1904-04-18

REPORT PRESENTED.

[Stage Direction]
Report of the Northwest Mounted Police.- Sir Wilfrid Laurier.

Mr. AULAY MORRISON (New Westminster).: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to ask the right lion, the First Minister if there is any information before the government to confirm the report that comes from British Columbia that the Emperor of China has made overtures to the imperial government seeking to interfere with the anti-Chinese legislation of this parliament at its last session ?


Rt.   H@: There is no information of such a character in the hands of the government.



THE JOINT HIGH COMMISSION.

Mr. R. L. BORDEN (Halifax).: I would like to ask the Prime (Minister whether or not there is any objection to placing on the table of the House the instructions or

commissions issued to the members of the Joint High Commission. We understand that it is uncertain whether or not that commission will again assemble. There is no immediate probability at least of its being convoked. I do not recollect of the instructions or commissions ever having been placed before this House, and I assume that there is no objection now to placing them on the table, for the purpose of informing the House and the country as to the authority which the members of that commission had in conducting their negotiations with representatives of the government of the United States.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: So far as my memory serves me, there are no other instructions than those contained in the commission, which I think was placed on the table of the House some years ago. At all events, there can be no objection to its being again placed on the table.


Robert Laird Borden: My right hon. friend may be correct. If so, it is not my fault that I have not seen the commission, because I made inquiry for it in the library, and was informed that there was no such document there. If it had been laid on the *table of the House, I assume that it would have been there.



THE ALASKAN BOUNDARY-CORRESPONDENCE.

Robert Laird Borden: 
Wilfrid Laurier: 
Robert Laird Borden: I would to ask the government whether or not a yjr correspondence between the Hon. Mr- ^ges and the government respecting the e ^ which led to his resignation, has been I before the House. The corresponded jp, ic was placed before the House oj p Blair himself during the past sessm rd' contained in pages 0740-0747 of ' I;aLjneilt of last session. There has been no Star so far as I am aware, that the whole ;lIjd correspondence has been brought doW^olllo formally laid before the House. I ask the Prime Minister whether the.^ BOt, of it has been brought down, and,AtiS^ whether there is any objection to o down the remainder ?	^ 1


Wilfrid Laurier: 
Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister ance).: 
[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read time.

[Stage Direction]
at :i<
Bill (No. 57) to incorpora,te the	IS1'1,11
Railway Bridge Company of 1	„
wick.-Mr. C. Marcil.	TmpeNal 3#
Bill (No. 58) respecting the I' *Iia<ja-and Investment Company of °	>
A. T. Thompson.	tl.eal TLi'
Bill (No. 59) respecting the	0
and Island Railway Company-	,
frion.	,	.	P1.
Bill (No. 60) respecting Valley Railway Company-
[Stage Direction]
Bill
(No. 61) to incorporate the Thorold
and r	oxj to incorporate tne xn
0jan J-'ake Erie Railway Company.-Mr. Ger-
Q(No. 62) respecting the Welland and 11
8«n 6 kake Railway Company.-Mr. Costittian,
respecting me vvenanu anu
'na Island Bridge Company.-Mr. Ger-
8l*l!! (?o.
'lave
63) respecting the Edmonton and
Brini ®°- 64) respecting the Strait of Canso ge Company.-Mr. Wade.

[Stage Direction]
SS. * LAKE CHAMPLAIN.'
r' E. D. SMITH-by Mr. Clarke-asked :
Mitjm answer to question of April 6th, the Charnar.°f Agriculture said: 'The ss. 'Lake v6nti]ajjin ' kad the ordinary system of cowl
vei
Ike government examined these cowl «,.i;tors, and found them in nroner order and
V°yagecient size' on this boat on each outward ' When perishable cargo was aboard ?
cu]t®k- SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agri-Harjjfw- One of the inspectors for the Detachof Agriculture has reported on from v-Jtward voyage of this steamship, both S6ason port of Montreal during the past St. j i °I navigation and from the port of ea i ' N.B., during the winter season, and ?>s fnii rePort the ventilation is described
decks : No. 1-2 in-takes, 2 out-V 4 ' No. 2-2 in-takes ; No. 3-2 in-takes ; fhives . 2 in-takes ; No. 5-2 in-takes, 2 out-Ori0' No. 6-2 out-takes.
, lloji' : No. 1-2 in-takes, 2 out-takes.
% p o .No- 1-2 in-takes, 2 out-takes : L' ~ in-takes ; No. 3-2 in-takes ; No. "o. r 'J^kes ; No. 5-2 in-takes, 2 out-takes ; i -the v 0l]t'takes.
i ihchi en.tilators in the 'tween decks were R inPi-,es in diameter, and those in the holds , <rv s:
11 iuL, inspector is instructed to mention of n3)ort the fact of a ventilator being ?ilthiur.*-61' 'I he so finds it when making his ot ''«on. The reports do not state that
and found them in proper order and
*411/
the 'tv AY
ventilators were out of order.

[Stage Direction]
^LRNnox asked :
cit,the total cost of the Railway Cattle-
;mmissi°a*
(,\va * R. EMMERSON (Minister of Rail-atWi * 5JanaIs0- The total cost of the b., ai'o Commission was $6,828,68.
wing electric power to united
ltl. _	STATES.
61.	asked :
a*'^ application been made to the gov-in P issi'on t i£ so>
when and by whom, for ^ahada r° obtain electric power generated [DOT] fo convey it to the United States ?
2.	If such application has been made, what action has the government taken, or what decision has the government come to, in respect to the matter ?
Rt.   H@: No record can be found of any such application.


ALBERTON STATION AND ENTRANCE.
Mr. HACKETT asked :: 1.	What report, if any, has the government received relative to the survey and appropriation of a new entrance by rail into the town of Alberton, Prince county, Prince Edward Island, and the avoidance of the ' Y ' nuisance, under which the place has long suffered ?
2.	Before the new station is commenced at Alberton, will this nuisance be removed by selecting a proper line of entrance ?


Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals) :: 1.	The department has received a report from the General Manager, which does not favour the proposed change.
2.	The matter is under consideration as to what shall be done.


IMPERIAL SERVICE COMMISSIONS-CANADIAN MILITIA.
Mr. SAM. HUGHES asked:: 1.	How many commissions in the imperial service of the British empire are allotted to officers from the Canadian militia annually ?
2.	Are these commissions over and above those given graduates of the Royal Military College, of Kingston ?
3.	What are the conditions under which the six commissions are supposed to be granted ?
i.	What examinations are to be passed ? If this information is too detailed for a question, will the government have it laid upon the Table of the House ?
5.	For the non-military examination, that is, for the literary examination, is a standing in one or the other of Canada's universities accepted in lieu thereof ? If so, what is the standing required ?
6.	How many Canadian militia officers have received such commissions annually since 1899, inclusive ?
7.	Are special commissions in the West African service, or other similar service, given to Canadian officers besides ?
8.	If so, what are conditions required for such service ?


Sir FREDERICK W. BORDEN (Minister of Militia and Defence) :: 1.	Six.
2.	Yes.
3.	An officer of the colonial military forces who is a candidate for a commission in the British army will be required-
(a)	. To be unmarried, and to be between the ages of 18 and 25 on the 1st January of the year in which he is allowed to present himself for the examination in military subjects.
(b)	. To have served as an officer in the local military force of the colony from which he is nominated, and to have attend-
.1359

ed two annual trainings, each training to be in a distinct year, or have seen active service in the field.
The application should be accompanied by-
(a)	. An extract from the register of the candidate's birth ; or, in default, a certi-eate of his baptism or other documentary evidence, accompanied by a declaration made by one of his parents or guardians before a magistrate, giving his exact age.
(b)	. A certificate of having served the required number of annual trainings (each training in a distinct year).
(c)	. A certificate from the governor that he is satisfied that the candidate is actually a colonist, that he is of good moral character, and, in all other respects, a fit and proper person to hold a commission in His Majesty's army.
(d)	. A certificate that the candidate has passed the prescribed literary examination, or that he has passed an equivalent examination.
4.	A literary examination ; an examination in military subjects ; a medical examination.
Further details as regards the different subjects of the literary and military examinations in which a candidate will be examined can be furnished on application to the department. Only one copy of regula-tions*available.
5.	Yes, provided the candidate has passed the examination specified below at any of the following universities :-
Oxford-The ' First Public Examination.' Cambridge-One of the parts of the ' General Examination,' or Part I. of any ' Tripos Examination.'
Dublin-The ' Final Examination of the Senior Freshman Year,' or the ' Final Examination of thb School of Engineering.' Durham-The ' First Year's Examinations.'
. London-The Intermediate Examinations in Arts, Law, Science or Medicine.
Scotch Universities-The ' Examination of Candidates for the Army.'
The Royal University, Ireland-' The Second University Examination in Arts, or the Second Professional Examination in Engineering.'
Victoria University, Manchester-The Intermediate Examination.
. Or if he has passed some other test which is accepted by the university as exempting him from the above examinations. A certificate that the examination is accepted by the authorities concerned must be produced.
An equivalent examination at the University of Malta, or one of the chartered colonial universities will likely be accepted as a sufficient ground for exemption.
A candidate is also exempted from the literary examination, except in geometrical drawing, if he can produce a certificate from a chartered university that he has-
(a)	. Taken his degree in Arts or Science; or
(b)	. Passed the examinations for the degree of B.A. or M.A. at one of the following


Sir F. W. BORDEN.: 
STE. FLORE VOTERS' 1,1ST-
[Stage Direction]
Mr. CASGRAIN-by Mr. Clarke-asked [DOT]
„ aCtO\,
j.. urn me depositary or tne	fot 1 t
for the purposes of provincial elections,,	t <>l
parish of Ste. Flore, in the electoral cu* t0 to® Three Rivers and St. Maurice, f°rw:	Jlf
Clerk of the Crown in Chancery, as „r„ c0pf
t U 771__ i	~	...	.	.... til tl u w <7 It*
![DOT] Did the depositary of the list of e* r 0e
4.1, _____ *	.	.	. i _ „+5onS. 1 j. o*
6 6
*. u, liib uown m unancery,	copJ .
the Franchise Act	of 1898,	section	10.	s*>_the changes or modifications made to , electoral list by a	judgment	rendered	jjoi_Rivers, on the 18th January, 1904, W 1 Judge Desmarais, erasing eighty-se*	,from that list ?	'„sitaff X2. On what date did the said deP°^r nio® the said list forward the said change Cb®w fleations to the Clerk of the Crown eery ?	aU*IJ51
Right Hon.   S@: 
RAILWAY FARES OF AGRICULT
Mr. HACKETT asked :: t0
1. Is the intention of the f=0V,eI'i1Jure, duce railway rates to a nominal 6 aeieg tj,o mit of free passes, for agricult wi(j:n of over public railways, in accord	nVeOti
resolution passed at the annual c the Prince Edward Island farnte [DOT]


APKIL 18, 1904 1361
[Stage Direction]
'What
'Blegat " *S t^le l°west existant rate paid by faref ,e? ^tending such conventions, and the Public [DOT] en formally engaged in promoting the traaie ,lnterests, and thus increasing railway
t'6ieS1l0l\I<5 not those gentlemen, giving their t0|llHtv i hrains to the advancement of the [DOT], he provided with free transportation ?
H- R. RMMERSON (Minister of thidp, Vs an<l Canals). I cannot very well to	whether this question relates
generally or merely to the gov-th6f]ent railway. I may say further that t>f !mtPuty minister informs me that no trace the a , Sl1cl1 resolution as that referred to in Uientquestion can be found in the departed [DOT] The second question relates to spe-(Ja'jtes on railways generally throughout l)artm' That information is not in the defree	The third question involves the
'Vaytr^nsportation on the government rail-btai °t all those who devote their time and
Oil:
to
the advancement of the country.
Coi),,„0"*nS stock might not be sufficient to '6y all of these.
0,rA.Nd
n,
trunk pacific railway.
°use
sm e resumed adjourned debate on the pro-?D«aW°tioil o£ Sir Wilfrid Laurier, ' That Mr. l° go in, 1,ow leave the Chair, for the House s°hition 0 c°mmittee to consider a certain re-JSfeej, e°ncerning the ratification of the 6 Gra between His Majesty the King and n	Trunk Pacific Railway Company,
a sea a 8th of March, 1904 ' ; and the pro-'tt,'6iUlmInen'iment of Mr. Borden (Halifax) in j. ment thereto.
}tr. '^ILLIAM J. ROCHE (Marquette). ^°Usef ,ker, the Bill which passed this tohtiper?r the construction of another trans-Mth	highway, which was heralded
gentlemen
®Pp08it C1 great, acclaim by hon. gi
e' as being the very acme of per-o	J a Bill that could scarcely be im
^'o\ n
?f vwuP°n, beneficial alike from the point
b	0f	_____j._____j	„___
h t°-(iri v°f B*e country and of the company, U0hspl o aeing subjected to criticism in this si,,™0nS its own friends. We have ipf 1Tloned to parliament, so we have B'hnk j?r?e(i by the president of the Grand aiIway- f°r the express purpose of 6lpg 8 that contract, th*e amendments all L,8 ft,Ul iculated to confer greater advanta-it>. hot greater benefits on that corporation, tp reats0llf °t them to further protect the of] °f Canada. When the opposition J ast session that it was the intention th liattieriferni.nent to force that Bill through ? lptrofl without consulting the country, hita^i ce<^ a series of resolutions which IMm ests- to turther safeguard Canadian of ch ^y.' , tn view of the vast expenditure Of ?ahadaS	incurred by the Dominion
tv *ts ie ,a'. the opposition in the performance tip Conf,,l5?te duties, endeavoured to make ho e bn a<?^ as Perfect as possible and to possible loophole that might sfl,' det).i,aavantage of by tlie company to htloj. , n't of the country. These rehowever
with, I think, but two
exceptions were rejected by the government and its followers on <the ground that they were not in the contract, that the company would not accept them and that parliament had either to accept or reject the contract as a whole. The hon. Minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick) and the hon. Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) in particular waxed indignant at the mere suggestion that this corporation might hot keep faith with the Canadian people. Could we imagine a body of men, said the Minister of the Interior, a body of reputable citizens standing so high in the financial world as these gentlemen who were seeking incorporation under this charter, to have so little regard for their standing and their integrity as to break faith with the parliament of Canada, and go back upon their solemn contract ? The idea in his opinion was preposterous and hut the phantom production of the imagination of the members of the opposition. But, Sir, notwithstanding this great faith on the part of the hon. Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) scarcely had the ink dried on the contract, not a bit of work had been done in pursuance of it, before we saw these reputable gentlemen going back on their contract and putting up not the deposit in cash or government securities required by the contract, but a deposit of Grand Trunk Railway bonds and this only after the time limit had expired. Thus we find these gentlemen right at the outset breaking their solemn contract and breaking it, not for the reason assigned by the Prime Minister that there was a stringency in the money market, for Mr. Hays very definitely stated that they could have had plenty of money, but merely as a matter of convenience to the company. So we In the opposition find ourselves justified in the position we took last year when we wanted to tie these gentlemen down to black and white, taking nothing for granted, no matter how upright they might be. When we find how lightly they have treated their written contract entered into with all the solemnity spoken of by the hon. gentlemen opposite, we feel perfectly justified in the position we took. The right hon. the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in dealing with this matter, this session profited by the criticisms administered to his speech of last year, avoided those mock heroics and that hysterical condition that played such havoc with his mental equilibrium last year. The mountains of information which he was supposed to lay before the House last year to furnish reasons for the construction of this line were found on careful perusal to contain very little practical information. It is true that this has been supplemented by the right hon. the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) lliis session by a quotation from a report made by a Jesuit missionary 200 years ago, wherein he had said that on a certain day in June, roses were in bloom and that they had no'night in that country. That was surely most modern Information on the
[Stage Direction]
strength of which to build a railway, and when the right hon. gentleman (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) has to employ such an argument to bolster up his opinion he can hardly continue to call himself a practical man. It is passing strange, Mr. Speaker, to observe the treatment that has been accorded by the right hon. the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) to the various gentlemen who have held the portfolio of Railways and Canals in this government.
The gentleman who occupied that position from 1896 to 1903, Mr. Blair, the only practical man in Canada so far as railways are concerned, the gentleman who knew more about railways than all the other members of the cabinet put together, the gentleman to whom the Prime Minister gives a certificate of character to-day as being the best railway expert in the Dominion of Canada- his information was lightly treated, and he himself was so cavalierly treated, that he was not even invited in when the negotiations that led up to this contract were undertaken. It is true that that gentleman was not slow in expressing his opinion of this contract when it was up for consideration last session. He denounced it in no measured language claimed that it was a mere wilful waste of public money, utterly unjustifiable, without a single redeeming; feature. After hearing that expression of opinion, after hearing that strong condemnation of this railway scheme, the Prime Minister valued that opinion so highly that be immediately said, in effect : Mr. Blair, your head is level, you are just the man I have been looking for. I have looked over Canada from one end to the other to find the most competent authority on railways, to find the very best railway expert. After hearing your expression of opinion and valuing it as highly as I do, I ask you to come up higher, to accept one of the best and most important railway positions in the Dominion of Canada, carrying with it emoluments, no small matter in itself, of §10,000 per annum. It is true that if your view were carried into effect it would save the country many millions of dollars, but inasmuch as your hands would be tied so far as this particular scheme is concerned and inasmuch as your silence would be secured for the next ten years, I think this would be a splendid move, looked at from a party standpoint, and would get a dangerous opponent out of our way. Please overlook those unkind criticisms that your erst-while Liberal friends have made on your conduct, those gentlemen who, when you were Minister of Railways and Canals, were servile supporters of every questionable scheme that has been put up by this government since 1896, lauded you as being one of the best Ministers of Railways and Canals Canada was ever blessed with ; but who, no sooner had you turned your guns upon this railway scheme of mine, immediately began to speak of you in violent language, to impute the worst of motives to you, stating that
Mr. W. J. ROCHE.: 
Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals).: The government have no persons employed on the eastern division of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway and, of course, the other information is not in the possession of the department.
So here we have the distinct declaration on the part of the minister that they have had no survey parties out on this eastern extension. The hon. member for Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee), also, on the 28th March, asked the following questions :
1.	Is the government aware that survey parties are at work along the route of the proposed Transcontinental Railway between Winnipeg and Quebec ?
2.	Are these parties employed by the government or by the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company ?
3.	If by the railway company, is there any understanding that the government will adopt the surveys, and pay the expenses incurred in making them ?
To which the following reply was made by the Minister of Railways and Canals ;
1.	The department is aware that survey parties are in the field north of North Bay and Port Arthur surveying branch lines to connect with the proposed Transcontinental Railway between Winnipeg and Quebec.
2.	These parties are employed by the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company.
Here is an admission that the only survey parties sent out are survey parties sent out by the company to survey branch lines and having no connection whatever with the main line. Again, on the same date the hon. member for Toronto (Mr. Kemp) asked the following questions :
1.	How many survey parties, if any, have been engaged upon the eastern division of the Transcontinental Railway ?
2.	By whom were such survey parties employed ?
3.	Upon which sections have such parties been working ?
The reply of the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals was as follows :
1.	Not in a position to say how many surveying parties, if any, are engaged upon the trunk line of the eastern division of the Transcontinental Railway ?
2.	If any are employed, cannot say by whom.
3.	Not aware that any such parties are working on the trunk line on the said section.
Here, we find on three or four different occasions the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals absolutely denying all knowledge, in fact, stating that the government have no parties out on the eastern extension. So, we have lost a whole year without anything having been done notwithstanding that last year we were told that time was so very


Mr. McCREARY.: How much government of Manitoba pay for the miles of railway that they secured irov* Northern Pacific Railway Company *


William James Roche: 
William Forsythe McCreary: How much dl.tj,erh
Manitoba government pay to the r
hoh;
iu.aiui.uua government pay to -Pacific for that 350 miles of road t
, mV hu"f


William James Roche: 
William James Roche: 
An hon. MEMBER.: They are delighted now all right


William James Roche: And the Minister
of Finance continued) to say :
But we are protecting the people against any such condition, because we are refusing the company the power to put a dollar's worth of that stock, on the market and sell it to any one. It is not negotiable, it cannot go in the stock market, it cannot be the subject of speculation; no innocent third party will be able to come and say : I paid in good faith 100 cents on the dollar for that stock and am entitled to get a dividend on what I paid. We have stipulated that the stock cannot be put on the market. It must remain in the hands of the Grand Trunk Railway during the term of this lease.
Can the Minister of Finance claim as much under the amended contract ? Why, the very danger that was there pointed out by the Minister of Finance last year is now a reality under this amended contract, and this stock can he speculated with ; and one of the avowed objects of the construction of this line, viz., the reduction of freight rates, will have been done away with, as the company will be morally obligated,


William James Roche: 
IU5V1SED EDITION COMMONS
[Stage Direction]
Now I never knew the lion, member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) whatever else he may have posed as in this House, to pose as a wag, but surely he is doing- so in this case in view of the fact that every member of the cabinet except the lion.
' Minister of Railways (Mr. Emmerson) who last year declared himself in favour of government ownership, on this occasion declared against government ownership while hon. gentlemen on this side approved of it. The hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) said :
The feeling in parliament in its favour is confined to a few members on the Liberal side, to wait until belief in government ownership had grown sufficiently to ensure the building of a transcontinental railway as a government work, would mean leaving the western country without a competing outlet, either east or west, too long for the good of either west or east. If we cannot get what we want, the next best thing is to get what we can, on the best terms we can. That being the case, I support the present arrangement.
The hon. gentleman's statement there of the policy of the opposition is directly opposite the facts. The policy of the opposition is in favour of government ownership, the policy of the government is opposed to it, and where is thejhon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver). That hon. gentleman (Mr. Oliver) has stated that he cannot support the amendment of the hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) because it means delay. If the hon. member had looked at the speech of the hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) at page 824 of ' Hansard ' he would have seen this declaration.
I say that the government itself should build
this road, it should build it promptly, not within seven or eight years, hut within a very much shorter time ; at least so far as that portion of it outside of the mountain section is concerned, and I say that it should build the mountain section as speedily as possible.
Another important advantage which would be secured to this country by adopting that policy is : that it will put to one side any future application by any other transcontinental railway for aid for a line from Edmonton to the Pacific coast. We will have another application before many years ; we will have it made on the basis upon which this aid is given to this company.
The government, building the line from Edmonton to the coast can give running powers, controlled by this country, to any other transcontinental railway-and let me say in passing lest I should forget it-that when I advocate the building by the government of this line into the Northwest of Canada, I should desire (o express my conviction that the government should by means of that national line, admit the Grand Trunk Railway of Canada into the Northwest ; but it should admit it. under such restrictions as will not permit our traffic to be carried to a foreign seaport.
Does that look like delay 7 Does that not condemn the government's policy on account of Its delay and urge the immediate con-
William James Roche: isL1
of entering into a discussion of the
J- ROCHE. Of course, Mr. j bere is a time and place for every-i';,i|ti0s6 Aa,n not here at this time for the
eSSed fU .	

~	VA. XTXU*.VWWW, 


Mr JOHN H. SINCLAIR (Guysboro).: The hon gentleman who has just sat down (Mr. Roche Marquette), in common with other hon. gentlemen opposite who have spoken in this debate, seems to be very much alarmed at the extent of the liability the government is undertaking in connection with this railway scheme. They have placed the amount at something like $150,000,000. Now I do not intend to discuss that question, because it has been very ably dealt with by other gentlemen who have preceded me in this debate. I consider, however, that their figures are very greatly exaggerated. I desire to point out that the liability this country is to incur in regard to this railway measure will only arise in the event of the Grand Trunk Pacific Company turning out to be a financial failure. If that company turns out to be successful like the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, it will not only pay working expenses and interest on the capital that will be invested, but it will also pay dividends to the shareholders who will invest their money in this scheme. If, I say, it turns out to be a scheme of that kind, then the liability of the country cannot arise at all. Now in order to ease the mind of the hon. gentleman who has preceded me, and of other hon. gentlemen who feel alarmed on this question, I wish to quote some authorities. I will quote from a source that they will not feel at liberty to question. The source I refer to is that of the leader of the opposition, in the speech he delivered on this question. I did not have the pleasure of hearing that speech, as I had not then the honour of a seat in this House. But I have given myself the pleasure of reading that speech, and I find that the leader of the opposition calls a number of witnesses to prove that the Grand Trunk Pacific Company has excellent financial prospects, and that it is likely to turn out to be a very successful venture, not only for the country but for the shareholders. These are the words the hon. leader of the opposition puts into the mouth of Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson :
Passing as It will do through the most fertile and promising belt of country in the whole of the Northwest Territories, there cannot he the slightest doubt that this portion of the road, built, as I have said, under such favourable and economical conditions, will immediately produce excellent results, and will itself more than justify the adoption of the scheme in its entirety.
Further on he quotes Sir Charles as saying :
As regards the prairie section, the govern ment, not unfairly, held that it would he selfsustaining from the day of its completion, and in this view we are willing to concur.
Then we have a quotation from Lord Welby :

With the rapid settlement of the country, which will fellow the establishment of the line within a very few years, it will be a very profitable line.
Then we have an opinion from Mr. Hays :
Here is the Grand Trunk, the parent company, standing with a large traffic ready to deliver it west bound. This traffic is now given to a competitor. It does not have to wait five, ten or fifteen years to build up a traffic ; it starts with a traffic right from the beginning, and that is of a most remunerative character. This enterprise which we are advocating to-day, ladies and gentlemen, combines points and advantages that no other transcontinental line in the United States or Canada can have.
Now, Sir, these gentlemen, from whom the leader of the opposition quoted, are railway experts, they are men of very large experience in the management of Canadian railways, they have made a special study of the question for the purpose of embarking their own capital in the venture ; and it is especially gratifying to hon. members on this side of the House to have this point made so clear on such high authority as that of the hon. leader of the opposition. I do not think that the hon. leader of the opposition could have intended to make this point so clear to the House. He reminds me of an old Bible story. A prophet who climbed the mountain side and stretched forth his hand to curse the children of Israel. But instead of cursing them, ' behold he blessed them altogether.' He did not want to bless them, he wanted to curse them, but somehow when it came to the point he couldn't do it. Now we on this side of the House are especially grateful to the leader of the opposition for having made this point so clear. It completely relieves our minds of all anxiety in regard to our liabilities under this contract, in regard to the payment of interest on the bonds, in regard to the mortgage on the rolling stock, in regard to the receiver, and all these other bogeys with which hon. gentlemen opposite have endeavoured to frighten us in this debate. This measure, Sir, whatever may be said about it by bon. gentlemen opposite, is an attempt to do two things : To open up for settlement a very large section of country, some 3,000 miles of new Canadian territory, and to divert the trade of the west into Canadian channels and by way of Canadian ports. Now we all agree that this scheme will accomplish the first of these objects. It is admitted to be one of the greatest colonization schemes that was ever proposed in Canada ; and I submit, without going to the trouble to prove it, that it will also accomplish the second object better than any other scheme that is now available to the people of Canada.
I confess to a feeling of disappointment at the attitude of the Conservative press and leading members of the Conservative party in this House with regard to this measure. There were moderate Canadians of


John Howard Sinclair: Railway, that it will build it up and make it a more profitable road than ever it was before. Hon. gentlemen opposite, must not think that the Intercolonial Railway consists of the section between Moncton and Quebec. That is only an insignificant part of the Intercolonial Railway. The government railways of Canada are 1,571 miles in length. Suppose we take off that part of the government railway which is in Prince Edward Island, 211 miles in length, which will not be affected so much by this ' culture. That leaves a mileage for the Intercolonial Railway of 1,360 miles. What part of that will come into competition with the railway that is proposed to be built ? The only part that can compete with the Intercolonial Railway is the section between Moncton and Quebec. The section of the Intercolonial Railway between Moncton and Quebec is 488 miles long. (You still have 872 miles of the Intercolonial Railway that will be immensely benefited by the construction of the new road, because it will receive an enormous amount of traffic from the new road. Every passenger that the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway will carry from the west will also be delivered over the Intercolonial Railway at Moncton Every pound of freight that it will carry from the west will also be delivered over to the Intercolonial at Moncton, and this will swell the receipts of the Intercolonial Railway upon its eastern section.
Railway experts say, that it is an accepted doctrine in railway operation, that it is the local traffic which pays best; and that if a ^way does not have local traffic it is difficult to make it a paying venture at all. rsow, Sir, we do not take away anv of the local traffic of the Intercolonial Railway by the project we propose. Any local traffic that exists on this 1,360 miles of railway would still remain. The local traffic that exists on this 488 miles between Moncton and Quebec will remain as it is at present. We do not take that away. And wliat do we take away ? The only two points where competition will arise at all are at Moncton and Quebec, but the traffic originating at Moncton and Quebec would be completed for by both lines as at present and the return derived from that traffic is a very insignificant part of the profits of the Intercolonial Railway. On the other hand the new tianscontinental railway will hand over to the Intercolonial Railway an immense amount of traffic that it does not now receive, so that any injury that could possibly be done to the 488 miles between Moncton and Quebec, will be more than compensated for by what the Intercolonial Railway will receive from the construction of the new line.
lion, gentlemen opposite seem to have the impression that because less is said this year than last year about the bonding privilege, that it is not considered important on this side of the House. That is a mis-


John Howard Sinclair: 
Mr. R. A. PRINGLE (Cornwall and mont).: 
Robert Abercrombie Pringle: 
IS, 1904
[Stage Direction]
kaye fl^'000,000 worth of woollen products to y, , n imported into this country, owing to tlipi0.rer!ng of tbe tariff on these goods,
-	OPtT'lTnnnf n tirl dnn4nim4{n^>
Of
iv00]i detriment and destruction __ .... there w5?dustl'y of tbis country. However Can be another occasion on which we Tile ,°Uss that matter.
fecrre,j °n' Sentieman (Mr. Sinclair) has re-«ge. r ^the bugaboo of the bonding privi-Varq tbought that that was dead. We !'ot a w!°?d d.eal abollt it last session, but *'aa °£u this session. Last session we Voiles ! ^irst Minister making an impas-*)dvilee-i>eecl1 011 tbe clanger of the bonding Pe°ple , beinS abrogated, but when the they ,,pSa^ the question in its proper light, hee'n d,, zed what a ridiculous bogey had ret on bet°re them, and lion, gentle-26 thi?°?ite apparently have come to real-ahy fu ' f°r they carefully refrain from
i 1 it ri r a'insion to the subject and have tenur~-
'V f01,Q^°P out of sight. T c?Ptior, b«ysborough (Mr. -Sin.
* 1, FTr\ Ln *	

l__ ji j
who
he lion, mem,

Sinclair) is an exi Uce lie i 6 bas ventured to revive it, and i g I'efe,, "as done so>
let me give it a pass-a%aaE.lence- 1 sbaI] simply quote from the thspose 6 °t an eminent American, s of it in these words :
J- Cana, na-s bound the transportation system tiaterWava Witb that of the United States. The ^hent j«y extending into the heart of the con-nari diDconimon to both countries. The south-W Provi tbe boundary allows a portion of k. h thP nce o£ Ontario to project far south, a eeh Miio,e-sub' tba*- £he most direct line beth °Ss n*t ?n and northern New York runs jvji the ntari0- Further north it is found north,1008*- direct communication between til^ay Western states and New England is pjutory feault Ste. Marie and across Canadian
|0;lUon Tbe Canadian territory occupies a lake ° „advantage with regard to combina-, lying n<* rail lines- In the portion of Can-lhaul'SGdS T^st of Montreal the conditions are *>>« the northern trend of the boundaries tV0111® d Canadian railway system dependent Sri, 1'0rthpfrfe °n the United States territory. °t pstvick fStern P°rtion of Maine divides New bhitea Irom Quebec by an intervening neck ^llfi "tates territory.
t})?'*08*-, direct line between Montreal tv, sWt ?.r,time province ports is of course
h.V thrft, IJe of the Canadian Pacific Rail-Vs	Maine. When this question
in, ** do1 diseussion in the United States,
Vd6 u° tvQ «„.i p	
[Stage Direction]
We find ? Tiie contention was
f]	fl
tal Carinsi Grand Trunk Railway and tTo aHv n-w1 Pacific Railway occupied a tV® tlm "Il1Cei'ent position. In a great detV ^hieri ,raud Trunk Railway is part of V ^tter [DOT] n transportation system, while ''In In foS a lnucb more independent sys-tjj** tlie etat entirely a Canadian system
. % r '^hine. This writer says :
NNi^lal Interests of the eastern states t both wi*-b the retention of the bonding % t Mid th as regards the domestic transit 6:ilstonPpe foroien transit trade. Through '	°£ the Grand Trunk, Massachusetts and Boston, which would otherwise have been helpless, were insured the benefit of natural geographical advantages of the position.
I am quoting from the report of the Massachusetts Board of Railway Commissioners, from which I shall make one other quotation :
The Grand Trunk has had a great deal to do
with making Boston a competiting point	
Before Canadian lines were established it was practically impossible for shippers of Boston to obtain through rates from western points.
I might go on and give many quotations from leading authorities in the United States, such as the Portland Board of Trade, the Committee of Transportation Interests, the Chicago Board of Trade and several responsible bodies in Canada and the western states, all to the effect that the United States could not afford to interfere in any way with the bonding privileges as they now exist between the two countries. For instance, the Portland Board of Trade says :
The interest of Maine in the maintenance of the bonding system is equally great. When the system was threatened in 1888 the Portland Board of Trade addressed their remonstrance to Congress.
Regarding Detroit, the Board of Trade declares :
The interest of Detroit in the maintenance of the system is similar. The abrogation of the bonding system would impose upon the citizens of Michigan a burden destructive of their material interests.
That is from evidence taken before the Committee on Transportation. Let me also quote from the statement of, Mr. G. F. Stone, secretary of the Chicago Board of Trade :	.
It would also be. disastrous to the interests of the railroad systems of Michigan to interfere with the bonding system. The Canadian roads have protected Chicago's interests. The competition has caused the American roads to discontinue the unjust arbitraries charged by them on shipments to Now England points.
The ' Journal of Political Economy ' has this to say on the subject:
The bonding system rests, not upon sentiment or one-sided favour but upon common interest. It is absolutely necessary to both nations.
I shall not detain the House longer by reference to this bugaboo of the abrogation of the bonding privileges.
My lion, friend said the policy of the opposition would have the effect of connecting the Grand Trunk Pacific at North Bay with the Grand Trunk Railway system as it now stands, and would divert the traffic of the west to the Grand Trunk Railway terminal at Portland. I cannot understand how the lion, gentleman could make any such statement. If he had said that the effect of the amended agreement would be to can-
[Stage Direction]
nect tlie Grand Trunk Pacific at North Bay with the Grand Trunk Railway, and in that way divert the trade of this country to the American port of Portland, he would have said what was absolutely true. But * in making the other statement, he has committed himself to something absolutely improbable. I cannot imagine for a moment how he could construe the policy of the opposition as one which would in any way divert Canadian traffic to Portland. It seems to me that lion, gentleman is not taking that interest in the welfare of his native province which he should. Let me refer him to the Canadian Year-book of 1902, in which he will find that a large quantity of our exports and imports went through American channels and that our ports of St. John and Halifax were being deprived of that traffic to which they are entitled, and which we desire them to have. If he will look at page 294 of the Year-hook of 1902, he will find that there was imported into Canada from the motherland and sister colonies, through United States ports, goods to' the value of $13,415,052, and from foreign countries $8,898,699, making a total of $22,313,751. He will find also that there was exported to the motherland and sister colonies, through United States ports, $44,860,785 worth of goods, and to foreign countries $3,332,065, making a total of $48,192,850, the grand total being $70,506,601, representing 17 per cent of the whole export and import business of Canada which passed through United States ports.
Now that is a state of affairs which we on the opposition side of the House would like to see corrected. We would like to see that 17 per cent going through Canadian ports. We have in the lower provinces, Halifax and St, John, both grand ocean ports, and we have also our ports of Montreal and Quebec. I contend that the policy of the opposition of extending the Intercolonial Railway from Montreal to Parry Sound will, in a large measure, if not altogether, bring these products to the ports of the lower provinces during the winter months, and to Montreal and Quebec in summer.
We had a speech the other day from the bon. member for South Essex (Mr. Cowan).
I do not wish to follow his example and say anything unkind of any member on the opposite side of the House, but the hon. member devoted a great deal of his time to that part of the policy of the hon. the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) which deals with the extension of the Intercolonial to Parry Sound and- then the acquiring of running rights over a portion of the Canadian Pacific Railway to the west. He opposed that on the ground that the Canadian Pacific Railway wanted to sell that portion of their road to the government at a large price and then to build a line connecting with their Soo road. The argument was rather a weak one be-Mr. PRINGLE.
o i'6
cause if the Canadian Pacific Railway now operating that section of their i' would it not be more in their interes ^ other roads were also using it, so ttiat g{ stead of having to pay the whole cost ,t maintenance they would pay only a V j of it ? But the hon. gentleman (Mr. LOv wants to do what ? To build another of railway; through that very c0,nttS And how does he describe the c°nfmt north of Lake Superior? He says ^ there is not a dollar's worth of local ^ that the company will ever draw North Bay to Port William. He say® ' {
One eloquent writer described this sec£j°dare the country as the one over which a ot° not take flight without carrying a Ku v ^ because there is not enough in it to tee in his passage.	.	^
And yet the hon. gentleman wa® ® 0i build another road through that sectinfi'id country. The Prime Minister (Sir M* 0( Laurier) has told us that this seemly
1 te°'
cujlu. us iiicli mis
the country is an uninhabited and a (
habitable land. That is the very e? tpat tion of the opposition. We say that i cill
	 *" "%£
har.
have
e%PeD^iie>>
portion of the country there is n.° js traffic, that it "s uninhabited that it ^tithe language of the Prime Minister " j0ur ly habitable land. Why then '* or five railways built at the .	„„,
this country through that section^oUjd they are entirely unnecessary [DOT]	0pp°'
not the scheme of the leader of v,ettel; sition (Mr. R. L. Borden) be far tuaj that running rates be secured throu section ot the country and that tn®
Trunk Railway, the Intercolonial tlie Canadian Northern and the v*
Pacific Railway all use that section and bear an equal portion of 'e of its maintenance ? It seems to that scheme is a very much better more in the interests of this country tU ; been said I do not wish H a word detrimental to our coum^' tpL speaking the other day to a gentle g to had been through that district i gupel that the country north of '®.fttuer
was *otA*?
A great deal has northern' country,
is absolutely no good. I tonished to hear that and I ing this as my own opinion there may be here and there
good country. _ _______
He said : Well, it is largely "''oSg, l"0f you will find 12 to 15 inches ot cQllp\e you will find a layer of clay 1	. ,V)
Inches thick and- then ice.	;n [DOT]*' "
I said : You don't find ice to - e
d0 y°u ?	* „ there
He said : You will find ice re t year round, and it has been	gp
time immemorial.	T iool'e<Ley
I thought that peculiar and S'Mpy, the reference in the report °n ltario, Nnr and Exploration of Northern . ,ve Ass printed by order of the Legis

bly
°ui- w 0lltai'io-Liberal file:

Tenee :
In this report issued by friends in Ontario, I found this
tr°ta fic<;	I

In general, the land back
the j ltle rivers is low-lying and marshy, and tratio lpervi°us nature of the soil prevents fil-Wh(„hu and promotes the growth of moss, with °t tjj, much of the land is covered. The effect DoratjS is to absorb moisture and retard eva-thr0y "n and also to preserve the winter ice *n the summer season.
tvw's.gentleman was evidently telling me stay, absolutely correct, that the ice an/; Ibei'e both winter and summer. I you n°£ an agriculturist and I cannot tell lautl Whether that would be good farming istg t°1' not' but those who are agricultur-Us6] te/ me that it would be absolutely Ilie /S' Yet that is the country in which
lid
8on.
uons f' *'entlemen are going to spend mil-Sir u-1'.the purpose of colonization, for, bej'n i is idle in this day to talk of this road
~ mic 111 Llllts Utiy L(J LcLllV U1 Lllln lUcltl
built through that country for the w°se of	~	'
>
the seaports of the east.
^est"to carrying the products of the
the ,'lurinS this debate an admission from 9o Du°n- the Minister of the Interior that Ml) „ eent of the products of the wgst ibei, 80 out from that country in the sum-I'OQtoi^htbs and will go by the water cow' But if we had not this admission gi'aj,. °h sense would teach us that when Qw eau be taken from Port Arthur to >tb(l e at from 3 to 3J cents per bushel itollt,rnn°t be hauled from Port Arthur to tviii Ieal at 15 cents a bushel the grain best 'f0 cJown the water route. But the to Se "'itication of what will happen is W "hi* way the grain is going now. thro'I tlle season of 1902, there passed sho\Vjj, . the Soo canal 76,730,695 bushels, I'Sing that almost all the grain which v8t tho ni tbe west to the east came down [DOT]he that"'-a^er route- One railway man told hossn.f,. *t is a physical and absolute im-
*et;
oitteff witb water route, uc	a uevi
oai.s, train from Port Arthur with fih(l a' holding say 27,000 bushels of wheat, M0,hiuo. * started it I have seen a vessel ? clock' lnto Poi't Arthur harbour at eight lulled aa(t leaving again at 12.30 o'clock v/ti'rv Av'th 140,000 bushels of grain, for 7«try s,0Uncl, and that vessel would be at t Whit°Und before my train would be haU] e Over. I asked him what it cost / or / train say to Carleton Placed, over of „Ven divisions ? He said that the f0l. °a* was .1>240, the cost of the crew hai,|. ea<1'h division, and the total cost
to haul grain by rail in com-He said: I have
[Stage Direction]
fO forCOal was ?240, the cost of the crew aL'3aUH„eacb division, and the total cost 1 f that grain was three times the 'h'bhr tcbai'ged for hauling it from Port wejefor T^uebec by the water route
[Stage Direction]
rt. titUg t * °ay n. is luie anu a mere waste 0 discuss the question of the pro-I'boa,.., ,be west being carried to the 8nq «< the all-rail route. But, Sir, Ttlls, and it has been proved, that
say it is idle and a mere waste
where you can combine the rail and water route then there is an advantage. We find that grain to-day is taken to Parry Sound and from Parry Sound on the Canada Atlantic Railway down to Montreal, at a comparatively low rate, but still not quite as low as that by the water route.
Now, the hon. gentleman for Guys-borough (Mr. Sinclair) referred to statements made by Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson W show that this enterprise would be a profitable enterprise. Those statements I have looked at, and they certainly do show that it would he a profitable enterprise . But profitable to whom ? Not profitable for the people of Canada, blit profitable for the Grand Trunk Railway Company. Let me refer to one on two things said by the president of the Grand Trunk Railway Company :
It is calculated that the present uninhabited area of the province of Manitoba and of the territories of Assiniboia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Athabasca, amounts to nearly 300 millions of acres, the greater portion of which is excellent farming land, and that the unoccupied portion of British Columbia amounts to some 200 millions acres, much of which is also suitable for farming and grazing. There is no time to be lost if we are to avail ourselves of the great opportunities presented. Prosperity is flowing rapidly from the east to the west outside and beyond the territory covered by the Grand Trunk. Thus surrounded on all sides by elements of progress, it is absolutely impossible for our company to stand still. We must either continue t*o advance or we must recede and yield the offered advantages to more enterprising and far-seeing competitors.
I quite agree with every word that the president of the Grand Trunk Company has said. We have a great country, we have a country which, from the moment the first wheel turns on this new road, will make that road a profitable one. For that reason I do not see why the people of Canada should be called upon to pay for the railroad and then hand it over to the Grand Trunk Railway Company. We also have the statement of Mr. Hays in regard to the possibilities of that country. But Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson in referring to the contract which they are entering into with this government, says :
The result therefore of the agreement was a combination of these two interests for the construction of the proposed road, which would thus be carried out, as I have said, by means of a partnership between the government and the Grand Trunk Pacific, supported as that company would be by the influence and connections of the Grand Trunk Company.
Well, Sir, I am opposed in the first place to entering into a partnership with any of these large corporations. But if we ate going to enter into such partnership, why do we pay nine-tenths of the expense of that road, the Grand Trunk Railway Company only paying one-tenth and then taking over the road practically as then- own l
[Stage Direction]
I was looking at a little pamphlet which has been sent all through the western country with the frank or the hon. the Minister of the Interior. This was sent out just about when it was understood this government was going to. the country last winter, and before the 12th day of January when they got rather panic-stricken over the hitch in the Grand Trunk Pacific proceedings and decided, instead of going to the country, to call on the session which Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson wanted called on for the purpose of completing this agreement. In this little pamphlet I find the following :
The feature of the bargain in regard to which most of this is done, is the financial arrangement.
I should think so.
It is an actual fact, an indisputable fact, that $13,000,000 will cover every cent of the country's expenditure in connection with the railway.
jS'ow, Sir, this is the pamphlet which these hon. gentlemen sept forth to the electors of this country, and when we have the election on, speakers will be going up and down the side lines and telling the people of this country :	Why, here is a
road for $13,000,000. Evidently they have made a mistake. What they should say is this :	We are building ;a great road
from the Atlantic to the Pacific and we are giving it to the* Grand Trunk Pacific Company for $13,000,000. It is true it will cost us $150,000,000 to? $170,000,000, but we are making it a present to them, we are handing it over to them for $13,000,000-although they try to make the people believe it is going to be a transcontinental line, all it is going to cost is $13,000,000.
I see sitting before me the hon. the Minister of Finance, and I would like him to say whether the statement that this road is going to be built for $13,000,000 is true or not. He has already told us that this road will cost $70,000,000 or $80,000,000, yet this pamphlet is sent broadcast throughout the country stating that it is only going to cost us $13,000,000.	1 say it is a
ridiculous statement, and one that should not be circulated. Then the pamphlet goes or to say :
As the premier said in the Commons, there are mountains of information available' about this country.
(We would like to see these mountains of information. I have been here since parliament opened, and I have heard no information whatever in regard to that country except the statement which was casually made by the Prime Minister in regard to this trip taken, I think by some gentleman^ who started from Tadousac and went up the Saguenay river and continued on ip that direction, and they told us something about roses being found up in that
Robert Abercrombie Pringle: 
Robert Abercrombie Pringle: Mr. Speaker, when the House rose at 6 o'clock, I was dealing with' the manifesto or memorandum of the 'exMinister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Blair) addressed to the cabinet council in the fall of 1902. I do not intend to quote at any very great length from that memorandum, as it is now published in ' Hansard,' and has also been very thoroughly circulated throughout the country. But let me say, Sir, that the memorandum is important in this respect; that it points to a continuation of the policy which was adopted by this government in extending the Intercolonial Railway system to Montreal. We find from the memorandum that Mr. Blair proposed to continue the work of improving the Intercolonial Railway by extending it to the Georgian Bay, so that the government railway might share in the growing grain trade and carry western business to Canadian seaports. That was the policy of the Liberal government until the month of June or the month of July, 1903. On January 22, 1897, the Prime Minister addressed a public meeting in Montreal, and he pointed to the Canada Atlantic line and he said :
The Canada Atlantic Railway extending from Parry Sound to Ottawa, is a road that would bring down to Canadian ports the greater part of the grain of the Canadian Northwest, and of the American northwest as well.
There, we have Sir Wilfrid Laurier in 1897, practically endorsing the scheme proposed by the leader of the opposition, and what he and his government and his supporters are now opposing. We also have the utterance of the Hon. Mr. Blair, then a minister, made in the hearing of the Finance Minister and in which Mr. Blair advocated the extension of the Intercolonial Railway to the Georgian Bay and ultimately its extension to the Pacific coast. That speech was delivered by Mr. Blair on, March 22, 1899, at a banquet given to the Hon. Mr. Fielding at New Glasgow, N.S. Mr. Blair there) expounded the government programme. He pointed out that the Intercolonial Railway had reached Montreal and he said :
It appears to be in entire accord with the national idea to furnish a highway to the sea, for our products all over the Canadian west, and at all seasons of the year to avail ourselves of the Intercolonial Railway.
There are a number of prominent Liberals, and among them members of the present government who are in favour of the very scheme which has been propounded by the leader of the opposition. I feel like apologizing to the House for continuing my remarks at any length, hut, Sir, when

I know that this scheme is going to involve the country in an expenditure of from $150,000,000 to $170,000,000 ; when I know that the constituency which I have the honour to represent will have to bear its share of that burden to the extent of some $800,000 ; I feel that it is my duty to my constituency and to my country to oppose in every possible way a scheme which will place such an enormous burden upon the people of Canada.
We have had some strong speeches in this House ; we have had the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) get up here and in the strongest possible terms advocate this scheme. Why, Sir, he pounded his desk and he said : If there are any weak-kneed Liberals we want them to understand that the Liberal party stakes its political existence upon this scheme. Well, are there any weak-kneed Liberals V


Some hon. MEMBERS: No.


Robert Abercrombie Pringle: There are none; are there not ?


Mr. LANG.: No.


Robert Abercrombie Pringle: Was the ex-Minister ot Railways and Canals, a Liberal; is the present Minister of Railways and Canals a Liberal ?


Mr. ALEX. JOHNSTON.: You bet your life.	i


Robert Abercrombie Pringle: Are any of the electors of East Lambton, and East Bruce and St. John city who voted for the Conservative candidate in the by-elections ; are any of them Liberals V I know very well that some of the men whom the hon. member from South Essex (Mr. Cowan) was so loudly applauding because he thought they had been attacked ; I know that these men art not weak-kneed on this scheme. We learned from the ex-Minister of Railways and Canals nearly a year ago : that Cox can't wait. He and his friends are not weak-kneed Liberals. The men who today, if you go to the Department of the Interior, have located all the timber limits west of Winnipeg; the men who are friends of the hon. Minister of the Interior ; they are not weak-kneed Liberals, they are ready to have the road go on. The men who will form a construction company to build this road from Winnipeg; they are wot weak-kneed /Liberals ; they: are ready to have the scheme go on. The very men that the ex-Minister of Railways (Mr. Blair) warned his colleagues about; they are not weak-kneed Liberals ; they are ready to have the scheme go on. But how about the agriculturists of this country ; how about the ratepayers of Canada who are going to bear the burden for these men who will form the construction company 1 They may be a little weak in the knees; they may say the day has come


Robert Abercrombie Pringle: 140S
my hon. friend the leader of the opposition. We are advocating a scheme which will bind together still more closely all the different provinces. We are advocating a scheme whch will enable the Intercolonial Railway to make the seaports of Canada those through which the products of this country will naturally flow. The scheme advocated by the leader of the opposition K one which will send Canadian products through Canadian seaports, whereas that of hon. gentlemen opposite is one which will enable the Grand Trunk Railway to carry those products to the American port of Portland. Go to the city of Toronto to-day and ask for a rate on flour, for instance, which is one of our staple exports, via Portland, St. John or Halifax, and the Grand Trunk Railway will give you a rate from two to three cents higher by a Canadian port than by an American port. They favour Portland to-day, and they will always favour that harbour where they have from $20,000,000 to $25,000,000 invested in terminals.
There is another great interest to be considered, the agricultural interest. In what way would that interest benefit if we had a government line from the Atlantic to the Pacific ? Take the position as it is to-day. I do not care whether you have one, two, three, or even five transcontinental lines', the same thing will occur here which has taken place in the United States. The r; ilway companies will fix their rates so as to enable them to pay interest and dividends, not upon the money which went into the construction of their roads, but upon their capital stock, and the only way we can control and regulate these rates is t" build a national highway from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Let me give you some figures ito show the money earned by the railways of this country.' In 1902 I find that on a capital of over $900,000,-ORO, which includes watered stock, the railways of this country earned 5'72 per cent. In order that I may make no mistake, let me give the exact figures from the government returns. The net earnings of railways in Canada for the year 1902 were ?72 Per cent. In (1901 they were 5-31 ; m 1900, 5-62; and in 1899, 5-76. That is upon the capital shares and preferential stock and bonded debt, but if you take simply what it costs to construct these roads, tne net earnings during last year amounted to from 10 to 12 per cent on the actual money spent in construction. I only quote this ns an evidence to show that the Intercolonial Railway extended to Georgian Bay and thence into the Northwest could earn good interest on the money invested and gjive to the people lower freight hate's than they have ever had. This would be a great boon to our farmers. Why, Sir, the people of the province of Ontario have lost millions of dollars through having been charged higher rates than are charged


Robert Abercrombie Pringle: 
POLICIES.
[Stage Direction]
'J'he ,y
!eSar<i'f°v"rnment an'f opposition policies, in l al lii° building ol a second transeontin-** 0ur ~e through Canada, are fairly outlined the ®arliamentary summary. to,Bne iLVerillhent, in brief, is pledged to build lck to **T.aKway from Moncton in New Bruns-

Win
Tb
mpeg jn Manitoba at the public exc exteii<l Graud Trunk, on its part, agrees a ast, me line from Winnipeg to the Pacific
fcv.tee tbs ®ovornment agreeing again to guar-tf1,eUsiQ, "0nds of the prairie section of this Of6 baeitic „ (?<a extent of $13,000 per mile and
lj Ihe Co® seetion to the extent of 75 per cent W- *® to be whatever that may be. The whole
Mu11'- 'kUe operate(i>
when built, by the Grand receiv the flrst teu years the government Id411 Which * u.° rental tor the portion of the jr fears . 1<;'s t0 build, and for the remaining °8®s T Very low rental. The opposition to >
^Oftctn an aIternative policy, to abandon "av iI<1, as1 to Winnipeg project altogether ; 'an ia the a uational work, such lines of rail-6ia' tor * .. ?'est as the necessities of the case Oh? Bav 0°,extend the Intercolonial to Geor-
ST Wat aud thov,„o	wi - ,*

 .- .[DOT]
[Stage Direction]
tllence to Winnipeg; to improve ij? Winn- ' and explore the country be-a toLii].., Ipe.® and Quebec, with a view to
l«r atUre . u wueuec, wnn a view t< Th9,8 the rai'way construction in that quar-Sov„ oritbi cess*ties °f the case may call for. Ihc^Ofiiem s® which Mr. Borden offered of the %h?eot n* p an was rather too sweeping, and
(li*.. I if	^ Wllat In 0*11*1 llTno I- V* 1 i « wind* r	Vi
A'tteVi4 °ther*lat he said was thus made weaker ^ reatiat gWise would have been. He, did not ^st®°vernm sufficient clearness between
oi".6rh _ ®nt s	m regar(j t0 ^be
respectively-the
%l?rn and s obligations in regard to the tion .tion toWestern sections respectively-the lhe 'a the sPend its own money in constructs. hlr>„. C One nnac „ „ ,1 ..1..		 „
%
i JtiaJl'°bCy i?110 case and merely to guar; Svisbctio,, ?rr°wed by the Grand Trunl for i,ln the other
antee unit for
g-c -or an ..-	But, even after als aSrtVernino, *. is there can be no doubt that t&i., d Th,.. . ht s nartnerfihin Rr*h«mo raiih
^ib? Trunt0?1 s Partnership scheme with the fCilb. Which h*S 0116 ot tlie most one-sided bar. 'k-al'] y Wher as ever been proposed, even in a s tc I win ,rall'vays always play a game of Foa* bmid 'taKs you lose.' The government °th 7 half ,a cost of least $118,000,000, the i? tost ,, the whole road (the greater half per mile and length of line), and
is to guarantee to the extent of 75 per cent the bonds required to provide the money for building the other half. In return the country gets nothing save such benefit as will come from the building of a second transcontinental line. It will not become owner of the whole road even in case of default by the company, and it will have no greater control over the rates than it has, in the general law, over all roads. If the government is to assume all the cost of public ownership so-far as half the line is concerned, and three-quarters of that risk in the other half, it might better go the whole length, and build and operate the entire road, and thus secure for the people of Canada a transportation service at actual cost.
But there is no reason why the whole road should be built-at least just yet. Concerning the great stretch of country between Quebec and Winnipeg, Sir Wilfrid Laurier says he has ' mountains of information,' but it was an exceeding small hill he placed before the House. He told what a Jesuit missionary reported of the character of the country 200 years ago. That story is interesting, but it hardly affords a sufficient basis on which to spend $118,000,000 of public money. The time probably wil come when all the hinterland of Quebec and Ontario will be required to support our population ; but that time is not yet. The policy of to-day is to provide for the people of to-day ; to consolidate where development has already begun, rather than spread out over a vast area we are not yet in a position to effectively occupy. Looking at the matter in this light, as we think most reasonable men will, the proposal to leave the Winnipeg to Moncton line in abeyance, to extend the Intercolonial to Georgian Bay and thence to Winnipeg, meantime pushing the Winnipeg extension westward seems the wiser plan of the two now before the country. This plan would utilize Georgian Bay and Lake Superior-and it is over this magnificent water stretch the great bulk of western grain must be moved ; it would give us a second completed line from sea to sea at not more than the cost of building the Moncton to Winnipeg line, and it would give us public ownership of an all-across-Canada line-the only really effective means by which transportation charges can be controlled.
I admit frankly that the Intercolonial Railway has been badly managed by the hon. gentlemen. There is no question about that, and we have heard the hon. member for Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair) tell us how badly it has been managed. But, notwithstanding all that, they made a profit last year of $130,000, leaving out the Prince Edward Island Railway, on which they made a small loss of some $72,160. Their percentage of expenses to earnings was a little high, 09-02 ; but under proper management-and there is no reason why it should not be managed, if we had a transcontinental government line, bv a commission, just as they are managing the Australian system of railways. There is no reason why the road should not be a great success and a great advantage to the people of Canada. We find Canadians going to other colonies and making a great success of railroads ; we find a Canadian at the head of a large system of railways in South Africa ; we find
[Stage Direction]


a Canadian, Mr. Tait, in Australia, and wo have Canadians in our country who could manage our roads and make them a success.
I take very strong objection to the company having the revenue producing part of this line and the country having the nonproductive section. I feel, as the ex-Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Blair) has stated, that the government are acting altogether too hastily in pushing 'the eastern section through an unsurveyed and unexplored district of country of which we know very little. There may be parts of it, and I hope there are, that wili turn out to be valuable country for agricultural purposes, bui we have millions of acres of land awaiting settlement that have never been, as X may express it, tickled by the plough. Let those lands be filled up before we consider-the advisability of building another line into that northern country for colonization purposes. The hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Wm. Roche) has dealt very fully with the weaknesses in the amended contract, tie has emphasized the fact that although the government advances practically all the money for tiie construction of that western road, they are powerless to foreclose their mortgage. The company may be in arrears for five years before anything can he done, and after that the government cannot foreclose, but the road passes into the hands of a commission, who operate it practically for the Grand Trunk Railway Company, and hand it back as soon as they have earned the fixed charges. I feel that there is nothing to prevent the company's western traffic going to American ports, and it is certainly decidedly in the interests of the Grand Trunk Railway that it should go to American ports. The hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. Clancy! lias pointed out that there is a difference of only 18 miles between the distance from Quebec to Portland and from Montreal to 1 ortland. What is to prevent the Grand Trunk Pacific from taking Canadian products from Quebec to Portland ? The 18 miles is only a trifle, it is a much shorter haul than to St. John or to the Canadian ports, and all they are bound to do is to give the same rate through Canadian ports ns they would give through American ports.
Now, Sir. Speaker, I am very strongly opposed to this scheme, and will have to vote against the resolution introduced by the hon. Prime Minister. Our aim, the aim of the Conservative party, is to make this Dominion of Canada compact, strong and prosperous, and I believe that aim will be carried out much better by the scheme proposed by the leader of the opposition than by the scheme proposed by the government.
Mr. RALPH SMITH (Vancouver).: Mr. Speaker, I had not an opportunity last session when this question was being debated in this House, of giving an opinion upon it. At the present time, after it 113s


Robert Abercrombie Pringle: 
question as a result of the policy that the Conservative party pursued in bringing Chinese to British Columbia by the thousands for the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway that they are naturally apprehensive. They have learned such a lesson that they do not want to have to deal with tlie difficulty of a second Oriental invasion in that province. The one great influence that brought this undesirable class of people to British Columbia was the construction of the British Columbia section of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Oriental labourers were brought into the province by the thousands from San Francisco. No restrictive principle as ag'ainst the importation of these people, no fair wage condition, no obstruction of any kind was provided for when the construction work of the Canadian Pacific Railway was going on, and as a consequence we have been flooded with them up to a recent time, and they would still be coming but for the fact that we have adopted a principle of restriction.
Now, Sir, it is very important for a British Columbia member to know just what the people of that province think of this railway policy. I can conceive of a member of this House having an opinion favourable to an abstract question, but that the demands of his constituents might force him legitimately to support a measure which in his own mind he might not be favourable to. I do not mean to insinuate that that is my position. I wish to say that I have looked into the question to my own satisfaction; that I have investigated as to the opinions of the people of my district; that I have taken an opportunity of testing the people of British Columbia on the question before the House, and ,1 have concluded to support the measure presented by the government, because I believe in it myself, and I believe that my action will be endorsed by the opinion of the people of British Columbia generally. I defy any member in this House to point to a. single complaint coming from British Columbia against this proposal, except in regard to the two matters I have mentioned. I have evidence here which will demonstrate to this House what the people of my province think about this scheme, as presented last session. Nay, more, I have the evidence, not of the friends of the Liberal party, but the evidence of the Conservative press'of British Columbia, in favour of the policy of the government. Last session when this question was being discussed here, my friend, Mr. Riley, from Victoria, repeatedly received letters and telegrams from the Conservatives of Britisli Columbia, requesting him to support the national transcontinental railway. Here is one telegram, signed by Mr. Helmcken, the president of the Conservative association of the capital city of the province :


Ralph Smith: 
Mr. DAVID HENDERSON (Halton).: From a point at or near the city of Moncton, in the province of New Brunswick, through the central portion of said province, and through the province of Quebec to a point at or near the city of Quebec, thence in a north-westerly and westerly direction to a point on the boundary line between the provinces of Quebec and Ontario within fifty miles of Lake Abitibi, thence in a north-westerly and westerly direction passing to the North of Lake Nipigon, in the province of Ontario, to a point at or near the city of Winnipeg.
A very different scheme indeed from that which was propounded by the Grand Trunk Pacific Company in the first instance, a very different scheme from that which the railway company itself desired to construct. As I said before, the president of the Grand Trunk Railway Company very fairly complained of the opposition that was piesented to the scheme which the Grand Trunk Pacific desired to carry out. They had new conditions imposed upon them, not permitted merely to construct a road from North Bay to Winnipeg and then' on to the Pacific coast, but new conditions, that no doubt had never been considered by tlie promoters of this railway, were imposed upon that company, and Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson justly complains of these new conditions. He said in addressing his shareholders :
Having arrived then at the conclusion that the best interests of the company necessitated some early measure in the direction I have indicated, we caused a Bill to be introduced into the Canadian parliament for securing a charter of incorporation for the creation of a company with an independent organization, but in close connection with and under the control of the Grand Trunk Company, lor the purpose of building a line of railway from a point of junction at or on the Grand Trunk line, passing-through the most fertile districts of the Northwest, and terminating at a port on the Pacific coast Under the natural impression that a scheme of this nature would commend itself to the approval, and would obtain the support and encouragement of the government and parliament of Canada, so liberally accorded to other railway enterprises, I ventured to suggest to


David Henderson: "hiaui-	[DOT] These people will still be
evGn huig increased transportation and '"hi u5?th this gigantic scheme before us siif-h , tIle credit, of the country pledged "''lift.-, ! *111 onnrnmnc; enm we will he COlli-


David Henderson: 
Mr. ROBERT D. WILMOT (Su®bUJ,f tj*® Queen's).: 
Hon. L. P. BRODEUR.: 
Mr. TAYLOR.: 
Robert Duncan Wilmot: Then I wil'^e'ch, 1 ^ but I shall not make a long *i