1904-07-18

Hon.  H. R.@: EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 157) respecting the payment of certaiD railway subsidies. He said : This is a Bill to make it possible to fix the amount of a subsidy before the work is completed. Under the present law a subsidy of $3,900 per mile is contracted for, and under the terms of the Subsidy Act, if the cost of the
railway exceeds $15,000, an additional subsidy can be paid not exceeding $6,400 per mile. This Bill seeks to make it possible, at the request of the railway company, to have a contract entered into, upon the report of the chief engineer, for the payment of a fixed amount. The $3,200 would be paid on progress estimates, as at present, and 70 per cent of the cost above $3,200 would be payable, the remaining 30 per cent being held until the final completion of the work. The operation of the present' Act causes very much difficulty to the department and also to the Auditor General. He favours fixing the amount beforehand, upon a survey and report of the chief engineer, by the Minister of Railways and Canals under the authority of the Governor in Council.


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

[Stage Direction]
Hon. CLIFFORD SIFTON (Minister of the Interior) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 158) to amend the Land Titles Act of 1894. He said : The purpose of the Act is to enable the owner of farm land to register a mortgage under the Torrens system before he has secured the deed from the company from which he buys, such as the Hudson Bay Company, the Canadian Pacific Railway Company or any other land company. Under the Torrens system in the Northwest Territories, an agreement for sale, or anything except an absolute transfer, cannot be registered. There is provision for the filing of a mortgage before the patent issues in the case of land granted directly from the Crown ; but when a farmer buys land from a company, unless he has the deed as the owner, though he may have paid the full price, he cannot register a mortgage on the land. In practice this is found very inconvenient owing to delays on the part of the companies in issuing deeds, and it is proposed to allow the registration of a mortgage on the filing of a certificate from the selling company that the land has 'been paid for in full. While I am amending the Act in this way, I am taking advantage of the circumstance to remove a technical defect that exists in regard to the registration of maps and plans.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

Hon. JOHN HAGGART.: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are called. I wish to ask the following question of the right hon. gentleman who leads the government : Have there been any negotiations between the government and any other per-

son or persons or corporations regarding the acquisition of the Canada Atlantic Railway ? Has any letter or assurance of any kind been given by the government or a member of the council that would encourage the proprietors of the Canada Atlantic Railway to believe that an arrangement would be carried out after the next election ? I f so, what is the price that is agreed upon V


Miss E.  N. H.@: There has been no negotiation of any kind. We have been approached on the subject, but we would not consider the question now.
THE MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND LT.-COL. WHITLEY.	.


Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: Mr. Speaker, I regret that the Minister of Agriculture is not in his place. If he is in the building, I would like to have him sent for.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: If my hon. friend wants to make a speech, we shall go into supply shortly, when he will have a better opportunity.


Samuel Hughes: I am not going to make a speech. I wish to draw attention to the fact that in the organ of the Minister of Agriculture of Saturday last-


Mr. FIELDING.: What is that-the 'Gazette ' ?


Samuel Hughes: I refer to the one that receives $80,000 a year from the treasury of the Dominion of Canada. I hold in my hand a copy of the Montreal ' Herald ' of Saturday last, in which I find the following despatch marked ' special,' which is generally understood in the city of Montreal to be dictated by the minister himself :
Ottawa, July 16.-There is a feeling in military circles that Lt.-Col. Smart, commandant of the 13th Scottish Light Dragoons, should be heard from in reply to a slur cast upon his command. Col. Sam. Hughes on Tuesday evening made a rumour the excuse for the following statement concerning that corps.
Then follows the statement from 1 Hansard' :
As the statement wras made on the floor of parliament, and as there is no truth in it, the opinion here is that Lt.-Col. Smart should show his interest in the good name of his splendid corps by giving it a public denial. A number of the Conservative journals of the country are taking advantage of his silence to give a great deal of publicity to the matter.
Now, If the minister were here, I would ask him, what is current rumour in the city of Montreal. Is it true, or is it not true, that the Minister of Agriculture has once more turned down the Minister of Militia, and has arrogated to himself-


John Graham Haggart: 


Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.: Order.


Samuel Hughes: Has arrogated to himself


Some hon. MEMBERS: Order.


Samuel Hughes: Has arrogated to himself the functions of the Militia Department ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Pardon me. I rise to a point of order. My hon. friend is entitled to ask a question or make an explanation; but if he wants to make a speech, he will have an opportunity in a few minutes to do so.


Samuel Hughes: I will conclude with a motion now.


Wilfrid Laurier: I would suggest to my hon. friend (Mr. Sam. Hughes) that it would be far more proper for him to take this matter up when the House is moved into committee. He could then make whatever statement he wished.


Samuel Hughes: I shall, if necessary, conclude with a motion.


Mr. SPEAKER.: I presume the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sam. Hughes) is going to move the adjournment.


Samuel Hughes: Yes. Once more I say the Minister of Agriculture has overridden the Minister of Militia. It is rumoured in Montreal that the Minister of Agriculture has wired to Colonel Whitley, brigadier of this regiment, and demanded of him a statement of the facts in connection with this matter, and Colonel Whitley, the story goes


William Mulock: I judge from my hon. friend's remarks that he is about to make.some statements about an alleged action of the Minister of Agriculture.


Samuel Hughes: I am.


William Mulock: I observe that the Minister of Agriculture is not at this moment in his seat.


Samuel Hughes: I am not responsible for that.


William Mulock: The hon. gentleman is not responsible, but as a military man would he not think it more fitting that his adversary should be present before he made an attack ? There will be an opportunity, as the premier has pointed out, of taking up this matter at a later period in the day, but if my hon. friend wants to go on

	.


Samuel Hughes: Yes, I am making my statement, and the matter can be brought up again when the Minister of Agriculture is present, if we can get him here.


Mr. FITZPATRICK.: He has been here before.


Samuel Hughes: I am giving what is current rumour in Montreal, and then when tire Minister of Agriculture returns he can take any opportunity he chooses of contradicting this statement.


Mr. CLARKE.: He will have the advantage of reading my hon. friend's statement.


Samuel Hughes: As my hon. friend from West Toronto (Mr. Clarke) points out, he will have the advantage of seeing my remarks and having time to frame his answer. The Minister of Agriculture did wire to Colonel Whitley-I do not know the form of the telegram, but he demanded, I presume, the answer which is referred to here -he wanted a public denial. The story goes that Colonel Whitley was not in a position to give a public denial, but on the contrary sent a public message to the Minister of Agriculture, telling what the facts of the case were.


Edward Frederick Clarke: That correspondence should be brought down.


Samuel Hughes: I think the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Clarke) is right. I wish to have that correspondence brought down, the communication addressed to Colonel Whitley and the answer that this officer sent to the Minister of Agriculture.
I understand furthermore, from telephonic communication with Montreal, that it is rumoured that Colonel Smart is out of the city, but it is also rumoured that Colonel Smart was also wired to on Saturday or Sunday-certainly at some time-and a demand was made on him by the Minister of Agriculture for a denial of this statement. The story goes that Colonel Smart was not in a position to deny these statements, but his telegram to the minister was such as to show that the statements, while possibly not in their exact chronological order, were far within the truth. I would ask the First Minister to be good enough to see that these two telegrams or communications sent by the Minister of Agriculture to the commander of the regiment are brought down.
I will also call attention to the fact that the Minister of Agriculture is stili arrogating to himself the direct control of affairs in the eastern townships instead of having communications sent through the regular channel, through the Minister of Militia and the adjutant general to the district officer commanding and the officers in these various corps. I wish to put some facts on record. One officer did go into camp, a very good fellow, but an officer who was brought in at the last moment owing to the holding up of the organization by the Minister of Agriculture, and this gentleman, the story goes, rode into camp with his ' helmet reversed, with his gaitered shoes on j instead of riding boots, with box spurs in- I 219
stead of jack spurs, with his spurs turned upside down and with two swords upon him


Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.: - He was a warrior.


Mr.   SAM@: one for peace, upon his left side, the other for war upon his right side. Another officer, one of the joint appointees of that Sunday meeting, when the Minister of Agriculture went down to the eastern townships and on the Sabbath day when the minister is so fond of upholding upon platforms in Ontario, held a meeting with the member for Shefford (Mr. Parmelee)-an officer who was a good fellow and against whom I am saying nothing personally, came into camp in a sort of mongrel uniform-in fact I understand there was very little uniform about him and that he was in such a state of intoxication that the brigadier saw fit to send him home.


Wilfrid Laurier: Order.


Samuel Hughes: Now we come to the two special appointments of the Minister of Agriculture. One of these a short time before coming to camp had been fined a large sum, $20 or some such amount, for assaulting an old man, and another had been concerned in improper framing of rifle returns, of cooking the rifle returns for his rifle association in the locality. That is one of the two officers whom the Minister of Agriculture forced on this squadron instead of Dr. Pickel and his cousin Tom Pickel. Another of these officers was proven guilty, as the documents read to the House by the hon. member for Compton (Mr. Pope) show, of having taken a false oath, and he came to camp with a black eye and was a rather discreditable and disreputable officer generally. These are the two officers appointed by the Minister of Agriculture. There are other stories connected with this camp to which I shall not refer at the present moment but which I shall take up later. There is another charge which I would ask the Minister of Militia to note. No one specially objects to the Minister of Militia receiving a salute on an occasion of this kind. He is the head of the department and a military officer, and as such no militiaman in Canada would%object for _ a moment to the Minister of Militia sitting beside the officer in command of the camp and receiving the salute. I think that is quite proper. It is another. matter however to have the Minister of Agriculture or any one else not connected with the militia going to the reviewing point and receiving a salute as the Minister of Agriculture did at Laprairie. It was scandalous and many officers when they saw this Minister of Agriculture receiving the salute hesitated as to whether they were doing their duty to their citizenship in not refusing to salute the officer in command when that salute would be received by the Minister of Agri-

culture. I wonder that the Minister of Militia allowed the Minister of Agriculture to arrogate to himself the salute. I wonder he did not send him back to his place in the rear. A staff officer of the brigadier dare not answer the salute. The staff officer sits perfectly rigid, while his superior receives the salute. I am surprised at the Minister of Militia allowing the Minister of Agriculture thus to bring the Militia Department into discredit.
I understand, too, that a militia order has recently been issued demanding an immediate return of the names and post office addresses of all the officers, non-commissioned officers and men of the militia of the Dominion of Canada. This is the first time I have ever heard of such an order ever being issued, and I would like the Minister of Militia at the proper occasion to give a full explanation of what this order means, and why it was necessary to issue it on the eve of an election. I would also like to know if these names, when procured, will be accessible to every one or whether they are for some special purpose. What is the object of having these names sent for at the present time ?
I see by the papers reference to some attempted interference with the right of free speech on the part of Colonel Ponton late in command of the Belleville regiment by the minister or some officer of the department, and I would like the minister, without formal notice, to bring down to the House the papers in connection with this matter, so that we can have full knowledge of the details of the case.
. I move the adjournment of the Houes.
Motion to adjourn (Mr. Sam. Hughes) ne-' gatived.



THE AUDITOR GENERAL AND THE DAVIS CONTRACT.

Mr. A. W. PUTTEE.: Before you pass to the Orders of the Day, I wish to call the attention of the government to a letter of the Auditor General that appeared in the public press on Friday. It appeared in the [DOT] Evening Journal ' of this city. It deals with a debate that took place in this House last week. The final paragraph of the letter is as follows :
Will Mr. Fitzpatrick bring the papers belore the Public Accounts Committee immediately, where I can have an opportunity of being heard and where this difference can be disposed of, and other questions which may be involved in the Davis contract may be explained by me in the presence of Mr. Fitzpatrick and the members of the Committee ?
Now, Mr. Speaker, I think that the exceptional position of the Auditor General and his particular responsibility to this parliament. demand of us at all events that immediate compliance should be given with Mr. SAM. HUGHES.
this request, and that he be given an opportunity of explaining all that he wishes to explain in connection with the Davis contract. It is very late in the session, and it would appear to me that there is no time now for a formal debate on the matter. I would like to ask the government whether it is their intention immediately to afford an opportunity to the Auditor General of explaining his position by remitting this matter at once, either to the Public Accounts Committee or to a special committee, to deal with.


William Stevens Fielding: The matter presented in the communication to which the hon. gentleman has alluded is new, and it is perhaps rather surprising to see an official of the government and of parliament deal in this manner with public affairs. I am not prepared to say at this moment what action the government may take on the matter. I do not think there has been any lack of opportunity for the Auditor General to make known his views on all the questions that concern his department or on any others. I am not prepared to answer at the moment what action the government may take in view of his recent letter in the public press.


Mr. R. L. BORDEN.: As the Finance Minister has said that the government is not prepared to deal with this matter, possibly he will be able, at a later date, and hs early as convenient, to state what the government propose to do about it, more particularly with respect to calling-as I understood it -a meeting of the Public Accounts Committee, in order that the Auditor General may make any further communication or statement on the subject which he seems desirous of doing.



GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC - EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS ON SURVEYS.

Edward Frederick Clarke: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to ask the Minister of Labour (Sir Wm. Mulock) if verbatim copies of the evidence which has been taken by His Honour Judge Winchester have been supplied from day to day to the Grand Trunk Pacific or to the Grand Trunk Railway authorities ? The matter was brought before the House some weeks ago, and a request was made to the minister for his views respecting the propriety of having the verbatim evidence printed and distributed among the members of the House. I would like to know in what position the matter stands now, whether the evidence is to be printed and laid on the table of the House before the estimates for the Grand Trunk Pacific surveys are discussed ?


Right Hon.   S@: I am not aware that vei-batim copies of the evidence taken before

His Honour Judge Winchester have or have not, from day to day, or at any other time, been furnished to the Grand Trunk or to any one. The inquiries are held publicly in open court, and the reporters .or the public press are in attendance. There is also in attendance a stenographer on behalf of the commission, and it is his duty to take down in full all the testimony given, although I do not think, from the recent correspondence I have had with Judge Winchester, that we can hope to get the testimony in detail here before the House prorogues, if it prorogues at an early date, the inquiry not being closed. Yet I think that the substance of the evidence has really been given to the public by the means to which I have alluded.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Has the stenographer any permission or any instructions to supply copies of the evidence to the Grand Trunk?


William Mulock: I never heard of such a proposition. Upon what authority does the hon. gentleman (Mr. Clarke) make that statement ?


Edward Frederick Clarke: Upon a statement I have received from the secretary of the Society of Civil Engineers for Manitoba and the Territories. Does the hon. gentleman say that he has not given instructions or permission to the official stenographer to give reports of each day's proceedings to either the Grand Trunk or the Grand Trunk Pacific ?


William Mulock: I do not understand the insinuations the hon. gentleman is making. Will he be kind enough to state specifically what he understands has been done.


Edward Frederick Clarke: I have already done so, and I will do so again. I asked the Minister of Labour if it was a fact that copies of the evidence taken before His Honour Judge Winchester had been supplied from day to day by the official stenographer to the Grand Trunk or to the Grand Trunk Pacific ? That is the information I want. I want further to ask if that information had been given with the knowledge and consent of the Minister of Labour V I ask these questions because it seems to me that it is of the highest importance that this parliament should be placed in possession at the earliest possible moment of the official report of the evidence taken by the official investigator. It seems to me to be an extraordinary thing that the Grand Trunk or the Grand Trunk Pacific should be furnished with copies of the evidence taken before the parliament of Canada is supplied with it.


William Mulock: If the hon. gentleman means to say or to insinuate


Edward Frederick Clarke: There is no insinuation. I am asking a question that I have a right to ask.
219*


William Mulock: I am quite prepared to disclose a full statement of the facts. But I want to say in the most emphatic way that I never heard, until this moment, of any such procedure being taken.
I wish to state that no instruction, or permission, or authority was given to any person, to the stenographer of the department, or to any one else in the service of the government to deliver to anybody any evidence except in the regular way : that is, that as the inquiry was proceeding from day to day, and was completed by the judge, he should deliver to the Minister of Labour for the information of parliament the evidence that had been taken. I am perfectly satisfied that, notwithstanding the statement that has been communicated, the false information that has been communicated, to my hon. friend by the secretary, as he says, of the Society of Civil Engineers, there is not a scintilla of foundation for that statement. If I have not completely covered the hon. gentleman's question, I would ask him to consider as made whatever denial it is possible to express in words.



THE MILITIA BILL.

Hon. DAVID TISDALE.: I would ask the Minister of Militia (Sir Frederick Borden) if he is getting the Militia Bill reprinted, and if so, when may we expect it ?


Right Hon.   S@: The order for reprinting was given last week. I cannot say when it will be reprinted, but I will try and let the hon. gentleman know this afternoon.



COASTING LAWS FOR BRITISH PORTS.

Robert Laird Borden: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to ask the government whether there has been any correspondence with the imperial government respecting the exclusion of foreign vessels from the coastwise trade. My reason for asking the question is that I have seen some remarks of Lord Lansdowne which I observe reported in the ' Journal of Commerce and Commercial Bulletin ' of June 25. The report of the remarks of Lord Lansdowne in that journal reads as follows :
The noble Lord has called the attention of the House to a subject of the utmost importance, a subject which has attracted not his attention only, hut that of many others besides. He is correct when he cites a resolution at the conference of colonial premiers in support of his views, and he is also correct in reference to the report of the Subsidies Committee. The resolution of the colonial premiers has been referred to the colonial governments for their opinions. We have received some but not all of their replies, and these vary in their nature. Some of the colonial governments are entirely opposed to the idea of excluding foreign vessels from their coastwise trade, and others, on the contrary, are desirous or intend to do so.

Then Lord Lansdowne proceeds to deal with that subject at considerable length, as reported in this journal, but it is not necessary for the purpose of my question to quote the remainder of his remarks. I wish to know whether any communications have taken place between this government and the government of the United Kingdom with respect to the matter referred to. and if so, whether there is any objection on the part of the government to bring down such communications and place them before parliament.


Right Hon.   S@: Speaking on the spur of the moment I think, though I am not quite sure, that we have had some correspondence on that subject lately-in fact I am pretty sure we have. But whether the correspondence is in condition to he brought before parliament I could not say to-day. Perhaps I could oblige my hon. friend (Mr. R. L. Borden) later on.


Robert Laird Borden: Perhaps the right hon. gentleman (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) would give us whatever information can properly be given to parliament on as early a day as possible.


Wilfrid Laurier: I will look at the correspondence, and see what there is, and then confer with His Excellency.



SECOND READING.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 155) for the relief of Annie Christman.-Mr. Calvert.


Mr. CLARKE asked :: 1.	For how many railways have schedules under the Fair-wage Resolution been prepared since the passage of the resolution ?
2.	What are the railways ?
3.	Have any of these railways been bonused by
the government ?	'
4.	Upon what principle has the resolution been made to apply to railways ?
5.	Is it proposed by the government to continue to apply the resolution to bonus railways ?
6.	Has the resolution been applied to any industry or railway simply because of the industry or railway receiving a bonus from the gov-ment ?


Hon. Sir WILLIAM MULOCK (Postmaster General) :: 1.	Fourteen.
2.	Bay of Quintfi Railway ; Halifax and Yarmouth Railway ; Ottawa. Northern and Western Railway ; Inverness Railway and Coal Company : Canadian Bridge Company for bridge built for South Shore Railway ; Central Counties Railway ; Middleton and Victoria Beach Railway ; Beersville Coal


Robert Laird Borden: and Railway Company ; Intercolonial Railway for a branch and double tracking ; Nova Scotia Eastern Railway ; Magneta-wan River Railway ; Halifax and Southwestern Railway ; Chateauguay and Northern Railway ; Lindsay, Bobcaygeon and Pontypool Railway.
3.	Yes ; thirteen railways received a subsidy
4,	5 and 6. These questions have reference to matters of policy, and are answered by the record of the government.


GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY-ALIENS ON SURVEYS-WARRANTS FOR DEPORTATION.
Mr. CLARKE asked :: 1.	How many warrants have been issued by the Department of Justice, authorizing the deportation of persons reported by Judge Winchester as having violated the provisions of the Alien Labour law ?
2.	Against whom and on what dates were such warrants issued ?
3.	Have any of the offenders been deported ? If so, whom, ion what date, and by what officers?
4.	Has any report been received by the government from any person or officer to whom the warrants of deportation were issued, as to the execution or non-execution of the warrants ; and the reason, if any, given for the non-execution of the warrants ?
5.	Have warrants been issued against all persons so reported by Judge Winchester ? If not, what exceptions were made, and for what reasons ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: One warrant has been issued, and twelve have been prepared, and five have been signed and handed over to the Commissioner of police. The first warrant was issued on 14th June last. None of the offenders have been deported by the police, as my information is that they have left the country. At the request of the Department of Labour, warrants have been issued, or are being issued against all persons reported by Judge Winchester as having violated the provisions of the Alien Labour law with instructions to report as to the manner in which each particular case has been disposed of.


ALIEN LABOUR LAW-ILLEGAL INTERPRETATION.
Mr. RALPH SMITH asked :: 1.	What are the names of the persons reported by Judge Winchester as imported, contrary to the Alien Labour Act, in connection with the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway ?
2.	What positions were given to them on the work ?
8. Have they all been deported ; or are any of them yet engaged on the work ? If so, who ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: The following are the names t


Cassius C.: Van Arsdol, division engineer.


Edward R.: McNeill, district engineer.

Walter Earl Colladay, assistant engineer.
Thomas, C. Taylor, assistant engineer


Charles F.: Gailor, assistant engineer.


James H.: Bacon, harbour engineer.


Edward McD.: Mellen, chief clerk.


Walter M.: Anderson, topographer.
Peter Talbot, topographer.
Herman Mark Goodman, draftsman.
Sherman Hurd Mason, draftsman.


Amos A.: Meador, draftsman.


John C.: Baxter, transitman


Frederick W.: Fink, transitman
Luther Collins Gunn, transitman


John A.: Green, leveller.


Frederick O.: Parsons, leveller.


Stanley J.: Mayo, rodman


MR. GEORGE DIXON'S HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Mr. W. J. ROCHE asked :: 1.	Did Mr. George Dixon, Regina, enter for a homestead for a quarter section adjoining the town site of Craik, N.W.T., three years ago or thereabouts ?
2.	Did he perform his homestead duties within the time specified by law ?
3.	Has an extension of time been granted to him for the performance of those duties ? If so, on how many occasions ?
4.	Is the government aware that Mr. Dixon has let some of this land to different people in small allotments, and that he has not broken any of the land, nor built any house on the same ?
with the exception of Algoma East, Algoina West, Thunder Bay, Muskoka and Nipissing. The lists which have been printed for Ontario up to the present time are as follows [DOT]
Bruce South. Frontenac.
Grey South.
Grey North,
Grey East, Halton,
Hamilton East, Hamilton West, Middlesex North, Middlesex West,
Norfolk,
Ontario North, Peel,
Perth South, Renfrew South, Waterloo North, Waterloo South, Wellington North, Wellington South.
For the province of Quebec the lists are all in. Those printed are as follows :
Bagot,
Beauharnois, Berthier, Bonaventure, Chateauguay, Drummond and Arthabaska, GaspS, Hochelaga, Huntingdon, Jacques Cartier, Kamouraska, LSvis,
L'Lislet,
Maisonneuve,
Missisquoi,
Montmagny,
Montmorency,
Pontiac,
Portneuf,
Quebec East,
Quebec West,
Quebec Centre,
Quebec County, Rouville,
Shefford,
St. Hyacinthe Ste. Anne's, Montreal, St. Antoine, Montreal Ste. Marie, Montreal / St, Lawrence, Montreal St. James, Montreal, Temiscouata.


Hon. CLIFFORD SIFTON (Minister of the Interior) :: 1.	Mr. George Dixon entered for the southwest quarter of section 14, township 24. range 28, west of the 2nd meridian, on the 7th of October, 1901.
2.	Mr. Dixon lias not performed bis homestead duties, but his entry has been protected by the department for the reason that be is a poor man who made bis entry in good faith and intends to go upon the land, which he has been prevented from doing through the disabling of one of his horses and, later on, through diphtheria and other sickness breaking out in his family. He has also met with other reverses which have compelled him to dispose of some of his stock, and it was therefore felt that under the circumstances it would have been a great injustice to have refused his applications for leave of absence.
3.	Yes ; three times.
4.	No ; but a few days ago a letter was received, in which it was stated that Mr. Dixon had let some five acres in allotments to residents of Craik. The charge will he inquired into.



PRINTING OF VOTERS' LISTS.

Mr. BLAIN asked :: In which of the electoral districts under the Representation Act of 1903 have the voters' lists been printed and distributed ?


Miss E.  N. H.@: The electoral lists for all the electoral divisions in Ontario are now in,
The lists for the province of Nova Scotia are all in, with the exception of Cape Breton South and Hants, and all are printed with the exception of these two and Yarmouth.
In New Brunswick the lists are all in, with the exception of Gloucester, and, with that exception, all are printed.
In Prince Edward Island there are no lists.
For Manitoba no lists have yet been received, and, of course, none printed.
For British Columbia uo lists have been received or printed.
In the Northwest Territories there are no lists.



THE ROSS RIFLE.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. NORTHRUP-by Mr. Clarke-asked :
1. How many rifles, known as the Ross rifle, were contracted for by the government ?
2- What were the terms of the contract as to times of delivery and price ?
3.	How many have been delivered, how many accepted, at what dates, and what is the cause of the delay, if any, in delivering ?
4.	What tests as to efficiency and otherwise were stipulated for ; and have the rifles undergone the tests as prescribed ?
5.	When and by whom were such tests made, and what reports or opinions were made or expressed by the inspectors ?
6.	Have any reports been so made or opinions expressed unfavourable to the Ross rifle ; and have any rifles' been since accepted ?
7.	Were any commissions or committees appointed with regard to the Ross rifle ; if so, of
[Stage Direction]
whom do they consist ; and for what specific purpose were they appointed ?
8.	Have any reports or opinions been made or expressed by such committees or by members thereof ? If so, what was the nature of the several reports or opinions ?
9.	Were any and what members of such committees present at the tests of the rifle ?
10.	Is the government aware whether the Ross rifle was at any time submitted for the appror val of the imperial authorities, and with what result ?
Hon. Sir FREDERICK BORDEN (Minister of Militia and Defence) :: 1.	The contract for the Ross rifle was laid on the table of the House shortly after the contract was made. The number of rifles contracted for was 12,000, but under the (terms of the contract the government is under obligation to purchase all the additional rifles which it may require from the Ross Rifle Company.
2.	The terms of the contract were that the rifle should be delivered within the past fiscal year at the rate, I think, of 1,000 rifles per month at the price named in the contract, $25 per rifle.
3.	None have been delivered, The cause of the delay is that they are not finished.
4.	I am not sure, as I have not the contract before me, but speaking from memory I think that no test is stipulated for, but that the rifles were to be subject to the satisfaction of the government inspector.
5.	Answered by No. 4.
6.	No reports unfavourable to the Ross rifle have been made as far as I know.
7.	A committee composed of the Hon. J. M. Gibson, Col. Hughes, Lt.-Col. Anderson, chief engineer of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, Col. Otter, district officer commanding No. 2 district, and Major Gau-det, the head of the Dominion rifle cartridge factory, were appointed a committee to examine the Ross rifle, and as far as I know, all of these gentlemen, or nearly all of them were present at the test which was made. A comparative examination of the two rifles, the present service rifle, the Lee-Enfield, and the Ross rifle was made and the report, I think, was brought down and laid on the table of the House some time ago and was to the effect that all things considered the Ross rifle was superior to the Lee-Enfield rifle.
8.	and 9. Answered by No. 7.
10. I am not sure whether the Ross rifle has been submitted for the approval of the imperial authorities, but I am inclined to think that it was at one time submitted to a subcommittee appointed by the war office to examine it and report upon it. I do not know the nature of the report.



RESIGNATION OF AUDITOR GENERAL.

Mr. CLARKE asked :: 1. Has the government replied to the communication of the Auditor General, dated June Mr. NORTHRUP.
21st, tendering his resignation ? If so, what is the purport of the reply ?
2- Does the government propose to submit the question of the resignation and superannuation of the Auditor General to parliament for consideration and advice ; or does the government propose to deal with the matter without submitting it to parliament ?
,3. Does the government propose to accept the resignation of the Auditor General and to grant the superannuation asked for ; or will the government endeavour to retain his services ; and if successful, recommend to the House that an increase be made to his salary ?
4. What action generally does the government intend to take in the premises ?


Right Hon.   S@: FIELDING (Minister of Finance.) The Minister of Finance has acknowledged tbe receipt of the Auditor General's communication. No other correspondence has taken place. The matter is under consideration.



SPEED OF MAIL STEAMERS.

Edward Frederick Clarke: What was the average speed per hour made during the year 1896 by steamships carrying British and Canadian mails from ports in the United Kingdom to Canadian ports ; and from Canadian ports to ports in the United Kingdom, respectively ?
IRt. Hon. Sir WILFRID LADRIER (Prime Minister). The average speed per hour made by the Allan Line and Dominion Line during the year 1895-6 from ports in the United Kingdom to Canadian ports and from Canadian ports to ports in the United Kingdom, was as follows :



ALLAN LINE.

[Stage Direction]
West bound-Liverpool to Halifax (summer) average 8'9 knots per hour. Liverpool to Halifax (winter), average 9'0 knots per hour.
East bound-Montreal to Liverpool (summer), average 9-4 knots per hour. Halifax to Liverpool (winter), average 10 T knots per hour.

[Stage Direction]
West bound-Liverpool to Halifax (summer), average 9'9 knots per hour. Liverpool to Halifax (winter), average 9'4 knots per hour.	'
East bound-Montreal to Liverpool (summer), average 9-9 knots per hour. Halifax to Liverpool (winter), average 10'5 knots per hour.

Mr. CLARKE asked :: 
Hon. Sir WILLIAM MULOCK (Postmaster General) :: 1.	No.	[DOT]
2.	The government has never so decided, each case as it arises is dealt with on its merits.



PILOTAGE ACT-AMENDMENT.

Hon.   CHAS@: FITZPATRICK (Minister of Justice) moved that the amendments made by the Senate to Bill (No. 100) to amend the Pilotage Act-Mr. Pr&fontaine-be concurred in.


Robert Laird Borden: What are the amendments?


Charles Fitzpatrick: The amendments are not of very great importance. The Bill oi'-iginally provided that the Governor in Council might at any time in the interest of navigation appoint the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to be the pilotage authority for any pilotage district, that by Order in Council the pilotage authority might be changed to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. The amendment made by the Senate is that the change can only be made :
Upon the recommendation of the shipping interests of the port or of the council of the board of trade.
I think this change is a very proper one.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, amendments read the second time and concurred in.

Hon.   CHAS@: FITZPATRICK (Minister of Justice) moved that the amendments made by the Senate to Bill (No. 102) to amend the Shipping Casualties Act, 1901-Mr. Prefon-taine-be concurred in.
Mr. R, L. BORDEN. Would the Minister of Justice be good enough to state what these amendments are?


Charles Fitzpatrick: There are four amendments which are not of very much importance. The first amendment is to section 1 of the Bill. Under the Bill as we have it now the expression ' pilot ' is defined in the following words :
The expression ' pilot ' means any person not belonging to a ship who has the conduct thereof.
To which definition the following words are to be added :
After ' thereof ' insert the following as subsection 2 :
2. The word ' pilot ' is inserted after the word ' mate ' wherever the expression ' master, mate or engineer,' occurs in the said Act.
The next amendment is in respect to the officers winch the government may appoint to make preliminary inquiries respecting shipping casualties. That section is amended so as to provide that the territorial jurisdiction of any such officer or person shall be defined in the appointment. Subsection 2 of paragraph 4 is amended by adding the words after the word 'default' ' or by the incapacity,' so that the section will now read:	.
If, upon a preliminary inquiry, the officer holding it is of opinion that any loss, or damage, or the stranding of any ship, or any loss of life, has been caused by the wrongful act or default or by the incapacity of the pilot in charge. &c.
The next amendment is to section 27 of the Act of 1901 which is section 3 of the Bill we are now considering. By the Bill as it passed this House it was provided that the court could fine
Any licensed pilot in any sum not exceeding one half of the net income he derives from his service as a pilot, based upon his earnings for the previous year.
The change is that of the words
One-half of the net income he derives from his service as a pilot, based upon his earnings for the previous year.
There are substituted the words :
Four hundred dollars and not less than fifty dollars.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, amendments read the second time and concurred in.

['']
Right Hon.   S@: FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved that the House go into Committee of Supply.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Before you leave the Chair, Mr. Speaker, I desire to ascertain just what rights members have in this House when they ask for information which they deem to be of importance, and which they have a right to receive from the government. A few minutes ago I rose in my place to ask the Minister of Labour whether it was a fact that the Grand Trunk officials had been supplied from day to day with the official report of the evidence taken before Judge Winchester ; and I am in the judgment of the House when I say that having asked in the most respectful manner for that information, I was treated in the most boorish manner by the Minister of Labour. It was suggested that in asking for this information I was making a statement that I had no foundation for making, and that charge I resent. The Minister of Labour has been long enough in this House to know how to conduct himself as a gentleman. and to respect the rights of others. I wish now to ascertain from the Prime



[Stage Direction]
Minister if I was not within my rights in what I did ? On the basis of a statement from Mr. Geo. L. Griffith, provincial secretary of the Dominion Institute of Amalgamated Engineers, I asked the question. That statement, dated Winnipeg, 14th of July, is as follows :-
The Grand Trunk Pacific officials have been supplied daily with a copy of the evidence by Judge Winchester's stenographer on instructions from the Minister of Labour.
That statement was mailed to me by the gentleman who has supplied uot only the Minister of Railways, but the Minister of Labour and many hon. members on both sides of the House, with information respecting the allegation made in the first place, as to the employment of alien engineers, and respecting the conduct of the inquiry. Upon the strength of that statement I was quite within my rights in asking for information. I protest that my courteous questions were not treated in a way that I had the right to expect they would be treated. I do not desire to occupy the time of the House, except to say that so long as 1 have the honour of a seat here I shall strive to conduct myself in as courteous and gentlemanly a manner as possible ; but neither the position which the Minister of Labour occupies nor the length of time he has been in this House will save him from castigation if he does uot treat hon. gentlemen as they have the right to be treated by him.
Sir WILFRID LA UR IK  II@: I am sorry that my hon. friend the Minister of Labour is not in the House at the present moment to answer the charge that has been brought against him by my hon. friend from Toronto (Mr. Clarke). I do not think that my colleague is liable to any censure in this respect. As I remember the incident, my hon. friend from Toronto asked whether or not the Grand Trunk officials had been supplied from day to day with a copy of the evidence, and the Minister of Labour answered that he was not aware that anything of the kind had taken place


Edward Frederick Clarke: Might I remind the Prime Minister that the Minister of Labour asked once or twice what I was insinuating.


Wilfrid Laurier: The Minister of Labour stated that he was not aware that any such information had been given to the Grand Trunk Company, and my hon. friend (Mr. Clarke) was surprised, because he evidently anticipated an answer to the contrary. The hon. gentleman pressed the point and thereupon my colleague stated that the hon. gentleman was misinformed, that Judge Winchester had no such instructions, and that he was not aware that such a thing had taken place. I may further say that in the relations between gentlemen on both sides of the House, there is I believe an effort to carry on these relations in a gentlemanly manner, and I am quite sure Mr. CLARKE.
that the Minister of Labour would be the last to be guilty of any boorishness-I do not think that was the proper word for my hon. friend to use. We are all human and liable to get hot, and probably in this very hot weather it is hard to keep cool.


Robert Laird Borden: Statements have been made to me to the contrary, of what the Minister of Labour would lead the House to believe. I am not presuming to pronounce judgment upon what the true facts may be, but I will read the statements that have been made to me from the same source which has been mentioned. This letter is from the Secretary of the Society of the Amalgamated Engineers, and it says :
Although 'copies of our letters to the government department were immediately forwarded to Mr. C. M. Hays, a similar courtesy was not afforded to us. The various communications of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway did not reach us until the second return sessional papers No. 124 ordered by parliament was brought down and a typewritten copy sent to us.
Further :
We respectfully asked the Minister of Labour to allow His Honour, Judge Winchester, to supply us with a typewritten copy of the evidence taken before the commission so that we could intelligently follow the investigation and render assistance, but our request was refused, although Mr. C. M. Hays and the Grand Trunk Pacific officials were supplied with typewritten copies of the evidence daily.
I do not know whether that is correct
or not, but that is the statement made to me and I am informed that a similar statement has been made under date, July 14tli, to the Minister of Railways.


William Mulock: Is that the same question that was up before this morning ?


Robert Laird Borden: I will repeat the extracts I have read for the Postmaster General who was not present. I have stated that I do not know whether the statements are correct or not, but they do not appear to be in harmony with the views of the Postmaster General.


William Mulock: I recognize the writer of that letter as Mr. Griffith.


Robert Laird Borden: I so stated.


William Mulock: As to the statement that his letters to me were furnished to Mr. Hays whilst a similar courtesy was not extended to him ; that is incorrect. In any case where I transmitted a copy of Mr. Griffiths' letter to Mr. Hays I did the same to Mr. Griffith. I made no distinction between either of the parties to the case ; I was desirous of getting at the facts ; I wanted to see where the truth was. Mr. Griffith was charging-and as the facts have disclosed very correctly charging

that United States engineers and others had been

employed, aud Mr. Hays was not giving us that information that I thought the circumstances entitled us to. There was a withholding of testimony so that it was impossible to determine what the facts were. During the whole of that correspondence which I was conducting with Mr. Griffith and Mr. Hays, in order that each one should know what the pther was saying to me, I deemed it my duty to transmit to the one the copies of the other's letters so that they would know what case was to be answered. Mr. Griffith was treated with every courtesy; just as much as Mr. Hays was. With reference to the statement that he applied to the department to furnish him from day to day with a verbatim copy of the evidence ; this was after the inquiry had begun and when it was proceeding at Winnipeg. The department had no machinery for furnishing the public with verbatim copies of the evidence. The meetings were public, the press was represented. We had one stenographer to take down in shorthand the evidence. I should be amazed to learn ; I am as satisfied as I am of my existence that there is not a scintilla of truth in the statement, that any officer of the department furnished verbatim or other copies to the Grand Trunk Company or to any other body. I am perfectly satisfied that it never occurred, but the stenographer is here and I will make inquiry at the department, and I will answer the hon. gentleman later on that point.


Robert Laird Borden: That is perfectly satisfactory. I have no knowledge of the truth of the statement, but I thought it advisable to bring it to the attention of the hon. gentleman.


William Mulock: I am satisfied that it is an unqualified mistake.


Robert Laird Borden: But I would hardly regard this society as in the position of the general public, so far as its right to receive the evidence is concerned, because it is the body which brought the matter to the attention of the government. Therefore I would suppose that any facility of that kind might very properly be furnished to it.
Sir WILLIAM MULOCIv. They were in attendance, and any one who read the Winnipeg papers would see that the evidence was taken down aud published very fully by them-in some instances as fully as it was taken down by the stenographer-and every facility was afforded to them to know everything that was going on. Mr. Winchester invited co-operation, and no step could be taken by him that would in my judgment in the slightest degree promote a more efficient inquiry than has been held.


Mr. EMMERSON.: My hon. friend has stated that there was a communication sent to the Minister of Railways' similar to the
one which he has received from Mr. Griffiths.


Robert Laird Borden: I said I am so informed. I have no knowledge of it myself.


Henry Robert Emmerson: I may say that up to Saturday night I had not received any such communication, and so far as I have been able to go through my letters this morning, I found none. My correspondence was very voluminous, and I have not been able to open all my letters which have come in the mails since Saturday night; but if there is any such communication, I will bring it to the notice of my hon. colleague, the Minister of Labour.


THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY.
Mr. F. D. MONK.: Mr. Speaker, before you leave the Chair, I desire to place before the House a grievance in connection with the tobacco industry of Canada. I mentioned a few days ago to my right hon. friend the leader of the government that I would avail myself of this opportunity to place before the House certain facts connected with that industry, and I will proceed to do so as briefly as possible, concluding by moving an amendment to this effect:
That the government has not given the tobacco industry of Canada the protection and encouragement it is entitled to.
I think I shall be able to demonstrate that that industry has been neglected in a culpable degree by the government, in spite of the repeated representations made to the government in various forms, by deputations, by memoranda, and by correspondence. In fact, the day after I had given notice of this motion to my right hon. friend, my hon. friend the Minister of Inland Revenue (Hon. L. P. Brodeur), gave notice of a resolution, the object of which is to remedy, at any rate in part, the grievance complained of, which is proof, I think, that the government has been remiss in its duty to this industry. I will refer to that resolution briefly as I proceed with the examination of this question. I will content myself with giving summarily to the House the information which I deem absolutely necessary to a proper understanding of this question, without which the House could not really appreciate the motion which I propose to move.
It may not be known to all the members of this House, though it is known to many, that the tobacco industry is one of great interest to a large number of people in Canada, and that the culture of tobacco, which has received an increased amount of attention in the last few years, is extremely remunerative. Therefore, anything connected with that branch of agriculture ought to interest us to a very large degree. The culture of tobacco, as it lias been carried on by many of our people in different parts of

Canada, is susceptible of yielding from $120 to $150 an acre, and even more. If you get from an acre, properly cultivated, 1,200 or 1,500 pounds of tobacco, which is sometimes obtained, you will receive for it at a moderate estimate 10 cents per pound. Consequently tobacco culture is one of the most remunerative kind ; and if proper means had been taken to encourage that culture and the domestic trade in our own homegrown tobacco, as well as the foreign trade which that article is susceptible of obtaining, we would have done a great deal to enrich the farmers who give themselves up to this culture in different parts of the country. In the province of Ontario, tobacco is principally cultivated, I believe, in the county of Essex ; but in my own province it is cultivated pretty extensively everywhere. In the counties of Montcalm, E'As-somption, and one or two others in their vicinity, the culture of tobacco is very extensive. It has been remunerative, and it is susceptible of being made still more so if the means suggested to encourage its cultivation and trade are adopted. It is cultivated to a considerable extent in my own county, and in other counties around the city of Montreal. In some instances where the culture has been carefully attended to, the results have been really phenomenal. So that the matter deserves the attention of the House as regards both the manufacture and the cultivation. Perhaps I had better proceed to mention at once what are the present duties upon tobacco. The customs duties on tobacco, cigars and cigarettes are $3 per pound, and 25 per cent ad valorem ; on manufactured tobacco and snuff, 50 cents per pound ; on cut tobacco. 55 cents per pound. The article is also susceptible to a very considerable rate of excise duties, which I will briefly give to the House. The excise duties are as follows : On foreign manufactured tobacco, 25 cents per pound ; on Canadian home-grown tobacco, 5 cents per pound ; on combination tobacco, that is, tobacco proper, partly of Canadian leaf and partly of foreign leaf, 5 cents per pound. Then, there is an excise duty which is in reality a customs duty, but which for purposes of convenience has been made collectable by the Department of Inland Revenue because that department has greater facilities for apportioning this particular duty properly, calculating the moisture of the tobacco and its proper weight. On raw leaf, foreign tobacco, there is an excise duty of 10 cents oer pound ; on stemmed raw leaf, scraps and cuttings, foreign tobacco. 14 cents per pound. I think that is the only original duty which has been imposed by the present government upon tobacco. The other duties to which I have referred existed previous to the present government coming into power. On cigarettes made from foreign leaf there is an excise duty of $6 a thousand ; on cigars made from domestic leaf, $3 a thousand ; on combination cigars, that Mr. MONK.
is, cigars made partly from foreign and partly from home-grown tobacco, an additional excise duty of 16 cents per pound ; and on combination cigarettes, an additional excise duty of 37J cents per pound.
On combination cigars made from stemmed tobacco and scraps and cuttings of tobacco, a still further duty of 23 cents per pound, and combination ^cigarettes made partly from stemmed tobacco, imported into the country, and partly with homegrown tobacco, an additional duty of 53 cents per pound.
In connection with combination tobacco, the [DOT] nature of which I have already explained, there are still further duties. Combination tobacco from foreign leaf is subjected to a duty of 20 cents per pound additional and combination tobacco made from stemmed foreign leaf, 23 cents additional. These special duties imposed upon combination tobacco have been so calculated as to impose upon tobacco made partly of foreign leaf and partly of native leaf, a measure of duty based upon the duty imposed on pure native tobacco and the duty imposed on foreign tobacco separately.
There is a duty on snuff tobacco, moist, of 18 cents and dry, of 25 cents.
There are still further duties which I feel I should mention so as to put the House in full possession of the state of our tariff as regards the article in question. There are still further duties on cigarettes as follows :-Foreign cigarettes not more than 3 pounds per thousand, a duty of $3 per thousand; foreign cigarettes, weighing more than 3 pounds per thousand, $8 per thousand ; Canadian cigarettes, that is cigarettes made purely of Canadian tobacco, $1.50 per thousand ; combination cigarettes, made partly with foreign leaf and partly with native leaf, $1.50 per thousand.
These duties which I have just explained in detail to the House result from the legislation passed in chapter 19 of 60 and 61 Vie., being legislation to amend the Inland Revenue Act and moreover in virtue of Orders in Council dated 1st July, 1897 and 19th of June, 1903. The object of these Orders in Council was to apportion in an equitable way the duties to be imposed and collected upon combination tobacco. Therefore I understand that what the present government has done, that is what constitutes its own legislation so to speak, is the imposition of a duty on the foreign leaf of 10 cents and a duty of 14 cents imposed on the stemmed leaf. There is also to be credited to this government the apportionment of the duties under the Orders in Council which I have just cited, and the excise duty upon combination tobacco in such a way as to collect the duty in a reasonable way upon the foreign ingredients in the combination tobacco and also upon the home grown leaf entering into its manufacture. Having stated the legislation

that has been passed upon this subject, I deem it necessary to lay before the House the result of this legislation since the past few years. I shall begin with a statement of the quantity of tobacco manufactured in this country in the three classes of imported, Canadian and combination tobacco.


Mr. BRODEUR.: Would the hon. gentleman be good enough to state how much protection 'the tobacco manufacturers are receiving to-day ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I have, I think stated, that in giving the duties in detail. If my hon. friend wants to know what further protection they require, I will come tcT~that in a moment.
The following table shows the quantity of tobacco of each kind manufactured in Canada from year to year :-
a remainder of 7.001.900J pounds, the exact amount of foreign tobacco employed :
There are some further figures which I desire to give in as brief a form as possible :


CIGARS MANUFACTURED IN CANADA, 1903.
[Stage Direction]
Total of tobacco employed	 3,131,377 bs.
Imported tobacco. Canadian. Combination. No.	No.	No.162,397,342	2,935,560	6,663,330

[Stage Direction]
Lbs.
produced in
	 13,629,520
. 8,341,685 lbs.
.. 5,287,835 lbs
tobacco
Year.
Canadian. Combination.
Lbs. 4,447,978 668,627 1,901,224 2,093,883 2,368,935 3,106,662 2,932,043 3,151,724
Lbs.
368,019
1,173,839
1,201,759
1,282,806
1,770,767
Imported.
Lbs.
1896		 9,169,299
1897		 7,980,884
1898		 8,408,129
1899		 7,349,270
1900		 6,931,132
1901		 6,761,532
1902..	.. .. 7,109,309
1903	 7,361,575
That is to say, that within the past few years there has been less imported tobacco manufactured in Canada and a great deal more Canadian tobacco and a steady increase of tobacco manufactured partly with foreign and partly with native leaf.
Now, let us see in a second table how the industry stands in regard to cigars and cigarettes, imported. Canadian, combination, the same order as in regard to the manufactured tobacco.
Canadian. Combination
Lbs.
1,289,000
1,561,040
2,383,966
4,687,150
2,881,360
Lbs.
4,222,770
6,581,640
6,966,195
6,622,288
Year.	Imported.
Lbs.
1896..	..	85,994,4001897..	..	106,496,1801898..	..	86,656,5671899..	..	105,359,8281900..	..	133,608,4171901..	..	258,514,8671902..	..	274,363,2051903..	..	335,222,014
This shows a considerable increase in the use of native leaf in the manufacture of cigarettes. Now, let us take the total manufactured tobacco :

[Stage Direction]
Lbs.
Total manufactured tobacco in 1903. .12,688,775i
Canadian tobacco	
3,165,207	lbs.Combination	
1,772,974	lbs.Cigarettes 'with com-	.bination No	
158,694
5,596,875
7.091.900J
In other words, if you substract from the total quantity manufactured the quantity of Canadian tobacco manufactured, you have
Total of leaf
manufactures	
Leaf tobacco imported Canadian leaf tobacco
13,629,520
All the figures that I have given are from page 82 of the report of the Department of Inland Revenue for 1003. I gather from these figures that the quantity of imported tobacco has diminished in recent years,while the quantity of home-grown consumed is greater. The reports indicate that the quantity of home-grown has improved, and the country, although consuming a great deal more tobacco than formerly, has imported less of the foreign tobacco and has used a greater quantity of native growth. This is a fact that is not generally known, but which it is necessary to make known in order that we may appreciate the motion that is now before the chair. In view of these important facts, it is understood, those engaged in the culture and manufacture of tobacco have represented to the government on several occasions and in a variety of ways, as by petitions, deputations and so on. that it is now absolutely necessary to do something more than has been done hitherto to foster and protect that industry. It is necessary, in order to give that most remunerative culture and industry the encouragement that is deserved, to take additional means to ensure its still greater development. The principal points submitted to the government and upon which tobacco manufacturers and growers have made representation I may mention in their order, and briefly that I may not take up too much time.
In the first place, the industry has represented to the government most emphatically that it is necessary to adopt legislation in order to suppress the monopoly of the American trust, the American Tobacco Company. It is known that at present we are threatened ' throughout the. country, and particularly throughout the province of Quebec and large centres like Montreal and Quebec with the absolute monopoly of the tobacco trade, a monopoly which, as I am informed. can be traced to the great American tobacco trust which is represented here by two Canadian associations incorporated an-
[Stage Direction]
der our own law, but which in fact, represent the American tobacco trusts ;-I refer to the American Tobacco Company and the more recently incorporated Imperial Tobacco Company. Conceiving that that monopoly is injurious to the trade and has a tendency to curtail the trade and to centre it all in the hands of this monopoly, the tobacco manufacturers have made representations to the government in order to have it abolished. Conceiving also that ultimately the monopoly will affect the tobacco growers of Canada as it will finally place in the hands of the monopoly control of the entire output of tobacco in Canada, the tobacco growers also have protested against this monopoly. The government, on several occasions have had deputations wait upon them, and, to some of these parties they have promised to put an end to the monopoly by legislation. In fact, last session, my hon. friend the Minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick) in pursuance of this introduced an amendment to the criminal law having for its object the abolition of that monopoly. That amendment which was calculated to meet the existing difficulty, was abandoned. It is true that an amendment of an analogous nature has been introduced by my hon. friend the Minister of Inland Revenue (Hon. Mr. Brodeur) since I gave notice that this subject would be brought up for discussion ; I will say a word about that amendment before I resume my seat. The tobacco industry has asked, further, as a means of encouraging this remunerative industry a moderate increase in the duty upon imported tobacco. I believe the deputation asked for an increase of ten cents per pound on foreign tobacco and fourteen cents per pound on the foreign manufactured article. This small increase is necessary under the British preference, for the great American tobacco trust has now more or less transferred the seat of its operations from the United States to England. We receive from England, particularly in recent years, very large consignments of tobacco, the property of this trust, which is sold here far more largely than before, under the rebate of the British preference, and at reduced cost of manufacture, I believe. In the third place the industry has asked for the use of a uniform stamp upon all tobaccos whether imported or not. The reason for that is that the green stamp used for Canadian tobacco solely, as experience shows, has the effect of rather impeding the sale of Canadian tobacco. As everybody knows there is, in some quarters a certain prejudice against the home-grown tobacco, and the colour of the stamp has the effect of preventing the sale of the homegrown tobacco.
I believe there are at the present time three stamps used by the Department of Mr. MONK.
Inland Revenue, a black stamp, a red stamp ' and a green stamp, put upon the Canadian 1 products. What they have asked is merely that stamps of a uniform colour may be used, and the testimony of all those versed ' on the subject is that it would be a great advantage in an indirect way to the cultivation of Canadian tobacco. They have asked in addition something which I think is of very great importance, and without which the industry to which I am referring cannot really prosper satisfactorily in this country. They have asked for the establishment-in connection with our experimental farms, I presume, would be the cheapest manner-of experimental stations where tobacco growers could obtain profitable information as regards the cultivation of tobacco, both for home and foreign market. Those acquainted with the subject know that our home market is insufficient, while there are large markets abroad for our tobacco which we can obtain with a little effort, there is no doubt whatever about that. They have therefore asked for these experimental stations conducted by the government itself, in order to encourage the cultivation of our own tobacco. Furthermore, they have asked for the establishment of a bureau of information in order to keep those engaged in the tobacco culture fully informed of the requirements of the home and foreign markets, exactly as is done at the present moment by the publication of bulletins by the experimental farm. The Central Experimental Farm gives the farmers information, both as regards the improvement of the growth of the products of their farms, and also in regard to the markets, domestic and foreign. There is no doubt that our tobacco growers, if information were carefully prepared by the government and given out to them in bulletins from time to time, could greatly improve and increase the output of tobacco.
Not long ago an important deputation came to Ottawa from my own province and laid all these matters very fully before the government. Without going fully into the details of their representations, i may say that the deputation was introduced to the right hon. the Prime Minister and to my hon. friends the Minister of Inland Revenue and the Minister of Finance. They asked for a small increase in the duty, they asked for a uniform stamp, for the reason I have stated, the establishment of experimental stations, the establishment of a bureau of information and for a law to put an end to the tobacco monopoly now in the hands of a trust. The deputation was introduced by my hon. friend from L'Assomption (Mr. R. C. Laurier). I find that the counties of Montcalm and L'Assomption were very well represented on that deputation by leading men, and among other delegates I may mention Mr. Wilfrid Legault and Mr. Claude, of the parish of St. Lau-

rent, in the county of Jacques Cartier, and there were gentlemen from other parishes. Mr. Legault is engaged in the manufacture of tobacco at St. Laurent, and has taken a very active part in the representations made to the government.
Now I wish to submit that the government has not acceded, so far as I can see, to a single one of those requests, though the government has repeatedly recognized the justice of those demands and representations. Now in regard to the monopoly, the government assured those who wished to put an end to it, that the moment the existence of that monopoly and its injurious effects were established, that moment legislation would be introduced to put an end to that monopoly. Judge McTavish was appointed by the government to hold an inquiry in order to ascertain-I believe that ' was the restrictive scope of the inquiry- whether such a monopoly existed. I moved last year for a copy of the report of Judge McTavish. It contained many interesting details in regard to the existence of this monopoly, but I will not take up the time of the House in referring to them fully. As a matter of fact, the finding of Judge McTavish was that the monopoly did exist. In hifi report he gives us the text of the contracts that are made by the American Tobacco Company with dealers, with what we call jobbers in tobacco, and the text of the contract which the Imperial Tobacco Company makes with the jobbers in cigars and cigarrettes ; and he arrives at the conclusion, which is very clear, in the light of the texts of these contracts and of the accompanying testimony given in the investigation, that the monopoly exists, and that it is impossible for those who deal in the goods of the trust to do so with any prospect of profit except by conforming to the exclusive regulations of the monopoly. The American trust has secured the very best brands of tobacco, the best brands of cigarettes and the brands that have most favour in the market, and nobody can obtain a sale of these articles from the company except by signing this contract, which has a monopolistic effect. Judge McTavish therefore arrives at the conclusion that the monopoly really exists. It has the effect, says the judge, of restricting the trade to a few hands. He was not able, nor had he instructions, to inquire as to whether it injured tobacco growers, but I think he says in his report that it must ultimately have that effect. Judge McTavish points out that in the state of Massachusetts where a similar evil exists, legislation has been passed to put an end to it, but that was so recently that he had not been able to find out what were the results. Well, that inquiry having been made and the report laid before the government, it became the duty of the government to introduce legislation to put an end to what they admitted themselves was an evil. Last year the Minister of Justice, as I have already stated proposed to add article 520a to the Criminal Code in the following terms :
520a. Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable, if convicted upon indictment, to a fine not exceeding	, and
not les-s than	, and on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding and not less than	, who, being a
manufacturer of or dealer in any class of goods,
(a.) makes a sale of any such goods to a person who sells or intends to sell goods of that class in connection with his own business subject to a condition that the purchaser shall not sell or deal in goods of a like kind produced by, or obtained or to be obtained from, any other manufacturer or dealer, or
Ob.) makes such a sale upon terms that would in their application deprive the purchaser of any profit upon the sale of such goods, if he should so sell or deal, or
(c.) consigns any such goods to another person for sale upon commission upon such terms that the consignee can profit by such sale only if he does not sell or deal in goods of a like kind manufactured by or obtained or to he obtained from any other manufacturer or dealer : provided that it shall not be an offence under this section to appoint an agent or sole agent for the sale of goods or the making of contracts for the exclusive sale of goods.
That amendment, introduced by my bon. friend the Minister of Justice, acting, I presume, from the conviction obtained by the government from this commission that the evil existed and that it was necessary to put a stop to it, remained a long time before the House last year and was ultimately dropped, for what reason I do not know. I know that some question was raised as to the effect this amendment might have on other lines of business that bad been subject to close scrutiny, but it might have been restricted to the tobacco industry, since the evil existed and since the bon. Minister of Justice and the bon. Minister of Inland Revenue had promised faithfully that the evil would be remedied. The measure was dropped, and. as I stated a moment ago, the bon Minister oif Inland Revenue, after I bad given him notice of my intention to bring* this subject before parliament, introduced a measure of an analogous nature which I do not think goes far enough. My bon. friend, in his proposed amendment, which is embodied in the resolution now before the House-
Mr. BRODEUR, Does my bon. friend think this is a proper opportunity to discuss this amendment ? I do not think it would be regular on a motion to go into Committee of Supply to discuss the subject of a notice of motion.
Frederick Debartzch Monk: I am not discussing that motion itself, but I am discussing the nature of the remedy which it is evidently the intention of the government to apply in regard to this complaint. I do not intend to dwell

at any great length upon it. We will discuss it when it comes up in regular way, but what he proposes is to give the lion. Minister of Inland Revenue the right, if he finds the condition of things to exist which is pointed out by Judge MacTavish in his report, which is alleged by those who complained to the government and which is described in the proposed amendment introduced last year by the lion. Minister of Justice, to withdraw the license from the licensed manufacturers who have a contract of that kind ; in other words, since the evil exists, since it has been recognized by the government, instead of applying the bare remedy which the government had promised to introduce, the Department of Inland Revenue has the power, if it finds that a monopoly exists, as it lias been proved to exist, to' withdraw the license from one of the licensees or one of the manufacturers. I will say at once to my hon. friend that I would rather see that done than nothing at ail. The government should have the power at any time, if sufficient pressure Is brought to bear upon it, to put an end to the evil in that way, but what I submit to the House is that it leaves the hon. minister the sole judge of the extent of the evil.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I would like to Know where the hon. gentleman gets that information, because I do not see anything of the kind in the resolution of which I have given notice.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: This is the resolution of which my hon. friend gave notice on Friday last


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is nothing mentioned about the Inland Revenue Department or the Minister of Inland Revenue.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: This is what it says :
Resolved, that it is expedient to amend the Inland Revenue Act, in providing that :
(2.) Any license authorized by this Act may be cancelled in any case where a person who, being a manufacturer of any class of goods subject to a duty of excise, either directly or indirectly-
Then follow the clauses of the amendment introduced last year.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It does not provide that this power is vested in the Department ol' Inland Revenue or in the Minister of Inland Revenue.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It is vested in the government, at any rate. It is an amendment of the Inland Revenue Act, and I suppose that any action that is taken to put this amendment into force would have to start with the hon. Minister of Inland Revenue. Probably it would require to be confirmed by Order in Council, but all I mean to say is that instead of curing the evil, as was promised last year, this is simply legislation having for its object to allow the government to cure the evil if it sees fit to do so Mr. MONK.
This is another example, among many which I have known since I became a member of this House in 1896, of the government taking into its own hands power which, I submit, ought to be exercised by parliament alone. This is in regard to the great grievance which exists and which the government has often been requested to put au eud to. Now, as a matter of fact, and as I think the hon. Minister of Inland Revenue is aware, the trust or the monopoly has not remained idle since the holding of the inquiry by Judge MacTavish, but it has gradually increased its hold upon the trade, and it is threatening to get possession of the whole tobacco trade of Canada, in so far as the manufacture of tobacco, cigars and cigarettes is concerned. I find that the output of cigarettes in 1902 was 137,000,000, and that the American Tobacco company sold of this number 109,000,000 in Canada. Since 1901, I think it is admitted that the trust has seized hold of the manufacture of Canadian leaf under the name I have already indicated, of the Empire Tobacco; Co(hi-pany, and by lits exclusive contract, to which I do not like to refer at any greater length, but which is amply set forth in the report of Judge MacTavish, it is gradually getting hold of the whole business In tobacco, and it is a mere question of time when this huge corporation will be able to control absolutely the output of Canadian tobacco. Not only is that the fact, but those who are largely interested in tobacco growing and those engaged in the manufacture of tobacco, who are not dependent on the trust, and there are among these a great many experts, agree that that is the result to which we are tending now.
I do not think the government has a satisfactory record so far as the monopoly is concerned, and it Is evidently because the government had a feeling of contrition and compunction, that, when they saw this question was going to be referred to in parliament, they judged fit to introduce the mild remedy of which the Minister of Inland Revenue gave notice last Friday. The government has refused to give any additional protection to the tobacco industry. All those Interests in that industry agree that a little additional protection would be necessary, but the last deputation that came here to get additional protection was told by the 'government that it was too late this year, thereby giving them to understand that probably additional protection would be afford-'ed at a later date. It is admitted on all hands that some additional protection would not diminish the revenue because the slightly increased rate of duty would amply compensate for the diminution of importations if such diminution would follow. Moreover, we must have foreign leaf in this country and Canadian leaf cannot by any possibility totally displace it. Even the most sanguine and enthusiastic supporter of the Canadian tobacco industry does not ad-

vance the pretention that the public demand will be satisfied with Canadian leaf alone. Canadian tobacco has been Improved it is true, and we can send a great deal of it to foreign markets, but we cannot prevent the importation of the foreign leaf which Is absolutely required in this country. There would therefore be no diminution of revenue and it seems to lie admitted that the increase in the consumption of the commoner kind of tobacco would be a great help to the inative industry. The demand of those interested, made to the government, that there should be uniformity in the stamps placed on tobacco is a most reasonable one. Dealers and growers have represented that the distinctive green stamp on Canadian tobacco creates a prejudice against it, and impedes its sale. They, therefore, ask that stamps of the same colour be used for all kinds ;of tobacco, and I do not think the government has given any sufficient reason why this demand should not be acceded to.
At One o'clock House took recess.
House resumed at Three o'clock.


ROYAL ASSENT.
Lawrence Geoffrey Power: I have the honour to inform the House that I have received the following letter from the Secretary of His Excellency the Governor General.
Ottawa, 16th July, 1904. Sir,-I have the honour to inform you that the Honourable Mr. Justice Sedgewick, acting as deputy to His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to the Senate chamber, on Monday,' the 18th instant at 4.30 p.m. o'clock, for the purpose of giving assent to certain Bills which have passed the Senate and House ot Commons during the present session.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
(Sgd.) F. S. MAUDE, Major, Governor General's Secretary. The Honourable
The Speaker of the House of Commons.


THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY.
Frederick Debartzch Monk: Did time permit, I should be very glad to he permitted to go further into Judge MacTavish's report, and I would have been pleased to read certain letters which I have received from tobacco manufacturers and tobacco growers in the province of Quebec, strongly urging the views which I am endeavouring to impress upon jthe government. I now shall say a few words upon the refusal of the government to establish experimental posts in compliance with the request made by those who have experience in the matter. I shall also refer to the absolute neglect of the governmnt to establish a sort of information bureau for [DOT] the growers of Canadian tobacco, and which could be established at small expense. The government is in possession of a petition signed by all the influential people interested in the tobacco industry in my province,
,and which promulgate the views of which I have given a brief resume. Neither the report of Judge MacTavish, not this petition, which bears one thousand signatures, nor the very important report of Mr. Blaise Dugas have been printed and circulated for the information of those interested in the industry as they should have been. Mr. Blaise Dugas, whom I do not know personally, but who is, I am told, an expert, was sent to Belgium two years ago to obtain complete information on the possibility of there being a demand for Canadian tobacco on the European market. That report ot Mr. Dugas, which I moved for in this House .was brought down on the 27th day of May last. I do not wish in any way to minimize the importance of the scant information contained in Mr. Dugas's report, but I say that he supports very strongly the argument that I am advancing for the information of the government. However, Mr. Dugas's investigation was very incomplete and very superficial Tfie information contained in his report as to the value of the Belgium and Dutch market for our tobacco is of little practical use. Had the government sent over samples of our tobacco with instiuc-tions to our representatives in London, Paris and Belgium to make a report, an equally good result could have been obtained at much less cost. The fact, however, that the government did send over Mr. Dugas proves that strong pressure had been brought to bear and that the ques-tiou deserved greater attention than the government had seen fit to give to it. Mr. Dugas took ten or twelve packages of tobacco with him; he submitted'them to some leading dealers in Antwerp, London. Liverpool. Glasgow and elsewhere, and we have his views as to their opinions.
What is important is this-and it will no doubt surprise the House-that this tobacco. taken principally from the counties of L'Assomption and Montcalm, not cured, not packed, not prepared as tobacco should be in order to obtain a favourable reception in European markets, was most favourably received by those who were privileged to examine it. I do not wish to take up the time of the House by reading extracts from Mr. Dugas's report; but if the government sees fit to have it printed, as it undoubtedly should be, members of the House will at once see, to their surprise, I am sure, that in England there is a very good market for our tobacco. The merchants who were consulted by Mr. Dugas are men of great responsibility, commendable in every way ; and from the observations they made to him it is evident that in the markets of England, Scotland and Ireland, which consume over 100,000,000 pounds of tobacco a year, there is a good opening for our tobacco, provided that proper attention is given to the cultivation of the plants, the curing and the packing. Now, summing up the observations of the Belgian, Dutch, Liverpool, Glasgow



and London tobacco dealers. I venture to [DOT]say that they all agree that the samples which they inspected, which were brought over by Mr. Dugas would, with improvement, constitute a very good tobacco for sale on the British and continental markets. It (appears, from the observations of these gentlemen, what most of us know, that what we require is not only an improvement in the cultivation of the tobacco, but proper training in regard to curing and packing it. But if these needs are provided, we have an unlimited market open to iis in England and on the continent. In order to secure .these ends it would be necessary for the government, as Mr. Dugas recommends in his report, and as all those who have any knowledge of the subject have earnestly urged upon the government time and again, to have some experimental stations. Members of the House will be surprised to hear, for instance, that most of the tobacco that is used in Belgium is grown in Wisconsin. The Americans have opened an immense market for their tobacco all over Europe ; but they have spent far more than $30,000,000 in acquiring the necessary science in the cultivation of tobacco, and the curing and packing of it, to suit that great market. That is for us a very important point, because our market is strictly limited. The counties of Essex and Kent in Ontario, and the principal counties in the province of Quebec where tobacco culture is carried on furnish a sufficient supply for the needs of our own country ; but if we had the means of introducing our tobacco upon the markets of Europe, a very much larger area might be cultivated with extraordinary success. Mr. Dugas, as I stated a moment ago. makes the suggestion in his report, that we should have experimental stations.
I think these could be secured in connection with the existing experimental farms, the central farm and its branches, at a trifling cost ; and it is impossible to appreciate the .extent of the returns. In regard to the curing, there is no doubt that we would have to obtain the services of two or three experts from the United States, men conversant with th'e needs of the European markets. That would not be a very great expense, and most excellent results would follow. In order to do that I venture to say that our Minister of Agriculture would have to take a little more interest in the affairs of his department and a little less perhaps in the affairs of other departments; for, after all, with what great agricultural reform or progress has the Minister of Agriculture associated himself during his incumbency of the office ? It was for a time boasted that he had invented cold storage ; but everybody knows that the merit of the establishment of cold storage does not accrue to the Minister of Agriculture. He has merely perpetuated what he found when hie came into office, and I venture to 'Say that when the estimates of that hon.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: 

Conservative regime. In 1896 there were twenty-seven factories engaged in the manufacture of foreign leaf. In 1903, there were only twenty-three of such factories, a reduction of four. Let us see how during the same period the factories engaged in manufacturing domestic leaf progressed. In 1896 there were only ten factories of domestic leaf, and last year that number had been increased to thirty, including those engaged in the production of combination tobacco. So, while we have decreased the number of factories of foreign leaf we have increased very largely those engaged in the manufacture of tobacco, of Canadian growth. In 1896, the tobacco manufactured from foreign leaf amounted to 9,609,191 pounds. In 1903, the last year for which we have the reports, the quantity had decreased to 7,726,316 pounds,-a decrease of 1,182,778 in the manufacture of foreign leaf to-day as compared with what it was under the Conservative regime. Now, take the figures for the Canadian leaf. Hon. gentlemen opposite, when in power, would not give any protection to the Canadian leaf ; they would not do anything for the Canadian farmer. The result was that, when they were in power, in 1896 we manufactured only 474,205 pounds of Canadian tobacco. Last year we manufactured of Canadian tobacco no less than 4,983,181 pounds, an increase in the manufacture of Canadian tobacco of 4,463,376 pounds. In 1896 the quantity of Canadian tobacco manufactured in the form of cigars was 515,870 pounds, making a total manufacture of Canadian tobacco in that year of 990,075 pounds. If we estimate this tobacco at ten cents per pound we find that the Canadian farmers received for their tobacco $99,007.50. Last year, 1903, besides the 4,938,181 pounds of Canadian manufactured tobacco, we used for cigarettes. 2,300,081 pounds and for cigars 9,598,890 pounds, a total of 16,837,052 pounds, as against 990,075 pounds under the Conservative regime. Take this total quantity at ten cents per pound, and we find that last year the farmers of this country with the protection they enjoyed from this government, received for their tobacco, $1,683,705.20, or $1,584,697.70 more than they received in the last year of the Conservative regime. There is the result of the policy of the government. And I cannot understand how, in the face of results like these, my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) and hon. gentlemen opposite generally can complain of that policy. But is it fair to say that all hon. gentlemen opposite complain of the policy of this government ? Some time ago I heard my hon. friend from Pictou (Mr. Bell) speak words which indicate that he does not share the views of my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier. Speaking of the government he asked: ' Why is it necessary that they should have surpluses to boast of from Mr. BRODEUR.
$14,000,000 to $16,000,000 ? They could get clear of a large portion by extending the reduction of duties from molasses to sugar. They could also make a reduction in the duty on tobacco, which would prove an immense boon to almost every man who contributes to taxation.'
Now who is right ? Is it the hon. meui-ber for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) or is it ' the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Bell) who has a right to enunciate the policy of the opposition since he is its financial critic? I am sorry he is not in his seat to-day ; but I suppose when the vote comes on he will be here to tell us on which side he stands. But that is not all. I have in my hands a circular which seems to have been issued by my hon. friends opposite, and which I will take the liberty of reading for the information of the members of this House. This is called * Leaflet No. 4 ' and it is headed ' Put this in your pipe and smoke it.' I do not know whether the hon. mem-(ber for Jacques Cartier had anything to do with the publication of this circular, but it is certainly published by the party sitting opposite, and I suppose before this debate is over they will repudiate it, because it is directly contrary to their motion :


PUT THIS IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT.
[Stage Direction]
Every user of tobacco in Canada has been paying $4.75 more in taxes on tobacco as the result of Liberal rule.
How is the man who uses tobacco affected by its taxation under the Liberal government 7	-
Compare the taxes on tobacco collected by the present government with those collected by the Conservative government :	'
Liberal taxation on tobacco, 1897-1902.
Excise	$23,485,642
Customs	 "2,661,875
[Stage Direction]
conservative taxation on tobacco, 1891-96 :
Excise	$17,875,401
Customs	 1,709,958
[Stage Direction]
Increased taxation on tobacco by the Liberals in six years, $6,562,158- '
The male population of Canada is 2,571,708.
Supposing 50 per cent of the male population of Canada are smokers, how does the increased taxation of tobacco affect each person using it ?
Under the Liberal government, each user of tobacco has been paying in taxation on tobacco alone $19.
Under the Conservative government, he was paying only $14.25.
Each smoker has been paying in taxes on tobacco alone $4.75 more under Liberal rule than he was under Conservative rule.
This increased tax on tobacco does not decrease the quantity used, and is quite unnecessary, even according to the government's own showing.

The government boasts that last year it had a surplus ot $14,000,000. That is to say, it took $14,000,000 more in taxes out ot the people's pockets than it had any need for.
If the revenues ot the country are so much in excess ot even the Liberal government's extravagant expenditure, why has the government imposed an additional tax of $6,562,15? on the users of tobacco since it has been in power ?
Have a quiet smoke, and think this over.
The Conservatives paid for their errors in 1896.
The Liberals must expect punishment for their vastly greater sins, and the government that succeeds theirs must be dealt with on. its merits. In other words, turn out one government after another until the message can go out to the world that the conscience of Canada is awakened.
Now let us read the motion of my hon. friend :
The government has not given to the tobacco industry of Canada the protection and encouragement that it is entitled to.
The circular says there is too much protection, while the motion says there is not enough protection. Who are we going to believe, the hon. member for Pictou, who says : Reduce the duty on tobacco, or the hon. member for Jacques Cartier who says in his motion :	Let us raise the duty on
tobacco, or this famous circular which says : The Liberals are putting too high a duty on tobacco ? I leave to my hon. friends opposite the impossible task of reconciling these contradictory positions. X hope my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier will realize the false position in which he finds himself now. This sort of polities may do for his county, may entertain the people of St. Laurent where there are some tobacco growers ; but I think the time has come when we should denounce this kind of political warfare. I hope the Conservative party will be brave and courageous enough to come before this House with a uniform policy for the whole country instead of one policy for one section and another for somewhere else. My hon. friends opposite owe it to their party to repudiate that circular and to declare that it is not a faithful representation of the sentiments of their party.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I think I have shown by the figures I have just read that instead of having neglected the tobacco industry this government has done it's best to develop it. My hon. friend from Jacques Cartier says that the preference is affecting tobacco imported from England, and that when it is manufactured by the American Tobacco Company in England it would be subject to the preference. I suppose my hon. friend has not read for some time the clause in the statutes relating to the preference. He will find in 60 and 61 Vie., chapter 16, the following proviso in the reciprocal tariff :	~
220i
Provided, however, that these reductions shall not apply to any of the following articles, and that such articles shall in all cases be subject to the duties mentioned in schedule A, viz.:-Wines, malt liquors, spirits, spirituous liquors, liquid medicines and articles containing alcohol ; sugar, molasses and syrups of all kinds, the product of sugar cane or beet root ; tobacco, cigars and cigarettes.
My hon. friend must have forgotten that part of the statutes relating to the preference, as otherwise he would not have made this argument in connection with tobacco imported from Great Britain. We have a right to expect now that my hon. friend will repudiate the statement that he lias made that the duty on tobacco imported from Great Britain is not the same as on tobacco imported from foreign countries. Now. Mr. Speaker, we have been in favour of a duty for the protection of the Canadian industry, we have also made a change which has been very beneficial to that industry; Before 1896 the Canadian growers and manufacturers asked our friends opposite several times to permit the mixing of Canadian tobacco with the foreign leaf. Several petitions to that effect were presented to the Conservative government, but in every instance they were refused. When the liberal party came into power we permitted the mixing of Canadian tobacco with the foreign leaf, and the result has been a very large increase of the Canadian consumption of Canadian tobacco. In 1895-96 no cigars were manufactured in this country from mixed tobacco, but in 1902-03 we manufactured 6,660,330 cigars. So far as the tobacco itself is concerned, we had none in 1895-96, but last year we manufactured 1,772,974 pounds. So you see, Mr. Speaker, that this policy of permitting the mixing of Canadian tobacco with foreign tobacco has been fruitful, has given the best results and has contributed to a large extent to the increased consumption of Canadian tobacco. The reason for that is easy to understand. You cannot put on the market a very good brand of cigars unless you use a wrapper of the finest leaf. In the United States they generally use Sumatra leaf for wrappers and in this country they also use Sumatra to a large extent. By permitting the use of Canadian tobacco with foreign tobacco we enable the manufacturers to put into the inside of the cigar Canadian leaf which is just as good as foreign leaf and then wrap this tobacco with Sumatra leaf. The result has been that whereas formerly we were manufacturing very few cigars we are now manufacturing them by the million.
Now, coming to the question of the exclusive contract of the American Tobacco Company, I see that my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier has stated that I gave notice of my amendment to the Inland Revenue Act to prevent those contracts being made by
[Stage Direction]
tlie American Tobacco Company only after he had given notice of his motion. The hou. gentleman is certainly mistaken in that respect because he will find that in the speech which I delivered on the 15th of June, in the debate on the budget, I made a statement in answer to him to the effect that this policy of the government would be carried out. If I happened to give notice the other day of my amendment it was simply because I had to give notice before the end of the session. The session is drawing to its end and it was important that notice of this amendment should be given as soon as possible.
Frederick Debartzch Monk: I think I am right in saying that my hon. friend gave notice of his legislation after 1 had told himself and the right hon. Prime Minister that 1 intended moving this motion and that was after the right hon. Prime Minister had on two occasions stated that the government had no more legislation to bring down this session.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think my hou. friend is entirely mistaken. My right hon. friend the Prime Minister stated the Other day when the Question was put to him for the first time that there would be certain Bills to he introduced to the House and some departmental legislation. My hon. friend, when I addressed the House on the 15th of June, heard me declare as positively as it was possible to declare that we were going to do something in regard to these exclusive contracts. It has been the policy of the government since last year to introduce some legislation in respect to that matter and we think the best way of preventing these exclusive contracts is by the way which has been suggested by this notice of motion ; that is to say that we shall declare that the licensees of the government be not permitted to carry on any combine or trust in this country. The reason for adopting this procedure is very obvious. The question has been asked as to why we should not meet this condition by an enactment in the Criminal Code. Under the Criminal Code we could only condemn these persons to certain penalties but I think the measure which is before the House in regard to these exclusive contracts will be more effective than if proceedings were carried on under the Criminal Code. Under the Criminal Code you would have to take proceedings day after day. Under the proposal which is now' before the House if persons are found to be carrying on business on the strength of these exclusive contracts their license can be cancelled and consequently the rem'edy is more effective than if it were provided for under the Criminal Code. Therefore, I say that It was not on account of the declaration made by my hon. friend the other day that we introduced that legislation but it has been done in pursuance of Mr. BRODEUR.
the policy declared last year by the government, declared to some extent by myself on the 15th of June last, and declared by the notice which I gave the other day.
MyJhon. friend, speaking on the question of tobacco, said that we should provide for ifniformity in stamps. He asked for a declaration of policy on the part of the government in regard to that subject. There is much to be said in favour of having a uniform colour of stamps for foreign and Canadian tobacco. I had thought at first that this question might be solved simply by departmental regulation but I find that it cannot be dealt w'ith very conveniently in that way and that if treated in that way it' would not prevent frauds upon the revenue. The best way to deal with this question would be by legislation and it may be dealt with by providing different scales of duties applicable to different kinds of tobaccos. We cannot deal with the question this year because certainly the session is far advanced. But, I may say that this question has engaged the attention of the officers of my department. The general inspector of tobaccos is now considering the question and if it should prove to be possible and feasible to have this change brought about it may be carried out, although 1 make this statement without making any formal promise to the House. There is not unanimity among the Canadian tobacco manufacturers in this respect. Some are in favour of the change while others, and perhaps the most prominent ones, are opposed to a uniformity of stamps because they believe that Canadian tobacco is gaining such a reputation for its quality that before long it will be in very great demand. I do not know whether that statement is correct or not, but at all events I may tell my hon. friend there is a great divergence of opinion even amongst manufacturers of Canadian tobacco.
In regard to the experiments carried on with respect to the cultivation of tobacco I may tell my hon. friend that the reflections which he has made upon my hon. friend the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Fisher) are not at all deserved. My hon. friend the Minister of Agriculture is now seriously examining that question and under his direction some very important experiments were carried on at the experimental farm. I may also add that this spring he sent to the state of Wisconsin two gentlemen with instructions to observe how thev seed the tobaceo there and I understand his intention is to send these gentlemen back to Wisconsin in the fall to find out the best way of curing it. They have been well received by Governor Hoard, of Winconsin, and this cordiality has resulted in the establishment of very satisfactory relations between the Wisconsin authorities and the Department of Agriculture upon this subject.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: May I ask the hon. gentleman who these parties are who are sent to Wisconsin and if they have made a report ?
Mr. BItODEUR. 1 think their names are Mr. Dugas and Mr. Denis. I do not exactly remember the names but I know that two gentlemen were sent to Wisconsin to find out the best way to cultivate tobacco in this country.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Have they made any report ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I do not know ; perhaps not because I suppose the report will cover the whole year. They have been there during the seeding time and X suppose they will go there during the summer and during the fall to see how the tobacco is cured. The reflection cast upon the Minister ol Agriculture is not deserved, because no man could do more than he has done to facilitate tobacco culture in this country. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Monk) must not forget that we have had an experimental station at St. Jacques, so to that extent we are carrying-out the jiolicy he advocates, il am sorry that my hon. friend (Mr. Monk) has wrongfully censured the government, and endeavoured to unburden on it his own want of devotion to the interests of the Canadian tobacco industry. The policy of the government has been fruitful of good, and it has been thus fruitful without adding any increased taxation upon the Canadian consumer.	.
Mr. GOliRLEY. How much tobacco was grown in Quebec last year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We have not the figures by provinces, but I shall endeavour to get a detailed statement for my hon. friend. I was about to say that in spite of the increased duty on foreign leaf, the Canadian consumer is now paying less than formerly for this tobacco, as the figures will prove. In 1896 he paid for domestic plug chewing tobacco 81 cents, and this year he pays 53 cents for the same quantity of tobacco.


Mr. CLANCY.: And the same kind ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, I suppose it is the Jsame kind. I am not a smoker, but I am told by those who do smoke, that Canadian tobacco is very much better than the foreign tobacco. My hon. friend (Mr. Clancy) apparently does not accept that statement, but I make it on the authority of a gentleman who changed from foreign to domestic tobacco, and he now says that the Canadian tobacco is the better. When hon. gentle-inen opposite become more Canadian than they are now, they will perhaps give up the foreign leaf and smoke our own good Canadian product. T.et me continue to quote the figures. In 1896 plug smoking tobacco cost eighty cents when it now costs fifty
cents, and in 1896 foreign smoking tobacco cost $1 when the smoker can now get the same quantity for forty-six cents. In these three kinds of tobacco the consumer is now paying in one case fifty-three cents less, in another case sixty per cent, and in the third case seventeen per cent less than he did formerly. And why is this the case ? It is because instead of smoking foreign leaf tobacco which is pretty heavily taxed, the consumer now smokes Canadian tobacco on which the tax is only five cents per pound. The net result of the policy of the government is that we have given to the Canadian producer a large amount of protection which encourages the growth of tobacco in Canada to the value of $1,500,000 more than under the Conservative regime, and at the same time we have reduced to a very large extent the price of the tobacco itself.
. Mr. CLANCY. Was it the policy of the government, of which the Minister of Inland Revenue is so distinguished a member, in raising the duty on tobacco to especially encourage the growth of Canadian tobacco in Canada.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Certainly that was the purpose and intention. The purpose was to favour as much as possible the growth of Canadian tobacco, and the figures I have quoted prove that the policy of the government in this respect has been a sound policy, which ought to meet with the support of hon. gentlemen opposite.


Mr. S. E. GOURLEY.: I congratulate my hon. friend (Mr. Monk) sincerely, that by the introduction of this motion he has drawn from the government the first clear honest distinct and manly statement in favour of a pijotective policy, that I have heard since I came to parliament. I congratulate the Minister of Inland Revenue for casting aside the hypocrisy of his party, and in a manly way stating his own policy in reference to this question. If members of the government would always admit that they looked with horror upon their past and promised to do right things in the future, I would cease to berate them, and would endeavour tio help them on in their career. I believe that in the end Canadian tobacco will be found to be of the most superior quality, because every product that can be grown in this northern country is of the highest excellence. We grow the best men and women in file world, and the country that grows the best men and women will grow every inferior product in the highest excellence. What are the Ontario members doing in this debate ? Do they know that in 1890 their province raised 11.000,000 pounds of tobacco, and that last year it raised only


C919 COMMONS
[Stage Direction]
'3,000,000 ? it would seem from these figures as if the policy of the government was helping Quebec, while it was destroying poor Ontario, and yet there is not a man of them opposite who seems to be aware of the condition of the tobacco industry in that province. I recently searched through the reports of the Dominion stati-tistician and I discovered that in 1902 we raised 500 pounds of tobacco in Nova Scotia, 30,000 in Prince Edward Island and 61,000 in British Columbia. There are no returns from Quebec, but I suppose Quebec is so much on top now that it need not be mentioned in statistics. In 1896, Ontario raised 11,000,000 pounds of tobacco leaf, mostly in the county of Kent and Essex, while in 1902, the last year for which we have returns, it only raised 3,000,000. I do not understand how this result can come from the policy of the government, because if they afford adequate protection it is bound to strengthen the growth of tobacco all over the country. No man who has seen the benefits of protection as conferred upon the United States of America can doubt that a wise system of protection would encourage Canadian industries. I congratulate the Liberal party in coming around to that sane view.
I was somewhat surprised however, that 'the Minister of Inland Revenue, who is somewhat liberal in his views, should attempt to make a little political capital out of this question. He should remember what befell the Postmaster General a few days ago, who, when he was discussing the Peterborough lock tried to introduce a political issue, and before he got out of it he was the worst whipped man I have ever seen in the House of Commons. I thought the Minister of Inland Revenue had more discretion ; I thought he had the French discretion, never to attack until he was sure to win ; I thought he had the Napoleonic genius to win or retreat, but he seems to have been off his guard this afternoon. Why the Conservatives could not hold by the policy they had. Such were the continued and persistent attacks of the Liberal party that the then Minister of Finance, Mr. Foster, showed awful weakness in going back from his policy of high protection and making sugar and several other articles free. What happened ? From that day I lost confidence in Foster-in everybody connected with the government. It did much to defeat the Conservative party, because the opposition told the people that the government had never believed in their policy.
Charles Fitzpatrick: Did I correctly understand my hon. friend to say that he lost confidence in Mr. Foster because of the action he took in connection with the tariff in 1896 ?


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Yes.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: 


Charles Fitzpatrick: What has he to say about the gentleman who wrote the leaflet on tobacco which he read a moment ago ?


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I am coming to the leaflet. I say I lost confidence, and I am frank in that. There is nothing like frankness among friends, and I say the Conservative party showed awful weakness in betraying their party by giving into you people-giving into your endless talk about things you never believed in for one moment-instead of going on building np and strengthening their tariff. They would have been in power to-day if they had done that instead of playing into your hands. You evidently do not intend to be defeated by any of your free trade nonsense, because you are abandoning every shred of it and throwing it to the winds, and adopting protection. My hon. friend the Minister of Inland Revenue is the advance guard in declaring that the old policy of the Liberal party is gone forever, and that protection, pure and simple, is its policy to-day. I want to tell the Minister of Finance, when he goes to Nova Scotia, not to wear the mantle of hypocrisy which he has worn so long, but to throw it off and to appear in the costume which the Minister of Inland Revenue has put on and worn so worthily to-day. With regard to that circular, I do not think the Minister ot Inland Revenue should have pursued the course he did. In this country-and unfortunately we have many illustrations in the province of Quebec-there is a class of people who are always advocating a sectional policy. >I know nothing about it. I have been brought up in an atmosphere where that humbug could not last for a moment. I admire the French Canadian people in many ways, and I wonder that they have not a man strong enough to take those people who are talking sectionalism and shake the life out of them, as Chapleau did the people who were talking sectionalism at the time of Riel. It is a pity they have not a strong French Canadian who would do the same thing to-day.


Mr. SCOTT.: Haven't you got Mr. Tarte ?


Seymour Eugene Gourley: The proof of the pudding is in the eating of it, and when I see people in Ontario licked into being national men instead of sectional men, I want to see a big, powerful man in each province able to destroy sectionalism of every kind. However, I was going to say that I think it unfair that the Minister of Inland Revenue should have brought that little bit of a circular into this discussion. I venture to say it was written in Ontario or Quebec.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: If my hon. friend will tell me who published the circular, I will withdraw my speech.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: I have never read or seen it; but I say it was very wrong for a minister of the Crown to attempt to read a

circular which has no authority, so far as 1 know, and which does not bind me or anybody else. Probably no man in this House ever saw it. Some man who wished to earn a few pennies writes something which he thinks may be in the interest of his party or the country, and the Minister of Inland Revenue brings it forward to bind the great Conservative party. It binds nobody and deceives nobody. It does not dignify the debates of parliament to introduce matters of that kind. It is a good tu quoque argument, if arguments of that kind are to prevail in Canada. It may do to catch somebody at a public meeting, but it does not mean anything.


Charles Fitzpatrick: How about the hon. member for Pictou ?


Seymour Eugene Gourley: He has a right to inveigh against surpluses if he wishes, and if his constituents believe in that kind of thing. I believe we should have far more surpluses in this country ; but we should spend them in the development of the country. l7ou people are afraid of expenditure , you are not attempting to develop this country at all. We want two or three thousand miles of railway in Nova Scotia, and you will not build any. The whole country is undeveloped to-day, while you people are piling up surpluses. I do not object to surpluses, but I object to your not spending them in the development of the country, but giving them to your friends and encouraging boodle.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: But my hon. friend must see that the hon. member for Pictou was advocating a reduction of the duty on tobacco.


Seymour Eugene Gourley: Yes, he did specifically mention the subject of tobacco. Well, my hon. friend has been here ten or fifteen years, while I have been here only four years, and he may have got impregnated with the notions which you people have been preaching. I have not ; I steel myself against them ; and you have so improved in your conduct that we perhaps need less will-power to do so now. But even a man of good sense who was here before 1896, and who listened to the distinguished men leading the opposition talking the twaddle they did for ten years, might have lost some of his intellectual virility, and Mr. Bell may have suffered in that respect. However, I support the hon. member for Jacques Cartier in advocating a strong duty to give the Canadian tobacco-grower absolute protection against all comers, until he shall get his industry into that state when he can face the world alone. I believe the time will come when the Canadian will face the world and conquer it in a fair field of battle. But this is not the moment ; w-e have not the capital, nor the skill, nor the training. I support the hon. member for Jacques Cartier, and I say the Minister of Inland Revenue will not be able to convince the people
of Quebec that it is a sufficient answer to his argument to quote a circular written by nobody, and representing nobody's views ou this side of the House that I know of.


Mr. WM. ROSS (Victoria).: It was mailed from this House to members of parliament


Seymour Eugene Gourley: That does not bind anybody. Suppose you mailed a warrant to hang me to-morrow, that would bind nobody.


William Ross: What about the franking of it ?


Seymour Eugene Gourley: People have a right to send any material they like to the country. That is a very weak argument. If my hon. friend has taken the correct course the people of Ontario should be up here inquiring seriously into the question how their province has been deprived of this industry. This industry has been stricken down from 11,000,000 pounds of tobacco to 3,000,000 pounds in three or four years. That is a question for the people of Ontario. You stand jeering and laughing at the quibs and jokes of the Minister of Inland Revenue which would be very timely and appropriate in addressing school boys. He did that well but I am sure that he fancied he was addressing School boys rather than serious men or he would have produced arguments more timely and suitable than those which he advanced. The reason I desire some information about the province of Quebec was to find out whether a similar loss had occurred in that province. In Ontario the industry has declined from 11,000,000 pounds to 3,000,000 pounds, and if there had been a similar decline in Quebec it would fully justify the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk). I am attempting to master the beautiful language which my hon. friend speaks as his mother tongue, and when I do master it I am going to the province of Quebec to ask the people of that province whether it was sufficient answer to the charges of my hon. friend Jacques Cartier for the hon. the Minister of Inland Revenue to read to the House a circular which he found somewhere.


James Clancy: It is rather refreshing to hear the Minister of Inland Revenue declaring the new doctrine of the Liberal party. He has now become quite a protectionist. In answer to my question he declared in unequivocal terms that it was the policy of the Liberal party to give protection to the tobacco interests, to encourage the growth of tobacco in Canada and that for that reason the increased duties were imposed in 1897. I think I understood the hon. gentleman to say that in the most unequivocal terms.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: If my hon. friend will permit me, what I said was that the policy of the government has had for effect to encourage the production, the growing of Canadian tobacco.


James Clancy: Then I have not misunderstood the hon. gentleman. Has the hon. gentleman forgotten that he has marched In the ranks of the Liberal party for many years declaring that protection had ruined the farmers ? Have hon. gentlemen forgotten that they went up and down the back concessions declaring that when the Conservative party imposed duties upon every article produced by the farmers of Canada these duties were utterly worthless to help the farmers of this country ? Does he deny that that was the policy, the doctrine, as preached by his own party-and by himself as the hon. gentleman (Mr. Clarke) suggests. When did he become convinced that farmers should have more protection ? Let me read to my hon. friend what the Minister of Finance said when he introduced the revision of the duties in 1897. The hon. minister should have consulted the Minister of Finance before he made his statement this afternoon.


ROYAL ASSENT.
[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by. the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod as follows :
Mr. Speaker, I beg to inform you that His Honour the Deputy of His Excellency the Governor General desires and awaits the attendance of your honourable House in the Chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, with the House, went up to the Senate chamber.
And having returned.
Mr. SPEAKER informed the House that His Honour the Deputy of His Excellency the Governor General had been pleased to give, in His Majesty's name, the Royal Assent to the following Bills :
An Act respecting the Home Bank of Canada.
Ah Act respecting the Toronto and Hamilton Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Lake Erie and Detroit River Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Berlin, Waterloo, Wellesley and Lake Huron Railway Company.
An Act to incorporate the Crawford Bay and St. Mary's Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Nicola, Kamloops and Similkameen Coal and Railway Company.
An Act to amend the Criminal Code, 1892.
An Act to amend the Criminal Code, 1892.
An Act respecting the Ontario Accident Insurance Company.
An Act to incorporate the Brantford and Hamilton Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Temiscouata Railway Company.
An Act to incorporate the Thorold and Lake Erie Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Tilsonburg, Lake Erie and Pacific Railway Company.
An Act to incorporate the Interprovincial Railway Bridge Company of New Brunswick.
An Act respecting the Kettle River Valley Railway Company.
An Act to amend the Act providing for the payment of Bounties on Lead contained in leadbearing ores mined in Canada.
Louis-Philippe Brodeur: An Act to amend the Criminal Cod*, 1892, re-pecting the punishment of Fraudulent Debtors.
An Act respecting the James' Bay Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Hudson's Bay and Northwest Railway Company.
An Act respecting certain patents of the Canadian General Electric Co., Limited, and others.
An Act to incorporate the Montreal, Nipissing and Georgian Bay Railway Company.
An Act respecting a certain patent of E. A. Small.
An Act respecting certain patents of Lewis E. Curtis.
An Act to incorporate the Canadian Artillery Association.
An Act to incorporate the Chicoutimi and Northeastern Railway Company.
An Act to amend the Act respecting the Navigation of Canadian Waters.
An Act respecting the Real Estate Title Guarantee and Trust Company.
An Act to incorporate the Monarch Life Assurance Company.
An Act to incorporate the Bessemer and Barry's Bay Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Sprague's Palls Manufacturing Company, Limited.
An Act respecting the Nova Scotia Permanent Benefit Building Society and Savings Fund.
An Act to amend the National Transcontinental Railway Act.
An Act respecting certain patents of William A. Damen.
An Act respecting certain patents of Seigfried Gironcoli.
An Act to amend the Canada Temperance Act.
An Act respecting the Essex Terminal Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Ottawa River Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Huron and Ontario Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Trans-Canada Railway Company.
An Act to incorporate the Dominion Fire Insurance Company.
An Act to incorporate the Farmers' Bank of Canada.
An Act respecting the Ottawa Fire Insurance Company.
An Act respecting certain patents of Edwin R. Cahoone.
An Act for the relief of Andrew William Mann.
An Act to incorporate the Cedar Rapids Manufacturing and Power Company.
An Act for the relief of Jennie Davidson Moore.
An Act for the relief of Eliza Robertson.
An Act respecting the Northern Bank.
An Act to incorporate the Okotoks and High River Lumbering and Development Company.
An Act to amend the Steamboat Inspection Act, 1898.
An Act respecting the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company.
An Act to Incorporate the Kingston and Dominion Central Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Similkameen and Kere-meos Railway Company.
An Act respecting the Rio de Janeiro Light and Power Company, Limited, and to change its name to ' The Rio de Janeiro Tramway, Light and Power Company, Limited.'
An Act respecting the Century Life Insurance Company.

An Act to amend the Pilotage Act.
An Act to amend the Shipping Casualties Act, 1901.
An Act respecting the Canada Southern Railway Company.
An Act to amend the Yukon Territory Act.
An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the Public Service of the year ending 30th June, 1905.


THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY.
[Stage Direction]
Ml-. CLANCY. I think I shall be able to make It perfectly clear to the hon. Minister of Inland Revenue (Mr. Brodeur), that the policy of the Liberal party in 1897 was not to protect the tobacco industry. Of course, the hon. gentleman (Mr. Brodeur) has told us that that is the policy now. But there has been no announcement of a change, and, where there is a difference of opinion among the ministers on a fiscal question, we must accept what is told us by the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Customs. By the way we have heard the announcemnt of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) that it is impossible to protect the farmer. The policy of the Liberal party, he told us, was to raise a revenue. If protection was afforded by a revenue-raising tariff, it was a mere incident and something which the hon. gentleman has always felt called upon to apologize for. The necessity for raising a revenue he always acknowledged but he would not acknowledge the necessity of protecting the farmers, but grudgingly allowed them to get the benefit of whatever protection might be afforded by a tariff for revenue purposes. I had better read to the Minister of Inland Revenue the policy of liis party in 1897, and ask him to revise his views, unless the party has changed its policy since that time without announcing that change. In 1897 the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) said :
How far it is possible for our growers to displace foreign leaf was much disputed before the tariff commission
[Stage Direction]
That was a committee of the members of the cabinet which received the representation of those who desired to show how the condition of the country could be favourably affected by tariff amendments.
-but, if the Canadian producer can as a result of this duty get some advantage, we see no reason why he should not have the same opportunity afforded him as has been afforded by other industries. Our main purpose is to get revenue. But, at the same time there is n.< objection to the growers of tobacco in Canada receiving the advantage from this resolution.
In other words it was a matter of pure indifference
Mr. PATERSON.: Hear, hear.


James Clancy: Is it not wonderful, Mr. Speaker, how little comfort satisfies that hon. gentleman (Mr. Paterson) ? Here is a
plain statement from the Minister of Finance that the object is simply revenue, but, if they get the revenue, the government will not object to the farmers getting an advantage. That is the plain English of the whole thing. The Conservative party has set forth its views in ' Leaflet No. 4 ' to which the hon. Minister of Inland Revenue (Mr. Brodeur) draws attention. The hon. gentleman need not withdraw' a single sentence. He read sound literature. It is true from start to finish and in every detail. Let me read


William Paterson: Will the hon. gentleman inform us where he got that leaflet ?


James Clancy: taking $6,000,000 from the people in six years more than was taken from them under the former government. Will he now say that the tariff that has taken so much from the people has in it that measure of protection to the tobacco-growing industry the protection to which it is entitled to ? The hon. gentleman talks about cheap tobacco. But who pays this large amount of increased taxation ? The hon. gentleman is mum again-not a word to say. I think we can leave these two hon. gentlemen, the Minister of Inland Revenue (Mr. Brodeur) and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) to settle the question between themselves, and, when they settle it, I will be delighted to withdraw every word I have uttered on this subject.
House divided on amendment (Mr. Monk).
YEAS : Messieurs
Blain,	Monk,
Borden (Halifax),	Morin,
Brock,	Richardson,
Clancy,	Roche (Marquette),
Clarke,	Sproule,
Earle,	Thomson (Grey),
Gourley,	Vrooman,
Henderson,	Wilmot,
LaRividre,	Wilson.-19.
MacLaren (Perth),	
	NAYS :
Messieurs	
Borden (Sir Frederick), Macpherson,	
Brodeur,	McCool,
Champagne,	McLennan,
Christie,	Marcll (Bonaventure),
Davis,	Matheson,
Douglas,	Mlgnault,
Fielding,	Mclock (Sir William),
Fitzpatrick,	Oliver,
Fortier,	Paterson,
Gallery,	Prdfontaine,
Galliher,	Proulx,
German,	Puttee,
Gibson,	Riley,
Girard,	Roche (Halifax),
Harwood,	Itoss (Victoria, N.S.),
Hughes (King's, P.E.I.), Ross (Yukon),	
Johnston (Cape Breton), Russell,	
Johnston (Lambton)	, Scott, [DOT]
Kendall,	Sifton,
Laurier (Sir Wilfrid), Sir clair,	
I aw,	Stewart,
LeBlanc,	Talbot,
Macdonald,	Tolmie,
MacKinnon,	Turgeon,
Maclaren (Huntingdon). Wade.-50. *	
	PAIRS :
Ministerial.	Opposition.
McEwen,	Sherritt,
Cowan,	Pringle,
Hyman,	Bruce,
Harty,	Reid (Grenville),
Wallace,	Tisdale,
Cartwright,	Tupper,
Lovell,	Kendry,


James Clancy: Tobin,	Ball,
Thompson (Haldimandb Kemp,	
Beith,	Tolton,
McGugan,	Bennett,
Costigan,	Birkett,
Gervais,	Casgrain,
Grant,	Armstrong,
Holmes,	Broder,
Lavergne	Ingram,
(Drummond & Artha.) Mackie,	Calvin,
Mclsaac,	Carscallen,
Dugas,	Tarte,
Sutherland (Essex),	Smith (Wentworth),
Brown,	Robinson (Elgin),
Bureau,	Lennox,
Lemieux,	Northrup,
Copp,	Hale,
Guthrie,	Cochrane,
Demers (St. John),	Hughes (Victoria),
McCarthy,	Culbert,
Power,	Gilmour,
Archambault,	McGowan,
Geoffrion,	Rosamond,
Calvert,	Taylor,
Logan,	Lefurgey,
Dyment,	McCormick,
McColl,	Ward,
Emmerson,	Fowler,
Sutherland (Oxford),	Haggart,
Wright,	Lavell,
Haszard,	Daniel,
Lang,	Hackett,
Bickerdike,	Roddick,
Campbell,	Barker,
Fisher,	Osier,
Gould,	Alcorn,
Heyd,	Avery,
Laurier (L'Assomption), Kidd,	
Loy,	Bell.
Smith (Vancouver),	Boyd,
Parmelee,	Pope,
Turcot,	Leonard,
Tucker,	Robinson,
Reid (Restigouche),	(Northumberland), Johnston (Cardwell)
Bazinet,	Seagram, .
Lewis,	Kaulbach,
Erb,	Clare,
Desjardins,	Donnelly,
Meigs,	Lancaster,
Morrison,	Ganong,
Stephens,	Maclean,
Ross (Ontario),	Porter,
Malouin,	Haliiday,
Amendment negatived.


Mr. J. J. HUGHES.: The hon. member for West Queen's (Mr. Haszard) has not voted.


Mr. HASZARD.: I was paired. If I had voted I would have certainly voted against lan increase of the duty on tobacco.


DOG-FISH PEST.
Robert Laird Borden: Before the motion is carried. I would like to inquire of the government whether the report of the Commissioner of Fisheries with regard to the dog-fish pest and other matters, has been laid on the table of the House. I observe that elteven weeks ago to-day the hon. member for London (Mr. Hyman) stated, in

reply to a question from the member for Lunenburg (Mr. Raulbach), as follows:
1.	The Commissioner of Fisheries was authorized to hold an investigation into the dog-fish pest and other fishery matters on the shores of northern New Brunswick. The investigation concluded on April 21st.
2.	The report is in preparation, to be laid before me in a few days.
3.	The report referred to is awaited before deciding the question of a dog-fish bounty.
4.	A large number of suggestions are before the government, and steps will be taken when the report referred to is presented.
I have inquired more than once of the officers of thle House, and I cannot find that this report, which was to be brought down within a few days, on the 2nd of May, has been brought down yet. I would like to inquire the cause of the delay.


Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries).: At the time that answer was made it was expected that the commissioners would meet and prepare their .report. Some members of the commission are members of this parliament, *nd unfortunately they havle been unable to attend to this question during the sitting of the House. Their preliminary report is not yet ready, but I will make inquiries and see whether it is possible to have it down before the vote is taken.


Robert Laird Borden: I may say to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries that it seems a littile surprising that a report rwhieh at that time was to be presented within a few days has not been presented after eleven weeks. I suppose the constitution of the commission was known as well then as it is now. The minister has mot referred to any unexpected circumstances, or any cause which would seem to me sufficient to justify the delay. It is of great importance that this report should be brought down. I have had many communications on the subject, and I have desired more than once to address the House on the subject, but I have waited from time to time until the report should be brought down, because it seemed unadvisable to enter into a discussion when we were daily expecting the report. I would ask the Minister of Marine and Fisheries whether he has any idea, any expectation that the report will be laid upon the table of the House in time to havte a discussion on the subject before the conclusion of the present session. It is a matter of very great importance indeed to the fishermen of the maritime provinces ; it is one which has attracted a great deal of public attention there and elsewhere, and it is highly important that this report should not be longer delayed, unless there is some very grave reason for it. Therefore, I would ask the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to expedite this report, and let I
us have it within a day or two, if possible. The answer which I have read did not mention any others of the commissioners, but referred to the fishery commissioner only. It was said that he was making an investigation, and would be prepared to make his report almost at onefe, which would be laid on the table within a few days. Now my hon. friend refers to some other members of the commission who are not mentioned in this answer at all. I see no reason, for my part, why this report should not have already been before the House.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: As regards the commissioner of fisheries, Mr. Prince, I may say that we have already in the department an exhaustive report from him on that question. The question has been taken up, not only by himself but by the other members of the commission who sat during last winter, investigating this matter as well as some others. In the department we understand perfectly well that this is an important question, and it is be-jcause of its great importance, and the great number of suggestions that have been made to us, some contradictory of each other and others tending to involve the government in a very heavy expenditure, that we are studying this question very carefully before we make a report which would be practicable. At the present time I do not think that any of the suggestions made to the commissioners have been found practicable. Of course it is only reasonable that they should confer together before coming to a conclusion. I will inquire to-morrow of the commissioner of fisheries whether he is in a position to make, if not a complete report, a temporary report on the question. We do not ignore the importance of the subject, and when the papers are before the House the hon. gentleman will see that we have been dealing with it in earnest, and the volume of correspondence and information which has been gathered will show that we have neglected nothing.


Mr. SPROULE.: Who composes the commission ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: So far as I 'remember, it is composed of Mr. Prince, Col. Tucker, Mr. Copp, Mr. Armstrong. Mr. Bowers, and one or two others whose names I forget at the moment. They were appointed a few days after the close of last session.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have they been engaged ever since in making a report ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: They have made preliminary reports on other questions, but on this, the most important of all, they have not yet made a report.


C931 COMMONS ITALIAN IMMIGRANTS AT MONTREAL.
Mr. URIAH WILSON.: I would like to ask the Minister of Labour if he has sent his deputy minister to Montreal to investigate the circumstances of the Italians who have arrived in that city and are said to be in destitute circumstances. Has a report been made to him, and if so, when will it be laid on the table of the House ? It is also stated in the press that this matter has been referred to Judge Winchester to investigate and report upon, and can the hon. gentleman give us any information on that point ?


Right Hon.   S@: I sent the Deputy Minister of Labour to Montreal to endeavour to ascertain how these Italians that were reported to be stranded in Montreal, came to Canada. He endeavoured to ascertain the facts, but he found a great deal of conflicting testimony. He came to some conclusion upon the subject, but I cannot say that he 'made a report, because the testimony was contradictory, so much so, that I recommended to Council, in order to get at the facts, that Judge Winchester's commission should be enlai'ged so as to embrace this subject. Accordingly his commission was enlarged, and I expect that Judge Winchester will begin to investigate this subject as soon as he is through with the inquiry in regard to alien labour troubles in Montreal, Judge Winchester is to-day in the city of Montreal. I am most anxious that he shall first complete the inquiry into the Grand Trunk alien labour question, and the moment that is done, he will take up ithe other question!, perhaps during the present week, but on that point I am not quite sure.


Uriah Wilson: Will the minister produce any report that was presented by his deputy ?


Sir WILLIAM MU LOCK.: I can hardly call it a report. It was a memorandum made to me. I am not sure whether it was of a confidential character or otherwise, but I think it rather went to the extent of saying that he could not satisfactorily determine anything, because of not being able to compel witnesses to give evidence under oath, and to submit to cross examination.


Uriah Wilson: If it is not confidential, will he lay it upon the table ?


William Mulock: No, because I do not think it is of the slightest value. My hon. friend can look at it and see for himself. The very fact that my deputy could not get the evidence shows that it is of no special value, nor do I think it will prove of much value to the commissioner himself.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: 



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
'House in Committee of Supply.
Indians-Ontario and Quebec, general legal expenses, $3,000.
['Everybody.\nSome resolutions reported.']
James Clancy: When this matter was under consideration on a former occasion the hon. Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) promised to bring down the instructions given in regard to the survey of Walpole island. Perhaps the hon. gentleman has that information now.


Hon. CLIFFORD SIFTON (Minister of the Interior).: I will give the hon. gentleman a statement of what is taking place :
On the 22nd December, 1900, the authority of His Excellency in Council was obtained to spend $2,250 and $750 from the capital funds respectively of the Chippewas and Pottawat-tamies of Walpole island for surveys. The reason for making the expenditure is stated bo be the impossibility of proiperly administering the lands and roads unless the islands are properly surveyed. Instructions were issued to G. W. McC-corge, Esq., of Chatham, on the 13th September, 1901, a copy of which is attached. When the attention of the department became known, the Indians petitioned that the work be not undertaken, alleging as a reason that their funds would not bear the cost. The department having used the argument that it was intended for their benefit and would undoubtedly lead to good results and a more businesslike administration of their property, a memorial was received in June last from the chiefs and councillors representing the chief agricultural Indians of the island, requesting to have the survey proceeded with. The surveyor has done some preliminary work, chiefly laying out the road allowances about the island and tracing the internal, roads, and .'picking up the points of the lands of the Indian locatees.
I have an extract from the letter of the surveyor which substantially gives instructions which were given to him.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman might state shortly the plan upon which the survey is to be made.


Clifford Sifton: The instructions given were as follows :
The Indian holdings as they now exist are to be surveyed and permanently posted, making only such necessary changes as may be required to straighten boundaries and this should not be done without the concurrence of the chief and councillors and the owners of the holdings affected. If any such change is objected to and you think it is very desirable, you should by argument endeavour to remove the objection. Wherever possible the rear boundaries of two or more holdings should be one straight line. For this purpose additions'may be made to the holdings.
The present roads should be made as wide as possible up to and not exceeding 66 feet in width. They may be diverted, changed or closed as may be decided on consultation with the agent, chief or councillors. All new road allowances should be 66 feet wide.

That is the plan in substance.


James Clancy: What provision is there for lands unclaimed ? The hon. gentleman knows that there is a very considerable quantity of land which is neither occupied nor claimed, and when the holdings are surveyed there will, of course, be a considerable quantity of land which is neither occupied nor claimed. The department have no doubt taken into consideration what the effect of the survey under such circumstances will be.


Clifford Sifton: The instructions further provide that :
After the Indian holdings are surveyed and posted, you should lay out the remainder of the lands in double fronted concessions. The loits should contain 80 acres. The distance therefore across a concession of regular width will be 80 chains and the width of regular lots 20 chains, allowance for side roads should be made where considered advisable ; generally not nearer than every five lots.
An lion, member on the other side of the House, who is not in his place at present, asked me for some information respecting the improvements made by squatters on the Doncaster reserve. I have a statement, which I will lay on the table of the House.
Nova Scotia, salaries, $1,225.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What are these salaries for ? Are the people who receive them teachers ?


Clifford Sifton: The Indian agents and their salaries in Nova Scotia are as follows :
John Lacy, Annapolis	$ 50
James Purdy, Digby	 50


Chas.   E.@: Beckwith, King's	 50
Charles Harlow, Queen's and Lunenburg.. 100


Rev.   C@: McManus, Halifax	 50
A. Wallace, Hants	 50


Thos.   B.@: Smith, Colchester'	 50
F. A. Rand, M.D., Cumberland	 50


Rev.  J. D.@: McLeod, Pictou	 100


John R.: McDonald, Antigonish and Guysborough	 100
Rev. John Fraser, Richmond	 100
D. Macpherson, Inverness..	'	 100
A. J- Macdonald, Victoria	 100
D. K. McIntyre, M.D., North'Sydney.. ..	75
W. H. Whelan, Yarmouth	 50
R. G. Irwin, Shelburne	 50


Rev.  J. D.@: MacAdam. Sydney, C.B	 75
Total	$1,225


Robert Laird Borden: What are the duties of tlfese gentlemen ?


Clifford Sifton: The duties of the agents are to have an oversight	over	theIndians generally, to provide	them	with
medical attendance and to report to the department anything that requires the attention of the department, as, for instance, special medical attendance, or occasionally they have some work to do in connection with getting wood for the Indians, or providing wood lands or something of that kind.


Robert Laird Borden: I have a communication now and then informing me that their lands ai'e being entered upon. I brought two cases before the minister, both in regard to reserves in my own county.
, Mr. SIFTON. We have had complaints that the Indians had trespassed on the timber lands of other people, and the opinion of the Justice Department was that the party should be left to their own recourse, and that the government was not liable. That is rather a poor remedy against the Indians, but we have exercised all the persuasion iwe can to endeavour to prevent it happening.


Mr.   I@: The complaint I had was that the Indian timber was taken by other people.


Clifford Sifton: In that case we have no difficulty in finding a remedy for we can sieize the timber and make them pay a pen-jalty.


Robert Laird Borden: The Indian chief complained to me in the case I refer to, and on making representation to the department 1 'had a very prompt reply from the minister stating that he would send an officer to investigate it.


Clifford Sifton: The deputy minister went down there, and it was found that parties were cutting timber on the Indian reserve, and we seized the timber.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It used to be a very common thing for certain parties to take timber from the Indian reserves. What is the punishment for that?


Clifford Sifton: The practice is to seize the timber and compel the parties to pay double dues and costs. In cases where timber is valuable and that penalty would not be adequate, we take the timber away from them altogether and proceed for other penalties as well.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What are the dues for timber Oil Indian lands?


Clifford Sifton: It varies as to the kind of timber. The timber seized is required to be put up at public competition. There is a schedule for each kind of timber, but what the details are I do not remember. We charge double dues and costs if we consider they are trespassing.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That is a very inadequate punishment for such an offence. In the case of hemlock for instance the double dues would only amount to .$2 or $3 a thousand.


Clifford Sifton: If a trespasser cuts timber of any value before he is discovered we seize the timber and sell it. and in addition fine him. It may happen that a man who

has lumber alongside the Indian reserve may trespass unintentionally, and we would let him oft' by charging double dues. If a man (knowingly cuts timber which he has no right to, we proceed against him for other penalties.
ill'.* SPROULE. I am told that it is a common practice to take Indian timber, and that often the department knows nothing about it. The ordinary value of timber is far more than double the dues, so that 'such a penalty is not adequate.


Clifford Sifton: The timber on Indian lands is well and carefully protected. Wherever such an offence has occurred full satisfaction has been demanded. I think I may say there is practically no trespass on Indian lands.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That shows how little the minister knows about it.


Clifford Sifton: Will the hon. gentleman give rue the information ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I have been told that men have taken Indian timber in large quantities.


Clifford Sifton: Where ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In the Georgian bay district.


Clifford Sifton: When?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not know the exact date, but it is some years ago.


Clifford Sifton: Probably when the Conservatives were in office.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No, but since the present government has come to power, and I am told that persons have come down here to try to settle these cases. I have been told that some people take the Indian timber, pay tiie penalty, and go back the next year and do the same thing. It is distinctly an injustice to the Indian. It is no punishment to the man who has taken the timber, because after he pays the double dues, he has a very large profit.


Clifford Sifton: If my hon. friend will specify the time and place that it has taken place. I will have the matter looked up, and will show that he is not correct.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It is not my place to play the detective.


Clifford Sifton: My hon. friend has not a right to say that a man is stealing timber from the Indian lands without giving particulars. The same inspector is in the department who was there when I took office. His work is particularly to look after the timber on the Indian reserves, and I am perfectly satisfied that his work is well and carefully done, and I should be very much surprised to And that there has been any loss of timber. I remember one case of Mr. SIFTON.
trespass on a very valuable limit, but the matter was settled in such a way as to prevent loss taking place.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: My hon. friend says I have no right to say what I did. I have a right to state in this House what is common rumour from reliable sources, and I will exercise that right, regardless of whether it pleases the minister or not. If it were necessary, I could give the names of parties who have done this in the past. I have always held that that punishment was no adequate punishment whatever, and as evidence of that, I cite that fact that the same men have been punished in the same way more than once, and have gone and done the same thing again.


James Clancy: We have passed from the item concerning the province of Ontario ; but I have been looking over the report which the hon. gentleman sent to me, and I do not find any report upon which the Order in Council of the 22nd of December, 1900, was based. There is the report of the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, but I assume that that is based upon some report with regard to the conditions upon the island. Can the minister tell the committee whether he has the report upon which this Order in Council was based, setting out the facts contained in the report of the Superintendent General ?


Clifford Sifton: I am not aware whether there was a formal report or not. If there is, I will let my hon. friend have it.


James Clancy: There must have been some report made by somebody connected with the Indian Department. The surveys branch would have nothing to do with that. Can the hon. gentleman call to mind who would likely have made a report of that kind ?	#


Clifford Sifton: I cannot remember.


James Clancy: I am afraid my hon. friend has had no report.


Clifford Sifton: What I said was that we proceeded on representations from the lands and surveys branch as to the difficulty of administering the affairs of that reserve without a survey.


James Clancy: Did the hon. gentleman send one of the officers up there to investigate the matter ?


Clifford Sifton: I do not remember.
Indians, N.S.-relief and seed grain, $2,700.


Robert Laird Borden: How much is relief and how much is seed grain ?


Clifford Sifton: About one-third is for seed grain and about two-thirds for relief.


Robert Laird Borden: How many Indians are in Nova Scotia ?


Clifford Sifton: 1,930.

Indians, N.S.

medical attendance, $3,700.


Robert Laird Borden: How much was expended last year ?


Clifford Sifton: The expenditures were: in 1900-01, $3,658 ; in 1901-1902,	$3,696;
in 1902-1903, $3,542.
Indians, New Brunswick, salaries, $1,308.


Robert Laird Borden: In connection with this item I might bring to the attention of the minister a communication from Alexander Brisk, an Indian Chief, bearing date Bathurst, 29th March, 1904. It is as follows:
there was a special reservation in the surrender to keep for themselves the right to fish they cannot fish.


Robert Laird Borden: Of course I cannot expect the minister to give me the particulars at once, but perhaps he would have the officers of his department prepare a little memorandum and send it to me so that I can inform the Indians what the position is.


Clifford Sifton: The only point would be whether the surrender reserves the right of the Indians themselves to fish.
I am herewith inclosing you a communication I received from Ottawa in reference to fishing privileges belonging to our reserve on the Nipi-sinquit river. You will note the contents. I know nothing of our fishing privileges on this reserve having been leased for our benefit at a rental of twenty-five dollars a year. If so; I would like to know to whom the money was paid and what was done with it as none of it has been received by us. I would like to know also if we can fish in this or rather in these waters, they having been leased without our knowledge or consent. I would be obliged to you if you would bring this matter up and have an understanding about it for me.
Respectfully yours,
ALEXANDER PRISK, Chief.
P. O. Chief Alexander Prisk,
Bathurst, Gloucester County, N.B.
Then there is an inelosure as follows :
Ottawa, 23rd March, 1904. Sir,-In reply to your letter of the 19th instant regarding the disposition of fishing privileges on the Nipisinquit Indian Reserve, I beg to say that in 1896 the Indians surrendered the fishing priviieges'tnr-ttris-reeepve-te-lto-leaeed for tl"ir benefit and under said surrender the department leased the said .privileges to Mr. Henry Bishop for a ten year term at an annual rental or $25. The agent of your reserve was fully-advised of the granting of the lease.	*
Your obedient servant,



[Stage Direction]
Secretary.
Chief Alexander Prisk,
Bathurst, N. B.
I thought it advisable to allow this matter to stand until the hon. gentleman's estimates came up but I have received another communication asking why I am not doing something about it. I would be glad to receive some information about the matter.	.
Clifford Sifton: My hon. friend will see that at page J-149 of the Auditor General's report a credit for the amount received and the particulars.


Frederick William Borden: He wants to know what their rights are and whether they still have the right of fishing in those waters.


Robert Laird Borden: The chief also seems to know nothing of the surrender. We might have particulars as to how the surrender was accomplished. I do not know the practical details and I would simply like enough information to make it plain to him that the Indians surrendered their rights and that nothing was done unjustly.
Mr. R, L. BORDEN. How many Indians are there in New Brunswick ?


Clifford Sifton: 1,699.
Medical attendance and medicines, $3,000.


Robert Laird Borden: It seems that with very unfailing regularity the medical attendance for the Indians throughout the maritime provinces costs about $2 a head all around, from year to year. It never seems to vary much from that.
Indians, P.E.I., salaries and travelling expenses, $300.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have you any Indians down there ?
m' SIFTON." 391.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You tax them a dollar a
head for agents and travelling expenses.
Relief and seed grain, $925.


Richard Blain: Would the minister give an explanation as to how the grain is distributed ?


Clifford Sifton: We have a local agent there and it is practically left to his discretion.


Mr. COCHRANE.: Are these Indians farming and if so why do they need seed grain every year ?


Clifford Sifton: The maritime province Indians do not go very extensively into farming.


Edward Cochrane: Then why do you call it seed grain if they do not go into farming ? This is a large amount of money to spend for seed grain. We have Indians in Ontario, but I do not see anything for the Indians in Ontario.


Clifford Sifton: I could not speak positively but I think they have surrendered ail powers. Under this correspondence they have surrendered the right to fish and unless


Clifford Sifton: If you will look at the head of this page you will see that the Indians of Ontario receive as much as the other Indians.


Mr. WM  BOSS@Victoria: They are farming now more extensively than ever before but still only to a limited extent. They are building their houses, and cultivating patches for themselves more than ever before.


Richard Blain: Is it the policy of the gov-erment to supply the Indians with seed grain every year ? What do they do with the grain which they grow ?


William Ross: They feed their cattle.


Clifford Sifton: In the case of the maritime province Indians the position of the government is just this. /We simply have to exercise a sort of paternal supervision over them, and have to do the best we can in each case as it arises. The agents do their best to induce them to follow such vocations as will enable them to be self-supporting. But, where there is a case of distress, the distribution of seed grain and so on is carried out, and this must be largely at the discretion of the agents. No hard and fast rule can be adopted, and more than a hard and fast rule can be adopted for the relief of distress in Ottawa.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The government seem to have some sort of rule, because the same amount is voted every year.


James Clancy: What is the condition of the Indians there that they should be differently treated from those in the other provinces? This is an old settled province. Have the Indians been taught habits of industry, and have they learned to farm or carry on any other productive labour? What is the reason for this condition on the part of the Indians ? It surely cannot be lack of opportunities for employment. Is the difficulty in the administration ? There must be something wrong. Perhaps the hon. minister will explain the condition and tell us why these Indians should be distinguished from other Indians under apparently similar circumstances.


William Ross: When they put in their little crop they move about from place to place sometimes making butter tubs, sometimes barrels, and so on. Then, when the hay is about fit to be cut, they move back to their little farms. The crop that they raise they feed to their few cattle and horses. I am intimately acquainted with the habits of the Indians in my own county.


James Clancy: That is hardly an explanation. These people are supposed to be able to sustain themselves. I can understand that, as the Minister of the Interior says, there must be a certain yielding to circumstances, that no hard and fast rule can be laid down. But it seems very strange that these Indians are not to sustain themselves Mr. SIFTON.
in a province where employment can easily be had.


William Ross: They never hire out.


James Clancy: The sooner the hon. gentleman teaches his constituents a lesson in industry the better.


William Ross: My constituents work, but not the Indians.


Clifford Sifton: In the maritime provinces we have about 3,900 Indians altogether. The total appropriation for these three provinces amounts to about $16,000. So, while this may seem a fairly large appropriation for the purpose of giving assistance, we cannot be said to do anything that is to be regarded as supporting the Indians. The government does not assume that duty. We simply give assistance where we think it absolutely necessary. In Ontario the circumstances are somewhat different. Some of the Indian tribes in Ontario have valuable lands and have settled down and become farmers, and are quite independent. SBut the Indians in Nova Scotia have not taken to farming to the same extent, and, while they do not receive very much more from the government, they do receive some more. I do not think the conditions can be improved at present. The difficulty lies in two things-in the first place the Indians have not land of a character to support them ; and in the second place, they are of a roving disposition, and my hon. friend knows that it is utterly impossible, in the case of a tribe that has the habit of roving to induce them to settle down.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. As the Indians have received this for years, does not the hon. Minister think that they will regard it as a perquisite and that, on that account, it will be very hard to take it from them ?


Clifford Sifton: For my part I agree with the hon. gentleman (Mr. LaRIviere). I think the Indians regard it as he says, and I do not think we are paying more money than we ought to pay.
At six o'clock Committee took recess.
After Recess.
Committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Indians, P.E.I.-relief and seed grain, $925.


Richard Blain: I would like the minister to give us some explanation of how this grain is purchased, what kinds of grain are purchased. and whether, at the close of the year, there is an investigation to find out if the Indians are pursuing the business of graingrowing in a proper way. whether they are improving or remaining at a standstill ?


Clifford Sifton: The seed is purchased locally by the agents. The quantities purchased in any particular place are very small. It

would be inadvisable to buy large quantities, because we do not require large quantities. It is mostly garden seed, seed potatoes, and things of that kind. We get reports from the agents annually as to the condition of the Indians. There is very little change in their condition, it remains about the same as it was twenty years ago. The Indians in the maritime provinces are of a somewhat different class from those of Ontario, they are engaged in different avocations and move about.


Richard Blain: Is there any effort on the part of the government to educate the Indians in farming, or is this contribution simply made to keeip them alive ? Is there any expectation that they will ultimately become self-sustaining in respect to graingrowing ?


Mr. SI FT  ON@: We do not carry on any system of farm instruction for these Indians as we do in the Northwest. The Indians understand agriculture fairly well, in a small way, and it would be no benefit to give them farm instruction.
Indians, P.E.I.-medical attendance and medicines, $650.


Richard Blain: Is that item for medical attendance paid to local doctors ; and, if so to how many ?


Clifford Sifton: I can perhaps explain best lhat matter by referring the hon. gentleman m the explanations that were given in the House last year. In the Auditor General's Report we have a statement of the sums paid to each doctor. To one, $17.50 ; to another, $70.20 ; to another, $19.50 ; to an-
UUJel' '?-** -ii rails along In iiial wa.i. The
work is not sufficient to justify putting them on a salary, and when cases of sickness occur doctors are called in. Their bill is certified by the agent, and if it is found V-';if011,able ^	We have a standing
difficulty with medical practitioners about the size of their bills, and the department has a good deal of difficulty in keeping the expenditure within limits.
if the number of Indians that are returned by the agents do not appear to be paid, of course the balance unpaid comes back.
Indians, Manitoba and Northwest Territories -implements, tools, harness, hardware, lumber and building material for Indians, $6,700.


Mr. W. J. ROCHE.: Would the minister explain this item ?


Clifford Sifton: The commissioner gives us a statement of what he requires under each head, whether flour, or bait, or hayforks, anything of that kind, ail that goes into the bill. The amount is made up for each agency, and the estimate is based upon that. I have here a list of the sums that are paid in each agency : $50.40, $60.70, $476.75. Take the Clandeboye agency, $50.46, it is made up of such articles as scythe snaiths, scythe stones, grind stones.


William James Roche: Are they purchased by tender ?


Clifford Sifton: 
William James Roche: The purchases are not made all at the same time ?


Clifford Sifton: No. For instance, at For-tage-La-Prairie we require this year a hay rake at $35 and a hay fork at $7.26. When we want such articles as these the agent . buys them at the ordinary retail price.
Indians, Manitoba and Northwest Territories -annuities, $143,475.


Mr.   M . J. ROCIIE@: I notice a decrease of $1,210 in this item since last year. How many Indians are there now in Manitoba and the Northwest Territories who are in receipt of annuities ?


Clifford Sifton: My hon. friend will understand that before the payment of an annuity can be made under the treaty, we have a calculation made each year upon the census returns received from the agents, and which vary slightly from year to year. In making up the total on the basis of the returns in our hands, it is this year some $1,200 less than last year. We do not always expend the exact amount that is voted, but we make an estimate upon the basis of the returns which we receive, the money is sent out, and 221
Seeds, field and garden, $1,933.


William James Roche: Is this an expenditure which changes from year to year ?


Clifford Sifton: It is pretty much the same every year.


William James Roche: There is an increase of $716. Is that because the farming and gardening operations of the Indians are being conducted on a larger scale ?


Clifford Sifton: In this case we receive from each of the agencies a requisition and of course as the farming operations increase on the part of some of the reserves we require to get an increased amount for seed. I may just give my hon. friend an illustration of the way in which we get these requisitions. We get a requisition, for instance, from the Pelly agency, where they
revised edition

require 80 bushels of wheat for seed. The agent sends in a requisition based upon the fact that the Indians will have a certain amount of land prepared for crop. There is no way of keeping it at any fixed amount. A requisition will come in one year and it could not by any possibility be the same as a requisition in another year. The commissioner exercises his supervision over the matter and if he thinks the amount asked for is unreasonable he makes a recommendation to the head office and it is finally adjusted.


William James Roche: Are the Indians improving in their farming operations, and are they indulging in farming operations to a greater extent each year ?


Clifford Sifton: Yes, I think I may say there has been a very great improvement in the last few years. The improvement depends almost entirely on the character of the agent. We have some agents who are extremely successful and some who are not. We have from time to time to change our agents around. We find that one agent is not getting along -well with a band, that he is not suited for the work which he has assigned to him and we make a change. We have had to make quite a number of changes recently. The greatest improvement that has been made in connection with the agencies in the Northwest Territories, which are under the charge of Mr. William Graham at the File Hills. He has been in the department for a number of years. He took charge some years ago and he was very successful with the Indians in the File Hills, with the result that the Indians upon that and one or two neighbouring reserves raised 65,000 bushels of wheat. He has been so successful in connection with cattle raising that we are buying a considerable number of heifers which we require for the Indians on the reserves in his inspectorate. We have made him an inspector which will enable him to extend his work to the whole inspectorate. Mr. Markel has lately been promoted to the inspector of the western division and it is hoped that he will be able to bring about a very great improvement m connection with the farming operations ot the Indians in Alberta. There the Indians have very fine reserves and great scope for carrying on the business of cattle raising, and it is expected that we will be able in a short time to make them become self supporting as a result of the work that will be carried on under Mr. Market's supervision. Upon the reserves that have been in charge of Mr. Graham the improvement has been so great that we have ceased to distribute rations to the Indians as was formerly the custom. In Manitoba the improvement is not so marked. The scope for improvement is not so great there. I am not able to speak with the same degree of positiveness as to the improvement there, but in the Ter-Mr. SIFTON.
ritories generally speaking there has been a very considerable improvement.
Indians-Manitoba and Northwest Territories-live stock, $40,395.


William James Roche: There is a very large increase for live stock.


Clifford Sifton: I will give my hon. friend a statement of the purchases to be made and which are to be paid out of the vote which is asked for here. We require for the Northwest Territories 8 stallions, 14 oxen, 72 bulls. 1,036 heifers. We are estimating for the oxen $50 to $80 per head, bulls $75 to $12o per head, stallions $250 to $350 por head, heifers 27 to 28 per head. As to the stallions two are for the Piegan reserve, two for the Blood, two for the Blackfeet, one for the Duck Lake reserve, and one for the Touchwood Hills reserve. It has been arranged that the stallions shall be bought locally by the agents because we find that range bred stallions are more satisfactory. Of the oxen four are required for Moose Mountain, 6 for Pelly, 1 for Berens river 1 for Fort Frances, 2 for Clandeboye. Of the bulls we require 4 for the Manitowapah agency, 2 for the Pas. 1 for Birtle, 1 for Assiniboine, 2 for Qu'Appelle, 2 for Touchwood, and 3 for Pelly, 2 for Duck lake, and 2 for Carlton, 2 at Sadie lake, 3 at Edmonton 2 at Hobbema, 6 for Blackfoot, 30 for Bloods, 10 for Piegan. Of heifers we require 1136 altogether, 200 for the Piegan, 30 for Blackfeet, 6 for Assiniboine, and 900 for the Blood reserve. The members of the committee will see from the statement I have made that quite a number of cattle are going to the reserves in the Alberta district where we are trying under the department's supervision to get the Indians to engage in cattle raising to such an extent that they will soon become self-supporting. So far as direct dependence on the government is concerned, though a comparatively short time ago they were rather backward, they are improving very much in their temper and spirit. There is great difficulty in getting them to engage in farming operations, - but it is hoped that they can be rendered selfsupporting by keeping cattle.


Mr.   W.J. ROCHE@: Who purchases these animals on behalf of the government, and who fixes the prices ?


Clifford Sifton: The prices are fixed by officers of the department, in most cases. 1 will give my hon. friend, if he likes, a statement showing where they have been purchased ; and the prices paid for them.


William James Roche: I would like to have that, because I know that many have been supplied by individuals, and unless the matter is thrown open to competition, these gentlemen may get a good deal more for their animals than they are really worth.


Clifford Sifton: My hon. friend will see that it would be practically impossible to buy

cattle as you would buy tea or coffee, wliicb is bought at so much a pound for a certain specified quality. An animal must be valued according to its worth. The cattle bought in the west were personally inspected by Mr. Markle, who is a good judge of live stock. A considerable number -were bought at the Calgary spring sale, where the stock breeders sold the animals by auction. Mr. Markle bought 33 bulls at an average price of $117. That was lower than we paid for the animals bought farther east, taking freight into consideration. He bought six stallions at $160 a piece.
pally to the supplies of beef and flour on the Sarcee, Stony, Blood and Peigan reserves. The decrease on the Blood reserve is $8,019; on the Blackfoot, $2,940; on the Peigan, $936; on the Sarcee, $987; and on the Stony reserve, $474. The reduction is in pursuance of the attempt to reduce the food supplies to the Indians, and endeavour to make them see the necessity of making themselves self supporting. These supplies are in large quantity and they are all purchased by public tender.
Indians-Manitoba and Northwest Territories-triennial clothing, $2,698.


William James Roche: I presume most of these high-priced animals are thoroughbreds ?


Clifford Sifton: All pedigreed.


William James Roche: The object, then, in supplying the Indians with these well-bred animals is to improve their stock, and not merely to increase the number ?


Clifford Sifton: Both to increase the number and improve the quality.


William James Roche: The reason I desired to know who on behalf of the government made these purchases was this. For instance. I mentioned the other day that a certain gentleman who is now the-Liberal candidate in one of the constituencies supplied many animals to the government. As he gets a pretty good price for his stock when sold to private individuals, I presume he would not get less from the government ; and I wanted to know how the government purchased the stock, who inspected them
IVSCl wl-10 fixed, tlip nri ops


Clifford Sifton: Last year we thought we would make an improvement in the method of purchasing by placing Mr. Markle in charge of all the purchases in Manitoba and the Northwest Territories.


William James Roche: That is Mr. Markle who used to be at Birtle ?


Clifford Sifton: Yes.
Indians, Manitoba and Northwest Territories -provisions, clothing, ammunition, twine, medicines and medical attendance for Indians, $173,068.


William James Roche: Would the hon. minister state how much has been expended under each head ?


Clifford Sifton: Last year the estimate was $193,472. The great effort this year has been to make a reduction in this estimate, the purpose being to supply a relatively large amount for the purchase of cattle. This item is made up of the following : Food supplies, clothing, ammunition and twine, medicine, medical attendance, hospitals, freighting supplies, and some special amounts aggregating altogether $9,000 or $10,000. The reduction shown refers princi-2214


Mr. W. .: 1. ROCHE. Are these supplied under treaty ?


Clifford Sifton: Yes ; regular distribution under treaty.
Indians-Manitoba and Northwest Territories-day, boarding, and industrial schools, $303,292.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. I wish to ask the minister if the policy hitherto followed by the government with regard to industrial schools is being changed ? I understand that one of these industrial schools in Manitoba and another one in the Territories, are being closed, and that boarding schools on the reserve are Substituted in lieu thereof. Is that a new policy on the part of the government ?


Clifford Sifton: 
C94Y COMMONS
[Stage Direction]
Intelligence, so that the general status of the band would be raised. While some of those engaged on behalf of the different ([DOT]lmrehes in Indian education, were not of liiy view at the time, I believe they have pretty well come to that opinion now. I did not think it was justifiable for me to change the policy which had been deliberately entered upon and in regard to which a large amount of money had been expended so I stated to the House that while on the "whole I held that view, I was not prepared to discontinue the industrial [DOT]schools which .existed. I thought I was bound to continue them much on the existing lines, but that the rule should be enforced that pupils should not remain to an advanced age. I held, however, that in the establishment of further institutions, the principle should be followed of conducting a boarding rather than an Industrial school system. My lion, friend (Mr. LaRiviere) is probably aware, that the authorities of St. Boniface industrial school have found that the principle 1 have advocated was the principle which should be applied in the carrying out their work, because the department accepted a proposition of theirs by which they agreed to take off our bands at a valuation the buildings and the property of the industrial school at St Boniface, and to build three boarding schools in lieu thereof. They agreed with my opinion that the boarding schools, where a less elaborate and lengthy system of education would be carried on and a larger number of children benefited (these schools being placed at different points upon the reserve) was much more beneficial than the carrying on of one industrial school at St. Boniface. We are carrying on the industrial school wrhich exists at the present time. Our desire is not to multiply them, but to inaugurate boarding schools wherever additional educational facilities are required. Experience shows that in order to get really effective results, the boarding school must be resorted to. In some places where we have day schools, and where we cannot incur the expense of [DOT]a boarding school, the results are not as satisfactory as we could hope.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. Do I understand that the boarding schools are as effective as the industrial schools ? I would remind the hon. gentleman that the education of the Indians does not merely consist in teaching them to read and write, but that in addition they have to be civilized. In that case if you keep the Indians within their reserve I am afraid the civilization of the Indians will not be attained. I believe that the best way to civilize them is to remove them from their reserves and get them to lead a civilized life at least for a certain length of time. I fear that the civilization of "the Indians will not be attained by keeping them on their reserves, removed
Clifford Sifton: from the knowledge and influence of civilization. I do not think that the question of cost should be taken into consideration in such a cause, and I fear that we are going back on a system that was found to be good. I see from the last report of the deputy superintendent of Indian Affairs that lie proclaimed the system of industrial schools to be far better than the other system on that very account.


Clifford Sifton: 
William James Roche: I notice an item on page j-71 of the Auditor General's Report :
Legal expenses, T. G. Mathers, Attorney General vs. Garrison.
I do not ask for an explanation of this item for legal expenses on account of the *amount, which is very small, but I would like to know the cause of that legal expense being incurred. Was it in connection with the case which I brought to the attention of the minister a few years ago where Garrison had purchased a printing plant from the industrial school and sold it to a fellow-Liberal for the purpose of conducting a Liberal newspaper in the constituency of Brandon, and, having received his money, did ndt pay the government the original purchase money ?


Clifford Sifton: My hon. friend I am afraid is responsible in a way for the item.


Mr.   W.@: ,T. ROCHE. I hope so.


Clifford Sifton: He brought to my attention the fact that a printing press had been sold and not paid for. I gave directions to have proceedings taken to recover the amount and this is the expense of suing Garrison. We found, however, that he was not worth anything, and we got nothing.


William James Roche: Have you anything else beside the judgment ?


Clifford Sifton: No.


William James Roche: Have you the cash 1 Mr. SIFTON. No.


William James Roche: That is a remarkable statement. Several years ago I brought this to the attention of the minister. When the printing trade was being done away with in the industrial school a printing p'iant was left on the hands of the government. A Mr. Thompson desired to
lease this plant from the government for the purpose of conducting a paper. He had many advertisements contracted for by the tradesmen of the town and the government agent there leased the plant to Mr. Thompson with the stipulation that he could cancel the contract by giving six months' notice. Thompson, however, was to have the first option of purchase. In a few months Thompson was notified by tile Indian commissioner that at the end of six months his contract would cease. He desired to purchase the plant, but the government refused to sell it and it turned out that the reason was they had arranged with Garrison, the editor of a Liberal paper in Virden, to take over this plant. Garrison purchased the plant from the government, but he sold it to another gentleman, Mr. Wildman, who is now using it in the publication of the Griswold ' Ledger,' in the hon. gentleman's own constituency. Wildman paid Garrison, but Garrison has noi paid the government to ibis day. I brought this matter to the attention of the government on several occasions and two or three years ago the acting minister (Mr. Sutherland) promised to investigate the case. I do not know if he has done so, but it seems strange if an investigation has not been held. The attention of the government has been drawn to this thing several years in succession, but the furthest advance they have made to the present day is the expenditure of $21 for legal expenses to get judgment against the man who sold the plant and pocketed the proceeds. It is, I say, a remarkable statement and it seems strange that Garrison, who has been running a paper in the interests of the hon. gentleman in the town of Virden, is not worth the few hundred dollars for which he sold that plant. It is a direct loss to the government. The judgment, I am sure, will not put anything in the treasury and I think the government are deserving of severe condemnation for the very great laxity they have exhibited in connection with the collection of this money, especially since they erred in the first place in refusing to Thompson the opportunity to purchase the plant when he was willing to pay for it. I would like some explanation from the minister.


Clifford Sifton: The first time the hon. gentleman brought t'he matter up I promised an inquiry, and I think I brought the correspondence down several years ago. 'My hon. friend will remember that the late Indian commissioner, desiring to close up the? office, gave instructions to have the press sold. It was sold to this man, Mr. Garrisou, The first time my hon. friend called my attention to it I said no proceedings were taken, but when he called my attention to it again I found that proceedings had been taken, and we got a judgment. T'he stock

did not realize the amount, and consequently we had to collect the money.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Could'nt you get the press back?


Clifford Sifton: The press disappeared.


William James Roche: The press has gone into another town where it is published in the interests of the hon. minister, so he has now the privilege of having two papers supporting 'him at the expense of the public treasury. When Mr. Thompson asked the Indian commissioner why he was not permitted to purchase the printing press, the Indian commissioner put all the onus on the minister, and said his instructions were from (headquarters to sell the plant to Mr. Garrison, not to lease it to Mr. Thompson. When I brought the matter up in the House a few session ago, the minister put the onus back an the Indian commissioner. I think the minister is the guilty party.


Clifford Sifton: Whatever my course may have been in relation to the matter I am prepared to take the responsibility.
Indians-Manitoba and Northwest Territories-surveys, $7,000.


William James Roche: I desire to ask for an explanation in reference to the Crooked Lake Reserve. I asked the minister a few weeks ago if it was the intention of the government to throw that open to settlement in the near future, but his reply was not a definite one. The reason I am asking for a definite reply is because representations have been made to the settlers, residents and intending locators in that portion of the country, that this reserve, or a portion of it, will be opened in the near future, and the people there are very anxious to know whetlier it is the intention of the government to throw that open.


Clifford Sifton: I understand the question covers the lease that lies north of the town of Broadview. The people there represented that they were desirous that a portion of the territory north of the town should be opened to 'settlement. The officers of the [DOT] department have been for some years past desirous of procuring the consent of the Indians to the opening of a portion of that reserve, not the whole of it, periiaps a third or a quarter of it. We have not yet formally submitted the question to them, because as my hon. friend will know, if you submit the question of the surrender of their land to an Indian band they will vote against it, and it will be impossible to get them to agree to it after that. They probably consider that it is a point of honour with them to stick to the decision that they have taken. It is therefore extremely imprudent to submit a question of that kind to them unless you feel sure that you are likely to get a favourable decision. In this particular case Mr. SIFTON.
the officers at Winnipeg have instructions to take such steps as may be deemed desirable. The agent is moving in that direction, and will ask for their consent just as soon as he has reason to expect a favourable conclusion. We have in that case, and one or two others, a statement of the disadvantages under which the towns are labouring from a portion of the surrounding country being practically uninhabited Indian reserve. I understand it is very desirable to get a settlement if it can be obtained.
Mr. LaRIVIERE. I understand the government have adopted a policy whereby all these little patches of land known as reserves may be thrown open, in the more settled parts of the province of Manitoba and the Territories and an equivalent found elsewhere. They are an impediment to colonization, and are not in the best interests of the Indians themselves. It is not desirable that the Indians should live in the midst of a settlement, because they will not improve, and they will contract all the bad habits that are practiced by their neighbours. In fact I see by reports here from all these small reserves near ordinary settlements that complaints are made by the agents that cases of intoxication from the use of liquor are becoming much more numerous among the Indians. But a step in the right direction has been taken with respect to the Indian reserve at Roseau River. A portion of the reserve has been thrown open for settlement. I see it stated that the land was sold at public auction, and it realized somewhere in The neighbourhood of $13 per acre. It is valuable land for settlers, but useless for the Indians because they do not cultivate it. If the balance of the Indians at Roseau River were removed and the rest of the reservation thrown open for settlement, it would be in the best interest of the country and of the Indians themselves. I see by the report of last year, that of $99,000 realized from the sale of that portion of the Indian reserve at Roseau one-tenth has been spent and applied in the interest of the Indians themselves. I do not know that there are any records of that expenditure, but I would like to know what was bought with the money.


Clifford Sifton: Just a word with regard to what the hon. gentleman (Mr. LaRivieret says as to the general question of policy. Whatever may be deemed desirable or otherwise, the fact of the matter is that the Indians own these lands just as much as my hon. friend (Mr. La Riviere) owns any piece of land for which he has a title in fee simple. The faith of the government of Canada is pledged to the maintenance of the title of these Indians in that land. Under the arrangement that we have made with them, our faith is pledged that we will not disturb them in the occupation of the land which has been reserved for them, except upon

their own consent being given in a specified form. We follow the policy of getting the consent wherever we can when we think it will not interfere with the means of the livelihood of the Indians ; for we realize, as my hon. friend does, that it would be to the interest of the Indians that the land should be thrown open for settlement and sold, and that they should be paid the interest on the proceeds rather than keep the land while putting it to no use. But my hon. friend recognizes the fact that we have to proceed in a diplomatic way and get the Indians to surrender their lands when they are willing to do so. The officers oi the department, having constant dealings with the Indians, know how far it is safe to go in each particular case. In the case to which my hon. friend refers, that of the Roseau reserve, after urgent requests had been made by the settlers, with some difficulty the inspector, Mr. Marlatt, I think it was, secured the consent of the Indians to sell a portion of that reserve. Under the law, the Indians are entitled to be paid in cash ten per cent of the proceeds of the land sold for distribution among themselves. I presume that the original intention of putting that in the statute was to offer a sort of inducement to the Indians to sell, for the Indian, like some wliitemen, has a fairly good appreciation of cash in hand, and the fact that they were going to secure something might be an inducement to them to surrender, when possibly they would not surrender if they were not going to get something immediately. The rest of the money goes to the fund held for their pui-poses.
Mr. LaRIVIEiRE. Was that distribution of ten per cent made in money or in kind .'


Clifford Sifton: Part of the money was paid, the accountant tells me, in cash and the balance in goods, which were purchased bv Mr. Marlatt at their request. And Mr. Marlatt makes a report, which will appeal in detail in the Auditor General's Report.
Indians-Manitoba and Northwest Territories-Sioux, $5,659.


William James Roche: What is the explanation of that item ?


Clifford Sifton: The Sioux Indians are at the Birtle agency, Assiniboine agency, Qu'-Appelle agency, Carlton agency, and a few in the Portage la Prairie agency.


William James Roche: Has there been any treaty with the Sioux Indians ?


Clifford Sifton: I do not think so. They have not been recognized as Canadian Indians. These are the Indians, or the descen-dents of the Indians, who came over from the United States at the time of the Minnesota massacre. They are not recognized as Canadian Indians, but the government thought at the time that, lather than have them in a discontented state, while not paying them annuities, and while no treaty obligations exist, it would be well to set apart reserves for them, appoint agents and furnish certain small supplies to enable them to get along. There about 600 of them altogether.
Indians-Manitoba and Northwest Territories-Mills, saw and grist, $4,327.


Clifford Sifton: There is an increase here of $2,065. This includes the establishment of a saw-mill at Pas agency and a contribution for a saw-mill at the Norway House agency. These mills are for the purpose of cutting lumber, and are operated by the Indians themselves. .


William James Roche: Do they out timber on the reserve ?


Clifford Sifton: Yes, where there is timber available on the reserve ; but where there is no timber on the reserve, I give them a permit to cut on Dominion lands.


Mr. WIDSON.: Is this merely to pay for the building of the mills, or is it to pay for their operation ?


Clifford Sifton: At the Pas agency we give $1,800 for a saw-mill, consisting of a 25-horse-power engine, with shafting, belting and all the necessary outfit.


Uriah Wilson: For the mill alone ?


Clifford Sifton: Yes. Then we make a contribution of $1,000 for establishing a mill at Norway House. The Indians themselves will pay the rest.


Uriah Wilson: What will the one at Norway House cost altogether ?


Clifford Sifton: As it is a long way to Norway House it may be a little expensive- $2,000 or $2,200 delivered there. The Indians at Norway House are outside the treaty limits, but they are fairly well advanced. They are pretty well civilized-as much so, perhaps, as any other Indians in Manitoba. The rest of the vote consists of small items for repairs and supplies in connection with the mills we have at the other agencies.


Uriah Wilson: How many mills are there altogether ?


Clifford Sifton: Ten altogether.


Uriah Wilson: Are they all sawmills ?


Clifford Sifton: There are three sawmills and six combined saw and grist mills and one grist mill.
Indians-Manitoba and Northwest Territories-general expenses and management, $166,852.


William James Roche: Is the increased estimate this year owing to the increased cost of managmeut resulting from an increase in salaries and other expenses in connection with the management, or what particularly constitutes the increase in the estimates?


C955 COMMONS
Clifford Sifton: The total increase is $7,561. dMere are the following increases in salaries in the commissioner's office : Mr. McKenna, from $2,400 to $2,600 and Mr. Paget, from $1,700 to $1,800. That rote will not be required at all. These estimates were made up last fall. The main estimates are made up before the beginning of the new year. I have since decided to remove Mr. Paget to the inside service and a special vote will liavd to be taken in the supplementary estimates for his salary. Mr. Lash is increased from $1,700 to $1,900, Mr. Be-tournay from $1,200 to $1,250, Mr. Jean from $1,000 to $1,100, Mr. Richardson from $900 to $950 and a stenographer from $480 to $550. The increases amounting to $770 altogether. In treaty No. 8 we have an inspector named Mr. H. A. Conroy.-Treaty No. 8, the last treaty tliat was made and comprising the Indians away north in the district of Slave Lake. Mr. Conroy as the inspector in charge of that inspectorate and takes out the money to ipay the annuity payments that are made and makes an animal trip for that purpose. We are increasing his pay from $1,800 to $2,000. Then we are putting up buildings at Norway House agency costing $4,000. On the Pelly agency we are increasing the farmer's salary from $600 to $060, appointing a farmer at Cote's reserve at $600 and putting up new agency buildings costing $4,000, the increase at the Pelly agency being $4,660. At the Crooked Lake agency we are increasing the farmer's salary from $600 to $660. At the Saddle Lake' agency we are increasing the farmer's salary from' $540 to $600. at Edmonton from $480' to $540, at the Stony agency we are increasing the agents salary from $900 to $1,000, the Sarcee agency we are increasing the agent's salary from $1,000 to $1,100, at the Blackfeet agency we are Increasing the farmer's salary from $600 to $600, these increases totalling altogether $10,170. There are items in tire estimates of last year amounting to $2,609, which are not required and this makes the net increase $7,561.


Edward Frederick Clarke: When the item of ' schools, day, boarding and industrial,' was up, I intended to ask the hon. minister as to the percentage of Indian children that pass through the Indian schools who retain the veneer of civilization which they receive there ? I visited the Indian' school at Brandon, was very much interested in the work, and would like to know from the hon. minister if these children after passing through the school are sent back to the re-s?rvation, and if so how many of them lapse again ? How many of them retain the polish they get in the schools, and what becomes of them?


Clifford Sifton: I- could not off-hand give the hon. gentleman the exact statistics.


William James Roche: 


Edward Frederick Clarke: I just want the hon. gentleman to state generally.


Clifford Sifton: Speaking generally the result has been that the pupils of the industrial schools have not been able to go out in ordinary life and compete with white men. I have stated my opinion as to what was the result and what was likely to be tlie result of this form of Indian education. I itm perfectly satisfied that you cannot take the child of the ordinary prairie Indian, put him in the industrial school, keep him there until he is twenty-one years of age and turn him loose to make his living amongst white men. He has not the physical, mental or moral get-up to enable him to compete. He cannot do it. The result has been that to a large extent the Indians who have been educated in this way have gone back to the reserves. I do not think that this work has been in any way lost because I can say to my hon. friend from my own knowledge, having lived in the Northwest since 1S76, that there is the most marvellous change in the general character of the Indian bands.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Is that the result of the Infusion of educated civilized Indians into the reservation ?
Ml-. SIFTON. I think that is very largely the result of the educational work that is being carried on. I think we have got less per dollar from the money we have expended in the industrial schools than we have from any of the other schools. I believe in the day and boarding schools. We have got a great deal more for the money which has been expended on these schools. While we have not educated them to such a high point, we have infused a great amount of education amongst a larger number. Avery promising experiment is being made by Mr. Graham, the inspector of the Qu'Appelle agencies, who has been most successful in bringing about a better state of affairs amongst the Indians under his charge. He has made good practical farmers out of them ; they raised 65,000 bushels of wheat last year ; we are buying cattle from vhem for supplying other reserves ; they are most successful, and we have ceased the distribution of supplies amongst them. Mr. Graham has adopted this plan: He has set aside locations on certain portions of the reserve, and he encourages the young men and the young women who come from the schools to marry and settle down upon these locations. He endeavours to see that they are not interfered with by the rest of the Indians. As a matter of practice, one of the most serious difficulties in improving an Indian band is that just as soon as an Indian couple show an inclination to thrift and gather a little property around them, all their Indian relations think it is not necessary for them to work just in proportion as this couple is prosperous. Their relations

take their supplies, ancl consequently they have no encouragement to accumulate property. Mr. Graham has been most successful in this experiment. A few years ago I put him in charge of three different agencies and lately I have promoted him to be inspector, so that he has a larger scope for his activity. I believe Mr. Graham will solve the problem if it can be solved, and he will solve it by endeavouring to promote settlement in a separate locality of those who come from the schools, and where they can have as much higher type of civilized life than they could if they settled amongst the other Indians.
Indians' British Columbia-salaries, $21,540.


Mr. EARLE.: There is an increase of $500 here over the vote of last year.


Clifford Sifton: That is explained by an increase of $300 in the salary of Mr. W. MaeLaughlan, senior clerk in the commissioner's office in Victoria, and an increase of $200 in the salary of Mr. Stevens, of the same office. These increases are made upon the report of Mr. Vowel], the superintendent. Mr. MaeLaughlan was appointed in 1891 and Mr. Stevens in 1900.
Indians, British Columbia-relief, $8,000.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What is the cause of the increase of $3,500 in this vote ?


Clifford Sifton: Mr. Vowell, the superintendent, reports that the vote in previous years did not cover the expenditure, and that this amount more approximates the outlay. Mr. 'S owell says that although every effort is made by the agencies to curtail the expenditure, yet many sick and helpless Indians, without friends and relatives, would be in a very bad state if it were not for the kindly interest taken in their welfare by the department. The fact is that in a province [DOT] like British Columbia, when population advances we come more into touch with the Indian tribes at different places, and our officers become cognizant of cases of distress that did not come under their attention before.


William James Roche: Are the British Columbia Indians increasing in number ?


Clifford Sifton: The number is practically stationary.
Indians, British Oolumbia-^day schools, $10,000.


Thomas Earle: How many of these schools are there ?


Clifford Sifton: Thirty-three.
Indians-industrial and boarding schools, $78,550.


Thomas Earle: How many of these schools are there in British Columbia


Clifford Sifton: Seventeen.


Thomas Earle: What is the explanation of the reduction of $3,100 in this vote ?


Clifford Sifton: Last year we voted several sums for building and repairs at some of the schools, and we do not require that vote again this year. We have this year increased the allowance for the Indian boys and girls at Metlakatla. Port Simpson and Aiberni, and the increase deducted from the decrease leaves the reduction $3,100.
Indians, British Columbia-travelling expenses, $5,600.


William James Roche: For whom is this expense incurred ?


Clifford Sifton: 
William James Roche: What is the cause of the increase ?


Clifford Sifton: This is made up as follows : Contingencies, and unforeseen expenses in connection with the Indian office at Victoria, $2,600 ; grants to hospitals, $2,500 ; to provide for the prevention of the sale of intoxicants to Indians and the punishment of offenders, $1,500 ; to provide for dyking and irrigation of land, $5,000 ; for agent's residence at Hazeiton. Rabine Indian agency, $5,000. The item of contingencies is intended to cover all contingencies at the Indian office at Victoria and the different agencies, such as repairs, light, rent, fuel, &c. In addition to the office at Victoria, there are nine agencies. The amount is not more than sufficient to meet the requirements. It is the same as that of last year. The item for hospitals explains itself. The number of patients treated during the year was : at Lytton, 298 ; at Port Simpson, 70 ; in the case of the others, the details are not given. The vote for dyking and irrigation is taken for the purpose of enabling the agents to undertake small works of that character where they are necessary in order to enable the agents to engage in agricultural pursuits.


Thomas Earle: Where is it proposed to carry on the irrigation and dyking ?


Clifford Sifton: My officers tell me that this vote of $5,000 is taken from year to year. There are no definite plans for the work of this year. The work done last year was at Cowichan on the Cowichan river, amounting to about $500.


Uriah Wilson: We ought to have an explanation of the kind of work done, and why the vote is taken every year and not expended.


Clifford Sifton: My hon. friend is per; fectly right. I overlooked the fact that there 1 was not a detailed statement of the work re-

. quired to be done with this vote. I have no objection to the committee reducing it, though perhaps it had better be allowed to stand. It can only be expended on such a requisition as we had before from the superintendent showing the necessity of the work. I will see that it is overhauled next year, and that we have a detailed statement of what is required.


Thomas Earle: I would like to ask the minister if any progress has been made in the removal of the Indians from the Songhee reserve.


Clifford Sifton: Not a bit. We are not a particle further than we were before. When I last spoke about it in this House my hon. friend will remember that I went to an enormous amount of trouble and a good deal of expense to get the matter in to shape, and we were in a position to make a bargain with the Indians, but unfortunately we could not come to terms with the then local government. The local government at the last moment set up a claim which made it impossible for us to carry out the arrangement. I am quite prepared at the present moment to carry out the proposition I made then, but unless the local authorities are willing to co-operate with us we are unable to act. I am quite prepared to instruct the officers to go on and carry out the proposition made then, but unless they co-operate we cannot do that. I am satisfied that if the local government would join in the proposition I made some years ago it could be carried out.


Thomas Earle: I noticed some time ago that the local government had taken steps to select a site for the Indians and that there was a possibility of the matter being settled.


Clifford Sifton: They have not given us any advice as to that.
Indians-Yukon-relief and medical attendance, $8,000. '
Mr. W\ J. ROCHE. That is an increase of $3,000.


Clifford Sifton: The number of Indians actually located in the Yukon Territory is estimated at 702. The expenditure for destitute Indians for 1902-3 was $6,118.40, but accounts remaining unpaid on the 30th of June would bring this to over $8,000.	1
may say that we have no Indian service in the Yukon and we simply spend this money under t.he direction of the commissioner of the territory. In connection with the vote of $5,000 to provide education for the Indians of the Yukon, I may say that last year we spent under this head $2,029.66. The department has not established any per capita rate for boarding schools or day schools within the territory, but last year gave a total grant in consideration of cer-Mr. SIFTON.
tain educational work being done in the district. The work is principally carried out by the Church of England at Forty-Mile, Caribou Crossing, Selkirk and Moose-hide. The number of pupils enrolled at these schools is 100. The most important school is at Forty-Mile and is a combination of day and boarding school. We have not put up any buildings, but simply give the Church of England a small grant for this work.
Indians generally, P- H. Bryce, medical inspector, part of salary, $1,000.


Robert Laird Borden: This item requires explanation.


Clifford Sifton: The increase is caused by the appointment of Dr. Bryce, late secretary of the Ontario Provincial Board of Health. I have appointed him as chief medical inspector of the Department of the Interior and Indian Affairs. A portion of liis salary, $2,200, is charged to the department of the Interior, and $1,000 to the Department of Indian Affairs. The intention is that his time shall be divided between the two departments, and this $1,000 is therefore charged against the Department of Indian Affairs for the time he devotes to its service. The intention is that Dr. Bryce shall take a tour of inspection and endeavour to improve the medical attendance and the sanitary arrangements on the various Indian reserves. Hon. gentlemen who have taken any interest in the discussion of Indians affairs from year to year, particularly in the discussion of medical attendance on Indian reserves, must have observed that this question came up repeatedly. It was largely in consequence of these discussions and the opinions I formed upon them that I decided to endeavour to bring about some improvement in that direction. While we. have an efficient service as far as medical attendance is concerned, tfhere was a lack of supervision by a medical authority ; the only supervision that was possible heretofore was given by officers in the department who are not medical men and therefore I thought it was desirable that we should have a medical man to make visits of inspection and report all necessary improvements. I appointed Dr. Bryce after a good deal of consideration, and I have no doubt from the experience we have already had with him that he is a very efficient officer. I am sorry to say that up to the present time, he has not had very much time for the Indian Department. This of course is the busy season with the Immigration Department, and as he has had to reorganize a system of thorough medical inspection of the immigrants of whom we are receiving a very large number, his time has been fully occupied. However, after the busy season in connection with immigration is over, he will devote some months to im-

proving the medical service on Indian reserves. The item of $1,000 for salary is, for a portion of his salary and the increase of $1,000 in the next item in connection with travelling expenses is to pay for his travelling expenses.


James Clancy: I am afraid the hon. gentleman will not cure the infirmity of his appointments hy the appointment of Dr. Bryce. The hon, gentleman has been a long time in his department and he knows the Indian character very well. He knows perfectly well that nothing disturbes matters upon a reserve so much as a change of physicians. It takes the Indians a long time to become acquainted with their physician, but if they once have confidence in him then they will call upon him. If they have not that confidence they will allow their children and wives to remain without any medical assistance.
Now, the hon. gentleman has been making changes in some of the reservations, and appointing men on purely party grounds. I am very sorry to learn that party spirit has gone so far that the hon. minister feels bound to yield to the pressure brought to bear on him and to make these undesirable changes. I am personally aware that some of these changes are not in the interest of the Indians. Without offering criticism on the appointment of Dr. Bryce, I can scarcely see how he is going to remedy the difficulty the hon. minister refers to. I take the case of the appointment at Walpole Island. Dr. Mitchell was the medical attendant there. But I believe he was guilty of being a Conservative, and that was sufficient reason, in the opinion of the hon. minister, why he should be decapitated, and the hon. gentleman did not hesitate at the operation. Another gentleman was put in the position, a gentleman against whom nothing can be said. But the change meant that the Indians went on employing the physician they had been accustomed to employ. If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sifton) would cease dismissing Conservative physicians he would not find it necessary to try this new remedy of his under Dr. Bryce. I would like to know in what particular he expects that Dr. Bryce will be able to overcome the difficulty that the minister himself has created. The hon. minister tells us that there is a good service. If he is convinced of that, why Dr. Bryce ? It would look a little as if the additional $1,000 for Indians is a pretext, rather than a reason, for giving Dr. Bryce an addition to his salary. It is a rather ingenious thing to divide that salary between the Indians and immigration, especially when the hon. minister tells us that Dr. Bryce cannot attend to one of them, to say nothing of giving attention to both,


Clifford Sifton: The appointment to which the hon. gentleman (Mr. Clancy) principally refers to was made a good many years ago


James Clancy: Not so many.


Clifford Sifton: Well, six or seven years ago, and the Indians have had time, since then, to apply my hon. friend's theory and become acquainted with their doctor. I will not go into a lengthy discussion of the case, because my hon. friend and I have had it out already several times in this House. Leaving that aside, I think my hon. friend will admit that there is room for a considerable amount of systematic work in the way of improving the sanitary conditions on the Indian reserves. The question was brought up frequently in this House, especiallj last year in connection with the Brantford reserve. After that discussion I secured the services of Dr. Bryce, who was not then an officer of the department, to investigate and make recommendations as to what should be done. After considering his report and going into the matter with my officers, I came to the conclusion that we could well afford to incur the additional expense involved in engaging a competent medical inspector, who would take hold of these questions, look at them from a scientific standpoint and, with the assistance of local physicians, make regulations and provide instruction for the Indian councils. For, in many cases the councils of the Indian bands would be perfectly willing to make sanitary regulations and, to a certain extent, appreciate and carry them out. My hon. friend (Mr. Clancy) shakes his head. Upon this very Brantford reserve they have a board of health amongst the Indians, and they have sanitary regulations which the Indians endeavour to carry out. But it is largely by reason of the fact that there is no competent superior officer to point out the difficulties and the means of remedying them, and also to give direction and encouragement. that better work is not done. I am satisfied that, in the course of three or four years-of course, it must be a matter of time-the difficulties I refer to would be fairly well overcome. With a competent man undertaking it

and we have the right man in Dr. Bryce-we shall make satisfactory improvement.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Sifton) says the matter to which I referred has been pretty well threshed out. It is not so very long ago that this change of appointment was made, but I must say it was carried out at the very first opportunity that offered for work of that kind. I have been waiting for six years for the hon. gentleman to offer either an apology or a reason for what he did, but up to this time I have not had either. As to the sanitary condition, that is a thing much to be desired. But the hon. gentleman knows perfectly well that, while you may have a board of health, it will do no good if it is a board of health only in name. It is a very difficult matter to enforce any sanitary regulations on Indian reserves. I am well persuaded that, no

matter how laudable the hon. gentleman's object may be, he will find himself entirely helpless in the enforcement of any sanitary regulation. Those who know the Indians and their condition, realize that long after the hon. gentleman has ceased to do work in the department, there will be little change in the condition of the Indians in that direction. I had hoped that the hon. gentleman would be able to give us some more practical reason for employing Dr. Bryce- a very estimable gentleman. I may say, but that fact alone does not justify him in being placed in a service where no substantial good can be shown as likely to arise from it. Men who have some knowledge of the Indian character will expect but little to come from the scheme that the hon. gentleman has outlined. I suppose that the only thing that we can do is to assume that the hon. minister has been more upright in this than he was in the dismissal of the Tory doctors in the past.


Uriah Wilson: I see that $1,000 of Dr. Bryce's salary is charged to the Indian Department and the balance to the Interior. I see also that $1,000 is allowed here, in the Indian votes, for travelling expenses. How much will be charged against the Interior for travelling expenses ?


Clifford Sifton: Dr. Bryce's salary will be $3,200, of which $2,200 will be charged to the Interior and $1,000 to Indians. There will be no fixed charge for travelling expense to the immigration branch-travelling expenses will be paid out of the general vote.


Uriah Wilson: You pay in travelling expenses from the Indian Department $1,000 and the balance, whatever it may be, from the Interior ?


Clifford Sifton: I have not made myself clear. The salary is $3,200, of which we charge $1,000 to the Indian Department, because, roughly speaking, 'it is expected that about one-third of Dr. Bryce's time will be given to the Indians. The vote of $1,000 is 'taken for travelling expenses. Against this vote we charge travelling expenses, *whatever they may be, in the Indian Department. If he is doing Indian work his expenses will be charged to that vote.


Uriah Wilson: And if they are more, they will be charged to the department.


Clifford Sifton: If they are more they cannot be paid, because we won't have the money. Whenever he goes away on a trip, as he constantly does go to seaport towns, his travelling expenses are paid out of the general immigration vote.


Uriah Wilson: When the immigration matter comes up I hope the minister will be able to give us more reasons why the immigration requirements are put into a bulk vote, while the details are given in the other estimates. My own impression is Mr. CLANCY.
that the immigration vote should be separated into details as well as the other votes.
Indians-New Brunswick-additional amount required, $1,200.	*


Clifford Sifton: This is the only supplementary item that is required, and is to pay expenses incurred last year. It arises from an outbreak of small-pox that occurred in the summer of 1903 in the town of M oodstock and the county of Carleton, twenty-eight cases in all.


Thomas Walter Scott: Before we leave the subject of Indians, there is a matter that I wish to bring before the attention of the committee, it may be remembered that at an early stage of this session I essayed to discuss the claim of a gentleman named Jean Louis Legare. of Willow Bunch, who more than twenty years ago was instrumental, at the time following General Custer's war with the Indians in the American Northwest, in inducing Sitting Bull and his Indian band to leave Canadian territory and to surrender to the United States authorities. At that time I was not pei'mitted to make a full explanation, nor do I intend to-night to deal with this matter except in the shortest possible way. Certain of the facts in connection with this matter are indisputable. It is an admitted fact that Mr. Legare was the person instrumental in inducing Sitting Bull and his band of Indians to leave Canadian territory and go back to the United States and surrender to the United States authorities. Mr. Legare did this at large expense to himself, with much loss of time, but chiefly in the loss of a whole year's trading supplies. He was at that time a trader at the Wood Mountain mounted police post, about 100 miles south of Moose Jaw.


Samuel Hughes: What was his object in acting as he did ?


Thomas Walter Scott: 
Clifford Sifton: I do not want to pass my hon. friend's remarks over without ' the courtesy of a reply, but 1 simply want to refer my hon. friend to the 'fact that he has already urged these considerations upon me a very great number of times and that heretofore I have not seen my way clear to do anything in the direction which he suggests. It has been intimated that our friends are desirous of adjourning early on account of the sultry weather and if the item of civil government is passed we will adjourn.
Civil Government-Department of the Interior-salaries, including C. H. Befldoe, $2,300 ; F. S. Checkley, $2,000 and J- B. Bollard, $1,200, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $137,056.50.


Clifford Sifton: The explanation of the increases is as follows :
Increase.
Promotion of F. S. Checkley to a chief clerkship at $2,000 from the 1st class,
at $1,850	f	;[DOT] $ 150
Increase to accountant, Mr. Beddoe, in
addition	to	statutory increase	 100
Promotion of Mr. A. Chisholm to 1st
class	 50
Promotion of P. Marchand, .in addition
to statutory increase.. .. '		200
Promotion of Mr. G. P. Pope, in addition
to statutory	increase	 250
Appointment of J. D. Bollard to 2nd class	1,200
Then there are the appointments of five temporary clerks to the third class who are entitled under the Civil Service Act of last year to be transferred from the temporary to the permanent list. This does not increase the staff but places these clerks under this vote. They are as follows :


Miss E.  N. H.@: Mercer	$642	50


Mrs.   A.@: Macmaster	 600	00


Miss   M.@: Casey	
600	00T. W. Hodgins	
557	50J. M. Larkin	
512	50

Appointment of one additional junior 2nd class clerk, A. Masson, $800.
Then there are the following statutory increments :
Chief clerks : 3 at $50, 3 at $25	$ 225
Technical officers, 2 at $50	 100
1st class clerks : 8 at $50, 4 at $25.. ..	500
2nd class clerks : 16 at $50, 13 at $25.. 1,125' Junior 2nd class clerks : 28 at $50, 1 at
$37.50, 13 at $25, 3 at $12.50	 1,800
Messengers, 2 at $50	 100
Total	$3,850
These increases total altogether $9,512.50.
Then, there are the following decreases :
Difference between salary of Mr. C. J. Steers, promoted to 1st class at $1,500, and salary of Mr. F. Clayton, deceased. $300
Difference between salary of Mr. Connelly, promoted to 2nd class at $1,200, and salary of Mr. C. C. Rogers, deceased	 200
Difference between salary of Mr, Surtees, promoted to 2nd cjass at $1,200,
vice Mr.	Steers, promoted	 150
Difference between salary of Mr. Robt. Addison, to bo appointed to junior 2nd class at $800, vice Mr. Connelly, promoted	    150
Total decreases	$800

This makes the net increase $8,712.50. The total vote of last year was $121,691.50. The increase which takes place consequent upon the provisions of the Civil Service Act of last year is $6,652.50, making a total of $128,344, and the increases which I have just enumerated bring this up to $137,056.50.


Uriah Wilson: Perhaps the hon. minister will be able to tell us how many officials he has in the inside service altogether.


Mr. SI FT  ON@: As nearly as my deputy can state the number is 290.


James Clancy: The hon. gentleman spoke about placing some of the temporary employees on the permanent staff. I would like to ask him if any others have been put on in their places as temporary employees ?


Clifford Sifton: No.


Mr CLANCY.: There are no temporary employees in the hon. gentleman's department ?


Clifford Sifton: I do not say that. We have not put all the temporary employees on the permanent list by any means. We have put a number of them on. When my supplementary estimates come up for consideration I will have a vote for 28 or 29 more temporary clerks who are being transferred. Under the Civil Service Act of last year you will find that the minister may, with the concurrence of his deputy, appoint any officer who is a temporary clerk to the permanent staff. We are endeavouring to work out a plan upon which that can be done satisfactorily although I am bound to say to my hon. friend that it is very difficult. We have a large number of employees all fairly efficient and to arrive at any plan whereby those who are more efficient can be picked out from those who are less efficient is not an easy matter. But my deputy has made certain recommendations which I will explain when the vote comes before the committee.


James Clancy: Do I understand the hon. gentleman to say that the policy of the department is to finally place all the employees on the permanent staff as far as possible ?


Clifford Sifton: That is the policy of the Act. The policy of the Act, I think fairly construed, is that these officials should not be left on the temporary list but that when the deputy has decided that their services are required and that they are not likely to be discontinued within any reasonable time they are entitled to be on the permanent staff.


James Clancy: I understand there are ii all the departments a large number of temporary employees wlip have been there for a number of years, who have not passed ttie civil service examinations, but who are deprived of promotion and statutory increases.


Clifford Sifton: 


Clifford Sifton: The word ' temporary ' is somewhat confusing. Some years ago the third-class clerks were abolished, but that grade is now reinstated. We employed what was called temporary clerks, but they were required to pass the civil service examination and they get a statutory increase of $30 a year. These employees were made third-class clerks. They were not temporary employees who had no fixed status in the service, but to all intents and purposes they were members of the service. However, their salaries were voted in a lump sum; and their employment was renewed by Order in Council from time to time.


James Clancy: Are there not a large number in the Interior Department who have not passed the examination, but who are nevertheless very efficient clerks and who have remained for years temporary employees.


Clifford Sifton: I do not know the history of the employment of those who were there when I took office, but practically none have been appointed since without passing the examination, except two or three in the Dominion Lands Branch who do special work. There were, I think when I took office a number of lady employees who had not passed any examination, and some of them will be appointed permanently under this rule.
Mi-. CLANCY. Will they be required to pass an examination before they come in?
Mi-. SIFTON. The Act of last year does not require them to pass an examination.


Uriah Wilson: Does this $290 include temporary clerks or only the permanent staff.


Clifford Sifton: Everybody.
Some resolutions reported.



ADJOURNMENT - BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

[Stage Direction]
Mi-. SIFTON moved the adjournment of the House.
James Clancy: What business will be taken up by the government to-morrow.


Clifford Sifton: T'here may be some Bills, and I shall be going on with the balance of my estimates.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The third reading of the Railway- Act will be taken.


Uriah Wilson: Do you intend going on with the immigration estimates before the committee reports ?


Clifford Sifton: I do not know what stage the committee is in.
. Mr. WILSON. It is almost ready to report. I do not see the use of taking evidence if yTou cannot use it in the House.

Mr, SIFTON. My hon. friend (Mr. Wilson) has had the evidence for some time and he does not need to wait for t'lie report.


Uriah Wilson: If the minister will look at the rules of the House he will find we cannot use evidence taken in the committee until it is reported to the House.


Clifford Sifton: We had better discuss that to-morrow when the time comes.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 10.35 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, July 19, 1901.