1904-05-31

PRIVATE BILL-EXTENSION OF TIME.

Mr. WM. ROSS moved :: That that portion of the 49th rule which limits the time for receiving petitions Ifor private Bills be suspended in reference to the petition of the Huron and 'Ontario Railway Company presented this day, praying for an Act to increase their bonding privileges in accordance with the recommendation contained in the 15th report of the Select Standing Committee on Standing Orders, and that it be read and received forthwith.


Mr. R. L. BORDEN (Halifax).: Would the hon. gentleman give his reasons for this motion ?


William Ross: This application was printed in the ' Canada Gazette ' and in the necessary newspapers some time in April, but the petition has been delayed in the transmission. I presented it last week. It

relates to a road being built from a point in South Ontario, and bas various branches. It was contemplated to make it an electric road, but it is found now that it can be better built as a steam road. The charter gives them this bonding privilege, but it is found that the bonding privilege is not sufficient, and therefore they ask the House by this Bill to increase the bonding powers from $10,000 to $20,000 a mile. That is all the Bill asks for. I think the ^proper notices have been given.


Robert Laird Borden: The object is no doubt a very good one, but my hon. friend knows that at this stage of the session these motions for extension of time should not be granted without very good reason.


Mr.   WM@: ROiS'S. In order to go on with the work it is necessary to have the bonding power increased, and I think I am able to give very good reasons why the petition was not presented before.


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. gentleman will recognize that after the petitions have been presented some good reason should be given why the rule should be suspended.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. CLARE moved :: That the petition of A. Harvey and others presented this day praying to be permitted to lay .before the House their petition for the passing of an Act to authorize the Commissioner of Patents to receive petitions and fees in certain patents of invention held by the Canadian Office and School Furniture Co., Ltd., notwithstanding the expiration of the time for presenting petitions for ^private Bills, be read and received and referred to the Select Standing Committee on Standing Orders.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. CALVERT moved :: That that portion of the 49th rule which limits the time for receiving petitions for private Bills, be suspended in reference to the petition of Andrew W. Mann presented this day, praying for an Act to dissolve his marriage with Helen M. Mann, his wife, in accordance'with the recommendation contained in the loth report of the Select Standing Committee on Standing Orders, 'and that it be read and received forthwith.	*


Rt.   H@: Is there any cause for that ?


William Samuel Calvert: It is the old law.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. MORRISON moved :: That that portion of the 49th rule which limits the time foe receiving petitions for private Bills be suspended in reference to the petition of the Similkameen and Keremeos Railway Company for an Act reviving the statute of
1901 respecting said company, and that the said petition be read and received forthwith and referred to the Select Standing Committee on Standing'Orders.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: We have just received four petitions of a similar character. It really seems to me that where petitions are presented the rule ought to be observed. I must say, for my part, that in future I will insist on the rules being observed, unless good reason is Shown to the contrary.


Mr. SPROULE.: I am very glad that the Prime Minister has at last wakened up to the abuse of this rule because for some years past I have endeavoured, somewhat ineffectively, to attract attention to what I believed was a growing abuse of the rules of this House. I am glad the right hon. the Prime Minister has determined to endeavour to keep within the rules we have laid down. If these rules are not elastic enough let us amend them, but so long as we have rules let us endeavour to keep within them.


Wilfrid Laurier: Hear, hear.



FIRST READING.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 126) respecting certain patents of Siegfried Gironcoli.

Mr. MacKinnon.

[Stage Direction]
The following motions to introduce Bills were dropped
To amend the Montreal Harbour Commissioners Act, 1894.-Mr. Prefontaine.
To amend the Quebec Harbour Commissioners Act, 1899.-Mr. Prefontaine.
To amend the- Harbour Commissioners of Three Rivers Act, 1882.-Mr. Prefon-taine.

Rt.   H@: That from this day to the end of the session government orders on Wednesdays and Thursdays have precedence immediately after questions to be put by members.


Robert Laird Borden: It has not been usual to take these two days at once. Is there any special reason why it should be done this year.


Wilfrid Laurier: No, the only reason is that if my hon. friend will look at the order paper he will find that the business of members is very, very light, and it seems to me that Monday is quite sufficient to dispose of all the business still on the order paper.


Robert Laird Borden: I think it should not include to-morrow at least.


Wilfrid Laurier: Not include to-morrow, very good. I move to amend the motion to that effect.
Motion (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) as amended, agreed to.



DESTITUTE IMMIGRANTS.

Mr. E. F. CLARKE.: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to draw the attention of the Prime Minister to a statement which appears in this morning's * Citizen,' respecting the character and quality of the immigrants which are coming into this country. Statements of a similar kind have been appearing for the past ten days or two weeks in many of the newspapers published throughout the country. I draw the attention of the right hon. gentleman to this statement because appended to it is an explanation from the officers of the Immigration Department. With the permission of the House, I will read what the ' Citizen ' states. The item is as follows : STRANDED IMMIGRANTS.
Walking Streets of Montreal and Sleeping in Jails.	.
Dominion Immigration Agent says the Reuter Despatch is Exaggerated-Private Agencies Responsible for Evil that may Exist.
(Canadian Special Cable.)
London, May 30.-A Reuters' wire from Montreal states that thousands of lately arrived emigrants are walking the streets, and being sent to '.the j^ils for protection, and that railway cars are being used as places for shelter.
Courtenay and company, an organization for sending gentlemen as pupils to Canadian farms at a premium of 15 pounds each, has been using a circular quoting the names of Lord Roberts, Judges Sifton and Barrow and Governor Forget by way of certificates presumably 'testifying to the reliability of their work. Lord Roberts has interviewed Lord Strathcona in the matter, asking that his name be withdrawn.
That is the despatch. Appended to it Is the following statement:
The superintendent of immigration in this city, i interviewed concerning the above, said that the report in stating that ' thousands of lately-arrived emigrants were walking the streets of Montreal,' was undoubtedly exaggerated. iHe stated further that emigrants have been repeatedly warned against Courtenay '& Co., private emigrant agents, who do business at 2 and 3 West street, Finnsbury pavement, London, Eng. The Canadian immigration department, he added, frequently has trouble from a class of immigrants, with those coming to this country it has not been in any way identified. These are chiefly Galicians who book to Montreal, or some of the Atlantic seaports, and on disembarking have no money to provide for their transportation further west. They are often unable 'to find work ; but the department helping them as far as possible, is in no way responsible for them, or for any other emigrants who book to the seaports without provision for further transport, a pro-Mr. R. L. BORDEN.
ceeding against which emigrants are always cautioned.
The ' Citizen ' representative saw a number of Galicians on the stairway leading to the immigration offices, who looked very tired and hungry. They had come from Montreal.
It will be within the recollection of hon. gentlemen now present in the House that two or three weeks ago fifty Austrians reached this city in a state of semi-strava-tion, and wer* maintained by the Immigration Department until a few days ago. I am sure we entirely concur in the humane work of the Immigration Department in maintaining these people until some work could be provided, but I think the primary obligation rests on the steamship company which dumped them in Montreal or some other seaport town. The United States law obliges the steamship company to make provision for destitute immigrants ; and when statements such as I have read are sent from Canada to the old country as to the condition of things in seaport towns like Montreal, I think all the powers that have been vested in the Immigration Department should be exercised and that the responsibility for the maintenance of these destitute immigrants should be placed squarely on the shoulders where it belongs, that is on the steamship company. I am sure that the Minister of Labour (Sir William Mulock) is aware of the fact that complaints have been made as to the methods adopted on the other side to send numbers of undesirable immigrants into this country, and as we have provision in our statutes for deporting undesirable pauper immigrants and for placing the responsibility for their maintenance while here on the steamship companies, I think that no time should be lost in putting the law fully into force so that complaints of this kind could not be repeated. The right hon. gentleman (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) is aware of course that we have the power to turn these people back, and in view of the explanation which the superintendent of immigration has given to the representative of the ' Citizen,' which is not in my judgment satisfactory, I have taken the opportunity of bringing this matter to the attention of the House. I therefore beg to move the adjournment of the House.


Mr. B. ROSAMOND.: I would like to add a word to what has been said by the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Clarke). Some twelve or thirteen of these Austrians found their way to the town of Almonte, in my constituency a few days ago, and they are perfectly helpless so far as making their wants known or conversing with any person is concerned. I am told they are Austrians who had no means of support or of going any farther, and they are dependent on the charity of the people of Almonte for a place to sleep in and for food. I think it is very unreasonable that

a steamship company should be allowed to launch these people on the country without means of support or of going forward to their place of destination. I therefore hope that the government will take some steps to remedy evils of this kind.


Mr. F. D. MONK.: I think the government is guilty of negligence in this matter and 1 venture to say a few words because 1 think the evil is likely to increase rapidly. We have in Montreal and in the surrounding municipalities at the present moment a very large number of these immigrants who are idle and have become a public charge. It is the duty of the government to come to the assistance of these strangers, and to protect the people of Montreal from the charge for their maintenance which has been unjustly inflicted upon them through the negligence of the government in not protecting us against pauper immigration. In the United States the laws, already stringent against such immigration are being enforced with more rigour. The American government have agents throughout Europe who make sure before people leave for the United States that they will be suitable immigrants. The confidential report made a year ago to the United States government, by their agent Mr. Maurice Brown who investigated the sources of this undesirable immigration, ought to be sufficient warning to the Minister of the Interior. He points out that in the south of Europe the large steamship companies including some Canadian companies, have unscrupulous men as agents who take from intending immigrants almost everything they possess, and it is shown that some of these agents, have because of their conduct, been sent to prison in Austria and elsewhere. These immigrants are sent to Antwerp and English ports, and they are set apart as being undesirable for the United States, some of them having distinctive marks upon their clothes for the purpose of identification so that they may be directed to Canadian ports. There is an inspection for disease in Canada, but there is no carrying out of the law that guards us against the immigration of people who are liable to become public charges. The construction of the Grand Trunk Pacific and other important works #wi 11 bring out here a very large number of these undesirable immigrants. Not only that, but they are brought out virtually in violation of the contract labour law, because these European agents get money from the immigrants, and give them assurances that they will obtain work on arriving in Canada. In many cases they are coming out under written contracts. Mr. Brown reports that these people are separated into small groups in Europe, in order that it may not be discovered that they are under contract to perform labour in America. Such people are now entering the Dominion of Canada in very large numbers, and they are a burden upon the people of Montreal. The member for Laval (Mr. Leonard) tells
me that some of them have got into his count}', and the probability is that they will invade the larger cities and their surroundings! The only remedy for that is, that the government shoufld properly enforce our laws not only in Canada, but at the ports of embarkation in Europe.


Hon. CLIFFORD SIFTON (Minister of the Interior).: The Canadian government has no control whatever over what Courtney and Company or any other private agency may do in England.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Except as to the quality of the immigrants that are being sent out.


Clifford Sifton: I will get to that in a minute. Any number of individuals may unite in England to engage in business there without being subject in any way to the control of the government of Canada.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: But the American officers inspect these immigrants at the points of departure.


Clifford Sifton: Wait until I get through. We have no control over these private agencies in England ; they are subject to the law of England and not to the law of Canada. We have no power to interfere* with the operations of English people who associate themselves together in England for the purpose of carrying on any business whether it be proper or improper. We have no authority to interfere with them in the use they may make of the names of any gentlemen in Canada. I have no hesitation in expressing my opinion, that so far as the Canadian gentlemen mentioned are concerned, they have said or done nothing which would authorize the use of their names in the manner in which they have apparently been used. I will take steps to have these gentlemen communicated with by telegram to ascertain whether they have allowed the use of their names in that way, and I shall give such publicity to the result as may be necessary for the purpose of counteracting the effort as far as possible. I desire to say further, that the officers of the department in England have done everything possible for the purpose of making it clear to intending immigrants, that these voluntary organizations are not reliable, and that people would not be safe in depending on them. Not only this, but our officers have been interviewed and they have issued statements for the express purpose of making it clear that these organizations were not endorsed by the government of Canada, and that intending immigrants would not be safe in accepting the representations made by them. My information is to the effect that a considerable number of mechanics have been sent from England by organizations such as that referred to in this newspaper, and that difficulty has arisen because it has been represented to these people that they could find work at their trades when they got here. That has not been encouraged ;

on the contrary it has been discouraged by officers of the department, and we are doing all we can to counteract the misrepresentations made in that way. Only yesterday I sent a cable to Lord Strathcona, setting out explicitly that in my judgment no immigrant should come to Canada unless he was either a farmer or intended to engage in farm labour, and that these were the two classes only that should be encouraged to come here.
That is the policy the department has followed, in making every possible effort to place these representations before the public in Great Britain and on the continent of Europe in such a way that no mistake can be made about them. With the exception of these mechanics who have come over on representations made apparently by private agencies, the only considerable number of people who might be regarded in any way as persons who ought not to have been encouraged to come are a collection of Italian navvies who were lately brought to the city of Montreal. These people, so far as information goes, came as the result of the work of some employment agencies. We have not been able to ascertain what agencies caused them to come; but it seems clear that notice was issued somewhere in Europe, which reached the knowledge of these people, and they were induced to come on vague reports that there was railway work in Canada on which they would be able to get employment. They were in the streets of Montreal, and the evil had arisen before any information had reached the department as' to what was going on. The question now arises as to what is to be done with them, and our officers are endeavouring to ascertain the best course to pursue; but we have not yet come to any conclusion in regard to it. I agree with my hon. friend us to the necessity of preventing the landing in Canada of any persons likely to become a charge on the public ; but my hon. friends themselves will see that while it is easy in general terms to demand the enforcement of the law, yet when it comes to the duty, of deciding between the man who comes here honestly for the purpose of engaging in labour as a farm labourer, who is a fit and proper person, whom we desire to have come, and for whom there is an opening, and the person who is not desirable, but who is likely to become a public charge it is a difficult and delicate duty to perform. All I can say is that we shall endeavour to have the inspection made as carefully as possible, and to enforce the law which requires steamship companies to re-transport persons brought here who are likely to become public charges. Respecting what my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) has said, I fear that his remarks may give the House an incorrect impression in regard to the facts. There is practically no Mr. SIPTON.
continued immigration to Canada at the present time from Italy. The particular people stranded in Montreal at the present time are of a class known as Italian navvies. Most of them have been in America before.


Edward Frederick Clarke: What about the Austrians who were brought out here two or three weeks ago ?


Clifford Sifton: Where were they brought to ?


Edward Frederick Clarke: There were fifty of them at tne station here. Your officers said they would send the last of them away on Saturday.


Clifford Sifton: Where did they go to V


Edward Frederick Clarke: I do not know.


Clifford Sifton: The Prime Minister says he is tolerably certain that they were not Austrians, but Italians.


Bennett Rosamond: Twelve or thirteen of them came to Almonte.


Clifford Sifton: I do not wish to be understood as saying that there were not forty or fifty people from any particular country. It is impossible for any one to speak with that degree of exactness ; but there is practically no immigration from Italy except that which was induced to come in the particular way referred to, and it is a special movement to which we shall give our special attention. As to the people who have come from southern Europe, apart from Italy, they have been, speaking generally, a good class of people, accustomed to agricultural operations, and they are now engaged either directly in agriculture on their own account or in farm labour. These people have practically all gone to the Northwest, and they are engaged there in useful occupations. So far as the general question is concerned, I can find no fault with the views expressed by my hon. friend. I agree as to the necessity of the most careful inspection to prevent the landing of undesirable immigrants where it can possibly be avoided.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I am prepared to give the names of the two agents in the south of Europe for lines coming to Canada, who are carrying .on this business contrary to the law and in a way that has been disapproved of by the inspector of the United States.


Clifford Sifton: I shall be glad to look into it.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Has the minister the authority to charge up against the steamship companies which bring out these unfortunate people the expense incurred by the department in maintaining them until it finds for them something to do ? If the

steamship companies were fined, they would be more careful about the class of immigrants they bring to our shores.


Clifford Sifton: They are liable to pay the expenses until the inspectors deport, and the cost of the deportation.


Robert Laird Borden: My hon. friend did not come to the point to which he said he would come, that is, the point mentioned by my hon. friend from West Toronto (Mr. Clarke) and my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk), who said that it was the practice of the United States government to send its agents across to Europe to make an inspection there of the immigrants who go on board steamships, and thus to ensure that no undesirable persons come over. When that was mentioned, my hon. friend proceeded to deal with something else and said he would come to it afterwards. It is quite true, we cannot control associations of people in England or anywhere else, but we can exercise control over steamship companies coming to our own shores. Our laws either extend to them or can be made to extend to them. Therefore if the Immigration Department of the United States can undertake that inspection on the other side and cure the evil where it begins, there seems to be no reason why our government could not do the same thing. I shall be glad for my own information if my hon. friend will give the reason why he thinks a similar course cannot be undertaken and carried out by this government.


Clifford Sifton: If I understand my hon. friend he refers to a proposed inspection at the port of embarkation of all the people who are coming to Canada and the furnishing of certificates from our officers there to those deemed of a fit class to come. I am not prepared to say that ought not to be done, but up to the present we have not found it necessary. If, however, my lien, friend is under the impression that there is a system of inspection by the United States officials of so effective n character that the United States are securing a more desirable class of immigration than we are, he is labouring under a most serious delusion. The average immigrant we are receiving is vastly superior to that which the United States receives. We are receiving at present, in the proportion of ninety-five out of every hundred, people who intend to engage in agriculture and who actually engage in agriculture when they arrive here. We can trace those people up and know exactly where they are and what they are doing. The United States, on the contrary, are receiving vast numbers from southern Europe, of people who are not of the agricultural class at all. but who simply go to swell, in many cases, the unemployed and the criminal classes in the large cities. And the American government have found it absolutely impossible to check to any great extent, this class who are merely labourers looking for odd jobs. The people we are receiving are of a very much better class, who become actual producers within a very short time. I do not say that it may not become necessary to make such an inspection as is suggested. That is a matter which has been under consideration during the last two or three months, more especially since the appointment of Dr. Bryce as medical inspector, but I have not yet come to the conclusion that it is necessary or desirable. It is quite possible, however, that the experience of this season may convince us that it is.


Mr. JABEL ROBINSON.: I think that this difficulty of a large number of immigrants overflowing Montreal and other places could be easily overcome, if they were the right class of people. There is room to-day for 50,000 men and women in the province of Ontario, if they are the right class, but it is little use to get people who do not speak our language and do not know how to work, especially people who have been living in large cities and towns, such as mechanics and that class. It would be very difficult for the farmers of Ontario to get along with them for a time. I think if the government had a railway of its own running into the Northwest, we could place these people on our trains and land them exactly where they would be required to settle up the country. I do not want to make a point against the government now for not building this railway and owning it themselves, but I want to say that the government could, with a stroke of the pen, If they liked, take all these people out of the large cities and leave them just where they are required. They can do it this afternoon if they like. I think that the trouble to which my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) has referred could be overcome if the matter were only taken up as it ought to be. The right way is to see that these people are distributed all over the country where required, and me Minister of the Interior is the right man to do it and to do it at once.


Mr. A. W. PUTTEE.: In addition to this matter of unuesirable immigration I want to bring to the attention of the minister the question of immigration under false pretenses of a large number of mechanics to the cities of this Dominion. Mechanics are now arriving at all our cities, more especially Toronto. Hamilton and Winnipeg, carrying with them what they believe to be a guarantee of employment. I shall just read an extract from the Winnipeg 'Free Press ' of last Wednesday, so that the House may understand the way this is carried on.
Among the immigrants to arrive in Winnipeg 'yesterday were a numberlof young Englishmen

who have been victimized by a lake labour bureau in London. They came to the west with the idea that situations were waiting lor them ,here and bringing what was supposed to be letters ol introduction ,to parties who would place them at work directly. On application at the address given there -was no work available and the London agent was unheard of. Several of them applied at the immigration department where steps are now being taken to block the scheme before any more victims are landed.
The scheme of the operation is to advertise that work of any kind can be secured in Canada for all applicants. The individual must pay his own fare to Winnipeg and must make a deposit of $5 as a guarantee of good faith. On calling at the office of the company or writing, the victim is told that an agent of the company will meet him at the dock with the necessary papers. At the dock he is handed a sealed envelope addressed to some one in Winnipeg, and which purports to be instructions for placing him in the desired situation. That is the last of it and when the dupe arrives in Winnipeg he is left entirely on his own resources.
That just outlines a few of the eases that occurred there on Wednesday. I have been getting a good deal of information regarding this matter. These immigration concerns are not confined to London at all but seem to extend all over Britain. Men are led to purchase steamship tickets on the understanding that they will be given a recommendation or guarantee of employment, so that they will he sure, immediately they arrive, of getting work. They are directed where to go. There is one feature about this business that deserves attention and that is that a great deal of the paper, on which the letters are written, is headed so as to lead those who receive the letters to suppose that they are official, and that they come from the Canadian government agents. There are joint letter headings useu by the steamship agents which indicate that they are also government immigration agents, and this leads these people to imagine that they are dealing with persons who are officially responsible. Young men arrive in Winnipeg without more than five dollars to spare and find themselves in a labour market which is absolutely congested and where there is no immediate prospect of their getting work. Thousands of them found themselves in that position within the last six weeks. A young man had a recommendation addressed to myself and another addressed to a contractor in Winnipeg. And when he presented his recommendation to the contractor, he found that 150 others had been there before him who had presented similar letters. I do not think it is necessary to go further in the matter just here, hut it is one of urgency. This is not a thing which occurred a few weeks ago and is over, but it is going on every day, and I believe is going on to-day in Britain, and I would suggest to the hon. minister that he should Mr. PUTTEE.
communicate with our High Commissioner ia London and have him bring the matter to the attention of the British government. Or. if not that-or, even in addition to that r-*the immigration agent of the government in England could meet some of the men who are returning with these guarantees and assist them to take action against the agents who are selling these tickets under false pretenses.


Clifford Sifton: Replying for a moment, and with the permission of the House, to my hon. friend, from Winnipeg (Mr. Puttee), X would say that the circumstances to which he has drawn attention are those to which I referred in my remarks a few moments ago. when I said that certain mechanics had come from Great Britain under representations which were not correct and that the disseminating of contradictions of such representations has been the subject of a good deal of effort on the part of the government officers. We have done absolutely everything it was possible for us to do to prevent these things from occurring. The facts to which my hon. friend from Winnipeg alludes were brought to my attention by a telegram from the superintendent of immigration in Winnipeg a few days ago. As I have said wTe are doing everything we can do to make known among intending immigrants the fact that these representations are not guaranteed by the Canadian government and that we do not regard them as reliable. In addition to this, our High Commissioner has been instructed by cable in regard to the facts, and, by this time, no doubt, has made a statement which will be thoroughly circulated in the English press.
Now, my hon. friend from West Elgin (Mr. Robinson) has referred to a fact which, I think, is, perhaps, not sufficiently taken into account when the question of immigration is considered, that is the absolute dearth of farm labour in the province of Ontario, and the necessity of supplying it. I may say to my hon. friend that if the people of the province of Ontario could devise some means for distributing men whom the Department of Immigration could bring, this lack would be very 'largely supplied in a comparatively short time. It is most difficult, in fact, it is impossible, for the Department of the Interior to undertake the distribution of these men among the farmers. All that we can do is this, we can bring practically any number that may be desirable of good substantial men, men thoroughly qualified to do the work required-perhaps not expert farm labourers, for the supply of these is limited, hut men who would answer the purpose and whom the farmers would be glad to get. These men we could bring to a central point in Ontario, and if some provincial organization or method of distribution were provided I am satisfied that the wants of the
3S57

farmers of Ontario could be quickly supplied. I mention the fact so that it may be given publicity ; and for my part I should be pleased if the farmers' organization of Ontario, which have done such effective and admirable work, as, for instance, in bringing our friend from West Elgin (Mr. Robinson) into our councils in the House, would take the subject up and make a practical suggestion in connection with the distribution of these people.


Mr. ROBERT HOLMES.: If the plan of the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) can be carried out, the hon. gentleman will confer a great benefit upon the farmers of Ontario. I can endorse heartily what has been said by the hon. member for West Elgin, that there is a demand in Ontario for at least 50,000 immigrants. I have had a good many applications made to myself personally and by letter and have generally had to turn them over to the department in Toronto. In my own constituency farmers are not able to get anything like the help they require. If I understood the Minister of the Interior aright he said that any number of men could be brought to a central point in Ontario. For two years, I have been trying to secure men for places in the county of Huron and I have not been able to get more than half a dozen. There is such a great demand for labour, the farmers are so anxious to get them, that, notwithstanding any difficulty they might experience with the lack of knowledge on the part of these men of our language, they would almost be glad to take even Italians or Chinamen, if they could not do better, and could get them to do the work.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Perhaps the hon. member for West Huron (Mr. Holmes) might think it well that the Minister of the Interior should send the two thousand Italians who have been dropped in Montreal in anticipation of getting work on the Grand Trunk Pacific. I think I see these men going into the agricultural districts of Ontario, and I can imagine how long the farmers of Ontario would put up with them. But I rose principally to draw attention to the fact that every year for three or four years past, complaints have been made of the arrival of undesirable immigrants in Canada, many of them diseased, some physically helpless and a large number of them paupers. And every time the matter has been referred to, the government has replied : There may be a few such immigrants, but we do not think there are many ; and in any case we will try to devise means to control this immigration as much as possible. And that is practically the reply that the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) has made again today. But it seems to me that for some years past the aim of the government has been to show that a large number of people have 122
been coming into Canada regardless of their quality. You see It in all the government organs that so many thousand have landed in Montreal, so many thousand in Halifax, and so many thousand have come in during the year. And all this notwithstanding the fact, which must be manifest to every one in our large cities, that there are collected in these centres of population many undesirable immigrants who are largely supported by charity. And, if they are not brought in under government auspices, at least they are brought in by reason of the fact that the government does not put sufficient restrictions upon their incoming. The Americans are trying to exclude this class of immigration, and they are doing it more effectively than we are. Why cannot we take a leaf out of their book ? Last year, or the year before, when statements were read in this House showing what the Americans were doing in this respect, the answer given by the government was that we in Canada did not need to take such precautions. But they agreed to appoint an inspector, and he has been appointed-inspector of health, I think thy call him-in the person of Dr. Bryce. The minister told us that Dr. Bryce had been appointed and that the government would consider what further was to be done. But, ever since last year, they have been merely considering the matter, and nothing has been done. Surely, with the influx of immigration into this country a large number of whom are undesirable, it is most important that the government should act promptly to check the influx of these undesirable people, before that influx becomes so extensive that it is impossible to deal with it. The hon. minister says that if the people of Ontario would take the immigrants he could supply and distribute them to the farmers, the wants of the Ontario farmers could soon be met. I ask him, what use, for instance, would be the Italians who were recently landed in Montreal if they were distributed among the farmers of Ontario ?


Clifford Sifton: My hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) is not justified in the argument he is making. I distinctly stated, that, as a result of the operations of some employment agency, these Italian navvies had been brought to Montreal. But I did not include them in the other remarks I made on the subject. On the contrary, I said that it was undesirable and a misfortune that they should be brought here. Everybody who knows anything about that class of people knows that they would not engage in farm work and would be very undesirable people to have on farms.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It is true that when the minister first rose he referred to these Italians. But when he spoke in answer to the hon. member for West Elgin (Mr. Robinson) he said that if the farmers would take the immigrants that his department could bring



11
into this country and distribute them he could supply the demand. That was a general statement regarding the immigration and would apply to these as well as any other class, and therefore I have a right to refer to them. How far is the government responsible for the coming of these people ? What do they cotne for ? To work upon the government's railway. That is the statement made in the Montreal newspapers-that they come here because they understood the government were building a railway and there was employment for any number of them if they were brought here. 'Who is to prevent them from landing if they are undesirable ? Is it not the government ? And yet the government seem to be remiss in their duty. Now what we complain of is that the government are not doing what they should do, and what they have the power to do, that is, to prevent these undesirable people from being landed in the country, people that are becoming a burden upon the charity of the country in such large numbers as at the present time.


Mr. EDWARD COCHRANE.: Speaking as a farmer in the county which I have the honour to represent, I know that it is almost impossible to get any farm help. I was down to the Department of the Interior and spoke to the minister the other night. I would suggest to him now that he adopts some means of communicating with the farmers, surely he must have officials in his department who could communicate with the farmers, and ascertain their wants in this respect ; and instead of sending these men up to Toronto or some place further west, have them distributed where they are needed. I think he should let that fact be known, and appoint certain officials of his department to communicate with the farmers and send these labourers where they are required. I know a farmer in the township of Seymour, who has a splendid farm. When I was at Campbellford he told me he wanted me to call upon him. Now to show the minister to what straits the farmers are put in connection with farm help, I will tell him what this man said to me. This was Mr. Hugh Ross, who has one of the most beautiful farms in East Northumberland. He has no sons of his own, and he told me he was so tired with hard work when I saw him that he could scarcely talk. He said several men could be employed there if the farmers could only get them. Now, I am sure, with all the officials the minister has at his hand, there should be some one in the city of Ottawa with whom the farmers may know that they can communicate when they want labourers, and this official should send them labourers to the nearest railway station where they are wanted. It would be sufficient if they were sent up to Brighton, or Campbellford, or any of those villages along the frontier. Let the farmers send in their applications and state what labour they re-Mr. SPROULE.
quire. So far as my knowledge goes, it is absurd to talk about Italians going among the farmers. Of what good would an Italian be if you cannot make him understand what you want him to do. As my hon. friend behind me says, after you have told them what you want them to do, they would not know how to do it. It is trouble enough to educate an English * speaking labourer to the habits of this country, without having to take the trouble to get an interpreter to communicate with foreigners. I am satisfied that hundreds of English speaking labourers could be employed in that section of the country at fair wages. I would suggest to the minister and to his officials not to promise them too high wages. If a man is not educated as an agriculturist he cannot expect to earn high wages until he has learned how to work ; and when that time comes, he can get good wages all through the province of Ontario, especially, in the part where I live.


Mr. C. B. HEYD.: It strikes me that whatever effort we may put forth in this country we can never assimilate an Italian labourer and make a farmer of him. The moment you land them in this country their natural proclivities lead them to gravitate towards the city. That has been the experience in the United States and it will be our experience here. The fewer men of this class we import to this country the better for Canada. If j;ou place these Italians among the farmers''of Ontario to-day they will not remain long, they will gravitate towards the cities, where they will meet their own kind. I do not think any expenditure to locate an ordinary Italian upon a farm will be attended with "beneficial results. The fewer of that class you bring into this country to compete in the labour markets of the cities and towns of Canada, the better for Canada. What we want in this country, and it is a paramount want, is to make farm life more attractive, so as to induce young farmers to remain on the farms. Already the attractions in the cites and towns are such that they are drawing from the farms the men who should remain on them ; and we cannot replace them with advantage, either with Italians or with any of that class of immigrants that come from southern Europe. In the United States the labourers who did the work in days gone by, the Irish and the Germans, are being displaced by Italians and Polacks, and nationalities of that kind. In the city of Brantford to-day we have hundreds of Polanders and Armenians who are working in our factories. They are industrious and frugal, but you cannot make farmers out of them; and I do not think it is in the interests of this country to expend our money and our energies in bringing people in here, that won't make good farmers.


Mr. MACLEAN.: Why does not the hon. gentleman give the farmers telephones at a cheap price 1


Charles Bernhard Heyd: I have no objection.


Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: I was not present when the debate opened, and I am not aware whether the Minister of the Interior has been made aware of the fact that immigrants from Europe, immigrants who have been described as the least desirable, are being brought from the continent to America at 810 a head less than British immigrants have to pay. Is the Minister of the Interior aware that the rates on steamers from continental ports to Canada and the United States are $10 a head less than they are from British ports ?


Clifford Sifton: There have been some changes lately, but as to their exact nature I have not definite information yet. We have received reports that certain steamship companies intended to make certain changes in their rates, but what has actually been done we have no definite information yet. It lias been suggested that certain companies intended to make a rate from continental ports to United States ports, discriminating against Canada, in order to take continental immigrants to the United States instead of Canada.


Samuel Hughes: At present, rates from certain United States ports and from eastern Canada to the Canadian Northwest, Are lower than the whole through rate from Europe. As the minister knows, the Douk-liobors are brought 500 miles to Odessa, in Russia, by rail, then from Odessa they are brought to Canada or the United States by steamer and landed on the banks of the north Saskatchewan river at $55 a head ; while Canadians from the province of Ontario and the maritime provinces cannot be landed there for any such sum.


Clifford Sifton: The information in the possession of the Department of Immigration does not show that.


Samuel Hughes: There is a difference of $10 per head in favour of the foreigner. Why does not the Department of the Interior make some arrangements with the Canadian Pacific Railway, or the Canadian Northern, and the steamship lines, so that for every settler they put down in the Northwest from the eastern provinces of Canada, they should get a rebate of $5 per head ?


Clifford Sifton: Does the hon. gentleman {Mr. Sam. Htighes) want me to answer his question now ? It is because every member representing a county in the province of Ontario, including the hon. gentleman no doubt, would vote against the government If we did so.


Samuel Hughes: There are a hundred young farmers from my own county now on farms in the Northwest, most of them good Tories, I am in one sense sorry to say, and who have to that extent depleted the Tory vote in the county. But I have the satisfaction of believing that an equal number 1221
of Liberals will turn over and support me when the next election comes on. But I want to make this point clear in connection with immigration. There are in England hundreds and thousands and tens of thousands of men of British nationality, labourers of every description who are anxious to come to Canada. Why cannot the minister, in addition to the efforts that he is now putting forth in that regard,-and I am not finding fault with these efforts although I am a little sorry he did not start earlier and get the wave which is only now commencing started some years ago, endeavour to make the most of the opportunities presented to us and get these labourers out to this country.


Clifford Sifton: We are ; that is what we are doing.


Mr.   SAM@: HUGHEiS. I mean to go further. The minister knows that long years ago I made the proposition that every man coming to this country should be assisted. In some of the best counties in Ontario to-dav there are farmers worth $5,000, $10,000, $20,000 or more, who were assisted from their homes in England by parishes and by this country. They were sent out by their friends without a dollar. They have done well, and why cannot we now adopt the same policy ? These men are unable to pay their expenses and bring their families out here. Why cannot the minister develop a scheme-there is no man In this country more capable of doing it than he is-to bring in thousands and hundreds of thousands of the right type of men, and if necessary when we place them on their little homesteads, give them their homes, give them their outfit to commence farming, the advance to be repaid in a certain number of years ? There are thousands of honourably discharged British soldiers open for service throughout the length and breadth of the empire. These poor fellows have no .money to place themselves away off in our Northwest Territories, and why cannot the minister evolve some scheme to bring these men out here, even if it costs $100 or $200 apiece to put them on their farms ? Let that be repaid, as it could easily be repaid, after a certain period Place these men on the farms, and then in ten, fifteen or thirty years, if the country wants to fall back on men, they will have them, and not such a type of men as those whom we see the little Japs rolling over by the dozen every time they meet. We have in the British Islands tens of thousands of men anxious to come to this country. Why cannot they he brought 1


Clifford Sifton: What my hon. friend (Mr. Hughes) has said involves a very large number of questions of policy, which I shall not undertake to discuss this afternoon. I shall defer anything I have to say on the subject until we are discussing the immigration estimates.


Mr. M. AVERY.: There are thousands of men of all kinds coming into the country, and I think it is in the public interest to try to employ these men and make good citizens of them. I think an effort should be made to furnish them with a certain amount of money for buildings, give them a certain amount of education in the language of this country and train them to work on the farm. It is said that the Italians are no good. I say they are good workmen if they are properly trained, and I notice that now, when the Canadian people have any large contracts in building sewers and building railways, &c., in swampy ground, the Italians are the only class who can be got to go into the soil and take out the wet soil and throw it on the bank to grade the roads. If these people were taken care of and educated, we could make good citizens of them. The people in this country very often send to an orphans' home to get a child to bring up, and such a child is very useful to them, but if these immigrants can be trained as well as the children taken from the orphans' home, they would become good citizens. Money thus spent would be better spent than by sending Canadians to other countries to advise people to come here, although when they come here they know not where to go.


Mr. A. A. WRIGHT.: Something has been said with regard to the quality of the immigrants coming into this country. I agree thoroughly with every one that we should have a superior class of immigrants if possible, but because a man unfortunately chances to be born poor, that is no guarantee that he will not make a good immigrant. Something has been said with reference to the Polanders. I wish to say that thirty years ago a large party of Polanders came to Renfrew. They were very poor, so poor that the women went out to the fields to glean after the harvesters and gather berries to earn their subsistence, while the men worked on the farms. What has been the result?' A large number of those immigrants who came originally never learned our language except in an imperfect way, but their sons and daughters did learn our language. They went out to work, and their descendants have become to-day some of the best farmers in Renfrew. They have become comparatively wealthy, and what is more, they have made some of the best citizens we have. When war broke out in South Africa it was the sons of these men who came to this country thirty years ago, who volunteered and fought on the battlefields of Africa in support of our honour and our integrity. In the township of Sherwood there are 500 or 600 of these Polanders who are settled on farms, and a more industrious and a more frugal set of people I never knew. They are among the best farmers we have. They raise as good grain, make as good butter, have as good cattle, Mr. SIFTON.
as any citizens we have there. I have a Polander in my employ who has worked for me for seventeen years, and I have never had a better man, and do not think I ever shall. As a matter of fact, the only way in which we can now distinguish the children of these Polanders from our own people is that perhaps they are better looking, better dressed, more thrifty and make better citizens than our own people do.


Mr. POPE.: You are placed in a fortunate county.


Mr. URIAH WILSON.: I think it is a pity that every once in a while we must have a discussion in this House because of the class of immigrants that are being brought in. We have been discussing this question for years, and while they have been improving to some extent, I think the department is not at all exercising that supervision over the class of immigrants coming into this country that they should exercise. It is astounding to observe what the American people are doing, and to compare it with our immigration policy. Last year the' American people got nearly 1,000,000 immigrants, and yet they would not allow any person to enter their country who was likely to become a burden, who was diseased, or who was in any way not a desirable person to become a citizen of that country. Instead of making the effort to get all kinds of people, the United States seek quality instead of quantity. They have compelled the steamship companies to have their laws in the language of the country, printed in large letters, posted up in their offices in every port from which their steamships sail. They instruct their officers to have the attention of the immigrants called to these laws. Then it is a fineable offenca for any person to solicit a person to come as an immigrant to the United States. Immigrants have also to pass a rigid examination before they are allowed to sail for the United States, and when they land in the United States they must undergo another rigid examination. Beyond all this the United States to-day have on our shores 116 officers whose duty it is to see that no person enters the United States from this country who is not a desirable citizen, or is not likely to become a desirable citizen. On the other hand, we have a large number of immigration agents in every*country that will allow us to have them ; and not only that, but we are pursuing, in my judgment, the worst possible policy with reference to agents. We are giving agents a commission, and I will go into the effect of this system, I hope, more fully at a later stage. We are allowing them to send out to this country any kind of person they wish, and they are paid a commission if they only get the certificate. Now, take it in the United States I have it on good authority that commercial travellers and people who are coming to this country to carry on business can go

to an agent who is on commission in the United States and get a certificate. They can present this certificate to the railway office and get their ticket for a fare of a cent'a mile.
That certificate is sent to Montreal, it comes back to the Interior Department here, and the agent is paid three dollars for a man, two dollars for a woman and one dollar for a child. I believe we artgetting no value for that money, and that we might as well throw it away. I believe that a great many of the immigrants we are bringing to this country are not such as we will be proud of in the time to come. I call the attention of the Minister of the Interior to a statement in the morning * Citizen,' that 7,000 pauper children are to be sent from England to this country. 1 do not think that is desirable I have time and again said in this House, that we should look more to the quality than the quantity of the immigrants who come here, and I repeat that statement now. The hon. member for Hast Assini-boia (Mr. Douglas) speaking at a Patron picnic in Prince Edward county declared that he did not see why we should be very anxious to give our fertile lands of the west to the pauper population of Europe, and I quite agree with him. I would rather wait a little longer and have a better-class of settlers. I think they will come. The trouble with the United States now is that they are getting more immigrants than they want, and we unfortunately have been willing to take their overflow of rejected immigrants, and have allowed the bulk of them to stay at the various ports in Canada. That should be put a stop to at once.


Clifford Sifton: If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Wilson) intends to assert that we have placed an undesirable class of people on the lands of the Northwest, and that it would be better to have waited and get a better class ; I state here now that there is no foundation for that assertion. The class of people who have settled in the Northwest are an excellent class ; agriculturists almost entirely


Uriah Wilson: Would the minister allow me to ask him if the immigrants that we rejected at Winnipeg last year, were sent out of the country or allowed to remain ?


Clifford Sifton: The hon. gentleman said that he would rather wait longer and get a more desirable class of people


Uriah Wilson: Yes.


Clifford Sifton: Then I wish to say, after having paid considerable attention to the question, that we have made no mistake as to the class of people we have put upon our lands in the Northwest.


Edward Frederick Clarke: due statements made by hon. gentlemen representing rural
constituencies would tend to show that there is a dearth of agricultural labourers in the province of Ontario. If it be true that the steamship companies are giving a bonus of $4 for each male adult farm labourer brought to Canada, then we should be able to get a much larger number of immigrants suitable for farm work in the province of Ontario.


Clifford Sifton: We can furnish almost any number, if some method were devised for distributing them.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Then, the Department of the Interior together with the local government ought to be able to devise means to distribute these farm labour immigrants where they are required throughout the province, so that our farmers would not be put to the straits they are now put to because of an insufficiency of labour. We are desirous of upholding the Minister of the Interior in bringing as many eligible immigrants as possible of the agricultural class to this country. I wish to draw his attention to the tabulated statement of immigrants that have been excluded from the United States along the, Canadian border for the year ending 30th of June last, so that when the minister makes his promised statement on the estimates he will be able to tell us whether the disgraceful condition of things set forth in this statement exists or not. If it does exist, it shows that our inspection of immigrants is to all intents .and purposes mythical. The report of the commissioner general of immigration for the United States shows that for the year ending 30th June last, 1.575 paupers and 1,439 loathsome, or dangerous contagious disease immigrants were refused admission from Canada to the United States. If that be so, it is time that a change were made in regard to the inspection of immigrants coming into Canada. Some years ago the United States immigration department sent medical officers to United Kingdom ports to inspect immigrants destined for the United States who intended to come through Canadian ports, an ounce of prevention in such a case is better than a pound of cure, and if the Minister of the Interior sends competent medical officers to inspect these immigrants before they sail for Canada. and if he provides that the steamship companies will be compelled to take back undesirable immigrants, I am sure we will all support him in that. In the report of the United States commissioner general of immigration it is stated that there were 1,062 who had been excluded .because they were without certificate and it may not be fair to include all of these as undesirable. The tabulated statement of the commissioner general of immigration for the United States to which I have referred, is as follows :
3S67



REPORT OF IMMIGRANTS REFUSED ADMISSION FROM FOREIGN CONTIGUOUS TERRITORY TO THE UNITED STATES, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ALIEN CONTRACT LABOUR LAWS, AND THE LAWS REGULATING IMMIGRATION, FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1903.

[Stage Direction]
-	Idiots.	GO a o T © © K M	Paupers,or likely to become pub lie charges.	t- [DOT] M2 2 8 ! 3 m * 3t= 43 Sj o « ='S.	Women for immoral purposes.	Contract labourers.	Without Certificates.	© p b A Si © ^3 i-t o HEastport, Me	1	1	79	1	3	12	52	1491	35	36214	1	2	39	223	47934	341	58	33	S'	1002	67	19	66	154441	380	34	22	8774	3	34	411	19	3	28	1	73	71	16	9	17558	37	2	27	1244	34	15	72	2	1271	10	23	3	22	596	125	577	2	58	70S1	113	177	45	33656	561	3	19	197	22036	2	9	18	6516	17	73	1069	6	6	41	62Other Canadian border ports. 	i	176	113	2	33	198	523Total Canadian Border	4	17	1,575	1,439	14	431	1,062	4,542
Now, I would like to know what lias become of these undesirable immigrants ? It is not creditable to us that when they are rejected by the United States officials as unfit to enter that country, they should be allowed to remain here a charge upon the people, and a menace to the health of the people of Canada. Surely there is some way of putting an end to this. There must be some way of providing at the ports of embarkation in Europe, that every man, woman and child who intends to come to this country, shall be physically and morally fit to become residents of Canada. I draw the attention of the Minister of the Interior to this statement so that he may be able to give some explanation of it when he comes later on to deal with the subject. I would also like to ask the lion, gentleman if he can tell us whether it is a fact that the steamship companies are paid a bonus for bringing out agricultural labourers, and, if so, what sum has been paid under that head during the last fiscal year, and how much per head ?
Clifford Sifton: The arrangement respecting the payment of bonuses has been explained repeatedly. As to the exact amount paid during the past year, I cannot give it, as I do not carry these figures in my head. I shall be glad to make a complete statement in regard to that when my estimates are up for consideration. I shall not undertake to Mr. CLARKE.
discuss the details of the statement to which my hon. friend has callled my attention further than to say that it does not at all follow, because people are marked in the list as rejected at the Canadian borders, that they were people who went through Canada to the United States, passed our inspectors and were caught by the United States inspectors. Numbers of cases have occurred of people going to the United States who formerly were in the United States, came to Canada, and when returning were stopped by the inspector on account of some physical defect. I will discuss that matter at some length at the proper time. In regard to our own inspection, I think the medical inspection of immigrants coming to Canada is at present as complete and perfect as it can be made. We have thoroughly competent medical inspectors, we have a system which I think is as efficient as it can possibly be made, and that system is thoroughly and properly carried out. I am not prepared to say that in previous years the medical inspection was as thorough as it ought to have been ; but I am satisfied that this year and for the future the inspection will be all that can be desired.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not think the hon. Minister of the Interior has made the matter much better by suggesting that these people afflicted with dangerous or loathsome diseases came from the United States to

Canada without any difficulty, and then were prevented from returning to the United States by the officers at the border. If that is the condition of affairs, it seems to me that it should be remedied at once. Why should we permit persons afflicted with loathsome or dangerous diseases to come from the United States into Canada without restriction, and then have these very persons, when they seek to return to the United States, stopped at the border and forced to remain in Canada? That condition of affairs should have been stopped at once and stopped long ago, if it has been continuing any length of time. So far as the immigration to the Northwest Territories is concerned, none of us denies that a large body of the immigrants from foreign countries are very desirable settlers indeed-Icelanders, Norwegians, Swedes, Danes. Alennonites, Germans, and many other nationalities which I might enumerate. For my part, I am bound to say that when I visited the Northwest some eighteen months ago I was agreeably disappointed in what I heard and saw of the Galician settlers. I went there with considerable prejudice against them.


Clifford Sifton: My hon. friend had been reading Conservative newspapers.


Robert Laird Borden: I had not been reading Conservative newspapers so much as listening to the hon. member for Alberta (Air. Oliver) in this House. That was the source of my information. I had listened to that hon. gentleman making three or four speeches in which he had decried these people very thoroughly. For that reason I went to the Northwest with a prejudice against them, but I came back with that prejudice entirely removed, because I found that the Galicians were making good settlers. Their children were going out to work, their girls were going into service and intermarrying with English settlers, and in the second or third generations they will probably hardly be distinguished from the ordinary English settlers. I do not think my hon. friend the Alinister of the Interior is quite at liberty to say that no mistake was made in the Northwest, because we had incidents last year, to which I need not particularly draw attention, which were not of a character to impress us favourably in regard to a certain class of the settlers. There were scenes enacted during certain pilgrimages which were not very creditable to the country or to the settlers themselves. They were certainly not very edifying, so far as we could judge from the printed and pictured accounts of them. Therefore, while I am free to concede that the principal body of the settlers in the Northwest are a good class, whether English-speaking or not, I think it is going a little too far to say that no mistake has been made.


Mr. WILLIAAI ROCHE.: Air. Speaker, you will remember that about this time last year there was a debate in this House on this
very subject. On that occasion I made some observations somewhat in the line of the remarks of the hon. leader of the opposition this afternoon. I was taken to task on that occasion by my hon. friend from Lennox (Air. AVilson), who denied to a considerable extent the statements I made. This afternoon I am happy to hear the testimony of the hon. leader of the opposition, corroborating exactly what I said on that occasion.


Uriah Wilson: Will the hon. member allow me to correct him ? Instead of my making a speech after him, he spoke after I did, and criticised me.
Air. WILLIAAI ROCHE; I am quite aware that my hon. friend, like a great many others in the House, after he has made the principal speech, generally makes a few little speechlets. Air. Speaker, I can only make a few observations on what I have seen at the port of Halifax, which is one of the principal ports of entry for immigrants from the continent of Europe, though we have also a great many from the British Islands. I do not refer to Alontreal, St. John or other ports of entry of which I cannot speak from personal observation ; but the statement which has been made this afternoon by the hon. member for West Toronto (Air. Clarke), so far as the port of Halifax is concerned, is totally incorrect. The immigrants destined for settlement in the United States are not allowed to remain in Canada, but if rejected the inspectors call on the steamship company immediately to deport them. I have been informed that a number of immigrants who came into Canada through other ports than Halifax, when presenting themselves at the border, were refused admission to the United States.
On the other hand I have bad letters from the Hamburg-American Steamship Company, complaining in the most severe terms of the excessive stringency of the medical examination at the port of Halifax. The company say that they have taken every precaution to prevent any diseased persons from taking passage by their line, that they have the intending passengers most rigidly inspected both at the depots in the interior and at the port of departure. In addition they also have a medical officer on board and take the best care of the passengers on the way out, so that they may arrive in the best possible condition, and they cannot understand why so many are being deported and why they should be put to the expense of bringing them back. The inspection which the government requires at the ports of entry is, they claim, excessively rigid. AVe have therefore both sides of the story, and possibly the truth may lie between the two. With regard to the Galicians, as some gentlemen in this House have questioned the [DOT]accuracy of the statements I have made

3S72
concerning them, I may say that I have seen and examined a great number of them, and from my personal knowledge they are constantly improving instead of retrograding. As the condition of these people was the subject of debate in the House, when the Minister of Marine and Fisheries was in Halifax, I took him to a steamer which had arrived with a cargo of these immigrants My hon. friend saw the immigrants in the shed and was astonished that remarks of a derogatory character should ever have been made concerning people of that class. He found them a most desirable class, from the personal inspection he then made. From my own knowledge, I can say that in a country which requires agricultural labourers, men who will begin at the bottom, no better class could be secured than those Galicians.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If that be the case, how comes it that within the last three weeks quite a number of these were sent into quarantine in Halifax on account of disease of the eyes and also into the hospitals of Montreal.


William Roche: The company complain that the examination is altogether too rigid and that a number are sent into the hospitals who need not have been sent there. There is a great deal of variety in that disease. In certain stages, it is not supposed to be contagious, but when it be comes developed, it is highly contagious, and those afflicted with it should be isolated, but the company contend that a far greater number are sent to the hospitals than require to be sent there or to be isolated. I have no desire to exaggerate or make any statement which is not accurate, but I can corroborate the statement of the hon. the Minister of the Interior, when he says that the precautions taken at the ports of entry are ample for all purposes.


Mr. J. E. ARMSTRONG.: Representing, as I do, a farming constituency in western Ontario, and having heard the Minister of the Interior state that he had plenty of good English speaking immigrants coming to this country who could be distributed throughout western Ontario at almost any ' time, I would suggest that he should send out notices that these men will reach certain cities and towns in western Ontario at stated periods ; and if he will do this, I feel confident he will find room for 5,000 of them among the farmers of the western portion of our province. As we are all well aware, many of the young farmers of western Ontario have gone to the Northwest and left the farms to a certain extent without sufficient help. Consequently, I believe it is the duty of the Minister of the Interior to send into that country at an early date a large number of suitable immigrants.


William Roche: 


Mr. THOS. MURRAY.: It appears to me that the farmers of Ontario who require this labour should organize. Let the different counties and municipalities organize and send requisitions to the Minister of the Interior, who has just told us that he can supply an unlimited quantity of such labour. That would be the business way to go about it. The hon. gentleman who has just spoken has told us that in his section some 5,000 could be employed. I know that farm labour is very scarce. Though representing a Quebec constituency, I live in Ontario ; and while it is unfortunate that these people should have come to Montreal, it does not follow that, even if they are destitute now, they are not good material out of which to make good citizens. No doubt the government will look after them and see that they are placed in the near future at such occupations as they can fill, r know many people who came to Ottawa without any money and wrere looked upon by the farmers as unfit for employment, bud who now can be employed at any service, and many of whom have raised good families and are numbered among our best citizens. In the Ottawa Valley there is room for any quantity of labour-mechanics and farm labourers and labourers of all classes:	It is the duty of the country
to do the best it can for these people who have arrived in this destitute condition and are now seeking work in the city of Montreal. But there is plenty of room for them in Canada, and no doubt they will all find employment if properly looked after.


Mr. A. B. INGRAM.: I would remind the junior member for Halifax (Mr. William Roche) that he is mistaken when he thinks that the hon. member for Lennox followed him last year with his speech or even with a speechlet. There is no record of either such speech or speechlet. But I can tell him that the hon. gentleman who did follow him and who criticised his language very severely was the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver). The hon. gentleman's zeal for the Galicians will not surprise those who know that he is speaking as one having some authority, because I understand he is an agent for the Hamburg-American Line which brings out that class of people, and it was because he was interested in sounding the praises of that particular class that the hon. member for Alberta found fault with him.


William Roche: If I have made any mistake, I shall be glad to correct it. We hear very imperfectly on this side. Sometimes even the brilliant observations of the hon. gentleman who has just spoken are utterly lost to us. If I have made any error or injured my hon. friend from Lennox (Mr. Wilson) I shall be first to make the amende honourable. Speaking from memory1 I think my hon. friend did make the few observations I referred to, or else it was


the gentleman next him. I am not speaking by the book, of course, but from memory. The statement I made certainly was attacked afterwards by my hon. friend from Alberta (Mr. Oliver). I spoke of the immigrants brought to Halifax, very largely Galicians and other foreigners, being brought mainly by the Hamburg-Ameriean line. In that I speak from personal observation, for I have seen them from first to last almost Individually, when they are imported.


Mr. BELL.: May I ask the Minister of the Interior if when he spoke of being able to bring in an unlimited number of farm labourers he spoke of men from the British Islands or men from the continent of Europe ?


Clifford Sifton: What I said was that we could furnish practically any number that are likely to be required of men quite fit to do farm labour and who, in that labour, would be satisfactory. I do not mean by that that we could get any number of trained expert farm labourers in the sense in which my hon. friend (Mr. Bell) will understand the word. In the old country, especially in the north of England and Scotland, what is known as a farm labourer is a man who is trained to that, who has been all his life at it, has been bred at it. But the number of these men is limited, and I do not pretend that we can furnish that class. But we can furnish as many as will be required of men who will en gage in farm labour and will prove satisfactory men. During the last couple of months I have had farmers from Ontario in. my office discussing the question. They say they have had labourers from England who have not been on farms in the old country but who made satisfactory labourers. We can furnish as many of these as may be required, but there is great difficulty on account of the unsatisfactory method of distribution. If that difficulty is overcome we can meet the demand.


John William Bell: Can arrangements be made to distribute these men to central points in the several provinces ?


Clifford Sifton: We are quite willing to do that.
Motion (Mr. Clarke) to adjourn, negatived.



REPRESENTATION IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Robert Laird Borden: Before the Orders of the Day are called I would ask whether the case, or what is known in the Privy Council as the record, upon the appeals of the provinces of New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island has been prepared, and also whether the cases-what we call in Supreme Court of Canada the factums,-have been filed and delivered. And, if they have
been prepared, will the government be good enough to lay them on the table of the House, together with information, if there is any information in the possession of the government, as to the date upon which the appeal is likely to be heard?


Hon. RODOLPHE LEMIEUX (Solicitor General).: In the absence of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick), I may say that the government will be represented before the Privy Council early in the month of July, as we are informed, when the representation cases will be heard. There is the representaton case of Prince Edward Island and the one for New Brunswick ; and we expect that the province of Ontario and the province of Nova Scotia will also be represented by counsel when the case is heard. The factums, as my hon. friend (Mr. R. L. Borden) calls them, are not yet printed, but we expect to receive them at the department in a few days. I do not suppose there would be any objection to laying them before the House.


Robert Laird Borden: They are called factums in the Supreme Court of Canada, but they are called the case in the Privy Council.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I think, then, the cases are ready.


Robert Laird Borden: I do not confine myself to these. I would like to know if what they call in the Privy Council the record, what we call the cases in the Sup-eme Court of Canada are ready ?


Rodolphe Lemieux: The cases are ready in two other cases, that of the Manitoba Swamp Lands and the Calgary and Edmonton Railway. In the representation case, I understand,' the cases are ready, but they are not printed. As soon as they are printed, they will be laid on the table.



G.T.P.-ALIENS EMPLOYED ON SURVEYS.

Robert Laird Borden: I would like to ask the government to hasten the production of the papers respecting the employment of alien labour in the services of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway


Rt.   H@: I may inform my hon. friend (Mr. R. L. Borden) that the correspondence about the Alien Labour Law was laid on the table yesterday.


Robert Laird Borden: I was not aware of that. Would there be any objection to having it printed ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I do not know. If my hon. friend (Mr. R. L. Borden) wants it; but he might look at it.


Mr. JAMES CLANCY.: I would ask the government if the commission issued to

Judge Winchester to inquire into the employment of aliens on the Grand Trunk Pacific has been laid on the table ?


Hon.   S@: I beg to lay on the table the commission of Judge Winchester to make inquiry into the charges of employment of alien labourers on the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway.



BOUNTY ON LEAD-BEARING ORES.

[Stage Direction]
House went into committee to consider the following proposed resolution :
Resolved, that it is expedient to provide that the bounty authorized by chapter 31 of the statutes of 1903, may be paid on lead-bearing ores mined in Canada and delivered at a smelter in Canada, on or after July 1st, 1903.- Rt. Hon. Sir Richard Cartwright.
Rt.   H@: I may explain that the object of this measure is to correct an oversight in the Bill which was passed last session. It was supposed that it would come into force much earlier, than owing to the lateness of the session, it really did. It was expected to come into force about 1st July, but did not come into force until 24th October. It was intended that the bounty should be paid on these lead-bearing ores on and from 1st July, instead of 24th October.


Robert Laird Borden: The Bill will have no effect except to fix the date at 1st July ?


Sir RICHARD CARTWRIGHT.: That is all the effect it is expected to have. Of course, the Bill will be placed in the hands of hon. gentlemen in due course.


John William Bell: Was anything paid under the operation of this Act during the course of the last fiscal year ?


Richard John Cartwright: Not during the course of the last fiscal year because the Bill only came into force about the end of last October. Of course, a good deal has been paid during the present fiscal year.


Robert Laird Borden: I suppose the right hon. gentleman (Sir Richard Cartwright) is not prepared with a statement as to that at present ?


Richard John Cartwright: I can get the figures shortly. The amount has been very considerable-I. think about $70,000 or $80,000. A good many claims are coming in all the time.


Robert Laird Borden: Is the right hon. gentleman prepared to tell us what effect if any, the granting of the bounty has had on this industry in the province of British Columbia ?


James Clancy: 


Richard John Cartwright: So far as I am advised, it has had considerable effect, chiefly in the way of encouraging mining in certain classes of ores. It did r.ot receive sanction until 24th of October, and the effect has not been as great as it otherwise would.


Robert Laird Borden: I would like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce whether he has any comparative figures as to the production in the province of British Columbia during the time it has been :n operation, that is, the production for any month since the 24th of October as compared with similar months in previous years ?


Richard John Cartwright: I think there is some information of that character.


Robert Laird Borden: Perhaps the minister would be good enough to furnish ns with that information when he brings down the Bill.
Resolution reported, read the second time and agreed to.
Sir RICHARD CARTWRIGHT moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 127) respecting Bounties on Lead.


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

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 113) respecting the Inspection of Grain (Sir Richard Cartwright) was read the second time.
Richard John Cartwright: I propose to refer this Bill to a special committee. The subject is somewhat complicated, and needs to be carefully considered. I move that the Bill be referred to a'special committee to be composed of Messrs Campbell, Ross (Ontario), Sifton, Douglas, Bickerdlke, Talbot, Scott, Henderson, Smith (Wentworth), Wilson and Robinson (West Elgin), the latter as representing the third party.


William Findlay Maclean: I would ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce if an opportunity will be given to the grain buyers to be represented before the committee?


Richard John Cartwright: The committee is for that purpose. I refer the Bill to a special committee, so that all parties may be heard.


Robert Laird Borden: No doubt this is a very wise course, but it is unusual. Perhaps the hon. gentleman will be good enough to explain the reasons.


Richard John Cartwright: Most of the clauses of this Bill are by no means new. From time to time there have been many amendments introduced in the general Inspection Act, affecting the inspection of grain, and there has been a good deal of difficulty in ascertaining their precise meaning. The hon. gentleman will easily under-

stand that when a series of amendments are introduced over a considerable number of years they are apt to appear at any rate, conflicting with each other. The principal object I have in view, besides revising one or two important details, is to consolidate these amendments into one Act affecting this subject which everybody can understand. In addition to that, many complaints have been made to the department touching the inspection of grain. The hon. gentleman will understand that it is a matter of first rate importance that our inspection of grain, when the grain reaches the other side, should be maintained. I desire as far as possible to see to it that the inspection is made uniform, and that there should be no conflict between the certificates given by your inspector on this side and the condition of the grain when it is received on the other side. Also, I want, as fa*r as may be, to harmonize the rules which now subsist iu the two divisions. There are two great divisions, the eastern and the western, otherwise called the Manitoba. Now there has been a good deal of conflict of opinion between experts on this subject, and I think it would be highly desirable that all parties concerned should be heard before a special committee, who will give full time and attention to the subject. The officers of the department have bestowed a great deal of attention and pains in 'trying to make this Bill workable so far as they know how ; but of course their work will be none the worse by being scrutinized by a few other competent parties.


Robert Laird Borden: Iu view of the explanations of the minister, I think it would be a wise course to send the Bill to a special committee. The subject is a very important one. At the meeting of the Chambers of Commerce of the empire iu Montreal last year, some persons engaged in the grain trade found fault with the certificates issued.- I think the ;answer made was that the certificates complained of were really granted in the United States. But the subject is important, and I think it might very well go to a committee.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) moved the second reading of Bill (No. 98) respecting the Harbour of Port Arthur.
Mr. HAGGART.: What is the object of this Bill?


Mr. PREFONTAINE.: The effect of the Bill is to put the harbour at Port Arthur under the control of a board of harbour commissioners. A demand has been made by representatives in the county council and it has been thought that it was in the interest of navigation and of trade and
commerce that this could be done. There is a similar Bill as regards the harbour of Fort William. This was recommended especially by the Board of Trade of Fort William. It is an ordinary harbour board and its powers are more administrative than otherwise. They will have the administration of the harbour of Port Arthur but they will not have the right to borrow money.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, Bill read the second time, and House went into Committee thereon.	[DOT]
On section 1,
John Graham Haggart: Is it usual in a place where there has been no local expenditure on a harbour to put that harbour under the control of the harbour board ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: The purport of the Bill, as I have explained, is to put the affairs of the port in the hands of a commission composed of men of the locality instead of leaving their administration in the hands of the Department of Marine and Fisheries as it is at present. The department of Marine and Fisheries now sees about the collection of dues, &'cr, and the Public Works Department sees about the construction of whatever works may be necessary. These two ports are becoming very important ; trade is increasing considerably and it has been represented by the people interested that by putting it into the hands of a commission in this manner the public interest would be better served.


John William Bell: Would it not be better served under qpe commission than under two ?.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: There are two separate ports and they have asked that two commissions be appointed. Port Arthur and Fort William are not the same port.


Mr. BENNETT.: Has there been a harbour-master at Port Arthur, and if so, what amount was collected by him from vessels last year ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I have not that information under my hand, but I will obtain it.


William Humphrey Bennett: Is it still the rule for the local harbour-master to collect from American vessels calling at Canadian ports ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I cannot give the information now, but I will procure it.
On section 2,


John Graham Haggart: What is it proposed to pay the harbour-master and commissioners ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: There is no salary as regards the harbour commissioners. If the commissioners appoint a harbour-master they will arrange that he should be paid by fees.

On section 5,


John Graham Haggart: Do you give the commission charge of the government work there, such as the clock ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: The existing docks will be transferred for the purpose of administration to the commissioners who will also have charge of the docks that are now being constructed.


Mr BLAIN.: Is a record kept of the cash payments of dues, as there is a record kept of the tonnage ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: Yes, they are obliged to keep regular books and to render accounts.


Mr. BLAIN.: Do they do that regularly ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: Yes.


Richard Blain: Are the books audited and inspected ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: Yes.


Mr. HENDERSON.: We should so far as possible relieve transportation from all burdens, and I would not like to see this commission given power to impose larger duties upon the shipping interests than would be desirable. How do the rates in the past compare with the rates under this Bill ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: The rates fixed by the commissioners must be approved by the Governor in Council. The government would not allow any rates which would be detrimental to the port, nor can it be supposed that the local authorities would make any rates which would be against the interests of their harbours. In Montreal and other places the tendency is to reduce the rates. In Montreal the rates have been reduced fifty per cent during the last seven years.


John Graham Haggart: What are the fees charged at present ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I cannot remember, but there will be no increase under this Bill.


Edward Cochrane: Are not the rates controlled by the department ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: Yes.


Edward Cochrane: Then you should know what the fees are.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I cannot keep in my mind the fees charged at a thousand ports in Canada.


Edward Cochrane: We don't expect you to, but when you bring a Bill here you ought to be able to explain it and not ask us to go it blind.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I will procure the information and give it to the hon. gentleman with great pleasure.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: 


David Henderson: There is too much of this sort of thing ; ministers of the Crown bringing on measures and not being able to give a scintilla of information with regard to them. This is a very important step to take with regard to these hhrbours which are going to be great harbours. To my mind Fort William harbour is second to none in the Dominion. Before we pass a Bill giving the control of these harbours to three commissioners, we should know all details with respect to these harbours in the past, and their prospects for the future. It is all very well to say that the Privy Council will supervise these matters, but if the Governor in Council knows no more about it than the Minister of Marine does to-day, there will not be much gained by governmental supervision. The Minister of Marine seems to have been raking in from the other departments every power he can lay his hands on for his own aggrandizement, and although he has a great capacity for business, it seems to me that he has just got a little beyond his capacity. I would suggest to him that he should allow some of the other ministers to have a little bit of the administration of this country in their charge and not grasp the whole thing, and then he will be able to give information about the measures which he submits to the House. The Bill should stand until he is able to give the House the information.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I thank the hon. gentleman for the left handed compliments he has paid me. He does not seem to know the aim of the Bill-


Edward Cochrane: Do you know it yourself ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I am explaining it to the hon. member for ITalton, and if my hon. friend (Mr. Cochrane) wants a special explanation for himself I will give it to him with pleasure. The aim of the Bill is not to take further power to the department, but on the contrary it is to delegate to a commission the powers which the Minister of Marine now has over these harbours. The Bill has been asked for by those specially interested, who believe it would be better to have these harbours administered by those'who live on the spot, rather than by an official who would perhaps take only enough interest in it to get his salary. All the information asked for is contained in the report of the Marine Department; I will send to the library for it and quote it for the benefit of the hon. gentleman.


Edward Cochrane: The Minister of Marine ought to be more familiar with his report than we are, and if it gives him too much trouble to look it up, he can get his officials to do it for him. I think it is a very-I was going to say insolent thing for a minister to tell me, when I ask for information, that I can get it from a report. I am afraid the

minister is losing his head. I want to tell him that he is a servant of the people, controlling an important department, and I don't want him to tell me, when I ask for information, that I can look it up in a report. We pay him for getting that information, and if he is not competent to get it, he had better get out and give some one else the job.


An hon. MEMBER.: Would you take it ?


Edward Cochrane: No, Sir ; I would not take it. I am not so anxious for a department as some hon. gentlemen, and they had better wait until they get their ambition fulfilled before they ask me whether I would take it. They are waiting, waiting,
[DOT] waiting, for something to turn up, until they can get a job themselves. It is not so funny as they think it is to ask me if 1 would take it, when they know down deep in their hearts that they are waiting for a job, and that just as soon as they get it, they will let somebody else take their place in the House. I wrant to tell the hon. gentleman that he knows, what all the world knows, that the Minister of Public Works was stripped of some of his patronage to gratify the ambition of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries ; and why does he want so much, when he cannot attend to what he has already ? I am here to give an impartial decision on these questions, and this is the way I look at this matter. The minister was very anxious to have more patronage, and he told his constituents that he was going to have it, and the government put themselves in a position to transfer to him a part of the patronage of the Minister of Public Works ; and now when he has got it, he is going to farm it out to a commission. How much are these commissioners going to have ? We pay the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to do the work, and then he says it will be better done by a commission than by one of his officials, who would only do enough to get his salary. I want to know if the hon. minister is sincere in that when he tells me as one of this committee that all his officials think of is to draw their salaries ? We are coming to have government by commission. No matter what little job they have, they transfer it to a commission. I know, Mr. Chairman, that you will sympathize with me in this matter. You are anxious that the money of the electors of your riding should not be frittered away on commissions. The minister is very anxious to talk about his department. If it is his department, he has officials who can hunt up the information when I ask a question ; and if he has not, we will get him another private secretary.


John Graham Haggart: Perhaps I can give the hon. gentleman the information which he asks from the minister. If he looks up the report, he will find that nothing was collected for harbour dues at Fort William or Port
Arthur. The minister states that the fees will not be in excess of those already charged, and the only object of the Bill is to levy harbour dues at Fort William and Port Arthur. This is rather a serious matter. The Canadian Pacific Railway steamers going to Port Arthur are some of them 5,000 tons burden. Under this Bill the fees paid by one of these steamers might be $50 each time it entered the port. They have never been in the habit of paying anything before. Yet, if the promise of the minister is carried out, the Bill will not make any difference, because he says the fees will not be any larger than they are already.


William Humphrey Bennett: I think the hon. member for South Lanark (Mr. Haggart) is wrong in saying that no fees have been charged ; but he is quite right in this, that there have been no fees returned. I find on page P-137 of the Auditor General's Report that in the province of Ontario there are only two harbours, Fort William and Midland, and that from neither of these have any fees been returned by the officers in charge. I suppose that at each port the harbour master keeps all he can get. I know that American vessel owners have complained that when they come into the harbour of Midland twice during the season they are charged with certain fees, which are generally regulated by the tonnage, while if a Canadian vessel goes to an American port she is not held up in this manner at all. Surely it cannot be that there are only two harbours in the province of Ontario where fees are collected ; or is it that the harbour masters everywhere collect them and put the money into their pockets ? I think in the interest of the country no fees should be levied at all, particularly as there are no fees on the American side. Are the harbour masters of Fort William and Port Arthur to have carte blanche to keep all they can collect, or are they to have as a salary what they do collect ?


James Clancy: I have waited with some expectation of hearing a declaration of policy from the government on what is, tq my mind, a very important question. The tendency of the times is to increase as much as possible the facilities for cheap transportation. No dues can be imposed, as harbour dues or any other kind, that do not after all come out of the pockets of the producers and shippers. This is, to my mind, a question that should rest on better ground than the mere representation of a board of trade, no matter how respectable or influential that body may be. It is a question on which the government should have some policy. I have not yet heard it explained what is to be accomplished by having harbour commissioners, even at small salaries, to catch vessels trading in and out of Canadian ports and to compel them to pay dues. I am astonished that in those days when we have the shipping interests constantly coming to

the government asking that canal dues and other charges be taken off, we should be now making provision for the imposition of a tax which, though small, will always be a load upon the trade, and consequently be a step in a retrograde direction. I should like to have the policy which is involved in this explained. While the sums to be paid to the harbour commissioners are not so large as to alarm anybody, still the expenditure will be useless unless there is some better purpose behind it than appears on the surface.


Wilfrid Laurier: I have a very distinct recollection that this legislation was passed, as stated by my hon. colleague, at the solicitation of the commercial authorities of these two towns, Port Arthur and Fort William. I have a distinct recollection that the boards of trade asked to be entrusted with the management of these two harbours. These harbours are of recent creation. They are contemporaneous with the establishment of the Canadian Pacific Railway and have been managed up to the present from the city of Ottawa by the Department of Marine and Fisheries. It will not surprise anybody that the citizens and merchants of these two towns should desire to have the management of their own harbours.


Edward Cochrane: Did they put any money into them ?


Wilfrid Laurier: No, nor do they expect to derive any personal profit, but they desire to attract all the trade they can and are engaged in rivalry with all the other harbours. Everywhere on the lakes there is rivalry between harbour and harbour to attract trade, which is very natural aud laudable. The people of these two rising towns pretend that they are better adapted to look after the interests of their own harbours than anybody else, and in that I agree with them. They can do better for themselves and the more business they can attract to their harbours, the more the whole country will profit. Therefore, when they ask to be entrusted with the management of their own harbours, that seems to the government a very natural and reasonable request and a very laudable ambition. There is one thing in which I agree with my hon. friend, and that is that he should not load down the trade of the country with undue taxation, but that all the charges should be kept as low as possible. This Bill does not violate that principle. Each harbour is to be managed by three commissioners to be appointed by the government, and these commissioners give their services gratuitously.


James Clancy: 
Wilfrid Laurier: No, that is what a harbour master gets, and surely that is cheap enough. Under the circum-Mr. CLANCY.
stances the tolls ought to be very low, and I think that the spirit of this measure should call for the commendation and not the criticism of my hon. friend.
Mr. CLANCY". Nobody will object to the spirit of friendly rivalry between these towns and to their desire to manage their own affairs,, but the question to me is whether this Bill provides the best means of increasing and encouraging trade. The power is given here of charging a maximum sum, and to that extent the government loses control entirely.


Wilfrid Laurier: No.


James Clancy: They may charge up to one cent per ton but cannot charge more. Up to one cent a ton they can make a charge independently of the government.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: No, they must have the approval of the Governor in Council.


Wilfrid Laurier: And the Governor in Council cannot approve of a rate exceeding one cent.


James Clancy: That means really a charge of some kind. Though the rate may be nominal, it is charged to a vessel every time it enters the port, no matter how often, and the right hon. gentleman knows that there is always a very natural tendency to increase the revenue, especially when there is means provided for spending it. It would be better to pay out any reasonable sum without getting any return in the way of fees than to impose any fees which would have the slightest tendency to load up the trade.


Wilfrid Laurier: I agree with you .


James Clancy: I question whether it is wise to create these new powers, which seems to me unnecessary and which it will be difficult for the government to restrain.


Wilfrid Laurier: There is a rivalry to-day among the different harbours around the lakes to attract trade. But in the case of Port Arthur and Fort William there is a growing rivalry to make our own end of Lake Superior the rival of Duluth. It is the ambition of Port Arthur aud Fort William to rival that great American port, and it is because of that ambition that they desire to be entrusted with the management of their own harbours. And I think we may trust to their own sense of self-interest not to impose any tax which would deter shipping from coming into their harbours. In their own self interest, they will endeavour to manage their business affairs so economically as to attract business. I am aware, however, of what my hon. friend has in his own mind and I agree with him. The trade is so sensitive that even a small fraction of a cent will effect something of

a diversion from one port to another. And therefore, not only has the government limited. but parliament here will limit, the power to a charge of one cent a ton. But, in case that even a charge of one cent a ton may be excessive, the Governor in Council has supervision of the rate, which must be prepared by the local authorities and submitted to the Governor in Council. We must assume that the harbour board will seek to bring trade to, rather than remove trade from, the harbour.


Mr. KEMP.: The Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Prefontaine) and the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) have stated that the reason that we have this legislation is that the people of Port Arthur and Fort William desire to control the affairs of their own harbour. How is it that we have exceptional legislation for these two ports V In other ports of the country as Toronto, Montreal, Quebec, all of them great ports- as Port Arthur and Fort William are destined to be great ports-the commissioners are appointed partly by the city council and partly by the Board of Trade. The position of Port Arthur will be much more important in the future than it is at present. The people have expressed a desire to have control of their own port. But, under this Bill every act of the commissioners is subject to the approval of the Governor in *Council. They have no power to even appoint the harbour master, but, under section 8, the harbour master is to be appointed by approval of the Governor in Council. So, the people there are not going to have control of their harbour in the way they must have had in their own minds when they sought this power. What is the length of term for which the commissioners are appointed ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: During good behaviour, just the same as everywhere else.
ilr. KEMP. Then, may I ask the minister what precedent there is for this legislation ? What other harbours of this country have a special Act of this kind ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: Many others-St. John, Halifax, North Sydney, Three Rivers- quite a number of them.


Albert Edward Kemp: But Quebec, Montreal and Toronto have not ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: Quebec and Montreal have.
At six o'clock committee took recess.
After Recess.
Committee resumed at eight o'clock.


James Clancy: It seems to me that, as a test of the good faith with which these powers are asked for for the collection of fees, it should be provided that all fees collected shall be turned over to the Receiver 1
General and become part of the consolidated revenue of Canada. I am very well persuaded that under such conditions, the commissioners would not insist for a moment that any fees should be charged. I wish to repeat that these ports will probably become the most important in Canada. I would urge the Prime Minister to remember that this is the gateway between the east and the west; it is the way by which all the grain must go, at least during a certain period of the year and that grain must be carried by vessel. Any fees must rest as a burden upon that trade, a share of which will have to be borne by those who grow the grain, while those who carry it will pay tile rest. This is unduly taxing commerce. In the very nature of things, these ports being the gateway between the west and the east, the right to charge fees affords opportunities for practically unrestrained means of collecting and expending the public money that should be under the control of parliament and the government. I think a great mistake has been made in the past. Probably some gentlemen of more experience than I have had will not agree with me. But it seems to me that it has been a mistake to permit the harbour commissioners to collect dues and spend the money themselves. There is no reason why money collected in that way should be treated differently from public money received for customs duties, canal tolls or in any other way. I do not say that these moneys have been misused in the past, but I say that the system is not a healthy one, and that these matters should be under control of the government and of parliament. I think the government should be held responsible for every dollar of revenue collected, through whatever channel it may come, and parliament should have something to say in the expenditure of that money. And, though it may seem late in the day, I appeal to the Prime Minister that it is not too late in this growing country of ours, to consider seriously whether all this might not be changed with a viSw to the better management of our .great national harbours. We have a national harbour in Montreal, one in Quebec and others elsewhere, but I think that the greatest shipping harbour in Canada will be at the gateway between the west and the east. Let us spend as freely as the finances of the country will permit to meet the needs of these harbours, and let us make them as good as we can. I think we cannot afford any policy of cheese-paring in matters of that kind, for our national harbours are far too important. I now reiterate what I have just suggested, that the system it is here proposed to continue is an incentive, if you please, iu the hands of the harbour commissioners, where they spend the money themselves to expenditures which might be better made if more completely controlled. I am not ascribing any motives except the

38S8
best. But this is a question of adopting the best system, and I repeat that if fees are to be charged they should be turned over to the Receiver General and become part of the consolidated revenue of Canada. And I repeat also that, if this were done, the commissioners themselves would declare for freeing the ports. Is not that fact alone conclusive proof that we should have no embargo, no charge upon the commerce at these ports ? It seems to me that, above all other places in Canada, these ports are the place where these principles apply. I hope the right lion, gentleman (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) will seriously consider the idea of making these absolutely free ports. If we must contribute to the improvement of these harbours, let us do it without hesitation. But to hand over to any other authority power to impose dues upon the commerce at the very gateway between the east and the west is I think a very great mistake.


Wilfrid Laurier: I must say to my hon. friend (Mr. Clancy) with perfect candour, that I am not prepared to take issue with him in the suggestion he has offered not only with reference to this harbour but to all those harbours which may be fairly considered national harbours. But I have only to observe at this moment that what he proposes amounts to an absolute revolution in what has hitherto been the practice in Canada-not only in Canada, but I think in most civilized nations of the earth. Not only in Canada but everywhere, so far as my information goes, I think all harbour dues collected in a harbour are spent by the authorities of that harbour, and for the harbour itself. It is so in Montreal to-day, it is so in Quebec, and I believe it is so in all the large harbours of the Dominion. I do not say that the hon. gentleman is wrong, far from it; I believe there is a good deal to be said in favour of his suggestion. I believe there is indeed a great deal to be said in favour of the proposition that we should make the harbours absolutely free. On the other hand, this would involve a very heavy charge upon the exchequer, and is a thing which, while laudable in itself, requires a good deal of consideration before we adopted it. I do not think however that in a Bill of this kind we should assume to deal with this harbour in a different manner from that which the government has followed with regard to every other harbour. Therefore whilst there is a good deal to be said in favour of the position of my hon. friend, all I can say at this moment is that the Bill ought to be allowed to go through its regular course before we undertake to consider the proposition of my hon. friend. But as he has made the proposition, it involves a very serious revolution in our policy. In respect to the harbour of Montreal, we shall have to consider at no distant day whether we ought not to make it absolutely duty free. If we do that in Mr. CLANCY.
Montreal, we will have to do it in Halifax, we will have to do it in St. John, and perhaps also with the harbours on the lakes. Before we adopt such a revolutionary policy we should take ample time to consider it.


Mr. GILMOUR.: I understand it is the intention of the government to collect dues at each of these ports. Would the premier for instance collect those dues from one vessel or boat at each of the ports of Port Arthur and Fort William ? I am almost inclined to think he would. Again I would ask how far down the lake from Port Arthur would these commissioners have jurisdiction, besides having control of the harbour itself-how many miles ? It strikes me that this Bill would give the commissioners absolute jurisdiction a long way down the lake.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: At the present time these harbours do not exist as regularly organized harbours. By this Bill it is proposed that a commission shall take charge of the harbour of Port Arthur and organize it as a harbour, or as a port. Now it stands to reason that certain expenses will be connected with this organization, and it is provided in the Bill that such rates or dues as may be imposed will all be controlled by the government, just as if the government were to take hold of it at the present time and appoint officers there to look after the port. Therefore I do not see that it makes much difference whether this port is administered by the department here through officers appointed by the department, or whether it is administered by a commission of gentlemen chosen in the town and having a stake in the locality. It is provided further down in this Bill that all moneys which may be collected there will go first to pay the salaries of the harbour master, because the commissioners receive no pay ; and the balance of whatever money is collected will be used for lighting, buoying and similar purposes, in order to equip the harbour properly. As I have already said, that can be done in two ways-by a harbour commission consisting of local gentlemen, or by the department at Ottawa. But the people there have requested us to organize the port with a board of commissioners, who will see that the necessary improvements are made, and provide for whatever needs to be done in the harbour. Now the rates that it is proposed to impose will all be controlled by the government, there can be no difficulty about that. The same rule will be applied to this harbour as is applied to the harbours in Montreal, in Quebec, in Halifax, and every other city where there is a harbour commission. As I have already had occasion to state, the tendency is to decrease the cost of the administration of these harbours, and to make as little charge as possible upon the trade, or on the ships that frequent these ports.

The question raised by the hon. member lor Bothwell (Mr. Clancy) is a very important one, but it would involve this government in assuming debts or liabilities to the amount of many millions of dollars. It is to be remembered that at this moment the harbour commissioners of Montreal are indebted in the sum of $10,000,000, the interest on which is provided for by dues charged in the harbour. These rates have not been increased, on the contrary they have been reduced during the last few years. The commissioners are about tc enter upon another expenditure to the extent of $3,000,000. which will [DOT] make the debt of the harbour commission of Montreal amount to $13,000,000. I do not exactlj know what is the debt of the harbour commission of Quebec. But if the government were to adopt the policy of assuming the liabilities of the various harbours, I am quite sure they would amount to not less than from $15,000,000 to $20,000,000. Well, the time may come when such a liability will be assumed by this country, but I do not think we are in a position to assume that liability at present, particularly in connection with this Bill.


James Gilmour: The policy of assuming the harbour debt would not be different from that of granting bounties to various industries. With regard to accounting for the fees for shipping as intended in this Bill, would that include an auditor to act for the government ? Now the minister did not answer my question. I asked how far down the lake would this Bill give the commissioners jurisdiction, how far from Port Arthur ? The reason I ask is this : The harbour commissioners of Montreal are residents of that city and no doubt the harbour commissioners of Port Arthur would be residents of that town, and they will be more concerned about the interests of Port Arthur than about any other portion of the shores of the lake for many miles. The same may be said with regard to Fort William. With regard to the tolls, I would ask the minister whether it would not be a good thing if the port of Montreal were made free.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: It would certainly be a good thing if the port of Montreal was free and the trade of the country would be very well satisfied if that could be brought about. Of course if the principle was applied to Montreal it would have to be applied generally and the country would have to assume a very large liability. I am not very familiar with the distances but the description of the harbour is given in section 2 and as far as I can make out, the harbour would comprise from 10 to 15 miles.


Robert Laird Borden: It is not so much a question of administration as one of policy that is involved in what has been suggested by /the hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. Clancy). No one, I am sure, doubts that 123
the commissioners to be selected from the citizens of Port Arthur would administer the affairs of the harbour in the most efficient possible way. It is not a criticism upon that phase of the Bill that is being made. The question submitted by my hon. friend is whether the government" shall or shall not use its utmost efforts, and adopt every possible safeguard to prevent any handicapping of these ports by the imposition of rates which might increase the danger of competition from the south. It seems to me that all of the ports in the east are very much interested in the welfare of Port Arthur and Fort William. I say that for this reason that the bringing of traffic to those two ports and the shipping of the grain from those ports is in the highest possible degree essential to the welfare of ports like Montreal and the maritime provinces. If you bring traffic to Port Arthur and ship it along Canadian routes, the eastern ports, on the St. Lawrence and on the Atlantic seaboard, Will obviously if proper safeguards are adopted have a better chance of traffic than if the grain goes to Duluth. The government must bear in mind that there is very fierce competition to the south of us, and that the bringing of eastern bound traffic to those ports is only a partial step towards keeping it in Canadian territory and shipping it from Canadian seaports. For that reason, it seems to me it would be unwise, except in case of the utmost possible necessity, for the government to impose any restrictions, by the exacting of rates or otherwise, which would in any way militate against the future of those ports. The people of Fort William and Port Arthur themselves are of course obviously interested in the freedom of the ports from the imposition of rates which would tend to divert traffic to the south. I am not sufficiently informed to know just what the conditions as to shipments from Duluth are. I have sent out, for some information which I shall have here in a moment, showing the relative distance of Port Arthur and Fort William from central shipping points in the west as compared with the distance of those points from Duluth by a railway which might, and probably will, be built. Having before us the possible danger -of diversion of traffic by direct communication between the great shipping points of the west and Duluth, ought we not, before entering upon a policy of this kind, to pause and consider what the conditions as to shipment at Duluth are and to consider especially whether or not a measure of this kind might not put us out of the race eventually and perhaps in the near future ? We have a great competing port in Duluth, which as I understand is marvellously well equipped, and where the conditions are not of a character to deter in any way traffic from passing to that point.



Has the Minister of Marine any information to give to the House as to the conditions 'of shipment at Duluth. It seems to me that is one of the very first things to consider in debating this Bill. We are authorizing here a rate up to a certain point which of course must be approved by the Governor in Council. It is all very well to have that safeguard ; I am not dealing so much with that as with the policy of the government as here set out which points to the exaction of a tonnage rate on every ship entering these two harbours. I understand the distance from Winnipeg to Fort William and Port Arthur by the Canadian Pacific Railway is about 426 miles, by the Canadian Northern, that distance is about 438 miles, and I also understand that it is quite possible to build a line from Winnipeg to Duluth which will not exceed 384 miles, between 370 and 384 miles. There is another line I believe almost immediately available which would not exceed 431 miles. Therefore the contention is that taking Winnipeg as a central shipping point you have a possible line to Duluth 60 or 70 miles shorter than the line from Winnipeg to these two ports. Thus you are face to face with a possibly very aggressive competition and you are now face to face with a competition by a line of I believe 431 miles in length. That line is either available now or can be made available almost immediately. Another line which would be much shorter, from 370 to 384 miles, could be built I suppose this year. In view of this it seems to me the Minister of Marine should have considered very carefully the- conditions of shipment at Duluth before embarking on a policy of imposing rates on tonnage entering these ports. Let me not be understood as saying that there should be for a moment any retarding of development of those ports ; I believe they should be developed and should be equipped, but I do not think they should be developed and equipped in such a way as to handicap them in the fierce competition which no doubt will exist, if it does not now exist between those ports and the port of Duluth.


Wilfrid Laurier: The difference in the length of the lines being only about 50 miles, 42 miles, because the distance from Winnipeg to Port Arthur is 426 miles and the distance from Winnipeg to Duluth 384 miles. A distance of 42 miles does not count very seriously after all. The rate between Winnipeg and the harbours on Lake Superior over all lines will necessarily be the rate over the shortest and therefore the cheapest line. ' All others will have to meet the rate of that line. The suggestion made by my hon. friend (Mr. R. L. Borden) and by the hon. member for Both well (Mr. Clancy) that we should not unduly burden the harbours on the lakes and perhaps should not burden them at all, Mr. R. L. BORDEN.
but should make them absolutely free ports is a proposition which is deserving of serious consideration.
I must say that when this Bill was prepared, we simply acted upon the petition of the merchants of Fort William and Port Arthur, and did not take that matter into consideration. If we adopt the policy of making these harbours free ports, we must apply that policy generally, and we cannot do that except upon a very comprehensive plan. We all agree that these harbours must be developed, and we thought we could npt do better than to develop them on the plan suggested by the commercial interests of these young and rising ports. There is not to-day a harbour in the Dominion which has not been developed along the same system of local authorities authorized by parliament to levy tolls with which to improve the harbours. The idea suggested by my hon. friend is not new ; it is now engaging the attention of the Transportation Commission, and in the meantime we thought we could not do better than to develop this harbour on the lines hitherto pursued.


Robert Laird Borden: The policy of the government during the past few years had been to remove as far as possible all charges upon transportation, and that policy has been partially carried out.


Wilfrid Laurier: That has been our policy, and its object is to help the St. Lawrence route.


Robert Laird Borden: I am not proposing to discuss the general policy at present for I have already expressed my opinion with regard to it. However, that policy does not stand in our way if we carry out the suggestion of my hon. friend (Mr. Clancy). We do not want to put Port Arthur and Fort William into such a position that in the future we may have to undo our work with respect to them as well as with respect to all our national ports. No injustice is done to eastern Canadian ports by making Port Arthur and Fort William free, because the ports of Montreal, Quebec, St. John and Halifax are in a very great measure interested in having these inland ports free, inasmuch as the better chance you give to these ports to compete with Duluth, the better chance our eastern Canadian ports have to. get the trade. The government should very* carefully consider the advisability of embarking on a policy such as is set forth in this Bill. I say this in the interests of not only Port Arthur and Fort William, but also in the interests of our grain trade, of the farmers of the west, and of our national ports on the St. Lawrence and in the maritime provinces ? I think that the government should delay pressing this Bill through, in order to see first whether the public interests generally do not demand

that these ports should be made absolutely free and national inland ports in the true sense of the term.


Wilfrid Laurier: There is a good deal in the suggestion of my hon. friend (Mr. It. L. Borden) and I would advise my hon. friend the Minister of Marine to go through the clauses of the Bill, but not to take it out of committee.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I would suggest that the government should await the report of their Transportation Commission, so that they may have information to enable them to intelligently deal with this question.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I will not press the Bill to a third reading until the matter is further considered. When I adopted the idea of the persons locally interested in preparing this Bill, the larger question involved did not present itself to my mind. I have visited Duluth in the capacity of harbour commissioner of Montreal, and as far as I can remember, although I do not speak with confidence, Duluth is not a public port, but is controlled by large private companies.


Albert Edward Kemp: The harbour dues in Montreal and Quebec are collected for the use of the docks, and in the case of Montreal, probably also for deepening the channel. There is no parallel between these harbour dues and the tax proposed by this Bill. The docks now exist in Port Arthur and belong to the great railways, .and if other docks are built those who build them will have the right to charge for their use. If we should pass this Bill we would be establishing the principle of a government tax upon transportation.
Not having before us information with regard to the taxes imposed at Duluth and other American ports. I think it would be a mistake to adopt that principle with refer-erence to Port Arthur and Fort William, which are the only Canadian ports on the great lakes which are likely to be of great importance. While the tax is small, it would constantly stare shippers in the face, and might be the means of diverting trade to American ports. Therefore, whatever is done with this Bill ultimately, I hope that the government will in the future as they have done in the past, assume the small liability which this tax represents. I would like to ask whether it was understood by the parties who petitioned for this legislation that the government would appoint all the commissioners. It is customary, as the minister knows, for the city council and the Board of Trade to participate with the government in the appointment of harbour commissioners, and it seems to me that it would be advisable to give the citizens of Port Arthur and' Fort William an opportunity of appointing one or perhaps two of these commissioners.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: 
Albert Edward Kemp: That is why I asked the minister about the appointment of the commissioners-whether the people of Port Arthur and Fort William signified to him either verbally or in writing that they would like to elect one or more of the commissioners themselves ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: No, the question was never raised.


Albert Edward Kemp: I do not want to oppose the passage of clause 7, but I do feel that if

3S96
you once admit the principle of this harbour tax, which is different altogether from harbour dues, you will he committing a grave mistake under all the circumstances.


David Henderson: To my mind this is a much more far reaching question than it appeared to he when the Bill was introduced or even when it was read this afternoon. I am glad this discussion has taken place, because it has brought more forcibly to our minds the great importance of the two ports, Fort William and Port Arthur. The. minister has told us that he was moved to introduce these two Bills by a petition from these two towns. Now, it occurs to me that there are a great many people just as much interested in these ports as are the people living in Fort William and Port Arthur. To my mind not only should they have been consulted, but the people of Winnipeg should have been consulted, and also the people of Regina, Calgary and all the other towns in that western country, because practically these are their ports. These ax-e the ports through which the transportation from the west to the east to a very large extent must pass ; and to my mind it is not fair to give the towns of Port Arthur and Fort William power to impose a tax on the immense traffic that will originate in the western country and pass through those ports to the eastern parts of the Dominion and on to the ocean. It seems to me that the minister should have gone much further than simply to .Port Arthur and Fort William for authority to introduce these Bills. It seems to me that all the people of the west should have been consulted. At any rate, their interest should have been consulted, because they are the people who are to pay the tax which is to be imposed upon transportation passing through these ports. I think the minister would do well to pause even till another session before committing himself to the policy which is suggested in these two Bills, and carefully consider the question as to whether or not the government could wisely make these two ports exceptional cases in the great transportation problem of this country.
To my mind they are exceptional cases, and ought to be dealt with in an exceptional way. We are abandoning in a great deal of our legislation all former precedents and laying down new rules in the best interests of the country ; and, in my opinion, -the fact that a certain policy was adopted in bygone years of placing certain harbours under the authority of a commission ought not to prevent us from changing our methods, if the new ways are better than the old ones. I regard the harbours of Fort William and Port Arthur, more especially Fort William, as two of the most important In this country. I know of none in the Dominion equal to the harbour of Fort William. That can be made an excellent commodious harbour at very much less cost than any we know of in this country. Along the banks of the Mr. KEMP.	_
Ivaministiquia jjou can have twenty-five miles of docks, including the Mission river, at practically very small cost to the country, because these docks are being constructed by private enterprise. The dredging of the river, *which would be the chief item of expense, would not be very expensive. Looking at these two harbours from every standpoint, they are of an exceptional nature. Their location midway between the east and the west, on the route over which the greater part of the traffic of the great west will pass to the east, warrants us in treating them in a very exceptional manner. So far as I am concerned, I am quite prepared to say that these ports should be made free, and that we should not tax the people of the great west for the privilege of transporting their goods through them. What we are trying to do is to remove burdens and not to impose them. We are discussing the question of giving increased facilities for the carriage of the traffic of that great western country, and why should we spend large sums to cheapen transportation and then place in the hands of three men in Port Arthur and three in Fort William power to impose taxes on transportation from west to east ? The hon. minister will do well to give this matter further consideration. He ought, in all fairness, to consult the people west of Port Arthur and Fort William, who are interested even to a greater extent than the citizens of these two towns. I hope that the minister will not hurry the matter through, but give it his most mature consideration. It will be well for us to start right. These are simply new ports, not yet organized, and in a different position from Montreal, Halifax or Quebec. Whatever changes we are going to make in our system of dealing with the harbours of this country, here is a grand opportunity for the Minister of Marine to exercise his judgment, and not start out in a way that he may regret five or ten years hence and which may compel him, or whoever may then be in his position, to change the system and adopt a new one. The imposing of this tax by the people of Port Arthur and Fort William on the traffic of the country is going to be an additional burden on the west, and he should hesitate before taking a step in that direction. These two ports are twin ports, and it is quite possible that a vessel may have to go to Port Arthur and, after loading partially there, finish her cargo at Fort William. Would it be fair to impose two taxes on that vessel one after another ? I am glad to know that the hon. minister will not press this Bill to a final reading to-night, but will give us another opportunity of discussing the question. After visiting the city of Montreal last year and viewing the harbour, I was very deeply impressed with the improvements being made there, and on my return from Montreal I expressed the opinion, which I stand by to-day, that I regretted very much Montreal

hacl not been made a free port. I hope that at no%ar distant day it will.


Mr. ARCH. CAMPBELL.: I do not think that the committee can say that the mover of this Bill has not proceeded with a great deal of deliberation. It was introduced last year simply as a notice to all interested and not carried, and I understand has been submitted to and approved by the authorities of Fort William and Port Arthur. It seems to me that the Bill is in the right direction. Both those harbours are becoming great and important, and it is necessary that they should be placed under proper jurisdiction. The fact that a small fee is to be levied is only in accordance with the practice followed in other harbours of the Dominion ; and until we decide to make the great harbours free, I do not see how we could proceed to make Port Arthur and Fort William free. The great object of the government has been to try and divert the grain traffic through Canadian channels. We all know and regret the fact that 230,000,000 to 240,000,000 bushels of grain go to the port of Buffalo every year, counting wheat, meal and flour as grain, while a comparatively insignia. cant quantity goes down to Montreal and Quebec, and the government are trying to change this condition. They have removed the tolls from the Welland and St. Lawrence canals, and by that means have removed one of the barriers which obstructed trade to Montreal and Quebec. They have also carried through with considerable success the improvements of these great ports, and it is not to our credit as a country that until the last three or four years nothing was done in the great harbour of Montreal at all.
The facilities for handling grain there were fifty years behind the times. Vessels unloading there could make only 4,000 bushels an hour while, in the great city of Buffalo they would unload grain at the rate of
50,000	or 60,000 bushels an hour. It is no wonder that trade did not seek outlet at Montreal. The government have wisely in my opinion, attempted to remove the difficulties in the way. In the first place they have removed the tolls on the canals. That has had a beneficial effect, for a much larger (Quantity of grain has gone down our highway this year than went down before. The government have also spent large sums in improving the terminal facilities at Montreal, which will be another attraction to the Canadian route. Now, it seems to me that, if you are to go further, if you are to attempt to make any harbours free, it would be better to begin with one of the harbours below the Welland canal. You are aw'are, Mr. Chairman, that a large quantity of the grain that comes through Port Arthur goes to Buffalo. To make those ports free would not divert the grain to the Canadian route. But, if you started at the other end and begin your experiment
by making one of the eastern ports free, the effect would be beneficial to our own transportation system. The time will come, probably, when all these harbours will be made free. But that time has not yet arrived. I do not think the Dominion of Canada is prepared, at the present time, to assume the burden of all these great harbours. It would be an enormous undertaking. We have spent $G0,000.000 in the canals and the working of these costs a very large sum every year, for which there is no return as the canals are free. If we are to assume the harbour at Quebec, the harbour at Montreal, the harbour at Halifax, St. John, Fort William, Port Arthur, Hamilton and all the other important harbours on the Great Lakes, it wTonld be a tremendous undertaking and one that we should not enter upon now'.


Mr. OSLER.: Can the hon. minister tell me the tonnage entering and leaving Port Arthur and Fort William last year ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I have not that information.


Edmund Boyd Osler: I am not very familiar with how this proposed tonnage scheme will work out, but I think it is more serious than the bon. minister believes it to be. Take a vessel of 2,000 tons plying between Port Arthur or Fort William and one of our ports on Georgian bay. In the season it would make probably twenty-eight trips. That would be a tax on that vessel during the season of $560. That is an enormous tax. And, if the vessel has to call at both ports, as many of them have to do, the tax would be doubled. In the future, the system of calling at both ports will probably be more general. I understand that very large terminal elevators are being erected at Port Arthur, and the cleaning elevators will be there. Supposing a vessel of 2,000 tons left Fort William and called at Port Arthur to complete her cargo, the dues in the course of a season would amount to over $1,100. A vessel of 2,000 tons is not very large even now, and probably they will increase rapidly in size. I believe that in the next five years many of our vessels will be 3,000 tons. The charge on such a vessel would be $740, or, if calling at both ports, $1,480. That is a line that would tell very heavily against Port Arthur and Fort William, and I think the tendency would be to send the traffic to Duluth. If my figures are right, and, of course, I have had no opportunity to verify them, this proposal is, as I say, a more serious one, I believe, than the minister supposes it to be. I am sure that the proposed fees of 1 cent a ton is out of all proportion. I do not think there is any such tax levied on any port in this country.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: My hon. friend from West York (Mr. Campbell) seemed to be under the impression that there was a desire on this side of the House to oppose legislation
3S99

'for the benefit of these two very important ports. But that is not the direction that this discussion has taken so far as this side is concerned.


Archibald Campbell: Only as to the question whether they should be free. I understood the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) to contend that they should be free.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: 
Mr. PORTER.: If inconsistency was not a chief feature in the character of the hon. member for West York (Mr. Campbell) and of the government he supports, I should be inclined to express my surprise at his using as an argument in favour of the principle involved in this Bill, the circumstance that the government has taken the tolls off the Welland and St. Lawrence canals. I think if he had stopped for a moment to consider that fact he would not have referred to it. The fact is, as every member of this House knows, that the government did, in its wisdom, see fit to take the tolls off the Welland and St. Lawrence canals. Let me ask for what purpose they did that. For the purpose, as expressed at the time,, of increasing the traffic by those canals, and to give shippers the benefit of cheaper means of transportation. Almost immediately after they had performed that act-and I may say it is not so old that it has escaped the memory of the hon. member for West York (Mr. Campbell)-


Archibald Campbell: Didn't I say so ?
Mr, PORTER. This government saw lit to pass through this House a measure for the construction of what they are pleased to call a transcontinental railway, 400 miles north to take the traffic away from these canals that they were professing to help. The principle involved in this Bill is not a new principle. There are many harbours in the Dominion of Canada that are today being operated under commissions appointed by this or former governments. I have had some personal experience with the management of a particular harbour under a commission appointed by this government. I am not disposed to quarrel with the principle involved in this mil and am not in a position to say whether the administration of the more important harbours of this country would be better under commissions than under the local authorities, but I am bound to say from my experience that I am led to the conclusion that the administration of these harbours by the local authorities is better than their administration under a commission. I am led to that conclusion from one particular case. In that case a petition was presented to the government by the board of trade just as a petition has been presented in the case dealt with by this Bill and it was conceived by the board of trade and by the municipal council at

tliat time, that it would be to the advantage of the municipality that that harbour should be administered by a commission rather than by the municipality itself. That petition found favour in the eyes of the government then in power and a commission was appointed ; the harbour was taken out of the control of the municipality and I think every respectable man in the municipality of which I am speaking, will endorse the statement that the government of that time not this government appointed to that position three men as responsible, as respectable, and as interested as could possibly have been appointed under the circumstances. The mayor of the city was one, the chairman of the executive committee of the council was another and a gentleman who had been engaged in mercantile pursuits in the city I am referring to, was the third, a gentleman who had had experience upon the council for many years and who was perfectly familiar wTith all the details of the harbour. During the two or three years of that commission's administration the harbour prospered. and was very greatly improved and the people generally who were shipping by and through that port were pleased with the result. But unfortunately there came a change of government and here is where I have a suspicion, a very strong suspicion that the Bill now introduced is introduced for the purpose of party advancement rather than for the advancement of the country as
whole. Notwithstanding that commission was then appointed and was operating the harbour to the great improvement of the trade of the harbour and to the general satisfaction of the public, a change in the harbour board came with the change of government and instead of three such gentlemen as I have already mentioned having control of the harbour of the city to which I am now referring, the government saw tit to appoint one man who resided no less than 14 or 15 miles from the harbour to which I am referring as one of these harbour commissioners.
An lion. MEMBER. What harbour ?


Edward Guss Porter: 1 think the Hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries understands perfectly well to what harbour 1 refer. A gentleman was appointed who resided 14 or 15 miles from the harbour. He knew no more about the harbour of that place than a goose knows about its grandmother. He saw fit to hold on and the government saw fit to allow him to hold on as harbour commissioner, until the local election in Ontario occurred and then this harbour commissioner resigned his position and ran for the local legislature. He was defeated and the province of Ontario or the riding in which he ran is to be congratulated on that defeat, but as soon as he was defeated he was reappointed to the position and he to-day occupies the position of harbour commissioner although he knows no more about the harbour of Mr. PORTER.
which he is a commissioner than I know about British Columbia. That state of affairs existed for some time until a second election was called and then this gentleman again ran and was defeated again, and still he is harbour commissioner of the harbour to which I refer. That is not the orly example:	instead of the gentleman
to whom I have referred, who had been engaged in business in the city adjoining the harbour for 30 odd years and who enjoyed the confidence of every business man and every respectable person in the municipality, a man who was perfectly familiar with all the details of the harbour being allowed to continue in office, the government appointed the editor of the ' Ontario ' newspaper which supports this government, who knows no more about harbours or the administration of harbour affairs than, as I said before, a goose knows about its grandmother. Thus, the harbours to which I refer has been carried on, and it is for this reason that I believe that the administration of the harbours of this country by a commission, if this government is going to follow the precedent that it has already laid down by appointing partisans, by appointing political hacks, by appointing people who know nothing about the condition of a harbour or how it should be administered, is not in the interests of the municipalities concerned, or in the interests of the country as a w'hole. The board of trade in that ease petitioned the government of the day to appoint this harbour,commission. But to-day if a vote was taken of the board of trade every man of them -would hold up his hand to say:	Revoke the charter
you have given to the harbour commissioners and let us have it under the old regime. They are feeling to-day the evil effects of the administration of the harbour under commissioners of whom I spoke. I had occasion, not more than two years ago, to call the attention of the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries and the hon. Minister of Customs to a grievance that exists at the port to which I referred. A very large canning factory is carried on in this municipality and fruits as well as corn, tomatoes, peas, and other products of the farm that are grown within a radius of 25 miles of this canning factory are shipped in the adjoining county not more than a mile or a mile and a half from this port by little boats plying -Up and down the Bay of Quinte and these boats are brought into the harbour at Belleville and their cargoes taken to the canning factory. [DOT]


An hon. MEMBER.: Belleville is the port.


Edward Guss Porter: Yes, Belleville is the port,
and I am ashamed to say it is being so treated. Those gentlemen who are running this canning factory are obliged to pay harbour dues to the commissioners on these products, and when they asked for relief the

commissioners refused to grant it. If that port were in the hands of the municipality, the municipality could grant relief, and the municipality would derive much greater *benefit than it derives now. I quite agree ,with the hon. member for Halton, that the hon. Minister of Marine ought to give the greatest consideration to this Bill, because there are large interests involved. Port Arthur and Fort William are the key of the transportation question from the west to the east. They ought not to be dealt with as ordinary ports, but they should be considered in the light of the solution of our transportation problem ; and political interests should not be allowed to interfere with their development.


Edmund Boyd Osler: The ' Huronic ' was built in Coilingwood a couple of years ago, and was perhaps the best vessel built in- Canada up to that date. Her net registered tonnage is 2,216, and she makes a trip at least once a week from Coilingwood to Port Arthur, calling at Owen Sound. Assuming that she makes twenty-eight trips in the season, that, at one cent a ton, would mean $616 in fees at Port Arthur, and if she called at Fort William also it would mean $1,222. If you give the harbour commissioners at Port Arthur and Fort William the right to charge one cent a ton you could not deny the same right to Coilingwood and Owen Sound, and il the ' Huronic ' called at these two latter ports and they charged one cent a ton, it would mean a total tax of $2,464 a season on this one vessel. Such a tax would probably mean the driving of all these vessels out of business altogether. I am quite sure that the shippers have no idea that it is contemplated by the government to give the commissioners at Port Arthur and Fort William the powers set out in this Bill. I hope the minister will let the Bill stand until the shipping interests are consulted.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: These harbour commissioners could only exercise the powers provided for in this Bill with the approval of the Governor in Council.


Edmund Boyd Osler: And if the government refused to allow them to charge one cent per ton, it would be natural that they would make a demand upon the government to spend money on their harbour.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: Not at all. It does not follow that the government would allow them to impose a tariff which would be detrimental to the port. I admit that the maximum tariff of one cent a ton is high, but I do not suppose that the local authorities would impose any fee that would be detrimental to their ports. I may say that these Bills were introduced last year, and were read a second time and printed, remaining on the order paper until the end of the session. We heard no complaint whatever about them ; but, on the contrary, those interested requested that the government
should endeavour to have them passed into legislation. However, the discussion this afternoon has been very fruitful of information. I have no desire to press the Bill on until an opportunity is given for further consideration. In reply to a question asked by an hon. gentleman, I may say that during the year 1903 the number of vessels arriving at Fort William was 332 ; tonnage, 395,000 tons; number of vessels departed, 303; tonnage, 343,000 ; number of vessels arrived at Port Arthur, 199 ; tonnage, 62,850 ; departures, 204 ; tonnage, 63,600. Comparing that port with the port of Quebec, we find that in Quebec during the last season the arrivals were 543 vessels, with a tonnage of
744.000	tons ; and the departures, 630 vessels, with a tonnage of 1,012,000 tons.


Edmund Boyd Osler: I find that the figures in the Trade and Navigation returns for the fiscal year ending the 30th June, 1903, do not correspond with those given by the minister. They give the number of vessels arriving at Fort William at 430 with a tonnage of
539.000	tons and the departures at 413 with a tonnage of 438,000 tons. At Port Arthur the arrivals were 23S with a tonnage of
246.000	tons and the departures 305 with a tonnage of 396,600 tons. These returns are evidently on their face wrong.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: My returns are for the last season to the close of navigation, while the statement read by the hon. gentleman evidently comprises the season from the 1st of July, 1902 to the 1st of July, 1903. I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Is there any objection to my hon. friend bringing down the correspondence in reference to these two Bills ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: There is no objection.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Perhaps my hon. friend would lay on the table of the House what information he can collect with regard to the system adopted in the port of Duluth.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I will try to procure the information. I may state at once, from the information I have gathered, that the statement that there are free ports in the United States is not exactly true. There are ports where there is no direct charge made, but the charge is made indirectly by being included in the railway charges when the terminals are controlled by railways.


Albert Edward Kemp: I would like to ask the Prime Minister a question in reference to a document which the ex-Minister of Public Works, the hon. member for St. Mary's (Mr. Tarte), states that he handed to the Prime Minister two years before he resigned his office, bearing on the question of making Montreal a free port. To make clear what I refer to, I will read from the hon. gentleman's statement in ' Hansard ' of May 3, at page 2489 :

With that object in view, a couple of years before I left office, I placed before the Prime Minister a public document-not a private document-in which I suggested, amongst other things, that the Montreal harbour debt should be assumed by the federal government, and that the port of Montreal should be equipped to handle the trade that is in store for it.
Would the Prime Minister have any objection to laying that document on the table of the House in order that we may have it before us in considering this measure ?


Wilfrid Laurier: The best way will be for my bon. friend to move for it. I think there would be no objection.
Progress reported.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Ottawa post office-reconstruction of portion destroyed by fire on January 4, 1904, and general improvements, 510,000.
[u'No. 118 (Mr. Casgrain) 1\xb0*, 3387 (ii).']
Richard Blain: Might I ask the hon. minister if he is importing the stone from the United States for the improvements to the post office ?


Hon. CHARLES HYMAN (Acting Minister of Public Works).: I am sorry to say that upon the very first question asked I have not the information. I presume that the work is to be done with the same kind of stone as that used in the old building, and if the stone in the present building was imported, we would of necessity have to import the stone for the addition."


Richard Blain: I see some stone in front of the old post office which I presume is to be used for the construction of the new work, and I understand that it has been imported from Ohio. While I do not wish to object if it is the same kind of stone as that used in the present building, it seems a strange policy that we should import stone from the United States to put into any post office building in Canada. I think if it is at all possible to use Canadian stone in the changes which are to be made in the post office, that should be done in the interest of the Canadian people.


Charles Smith Hyman: I quite agree with the hon. member. I am very sorry that the department which originally constructed the post office should have imported American stone ; but not desiring to have an unsightly building, the department felt that it would look more decent to use the same kind of stone as that used in the present building.


James Clancy: Has the department made any inquiry whether it is possible to obtain in Canada any stone that would prevent the unsightly appearance which the hon. gentleman has pictured ? I suppose that before coming to the conclusion that there was no stone in Canada suited for the purpose, the hon. gentlemen had a very thorough exami-Mr. OSLER.
nation, and will be able to bring down the report of his engineer or architect on the subject.


Charles Smith Hyman: I simply have to say at the time this matter was first taken up I was not acting as the minister of the department. I simply have before me the report of the engineer, but am not in a position to say whether an attempt was made or not to obtain the same stone. I think however it stands to reason that it would be impossible to obtain Canadian stone which would exactly correspond with that in the building at present. The intention is to take down the first story of the building and add another story, and the stone in the new story will have to be the same as that which is in the main part of the building. This is only an estimate for $10,000. The whole cost of the work will be something like $160,000.


Richard Blain: When does the hon. gentleman expect to have the work completed ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This vote only covers expenditure until the 30th of June, and there will have to be a large amount in the sup-plementaries.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is the work being done by contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No. The chief architect represented very strongly to my hon. colleague, whose place I am temporarily taking, that it was almost impossible to do the work by contract because the departments had to continue occupying the building while the work was going on.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What will become of that resolution which the government accepted, that no work over a certain amount should be done except by tender and contract ?


Charles Smith Hyman: That would refer to new work, but this is work which has to be done while the departments are in charge of the building, and it would be difficult to lay out a contract and ask for tenders under the circumstances.


Mr. T. I. THOMSON.: Are you going to use Canadian cement or American ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This only asks for $10,000 and the matter of cement does not come in.


David Henderson: Is it to be Canadian labour or American labour ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I think I can promise the hon. gentleman that it will be Canadian labour.


Wilfrid Laurier: There is another question whether they will be Ottawa stonecutters or Hull stonecutters.


David Henderson: I am not going to raise that Quebec question, because I am not quite so provincial as that. I was very much surprised to hear the hon. gentleman say
;909

that we were to spend $100,000 on this building. I wondered where the money was going to be put, but when the hon. gentleman told us they are going to have the work done by day labour, he let the cat out of the bag.


Andrew B. Ingram: If he is going to employ Hull stonecutters, that will be the sign of another election in Wright.
Militia, salaries and wages, further amount required, $18,000.


Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.: Last year I explained that a change was made in the stores branch which up to that time was a civil branch. When that change was made, a portion of the vote proposed last year, amounting to $95,000, was carried to an item under the heading of ' Pay and Allowance, Military Vote,' and $50,000 was left under the present heading ' Salaries and Wages. It was then expected that the change would be made about the 1st of July, but the House continued in session until October, and the change was not made until November, consequently the whole of the vote was exhausted in paying the whole of the stores branch out of the civil vote, and I have had no money really since last March to pay our employees. It costs us $6,000 a month to pay them and we require three months pay. The fact is that a transfer took place of too large a sum of money, and the change did not take place in the department as soon as expected.
Department of Inland (Revenue-Civil government-salaries, $44,310, contingencies, $7,000.


Hon. L. P. BRODEUR (Minister of Inland Revenue).: There is an increase of $5,150 over last year, which is explained as follows :	Statutory increases provided for
two chief clerks, seven first-class, seven second class, six junior second class, six third class, new appointments, two messengers.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How many new appointments ?	-


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Six, under the amendments to the Civil Service Act last year. Those persons were already in the service but not on the permanent list.


Mr. TAYLOR.: Have others been put on the temporary list in their places ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No. there are none filling the places of those permanently appointed.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Last year we had a discussion about the analysts. Has any change been made in the custom, or are you continuing the work as it was carried on last year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I have not made any change in regard to that matter since I entered the department. There are district analysts to whom samples are sent fon
analysis, and also some samples are sent to the head office here.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But, according to my recollection, prosecutions were impossible because, while the district analyst was the party who. ought to be employed to make the analysis, and who would be available to give evidence, the samples were sent here, and the chain of evidence necessary to conviction of the party was broken. I have not the law before me, but that is my remembrance of the matter. The district analysts did the work for years. But, for some reason unknown to the House, they were dropped. Their names remain there, but they are not given any work to do.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think my hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) is misinformed. I do not think we are bound by the law to send samples to the district analyst. The evidence could be given just as well, and perhaps in a more efficient way, by the analyst at the head office. We had some difficulty formerly because the analyses, instead of being made by the district analysts, were made by outside parties, and so we could not prosecute. We have taken means to make it certain that the analyses shall be made properly.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think that was not where the trouble came in. The law provided, and if I remember well, that the district analyst should collect the samples


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, the law provides that the samples shall be collected by parties employed for the purpose. In all large centres we have men who do that work. Ri Montreal I know a man is busy collecting these samples for analysis.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not intend to deal with the matter to-night, because I have not it sufficiently clear in my memory to give the salient points. But I went over it last year and found that po prosecutions were made under the law. My recollection is that the explanation given to me was that there was a break in the chain of evidence and a case could not be established. At that time I had the law before me, and I remember that it was quite clear to me at that time why you could not prosecute successfully. The fact that prosecutions did not take place is at legist prima facie evidence that there was something wrong. The law was violated, but there were no prosecutions.
Mr. BRODEUR, I know that there was some difficulty in the way I have mentioned-some district analysts instead of analysing the samples, had them analysed by outsiders.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No, that was not the trouble.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Besides, if I remember the law, it is not specially provided that the

analysis should be made by the district analyst. It can be made at the head office. As to prosecutions, I may say that, in most eases where it has been found that food is adulterated, we have thought it as well to impose as penalty the cost of the analysis, which is very heavy. My hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) knows more about that than I do, having a knowledge of chemistry. No analysis that we make, I believe, costs less than $15. We found that it was much cheaper to have most of these analyses made here.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It seems to me that that could hardly have been the experience. The new system I think was more expensive than the old, and that is borne out by the fact that the estimate for last year was larger than that of the year before, by $5,000, I think. I still believe that the trouble was that the analyses have not been made by the outside analysts whom the department has in different parts of the country. There is one in London, one in Toronto and


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think there are three in Ontario, one in London, and one in Ottawa.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It seems to me, I have seen the names of others.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There may be, I am not very sure.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think these analysts get so much a year.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, I think so.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But no work was given them to do. I do not know whether the salary is still paid. But, if so, it is paid for nothing because the work is done by the department here. And the effect is that though it cost $5,000 more no prosecutions could be carried on.
Mr. BRODiEUR. I have not the figures of last year, but the hon. gentleman will see that we are asking the same amount for next year as was voted for this year.


George Taylor: Among the items charged for contingencies given in the Auditor General's Report, page K-4, are a number of books and papers purchased, including a copy of Sir Wilfrid Laurier and the Liberal Party at $6. I would like to know from the minister wjiat benefit the purchase of that book is to the Department of Inland Revenue ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I was not there then, but I suppose it must be a very valuable book.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Was it a work on analytical chemistry or on political chemistry V


James Clancy: WTe have not had an explanation from the minister whether there is a new clerk coming in. The hon. gentleman knows that iq recent years it has been the custom in his department to appoint a Mr. BRODEUR.
number of temporary clerks, and the next thing we know they are put into positions where they command large salaries. Now, I am not disposed to criticise a fair salary to an efficient officer, but the result has been that many efficient persons who have been for a long time in the service are passed over in favour of later appointments. I would like to know if this is one of those cases.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: All the appointments are made under the Civil Service Act; there are no special cases.


James Clancy: This is simply advancing the salaries, and giving the statutory increases to those already on the staff, but making no increase in the staff ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand you have had heretofore a number of temporary clerks, but by an amendment to the Civil Service Act last year you provided to make those all permanent ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: They are all permanent, and are paid by the moneys provided for the payment of the temporary clerks.


George Taylor: There is an item in the Auditor General's Report, K-6, about which I would like an explanation. It reads :
D. J. Brennan, removal from Toronto : transportation, $7.15 ; board, one week, self and family, $28 ; packing furniture, $31.40 ; unpacking furniture and help in settling, $19.96 ; cartage, $15 ; freight, $16.80 ; total, $118.31.
Why should the country be called upon to pay this ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is sometimes necessary to remove from one place to another officers specially qualified to take charge of some branch of the service. We have then to provide for their removal, and it is only fair that their travelling expenses should be paid. These special services cannot be performed by everybody, but have to be given over to the charge of men specially qualified. In that case we pay their travelling expenses and board.


George Taylor: When was Mr. Brennan appointed ? I find on turning up the Toronto list that he only commenced his work there on the 1st of July. He is not described as a special man.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I could give the hon. gentleman fuller information later on. This is a very small amount.


George Taylor: I don't think the country should be called upon to pay a cent of it. This gentleman was called into the service six months ahead, and perhaps there was not room for him in Toronto.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: In regard to the metric instruments purchased in Paris-there is an amount in last year's Auditor General's Report of $1,744, and further on the same page

another sum for metrical instruments purchased in Paris, I think, of $2,289. I would like to ask my hon. friend through whom those instruments were purchased ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think they were bought directly by the department.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I would like the minister to make a note of that, because I see it is mentioned on page K-26. The Auditor General seems to have asked for vouchers for these amounts and not to have received them. So I would like to know through whom these instruments were purchased ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed by my deputy that they were bought directly by the department.


Melzar Avery: Why has the minister no vouchers ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I understand that a draft was drawn, and it was kept in the office here. But these accounts are not paid until all the instruments ordered have been delivered, and the whole of them have not yet been delivered.
Excise-salaries of officers and inspectors of excise, &c., to provide for increases depending upon the result of excise examinations, $374,562.50.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The regular increases amount to $15,620 ; increases not provided for, $900 ; new appointments, $1,110.


Andrew B. Ingram: At page C-61, of the Auditor General's Report there is an item :
Extra duty-pay at large distilleries and other factories.
And another :
Duty-pay to officers serving longer hours at other than special surveys.
Would the hon. gentleman explain what that means ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The duty-pay was established by Order in Council of December 20, 1880, and was granted on the ground that the higher l'ates of duties charged had increased the responsibilities of the officers and that the straight salaries paid them were less than the qualifications required for the work should command. The duty-pay was not to be considered as an addition to the salaries. The duty-pays are given in the schedule of the Act.


Andrew B. Ingram: Suppose they perform these duties in their regular hours and do nothing outside that, then are officers entitled to any additional pay or is the department entitled to any remuneration ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Every distiller or manufacturer who requires the services of a man outside of the ordinary hours is obliged to pay for that additional time.


Andrew B. Ingram: But suppose he does not have their services outside the ordinary hours, what then ?
Mr*. BRODEUR. He has nothing to pay.


Andrew B. Ingram: What are the factories under the Inland Revenue Department ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The distilleries, tobacco factories, malt houses, vinegar factories.


Andrew B. Ingram: In the case of vinegar factories what is the method of collecting fees ? Do the factory owners have to pay anything towards the additional pay ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, unless the officers work outside the ordinary hours then he has to pay for that, but for the ordinary hours of work all the surveys are paid by the government.


Andrew B. Ingram: Well, he would have to contribute to the Inland Revenue Department in some way, I suppose. He would use spirits on which he would have to pay an inland revenue tax or duty.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, as far as vinegar is concerned, I understand there is a fee which is paid to the government, not to the officer.


Andrew B. Ingram: What is the method of imposing that fee and what is the fee generally ? Is there a sliding scale, or is it in the discretion of the minister?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is a sliding scale ; the man who manufactures under 10,000 gallons pays $25 a month, and the man who manufactures over 10,000 gallons pays $50 a month.


Andrew B. Ingram: That is one of the Uiings that has come under my notice, and I think that the department in using their discretion ought to do something to change the rule. Very large manufacturers of vinegar pay a fee of only $50 a month w bile7 others who may not manufacture one tenth or one twentieth as much have to pay $25 a month. I think this is a matter that should be looked into ; it is hardly fair to the small manufacturer and very much in favour of the large one.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is very much in the suggestion of the hon. gentleman. The matter has never been brought to my attention but I shall be glad to give it my best consideration ; I think it is well worthy of consideration.


Andrew B. Ingram: I would be very glad to speak to the minister of the cases I have in mind. I think it is an injustice and the Act should be amended or the minister should exercise any discretion he may have in the matter.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The minister has no discretion, it is all fixed by Order in Council.


Andrew B. Ingram: Does not the Order in Council give you discretion ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It can be amended, but as it is to-day the minister has no discretion. It is fixed by Order in Council, but

as my bon. friend knows we may amend the Order in Council.


Uriah Wilson: How do you arrive at tbe amount to be paid per hour ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is fixed by tbe regulations. It bas been so fixed for many years.


Uriah Wilson: I would like to know wbat tbe rate is ?	.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It runs from 25 cents an bour to 50 cents an hour.


Uriah Wilson: Is that all ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: That is all.


George Taylor: I see on page K-13, a sum of $869.91 paid to lawyers throughout the country. I thought when we had a Minister of Justice and a Solicitor General that these legal expenses would be cut down very materially, yet here is this amount of $869.91 paid to a few lawyers : D. C. Chisholm. Antigonish, N.S., $64.50 ; Hon. Lomer Gouin, K.C., Montreal, $S0, and so on. Why was not this work "done by the Solicitor General ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think it would have cost a good deal more if we had sent some one from Ottawa to attend these prosecutions. Take a case in British Columbia and it would hardly be advisable to send some one from Ottawa to conduct the trial. It is the same with the maritime provinces ; it is too far. My hon. friend will find that the amount which has been spent for legal services is a very small one, very much smaller, I think, than it was in past years.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The minister is unable to tell me how many fines were imposed for the violation of the law. I put the same question to his predecessor last year, and it met with the same result. Last year the following discussion took place, and it applies equally as well to-day:


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How many fines were imposed during the past year tor violations of the Act ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: There were no lawsuits taken, but when the parties were found guilty the department exacted a certain fine as well as the expenses of the analysis. The cases were settled out of court,


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How many fines were imposed by the department ?
The	MINISTER	OF	INLAND	REVENUE.
It is not easy to tell that off-hand, because these penalties are exacted by the collectors of the different divisions. I can bring down a statement if my hon. friend wishes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then you did not go into the courts at all ?
The	MINISTER	OF	INLAND	REVENUE.
No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why not ?
The	MINISTER	OF	INLAND	REVENUE.
Because we are at liberty to settle	these cases,
provided the party who is found guilty is will-Mr. BRODEUR.
ing to do so. We can either impose a penalty or go into court.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Were any samples except fertilizers and Paris green taken last year ?
The MINISTER OF INLAND jREVENUE. Yes. There were 100 samples of fertilizers and 150 samples of Paris green. WTe had also honey, 100 samples ; flavouring extracts, 100 ; canned meat, 100 ; and canned vegetables, 100. These are now undergoing analysis. We have reports of canned meats and fertilizers, which have been published in the bulletin. The balance remains to be published.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: These are all the articles of food or beverages collected during the past year ?


The MINISTER OF INLAND REVENUE.: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: As I read the Act, you could not sustain a prosecution at all. The first clause provides howT the samples shall be obtained by the outside analyst. He shall obtain three samples, one of which he shall put up and send to the department, one he shall give to the party handling or selling the goods, and the third he shall retain and examine himself. The prosecution must take place only after the analysis of the outside analyst, not after the analysis of the central analyst ; and if the prosecution is sustained and the party desires to appeal, he appeals to the chief analyst here, and not till then. I venture to say that you could not sustain a prosecution upon an analysis first obtained from the chief analyst. You might patch up a case and fix a penalty, and the individual breaking the law might be willing to pay it without going any further ; but otherwise you could not sustain a prosecution. If the procedure as defined in the Act is not followed out by the department in the regular order, I do not think it could sustain a prosecution. For these reasons I think the Act is violated, and it is practically of little use. It is for the reason, I think,, that we have had no prosecutions lately, and very little has been done in the last few years.
As I pointed out last year, tbe law provides that the samples shall be collected by the outside analyst, and that he shall analyse. Then when a prosecution took place, he would give evidence, and if the party were not satisfied, he appealed to the department here and the chief analyst was practically a court of appeal.
Mi*. BRODEUR. The samples are collected by the food inspector and not by the analyst.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The law provides that they shall be collected by the analyst.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No. Generally the samples are collected by the food inspector and two of the samples taken are sent to Ottawa, one of which is analysed by Mr. McGill, or one of the other assistant analysts, and then an appeal may be made from the assistant analyst to the chief analyst.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You would not prosecute under the analysis of one officer of your department, and then: appeal to another departmental officer?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The law so provides.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: As I understand it, the outside analyst makes the analysis and is examined to prove the charge. If the party is dissatisfied he can appeal to the department here.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is within the discretion of the minister to have the analysis made by one of the departmental analysts, and it is not necessary that it should be made by the district analyst. That is where my hon. friend is mistaken.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The law says that one sample shall be given to the district analyst who shall analyse it.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The minister can decide by whom the analysis shall be made. The law formerly was that the analysis should be made by the district analyst alone, but the law has been amended and now the samples are sent to Ottawa and analysed by one of the assistant analysts. If we are not satisfied, there may be an appeal to the chief analyst.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There were many samples collected, and many were found to be adulterated, but why have there been no prosecutions?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Most of the people were fined. My hon. friend will find, if he becomes Minister of Inland Revenue one of these days, that it is rather hard to prosecute and have large fines imposed upon poor dealers in the country, who sometimes are found selling things which are adulterated without having any knowledge of the fact. The best way is to compel them to pay a penalty in the shape of the'cost of the analysis. I admit that in some cases ([DOT]samples should be made, and I intend to carry out the law as efficiently as possible.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think it is very important that there should be publicity given to the prosecutions, so that they will serve as a warning to others.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: They are published in the bulletins.


George Taylor: On page K-23 of the Auditor General's Report, I find that the department purchased from W. H. Sproule, Ottawa, eight stop watches. To whom were these distributed, and for what purpose were they purchased?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: They were for the electrical branch, I understand, to be supplied to outside inspectors of electric lights.


Andrew B. Ingram: Is there any analysis made of the cement manufactured in Canada and the cement imported into Canada from the United States?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No.


Andrew B. Ingram: Has there been any application made to the department from the Canadian manufacturers of cement to have that done for the purpose of shutting out
cement of an inferior quality from the Unit-fc.:l States, which is sold in Canada in competition with the genuine article manufactured here?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The department has no jurisdiction in the matter, and I am informed by my deputy minister that no such request has reached the department.


Andrew B. Ingram: All I can say is that there is a good deal of agitation throughout the country on the subject among those interested in cement factories, and I am rather surprised to hear that the department has never received any application or suggestion of that character.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Our Act refers only to
drugs, foods, and fertilizers. As cement does not fall within this classification, I do not see that the department has any authority to analyse it.


James Clancy: The cement industry is a growing industry in the country, and I would ask the Minister of Inland Revenue' if it is not of sufficient importance to justify some, provision being made for an analysis of this article. It will hardly do to pass it over by saying that the department has no jurisdiction, and that therefore nothing should be done.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed that the Department of Public Works is making some analysis of cement for its own purposes. So far as the Department of Inland Revenue is concerned, the law provides for our analysing the three classes of articles which I have just mentioned. The question of cement has never been called to our attention.


Mr. A. F. MacLAREN.: Would it not be well to have samples of cement collected from the different cement factories throughout the country, just as you collect samples of different products, and have them brought to the chemist of the department to be analysed. to ascertain whether any of the cement is adulterated or not?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: My deputy informs me that the Public Works Department does something of this kind, I do not know whether it is for its own purposes or for the public generally. My impression is that it is for its own purposes. If, however, the Department of Public Works were not doing anything in that direction, it would be worth while considering whether we should not amend our Act to make provision for analysing cement. I shall be very glad to give the question due consideration.


Andrew B. Ingram: I am glad to hear the minister speak in the way he does of this very important industry. It is not only the manufacturers of cement who suffer because of the use of adulterated cement, but the public. Our various cities and towns use cement largely for sidewalks, and frequently you will find great cracks in some

of these sidewalks because the people laying them have been humbugged by the manufacturers of inferior cement. If there were some standard of quality imposed and a brand placed upon each barrel, the public would not be humbugged in the way they often are. I hope the minister will give this important matter his consideration.
Excise-to provide for extra duty pay at large distilleries and other factories, $7,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This duty pay was established by Order in Council of December 20th, 1880, and was granted on the ground that the high rates of duties charged had increased the responsibility of the officers and that the straight salaries paid them were obviously less than the qualifications necessary for the effective performance of such duties should command.
Excise-to provide for duty paid to officers serving longer hours at other than special survey, $1,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to pay deserving "officers engaged at other than the special survey, on account of their long hours of attendance and the disagreeable character of their work. They serve from 7 a.m. to 6 p. m., as they are required to be present when the factories open and close. They are simply officers in charge of the factories.


James Clancy: How much was expended last year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 


Richard Blain: Have these inspectors to undergo any examination ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, they cannot be appointed unless they pass the civil service examination.


Uriah Wilson: How many of these factories are there which you have to inspect and have men at all the time ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There are nine distilleries, five tobacco factories and four or five vinegar factories.


Uriah Wilson: In one item I notice you pay $7,000 for overtime of these inspectors, and you only pay them from 25 cents to 50 cents an hour overtime.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is not a question of overtime as far as the $7,000 is concerned, but a question of special work which they do there on account of the importance to the service. It has nothing to do with the number of working hours.


Uriah Wilson: You are then making no appropriation for overtime, but compel the factories to pay. If an inspector works overtime, is he paid by the factory owner or do you pay him ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The factory owner pays the government and the government pays the officer.


Andrew B. Ingram: 


Uriah Wilson: Where are the particulars to be found ?
Excise-preventive service, $13,000.


James Clancy: How much was spent last year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: $10,755.59. With regard to the overtime paid the inspectors, the hon. member for Lennox (Mr. Wilson) will find the particulars on page K-26 of the Auditor General's Report :	' Extra services oL
excisemen paid by manufacturers, $1,021.75.'
Excise-travelling expenses, rent, fuel and stationery, excise, $60,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 'This covers these expenses for the entire outside branch. Last year the expenditure was $57,479.58.


Richard Blain: Were there any prosecutions last year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, several. There was a prosecution every time we discovered some violation of the excise law.


Uriah Wilson: I presume this rent is for offices:	How many offices have you, and
where are they located ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In all the little places in the country where the government has not got a building of its own.


Uriah Wilson: In many of the smaller places you utilize the services of a customhouse officer, and he is an official of the Inland Revenue ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, and I pay him on a commission.


Uriah Wilson: What commission do you pay 7


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I understand about five per cent.


Uriah Wilson: What does it come to in Napanee V


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: On page 129 of the first part of the report of the Inland Revenue Department you will find that Napanee gave $250 commission.


Andrew B. Ingram: Has the hon. gentleman got the figures showing the expenses of rent, fuel, &c.?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No.


Andrew B. Ingram: The vote last year was $60,000, and you are asking the same this year V


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Richard Blain: What was the revenue last year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 

Excise-stamps for imported and Canadian tobacco, $35,000.


James Clancy: This is an increase of $10,000. I suppose it is for additional stamps V


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Andrew B. Ingram: The stamps are got from the American Bank Note Company ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Andrew B. Ingram: Is there a stated price for these stamps, or is there competition in the supply of them ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is a regular contract, which was laid before the House some years ago, fixing the amount we are to pay for these stamps.


Andrew B. Ingram: How long was the contract for ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It has been in existence for five years. I do not know exactly how long it has to run. The contract is not made with our department but with the Finance Department. The company is making the Dominion notes and also our stamps.


James Clancy: There was an over-expenditure last year under this vote. And 1 suppose the hon. gentleman expects to pay for an increased number of stamps ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, the sum expended last year was $26,000 and accounts aggregating $4,920.09 remained unpaid at the end of the fiscal year. We ask this additional vote in order to provide for that amount, and also to enable us to buy more stamps. The number of stamps required is increasing very rapidly. This year we shall collect much more revenue than before, and, consequently, shall require more stamps. Besides, of late years we have not kept a sufficiently large stock of stamps, and our intention is to provide a stock. As my hon. friend will see, if an outside officer asks for stamps and we have not them in stock to send at once, the public interest may suffer.


James Clancy: I suppose this is not an intimation to the dealers that the hon. gentleman proposes increasing' the duty on tobacco. It would not be a proper question for me to ask whether the hon. gentleman intends to increase the tobacco duties, because an intimation on that subject would at once be taken notice of by the trade.
I take it that there is nothing of that kind in contemplation or he would not give the trade so striking a warning just before the budget.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The increased amount has nothing to do with the tariff. And. as for the duties I cannot satisfy my hon. friend's curiosity.


Andrew B. Ingram: If the premier assists the hon. member for Huntingdon (Mr. W. S. Maelaren) to get through his Anti-Cigarette Bill, I wonder what the effect will be on the stamps.
Excise-to pay collectors of customs allowance for duty collected by them for 1903-4, $5,500.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In soihe places, we enlist the services of the customs officers and we pay them by commission. This sum is required to pay that commission.


James Clancy: Do I understand that in some cases this is collected through the customs and in others through the Inland Revenue Department ? We all understand that you mean that there is a duty of fourteen cents a pound on stemmed foreign leaf coming into Canada and as customs duty of ten cents on unstemmed ; but, as a matter of convenience, and for the benefit of those who do not want to pay the duty all at once, they pay through the Inland Revenue Department as they take the tobacco out of bond. I wish to know if there are still some cases where it is collected by the customs officer ?	*


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: All ,the duty collected on raw leaf is collected by the Inland Revenue Department.


James Clancy: Although a customs duty?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, it is not.
Mr.	CLANCY.	My	hon.	friend	(Mr. Brodeur) is mistaken. The tariff provides for that.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think my hon. friend is misinformed. At the beginning, it was a customs duty, but afterwards the law was changed, and now it is an excise duty and is collected by the excise department.
Mr.	CLANCY.	My	hon.	friend	(Mr. Brodeur) will pardon me-that never was changed, but is part of the tariff, The method of collecting was changed, but it is a customs duty and has never become an excise duty.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: According to my recollection the Customs Act states that tobacco is imported free subject to excise regulation.


James Clancy: No, that is the old Act.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: My hon. friend will find it in section 258 of the Inland Revenue Act subsection M :-
On all foreign raw leaf tobacco, unstemmed, taken out of warehouse for manufacture in any cigar or tobacco manufactory, ten cents per pound.


James Clancy: Excise ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, that is the Inland Revenue Act, 60-61 Vic., chapter 19, section 13.


James Clancy: I am very much surprised if that is right. .
Excise-L. A. Frechette, for special translation, $100.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is that ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We have some circulars which are very difficult to translate on ac-

count of the technical words used, so we have to seek the services of Mr. Frechette, who is the chief translator of the House of Commons. We pay him hy the page. Last year, we paid him $95.42.
Excise-provisional allowance of not more than $100 each to officers in British Columbia whose salaries do not exceed $700 per annum, $500.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In British Columbia living is more expensive than it is in eastern Canada, and we give this additional allowance for that reason.
*
Excise-to enable the department to supply methylated spirits to manufacturers, the cost of which will be recouped by the manufacturers to whom it is supplied, and to pay for rent, light, power, freight, salaries, &c., $60,000.


George Taylor: Where are these spirits purchased now ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The department buys this wood alcohol from the Standard Chemical Company, and grain alcohol is bought from the distillers.


George Taylor: There has been an advance in the price to $1.40 per gallon ; is that the contract ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is no contract with the Standard Chemical Company ; we have to buy from them because they are the only parties producing wood alcohol in this country.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Where does this chemical company operate ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I understand they are
operating in Deseronto, Fenelon Falls, Cookshire, and there may be a branch in Simcoe. In all these places I understand are plants operated by this company. I see by my notes that wood alcohol has been shipped from all these places I have just mentioned.


George Taylor: This company then controls all the output, no matter where it is made ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: So I understand.


George Taylor: And you have a contract at $1.40 per gallon.
Mr. BRODEUR, No, we have no contract.


George Taylor: The Postmaster General stated last year there was a contract made for the present year with these people. t


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There was a contract made I think in 1898 for five years, which expired last year. But this contract has never been renewed.


George Taylor: Then you are continuing to pay the same price, $1.40.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, that was the contract price.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How much have you purchased from them last year ?
Mr. BRODEUR, We paid them last year $16,484.44.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Would it not be the part of wisdom to ask for tenders for the supply of this article from any person who might desire to go into the manufacture, instead of giving it to one firm at their own figures, which I think are very high ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I may say that some years ago the Rathbun Company were making wood alcohol, and we were paying them I think $1.60 a gallon. They refused to go on with the manufacture at that price, and they sold their plant to the Standard Chemical Company, all their plant producing wood alcohol. The suggestion of my hon. friend that we should ask for tenders, might be considered. It is a question whether we could get anybody to tender, because I am informed that this is the only company in this country that produces wood alcohol. We might have to go to the United States.


George Taylor: The government created this monopoly and established this Standard Chemical Company out in North Ontario just previous to the by-election and made a five years contract with them. Probably they forced the Rathbun Company and other manufacturers out of the business. The minister says the Rathbun Company charged $1.60. I know they charged less than $1.40, because I have been several times with Capt. Carter trying to get them to take their product. But this contract has been made, this government has created this monopoly by giving them a five years contract just previous to the election, and that shut up the Rathbun Company, they were simply forced to sell out, and this Standard Chemical Company now controls the whole industry.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think my hon. friend is mistaken because I am informed the contract was made in 1898. It was not made with the Standard Chemical Company alone, but with the Rathbun Company also. But afterwards, I am informed, the Rathbun Company sold out all their plant to the Standard Chemical Company, and since then we have necessarily bought from the latter company because they were the only ones manufacturing wood alcohol. The Rathbun Company ceased to deliver us any goods. The contract provided that either the Rathbun Company or the Standard Chemical Company, or both combined, should, from time to time, deliver, during a period of five years, at the said price, such alcohol as the government required.


Samuel Hughes: Was not this contract terminated last year ?	.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Samuel Hughes: What price do you pay this year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: $1.40 a gallon.


Richard Blain: Was the contract renewed without tender ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: That was the first contract we had. It was made without any tender, I think, because they were the only company making wood alcohol. I do not think there is to-day-perhaps the hon. member for South Victoria could tell us-any other company in Canada producing wood alcohol except this Standard Chemical Company.


William Humphrey Bennett: What was the date of the existing contract ? [DOT]


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No new contract has been made. We are buying to-day from the Standard Chemical Company at $1.40, but there is no contract.


Samuel Hughes: Has the government ascertained the price of this commodity in the United States and what it could be imported for ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, we have not asked for any price in the United States. If duty had to be paid on this it would come very much above the $1.40 that is being paid today.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I have been told that it can be made and sold for less than a dollar a gallon and still leave a very large profit, and had it been open to free competition and had the government not given it all under the control of one firm, the chances are they would be getting it to-day for a much less figure than they are.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I shall be very glad to buy at a less price than that if it is possible, and if, after considering the question, I find that we are likely, if we were to ask for tenders, that we should get a better price I would be very glad. I am afraid, however, that we might not be in a better position.


Samuel Hughes: Is the Rathbun Company, of DeserontO, concerned in this company V


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think so ; it is all in the Standard Chemical Company.


Rufus Henry Pope: The Rathbun Company have leased their works at Deseronto to the Standard Company for a term of years ; it is a complicated lease.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think there is a lawsuit over it.
Mr. POPE, The creation of wood alcohol alone, apart from the other chemicals derived from hardwood, would not be "a very profitable business. It wholly depends on the disposition that is made of the bi-products-charcoal, acetate of lime and tarproduced in the process of making wood alcohol. It is only by the sale of these that it is possible to sell at a dollar ; there is no profit in wood alcohol alone at a dollar. You have to pay for the hardwood from $4 to $5, a cord, and a cord will not produce over five gallons of wood alcohol. Consequently, without any application of labour whatever, the first cost of the wood would more than equal the selling price. It has to be solid hardwood of a certain size, and it is more expensive to cut and manufacture than the ordinary cord-wood. Consequently, you pay in the original price of the hardwood as much as you would get out ofi the wood alcohol at a dollar or one dollar and fifteen cents a gallon. So that the price at which the minister may be able to obtain it for the people of Canada is his business, not mine ; but it is a mistaken idea to think that this wood alcohol can be produced for sixty cents or seventy cents a gallon and leave a profit. Everything depends on the handling and selling of the bi-products. The sale of charcoal has been worked up by the Standard Chemical Company to a considerable extent, particularly in Montreal and Toronto. Then they export a large quantity of wood alcohol ; if they had to depend on the Canadian market the Standard Company could not carry on its business. - I have always looked upon it perhaps from a selfish standpoint, as they have an establishment in the village in which I live, in which, however, I have no interest as a shareholder. The raw material is entirely a Canadian product, the second quality of hardwood. One of the difficulties in the handling of hardwood in Canada has been that we have no market for the balance of the tree after what is known as the butt log. With this industry we are able to utilize a greater portion of the tree and get something out of it. This is of great value to the hardwood producers of Canada. The German empire, under the direct inspiration of the Emperor of Germany, has worked out a tremendous problem in the manufacture of this article. It is, I think, worthy of encouragement also from the fact that a large portion of this product is exported in addition to what is being utilized at home. At the same time we lose nothing from an economic standpoint from the extraction of the chemicals, because the charcoal has a heating power which has as much heating power as the wood before it is converted into charcoal. Consequently, I think it is a worthy industry, and personally I would feel sorry to see this article imported from the United States rather than see it manufactured in Canada. However, the minister is at liberty to see what price he can get.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: My suggestion was not that it should be imported at all, but rather that an opportunity might be given to others to commence the same line of business. It is true that if you charge the whole cost to

392S
one product, the wood alcohol, you would be obliged to sell at a high rate, but then it is known that that is not the case at all. the by-products are sold to make up the difference, and when a cord of wood costs $4 or $5, when you take all the by-products into account, I am told by a party who professes to know that it could be produced and sold at less than a dollar.


Samuel Hughes: There is a branch of this institution in the riding I have the honour to represent, as well as in the adjoining riding of North Ontario. Until a market was found for the charcoal and other by-products no one expected that this methylated spirits could be sold at a very low rate, but now, as the hon. member for Compton has said, there is a market for all the charcoal and more than can be produced from these industries, and, as he says, this charcoal, wihen sold, nets more than the cost of the cord of wood. With the sale of the acetate of lime and other products of the industry [DOT] the methylated spirits can be sold for 25 and 50 cents, that is if they take into account the manufacture of this charcoal and of the other commodities.


Archibald Campbell: Do you know the price in the United States ?


Samuel Hughes: The prioe in the United States is about one-half of the price here.


Rufus Henry Pope: The hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat did not fairly state the case, in so far as the value is concerned. You get about forty-five bushels of charcoal out of a cord of wood, and this would be worth about four or five cents a bushel. Multiply these together and you get the value of the wood, to say nothing of the labour.


William Humphrey Bennett: Might I ask when the last contract with the Standard Company expired, and also if it is anticipated that $60,000 worth of wood alcohol will be purchased this year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Hast year we bought only $17,000 worth.


William Humphrey Bennett: The estimate is for $60,000 ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We have to buy grain alcohol at the same time, and that $60,000 includes everything.


William Humphrey Bennett: What will be the value of the wood alcohol which will be purchased this year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Last year it was about $17,000, and 1 suppose it will be about the same this year.


William Humphrey Bennett: When did the contract with the Standard Company expire ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In July, 1903.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: 


William Humphrey Bennett: Last year we had quite a spirited discussion upon this matter, and it was made so apparent to the Minister of Inland Revenue that he assured the House that he would not enter into another contract with this company, and that competition would be invited. It may be only a coincidence, but it is a fact, that the parties who are interested in the Standard concern at Orillia are very active Liberals. If the government of Canada wish to put up a mail contract for competition that involves an annual expenditure of perhaps a paltry $25, $8 or $10 is spent in advertising and then tenders are invited, but here the department are going to purchase probably more than $17,000 worth of an article that is made by only one firm in the country.
It is a notorious fact in that part of the country, that the Standard Chemical Company is practically owned by Liberals who are making a small fortune out of this business. Why doesn't the minister apply the healthy principle of competition, and if these people are able to supply the article as cheaply as it can be imported, let it be imported. Last year the statement was made by the member for Ottawa (Mr. Bir-kett) who is conversant with the business, that this commodity was being sold retail for $1 and $1.05 a gallon. In Orillia, where the owners of this concern are well known, there will be a feeling of suspicion that the business is not being conducted on a fair basis when the minister gives to his party friends their own price for this article.


Mr. GRANT.: The hon. member for Compton (Mr. Pope) has stated very concisely, the conditions under' which this industry is being canned on in Canada. The Standard Chemical Company has a large factory in the village of Longford in the riding which I represent. I happen to have some knowledge of the practical working of this industry, and I endorse what has been said by my hon. friend (Mr. Pope) as to its value to the farmers of the districts in which the different factories of the company are situated. As the hon. gentleman has well said, a class of hardwood which cannot be utilized in any other way, is utilized in this industry with great advantage to the farmers who sell that hardwood. To my own knowledge, within a radius of 100 miles of the factory in North Ontario, a class of hardwood is bought by this company which could not be utilized for any other purpose, and the farmers of that vicinity are greatly benefited in consequence thereof. I wish to know if either my hon. friend from East Grey (Mr. Sproule) or my hon. friend from Leeds Mr. Taylor) would rise in his place and advise the ministers to invite competition from the United States-


Archibald Campbell: From the Yankees.


George Davidson Grant: I for one would regret to advise the Minister of Inland Revenue to purchase wood alcohol in the United States.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. member is making a suggestion which is not warranted by anything I said. If the Minister of Public Works invites competition for a building, on a public work it does not follow that he goes to the United States for contractors. There was nothing in what I said to convey the suggestion that I would invite competition by importation from the United States.


George Davidson Grant: I have no wish to misrepresent my hon. friend, but it occurred to me that knowing as he did that this article is not produced in Canada except by the Standard Chemical Company, if competition is invited it must be invited from the manufacturers of this article in the United States. That would be the natural conclusion, and the only conclusion to draw from his remarks.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: When the government asked for tenders for Dominion bank notes there was only one Canadian firm, but an American firm came over here and established an industry. If the government asked for tenders, and offer to contract for a reasonable length of time, for this wood alcohol it would be an invitation for.others to go into the business, as in the case of the manufacture of bank notes.


George Davidson Grant: I must ask my hon. friend to stick to the question before the House. I do not think that the field for the industry is sufficiently extensive to induce others to enter into competition in the manufacture of this article. I may tell my hon. friend from East Simcoe (Mr. Bennett) that I have some knowledge of those who form the Standard Chemical Company, and that they are not altogether Liberals in polities. However, what that has to do with the question I cannot quite see.


William Humphrey Bennett: Who are the Conservatives ?


George Davidson Grant: Hon. gentlemen opposite professed to be in favour of the protection of Canadian industries, and here is an opportunity to put to the test their professions in that regard. This industry is not only important in itself, but it is of great value to the district in which the various factories are operated ; and I for one would not be disposed to advise the minister to invite competition from the United States. My hon. friend from Leeds (Mr. Taylor) made a statement which, in view of the information vouchsafed by the minister, I am sure he will retract. He said that on the eve of a by-election in North Ontario-


George Taylor: I did not say by-election.


George Davidson Grant: I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon. Then, he did say that on the eve of an election in North Ontario, a contract was given to this company, without tender, for the supply of this article. Now, the date of the contract as .read by the minister, is
1S98, and although my acquaintance with politics has not been very long, I do not think we had an election for some years following 1898. Therefore, the contract could not have been entered into with the view of influencing an election. More than that, the contract was not entered into, as I understand it, with the existing Standard Chemical Company, but with the Rathbun's, of Deseronto, who some years after sold out their business, and I presume that the contract then passed to the Standard Chemical Company. One hon. gentleman opposite stated that as it was now possible to sell charcoal at a considerable profit, the price of wood alcohol should be reduced. I was recently informed by a gentleman interested in this industry, that while their sales of charcoal have been considerable of late, yet, owing to reasons with which I need not weary the House, they have not been able to build up a profitable trade in charcoal, although they had every hope, that such would prove to be the case in the future. There is therefore no point in the statement that charcoal the by-product of wood alcohol being sold at a profit the price cf wood alcohol should be lessened. I regret delaying the committee at this length, but, as perhaps the largest factory belonging to this company is situated in my riding, I have a considerable interest in seeing that industry flourish, and in wishing that it should be treated at least with fairness by the government and by parliament.


George Taylor: Perhaps I know as much about the industry as any person in the House, from the fact that I have been associated with the Rathbun Company in business matters for a great many years. I came with Captain Carter years ago, when the hon. member for Victoria, New Brunswick (Mr. Costigan) was Minister of Inland Revenue and was importing wood alcohol from Germany. The Rathbun Company proposed to establish the industry if the government would transfer their trade to them. They agreed to do so if the price were the same and the quality equal. The Rathbun Company established the Industry, and supplied the government for years at a less price than they had paid for the imported article, and they would have continued to do so but that this government, immediately after they came into power, made a coiitract with a gentleman in Toronto for the supply, extending over a number of years.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The hon. gentleman Is mistaken.
Mi-. TAYLOR. I know better. The result was that the Rathbun Company was forced to unite with this company and afterwards sold out to it.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Then it was before
this government came into power ?

3931


George Taylor: No, it was immediately after this government came into power. They made a contract with this gentleman in Toronto for the manufacture of the product in the riding of my hou. friend. I know the way the Rathhun Company were treated by this government handing over the trade to the Toronto Chemical Com pany. If the hon. minister will advertise for tenders for the product to be made in Canada for a term of from five to ten years, he will receive tenders from half a dozen different people, notwithstanding the combine that this government has brought into being by taking the supply from the Rath-bun Company and handing it over largely to the Toronto Chemical Company.


Samuel Hughes: One part of the policy of the Liberal-Conservative party is tnat whenever a combine is found to exist ir any article and to abnormally raise the price in Canada, the duty should be removed from that article, in order that the people may not suffer from the effects of the combine. I might recall the case of the salt combine formed by a number of gentlemen a few years ago in order to raise the price of salt abnormally. The Liberal-Conservative government removed the duty entirely, and that broke up the combine. There is a combine in the present case. About 50,000 gallons of methylated spirits mixed with cheap alcohol costs the government about $30,000; and yet you can buy that methylated spirits at retail at $1.50 a gallon at any drug store, showing enormous profits somewhere in that industry.


Mr. TALBOT.: How can the hon. member for Victoria talk of combine in this matter when just a few seconds ago the hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Taylor) declared that there used to be only one factory in Canada, the Rathbun, and now there is only one. Where is the difference ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I may say that the hon. member for Leeds is mistaken so far as [DOT]the Rathbun Company is concerned. The contract made by the government was with the Rathbun Company and the Standard Chemical Company. It was signed in July, 1898. Some months afterwards the Rathbun Company wrote to the department to Mr. Miall who was then Commissioner of Inland Revenue :
We beg to advise that we have' come to an arrangement between ourselves as to the percentage ol wood alcohol you may order. In future, in order to facilitate matters, we would prefer that you send all orders to the Standard Chemical Company.
The Rathbun people themselves asked the department to send all their orders to the Standard Chemical Company.


George Taylor: I would like to ask the hon. minister where this government purchased their wood alcohol during the years 1896, 1897 and 1898, up to the time that Mr. BRODEUR.
ccr.tract was entered into? I know as a n atter of fact that it was immediately after 1896, or previous to the elections of 1896, that an arrangement was made through the Postmaster General with this gentleman in Toronto to have this stuff manufactured in Orillia. It was previous to the general election that the bargain was made as to what should be done if they came in. You will find that for one or two years they purchased from this Toronto company exclusively, and left the Rathbun Company out in the cold. They afterwards forced tLe Rathbun Company to come in and join this company. I know all about it.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This government in 1896. 1897 and 1898, bought from the Rathbun people.


George Taylor: Partly, until their own friends manufactured enough to provide the supply.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The first sale made by the Standard Chemical Company was made in 1898.


George Taylor: Before this contract was made, where did the government buy it ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I have just told the hon. gentleman that it was bought from the Rathbun people.


George Taylor: Not all of it.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: A part of it was brought from the United States, but we thought we should discontinue that, and protect Canadian. industries.


William Humphrey Bennett: 
Archibald Campbell: Did he get it ?


William Humphrey Bennett: No, because the ex-minister had a sense of fairness and could not be dragooned into giving it. No doubt the former minister was unpalatable to many for carrying on the department on that line. I know he would be to the hon. member for West York. I am glad this matter has come up, because it will show the people of that riding how this government transacts business. There was the case of a steamer belonging to the Noble Bros, concern, who were given practically a present of $25,000 through a scrape they got into with the Marine and Fisheries Department. Then there was a present to Mr. Peuchen, one of the stockholders, and Mr. Thompson, of Orillia, also a large stockholder in the concern, of this monopoly of supplying methylated spirits. The administration of the hon. gentleman will not be regarded favourably by people acquainted with these circumstances. This concern is making a huge profit by selling this wood alcohol at $1.40 per gallon, and if forced into the open market they would have to sell it for a good deal less. I am in favour of giving a preference to local industry, but I do not believe in allowing any one to hold up the government. In fact one of these gentlemen connected with that concern went on the platform in the by-election and announced that he had been- a Conservative ; but by reason of the kindly treatment accorded this institution, he saw fit to change his policy. The next week he came to Ottawa and made a request to have the contract renewed. I would ask the minister to let tenders be called for. Then if his party friends cannot supply the material as cheap as any one else, the contract should go to the lowest tender.


Mr. ERODE  UR@: Last year private tenders were asked for from two or three people. They were asked from the Rathbun people, but they simply neglected to answer our letter. We asked whether they would [DOT]be prepared to supply the department with wood alcohol and they gave us no answer V A similar demand was made of the Sault people, but they were also unable to make any tender. So that the only tender we received was from the Standard Chemical Company.


William Humphrey Bennett: Did you publicly advertise for tenders ?
Mr. 'BRODEUR. No. This is a very small amount $16,000, and it is nothing compared with the business those people are doing. The hon. member for Compton knows something about it.


Andrew B. Ingram: I understand that the hon. member for Ontario is not in favour of tenders being asked for supplies. He says that tenders should not be asked for this amount of $17,000 worth of spirits. That applies to his own county. Would he like to see the same thing occur in any other county ?


George Davidson Grant: The hon. gentleman, I am sure would not wish to misinterpret what I said, but before dealing with what I said, let me say a word or two in reply to the hon. member for East Simcoe. I had thought that the by-election in North Ontario was held so long ago and was so entirely satisfactory to the whole Dominion that we would not have it brought up now. I want to, say most emphatically that the Standard Chemical Company did not, nor did any of its officers, take an offensive part in that by-election. It is quite true that Mr. Peuchen, the president, did make a short speech, not as a Liberal, but as a Conservative. He expressly stated he was a Conservative, but that he came to North Ontario as a personal friend of mine, and gave me all the support he could. He did not canvass or interfere with his men in the slightest.


William Humphrey Bennett: Why, it was the talk of the town, the way they were dragooned.


George Davidson Grant: I wish to repeat that he did not in the slightest degree attempt to influence the votes of his workingmen. During the remarks made last session on this very question, it was stated that the subdivision of Rama township, in which the factory is located, changed its vote by giving myself a majority of forty-nine or fifty when formerly it used to give a Conservative majority of two or three. That happens to be the ease, but the change in that subdivision where this factory is situated was not as great as the change in the surrounding subdivisions of the same townships where the factory had no influence and which none of the concern even visited. The change in the subdivision of Rama is only in consonance with that in other subdivisions.


Samuel Hughes: What the hon. gentleman has just said about the members of that company.not taking part in the election, he must know is not accurate. Mr. *Wm. Thompson did take a part and so did Mr. Peuchen. Mr. Geo. Thompson drove through the country.


George Davidson Grant: Pardon me, he was quarantined with small-pox during the four weeks when the election was going on.


Samuel Hughes: Mr. Geo. Thompson was in Muskoka and Baysville and drove through the county. I know it. He drove through with the Ontario grit government agent, named Henderson.


George Davidson Grant: The hon. gentleman should take my word.


Samuel Hughes: I shall not take the hon. gentleman's word, because he knows it is a matter of public notoriety.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Order.


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Monet).: The hon. gentleman must take the word of the hon. member.


Samuel Hughes: I am not saying that he is not saying what is true, but I do not take his word. The House may take it but I will not.
Mr. B(ENNETT. I saw Mr. Geo. Thompson myself taking part in that campaign,


Samuel Hughes: I want to tell the hon. gentleman that Conservatives were ordered. on pain of dismissal, to vote against the opposition candidate, but eighteen of them either spoiled their ballots or declined to vote. They said they did not wish to disobey and lose their positions and had to bow to the lash of tyranny.


Mr. COWAN.: What authority has the hon. gentleman for that statement ?


Samuel Hughes: The authority of honest men.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


Samuel Hughes: They would not be coerced. He went up to these parts and used his influence for the government candidate. If he paid fair wages to his workingmen and a fair price to the farmers who supplied the wood, I would have nothing to say.


Mr. BUREAU.: The hon. member for Compton can tell you something about that.


Samuel Hughes: 
George Davidson Grant: May I ask the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sam. Hughes) if he knows the ruling prices for hard wood for this purpose ?	[DOT]	'	.


Samuel Hughes: 


Samuel Hughes: I am not subject to cross-examination


Some hon. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.


Samuel Hughes: I am not subject to cross-examination by any such gentleman as the hon. member for North Ontario (Mr. Grant). We know all about the price and the workings of it ; and the intrigue and corruption in North Ontario practised by this industry.


Andrew B. Ingram: I was under the impression that it was owing to the stuffing of ballot boxes that the Liberals had such a large majority in North Ontario. But I understand now that it was this Grit who had the small-pox running around North Ontario that frightened the Conservatives so that they did not go out to the polls. That is the explanation of the hon. gentleman's large majority. But the minister has not answered the question why he has not called for tenders for this supply.


George Davidson Grant: I think the hon. gentleman (Mr. Ingram) must have heard it stated that this article is produced in Canada practically by this concern only. And advertisement for tenders would lead simply to reply from this one concern. The Minister of Inland Revenue has pointed out, and, I think he has done it well, that the amount of this contract would not be sufficient in itself to induce others to go into this industry. The public must know what is taken annually by the government, and those who contemplate going into the industry would have to estimate also what the Canadian market would require and what could be exported. It is open to anybody to enter into this manufacture and seek to sell it to the government. And there can be no doubt that if others entered into the manufacture of this article tenders would be asked for by the. department at intervals as the contract expired.


William Humphrey Bennett: Would the minister state what is the duty on wood alcohol and when was it last increased in favour of this Standard Chemical Company-for that is the only concern benefited ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The duty is $2.40 a gallon, imposed in 1896 or 1897. We certainly were not then making business for the Standard Chemical Company.


William Humphrey Bennett: Has any change been made since 1S96 ? I think that came up in the discussion last year V


Andrew B. Ingram: The hon. minister means 1897.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


William Humphrey Bennett: And it was also brought out last year that these party friends secured not only a monopoly but an increased duty.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I said the contract was made in 1898, while the duty was fixed in 1897, the Standard Chemical Company was not in existence.


Andrew B. Ingram: Hon. gentlemen opposite oppose reasonable protection to the industries of this country, but a concern that supplies the department with this material Is given a protection of $2.40 a gallon. 1 am sure the hon. member for North Ontario will show that he is willing to support every straggling industry by giving it reasonable protection, even though it may not be located in North Ontario.


James Clancy: Is there any contract for gin ? The hon. gentleman made a very notable speech not many months ago in which I find the Minister of Inland Revenue and ' the hon. member for North Ontario seem to have an affinity of views in matters of this kind. They are both what are called revenue tariff men, except on these special items, the Minister of Inland Revenue on gin, and the hon. member for North Ontario on methylated spirits. The member for North Ontario declared with no uncertain sound that it would be an outrage, a public abomination to permit the Yankees, as he called them to compete against a Canadian firm that is manufacturing spirits. Yet, he votes against everything that savours of protection. As a Canadian industry this ought to be maintained on fair grounds. But hon. gentlemen opposite are the last men who should say that competition from foreign countries should be shut out in matters of this kind. They have shown particular care of this industry. There is an interesting story about that. The person engaged in - the manufacture of this article came down and, by political pressure, succeeded in getting the present government to increase the duties on that particular article. Then followed the conversion of Mr. Peuchen to the Liberal party. I have not much doubt that he had good, substantial reason to conclude that they were the right party. And bow he has succeeded in electing the very amiable and able gentleman who represents North Ontario (Mr. Grant).


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


James Clancy: I find I am approved for once by hon. gentlemen on the other side. But I do not remember that any of these ' gentlemen, now so loud in their applause, have ever made use of any such generous expressions toward an opponent, even though it was as well deserved as in the case of the hon. .member for North Ontario. That hon. gentleman has not spoken on the tariff before. His voice has been raised to-night in favour of maintaining the privileges of this industry.


William Humphrey Bennett: Is that the minister's ultimatum-that he does not Intend to ask for
125	'
tenders, but will go on giving this company the benefit of $1.40 a gallon or any other price they see fit to demand 7


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I explained that we asked for prices from the people who should be in a position to supply wood alcohol. The Rathbun people did not even answer our letter. The Soo people could not supply us, and the only firm willing to give prices was the Standard Chemical Company. I may say, in answer to the hon. member for Both-well (Mr. Clancy), that, in 1897, the duty was raised, not only on wood alcohol, but on grain alcohol as well.


James Clancy: Not on all.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, on all. It was not until a year later, 1898, that the Standard Chemical Company was formed and made a contract with the government. So the duty was not raised for the purpose of serving the interest of the Standard Chemical Company, for that company was not then in ex-istance.


William Humphrey Bennett: I must congratulate Mr. Tudhope on his relations with this government. Prior to 1896 Mr. Tudhope was one of the most uncompromising Conservatives in Ontario and one of the most bitter opponents of hon. gentlemen opposite. Of course, with the change of government in 1896 he saw new light, especially when hon. gentlemen opposite increased the duties 10 percent on the cutters which he manufactured. Now, since the government are giving this company this monopoly, with the duty I have no doubt added, he will in future make some further demands on the hon. gentlemen, and the people in that part of the country will understand that all one has to do with this government is simply to be converted, and then you get what you like from them.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I notice by a Chicago trade review that wood alcohol of 95 per cent and 97 per cent sold at 65 cents a gallon.
I notice that in most of these druggists' lines there is a close similarity between American prices and Canadian prices. I am quite sure I was correct in the statement I made. The information given me was that it could be sold for $1 a gallon and afford a big profit then.


James Clancy: Did the hon. gentleman send out a request for tenders to any one else ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: To the Soo people, but the Soo people were not able to supply us.


James Clancy: Have any goods been shipped either by the Rathbun people or by the Soo people through this company the hon. gentleman is now dealing with 7


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I could not say.
Some resolutions reported.

J

Rt. Hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIER (Prime Minister) moved the adjournment of the House.


Robert Laird Borden: What business will be taken up to-morrow ?


Wilfrid Laurier: After private business, we will take up Inland Revenue estimates, Weights and Measures.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 12.25 a.m., Wednesday.

Vol.   II@:  on sec. 2 of Bill, 2670 (ii)

 on sec. 3 of Bill, 3034 ; on Amt. (Mr. Bell) 3143 (ii).

 on sec. 6 of Bill, 3204 (ii).


VOL. II-A
[Stage Direction]
Barker, Sami.-Con.
G. T. Pacific Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) on sec. 7 of Bill, on Amt. (Mr. Alcorn) 3211; on Amt. (Mr. Casgrain) 3321 ; on Amt. (Mr. Clancy) 3214 ; on Amt. (Mr. La-vell) 3332 ; on Amt. (Mr. Northrup) 3250 ; on Amt. (Mr. Sproule) 3257 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
in	Com.	on	sec. 1 of schedule, 2229.
[Stage Direction]
 on	sec.	2	of	schedule,	2289	(ii).
[Stage Direction]
on	sec.	4	of	schedule,	2399	(li).
[Stage Direction]
 on	sec.	5	of	schedule,	2429	(ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on secs. 6 and 7 of schedule, 2451 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on sec. 9 of schedule, 2538 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on sec. 10 of schedule, 2652 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
on M. for 3°, on Amt. i (Mr. Lennox)
3529 (ii).
G. T. P. Bill, on Amt (Mr. Clarke) and Mr. Speaker's Decision re Vote being taken, 2057 (ii).
G. T. P., Application for Aid by Co., Communication to anybody previous to reading in the Hse. (Ques.) 3761 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Contracts and Surveys re different Sections (remarks) 3361 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Mr. Hays' Memo re Pet. for Aid in
Nov., 1902, on Criticism (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) in holding back from Rets., 3708 (ii).
' Jack Pine, &c.' Ques. of Priv. re ' Globe ' Editorial, 2459 (ii).
Monarch Life Assurance Co.'s B. 69 (Mr. Osier) on M. for 3°, 3479 (ii).
Privilege (Ques. of) re Par. in ' Globe ' r« ' Land of Jack Pine, &c.,' 2459 (ii).
ii
[Stage Direction]
Sell, A. C., Pictou.
Butter and Cheese, Cost of manufacturing at Nappan, N.S. (Ques.) 2805 (ii).
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s Bill No. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) on M. for 2°, 2063 ; in Com., 2269 ; on sec. 3 (amt.) 3134 ; on sec. 7, on Amt. (Mr. Casgrain) 3323 ; on Amt. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) Govt, ownership, to M. for 3*, 3679 (ii).
G.T.P., Mr. Hays' Memo re Pet. for Aid in Nov., 1902 ; on Criticism (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) in holding back documents from Rets., 3707 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Speech re and Whip's Arrangements
(personal explanation) 2002 (ii).
Immigrants, Destitute and stranded in Can. (remarks) 3873 (ii).
I.C.R. Passes issued, Inquiry for Ret., 3540 (ii).
Lead Bounties B.: 127 (Sir Richard Cartwright) in Com. on Res., 3875 (ii).
Mabou Creamery, Cost of Buildings,&c. (Ques.) 2806 (ii).

 (M. for copies of cor.*) 3771 (ii).
Nappan Dairy Station, Butter and Cheese, Cost of Manufacturing, &c. (Ques.) 2805 (ii).

 (M. for ret.*) 3770 (ii).
Newfoundland Fisheries Treaty with U. S., on M. (Mr. Kaulbach) 2127 (ii).
Personal Explanation re Par. in ' Globe ' re Speech on G.T.R. Bill and Whip's Arrangements, 2002 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: 98 (Mr. Prefontaine) in Com., 3878 (ii).
Ross Rifle Factory, Application for Land on Cove Fields, Que. (Ques.) 2378 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: 
Port Arthur Harbour B.: iii
Borden, Sir Frederick-Con.
S. A. War, Canadians injured, Care of by Govt. (Ans.) 3538 (ii).

King's Medals, Application by Canadians, Number, Condition, &c. (Ques.) 2375 (ii).
Supply :
Militia (salaries and wages) 3909 (ii). Valleyfield Labour Troubles, Collection of Payments by Municipality, &c. (Ans.) 3128, 3312 (ii).
Borden, R. L., Balifaac.
Alaskan Boundary Commission, Inquiry for Cor., 3725 (ii).
Alien Labour and Protection to Canadian Workmen on the G. T. P. (remarks) in Com. on Bill, 3282 (ii.)
Atlantic Mall Contracts, Inquiry for Ret., 3126 (ii).
Budget, The (remarks) 3726 (ii).
Can. and Mexico SS. Service, Govt. Policy re, &c. (Ques.) 2118 (ii).
Canadian Northern Subsidy, Inquiry for Ret., 2116, 2285 (ii).


Canada Temperance Act Amt.   B.@: 3 (Mr. Lancaster) in Com., 2794 (ii).
Edmonton Street Ry. Co.'s B. Ill (Mr .Oliver) on M. (Mr. Oliver) to receive Pet., 2681. Farmers' Bank of Canada B. 131 (Mr. Guthrie) on M. to receive Pet., 3713 (ii).
Fishing Bounties, Delay in Payment of Cheques, &c. (Ques.) 2118 (ii).
Govt. Business, on M. for Precedence on Wednesdays and Thursdays, 3846 (ii).


Grain Inspection B.: on sec. 2 of Bill, 2669 , 3027 (ii).

on sec. 3 of Bill, 2677, 3043 ; on amt.
(Mr. Bell) 3150 ; on Amt. (Mr. Roche), Marquette) 3174 (ii).

 on sec. 4 of Bill, 2678 (ii).

 on sec. 5 of Bill, 3203 (ii).

on sec. 6 of Bill, 3203 (ii).

 on sec. 7 of Bill (amt.) 3293, 3357,
3359 ; on amt. (Mr. Earle) 3267 ; on amt. (Mr. Lavell) 3304 ; on amt. (Mr. Porter) 3289, 3291 (ii).

 on sec. 2 of schedule, 2289, 2320 (ii).

 on sec. 3 of schedule, 2664 (ii).

 on sec. 4 of schedule, 2388, 2395 (ii).

 on sec. 5 of schedule, 2441 (ii).

 on ss. 6 and 7 of schedule, 2447 (ii).

 on sec. 9 of schedule, 2463, 2477 ; stock
securities, &c., 2592 (ii).
/ VOL. II

Ai
Borden, R. L.-Con.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid
Laurier) on sec. 10 of schedule, 2636, 2648.

 on sec. 11 of schedule, 2641 (ii).

Aliens employed on surveys, inquiry for
Cor., &c., 3757 (ii).

 employment of aliens, delay in producing papers (remarks) 3874 (ii).

protest re aliens, &c., Cor., Pets., &c.
(M.	for copies*),	2847 (ii).

emplymt. of	Canadians	as Engineers,&c.	(remarks) in	Com. on B.	72,	3028, 3104
on Amt. (Mr.	Clarke) and	Mr.	Speaker's
decision re vote being taken, 2056 (ii).

 Appnmt. of a Fourth Commissioner (remarks) 3006, 3376 (ii).


Arrangements of Whips with Min. of
Jus. as to Procedure, 2112, 2268 (ii).

 Mr. Hays' confidential Memo., Nov.,
1902, Pet. for Aid on from North Bay to Pacific Ocean, Criticism re holding back from the Hse., 3701 (ii).

v
Borden, R. L.-Con.
G. T. Ry. Co., on M. to take Precedence (remarks) 2001 (ii).

on M. to take Precedence (remarks)
2001 (ii).

on Order for Com., Postponement, 2686
(ii).

 Shareholders' Meeting, Declaration of
Official Reporter (read) 2956 (ii).

 Signing of the Agreement (remarks)
2462 (ii).

 Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson's Speech
(read) 2976 (ii).

 ' Trap ' set by Govt., re Amendments,
Par. in ' Le Canada ' (remarks) 2957 (ii).
Halifax Fishery, Award of 1877. Case ref. to Supreme Court (remarks) 3126 (ii).
Huron and Ontario Ry. Co.'s B. 130, on M. (Mr. Ross, Ont.) to receive Pet., 3844 (ii).
Immigrants allowed into Can. from U.S., &c., (remarks) 3868 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: 98 (Mr. Prefontaine) in Com., 3889 (ii).
Private Bills, Presenting Pets. (M.) to extend Time, 3433 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake, &c., Order, Ques. of (Mr. Dep. Speaker) Ruling, Remarks, &c. 2889 (ii).

Irregularity of Debate, on Personal Explanation (Mr. Osier) and Mr. Dep. Speaker's Rulings re Ms. to adjn., 2885 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: [DOT] on sec. 7 of Bill (amt.) 3212 ; on Amt.
(Mr. Kemp) 3265 ; on Amt. (Mr. Northrup) 3246 (ii).

 on sec. 1 of schedule, 2214 (ii).

 on ss. 6 and 7 of schedule, 2450 (ii).

 on sec. 9 of schedule, 2474, 2625 (ii).

 Appnmt. of Fourth Commissioner, 3385
(ii).

 Emplymt. of Canadians as Engineers in
Com o.n B. 72 (remarks) 3078 (ii).

 Emplymt. of Aliens, Commission to
Judge Winchester (remarks) 3874 (ii).

in Com. on sec. 1 of Bill (amt.) 3007 ;
on Amt. (Mr. Barker) 2975, 2985 (ii).

 on sec. 7 of Bill, on Amt. (Mr. Lavell) 3330 (ii).

in Com. on sec. 1 of schedule, 2215 (11).

 on sec. 2 of schedule, 2288 (ii).

 on	sec.	3 of schedule,	2314	(ii).

 on	sec.	4 of schedule,	2420	(ii).

 on sec. 5 of schedule, 2438 (ii).

 Alien	Labour Law	Enforcement	at
Sauit Ste. Marie, Par. in * Mail,' 3492 (ii).

 Emplymt. of Canadians as Engineers
(remarks) in Com. on B. 72, 3078 ; Cor. from Mr. Griffith, &c. (read) 3082 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: See ' Qu'Appelle, &c.'	.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 1 of schedule, 2241; on sec. 9 of schedule, 2490 (ii).
Lumber in B. C., and Tariff Readjustment (remarks) 2572 (ii).
Mail Delivery in North-west, Delay on Qu'Appelle and Long Lake Ry., Breaking of Bridges, &c., Tels. (read) 2359 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Ry., Attack on Mr. Osier (M.) to adjn., 2787 (ii).

 Breaking of Bridges, &c., Tels. (read)
2359 (ii).

 on Personal Explanation (Mr. Osier)
re Attack by Mr. Scott,, &c., 2872 (ii).

See ' Seed Grain,' &c.
Rebellion Losses, 1885, Payments. Pets. Cor., &c. (M. for ret.) 2808 (ii).
Saskatchewan Mail Service, Tel. from Board of Trade, Rosthern (remarks) 2188 (ii).

Davis, T. O.-Con.
Saskatchewan River and Lakes, Navigation re Surveys, &c. (M. for ret.*) 3771 (ii).
Seed Grain, N.W.T., Inability to get any (remarks) 2283 (ii).

 See * Qu'Appelle,' &c.
Donnelly, Jas. J., East Bruce.
Railway Freight Rates in Ont., on M. (Mr. Broder) to adjn.. 2947 (ii).
Douglas, Jas. M., East Assiniboia.
Lumber Industry, B.C., and Tariff Readjustment, on M. (Mr. Morrison) 2576 (ii).
Earle, Thomas, Victoria, B.C.
Fish Trap Licenses, B.C., Cor. between Can-ners Ass'n. and Govt. (M. for copies*) 2848. Fish Trap-Nets in B. C. Waters. Licenses issued re, &c. (Ques.) 2601 (ii).
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 7 (amt.) 3266 (ii).

 Appointment of Fourth Commissioner
(remarks) 3307 (ii).
Emmerson, Hon. h. R. (Minister of Railways and Canals), 'Westmoreland.
Beauharnois Canal, Number of Employees, &c. (Ans.) 3129 (ii).
Beique, Supt. of Beauharnois Canal, Superannuation, &c. (Ans.) 3129 (ii).
Brockville and Ottawa, and Railway Connections from G.T.R., Govtl. Action re (remarks) 2120 (ii).

 on sec. 3 of Bill, on Amt. (Mr. W. J.
Roche) 3201 (ii).

 on sec. 7 of Bill, on Amt. (Mr. Bennett) 32k; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3297; on Amt. (Mr. Casgrain) 3320 ; on Amt. (Mr. Clancy) 3220 ; on Amt. (Mr. Earle) 3267 ; on Amt. (Mr. Kemp) 3264 ; on Amt. (Mr. Lavell) 3329 ; on Amt. (Mr. Porter) 3291 ; on Amt. (Mr. Sproule) 3255 (ii).

 on sec.	1	of	schedule,	2211	(ii).

 on sec.	2	of	schedule,	2309	(ii).

 on sec.	4	of	schedule,	2419	(ii).

 on sec.	5	of	schedule,	2430	(ii).

 on sec.	9	of	schedule,	2473	(il).

 Petition from G. T. R. Co., Nov. 3,
1902, ' confidential ' (read) 3634. Conservatives opposed to building a transcontinental ry., 3574 ; Govt, unscrupulous company promoters, 3574 ; not a question of details, 3574; met with taunts and jeers by opposition, 3575 ; opposition now outbidding one another by amendments and resolutions to build another transcontinental line, 3575 ; a right-about-face, 3575 ; never intended leaving the Cabinet, 3576 ; opposition said everything favoured the company and nothing the country, 3576 ; we were not dealing technically with the
X

si
Fielding, Hon. W. S.-Con.
G. T. P. Ry. B.-Govt. Ownership (amt.)-Con. Mr. Allen resigns because we bind them not to send our traffic to Portland. 3607 ; road will have important effect in developing improved communication between east and west, 3608 ; efforts more to create a hostile feeling in St. John, but best minds favour G.T.P. scheme, 3608 ; if this Govt, had agreed to send G.T.P. to St. John, not a word would have been said in opposition, 3609 ; scheme not to benefit only one but the Mar. Provs. as a whole, 3609 ; some steamers left St. John because they could not get freight, 3609 ; C.P.R. has its own line of steamers, 3610 ; we hold out hope to all the Mar. Provs. to have a fair chance, 3610 ; they will see that it is a full promise for them, 3610 ; the Mar-Prov. will get some of the grain trade of the west, 3610 ; difference between long and short haul, we can overcome these difficulties, in developing this Dom., 3610; other Provs. must be truly national In their aspirations and not end when it reached the boundaries of their Provs., 3610 ; there may be difficulties by our scheme, but not as great as with Mr. Borden's scheme, 3610 ; tables of distances prepared by opposition compared with Govt, plans, 3611 ; opposition favour Govt, aid to a ry. from North Bay to Winnipeg, 3612 ; Mr. Haggart's position on govt, ownership, 3613 ; we are opposed in this scheme to govt, ownership, 3613 ; amt. drawn in a very ingenious way, 3614 ; insidious clauses of G. T. agreement, 3614 ; no more subsidies to soulless corporations,
3614	; people will not be misled by the ambiguous wording of Mr. Borden's amendment, 3614 ; govt, ownership popular in some respects, 3615 ; growing feeling in that direction, 3615 ; but people of Can. are not prepared for a general policy of govt, operation of rys., 3615 ; it is the theory rather than the practice which attracts, 3615 ; doubts the wisdom of govt, ownership even for the I. C. R., but would not favour a change now, 3615 ; some years ago Conservatives favoured a policy of transferring the I. C. R. to a company,
3615	; C. P. R. trying public opinion on this question, 3616 ; rys. in modern times do not confine themselves to ry. operation alone, but affiliate with other lines of business, for instance, C. P. R. owning hotels, &c., 3616 ; Conservatives are on record as opposing govt, ownership, 3616 ; Sir John Macdonald's position re Crow's Nest Pass Ry., 3618 ; govt, ownership placed in hands of a commission a monstrosity, 3620 ; Con. party in Man. adopted govt, ownership, but Abandoned it as soon as elected, 3621 : coll of the road, 3622 ; obligation of the govt., 3622 ; we build the eastern division, but we provide a tenant for it, 3623 ; Mr. Borden's estimate of cost of road of eastern division, a financial delirium, 3623 ; gives no authority for his estimate, 3624 ; Mr. Adam Davy's estimate reported the country not a difficult one, 3624 ; application to Parlt. on his report asked for $25,000 a mile, 3624 ; railroad building less expensive now. 3624; Mr. Schreiber's letter dealing with original estimate of cost read, 3625 ; question
Fielding, Hon. W. S.-Con.
G. T. P. Ry. B.-Govt. Ownership (amt.)-Con. of three years' interest, 3626 ; Quebec bridge in relation to this scheme. 3627 ; a fairer way would be to leave the Quebec bridge out of this scheme, 3627 ; it should be a self-sustaining work, 3628 ; we enter upon this agreement with confidence of success, 3628 ; G. T. P. Go. must fulfil obligations or not get a cent out of this road, 3629 ; summary statement of obligations, 3629 ; company has only power to issue bonds to the extent of $50,000 per mile, and no application for an increase, 3630 ; comparison with C. P. R. building, 3631 ; conditions then and now, 3631 ; aid to C. P. R., $25,000,000 in cash, 25,000 000 acres of land, 3632 ; gave exemption from taxation, 3633 ; we are not afraid to compare our road with the C. P. R., 3633 ; offer of G. T. R. to build from North Bay to Pacific for ordinary subsidy, 3633 ; confidential memorandum to Prime Minister, Nov. 3, 1902, for subsidies amounting to $6,400 and 5,000 acres per mile (read) 3634 ; never before such a truly national policy as the present one presented to Parlt., 3637 ; has commanded admiration from ocean to ocean, 3637 ; a new line of internal communication, 3637 ; a great scheme for Ontario, 3637 ; no one in Quebec dares to hold up his head against this scheme, 3637 ; some members from Quebec apologizing for the opposition, 3637 ; petty criticism of opposition will not weigh with the people of Canada, 3638 ; the darkest history of Canada was the corruption of the C. P. R. contract, 3638.
G.T.P. Bill, Employment of Canadians as Engineers, &c. (remarks) 3092 (ii).

 on Ques. of Order (Mr. Dep. Speaker)
re Judgment being sustained by Hse., 2890.


Canada Temperance Act Amt.   B.@: 3 (Mr. Lancaster) in Com., 3790 ; (amt.) 3795 (ii).
G. T. P. B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 1 of Bill, 2191, 2665, 2959 ; (Amt.) to clause 3 (Mr. Barker) 2959, 2992 ; on Amt. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3007 (il).

 on	sec.	2	of	Bill, 2669 ; (amt.)	3028,
3359 (ii).

 on	sec.	3	of	Bill, 2677, 3032 ; (amt.)
3067 ; oin Amt. (Mn. Roche, Marquette) 3164 (ii).
*

 on sec.	4	of	Bill, 2678	(ii).

 on sec.	5	of	Bill, 2678,	3203 (ii).

 on sec.	6	of	Bill, 3203	(ii).

 on sec.	7	of	Bill, 3360	; on	Amt. (Mr. Alcorn) 3210 ; on Amt. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3358 ; on Amt. (Mr. Casgrain) 3302, 3318 ; on Amt. (Mr. Clancy) 3214 ; on Amt. (Mr. La veil) 3328 ; on Amt. (Mr. Northrup) 3246; on Amt. (Mr. Sproule) 3260 (ii).

 on	sec.	2	of	schedule, 2286 (ii).

 on	sec.	3	of	schedule, 2664 (ii).

 on sec.	4	of	schedule,	2388	(ii).

 on sec.*	5	of	schedule,	2429	(ii).

 on secs. 6 and 7 of schedule, 2445 (ii).

 on sec.	9	of	schedule,	2462,	2634	(ii).

 on sec.	10 of	schedule,	2636,	2647	(ii).

 on sec. 11 of schedule, 2638 (ii).

 Amts, of Opposition (remarks) re
* trap,' 2958 (ii).

 Construction on different Sections
simultaneously (remarks) 3361 (ii).

Procedure in Discussion, Arrangements
between Govt, and Opposition, 2268 (ii).

 Signing of Agreement (remarks) 2461.

 Speech of Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson
(read) 2975 (ii).

 Stock Securities, &c., 2594 (ii).

 on sec. 7 of Bill, 3225 ; (amt.) 3299 ; on
Amt. (Mr. Sproule) 3260 (ii).

 in Com. on sec. 4 of schedule, 2411 (ii).

 on sec 5 of schedule, 2437 (ii).

 on sec. 9 of schedule, 2519, 2635 (ii).

 on sec. 11 of schedule, 2644 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: Appointment of Fourth Commissioner,
3383 (ii).
Militia Regulations, Remuneration re Camp Attendance (remarks) 3755 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: 98 (Mr. Prefontaine) in Com., 3879, 3895 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake & Saskatchewan Ry., Order, Ques. of, h. m. (Mr. Scott) not discussing the question before Hse., 2764 (ii).

 Ques. of Order, &c., No Motion before
Hse. for Discussion, 2787 (ii).
Rebellion Losses, Payment of Claims, 1885, on
M.	for Ret. (Mr. Davis) Ques. of Order, Discussing other questions, 2826 (ii).
Supply :
Agriculture (archives) 2728 ; (Winnipeg exhibition) 2754 (ii).
N.	W. Mounted Police (pay of force) 2691. Public Works-Buildings, Ottawa (P. O. reconstruction) 3908 (ii).
Heyd, C. B., South Brant.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 3 on Amt. (Mr. Roche) 3193 (ii).

 in Com. on sec. 7, on Amt. (Mr. Porter)
3292 (ii).

 in Com. on sec. 5 of schedule, 2436.

 in Com. on ss. 6 and 7, 2454 (ii).

 Mr. Hays' Memo, re Pet. for Aid dated
Nov., 1902, on Criticism (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) in holding back from Rets., 3710 (ii).

 Whips' Arrangements re Speeches (remarks) 2007 (ii).
Immigrants, Stranded and Destitute in Canada, &c. (remarks) 3861 (ii).
Militia Regulations, Remuneration re Camp Attendance (remarks) 3756 (ii).


Canada Temperance Act Amt.   B.@: 

Hughes, Sami.-Con.
Supply :
Inland Revenue-Excise (methylated spirits) 3924 (ii).
Ticket-of-Leave System, Prisoners liberated, &c., on M. for Ret. (Mr. Monk) 3767 (ii). Trent Canal, Bridge in Carden Township (Ques.) 3435 (ii).
Trent Lakes, Fisheries, Rep. re Destruction by Ice, Restocking, &c. (Ques.) 2556 (ii). Victoria Day Adjournment, on M. (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) 3227 (ii).
Voters' Lists, Victoria and Haliburton, Printing, &c. (Ques.) 2375 (ii).
Wood Alcohol, Purchase from Standard Chemical Co. (remarks) in Com. of Sup., 3924 (ii).
Hyman, Hon. C. S., London.
C. P. Ry. Co.'s B. 70 (Mr. Douglas) in Com., 2597 (ii).
Collingwood Dry Dock, Value, Bonuses, &c. (Ans.) 3310 (ii).
Interprovineial Ry. Bridge Co. of N.B., B. 57 (Mr. C. Marcil) in Com., 2370 (ii).
Nicola, Kamloops and Similkameen Coal and Ry. Co.'s B. 48 (Mr. Galliher) in Com., 3477, 3758 (ii).
Parliament Square and Buildings, Lighting Contract (Ans.) 3311 (il).
Point aux Trembles Wharf, Request for Aid, &c. (Ans.) 3761 (ii).
Quebec and Lake Huron Ry. Co.'s B. 43 (Mr. Malouin) in Com., 2369, 2372 (ii).
St. Francis River Ice Piers, Total Cost (Ans.) 3389 (ii).
Seal Cove, Survey for Wharf (Ans.) 3761 (ii). Supply:
Public Works-Buildings - Ottawa (post office reconstruction) 3907 (ii).
Timagami Ry. Co.'s B. 94 (Mr. McCool) in Com., 3758 (ii).
Ingram, A. B., East Elgin.
Agriculture, Deptl. Salaries, &c., Inquiry for Statements, &c., 3751 (ii).
Alien Labour and Protection to Canadians (remarks) in Com. on G. T. P. Bill, 3281 (ii). Cement in Can., Analysis of, &c. (remarks) in Com. of Sup., 3917 (ii).
Distillery Officers, Extra Pay for Special Work (remarks) in Com. of Sup., 3913 (ii). G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 7 of Bill. Amt. (Mr. Earle) 3273 ; on Amt. (Mr. Casgrain) 3325 ; on sec. 1 of schedule, 2206 (ii).


Canada Temperance Act Amt.   B.@: 
Union Labels B.: in Com., Appnmt. of Fourth Commissioner, 3378 (ii).
Newfoundland Fisheries Treaty with U. S., on M. (Mr. Kaulbach) 2129 (ii).

on see. 7 of the Bill (amt.) 3262 ; on
Amt. (Mr. Casgrain) 3305, 3319 (ii).

 on sec. 1 of schedule, 2228 (ii).
______ on sec. 9 of schedule 2549, 2631 (ii).

on sec. 10 of schedule, 2663 (ii).
Montreal Harbour, Free, Port, Letter from Hon. Mr. Tarte to Prime Minister, Inquiry for, 3906 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.:  on sec. 1 of Bill, 2190. 2958 ; on Amt.
(Mr. Barker) 2969, 2997 (ii).

 on sec. 2 of Bill, 2671, 3029 (ii).

 on sec. 7 of Bill, on Amt. (Mr. Casgrain)
3319	; on Amt. (Mr. Clancy) 3219 (ii).

 on sec.	1	of	schedule,	2203	(ii).

 on sec.	4	of	schedule,	2378	(ii).

 on,sec.	5	of	schedule,	2429	(ii).

 on sec.	9	of	schedule,	2481,	2510 (ii).

 on Amt. (Mr. Clarke) and Mr. Speaker's
Decision re Vote being taken, 2058 (ii).



Laurier, Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid-Con.
G. T. P. Ry., Application for Aid, Communicated to anybody before reading in Hse. (Ans.) 3761 (ii).

Appointment of Fourth Commissioner
(prop. Res.) 3306 ; (amt.) re Fourth Commissioner, 3377 (ii).

 Arrangements of Whips with Min. of
Justice as to Procedure, 2267 (ii).
..

Cor. with Grand Trunk Co., re Construction of Contract, 2977 (ii).

 Employment of Aliens, on Delay in producing Papers (remarks) 3874 (ii).

 Employment of Aliens on Surveys, Inquiry for Cor., 3757 (ii).

 Employment of Canadians as Engineers
(remarks) 3029 (ii).

 Mr. Hays' Memo, re Pet. for Aid in
Nov., 1902, on Criticism (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) in holding back Documents from Rets., 3704.

 ' Jack Pine,' &c., on Ques. of Priv. (Mr. Barker) 2460 (ii).
*

 Order for Com. (postponement) 2686 (ii).

 ' Pettifogging and Quibbling,' Ref. to
Mr. Barker, 2233 (ii).

Procedure, &c. (M.) to take Precedence,
2001 (ii).

 Stock Securities, 2593 (ii).
Joint High Commission, on Inquiry for Cor., 3726 (ii).
Lake Erie and Detroit River Ry. Co.'s B. 105 (Mr. Sutherland, Essex) on M. to receive Pet., 2927 (ii).
McCreary. Mr. W. F., late M.P., Decease of (remarks) 2598 (ii).
Militia Act (pay and allowance) Amt. B. 5 (Sir Frederick Borden) in Com. on Res., 2906 (ii).
Militia Camps, Remuneration for Attendance (remarks) 3726 (ii).
Militia Inspector (prop, res.) 2685 (ii).
Minister of Railways, Absence during Debate on G. T. P. Bill, Criticism of Opposition (remarks) 3339 (ii).
Newfoundland Fisheries, Treaty with U. S., on M. (Mr. Kaulbach) to adjn., 2124 (ii).
Ottawa Electric Co.'s B. 110 (Mr. Champagne) on M. to receive Pet., 2457 (ii).
Ottawa Garrison Drill Hall, Application, &c. (Ans.) 3390 (ii).
' Ownied,' ref. to Mr. Osier, Quotation (from Sir Walter Scott) given, 2166 (ii).
Pensions for N.W.M. Police (remarks) in Com. of Sup., 2714 (ii).
Petitions, on M. to receive, Special Circumstances. &c. (remarks) 2369 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: 98 (Mr. Prgfontaine) in Com., 3883 (ii).
Printing and Stationery, Deptl. Rep. (presented) 2188 (ii).


Vol.   II@: -B.	'
Laurier, Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid-Con.
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Ry. Co., on Ques. of Order (Mr. Lancaster) re placing on Table Letters read in Debate, 2784 (ii).

 on Personal Explanation (Mr. Osier)
and Mr. Dep. Speaker's Rulings re Irregularity of Debate, 2885 (ii).
Railway Act Amts., Legislation re by Govt, (remarks) 3755 (ii).
Railway Freight Rates in Ont., on M. (Mr. Broder) to adjn., 2933 (ii).

Order, Ques. of, 2951 (ii).
Rebellion Losses, 1885, Payment of Claims, &c., on M. (Mr. Davis) for Ret., 2827 (ii).
Returns, on Inquiry for, 2284, 2369 (ii).
St. Andrew's Rapids, Improvements, Res. of Board of Trade. Letter re (Ans.) 2602 (ii).
Savard, Mr. P. V., on Inquiry for Ret. re, 2284 (ii).
Seeds, Sale and Inspection B. 125 (Mr. Fisher) on M. for prop. Res., 3720 (ii).
Similkameen and Keremeos Ry. Co.'s B. 136 (Mr, Morrison) on M. to receive Pet., 3846.
Strathcona, Lord, Speeches re Imperial Policy (remarks) 3753 (ii).
Supply :
N. W. Mounted Police (pay of force) 2686 ; (subsistence, &c.) 2713 ; Yukon (pay, subsistence, &c.) 2713 (ii).
Toronto Island, Protection re Washings, &e. (Ans.) 2807 (ii).
Treadgold Concession, Inquiry for Ret., 3727.
Victoria and Haliburton, Printing of Voters* Lists, &c. (Ques.) 2375 (ii).
Victoria Day Adjournment (M.) 3227, 3434 (ii).
Voters' Lists, Preparation and Distribution, on Inquiry for, 3540, 3727 (ii).
Whips' Arrangements for Adjournments, on Personal Explanation (Mr. Taylor) 2111 (ii).
Winnipeg Board of Trade, Res. Protesting against Charter to Co. for Transportation Route, &c. (Ans.) 2803 (ii).
Winnipeg ' Free Press,' Amounts paid to, 1903-4 (Ans.) 2376 (ii).
Winnipeg Newspapers, Amounts paid to by Govt. (Ans.) 2184, 2373 (ii).
Woodstock, N.B., Drill Hall, Purchase of Site, &c. (Ans.) 2928 (ii).
LaRiviere, A. A. C., Provencher.
Navigation Improvements in Man. and N.W.T., Application for Charter, Res. from Board of Trade, Winnipeg, protesting, &c. (Ques.) 2803 (ii).
St. Andrews Rapids, Res. of Board of Trade, Letter re (Ques.) 2602 (ii).
Winnipeg Board of Trade, Res. protesting re Charter to incorporate Co. to improve
Navigation, &c. (Ques.) 2803 (ii).


XV1U INDEX
[Stage Direction]
Lavell, J. R., Leeds and Grenville.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) on M. for 2°, 2133 ; in Com. (amt.) 3326 ; on sec. 11, 2641 ; on M. for 3°, (amt.) 3416 (ii).
Wolford Centre Post Office Mail Service, Change, &c. 2928 (ii).
Law, B. B., Yarmouth.
Canada Temperance Act Amt. (B. 119) 1° m., 3435 (ii).
Lefurge/, A. A., East Prince, P.E.I.
Alberton and Kildare Mail Service, Contracts re, &c. (Ques.) 3128 (ii).
Chicken Fattening Stations, P.E.I., Number in Operation, &c. (M. for ret.*) 3771 (ii).
Hillsborough Bridge and Murray Branch,
P.E.I. Ry., Amounts expended (Ques.) 2186 (ii).
Hillsborough Bridge and Murray Harbour, P. E. I., Expenditure in Detail (M.) for stmnt.*) 3771 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
See ' Murray Harbour,' &c.
Lobster Canneries established in P. E. I„ Location, &c. (Ques.) 2185 (ii).
Lobster Canning Licenses, P. E. I„ Official Letter from Min. (M. for copies of pets. re*) 3771 (ii).
Lobster Fishermen and Packers, Prices paid, &c. (Ques.) 2185 (ii).
Murray Harbour and Hillsborough Bridge, P.E.I. Ry., Amounts expended (Ans.) 2186.
Murray Harbour Ry. and Hillsborough Bridge: Inquiry for Ret., 3754 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
See ' Hillsborough,' &c.
Lemieux, Rodolphe (Solicitor General), Gaspe.
Representation in H. of C., Appeals from N.B. and P.E.I., &c. (remarks) 3874 (ii).
Supply :
Agriculture (Year-book) 2741 (ii).
Lennox, H„ South Sitncoe.
Cattle Guard Commission, Appnmtfi., Instructions, Reps., &c. (M. for copies*) 2848.
[Stage Direction]
 Inquiry for Ret. 2459, 2602, 3539, 3727.
Cheese Curing at Brockville, &c., Inquiry for Ret., 3754 (ii).
Criminal Code Amt. (B. 56) in Com. (amt.) 3796 (ii).
Finances of Canada, Consolidation, &c. (M.) for SeL Com. (remarks) 3768 (ii).
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co's B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) on M. for 2°, 2153 ; on sec. 1 of Bill, Amt. (Mr. Barker) 2983,	3000 ; on
Amt. (Mr. Clarke) 3011 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on sec. 2 of Bill, 2670 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on sec. 3, 3054, 3059 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on sec. 2 of schedule, 2291 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on sec. 4 of schedule, 2353, 2378 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on sec. 11 of schedule, 2638 (ii).
Lennox, H.-Con.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) on M for 3° (amt.) 3515 ; on Amt. (Mr. Bennett) 3537 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Signing of Agreement (remarks) 2461.
Private Cars, Construction, &c., on M. (Mr. Tolton) for Ret., 3770 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake Ry., on Personal Explanation (Mr. Osier) 2881, 2887 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Order (Ques. of) * a member must accept statement of another member,' 2876 (ii). Railway Act (1903) Amt. (B. 73) 2° m., 3831. Railway Freight Rates in Ont., on M. (Mr. Broder) to adjn., 2949 (ii).
Seeds, Sale and Inspection B. 125 (Mr. Fisher) in Com. on Res., 3723 (ii).
Small, E. A., Patent Relief B. 93 (Mr. Logan) in Com., 3058 (ii).
Supply :
Agriculture (Imperial Institute, London) 3741 (ii.)
Wolverhamptoin Exhibition, Purchase of Whisky (remarks) in Com. of Sup., 3750 (ii).
Leonard, J. E. E., Laval.
Beauharnois Canal, Number of Employees, &c. (Ques.) 3129 (ii).
Beique, Supt. of Beauharnois Canal, Superannuation, &c. (Ques.) 2128 (ii).
Credit Companies, Incorp. by Letters Patent, Number, &c. (Ques.) 3129 (ii).
Doncaster Indian Reserve, O.C., Cor. re Exchange, &c. (M. for copies) 2831 (ii).
Point aux Trembles Wharf, Request for Aid, &e. (Ques.) 3760 (ii).
Valleyfield Cotton Co., Res. from Town Council, &c. (Ques.) 3129 (ii).
Logan, H. J., Cumberland.
Small, E. A., Patent Relief (B. 93) 1°*, 2282 ;
in Com., 3056 (ii).
Supply :
Agriculture (Winnipeg exhibition) 2756 (ii). Winnipeg Exhibition, Ry. Rates from the East re Exhibits (remarks) in Com. of Sup., 2756 (ii).
Mackie, T., North Renfrew.
Lumber Industry in B. C., and Tariff Readjustment (remarks) 2565 (ii).
MacKinnon, D. A., East. Queen's, P.E.I. Gironcoli, S., Patent Relief (B. 126) M. to receive Pet., 3719 ; 1°*, 3846 (ii).
MacLaren, A. F., North Perth.
Cement, Analysis of Imports from U. S. (remarks) in Com. of Sup., 3918 (ii). Maclaren, W. S., Huntingdon.
Cigarettes, Manufacture of, Prohibition of, in Com. on Res., 3772 (ii).
[Stage Direction]


Maclean, W. F., East York, Ont.
Govt. Ownership of Rys. (remarks) 3155, 3193 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 See ' Municipal.'
Grain Inspection B.:  on sec. 1 of schedule, 2197 (ii).
Long Lake & Saskatchewan Ry. Co., Defective Service, on M. (Mr. Scott) to adjn., 2781 (ii).

Appointment of Fourth Commissioner,
3383 (ii).

 Surveys, &c.. re Eastern Division (remarks) 3371 (ii).
Immigrants, Destitute and Stranded in Canada (remarks) 3849 (ii).
Metric System, Purchase of Instruments (remarks) in Com. of Sup., 3912 (ii).	'


Port Arthur Harbour B.: 98 (Mr. Prefontaine) in Com., 3898 (ii).
St. John d'Iberville Post Office Site, Pets, re (M. for copies*) 2847 (ii).
S. A. War, Canadians injured, Care of by Govt. (Ques.) 3538 (ii).
Supply :
Civil Govt.-Inland Revenue (salaries) 3912 (ii).
Ticket-of-Leave System, Names of Prisoners, &e. (M. for ret.) 3766 (ii).
Tobacco Trade with Belgium, Rep. of B. Dugas, (M. for copy*) 2848 (ii).
Vegetables and Fruits imported from U. S., Quantity, Duties collected, &e. (M. for ret.) 2808 (ii).



Morin, J. B., Dorchester.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 2, (amt.) 2671 ; on Amt. (Mr. Lavell) 3331 (ii).
G. T. Px., Contracts, Surveys re Eastern Sections (remarks) 3367 (ii).


Athens P.   O.@: , Charges against Postmaster, &c. (Ans.) 2601 (ii).
Brockville and Ottawa Ry. Mail Connection with G.T.R., and Govt.'s Action (remarks) 2119, 2461	(ii).

 Commission to Judge Winchester (remarks) 3875 (ii).

 on sec. 7 of Bill (amt.) 3243 ; on Amt.
(Mr. Blain) 3240 (ii).

 on sec. 1 of schedule, 2207 (ii).

 on sec. 2 of schedule, 2294 (ii).

on sec. 9 of schedule, 2603 (ii).

xxi
Osier, E. 8., West Toronto.
Calgary & Edmonton Ry. Co., &c., Attack by Mr. Scott (personal explanation) 2849 (ii).

 in Com. on sec. 1 of Bill, on Amt. (Mr. Barker) 2969, 2982 (ii).

 on sec.	2	of	schedule, 2296 (il).

 on sec.	4	of	schedule, 2344, 2425	(ii).

 on sec.	5	of	schedule, 2431 (ii).

 on secs. 6 and 7 of schedule, 2450	(ii).

 on sec. 9 of schedule, 2628 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: 98 (Mr. Prefontaine) in Com., 3898 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Ry. Cos., &c., Personal Explanation re, Attack by Mr. Scott, 2849 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: 
XXI1 INDEX
[Stage Direction]
Prefontaine, Hon. Raymond -Con.
Masters and Mates' Certificates Act (inland waters) Amt. B. 4 (Mr. Lancaster) on M. for 2°,,3796 (ii).
Montreal Harbour Commission (B. wthdn.) 3846 (ii).
Montreal Harbour Board, Res. from Chamber of Commerce re Quarrels, &e. (Ans.) 3132 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 See ' St. Lawrence,' &c.
Navigable Waters Act (rules of the road) Amt. (B. 112) 1° m., 3016 (ii).
Newfoundland Fisheries Treaty with U. S., on M. (Mr. Kaulbach) 2130 (ii).
Pilotage Act (harbour jurisdiction) Amt. (B. 100) 1° m„ 2681 (ii).
Port Arthur, Ont., Harbour (B. 98) 1" m., 2681; 2° m., and in Com., 3877 (ii).
Quebec Harbour Commission (B. wthdn.) 3846 (ii).
St. Lawrence Floods, Res. from Chamber of Commerce re Prevention (Ans.) 3132 (ii).
Sable Island, Tree Planting, Reps, re Success (Ans.) 2117 (ii).
Shipping Casualties Act (pilot) Amt. (B. 102) 1° m„ 2684 (ii).
Signals, Submarine, Purchase by Govt, in Boston (Ans.) 2187 (ii).
Steamboat Inspection Act (mechanical power) Amt. (B. 101) 1° m., 2682 (ii).
Submarine Signals, Purchase by Govt, in Boston (Ans.) 2187. (ii).
Three .Rivers Harbour Commission (B. rvthdn.) 3846 (ii).
Trap Net 'Licenses for Mackerel, Decision of Sup. Court (Ans.) 3389 (ii).
Trent Valley Lakes Fisheries, Destruction by Ice, Restocking, &c. (Ans.) 2556 (ii).
Pringle, R. A., Cornwall and Stormont.
Alien Labour and Protection to Canadians (remarks) in Com. on G.T.P. Bill, 3279 (ii).
Brockville and Ottawa Ry. Connection via G.T.R., Rep. re Investigation (remarks) 3316.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 3, 3051 ; on sec. 7, on Amt. (Mr. Porter) 3284 ; Emplymt. of British Subjects on Surveys, &c. and Alien Labour Law re, on Amt. (Mr. Clare) to M. for 3°, 3511 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Mr. Hays' Memo, re Pet. for Aid, Nov.,
1902, on criticism (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) in holding hack document from Rets., 3713 (ii).
Ottawa and New' York Ry. Mails, 3316 (ii).
Puttee, A. W., Winnipeg.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com., on sec. 1, 2223 ; on sec. 2, 3092 ; on sec. 7, on Amt. (Mr. Clare) re Alien Labour, 3275 ; on Amt. (Mr. Clare) to IvT. for 3°, 3473 (ii).
Puttee, A. W., Winnipeg.
G. T. Pacific Ry., Emplymt. of Aliens, &c. Ireinarks) 3092 (ii).
Immigrants, Destitute and- stranded in Canada (remarks) 3854 (ii).
Letter Carriers, and P. O. Act Amt., Pets, re Grievances, &c. (Ques.) 2555 (ii).
Reid, J. D., South Grenville.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com., on Amt. (Mr. Lavell) 3333.
[Stage Direction]
 on Amt. re Fourth Commissioner, 3376.
[Stage Direction]
 Contracts and Surveys on several
divisions, &c. (remarks) 3360 (ii).
Richardson, M. K., South Grey.
Dental Association, St. Louis Exposition, Can. Representative (Ques.) 3132 (ii).
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. No. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) on M. for 2°, 2080 ; in Com., 2357 ; on M. for 3° (amt.) 3423 (ii).
Railway Freight Rates in Ont., on M. (Mr. Broder) to adjn., 2941 (ii).
Supply :
N. W. Mounted Police (pay of force) 2697 (ii).
Robinson, Jabel, West Elgin.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com., 2279 ; on M. for 3°,"on Amt. (Mr. Lennox) 3522 (ii).
Immigrants, Destitute and stranded in Canada, &c. (remarks) 3854 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Ry. on M. (Mr. Scott) to adjn., 2783 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on Personal Explanation (Mr. Osier)
2886 (ii).
Railway Act (express and telephone cos.) Amt.
B. 6 (Mr. Maclean) on M. for 2°, 3817 (ii). Railway Freight Rates in Ont., on M. (Mr. Broder) to adjn., 2947 (ii).
Railways, Minister of, Absence during Debate on G. T. Bill, &c. (remarks) 3345 (ii).
Seeds, Sale and Inspection B. 125 (Mr. Fisher) in Com. on Res., 3724 (ii).
Supply :
Agriculture (fumigating stations) 2750; (Winnipeg exhibition) 2750 ; (Year-book) 2735.
Roche, Wm., Halifax.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 3, 3173 ; on sec. 7, on Amt. (Mr. Blain) 3241 (ii).
Immigrants refused admission into Canada, &e. (remarks) 3869 (ii).
Roche, W. J., Marquette.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 1, 2192 ; on sec. 3, 3158 ; (amt.) 3164, 3184 (ii).
Infectious Diseases, Quarantine and Provincial Board of Health, Man., Restriction re (M. for cor.*) 3772 (ii).
[Stage Direction]


Roche, W. J. -Con.
Winnipeg Papers, Amounts paid to by Govt. (Ques.) 2184, 2373 (ii).
Winnipeg 'Free Press,' Amounts paid to 1903-4 (Ques.) 2376 (ii).
Rosamond, B., North Lanark.
Immigrants, Destitute and stranded in Canada (remarks) 3848 (ii).
Ottawa Fire Insurance Co.'s (B. 122) M. to receive Pet., 3226 ; 1°*, 3719 (ii).
Ross, Win, South Ontario.
Huron and Ontario Ry. Co.'s (B. 130) M. to receive Pet., 3844 (ii).
Immigrants and Homestead Entries, &c., Number, &c. (Ques.) 3130 (ii).
Railway Act (express and telephones cos.) Amt. B. 6 (Mr. Maclean), on M. (Mr. Fitzpatrick) to ref. to Com. on Rys., 3822 (ii).
Ross, Hon. Wm, Victoria, N.S.
Millitia Act (pay and allowance) Amt. B. 5 (Sir Frederick Borden) in Com. on Res., 2917 (ii).	.
Rebellion Dosses, 1885. Payment of Claims, on M. for Ret. (Mr. Davis) 2828 (ii).
Scott, W., West Assiniboia.
Calgary and Edmonton Land Co., Sale of Lands, Rep. from London, &c. (remarks) 2365 (ii).
Calgary & Edmonton Ry., Inefficient Service (M.) to adjn., 2760 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
See ' Qu'Appelle,' ' Railway Accommodation,' &e.
Edmonton Street Ry. Co's (B. Ill) 1°*, 3016.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Lau-rier) in Com. on sec. 1 of Bill, 2213 ; on sec. 1 of schedule, 2241 ; on sec. 4 of schedule, 2426 (ii).
Lumber Industry in B. C. and N.W.T., Tariff Readjustment (remarks) 2566 (ii).
Mail Service in West : See 1 Ry. Accommodation,' &c.
N. W. Mounted Police Force, Increase, &c. (remarks) in Com. of Sup., 2689 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Pension Bill (remarks) in Com. of Sup.,
2714 (ii).
Osier. Mr., M.P., and Connection with the Qu'Appelle, Long Lake & Saskatchewan Ry. (M.) to adjn. Hse., 2759 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake & Saskatchewan Ry. Co., Inefficient Service (M.) to adjn., 2759.
[Stage Direction]
 on Personal Explanation (Mr. Osier
2856 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Order (Ques. of) Charged with defaming country, 2898 (ii).
Railway Accommodation in N. W. T., Tel. from Mr. Bredt (read) 3439 (ii).
Scott, W. -Con.
Rebellion Losses, Claims, Payments, &c., on
M.	(Mr.Davis) for Ret., 2824 (ii).
Regina and Prince Albert, and Calgary and Edmonton Ry. Cos. Rep. from London re Sales of Lands (remarks) 2366 (ii).
Seed Grain Shortage, N. W. T. on Account of Inefficient Ry. Service (M.) to adjn., 2759(ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Tel. from F. C. Whitelock (read) 2282.
Supply :
N.	W. Mounted Police (pay of force) 2689.
Sifton, Hon. Clifford, (Minister of the Interior), Brandon.
Blood Indian Reserve, N.W.T., Applicants for Grazing Leases, &c. (Ans.) 2554 (ii). Bostock, Mr. H., Sale or Lease of Lands in B. C. by Govt. (Ans.) 3437 (ii).
Forestry Protection, Res. of Can. Forestry Association, Action of Govt. (Ans.) 3760 (ii). G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s'B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 3, 3145 (ii). Grazing Leases, Blood Indian Reserve, Names of Applicants (Ans.) 2554 (ii). Immigrants, Destitute and stranded in Canada, Govt. Control, &c. (remarks) 3850 (ii). Imigrants and Homestead Entries, Number, &c. (Ans.) 3130 (ii).
Imperial Labour Bureau and Salvation Army in G. B. (Ans.) 3134 (ii).
McCieary, Mr. W. F., Late M.P., Decease of (remarks) 2599 (ii).
N. W. Mounted Police Force, Increase and Pay of Force (remarks) in Com. of Sup.i 2706 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake & Saskatchewan Ry., on Ques. of Order (Mr. Lancaster) re placing Letters on Table read in Debate, 2784. Rebellion Losses, Payment of Claims, 1885, on M. (Mr. Davis) for Ret., 2827 (ii).
Seed Grain supplied to N. W. T. Settlers, and Inefficient Ry. Service (remarks) 2283, 2786 (ii).
Supply :
Agriculture (Winnipeg exhibition) 2751 (ii). N. W. Mounted Police Force (pay of force) 2706 (ii).
' Synopsis of Regulations for Disposal of Minerals, &c.,' Cost of Advertising, &c. (Ans.) 2806 (ii).
Treadgold Commission, Issue of to Judge Britton (Ans.) 3760 (ii).
Sinclair, John H., Ouysborough,
Dogfish used as Lobster Bait, Official Tests, &c. (Ques.) 3310 (ii).
Newfoundland Commercial Agent, Appnmt. of &c. (Ques.) 2804 (ii).
[Stage Direction]


Smith, E. D., South Wentworth.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) Emplymt. of British Subjects on Surveys, &c., and Alien Labour Law re, on Amt. (Mr. Clare) to M. for 3°, 3503 (ii).
Smith, Raiph, Vancouver.
G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 3, on Amt. (Mr. Roche) 3198 ; on sec. 7 on Amt. (Mr. Earle) 3269 ; Emplymt. of British Subjects and Alien Labour Law re, on Amt. (Mr. Clare) to M. for 3°, 3502 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
Alien Labour, Protection to Canadians
(remarks) in Com. on G. T. P. Bill, 3112, 3276 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
American Engineers, Emplymt. Names,
&c. (M. for stmnt.) 3765 (ii).
Imperial Labour Bureau, and Salvation Army in G. B. (Ques.) 3132 (ii).
Leger and Wood, Messrs., Emplymt. on I.C.R. Dismissal, &c (Ques.) 3437 (ii).
Union Labels (B. 35) 2° m., 3829 (ii).
Speaker, Mr. (Hon. N. A. Belcourt) Ottawa.
G. T. P. Bill, on Amt. (Mr. Clarke) calling for Division, 2055 (ii).
Mess, from His Ex., Suppl. Estimates, 1904
(presented) 3765 (ii).
Order in the Hse. and Galleries, Request to preserve Order, 2190 (ii).
Petitions, on M. to receive Consdn. by Com. on Standing Orders (remarks) 2368 (ii).
Qu'Appelle & Long Lake Ry., on Personal Explanation (Mr. Osier) ' Discussion should be left to Members directly concerned ' (ruling) 2864 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
h. m. (Mr. Oliver) ' must not anticipate
an order on Order Paper,' on M. to adjn. (ruling) 2893 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 on Ques. of Order (Mr. Scott) re ' Defaming Country,' 2898 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Member (Mr. Scott) remarks checked
2860 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
i Unparliamentary Language ' vufious
and unworthy ' (remarks) 2866 (ii).
Railway Freight Rates, on M. (Mr. Broder) Ques. of Order (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) Irrelevancy of Debate (ruling) 2951 (ii).
Union Labels B.:  Clause 9 (read) 2603 (ii).
Speaker, Deputy -Con.
G. T. P. Ry. B. 72, Irrelevancy of Debate (remarks) 2254, 2514 (ii).

 Member (Mr. Scott) remarks checked,
2388 (ii).

 on sec. 9, Irregularity of Debate (remarks) 2254, 2548 (ii).

 Member's (Mr. Maclean) Remarks
checked, 3199 (ii).

 Procedure in Discussing Whips' Arrangement with Govt., 2267 (ii).
N. W. .Mounted Police, in Com. of Sup. Charges against an hon. member (ruling) 2704 (ii).
Order in the House, Complaints re unnecessary Noise (remarks) 2665 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake & Saskatchewan Ry., Irregularity of Discussion (remarks) 2882; Substantive motions to adjn., ' May ' quoted, 2883 ; (ruling) 2883-2891 (ii).

 Notice should be given to h. m. (Mr. Osier) before discussing question (ruling) 2765 (ii).

 on Ques. of Order (Mr. Borden) Ref. to
past Debate (ruling) 2766 (ii).

on Ques. of Order (Mr. Henderson) that
member not discussing question before the Hse. (remarks) 2764 (ii).

 on Ques. of Order (Mr. Henderson) re
Motion to adjn. (ruling) 2787 (ii).

on Ques. of Order (Mr. Lancaster) re
placing on Table Documents read in Debate (ruling) 2786 (ii).

 Ref. to past debate (Mr. Oliver) 2888.

 Misunderstanding re Motion to adjn.,
2890 (ii).

 on sec. 3, on Amt. (Mr. W. J. Roche)
3168, 3201 (ii).



Sproule, T. S.-Con.
G. T|. P. Ry. B. 72, in Com., on sec. 7 (amt.) 3252; on Amt. (Mr. Casgrain) 3324 ; on Amt. (Mr. Lavell) 3331 '(ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: 98 (Mr. Prefontaine) in Com., 3893 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake & Saskatchewan Ry., Irregularity of Debate, on M. to adjn., Mr. Dep. Speaker's Rulings, 2885 (ii).

 Order (Ques. of) ' a member cannot
anticipate motion on the Order Paper,' on M. to adjn., 2893 (ii).


Union Labels B.: 
Athens P.   O.@: , Charges against Postmaster, &c. (Ques.) 2601 (ii).
Brennan, D. J., Removal Expenses (remarks) in Com of Sup, 3912 (ii)



Taylor, Geo.-Con.
Brockville and Ottawa Ry. Connection via G. T. R., Govtl. Action (remarks) 2119, 2i61

Labour Bill, and evidence taken before
Com. quoted, 3461 (ii).

 on Amt. (Mr. Clarke) and Mr. Speaker's
Decision re Vote being taken, 2056 (ii.)

 Rep. of Shareholders, Criticism re
'fake' Report (remarks) 2109 (ii).

 Whips' Agreements re adjourning, &c.
(explanation) 2003, 2109 (ii).
Landon, J. A., Lighthouse Keeper, Dismissal, &c. (Ques.) 2376 (ii).
Nash, E. A., Dismissal as Dom. Lands Agent in Kamloops, B.C., Cor., &c. (M for copies*) 2847 (ii).
N. W. Ter. Representation Act Amt, (B. 117) 1" m., 3387 (ii).
Ottawa Buildings rented by Govt., Number, Rental, &c. (M. for ret.*) 3772 (ii).
Personal Explanation re Agreement between Whips to adjourn, 2109 (ii).
Qu'Appelle, Long Lake & Saskatchewan RY., Ques. of Order, re reading letters reflecting on Members of the Hse., 2788 (ii).
Qu'Appelle and Wishart Mail Service, Contract re, &c. (Ques.) 2556 (ii).	,
Railway Connection at Brockville, and Action of Govt, (remarks) 2119 (ii).

 Inquiry for Ret., 2002, 2113, 2557 (ii)
Wright, A. A., South Renfrew.
,G. T. Pacific Ry. Co.'s B. 72 (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) in Com. on sec. 9, 2507 (ii). Immigrants Stranded and destitute in Canada (remarks) 3863 (ii).
Seeds, Sale and Inspection B. 125 (Mr. Fisher) in Com. on .Res., 3725 (ii).


INDEX-SUBJECTS
[Stage Direction]
Acadian Historical Data, Compilation :	in
Com. ol Sup., 2744 (ii).
Acetylene Gas used for Lighthouses, Location of, &e.: Ques. (Mr. Kauibach) 2186 (ii).
Acton, J. A., Lighthouse Keeper at Burnt Island, Dismissal, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Taylor) 2377 (ii).
Adjournments of Debates, Whips' Arrangements : Personal Explanation (Mr. Taylor) 2109 (ii).
Advertising, Cost of, * Synopsis of Regulations .re Minerals, &c.:	Ques. (Mr. Clarke) 2806.
Agriculture, Civil Govt., Salaries : in Com. of Sup., 2715, 3728 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Contingencies : in Com. of Sup., 2717 (ii).
Agricultural Delegates, P.E.I.: Remarks (Mr. Hackett) in Com. of Sup., 2723 (ii).
See ' Farmers,' &c.
Agriculture, Deptl. Salaries :	Inquiry for
Statement. (Mr. Ingram) 3751 (ii).
Agriculture Societies, Aid to : in Com. of Sup. 2742 (ii).
Alaskan Boundary Commission :	Inquiry for
Cor. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3725, 3726 (ii).
Alberta Ry. and Irrigation Co.'s incorp. B. No. 85 (Mr. Oliver) 1°*, 2116 (ii).
Alberton and Kildare Mail Service, Contracts re : Ques. (Mr. Lefurgey) 3128 (ii).
Analysts and Prosecutions for Violation of Inland Rev. Act :	Remarks in Com. of
Sup., 3909 (ii).
Archives : in Com. of Sup., 2727 (ii).
Ascension Day Adjournment : M. (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) 2849 (ii).
Athens P.   O.@: Rep. of Investigation : Remarks (Mr. Taylor) 3313 (ii).
Brockville Cheese and Curing Room, Total Expenditure, &c.: M. for Ret. (Mr. Taylor) 2839 (Ii).
See ' Cheese,' &c.
Burnt Island Lighthouse Keeper, Dismissal, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Taylor) 2377 (ii).
Butter and Cheese5, Nappan Stations, N.S. Cost of Manufacture :	Ques. (Mr. Bell)
2805 (ii).
Cahoone, E. R., Patent Relief B. 129 (Mr. German) M. to receive Pet., 3752 (ii).
Calgary and Edmonton Land Co., Sales, &e., Rep. from London re Sales of Land : Remark^ (Mr. Scott) 2366 (ii).

Attack on Mr. Osier : M. (Mr. Davis) to
adjn., 2787 (ii).

Penalty Clause : Remarks (Mr. Maclean)
2801 (ii).

Attack on Mr. Osier : M. (Mr. Scott)
to adjn., 2759 (ii).
See ' Qu'Appelle '.
Campbell, Mr. John D., Repayment of Claims for Sheep Quarantine, &c. : M. for Cor. (Mr. Hughes, Ont.) 3761 (ii).
Canada and France SS. Service, Transfer of Contract to Mr. Carbonneau : Ques. (Mr. Casgrain) 3311 (ii).


Canada Temperance Act Amt.   B.@: 
Canada Temperance Act Amt.   B.@: 
Canada Temperance Act Amt.   B.@: 
Grain Inspection B.: Grand Trunk Pacific Ry. Co.-Con.
Debate on s. 1 of the Bill-Con.
Northrup) 2207 ; (Mr. Clancy) 2214 ; (Mr. Puttee) 2223 ; (Mr. Pope) 2225, 2238 ; (Mr. Kemp) 2228 ; (Mr. Barker) 2229 ; (Amt.) 2666. 2959, 2986 ; (Mr. Bennett) 2235. 2261 ; (Mr. Scott) 2241 ; (Mr. Lancaster) 2245 ; (Mr. Bell) 2269 ; (Mr. Robinson, Elgin) 2279 ;Amt. (Mr. Clarke) 3007 (ii).	'
On s. 2 of the Bill :
(Mr. Fitzpatrick) 2669 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.)
2669	; (Mr. Lennox) 2670 ; (Mr. Barker)
2670	; Amt. (Mr. Morin) 2671, 3367 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3027 ; Amt. (Mr. Fitzpatrick) deposit securities, 3028 ; (Mr. Cas-grain) 3318 (ii).
On s. 3 of the Bill :
Amt (Mr. Blain) agreements between G. T. R. and G. T. P. Cos., 3030; (Mr. Fitzpatrick)	3032	;	(Mr.	Barker)	3034 ;	(Mr. Clancy)	3040	;	(Mr.	Borden,	Hfx.)	2677,
3043 ; (Mr. Maclean) 3046 ; (Mr. Haggart) 3048 ; (Mr. Pringle) 3051 ; (Mr. Fowler) 3052 ; (Mr. Lennox) 3054, 3059 ; (Mr. Blan-chet) 3065 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Bell) 3134 ; (Mr. Barker) 3143 ; (Mr. Sifton) 3145 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3150 ; (Mr. Maclean) 3155 ; (Mr. Hughes, Ont.) 3156 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3158 (ii). Amt.	(Mr.	Roche,	Marquette)	completionof western section,	3158, 3184 ;	(Mr. Fitzpatrick)	3164	;	(Mr.	Haggart)	3165 ;	(Mr. Clancy)	3168	;	(Mr.	Sproule)	3168 ;	(Mr. Maclean) 3171, 3193 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3174 ; (Mr. Henderson) 3175 ; (Mr. Oliver) 3177, 3191 ; (Mr. Northrup) 3182 ; (Mr. Johnston) 3195 ; (Mr. R. Smith) 3198 (ii).
On s. 7 of the Bill ;
Amt.	(Mr.	Alcorn)	conditions	for public
aid, 3204; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3210 ; (Mr. Barker) 3211 (ii).
Amt.	(Mr.	Clancy)	inspection	of books,
&e., 3212 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3214 ; (Mr. Barker) 3215 ; (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) 3219 ; (Mr. Fielding) 3220 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Blain) interest payable by govt., 3229 ; (Mr. Wade) 3232, 3237 ; (Mr. Hughes, Ont.) 3235 ; (Mr. Northrup) 3240 ; (Mr. Bennett) 3233 ; (Mr. Roche, Hfx.) 3241 (ii). Amt. (Mr. Northrup) paid-up stock pledged as a security, 3243 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3246 ; (Mr. Clancy) 3246 ; (Mr. Barker) 3250 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Bennett) approval of lease. &c., 3252 ; (Mr. Fielding) 3252 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Sproule) apportionment of earnings by arbitration, 3252 ; (Mr. Fielding) 3255 ; (Mr. Barker) 3257 ; (Mr. Haggart) 3260 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3260 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Kemp) rental paid for eastern section, 3262 ; (Mr. Fielding) 3264 ; (Mr. Clancy) 3265 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Earle) employment of Chinese labour, 3266 ; (Mr. Fielding) 3267 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3267 ; (Mr. R. Smith) 3269 ; .(Mr. Macpherson) 3270 ; (Mr. Ingram) 3273 ; (Mr. Clare) 3273 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Clare) protection to Canadian labour, &c., 3274 ; (Mr. Fielding) 3274 ; (Mr. Puttee) 3275 ; (Mr. R. Smith) 3276 ; (Mr. Pringle) 3279 :	(Mr. Earle) 3279 ;
(Mr. Clancy) 3280 ; (Mr. Ingram) 3281 (ii). Amt. (Mr. Porter) guarantee to perform conditions, 3282 (ii).	1
Grand Trunk Pacific Ry. Co.-Con.
On s. 7 of the Bill-Con.
Amt. (Mr. Pringle) disposal of common stock, &c., 3284 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3289; (Mr. Fielding) 3291 ; (Mr. Heyd) 3292 (ii). Amt. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) investigation re complaints reported on by Ry. Commission, placed before parliament, 3293, 3357 ; (Mr. Fielding) 3297 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3358 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Haggart) rights of govt, to securities, &c., 3299 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Casgrain) directors to be Bri-ish subjects, 3302, 3318 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3304, 3318 ; (Sir Wilfrid Laurier)
3319	; (Mr. Kemp) 3319 ; (Mr. Fielding)
3320 ; (Mr. Barker) 3321 ; (Mr. Bell) 3323 ; (Mr. Sproule) 3324 ; (Mr. Ingram) 3325 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Lavell) branch lines retained by govt., value, &c., 3326 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3328 ; (Mr. Fielding) 3329 ; (Mr. Clarke)
3330	; (Mr. Wilson) 3330 ; (Mr. Sproule)
3331	; (Mr. Morin) 3331 ; (Mr. Barker)
3332	; (Mr. Reid, Grenville) 3333 (ii). Amt. (Mr. Fitzpatrick) lease approved by
Gov. in Council, 3357 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Fitzpatrick) deposits declared valid, 3359 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) running powers over western division, &e., 3360 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Fitzpatrick) construction at different points, 3360 ; (Mr. J. D. Reid). 3360 ; (Mr. Barker) 3361 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Morin) 2671, 3367 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3370 ; (Mr. Monk) 3371 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Fitzpatrick) appnmt. of fourth commissioner, 3376 ; (Mr. J. D. Reid) 3376;. (Mr. A. Johnston) 3378 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3378 ; (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) 3379 ; (Mr. Ingram) 3380 ; (Mr. Talbot) 3382 ; (Mr. Henderson) 3383 ; (Mr. Monk) 3383 ; (Mr. Sproule) 3384 ; (Mr. Clancy) 3385.
On s. 2 of the schedule :
(Mr. Fitzpatrick) 2286 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 2286 ; 2320 ; (Mr. Clarke) 2288 ; (Mr. Barker) 2289,	2329 ; (Mr. Wilson) 2290 ; (Mr. [DOT] Lennox) 2291 ; (Mr. Northrup) 2294, 2342 [DOT], (Mr. Osier) 2296 ; (Mr. McCreary) 2312 t (Mr. Clarke) 2314 ; (Mr. Fielding) 2318 ; (Mr. Bennett) 2333 ; (Mr. Richardson) 2357 (ii).
On s. 3 of the schedule :
(Mr. Fitzpatrick) 2664 ; Amt. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 2677 (ii).
On s. 4 of the schedule :
(Sir Wilfrid Laurier) 2378 ; (Mr. Lennox) 2378 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 2388 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 2388, 2395 ; (Mr. Dep. Speaker) Member's remarks checked, 2388 ; (Mr. Paterson) 2390 ; (Mr. Barker) 2399 ; (Mr. Wade) 2408 ; (Mr. Haggart) 2411 ; (Mr. Fielding) 2419 ; (Mr. Clarke) 2420 ; (Sir William Mulock) 2421 ; (Mr. Wilson) 2423; (Mr. Osier) 2425 ; (Mr. Scott) 2426 ; (Mr. Heyd) 2437 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 2437 (ii).
On s. 5 of the schedule :
(Mr. Fitzpatrick) 2429 ; (Mr. Barker) 2429; Sir Wilfrid Laurier) 2429 ; (Mr. Fielding) 2430 ; (Mr. Osier) 2431 ; (Sir William Mulock) 2433 ; (Mr. Haggart) 2437 ; (Mr. Clarke) 2438 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 2441 (ii).


YOL. II.-C
[Stage Direction]
Grand Trunk Pacific Ry. Co.-Con.
Debate on 3° of Bill-Con.
Amt. (Mr. Alcorn) obligation to carry traffic through Canadian channels, &c., 3430 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3432 :	(Mr. Borden,
Hfx.) 3433 ; Neg., 3433 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Clare) British subjects to have preference on all surveys, penalties for violation, &c., 3440 ; (Sir William Mu-lock) 3450 ; (Mr. Monk) 3453 ; (Mr. Bou-rassa) 3457 ; (Mr. Taylor) 3460 ; (Mr. Macpherson) 3465 ; (Mr. Hughes, Ont.) 3470 ; (Mr. Puttee) 3473 ; (Mr. Campbell) 3474 ; (Mr. Clarke) 3480 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3494 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3498 ; (Mr. Sproule) 3500 ; (Mr. Smith, B.C.) 3502 ; (Mr. Smith, Wentworth) 3503 ; [DOT] (Mr. Johnston, N.S.) 3507 ; (Mr. Lancaster) 3508 ; (Mr. Sproule) 3509 ; (Mr. Pringle) 3511 ; Neg. (Y. 50 ; N. 86) 3513 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Lennox) the right to expropriate and acquire whole undertaking, &e., 3515 ; (Mr. Robinson, Elgin) 3522 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3624 ; (Mr. Clancy) 3525 ; (Sir Wilfrid 'Laurier) 3527.,; (Mr. Sproule) 3528 ; (Mr. Barker) 3529 ; Neg., 3530 (ii). Amt. (Mr. Bennett) the right to expropriate if failure to route traffic through Canadian channels, 3530 ; (Mr. Armstrong) 3533 ; (Mr. Fitzpatrick) 3534 ; (Mr. Daniel) 3534 ; (Mr. Barker) 3536 ; (Mr. Sproule) 3536 ; (Mr. Lennox) 3537 ; Neg., 3537 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) Govt, ownership, 3540 ; '(Mr. Fielding) 3574 ; (Mr. Haggart) 3639 ; (Mr. Daniel) 3655 ; (Mr. ISin-merson) 3659 ; (Mr. Bell) 3679 ; Neg. (Y. 59 ; N. 105) 3696 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Haggart) Govt, right to foreclose or sell upon default, 3698 ; Neg., 3699 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Hughes, Ont.) prairie section to be completed within four years, 3699 ; Neg., 3700 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Porter) G. T. Ry. Co. to be bound to carry out agreement of G.T.P. Co., 3700 ; (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3701 ; Neg., 3717 (ii).
Amt. (Mr. Ingram) Govt, right to running powers and haulage over western division, &c., 3419, 3717 ; Neg., 3717.
Bill passed on reversed division, 3717.
Grand Trunk Pacific Ry., Americans employed as Engineers, Copy of Commission to Judge
" Winchester : Inquiry for (Mr. Clarke) 3539, 3751 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Confidential memo, of Mr. Hays, Dec.
2, 1903, reasons for holding back important communications from Rets, (remarks) 3701.
[Stage Direction]
 American Engineers Emplymt., Names,
&c.: M. for Stmnt. (Mr. Smith, B.C.) 3765.
[Stage Direction]
 Application for Emplymt. on Surveys,
&c., M. for Copies of Cor.* (Mr. Clarke.) 3772.
[Stage Direction]
 emplymt. of British Subjects as Engineers, &c., Protest re Aliens, &c., Cor., Pet., &c.: M. for Copies* (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 2847 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 inquiry for cor. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3757,
3874 (ii).
[Stage Direction]


Grand Trunk Pacific Ry. Co.-Con.
[Stage Direction]
 emplymt. of Canadians as Engineers :
Remarks (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3028 ; read from Mr. Griffiths (Mr. Clarke) 3082 ; Cor. from G. T. R., &e., read (Sir Wm, Mulock) 3070 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
Application for Aid by Co., Communicated to anybody previous to reading in House : Ques. (Mr. Barker) 3761 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Arrangement with Whips re Speeches :
Personal Explanation (Mr. Bell) 2002 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
^ personal explanation (Mr. Taylor) re
Adjournment of Debate, 2109 (ii).
;

 Construction of Contract, Cor. with G. T.
Ry. Co.: Remarks (Mr. Borden. Hfx.) 2977.
[Stage Direction]
Irrelevancy of Debate in Com. on B.,
2254 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Order for Com., Postponement : Remarks
(Sir Wilfrid Laurier) 2686 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Procedure in Com., Arrangements with
Min. of Jus.: Remarks (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 2267 ; M. to take Precedence, 2001 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
Railways, Minister of, Constitutional Responsibilities re Bill, Authorities quoted &c. (Mr. Casgrain) 3334 (ii).	[DOT]
[Stage Direction]
Shareholders' Meeting, Declaration of
Official Stenographer : Read (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 2956 (ii).	.
[Stage Direction]
Signing of Agreement, Date, &e.: Remarks (Mr. Lennox) 2461 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Stock Securities : Remarks (Mr. Borden,
Hfx.) 2592 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
Surveys, Emplymt. of Aliens, Delay in
producing Papers : Remarks (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3874 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Commission to Judge Winchester : Remarks (Mr. Clancy) 3874 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 ' Trap ' set by Govt, re Opposition
Amendments : Par. in ' Le Canada Remarks (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 2957 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
Sir Charles Rivers-Wilson's Speech: Read
(Mr. Fitzpatrick) 2975 (ii).
Grazing Leases, Blood Indian Reserve, Names of Applicants : Ques. (Mr. Gilmour) 2554.
Great Lakes and North-west Transportation Co.'s incorp. B. No. 107 (Mr. German) 1°*, 3016 ; 2°*. 3354 (ii).
Guarantee Bonds for Civil Service : See ' Security.'
Half-breed Scrip : See ' Rebellion,' &c.
Halifax Fishery Award, Ref. to Supreme Court: Re,marks (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3126 (ii).
Hamilton, Grimsby and Beamsville Electric Ry. Co.'s B. No. 77 (Mr. German) 1"*, 2001 ; 2°*, 2327 ; .in Com., and 3°*, 3758 (ii).
Hannay, Dr. Jas., Qualifications for Dom. Archivist : Remarks (Mr. Fowler) in Com. of Sup., 2731 (ii).
Hillsborough Bridge and Murray Harbour Branch, P. E. I. Ry., Amounts expended : Ques. (Mr. Lefurgey) 2186 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 M for Stmnt.* (Mr. Lefurgey) 3771 (ii).
See ' Murray Harbour.'
Homestead Entries : See ' Immigrants,' &e.
Hope Island, Quantity of Timber Cut, Contract Manley Chew, &c.:	Ques. (Mr. Bennett)
2808 (ii).
Horses imported into U. S. from B. C., Claim for Refund of Duty : Ques. (Mr Sproule) 2804 (ii)	'
House of Commons Elevators : See ' Elevators.'
Hudson's Bay, Fishing Rights granted to Americans, &c. : Ques. (Mr. Sproule) 2117.
Huron and Ontario Ry. Co.'s B. 130 (Mr. Ross, Ont.) M. to receive Pet., 3844 (ii).
Ice Piers, St. Francis River, Total Cost, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Pope) 3389 (ii).
Immigrants and Homestead Entries, Number, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Ross, Ont.) 3130 (ii).
Immigrants, Destitute and stranded in Canada, Cable from London : Read (Mr. Clarke) 3847, 3865, (ii).
Imperial Institute, London, Can. Exhibit : in Com. of Sup., 2757, 3728 (Ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Transfer to British Board of Trade,
3739 (ii).
Imperial Labour Bureau and Salvation Army, in G. B. : Ques. (Mr. Smith, B.C.) 3132 (ii).
Inland R«tvs(nua, Oivtil Govt, 'Salaries :	in
Com of Sup., 3909 (ii).
Inspection Act (binder twine) Amt. B. No. 124 (Sir Richard Cartwright) 1° m., 3719 (ii).
Inspectors of Excise, Salaries :	in Com. of
Sup., 3913 (ii).
I. C. R., Number of Passes issued : Inquiry for Ret. (Mr. Bell) 3540 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
 Train Service with Mar. .Provs. : Remarks (Mr. Talbot) 3312	(ii).
[Stage Direction]
 See 'Wood,' &c.
Interprovincial Ry. Bridge Co, of N. B., B. No. 57 (Mr. Marcil) in Com., 2370; 3°*, 2371 (ii).
Irena Postoffice, Change in Postmasters. Cor., &c. : M. for Ret.* (Mr. Broder) 2846 (ii).
* Jack Pine &c.,' Rep. in ' Globe ' : Privilege, Ques. of (Mr. Barker) 2459 (ii).
Joint High Commission. Inquiry for Ret. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 3725, 3726 (ii).
Judiciary of Ontario, Changes, Vacancies, &c„ 1904 : Ques. (Mr. Bennett) 2374 (ii).
Kingston and Dom. Central Ry. Co.'s' incorp. B. No. 123 (Mr. Harty) M. to receive Pet., 2368, 2467 ; 1°*, 3719 (ii).
Kingston Postoffice, Investigation re Charges against J. L. Renton : Ques, (Mr. Broder) 2928 (ii).
[Stage Direction]
aXXV
Lachine Canal Bridges : See ' Cote St. Paul.'
Lake Erie and Detroit River Ry. Co.'s B. 105 (Mr. R. F. Sutherland) M. to receive Pet., 2601, 2926 ; 1°*, 3016 ; 2°*, 3127 ; in Com., and 2°*, 2750 (ii).
Landon, J. A., Lighthouse Keeper, Dismissal, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Taylor) 2376 (ii).
Lead Bounties B.: No. 127 (Sir Richard Cartwright) prop. Res., 2685 ; in Com. on Res., 3875 (ii).
Leger and Wood, Messrs., Emplymt. on I. C. R., Dismissal, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Smith, B.C.) 3437 (ii).
Leitter Carriers' Grievances, Pets, re, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Puttee) 2555 (ii).
Lighthouses, illuminated with Acetylene Gas, Location of, &c.:	Ques. (Mr. Kaulbach)
2186 (ii).
Lobster Canneries, Established in P. E. I., Location, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Lefurgey) 2185.
Lobster Canning Licenses, P.E.I., Official Letter from Min.: M. for Copies of Pets, re (Mr. Lefurgey) 2771 (ii).
Lobster Fishermen and Packers, Prices paid, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Lefurgey) 2185 (ii).
Lobster Propagation in Pacific Waters, Experiments by Govt.: Ques. (Mr. Morrison) 2373 (ii).
See * Dogfish,' &c.
Long Lake & Saskatchewan Ry. Cos., Attack by Mr. Scott on Mr. Osier : Personal Explanation (Mr. Osier) 2849 (ii).

 Letter of Mr. Kingsmill : Read, 2850 (ii).

 Order, Questions of :
Member's (Mr. Scott) Remarks checked, 2860.
Calling a member a * man,' 2861.
' Addressing members by their constituency,' 2861.
' Discussion should be left to Members diect-ly concerned,' 2864.
4 Vicious and unworthy,' 2866.
* Statement of h. m. must be accepted,' 2876.
Irregularity of Discussion, 2882.
Substantive motions to adjn, ' May ' quoted, &c., 2883.
Ref to past Debate, 2888.
Misunderstanding re Motion to adjn., 2890.
Prime Minister's Remarks to Mr. Dep. Speaker, 2889.
' Judgment being sustained by Hse.,' 2890.
' Member cannot anticipate another Order on Paper,' 2893.
' Defaming Country,' 2898.
See ' Qu'Appelle,' &c
Lumber Industry in B. C. and Tariff Readjustment : M. (Mr. Morrison) to adjn., 2558 (ii).

 Pet. Circulated Privately (read) 2560-61.

 M. for Copies of Cor.* (Mr. Bell) 3771 (ii).
Mail Delivery, delayed by Broken Bridges on Qu'Appelle Ry. :	Tels. read (Mr. Davis)
2359 (ii).


XXXV1 INDEX
[Stage Direction]
Murray Harbour and Hillsborough Bridge, P. E. I. Ry., Amounts expended : Ques. (Mr. Lefurgey) 2186 (11).
[Stage Direction]
 Inquiry for Ret. (Mr. Lefurgey) 3754 (11).
See ' Hillsborough '.
Nappan, N.S., Dairy Station, Butter and Cheese manufactured, Number of Pounds, Cost,. &c.: M. for Ret.* (Mr. Bell) 3770 (11).
[Stage Direction]
 Ques. (Mr. Bell) 2805 (11).
Nash, Mr. E. A., Dismissal as Dom. Lands Agent In Kamloops, B.C., Cor. &c.: M. for Copies* (Mr. Taylor) 2847 (11).
Canada Temperance Act Amt.   B.@: Yukon (pay of force) 2713 (ii).

 Orders, Ques. of, 2861, 2864, 2866, 2876,
2883, 2890, 2889, 2893 (ii).
Personal Explanation (Mr. Bell) re Speech on G. T. P. Bill, Arrangement of Whips, 2002 (ii).


Port Arthur Harbour B.: xxxvii
Private Bills, Presenting Pets.: M. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) to extend time, 3433 (14).
See * Petitions.'
Private Cars : See ' Oflicial,' &c.
Privilege, Qii^s. of OMr. Barker)' Rep. .in 'Globe' re 'Jack Pine, &c.', 2459 (ii).
See ' Personal Explanations.'
Public and other Works, Management and Control of Act : M. for Copies of O.C.'s* (Mr. Casgrain) 3771 (ii).
Public Works : in Com. of Sup., 3907 (ii).
Qu'Appeile and Wishart Mail Servipe, Distance, Contract, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Taylor) 2556 (ii). *
Qu'Appelle and Long Lake Ry., Breaking of Bridges, &., Delay in Mail, &c.:	Tels.
read (Mr. Davis) 2359 (ii)	.

 M. (Mr. Scott) to adjn., 2759 (ii).

Order, Ques. of (Mr. Henderson) Member not discussing Question before Hse.: Ruling (Mr. Speaker) 2764 (ii).

 Order, Ques. of (Mr. Borden. Hfx.) Ref.
to past Debate :[DOT] Ruling (Mr. Speaker) 2766 (ii).

 Order, Ques. of (Mr. Lancaster) Letters
read in Debate must be placed on Table : Ruling (Mr. Speaker) 2786 (ii).

 Order, Ques. of (Mr. Henderson) Discussing other Questions, 2826 (ii).
Regina and Prince Albert, and Calgary and Edmonton Ry. Co., Rep. from London re Sales of Land : Remarks (Mr. Scott) 2366.
See ' Qu'Appelle,' &c.
Renton, Mr. : See ' Kingston.'
Representation in H. of C., Appeals of N. B. and P. E. I.: Remarks (Mr.'Borden, Hfx.) 3873 (ii).
Returns, Inquiry for, 2285 (ii).
Richard, Mr., Copyist for Archives Branch : Remarks in Com. of Sup., 2732 (ii).
Ross Rifle Factory, Application for Land on Cove Fields : Ques. (Mr. B'ell) 2378 (ii).

 M. for Copies* (Mr. Bell) 2847 (ii).
St. Andrews Rapids Improvements, Res. of Board of Trade, Letter re : Ques. (Mr. LaRiviere) 2602	(ii). '	,
St. Francis River Ice Piers, Total Cost, &e.: Ques. (Mr. Pope) 3389 (ii).
St. Hyacinthe, Que., Cheese Cooling Rooms, Total Expenditure :	M. for Ret.* (Mr. Taylor) 2847 (ii).
St. John d'Iberville Postoffice Site, Pets, re : M. for Copies* (Mr. Monk) 2847 (il).
St. John, N.B., Militia Service, Drill Hall, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Daniel) 2556 (ii).
St. Lawrence Floods, Res. from Chamber of Commerce re Prevention :	Ques. (Mr. Geoffrion) 3132 (ii).
St. Lawrence Mail Contracts :	Inquiry for
Ret. (Mr. Borden, Hfx.) 2369, 3126 (ii).
St. Louis Exhibition : See ' Dental,' &e.
Sable Island Tree Planting, Rep. re, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Kaulbach) 2117 (li).
Salvation Army and Immigration : See ' Imperial Labour.'
Sau JosS Scale, Fumigating, &c.: in Com. of Sup., 2746 (ii).
Saskatchewan River and Lakes, Navigation re Surveys, &c.: M. for Ret. (Mr. Davis) 3771.
Saskatchewan Mail Service, Tel. from Board of Trade, Rosthern :	Read (Mr. Davis)
2188 (ii).
Savard, jMr. P. V.:	Inquiry for Ret. (Mr. Casgrain) 2284 (ii).
Seal Cove, N.B., Survey of Wharf : Ques. (Mr. Ganong) 3761 (ii).
Security Bonds for Public Officers and U. S. Guarantee Cos., &c.:	Ques. (Mr. A. T.
% Thompson) 3387 (ii). *
Seed Grain in N. W. T., Inability to procure any : Tel. from F. C. Whitelock : Read (Mr. Scott) 2282 (ii).
- M. (Mr. Scott) to adjn., 2759 (ii).'


Union Labels B.: Victoria and Haliburton, Printing, &c.:
Ques. (Mr. Hughes, Ont.) 2375 (ii).

 Incomplete Ret.; Remarks (Mr. Wilson)
2557 (ii).

 Confidential Letters re :	Remarks (Sir
Wm. Mulock) 2602 (ii).
Winnipeg Board of Trade, Res. protesting re Granting of Charter to Co. for Improvements of Navigation, &c.: Ques. (Mr. La-Riviere) 2803 (ii).
Winnipeg Exhibition, Grant to : in Com. of Sup., 2750 (ii).
Winnipeg Exhibition, Ry. Rates from the East re Exhibits ; Remarks (Mr. Logan) 2756.
Winnipeg ' Free Press,' Amounts paid to, 19034 : Ques. (Mr. Roche, Marquette) 2376 (ii).
Winnipeg Newspapers, Amounts paid to by Govt., 1902 : Ques. (Mr. Roche, Marquette) 2184, 2373 (ii).
Wolford Centra IPostoffice, Change in Mail Service ; Ques. (Mr. Lavell) 2928 (ii).
Wolverhampton Exhibition, Purchase of Whiskey : Remarks (Mr. Taylor) in Com. of Sup., 3742 (ii).
Wood Alcohol, and Standard Chemical Co.: in Com. of Sup., 3923 (ii).
Wood and Leger, Messrs., Emplymt. on I.C.R. by Govt., Dismissal, &c.: Ques. (Mr. Smith, B.C.) 3437 (ii).
Woodstock, N.B., Drill Hall, Purchase of Site : Ques. (Mr. Daniel) 2928 (il).
Year-Book, Statistical : in Com of Sup., 2735.
Yonge Street Ry. Crossing, Toronto, Order re Construction : Ques. (Mr. Clarke) 3308 (ii).


Yukon Ter.   R@: