1904-07-28

Mr.  R. G.@: MACPHERSON moved that Bill (119) respecting the Pacific Bank of Canada be placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading on Friday, July 29.


Mr. DAVID HENDERSON.: I think the hon. gentleman is making a mistake. That Bill was last night referred to the Committee on Banking and Commerce.


Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance).: The Clerk informs me that this Bill has already been given second reading and referred to the Conjmittee on Banking and Commerce. There would therefore be no reason for adopting his motion and I would suggest that he withdraw it.
Motion withdrawn.



QUESTIONS.


Mr. BOYD asked :: 1.	Has a license been granted to any person or persons giving the exclusive fishing privileges on lakes north of Lake Winnipeg ? If so, what lakes ?
2.	If such license has been granted, to whom granted, for what term of years, and what is the fee paid, if any ?
3.	Was there any Dominion license granted to parties to fish on these w-aters previous to the granting of the exclusive lease ?


Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) :: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Answered by No. 1.
I may state that these licenses will be laid on the table of the House during the afternoon.


GRAIN CARRIED ON INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY.
Mr. FOWLER asked :: 1.	How many tons of grain and grain products were carried by the Intercolonial Railway from south-west of Montreal to St. Jobn, for other Bay of Fundy ports during each month com-Mr. FIELDING.
mencing September 1, 1903, to June 30, 1904, and how many tons of the same articles from points west of Montreal were carried during the same time to the same port for local delivery ?
2.	What are the respective freight rates for such products from points west of Montreal to St. John, when intended for local delivery, or for distribution to other Bay of Fundy ports?
3.	Is the Department of Railways and Canals aware that grain and grain products from points west of Montreal have been delivered in St. John for local delivery after having paid the export rate of freight only? If so, to whom have these products been delivered, in what amount, and what is the reason for the discrimination ?
4.	What means are taken by the department to make sure that freight delivered at St. John by the Intercolonial Railway at a special rate for export is really exported and not detained for local delivery ?


Hon.  H. R.@: EMMERjSON (Minister of Railways and Canals) :
1.	No grain or grain products were carried by the Intercolonial Railway from southwest of Montreal to St. John for other Bay of Fundy ports from September 1, 1903, to June 30, 1904.
The following tonnage of the same articles was carried from points west of Montreal during the same time to the same port
for local delivery :
Tons.
September, 1903	 1,427
October, 1903	 982
November, 1903	 919
December, 1903	 963
January, 1904	 502
February, 1904	 716
March, 1904	 614
April, 1904	 798
May, 1904	 662
June, 1094	 672
2.	As grain and grain products are shipped from many points, rates can only be ascertained by obtaining copy of billing of each shipment. Generally speaking, the rates from main line points west of Toronto to St. John for local delivery is 21 cents per 100 pounds, and for furtherance to Bay of Fundy ports, 13} cents per 100 pounds.
3.	The Department of Railways and Canals is not aware that grain and grain products from points west of Montreal have been delivered in St. John for local delivery after having paid the export rate of freight only.
4.	The usual means adopted by all railways, viz. : the delivery of the freight to the steamship line upon which the through bill of lading is drawn.



POONAMALIE DAM.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LAVELL-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
1.	Has the dam at Poonamalie, on the Rideau canal, been at any time rebuilt since the construction of the canal ? If so, when ?
2.	What repairs have been made to the dam, or any part of it, in the last fifteen years ?

3.	When was the protecting dam removed, and why was it not replaced ?
4.	After the boom was removed, was anything done to protect the dam from injury from ice ?
5.	If so, what was it. and when was it done ?
Hon.  H. R.@: EMMERSON (Minister of
Railways and Canals) :
1.	Tlie dam lias been entirely rebuilt since the construction of the canal. It was rebuilt in 1870.
2.	The dam has twice been partially rebuilt within the last fifteen years. A new weir having been put in, and a new top and braces having been built. The dam was last repaired in 1899.
3.	Not aware of any protecting dam having been removed. There certainly has been no such protecting dam for the last twenty-two years.
4.	There was a boom for catching flood wood which was removed over thirty-five years ago, ns there was no further necessity for it.
5.	Is answered by No. 4.



BOUNTY ON CRUDE PETROLEUM.

Right Hon.   S@: FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved that the House do to-morrow go into Committee of the Wh*>le to consider the following proposed resolutions :
1.	Resolved, That it is expedient to provide that there -shall be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund a bounty of one and one-half cents per gallon on all crude petroleum produced from wells in Canada on and after the gth day of June, 1904, and on crude petroleum produced from wells in Canada and held in storage tanks or other storage receptacles on that date.
2.	Resolved, That the Minister of Trade and Commerce may, subject to the approval of the Governor In Council, make such resolutions as he deems necessary respecting the payment of the said bounties.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Sir FREDERICK BORDEN (Minister of Militia).: As some doubt was expressed in the discussion which took place yesterday as to the correctness of my statement regarding the occurrence immediately preceding the passing of the Order in Council extending the time of Lieut.-Col. Gregory, 1 wish to carry out the promise which I made to bring down the original ' Gazette ' for the inspection of the House.



DUTY ON TOBACCO.

Mr. A. B. INGRAM.: Would the right lion, gentleman say wliat he has done about the tobacco question, as I did not catch his remarks. My bon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) asked me to remind the right hon. gentleman of his promise not to proceed with this question until the return of the hob. member from Jacques Cartier.


Mr.  W. H.@: My hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) asked us not to proceed with the resolution of the Minister of Finance in his absence.



REPRESENTATION ACT, 1903-AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. CHARLES FITZPATRICK (Minister of Justice) moved that Bill (No. 149) to amend the Representation Act of 1903 be read the third time. He said : In the discussion in committee yesterday my hon. friend from Grey (Mr. Sproule) asked that the third reading be postponed until to-day so that I might procure some maps that he thought were in existence, showing the boundaries of the electoral constituencies in Ontario. I have given him the information.
Mr. SPROULE.: I thought there were maps of each constituency in Ontario, but the minister writes me that there are no such maps.


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

[Stage Direction]
Hon. CHARLES FITZPATRICK (Minister of Justice) moved that Bill (No. 152) respecting an arbitration between His Majesty and the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada be read the third time.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN.: The hon. gentleman has been good enough to send me a telegram from Mr. Cook, who appears to be an official on the Intercolonial.


Mr. FITZPATRICK.: No, he is counsel for the government in the arbitration.


Robert Laird Borden: From the nature of the telegram I supposed he was an official on the Intercolonial. It appears from this telegram that there are no data by which the government are able to estimate the amount of freight diverted. Perhaps the hon. gentleman would have no objection to my reading the telegram.


Charles Fitzpatrick: None at (all. In fact I shall have a letter to-morrow which will give fuller information. I am willing to allow the matter to remain over until that letter is received.


Robert Laird Borden: Perhaps that would be the better course, and if the hon. gentleman would let me have such information as he sees fit in the meantime, I would be very glad.
Motion withdrawn.



BANK ACT-AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 160) to amend the Bank Act-Mr. Fielding-was read the second time, and House went into committee thereon.
William Stevens Fielding: In introducing this Bill some days ago I fully explained its purpose. Though it is a repeal of a statute of 1899 and its reenactment, this is done entirely for the purpose of. drafting, so that the Bill may be in good form. The actual change is very slight. Existing legislation provides that our banks doing business in colonies other than Canada shall have power to issue notes in those colonies. We have made provision for the issue of notes in pounds sterling and in Canadian dollars. But a case has arisen in which it is found that a bank which desired to issue notes in another colony discovered that its currency was slightly different from the currency of Canada. Although the currency of both countries is in dollars and cents, that slight difference is enough to prove an obstacle. The case arose in the colony of Trinidad, and the British government, through the colonial office, expressed the desire that the matter should be dealt with by legislation in the parliament of Canada. What we propose therefore is that a bank doing business in any British colony shall have a right to issue its notes in that colony in the currency of the colony in actual commercial use. That is the whole matter. There are only a few words changed in the Act.


Mr. OSLER.: Is there any provision in the Bill as to what proportion of the circulation is outside of Canada ? That might perhaps be of importance.


William Stevens Fielding: We have never required it. But of course under the general provision calling for a special return, we can obtain it at any time. Perhaps my hon. friend is right in the suggestion, it might be desirable information ; but the Bank Act gives power to obtain it by calling for a special return.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: When the minister spoke before I asked if these notes would be legal tender in the Dominion. We give them authority to issue the notes.


William Stevens Fielding: No, they would not be legal tender in Canada. In fact, except under special conditions, a bank note is not a legal tender. Here we provide simply that the notes shall be redeemed in the colony in which they are issued, so long as the bank does business in that colony ; but if for any reason business is suspended, then they must be redeemed in Canada. The idea is that the circulation of the notes shall be confined to the colony in question because, as they represent a different currency, it would be rather confusing to have their notes circulated in Canada. They are not a legal tender.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


Robert Laird Borden: 



SUPPLY.-WHARF AT CAMPBELLTON, N.B.

["McColl,\tWard,\nSutherland (Oxford),\tHaggart,\nTobin,\tBall, '\nThompson (Hald.),\tRoche (Marq.),\nLaw,\tCasgrain,\nMcCool,\tAvery,\nPaterson,\tMaclean,\nGalliher,\tCalvin,\nHolmes, [DOT]\tClare,\nRoss (Ontario S.),\tDonnelly,\nGirard,\tLeonard,\nGerman,\tJohnston (Card.),\nScott,\tMacLaren (Perth),\nSifton,\tTarte,\nSmith (Vancouver),\tRobinson (Nord.),\nOliver,\tLavell,\nHyman,\tBruce,\nHarty,\tReid (Grenville),\nWallace,\tTisdale,\nCartwright,\tTupper,\nLovell,\tKendry,\nHaszard,\tDaniel,\nWade,\tKaulbach,\nDavis,\tBoyd,\nBicberdike,\tRoddick,\nGallery,\tBroder,\nJohnson (C.B.),\tCarscallen,\nGuthrie,\tCulbert,\nRussell,\tHaekett,\nTolmie,\tSeagram,\nDemers (Levis),\tMonk,\nParmelee,\tPope,\nFisher,\t*Hale,\nStephens,\tThomson (Grey),\nMalouin,\tTolton.\nAmendment negatived. Motion agreed to, , and House went into Committee of Supply."]
Right Hon.   S@: FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved that the House go into Committee of Supply.


Mr. GEO. W. FOWLER.: Mr. Speaker, before you leave the chair, there is a matter which I wish to call to the attention of the government in connection with the public wharf at Campbellton, Restigouche county, N.B. It seems that there is just one public wharf at Campbellton, which all the shippers of lumber, particularly at that port, are obliged to use, but it seems that one corporation have been granted a preference in the use of this wharf by the Department of Marine and Fisheries, without any good reason therefor. The wharf is necessary for the economical shipment of lumber at that port. An order was given, a copy of which I have, and which I will read, by the Department of Marine and Fisheries, dated .Tune 1C, 1904, addressed to Mr. Asker, who is the wharfinger at Campbellton. Tt is as follows :
Sir,-I am to instruct you to see that ships taking cargo direct from the cars on the government wharf at Campbellton are given the railway or wharf berth. It has, the department understands, been the custom in the past for the first vessel in to get the choice of berths but in future precedence is to be given in this connection to vessels loading from the cars.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
(Sgd.) F. GOURDEAU, Deputy Minister M. and F. To Mr. G. E. Asker,
Wharfinger, Campbellton, N.B.
As a matter of fact at this government wharf there is only room for one steamer to load at a time, and the complaint is made that the corporation known as the Shives Lumber Company have the right under this order, which is given here, to take the wharf and to take this berth whenever they choose, no matter whether other vessels are in before them or not. Complaint was made to the department in a letter written by the William Richards Company, Limited, under date of June 23, 1904. That letter is as follows :
Campbellton, N.B., June 23, 1904.
F. Gourdeau, Esq.,


Deputy Minister M.: and F.,
Ottawa, Can.
Dear Sir,-In reference to inclosed copy of your instruction of June 16 to Mr. Asker, war-finger at this port, we hardly think that you know or are at all aware of the condition of affairs at this port or you would not have issued the order in question. We will, as briefly as possible, give you the condition of affairs. At the port of Campbellton there are only two shippers that have been shipping deals over the government wharf, they being the Shives Lumber Co. (Limited) and ourselves, and in fact up to this year have been the only ship-

pers from this port in recent years. We, as a rule, load the bulk of our cargoes from lighters, *while the Shives Company' load theirs from cars and lighters, but this year they will load the most from Cars, whereas we will load none from cars, and they shall have full charge of this government wharf under this order. As far as the order is concerned, the wharf is the only berth where steamers can load with safety, and if the Shives Lumber Company are given the full control of this wharf it means that our company have to carry deals on lighters to Point le Garde, some ten miles below Camp-bellton, which is the only safe berth for a steamer to load within the port of Campbell-ton, excepting the government wharf. If such a state of affairs continues it means that this company, in order to do business, must do such business at a great loss to themselves, as well as doing injury to the port, as there is no safe berth within the port, and there are days when you cannot load a steamer at Point le Garde, because it is an open and exposed roadway, and lighters cannot put alongside the ship. We feel that if this order is carried out as intended, and we have no rights to the use of the government property at this port, and it is given over to one shipper for their absolute use and benefit, it means that we cannot see any course left open to us but to stop doing business and shipping from this port. We might further add that we have a very valuable plant situated at this port and are large employers of labour and make more use of the wharf than any other shippers, as by reference to the customs here you will ascertain. We would therefore ask that the said order be cancelled forthwith and that both shippers be given equal rights in regard to the use of government, whai'fs and property at this port and that the old state of affairs be restored, namely, that the first vessel arriving to have the preference of the use of the government wharfs on payment of the proper tolls, and we would thank you to give this matter your serious and prompt consideration, as we can asure you that it is a very serious matter as far as this port is concerned. Awaiting your reply.
We are, your respectfully,
(Sgd.) WM. RICHARDS & CO. (Ltd.)
To that letter the department replied by the following letter bearing date of July 2nd, and addressed to Win. Richards & Company, Limited :
Your letter of the 23rd of June has been fully considered. Instructions were given Mr. Asker, wharfinger, to give the preference to vessels loading from the cars. It was understood that Mr. Shives, at considerable expense, placed a siding on the wharf in order that vessels might be loaded from the cars.
I am instructed that that is absolutely untrue ; I am instructed that Mr. Shives did nothing of the sort ; I am instructed that Mr. Shives expended no money upon the government wharf after the expropriation proceedings were taken.
In view of the fact and the expense to which Mr. Shives has been put

Remember, this is the sole ground upon which this preference is granted according to the letter of the department.
In view of the fact and the expense to which Mr. Shives has been put, it seems reasonable that vessels that have been loaded from the cars should be given the preference with regard to the berth. It was also understood that two vessels being there together owned by different firms would rarely occur, and consequently any other firm shipping lumber would not to any extent suffer. The department does not wish to place any obstacle in the way of yourselves in loading lumber from the wharf, and would be pleased to consider your interest as well as that of Mr. Shives. It is understood that there will be a large expenditure for wharf accommodation at your wharf in the future, and that there will be abundance of room for lumber dealers to load and unload lumber in Campbellton.
That is a case of : live horse and you'll get grass.
In the meantime, I do not consider that the instructions to Mr. Asker can be at this stage cancelled unless you are able to prove that you are suffering severe damage.
In reply to that, the .Messrs. Richards and Company addressed another letter dated 6th July in which they say :
Re inclosed correspondence, we would like to add that since this order has been issued and it has become known, it has already compelled us to pay extra freight over the other shipper from this port, as the steamship owners are fully aware that when a steamer moves to Point le Garde, that it involves a lot of extra expense; we might say that we have recently had to pay 5 per standard on account of this order, and think that in all decencv and fair-play it should be cancelled.
This means, that if Richards and Company cannot have the use of the government wharf they must load their steamers at Point le Garde which is ten miles distant, and in an open roadway which in storms from certain quarters is very dangerous for steamers. It is impossible to carry on the loading there under certain conditions. The steamer is detained therefore much longer than would be necessary, if she were at the government wharf and in consequence Richards and Company have to pay higher rates on the shipments of deals. The letter continues :
We also have a steamer in port since last Friday, and on Saturday the writer requested the harbour master to allow him to have the berth after the Shives steamer ' sailed, and the reply he got was this, that Mr. Shives had a sailing vessel, that he wanted to load at the wharf, and if he wanted the steamer to get the berth we woould have to arrange with Mr. Shives. Our steamer is some 1,600 tons and is loading from lighters in the stream, and the Shives barque is only 800 tons and loading from lighters in the stream, and wo are informed that most of her cargo is coming in lighters. The barque could load safely where she is. as she is only geting 35 M. of dry boards per day and our steamer is loading at the rate of 200 M. per day, and if she does not. get the berth as soon as vacated by the Shi-ves steamer on Friday will have to proceed to Point le Garde to take in balance of

her cargo, which will likely be one million. At present there are In port one steamer and one large sailing ship for us and one steamer and one sailing ship for Shives, as well as a number of schooners that cannot get a berth at all. You will see at once that our claim is fair and just, and we cannot see how the government or department can give over public property like this to one concern and debar the rest of the public. We trust that the department will at once cancel this order or it will be not only very injurious to ourselves, but to the port and public in general.
It seems that the Shives Company hail a wharf alongside the government wharf, and that in order to reach the government wharf it was necessary to cross the Shives wharf. Expropriation proceedings were taken by the government to get the Shives wharf ; the government offered Mr. Shives, or the corporation of which he is the head, some $5,000 for the wharf, but $40,000 or $50,000 was demanded, and the award of the arbitrators was $35,000. which I understand the government has appealed, and it is now before the Exchequer Court. But it does not appear from anything on the face of this correspondence or from any other evidence, that the Shives Company has any right to any preference. The point is made that the Shives Company is loading lumber from the cars, but I fail to see how that could give them a preference on this government wharf over other shippers. I am informed that the allegation that any expenditure has been made by Mr. Shives for a siding on this wharf is absolutely untrue.- Anyway, what right would Mr. .Shives have to run a railway track upon the government wharf ? It seems to me that whoever is in charge of that public wharf would be derelict in their duty if they allowed any private individual or corporation to make such use of government property. In view of the strong statements made in this letter and in view of all the circumstances, it seems to me that this order-a very improper order in the first place-should be cancelled, and that fair play and equal rights, what we call British justice should be meted out to each man who desires to use that wharf-and who is willing to pay tolls for that use.


Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE.: Surely the hou. gentleman (Mr. Fowler) does not expect me to give him the information without any notice whatever being given in advance. If the hon. gentleman had wanted the information to-day, he should have certainly given me notice last night or yesterday. I know nothing whatever about this matter, but will make the necessary inquiry and bring down the information.


George William Fowler: I mentioned this matter yesterday in supply, and I stated that I would bring it up again at the first opportunity. I would suppose that was sufficient notice. I did not intend to be guilty of any discourtesy in not giving notice.


George William Fowler: 


Hon.  H. R.@: EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals.) My attention has not been called to this matter, but as the question of a railway siding is involved I wish to say that there was an appropriation last year for laying rails and ties on a siding connecting the new industry at Camp-bellton established by the Shives Lumber Company, with the Intercolonial railway. The Shives Company graded the siding and we put down the rails and ties with the view of securing to the Intercolonial railway the products of that mill, which they would ship by water if this were not done. The products of the mill are brought down over the Intercolonial railway and shipped from the public wharf at Campbellton. An extension of that wharf is arranged for whereby a turntable will be used, and I have no doubt that within a very short time provision will be made for more vessels than one. That of course will be done at the expense of the Intercolonial railway, in order that it may have the advantage of the traffic, and not at the expense of any individual or corporation. Do I understand the Richards Company lighter their material to the wharf and then load it from the lighters, or do they haul it on to the wharf and have it shipped ?


Mr.   FOWLE@: I do not know, but I presume the latter.


Mr. EMMERSON.: Their mill is on the line of the Intercolonial railway, but I do not know whether they utilize the railway or whether they haul their lumber.


George William Fowler: They do both. Sometimes they haul by the railway and sometimes they carry by lighter.



[Stage Direction]
Mr. R, L. BORDEN. Mr. Speaker, before you leave the chair I would like to inquire of the government whether or not they have any further information as to the date on which the report of the commission appointed to investigate certain matters in the Yukon will be laid on the table of the House. So far as I am aware, it has not been laid on the table up to the present time.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: Does my hon. friend refer to. the report of Mr. Justice Britton ?


Robert Laird Borden: Yes.


Wilfrid Laurier: No, it has not been laid on the table yet.


Robert Laird Borden: There seems to be an extraordinary delay in this matter. The instructions to the commission were issued in June of last year, some thirteen months ago. The commission had not a wide scope, although a promise was made by the member for the Yukon in the election campaign that certain ' charges of fraud would be investigated as soon as par-


J ULY 23. 1904
[Stage Direction]
Jiament met. The hon. gentleman's health was not such as to enable him to be present till some time after parliament met. I am not saying that in reproach to him ; but in his address to the electors of the Yukon there was a promise made that charges of fraud would be thoroughly investigated. That promise was ratified last year by the Postmaster General, when the matter was first brought up by the hon. member for Montmorency (Mr. T. Chase Casgrain). I do not propose to go over the discussion which we had last year on the instructions to the commission which were brought down by the government-instrue tions which did not admit of the investigation of the circumstances attending the granting of the concessions. We on this side of the House demanded that wider powers should be given, so that all those circumstances should be investigated by the commissioners. Although that investigation had clearly been promised by the Postmaster General, the promise was afterwards withdrawn ; and the instructions to the commissioners were carefully framed so that no such inquiry could be made. The inquiry, such as it was, proceeded before two commissioners- Mr. Justice Britton, of the bench of Ontario, and Mr. Bell. The inquiry, so far as it went, was concluded, and from that time to the present we have had no report ; although, if I remember rightly, the inquiry was concluded in November or December last. This House has now been in session nearly five months, and it was not unreasonable for us to expect long before this that the report of Mr. Justice Britton should have been received. I do not know whether any report, or any draft report, from the other commissioner, who met his death by a deplorable accident, was ever received by the government. It is well known that Mr. Bell stated before his death that his report had been drafted. No trace of it has ever been found, and I assume that no copy of it, certainly not the original, has come into the hands of the government. If it was ever received, its nonproduction merits the severest criticism. Its disappearance has undoubtedly been very mysterious, because I believe no trace of it has been round among Mr. Bell's papers. Since Mr. Bell's death the matter has been before Mr. Justice Britton, and I should have thought he could have made up his report ten times during the period at his disposal. I am saying that with all respect to the necessity of his performing his judicial duties ; because, if his judicial duties are of such a character that he has been unable during the seven or eight months which have elapsed sUnce the investigation was closed, to prepare his report to parliament on this subject, then he should never have been appointed on this commission. The whole inquiry has been absolutely farcical. It was farcical, to begin with, because that which had been promised to the people of the Yukon during the elec-
'tion campaign by my hon. friend who represents that constituency was not granted. It has been farcical, in the next place, because seven or eight months have elapsed since the investigation was completed, and apparently parliament is to be prorogued without having an opportunity to consider that report. I desire to place on record my protest against this method of conducting the public business. There was a very unanimous cry-not a party cry, but a cry from one end of the Yukon to the other-to have, not only the investigation which the government has given, but an investigation of a very much wider character. The limited investigation that was given, was given thirteen months ago, and from that time to this we have not heat'd one word of what that investigation amounted to, or what the opinion of the commissioners was. I do not think the government are to be congratulated on the way in which they have dealt with this subject, and I conclude by once more asking the Prime Minister whether or not we are to have, even in the closing days of this session, any report from Mr. Justice Britton ?
Mr.  W. H.@: Mr. Speaker, I think I can fairly say that the matter which my hon. friend has brought to the attention of the House is no longer an issue, and has been disposed of more than once on the floor of this House. It is quite true, promises were made at one time by parties who were not in the government, but who spoke in the interest of common justice, that certain charges of fraud, which were made in the Yukon, would be investigated. The government expressed its willingness to have such an investigation when particulars were given ; but we refused to authorize a blanket investigation into charges Which were not formulated. Such being the intention of the government, expressed more than once in this House, a commission was issued last year to Mr. Justice Britton and Mr. Bell authorizing them to investigate, not the charges of fraud which had been made, but the nature of the concession, the needs of the Yukon, and especially the wants of the miners as to water. The death of Mr. Bell was most disastrous in many respects. It is stated that his report was drafted. That may be, but, so far as I know, the draft never reached the government. In the absence of the Minister of the Interior, I would not say any more. With regard to the report of Mr. Justice Britton, I do not know that he has made his report as yet. He has been communicated with once more to hasten it, so that we may have it before the House rises. I may say that the necessity which existed at one time for this investigation has been removed by the fact that the Treadgold concession, which most of the complaints had reference to, is no longer in existence.


Mr. E. F. CLARKE.: It seems to me that the very fact that the Treadgold people have abandoned their privileges is all the more reason why this matter should be investigated. It will be within the recollection of hon. members that members of the House were sent again and again copies of newspapers which support the government from the Yukon making the most serious and damaging allegations. Public opinion seemed to have been aroused at the enormity of the transaction ; and the commission having been appointed, it seems most unfair, notwithstanding its limited power, that parliament should be prorogued without having the report of Mr. Justice Britton. It is seven or eight months since the commission ceased taking evidence, and Mr. Justice Britton has either had time or has not had time to make his report. I understand that he has been in Ottawa several times during the last three or four months. Has the government received any information from him as to what progress he has made with his report ? I understand that no report has been received by the government from the late Mr. Bell. Has the government received any information as to the progress of this report, and is there any possibility of our having it before prorogation ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I cannot say off-hand whether that is possible or not, but will inquire.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That seems an extraordinary reply, in view of what has taken place recently. The Treadgold concession has been cancelled by the government because no doubt of some information conveyed to it through some channel that it would be improper to continue it or carry it out. That is the only conclusion which we can reach. Through what channel did that information come ? The government have their own channel, and were inquiring into the charges made with reference to that concession. The charges were of a most specific character. They were not made by opponents of the government, but by their own friends. Letter after letter is in the possession of members on this side, written by friends of the government, complaining that they had made every representation possible, and could get no redress. These friends of the government complain that they elected a representative to this House, who became dumb from the day he entered it up to the present, because, so far as they knew, he has never opened his mouth in this House to bring to the notice of the administration the complaints which people were making, and the difficulties under which they were labouring.


Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: He ran away.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The government promised to have a full investigation, and the member elected promised his constituents to have an investigation made as soon as Sir WILFRID LAURIER.
he reached parliament. That member has been in parliament a long time, and if such an investigation were made what information has reached the government as the result of it. We are utterly in the dark regarding what took place. It is true that one of the commissioners is dead, but the other is still living. Can it be possible that he is so busily engaged in his different duties that he is unable to make a report ? He was appointed to inquire and report, so as to put parliament in possession of the information which parliament ought to have in order to deal intelligently with the question, yet during the whole of this session, which has lasted nearly five months, this commissioner has given up most of his time to his ordinary duties, and has so far made no report to parliament. That is treating parliament with contempt. It is not treating parliament with that courtesy to which it is entitled from its own officials, and this commissioner is really an official of this parliament. It is treating the representatives of the people with contempt. It is treating the people of that country, who have made complaints regarding the condition of affairs, with great contempt. I have in my possession a letter describing the kind of inquiry which was made. I do not know the gentleman who writes the letter, but ho is represented to me as an intelligent, respectable, law-abiding citizen. He says that the inquiry was a perfect farce, that he was called down by the commissioner several times for doing what his counsel advised liim he had a perfect right to do. He endeavoured to place information before that commission, but the commission refused to receive it or allow him to give it and would only receive just such information as the commissioners asked for. Following that procedure, an indictment was made against him and he was told that if he did not conduct himself better he would be dealt with for contempt of court.


An hon. MEMBER.: Dragooned.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Yes, dragooned for contempt of court. His answer to this threat was that he did not see how it was possible for any one to have greater contempt for the court than he had in view of the way in which he had been treated. But; out of that grew some other trouble for which he was put in prison; and as far as I know, he has been lying in prison ever since. He was refused the common justice of being judged by his own peers. He was refused a jury trial. He was deliberately thrown into prison, and is there yet. He writes to know if anything can be done, and if that commission has reported. He was indicted on another charge which, I believe, arose out of this matter before the commission-the charge of taking logs which he thought he had a perfect right to take. He was denied trial by jury, and tried by a stipendiary magistrate, and is now in prison.


Wilfrid Laurier: Do I understand tlie lion, gentleman to say that some one was thrown Into prison by order of the commissioner for contempt of court ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Not by order of the commissioner ; but he was Indicted before a stipendiary magistrate, and thrown into prison, and Is there yet.


Wilfrid Laurier: That happens everywhere.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If that kind of inquiry is enough to satisfy the government, it is not enough to satisfy the people out there. If that kind of justice satisfies the government, it is not what will satisfy lovers of British justice in any part of the British empire. It is a high-handed proceeding, which is devoid of the essence of fair play or justice. These things require to be ventilated, and the only opportunity we have is to discuss them in parliament, and to do that properly we should have the report before us. We are now in the closing days of the session, and we want to know whether it is the intention of the government to lay that report on the table, and give us an opportunity of considering it. Is the government going to content itself with the cancelling of the Treadgold concession ? What is the reason that the government does not dare to bring down that report, or give parliament the reasons why it has cancelled the Treadgold concession ? Parliament is entitled to know why. On what information has the government acted ? That information should be given parliament, and above all things the commission appointed | over a year ago ought to have had its work done long ago' and reported to parliament, so that we might deal with this question in the light of all the information available.


Mr. JAS. CLANCY.: Has any communication been had with Mr. Justice Britton regarding this report ? The right lion, gentleman will perceive the pertinency of this question when he remembers what took place in the Senate a few days ago. The government has declared that the Secretary of State was not warranted in the statement he then made that the remaining commissioner would not report. Has Mr. Justice Britton been requested to make a report ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I can inform my hon. friend that Mr. Justice Britton has been communicated with.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is his reply ?


Wilfrid Laurier: That is more than I can say at present. The Secretary of State made a statement some time ago in the Senate, to which attention was called, and he then communicated with Mr. Justice Britton, and instructed him to take his letter as not written, and hasten his report.


APPOINTMENT OF MR. .T. B. JACKSON.
Mr.  W. H.@: BENNETT The other day, when the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce were being discussed,
I brought up what is known as the Jackson matter in the province of Ontario, namely, the appointment of Mr J. B. Jackson, formerly of Ingersoll, to the position of commercial agent in Leeds, England. The minister stated that when an item was reached under the heading of commercial agencies, the matter might be taken up. As the hon. minister saw fit to discontinue his estimates, no opportunity to discuss it was reached, and I am bringing it up now.
Some few years ago a general election was held in the province of Ontario, and as the result of the death of one of the elected members, the Ross government found itself with a majority of only one. All the sacrifices which had been used in Ontario for many years had been resorted to, and then the government, staggering under what was a decisive defeat, saw that something had to be done. Their only hope was to resort to the courts. After looking over the field they seized on South Oxford which had for many years been a Liberal stronghold and they thought if they could succeed in unseating the Conservative candidate there they could win that riding. A close study of the whole situation revealed the fact that they could not by legitimate means unseat Donald Sutherland, the Conservative member, who had been returned by a majority of about 150. There lived in the town of Ingersoll in the county of Oxford J. B. Jackson, a particular friend of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, a gentleman whose name has figured very conspicuously' in those hand to hand encounters which have signalized the entrance of the Minister of Trade and Commerce into the party conventions of that riding, and there can be no doubt that of all the men who have done yeoman service for the Minister of Trade and Commerce in the bitter, acrimonious fights to secure the nomination, none stood closer to the minister than did Mr. Jackson. It was notorious in Woodstock, Ingersoll and all that neighbourhood that Jackson was carrying in his pocket the appointment of county judge of the county of Huron. That was life and well known there. This and other offices had been promised to Jackson and I can only produce in substantiation of that, Jackson's own sworn testimony. He was asked referring to certain offices which had been mentioned, and said :
Well there are several in my mind and have been for several years.
And being asked if several positions had been the subject of discussion, he replied :
Well, I do not know that.
He was asked :

Will you swear to that, that have been mentioned between yourself and those in whose gifts these officers are ?
He replied :
Oh, I suppose that conversations have taken place between me and others in regard to that in the last few years.
So it is quite clear from the statement in evidence of Jackson that he expected something from this government. It is clear that the Minister of Trade and Commerce was solely responsible for this man's appointment because the Minister of Public Works speaking at Woodstock when complaint was made as to Jackson's appointment said :
I have heard since I came home something in reference to acts of Mr. Jackson that were not creditable to him ; but his appointment was a departmental matter, under the minister, Sir Richard Cartwright, and I have no doubt that he had no idea there was anything wrong.
This statement was made by Hon. Mr. Sutherland last winter and it cannot be expected that the public will be so gullible as to believe that a man of the ability of the Minister of Trade and Commerce had not heard of the peculiar and improper acts of Jackson as commented upon at the time. It is true that Hon. Mr. Sutherland here refers to some improper acts. I do not know that he means, because he does not say specifically, Jackson's action in connection with this trial. He may refer to some other actions that were dismissed in that neighbourhood. There was a prosecution of this same Jackson on a charge of forgery before the courts of Oxford which was dismissed owing to the fact that in some mysterious manner the very document that was the basis of the charge disappeared. I shall not refer to other charges that are rife there, but I assume and it is fair to assume that what Hon. Mr. Sutherland referred to as improper acts on the part of Jackson are those acts which were condemned and rightly condemned by one of the trial judges.
I have before me the evidence in this case as heard before Mr. Justice Britton and Mr. Justice Street when after days of fishing and days long drawn out of evidence given, the court had only two cases before them and on these two cases, most trival in their nature, one judge was in favour of acquittal and the other in favour of unseating. An appeal was taken to the court of aippeal, but the appeal court decided that an appeal did not lie where two judges disagreed in that manner and Mr. Sutherland was sustained in his seat. I shall not advert to the judgment which Mr. Justice Britton gave, but it was an unfortunate thing for that judge coming fresh from politics wherein no one wall say that he had not been a bitter partisan, that on two most trifling charges that were backed up by evidence of a scatly character Judge Britton should have decided against Mr. Sutherland while


Mr. BENNETT.: Judge Street decided in his favour. Be that as it may Mr. Donald Sutherland was sustained and I am going to refer to the facts which led up to the prosecution or persecution of Mr. Donald Sutherland. There have been many election trials in this Dominion but no other trial can be compared to this one. Jackson was the solicitor in the case, living in Ingersoll, right in the centre of that well populated riding. He was conversant with all the adjacent towns. He had carte blanche and unlimited funds to find evidence, whether true or false, as sworn to by witnesses, to unseat Sutherland.
Now what is some of the evidence that proves that I have here the sworn evidence of this Mr. Jackson ? Jackson goes through that riding and one approach that he makes is to Mr. Chambers in Woodstock. I need not give a verbatim account of the evidence but briefly it is this : He approached Chambers in Woodstock, a man whom he had practically not known up to that time, goes into his place of business, addresses him in a familiar way and after serving him with the subpoena says :	We will require you
at the trial. He then invites him across the street to have a cigar. As soon as they reach the hotel he asks Chambers to adjourn to a private room and once there starts at Chambers with a most astonishing proposition. He says that he is prepared to spend an almost unlimited amount of money in order that evidence may be secured against Sutherland and his agents in order to effect his downfall. Chambers mentions $5,000 and, after a little parley, it is arranged that this man Jackson shall come from his own home in Ingersoll to Woodstock and at the house of Chambers discuss the terms upon which Chambers shall produce evidence, whether true or false, that will bring about the defeat of Sutherland on the protest and his consequent unseating. Chambers was a man of prominence in the community and he at once went to certain friends of his and divulged the whole affair. The result was that, true to his promise, Jackson turned up at Woodstock on a subsequent evening. On this occasion Chambers had taken the precaution to have two responsible gentlemen conveniently situated where they could'overhear what was said during the interview. Chambers was not going to trust himself to the tender mercies of Jackson, for prior to this time Jackson had a most unsavoury reputation. These two gentlemen heard everything. Jackson's proposition as admitted in his own sworn evidence was that he would pay $375 to Chambers if evidence was forthcoming, perjured or true, and $375 more should be furnished to Chambers if eight charges were proven. They go on further and discuss it and Jackson further makes this offer that if the charges were successfully proven $1,500 might be paid to Chambers. It was necessary in order to get evidence to resort to

witnesses who knew nothing whatever of the matter, but who could be suborned to perjure themselves. Chambers had furnished certain names of men as Chambers was right in the game. He knew nothing of any improper wrong doing and consequently Jackson did not call any of these men into the box because he found subsequently' that he had been hoaxed and had been deprived of $375.
But Jackson turns in another direction, and that seems to have been a very fertile field in the riding of South Oxford, namely, to resort to the most abandoned characters, men who were proved by' the records of the police court to have been time and again arrested on criminal charges. One man who is a strong witness against Sutherland on the personal charge, had served a term in the Central Prison at Toronto. What is some of the evidence of this man ? A man named Charles Parker testified that a brother-in-law of his, named George Fournier, came to him and asked him if he would swear that he got money from a man named Joseph Clark ; and he was given the further option that if he did not want to swear that he got the money from Clark he could swear that he got it from a man named Sindon, and if he did'nt want to swear that he got it from him he could swear that he got it from a man named Davis. He was offered the option of three different men from whom he could swear that he got the money. There looms up then from the office of Kerr, Macdonald & Grant, Toronto, who seem to be engaged in all these election protests, a fellow named Sullivan or Sutherland, who is notorious as a part of the machine in the province of Ontario. This Sutherland had been celebrated in a certain provincial election trial in the county of Lennox, and Sutherland makes the further admission that he went to this man and swore it on Sindon or Johnson, or a third man whose name I forget. Now the house will wonder why he was given the option of three men to swear it on. The reason was this, that Clark was a coloured man, and everybody knows there is a certain amount of prejudice against men of colour. Therefore it was decided by this foxy Sutherland, after a good deal of consultation with Jackson and the rest of the gang, that this charge was to be put on this man Clark. But it would not be well to have Clark go into the box and swear that he had received a sum of money from some reputable man in the town of Oxford -because this took place in the county of Oxford ; and in that case it would be necessary to swear that it was got from some man whose word would not avail him, and something more than that was necessary to have the other parties opportunely turn up and he able to swear that they heard the conversation. So he got Fournier to promise that he would be on hand and would swear the story true. He also says
another man named Keir is to be on hand in order to corroborate the story. Now Fournier swears that he had conversations with Jackson, repeated conversations in Jackson's office, and although we are not able to prove that Fournier and Jackson were in combination, because neither of the two will admit that they tried to bribe this man Parker, still we do know that Jackson admits that he paid $5 to Fournier himself, that he paid $5 to Parker himself, although Parker says he got $10 from Jackson. Then he was to swear that the coloured man had paid him $5. Then Parker meets again this man Sutherland in Jackson's office, and there he is promised by Sutherland that he will be paid $20, and in the event of his losing his position in. the city hospital where he was employed, he would secure him a position on the government canal. Now if the story of this man Parker were not true, it would have been fair for them to have called Sutherland, and to have denied the statement made by him.	But	Sutherland although a short time prior to that was in the city of Woodstock, could not be found, and Sutherland's solicitors were unable to find him and put him in the box either to corroborate or deny the statement of Parker. Then there was another man who figured prominently, one named Anderson, county constable in the town of Tilsonburg. Then a man named Fick was given by Jackson a considerable sum of money, some $250, and he employed himself in going about the country and attempting subornation or perjury, and witness testified that he received money from Fick, and yet when the trial comes on Fick, also flies from the country and cannot be found. The result was that they could get no denial from Fick and no corroboration of the witnesses called by Sutherland. Then they called a man named Frederick Avey and he testifies :
One Hewlett cancelled store account of $40 for signing a declaration. Jackson told me to say nil as to the account. Jackson came to my house at Norwich.
Now -the game followed out was this : Prior to holding the trial these men Sutherland, Jackson, Fick, Wright and Hewlett would go to these abandoned characters in the police court and get declarations from them that they had received certain sums of money, and then they would afterwards be able to confront these men with the declarations and say : You made this solemn declaration, now we expect you to swear it through. In the case of this fellow Hewlett who cancelled the $40 store account, he will swear that he received from a Conservative a certain amount of money. Jackson acknowledges himself the fellow who went to his house at Norwich, and Jackson further asks him to say nothing as to the account, to say nothing as to having got the

$40 for making this declaration, and which declaration Avery replies was untrue. Another man named Pollard says :
Hewlett paid me $25 for declaration. I was promised $75 and protection from law. Jackson saw me at Norwich and told me to say nil about the declaration.
That is what is guaranteed in the province of Ontario to those who give testimony in election trials where wrong doing has been committed, namely immunity from prosecution by law. The same thing was done in the West Elgin trial, and in all these trials in the province of Ontario men who have been wrong-doers have never been brought to book, everything has been covered up. No wonder that this man Pollard, when he was sure of protection against the law, and that the Attorney General of Ontario would not prosecute him said he believed the statements made by Hewlett,. Then a man named W. A. Young is called and he says :
Sutherland of Kerr's office told me he would give me $25 if I would stick to charge on respondent.
So it goes all through the evidence. Witness after witness is called who testify that they received money for making those declarations, and then afterwards when they were brought to book in court, openly admitted that they knew nothing at all as to the truth of these charges, that they were false, that they had not been paid this money for making the declarations. Now it cannot be argued that Jackson did not know who these men were. They were all living not far from each other, and they came into contact several times with the solicitor of the government. He must have been making inquiries. What is Fournier's record :
Convicted August 12, 1901 of being drunk and disorderly, fined $5 and costs. Convicted 22nd January, 1898 of assault, fined $1 and costs. Convicted 8th June, 1894 of assault and battery, fined $1 and costs. Tried July 17, 1896 on a charge of perjury, dismissed on a technicality as explained in the evidence of Mayor Sinclair.
Another man named Keilor, who was one of the corroborative witnesses, had been committed to three months in jail for vagrancy. Another man named Mustard was convicted of theft and again of being drunk and disorderly. A man named Collins, who swore a charge on Mr. King of Ingersoll. was convicted of an indecent assault and fined $50 and costs. Again convicted of being drunk and disorderly, again drunk and disorderly, convicted on three different charges of theft and sentenced to four years in Kingston penitentiary ; charged by his wife with attempting to commit suicide. A large number of witnesses swore his reputation was so bad that they could not believe him on oath.


William Humphrey Bennett: Then there was John Henderson who swore this charge on Johnson in corroboration with Parker. Henderson was convicted of being drunk and disorderly ; again convicted of breaking and entering a shop of John Christophers and stealing goods therefrom, sentenced to 18 months in the Central Prison. Isaiah Wright, who swore to charge on Johnson, was convicted on October 15, 1890, of being drunk and disorderly, sentenced to 30 days in jail ; again convicted of larceny, sentenced to 365 days in the Central Prison ; another charge of drunk and disorderly, 30 days ; convicted of assault, $1 and costs ; another charge of drunk and disorderly, 30 days ; another charge of drunk and disorderly, 10 days; another charge of drunk and disorderly, 20 days; another charge of drunk and disorderly, 20 days ; convicted of theft, 3 months in common jail ; disturbance, 6 months in Central Prison ; non-support, 6 months in Central Prison ; theft, 29 days in Central prison ; drunk, $1 and costs ; drunk and incapable, $2 and costs ; drunk and disorderly, 30 days in common jail ; drunk, $1 and costs. And these are the men who are the confidants, friends and accomplices of this Canadian representative in Leeds today. But what was the whole condition of this matter ? It is all very well to make comments here but we have the comments that a gentleman made, who was right under the guns, so to speak, who was holding the inquiry into the fact. When this matter was before the court and when man after man had been placed in the box, the comment of Mr. Justice Street, as reported in the ' Globe' of October 20, 1902, was as follows :
Judge Street interposed saying : ' Mr. Blake was quite within his rights in calling attention to the means that have been taken to procure evidence in this case. One of the difficulties I have in this case is the knowledge of the improper and reprehensible means and large expenditure which have been proven to have been devoted to an absolutely improper purpose. It, is impossible to follow' the ramifications of such an expenditure, and in dealing with the last case I cannot get out of my mind the possibility of the course of the inquiry having been affected by the expenditure of a very large sum.of money. Here is Mr. Jackson, a lawyer in Ingersoll, here is this man of the lowest possible character, as far as appears from what has been said about him, and one knows of the desperate efforts that have been made to prove the charges. Nothing was ever heard in my experience before like it. It is impossible to trace out all these underground influences.
And yet this is a sample of the men who to-day are to be found in Great Britain as the representatives of this country. Mr. W. T. R. Preston certainly had an unsavoury reputation in this country, but even Ms reputation is as the rose compared with that of this man Jackson. How did Jackson act when he was in the box ? There is no doubt 1 that Jackson was trying to save himself as

much as he could. When he was driven from pillar to post, he was forced to admit that he had never kept any record of these moneys that he had been paying out. He had paid Chambers 8375. Fick 8250, and a considerable amount to Hewlett as well as paying all these other individuals one after another as they came into his office, different small amounts. What does he say ?
Q. And have you got no book in which you have entered that ?
A. I have not.
Q. How do you keep track of such payments ?
A. Well, I sometimes paid by cheque but I generally tried to keep track of such payments.
Q. In what way, I am asking you ?
A. Well, in my mind.
Q. In your mind ?
A. Yes.
Q. Are all your cash transactions done in the
same way ?
A. Not my business transactions.
Q. This you did not call a business transaction ?
A. Well, I was paying him and I think I gave him about $150 and about $100 besides to pay for subpoenaing some 46 witnesses.
Then he was referring to Fick :
I was not asking you that ; you told me you paid him $150 and now you tell me you paid him another $100, that is- $250. I asked you what track you kept of it and have you any entry in any book of that ?
A. I have not any entry in any hook of that.
What does all that show ? It shows that Jackson knew that he was being involved in a discreditable and disgraceful proceeding. What is going to be the end of this sort of thing if it is to go on in this country 7 It would seem that Jackson was supplied with funds to an unlimited extent and there is no statement on his part that this was his own money. It is incredible to think that this was his own money. Chambers in his statement says that Jackson told him that he was going to Toronto to see some members of the government and I think he said Mr. Ross amongst them, although I will not say as to that, and that when he did come back he did see him about it, and all the information that we have about Jackson's circumstances is decidedly of the nature that would go to show, that $375 was not an amount of money to be found every day on the person of Jackson. Then it must be positively the fact that this money was furnished from headquarters. I am not going to say that Mr. Ross, or whoever supplied him with the money, was aware of the purpose for which it was to be used, but here is the money on Jackson who was able to secure command of this money and here is the conclusion of the judge after hearing the evidence, who says, that the conduct of Jackson was in every way most disgraceful and discreditable. Two charges were brought against the respondent Sutherland.
one a question of disqualification-for giving an hostler a fifty cent tip, and these were the subject of a disagreement between the judges. Men were found to give the evidence and accomplices turned up to corroborate fheir statements. The plan was so laid that there was always corroborative evidence. In face of the fact that this matter was commented on publicly at the time in the newspapers it is idle for the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commehce to say that he never heard of it. It would; be incredible on the part of any reasonable person to believe that the right hon. gentleman never heard of the South Oxford election trial. He must have read these comments of the judges. As a party man, he was interested in the South Oxford riding. As to the success or failure of his party in South Oxford whether in federal or local affairs it goes without saying that he would be interested. He has been the representative of South Oxford for a great many years in this House, and there is no reasonable man who will ever be got to believe for a moment that the right hon. gentleman did not read the comments of the judges on the evidence adduced at the trial. So that, at the time of the appointment of this man Jackson, it is impossible for us to believe that he was not aware of his wrong doing cn that occasion. As to the matter of the appointment we must not forget that the hon. Minister of Public Works has declared that the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce is solely responsible for the appointment and employment of this man Jackson, and I think the right hon. gentleman owes it to the country and to the House to explain why Jackson in the first instance was ever secured by the government to perform the duties of the office that he now fills and in the next place why, in face of the allegations that have been made against this man in the House and in the face of the means that the right hon. gentleman has had of gaining access to the records which will prove the truth or falsity of these statements, his services have not been dispensed with.


Right Hon.   S@: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennett) is perfectly right when he says that I am responsible and I accept the sole responsibility for the appointment of Mr. J. B. Jackson. I have not the slightest desire to shelter myself under any diversion of that responsibility. I may add, that, knowing Mr. Jackson very well. I know him to be a very intelligent, capable man, I know that he has filled his office well and will, I think continue to discharge his duties well. As to some of the points to which the hon. gentleman referred I have one or two things to say, There is no doubt whatever that the circumstances connected with the election of Mr. REVISED EDITION

Sutherland, to the local assembly for South Oxford were such as to naturally excite a very considerable amount of suspicion in the minds of those who are acquainted with the history and the details of that country. South Oxford is and has been for a great many years a persistently Liberal county. Mr. McKay, the local member who was defeated, had been returned at the last election by a majority of some 400 or 500-I forget which at the moment. I myself had been but a short time before returned for these portions of tne constituency which were afterwards carried for Mr Sutherland by a very large majority also. Very unexpectedly, very suddenly, we discovered the large majorities for the Liberal candidate were turned into a minority. There was no doubt whatever that large funds had been put up, not by Mr. Sutherland, but by the supporters and friends of Mr. Sutherland, for the purpose of defeating the Ross government, and there was perfect justification for the suspicion that very improper means had been used to elect Mr. Sutherland. Mr. Jackson who was very well acquainted with the constituency, knew who were likely to be concerned in this ; he had been making inquiries and had come on a number of clues that pointed to the fact that a certain gentleman by the name of Chambers knew all about the matter. I think the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennett) said that Mr. Chambers was perfectly unknown to Mr. Jackson.


William Humphrey Bennett: Mr. Chambers lived at Woodstock and Jackson came in and served him with a subpoena and invited him across the street to an hotel and up to that time
they were perfectly unacquainted.


Sir RICHARD CARTWRIGHT.: 
William Humphrey Bennett: It is the trial report in the ' Globe.'


Richard John Cartwright: The trial report in a newspaper is not the judge's charge by any manner of means.


Robert Laird Borden: Why is it not the judge's statement ?


Richard John Cartwright: The judge's statement it may be, but it is not the judge's statement corroborated by the judge himself. My hon. friend knows very well that these newspaper reports are not to be taken as absolutely reliable on all occasions. I accept what the judge states from the bench as very good evidence of what the judge thought, but I am informed that when the matter came to be reviewed -the trial was conducted before Mr. Justice Britton and Mr. Justice Street-neither of these gentlemen commented on Jackson's proceedings.


Andrew B. Ingram: Would the hon. gentleman permit me to say that I was present and heard the statement made by Judge Street, and that report is as near as can be, word for word of what he said.


Richard John Cartwright: Was that his final charge 7


Andrew B. Ingram: There is no final charge.


Richard John Cartwright: The judge delivers his judgment.


Andrew B. Ingram: No. I have the statement here from the evidence itself.


Richard John Cartwright: If that were the statement corroborated from the shorthand notes taken before the judge, it undoubtedly would be entitled to regard ; but, if it is a simple statement in the newspaper it is not entitled to equal regard no matter what that newspaper may be.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It is in the friendly * Globe.'


Richard John Cartwright: Well, it does not matter. If Mr. Jackson had committed an offence punishable by law there were plenty of parties who would have de-
*

sired nothing better than to prosecute Mr. Jackson.


Mr. COCHRANE.: You got him out of the way.


Richard John Cartwright: No they bad months and months, and months, and they would have prosecuted him had	he	committed a criminal offence. I made inquiries about the matter and I was informed that whatever indiscretion he may have been guilty of, he had committed no offence contrary to the laws of the land, and I know that these people would have prosecuted Mr. Jackson if he had so done. Nor do I notice that either one or other of the judges stated that Mr. Jackson had left himself open to a prosecution in any shape or way.


Mr. CLANCY  .@: You seem to think that Mr. Jackson was a mere martyr.


Richard John Cartwright: Mr. Jackson no doubt finding that this constituency had been carried in a very suspicious fashion, and finding that the tracks lay in a particular direction, did go to the party whom he had reason to believe was the most thoroughly acquainted with the whole details, and he did offer him a considerable sum of money it appears for the purpose of obtaining {that evidence ; but Mr. Jackson did not suborn nor did he attempt to suborn testimony.


William Humphrey Bennett: I quoted from the sworn evidence of the person who said that Jackson asked him not to mention anything about this matter.


Richard John Cartwright: All that came before the judges and the judges did not make any such imputation upon Mr. Jackson. Mr. Jackson did attempt to obtain evidence, but he did not attempt to suborn testimony.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh.


Richard John Cartwright: I would like to know how you are going to obtain evidence in these election trials, unless sometimes men are prepared to pay sums of money for the obtaining of evidence. I venture to say that there are mighty few election trials which are brought to a close in this country in which something of the kind has not to be done. I do not mean to say that it is nice work ; I do not mean to say I like it; I do not mean to say that it is good work, but it is work that has to be done unless you are going to allow these parties on either side to go from one end of the country to another using money for the purpose of illegitimately influencing the electors. You have two choices ; you may prohibit the use of money for obtaining evidence, but if you do, as I said, it practically amounts to granting an amnesty to all parties concerned, to go and bribe just as they please. In this matter Mr. Jackson offered 248J
a sum of money to a party whom he thought could obtain evidence which would unseat Mr. Sutherland. How, and in what way I would like to ask, is Mr. Jackson, morally speaking, more censurable or more culpable than the gentlemen who-unless my memory fails me-offered rewards of several thousand dollars to all parties who would obtain evidence against Liberal candidates at this very same general election ? I think a public advertisement was used ; I think large sums of money were offered ; I think every possible inducement was given to get up cases against the Liberal members. I never heard hon. gentlemen opposite object to that. I never heard these hon. gentlemen dissent from that being an illegitimate means of employing their money, and I cannot for the life of me see in what respect, morally speaking,	Mr. Jackson's conduct was worse than the conduct of those very respected and honourable gentlemen who publicly advertised that they were prepared to pay large sums of money to obtain such evidence as would unseat Liberal members.


Edward Cochrane: Such rascals did not get government appointments.


Richard John Cartwright: No ; my hon. friend knows something about government appointments in past times, as the records of the House will show, unless I forget.


Edward Cochrane: You need not forget. I am here and if you want to make that charge, come up into my riding and make it. You are looking for a constituency now, and you can come up to my riding and tell all you know about it, and that won't take you long.


Richard John Cartwright: It is on record, and my hon. friend need not distress himself. The matter has been discussed in this House.


Edward Cochrane: The riding has spoken several times, and if you are not in accord with the verdict, come up and try it yourself.	,


Richard John Cartwright: My hon. friend must find the cap to fit very tightly, or he would not be so irate at being reminded of what he did in reference to government appointments. It is not the first time, and I suppose it will not be the last on which we shall hear from hon. gentlemen in reference to this matter. No doubt, as I have said, the means that are adopted for obtaining evidence in these; election trials are of a character which I suppose no man on either side of the House wishes to see employed. At the same time, I must point out that the judges stated that in their opinion Mr. Jackson, whatever he had done, had not brought himself within the precincts of the law. nor did the parties who,

were disposed, if they had a fair chance, to prosecute Mr. Jackson, attempt to take any proceedings against him. Unless I am entirely misinformed, these same parties did not put Mr. Chambers into the witness box at all.


An hon. MEMBER.: Why ?


Richard John Cartwright: The
evidence, such as it was, was obtained by Mr. Jackson himself. Why did they not put him into the box ? If I might suggest, they abstained wisely from doing so because in all probability he knew too much. However, be that as it imay, I desire to be clearly understood. 1 exonerate my colleagues entirely in this matter and take the full responsibility of Mr. Jackson's appointment. I say he is a capable man, and if he continues in his office, I think he will justify his appointment. Already I have received on more than one occasion testimony to the ability and diligence with which he is conducting his work. The hon. gentleman did not conclude with a motion ; but I have given him all the information in my power. Such of his facts as were correct I have admitted ; and I have called the attention of the House to the fact that if Mr. Jackson did wrong, his assailants might avail themselves of the courts, but they did not choose to do so, which is the best proof that they knew that whatever faults Mr. Jackson committed, he did not bring himself within the purview of the law.


William Humphrey Bennett: I received the following from the evidence :
Q. Do I understand you to say that Jackson told you not to say anything about the declaration if you were asked ?-A. If anybody asked me, he told me not to say anything about it.
If he was asked at the inquiry if he had made such a declaration, he was to answer that he had not. There is the evidence of half a dozen other witnesses that Jackson interviewed, and each one of them, when asked that question, presumably at the trial, was to answer that he had not made any declaration. I congratulate the hon. gentleman on his view of political morality in this country.


Andrew B. Ingram: I was rather amused to notice that when the right hon. gentleman rose in his place he received the applause of his friends ; but I was very much pleased to notice that when he took his seat, his friends did not see fit to applaud him for the stand he had taken.


Samuel Hughes: The professionals applauded him.


William Humphrey Bennett: They hope to get their jobs.


Andrew B. Ingram: The hon. member for South Oxford says that Mr. Jackson is a very capable and intelligent man. I quite agree with that. Some years ago my right Sir RICHARD CARTWRIGHT.
hon. friend had some difficulty in securing the nomination in South Oxford, and be appealed to this capable and intelligent man to manipulate the convention as against his friend Mr. Janes, from the city of Toronto. Mr. Jackson was successful. I do not know whether he encouraged all the criminals that he could get in South Oxford to assist him in securing that convention ; but I do know that he was successful in securing it for the right hon. gentleman, and he is well able to carry out successfully anything he undertakes in the political line. The hon. member for South Oxford says that the constituency is a very safe one. I would ask the right hon. gentleman, from his own experience in politics, whether he would advise his friends to expend large sums of money in a constituency which he claims to have been carried sometimes by hundreds, some times by thousands, and sometimes by acclamation. The right hon. gentleman would not advise his friends to do anything of the kind. That kind of thing is not done on either side. But what occurred in this case ? The representative. Dr. McKay, had paid very little attention to his constituents. In a measure he had ignored them. There was a rumour circulated to the effect that he only required to run his election in order to obtain a government position. Many of his supporters, who had been loyal to him up to that time, disliked that kind of conduct and when Mr. Sutherland, who is a farmer-it is largely a farming constituency-went round the constituency, large numbers of the electors agreed to support him instead of Dr. McKay. These were sufficient to roll up a majority of a hundred or more for Mr. Sutherland. Now, nobody has ever charged Mr. Sutherland with corruption in that election. The proof is in this fact that the trial started on the 15th of October and continued to the 18th, when it was adjourned to December 1st, 2nd and 3rd, after which the argument was adjourned to the city of Toronto. Will any hon. gentleman in this House say, after a careful search made by men like Mr. Jackson, who was connected with the firm of Messrs. Kerr, Davidson, Patterson and Grant, after securing all the assistance which they could by hook or crook, from constables and others, all these days of trial in the city of Woodstock, that Mr. Sutherland was guilty of any charge of corruption without having that charge brought before the judges of the court ? It is simply absurd for any hon. gentleman to talk in that way. There was only one charge proved against Mr. Sutherland's friends ; that was, the hiring of a livery in the town of Ingersoll. I think that pretty conclusively proves the statement of my hon. friend if there was anything suspicious in connection with that election in South Oxford, it is not borne out by the evidence which was brought out in the court held in the city of Woodstock. Now, if my hon. friend's statement is correct that

large sums of money were supposed to have been spent in tbe case of Mr. Sutherland to corrupt the vote, this is the only instance. With reference to Mr. Chambers being practically unacquainted with Mr. Jackson, let me say that Mr. Chambers was acquainted with Mr. Jackson and Mr. Jackson was acquainted with Mr. Chambers.
At One o'clock, House took recess.
House resumed at Three o'clock.


Andrew B. Ingram: When you left the chair at one o'clock, Mr. Speaker, I was leading up to the difference between the explanation of the right hon. the Minister of Trade and Commerce and that of the hon. member for East Simcoe (Mr. Bennett), regarding degree of acquaintance between Mr. Chambers and Mr. Jackson. The hon. member tor East Simcoe was quite right in assuming that these gentlemen were not well acquainted with each other. When he read the declaration of Mr. Chambers, he found these words in it :
He then asked me to come with him to the Dufferin Hotel and have a smoke. When we reached there, he asked if there was a private room, and on being shown one we both went m alone. He talked with me very familiarly, call ing me by my first name.
From these words one would naturally conclude that Mr. Jackson had assumed a familiarity with Mr. Chambers which he had not been in the habit of doing, and consequently the hon. gentleman was quite justified in concluding that the two men were strangers. I know from my personal knowledge that they were acquaintances, but I am quite well satisfied that they wei not familiar acquaintances. My right lion, friend the Minister of Trade and Commerce tried to make a point out of the fact h tbe respondents counsel did not place Cham bers in the box on that occasion. But he did not say why Chambers' evidence was not admissible. His evidence was offered in court, he was called, but the fact ot Mr. Jackson not being the respondent case and not being on trial, rendered Chambers' evidence not admissible. In other words, it was collateral evidence and not admissible on that occasion But I can go so far as to say that if the evidence of Messrs. Chambers, Francis and Smith had been admitted, they would have proven beyond doubt that Jackson had made the statement that he was prepared to pay for any evidence wliicb would unseat Mi. Sutherland, whether that evidence was true or false. I was amazed when my right hon. friend, in his jocular way, condoned the conduct of Mr. Jackson. I was amazed to hear him condone the obtaining of evidence in that way. I was grieved to hear the right hon. gentleman (Sir Richard Cartwright) view it in that light, and I must confess I had a better opinion of
my right hon. friend. It is a well known fact that judges do not approve of statements being taken down by lawyers on behalf of witnesses. It is well known that they do not approve of lawyers taking affidavits or declarations. They prefer that the witnesses should be placed in the box and give evidence themseives and be free to state what they believe to be the truth; but my right hon. friend (Sir Richard Cartwright) seems to approve of the solicitor for the petitioners in this case obtaining affidavits from men-who are telling the truth. Now, the sole object was to obtain affidavits from men who, Mr. Jackson knew, were not to tell the truth, and he was .paying them to make such affidavits and to be prepared to stick to them, should they be called into court as witnesses. - , There is another case, that of Mr. King. The hon member from East Simcoe mentioned Mr. King. Mr. King is a highly respected citizen of Ingersoll. He )s a merchant and a gentleman whom the citizens honoured by electing him as mayor, and he represented that town as mayor foi some time. Well, what do we find Mr. Jackson doing ? We find him going to a man of the name of Collins, whose criminal offences have been quoted in this House, and inducing that man to make a statement against one of the most respected citizens of Ingersoll. And who did Jackson get to corroborate this statement of Collins ? No other than Collins's wife, who was also a criminal, as was shown in court. And we have these two criminals giving evidence against one of the most honoured and respected citizens of the town-one whom the people of Ingersoll, largely Liberal, elected as their mayor, although he is a Conservative thus showing their confidence in his honesty and ability. Yet in order to unseat Mr. Sutherland, these two criminals were brought in to swear falsely against a respected citizen of the town of Ingersoll. Why was all this done ? Because the Ontario government was only sustained in the general elections by two of a majority, and owing to the death of Mr. Munroe. of Renfrew, that majority was reduced to one. In order to save themselves they attacked Mr. Sutherland in the county of Oxford. They attacked him in order to unseat him, because, as my right hon. friend has said, South Oxford has a Liberal majority, and they thought, if they could unseat Mr. Sutherland by any means, good or bad, they would be, in a position to elect in his place a supporter of the Ontario government. That is what the Ontario government had at stake. And what had Mr. Jackson at stake ? He had a judgeship at stake. He was working for his reward from this government. There, is no use trying to deny the facts. We have in this House a gentleman, occupying one of the highest positions in the government of Can-

ada, honoured by the imperial authorities with a title (Sir Richard Cartwright), coming forward and admitting that he knew all the facts in connection with the case and took full responsibility. Was this the reason why this government rewarded this gentleman ? I do not believe that it was the sole reason. I am inclined to believe that services rendered, untold events which occurred in some years gone by-and which Mr. Jackson threatened to expose, if not rewarded-had something to do with his appointment. Mr. Jackson knew that he could not secure a judgeship. He knew that the Ontario government dared not with its small majority of one, appoint him to any position under it. He therefore came to Ottawa, and inside of a year was appointed to an important position in England. What was that important position ? I find this inquiry put by the Hon. Sir Mackenzie Bowell in the Senate :
Whether a man by the name of J. B. Jackson, of Ingersoll, Ontario, has been appointed to any position in England or elsewhere, by the government of Canada, or any member of said government ?
If so, what are the duties assigned to him, and what salary or remuneration is he to receive for the performance of such services ?
Hon. Mr. SCOTT-J. B. Jackson, of Jngersoll, Ontario, was appointed by Order in Council of date October 31st, 1903 (appointment to date from 1st November, 1903) commercial agent to Leeds and Hull, England.
His duties are to report monthly, or more frequently, if necessary, to the Department of Trade and Commerce upon ail trade matters which may be of interest to Canadian exporters, and to use his best endeavour to further Canada's market in the district to which he is assigned. These reports are published weekly and are sent to any business men in Canada desiring them.
Mr. Jackson's salary is $3,000 per annum, and office and contingent expenses. I
I have made hard statements about this man. I call upon my witnesses to substantiate the statement I am making and if the right hon. gentleman will communicate with Mr. Ball, county Crown attorney for Oxford, I believe that he will get some information about Mr. J. B. Jackson. He will find that Mr. J. B. Jackson was charged with forgery or perjury and that owing to the theft of a certain document during the night Jackson escaped being committed for the crime with which he was charged. If my right hon. friend will communicate with Mr. Ball, Mr. Ball will tell him that Jackson is a scoundrel. And yet, Sir, this gentleman whom I find in the 'Parliamentary Companion ' to bear this title :
Rt. Hon. Sir Richard John Cartwright, G.C.M., P.C.
Privy Councillor, who has received one of the highest titles in the gift of the imperial authorities as bestowed on Canadian subjects, a gentleman who has filled the im-Mr. INGRAM.
portant position of Finance Minister of Canada, and who to-day is filling a responsible position of Minister of Trade and Commerce, has appointed this man Jackson to an important position. I ask my hon. friends who have heard the evidence that has been shown in this House to-day, after witnessing the flippant manner in which that right hon. gentleman spoke in connection with the appointment of this man Jackson, do they think it will be a very nice thing for the imperial authorities, who have bestowed this title on the right hon. gentleman, to read the evidence in connection with J. B. Jackson ? Do hon. gentlemen think that the imperial authorities will consider that the title has been well bestowed upon a man who by his own assertion to-day has condoned the purchasing of perjury and offences of this kind ? Reference has been made to the confusion of Ontario and Dominion politics and the Conservatives in this House have been blamed for dragging in the provincial government in matters of this kind. I remember in days gone by when the Liberal party in this House condemned the Dominion and local authorities for travelling in couples. I remember those days quite well, but, Sir, who were the first to drag into the same arena local and Dominion issues and make them as one ? The very party of which the right hon. gentleman is one of the chief leaders. Who are they selecting as candidates for this country ? I go to London and find that the governor of the county jail in Middlesex is the Dominion candidate in North Middlesex. I go to the constituency of my hon. friend from Halton and find opposing him the public school inspector receiving pay from the Ontario government. I go to Dundas, and find as the Liberal candidate the provincial inspector of jails and asylums, Dr. Chamberlain. These men drawing money for their services from the local government are now candidates for this House on behalf of the Liberal party. And yet hon. gentlemen talk to us about associating local and Dominion politics !
There is another important question. As I said the hon. gentlemen opposite applauded the right hon. gentleman when he rose to reply to the remarks of the hon. member for East Simcoe (Mr. Bennett), but I wish to congratulate hon. gentle'men behind him upon the fact that they did not applaud the right hon. gentleman after he made Bis explanation in this House, and I am sure when the statement made by him is quoted against him in this country-and it will be because it deserves to be-showing the depth to which these hon. gentlemen have descended, and showing the disregard they have for what is proper and right and the degradation that will attach to any man who is a member of a party whose leaders express such sentiments. This chamber has rung day after day during this session because we have found that a government
, JULY 28, 1904
employee of this country had the audacity to write a letter or to find fault in connection with certain political interference with his duties connected with his office. We were told by the Liberal press that these officials had disgraced themselves. The people of this city were only the other day warned not to join in a procession in honour of a man who had disgraced Canada by finding fault with the political influences used in his department. Every word of that paper was in condemnation of those who turned out to give a send-off to that man because he had disgraced himself. I have yet to learn that Lord Dundonald has arrived at the stage of having bought perjured evidence in this country to unseat a good man. What he has done has been an honourable thing. He is condemned for that and yet we find praise and reward for the man who had purchased perjured evidence. Now, Sir, I do not wish to pursue this matter any further. The right hon. gentleman has relieved us from believing that he was not aware of what occurred on that memorable occasion and I have only to say to him that the electors of South Oxford will not compliment him for saying that money was put into that constituency for the purpose of purchasing the honest electors of South Oxford.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There was a time in the history of Canada when the Reform party were credited with standing for honour and honesty if for nothing else. The 'people of the country believed that the more prominent men of the party were men of sterling honour and sterling integrity and certainly in the public life of Canada so far as Canada knew they were examples of honesty, examples that might well be copied by the rising generations. But unfortunately of late years they seem to have drifted away from their moorings, and those who were the leading lights in the party in the past appear to vie with each other today in their degradation and their lowering of the public life of Canada, in discrediting the honour of Canadian public men and disgracing party politics. That is the position as it appears to-day. What is the qualification for appointment to office to-day ? Appointments to office are made strictly I believe for party purposes, and I am speaking advisedly when I say so. If I were requested to give an example I might name them by the dozen and the greater the scoundrel, the more successful he has been in wrongdoing for his political party, the more successful he has been in accomplishing in an improper way what they desire to have accomplished, the success of the party, the greater seems to be his qualification for a position of trust and o,f honour. Need I give examples of it ? Take, for instance, the one that we have been discussing this afternoon. Take Mr. Preston, if you like) who occupies a very prominent position as an immigration agent of Canada to-day.
For years and years, to the disgrace of the party and the disgrace of Mr. Preston, he was one of the most unscrupulous men, L believe, not only in the province of Ontario, but in the Dominion of Canada, a man whose word was of no account, whose honour seemed to be so light that no person respected it, a man whose own uncle went into court and produced not less than ten or twelve respectable witnesses who made affidavits to the effect that they would: not believe him on his oath. That Is the reputation of the man who has been honoured by being appointed to a prominent position and to-day he is pensioned on the country at a salary of 83,000 a year and office and other expenses, as an immigration agent in England.


Mr. CAMPBELL.: And he is one of the best we ever had.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: One of the best we ever-had according to the judgment of the hon. member for West York (Mr. Campbell). And when the country knows that, I need say no more.


Archibald Campbell: They do know it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I say that that man who came back here and entered a suit against a party in this city to vindicate his character

 i


William Humphrey Bennett: His what ?
Mr. SPROULE

and he dared not go
on with the suit for fear that his character which he wished to vindicate would only be shown to be blacker than it was considered to be up to that time.


Archibald Campbell: If Mr. Preston was here you would not dare to say that to him outside the chamber.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I have said the same thing to Mr. Preston face to face. I do not need to hide behind the privileges of parliament. Mr. Preston knows it too well, and the hon. member knows it too.


Archibald Campbell: You are very bold in the House of Commons, but you would not be so bold outside.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I may be told that had the suit been tried Mr. Preston would: have been cleared. What are the facts ?' The record stands to-day in the courts of this country that twelve presumably honest men went into the court and swore they would not believe him on his oath, his own uncle and other witnesses to the number of ten or twelve. This is fihe man who did the dirty work for the party for years, and travelled in filth and mire up to his neck ; and this is the man who to-day is honoured by holding the high position of representative of Canada In England, and who is writing letters to discredit 1 a man like Lord Dundonald. This is the

civil servant who did the dirty work of the party and whom they celebrated to-day, he believing that he will be shielded by his party as he has been in the past. That is an example of what is going on in our decaying and decadent public and political life in Canada as a consequence of the party who are in power to-day.
Then we take Jackson whose case is before the House for consideration at the present time, and we hear an hon. knight dedaring : I assume full responsibility for Jackson's appointment, and I defend it. And what does he add ? He is an intelligent and capable man ? On hearing that I said mentally : It is a great pity he could not say that he is an honest and truthful man. Could he do it ? No, he dare not risk his reputation by saying that, because there is too much on record to prove the contrary -a man who stands disgraced before the public of Canada to-day, a man who has not only perjured himself but endeavoured to purchase others to commit perjury as well, a man who is a forger himself, and had the documents not been improperly stolen or taken away from the public office, documents that are in the custody of friends of the hon. gentleman, that would have been proven in court, and I presume Jackson would have been in the penitentiary to-day instead of receiving the salary that he does over in England. And this is the man of whom the knight says : I assume the full responsibility of his appointment, I am prepared to assume it. Then if we go back in history a little, what do we find ? We are told this is the man who succeeded by his peculiar methods in political life, Or who helped others to succeed in getting the knight elected in South Oxford, for the last time -the Wandering Willie of his party, who, like Noah's dove, found no rest for the sole of his foot until he found it in South Oxford by virtue of the machinations of such men as Jackson, who to-day is reaping his reward. No wonder the hon. gentleman assumes responsibility for his appointment. There is a debt of gratitude due to Jackson from the hon. gentleman that he dare not withhold. Jackson knows too much to be left in the cold and friendless world, he must be taken care of, and he is taken care of, and the hon. member to-day assumes the full responsibility of his appointment. I can tell him that, talking a short time ago with some of the honest Reformers in South Oxford, they declared publicly to me that it was one of the most disgraceful appointments ever made in Canada, and on no man does that disgrace rest with greater weight than upon the hon. member for South Oxford.


Mr. TAYLOR.: The Prime Minister is responsible.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Yes, and every other member of that cabinet, and they must be Mr. SPROULE.
held responsible for it to the public of Canada, because that is what they have brought upon Canada by such appointments. Then we take others of the same ilk, because they are hunting in couples to-day, they are employing the same degraded characters to do the dirty work for the party in the Dominion as well as the provinces. Take Pritchett, take Tom Lewis, take the notorious Grant, who has always been the handy man of the party, ready to do their dirty work, take Captain Sullivan, take Frank Sullivan, take the whole gang of them, and what are they ? Every one of them, the deeper they are steeped in political crime in the service of their political party the more eligible they are for high appointments in the gift of the party.


An hon. MEMBER.: Masters of the administration.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
Robert Laird Borden: Mr. Speaker, the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir Richard Cartwright) has accepted the full responsibility for the appointment of this gentleman to the lucrative position which he now holds. It may be advisable for us to review that appointment very briefly in the light of what was disclosed at the trial which has already been referred to. Mr. Jackson, who was a solicitor, had charge of the petition, and his chief assistants in the local preparation of the case were a constable named Ellis Fick, of Tilsonburg, another man named Charles Hewlett, a prominent Liberal worker in the Tiding, and a professional machine man, as he is called, in the riding, named George Sutherland. The trial opened at Woodstock on the 15th October and continued for several days. The evidence and declarations which I have in my hand disclose the following facts in regard to Mr. Jackson :
He personally paid money to George Fournier, a criminal character, one of his witnesses in the protest. A man by the name of Parker, another named Elijah Harp, and others, swore that Fournier offered them money to swear to falsehoods. I have the evidence for that under my hand, and I have the pages to refer to if any hon. gentleman sees fit to deny or discredit that statement. Jackson paid Charles Parker $10, or, according to his own admission, $5 for similar purposes. I have the'evidence to give in answer to any person who will undertake to contradict that statement. He paid Ellis Fick, by his own admission, $250, and according to the evidence of Charles Parker and William Abraham Young and others, Fick endeavoured to bribe them to swear to falsehoods. The right hon. gentleman has referred to witnesses not being put in the box. Let me remind him that when this evidence was given in this case the petitioner did not put Fick in the box to contradict this statement, but, on the contrary, Fick was found con- [DOT] veniently absent as soon as this evidence had been given. Mr. Jackson had Charles Hewlett and George Sutherland assisting


V823 COMMONS
[Stage Direction]
him in preparing the protest, and he himself interviewed witnesses, F. R. Avey and Lincoln Pollard, who admitted on oath that Hewlett had paid them money to make declarations. A large number of witnesses, among them Parker, Young, Avey, Pollard and Mustard, admitted on oath that Hewlett and Sutherland had bribed and attempted to bribe them to give evidence, and their statements were not attempted to be denied. In fact, the evidence shows that Hewlett and Sutherland absented or concealed themselves, so that the respondent could not subpoena them for the adjourned trial. It should also be remembered that Sutherland did a great deal of his work in the office of Mr. Jackson himself.
Mr. Jackson himself paid Edward Chambers $8 i.>
cash, and promised him $375 more on condition that Chambers should get evidence which would prove eight charges. This agreement with Chambers was to be private : in fact, there was a written declaration drawn up that nothing was to be said about it. Mr. Jackson admits that the last $375 was to be paid only on condition that Chambers would prove eight certain charges. Jackson told Chambers that it did not matter whether the evidence was true or false so long as it answered the purpose. Mr. Chambers is corroborated on oath as to this by two other reputable gentlemen of Woodstock, Mr. Vaughn Francis and Mr. Samuel Smith, who declare that they overheard Jackson distinctly tell Chambers that it did not matter whether the evidence were false or true, so long as it unseated Sutherland. The right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce is, now willing to accept responsibility for' that. I should say, in justice to Mr. Jackson, that he denied this statement, but he was met with the distinct statement to the contrary of no less than three witnesses. He disbursed an enormous amount of money in connection with the campaign, and he states that he kept no record of his disbursements. He interviewed Frederick R. Avey, a bribed witness, at Avey's house, and, as Avey swears, told Avey he was not to say that he had been given anything for giving his evidence. He interviewed Lincoln Pollard, another bribed witness, and, according to Pollard, told Pollard if any one asked him about it to say nothing about making the declaration. I would be inclined to think that the right hon. gentleman is accepting a pretty fair share of responsibility when he undertakes to shoulder all that.
Let me call his attention to some of the sworn evidence, to which I will just briefly refer in order that this evidence may impress itself a little more upon him. Edward William Chambers made a sworn declaration on the Uth October, 1902, from which I shall read. On Friday evening, before thp trial opened, and the trial opened on the 15th October, he had an interview with Mr. Mr. R. L. BORDEN.
Jackson. He told Mr. Vaughn Francis of the proposed interview, and he arranged to have Mr. Francis and Mr. Samuel Smith come to his house on that Friday evening, in order that they might hear what Mr. Jackson had to offer. He goes on to say that they were in a position to hear what took place, and he details in his affidavit the conversation as follows :
After a general conversation Jackson wanted me to sign an agreement not to divulge the conversation, which I refused to do, and then Jackson wanted to know how much I wanted to get him evidence to unseat Sutherland. I told him $5,000. He said that was out of the question. He then said that he thought $500 down, and $1,500 additional if the evidence was sufficient to unseat Suth-land.
That is paragraph 4 of the declaration and paragraph 5 is as follows :
I 'then asked him what class of evidence he wanted, whether false or true, and he said it mattered not to him whether it was false or true so long as he could unseat Sutherland. He said he would lose his gown if this conversation was divulged.
Let me point out to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, that by the sworn declaration of Mr. Vaughn L. Francis under date of 11th October, 1902, that statement is expressly and absolutely confirmed, and by the sworn statement of Mr. Samuel Wm. Smith under date 11th of October, 1902, that statement is also confirmed. I shall refer to one or two passages in the evidence taken in the trial. I quote from the evidence of Chas. Parker.
Q. What proposal did he make to you ?
A. Well, he asked me if I received anything for my vote and I told him I did not.
Q. What next did he say to you ?
A. Well, he asked me if I would say that I had.
This was not a proposal made by Mr. Jackson himself but it was a proposal made by one of the men whom he had hired and paid for the purpose of obtaining evidence in this case. In the evidence of Mr. Jackson himself he was asked with reference to his conversation with Mr. Chambers.
Q. Didn't he ask for $5,000 or $10,000 or a larger amount ?
A. $5,000 may have been mentioned, but I am sure that $1,500 and $2,000 was mentioned.
Q. How much did you promise to give him ?
A. I gave him $375 and, I promised to give him $375 more if he could produce evidence to substantiate the eight charges he gave me.
Further on :
Q. You paid him $375 down and you were to pay him the balance on what condition ?
A. On condition that the eight charges should be proved.
Let me point out to the Minister of Trade and Commerce that he himself has stated that applications of this kind are made to persons of a certain character; persons

who are not to be too much trusted, and here is this gentleman for whose appointment the minister takes full responsibility, going to one of these men so characterized by the Minister of Trade and Commerce-* although I believe him to be a reputable citizen-Jackson goes to this citizen who is supposed to be influenced, and he pays him $375 down and promises him the same amount in addition if he will produce evidence that will unseat Mr. Sutherland. The Minister of Trade and Commerce has no adjectives to apply to conduct of that kind, except ' indiscreet.' That is all that the English language will furnish the right hon. gentleman for conduct of that character and for an occasion of that kind-his vocabulary is not so bare on other occasions. In the evidence of Mr. Frederick R. Avey, is to be found the following :
Q. Do you know Mr. Jackson, the lawyer of Ingersoll ?
A. Yes.
Q. He stated to you as I am instructed that you were not to say that you had been given anything for swearing for them ?
A. He did.
Q. When was that ?
A. Well, it was a week ago last Tuesday night, or two weeks.
Q. Where did he give you these instructions?
A. At my house .
. Further on :
Q. Did he speak to you about the declaration which you had given to Mr. Hewlett ?
Mr. Hewlett was one of the paid agents of Mr. Jackson.
A. Yes.
Q- What did he say about that ? He knew all about it then ?
A. Yes.
Q. What did he say about it ?
A. He said : If they ask did you make a declaration, you need not tell them ; somthing like that.
Further on :
Well, he says, if they'ask you whether you got anything for it or not, tell them that you did not.
Further on another witness whose name I do not recollect was examined by Mr. Watson counsel for petitioner.
Q. There is just one question ; in the meantime do I understand you to say that Mr. Jackson told you not to say anything about the declaration if you were asked ?
A. If anybody asked me he told me not to say anything about it.
And so on, and all through this evidence one could quote ad libitum statements of precisely a similar character. It seems to me that the position which the Minister of Trade and Commerce has taken with regard to this matter is of an extraordinary nature. In fact he has invented a new decalogue ; so far as the commandments forbid, he would abolish them all
and insert instead : ' Thou shalt be discreet so that thou shalt not be found out.' The Minister of Trade and Commerce has no word of criticism upon Mr. Jackson for asking these men to procure evidence, whether true or false, so long as it should unseat Mr. Sutherland. He has no word of criticism with regard to that, but he has a reproach against Jackson because he did not look up the chimney, because he did not look in the cellar to see if any one was listening ; in short, because he was indiscreet. In other words if we are to take the right hon. gentleman at his own valuation he is perfectly content that Mr. Jackson should purchase evidence that he should incite these men to procure evidence whether true or false ; and the only requirement necessary for promotion in the civil service of Canada is that it shall be done so that it cannot be proven. Well, the right hon. gentleman is eloquent sometimes ; he is severe sometimes ; I think he told us since last session that on this side of the House we were a lot of nobodies, heard of nowhere outside of our own parishes. I say to the right hon. gentleman the Minister of Trade and Commerce, that it had been better for him as a public man in this country if he had retired to the isolation of his own parish and been heard of no more, before he made the declaration which he has to-day made in this House. I believe, Sir, that there never was in the public life of this country or of any other country a more damnable doctrine more unblushingly avowed. I do not understand how a gentleman who has had his experience in public life, who has in the past preached lofty doctrines with regard to purity of public life and in the administration of public affairs, could ever have found it in his heart to stand up in this House of Commons, and to make the avowal which the Minister of Trade and Commerce has made to-day. It was bold ; it was more than bold, it was unblushing, and if I were not transgressing parliamentary decorum I would say that it was utterly shameless. That this man, so stigmatized by Mr. Justice Street, should be promoted to the public service of Canada, and that the Minister of Trade and Commerce speaking for the government should not be ashamed to stand up and justify him, is an unheard of degradation in our public life. We are indebted to the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennett) for bringing the matter to the attention of the House, and in my opinion, it deserves grave consideration from the House and the country. To testify my appreciation of the importance of the question, I beg to move :
That all the words in the resolution after the word ' that ' be omitted and the following substituted therefor : -
That in making appointments to pubic offices, and particularly to those of a representative nature, party services should not alone he considered, but selections should be made
[Stage Direction]
[DOT]with regard to capacity and to personal character.
House divided on amendment of Mr. R. L. Borden.
YEAS :
Messieurs
Alcorn,	Kemp,
Armstrong,	Kidd,
Barker,	Lancaster,
Bell,	LaRivibre,
Bennett,	Lefurgey,
Birkett,	Lennox,
Blain,	McGowan,
Borden (Halifax),	Morin,
Brock,	Northrup,
Clancy,	Osier,
Clarke,	Porter,
Cochrane,	Richardson,
Earle,	Robinson (Elgin),
Erb,	Rosamond,
Fowler,	Sherritt,
Ganong,	Smith (Wentworth),
Gilmour,	Sproule,
Gourley,	Taylor,
Halliday,	Vrooman,
Henderson,	Wilmot,
Hughes (Victoria), Ingram,	Wilson-43.
NAYS :	
Messieurs	
Archambault,	Laurier (L'Assomption),
Bazinet,	Lavergne
Beith,	(Drummond & Artha.)
Blanchet,	Lavergne (Montmagny),
Borden (Sir Frederick),	LeBlanc,
Bourassa,	Lewis,
Brodeur,	Logan,
Bruneau,	Loy,
Bureau,	Macdonald,
Calvert,	Mackie,
Campbell,	MacLaren
Carbonneau,	(Huntingdon),
Charlton,	Macpherson,
Christie,	McEwen,
Copp,	McGugan,
Costigan,	Mclsaac,
Delisle,	McLennan,
Demers (St. John),	Marcil (Bagot),
Douglas,	Marcil (Bonaventure),
Emmerson,	Matheson,
Ethier,	Mignault,
Fielding,	Morrison,
Fitzpatrick,	Mulock (Sir William),
Fortier,	Prefontaine,
Geoffrion,	Puttee,
Gervais,	Riley,
Gibson,	Rivet,
Gould,	Roche (Halifax),
Grant,	Ross (Victoria, N.S.),
Harwood,	Ross (Yukon),
Heyd,	Stewart,
Hughes	Sutherland (Essex),
(King's, P.E.I.),	Talbot,
Johnston (Lambton),	Tucker,
Kendall,	Turgeon,
Lang, Laurier (Sir Wilfrid),	Wright-70.
PAIRS :	
Ministerial.	Opposition.
Cowan,	Pringle,
Dyment,	McCormack,
Robert Laird Borden: McColl,	Ward,
Sutherland (Oxford),	Haggart,
Tobin,	Ball, '
Thompson (Hald.),	Roche (Marq.),
Law,	Casgrain,
McCool,	Avery,
Paterson,	Maclean,
Galliher,	Calvin,
Holmes, [DOT]	Clare,
Ross (Ontario S.),	Donnelly,
Girard,	Leonard,
German,	Johnston (Card.),
Scott,	MacLaren (Perth),
Sifton,	Tarte,
Smith (Vancouver),	Robinson (Nord.),
Oliver,	Lavell,
Hyman,	Bruce,
Harty,	Reid (Grenville),
Wallace,	Tisdale,
Cartwright,	Tupper,
Lovell,	Kendry,
Haszard,	Daniel,
Wade,	Kaulbach,
Davis,	Boyd,
Bicberdike,	Roddick,
Gallery,	Broder,
Johnson (C.B.),	Carscallen,
Guthrie,	Culbert,
Russell,	Haekett,
Tolmie,	Seagram,
Demers (Levis),	Monk,
Parmelee,	Pope,
Fisher,	*Hale,
Stephens,	Thomson (Grey),
Malouin,	Tolton.
Amendment negatived. Motion agreed to, , and House went into Committee of Supply.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
Public Works-harbours and rivers-Quebec

St. Simeon wharf-extension, $3,00U.
['I understand an lion, gentleman opposite desires to move an amendment to supply ; therefore a motion to go into supply will be made in the morning. When that motion is disposed of, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice will have some estimates, then the Minister of Public Works.']
Mr. BLAIN.: Please explain this item.


Hon. CHAS. HYMAN (Acting Minister of Public Works).: This is for the extension of the wharf, the estimated cost of which is $15,000.
Quebec-Seven Islands-wharf, $60,000.


Mr. BELL.: What is the explanation of this ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This is for the completion of a wharf at Seven Islands.


John William Bell: Is it at the place called Seven Islands ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It is in the bay.


John William Bell: How far east from Seven Islands ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Just at the entrance, about four miles across the bay.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: When was this wharf begun ?


Charles Smith Hyman: In November, 1903.


John William Bell: What is the population ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I do not know anything about the population there now, but

there seems to be quite a number working in that locality. The bay of Seven Islands is the only harbour of refuge practically on the north shore of the St. Lawrence from Tadousac down to the entrance of the Straits of Belle Isle. It is immediately opposite the western end of the island of Anticosti on the north shore. It is getting to be a very important business centre. Several industries have been started there, including one of the largest pulp mills in the world, belonging to the Clark Paper Company, composed of capitalists partly from Toronto and partly from New York.


John William Bell: Did the government begin this work ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No.


John William Bell: We would like fuller explanation.


Charles Smith Hyman: This matter was discussed last session. The North Shore Power and Navigation Company began the work. The government acquired from that company the work, which was in an uncompleted state, for $34,433.99. Since then the government have been engaged in completing the wharf. This item of $60,000 is to complete it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What was paid for the site ?
ing that pulp industry is the harbour of Seven Islands, and the Clarks got possession of the best location in the harbour and set to work to build a wharf. It is desirable that the wharf should not be the property of any particular company, but of the government and be used by all those who want to do business in that locality. The Bay of Seven Islands is the only harbour on the whole shore from Tadousac down, with the possible exception of Pentecost, where we are now attempting to create a harbour. Last year the government undertook to acquire this wharf from the Clarks. We had an estimate made of the work done, and on that estimate took over what work was done and the materials and supplies and arranged with the Clarks that the latter should complete the work according to plans and specifications prepared by the department and under the supervision of the government engineer who was down there. They will supply all the vouchers for the material before they get paid. These people are in possession of the locality and are the only people who can supply the lumber and labour. They have a great many people employed there at present. If you were to call for tenders, they would get the work practically at their own price or at any price they chose to offer.


Charles Smith Hyman: Nothing was paid for the Mr- SPROULE. They are getting that site. The site was given free of charge. anyway.


John William Bell: Is this work under contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No, the local engineer is in charge of it.


Mr. MORIN.: Will this wharf be the property of the company or of the government ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It is the property of the government.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I submit they are not. They are to be paid solely for the actual expenditure they make for materials and labour, and it seems to me we are getting the benefit of the work carried on there by this private corporation-


Edward Frederick Clarke: Have you any agreement with them ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How is the engineer carrying on the work-by contract or day labour ? The law provides that any work over $5,000 must be let by contract after calling for public tender. That law seems to be entirely ignored in this matter.


Charles Fitzpatrick: My hon. friend will realize how futile it would be to call for tenders for the construction of a work at this place. I have explained where the Bay of Seven Islands is situated. It is in the county of Chicoutimi and Saguenay. The firm interested are men well known in Toronto, Clark Bros., who have an establishment also in New York where they carry on a large printing and publishing company. They bought a large tract of land down the north shore of the St. Lawrence for the purpose of developing a pulp industry. In addition to the Clarks, there is a firm there from Ontario, called the Mossie, Boyd Company. They are the adjoining proprietors. The only harbour down there which can be used by these different persons develop-


Edward Frederick Clarke: Will the hon. minister bring it down ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes, I shall be glad to do so.


Edward Frederick Clarke: If they agreed to furnish materials and labour at cost, that is very reasonable, but we should see the agreement.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Is the government quite sure that the development of the pulp industry is going on ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Because we have all over Canada as we know a great many pulp industries which have started and many of which have not been a success. I must say that I quite agree with the proposition of the minister that if this large work is going on and the government are to build a wharf there, perhaps the best way to build that wharf is in the manner suggested, with proper supervision to see that the govern-

'iiient are not charged too much. I think, however, the government should be very certain that the private works are going on and will likely be permanent before spending this large amount.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I am speaking now of my own actual personal knowledge, and I say that over a million dollars has been expended and that it is expected that the pulp mill will be in operation this autumn.


Samuel Hughes: Is not this island owned by some individual ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: You are thinking of Anticosti, owned by Menier. This is the Bay of Seven Islands on the coast of the St. Lawrence ; the Island of Anticosti is opposite it.


John William Bell: It is evident in this case that the government is building a wharf for a private corporation.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Not for one, for several.


John William Bell: The minister states that there are some others, but he has not given particulars. My information is that there is not a house or dwelling at this place.


Charles Fitzpatrick: That is absolutely incorrect.


John William Bell: There is a settlement, an old Hudson's Bay post, nine miles distant from this work, and the fact is evident that the government are repeating here what they did in Grande Vallee, furnishing a wharf for private parties. Under these circumstances we cannot allow an item of this kind to go through without information. We must have the contract. If the government are disposed to put it through they have the power to do so, tout it is our duty here to bring out all the facts. In the first place it is evident that the company spent $34,000, and then the government took the work off their hands, and now when they propose an expenditure of $50,000 more, instead of letting the work by contract the government are simply paying the bills of this private corporation, settling such accounts as they choose to render.


Charles Fitzpatrick: That is not a correct statement of what is done. Ask Mr. Osier of Toronto, a business man what his view is of this.


John William Bell: The statement of the Minister of Public Works was that the department were paying-


Charles Smith Hyman: The actual expenditure
under the supervision of a government engineer.


Samuel Hughes: Why is a government engineer in charge of the work if we have not voted money for it before ?


Charles Smith Hyman: We have voted money
before.


John William Bell: $25,000 and nearly $10,000 more than that amount has been spent upon it. The minister said a few moments ago that $34,000 had been expended.


Charles Smith Hyman: That is the amount. We have not paid it, but we have become liable for that amount.
. Mr. BELL. That is practically expended now and this work will cost $85,000 which is a large sum even for the Dominion of Canada. There is no guarantee that $85,000 will complete the work, because this corporation may extend the work indefinitely, and apparently all they have to do is to pass the accounts to the government through the engineer in charge and have them paid. We cannot allow this to go through without having the information.


Charles Smith Hyman: What information ?


John William Bell: We want to know what the contract is. If the government of Canada have entered into a contract with these parties without inviting tenders or making any effort to get them, I think it is essential that we should know what the contract is.	.	.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What wages per hour are being paid these men ? What is being paid per thousand for the timber that is being used, and what advantages are to be secured to others than the gentlemen who commenced the construction of the wharf ? Would it not have been better for the government to give a round sum with all these conditions securing facilities for others and with certain obligations imposed upon the builders ? Surely the government will not expect this item to pass without laying the contract on the table ? I think that request is so reasonable that the item should stand.


Charles Smith Hyman: The wages paid are the current wages in the district, whatever they may be.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What are they ? Does the fair wage officer fix the wage ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The minister stated that you could not let a contract here because it is remote from the settled sections of the country. There is no force in that because contractors go all over the country.


Charles Smith Hyman: How could a contractor from outside compete with local men who are the owners of the mills and all facilities ?


John William Bell: If tenders had been advertised for, then we would know that the local men got it by open competition. In the first place there is a deliberate violation of the law.


Charles Fitzpatrick: My hon. friend has forgotten the amendment of last session.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I forget the amendment of last session. There was a violation of the


Edmund Boyd Osler: worthy principle that In the expenditure of public money the work must be let by contract. I am told that in this case only two firms are getting the benefit.


Charles Fitzpatrick: For the present, but there will be others.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Men go in and get timber limits and they want the government to come to their aid and provide facilities for wonting these limits. They commence work for themselves, but afterwards induce the government to buy the works for $35,000. $35,000 will pay for a good deal of material supplied in a place like that which is almost a forest and the little work that has been done, and I have no doubt that they have been paid a large figure for everything. The government now, instead of turning found aud endeavouring to economize public money by advertising for tenders, give the contract to the same individuals regardless of price, practically, because where there is no competition they caii charge us any price and we cannot help it. This money is being expended simply for their purposes, just as in the case we dealt with last night at Grande Vallee. Possibly in the future there will be a town or village, but that settlement will be the aggregation of people brought in by the company to do their own work, to handle the timber and manufacture it as they are supposed to do. We do not believe it is right to allow public money to be voted in that way and we would like to know what contract there is between the government and those parties to do the work.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: I think that the government has too much love for those Clark fellows at Seven Islands. In the first place we all know that the Clarks are very wealthy men.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Hear, hear.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: And they have millions of dollars to spend.


Charles Fitzpatrick: They are spending It too.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: They were building a wharf there. Why not leave them alone and let them build their own wharf ? Let well enough alone. Do you not think that is better ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: My hon. friend who has some knowledge of the local conditions will no doubt answer this question as to whether there exists at the present time a harbour on the north side of the St. Lawrence, taking in the Island of Anticosti, in which a ship can find refuge at any point between the entrance to the Saguenay river and the entrance to the Straits of Belle Isle ? Is there a single place outside the Bay of Seven Islands where a ship can get refuge in the whole of that territory ?


Jean-Baptiste Morin: In the first place, there is no reason for any ship going there.


Charles Fitzpatrick: There wrere no less than four wrecks there this spring.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: There are places where small vessels land, but steamships or sailing ships never go to the Seven Islands at all. Vessels stop along the coast, and have been stopping there for years, aud they will keep on doing so. I think in this case there must be a nigger in the fence.


Charles Smith Hyman: I have no objection ;to let the item stand. I have sent for the contract.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Last year $65,000 was voted on this item and the explanation given was :
This is to make provision for the construction of a deepwater pier on the west side of Bay of Seven Islands. The pier will run out in a northerly direction, nearly at right angles to the shore, and it will have a total length of 1,325 feet, reaching a depth of 48 feet at low water spring tide. The estimated cost is $65,000. The reason for the work is that there is a most important development going on at that place, and there are now large pulp mills in that district which was up to a year or so ago almost unknown.
It would look from that as if the government intended to construct a deep water pier. The information we have to-day is that the people are building a deep water pier themselves, and having spent $34,000, the government are now taking it off their hands, paying for it, and allowing them to do the work at their own price.


Charles Smith Hyman: That statement is not fair, The hon. gentleman knows perfectly well that is not in accordance with the statement given when he says they are allowed to do it at their own price.


Edward Frederick Clarke: At what price are they doing it ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The price is controlled by the department.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What control has the department over the price ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The department knows what price they pay themselves. They have an engineer in charge and he has certified that these prices are fair.


Edward Frederick Clarke: According to the statement I have read, there was no development and no improvement on the water front there a year ago. Now what kind of work did the department get done there a year ago 1 How can they cdmpare the price being charged here with the price the company paid themselves ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The work is done by the company as I understand.


Edward Frederick Clarke: When this vote was taken last year there was a different statement made altogether. The government

said they proposed to construct the pier in deep water at low spring tide.


Edmund Boyd Osler: When was the contract made for the purchase from the private individuals ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The agreement is dated February 8, 1904.


Edward Frederick Clarke: The appropriation last year was passed in October. It seems to have been an afterthought, after parliament had voted this money, for the government to construct this pier and take it off these people's hands. Surely we ought to have all the particulars, all the correspondence and negotiations for the purchase mentioned here, and some reasons in addition why the government should allow the company to go on and complete their own pier. They must have had the work more than half done because, according to the evidence given us last year, the work was to cost $65,000 and the company had $34,000 worth of work done.


Charles Smith Hyman: Allow the item to stand, I have sent for the contract.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I might draw attention to the fact that last year the member for one of the Victorias, speaking of this particular locality, said it was a very good work and deserved to be commended.


Edmund Boyd Osler: It would appear from the discussion at that time that there was no information given to the House that any work had already been done there, it looked as if it was an entirely new work. From the information that is given to us now it is evident that at the time this item was under discussion a large amount of work had been done and the government must have had in contemplation, not the new work undertaken by the government, but the purchase of the work done by private individuals. That must have been contemplated by the government then, though no intimation of it was given last session.
Quebec-Three Rivers harbour-additional deep water wharfs, $60,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This work is under contract, which was made on the 16th of June, 1902.


Edmund Boyd Osler: What is the estimated total, cost ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Of course this is a large work, in a place like Three Rivers. The amount of the contract is $280,000 and there is an additional contract for the substitution of concrete for timber in the superstructure, for the sum of $50,000. Including sums for contingencies the whole amount would be $355,400.	$81,564 was
spent up to the 1st of December. With this at the disposal of the department they will be able to pay $169,914 of the total Mr. CLARKE.
$355,000, leaving an additional amount required to complete the work of $185,400. The first contract was let on the 16th of June, 1902. I am informed by the engineer that at that time the general policy was, and has been since, wherever it was possible, and the matter is always taken into consideration by the engineer, to substitute concrete for timber. The price seems to be fair in view of the alterations made.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Surely two years ago that policy prevailed in the department. It strikes one as peculiar that the contract should be let in June, 1902, after which a change was made involving an additional cost of $50,000 or $60,000 for concrete. To whom was the contract awarded ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Part of the work had been done before the change made by the department.


Edward Frederick Clarke: How much money had been paid to the contractor before this change ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I am unable to say the exact amount. About $80,000 had been, expended on that work when the change was made. The change was made on the 7th of December, 1903, and the expenditure up to the end of December was $81,588.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Was a vote taken last session of parliament for the increased cost owing to the change made from timber to concrete ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The supplementary contract was made on the 7th of December, 1903. The hon. gentleman will understand that it was impossible to take a vote last session because the House rose in October.


Edward Frederick Clarke: This additional expenditure was contracted for notwithstanding that parliament had been advised that the work called for a certain sum and was been expended in a certain way. It seems to me to be out of the usual course of business to change the character of a work from timber to concrete involving the country in an expenditure of $50,000 or $60,000 without having an appropriation from parliament.


Charles Smith Hyman: The change was made at the request of the harbour commissioners. The harbour commissioners made the request to the department and the department upon taking into consideration their request, decided that it would be in the interest of the country to have the change made. Almost every day matters of this kind come before the department. Work is contracted for and very often it is found in the interest of the public to make some change. After the work has been started and a certain amount of money expended the engineers find upon consideration and as a result of suggestions having been made

783S
there are changes which can be advantageously made.


George Taylor: Generally in the interest of the contractor.


Charles Smith Hyman: I do not know that that is exactly fair. I think the interests of the country are very well looked after by the engineers of the department.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Would it not be reasonable to suppose that these gentlemen would be able to advise in the first place in respect to the best means of doing this work ?


Charles Smith Hyman: They always try to do that.


Edward Frederick Clarke: They thought the wooden pier would be all right until some one suggested that the work should be done in concrete. It seems to me to cast a reflection on the ability of the officer who would make such a recommendation.


Mr. BUREAU.: The harbour commissioners of Three Rivers and the chamber of commerce demanded this change. We have docks at Three Rivers. The current runs inland and every year, these docks being floored with deals, the deals come off and the front of the docks is torn up. The result is that it is necessary to make Extensive repairs every year after the ice floats down.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Were the engineers aware of the local situation which the hon. gentleman describes when they made this recommendation ?


Jacques Bureau: I do not know. The docks at Three Rivers are under the control of the harbour commissioners and they have their own engineer. The commission reports to the department when they want to borrow any money, because under 'the law it is necessary for them to have their plans ratified, formerly by the Department of Public Works, but now by the Department of Marine and Fisheries. The money has been expended on an icebreaker that was built 150 feet long by 50 feet wide in a depth of 30 or 32 feet of water. They had to make it very strong because coming out of Lake St. Peter the St. Lawrence brings the current and the ice inside of this spot at which they are building the dock. It was at the instance of the commissioners that I went to the department and recommended a change being made from a wooden to a concrete dock. This is a dock 2,020 feet in length. It extends up the river and it has to resist the force of a rapid current and the ice which comes down with it.


Edward Frederick Clarke: It seems to me that in regard to this work involving a very large expenditure one would have expected to have received better advice from the engineering staff. They should have made 240-
themselves familiar with the local situation, because it is not business after a work has been commenced to. allow alterations of this character to be made. If it were necessary in view of the local situation to have a particularly strong wharf, it seems to me that the engineers should have made the recommendation in favour of concrete 4n the first place, and not have had this change made involving this large additional cost ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the additional cost ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The additional cost involved by the substitution of concrete for wood is $50,239.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Did the hon. minister get a report from his own engineer before he ordered the change ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes, there was a report from the resident engineer to the chief engineer and this was concurred in by the chief engineer.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is the resident engineer the government engineer or is he the resident engineer of the harbour commisioners there ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The government engineer.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Is that man a resident of Three Rivers ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The resident engineer at Three Rivers has charge of the government works.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Was it the resident engineer at Three Rivers who prepared the plans that were submitted to the government in the first place for a wooden dock ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No. The plans were prepared by the department under the supervision of the chief engineer.


Edward Cochrane: I would like to ask the hon. minister if the department have had any experience with reference to this concrete work ? Are they sure that with the ice jamming around there these piers of concrete will not break as well as timber ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Not only have the department had considerable experience, [DOT] but they have the advantage of knowing what the experience is all over the world. This is the age of concrete. Concrete is being used more freely in all works. In this case it was adopted on the report of the resident engineer because it was considered to be in the interest of the general public.


Edward Frederick Clarke: We are desirous of seeing this work properly done, if the hon. gentleman will give us any good reasons why the change should be made; but are we to understand that the gentlemen at headquarters here prepared these plans for this work and offered their advice without consulting the



engineer in charge of the work in the district of Three Rivers ? Did it strike this gentleman at Thrqe Rivers that, after a large sum of money has been spent on the work, the plans should be changed and the work done in concrete ?. Surely it is not paying a very high compliment to the engineering skill of the engineer at Three Rivers to say that he would allow that work to go to a certain stage, and that then it would strike him all [DOT] at once that concrete would be a better substitute ? It is possible that the gentlemen at headquarters did not know the local situation. The hon. gentleman who represents that district (Mr. Bureau) has explained the great pressure from the ice and water, but the local engineer ought to have known all about that ; and if he was familiar with the conditions we would have expected that he would have advised before the work had been let that it would be in the public interest to substitute concrete for timber. It does not look to be a very healthy shite of affairs, having such a multitude of councillors as the hon. gentleman has, that he should be obliged, after the work is half done, to call for new plans. It does not seem to be a business-like method of procedure. He has an engineer at Three Rivers as well as engineers in his own office here, some of whom ought to know the conditions required in the construction of the piej or wharf, and who ought to be able to say which is the better material to be employed in the construction of the work.


Charles Smith Hyman: At the time these plans were prepared in the Department of Public Works there was no resident engineer at Three Rivers. The resident engineer at Three Rivers only became the resident engineer after this work was started. The plans for the work were prepared in the office of the department here by the engineer and that engineer was placed in charge of the work. This gentleman who is the resident engineer and who has charge of the work made the recommendation to the chief engineer of the department in favour of the change, it was concurred in by the chief engineer and upon their joint report the change was made and the extra contract entered into. There was no resident engineer of the department at Three Rivers at the time the original specifications were made. If there had been he would have been consulted by the department. The gentleman who is now the resident engineer at Three Rivers was at that time on the staff at Ottawa. It was only on the commencement of the work that the resident engineer was sent there to specially supervise that work.


Edward Frederick Clarke: And since he has been there he has been impressed with the magnitude of the undertaking and with the desirability of making it more substantial by using concrete ?


Edward Frederick Clarke: 


Charles Smith Hyman: That is it exactly.


John William Bell: What amount was spent on this work up to the time the change was made V I understand that about $80,000 worth of work was done before the change was made. Is that $80,000 absolutely lost in consequence of making the change :


Charles Smith Hyman: There is no loss to the country at all. There is $80,000 worth of work completed. When you construct a pier you start at the bottom. The piles have to be driven. After this $80,000 worth' of work had been completed the engineers as a result of their discussions and the consideration of their reports decided that it would be in the interest of the country that an increased expenditure of $50,000 should be made upon this work by substituting concrete, in this way very much increasing its durability. The minister acted on the report of the engineer's department that the public interest would be better served by a substitution of concrete for timber.
Mi). SPROULE. What foundation did they make for the concrete ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The same foundation.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How is the foundation built ?


Jacques Bureau: I am not an engineer, but I know that they have a solid front and that spiles are driven, and the solid front is fixed on to these big spiles with iron rods, and on top of that they construct their concrete work. The $80,000 was spent in dredging and levelling. At the head of the dock there is an ice-breaker that rises thirty or forty feet above the water. It is built of square timber cribwork filled with broken stone. The country did not lose a cent by the change, because if the dock had been built with a wooden superstructure everything that was done at the time of the change would have to be done all the same. They utilized every particle of the work done under the first contract for the second contract.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You are building a concrete superstructure upon wood and stone '!


Jacques Bureau: Exactly.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Wood must decay in time.


Mr. TALBOT.: It never decays under water.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman may know a good deal, but there are others as old as he and with quite as extended experience. Certain kinds of wood will last longer under water, but they will decay in time, and no one will argue that this work would be as permanent as if it were built on solid concrete from the bottom. Now, I want to see the report of the engineer recommending the change. I want to know if,. 1 when this contract was changed, tenders
7841	JULY 28, 1904	7842
were invited, or was the contract continued by private arrangement ?


Charles Smith Hyman: There were no new tenders. $80,000 had been spent on the work, and upon the report of the engineer the contract was extended, and $50,000 added to pay the extra amount required for the substitution.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That was a private agreement between the contractor and engineer.


Charles Smith Hyman: It was sanctioned by Order in Council.


Mr. SHERRITT.: It is a pity that this work was not first started with a view of using concrete. The explanation given by the minister would indicate that there was no resident engineer there at the time, and that it was the member for the constituency that recommended the change.	t


Charles Smith Hyman: There was no departmental resident engineer when the original contract was entered into, but there was when the change was made.


John Sherritt: I understood the hon. member (Mr. Bureau) to say that he recommended the change. Why didn't he recommend concrete when the first contract was made ? I have been a contractor myself, and I know a little about these things, and I know that after a contract is taken the changes are usually made in the interests of the contractor.


Charles Smith Hyman: That is a frank admission from an old contractor.


John Sherritt: It is, and it is the case nevertheless. I understood that the hon. member (Mr. Bureau) said he recommended the change.


Jacques Bureau: I stated that I recommended the change at the instance and request of the harbour commissioners and the chamber of commerce, through their engineers. They came to me and asked me to advocate the change, and I did so. As a matter of fact, they passed a resolution asking that the top of the dock should be concrete instead of wood.


John Sherritt: Why didn't they recommend that in the first place ?


Jacques Bureau: I do not belong to the harbour commission.


John Sherritt: Why did not you recommend it at first ?


Jacques Bureau: 
John Sherritt: I understood you suggested that the top should be concrete.
249|


Jacques Bureau: No ; the harbour commissioners asked for it. There was a resolution sent to me, which I forwarded to the department, and they asked me to use my best efforts to have the change made.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Bureau) seems to have engineered the job all right.


Jacques Bureau: I submitted it, and it was so good in itself that it went through.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How is the work paid for now ?


Jacques Bureau: It is a lump sum contract.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The lump sum must be based on something.


Charles Smith Hyman: There was an estimate made by the engineer.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Was it let per cubic yard for a lump sum without any knowledge of the cubic yards in it ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Not at all. It was a lump sum, and of course the number of cubic yards is taken into account by the engineer in arriving at the lump sum.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How much are we paying per yard ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I am informed by the engineer that it is impossible to arrive at the exact calculation of how much per square yard, because the change to concrete involves some other changes. The $50,000 represents not only the concrete, but any additional work that may be required in consequence of using concrete.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Any engineer can estimate exactly how many cubic yards of concrete will be required. When that information is before us, and not till then, can we tell whether we are getting value for the money expended.


Charles Smith Hyman: When it was decided to change this contract, an estimate of the work was made by the engineer. The whole amount is not for concrete. Part of it is for cement, and the balance is for extra piling, extra iron work, and bracing in consequence of the extra weight of the concrete.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then we want to know how much is allowed for concrete, how much for the extra iron work, the extra piling, and so on. When we have that information, we shall have some idea whether this is a profligate or an economical expenditure of public money.


Charles Smith Hyman: The hon. gentleman is entitled to any information in the possession of the department; and if he will allow the item to pass, I shall be very glad to morrow morning to give him the detailed estimate made by the engineer on .which the recommendation was made by the department to council.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not want to check these items more than is necessary, but it is not the best plan to pass the item and then to get the information. We would rather have the information first.


Charles Smith Hyman: I should be very glad to have the hon. gentleman make any comments he pleases after getting the information.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Unless the committee are supplied with the information as to the amount of concrete required and the value of the extra iron required for bracing, how can they determine whether the contract has been a profitable one or the reverse ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I shall be very glad to bring down the engineer's report, Which he tells me shows the details of the whole work. I will put the information in the hands of the hon. members, and it can be discussed on any item in the Ontario estimates.
yuebec-Trols Pistoles-breakwater, $3,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This amount is to complete	the work.	The	estimated cost	is
$5,800. The expenditure up to the 30th of June, 1904, was $2,800.
Quebec-Vercheres-wharf, $3,000.
Mr.	HYMAN.	The	appropriation	for1903-4	was $5,500.	The	estimated expenditure up to June 30, 1904, was $3,500. This vote is to complete the work.
Quebec-Yamaska river, dredging, $10,000.
Mr.	HYMAN.	The	appropriation	for
1903-4 was $16,000. The expenditure up to the 30th June, 1904, was $6,000. This is a revote to complete the work.


Edward Frederick Clarke: ' What depth of water ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Seven feet.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How is this dredging being done-by the government dredge or by contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: By dredge ' No. 4,' for which the department pays at the usual rate of $8 per hour, which is based on the amount of work done according to the capacity of the dredge.
Quebec-Ontario - Grand Bend breakwater, pier, &c., $15,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This vote is asked to make provision for the construction of a breakwater at Grand Bend. A contract was entered into amounting to $21,388. The estimated total cost of the work is $23,400. There is an amount in the main estimates of $15,000.	. .


John Sherritt: Has the government purchased any property there ?


Charles Smith Hyman: My deputy has no recollection. There has never been any sug-Mr. HYMAN.
gestion that the public has not free access to the wharf.


John Sherritt: My information is that it has none.


Charles Smith Hyman: Does the hon. gentleman state that the public have no approach to the wharf ?


John Sherritt: I am asking for information.


Charles Smith Hyman: We have no information to that effect. Instructions will be sent that no money shall be expended until free approach is granted.


Mr. McEWEN.: There' is a roadway there running down to the lake, but south of that, at the creek or river, there might not be if public approach.


John Sherritt: Is the work let by contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes, to the lowest bidder.


John Sherritt: Has not some change been made in the contract since it was let?


Charles Smith Hyman: The only change made was that it was reduced. It was found that the expenditure was too large, and a certain amount of work was taken off and the price proportionately reduced.


John Sherritt: Were the parties who tendered notified and given a chance to tender again ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No, the lowest tenderer got the contract. It was found that the work, as originally contemplated, would 'cost too high, and it was decided to cut it down. But instead of going to the expense of re-advertising for tenders, the lowest tender was accepted and a proportionate amount struck off the price.


John Sherritt: What proportion of work was cut off ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Four piers.


John Sherritt: What proportion of the whole amount of work is that ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The cubic contents of the whole wharf were taken and a proportionate amount reduced from the contract.


John Sherritt: Had you not a tender from a syndicate at the head of which was one McTavish ?
'Mr. HYMAN. I have not a list of those who tendered. I have only the name of the lowest tenderer. It would not have made any difference, because a proportionate amount taken off any of the higher tenders would still leave it lower than the lowest original tender.


John Sherritt: I have been informed that the contractors consider they were not fairly used. The tender of the Me-

Tavish Company for the whole work was $34,000. In taking off the cribs, 9, 10, 11 and 12, which are the four placed in the deepest water, you are taking off a work which is proportionately more difficult and more costly than the other, and consequently gives an advantage to the contractor. Had that ibeen done with the McTavish tender, it would be lower than the one accepted. Is there any dredging in connection with the contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: There was and that was taken into consideration.


John Sherritt: Is there any to be done in connection with the contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Not now.


John Sherritt: I am more than ever convinced that your contract, let as it is, for $21,000, is higher than would have been the contract if the $34,000 tender had been accepted. When you consider the four piers in deep water taken from the contract, that would certainly bring the $34,000 tender lower than the contract accepted. The cribs put down close to the shore are certainly not as expensive and difficult and would not require the same quantity of material as the cribs put in deeper water. What is the depth of water '!


Charles Smith Hyman: Twelve feet.


Mr.   SPROTJBE@: What is the length of each crib and the width and depth ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The original length of the wharf was 648 feet and it is now about 450 feet. Each crib is twenty feet wide.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What kind of cribs ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Ordinary crib work built up and filled in. There is also 100 feet of a stone approach.


John Sherritt: What was the object of cutting off this ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Because it was felt that the expenditure was too great. The department did not feel inclined to enter into an expenditure of this kind and it was felt that the 450 feet would practically answer the purpose, but if it is necessary hereafter to extend it from time to time the department will take into consideration the question whether the extension should be made.


John Sherritt: $34,000 was the tender.


Charles Smith Hyman: I have not the verification of the amount but of course I am willing to accept the hon. gentleman's statement.


John Sherritt: I am not speaking positively. For the payment of a1' little over $10,000 it does seem to me It would be in the public interest to continue that work to the full extent first intended. As '1 am better acquainted with that place than other members of the House I may say that it
strikes me that the sandbar there may cause sand to drift in. Possibly the engineer was relying upon the existence of this sandbar when he came to the conclusion that it would not be necessary to run it out the 600 feet. I fear that the sand may drift in and perhaps leave the work done practically useless. I think the minister might consider the continuing of that work in accordance with the original specification.


Charles Smith Hyman: I see the work has not been completed and will not be completed for a year and I have instructed the engineer to make a report on the whole matter. I will be glad to discuss the matter with the hon. gentleman, and if the engineer thinks it is in the public interest that an extension should be made, I will be glad to take the matter into the consideration of the department. *


John Sherritt: Has any provision been made for the purchasing of a road to the wharf ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I do not think that a road would have to be purchased.


John Sherritt: The wharf is not on a public road but is at the point to which the Au Sable river was diverted by the municipality which is 30 or 40 rods from the main road, so that you would have to cross private property in order to get to the wharf.


Charles Smith Hyman: The information I have from the engineer of the department is that the department has been very careful in all these works not to start any construction until such time as the property has been conveyed to the Crown.


John Sherritt: I was asking for information, I was not aware of any purchase.


Charles Smith Hyman: I will have that matter looked into at the same time as the other.


George McEwen: Has the work been begun ? Have the cribs been put down ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The contract has only been let a short time. I do not think there has been any actual work although the contractor has, I suppose, ordered his material.


George McEwen: If they have the pier at the end of the street or road, they will not require to buy any land. I know it will be much handier at the end of the road than down at the mouth of the Au Sable.


Charles Smith Hyman: A change in the location might of course require an entire alteration of the specifications.


John Sherritt: The wharf is not intended to be put at tne end of the road, but at the point to which the river was diverted by | dredging. It was felt that the same amount of money would go further there, notwithstanding the little difference m the cost of the purchasing the road. YVe have

spent as a municipality some $20,000 in dredging and the plant and specifications have been drawn up with a view to building at the outlet of the river, which is about 60 rods from the end of the road. The timber is there and although the work has not been carried on to any great extent, I saw the timber there.


George McEwen: I do not quite agree with that, unless you want to go on and dredge the river afterwards, and have deep water in behind. I think that this pier or wharf can be built as cheaply at the end of the road as at the mouth of the river, notwithstanding what has been said to the contrary. I believe it could be built as cheaply at one place as at the other, and it certainly would be much more handy at the end of t(je road than away down there.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What was the depth of the four cribs that were left out ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Of course this contract has not been changed without a report having been made by the engineer to the department authorized by Order in Council. While it would be impossible to bring down all the reports in connection with these different works, I shall be glad to bring down any that are needed.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: ' The government does not change all contracts after they are entered into, and the minister could easily have with him those in which changes have been made. It is important to know whether the four cribs that were left out are deep or shallow, as it might make a great difference in the amount of stone that would be required for them. It appears that the original contract was for $34,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: I don't say so.	-


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understood that.


Charles Smith Hyman: I said the contract was let for $21,388.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The amended contract; what was the original ?
i.	.


Charles Smith Hyman: This was the only contract that was let. The hon. member for North Middlesex made the statement, and I presume he is aware of the' fact, that there was a tender, possibly a local tender, amounting to $34,000. It was not a contract, it was a tender.


John Sherritt: Will the hon. gentleman tell me the full amount of the tender of Mr. Warwick the present contractor '!


Charles Smith Hyman: I have not the amount here of the original tender, the lowest tender for the work.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Now, the tenders were upon plans and specifications for 648 feet of cribwork upon which the prospective contractor would tender. Did they tender upon


John Sherritt: that basis, or were tenders received ? The hdn. gentleman says he don't know whether any were received.


Charles Smith Hyman: I did not say that, I said tenders were received, but I was not aware of the fact that tenders were received for $34,000. I said tenders were received for the work as originally contemplated, upon the plans and specifications furnished by the department for the original work ; and after the tenders had been received it was not considered in the interest of the public that such a large expenditure should be made, therefore the departmental engineers figured out upon the lowest tender and made certain reductions based upon the proportionate amount, leaving the additional work for four piers, and then the contract was let to the lowest tenderer, on the basis of the cubic contents of the wharf.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If the reduction was made upon the basis of the number of cubic yards, it would not be so bad. But there must uaturally be an allowance for the whole cost of the work that is done in water as compared with that done on the shore, and I take it there ought to be some allowance made for that. I wished to ascertain upon what basis the contract was let, if tenders were asked for the longer work and upon what basis the contract was let.


Charles Smith Hyman: If the hon. gentleman desires full information with regard to the tender I shall be glad to bring down all the tenders and the amounts of each. I have already told him how the reduction was arrived at. It was arrived at by taking into consideration the cubic contents of the wharf. There were four piers that it was not considered in the interest of the public to complete ; therefore a contract was entered into for a less amount of work, making a reduction which was a proportionate amount of the whole. The original number of pier's was twelve, and four of them were not built. But in making the calculations the stone approaches have to be taken into consideration, all of which was done by the engineers of the department.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If a number of cubic yards in the increased length of the work is cut off, one can understand that the contractor is substantially the gainer by the change.


Charles Smith Hyman: I cannot agree with the hon. gentleman's argument, though I do not dispute his right to make any statement he pleases.
A4r. SPROULE. I am giving the reasons for my statement. I say it would be more costly to put in 100 cubic yards of stone in *water 9 feet deep than to put the same quantity of stone where there is little or no water at all. Which is the most costly, to do work at a distance from the shore or to do work on the land ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I do not pretend to arrive at* an exact cost of this work, nor do 1 suppose the hon. gentleman would presume to either. I am informed by the engineer that the difference in the depth of water where the piers are to be built, and the depth of water where the four were lett out, will not affect the cost. The engineer tells me that the difference in the depth of the water is so little that it will not affect the cost. The hon. gentleman does not know whether the water is four feet deep or five feet deep, or where the stonework starts at the end of the pier.


John Sherritt: 1 can assure the hon. gentleman that there is a great difference in the depth of water where the pier commences and where it ends. The hundred feet of stonework is in a cut where the water is very shallow. While the minister might advance that sort of an argument, I do not think an engineer would say that it was not more expensive to handle a cubic yard of stone where there is 14 feet of water than where there is only 2 or 3 feet of water. Any schoolboy would understand that. This wharf is on a shore which is subject to severe storms, and some $10,000 had to be spent a short distance off to replace piers that were blown away. We know very well that where there is ten feet of water there must be more risk and more expense in constructing piers, in sinking the crib-work and,filling it with stone, than there would be in shallower water. I think the hon. gentleman ought to apologize for advancing such an absurd argument.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am simply giving the statement and estimate of the engineer, based upon careful examination of the spot.
I hope the hon. gentleman would not presume to put his opinion against that of the engineer. The hdn. gentleman himself probably does not know what depth of water there is where these piers start, and where they end. I am obliged to take the information furnished by the engineer, and I am informed that the cost is not out of the way, in view of the reduction of the work.


John Sherritt: I cannot take your statement.


Charles Smith Hyman: Any statement I have made is made upon the advice of the chief engineer of the department ; and if I have to accept advice upon a pier, I would rather have the advice of the chief engineer of the department than that of the hon. member for North Middlesex.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I can only tell the hon. gentleman that a contractor would reason the other way. I have seen a few of them figuring up contracts for piers, and they make a big difference between working in water, close to the shore, where the water is calm, and working out where it is exposed and much deeper. They do not think it should be done at the same price. I would
like to ask the hon. minister if he will bring down the engineer's recommendation as to the change ?


Charles Smith Hyman: 1 shall be very glad to do it.


John Sherritt: And also a list of the tenders '!


Charles Smith Hyman: 1 cannot give a list of the tenders now, as they are all locked up in the department, but I will bring it down in the morning.	<
Harbours, rivers and bridges general repairs and improvements to, $15,000.


James Clancy: What progress has been made with the work in the River Sydenham . There seems to be no item this year, either in the main or supplementary estimates, for dredging the River Sydenham. The hon. gentleman perhaps will be able to reca.l that $5,800 was voted for that work last year, but 1 understand no dredging was done such as was contemplated. Perhaps the hon. gentleman will be able to give the reason why it has not been done.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am informed by the chief engineer that there was some dredging done. D<T you mean in the Sydenham itself ?


James Clancy: Yes.


Charles Smith Hyman: There was a small amount of dredging done in the vicinity of Dresden, .There was some dredging done at Mitchell's Bay and some at the mouth of the Chenal Eeartg. If there is any necessity for further dredging being done, the department will have at their disposal an amount for dredging, and that money can be used for the purpose. It can be taken from the general vote.


James Clancy: There is some correspon- [DOT] dence in regard to that. Will the hon. gentleman be good enough to take that up aftei six o'clock ? I want the hon. gentleman to bring down the correspondence.


Charles Smith Hyman: I cannot get the correspondence at this time, as it is all locked up in the department, but I will be very glad to bring it down.


James Clancy: When you reach the supplementary estimates ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes, I will bring it down.


James Clancy: Will all the correspondence be brought down in relation to the work being done at those particular points ?


Charles Smith Hyman: If the hon. gentleman desired this correspondence, I presume the proper way would have been to have moved for it. Of course, it is a very voluminous correspondence, and I do not want to make a promise that I cannot fulfil.


James Clancy: I fancy the hon. gentleman will not ask members at this stage of the session to move for correspondence. I

am aware of the character of the correspondence that ought to be brought down, and can be brought down in ten minutes.


Charles Smith Hyman: The item which is being discussed is :
Harbours, rivers and bridges-general repairs and improvements to, $15,000.
I do not anticipate the hon. gentleman would ask me to bring down all the correspondence in reference to this item. If the hon. gentleman will specify the correspondence be wants, I will bring it down.


James Clancy: I asked a question upon this item, because there was no item in the estimates in regard to the improvement of the Sydenham river. The correspondence I want is in relation to the disposal of the $5,800, and as to the work done in the River Sydenham, at the mouth of Chenal Ecarte. and at what is known as the eastern passenger Chenal Ecarte, going into Lake St. Clair. The hon. gentleman's chief officer will know what I refer to. I do not want any further correspondence.


Richard Blain: Will the hon. gentleman give an explanation of this item, and state where the money is to be expended ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This is a general item that is always taken by the department to provide for cases of emergency, such as injury to a wharf caused by a storm. The department have felt that they should have at their disposal a general sum with which work of that kind can be proceeded with at once.


Richard Blain: The hon. minister will remember that I brought to his attention some repairs which are required at Port Credit, and I would like to know whether any of ' this vote will be available for a purpose of that kind ?


Charles Smith Hyman: If it were a small work it would be. If I understood the conversation we had the other day, it was in regard to some dredging we had at Port Credit. The matter has been pressed upon the attention of the department by numerous residents of the locality in addition to the hon. gentleman himself. The vote out of which that work can be done is not included in this particular item. This vote relates to repairs to wharfs, &c. The work which the hon. gentleman asked me to have done could be done out of the general vote for dredging if a dredge were available.


Richard Blain: There is a vote of that character ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes.
Ontario-Honora-wharf, $8,000.


Richard Blain: We will ask the hon. gentleman to give us some explanation of that ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This work is under contract, which was entered into on the 22nd Mr. CLANCY.	. i
February, 1904. The amount of the contract is $9,000.


Richard Blain: What county is it in ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Algoma.
At Six o'clock, committee took recess.
After Recess.
Committee resumed at Eight o'clock.
Ontario-Kingsville-filling superstructure of extension of breakwater with stone ballast, $4,000.
'Mr. HYMAN. The engineer has recommended that more good could be accomplished if a certain portion of this vote were used for dredging, and I think that should be the understanding.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Amend your resolution by adding the word 'dredging.'


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes, but if it is mentioned in ' Hansard ' I think it should be sufficient.
Resolution amended by adding the words ' and dredging.'
Ontario-Lake Temiscaming wharfs, $3,500.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will.this complete?


Charles Smith Hyman: There is a further amount in the supplementary estimates of $3,000 which will complete the work. There has been $12,000 expended and $8,500 is asked for in these estimates.
Ontario-Little	Current-improvement	of
northern steamboat channel in Georgian Bav. $15,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This is a revote and there is a further amount in the supplementary estimates of $10,000. This is to dredge the channel to afford twenty foot navigation.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it being done by contract or by the government dredge ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It is done in the usual way ; the department has a dredge there for which they are paying so much an hour.
Ontario Moaford harbour-new breakwater pier, $15,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You did not use any money for this work last year. I think you have another item in the supple-mentaries as well as this.


Charles Smith Hyman: We have $10,000 in the supplementaries. I am informed by the officers of the department that there was some delay in the preparation of the plans and specifications, but tenders have now-been advertised for and received. I am not sure whether the contract has been completed or not, but the lowest tender was from Messrs. Ivastner and Porter, of Wiar-ton for $59,500.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I heard they got the contract.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am not sure if it has [DOT] passed Council yet.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How much will it cost when completed ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The total estimated cost is $65,800 ; the contract is $59,500, and then the contingencies have to be considered. This is a revote of $15,000, and with the $10,000 in the supplementaries it leaves $25,000 available during the year. [DOT]


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will the work be gone on with right away.


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes, the work will be completed at once.
Ontario-Midland harbour-wharf, $15,000.


William Humphrey Bennett: What is the amount of the contract here ?


Charles Smith Hyman: $19,492, the contractor is A. A. Macdonald of Hamilton.


William Humphrey Bennett: When will it be completed ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The contract calls for completion this fall.
Ontario - Midland harbour improvements,


William Humphrey Bennett: Have any amounts been paid for private dredging done at Midland?


Charles Smith Hyman: The work done in 1902-3 by the Owen Sound Dredging and Construction Company amounted to $16,700.


William Humphrey Bennett: The government pays the Owen Sound Company for the work they do, but has the government been recouped by any persons for whom dredging was done which might be of a private nature ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I have been informed that there has been no money paid back.
Ontario-Owen Sound harbour-dredging and pile protection work, $14,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is this item for ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This is to provide twenty feet of water in the channel. They are working at the usual price of $8 aD hour.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You have something in the supplementaries for that as well.


Charles Smith Hyman: That is for the continuation of the same work.
Ontario-Pembroke-wharf, $43,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This contract was let some time ago but the department only recently decided upon the location, and it is only two weeks ago the contractor was ordered to start the work, so that it may be necessary to extend the time.


Richard Blain: Does the government own the property ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The wharf is at the foot of a public street.


Richard Blain: What would be the total cost ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The total estimate is $43.000 and the contract was a shade under $42,000.


Richard Blain: Will that be the total cost?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes, except that there is always something added for contingencies.


Richard Blain: Who is the contractor 7


Mr. HYMAN W. J.@: Poupore.
Ontario-Penetanguishene, dredging and other improvements, $22,000.


William Humphrey Bennett: What is the nature of the other improvements ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Repairing the reformatory lighthouse pier, which amounts to $1,200.


William Humphrey Bennett: Why does the Dominion government do repairs on property of the local government ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This is done on account of the lighthouse being a Dominion institution.
Ontario-Port Perry, dredging harbour, $2,200.


Charles Smith Hyman: This vote was not expended last year owing to the difficulty of obtaining a dredge.


Mr. VROOMAN.: I would like to ask the minister in reference to the dam at Lindsay, which is on the same water as Port Perry. I understand that the minister sent his engineer to inspect that dam, which is a very old work and needs to be repaired. In fact, I 'think he will find that the report of his officer recommends a new dam. I anticipated that there would be an item in the estimates for this work, but I have not been able to discover it.


Charles Smith Hyman: I think there is a report of the engineer in the department. I will have it looked up, and if I find that the survey has not been sufficient, I shall be glad to have another officer examine the work and report.


Richard Blain: Is Port Perry a government-owned harbour ?


Charles Smith Hyman: There is no information in the department to the effect that it is not. Has the hon. gentleman any information to that effect ?


Richard Blain: I have no information that would be valuable to the committee, but my understanding of it is that it belongs to two private individuals. I assumed that the minister would know.


Charles Smith Hyman: I have no information here in regard to the matter. The hon. gentle-

man will understand that there is a difference between an expenditure on a harbour in the way of dredging, although it may not be a government-owned harbour, and an expenditure on a wharf which is not owned by the government. The hon. gentleman has pcssibl.v in mind some dredging in regard to another harbour on Lake Ontario. I can only say that I shall be glad to take that matter up, and the only reason why I understand the dredging has not been done there before, has been the difficulty in getting a dredge.
Ontario-Port Stanley-dredging, $4,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: The harbour of Port Stanley in the past two years has become a very important harbour, serving from loO.OOO to 300.000 in the western part of Ontario. For a number of years this harbour was in possession of the railway, and the policy of the railway was not to open it but rather to keep it closed. The harbour is now being transferred to the Dominion government, and coal, which was formerly brought around by Detroit, is now brought across the lakes bj ferries which run winter and summer to Port Stanley. So that it has become a very important harbour in this respect, besides being a harbour of refuge. In addition to this vote, there is a further amount of .$25,000 in the supplementary estimates for Port Stanley.
Ontario-River Otonabee, dredging at Peterborough, $6,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This work is being proceeded with by a small dredge rented from the Department of Railways and Canals.


Adam Edward Vrooman: Is that below the town?


Charles Smith Hyman: No, directly at the town.
Ontario-Rondeau harbour-improvements to piers and dredging at entrance, $16,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: The explanation which 1 gave in regard to Port Stanley harbour practically applies to this harbour. Port Stanley, Rondeau and Port Burwell are practically the only harbours on that part of the lake. At the present time there is no harbour of refuge in that vicinity at all. Until the last two or three years the shipping which came to Rondeau harbour was not very large ; but at present the amount of coal coming there from across the lake has very greatly increased, and the improvement of the harbour results in cheapening the supply of coal all through western Ontario.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is this by contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: By a dredge owned by the department.
Ontario-Sarnia, dredging, $12,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This is being done by contract.


Charles Smith Hyman: .


John Sherritt: What is the cost per yard ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This dredge is hired by the hour at the rate of $12 per hour, and the price is based on the amount of work which the dredge is capable of doing in a given number of hours. It is based on a price of 13J cents a yard. In order to earn the $12 per hour, this dredge has, to remove 800 yards. In the case of a dredge to which we pay $8 per hour, the price is based on 600 yards.
Mr.' BELL. Are they actually paid by the yard ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No, but the day's pay is based on the price of 13J cents per yard.
Mr. BELL Suppose they do not take out the quantity, are they paid the full price ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The difficulty is sometimes that material may change and that is taken into consideration. There is a government inspector on each dredge. They are very closely watched, and often the full amount is not paid. We must have a certificate from the inspector that the dredge does the full amount of work.
Ontario-Sault Ste. Marie-harbour improvements, including dredging of approaches, $30,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This work is under contract. The contractor is Joseph Battle of Thorold. The estimated cost of the work is $71,500.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What harbour improvements are you making there ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This includes the extension of the government wharf and dredging, so as to have twenty feet at low water.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is that dredging the approaches to the harbour or the channel.


Charles Smith Hyman: The channel entering the canal. This is for dredging from the head of the wharf to the channel. The actual work in the channel comes under the Department of Railways and Canals. This is for the extension of the wharf and dredging twenty feet from the wharf to the channel.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: When that is done, will it allow the largest boats, such as the Canadian Pacific Railway boats, to call there ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This will provide twenty feet of water. Any boat that can go through the canal will be able to approach the wharf, which they all cannot do now.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will this complete the work ? It seems to me from the outlines there, that there is a great deal of dredging to be done before boats could get with safety to the wharf.


Charles Smith Hyman: This will not complete the wliarf. One of the objects of extending the wharf was to lessen the amount of dredging. This amount will cover all that can be expended during the present year, and a further amount of about $39,000 will be required to complete.


John William Bell: What length is the wharf extension ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Two hundred and fifty feet,


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is there anything in the supplementaries for this ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No, the engineer of the department reports that this $30,000 will cover the expenditure until another vote is taken. This is done by contract.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: By the yard ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This is a bulk sum including the dredging and the extension of the wharf.
Ontario-Southampton-improvement of harbour, $10,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: I was going to explain to the committee that the estimate for this work is quite large, and I am going to move that this item be struck out. The reason is that, in the opinion 'of the engineers of the department, the money can be more advantageously spent in other portions of the harbour, and in the supplementaries will be found an item of $10,000 for improvements which could not be spent under this vote.


John William Bell: How does it appear in the supplementaries ?


Charles Smith Hyman: As Saugeen river improvements. We thought it better to take a vote for Saugeen river so that there would be no misunderstanding.


Mr. HALLIDAY.: This is the fourth session that this item has appeared in the estimates. It seems to be held there as bait or something of that kind without any intention of spending the money. Three years ago we were told that this money would be spent at once.


Charles Smith Hyman: Well, we are perfectly frank about it, and I am moving to strike it out on the report of the engineers.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and item struck out.
Ontario-Spanish Kiver, dredging, $10,000.
Charles Smith Hyman: The difficulty here is that we have not so far been able to find a dredge available to do the work.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have yon any assurance of being able to get a dredge this coming summer ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It is almost impossible to get dredges to take small contracts of this kind, owing to the cost of towing, loss of time, &c., in going from place to place.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I can appreciate the difficulty of getting dredges, because I know there is a dearth of them in that district, but at the same time, I object- to the principle of taking money from year to year, unless the government- are satisfied they can go on with the work because otherwise it becomes a temptation and is used in favour of the government at election times.
I have often heard the hon. member for South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwright) in the strongest language denounce this practice, and I think he was justified in doing it.
I agreed with him and still entertain that opinion. We have these items by the dozen, money voted year after year and not spent. When they ask for money they should make an effort to spend it, and they should not ask for it unless they are in a position to go on with the work.


Charles Smith Hyman: The hon. gentleman is perfectly right in saying there are certain amounts in the estimates, but the great difficulty is with such a large number of works to get them all going. It takes a considerable amount of time in the department to prepare the plans, but the engineers lose no time in their work. But, of course there must be delay in a case of this kind where a dredge is not available.


John Sherritt: What amount of money has been expended since last year ?


Charles Smith Hyman: $5,000 the whole vote.


John Sherritt: What is the condition of the work there now ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I aln informed the work is completed.


John Sherritt: Last session the member representing that riding objected to this vote, I am not sure he moved to strike it out but he opposed the item and the Minister of Public Works promised this committee that no more money would be spent on this until he went up himself personally and investigated it. Could the acting minister inform the committee whether that promise has been carried out or not, whether the minister has himself gone up and investigated it ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The department has simply employed sufficient labour to use the materials that were on the ground. It was felt that it would not be right after making an expenditure of that amount to let the material go to waste.


John Sherritt: We were well aware of that last year. But the matter has been brought before the committee last year, that the promoter of that work was not very reliable and that he had in some way misled this government. The Minister of Works agreed with this committee that under these circumstances, having been informed that the promoter was not reliable, and had made statements that were not at all likely to be correct, he himself would

go up before the material was made use or* and investigate. I shall read the minister's words with reference to the promoter last year. He said, referring to Mr. Can-tin :


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: This man is no doubt a good deal of the character the hon. gentleman (Mr. McEwen) spoke of. He seems to be able to live by his wits and to induct people to put money in schemes that have little foundation. I do not know him myself or anything about him except what I hav-* heard in connection with this matter. He deceived a great many people into putting money into this scheme. It is stated now that a good many substantial people have taken hold of the work, and I think we might probably take a vote and spend it on the conditions as to whether they are going on to develop this place and the work will help to do so. Now that we have spent so much money wc might go on.
Tliis Is the opinion given by the Minister of Public Works and after some further remarks by Mr. McEwen in opposition to the vote, the minister says :


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: There has been ov,er $10,000 expended on the work, but I am perfectly willing, if the item passes, to have an inquiry into all the circumstances, and if this work is not in the public interest, I will not finish it. The chief engineer of the department says that there are ten or eleven feet of water there, and I cannot understand how he could have made such a report if there is none.
Mr. McEwen said on that occasion :
As far as I am personally concerned, if the hon. minister will go up there and see for himself, I am willing to let the item drop.
That is the hon. member's statement. Now we will see' what the hon. minister says further :


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS.: I am perfectly willing to go up there and consult the hon. members of the riding before anything further is done.
In another place he says, in answer to Mr. McEwen :
If the hon. gentleman thinks that I should go instead of the chief engineer, I am quite willing to do so.
Now, there was a straight promise to go up there and investigate. He knew the circumstances very well, there has been nothing revealed since. All the material was lying there at the time, there has been no other material furnished since that discussion took place. The minister promised that he woqld go there before he spent a dollar of money. Under these circumstances we allowed the matter to pass, being satisfied that if he went up there and investigated for himself he would not spend a dollar of money. Now, it is unnecessary for me to say that the people up there look with a good deal of disfavour upon the government spending public money there. If the people in that part of the country asked for that Mr. SHERRITT.
amount of money, do you think the member representing that riding would get up here on the floor of the House and ofipose it, as he did oppose it in every possible way ? Do you think that I would risk my reputation amongst the people there by opposing it, as I live only a short distance away from the work ? The thing is very unpopular there. It is an extraordinary state of affairs that, notwithstanding a promise made in the House by the Minister of Public Works, this work should go on and money should be spent there. To my mind it is ail awful state of affairs if we cannot believe a minister's statement.


Charles Smith Hyman: Oh, I think that is rather hard.


John Sherritt: I will take that back- if we cannot rely upon the promise of the minister to go up there and see for himself.


Charles Smith Hyman: Under ordinary circumstances possibly the hon. gentleman might be justified in making these rather harsh comments. But I would like him to remember that the Minister of Public Works has not been in good health for some time. The hon. gentleman knows that for the last two or three months he has been entirely unable to give serious attention to his department, and under these circumstances i think the hon. gentleman might have been a little milder in his criticism. When the minister gave that promise I am quite sure he intended to carry it out and to go there and see this work. Unfortunately for the last three or four weeks he has been obliged to be away a good deal of the time.
I do not remember myself authorizing the work, but I remember the condition of affairs was brought to my attention, and I was told that this amount of material was lying there, and that the engineer had reported that it was in the interest of the country that the work should be proceeded with instead of allowing the material to go to waste. I know there has been considerable criticism of this vote, but it must be remembered that at that time a large amount of money had been spent and a considerable amount of material was on the ground.


John Sherritt: I have no doubt that the minister at the time intended to carry out ,his promise made in the House. But it seems to me if he could not go himself he might have sent some one. When he stated in the House that he would not spend any more money without discussing the matter with the member for the riding-of course I do not represent the riding-I thought that he might at least have given us some idea of his intention. I assure you again, Mr. Chairman, that the people in that locality look upon this expenditure as a throw-away of money. May I ask the

minister what is the condition of the harbour there now, what depth of water is there now ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I am informed there is from ten to eleven feet at the outer end of the pier.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The year before last the same question was discussed In this House at length, and the then Minister of Public Works told us most positively that he would have a report made upon that harbour, and if the circumstances were found to be as alleged no money would be spent. Still he went on and spent the money. When we came back to this House that minister is out and another takes his place.


Charles Smith Hyman: The minister is not out, he is ill.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am correct, I say the minister who gave this promise to the House was out and another was in his place when we came back again. Now we have the same discussion over again. More money was asked for and the money which was voted the year before last was spent, notwithstanding the promise that had been made. Another sum was voted last year, and we had a similar promise made by this minister, and we come back this year to find that the money is spent again, and that the minister has not carried out his word. So we are being jollied along from year to year, promises are made which are not kept, and in the meantime the money is being squandered.


Richard Blain: When was this money expended, the $5,000 that has been expended since the last session of parliament ?


Charles Smith Hyman: In the months of April, May and June of this year.


Richard Blain: Well, I think this is a very strange manner of conducting public business. In addition to what my hon. friend from North Middlesex (Mr. Sherritt) has read, I want to read a statement from the member for South Huron (Mr. McEwen). Last year, speaking about the promise that was given to the government when they first proposed to construct this work, the hon. gentleman said :
They have not yet established a manufactory of any kind or any other thing that would require a wharf.
Further on he says :
As to the wharf, there has been $10,000 spent, and I am very sorry to say that the money has been unwisely spent. I could not approve of this expenditure, because nine out of ten of my constituents believe that the money has been unwdsely expended.
Now, here is a statement from the hon. gentleman vdio represents the county and is a supporter of the minister himself. Leaving out the fact that this gentleman
was sufficiently influential with the government to get the work commenced, I will just read what the member for South Huron says about the matter :
What surprises me is that a man of his kind'should be able to mislead this government into spending money where there is no need for it at the present time or for years to come.
It is a little unfortunate that the minister and his supporters should expend money in so many places where it is not required, even according to the statements of the hon. gentleman who represents the county, and leave other places unprovided for where the money is required in the public interest. According to the testimony of the hon. gentleman on that side of the House who represents the county, it appears that the government were misled by this gentleman into an expenditure of $10,000. The hon. gentleman stood up in his place at the last session and condemned the government for undertaking this work, and as my hon. friend from East Grey has pointed out, we had a promise from the hon. Minister of Public Works two years ago, and another promise last year that no further money would be expended until an examination of the work had taken place, but in the face of the statement of the hon. gentleman representing the county that the wharf is of no value, that it is not required now, that it will not be required for years to come, and in face of the further statement in reference to the $10,000 that has been expended we are asked to put $5,000 more into the work. The hon. member who represents the county said last year :
As to tbe wharf there has been $1 0,000, spent, and I am very sorry to say that the money has been unwisely spent. There are seven or eight cribs on the shore, and one crib in two or three feet of water, and that is the whole result of the expenditure of $10,000.
In the face of that statement, the hon. gentleman and his supporters will go into that county, and spend $5,000 more of public money, having before them the bald statement of the hon. gentleman representing that county that the wharf is of no value to the people, and knowing that the promises given by the gentleman who induced the-government to spend this $10,000 have not been fulfilled. Then the hon. minister appeals to the electors again by saying : We will consider it further and we will, perhaps,, spend some more money.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am sure the hon. gentleman does not wish to put words in my mouth that I did not utter.


Richard Blain: I do not wish to misrepresent the hon. gentleman, but I thought his remarks suggested something in reference to what might take place in the fall or at some time in the near future. I think this

is a wasteful expenditure of money. There can be no justification for it whatever. In face of the statement made by the hon. gentleman who represents the county on May 19, 1903, the government send a representative up there, and they say to the department: Go on and spend the money. No matter about the $10,000 ; let it go. We have evidence that the wharf is not required, and we have the evidence from the county representative that the wharf is of no value to the residents there. Although this work will be of no use to the public, it will be a monument to an extravagant government which has money to spend in counties where a work is not required and which is neglecting some other counties where money wisely expended would be in the public interest. I hope the hon. minister will learn new lessons of economy since he has taken charge of the department. I hope that next year he will not venture to bring such illustrations of economic government before the people of this country as this one is.
Ontario-Thessalon-breakwater, $15,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: Under contract.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the nature of the work ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The building of a pier. The contract amounts to $19,000. The total probable cost will be about $21,000. There was voted in the main estimates $15,000, and in the supplementary estimates there will be $5,500 to complete.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Who has the contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Boyle Brothers, Sault Ste. Marie.
Ontario-Thornbury, dredging, $3,550.


John William Bell: How is that dredging done ?


Charles Smith Hyman: -It is done by a hired dredge.
Mr. -SPROULE. I notice that you did not do this dredging last year. I suppose that was because you could not get a dredge ?


Charles Smith Hyman: That was the reason.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This happens to be in my riding, and of course I know the necessities of the case better than those who are not acquainted with the locality.


Charles Smith Hyman: If the hon. gentleman can suggest where we can get a dredge, I shall be very glad to do the work.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If I could I would be very glad to do so, but I do not know where the dredges are located. I do know the necessities of the people of Thornbury.


William Humphrey Bennett: I was not here when the Collingwood item was under consideration, but I would like to ask the hon. minister if he can state to the committee what is the valuation of the dry-dock at Collingwood ?


Richard Blain: The information was promised to me tonight.


Charles Smith Hyman: I have not the information, but I will be very glad to bring down a memorandum to-morrow.
Ontario-Toronto harbour-works at eastern entrance, &c., $28,000.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Before this item is adopted, I would like to draw the attention of the hon. minister to a paragraph I see in the Ottawa correspondence of the Toronto ' News,' which bears upon it. It is as follows :
In the main estimates brought down some months ago there is an item of $28,000 for Toronto harbour works at the eastern entrance, and, according to the departmental officials, this item will' cover dredging generally, repairs to the two piers at the eastern gap and repairs to the breakwater from the eastern entrance westward. No further - item appears in the supplementaries. The department is advised by its own engineers and by other engineers who have studied the question, that the ultimate solution of the protection of the island must be found in the construction of a continuous breakwater from end to end of the island. For the present, however, the government does not seem disposed to invite the necessary vote. The present item, which may be reached in discussion to-day, is not thought to he large enough to permit any enlargements of the breakwater. That portion of it which will be applied to the breakwater will be for repairs done.	.
I would like to ask the hon. minister what amount has already been expended for repairs under that' item of $28,000 ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The expenditure from the 1st of July to the 31st December, 1903, was $13,041, and up to the 30th of June it is estimated that the expenditure will have been $10,900. That will be about $24,000, and there is $10,000 of a revote. We are asking for a further amount of $18,000.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Toronto harbour is one of the most important harbours in Canada outside of a sea harbour. I suppose it is next to Montreal, if it is not ahead of Montreal. It is a work which is entirely under the control of the Dominion government. It has. without doubt, been neglected, and year after year damage is being done to the harbour and to the island, which, if not looked after now, will entail later on an expenditure of tens of thousands of dollars, where thousands of dollars will suffice now. The hon. minister knows that this year there has been exceptionally high water. Perhaps it is at high water mark in all our lakes. While I cannot speak from having visited the eastern end of the island this year, 1 can state, having visited the western end of the island, that the water is so high that the washing away of the island this year is more serious than it has been for ten years past. I think that in justice to' the important harbour of Toronto the hon. minister

should see that the matter is reported upon at once, and that a necessary amount is provided in the supplementary estimates to cover any expenditure that may be absolute ly necessary for this year. According to the statement in the * News ' there is only $18,000 available.


Charles Smith Hyman: I will have to disclaim responsibility for the statements of the ' News,' there is $28,000 to expend.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Toronto harbour is so important that the government should not fail to grant sufficient money to keep it in proper condition. X am sure that the neglect of the government to expend a comparatively small sum of money immediately, would entail the expenditure of ten times as much in the future.


Charles Smith Hyman: 
Mr. KEMP.: The minister (Mr. Hyman) is under a misapprehension when he says that one and a half million dollars have been spent on Toronto harbour by the government of this country. Not one single dollar has been spent by any government on Toronto harbour. The money he refers to has been spent upon the island and upon the canal through which vessels come into the harbour. Toronto harbour not only accommodates a great deal of commerce but it is a harbour of refuge as well, and some years
iigo it was consiuered good policy to have , channel built through the eastern end of the island. Some years ago the city of Toronto paid to the government $100,000 and were disenarged for all time to come from my obligation regarding that entrance. The government expenditure has been on works to prevent the washing away of the southern part of the island, and on that eastern entrance. The revenue derived from the shipping in the Toronto harbour has been devoted to improving the harbour from time to time by the harbour commissioners of Toronto, but I repeat that there never has been a dollar of public money expended upon the harbour itself. Three or four years ago the government appointed an engineer to consult with an engineer appointed by the city of Toronto in regard to the diversion of the Don, and the improvement of the harbour. The government engineer agieed with the engineer representing the city that certain works ought be carried out by the government, and the government, four years ago. put a sum of $7o,000 in the estimates but no money was spent. This appropriation was. put in the estimates for :he purpose of diverting the Don river which lows into the eastern end of the harbour and which river carries with it during the spring freshets, immense alluvial deposits from the surrounding country north and east, which have gradually filled np the beautiful harbour of Toronto which used, to have from fifteen to thirty feet ot water, but which now has only five or su fe t m certain places. The government have been appealed to by deputation after deputation. It was pointed out that the city of Toronto could in no sense be held responsible for the filling up the harbour by these alluvial deposits, and that the government should undertake the work of diverting the Don river to prevent this occurring. Within this last year or two the government has seen fit to drop that item from the estimates. Why. it is impossible for me to say ; after their own engineer reported in favour of this
___4 1,	4-	

under a moral obligation to the city of Toronto to go on with that work and save the harbour. I do not want the impression to
go forth that the government of Canada have spent public money on the Toronto harbour in any form, because it is not so.


Charles Smith Hyman: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Kemp) says he does not know why the government have dropped this item of $75,000 from the estimates, but he has been answered by his colleague (Mr. Osier) who said he agreed with the late Minister of Public W orks that there should be no expenditure on the harbour until the city took charge of the sewerage.


Edmund Boyd Osler: That was another item.


Charles Smith Hyman: It was for the same work. 1 repeat what I said in answer to the hon. gentleman (Mr. Osier) that I shall have the extension of the breakwater looked into immediately, and will provide, if there are further supplementary estimates, a sufficient amount to undertake that work.


Edmund Boyd Osler: I think there is more work required there. I understand that there has been considerable damage done west of- the breakwater on the eastern portion of the island, and that another year of high water and storm from the east may cause further material damage.


Charles Smith Hyman: I will have the report of the hon. gentleman's remarks in ' Hansard *' with regard to that portion of the work, and the engineer will examine into it at the same time.


Albert Edward Kemp: I wish to state that about a year ago the city council passed a resolution to the effect that they would accept responsibility for the sewerage, provided the government would do the work they had proposed to do according to the estimates submitted to parliament. So far as the city is concerned, I think it has relieved itself from any responsibility by passing that resolution. I would like to have it understood that these are two distinct questions. The question now before the committee is that of the breakwater at the eastern gap, for which the government is responsible, and for which the city of Toronto, by paying $100,000 some years ago, was relieved of responsibility. The other matter is one which we have been agitating for years ; and when money is being lavished on dredging, wharfs and other public works in small places all over the country, we do not understand how it is that the great city of Toronto, which has more freight to ship than any other place in this country, which ships much more freight than the city of Montreal, is so much neglected by the government. I would like the minister to tell us why the government neglects its duty in regard to the diversion of the Don in order that the deposits from that river may be diverted to Lake Ontario and not fill up the harbour in the future as it has done in the past.


Charles Smith Hyman: I understand that it was only last year that the city council took Mr. KEMP.
this ground. So that whatever blame may be attached to the government could only be from last year.


Albert Edward Kemp: It was previous to last session.


Charles Smith Hyman: The government always took the stand that until the sewage was disposed of, it would be impossible for the government to do any work on the harbour. Personally I thoroughly appreciate the importance of the work and the importance of Toronto as a shipping point. I am only acting minister, but so far as I can, I will take pleasure in affording any expenditure possible to improve the shipping facilities at the port of Toronto ; and if the city council are prepared to enter into negotiations with the government for the disposal of the sewage in accordance with the plan laid down by the former Minister of Public Works, I shall be glad to take up the matter at any time.


Albert Edward Kemp: Will the acting minister have any objection to reinstate in the supplementary estimates the sum which his predecessors committed themselves to for the straightening of the Don river V


Charles Smith Hyman: I am not prepared to make that promise.


Albert Edward Kemp: Wh/ was it taken out V


Charles Smith Hyman: I think negotiations should first take place between the city and the government. It is a matter that would have to be discussed first departmentally and afterwards with my colleagues in the government.


Albert Edward Kemp: I admit that. At the same time, the work need not be gone on with until a proper arrangement is come to with the city. The sum might be placed in the estimates conditional on such an arrange-met being made.


Charles Smith Hyman: The only fear I have in regard to a matter of that kind is this. If we should put the $75,000 into the estimates and if by the end of, the year the government and the city were not able to come to any arrangement, I have no doubt that the government would be charged with having put it in for political purposes. Therefore I would not like to pledge myself, because I might get into trouble.


Albert Edward Kemp: The $75,000 is only a drop in the bucket when the government are trying to find means of spending the tremendous surplus which they have; and, inasmuch as the hon. gentleman's predecessors committed themselves to this policy, I think he ought to be willing to reinstate the amount in the estimates, subject to a satisfactory arrangement being arrived at with the city of Toronto. In reference to the vote having a political tinge, the members from Toronto are willing to assume

any responsibility in that respect. I do not think the government need be afraid of being criticised for an expenditure of this kind in an important harbour like Toronto, in view of the tremendous amount of money being spent in Montreal, at Three Rivers, on the deep water wharf at Sorel, and on public works at other small places. If the minister reconsiders the matter, I think he will see that there is not much in that argument.


Charles Smith Hyman: I presume that the hon. gentleman knows whereof he is speaking when he says that the city of Toronto passed such a resolution. Can he tell me whether it has been communicated to the Department of Public Works ?


Albert Edward Kemp: Yes, and a deputation waited on the Minister of Public Works last year in reference to it. It was passed for the purpose of being communicated to the government.


Charles Smith Hyman: Can the hon. gentleman remember the nature of the resolution-that the city desired to enter into negotiations with the government in regard to the matter ?


Albert Edward Kemp: The city assumed all responsibility in regard to the sewage and the removal of it.


Charles Smith Hyman: It would seem to me that the department would require something more than that, to guard against the harbour being filled up again with sewage. I think the hon. member should be satisfied with what I say, that I shall be glad to have the matter taken up immediately, with regard to reinserting the item in the estimates, I am not prepared to say off-hand that I will do so. I think it is a matter that ought to be preceded by negotiations between the city and the department.


Albert Edward Kemp: I think the first item placed in the estimates was $75,000, and that in the following year $50,000 was inserted. I think it will be satisfactory if the minister will reinstate the sum of $50,000 in the supplementary estimates, subject to a satisfactory arrangement being arrived at with the city. If a satisfactory arrangement is not arrived at, then the amount drops.


Edward Frederick Clarke: If the minister would come up there himself, he could see the work that is required to be done. My colleague from East Toronto has stated the case correctly. Many years ago a celebrated engineer, Captain Eads, visited Toronto, and recommended the construction of a breakwater to separate Ashbridge bay from the harbour. That has not given satisfaction, for the reason stated by my hon. colleague. The freshets carry a large amount of alluvial matter down the Don river to the eastern part of the harbour.
The result is that there are scores of acres where the water is not more than two or three feet deep. The appropriation of $75,000 taken some years ago was intended, I think, to be expended in diverting the channel of the Don towards the southeast, so that the alluvial deposits would go to fill up Ashbridge's bay, which would be a great improvement. Instead of that, the debris flows into Toronto harbour, constantly filling it up.
The expenditures which have been made and which are charged against the Toronto harbour were incurred in order to protect the island, and in work on the eastern gap, As has been pointed out, on account of the water being so high in the lake, especially this year, great damage has been and is being done to the southern part of the island. But with regard to the harbour itself, there cannot be two opinions as to the necessity of a large expenditure being made to protect it ; and if the minister could find time to make a personal visit, he would be able to judge of the condition of the harbour for himself. As to the work of disposing of the sewage, that work is done by the city. There is a large quantity of sewage taken out of Toronto bay to-day at the expense of the corporation, which should be taken out at the expense of the government. As my hon. friend from East Toronto (Mr. Kemp) has pointed out, the sewage deposit is increased by the silt which is carried down by the river Don. The slips are continually being cleansed by the city dredges, and the engineer's estimates of the quantities dredged out would convince the hon. gentleman that the city of Toronto is not shirking in any way the obligation devolving upon it. This work of cleansing and deepening the harbour is necessitated by the action of the Don river, which has been declared a navigable stream, and over which the city of Toronto exercises no jurisdiction. Therefore the work of removing the silt brought down by the Don, which is being-performed by the city of Toronto, is not work the cost of doing which ought to be borne by that municipality. The government has expended a large sum in protecting the eastern end of the harbour, but that work will be practically of no value until steps are taken to remove from the harbour proper the accretions brought down by the river Don to the eastern end from year'to year. If the minister would read the report of his officers, endorsed by the report of Mr. Jennings, ho would see the reasonableness of the request made ; and no charge of political design on the city will be made against him if he will only comply with our reasonable request and put a substantial sum in the supplementaries to carry the desired work out. And if he should not be satisfied, after an examination and inspection, with the arrangement which the city of Toronto has made, then he heed



[Stage Direction]
not spend a dollar. That proposition is so reasonable, coupled with the cordial invitation to the minister to come and see for himself, that I do not see how he can decline to come. The harbour is being steadily destroyed. Captain Bonicastle, fifty years ago, in prophetic words declared that that would be the inevitable result if the Don were allowed to continue pouring its flood into the harbour. The city undertook to pay the sum that was considered necessary and reasonable, namely the sum of $100,000, as its share of the work of preserving Toronto island. It provided that sum and handed it over to the Dominion. Inroads are being made on the island by the waters of Lake Ontario ; and it will not be argued that the municipality of Toronto is bound to protect an island two or three miles out in the lake from the depredations caused by the heavy storms from the east and south-east. The situation is a unique one. If the government desire to perserve the harbour, they must protect the island, and that can only be done as the result of an intelligent and systematic cooperation of the government with the municipality. A personal examination of the situation will convince my lion, friend that the statements of my colleague are absolutely within the mark and that it is necessary something should be done.
Charles Smith Hyman: As regards the protection of the island, I would recommend strongly on my colleagues that a sufficient sum for the extension of the breakwater be put into any further supplementary estimates. With regard to the other question, I shall be glad to take the opportunity, either as acting Minister of Public Works or member of the cabinet, to visit Toronto and become acquainted with the whole work. I should be glad to have the opportunity of personally inspecting the whole work, but I must make a decision at present, as far as I am concerned. Until negotiations are entered into with the city of Toronto and the propositions made by the city have found favour with the engineers of the department, or whatever engineer the matter may be referred to, the matter will have to remain in abeyance. A work of that character, leading to a very large expenditure, had better be proceeded with, in the first place, by negotiations between the city of Toronto and the department, and I shall be glad to study the whole question from every standpoint.


Edmund Boyd Osler: The time is very short within which the last supplementaries may be presented.


Charles Smith Hyman: I will have it done by telegraph to-morrow.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I have a copy of the resolution of the council, also of Mr. Jennings's report, and a copy of the by-law passed authorizing the raising of $100,000 for the protection of the island : but as the docu-Mr. CLARKE.
ments are voluminous I shall not undertake to read them. But I assure the bon. minister that the city of Toronto has expressed its willingness again and again to do its share of the work, and is actually doing more than its share. It is dredging all the slips into which the sewers flow, and that work has been going on continuously for twenty years. According to the statement of the Toronto city engineer, the quantity of material taken out of the harbour by the city dredges at the expense of the city is much greater than the quantity deposited by the sewers every year. The condition of the Toronto harbour, especially the eastern part, is deplorable. Scores of acres of the harbour are filled up now as the result of the deposits brought down by the Don river. The citizens and the Board of Trade have urged the government to have the necessary work done. The department issued instructions to one of its engineers to make a report, in conjunction with Mr. W. T. Jennings, late city engineer of Toronto, who is thoroughly familiar with the ground and with all the conditions in the harbour. The hon. gentleman has that report in his department now, and I think a perusal of it would enable him to possess himself of knowledge as to the requirements of the harbour. The harbour of Toronto is growing in importance, its shipping is increasing, and as the hon. gentleman knows it is the only harbour of refuge on the north shore of Lake Ontario. It is a most important harbour and the necessary expenditure should be made.


Charles Smith Hyman: I may say that I have asked the engineer to bring the resolution of the council to my attention. At the same time I shall look over the reports in the department and if I cannot find it I shall avail myself of the hon. gentleman's offer.


Albert Edward Kemp: On April 16, 1903, the matter was brought up in the House. The discussion on the question was not very long as it was thought by the deputation which came down to wait on the Minister of Public Works that he was so deeply impressed with the justice of the case that he would bring in, in the supplementary estimates, an additional sum for the purpose we are discussing. The Minister of Public Works, as reported on page 1433 of ' Hansard ' said in regard to Toronto harbour and this question we ai'e discussing now, the diversion of the Don.
This has no connection with the matter to which the Toronto deputation made reference recently.
lie was referring to the matter of $14,000 in the estimates of last year for works at the eastern entrance.
This work has no connection with the matter to which the Toronto deputation made reference recently. I had a communication from
7*73

the council this week pointing out that this work is very pressing.
So that the Minister of Public Works has this resolution and this memorial from the council. The deputation waited on him in his room in this building. I was present and I am sorry there was not placed in the supplementary estimates last year a sum for this purpose, but we expected fhere would be this year. The deputation, I believe, has not visited the minister this year. I do not know why for one thing the mayor is away in Europe at present. X really think the proposition to put a sum in the supple-mentaries, contingent on a satisfactory arrangement being arrived at with the city as to sewage disposal, is a fair proposition, and I am surprised that the minister does not accede to it.


Charles Smith Hyman: It is only fair to say that this matter has been brought to our attention by His Worship the Mayor of Toronto. I would ask if this communication to which reference was made in the remarks of the Minister of Public Works was before or after the passing of the resolution by the city council of Toronto assuming responsibility for the sewage.


Albert Edward Kemp: This resolution was passed prior to the coming of the deputation. Council passed a resolution in regard to the sewage previous to this time.


Charles Smith Hyman: Did they pass the resolution to which the hon. gentleman referred in which he says, the council declared that they were prepared to take the responsibility for the sewage.


Albert Edward Kemp: This was passed previous to the time the deputation waited on the Minister of Public Works.


Charles Smith Hyman: Then it was two years ago.


Albert Edward Kemp: I do not know the date of the resolution. I have the full information about it, but the resolution was passed previous to the coming of the deputation.


Edward Frederick Clarke: The resolutions were passed a year ago. There have been deputations down here again and again, as the hon. gentleman is aware, about this matter, and I would like to emphasize the fact that the corporation of Toronto has been dredging these slips for 15 or 20 years in order to enable vessels to come in. The hon. gentleman, I am sure, knows the Yonge street slip, the main slip of the city, where the Niagara boats and the island ferries ply from. The city dredges that slip continuously, and also dredges elsewhere when it is required. The city is doing all of that work now, and there need be no apprehension of the city's desire to shirk any of its obligations, because it has never done so. The city has not only cleansed the slips of the material deposited by the sewers, but has absolutely dredged along the front the ma-2504
terial brought down by the Don. X say that it is not fair to hold the city of Toronto responsible for the disposal of the silt brought down by the Don, and yet it is this silt which is filling the harbour and causing all the trouble. As long as the mouth of the Don is allowed to discharge as at present, into the harbour, the difficulty will continue. The Don must be diverted. There was a sum of $75,000 placed in the estimates some years ago for this work, but no expenditure was made. The estimate was provided three or four years ago, I think.
Ontario-Wiarton wharf, $13,000.


Andrew B. Ingram: As this is the last item in the Ontario estimates for harbours, I would like to ask the minister what is included under a vote for harbour improvements. Does it include the extension of piers, dredging or any work done around the harbour ?	.


Charles Smith Hyman: The broad words ' harbour improvements ' include dredging, repairs to piers or an extension to piers.


Andrew B. Ingram: I asked a question the other day with respect to the expenditure at Port Stanley. The hon. gentleman answered that the total expenditure had been something like $9,000. In 1893 there was an item of $12,000 for the extension of the piers. In 1S94, $5,000 was voted for the improvement of the harbour, so that I cannot reconcile these facts with the statements made in reply to my questions. It may be that my question was not full enough and that for that reason I did not make myself quite understood.


Charles Smith Hyman: The hon. gentleman has quoted the amount voted, not the expenditure ? Which does he mean ?


Andrew B. Ingram: That is what I want to arrive at. I am anxious to get the correct information. I asked the amount of the expenditure and I thought there might be some mistake in the reply. Am I to understand that of the $12,000 voted in 1893, only about $1,000 was expended in that year. I would ask the hon. gentleman to look the matter up.


Charles Smith Hyman: I will have the hon. gentleman's remarks in ' Hansard ' and I can look tiie matter up.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What is being done in the way of additional groining on the south side of the island at Toronto ?


Charles Smith Hyman: There is nothing in the present estimates for the south side.


Edward Frederick Clarke: The protection given by the piers at that part of the island is limited. It extends only a certain distance west, and the damage is done to the island proper west of the point where the influence of the piers ceases.


Charles Smith Hyman: I understand there was a good deal of that work done last year.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I would like to suggest to the hon. gentleman that additional groins would be of immense service in protecting the south shore of the island.


Charles Smith Hyman: I do not think there have been any representations made to the department up to the present moment in regard to this particular expenditure.


Edmund Boyd Osler: The minister might ask that to be reported upon at the same time as the other matter. He might find out if anything is really necessary in reference to that.


Charles Smith Hyman: I shall include that.


Richard Blain: Might I ask the minister where that item for general dredging in the province of Ontario will be found, in the enpplementaries.


Charles Smith Hyman: It is on page 56-dredging, Ontario and Quebec. We have not reached it yet.


Richard Blain: I would like at the same time a summary of the expenditures that I asked about;


Charles Smith Hyman: I will send it over to the hon.* gentleman.


Richard Blain: And will the hon. gentleman be good enough to furnish us with a summary of the expenditures in counties in the other provinces as well some time before the supplementary estimates come up for discussion ?


Charles Smith Hyman: That would involve a considerable amount of work, as the items do not appear in the estimates. The hon. gentleman will understand that when these estimates are going through the engineer has to be here and cannot well attend to other matters. But I will endeavour to furnish the hon. gentleman with the Nova Scotia one, which he asked for.


Richard Blain: There are perhaps some other officers of the department who can prepare a statement of this kind. Perhaps the hon. gentleman would have it ready for next week, when the supplementaries come up.
Manitoba-Harbours, rivers and bridges- general repairs and improvements, $3,000.


Mr. BOYD.: Will the minister explain what that is for ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This is a general vote for emergency cases. If anything happens to a harbour or a public work in consequence of a storm or other accident, this amount will be available for immediate use.


Nathaniel Boyd: Last session I asked the minister to put something in the estimates for the Assiniboine river. There are a great many people living on that river, and I think something should be done to make it navigable. Some hundreds of miles of it can be made navigable. The minister assured me he would make some surveys and ascertain Mr. HYMAN.
what was necessary to be done. Does the minister propose to do anything in that respect ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I am informed that no report has been made up to the present time.


Nathaniel Boyd: Will the minister say whether he will have anything done In that regard ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Instructions have been given, but the report has not yet been received.
Manitoba-lowering of Lake Dauphin, $2,500.


Nathaniel Boyd: What has been done in regard to that ?


Charles Smith Hyman: $2,500 was spent last year in dredging. I do not think any decision has yet been come to as to how far the lake should be lowered. The work will he proceeded with from year to year, and we will see what the effect is.
British Columbia-Anderson and Kennedy lakes-clearing outlets, $2,500.


Mr. EARLE.: Will this sum complete the work ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This item is to continue the work.


Thomas Earle: Does the minister know how much more is required to complete ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I could not tell at the moment.


Thomas Earle: My object in asking is this : A considerable sum is eaten up in sending a foreman there, in overseers' expenses and small matters like that, so that unless a considerable amount is voted there will not he much left. I think that it would be advisable to grant a larger amount so as to complete the work.


Mr. RALPH SMITH.: I understand from the report of the British Columbia engineer that this sum will complete the work.
British Columbia-Fraser river-improvements of ship channel, protection works, &e., $25,000.


Thomas Earle: Could the minister give us any information as to the condition of that protection work that has been going on for some years, whether the work is found to he effective, whether it will be continued from year to year, and also the amount that has been expended up to the present time ?


Charles Smith Hyman: We will allow that item to stand until the engineer is back to give the information.
British Columbia-Fraser river, improvement of ship channel, protection works, &c., $25,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: If my hon. friend from Victoria (Mr. Earle) will renew his question I will be glad to give him the information.


Thomas Earle: I would ask the hon. minister if he would give me what information he has in regard to the protection works

being carried on in the Fraser river for many years, the amount expended up to the present time, whether the work has been effective, and whether it is work which will have to be continued from year to year indefinitely.


Charles Smith Hyman: The amount that has been expended up to the 31st December, 1903, is .$(100,000. I am informed by the officers of the department that this vote is asked for the purpose of making provision for maintaining, renewing and strengthening the existing works constructed for the improvement of the ship channel in the winter river. 1 am also told that it will be necessary from year to year to have certain votes available for the continuance of this work.


Thomas Earle: There is nothing for new work this year ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No.


Mr. LENNOX.: I wish to bring to the attention of the hon. minister a matter in reference to the dry-dock at Vancouver. I understand that the government have entered into or aw; about to enter into an arrangement with the Vancouver Dry-dock and Shipping Company for the building of a dry-dock at Vancouver. I would like to know if the arrangements have been completed.


Charles Smith Hyman: I understand that the arrangements have been completed with the Vancouver Dry-dock Company.


Haughton Lennox: Could the hon. minister inform me whether any work has been done on the dry-dock yet ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No work has been done as yet. The agreement is not completed inasmuch as the company have not signed it. The Order in Council has, I understand, been passed, but it has not reached the stage where it has been completed by the signing of the company.


Haughton Lennox: Does the government propose to complete the. arrangement with the company '?


Charles Smith Hyman: I understand so.


Haughton Lennox: Does the hon. minister understand that there has been a protest made by the Jackson Company, which I think is called the Vancouver Engineering Works, represented particularly by Mr. Jackson ? Has the hon. minister had occasion to look at the protest entered on behalf of that company ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The matter has not been brought to my attention since I have been acting in the department.


Haughton Lennox: I propose to discuss this matter and I would like to have a good deal of information from the hon. gentleman in reference to it as I proceed. There
are one or two other members of the House who propose to have something to say on it. But, I think it would probably be more 'convenient if one item were allowed to stand over for that discussion. I think probably my hon. friend the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) also wishes to say something on it.


Charles Smith Hyman: If the hon. gentleman will discuss this item on the supplementary estimates I will have an opportunity of looking over the papers in the meantime and I will give the hon gentleman whatever information he may require.


Haughton Lennox: I think it might be more convenient to have the discussion at some other time, but I would not like to leave it over for the supplementary estimates because probably there will not be very much discussion on those supplementaries, but if the hon. minister will allow this matter to stand until his estimates come up again we could go on and discuss it. I will go on with the discussion now if he will give me the information I require.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am not prepared to give the hon. gentleman the information. The matter has not been brought to my attention at all since I have been in the department. If the hon. gentleman will accept my suggestion I will be very glad, if he will give me a memorandum now of the particular documents he requires, to bring down the information when we are discussing the supplementary estimates.


Haughton Lennox: I want to have an item left over if the hon. minister is not prepared to discuss the matter now.


Charles Smith Hyman: This is not an item upon which the matter can be properly discuss, ed. The item that is under discussion is the * Fraser river, improvement of ship channel and protection works.'


Haughton Lennox: The hon. minister knows there is a convenient way of discussing it 'rather than to bring it up on going into Committee of Supply. If the item is allowed to stand until to-morrow I am quite satisfied to leave it until then.


Charles Smith Hyman: I do not wish to- be discourteous to the hon. gentleman, but he can hardly expect me to be possessed of the information by to-morrow. If I am asked to go on with my estimates to-morrow I will have no opportunity of becoming possessed of the information. The hon. gentleman will have plenty of opportunities for discussing the matter. Leave it over until next week.


Thomas Earle: Before we leave the votes for British Columbia, I wish to ask whether the city of Victoria will be able to get the use of the dredge ' King Edward ' again this summer, to complete the work which was commenced last year ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The ' King Edward ' is on the Fraser river at the present time. Of course the hon. gentleman knows that this dredge has done a great amount of work in Victoria and the work at the mouth of the Fraser river is very important. It is almost impossible sometimes to decide as to which work a dredge will be put on, and this matter, I will have to discuss with the officers of the department before I can give a distinct answer.


Thomas Earle: I think there was an understanding that during the season of high-water when she could not work very well on the Fraser river she might be put to work at Victoria. This is work which can be carried on by a dredge of the character of the ' King Edward,' and it certainly is work that is very badly needed.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am sorry I cannot give the hon. gentleman any definite answer. The ' King Edward ' was in Victoria for a long period and did a large quantity of work there. The work on the Fraser river is said to be very important, and I would not like to send the ' King Edward ' to Victoria and go to the trouble of towing ,her back and forth.


Thomas Earle: I understand that if she could be spared to work at Victoria for a short time, the city would be quite willing to pay the expense of towage.


Charles Smith Hyman: I understand that, but there is the loss of time.


Thomas Earle: It is only a day.


Charles Smith Hyman: A day each way.


Thomas Earle: The work at Victoria is very important.


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes, but so is the work on the Fraser river, and there is a protest against sending her from that work.


Thomas Earle: There is a protest from our side too.


Charles Smith Hyman: There are two protests, but I suppose possession is nine points of the law.


Thomas Earle: She is a British Columbia dredge and she belongs to Victoria as much as to any part of the province. There is no reason why her services should be confined to the Fraser river continuously. We only want her for a month or six weeks and we could utilize her during the high water in June and July when she could not work to advantage on the Fraser river.
Lewes and Yukon Rivers, improvements, $15,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This vote is placed to the credit of the Yukon commissioner and expended by him on the advice of the steamboat companies for the improvement of navigation. '	[DOT] ij


Thomas Earle: 


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You allow the Yukon Commissioner to make the expenditure and then draw upon the government ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The vouchers are of course sent there.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How many dredges have you altogether and how are they distributed ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The maritime provinces have seven ; Quebec, three ; Ontario, four ; Manitoba, two ; British Columbia, two.


Mr. PUTTEE.: Is the snag-boat for the Red river under construction 1


Charles Smith Hyman: No ; the intention is to call for tenders immediately.
New hydraulic dredge for maritime provinces, $50,000.


Mr. LEFURGEY.: Is this dredge completed yet ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It is afloat, but is has not yet been despatched to its work.


Mr. WILMOT.: When will the dredge be ready ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I am in hopes that the dredge will be ready for work this fall and sent down to the lower provinces early in the spring.


Robert Duncan Wilmot: I make the inquiry because there is an obstruction at the entrance to St. John harbour which requires to be dredged in order to enable a large vessel to go through. When will the dredge be ready to work ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It is hoped that the dredge nmy be despatched early in the spring.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: What work will she he put at ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I cannot say at present what work -will be considered the most important.
New dredge for Prince Edward Island, $25,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: The contract has not yet been signed, but tenders have been received and have been reported to Council.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is the estimated cost of this dredge ?


Charles Smith Hyman: In the neighbourhood of $50,000.
New dredging plant, Ontario and Quebec, $75,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This is the estimated sum required this year for a new dredge, two new scows, new tug, light draught tug, swing engines and boiler, and four yawl boats. It is practically a renewal of a dredge owned by the department at the present time.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Is that dredge to be used ou the Ottawa river ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It has not yet been decided where the dredge will be used. That will have to be considered by the department when the dredge is ready.


Richard Blain: Where is the work being done on this dredge ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The intention of the department is to have the hull brought to Ottawa and the work done in our own shipyard at the foot of the locks.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Are you building anything in the shipyard at Three Rivers ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I suppose the hon. gentleman means the Sorel shipyard. That is not under control of this department.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Are any of these dredges being built there ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The dredge ' Fielding ' is being built there-the new hydraulic dredge for the maritime provinces.


Richard Blain: What is the total cost of the ' Fielding ' dredge ?


Charles Smith Hyman: In the neighbourhood of $500,000.


Richard Blain: When will it be ready for operation ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I answered that question when the item was under discussion. It is hoped that the ' Fielding ' will be completed so that she can be tested this fall and be ready for work in the spring.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Where is the dredge ' Laurier ' or the dredge ' Tarte ' working at the present time ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The dredge ' Tarte ' is not working. She is being repaired. She is one of the dredges belonging to the ship channel and is not under the charge of this department.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Let us understand how these dredges are being built. Are we building dredges under the various departments? I always understood that they were built under the Public Works Department.


Charles Smith Hyman: Not necessarily. When the work of the ship channel was transferred to the Department of Marine and Fisheries, as the Order in Council which was read here fully set forth, all the plant belonging to the ship channel was transferred to that department, including the dredge ' Tarte ' and six other dredges.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand that the plant might be transferred to the Marine Department after it was built by the Public Works Department. I did not understand that the Marine Department was to build its own plant, as well as the Public Works.


Charles Smith Hyman: I do not know what the policy of the Marine and Fisheries may be in regard to these dredges. That will be entirely under his own control. So far as this department is concerned, I do not know that any settled policy has been adopted. When the question of building a dredge comes up, the department adopts the most economical way of building it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: All I can say is that that explanation is simply moonshine. The hon. gentleman has been long enough in this House to know better. I say it has been the policy in the past to have the dredges built under the Public Works Department. We have never yet to my knowledge had any intimation that the Marine and Fisheries Department was building a dredge.


Charles Smith Hyman: I cannot answer for the policy which my hon. colleague, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries will adopt. The Department of Public Works is responsible for the building of its own dredges, and whatever dredges are built under the control of this department will be built in the most economical way. I am unable to give information with regard to what policy may be adopted by the Department of Marine and Fisheries regarding its dredges.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We ought to have some one who can speak for the government, and let us know what the policy of the government is.


Charles Smith Hyman: If the hon. gentleman will renew his question when the leader of the government is here, he will get the information he seeks. I am only authorized to speak as the acting Minister of Public Works, and cannot speak for my colleagues.


Thomas Earle: In what department are the workshops at Sorel ?


Charles Smith Hyman: In the Department of Marine and Fisheries.


Thomas Earle: If you want anything done at these workshops, you would have to go to that department ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes. The Department of Public Works would ask the Department of Marine and Fisheries for an estimate of the cost, and the work would be done by the Department of Marine and Fisheries.
Mr. 'EARLE. I cannot understand why these workshops should not have remained in the Department of Public Works. That would not have prevented the Department of Marine and Fisheries having its dredges built there.


Charles Smith Hyman: The only difference is that instead of the Department of Marine having to come to the Department of Public Works to have its dredges constructed in the Sorel workshops, the Department of Public Works will have to go to the Department of Marine. The department under whose control these workshops are will do the work.

Mr. WIIjSON. I would suggest then that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries he sent for, so that he may give the explanation *which the acting Minister of Public Works is unable to give.


Charles Smith Hyman: I can give all the information regarding this particular item, but I cannot go beyond it and inform the House what policy the Department of Marine and Fisheries is going to adopt with regard to the building of its own dredges. I cannot igive information as to the policy of building dredges, generally, because that is in the province of the Department of Marine and Fisheries and not of mine. But I can give all the information required regarding the building of dredges for the department of which I am now the acting minister.


Mr. WIHSON.: That is the difficulty we are in when these estimates come up and there is only one minister present. We ought to have present such ministers as are able to give the information we seek with regard to any item under discussion.
Mr. 'SITtOULE. When the ex-Miuister of Public Works (Mr. Tarte) was in office, he gave us all the information we required with regard to the dredging plant, and he did so because that plant was under the Public Works Department. He told us how many men were employed, how many dredges were being built, what kind of dredges, and so on. But to-day, when there is an item before us for the building of certain dredges, and we desire to know what dredges are being built and all the details concerning them, we are told by the minister that he does not know anything at all about it.


Charles Smith Hyman: I did not tell the hon. gentleman that I did not know anything about it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: When I asked about what was being done at the Sorel workshops, the hon. gentleman said he did not know anything about it.


Charles Smith Hyman: Neither do I, because that is not in my department. But I am prepared, perfectly prepared, to give all the information required with regard to this item. I cannot, however, give information with regard to the general policy of building dredges, because that matter has been transferred to the Marine and Fisheries Department, and is no longer under mine.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am asking with regard to the general policy of the government in carrying on the public works of this country. I first started by asking if it was the policy of the government to build dredges in the different provinces in which they were entitled to operate. That policy was adopted two years ago, when a question arose as to the advisability of building in British Columbia the dredges that were intended to operate in that province. We contended that it was Mr. HYMAN.	,
better these dredges should be built there, and the government finally decided to do that, as far as that could be carried out. At that time the Sorel shipyards were under the control of the Public Works Department, and it was declared that any dredging plant which could not be built in the outlying provinces would be built in those shipyards. We are now desiring to get information as to what is being done in pursuance of that policy.


David Henderson: It seems to me that the recent changes in the position of the various departments is not at all in the interests of economy in this country*. The only advantage that I can conceive as having been accomplished has been the transfer of power from the control of the minister representing the province of Ontaro to that of a minister representing the province of Quebec, simply exploiting one department to give more patronage and more prestige to the minister of another department. Now we find that the Marine Department wants dredges, the Public Works Department wants dredges. It may be that some of the others will want dredges but we will speak of these two only. The Minister of Public Works had his shops at Sorel, he had all his staff, his engineers conversant with the work of building dredges, and was prepared to construct all the dredges necessary for the work of the country. Now what do we find ? We will have to have another set of workshops similar to those at Sorel and another full compliment of men at some other point to construct dredges, another set of engineers, a professional staff as well as a staff of ordinary workmen. The effect will be that the cost will be double, there will be no advantage to the country beyond simply gratifying the ambition of one minister who thinks he ought to control the prestige of half the country. I do say the minister has made a terrible mistake when he permitted that patronage to slip away from him. I will not say he permitted it because if we are to judge from appearances and from the fact that the minister has not appeared in this House from the time the exploitation was made, it was not done with his consent, and it would seem that he was still protesting and will still protest. I am glad he had the courage to do so, and I think the people of this country will protest against the exploitation of one department for the benefit of another. I am sure there is no gentleman in this House on either side who will not see the impropriety of what took place during this past year with regard to the division of the departments. It can result only in additional expense and no benefit whatever can accrue to the country.
New dredging plant, Manitoba, self-propelling snag boat, $10,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: It is intended to build this up there if possible.

New dredging plant, British Columbia, to replace snag boat ' Samson ' and dredge * Mud Lark,' $10,000.


Thomas Earle: Is that amount supposed to replace both of these ?


Charles Smith Hyman: There is a further amount in the supplementary estimates.


Thomas Earle: How much ?


Charles Smith Hyman: There is an amount of $80,000 in the supplementary estimates.


Thomas Earle: Is that supposed to cover the work ?


Charles Smith Hyman: That is the amount that will likely be paid out on the contracts that will he made during the fiscal year until the department is able to ask a further vote of the House.


Richard Blain: What will the total cost be ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The total cost is estimated at $169,000.
New dredging plant, BriBsh Columbia, one tug and two hopper scows, $36,000.


Richard Blain: Will this be the total cost ?
Mr, HYMAN. This is estimated to be the total cost.
New dredging plant generally, $60,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: That is all over the Dominion.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is that for repairs or building over or what ? It is hardly a new dredging plant ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This is not so much for the building of dredges as for the building of vessels accessory to dredges, such as scows, &c. Accidents often happen, and it is from this vote that all of that is taken. Everything that is necessary as accessory to the dredges.
Dredging, 'Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, $115,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This is for the running expenses of the plant belonging to the government in the maritime provinces.


Mr. WILLIAM ROCHE (Halifax).: Last year the Hon. Mr. Sutherland made a promise that at the first favourable opportunity when dredges could be secured some of the harbours in Halifax county would be favoured with a visit from one of those dredges. There are several public wharfs in Halifax county which require a small amount of dredging to make them effective, not a large amount but a small amount, and I would ask the minister if he would give us an engagement that at the very earliest opportunity, say next summer, he will endeavour to assist these harbours in that way. The dredging required is not extensive and a small amount would make these harbours effective.


Charles Smith Hyman: I can only say that the large dredge ' The Fielding ' which is now being constructed- at Sorel, as soon as she is completed will greatly relieve the situation. She is very large and powerful, supposed to be the most powerful dredge in the world. When she is ready the department will have better and greater opportunities of performing works such as the hon. gentleman refers to. There has been a great deal of difficulty in the maritime provinces, the amount of dredging required is very great and in some harbours it is almost continuous, so that the Department of Public Works have considerable difficulty at all times ' in securing sufficient dredges. I can only promise to give every consideration possible to Halifax.


Mr. WM. ROSS (Victoria).: May I ask the hon. minister when that will be ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I have already answered that question.


William Ross: We have been promised that dredge in the province of Nova Scotia for the last three or four years.


Mr. KAULBACH.: The promise to which the hon. member for Victoria has referred I think is one that is in his memory with relation to the county of Lunenburg. The member for that county has been applying for years and nothing has been done. The promise has always been made that the dredge would be completed, and that when she was in service Lunenburg would be recognized the first of all. The general trade of tiie place is being interfered with for the want of this improvement. There is no countv that requires the dredge more than the county 1 have the honour to represent. There is more shipping there than in any other part of the province, Halifax not excepted.


William Roche: I may say in connection with the observations of the minister that in Halifax county we do not require a large amount of dredging, but if we had one of the small dredges at an early period, she could do a large amount of work that would be of great benefit.


Charles Smith Hyman: I did not intend to say that it was not the intention of the department to have the 1 Fielding ' do the work to which he refers, because I hope that she will soon be able to take the place of some of the other dredges.


Robert Duncan Wilmot: I would like to know if any dredging is being done on the St. John river in New Brunswick.


Charles Smith Hyman: There is some being done at the present time in St. John. Representations have been made to the department with regard to dredging the St. John river, and we are endeavouring to do our best to meet the wishes of the people of that river. The dredge ' New Brunswick ' is now at

*work there, where there are a number of wharfs that require a small amount of dredging. I cannot tell at which particular wharf she is working at the present time, but she is engaged doing work that has been asked for by the Navigation-Company and by the people of the city.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: There are a number of dredges employed in the province of Nova Scotia doing work that is less needed than that I referred to a moment ago. A small dredge will do for some of these harbours equally as well as a larger one. I would urge that this work be looked after at the earliest possible moment, as the trade and interests of Lunenburg as a county are suffering. A number of vessels are compelled to go to Halifax and discharge there and then reship their cargoes of salt, for the want of dredging in the harbours of Lunenburg, Bridgewater and Mahone Bay.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am sorry that I cannot make the hon. gentleman any definite promise in regard to the matter. As a matter of fact there are two dredges doing work in Nova Scotia. When we have the dredge ' Fielding ' at our disposal, we hope to relieve these dredges that are now there from some of the work they are doing, and then we shall be glad to send them somewhere else.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: Why should favour be shown to those counties where the work is less needed than in my county ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I do not think the people of those counties where these dredges are working would agree with the hon. gentleman that his county needs the work more than theirs do.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: It can easily be ascertained that there is very little shipping in some places where the dredges have been employed for the last few years.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What has been the experience with the new suction dredge that was built, I mean the 1 Tarte ? '


Charles Smith Hyman: She was only working for a short period before meeting with an accident, but the report of the engineers' department is that just previous to the accident she was doing more work than had ever been performed by any other dredge in the world. That is a large statement, but it is borne out by the reports.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What happened to her ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Her boiler burst. But before the accident she did 38,000 yards in one day. That is entirely beyond anything that has been accomplished before.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: All the more reason why she should be employed in the work I have referred to.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am afraid the * Tarte ' would be found an unwieldy dredge to take down to Lunenburg. It is a suction dredge.


Charles Smith Hyman: 


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: We would be well satisfied to have her there until the other can be brought into service.
Dredging, Ontario and Quebec, $95,000.


Richard Blain: Perhaps the hon. gentleman would give us an explanation about the Port Credit harbour that I brought up.


Charles Smith Hyman: I cannot give any more explanation than I endeavoured to give a short time ago. The hon. gentleman has applied for a certain work to be done in Port Credit harbour. Is the dredging to be done at the mouth of the harbour ?


Richard Blain: Yes.


Charles Smith Hyman: If it is dredging at the mouth of the harbour, the work is so small that it would be useless to give it out by contract.


Richard Blain: Is that likely to be done this summer or fall ? I do not wish to press the matter, I understand the hon. gentleman is doing his best. It is a long time since the promise was made, but I suppose it is almost impossible for him to meet the wishes of the people at all the harbours. With regard to its being a private harbour, it is owned by a private company. But the hon. gentleman must bear in mind that the government has expended money on that harbour in days gone by. In 1892, dredginsr was done there by the department that cost $1,214.75 ; in 1893 the work cost $592. Last year the minister sent an acting engineer to examine the work, and he reported what was required in the way of repairs :
The following is an estimate of work required :-
West side, 275 lineal feet of close pile
work at $15 per	foot	 $4,125
East side, 390 lineal feet of close pile
work at $15 per	foot	 5,850
Dredging, 14,000 cubic yards at 15 cents
per yard	 2,100
General repairs to piers	 1,000

The hon. minister will notice that there was an estimate of $2,100 for dredging a small proportion of the whole amount required. I would like to draw the hon. gentleman's attention to the fact that this Is an important harbour. It is a natural harbour, there is a great deal of traffic between Toronto and Hamilton and this harbour is necessary as a harbour of refuge. I would further draw his attention to the fact that there are two large manufacturing establishments at this place, one large starch work employing a great many hands and another, a pressed brick work, which is now in operation and which is likely to employ an increased number of hands. In addition I may say, that the appropriation, if properly expended, would serve very many other citizens in that locality in respect to getting in coal supplies, a commodity which is very impor-

tant In tlie province of Ontario at the present time. If that harbour were put in proper shape vessels could come in with coal and the farmers and citizens generally in that neighbourhood would be able to purchase their coal at a very much cheaper rate than they can now, being compelled to bring it in by rail. I do not wish to press the matter further. I have introduced it at every session during this parliament. The government, I think, have made an effort in the shape of promises and I am quite sure the promises have been honestly made but there does seem to be a difficulty in securing sufficient dredges to meet a case of this kind. May I ask the hon. minister if he has a dredge working in the harbour of Toronto or of Hamilton ?


Charles Smith Hyman: There is no dredge working at Toronto but there is a dredge engaged in some large work in Hamilton.


Richard Blain: May we expect that possibly during this summer something will be done ? I may say that the longer the delay the greater will be the work that will be necessary. In the petition that was presented to the government from this section last year it was pointed out that:
The entrance to the harbour is almost filled with sand, making it impossible for vessels with a draught of 4 or 5 feet to enter. I
I would therefore draw the attention of the hon. minister to the fact that the longer the delay the greater will be the amount of work'necessary, and that possibly the estimate given by the engineer last year of $2,100, if the work is left for another year, will require to be doubled. The hon. minister will see the importance of securing a dredge as soon as possible in order that the citizens of that section of the country may be served by a proper appropriation for the prosecution of this work.


Charles Smith Hyman: The petition to which the hon. gentleman refers was brought to the attention of the department and there have been numerous requests made in regard to this work which the hon. gentleman has so forcibly brought to the attention of the committee. It will be the duty of the department to give its attention to the matter, but in the absence of any available dredge it is entirely impossible for me to make such a promise as he suggests. I can only hope that circumstances will intervene that will permit this dredging to be done.


Richard Blain: Do I understand that as soon as this dredge is available the hon. gentleman will give it his attention ?


Charles Smith Hyman: As soon as the dredge is available I will give it my serious attention.
Dredging, British Columbia, $35,000.


Thomas Earle: Before we leave the question of dredging in the west there is a matter that I would like to call to the attention of the hon. Minister of Public Works, as I understand the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Prefontaine) is to leave in a few days for British Colum-'bia. Dredging in the inner harbour of Victoria has been going on for a great many years. It is impossible to make the harbour capable of admitting the modern vessels that are coming to the port to-day, and the only port we had with sufficient water to accommodate these vessels has been taken over by the admiralty so that it has been left to a private individual to give us all the accommodation there is at the present time outside of the inner harbour for deep water vessels. That gentleman has spent half a million dollars but it has been found that the harbour which he has provided is not capable of accommodating the shipping which comes to the port. There has been a question discussed with regard to affording all the capacity that we require in the future by. the building of a breakwater from the outer point or wharf to Brotchie Ledge. It is a question that ought to have been taken up some years ago as it is the only proposition within reasonable cost that would afford the extent of harbour that is required. I think there is a distance of about a thousand yards from the shore to Brotchie Ledge, which if connected by a breakwater would afford wharfage accommodation for any amount of shipping. I would ask the hon. minister to be kind enough to call the attention of his colleague, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. now that he is going to 'pay a visit to British Columbia, to tne matter, and ask him to look into it and report as to the feasibility of that scheme. It would cost very little to get a report upon the expense of construction from the engineer there because a very late and very close hydrographic survey has been made by Mr. Gamble, who was formerly the Dor minion engineer in British Columbia, and all the data required to have an estimate made of the cost is obtainable without any expense whatever. If the hon. minister will be kind enough to have the attention of the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries called to that matter before he goes and if Jhe will ask him to look into it while he is there it will be less expensive than if it were done at any other time.


Charles Smith Hyman: I shall be very glad to call the attention of my colleague, the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries to the matter and ask him to look into it when he is visiting Victoria and I shall be very glad to get from him any report that he sees fit to make on his return. I am sure that if the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries enjoys his visit to Victoria as much as I did the last time I was there and if he

7891
receives ail the courtesies with which I was ifavoured he will come back in a happy frame of mincl and will be able to recommend to the department any expenditure that may be required to have the work done.
Public Works, slides and booms, St. Maurice district-improvements of boom works to facilitate the floating and storage of logs, &c., $40,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This is a revote. The intention is to proceed with the work of the construction of mooring piers and fly booms, the construction of a mooring pier at Ste. Flore, the construction of 600 feet of two fly booms at Les Hetres, the construction of a mooring pier at Pointe & Bernard and other works and in addition to these there are the usual contingencies amounting in all to $40,000.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: I would like to ask the hon. minister if he knows what it costs the government to meet the running expenses of these booms and slides and what the revenue from them is ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The gross revenue was $29,232 and the cost of running expenses $11,501, apart from construction charged to capital.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: In this case the government gets a surplus of revenue over expenditure which in most instances is not the case. I do not see why the government should go into the business of erecting booms and slides for lumbermen. I have been in the business for thirty years and whenever there was a boom or slide or dam to be built I did it myself. The government might as well build sawmills for the lumbermen.


Charles Smith Hyman: This question has received the consideration of all governments since 1851 and it has been looked upon as a national expenditure. The revenue which is derived from it at the present time is very large. For the reason that this is a general work and that one individual for lack of capital or other reasons could not undertake it, it is undertaken by the government.
Roads and bridges.-To open a pack trail from Peace River to Pelly River, $25,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This Is asked for by the mounted police, the intention being to open a trail so that in case of emergency, police might be sent from British Columbia to the Yukon.
Telegraph line between Deer Island, New Brunswick, and Eastport, Maine, $3,500.


Mr. GANONG.: Is it the intention of the government to build that line this year Y


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: How many miles of government lines in Canada ?


Charles Smith Hyman: 


Charles Smith Hyman: Six thousand five hundred.


Robert Laird Borden: Is Prince Edward Island connected with the government telegraph system ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No. I have a map here of all our telegraph lines which I will send to the hon. gentleman.


Robert Laird Borden: Thank .you. Is it the intention to extend the Magdalen Island line to Cape Breton ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It is now connected in an indirect way by iSt. Paul's island and is open for private business.


Robert Laird Borden: How near does the line approach Prince Edward Island ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The nearest point is Port Hood, a distance of about thirty miles.


Robert Laird Borden: What would it cost to extend that line to Prince Edward Island?


Charles Smith Hyman: From $600 to $700 a knot.


Robert Laird Borden: That would be about $20,000. What rates do you charge ?


Charles Smith Hyman: They are based upon commercial rates.


Robert Laird Borden: On a recent visit to Prince Edward Island, I found there was a great deal of dissatisfaction in regard to the existing telegraph service. The rates paid by the people are double the ordinary rates and from eight o'clock at night till eight o'clock in the morning telegraph communication with the rest of the world is cut off. Has the government under consideration the amelioration of the telegraphic conditions in Prince Edward Island, which apparently could he effected by a small expenditure in connecting the island with the government system at Port Hood ? That may be a suggestion which is impracticable. 1 am asking entirely for Information.


Charles Smith Hyman: The matter has been brought to the attention of the department, and there is an item in the supplementary estimates of $5,000, in addition to the $2,000, .which was the amount in the estimates last year. I intend to ask the House to place that $5,000 at the disposal of the department, so that it may enter into negotiations with the companies with a view to obtaining an improved service for Prince Edward Island. That is the idea with which the amount is placed in the estimates. Whether it would prove a profitable undertaking for the government to construct the cable line, which the hon. gentleman suggests, is a matter that would have to be considered.


Robert Laird Borden: No disposition was made of the sum voted last year ?


William Stevens Fielding: That is a sum voted annually, arising out of the terms of union, which require that we shall keep up telegraphic communication with Prince Edward

Island ; and the $2,000 a year is an old subsidy which the Dominion government was to pay. It is now proposed to increase the vote from $2,000 to $7,000, in the hope that we may come to a better arrangement with the companies. With regard to a cable between Port Hood and the island, that would hardly improve the communication in the way the island people most desire. What they are anxious to have is communication with the mainland and also with all parts of the upper provinces ; and the hope is that some arrangement may be made with the present companies whereby, in consideration of some increased subsidy, they will reduce the rates and give the accommodation which the people require in regard to later hours.


Mr.  E. L.@: IiOEDEN. If you connect the island with Port Hood, would you not connect it with the telegraph system of Nova Scotia, and therefore with that of the continent ?


William Stevens Fielding: Yes ; hut there is not much commercial business coming from the upper provinces by that way. I think all the commercial business would come by the Western Union or the Canadian Pacific Railway lines. However, all these matters are worthy of consideration. We ail recognize the desirability of giving the island better accommodation, and if the House votes the minister the $5,000 which he is asking for, we hope that some arrangement can be made with the companies. If not, the question of the advisability of the government laying a cable will arise. [DOT] That could best be done between the capes, and perhaps some working arrangement could be made with the companies.


Robert Laird Borden: Communication between the island and Port Hood would connect with the Western Union system. I do not know whether the Canadian Pacific Railway lines extend there or not.


William Stevens Fielding: They are not in that part of Cape Breton.


Robert Laird Borden: I recollect that there is some difference between the view of the contract with this cable company held by the people of the island and the view of those interested in the company. I do not remember the exact nature of the dispute. Possibly the Minister of Finance will recall it.


William Stevens Fielding: Yes. The original contract with the company, which was first known as the New York, Newfoundland and London Telegraph Company, which has, since been absorbed or controlled by the Anglo-American, which is associated with the Western Union Company, provided that no other company should have the right to land a cable on Prince Edward Island. But from the point of view of the Island people, and the point of view of the Canadian government, that is understood to apply entirely to the landing of a cable from Europe, and would not shut out the landing of a cable from Canada. The company takes a different view ; but the parliament of Canada has rejected that view in the last year or two by granting a charter to another cable company, giving it the right to do business with Prince Edward Island, as well as with other parts of Canada. The question may possibly have to be decided in the courts ; but the idea of the monopoly has never been acknowledged by the government of Canada.


Robert Laird Borden: I am glad that the matter lias received the attention of the government. There will be an opportunity of discussing it again. May I ask the Minister of Public Works whether the extension of the government system of telegraphs is in pursuance of any definite plan, or whether it is made from time to time as immediate circumstances may seem to require ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I do not think there is any definite plan. Each case is considered
as it comes up.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That was not the statement made a couple of years ago. We were told that there was a definite plan, and that the government telegraph system was being extended from time to time along the coast.


William Stevens Fielding: The general rule with regard to the government telegraph lines is that they shall be extended to portions of the coast which are isolated-in other words, to portions of Canada which ordinary commercial enterprise would hardly reach. That is the idea with which they were started, and we still cling to that idea. In pursuance of it. we are opening up the Yukon and the Labrador coast by telegraph. In a sparsely settled country there may be reasons, in the saving of life and property, for erecting telegraph lines.


Robert Laird Borden: For example, between Port Hawkesbury and Port Hood there is a land line indicated. Is there a private line between these two points ?


Charles Smith Hyman: There is, I understand, a private line between those two points-the main line of the Western Union.
Telegraph lines-Quebec-Bersimis to God-bout telegraph line, P. Q., $6,000.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: What is the distance from Bersimis to Godbout ?


Charles Smith Hyman: About 90 miles.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Is there a drive road or sleigh road between these points ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This is being built along the shore.
Telegraph lines-Quebec-to repair and improve roadway and increase operating facilities generally to eastward of .Godbout, $1,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is not that a provincial
work ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This is for the roadway on either side of the line for the purpose of the maintenance of the line and is not a highway.
Telegraph lines-Quebec-Anticosti island- renewal of line wire between Fox Bay and Becseie River, $3,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How is the Marconi system, to which we are giving $80,000 per year, working ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Very satisfactorily, but this is a matter which comes under the Marine and Fisheries Department.
Miscellaneous-Public Works, arbitrations and awards, including payments authorized, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Civil Service Act, $5,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it because you are expecting to employ civil servants as arbitrators and pay them something in addition to their salaries that you put in this item ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The expenditure last year on this vote was only $226.12. The vote is only taken in case any expenditure should be necessary.
Public Works-miscellaneous-surveys and inspections, $50,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You spent $50,000 last year. What was that for ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It was spent on purchasing instruments and supplies necessary for surveys. The season was too late last year to start the survey, but the supplies were purchased and the parties are out in the field now.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How many is the party to consist of ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Each party consists of ten or twelve-the ordinary survey party.
National Art Gallery, Ottawa, including the purchase of painting on the advice of a committee of artists, $7,500.


Charles Smith Hyman: With the consent of the House $750 of this will be spent in having a painting of the late Chief Justice Armour.
Public Works Department-Chief Architect's office-salaries of architects, draughtsmen and clerks, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $32,200.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why do you put these \\ ords in ' notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act ? '


Charles Smith Hyman: Because these are technical men, not put on the permanent list, and you could not get the services of such men if they had to come in for the small sum of $400.
Public Works Department-miscellaneous- to provide for one half of the salary of the departmental photographer, $800.


Charles Smith Hyman: ,
Mr. SPROuLE. In connection with this vote I would ask why it is that after the adoption of the amendment of last year providing for the placing of these temporary clerks upon the permanent list we still provide the same vote for the same number of employees.


William Stevens Fielding: The amendment of last year did not require that all these persons should not be put on the permanent list. It was an enabling Act which enabled the government to take a number of these temporary people and put them on the permanent list. It was not intended that they all should be put on but in many cases it w;ys done. It was done in many cases but not universally.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I thought that all who had been employed for a certain number of years were placed on the permanent list V


William Stevens Fielding: The intention was to take a number of the temporaries who were especially qualified and worthy and put them on the permanent list. I think in this case they were not put on.
Public Works Department-Miscellaneous- to provide for expenditure in connection with a transportation commission, $25,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We have no report from the Transportation Commission yet. They are visiting different parts of the country and I would suggest that they should make an annual report as they are conducting themselves as if their commission was a permanent commission.


Mr. HYMAN  I .@: think the non. gentleman's suggestion is a good one. There has been no final report yet and I shall communicate with the committee asking them for an interim report or a report which can be distributed with the report of the Public Works Department.
Land and cable telegraph lines, lower St. Lawrence and maritime provinces, including working expenses of vessels required for cable service, also maintenance of Marconi wireless telegraphy at Belle Isle, $80,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I thought this was in the Marine Department.


Charles Smith Hyman: No. I am infornled that this part of the system is working very well and very satisfactory. It is only twenty-two miles.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This was the sum which we gave them.


William Stevens Fielding: No, my hon. friend was mistaken. It happens to be an equal sum but the $80,000 which we gave to the Marconi Company for a station at Glace Bay is what my hon. friend is referring to. That $80,000 was a special vote that appeared only in one year. It was paid and the transaction was closed so far as our expenditure is concerned. The matter has not made

all the progress we could desire, but the Marconi people tell us that the experiments are going on satisfactorily. They have been telling us that for many months, and we are not in a position to give much additional information on the subject. This, however, is a different matter, and is for maintenance of other telegraph service.
Quebec harbour improvements, $100,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This is under contract.


Robert Laird Borden: When will it be completed ?
Mr, HYMAN. It is a large work, and the engineer informs me it will take 18 months anyway to complete it.


Mr. HYMAN  I .@: Is there a time fixed by the contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: A time is fixed by the contract, but the engineer is not prepared to say that it will be completed within the time. A great many difficulties have been met with in regard to dredging, &c., one way and another. I had the pleasure of seeing the work the other day, and I think the contractor has done very good work indeed.
Manitoba-St. Andrew's rapids improvements, Red1 river, $80,000.


Arthur W. Puttee: What position is that work in now ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The engineer's department is looking into the whole question, but I have not yet had any report. They were up there about a month ago.


Arthur W. Puttee: Are you going to call for new tenders, or another contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I have not yet got a report from the engineer ; when I do, I will take the matter into consideration.
Transportation facilities-lower division of Montreal harbour-improvements below St. Mary's current, $75,000.


Robert Laird Borden: When will this work be completed ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Probably it will be completed this fall, this vote is to complete.
Ontario-Port Colborne-harbour improvements, $85,000.


Charles Smith Hyman: This work is under contract, which was let on the 8th of June. 1904, and calls for completion on the 30tli of November, 1905.


Richard Blain: Will the minister give us some explanation of the manner in which the money has been spent at Port Colborne?


Charles Smith Hyman: All by contract. The
main breakwater has been completed. This contract is for a further eastern breakwater.
Some resolutions reported.


Right Hon.   S@: FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved the adjournment of the House.


Robert Laird Borden: What business do you propose to take up to-morrow ?


William Stevens Fielding: I understand an lion, gentleman opposite desires to move an amendment to supply ; therefore a motion to go into supply will be made in the morning. When that motion is disposed of, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice will have some estimates, then the Minister of Public Works.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, House adjourned at 11.55 p.m.

[Stage Direction]
Friday, July 29, 1904.