1904-03-24

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE.

Mr. F. B. WADE (Annapolis) moved :: That the Public Accounts of Canada for the fiscal year which ended on the 30th June, together with the report of the Auditor Genera', be referred to the next Standing Committee 09 Public Accounts.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 8) to further amend the Act r<£ specting the Nova Scotia Permanent Be® fit Building Society and. Savings Fund-Mr. R. I,. Borden.
Bill (No. 9) to revive ami amend the respecting the St. Clair and Erie Ship CaD Company.-iMir. Tisdale.	.
Bill (No. 10) to incorporate the CamP^f y ford, Lake Ontario and Western Rai1"' Company-Mr. W. Ross, (Ont.)	,
Bill (No. 11) respecting the British umbia Southern Railway Company"-Ualliher.
Bill (No. 12) respecting the Montreal, tawa and Georgian Bay Canal Coin!'1 -Mr. Mackie.	cj.
Bill (No. 13) respecting the Canadian 1 ' fie Railway Company.-Mr. A. T. ThoiM ^ Bill (No. 14) respecting the Atlantic Northwest Railway Company.-Mr. Thompson.	r
Bill (No. 15) respecting the Ottawa, era and Western Railway Company-Champagne.	'	et
Bill (No. 10) respecting the French Boom Company, Limited.-Mr. Grant.
Bill (No. 17) to confer on the Coin ^ sioner of Patents certain powers f°r lief of the Hon. C. A. Parsons.-Mr. ( ' iPj Hill (No. 18) respecting the Manitoba jji. Northwestern Railway Company of L*
-Mr. McCreary-by Mr. Douglas.

[Stage Direction]
EXPERIMENTAL POULTRY STATl°Nt"
Mr. LaRIVIEItE asked :-	,
1.	Has the following copy of a motlon from the minutes of a meeting of the * jsfi Poultry Association, held In Brandon " th nary 28th, 1904, been received by the Minister of Agriculture :-	, tvei F9,
' That, realizing ihe good results de^iv ijts the experimental farms to the agrl but as these farms do not make a re s>
poultry breeding, we feel that one or 1 (h0 n\ lions for this purpose, together with ^rV tenlng and dressing of poultry >or

[Stage Direction]
should be established in the province of Manitoba ; which would prove to be of great benefit to those who are unacquainted with this branch °f farm work ' ?
2.	Is it the intention of the government, in compliance with the recommendation contained ln the above motion, to establish one or more stations in Manitoba for the purposes therein thentioned ?	.
Hon. SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agriculture) :: [DOT]
1.	Yes.
2.	It is tlie intention of the government to endeavour to meet the wishes of the members of the Manitoba Poultry Association, as expressed in the resolution.


THE QUEBEC BRIDGE COMPANY.
Hr. CLARKE asked :: 
IMPROVEMENT OF ST. ANDREWS RAPIDS.
Mr. PUTTEE asked :: 1.	What amount has been paid to the contractors under the contract for the improvement of St. Andrews rapids ?	*
2.	Has any extension of time not yet expired been granted to the contractors ?
3.	Are arrangements being made to proceed with the work when the season opens ?
4.	Will the Public Works Department complete the work, or will a further contract be let ?
Hon, JAMES SUTHERLAND (Minister of Public Works) :
1.	$75,800.
2.	No.
3 and 4. The matter is under consideration.	.


CHINESE LABOUR IN BRITISH COLUMBIA.
Mr. PUTTEE asked :: Has the government received any information that the Chinese government demands free entry of Chinese at Vancouver, in return for its sanction of the peonage system of Chinese labour in South Africa ?


Itt.   H@: The government has not received any information on the point.


SALE OF MODELS BY GOVERNMENT.
Mr. PORTER asked :: 1.	Have the models deposited by inventors in the Patent Office Department been sold ?
2.	If so, under what right were they so sold ?
3.	How many models were sold ?
4.	Were they sold by public tender or private contract ?
5.	To whom were they sold ?
6.	Were these models catalogued or listed, or were they sold en bloc ?
7.	What was the gross and what the net amount realized from such sale ?
8.	How many of these models were full size, or commercial machines or articles ?
9.	Was any restriction placed upon the purchaser or purchasers to prevent these full-sized or commercial machines or articles coming into competition with the product of the inventor, or interfering with liis rights as such inventor ?
10.	What is the wholesale or retail value of the total number of models of full size or commercial machines or articles so sold ?
11.	Was the consent of the inventor, or any assignee of the inventor, of these various models procured for the sale thereof ?
12.	Was any opportunity offered to each inventor to procure by purchase or otherwise his own model, without acquiring by purchase all other models ?	.	.
13.	Has any compensation been made, or is it the intention to make my compensation to the Inventor for his labour and expenso in producing these models ?


Hou. SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agriculture) :: 1.	Y'es.
2.	3 Edward VII., cap. 46, sec. 13.
3.	It was estimated that there were between 25.000 and 30,000. The sale was made without any warranty as to number.
4.	By public tender.
5.	T. G. Brigham, of Ottawa.
6.	They were sold en bloc.
7.	The gross amount was eight hundred dollars. The net amount was four hundred and ninety-nine dollars and sixty-fire cents, the difference being the expense of advertising.
8.	The records of the department do not show what models were full size or commercial machines or articles. The only requirement of the law and the regulations has been that the models should be working ones ot convenient size, not to exceed twelve inches on the longest side ; and the only entry in the records respecting them it is of their deposit or filing.
9.	The sale was made under the law above cited, and in accordance with the terms of the notice calling for tenders, which was as follows :


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
[Stage Direction]
Tenders are invited for the purchase en bloc of the models heretofore deposited in the Patent Office by applicants for patents of invention.
The models are some twenty-five to thirty thousand in number, and are made of every variety of material.
The sale will be made for cash, and without any warranty as to the number of the models or their condition.
The purchaser must remove all the models from the premises in which they are stored within two weeks from the date of notice by post of the acceptance of his tender.
The lowest or any tender will not necessarily be accepted.
Sealed tenders addressed to the undersigned and endorsed ' Tenders for Purchase of Patent Models ' will be received at this office until Tuesday, the 1st day of March, 1904, at 1 o'clock p.m.
By order.

[Stage Direction]
Secretary..
Department of Agriculture, Ottawa, 21st January, 1904.
(N.B.-Newspapers inserting this advertisement without authority from the department will not be paid for it.)
1U. The department has no knowledge of the value of till or any of the models, except that placed upon the lot en bloc by the tenderers for the same, whose tenders varied from one hundred and forty-nine dollars to eight hundred dollars.
11.	No, as they were the property of the Crown.
12.	No. Owing to lack of space, for some years the models have not been displayed, but have been stored in different public buildings, the greater part of them being
Mr. PORTER.: packed in large cases. In order to give each patentee an opportunity of selecting his model, it would have been necessary to procure a large building where the models could have been exposed to view. A large staff would have been required to rearrange and classify and select the models as they were required. As it was not recognized that the inventors had any right of property in jho models, and rarely showed any interest in them, it was not considered that the expense that such a course would have necessitated was warranted
13.	No. The production and furnishing of the model was a condition imposed by law of obtaining the patent.


GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY DEPOSIT'
Mr. BARKER asked :: 
Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of A * ance) :: 0j.p


Hon. RAYMOND PIIEFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) :: on the island side of the dam, which would make a very strong current at high water and little fall at low water, both useless to the ascent of spawning fish.	h
While no doubt it would be beter to have these dams provided with good flsh'p"ses' 1 hesitate to urge their construction before the department decides to build one in the Carillon dam ; otherwise the Lake of the Two Mountains alone would benefit by fish-ways in the Terrebone dams. The department should also endeavour to test fish-ways of different models and adopt the one best suited _ to our inland streams, so exposed to heavy ice and strong
freshets	.
With the above obstacles removed, efficient fish-ways in the Terrebonne dams would permit the St Lawrence fishes to ascend the Ottawa as far as the Chaudiere. The fish now found in River Jesus consist chiefly of coarse fish, suckers, sturgeon, carp, catfish, eels, bullheads, and perhaps a few pickerel.


UNDESIRABLE IMMIGRANTS.
Mr. URIAH WILSON (Lennox).: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are called, I wish to call the attention of the government to a paragraph which appeared in the morning ' Citizen ' of yesterday, which says :
Piftv Russian Jews have been deported from Fargo', North Dakota, to Winnipeg by United States immigration authorities.
I would like to know what the government intend to do about this matter. Will they allow these people to stay in this country, having been turned back from the United States, or will they send them back to the country from which they came ? I think it is very desirable that this matter should be looked into and that we should not be burdened with this class of people. If they are not fit to be citizens of the United States, I think they are not fit to be citizens of Canada.


Sir WILFRED LAURIER.: I am sorry that I have not the information to give my hon. friend (Mr. Wilson) to-day. But I will endeavour to have it to-morrow.


RAILWAY ACT, 1903, AMENDMENT.
[Stage Direction]
On the order being called for :
House in Committee on Bill (No. 2) to amend the Railway Act, 1903.-Mr, Lancaster,
Mr. SPEAKER.: There has been a mistake in connection with this item. I understood the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lancaster) moved the second reading the other evening. But I did not understand that the second reading had been carried, and certainly not the motion to go into Committee of the Whole. I understand that the hon. gentleman desired to speak on the second reading. To correct the error that was made, I would ask him if he would move again the second reading of the Bill.


Mr. E. A. LANCASTER (Lincoln and Niagara).: 
Some hon. MEMBERS: Louder.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: for that. We are asking for a reasonable Measure of protection in regard to everybody at these crossings within the incorporated limits of any city, town or village, and I have yet to hear any one tell me that this request is unreasonable. We have to ask in regard to this legislation, as we ka.veJn regard to all other legislation: What is the evil to be remedied ?
The evil is that the people who have a right to use the highway, and who are the prior users of that highway as against the railway corporation, cannot enjoy the use of that highway without being subject to the danger of being killed through the operation of that railway. The Supreme Court of Canada has decided that the common law is superseded by the restrictions in the special statute, and when we override the common law by special legislation passed in this parliament, we should be careful to preserve that same measure of protection that the common law afforded to the public. In the case of McKay and the Grand Trunk, the jury found that the rate of speed was excessive at a particular crossing, but the Supreme Court decided that they had no right to so find, because the common law could not operate in the face of the special statute dealing with the imattler. Now, what fairer remedy can be provided against that evil than the one which I suggest ? _ If any Member of this House, on either side, will suggest to me a more reasonable remedy from the railway standpoint, I shall be glad to adopt it, if it is a remedy. I do not want to put the railway company to any more expense than is necessary, but I do want protection to be given to the public ; protection which they cannot get without such a law as I mow submit for adoption to this parliament. The people who use railway ' crossings are not trespassers ; they have a perfect right to use them, and they must use them in the transaction of their ordinary business. I do not wish to get sentimental, but I do say that when a man goes out to work in the morning, his family expect to see him come home alive at night, and as a member of the community that man has a right to be protected from being killed by a railway train. The fathers and mothers of children who go to school in the morning, expect them to come home alive at night, and not to be brought back as little corpses. Too many people are being killed in Canada at these railway crossings, and the railways will not do anything to stop it unless tile law of the land compels them. Our courts have decided that we will have to come here to the Railway Committee of the Privy Council (now the Railway Commission) to get a special order for protection nt a particular crossing before recourse cam be had against a railway company for not putting that protection in. We have always understood Ithat in thickly populated places the speed of a railway train should not exceed ten miles an hour


Edward Arthur Lancaster: 
Edward Arthur Lancaster: 
Mr. FITZPATRICK.: 
Edward Arthur Lancaster: it

Why should !gSio* necessary to go to the Railway Com ^ v
for a watchman ? If my Bill Pa , ct<fi , will have a watchman at each le\ at ing and any further protection 1 ^ Pa be required will be given to ns oy
way Commission.


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the second time.
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved that Bill (No. 2) to amend the Railway Act. 1903, be referred to the Select Standing Committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines.
Edward Arthur Lancaster: Before that resolution is carried, I desire'to say a word or two about it. YVo bftve had a good deal of experience in the last two years, in the way of referring tlie matters of general law to the Committee on Railways, and I am bound to say-perhaps it would be better if some one else said it-that I think that what 1 said three years ago was well founded, and that no progress is made by referring Bills of this general character to that committee. I have never known progressive legislation to be passed in this House except in Committee of the Whole. We do not find that the Minister of Agriculture, when he introduces a Bill relating to some agricultural question referring it to the Committee on Agriculture. And, when we undertook to consolidate the Railway Law last session, a work that occupied the Committee of the Whole for seven or eight weeks, nobody suggested that it should be referred to the Committee on Railways. My hon. friend from St. John and Iberville (Mr. Demers) several sessions ago, introduced a" Bill which I thought a most proper piece of legislation, dealing with fires started by railway locomotives. That Bill was referred to the Railway Committee in two sessions, blit no result was gained by following that course. But when it was proposed last session, to deal with this matter in Committee of the Whole and to.incorporate the provisions suggested by the hon. member for St. John and Iberville in the general Railway' Act, the provision became law. In the same way, my hon. friend from South Essex (Mr. Cowan), introduced a Bill which I myself strongly favoured, to enable farmers to drain their property across railway lands. It was referred to that Railway Committee on two different occasions, but, as in the other case, nothing came of it. Tlie Bill was smothered, or chloroformed, or died a natural death in tlie Railway Committee. But when we were in Committee of Hie Whole on the General

Railway Act, this reform also was embodied in the statute. And last, but. I think, not least, there was the cattle-guard legislation. I introduced a Bill and it went through the same formalities, went to the same cul de sac, went into that opening which leads nowhere, and at last it had to come back to the Committee of the Whole House as the only channel through which it could reach a place in the statute-book. For every Bill referred to the Railway Committee must come back to us. It is not with these public measures as it is with private Bills. If a private Bill is reported adversely by the Railway Committee, it ceases to have existence. But the most that the Railway Committee could do with a public Bill of this nature, would be to send it back to this House with an unfavourable report-and that report would not be unanimous in this case, because I am a member of the Railway Committee myself. To refer such a measure to the Railway Committee is merely to give us unnecessary work and waste our time. When these matters come up in the Railway Committee we argue and discuss, but the party that is outvoted is not satisfied. I know I shall certainly not be satisfied if some reasonable measure of protection-some ' adequate protection '-is not granted to the people in regard to this matter. I do not wish to discuss again the merits of the Bill, but I would remind the House that this is a Bill that affects the whole community and not a matter requiring some special technical knowledge for its discussion. It is a matter that must be discussed on the floor of the House in any case. And so I ask the House not to agree to the proposal of the Minister of Justice. That hon. gentleman and I are the best of friends, but it seems clear to me that it is unreasonable to go to the Railway Committee with a law of this kind when, in any case, it must be dealt with on the floor of this House.


Mr. R. L. BORDEN.: There might be some advantage in having this measure discussed in Committee of the Whole ; and yet, perhaps there are interests involved that should be heard in some way before the amendment passes.


Charles Fitzpatrick: There are municipal interests and corporate interests affected by the Bill, which, I think should be heard.


Mr.   I@: I appreciate that. I was going to make a suggestion to the Minister of Justice and to my hon. friend from Lincoln and Niagara. I would like to discuss this Bill in Committee of the Whole to see what its scope is and whether it would not be possible, with due regard to the interests of the railway companies, to amend the statute so as to provide greater security for life. Would it not be possible to go into Committee of the Whole on the Bill in any case ? The Minister of Justice would have the right at any time to move Mr. LANCASTER.
to discharge the order and not send the Bill to the Committee on Railways-Thus we should have the opportunity of discussing it more freely than we can with Mr-Speaker in the chair, and, later on, we would have'the advantage, if thought desirable, of sending it to a committee where those who are interested could be heard. Would that ^ course be acceptable to my hon. friend from Lincoln and Niagara.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: 
Mr.   I@: 
Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
E. A. LANCASTER (Lincoln and rv;|gaora) moved the second reading of Bill 3) to amend the Criminal Code, 1892.
o^WiLFMD LAURIER. What is the °^ect of this Bill ?
LANCASTER. It is to protect the itii-H people, of this country to a still the fl1' extent than it was sought to do in be .^bate of yesterday, with all deference R said to the supporters of that motion.
FITZPATRICK. I lost the bene-Senti nearly Falf the remarks the hon. bec„ emau made on his previous Bill he . e I was unable to hear him. Will *°me down a little closer V
Take him over on
hughes.
It is only a question
Treasury benches.
°fJtimeITZPATRI0K'
leader. U-tlN'CASTER. Won't you take my is t0r with me ? The object of this Bill yorujoP1'°vide protection to young men and ta-efej. women, or boys and girls as you may With n .call them, when they are charged t° airipn^lruiual °ffence- The section I wish hate illd is ^at which requires the magis-harticf certain cases which I need not lie elect*' to ask tke defendant whether °r by +1 to l,e tried by a judge and jury 4o bv ?.e. maSistrate. Now what I seek to l'ePresenr i HtH, in case the child is not fUarm,.lteii by counsel, is to allow his 1 am \ ®r bis parents to elect for him. hs Ac'ot dealing with the Juvenile Offend-!l PersArT am dealing with any crime Which charge(1 1 RRder 21 years of age can be sauit ' . Wlth, be it a case of theft or as-great ^thing else.
1 ai't Ip „ many	such
Ple of the as
We have had
of ii 

[DOT]' i3Ul;u cases in my
are i country where young peo-[DOT] bov« c"arged with offences, such rustic El cnurged with assault or do-!av'e ijp v ailts with theft, and where they convicted and are now servin havf ,lmPrisonment
&>
* b~""
[Stage Direction]
and they would , - m onvicted if they had been ry. l -nperlor or county court, or by a (her.,.	^ a question of nnimna fnronrli
0„. 'llstimr,?- '! .'luestion of animus furandl, P1 n>e, aim "king between a tort and a dons, „ e Question arises, where the Wio'mt ®°mething wrong but does not Si,, the	whether the act was done
Pk,? Ih or,i,. <!'<1 Intention which is neces-
Pr
,°Pose
of 21
Of r/se that' Jn make tho !'ct a crime. I tbo „,.lt when a
a person appears to be liRC6. shall "n i ' ye*™ <>r under, the magia-Ooii^Sht to * . (;a'1 that person to waive 1, but ,|1 J before a jury or a higher I41	' ''dl first call upon Ills guardian
or parent to advise him, in case he is not represented by counsel, of course if he is represented by counsel, my amendment would not apply. I propose to amend the section by which the defendant is called upon to elect whether he shall be tried by a magistrate, and if convicted, whether he shall be sentenced by a magistrate, or whether he shall waive what, since King John's time we have all got, the right to trial by jury. My Bill has only one section and it reads as follows :
Section 786 of the Criminal Code, 1892, is amended by adding thereto the following subsection :-
' 2. Whenever the person charged appears to be about the age of twenty-one years or an infant under that age, and is not represented by counsel present at the time, the magistrate shall not proceed under this section without first asking the person charged what his age is ; and if such person then states his age as being less than twenty-one years, the magistrate shall defer any further action, and shall at once cause notice to he given to the parents, living in the province (or if none, then to the guardian or householder with whom the person charged resided at the time of the alleged commission of the offence), of such person having been so charged, and of the time and place when such person will be called on to make his election as to whether he will be tried by the said magistrate,-which notice shall allow reasonable time for the said parents, guardian or householder to be present and advise the said person charged before he is called on to so elect.'
Now speaking as an active practitioner in these matters, the most important thing to decide with regard to any jmung person who is charged with an offence, is what should be done with him if convicted. If there be a doubt, by all means give him the benefit of the doubt; but if convicted see that you do not dishearten him by compelling him to herd with criminals worse than himself, or by placing a stigma upon him that will shut him out from good society afterwards. Therefore I say the most important thing is the choice of the tribunal which shall try him. Sometimes there is more harm done in the sentence than in the conviction. It does not do so much harm sometimes to Convict with a suspended sentence, although it brands the young person perhaps improperly as a criminal, and compels him to associate with other people worse than himself. If the young person is allowed to go under suspended sentence with a warning from the magistrate, he keeps that warning in mind and may grow up correctly enough afterwards. In our part of the province, and I am told it is the same in many other parts, we have a good deal of fault to find because the magistrates are not restrained by statute. They think their first duty, when a child i.s brought before them, is to make them elect by what court he shall be tried. Complaints of (his kind come from St. Catharines, from Grimsby, from
[Stage Direction]
Smithville, Welland and other places. Whenever a young person is brought in the magistrate says :	' I suppose you want me
to try you,' or, ' Do you want me to try you ' ; The child says that he does not know, or it does not make any difference. He has no counsel, or parent or guardian, lint it does make all the difference in the world. These are cases where the offender should be represented by some one.
As the horn. Minister of Justice knows, nearly all of the offences which are apt to be committed in early life can be tried by a magistrate, and directly the young man or young woman charged with one of these offences is brought into court the magistrate asks the accused : Do you want me to try you V Then, he is called upon to elect. If he says that he wants the magistrate to try him "the magistrate tries him, and lie disposes of the law and of the sentence. In a great many of these cases no lawyer would decide them in the way in which the magistrate decides them. In many cases the magistrates are laymen. If we were appointing magistrates, I could suggest a way of getting over this difficulty outside of this proposed amendment, but the provincial authorities appoint magistrates, and I am sorry, not because I am a lawyer, that they are not professional-men. I think they ought to be. because they would then understand where the mischief is done in these cases. A lawyer or a judge would take cane that a child brought before him bad the advice of some one competent to advise him before he would ask him to elect. We do not in any province-at least, I know we do not in the province of Ontario-allow a child's property to be dealt with until lie is twenty-one years of age ; yet, the young man or young woman of sixteen or eighteen years of age is called upon to make an election affecting his or her liberty and whole reputation without advice from anybody. Because such people cannot afford habeas corpus proceedings they go down. There are in the reformatory at Penietanguishene hoys that I am satisfied would never have been sent there if any lawyer lmd been called upon to deal with the case. There are those who have been condemned who have been guilty of nothing but a tort, and no crime at ail. They were charged with stealing when they were simply guilty of a conversion of property, believing that they were entitled to use it for tlie time being. I know of a case where a gun was said to have been stolen, when, as a matter of fact, it lind been borrowed and returned, but because the man wanted to lie smart, lie wont on with tlie case and sent the child who was accused of stealing Hie gun down to Peiietanguisheiie for three years. lie was a boy just out of the high school who had borrowed a gun to take with him when ho went out with some other boys hunting squirrels. I have had to deal with cases where servant girls were charged with theft, when, as a matter of fact, they took [DOT]Mr. LANCASTER.
the articles alleged to have been stolen believing them to be theirs. No judge would have believed that there was any intention on their part to do wrong. No jury would have convicted them of any intention ot committing a crime. These people are convicted because they elect to be tried without proper advice, they become branded as criminals, and it is a bad thing in this country to lightly brand young men or young women as criminals. We might better giye them a chance until they are twenty-one years of age, when they are better able to judge for themselves the course which they should pursue. Living near the border, * know dozens of instances of young men and women who formerly- lived in the neighbourhood of my county who are now earn ing their living in the United States, because they prefer to live in a counti'J where there is no record against then1; They are not Canadian citizens, and the)' would be good Canadian citizens had the! not become disgusted with their country because they were harshly treated wh®f they were young. This proposed aniendj ment can do no harm. This probably '"'1 commend itself more strongly to my hob-friend the Minister of Justice than my Pr® posed amendment which we have just he^{ discussing to protect the lives of people [DOT]. railway crossings, because lie might say t*5 by its adoption the railways would hurt by having to pay a little. * e body is hurt by this amendment.	J t0
prosecutor cannot be hurt; he may have wait a week before lie is able to have; ;l child convicted, hut if the child is guile ' conviction can then be secured. In the time the child can remain in custody, bja. nobody can possibly be hurt by ibis le*j>
aj>
tion, while, on tlie other hand, we will do^r act of justice to the young people ot country who are now labouring lliw; jus-great injustice. If the hon. Minister of ^ tice can propose any other remedy, 1 ^y ready to accept any suggestion he >
make in that respect. My object is * amend the law as to provide that \e( young people, when they appear to be l^ejr twenty-one years of age, shall be asked ^ age, and if they are under twenty-one J so of age, a reasonable time shall lie of as to allow their parents, or guard'® 1 the householder with whom they resi the time the offence was said to have , fl(j. committed, to come and give them th	to
vice before they are asked to elect -(g-whether they shall be tried by the ' vo 11 (rate and thus waive their right to m ..y. trial by a superior court judge and „i>0lJ I propose that they shall not be 01,1 ,.,<ce 0 to waive that right without the cd e no their parents or guardians, if they {e-counsel present. I (rust the matter	^oboe ive the careful consideration	jlh1'
Minister of Justice. I believe the * Apt®^ later of Justice is Just as anxious t< 1 j Ve the children of tin* country as l 111 [DOT]

42 G
l6ye that we can do no harm, but that we can accomplish much good in this matter. Nobody, as I have said, can be hurt by it.
cannot cause any trouble to any one. fhere may be a little expense incurred by paving a policeman deliver a notice at the ho°r. if pon. Minister of Justice wants [DOT]especial form of notice to be appended to Bill, I have no objection, I would be .filing to leave it to the magistrate to UP that notice, but if the lion. Minis-a r °f Justice thinks that to make it clear id complete we had better give the form of e notice, I see no objection to that.
Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Edward Arthur Lancaster: That protection only deals with theft.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, in connection with theft the age is fixed at sixteen. If the hon. gentleman would adopt a suggestion as to the age of sixteen, it might be possible to clo something to come to the relief of those to whom he has referred, but the section would be required to be drawn in a different form than in the Bill.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I cannot see why we should draw the line at sixteen years. I think, with all due deference to the minister. that we have no expert criminals in this country under the age of 21, whereas there are a very large proportion of youths between sixteen and twenty-one about whom we should be very careful to see that they get fair-play. Magistrates have told me that they have a perfect right to ask a man to elect, that there was nothing to prevent them, and that once having elected the prisoner could not elect a second time.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Can you refer me to any reported case in Ontario where such a point was decided.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I have several of them in my mind. It often happens with persons over twenty-one years, but I think a man over twenty-one ought to know enough to send for his lawyer before lie elects. Not long ago an express package was lost and a young man about twenty-five was charged with stealing it. He telephoned for me. but before 1 got there tlie magistrate had asked him to elect, and said lie did so. I had to threaten the magistrate with all sorts of things, and the Crown Attorney had to assist me before the magistrate would give that young man another chance to elect. I thought that the age of twenty-one was reasonable, but if the Minister of Justice wishes 1 will compromise at eighteen years.
Mr. FITZPATRICK, if the hon. gentleman will withdraw tlie Bill, I shall endeavour to draw an amendment myself.

, Mr. LANCASTER. I suppose we can adjourn the debate.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Very well.
On motion of Mr. Lancaster, the debate was adjourned.


CERTIFICATES TO MASTERS AND MATES.
[Stage Direction]
On the order being called for :
Second reading of Bill (No. 4) to amend the Act respecting certificates to Masters and Mates of ships.-Mr. Lancaster.
Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I understand that this Bill stands.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The Minister of Marine has asked me to allow this to stand, because he says he is going to introduce legislation which will cover all that is in this Bill. I am quite willing to allow it to stand on that understanding. I have not agreed to withdraw it, but if I have the understanding that the Minister of Marine will introduce and pass a Bill that will cover all that is in this Bill, I shall do so. The Minister of Marine assured me in the corridor, that he only wanted to have this stand until he brings in his Bill, and of course I would expect him to bring it in within reasonable time. The masters and mates who are interested, sent a deputation who went into the matter carefully with me, and they are anxious to have this Bill passed as it is. It is because the Minister of Marine has a majority of the House behind him, that I am willing to let this Bill stand until he brings in his own Bill covering these points.


Charles Fitzpatrick: It is absolutely impossible for the government to introduce a Bill that would cover all the points mentioned in this Bill. My hon. friend (Mr. Lancaster) has overlooked the fact that we cannot make British subjects in this country.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I am not asking that the government should make British subjects.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I beg your pardon. I am asking in this Bill, that a man who is not a British subject should not get a license to run a boat as master or mate in our waters when a man who is not an American citizen, cannot run a boat owned by American people in the same waters.


Lawrence Geoffrey Power: The discussion is out of order.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I am answering what the Minister of Justice said.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: The- Bill stands and will be called again.
Order allowed to stand.


Charles Fitzpatrick: 


RETURN ORDERED WITHOUT DISCUSSION.
[Stage Direction]
Copies of all contracts entered into between the government of Canada and any corporation, company or person, during the past five years, for the carriage of mails between any port or ports on the St. Lawrence and the United KinS' dom ; and copies of all such contracts for the carriage of mails, during the period aforesaid, between any port or ports in Nova Scotia New Brunswick and the United Kingdom.-M1'-R. L. Bolden.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
["Continuing with the estimates of the'' Minister of Public Works-"]
Robert Laird Borden: 
William Stevens Fielding: 
Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: The changes are a promotion from the lirst-t'1^
to a chief clerkship, and a promotion
the second-class to the first-class. All others are statutory increases.


Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: Have all the received their statutory increases ?
u W&0


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Yes, all ' are eligible under the statute.	^


Samuel Hughes: Who are i>ot gible under the statute ?	.le-


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: In partment I think they were all eligm1 [DOT]


Mr. COCHRANE.: Messengers too 1


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Yes. ^
Office of the King's Privy Council	^
-contingencies, nothwithstanding anytD the Civil Service Act, $9,000.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the ing of that provision ?	w


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I am ^ say that the meaning of it is that per been employing for a great many S' " e sons to do temporary work who jv qualified under the Civil Service A t'j)(lt 1 only justification I can plead e IF1 that it has been so ever since 1 D in office, and before.	p


Mr.   I@: How sons are employed in that way [DOT]


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: The total amount expended in that way last year was $1,955.19.


Mr.   I@: That was not exactly me information I wished to get. How aaany persons are employed in that way ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I cannot give tay hon. friend the information.
, Mr. R. l. BORDEN. What are then-duties '!


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I think the duties are chiefly copying.


Mr.   R.@: 
Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: 
Robert Laird Borden: I notice on page U-2 of the Auditor General's Report, there are three private secretaries to the Brenner. Would my right hon. friend tell me how long these have been employed, and what the p:actice has been '!


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I do not know that there is any practice ; I have three secretaries, two of whom have been employed since I have been in office. The third, Mr. McDougall, has been in my department and acting as jny secretary for the last two years.


Robert Laird Borden: I can only say to my right hon. friend that he made it rather a matter of reproach to me last year when I suggested that my accommodation in this House for the purpose of doing my work was not very good, and he seemed to think that it was a perfect answer to me that very eminent men in days gone by had got along with the same accommodation as I now have. I suppose I might say that there have been very eminent men in his place who got on without three private secretaries. I say this to my right hon. friend only to suggest that comparisons may be made on both sides if he desires to make them ; I am not suggesting that the three secretaries are unnecessary. They may be necessary by reason of tbe greater amount of business, but the comparison is as fair as that which he made last year.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Perhaps those who were in my place were more diligent than I am and did not require so much assistance.


Mr. R. U. BORDEN.: If my right hon. friend desires to take that position I am sure none of us will wish to dispute it.
Department of Justice-Salaries, including John Chisholm at $1,650, and allowance to private secretary of the Solicitor General, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $39,090.


Mr. HAGGART.: What is the cause of the increase ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: The first item of tlie increase is caused by an increase in the salary or the deputy head, Mr. New-combe : lie comes under tbe Civil Service Act of last session and secures $1,000 increase. In addition to that there are the usual statutory increases of $50 per year for two chief clerks. The first-class" clerks, Mr. Leslie and Mr. Cote, receive $50 increase each and there is an increase for Mr. Chisholm of $150. I promoted Mr. Chisholm to the position ol first-

class clerk, which necessitated an increase of $150 Then there are other statutory increases. Mr. Mullen has an increase of $100 and Mr. Verrett also has an increase.


Mr.   I@: Why is it necessary to make this exception from the Civil service Act with respect to private secietaues .


Charles Fitzpatrick: The reason for the provision with respect to the pmate secie-tary of the Solicitor General is that under the Civil Service Act it is not permitted to pav anything extra to a member of the civil service, and in the creation of the office of Sollicitor General there was an omission in regard to a private secretary which does not apply to the secretaries of ministers ; therefore, in order to justify the extra payment to him-, it is necessary to have this provision.


Edward Cochrane: Why is there an increase of salary ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: My hon. friend will remember that the practice has been to make an, employee of the department a private secretary and to give him the allowance for a private secretary in addition to the salary by him received from the department.	-


Edward Cochrane: But this practice was sometimes very strongly condemned by hon. gentlemen when on this side of the House.
sir. SAM. HUGHES. I would ask the STinister of Justice if the Solicitor General is a member of the cabinet under this administration?	.


Charles Fitzpatrick: No change in that respect has taken place.


Samuel Hughes: Surely after the language used by hon. gentlemen opposite when In opposition, they are not going to keep a gentleman of the distinguished legal attainments of the worthy gentleman who occupies that position knocking at the door, but will make him a minister?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I am afraid in that respect we suffer from the misfortune of bad example.


Robert Laird Borden: It is a pity my hon. friends are so susceptible to bad but not to good example. I would like to mention a matter in connection with the administration of the Department of Justice, but I shall not discuss it now and my remarks to-day may be taken rather ns an intimation that it will be discussed later on. I do not know the present practice with regard to the professional work of the Minis-tei of Justice and Solicitor General, outside of the department. My hon. friend the Minister of Justice and the Solicitor General will understand, of course, that my lenmrks are entirely impersonal, that I am speaking without regard lo the gentlemen who occupy these positions to-day, and only


Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: And a change at the same time with respect to palarie ' I think.	'
\t


Robert Laird Borden: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: 
Robert Laird Borden: What the Solicitor j General (Mr. Lemieux) has said was very much what I had in my owu mind. As this country grows and develops the work of the department of Justice must necessarily increase. I shall not go over certain matters that have been discussed in days gone by as to tiie work that should be performed by the Minister of Justice and the Solicitor General in connection with litigation in which the Crown is engaged. All I have to suggest at present is that I entirely agree with tiie view tiie Solicitor General has expressed when he says that ample work can be found in the Department of Justice to fully occupy his time. I will go further and say that very probably the remuneration afforded by the country to the man who gives up his whole time to the work of tiie country is not up to the standard of what lie might expect. But I think that when we have a Minister of Justice, and Attorney General and a Solicitor General, we should require them to give their whole time to the work of their department, and we should give them such a salary as would induce the acceptance of those offices by men qualified to till them at all times. That is the view I take. As I said before, I will' not discuss it further at present, but I may have a private conversation with my hon. friend the Minister of Justice in regard to it. Possibly, as I said before, at some later date in the session I may take occasion to discuss this matter in connection with certain other matters in relation to the Department of Justice.


Edward Cochrane: I want to draw the attention of the hon. gentlemen opposite to what, they used to say when the party I support was in power.
An lion. MEMBER. Dispense.


Edward Cochrane: will remember very well when the Conservative party was in power, how the opposition used to talk about us in the House and in the country. I am sorry the Prime Minister has gone out, because I recollect very well when he made as a text of speeches in the country the enormous expenditures of the Conservative government in connection with the administration of justice.


Hon. Mr. TARTE.: He won't do it again.


Mr COCHRANE.: Well, I don't think he WUI ' still, they have got a good deal of cheek and can do almost anything. Even the Minister of Justice tells us they are very ready to accept good sense, especially where there are dollars and cents. Now is it not a sad comment to think that the Prime Minister of this country used to go around preaching of the enormous expenditures alleged to have been made by the Conservative government, and now we find that his government is doing even worse '?
1 am not finding fault with them for doing this, but I am finding fault with them for condemning us for doing what they are now doing. They said that we were doing wrong. I say with the leader of the opposition that if the salary of the Minister of Justice is not sufficient he should have a sufficient salary to pay him for all his time, and the same with the Solicitor General. The premier when in opposition used to complain that we were paying enormous amounts to outside parties to do business that the Minister of Justice and the Solicitor General ought to have done. What do we find to-day ? I have not added up the figures, but I think I am safe in saying that they have spent $40,000.


Mr. TAYLOR.: 


Edward Cochrane: Well, that is worse still. I do not blame the Minister of Justice for he was not in the House then, but I daresay he supported these gentlemen at the time, and now when they are in power we find them perpetrating the same thing. I consider they are doubly guilty, because they are now doing what they Said was wrong when we were in power. I am glad to see the Minister of Customs looking serious. I know that when he reflects on what he used to say with reference to this matter, if he has any conscience at all it must upbraid him. He has made me uneasy sometimes when I was on that side of the House by his strong denunciations of the government on those lines ; now he sits complacently here and sees his colleagues do the same thing. They are doubly guilty now in doing what they denounced ns for doing. $70,000 is an enormous sum, it is more than we ever spent.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I quite agree that we pay a very large amount for law-


Edward Cochrane: 
Robert Laird Borden: 
Charles Fitzpatrick: I added that ^ had increased the salary of the deport j9 $1,000. Let me also add this, that tn ^ no man in this country who has more tively co-operated in this work of re rgrffi than the Deputy Minister of Justice. j,e6 reduction could not have been aecoifiP*[0p without his effective and loyal co-opt-1 *
At six o'clock, committee took recess

After Recess.
Committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Department of Public Works-salaried 150.	ps i,f


George Taylor: 
Edward Frederick Clarke: Make a clean '*i'a whole affair.


Mr. JAMBS SUTHERLAND (Minister Public Works).: 
Mr. HENDERSON.: 
Mr. J. SUTHERLAND.: In reply to my hon. friend (Mr. Henderson), I may say that I aim still the Minister of Public Works, not having resigned, and I may possibly he for the balance of the year for which these estimates are asked. If there is a general election and a change is made, my hon. friend may false my place,, and I am sure he will see that this money is applied in the best way possible. I will try to see, while I am Minister of Public Works, that the country gets value for it. There is one item under the head of the Department of Public Works for hydrographic surveys, and when we Come to that I will explain that the vote to be taken will be under the jurisdiction of the Department of Marine and Fisheries for the coming year. That is a change which I announced last session. It is a very sma'l vote of something like $20,000 or $30,000. The only other item of a like character upon which the change may be discussed is the-appropriation for the (St. Lawrence river improvement. My hon, friends, having taken my assurance last session, that the money voted would be spent by the Department of Public Works, I am sure will be willing to-take that assurance again, because any money voted for the Department of Public Works will be expended by the Minister of Public Works. There is no change in regard to any of the items in the estimates for which i am now asking a vote. There is some proposition to make a change in regard to the two items I have mentioned. I am not keeping anything back from the committee in regard to them.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Does the Department of Public Works remain in the same position as it was twelve months ago i


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Just the same.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Does it exercise the same jurisdiction over the works and services as it did twelve months ago ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes.
Mr. SPROULE, What is going over to-the Department of Marine and Fisheries, because It was given out in the press that the Department of Marine and Fisheries would deal with certain public works which seemed more appropriately connected with that department than with the Department of rublie Works ? Was the country misled, or was it Intended that the Department of Marine and Fisheries should take charge-of these works ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I think there may be a wrong impression ns to what I said last session Hint in my opinion the hydrographic surveys would be better carried on under tho Department of Marine and Fisheries, and it is only recently that that change lias been made. We were then really at

the encl of the season during which that work can be done, and it was not thought well to make the transfer until the opening . of another season. X have given instructions to transfer that work to the Department of Marine and Fisheries for the coming' year. There may also be a change in regard to work in the St. Lawrence river.


Mr.   CLARICE@: What will be the nature of that change ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: That is as to the improvements which are being made in the St. Lawrence river. That with the hydrographic survey is the only change, and I do not think there is anything kept back, or that there is any misunderstanding in regard to that matter. When these items come up, either in the estimates of the Department of Public Works or the Department of Marine and Fisheries, a full explanation will be given in regard to them.


Mr.   CLARICE@: What works are being carried on under the authority or supervision of the Department of Public Works in the way of improving the navigation of the St. Lawrence which it is intended to transfer to the Department of Marine and Fisheries ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The improvement of the,channel between Montreal and Quebec.


Mr.   CLARICE@: Of what nature ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Almost altogether the dredging and sweeping of the channel. Lighting and all other aids to navigation are now under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries. It lias been thought that perhaps a saving might be made if that work was done under the Department of Marine and Fisheries. That is the only change that is under consideration now.


Mr.   CLARICE@: All the dredging was formerly done under the superintendence of the hon. gentleman's department ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Not at all ; none whatever, except what refers to the main channel.


Mr.   CLARICE@: All the dredging com liected with the improvement of the channel on the iSt. Lawrence which has been done under the hon. gentleman's department is to he taken away ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: No, there muybe a misunderstanding. Any dredging that is properly under the department now in regard to harbours or any other Improvements that may be made to wharfs along the St. Lawrence will still be retained under the control of the Public Works Department. It is only 'the improvement of the ship channel that is given over to the Department of Marine and Fisheries.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Mr CLARICE Then everything connected with navigation will be taken away from the hon. gentleman's department ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: In the channel.


Mr.   CLARICE@: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: The Public Works Department.


Mr.   CLARICE@: Is that gone also ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I said that change has been made and that there wouD not likely be any change this year.


Mr. CLANCY.: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: Only the cliun*el below Montreaj.


George Taylor: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: These in"l will all come up for discussion "'he, ,o3e come to the appropriation for that Pu later on.	,
tU3


Mr.   CLARICE@: Is it intended Sorel establishment shall be taken tlie Public Works Department and 1 ' |Ua over to the Department of Marin Fisheries ?
n9 tup
Mr. .1. SUTHERLAND. That j fo\ proposition, but if any vote is ask that purpose, full information 'vl to be given.


Mr.   CLARICE@: And if that is Hie dredges of the Public Works ment will be banded over to the Department for repairs ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: I fully agree with the policy laid down by my hon. friend ; but I thought I made it clear to tile committee that not one cent of the salaries of any of the officials or men employed in connection with any of the work that is being transferred will be paid out of this vote.


Mr. SPROTTLE.: That is not the question.
If you require much less work to be done, do you require all this vote ?
Mr, J. SUTHERLAND. I leave the hon. gentleman to infer, when I say that the full amount of expense to be affected by the change which will be made at the begin- [DOT] ning of this season will be about $500,000 which is got a large amount out of a total of between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000. and would not greatly affect. the size of the staff at headquarters, especially as the staff in connection witli these particular works are not located at Ottawa, and are not paid nt nil out of these appropriations.


David Henderson: During last session power was taken by the government to transfer by Order in Council from one department to another, various works which were formerly under* the control of either the Minister of Public Works or the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. Wo have now at length succeeded in getting the information that about $500,000 of work is to be performed under the direction of the Minister of Marine and Fisherties, which would otherwise have been under the control of the Minister of Public Works. It is quite possible that before the 30th of -Tune, 1005, some material changes may still he made. I would like to know from the Minister of Public Works, whether the transfer of work to the Minister of Marino and fisheries which has thus far been jleeided

upon has been made at the suggestion of the Minister of Public Works, or was the demand made by the Minister of Marine and fisheries ? I shall expect when I sit down to get an answer to that question. The hon. member for East Elgin (Mr. Ingram), a few moments ago drew attention to the tact that the minister was asking for the staff , this year $1,000 more than was required last year.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Only the $50 increases, as I have explained.


Mr HENDERSON.: I quite, understand so" But what I want to draw attention to is this that while the department has been relieved of some of its work, involving less office work, less engineering, less work for the architects, the amount asked for the payment of the staff lias not decreased. To my mind, if there is a decrease in the expenditure, the cost of the staff ought to decrease. Now. I turn to the estimates of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and I find that a very material increase is to be asked for by him ; and no doubt, when we reach those estimates, we shall be told by the minister that the increase is all owing to the fact that a considerable amount of work that was formerly done by the Minister of Public Works, is now to be carried out by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. If the whole of the work to be performed by the two departments is simply equivalent to what is done by the two departments to-day, there should be no increase in the staff, whereas we find that for the Department of Marine and Fisheries provision is made for an increase of the staff from 52 to 56. Now is the time when all .these matters should be explained, because if we vote this sum, a sum in excess of what we think the minister requires for his staff, we shall be handicapped when we come to vote the salaries, for the department of Marine and Fisheries, which amount to some S4.500 more than those of the previous year.
Now. I think that perhaps the Minister of Public Works has not been very fairly treated in this matter. Of course if the change has been made at his own request, if he has asked that a certain amount of his work be transferred from his department, then I have no fault to find with the head of the government. Rut if a demand has been made by another minister, his .iunior in the government, and that demand has been acceded to, I think there is some unfair treatment of the Minister of Public Works and it is jufft as well that we who are voting this money should know just whence the pressure came that brought about the change that seems to have occurred. That there is a change is perfectly evident from the fact that the Minister of Marine is asking for a very large increase in the vote for his staff whilst the Minister of Public Works is asking for practically no Increase.


David Henderson: 


Robert Franklin Sutherland: If my hon friend (Mr. Henderson) will look at this vote he will see that it provides for no eir gineers except the chief engineer of the department. As to the architect he never haa anything to do, and would not have anything to do, with any of the changes that are pr?' posed. On a previous occasion I stated 11 this House that in my opinion the work o_ the hydrographic survey should be train ferred to the Department of Marine an Fisheries.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is that all that has been transferred ?
Mr. .1. SUTHERLAND. It is.


David Henderson: 
George Taylor: If the argument oi w~ minister is correct with reference to th eat drographic survey, it certainly is a "jpg. deal more applicable in the case of drw-j olJ He thinks the surveys can be carrier tmore efficiently when all under one dO^ ja
ment and how can he say that it .wl,,ffiic? the public interest that the dredging. . oljld requires a large and expensive plant.	j,iic
be divided between the Marine and Works Departments ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: This	tpe
change that is being made now and pF event of any changes being made	pi*"
future that would be a fair matter cussion.	-$1


George Taylor: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Sproule) must leave out of account the things he sees in the newspapers. But he knows that power was taken by the Governor in Council to make such changes. I can only speak for myself, but I can say that in asking for votes I do so with the expectation that no change will be made during tlie year for which tlie vote is given. That ought to satisfy the House that when they vote money they know what department it will be spent by. I have gone further and have intimated in a general way what would be the result if the proposed arrangements with regard to the St. Law-ence channel are carred out. If the change is made, It will not affect this vote or any other I ask the House to grant.


James Clancy: I have listened with some interest to the hon. gentleman's explanation in answer to the question asked by the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson), namely whether the changes that have been or are about to he made have been or will be made on the recommendation of the Minister of Public Works himself. I do uol wish to do tlie lion, gentleman an injustice, hut perhaps he will take what I am about to say as a compliment. He seems to have the art of answering questions that are not asked. The hon. gentleman was asked if lie had made such a recommendation. His answer as I understood it was that he had stated on a former occasion-last session I believe-that the vote of the hydrographic survey should he placed under the department of Marine and Fisheries to which it had formerly belonged. But apparently that did not cover the point. For, the hon. gentleman said that half a million dollars at least would be involved in this change. If I understand it aright we are not spending half a million on hydrographic surveys. What we are spending a part of this money for is the improvement of the channel below Montreal. If the hon. gentleman will permit me, I will repeat the question in a narrower form :-Has (ho lion, gentleman recommended changes with regard to the expenditure of money for the Improvement of the channel as well as for the carrying on of tlie hydrographic surveys ? Has st been under the hon. gentleman's recommendation that these changes have been made? lie lias just had a second conference with the Minister of Finance (Hon.

All-. Fielding) and surely he will be able to make it clear this time. And I am sure the Minister of Finance will assist his colleague the Minister of Public Works in giving an answer to my question.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I do not know whether that ig a fair question or not. Of course, my hon, friend (Mr. Clancy) understands the constitutional practice. Personally I have no objection to answer, and I thought I had done so. I said I had suggested although I did not recommend one change-it had to be recommended by the Prime Minister. I suggested one change, but not the other. It is a matter for discussion at a future time.


James Clancy: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
James Clancy: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: No other changes have been made, and none others are under consideration.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understood some changes would be made during the time this money was being expended.


Mr. .T. SUTHERLAND.: One cannot tell what may be done more than a year hence. Something may occur which may render other changes necessary. But iio other changes have been made than I have stated, and there will be no other changes made until parliament meets again.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But the law provides that changes may be made at any time by Order in Council, it becomes a matter of importance to know whether it is contemplated to make any during the present year.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I wish to make it clear that so far as my department is concerned, and so far as the policy of the government is concerned, of which I have any knowledge, there is no intention of making any change.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I want to bring up another question. I notice in some of the departments some of the officers have received their statutory increases under the Civil Service law we passed last year. Looking over the Act I cannot understand very clearly when it will come into force. I am told that in some departments it has already been enforced and that some are enjoying the benefits of the law while others are not, that some have got them in the past and that some will get them in the future. Perhaps the hon. Minister of Finance would be good enough to give an explanation as to what the operation of the law is at the present time, what departments have been brought under it, and what civil servants are enjoying the increases provided lor by it V


William Stevens Fielding: The Act was an enabling Act authorizing the government to do certain things. As respects some portions of the Act 1 think all the departments-I am speaking from memory-have availed themselves of the privileges of it. There are some parts of the Act that have not yet been put into operation, for example. that portion of the Act which creates a class known as grade ' A.' The matter is under consideration as to what officials in



the departments are entitled to receive the promotion of the character which is contemplated by the Act. I think I am correct in stating that all of the departments have availed themselves of some of the provisions of the Act.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: The number is 2T. and if you multiply the amount by that it will give you the amount of increase that each will receive.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I assume that in the Department of Public Works they are getting it while in some other departments, I am told, they are not getting it. Why is it that some benefit and others do not ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The deputy
minister informs me that all are to be benefited under the Act.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There are others who do not benefit outside of grade ' A.'


Robert Franklin Sutherland: All in the
Department of Public Works who are entitled to it under the Act get the benefit.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand that in the Department of Public Works they get it but in some of the other departments they do not.


William Stevens Fielding: We will have to deal with the question as each department comes up. The operation of the Act may not be uniform in this respect, that although the Act empowered the government to do certain things each department would have to take the initiative as respects its own officials and that initiative may not have been taken at the same moment. I think I am correct in saying that all the departments have availed themselves of the general provisions of the Act. I know that in my own department each official got the benefit of the Act in all matters outside of grade ' A.'


William Stevens Fielding: 


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That which may have been done by one department may not bav been done by all at the same time. If Order in Council was passed last year brins' in" the Act into operation as respects on set of civil servants, and it was not brougu into operation in another department unt this year, it would be a great injustice.


William Stevens Fielding: 
William Stevens Fielding: There were one two features of the Act which were oV to debate as to their possible interpretati , and there was some delay as to that, bh j(g think I am quite safe in saying, that, '.j respects the well established classes of C1 e servants in all the departments, they [DOT] received the benefits of the Act. They not all have received them on the same a e but they have received them, ff tbef exceptions there must be good rec ^ for them and of course the hon._ gentle e would have to point to a particulai before we could give the explanation.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The Act was Passe!Lr the current year but it was after the (lle mencement of the financial year. Worn j/ civil servant get the advantage of one ? or three quarters of a year or how niu ^


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
David Henderson: Going back to the question that we were discussing before in reference to the change in the Department of Public Works and the Department of Marine and Fisheries I have been endeavouring to find the Act to which I referred a short time ago, but the indexes made by the well paid government officials of these statutes are so extremly vague that I am always at a loss to find anything that I want to get. I wonder that some Minister of the Crown does not take this matter up, and suggest a better system of indexing the statutes. There are indexes scattered all over the book and you have to look here and there and everywhere before you come across, accidentally in the end, what you want to get at. Now, Sir, the government having acted upon that Act of Parliament in one instance, by transferring under Order in Council to. the Marine Department a portion of the attributes of the Public Works Department ; can they go on from year to year passing Orders in Council, based upon the authority of this Act, and constantly change the duties of one department to another. I am sorry that the Solicitor General is not here to give a legal opinion on the question. It is my belief that once having exercised their power under that Act, the power of the government is exhausted, and they have no right to go on from year to year making constant changes. Probably the fact that I did not know what the minister meant by a hydrographic survey, led me to make comments which were not necessary. We have had hydrographic surveys in the Georgian Bay under the Marine Department, but these were surveys of the bed of the lake for the purpose of charting the obstructions to navigation. I never understood before that dredging would come under a hydrographic survey, and I do not think that most other people understood it either. The fact is, that the minister was speaking of a hydrographic survey, when we were speaking of dredging, and that is where the difficulty arose. I believe that we were right, and that a hydrographic survey is not a proper description of that dredging work.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I would not go so far as to say that there should be no hydrographic survey on the St. Lawrence river. Of course the department will have to carry on surveys which are quite different from the ordinary hydrographic survey, for the purpose of charting. The surveys of the department for dredging purposes will be carried on as usual wherever tbat work is to be done. There was established under tlie late Minister of Public Works, a hydrographic survey, which I thought might be better handed over to the Marine Department.


David Henderson: I agree with the minister that anything in the nature of a hydrographic survey should come under the Department of Marine, but I do think that

there was no good reason why any change should he made in the dredging even in the lower St. Lawrence. X am sure the House would have been better satisfied if the whole work, which had been assigned to the Department of Public Works for years had remained with the department. I am rather happy to know however, that the Minister of Public Works was not an assenting party to the change that was made.
I notice here that there is an item of $600, for allowance to a private secretary. As I understand it, the minister selects a civ i 1 servant who has a certain salary, as his private secretary, and on account of the additional duties, or on account of the greater responsibilities that attach to the position of private secretary, he is allowed an extra salary of $600. I presume that is what the item'refers to, because surely the minister does not pay his private secretary the paltry salary of $600.


William Stevens Fielding: My hon. friend (Mr. Henderson) is quite correct, subject to the qualification, that in some instances the $600 may be divided between two officials. That has been the practice for generations.


David Henderson: If that be so, then why is it that in regard to this $600 for private secretaries, you have the words [DOT] notwithstanding anything contained in the Civil Service Act ' in most cases, while they are not connected with this particular vote.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The explanation probably is that the gentleman who is acting as private secretary to the Minister of Public Works, is qualified under the Civil Service Act. It is quite possible that a minister might appoint as private secretary, one who has not passed the examination, and then these words would be necessary in order that he be paid.
Public buildings, Ottawa, Astronomical Observatory, $35,0000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In what stage of advancement is this work now ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It will be completed during the coming year.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Building, fittings and everything ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Building, fittings and everything are supposed to be completed this year, and this Is to provide for its completion.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What are the building and equipment expected to cost ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: In round numbers $1)6,000 including equipment and fittings. The original contract for the building was $74.01)9. The rest is for equipment and fittings.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: When do you expect to ha ve your arrangements all complete ?


David Henderson: 


Robert Franklin Sutherland: During the clir'
rent year.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 
David Henderson: Why by the Depot ment of the Interior ?	j


James Sutherland: Because carry on the work. We simply comp'd and furnish the building for them, do not furnish the technical instrumentcofl'


David Henderson: Where is the c^. nec-tion between the Department of the , terior and an astronomical observatoiy


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Because au ^
staff connected with that work are i* Department of the Interior.	{


David Henderson: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: I see it rumouredj^-time to time in the press that the "	'
	 I
tory at Toronto is to be moved to u
Is that the intention ?	^gCr


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The W*V
v a lories are not in connection with 1 h branch at all. The Toronto observa ^ t under the Marine Department no ^ 1 always has been, and it will rerna is.


Edward Frederick Clarke: There is no vote ^ asked for. to move the meteorology from Toronto to Ottawa ?	.g #
Mr. .1. SUTHERLAND. No, th<'rC vote being asked for.
Ottawa Royal Mint, $50,000.	y


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
Thomas Simpson Sproule: I presume that about the time that a Liberal candidate for Ottawa is chosen we will have the announcement of the choice of a site V


William Stevens Fielding: I can assure my hon. friend that the high-minded electors of Ottawa are not influenced by such things at all. They realize that this is the capital of the whole Dominion and take no notice of these things.	,
Victoria Memorial Museum and other buildings, $170,000.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: A site has been purchased, and I shall ask for a revote of the balance not taken last session. The plans now are almost completed, and I expect to be able to lay them on the table of the House within a very short time. The site purchased is the Stewart estate at the foot of Metcalfe street. It contains nine acres and cost $73,500. I believe that the selection of this site has met with the general approval of the members of this House, as well as of the citizens of Ottawa. Along with the other members of the government, I have given the matter considerable attention, and after a full discussion of the whole subject we thought that in the public interest this: particular sitei which has a fine large plot of ground about it, would be better than any other site available. ,


Edward Cochrane: What do you mean by ' other buildings ' ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: We had several other buildings under consideration, such as the erection of a fire-proof office for the records of Canada, for which there is now no proper accommodation.


Edward Cochrane: Does this include rent of- buildings ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: No ; this is only for new buildings. The present buildings are so overcrowded that we have been compelled to rent office room.


Mr. COGHRANE.: I am surprised to hear that the buildings are crowded. When the Conservatives were in power we heard a great deal of the buildings being all crammed from cellar to garret, but now V see the buildings are filled, and almost every second block I ask about In the streets of Ottawa I am told is rented by the government.
Mr. ,1. SUTHERLAND. There is no doubt that with the increase in the business of the country the departments have been so crowded that it has been necessary to find more accommodation.


Edward Cochrane: If, as the minister has said, the decrease in the work of his department does not relieve the country of any expense, why should, the increase in the business of other departments entail additional expense ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I have several times stated that the Bublic Works Department at Ottawa is not affected by any of the proposed changes. I may say that the Public Works Department, as far as my experience is concerned, is pretty well crowded, and after all the changes that have been made in that building we have not secured an extra room, and I can assure my hon. friend that we have not too much accom modation.


Edward Cochrane: I have seen two or three men sitting in a place where there would be only one under the Conservative government. I have seen two or three men to wait on a minister where one was sufficient when we were in power.


George Taylor: Was the property purchased by tender, by public auction or by bargain and sale ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: By court sale. I am not sure through what officer, but I believe it was the Master in Chancery.


George Taylor: Was there any commission, retainer or other sum paid besides the purchase price ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: There was a commission, I think of 2 per cent paid to Mr. Taggart, the real estate agent.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What would be the size of the building it is proposed to construct ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I did not furnish myself with the details, as It was my intention to lay the plan on the tablb. The building will be 280 feet front, with two wings 126 feet in depth.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will it be fireproof ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It will be of stone, and practically fire-proof.


George Taylor: Do I understand the minister to say that he gave some gentleman a commission of 2 per cent on the $75,000 over and above what was paid for the property ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: An arrangement had been made by the previous minister to have an option on this property. Negotiations had been carried on and a bargain was practically made with the owner, but I was informed by the solicitors that the owners could not give a title except through the courts. So, the purchase had to he made in that way. But the bargain had already been made, and morally and legally the man was entitled to his commission.


David Henderson: I do not see that. It would seem that this agent undertook, for a commission of 2 per cent, to secure this
property for the government, but was obliged to come to the minister and sal that he could not carry out his agreement.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
Mr. LENNOX.: Was this a compromise ? Was the original claim for commission higher than this ?
Mr. 3. SUTHERLAND. I think it was 2 per cent originally-no compromise about m


Haughton Lennox: Was there any other tPj at the sale except that of the government


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I think not.


George Taylor: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
Haughton Lennox: I understand that tiations for the purchase had advanced * m
certain stage,
and the amount to he P g agreed upon-$75,000. Then, because ti ^e was some difficulty in making the solicitors for the vendors suggested _ j there would have to be a court sale. - *
[DOT] [DOT]

 

 

 - 

 . faif
understand It, then, it would hardly ne aI1y for the minister to say that this was in rj. proper sense an auction sale. It was n
rate contract after negotiation, and t!ie tor was put through at a formal nu sale for the purpose of completing the Mr. 3. SUTHERLAND. That is as I 1 del-stand it.	oft


Haughton Lennox: The amount agreed was $75,000. and the government Pal ^lie" into court. I am not quite clear as pIJ, ther this 2 per cent was paid in nddi >
^


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The amount paid less the 2 per cent.


George Taylor: Then, the parties
onl?
___ived WsTbOOL, instead oT$75,000 ?	9


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
Mr. BELL.: I do not see that any great advantage would result from taking up these items now and then going back and discussing them again at a future time.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: There is this advantage, that we would be getting on and doing some business.	,


John William Bell: We might take up the next item.
Prince Edward Island-Charlottetown Dominion building, improvements, additions, &c., $5,000.


Mr. LEFURGEY.: I would like some explanation of this item.
Mr. .1. SUTHERLAND. This is to complete the improvements and additions that are being made to the Charlottetown Dominion building. The repairs are going on at the present time.
Mr. LEFURGEY'. Would the minister tell me if this contract was let by tender ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It was let to II. & S. Low for $11,155. Theirs was the lowest tender. In addition to the contract there were some fittings.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: When was the contract to be finished ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It was to be completed on the 16th of February last.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I understand there are many complaints from the people who have to use a small building in the upper part of the town. In this contract were there some repairs to the roof to be made for the $ll,Ou0 ?
Mr. .1. SUTHERLAND. No, they were not included in the contract.
Mr. LEFURGEY'. Do you contemplate any repairs to the roof of the building ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The chief architect informs me they are not included in this vote ?


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: Have you got anything in coming estimates ?
Mr. .1. SUTHERLAND. The matter is now under consideration. If the chief architect reports that it is necessary to make these improvements to that building there is no doubt we will have to ask for a sum in the supplementary estimates and have them carried out.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: I have advices from different people In Charlottetown that the work now being done on the Inside of the building, which is quite elaborate, will certainly be destroyed If the building is not repaired as it is in a very bad condition at the present time, and as my informant says, leaks like a sieve. If the hon. minister wdl,

take this matter in hand, he will find that the repairs to the roof should have been done before the repairs to the inside of the building.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: My deputy
informs me that the report has reached the department within the last few days in regard to the matter and it will be attended to.
New Brunswick-Campbellton public building. $12,000.


Mr. FOWLER.: I would like to have an explanation from the hon. minister as to this item.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: This is for a public building in Campbellton, N.B. The site has been purchased from Mr. Archibald Mackenzie for $4,000. It is on Water street a nd is 100 feet square. It is reported to be advantageously located in the central portion of the most important thoroughfare of Campbellton. This vote of $12,000 is for the ' purpose of erecting a building on the site already purchased.


George William Fowler: Was the site purchased by a bargain between the department and the owner ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It was a
bargain between the owner and the department.


George William Fowler: Who acted on behalf of the department ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Mr.	Waterbury, of St. John, one of the officers of the department.


George William Fowler: Will this $12,000 complete the building ?


Donald Sutherland: We are having the plans prepared and advertising for tenders. I should say that to complete the leading building it *will cost between $15,000 and $18,000. We had a vote last year to pay for the site. The amount we are asking for now is probably as much as we will be able to spend this year.


George William Fowler: What were the expenses of securing the title ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: They were very small. The work was done through the Department of Justice.


George William Fowler: You have not let the contract ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: No. we are just advertising for tenders now.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is this for the post office and custom-house ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes.
Rlchibucto public building, $3,500.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: This is to complete the building at Rlchibucto under contract.


Alfred Alexander Lefurgey: 


George William Fowler: When was the contract let ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: In November, 1902.
St. John Dominion buildings-improvements, repairs, &c., $3,000.


Mr. DANIEL.: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
John Waterhouse Daniel: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: Is the gentleman (Mr. Daniel) speaking of tbe 1,11 ing on Partridge Island ?


John Waterhouse Daniel: No, I am speaking ^ building at Sand Point.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: This vote $ plies altogether to the water service p improvements being made to the buildm^jii Partridge Island. The other building come up again under another item.	-


George William Fowler: Where are you getting water from ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 
George William Fowler: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: Pipes ore u laid under the bay.


George William Fowler: What is going to 1,0 total cost ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I thin*5 will complete the work.	j||


George William Fowler: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: Was this work done by
ihent"Ls!lpervl3l<)n of Mr!
,L engineer
It was done Shewau, the


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Mr. Shewan is the resident engineer ftp- the whole province, and of course there had to be a foreman in charge of that particular work. My hon. friend knows that quite considerable work has been done there, and he is only quoting from the Auditor General's Report up to 30th June last, which is nearly a year old.


George William Fowler: I do not thiidc that my hon. friend (Mr. Taylor) is quite fair in criticising the minister for having expended $409 for supervising a work that cost $1,100. That was a public work in my own county on which the expenditure was something like $3,000-1 would not be sure as to the exact figures but the proportions are all right-and out of that $3,000, about $2,000 was paid to the clerk of works, and the balance went into the work.


George Taylor: Why that is worse.


George William Fowler: If the minister has succeeded in this particular case in getting $1,100 expended for $400 to supervise it, lie is to be congratulated on the improvement.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: There is improvement going on all the time.


Mr. FOWLER  .@: I refer to the Sussex armoury and as I say, the' salary of the clerk of works amounted to about two thirds of the total expense, but in that case they forgot to discharge the clerk of works ; and lie was getting $3.50 or $4 a day for mouths and months after the work had been completed. Not only that, but (here might be some criticism as to the fitness of the clerk of works for such a job. There was carpenter work, and masonry work, and plumbing to be done, and the House will understand that the clerk of works was well qualified to superintend this, when I state that by occupation he had all his life followed the business of a merchant tailor. However, die had one qualification in a very high degree ; he was perfectly capable of drawing his salary. He supervised the work so well, that one night (lie windows of the basement were left open, and the pipes froze and burst and it cost the department $700 or $800-1 do not say that these are the exact figures I mt they are approximately correct, to repair the damages caused by this gentleman's neglect. 1 would not ask the minister whether it is liis intention to clniige the clerk of the works with the damages caused by liis neglect.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I believe they were paid for by the department.
Mi- FOWLER. The department paid a man i supervise the work for twelve months fter it was completed, so that he drew over 2.000 on a work the total cost or which ,-as less than $9,000, and considering tlie

particular part of the work that he had to inspect, his pay was in the proportion of two to one ; two parts going to the Clerk of works and one to the contractor. Therefore, the hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Taylor), instead of criticising the minister for spending $400 on the supervision of an $1,100 job in this case, should have commended him for the economy which he is practising.


John Waterhouse Daniel: I would ask the minister, in regard to the Sand Point building, whether the insecurity of that building in case of fire has been brought to his notice, and whether it is his intention to remedy the defect ? 'ibhis is a very urgent matter indeed, and the minister * should give it his attention at the earliest possible date.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I shall make a note of the statement of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Daniel) and have it inquired into. It has not been brought to my attention before.


George Taylor: The hon. member for King's (Mr. Fowler) has rather censured me for referring to what the minister has done in connection with the St. John quarantine service, but I want to tell him that the only item in the expenditure they would require a clerk of works for was the building of the steward's house which cost $364, and for superintending that job they paid the clerk of works $409.50.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: He must have been in charge of the whole works.


George Taylor: Well, there were bedsteads bought, and there was tlie travel to Ottawa of John Cowan, which cost $64.85, and it did not require any clerk of works to supervise his trip. The only thing the clerk of works had to do was to supervise the building of the steward's house, which cost $364, and for that he was paid $409. That Is worse than the Sussex armoury job.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: They laid half a. mile of Inch pipe there, and that had to be superintended. Seriously speaking, I believe that this is one of the weak spots in the conduct of work away from the centre. Delays take place that are perhaps sometimes unavoidable in the erection of these public works, and the foreman cannot very often be discharged after he has undertaken the work. It is impossible to get a man at all competent to oversee a work like that for less than $3 a day. In fact, I find that we have sometimes to pay more for men of practical knowledge. I know it is one of the weak points about having works carried on at a considerable distance from head quarters; but since I lmve been in the department I have endeavoured to see that only qualified men are employed.


George Taylor: The hon. member for King's (Mr. Fowler) says the clerk of works at Sussex was a tailor. Perhaps the hon.


George William Fowler: minister can inform us what was the occupation of Mr. Beatty, wuo was superintending the construction of this building at St John.


George William Fowler: He was a baker.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I have no personal knowledge of the matter.


George William Fowler: 
James Clancy: 
Mr.   J.@: 
James Clancy: The hon. gentleman has disclosed that he has no will of his own. He trusts entirely to the good judgment of the man who represents the riding, and 'f the member recommends any gentleman, no matter what his previous business in life has been, the minister assumes at once that he is a first-class man and appoints him. I notice that no farmers are appointed to positions of that kind. As far as I can discern they are regarded as too stupid a lot. I happen to belong to that class and I do, not know but what it might be a standing grievance that they are not recommended to positions of that kind. I was, probably falsely, under the impression that we were as intelligent as butchers and bakers, and I do not see any reason why farmers should be excluded. We could safely adopt the rule that no man should be appointed to a position of this kind unless he was qualified by some previous experience. I do not think, to repeat the words of the hon. minister, that any member of this B*ouse would be so foolish as to recommend a man not fit for the position, but I do not think the members generally concern themselves whether he is fit or not, thq< thing is to get. tlie appointment, it seems that the hon. minister is very amiable and that if one of his supporters in this House makes a recommendation he concludes at once that it is a capital appointment. The minister should at least make inquiries and not have a man placed in charge of a work who is not thoroughly qualified.


George William Fowler: There should be no difficulty of the kind the minister mentions, caused by these men charging for time when the work was not in progress. If the department refused to pay the account, as they would have the right to do. the matter would he settled. There should he some check over the clerk of works and he should not be able to obtain more money than lie is entitled to. The minister does not go far enough in simply urging that certain tilings should not he done. It is his duty to insist on the appointment of competent men. In the case to which I have referred this man had never followed any other occupation than that of a merchant tailor. This building was being erected in my own town, and this man's place of business is directly opposite my own. I know, as a matter of fact, that that man never spent much time at the building, when drawing his $3.50 a day. He never spent two hours a day at the building. His custom was to go up to this work at noon hour and then to come back to his place of business and follow his ordinary vocation during the rest of the day. The department forgot that they had appointed him and although the contract lasted only four months he continued to draw the pay

for two years. That is a fact that can be ascertained by the minister. That has happened, I have no doubt, in many other places. In this case the only work he could do would be to supervise the erection of a house which would cost only $300 unless he may have supervised the putting up of some of these beds. The total cost of the beds was six cents a bed, or about $10 in all. Add that to the $367 which the house cost, and you have $377 and he.is supposed to have worked 117 days on it. If there were only one carpenter on the job a house costing $367 ought to be built in less than 117 days. This may seem a small matter, but if this kind of thing is going on all over the country it means that a very large sum belonging to the public is wasted. It seems to me the minister should do something more than urge. He should inquire into the matter and hold the engineer in charge responsible. I suppose the engineer must certify this account. Is that the custom of the department ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes.


George William Fowler: Of course, the minister cannot undo what has been done, but he should see to it that such waste is not repeated. The minister cannot say he has not had warning.	.


James Clancy: What has the minister to say to this very serious charge made by the hon. member for King's (Mr. Fowler)'.' Is this the first intimation he has had of the matter ? If so, the hon. gentleman owes it to himself to ascertain why it was that the case was not called to his attention before. If this case is an index to the general condition of affairs, it is evident that very large sums are wasted, and the minister should give us an explanation.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The case the hon. gentleman refers to is quite old.


George William Fowler: It is not out-lawed yet.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I think we could hardly collect what has been paid out. I have endeavoured to have economy in these matters, and have found serious fault where there was evidence of waste. It is true that cases do occur where a good deal more is paid out than is necessary. It may be that the resident engineer or other person incharge should be hauled over the coals. Rut in that case, one excuse or another is given, and if a man is a good man and well up in his business, you do not want to deprive the department of his services by discharging him. I have made every effort to have well qualified men, and to have them paid by commission rather than by the day, fis I believe that saves a good deal. I will ask Mr. Waterbury, who is in charge of these matters, how this large amount was paid out. This work went on right in St. John, where lie lives and he could not help


George William Fowler: but know whether this man was at work or not.


George William Fowler: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: Speaking ^ memory, I believe that as soon as I heard, it, I made inquiries and the matter stopWj; as soon as completed. I recollect it now stopped immediately I heard of it.	t


George William Fowler: 
John Waterhouse Daniel: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: I have no doubt it was their intention, and is still their intention, to erect a public building in St. John,


George William Fowler: How soon does the government propose to put that intention into effect ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The hon. gentleman must see that this matter does not come up properly under the item which we are discussing.


George William Fowler: I am not asking for details. I am simply asking whether in the near future such Is the intention of the government.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: In a general way. I have no doubt that it is their intention. But my hon. friend will understand that the Department of Public Works will only erect such building at the request of the Department of Militia and Defence.


George William Fowler: Does your architect draw the plan ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: They furnish us with sketches and outlines of what they require before the matter is taken up by the chief architect of the Department of Public Works.
Mr..FOWLER. Have the Department of Militia and Defence an architect of their own ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: They are not called architects. They are engineers. They have graduates of the schools who are capable of drawing plans.


George William Fowler: Would it be possible that tne Department of Militia and Defence through their engineers prepared these sketches and sent them to the district officer commanding at St. John for his approval before they were submitted to your department?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: That is quite possible, because 1 know that sketches of this kind are sent to the local officers commanding and that they come to our department with the remarks and information furnished by the Department of Militia and Defence. I think it is usual to consult the officers of tho>
militia in regard to any work of this kind that is going on.


George William Fowler: Then these sketches would he sent to the district officer com-

manding for liis approval before they were submitted to your department ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It is customary to do that. That might be done before the plans were drawn and before the matter came to our department at all.


George William Fowler: The engineer would prepare a sketch, send it to the district officer commanding for his approval and then it would come back to your department?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes.


Mr. BLAIN.: Is it customary to prepare plans before any money is voted for a public building ?	\


Robert Franklin Sutherland: As a rule the plans are prepared in order that parliament may be intelligently - asked to authorize a vote.


George William Fowler: These plans were something like the telegram that came down to St. John at the same time from the general manager of the Grand Trunk Railway applying for berths. But, he missed fire ; he did not know on which side of the harbour the railway was going and therefore he applied for berths on the wrong side.
Woodstock armoury and gun shed, $15,000.


George William Fowler: Kindly explain that.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: This vote is expected to complete that armoury. If I remember aright the explanation given last session was that the rink was purchased at the request of the Militia Department. They have a very large field battery there. The rink was purchased, I think, for $0,000.
I am only speaking from memory. This amount is taken to fit up the building in accordance with the request of the Department of Militia and Defence. '


George William Fowler: You bought the rink and the land it stood on for $6,000 ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I am speaking from memory. In round figures it was $6,000.


George William Fowler: You did not spend any money last year ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: No.
Maritime provinces-Dominion public buildings-renewals, improvements, repairs, &c., $12,000.


George William Fowler: How much did you spend last year ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: About $9,000. We have a few months to run yet before the end of the fiscal year.
Some resolutions reported.



[Stage Direction]
Mr. FIELDING moved the adjournment of the House.	1
George William Fowler: 


Robert Laird Borden: 
William Stevens Fielding: I will do so.


Robert Laird Borden: 
William Stevens Fielding: 
David Henderson: What supply ?


William Stevens Fielding: Continuing with the estimates of the'' Minister of Public Works-


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 11.15 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Fbiday, March 25, 1904