1904-04-14

QUESTIONS.


Mr.   SAM@: HUGHES-by Mr. Taylor -asked :


Mr. LANCASTER.: 
APKIL 14, 1904 3200
[Stage Direction]
labniUrers (iu summer), $1.50 per day ;
7 7nols (-iu winter), $1 per day.
Wris l°ads (cut) at 60 cents, $424.80 ; 76 ;oan* /landing) at 15 cents, $11.40 ;	121
72 tanaing) at 12 cents- -?14-52 ! total,
U(1('l,5es- The continuation of the work is 0, r.,, eoilsideration.
Uetes.„, engineer reported that work was tnair, Sai'y to prevent decrease of depth in
ain entrance.
l,Ti
"'R navigation of lake superior and GEORGIAN BAY.
'tk SPjJoULiE asked :
enSage il tha intention of the government to havi°r	an ice-breaker to test the win-
«ay i T®at>ility of Lake Superior and Georgian
i 2- Will S0, wllen ?
o ak th any effort be made this spring to ®te. jj ® *°e in these harbours, and at Sault ll>°se	so an to prepare for navigating
aters at the earliest possible date ?
, tton r>
farin' 11 * PRBFONTAINE (Minister of .1.	Fisheries) :
sifleration ma44er is at present under convessii°' because the government has no 1 available.
C^Nstt«3
production by industries. \Vl. ^P^OULE asked :
t[atistics?1I1|,tlle census bulletin, containing the le c°Uutrmanufacturing industries of lj0lj Y>
ready for distribution ?
i!8l'i('UltinY,DNEiY FISHER (Minister of ;as been * ' bulletin on manufactures 3teuient lssued by the census office, but a V.Veu to ti 0f Production by industries was die ,1. Press on the 25th January, 1904. 1>
[DOT]6(1 in°^Pilati°ns and tables were com-r<, ter u December, 1903, and the King's 3'ly fo,. Promised to have the statistics e*t. 1 distribution by the 1st of July
%

-\ir
Trunk pacific-appointment of commission.
^ 1, Ils ^dOtJLE asked :
b-j!',0hilcec]llei c°nmiission which ihe government t#| J th6 eaIaS*' year was c0 be aPP°>nted to 2 **ailwavstbru ffirision of the Transcontinental** s0 been appointed ?
outhene„ compose it, and when will they C lf hot heir duties ?
hyas °f it aPPointed, who arc to be the mem-c*e ?	and when will the appointments be
, Ilf, p|
glister)11' WILFRID I,MIRIER (Prime k.?*>
an*,*.. The commissioners have not
bs.71* ann„, . commissioners have nor h<w J' at sotet1' They will he appointed pro-bejor°*® early date after the question quo!L.e House has been disposed of. -Cf>' thfl0n No- 1 am afraid I cannot curiosity of my lion, friend tothe
Mr SPROULE.: There does not seem to be as much urgency now as there was last year.


PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND RAILWAY.
[Stage Direction]
STRAIGHTENING LINE AT CURTIS CREEK.	.
Mr. LEFURGEY asked :: 1.	Were tenders received for straightening the railway at Curtis Creek, Prince Edward Island ?
2.	If so, who were the tenderers, and what was the amount of each tender ?
3.	On what date were tenders to be in, and were all tenders in on the appointed date ; and if not, who were the tenderers after, and what were the dates on which these tenders were received ?
4.	Has the contract been awarded ? If so, to whom, and what was the amount of the contract ?


Hon.  H. R.@: EiMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals) :
1.	Yes.
2.	Jas. W. McDonald, Willard Kitchen, Robt. P. P. Fraser, and Thos. Campbell were the tenderers. The tenders are on schedule rates and the amount of contract depends on the amount of each class of work executed.
3.	The tenders were, received up to March 15, 1904. All the tenders were in on that date, and no tenders were received after that date.
4.	Yes, Mr. Willard Kitchen being the lowest tenderer according to schedule, was awarded the contract.


PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND RAILWAY- MURRAY HARBOUR BRANCH.
Mr. LEFURGEY asked :: 1.	What was the estimated cost of the first eleven miles of the Murray Harbour branch of the Prince Edward Island Railway from Southport east ?
2.	(a) Were tenders received for same ; (b) what were the names of tenderers, and the amount of each ; (c) what was the name of the tenderer whose tender was accepted, and the amount of same ?
3.	(a) Is this first eleven miles completed ; (b) if so, what was the cost of same ; (c) if not, why not, and what is the cost of same to date ?


Hon.  H. R.@: EMMERSON (Minister of
Railways and Canals) :
1.	The estimated cost of the first 11 miles of Murray Harbour Branch of the Prince Edward Island Railway from Southport east
was $45,628.93.	.
o ial Yes. tenders were received, ihi Geo E Full. Willard Kitchen, John W McManus. J. B. McManus and Thos. Campbell were the tenderers. The tenders are on schedule rates and the amount of contract depends on the amount of each class of work executed.

(c). John W. McManus, being the lowest tenderer according to schedule, was awarded the contract, but on account of ill-health and inability to give the work his personal attention, and on that account only, he made application to the department to be relieved of his contract. His application was granted, and the contract was awarded to the next lowest tenderer according to schedule, viz. : -Mr. Williard Kitchen.
3. (a). No, it is not yet completed.
(b)	. Answered by question in subsection a.
(c)	. Track laying was commenced and carried on from Murray River and was only completed to Southport late in the season of 1903, therefore, work depending on track such as ballasting and widening dumps, &c., yet remains to be done. The account of cost of these 11 miles was not kept separate from the rest of the branch.


SWINDLING OF IMMIGRANTS.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. Speaker, befog are called I w°u,,.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN.: 
Mr. SAM. asked :: 1.	Has the government any data showing that immigrants to Canada have been swindled by ' confidence men ' and ' sharpers ' ?
2.	What precautions are taken by the government to ensure that immigrants en route to Canada, and passing through to their destination, are protected from such ' confidence men ' ?
3.	Are Canadian government officers in uniform upon all steamers and trains, to assist, instruct and direct immigrants?
4.	Are government detectives in civilian clothes upon the steamers and trains, to arrest those swindling, or attempting to swindle the immigrants ?
5.	Do government officials permit persons to pass among the immigrants en route, making contracts with them, taking deposits for the carrying out of the said contracts ; and in general diverting them from taking up homesteads, as originally intended ?


Hon. CLIFFORD SIFTON (Minister of the Interior) :: 
Mr. EMMERSON.: hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) to treat any question couched in proper terms by any hon. member of this House as a bona fide question. This question was couched in respectful terms and conformed in every way with the procedure of the House. My right hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) says that the answer could be found in public documents. That is no answer as I have shown. He contends in the next place that the question is not a bona fide one. I say that is not a proper attitude for my right hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) to take because it is his duty to assume that my hon. friend beside me (Mr. Casgrain) was acting bona fide in asking this question, and in that view he was entitled to an answer. I therefore beg to move that the House do now adjourn.


Rt. Hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIER (Prime Minister).: 
Robert Laird Borden: Does my right friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) say tba rule is an abridgment of the former t*
practice ?


Wilfrid Laurier: It former English practice.
the


Robert Laird Borden: 
Mr. T. CHASE CASGRAIN (Montmorency).: On March the 17th I put the following question to the government:
How many members ol the House of Commons of Canada have been named to the position of lieutenant governor of any of the provinces of the Dominion since the 1st of August, 1896 ?
This question was followed by another, asking how many members of the House ef Commons had been appointed to judgeships and senatorships and other positions of emolument under the Crown. My hon. friend then said :
I would ask my hon. friend, so far as this question, and also questions 4, 5 and 6 are concerned, to move for a return.
When my right hon. friend asked me to move for a return, I thought it more convenient to go to the records myself and make a list I did this and then put the following question on April the 11th :
X. Have the following persons been appointed to positions, at the salaries named, since July, 1896, as follows Francis 3. Forbes, sub-col-leitor of customs, $120 ; Joseph Lavergne, judge, Superior Court, Quebec, $5,000 ; C. R. Devlin, emigration agent to Ireland, $2,000 ; Francois Langelier, judge, Superior Court, Quebec, $5,000; M. C. Cameron, lieutenant governor, $7,000 ; J. F. Lister, judge, Court of Appeals, Ontario, $5 000; P. A. Choquette, judge, Superior Court, Quebec, $4,000 ; C. I. Rinfret, district inspector of inland revenue, Quebec, $2,500 ; C. A. Beau-soleil, postmaster, Montreal, $4,000 ; M. E. Bernier, member of the board of railway commissioners, $8,000 ; A. G. Blair, chairman of the board of railway commissioners, $10,000 ; B. M. Britton, judge of the High Court of Judicature, Ontario, $5,000 ;. H. G. Carroll, judge of the Superior Court, Quebec, $3,500 ; Sir Louis Davies, judge, Supreme Court, Canada, $7,000 ; O. Desmarais, judge, Superior Court, Quebec, $4 000- T. B. Flint, Clerk of the House of Commons, $3,400 ; T. Fortin, judge of the Superior Court, Quebec, $4,000 ; D. C. Fraser, judge of the Supreme Court, Nova Scotia, $4,000; J. A. C. Madore, judge of the Superior Court, Quebec, $4,000 ; E. C. King, Senate ; B. R. Fiset, Senate ; John Yeo, Senate ; A. M. De-chene, Senate ; W. C. Edwards, Senate ; J. God-bout, Senate.; J. H. Legris, Senate ?
This list is not complete, and that is me of the reasons why I put the question. Df course, I had a perfect right, and it was probably my duty, to look through the mblic records and find out for myself what members of the House had been appointed to positions of emolument under the Crown, but I desired to obtain authentic information from the government on that point, and the fact that I made a mistake and gave an incomplete list n my question shows that in asking the government for the information. 1	'
joins what in the public interest I was entitled to do. 1 have just named 20 gentlm men who were appointed, but I find that


The PRIME MINISTER.: Will uW, fof friend (Mr. Casgrain) say who and who voted against that bill ?


Mr. CASGRAIN.: I am not speaking that now.


Some hon. MEMBERS: 
Hon.   S@: Mr. Speaker, I have to thank my hon. friend from Montmorency (Mr. Casgrain) for the importance which he attributes to me in the councils of the liberal party. I am not aware that the individual views of a member of the great Liberal party of Canada, until adopted by fhat party, are to be considered as the views of the party as a whole. It is true that, at a certain period of my political life, I occupied a seat on the opposition side. For many years I had seen certain abuses growing in this House. I had seen members of parliament notoriously chosen to fill positions of emolument under the Crown when their period of usefulness in this chamber was at an end, men who were hostile to the government on many measures, and yet whose views were stifled by the promise of place.


Mr. COCHRANE.: Where is Blair ?


Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.: The hon. member for East Northumberland (Mr. Cochrane) asks me where Hon. Mr. Blair is. He is where I am perfectly sure my hon. friend from East Northumberland would extremely like to be. I say that for many years we had witnessed in this House the spectacle of half a dozen or, perhaps, a dozen members then supporting the government who had been chosen for appointment to office as soon as it suited the convenience of the government and the constituencies these gentlemen represented. If it had been the case of men appointed promptly from the ranks of supporters of the government, without tlieir appointment being promised or dangled before their eyes, then the independence of parliament, perhaps, would not have been assailed. But such was very far from being the case. And during the


Edward Cochrane: Don't try to dra1' red herring across the trail.


William Mulock: 
Edward Cochrane: 
An hon. MEMBER.: 
William Mulock: 
Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


An hon. MEMBER.: Cremated.


Sir WILLIAM MULOOK.: I will refer my hon. friends to the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule) upon this subject. It is one more in his professional line than mine, but, so far as any of our uncompleted principles are concerned, we are here doing business at the old stand and prepared to give effect to them as soon as the circumstances make it wise to do so.


Mr. T. S. SPROULE. (East Grey).: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Postmaster General (Sir William Mulock), on taking his seat, referred a certain question to the hon. member for East Grey and therefore I consider it in order to reply. In the first place the hon. gentleman says that the individual opinion of a single member of a party cannot be taken as the policy or principles of the party. He followed that up by admitting that although the motion was made by himself, he was not supported very strongly by his own friends in the House. He said that a motion might be made by an insignificant member of his party. Did he regard himself then as an insignificant member of his party ? Did he wish to make the country believe that he was an insignificant member of his party, and that he had enunciated a principle that was not accepted by his party or held to be a correct one ? As an argument to the contrary, I might mention that the same motion which the hon. member for North York then made and embalmed, as he said, in ' Hansard ' as an expression of the principles of his party was read and quoted and commented all through the country as one of the burning principles of his party that would be lived up to and not departed from when they came to power. Have they lived up to it ?


An hon. MEMBER.: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have they departed from ? The hon. Postmaster General said, very uly, that it is embalmed. Yes, it is created like many of their other principles, he hon. gentleman said that the motion as made when the party in power had not le confidence of the country. It was dur-ig the session of 1895 that the motion was iade During that session several votes ,ok place in this House, and while speak-,g from memory, I think I am correct in lying that the government of that day had ie confidence of the House to the extent of
commons
a majority of 53 or 54. They had not lost the confidence of the House or of the country. I do not think the hon. gentleman could have spoken with deliberation upon that point. The hon. gentleman said : We are not following the bad principles of" the Conservative party. What is the difference ? My hon. friend beside me (Mr. Casgrain) read out the names of a number of members of parliament who have been appointed to positions of emolument under the Crown directly from this House. What was the complaint of the hon. member for North York in 1895 ? that it was a bad and pernicious principle and that it should not be tolerated and he embodied the principle which he set forth in a resolution which was submitted to this House in the shape of a Bill.


William Pate Mulock: What the hon. gentleman voted against.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. Postmaster General says : We are not following the bad principle of our predecessors. Where is the difference between what the present government have done and what their predecessors did ? It is only a matter of degree. It is exactly the same thing. What was the original complaint ?-that members of parliament were being appointed by the government of the day to positions of emolument under the Crown. What is the complaint to-day '-that the same thing is being done. Where is the difference between the course of the previous government and that of the present government ?-none at all except, that, whereas the previous government appointed a number of members of parliament to offices of emolument, the present government have appointed nearly three times the number; therefore, it is only a question of degree and to that extent the offence of the present government is very much greater than that of their predecessors.
I think the hon. Postmaster General should be at least one in this House to mention that question, because, if there is anything embalmed in the records of ' Hansard ' that is discreditable to both him and his party, it is their failure to adhere to the principles which they have enunciated. The hon. Postmaster General made another statement to the effect that no member of this House, after he had received an intimation from the government that he was about to be appointed to a position, sat in this House or voted. What did he think of Mr. Langelier who sat in the House after having written a letter to the Montreal ' Witness ' declaring that he had been promised the office of Lieutenant Governor of Quebec by the right hon. Prime Minister, and that the promise was not carried out ' Was that not a violation of this principle ? That circumstance is in direct contradiction to the assertion of the lion. Postmaster General that there was no violation of the principle by any member of this House. I have only given one in-


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
William Pate Mulock: You said so.


Mr. HAGGART.: The Postmaster General said that I made that statement in a speech in this House.
Sir WILLIAM MULOCIv. Yes.


John Graham Haggart: I would like the Postmaster General to show me his authority.
Sir WILLIAM MULOCIv I will get it
for you.


John Graham Haggart: If I remember aright, I was very careful and very guarded in any remarks I made in reference to that question.


Some hon. MEMBERS: statement that I was opposed to government ownership of railways. What I said was, that government ownership was preferable to the scheme of the Prime Minister, and I still believe that the plan proposed by my hou. friend (Mr. R. L. Borden) is preferable to the plan proposed by llie Prime Minister. 1 stated that, but at the same time I did not commit myself as to government ownership as a general principle. I stated that in Germany government ownership was a success, and that in Belgium it was a success as far as it went.
I do not believe, that if government -railways were under the control of the Prime Minister and the men he has had as Minister of Railways, government ownership would be a benefit to this country ; but it is possible that conditions may arise which would make government ownership of railways an advantage. I have not made up my" mind on the question as to this country. I do not advocate one or the other.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


John Graham Haggart: 
Robert Laird Borden: 
Wilfrid Laurier: The itself is when a motion to adjourn been made.	^


Robert Laird Borden: I asked nM hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) a	&\lago, if he argued that our practic jjg fered from the former English PraCtlforii)?r said that our rules did not alter the	cede
English practice. If he desires to from that position, well and good
aU-
not


Wilfrid Laurier: Not a*


Robert Laird Borden: 
John Graham Haggart: Mention one.


William Mulock: I could name them if I had them before me.


John Graham Haggart: Name one.


William Mulock: I will look cier the appointments. I cannot carry them ah iu my mind.


Edward Cochrane: How do you know what promises were made ?


William Mulock: It was notorious and they were appointed.


Robert Laird Borden: 123$
self far away in a foreign land. He talks about that railway policy in scathing and withering terms. Let him remember that that policy was put before the electorate in the county of East Bruce, and the county of Lambton, with the result that in Lambton the majority was increased from 200 to 600 and in Bruce it was also considerably increased.


William Mulock: Was that policy put before the electors of Guysboro ?


Robert Laird Borden: I do not know whether it was or not, but it was put before the people of St. John, and it was put before the jieople of the province of Quebec in various constituencies, with the result that the majorities in the province of Quebec were cut down to the extent of about 4,000. My hon. friend the Postmaster General may rest assured that whenever he is willing to1 come and discuss that policy, to which he refers in such contemptuous terms, on any public platform, there is not one man on this side of the House who will not be ready to go and meet him. But I am inclined to think that when the opportunity offers, my-hon. friend will again seek refuge in a foreign clime instead of coming out and assisting gentlemen who, like the Deputy speaker, are ever ready to come forward and face their political opponents on the public platform. I would not have made any reference to this had not the Postmaster General, without any cause that I can see, seen lit to introduce into this debate-I suppose he had no other answer-improper leteienees to another debate of this House as to which we might have called him to order, but as to which we did not think it worth while to raise the point of order. I submit again that the matter which I have brought to your attention, Mr. Speaker-I trust in a respectful and courteous manner-is one on which possibly we may on some future occasion have from you a matured decision.


Hon.  L. P.@: BRODEUR {Minister of Inland Revenue). I am very glad indeed that this question, which has been brought up also by my hon. friend from Montmorency (Mr. Oasgrain), is going to be considered bv this House. To what extent members of this House have the right to put questions to members of the government concerning public matters, has always been a disputed point. On the first day of this session, I think, the hon. member for Montmorency gave notice of a question asking how many members of this House had been appointed to offices of emolument under the Grown since 1886. I was sorry to see my hon. friend put such a question, and I suppose that if he had been here at the end of last session, lie would certainly not have put it. ,	.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: I am not surprised that you are sorry I put the question.


Robert Laird Borden: 


Mr. BRODEUR.: The hon. gentlen^ should know that last session the same q)ie tion was put.


Mr. TAYLOR.: And not answered.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I beg the hon. gehj^ man's pardon. A motion was made for ^ production of a report, and a report brought down, because my hon. friend 1 referred to it.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: No.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 
John Graham Haggart: 
Louis-Philippe Brodeur: At the beginning 0*cf session the hon. member for Montmn. erS asked the government how many 11)13 of this House had been appointed.


John Graham Haggart: I know that.	^|)(j


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: He received a rep^^e two days ago he came back with the question.


John Graham Haggart: No, an entirely
di#ere0t
, il U, dll CUV*lv'*
question.	fl(j'


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think it will ^vee mitted that the question put two 01 days ago by my hon. friend froh* e morency was, in all respects, We s' $eS' the one he put at the beginning of sion.	0jjjt


John Graham Haggart: 
Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I was simply nod-attention to the fact that when [DOT] friend from Montmorency renewed a 0,tt 0 tion the other day, he was absolute j order.	pjf


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: Why then 

 , lion, friend raise the point of orde [DOT] p


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 
Mr. POPE.: 
Mr.  K. L.@: ' BORDEN. That does not indicate great confidence, in your ruling, Mr Speaker.


GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY.
[Stage Direction]
House resumed adjourned debate on the proposed motion of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, [DOT] That Mr Speaker do now leave the Chair, for the House to go into committee to consider a certain resolution concerning the ratification of the agreement between His Majesty the King and me Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company dated the 8th day of March, 1904 ' ; and the proposed motion of Mr. Borden (Halifax) in amendment thereto.
Mr. MAHLON K. COWAN (South Essex).: Mr. Speaker, even if I had not intended to say anything on the question now before the House, I think the speeches made this afternoon by the hon. member for Montmorency (Mr. Casgrain), the hon. member for South Lanark (Mr. Haggart) and the hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. It. L. Borden) would impel any ordinary representative of the people in this country to at least draw attention to the position of the various leaders of the opposition upon what I consider the most important question that has, for many years, engaged the attention of this House. We have had this afternoon the delightful spectacle of the hon. member for South Lanark-one of the oldest members of this House, an ex-Ministei' of Railways and Canals, and. certainly one of the leaders, or the leader, from the great province of Ontario-we have this hon. gentleman standing up after his twenty-two years of experience in public life, and, when a project involving the national credit, the national honour, the national prosperity of Canada is before this House, making the candid admission that he does not know whether he is in favour of government ownership or not. And yet the hon. gentleman on two occasions has voted on that [DOT]question, and during this session has spolten both for and against it. Why, Sir, I remember, when trumpet-tongued and clarion-toned, the hon. member for South Lanark last year spoke against government ownership. I remember when the hon. member for \\ innipeg (Mr. Puttee) moved a resolution on the floor of this House in favour of government ownership, and as
Mr. SI'EAKER.


Mahlon K. Cowan: 

help out the Intercolonial Railway with through-freight. From Sudbury, the end of the Soo line, through to Fort William is 555 miles. The best evidence of the poverty of that section is that though it has been completed for nearly eighteen years, I defy lion, gentlemen opposite to point to 555 bona fide settlers along its line which are not now employed by the Canadian Pacific Railway or Hudson Bay Company or incidentally to these companies. That is the section of road which the hon. gentlemen wanted to unload on to the Canadian taxpayer. That is the kind of government ownership which the leader of the opposition wants us to take. And the hon. gentleman himself (Mr. R. L. Borden) was so conscious of the onesided character of the bargain he proposed, that he felt called upon to say that nobody in the Canadian Pacific Railway had ever, suggested it to him. Why did the hon. gentleman feel called upon to say that the Canadian Pacific Railway had not suggested that enterprise to him ? It was because he knew full well that with less money than the figures I have given this House, the two connecting lines could be built, one costing seven and a half million dollars and the other eight million dollars, and the company would not only have a surplus of $2,500,000 in cold cash in their pockets but would have unloaded this white elephant on to the taxpayers of the Dominion.
Then I find that the hon. member for West Toronto spoke about the ' Midsummer Night's Dream,' and at page 893 of ' Hansard ' exclaimed ' God help us.' Then at page 885 he exclaimed : ' I pray Heaven the Liberal party do not built it.' I can very readily understand the midsummer night's dream of the hon. gentleman.
I can readily understand Miss Canada ly ing prostrate, as he described her. I can readily understand her awakening to the proposition of the leader of the opposition, and her friends raising the cry, ' God help us,' as they heard it suggested that this political crime should be perpetrated upon the people. I can understand the attitude of the hon. leader of the opposition with his not overabundant knowledge of railway subjects; I can understand and appreciate the help given him by the hon. member for West Toronto, who would like to be Finance Minister in the Conservative government, if they come into power in the year 1905. I can understand him saying,
Heaven help us ; I hope they will not build it, in, order that we may palm the elephant off on the people of this country.' I dislike miking, in the absence of the hon. member for West Toronto, the references that, it seems to me, should be made to him. Apparently the hon. gentleman forgot himself. My mind goes back to a time shortly after the hou. gentleman became a member of this House. Mr. McMullen, now Senator McMullen, and Mr. Wood, afterwards Senator Wood, and now gone to his long home, were members


Mahlon K. Cowan: 
Mahlon K. Cowan: I want to close.


Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: Ten minutes past six now.


Mahlon K. Cowan: Well, the hon. gentleman may go.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: I call your attention Mr. Speaker, that it is six o'clock.


Mr COWAN.: I hope that the hon. member for Montmorency (Mr. Casgrain) will not take that ground. I want to catch the train at seven o'clock, and I will be able to close in a few minutes. But if the hon. member for Montmorency insists, I shall sit down and remain.


The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr. Douglas).: I suppose that by leave of the House the hon. gentleman may be allowed to finish.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: The hon. gentleman might be more polite about it.


Mahlon K. Cowan: I am not going to take a leaf out of the book of the hon. member when he addresses the House himself. I tell the member for Montmorency that if he charges me with impoliteness it is like Satan rebuking sin.


George Taylor: It is six o'clock.


Mahlon K. Cowan: Well, I will remain.
At 6.10 p.m., House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.


Mahlon K. Cowan: Mr. Speaker, when the House rose at six o'clock I was just closing my remarks, which had been directed towards the elucidation of the same expressions concerning the Grand Trunk Pacifie directors, to whom the hon. member for West Toronto had been referring as fakirs. In order that there cannot be any misunderstanding in regard to this matter, I desire to refer exactly to what the hon. member for West Toronto said. I have, in the few remarks which I have made, referred strictly to the names mentioned in the agreement. My reason for doing so was because the hon. member for West Toronto had referred to the people who were parties to the agreement. At page 884 of the unrevised ' Hansard,' I quote from the speech delivered on April 6 by the hon. member for West Toronto :
The government last year closed this bargain with tile Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company, they were negotiating with and closed a bargain with a company that l.ad no backing, with a lot of fakirs who proposed to get the Grand Trunk Railway Company to endorse their scheme.
In order that the House may know exactly to whom he refers as being fakirs, I quote from chapter 71 of the statutes of Canada, 1903, page 463. This is the agreement and these are the people with whom the bargain was made and with whom the bargain was closed. He makes no distinction between those who conducted the negotiations


Mahlon K. Cowan: 
William S.: 
190A
[Stage Direction]
oile the Canadian Bank of Commerce, dai i tlle best au(l most respected finan-°1' on fk ons in the Dominion of Canada ti0ll 1 ,he continent of America, an institu-Uietl'vhose branches have extended to the foil. , phs of the west, whose branches are dt}g in New York'city and the other large ? °f the American republic. In London the p across the Atlantic, you will find tila^ anadian Bank of Commerce, and I saj Lank- 6 directors and shareholders of the in Commerce are quite as respectable Um J* standing in this country, and_ have ])r0ln.. their direction an institution quite as
and whose position is as well the i, as that of any institution with which been Member for West Toronto has ever W hMhtiiied. Towards men of that stand-"'oi'ken of that financial ability, who have be themselves up from poor men to t^hao .hancial kingS of the Dominion of tt'es't 'r' 't ill-becomes the hon. member for are ti,;oronto t0 use such language, if these Not e Men to whom he refers as fakirs. IH'esj.iM'ly ig Senator George A. Cox hierce 11 of the Canadian Bank of Com-Coni|l' hht also of the Canada Life Insurance "'hich* an institution in life insurance of He is ®.Ver.v man in Canada to-day is proud. SUranoR f? C01111«cted with the Western Ashot a !°mpany. In point of fact, there is Lota '"gle man in the Dominion of Canada, c'°ra n eild of it to the other, whose re-
Hr. - 8 " "	.	. .	.
r. a financier is higher than that of *Mate, at whom the hon. member for West l11 the ' ™ged with an after-dinner glow,
ibrow lifxuberance of llis spirit, sought to '''hole (i ) at by calling him a fakir. In this -sife "©bate there seems to have been a ' ,i parting with the leader of the oppo-, °l'onto°'Vu to the hon. member for West "©h a,,; to throw stones at reputable Is been t^hitlulge in a style of debate that li turn hitherto unknown in this House, hbfi this fUle ' Hansard ' of April 5, and l ' the statement made by the hon. leade* It he PPositi°n :
thf exteiT,?,1' use<! any language with regard to Qeoro-i' 011 of the Intercolonial Railway to orSian Bay-
6terre(j^M the Hon. A. G. Blair to whom he
hi'' "on 1,1 ,
tr* °Uliadi ,nave expressed himself absolutely ?re<l ctlon to what he said in a carefully ' Hr. n,®.ln°- In a memo, which he publish-I ^ la!r said this
[Stage Direction]
!? you to note, Mr. Speaker. ' in a >*ht is "Mh he published.' That state-
\v lfl i
that
it
UeveJf^'on April the 5th.
That memo
f.	LHC GUI. JLAJCll.	O
?ii bight .Published until it was published hot I ,i tb.ibe Montreal 1 Star'-on April t 1 side ety any hon. member sitting on to	, the House to state where
lv it ;il [DOT]''"dished. Let us come up U'o, Let , Meet it fairly and honest-fa, haVe in 1. know what kind of politics the nnVi- s country ; let us know how i outical honour of men is sacred
in this House ; let us know what is the duty so far as that honour is concerned, of the leader of a great party. Mr. Speaker, that was an absolutely private memorandum from which the leader of the opposition quoted. It was marked ' confidential ' on the top; it was printed for the fellow ministers of a cabinet minister, and for their use only, and it was stolen by some civil servant, the political ally of the hon. gentleman opposite. And on the 5th day of April, the leader of the opposition, having gained possession of that privileged communication ; of that confidential memorandum, of that memorandum marked 1 confidential ' as between cabinet ministers, reads it in this House, and in order to cover up his tracks and in order to save himself from being charged with one of the grossest breaches of professional conduct and etiquette-not to say anything of political etiquette-that was ever ventured in any parliament wherein the English language was spoken ; he said it was published. The leader of the opposition knew very well that whether he found it or acquired it-and he did not find it; he got it and he got it wrongfully, and he knew when he he got it that he had no business with that memorandum, and be knew it was got by reason of being stolen by some person in the employ of this government and to -whom the kind hand of charity and forbearance has been extended by this government-the leader of the opposition knew that he might just as well find a private letter belonging to any man or any woman in the street, a letter marked ' private ' and ' confidential ' and bring it into this House and read it; and then in order to cover up his conduct, make the misstatement that the matter was published. I say, Mr. Speaker, if political morality in this country; if political honour, if political etiquette has got to that low ebb in which such things are not sacred ; and that this can he done in order to score a point against the Grand Trunk Pacific and to help his ally, the member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) and the Canadian Pacific Railway to bleed further and for some years to come, the farmers of the Northwest Territories ; then it is cime the people of this country should know
it.
Then, Sir, I have another precious docu-nent in my hands. I have here a document 'faded ' The Grand Trunk Railway Com-lany of Canada. Minutes of proceedings it the ordinary general, halt yeariy meet-ng of shareholders, held at the Terminus Vote) Cannon Street, E.C., on Tuesday, March 8th. 3004, Sir Charles Rivers-Wilso'i >
C M G O.B., in the chair.' I listened <o he hon. member for West Toronto reading datements alleged to have been made by Mr Charles Rivers-Wilson at a meeting of J o Grand Trunk shareholders held in Lon-lo„ I thought it was more than passing Orange that we had not heard this before,
[Stage Direction]
and 1 therefore set out to see what the minutes of that meeting were. I searched and searched the London ' Economist '	1
searched the ' Financial News ' and I searched ' Herapath's Railway Journal,' all printed and published in London. England. It struck me that a great enterprise involving the construction of over three thousand miles of railway in Canada, and with a great railway company behind it, having 40,000 shareholders in England, Ireland and Scotland, with about $200,000,000 of invested money in this country; it struck me that the groat London newspapers would have taken sufficient cognizance of the fact to report all the important references and all the important utterances which were made. But, Sir, I found in none of these papers any such stuff quoted as that which was printed to be quoted by the lion, member for West Toronto. I knew that the financial men of Edinburgh and Glasgow, and the ill ancial institutions of Scotland were luavily interested, but in none of the Glasgow or Edinburgh papers could I find any such statements reported. I wondered where it came from. And where do you suppose it came from ? It came from the hand of the lion, member for West Toronto ;Mr. Osier), who says he hired a stenographer, or that a stenographer was hired, to go into that meeting for the purpose of taking down the actual statements, word for word, as they were uttered. Now who do you think was interested in halving those words taken down ? Why it is the hon. member for Toronto (Mr. Osier) who was so interested. The hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) is so generous and so anxious that the people of this country should not be imposed on, that he had it printed at his own expense. And here it is; I hold it in my hand as a' monument of ihe generosity of the hon. member for West Toronto. Is there a man in Canada who believes any such report as that ? What was it got up for ? Is there a man who believes that these great financial journals would not have contained a record or that meeting which was so important to the financial men of England, and to the financial men of Scotland ? Why the whole thing is put up for the purpose of tiying to show that Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson either misrepresented the facts to his shareholders, or that this government is disagreeing with his views, and in oruer to bolster that up they pretended to have smuggled a shorthand reporter into the meeting, and this is the product of his labours. The hon. member for West Toronto, went to considerable expense ; he went to considerable trouble. I suppose be thinks lie did it in the interests of the bleeding and suffering humanity whom he did not wish to see the Grand Trunk Pacific imposed upon ; but out of whom he hoped for years to come to be able to get undirnin-ished dividends for the Canadian Pacific Mr. COWAN.
ce
he is the mouth-pi®1
the
and
tbib
ue«
Railway ; of which in this House, the director, cabinet minister.	bel-
I listened with interest to the hon. men for West York (Mr. Campbell) aha p pointed out another reason why Sent Yggd on the other side of this House are oPP Jj1(>
to this enterprise. He pointed out tha Canadian Pacific Railway were carrying,, a lower rate the merchandise front -^,e erican ports to the west than they, charging from Canadian ports. I ant W* the judgment of every man in Canada '' ,e I make the statement, that wherever llV is competition in transportation, eith ^ rail or water, or mule-pack train if y0® you find lower rates than you find oBe competition does not exist. There is 11 to-particle of bona fide railway compete1 y0n day in the Northwest or in Manitoba, have got there the Canadian Northern e the Canadian Pacific Railway, and they made their amalgamation to use each lines, and they have come and gone 0{ together. The result is, that the far®;eS of the west has to pay the combine ra il0tii freight and he will have to pay them the Grand Trunk Pacific gets into th® try. to relieve him from the inciibu® .c.jn which he is groaning. To-day, the A-no^ tbe railways are carrying the product a(iG" American manufacturer to the yc 'at s cities in the Northwest Territory < \s lower rate than the Canadian P? a<ji carrying the factory goods of the °,L,nat ** manufacturer to the same points.	'
the kind of thing that the Consery this House stand up and d Canadian manufacturer is at a
i'atl'efrue
defendetenu- Mgdisadya® nts the fye rtlF
to the extent of the difference in from the American factory towns fr°j: Northwest, as compared with the v„,tb'"'e!' r Canadian factory towns to the a and yet, gentlemen opposite are m 01,pos' of that. The hon. the leader of ^.jeii®, tion and his supporters pose as tn , th®-. of the Canadian manufacturer, ana ^ pol|C' stand up in this House and opP°® which will give him railway L'° .	or®®,,
that will reduce his freight rates, re$c that the product o* his factory ,JlB a1 Winnipeg. Brandon.vMoosejaw",	e r*1 B
the other points west at the « tWj of freight, or lower rates of ®er h® ; his rival American manufact gB)- [DOT] enjoys.. The leader of the opp°sl , s increase the duty. Well, it J®11 ,uty evident to every man that if the o0t, 1
creased to help the manufacture ^
western ranchman, and the w jce. sumer, must pay the increase m V o is the kind of policy that the a- .ntere~ opposition, assisted by the ( "
Toronto "	^
I come now to the last P*an.^„'oppa^fiS
'coK
~ t«
gentleman from perpetuate.
I come no,, w form of the hon. lender of the. and that is government owner
ship'

[Stage Direction]
ver®Y found child ; that has not had birth Johi !i°ng uP°n that side of the House. Sir !{,,„* Macdonald never favoured it; Sir John Part °na^ tke distinguished leader of their Snid-V spoke against it ; Sir John Macdonald Uli|t no railroad could be run as economical] ?hd i
e°mpay Py a government as it could by a
There was a commission in 1892, isto,.' will read now what the Deputy Minliri,,,,. °f Railways and lit-	Schreiber. had to
r' Sehrdan who can
Canals, say
Mr. Col-about it.
not a ^re'*:)er is not our aI>l,oiiitiiierit. He is
Grp"' u*an who can be accused of being a ServoM^*san; I do not say that he is a Const oil e 0ne, but he is not a Grit partisan tvhiCK ev®nts. Here is question No. 3,228 .Was Put t0 bim and here is his
Wild ,etl you come to go through farm lands or trai]vaa|fs, do you have much trouble? We gen-®ut the V? very little trouble with farm lands, '"as t re is an instance of a piece of land that 8favej ,n for the Intercolonial Railway for a Jurietin « *n the wild woods near Gloucester thihh 11 .f°r which the government offered $5, I s°ih6l, Afterwards they increased the offer The o«7at- hoping thus to settle the matter. wner is now claiming $70,000 for the land.
ki^Un 1 may add, for the benefit of gentle-Serv, °PlJOsite, that the government, the Con-
Vathv .
fli,00O:
^'OUCOol 1 m
Sak>We of'
.overnment, paid the modest for that gravel in the hush near
Brunswick. That is a S°veVn 01 wbat you run up against with teaii^ent ownership. Sir John Macdonald ^hclin. ^* fbe leaders on the Conservative 'yer6 s bi the past realized it ; they eVen ., against government ownership ; agaii. leader of the opposition voted ister Ia«t year. The Conservative Min-he VoPr Railways (Mr. Haggart), although this Sp a.twic'e against it, and made a speech that	on both sides of the fence, says
mPs he is against it, but to-day he {,'°W. Now what does government The western man be-

«ves

and
Now mean ?
*hem- ls not fai' wrong, that with gov-'1 the 1 0Wnership he would get lower rates bcians ^,sy Process of squeezing the poli-faay Iji/ban he could obtain from a com-lhe u e- The annual deficits arising from ^et,	fates would have to he
oe°P'e y, by him alone, but largely by the -biebee 1 t7*e 0l(i settled parts of Ontario aud !n °thc',. Wk° are served by company lines ;
Words, the latter would not only
nay
e to
[Stage Direction]
for
0f thej,. Pay c°mpany rates for the hauling id We
^ecl fr ?Wl1 Products, but to submit to he West tllc transportation of those from ►pbiPetHi. which to some extent enter into
with theirs-a state of affairs
i e onDn ij.bardly appreciate. The leader of J?6 co, . Sltion must see that the equities of for one of two things-either w. -^u	. 8 bi the country should be purtm linl PR'fated by the state, or existing llied 0 bke the Intercolonial should be er to company control. In no
cRaV title!
other way can even-handed justice prevail throughout Canada In the important matter
of rates.	, . .	.	,
There is a point, however, which the western settler is apt to overlook. Suppose we did extend the Intercolonial to Winnipeg, Edmonton or Port Simpson, what would it do for branch lines ? Does any one imagine that the government could build such lines paralleling or in direct opposition to those of the Canadian Pacific and Canadian Northern, which have been bonused by the people and in which a great amount of private capital has been invested without imperilling the public credit ? To put it more strongly, can any one suppose that any government, Liberal or Tory, could, do so without incurring the stern ^ opposition of those two companies and having to face it in the cabinet chamber, and above all. In the party caucus 1 And what, in all likelihood, would be the attitude of the members from the older provinces, who, it is well to remember, still control Parliament ? In the case of the proposed Grand Trunk Pacific, Ontario and Quebec set much store on the fact that, as a child of the Grand Trunk, it will have the advantage of xlirect connection with the network of Grand Trunk lines and branches in those provinces ; will be able, that is, to collect merchandise going west and distribute products coming east at minimum cost. Such an alliance is manifestly of just as much importance to the western settler. But if we had to depend on an extension of the Intercolonial, as the leader of the opposition suggests, it would either have to do without feeders in Ontario and Quebec or build them in opposition to existing lines, which would create the same difficulty as before.
But supposing the scheme of the hon. gentlemen opposite should be carried out, and the road should be extended as far west as Winnipeg or Edmonton, where are they going to get branch lines to it ? Do you suppose? Sir that when the lion, gentlemen come into power ill 2005,
Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Mr COWAN:: I use the 2000 advisedly, but I will take off the five-suppose that in the vear of grace 2000, the hon. member foi West Toronto (Mr. Osier) should happen to he a member of the government, being stiff Canadian Pacific Railway director and member of its executive, bondholder and stockholder, and that there shouk? ,^;.'	?"
bined arrangement for inning powers be tween the Canadian Northern and Canadian
for West1 Toronto, tteflnancikl critic, should he Z Minister of Finance in this country, that government road have a Tn net time getting branch lines against the


Mahlon K. Cowan: of my constituents are identical in principle with the interests of the rest of Canada. To-day, owing to the high rates that ^ are charged by the Canadian Pacific, American fruits are carried from the other side of the Detroit river to the Northwest, to the exclusion of a better article grown by our own people, backed by Canadian capital-the product of our perfect Canadian climate and of skilful and intelligent Canadian labour.


Mr. E. GUSS PORTER (West Hastings).: 
Mahlon K. Cowan: eminent is not dealing honestly or fairly or openly with the people. Let me call attention to the clause 2 of this agreement. By clause 2 it is stated, notwithstanding anything contained in the twentieth and twenty-ninth paragraphs of the said contract, the company shall, when it shall have completed the construction of the said western division in accordance with the terms of the said contract as hereby amended, and shall have supplied rolling^ stock to the amount of .$15,000,000, if the eastern division, shall not then have been constructed and completed by the government, be entitled to the return of their deposit.
What I desire to call attention to, with regard to that clause in the contract, is simply this. Why were those words inserted :
If the eastern division shall not then have been constructed and completed by the government.
If it was the intention, as no doubt it always has been, that as soon as the Grand Trunk Pacific had completed the western division of the road and supplied the rolling stock as provided by the original agreement, the deposit made with the government should be returned, why was not this government satisfied to express this intention in. so many words ?
Why not leave the matter as it was expressed in so many words in section 13 of the agreement, as it appears in the statute, chapter 71 of the statutes of last year. Are not the insertion of these words clear notice to the people of Canada that this government does not intend to construct this road in eight years or, perhaps, at all ? At any rate, it leaves this government an opportunity of playing upon the words of this section: it leaves it open for them to say : Oh, we could not build this portion of the road for reasons that have since appeared. But they will not say so until it shall have answered the purpose of the government in deceiving the electors into believing that it will be built. But Liberal members will say : if you do not believe that it is the intention of the government to build this portion of the road, why make such a fuss about it ? The words can do no harm. My answer is that I make a fuss about this clause of the contract, because it is being used by the govern ment of this country to deceive the people into believing that the road will be constructed, though the government have no intention of carrying that out. This is being used-for a dishonest purpose, to secure unfairly the support of the electors for the government. As I read this clause, it is practically a guarantee to the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway that this government will not build, and, consequently, the Grand Trunk Pacific will not be required to operate or to furnish the rolling stock for this portion of the road. Now, let me refer the House to another


Edward Guss Porter: 
Edward Guss Porter: 
APKIL H, 1904
[Stage Direction]
the Jatercolonial. That _
- orin centre of all opposition to the govprovince has been
the railway. The most violent critics of thost . ®rc°lonial in parliament, as well as its t°und *1 er opponents in the press, are to be 4ble o„?re' and this is because no consider-trlen,jivc.on °£ the people has any direct lew p y interest in the railway. Relatively It d0e_°I^e from that province travel over it. ha\-e uaot touch the province, and Ontarians an	rather brought to look upon it as
StitutioUn an(^ wasteful, if not corrupt, in-®eck f tled like a mill-stone around the tauge . the country, to be endured only bethel as c 'vas a part of the national compact, ^°Uia' a Piece of public property which they tions f S'adly see transferred to the corpora-This the relief of the Dominion exchequer, hut iee"ng does not arise from sectionalism, Ce*tuat r,at*ler a prejudice, fostered and ac-*heir	both political parties, each in
tioij in 7 having made a football of the ques-e|iuiinatg"1eii' Patty conflicts. All this would be
*S the inf {rora Ontario politics as completely tn trom tercoIonial Railway has been eliminat-t e subiP°litics ih the maritime provinces as ttusiop ;eeh °£ party controversy, if the ex" still jp 0 the Georgian Bay were effected, and a,J surely would this happy condition ki govo^ it were a part of the policy of IJttavra rninent to extend the railway from "Stl! '	"
4|Ja auy other suitable point on the ti!lch a ]*1 antic road, to the city of Toronto. a^r°l'gh o'!? ?n a favourable location, passing n ®°od oesirable section of the country, wit* f rsOns" 0thise of local business, it is said by ""hd, arm°mpetent to judge, could easily be x y aim Ihe question might well engage the ti "thing s?ri°us attention of government.
>
wavs' 14 would seem, could be devised in
^ St>*-	^ I 3. I*Q 1 lnrn^r nAlirtfr K aI-4-	aa 1 ah! a + a/I
*stfeno-tn a railway policy better calculated s;*s Wopi*fen the Liberal party in Ontario than tu-do' If evidence were required to
view it, would be found in the with which the people of that pro-
5atnin~V" approved the building of the Tem-e3t. j, Z4,atlway by the provincial govern-tept 6*t ow Wor<I is heard of the folly of go" The flersll'P in connection with that pro-Uin sUch tac* *s' Public opinion is ripe to an-* .iKJa Policy as a boon from the governfr,

ana s.
'vhat [DOT] Promising relief to the country lw the ri£htly or wrongly, people believe lo;i .reasonable exactions of the cor-eno'^ays- The resources of Canada are big respe„j to justify an enlightened policy ng.b't in . 1 fo railway and transportation pr*-be sun West; but the government would ot WoSf orted in supplying such a policy Wr,,., 6 rail only- There must be a balancing t0 ,,'i be Way favours to be distributed. It toA®6 wesf erave political blunder to respond |L "'ithouf el,n .cry-an<I it must be responded Ppopie ®eeing to it that the interests of I'he °f tke east are not overlooked.
ion'lvertirl'm0l'andum continues : bog® °n jJq again to the subject of rates and *&**} 63tPre«ioer1nment railways, the opinion has D*evaii tllat similar tolls would neces-as are \ 011 government extended rail-s^efor force 011 the present main line, jn e* no improvement could be an-sense from such extends- "t Dnsfjjv, 'his opinion the undersigned ly agree. Varying rates govern-Portions of the same railway are
Ktbut ^ %,p0S!
not unusual in Canada, and such variations occur as to both local and through-traffic.
The Railway Act, in defining the powers of the Railway Committee of the Privy Council, and of the Governor-in-Council, to regulate and control railway tolls, expressly recognizes a difference in tolls oil different sections of the same railway; and the Act goes so far as to sav that, when differences in the circumstances and conditions exist, such, for instance, rates are permissible. There are two striking as those arising from competition, difference in illustrations of the actual existence of the variations had in view:	One is furnished by
the Intercolonial Railway itself in respect of the section between Levis and Ste. Rosalie and Montreal. This is defensible on the ground that when the railway going westerly reaches Lfrvis it makes that place a common railway point, and the line to Montreal then becomes a commercial line, located on the shortest route, instead of continuing to take a longer and more circuitous course such as the Intercolonial Railway had followed up to that point. The other, a more striking illustration, is to he found in the case of the Canadian Pacific, upon which at least three or four different scales of rates, governing local as well as through-traffic, are recognized and established as between its western and eastern termini, on as many separate and distinct sections of that railway.
If the Canada Atlantic system were taken over by the Intercolonial, the tolls now in force on that line could be maintained. No complaints have been made with respect to these tolls. That they are moderate and acceptable to the people who use the railway is shown by the entire absence of agitation, public or otherwise, against them. That these rates are also profitable is shown by the net results for the year 1902, which amounted to $618,000, or 4 per cent on $15,000,000, after paying all operating expenses for the year and making a large outlay upon betterments.
The undersigned would point out how unreasonable and unwise it would he to reject a proposal for acquiring the Canada Atlantic for the purpose of Intercolonial Railway extension, if it is on its merits a good business proposition solely because it is feared government may' be compelled to cut down rates, already moderate, below a paying basis. Such a fear-founded at best upon mere conjecture implies a weakness upon the part of government in Canada which is not . found elsewhere, and would be an admission that the Canadian government and people are unable to do what has been successfully accomplished by other British colonies and dependencies.
From the Georgian Bay to Montreal the Canada Atlantic Railway line traverses a country which is not affected by water competition, the business upon which is increasing every	'
and will continue to increase. Having tram arrangements with such a railway as
C^n^al point of
viST«U Railway Canada. ScCK - outlet during the summer
the''winter afSix^d Kb, and there
[Stage Direction]
is good reason to believe that it would give the two Atlantic seaports (the Canadian Pacific also serving St. John), all the business they could conveniently handle for some time to come; and, moreover, from the point of view of its paying prospects, the outlook is in the highest degree encouraging. At present there are 400 miles of good paying railway at the eastern end of the Intercolonial Railway. Extension to the Georgian Bay, by way of the Canada Atlantic Railway, would give 300 or 400 miles of profitable railway at the western end, and, as has already been pointed out, these two ends together would be able to carry financially the less productive and intervening section and afford a substantial surplus towards paying interest on the capital outlay.
The undersigned, in concluding his memorandum on the subject of government ownership of railways, would wish to make a short reference to the project now in contemplation by the Grand Trunk Railway Company, or the leading parties connected with that corporation. Since the undersigned first called the attention of his colleagues^to the necessity of devising some other method of ensuring the railway development of sections of the country needing railway accommodation, other than by bonus-ing or subsidizing companies, public opinion has made vast strides and is now very decidedly opposed to the policy, at least, on any large scale, or in respect of important lines which promise to become self-paying undertakings. Assistance in some form or another, it is alleged, must be given if railway needs are to be supplied, and assuming this to be the case, the question is : How shall assistance be rendered ? The undersigned has been of opinion that there are only two methods of assisting companies, in the case of such railways as have been alluded to, which would be seriously considered. One is by way of loan, payment being secured by mortgage upon the railway undertaking-the amount being limited to such sum as is required to put the railway in good working condition after taking into account the capital actually subscribed and paid in, and any sum borrowed on a first mortgage. Such a method would call for very careful supervision of the company's expenditure on construction and equipment, and would necessitate the taking of a second mortgage as security for the government loan. And it would be expected that only such enterprises should be aided in this way as would be likely to ultimately repay both principal and interest.
The other method would be by guarantee of the company's second mortgage bonds. This plan involves the same care and supervision as the first. While either of these alternative modes of aiding railway enterprises is to be preferred to the gift of a bonus or subsidy, even they are not free from grave objections.
The present disturbed state of public opinion with regard to railways and transportation arises from the feeling that tolls are excessive and discriminative. This feeling exists not only west of Lake Superior, but in Ontario as well. West of Lake Superior the great distance to ocean ports is a serious-handicap, and any new transcontinental lines should be built under conditions which would make every dollar of bonds and every share of stock available in cash as near the face value as possible. If bonds may be disposed of by companies at a large discount, and stock distributed gratuitously, or on terms which produce little or no Mr. l>ORTER.
cash at all for construction and equipment^) poses-which has been forbidden by laW=ivj-business, such railways may do will, f°r " dend purposes, be always unduly burdened will be a grave handicap for all time to res velopment of the interior. With capital sh*jg and bonds ultimately coming into the	g.
of innocent buyers at prices in®r jt ing with the growth of the railway traffic*^. will be impossible for either a railway corn.0jis sion of the government itself to reduce	u
below a dividend-paying basis. An appeal	g
the holders of the company's bonds and s''prate to fix tolls sufficiently high to insure a m°a a dividend, cannot easily be resisted, and < gS consequence the country through its ',aJoUgt>
and traffic, is in effect as much charged, .0,,s indirectly, with the weight of these	of
as if the amount was covered by an iss government bonds.	^rlrf
Moreover, the system is not sound. pj-should a few people be allowed to make oHe selves millionaires in such a way ?	, snarcS
nowadays puts his money into the capital B of a railway company at the inception js undertaking. It has been done hitherto >
wit" not not done now, and why not ? Becaus sa'e government assistance supplementing _ yet of bonds the railroad can be built. A 90" capital shares are issued by the miU1 eg a appear later, when the enterprise beco wi>ff success, in the hands of the purchase clamour for dividends upon them. ^ yjtb The objection to this system aPPlieoluitr5I' great force to railways in our western c reacD where the drawbacks of a long haul te of the market must always make a m°"® reasonable railway toll a vital conSid o It may not be possible to repair the e reVe'B the past. It is possible to prevent tVprtaKi*^ tition in the case of new railway u , (he ii"' ill the future, and the remedy lies 1® enSurj mediate adoption of a policy which w'i . the construction of railways running ped west, and traversing our rich undeve e gions in the west, under conditio1 will limit the amount of dividends to lindcr based upon the actual cost of th
dC'
takings.	h un^ „
The ideal policy, as it appears to i g0 soo signed, for the government to adopL as it shall be deemed necessary t"t rail^|[
ote
as it shall be deemed neeessau - . rai' „]1
the subject of a third transcontinenta
would be to insure, first, that the ra* pi-oi'" be wholly Canadian. That it shall oUJ-
the carriage of our export products 9 imports southerly by way of United * j>a\vreIgt. of railway ; but to and from the *t- aOa pe in summer and the ports of Ha111 rldge tue John in winter. That the Quebec 0a.t Ky utilized as a part of said line, a®
railway be pushed westerly from .tb^roU^.^e, degrees to the Peace river "Whe	**
Rockies to the Pacific coast. In tn„3jStanpp£ld) it would be well to decline all. a n0t al'" jj-railways to which government is tj,at Uncommitted, and propose to parliame be lV way charters covering this territo *
held.	vned. ^svP'
Such a policy as that above outli ])eart!, dersigned believes would meet the ^atef report of the Canadian people,	UJU - ,iP-
strengthon the government and ;ve. teeK garded as both bold and Pr<!f?^ag ncve^, *f' country is prepared to-day, as it h .tjeg ' go'1' before, to assume large responsi aiw der to insure Its fuller develop™ '
would
aid 1,6 fb"

"PPortml,1^ 3t fails to act, will lose a splendid l° cong11 [DOT] Proving its capacity and courage '"atiner Witl1 and solve large problems in a 'Oils commensurate with Canada's marvel-CaErogress.
any one, after reading that memo-fMy	entertain any respect for the honf-'rnn1(,| 'Sence or patriotism of this gov-l'0n(|	* This memorandum shows be-
''0\l|.f,3:iei'adventure the utter fallacy of the Hun ,, now pursued by this government '[DOT]pposin wis(tom of that advocated by the °J tilp 10n- It demonstrates that the policy ,,0aiu,.voPP°sition is in the interests of this for «*>
and even now it would be well ""t tli	government to adopt and carry
they at Policy rather than pursue the course
The n i-0w (3°ing-
!'f i(„jf 01l(!y advocated by the late Minister >oiv'?ays in the article I have just read 1 ihvni tw° Questions. It involves, first, ^'"hentVes' flrst| tl3e question of govtdvnfit'i °Wnei'ship, and secondly, the most ineW^ous location of the third transcon-no:ii, that6' Concerning the first proposi-shall re]ating to government ownership, X *°t trouble the House with any at present. As regards the second , it involves the question whether
ttoposmoat pi'esei|3.
J.ltlon, it involv(
ire now bef
the first pla
v«ll, ~"*Ve the congestion complained of 7
hRl. Qras"re now before the House fills the ,h>e r'e]i "e first place, does this proposed
'Will	flip nmicrocHnn r*nmnlnillfid Of?
'3fthur i? sei'i°us congestion east of Port as ever been found to exist, for the ,e*l the6asotl that from that point to Mont-tho ® ulready exist several routes. There ^ter cam "th r°ute. i'0j] l«e th^^ute.
Prg?6® uoc capaoie in imaunug u-,
}	height of the west, for years
*ter e,,panadian Pacific Railway, the all-"to, the Canada Atlantic road Grand Trunk Railway fleet and it will not be contended that, are not capable of handling a'I
x ii	_	_	. _	_	,	_
til1*5 Pro'i and 33 3s perfectly apparent that v.fP0Se ^ed railway cannot serve any tli hipe;/1 relief except perhaps between ule cot,„p f.u<3 Fort William, but to relieve ijAsary ?°n felt at these points, it is not -r ii'orii \xf- have a long and expensive n/he spor,Vl"ln3peg to Moncton. r,;i|' rates , "qhsideration is, will it reduce lii, attend 3n this connection, I would of r,;,Ion to this one fact, that four
Q|i. ' Of	LU Hilo Ullc ItlLl, LUi.lt
tfM of r'i already existing between the 1'en e°t i,:1®*0 aud New York, having as I tr Mth Y?ad hed as possible, being equip-!Weihsnt« 6 ,3a3est and most modern im-tr, , the /' ""th the lowest possible grades t^e i hi RiytSGSt Possible curves and able ''a,. efip cars in one train, and with tv'8 ie ./"Petition offered those four rail-cannn+ United States, we find that l,lKv' Yoi-i cai-ry grain from Chicago to %he:l,	, f°r less than 11 cents a
of *3 that mark you, for a dis-tj/M T n'y 879 miles. I ask will the Wf ca,, U*i Pacific reduce the rates ? 'Ml ' tile n,. 'he Grand Trunk Pacific -* ev„,, oduct« of the Northwest 1,400 1 admitting that it shall enjoy
the same class of road bed and equipment as are enjoyed by these magnificent railways Can it carry that grain 1,400 miles ns cheaply as the American roads can carry it 875 miles ? Upon the same proposition and figuring it on the same basis, the Grand Trunk Pacific cannot carry the products of that country from, Winnipeg to Quebec at a less rate than 15 cents per bushel. It is perfectly evident from that fret alone, that this road will not have tflie effect of reducing the rates to the farmers of this country.
The third consideration that strikes me as involved in this problem, is ; Will It connect the west with the east? It will certainly connect the west with the Quebec bridge; but it will not connect the west with Ontario or Montreal. I need not point out how very detrimental an effect it will have on those portions of the Dominion by reason of its want of connection with them.
The fourth and last consideration that strikes me as being involved in this question : Will this road carry Canadian products to Canadian ports. I shall only offer one observation in this connection. The bill as originally before the House and now in operation provides that unrouted grain shall be carried on Canadian lines. I have taken occasion to inquire from grain men and shippers generally, and they tell me that when they have any commodity to ship, they make inquiries from all lines interested in the carrying of these products and ascertain not only the quickest but the cheapest route by which they can ship. There is nothing in this Act that I can discover that will prevent the Grand Trunk Railway proper from using the Grand Trunk Pacific for a portion of the distance and then diverting the trade from that line to its main line and so carry it to Portland. The Canadian people, in my opinion, will object to being taxed to such an enormous extent as will be necessary to carry out this scheme, in order to build up the city of Portland. But they will not object to being taxed, and taxed heavily, to carry out a scheme in the interest of Canada at large, and build up Canadian ports, such a scheme as that advocated by the hon. leader of the opposition. The article to which I have referred is useful in one other respect-and I shall only make this further brief reference to it. It has been stated in this House by the right hon. I rime Minister that the ex-Minister Railways and Canals was as strongly °PP"sed.t" 'j|(' proposition submitted to this House by the leader of the opposition as he was to the proposition submitted by the government. No stronger answer to that statement, n stoonger^Condemnation of it, could be given than the memorandum I have read to-night
iSef b" tie hand of tie uoiiwnvs and Canals lnmselt. tie there M distinctly and emphatically as
[Stage Direction]
English words can express it, that he is opposed to the scheme proposed by the government. So strongly did he feel on this point and so completely had he the courage of his convictions, that he left the govern-, ment and the proud position that he occupied rather than advocate the scheme that the government is advancing to-day. And in that document he just as strongly and emphatically endorses the proposition advanced by the leader of the opposition in this House, thus giving it direct and complete contradiction to the words used by the I rime Minister.
There is only one further matter that I will trouble the House with in connection with this railway project. It has more particular relation to the province in which I am particularly interested, the province of Ontario. In making the remarks I am about to make I do not desire it to be understood that I object in any way to the province of Ontario bearing its fair share of the burdens of this country. On the contrary. I say, and I think the history of the province of Ontario and of this Dominion . will prove, that Ontario has always been ready and willing, without murmuring, to bear its fair share of the public burdens. But I do object, I most strongly object to, and protest against the province of Ontario being made to bear more than its fair share of the country's burdens, or being discriminated against and its interests sacrificed for the benefit of any other portion of the Dominion. When I say that Ontario has done more than any other province of this Dominion to advance its progress and development, I am not belittling the efforts that have been put forth by other portions of the Dominion. It is only right and fair that Ontario should do so. It possesses the largest population and the greatest wealth and is in a position to do more for the advancement of the country, perhaps, than any *other part of the Dominion. But, while *Ontario has always shown that willingness and has done these things, it has always received some consideration for the efforts it was putting forth on behalf of the Dominion. But what is there for the province of Ontario in the proposition that is now being advocated by the government. What advantages is Ontario going to derive-from the carrying out of the policy of the administration?
If the expectation of the hon. members on the government side are realized, Ontario would suffer disadvantages rather than gain advantages. By this scheme the country will be saddled with a debt which is estimated variously at from $150,000,000 to $170,000,000. That debt must be paid by 0,000,000 of Canadian people. It means a debt for every man, woman and child in the Dominion of $26 on the average. The province *of Ontario, having a larger population than any other province of the Dominion, will be obliged to pay the greater portion of this
Edward Guss Porter: 
FIRST READINGS.
[Stage Direction]
57) to incorporate the Internak,.	-	v^v/mpci
<u'les Marcil.
ap<i L®°' 58) respecting the Imperial Loan A 1' Abstinent Company of Canada.-Mr. Bil) ^ompson.
J'kl u!0- 59) respecting the Montreal Park Poj) dnu Railway Company.-Mr. Geof-
(No.
60) respecting the Kettle River
v Hiii
vailoj	, _______„	
hill liaiIway Company.-Mr. Galliher.
r.hd hfu-0, to incorporate the Thorold 'e Erie Railway Company.-MV.
62) respecting the Welland and 'an. -hind Bridge Company-Mr. Gerr,ave r 63) respecting the Edmonton and °st%in' Ce Railway Company-Hon. Mr 1* *
rt%e	respecting the Strait of Canso
otnpany._Mr. Wade.
®HSONAL explanation.
lit6 Ordei' ®°ROEN. Mr. Speaker, before Air to teat0® Day are Ca,led, 4 would thp0*1 tvei.ie a reference to certain remarks 1^A0", rn ma<Ie with regard to myself by 0 A a ti) e,nil'er for South Essex (Mr. M. >
last evening in my absence. I
make this reference by way of personal explanation, as I have no desire to enter into any altercation with that hon. gentleman in regard to the matter to which he refers. In' the first place, let me say that he referred more than once during his speech to my absence from the House. My absence from the House from five o'clock until six o'clock was for the purpose of having an interview with a gentleman who had come from a long distance to see me, and who was going away that evening. My absence after six o'clock was owing to a social engagement which I had made long before' I knew that the hon. gentleman was going to engage in the debate. I did not know of his remarks until very late last evening, after the House had adjourned. He refers to a document from which I quoted in the course of my speech upon the resolution introduced by' my right hon. friend the leader of the government. Let me state how 1 came to make that quotation and what 1 did really say-and in this connection I am quoting from revised ' Hansard,' which the hon. member for South Essex did not see fit to refer to in the course of his remarks. My right hon. friend the leader of the government, in the course of the debate on the address, at page 73 of the revised ' Hansard,' had used the following language :
Mr. Blair stated that he was alone on the
question. He could not side with the government on their railway policy, but he could not side with the opposition on theirs, because their scheme was a mad scheme.
On page 7GG of revised 1 Hansard ' I said this :
Let me quote what I believe to be the words of Mr. Blair, and which, if my information is correct, were communicated hy him to his colleagues ; let me quote his views on the subject ; and if I am mistaken in any way as to the authenticity of this memorandum from which 1 am quoting, let me say that the words which I attribute to Mr, Blair and which 1 believe, were used by Mr. Blair in diseasing this matter with his colleagues, are words which carry great weight of themselves whether they are uttered by Mr. Blair or ay any one else.
Then I went on to quote the words of Mr Blair from the document to which I referred. Further on, at page 772 of revised ' Hansard,' I said tliis :
If he ever used any such language^ with regard
to the extension of the I"tere0'"ialin ° ^ab-gian Bay, he would have expressed himself ab solutely in contradiction to what he sa d m a carefully prepared memorandum. In that memorandum Mr. Blair said	[DOT]
Now the hon. member for South Essex
^ny'attrlbutinrfdiStiofto me™'
seR by attnbutmg	i	, d0 not
SnklXSd^ all ; and hi that regard he used this language .
[Stage Direction]
In this whole debate there seems to have been a desire, starting with the leader of the opposition down to the last and least, the hon. member for West Toronto, to throw some stones at reputable men and to indulge in a style of debate that has been hitherto unknown in this House.
I desire to disclaim, in language as strong as the usage of parliament vvili permit, any such disposition on my part in this debate. The hon. member quotes me in unrevised ' Hansard ' as having used this language :
If he ever used any language with regard to the extension of the Intercolonial Railway to the Georgian Bay, he would have expressed himself absolutely in contradiction to what he said in a carefully prepared memo. In a memo which he published, Mr. Blair said this.
These words do occur in the unrevised ' Hansard,' and as soon as I saw them, I corrected them for the revised ' Hansard ' ; for, to the best of my recollection and belief, I did not use any such expression as ' which he published.' I believe that to be a clerical error on the party of some member of the [DOT] Hansard ' staff ; and as soon as I looked over the copy of the report which was supplied to me from the debates office,
I corrected that, and it appears as corrected m the revised ' Hansard.' The hon. gentleman further refers to me in this way :
Mr. Speaker, that was an absolutely private memorandum from which the leader of the opposition quoted. It was marked ' confidential ' on the top; it was printed for the fellow ministers of a cabinet minister, and for their use only, and it was stolen by some civil servant, the political ally of the hon. gentleman opposite. And on the 5th day of April, the leader of the opposition, having gained possession of that privileged communication ; of that confidential memorandum, of that memorandum marked ' confidential ' as between cabinet ministers [DOT] he read it in this House, and in order to cover up his tracks and in order to save himself from the charge being made against him, one of the grossest breaches of professional conduct and etiquette-not to say anything of political etiquette-that was ever ventured in any parliament wherein the English language was spoken-he said it was published.
If the hon. gentleman had been good enough-I will not say fair enough-to refer to the revised 'Hansard,' he would have seen that I had eliminated the word ' published ' which I believe I did not use. I desire to call attention to the fact that the revised 'Hansard,' containing that correction, had been distributed among hon. members of this House for some days before the hon. member for South Essex made the remarks which he did. He went on further :
rlhe leader of the opposition knew very well that whether he found it or acquired it-and he did not find it ; he got it and he got it wrongfully, and he knew when he got it that he had no business with that memorandum, and he knew it was got by reason of being stolen by some person in the employ of this government and to whom the kind hand of charity and
Robert Laird Borden: 130*
House and that which is published in the ' Railway News.' I, therefore, desire to say, so far as I am concerned, that this is not a fake document. It is what I believe to be a true document and certainly I presented that document to the House in good faith. In order that the House may have before it the report of this meeting as published in the ' Railway News,' and in order that members may appreciate how absolute' ly similar the report in the 1 Railway News ' is to that from which I quoted in the House, I am going to ask one of my hon. friends who will follow me in this debate to read the whole of this report from the ' Railway News,' which certainly does not come from any biased source. I should have added one thing further, and that is that in the report in the ' Railway News,' the speeches from the shareholders are not reported in full. The speech of Mr. Seal is not reported in full, nor was that of Mr. A. Smith, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Girdlestone, Dr. Drysdale or Mr. Allen, from the latter of whom I quoted as reported in full in the document I brought to the attention of the House. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I merely have to say in conclusion that, so far as I am concerned, I regard the remarks of the hon. member for South Essex as absolutely and entirely uncalled for ; and I take this earliest possible occasion of placing myself right before the House and before the country with regard to the matters to which lie referred.


Mr. SPEAKER.: I take it that the hon. member (Mr. R. L. Borden) moves the adjournment of the House ?


Robert Laird Borden: I had not intended to move the adjournment, unless you think it necessary, Mr. Speaker.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: As I understand the practice, it requires that a motion to adjourn be made, even on a question of personal explanation. In any case, if I bad not assumed that the hon. member intended to move the adjournment of the House, I think I would have had to call his attention to the point and ask if he intended to put himself in order.


Robert Laird Borden: I would direct your attention, Sir, to the fact that, when the hon. member for Digby (Mr. Oopp) made a personal explanation the other day, no such motion was required of him.


Wilfrid Laurier: 
An hon. MEMBER.: 
Mr.   R .L. BORDEN@: -So far as I am concerned-


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I would remind the hon. gentleman that there is really no question before the chair.


Mr R.: ISO*
have heard of confidential communications made to manufacturers in Montreal and Toronto with regard to some matter, and a statement as to that has been made on the floor of this House in my presence and not contradicted by any member of the government. Are these declarations of policy so made to the manufacturers confidential, if any one becomes aware of them ? Privately expressed opinions of public men regarding great public questions, are they to be always confidential ? Are they to be so regarded when they are intended to affect the political action of those to whom they are addressed ? These statements have been made in the House with regard to this matter. I do not regard Mr. Blair's opinions, speaking as a public man with regard to a public question, as confidential in the sense in which my right hon. friend regards them. There was not in this document any party secret, it was a question of public policy, it was a matter of Mr. Blair's opinion as to a great public question-that is all and no more-which I do not regard as confidential in the sense in which my right hon. friend uses these words.


Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance).: If it be necessary to put myself in order I will, at the conclusion of my remarks, move the adjournment of the House. The words I shall use are exceedingly few. It would be a great misfortune if we should allow the real point of this debate to be lost sight of by the introduction of other matters. The document which my hon. and learned friend the leader of the opposition refers to, is not in itself of any importance, because it adds nothing to our information as to Mr. Blair's opinions. The House was aware, the country was aware, that Mr. Blair had favoured the idea of government ownership of railways. Therefore the document, in a sense, adds nothing to what the House and the country knew. But that is not the point. There is a well understood principle governing private and confidential documents, there is a well understood principle governing private property. If a man is found in possession of stolen goods the onus rests upon him of explaining how he received the goods. From that there is no escape. Confessedly, a document not in itself important-but that is not the point-a document bearing on its face the expression ' Private and confidential ' came into the hands of the leader of the opposition. We do not accuse the hon. leader of the opposition of stealing the document, as my right hon. friend has explained.


Rufus Henry Pope: You dare not.


William Stevens Fielding: 
Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: 
William Stevens Fielding: 
Thomas Chase Casgrain: 
Lawrence Geoffrey Power: Mr. Fielding conded by Mr. Fisher, that the now adjourn.	^oV.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: 
Mr. A. B. INGRAM (East Elgin).: with the statements contained in the document presented to the House by my hon. triend the leader of the opposition in this debate ; in other words, that the Hon. Mr. Blair, who was then Minister of Railways and Canals, did disagree with the right hon. leader of the government in the matter that was being discussed by my hon. friend the leader of the opposition at that time ; but since this document has come to light, I do not think the statement made on that occasion by the right hon. leader of the government was quite in accordance with the facts as we find them in that document. Reference has been made to some letters stolen by one McMullen some years ago in connection with the Canadian Pacific Railway. 1 do not think a fair comparison could be made as between the conduct of hon. gentlemen opposite on that occasion and the conduct of my hon. friend the leader of the opposition to-day ; in fact, there is no comparison to be made between the two incidents. In one case these documents were deliberately stolen and used in this House for the purpose of discussing the question then before the House with the knowledge that they had been stolen. In this instance we have my hon. friend's honest, candid statement to the effect that this document was not stolen, as far as any member of the opposition is aware.
Motion (Mr. Fielding) negatived.


GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY.
[Stage Direction]
House resumed adjourned debate on the proposed motion of Sir Wilfrid Laurier; ' That Mr Speaker do now leave the Chair, for the House to go into committee to consider a certain resolution concerning the ratification of the agreement between His Majesty the King and jGl^n<5 oTrunk Pacific Railway Company, dated the 8th day of March, 1904 ' ; and the proposed motion of Mr. Borden (Halifax) in amendment thereto.
Mr. FRANK OLIVER (Alberta).: 
Andrew B. Ingram: 

that Jine. Not a word was heard from any member of the opposition on the subject,- and many who are here now were here then. But the Crow's Nest Pass is a valuable feeder to the Canadian Pacific Railway, while the Transcontinental will be a; competitor.
The question is not as between a transcontinental railway under one set of conditions and such a railway under another set of conditions. It is whether Canada shall be content with monopoly or shall insist on competition in transcontinental traffic. Last year the bargain was opposed because it was bad for the company. The company could not work its lines and pay its way. Now it is opposed because it is bad for the country. The country is paying a vast amount of money and getting nothing. Any reason is good so long as it is a reason against.
The statement is made-deliberately made and repeated-that the country is incurring liabilities in respect of this enterprise for the advantage of the Grand Trunk and Grand Trunk Pacific of from 150 to 170 million dollars. The impression is conveyed that the liabilities of the Grand Trunk Pacific, and of the government in connection with this enterprise, are respectively 15 and 150 million dollars. This is practically an absolute reversal of the facts. The case is such as that of a citizen, who with a lot, a thousand dollars in cash and a well established and paying business, undertakes to build a ten thousand dollar house. He puts in his thousand dollars, the loan company advances him nine thousand dollars, and takes a mortgage upon the completed house as security for principal and interest. Is the loan company assuming a liability for $10,000 or is the debtor assuming that liability ? If the debtor does not pay, the company gets his thousand dollars and the house. The risk, and therefore the liability is his, not that of the loan company. If the Grand Trunk Pacific does not pay interest on that part of the cost of the road contributed, or guaranteed by the government, the Grand Trunk loses control of the road, and the Grand Trunk Pacific loses any return on the proceeds of the $45,000,000 of preferred and common stock which it is allowed to issue. The government takes control of the road and becomes absolute owner of twenty million dollars worth of rolling stock supplied by the company with which to operate it. Both country and company go into the project in the belief that the traffic will pay interest on the cost ; but if that expectation fails, the company, not the country, loses its investment.
So much has been said of the immense liabilities to be incurred by the country and the vast possibilities of illegitimate profit by the company, that a comparison is fairly in order ; the more so as the question before the House is not only to reject the proposition of the government, but to defeat it and 1


Frank Oliver: 
Rufus Henry Pope: After listening to the somewhat able essay which has been read by the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver), to which I noticed you,

h ' CMI] <1	JLVV.lv Jivviv, * * 'V	


APKTT, 15, 1004
[Stage Direction]
°iier had these gentlemen landed on the cn?l'6s ot Canada than these secrets were not ,municated to me. Not stolen ! I did hav aVe to 1013 anybody ot them. I did not tin'6 hire anybody to give this informa-g'! to me. It was stated to me that a vvjt|t transcontinental scheme associated tbe Grand Trunk Railway Company tiiR t0 be Placed before the parliament of Uni C0lmtry. This was in November. Par-12thUt did not meet until the following tim *Uareh. There was no talk at that Urm °f any changed condition except that p„ . the application of the Grand Trunk Railway Company being made cer-thii elements from the city of Quebec made aPPe«ranee. That was the peculiar Chsfltion that was referred to by Sir 'Vow ,s Rivers-Wilson. I presume the ina ! uatl been pulled over that poor old 1R S eyes here, in the Railway Committee. us "'as told that the opposition came from ilQl| The opposition on this side of the aotu!? Was then as now and ever shall be H6s ated by the determination that the busi-afla °i Canada shall be done inside of Can-asit fPd through the ports of Canada. We atl(i tor nothing more. We demand it now tor ,uVe say that if we are going to pay °'V)i * road with our money we want to b(ij|] d- Sir Rivers-Wilson found himself adv d by these gentlemen-a mere set of o;>
enturers to some extent from the city ot t7Uebec. I am not now speaking *but ,, Trans-Canada Railway Company, ciat6fl ^ere are a lot of men asso-tho ] . "'1th the government who are be]); "angers-on in and out of parliament 'veil this government, and who are very lie j)(ui0"'n. When the Grand Trunk Paci-bofjj °Ple came here they found this stub-or tijj"'01'^ going on. Finally at the second a meeting of the committee we found to °,<1 hue on the map from North Ray t(l chec-merely a dotted line. We ask-'i'bisW.at this was, The reply was: 'tifl la a new piece of road. They a °t even use ink enough to make 'vere atlgbt line ; they dotted it. We do-wjj ftola that this was the extension * 6 hi i tlle city of Quebec. We knew it. hif°r', h°t steal the information. The jo this1011 was as free as it was in regard blow,, document. The fact had been well jjf tlns x° me tor a long time. Members . d to] | i°use, newspaper men and others 'h'e ,((|d me of it. ITon. gentlemen opposite jh'e. ,jt half as close as they think they are easy in some respects. We ***** the proposition had been brought tion, d, that it was due to political condi-t e Trn ^at when the real bona fide men, toid: JdS'Canada, came here they were "We t 'e cannot consider you at all ; we adfi bdiid across here. The Trans-Can-tiinu. + wbo have devoted a great deal feat oL,	project and who possess a
L°hiitrv ti°E "alnable information about the through which this railway is to
pass were brushed aside and the wonderful genius of this government was brought to bear to construct in one night a road running through a rose-bed in the northern part of Quebec. Then, we had to have a holiday. We had to have recreation and when I was returning on the train to Ottawa i got into contact with my Liberal friends from the lower provinces who said to me : Mr. Pope, you live down in the east and you must join us in our scheme. I said : What is your scheme ? They said :	We
want to get this road extended down to the maritime provinces. I said :	I will
hear what you have to say. We heard the argument put up by the Minister of Railways and Canals (Hon. Mr. Emmerson). We have heard no argument put up since by that bon. gentleman. They dare not trust, him. Then what was the next proposition? Was it a question of traffic? Not at all. It was purely and simply a question of politics, a question of remaining In power, first in the district of Quebec and next down by the sea. What is the result ? The result is that we have this proposition forced upon us by the government to build a road, not from North Bay, but from Winnipeg. The Grand Trunk Railway Company were willing to build a road from North Bay to Winnipeg under the ordinary conditions. Why this government did not wish them to do it is more than I can understand. They had already arranged to do so under the ordinary charter of the Grand Trunk Railway Company, but instead of that in the generosity of their hearts the government set to work and put on another 1,000 miles to Winnipeg, making the total distance 1,900 miles to be built with our money and as a competitor with the $70,000,000 of our money invested in the Intercolonial Railway. The right lion, leader of the government last year said that he did not regard this new road as a competitor with the Intercolonial Railway, that the Intercolonial Railway would have its own traffic, but what was the argument which was advanced to us in favour of the extension of the Intercolonial Railway to Montreal and why did I vote for that extension ? I voted for that extension because the argument advanced in favour of it was that it would tap the great western centre of the country, bring tbe Intercolonial Railway into touch with the canals and enable it to carry the freight of the west. Now. if it is true, that, as the right lion, gentleman claims, this road is going to carry wheat over the height of land, how is it going to deliver it to the Intercolonial Railway ? But, he says, that the Intercolonial Railway can run up there as well. Fancy the Grand Trunk Railway corporation which owns this railway, owns the track, controlling- everything under its lease and under its "proprietary rights, coming along and picking up all the passengers and freight and the Intercolonial Railway train coming
J <527
[Stage Direction]
132S
trundling along afterwards while the people are going ahead on the Grand Trunk train ! That will be the position of affairs. In the speech which the right hon. leader made he.said that prairie section would be the fruitful section. Mr. Hays says the same thing. Every man who knows anything about railroading knows perfectly well that when you enter the prairie section you get into the fruitful part. Why should not the right hon. gentleman continue on with tne road after having built 1,900 miles already, particularly in view of the fact that he is giving a guarantee of three-quarters of the cost of the western section and that he is going to get no interest for the next eighteen years ? How long has the Canadian Pacific Railway been built ?- about eighteen years. How many dividends has it paid in these eighteen years ?-a great many. That shows that the right hon. gentleman is giving these people the whole present life of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Why did he do it ? Because he found himself occupying the same position that the hon. member for Alberta did to-day, he found himself between two great corporations, he found the Canadian Pacific Railway and he found the Canadian Northern in the field and he dared not take an independent course and build that road up through that country. Hon. gentlemen opposite have been severe in their criticism of the Canadian Pacific Railway, but there are no people more desirous of utilizing the Canadian Pacific Railway than they are for what they can get out of it. They had not the pluck or the courage to take an independent course. They knew that with the then Minister of Railways and Canals they had pledged themselves to the principles of government ownership when they voted for the extension of the Intercolonial to Montreal. I voted with them upon that question because I believe that the future of Canada depends largely upon the question of transportation, that the future of Canada must be promoted by the development of the great west and that the power of dictation in the matter of freight rates is safer in the hands of the government or of a commission appointed independently of politics than it is in the hands of any great corporation.
Think of the fearful tale which has been told by the member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver! in that beautiful essay which he read to us : think of that tale of woe. What guarantee have we in this contract that the Grand Trunk Pacific will not charge the same rates 1 He said that the Intercolonial Railway can go clear up the whole length of the line ; that may be, but it cannot do the business. The business is going to be done by the Grand Trunk, and when the Grand Trunk has cinched this contract they will then have more power over the government than they had when they drove the government into a partnership with them, accord Mr. POPE.
ing to the statement of Lord Welby. 0 government wanted to assert its xnaeP dence of the Grand Trunk Pacific, the ti to do it was before the Grand Trunk Pa -1 / put up their deposit. But the governmen Canada have entered into a compact w * a body not representative in its nature ,g which cannot be got at. That contrac . immoral ; it is against the principles wn have been announced by the Liberal P' ; for the last twenty-five years. ^liat„P1jt curred in the city of Montreal at the ret elections shows the immorality of that ;1 tract. The Minister of Finance mad^ speech in Westmount, and, 'with all ,g suavity that he possesses, he said : a difficulty between us and the Grand hi we hope the Grand Trunk will come to ^ terms, but if they do not, why road must go on just the same. Now. is the meaning of ' just the same ' [DOT] s' nel

it means nothing else but government ° . ship. The Minister of Finance disco'" that the only way of carrying this cm tuency was to resurrect the Grand inti! which had been as silent as the grav® fion-tlie Friday morning previous to the eie ^ when it came to life after Mr. 0ayscolO. other gentlemen came to this city and ^ muned with hon. gentlemen opposite* t0f tamed down the wild independent thou*- til the Minister of Finance and brought n er his own level, and said : You are my Pa'lT,0i1 my dear friend ; you and I have a co ^ interest in this : you furnish the mon ^ w® we will own the road : if you do tm ^jj] will elect your man in St. Gabriel ; take our men by the throat and mak rI1e<3 vote against Dr. Barnard, and so n_ ^gye
out to be, knows it.
i-ybody who was of 4 the first samP16
and ever, .
There was the first
the immoral. effect of this con
tract,
when the people of Canada wake ^P igued immorality of it they will be asto coiO' These gentlemen opposite speak ot ',nluePt pact between the Conservative gove th® and the Canadian Pacific Railway ntrU®-building of that road. I say that is « th®
We know that after the construction
Canadian Pacific Railway, in the cas cer Onderdonk section in British Coin® y retain propositions were made, and aiid suited in the then Minister of RafiW y,.lCjfF the general manager of the Canadian tel-jU3 Railway never being on speaking ,jwa? again, and the Canadian Pacific arbi-had to fight their case out before ^ \\ ® tration court and get what they co cauS-built the Canadian Pacific Railway _^,g pah it was a compact of confederation- pad*1. a high price to build the Canadia tl>a Railway through the barren sectio _ „ev-great western country. There are [DOT] ncbe tlemen sitting on the government qi) tu now who exercised their influent r tu, financial and political world to na g a a Canadian Pacific Railway underta^
a*°
tb®
„ w hamper^
^	undertaking ceto make it as difficult as possible C°
*	'	

^ nv L ->o
thorough survey was made by
servative government of that w
estei'H

tbe w ihe Grand Trunk Pacific now reaps investeri 1 of tlle larSe sums of money then tftlw a Jor surveying the Saskatchewan c°hntr\. hu' John Macdonald held that that <hyn \ was fertile enough to furnish its sW/' ay, and tllat the people of Canada fertile P°t be taxed to build through the Ileur.p -zelt °i' Cm Saskatchewan valley, ihron^t,+,Was-that 11(5 helped to build a road ^e$t ba tae less fertile regions of the North-^isteVn to make ^ a highway binding hg{ljn Canada with the Pacific coast. I hfe fjg.j^Peat, Sir, that no government has %ll\Va * stamp a railroad as a national hie unless the people own it. This is Sill r)1, ll Trunk Railroad to all intents WnrP°Ses' and when the Prime Minister neutai lat. ls a great national transcont!-ho Ilot railroad his statement is not true. I [DOT]nan infltlsrnuate that the right hon. gentle-% tjj^hds to delude the public, but I do hiat L1 there can be no great national work tiny I hot the property of the people. It ^ay g'Ve national results and good effects !°tstr from it, as have flown from the t'ay j h°n of the Canadian Pacific Rail-I- Can i?° these gentlemen opposite cal! r'lHa] uadian Pacific Railway, a great na-y0ttPaiivO?k Twhen it is owned by a private m tlern'I ' t have never heard one of these ?* the o on the government benches speak *7*hon-,1 na(iian Pacific Railway as a great ti thl;' |>
"'i°rk, and neither is the Grand , e pro_ huific a great national work. It is ftfl, supfty of the Grand Trunk Company *P°lissh if °eing the case, it is a bad and a ini!?*11 : yea, it is a mad bargain t^OOone'0'000'0™ of our money as against grI ,u °f theirs, and hand over to them 5 Ghteri' L railway that that money has oy.V°W u,hy not give the people of Canada th 11 that „sayinS whether or not they shall Hin t'l'irrini}? ? Last year we were told by sA* tye _ Minister that we could not wait, Hie: To-61'6 warne(l against the man who nirori'ow, and to-morrow, and to-!lti(] aM pllere have been two hun-U01 the frR tlfty to-morrows since then, is1 ' ivaj* htleman who was told he could %v°t th-'ouVait' waiL,' is still waiting if he Of 'stey A,[DOT] iWe were told by the Prime llie,?tlier, ,, ' the flood gates, or something 4f0'e ha's , °uld come pouring down, but ?p,en 110 flood, and we are not Wi.tlie<s,i 16 Rideau river rose a little tlji! ?6en up W Went off, but that is all. There great calamity; no great finan-W,6*' abrn' the bonding privileges are no {he p ago, hf+tion than they were twenty 'a he tme' w,t We are waiting yet. And if oldster lives, as I trust be shall. 1® in « 8 centenarian senator whose \jK, tion the lobby, be will not see the than aSe to ti 16 bonding privilege. It is of %, *t js . Ile People of the United States the peoPIe of Canada, just as then , y Jreaty was of more use to j Wf<s to us, as they are beginning to find out now, and as we found out long ago.
Why did the right hon. gentleman create us a nation in a single night, if not to be independent of all that ? Why did he not leave us as only Canada and not a nation ? Why did he waste that time, when as a nation we would be more afraid of our neighbours than we were before ? It would have been better to have left us as children. What we have to do in this country is to take advantage of the lessons that are being taught us by the experience of seventy millions of people to the south and millions on the other side of the Atlantic. It is not right that a modern nation like Canada, just springing to her feet, should have to go through all the trouble which old nations have experienced in order to arrive at a position of eminence. She ought to take advantage of the trade conditions, improvements, history and knowledge of the time. She ought to watch the results flowing from the operation of transcontinental lines in the United States. There are five or six transcontinental lines in that country ; and they have barren sections there as we have barren sections here ; because the whole of the United States is not, like, the pathway of this proposed railway, a bed of roses. It has deserts of sand and rock, hill and dale which are not fruitful. We should take advantage of the experience of that country, which, with six or seven transcontinental lines, has not had a lowering of freight rates. The moment competition began between them, we saw a great trust formed to dictate the operation of all those lines. And Sir, that great corporation can just as easily buy the stock of the Canadian Pacific or the Canadian Northern as it did the stock *o4: the Northern Pacific or the Union Pacific; it can extend its operations to this country just as easily as it can remain out. From the experience of that country, I conclude that there is but one safeguard against Canada getting into the same position as the United States, that is. the safeguard of owning and diclating the operation of railroads from ocean to ocean. We should not be above being taught the lesson of experience by those gentlemen on the other side of the line. By this contract, as I read it, we are giving up the right of demanding from the Grand Trunk Pacific Company 3 per cent on the cost of this road for ten years. Then, we must allow the railway to charge the freight rates that will pay that 3 per i ent, or else we do not get it. If we do not get the 3 per cent, why should we not own the rai road ? The Finance Minister tells us that it is only going to cost us *13.000,000 to build our portion of this road.
I do not know any railroad that has been built so cheaply on this continent. Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson says the company's portion will cast them $15,000,000, and the Finance Minister says our portion will cost
[Stage Direction]
us $13,000,000 ; that is, $28,000,000 to build a road 3,400 miles long, with its terminals and equipment. I think we had better own it. Was ever a more ridiculous proposition made on the face of the earth V It has no parallel, and I trust that it never will have one.
I regret exceedingly, Sir, that I do not possess the power of influencing this government in regard to this matter. I may be wrong ; I hope I am ; but I am convinced that we are giving away the people's franchise, and that we are giving the company a bonus of $25,010,000 of stock for taking the present. Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson says his company is going to have that $25,000,000 of stock, although its portion will only cost it $15,000,000. Take all these things into consideration, and I ask you : suppose I go lack to my electors and say to them, I had an opportunity of getting a railroad across this continent for you for $15,000,000, and 1 refused the chance ; I paid the rest of the cost, guaranteed the bonds, built 1,£00 miles of the most barren and expensive part of that railway as a government road, and by paying $15,000,000 more, I could have a road for you that would be worth from $150,000,000 to $200,000,000. What do you think they would say to me ? If I did that, I firmly believe my constituents would say to me : Pope, you are a fool ; you don't know how to make a trade, and you will not go back to that House again. And I believe they would be fully justified. That is my opinion of what would happen to me if I made a bargain such as this government is making; and I am sincere when I say that X wish I possessed the power to prevent them carrying out this contract. All the safeguards that were in it last year they hove wiped out this year, and where are the ministers who insisted last year on these safeguards being put in. We know that this contract did not go through the cabinet until it was changed; clause after clause had to be put in to suit these hon. gentlemen. Nobody stole this information ; it is public property. We know that some of the ministers of the Crown kicked. Mr. Blair kicked out. He is a man who, when he kicks, goe s. But the re were some other gentlemen who did some kicking, but who stayed in the cabinet, until a clause was added here and a clause added there to safegbard the public interests, and then the contract was ratified. All these safeguards are missing in the amended Bill or contract. If by staying here for six months or a year, I could get the people of Canada to have the right to say whether they wanted to spend $150,000,000 on this property and then give it away, when by spending $15,000,000 more they could own it. it would be my duty to stay. I do not think the trustees of this country should look lightly upon their res, onsibilities when they are s >
g ave as they are in this instance not only fin mcially, but with regard to the Mr. POPE.
[Stage Direction]
control of competitive railways across continent.	J8
One word more, and I am finished. goUtb in reference to the hon. member for ® ,J(je Essex (Mr. Cowan) who, after having b\S such a speech as he did yesterday, s jje not have been absent the next day- 0{ refers to the absence of the hon. leao the opposition. Mr. Speaker, you ha''et)ate, sitting there more or less during this u and you have seen how many of tn1 n\j\e isters of the Crown have taken the r ^ete to remain in their seats. We have tw p,e this afternoon -the Prime Minister a goJjje-Minister of Trade and Commerce. times we have had only one, and soi* we have had two.	. . n jit-
The hon. the leader of the opposhi 0f R. L. Borden) is alone in the preparai t _ be his policy and the conduct of the ** wlioiB has no cabinet surrounding him t011iecti®® people who wish to see him in co>' , lV® with political matters may be refer1'® [DOT] oil see to-day not half a dozen Sellt funist®1? the opposite side, with one or two n out of seventeen :	no one lcnows^ I)0t
has become of the others but they ' a here. We want no more such	d®'
the hon. member for Essex (Mr. y? ob°sl'"s livered yesterday. We can furnish pate language if necessary, but any man jjoUs' to do it. I myself did it once in taw ^ n with a feeling of repugnance, but \ 1>®' because I believed it to be my dm- * ^ th1' lieve that the leaders on both sid® gSpe® ' House are entitled to be treated , aS it 1*\, and I am determined to see, so tax * \VP' in my power, that the hon. gentle ' p, m leads this side of the House	rl.
Borden) shall be treated with the ' t0 e spect and courtesy as I am disp°=b0 le* ^ tend to the right hon. gentleman [DOT]$qlfr the other side of the House (*
Laurier).
Mr. WM. ROCHE (Halifax).: 
READINGS.
[Stage Direction]
fioom 1?°- 16) respecting the French River Company (Limited).-Mr. Grant.
23) respecting the Collingwood liill AIarine Hospital.-iMr. McCarthy.
°t p. (^T°- 17) to confer on the Commissioner the iTroIlts cei'tain powers for the relief of Bill >n°Ulabie O- A. Parsons.-Mr. Clarke. M;uu (No. 20) to incorporate the Cascapedia Char] aetUring and Trading Company.-Mr. Marcil.	*

[Stage Direction]
Bin
«t'U it,{^°- 40) respecting tlie Canada South-Bill ' * Way Company.-Mr. Ingram.
41) to incorporate "latcii Railway Company.
the LiSvre and ay Company.-Mr. Charles
ffailUPw' 4?) respecting the Sprague's Falls *at>onaCtUl'ing Company	(Limited).-Mr. t hill Tv
[DOT]akp '*Bo. 43) respecting the Quebec and ^iouiii Uron Railway	Company.-Mr. J)|jj
r?0' VVm?' fl) respecting tlie Berlin, Water-'tQnav,1 es ey and Lake Huron Railway
hill "y'~Mr. Glare-	.
eaiWon*' to incorporate the Boundary, °lTir)fir,, and Cariboo Central Railway ^'ill N Mi' Blalliher. lll! ttuhw ^ respecting the Kootenay Cent-Bin f\i aj" Company.-Mr. Galliher.
L.5- 48) respecting the Nicola, Ivam-Simiikameen Coal and Railway 5

Mr. Galliher.
Bill (No. 49) respecting the James Bay Railway Company.-Mr. McCool.
Bill (No. 50) to incorporate the St. Maurice Valley Railway Company.-Mr. Bureau.
Bill (No. 51) to incorporate the Okotoks and High River Lumbering and Development Company.-Mr. Oliver.
Bill (No. 52) respecting the Manitoba and Keewatin Railway Company.-Mr. McCreary.
Bill (No. 53) respecting the North American Telegraph Company.-Mr. McCreary.
Bill (No. 55) respecting the Canadian Northern Railway Company.-Mr. Davis.

[Stage Direction]
On the order being called for :
Second Reading of Bill (No. 45) respecting the Home Bank of Canada-Mr. Osier.
William Stevens Fielding: I would ask that this Bill should stand for the present. It is an amendment to the Bank x\.ct and I wish to have an opportunity of looking into it.
Order allowed to stand.


DOMINION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. MACPHERSON moved second reading of Bill (No. 54) to incorporate the Dominion Fire Insurance Company. [DOT]
Mr. HENDERSON.: I desire to ask the Minister of Finance if his attention has been drawn to the title of this Bill. The hon. minister objected very much to the use of the word ' Canada ' or the word ' Dominion ' in the title of a bank. To my mind the same objection applies to the title of an insurance company.


William Stevens Fielding: The question might be seriously considered in the Committee on Banking and Commerce. We do not usually, raise questions of that kind on the second reading of a Bill. There is something in the suggestion oil my hon. friend, and we can consider it in the Committee on Banking and Commerce, where it frequently happens that a change of title is made.


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

[Stage Direction]
House resumed adjourned debate on the proposed motion of Sir Wilfrid Laurier and the proposed motion of Mr. R. L. Borden in amendment thereto.
William Roche: Mr. Speaker, the rate of interest being high at the present time, we may have to pay four per cent on the bonds for a year or so. Then, very probably, the rate will be reduced to three per eent or even less. On
133!/

this assumption it is fair to believe that the, road from Moncton to Winnipeg can be constructed for $65,000,000.
I beg to call your attention and the attention of the House to the proposal of the hon. leader of the opposition. His proposal is to extend the Intercolonial to Depot Harbour, and I suppose on from that to Winnipeg, buying the Canada Atlantic line and the Canadian Pacific line, and building westward from Winnipeg. These railways are to be bought this year. If they sell, they will expect to be paid immediately. If they are to be paid immediately, the interest to be paid on the purchase money would be at four percent.
Now assuming the cost from Moncton to Winnipeg to be $65,000,000, and allowing seven years' interest, during which the Grand Trunk Pacific pays no rent, that, at 3i per cent, would amount to $2,270,000 per annum, or, for the seven years, $16,000,000. That would bring up the total cost to $81,000,000. Then, for the Quebec bridge I will allow a cost of $6,700,000, and interest amounting to $300,000, making in all $7,000,000. It was argued very cogently and successfully by my hon. friend from Haldimand <Mr. A. T. Thompson) that two or three railways would participate in the use. of that bridge and would -contribute to its cost by way of either interest or tolls ; so that the sums derived for the use of that bridge would pay the interest on the original cost, and the issue of bonds or other securities for the amount would be simply so much paper, while the interest was being paid to the government.
For the prairie section of 1,000 miles it is fair to assume that nothing is to be paid. On that point Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson further said :
As regards the prairie section, the government, not unfairly, held that it would be selfsustaining from the day of its completion, and in this view we are willing to concur.


Mr.   C@: visions of the said contract, its guarantee of (he bonds of the said company to be issued for the cost of construction of the said western division, in such manner as may be agreed upon, so to make ihe proceeds of the said bonds so as to be guaranteed a sum equal to seventy-five per centum of the cost of construction of the western division ascertained as provided in the said contract, but not exceeding in respect of the prairie section, thirteen thousand dollars (-?!?,000) per mile.'
If the Grand Trunk Railway is ultimately to pay the amount of the bonded indebtedness, it will see to it that no excessive bonds are issued. And, if the government are to be the ultimate possessors of the road, their officers will take pains to prevent any excessive bond issue of the payment of any exorbitant commission to those who are to dispose of the bonds or provide the cash.
Third. A foreclosure in case of default of interest ,-to be paid by the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company. I am not a lawyer, and have no intimate acquaintance with the mode of foreclosure. I do not wish to add to the learned legal argument made on this question. It has been thoroughly elucidated. My- effort would not tend to cast further light upon it. but rather to obscure it. But there was one singular remark made upon this subject by the leader of the opposition. That remark was to the effect that if this portion of the road should prove unremunerative the Grand Trunk Pacific Company would make default, in * which case the road might be. put in the hands of a receiver ; but when business revived and traffic increased, making the road profitable, then /the Grand Trunk Pacific Company would take the road
back and operate it during the good times ;_
and, I suppose, they would leave it to the government again when the profits fell off. I may be bold enough to say that if there be any suspicion in the minds of the leader of the opposition or auy other gentleman that this kind of sliding scale could be put in force, the matter should be made clear. It would not be creditable to the government of Canada that there should be any such alternating of control. Once default is made ror a number of years, after due charity has been extended to the undertaking, if it is found that either wilfully or by reason of inability, the company does i/ot work that section of the road, the government should resume possession of it and operate it for -ill time.
Fourth. Alteration in the contract as to the common stock of $25,000,000 to be handed over to the Grand Trunk. Part of that item, I have no doubt, was to provide rolling-stock, part was for ships and part for other expense, perhaps to provide the balance of capital between what the government would supply and that which the Grand Trunk . Company would have to furnish on the two sections. But the learned leader of the opposition goes on to say that these are con-


William Roche: 

conveying of Russian troops and munitions of war over Lake Baikal because be said that navigation might be prolonged a little longer in the fall of the year by ice breakers. I would like to see the commerce of the great lakes, the commerce of the great west, the commerce which goes to the maritime provinces depending upon the water being kept open in a winter like the last one by ice breakers on Lake Superior or any other lake. How would it be in winter along the projected Grand Trunk Pacific Railway? The winter of 1004 will long be remembered in Canada and the northern states on account for the severe weather and continuous snow storms which blocked the railways almost everywhere and especially in western Ontario to an extent without precedent in railway experience, some of the lines being closed for weeks at a time and on this we are to depend to carry out the project of the hon. leader of the opposition. The following editorial from the Toronto ' Globe ' on March 3, 1904, shows that northern Quebec, usually looked upon as the region of snow blockades is not so white as it is painted, the most northern railway in the province not having cancelled a single train -freight or passenger-during this exceptional winter, and its tonnage hauled showing increases every week since December last:
The Unblockaded North.
The man with the yardstick is reporting on the snow blockade. Bight feet on the level is a customary figure, but one observer, with a talent for accuracy, announces that the depth in his locality is thirteen feet three inches. Snow stories are the winter counterpart of fish stories in summer. Amid all this talk of the blockade it is pleasant to learn of some part of the country where the snowfall does not interfere with traffic, and, curiously enough, the north country furnishes It. It is now about ten years since the Quebec and Lake St. John Railway was completed from Quebec to Roberval and Chicoutimi, a distance of 240 miles, traversing a portion of the same country, northwest of Quebec, through which the government Pacific road is to pass. During all these years this road has been operated without any interruption whatever from snow. The Quebec papers tell us that during this exceptional winter and through all the storms of this northern country the Lake St. John passenger trains have been running sharp on time, there has been no delay in the freight service, and the earnings show satisfactory increases over last winter. The road has been sending all winter thousands of tons of pulp from the mills of the north to the paper mills in New England, which, owing to the scarcity of water, they cannot get from the pulp mills in their own country.
There is a good argument in all this for the new transcontinental. It shows the wisdom of the government's decision to build the road by the shortest and most direct line from Quebec to Winnipeg, north of the height of land in the James Bay territory of Quebec and Ontario. The objection has- been raised that it might be difficult to operate such a road in the winter owing to the excessive snowfall.


William Roche: 
Mr.  W. J.@: ROCHE (Marquette) moved the adjournment of the debate.
On motion of Mr. Fielding, House adjourned at 9.45 p.m.

Monday, April 18, 1904.