we have been able to accomplish that. D(j if during the present year it should be ^ necessary to have a private secretaiy g pointed, the salaries of these young te could not be supplemented out of this	^
That is the reason the vote is ther ,	,
with the slightest intention to deceive, n not with the intention of giving Mr. any more salary than the $2,800.


Richard Blain: 
William Paterson: It simply lapses.


Andrew B. Ingram: In view of the attitude of the Minister of Customs with resp ^r.g|j Assistant Commissioner	of	Customs,	c0j|to move that the item be 1 0f by $2,800, that being the saiaiy gay the assistant commissioner. I m'c- tjjjs further that as a member 0 opposition,	representing	for the tim	0fa portion of the Conservative P- ^oUid Canada, I	decline to be	one who	cjr.vete to pay money for the purpose ujoV-' c ulating campaign literature. I beg i therefore :	...[DOT]	i bv
That the item of $67,160 be reduce ^ t^e amount of $2,800, that being the saiai. Assistant Commissioner of Customs.
Motion negatived, yeas 13, nays 23.


Andrew B. Ingram: 
Mr. TAYLOR.: 
William Paterson: In case n istant found necessary to appoint an '
Mr. Bain, I ask for this amount.


George Taylor: The hon. gentleman wants to put on one or two more assistants to address campaign literature. He cannot say that he will require further assistance, hut asks the vote and declares that if h: does not use it all, that portion which he does not use will lapse, He cannot expect the opposition to support votes of that kind, for they will move amendments to reduce them to the amount required. The hon. gentleman ought to know what he will require and not ask for more.


George William Fowler: What salaries do these assistants to Mr. Bain receive now ?


William Paterson: One gets $800 and the other $450.	.


George William Fowler: What hours have these clerks to work ?


William Paterson: The office hours are from 9.30 to 5, but these ladies are very often at work long after that closing hour.


George William Fowler: What particular work ?


William Paterson: The necessary work of the department.


George William Fowler: This lady who gets the $800 is a stenographer, and I venture to say that there are more stenographers receiving a salary half that amount than there are who receive that sum. It is all right for the hon. minister to be chivalrous and ga'-iant, but he is a trustee of the people's money and has no right to be so very generous, with the public funds.


Andrew B. Ingram: Is it not a fact that Mr. Bain was here when I put the question I did a short time ago, and is he not in this chamber now ?


William Paterson: No, he is not.


Andrew B. Ingram: Was he not here when l asked this question ?


William Paterson: No, he was in befo.e
that.


Andrew B. Ingram: He was in since that. >f the hon. minister were sincere in desiring to know whether his commissioner was h'eparing campaign literature, he could have received the information from that gentleman himself. The hon. minister is pursu-'hg a course which is not at all creditable w him. He sets himself up to be particularly honest-and I do not wish to charge Win with anything dishonourable or dishonest-but It is unbecoming conduct on his part to allow that kind of thing to continue in his department. I make this charge to-night to show that the hon. gentle-Wan is not sincere in his expression of a desire to find out whether or not that kind W thing is going on in his department. I "ade the statement I did, in view of what
'lave seen with my own eyes. i Mr. CLANCY. When did Mr. Bain first 'Who into the service ?


William Paterson: In 1896.


James Clancy: On what salary ?


William Paterson: About $1,200.


James Clancy: Was he in the service before that ?


William Paterson: No.


James Clancy: What is he getting now 1


William Paterson: He is getting $2,800.


James Clancy: Is there any other chief clerk or officer of tfiis department who has been in the service so short a time getting $2,800 ?


William Paterson: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There seems to be an anomaly in this proposition of the Minister of Customs. I understood him to say that two young ladies were doing part of the private secretary's' work. Are they appointed as his private secretaries ?


William Paterson: No. They do the clerical work of stenography and typewriting in that branch of the department's work which receives my own personal attention.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How does the minister reconcile this with the Act, which says :
Any member ol the civil service may be appointed private secretary to the head of the department, and may be paid an additional salary not exceeding $600 a year when so acting.
I take it there is no compliance with the Act unless an appointment is made. The hon. minister takes a vote of money and distributes it among three or four who are not appointed private secretaries at his own will. I venture to say that if this came to the Auditor General's attention, he would be reluctant to pay the money.


William Paterson: The Auditor General has knowledge of it ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Has he assented to it ?


William Paterson: He pays it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Does he authorize it, or is he overruled by the Treasury Board, as In so many other cases ?


William Paterson: I am informed that he never raised the question.


George William Fowler: But does not the minister see any force in the objection himself ? The Act requires that the appointment shall he made of some person in the civil service as private secretary. But the minister takes a vote of $600, and. without the appointment of any private secretary, he does as he likes with the money, showing favouritism, apparently, because' one young lady gets $150 and the other only $100. I am surprised at the Auditor General paying this without protest.


William Paterson: Section 18 of the Act provides :
Any member of the civil service may be appointed private secretary to the head of a department, and may be paid an additional salary not exceeding six hundred dollars a year whilst so acting.
2.	No salary shall be payable to any private secretary unless the amount has been voted by parliament.


George William Fowler: Yes, but the hon. gentleman has told us that he made no appointment of private secretary, but that these young ladies who are not private secretaries, do certain clerical work. He takes his vote of .$600 and out of it pays $250 to persons who do this clerical work. That is not a compliance with the Act, and if the gentleman who has been acting as his legal adviser this evening, the Finance Minister were here, I am sure he would not say it was. Well-I take that back, for the Minister of Finance made some strange statements along legal lines.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Who is the minister's private secretary to-day ?


Mr. PATERSON  .@: Mr. Bain.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: And does the minister think that the money can be paid to any one but Mr. Bain ?


William Paterson: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The law says that any member of the service may be appointed private secretary and may be paid'$600 in addition to his salary. But the law does not say that the minister may pay it to any one else.


William Paterson: Mr. Bain was appointed my private secretary and has remained so ever since. Before he was appointed assistant commissioner, he was a first-class clerk, receiving $1,500 and also this $600 [its private secretary-a total of $2,100. When he was promoted to be assistant commissioner at $2,800, he did not draw any of the $600. But, out of that amount, as 1 have said, we have paid these two ladies, who assist in the work that comes under my own attention. The question has not crossed my mind as to there being anything irregular in it, nor has the Auditor General, I am informed, taken exception to it. Neither has my attention been called to the matter.


George Taylor: 
William Paterson: The Auditor General has not objected.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not understand boW
the minister can get over this clause ot 1 Act, which says :
No extra salary or additional remuneration^ any kind whatsoever shall be paid to any _ pnty head, officer or employee in the C'VI* an-vice of Canada, or to any other person per ently employed in the public service.
I ask how the minister can square _ conduct with the requirements of that tion.


William Paterson: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: Does the minister think it would be better to leave tins ^g until we get some information to just y in passing it ?


William Paterson: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: Not at all. Blltwifb to have the money spent in compu the provisions of the law. .
[DOT]	,, Hie minls


Mr. BIRKETT.: I desire to ask 111 v0te
ter if provision lias been made m ^^tory of $57,1.60 for payments of tup *

allowances to tlie different classes of clerks mentioned in this item.


William Paterson: Yes. I think the statutory increase is being given this year to every one on the permanent list entitled to it and eligible for it. There are two others I think who are at the maximum of their class. Of course they cannot be paid more. But every one who is eligible will receive an [DOT]ncreaee of $50.


Thomas Birkett: In the item for clerical assistance here, I see that the amounts in the vote is $14,700. That is only $350 above the amount voted last year. Now, the statutory increase is $50, and how you are going to pay $1,050 out of $350, I am puzzled to know. How are you going to pay the statutory increase to eleven clerks at $50 out of *350 ?


William Paterson: In some cases the statutory increase only begins on the 1st of January, 1905.


Thomas Birkett: I see eight first-class clerks here. Last year, for statutory increases, the amount voted was $13,150, but here you only have $13,000.


William Paterson: We saved $400 by the deatli of Mr. McKiel this year, and who was in receipt of $1,800. His place was filled by the promotion of a second-class clerk at a salary of $200 now. He has been appointed at the minimum salary of $1,500. Then there is a vacancy in the accountant's branch 'v'hich we propose to fill by the promotion of Mr. Frost to a first-class clerkship at the Minimum salary of $1,500. Mr. Frost is how a second-class clerk at a salary of *1.200, and was appointed on the 1st of November, 1900. So in these two promotions there is a saving of $400.


Thomas Birkett: I see that, but I also see that in the Auditor General'^ Report for the 'ear ending June 31, 1903, there were three hrst-class clerks at $1,800, one at $1,750, two $1,550, one at $1,450 and one at $1,500. I hotice now in these estimates there are two at $1,900. one at $1,050 and four at the Minimum of $1,500. It is hard to understand hy a comparison of these estimates and Jhose of last year, why the mutilation of Mis class has taken place.
, Mr. PATERSON. Under the new Bill, ,e accountant informs me, the maximum J:. $1,800 was increased to $1,900 and two 1 them get the extra.


Thomas Birkett: 
Thomas Birkett: 
ESTIMATES.
Hon.  W. S.@: FIELDING (Minister of Finance) delivered a message from His Excellency the Governor General.
Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER read the message as follows :
Minto. .
The Governor General transmits to the House of Commons supplementary estimates of sums required for the service of the Dominion for the year ending 30th June, 1904, and in accordance with the provisions of the British North America Act, 1867, the Governor General recommends these estimates to ' the House of Commons.
Mr. FIELDING moved-	[DOT]
That the message of His Excellency, together with supplementary estimates be referred to the Committee of Supply.
He said : I may say that these are two or three items of emergency, but they are not the general estimates for the balance of the year.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
On motion of Mr. Fielding, House adjourned at 12.30 a.m.. Saturday.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, April 25, 1904.