1904-05-09

Mr. A. T. THOMPSON (Haldimand and Monck).: Mr. 'Speaker, I beg to move that the petition of Charles G. Curtis, the Canadian General Electric Company, Limited, and others, be permitted to lay before the House their petition that they be allowed to import into Canada, for a period to the end of 1905, certain turbine machinery covered by certain patents of which they are the owners.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: For what reason ?	.


Andrew Thorburn Thompson: The reasons have arisen since the time limit for the presentation of petitions has expired. The reasons are very fully set forth in the petition, which I shall be pleased to read if the House cares to have it read.


Wilfrid Laurier: My hon. friend (Mr. Thompson) had perhaps better give the reasons.


Mr.  A. T.@: -THOMPSON read the petition.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. WALTER SCOTT (West Assiniboia).: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I find myself under the necessity of again alluding to a serious state of affairs that exists in a portion of the Northwest Territories, and if necessary I shall conclude with a motion.
About ten days ago I received a message from the village of Davidson, on the Regina and Prince Albert branch railway, which I placed before the government and the House. That message set forth that the settlers in that locality were entirely unable to obtain seed for their fields this year on account of the breakdown of the railway service. My hon. friend the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) on that occasion, ten days ago, gave me definite assurance that he would make an attempt to have such steps taken as would ensure to these settlers a supply of seed grain. I stated at that time my apprehension that possibly other localities on the same line of railway were labouring under the same difficulty. I find that my fears in that respect were only too well justified, because I have now received another message from another town on that line-Hanley. That message is as follows :
We are short of provisions, seed grain and farm implements. Situation is serious and immediate relief is prayed for. Can get no information from local officials and desire you to take the matter up in earnest. Reply and give Mr. FIELDING.
us some information that we may know what we have to face.



K. B. BIRKELAND,

[Stage Direction]
On behalf of citizens.
I do not need to say to the House that this is a most serious condition of affairs. There are thousands of people who have gone into that section of the country within the past year and who find themselves to-day not only deprived of implements and seed grain, rendering them unable to go on with the seeding operations, but, if we are to believe the words of this despatch, which, I may say, has come from Mr. K. B. Birkeland on behalf of the citizens, they are actually face to face with starvation because they are short of provisions.
Mr. HEYD.: Who owns the railway ?


Thomas Walter Scott: past ; (and as has been the ease every few months for years ;) to have in prospect as at the present time, a famine in seed grain, and a famine in agricultural implements ; to be actually face to face with starvation because of dearth of provisions ; to have as has been the case last winter and during previous winters, actual famine in fuel supply for weeks at a time ; all these things mean that the people were better off before they had a line of railway at all. As mv hon. friend from Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) pointed out the other day, before this line was built from Regina to Prince Albert, the people who lived in the country then were far better off in the matter of transportation than the people are now. The old stage line running from the village of Qu'Appelle to Prince Albert in the earlier days, gave more regular and more secure service, than is given at the present time, or than has been given for many years by this railway company. I have, on previous occasions, alluded in pretty strong language to the transactions which have brought about the results of which I am complaining. and to call these transactions rascally is not putting the matter in too strong language. I would say that the rascality which was perpetrated in the financing of these railways has produced great damage, not only to the people who immediately suffer the lack of railway service, but to the people of the whole Dominion of Canada. It has retarded the development of this immense section of the country for practically a decade ; it has condemned northern Alberta and Saskatchewan and the whole district of Assiniboia north of the Qu'Ap-pelle valley, to the poorest apology for a transportation service that can possibly be described. In the case of Saskatchewan, that unfortunate condition is not yet ended, and will not be ended, I fear, until the Canadian Northern and the Grand Trunk Pacific get into these districts. I venture to say that these two railway transactions have done more to damage the credit of Canada on the money markets of the old country than any other railway transaction that can be mentioned. We have had in connection with the Grand Trunk Pacific debate, the suggestion made by our friends of the opposition, that it would be far better policy for the opening of the newer parts of Canada to run railways from the north to the south. For instance, seme of our Conservative friends from the district of Montreal, contend that a lateral railway from the east to the west should not be constructed, but that a railway should be built from Montreal up into the northern part of Quebec


Mr. COCHRANE.: What has that to do with your railway ?


Thomas Walter Scott: I will tell my hon. friend in a moment. Others have contended that a road built from Toronto up through the northern part of Ontario, would serve the Mr. SCOTT.
interest of the Dominion much better than a lateral road from the east to the west. That is just the policy which our hon. friends opposite pursued when they were in power and the Calgary and Edmonton and the Regina and Prince Albert roads were built in furtherance of that policy. I can tell my hon. friends from Ontario and Quebec, that if they are wise they will never consent to a continuance of any such policy, because we have the unfortunate results of it in the Northwest at the present moment. My hon. friends opposite will not be surprised. I imagine, if I am compelled to allude to one of their colleagues in connection with this enterprise.


Mr. HENDERSON.: I rise to a point of order. The hon. gentleman rose to state a grievance with respect to seed grain and provisions and agricultural implements, and instead of confining himself to the subject, he proposes to wander all over the field and discuss all kind of questions. I submit that the hon. gentleman must confine himself to the question he proposed to discuss when he rose to address this House. I ask your ruling.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Scott) moved a substantive motion to adjourn, such as is usually moved when it is desired to bring any important matter before the House.


Edward Cochrane: He did'nt move it.


Peter Macdonald: He said he would move it.


Edward Cochrane: He did'nt.


Peter Macdonald: Is that the point of order that is raised ?


David Henderson: No.


Peter Macdonald: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Scott) proceeded to point out that certain conditions prevail in that section of the country on account of the deficiency of a certain railway. He went on to show the reasons why the railway was in that condition, and unless he ranges further, I think he is fairly within the mark when he goes on to show that certain conditions now prevail in the Northwest to prevent the people from receiving their farm implements and seed grain. I think the hon. member (Mr. Scott) is reasonably within his right in the discussion of the question before the House.


Edward Cochrane: What do you mean by 'reasonably ' ?


Thomas Walter Scott: I was just remarking when my hon. friend from Peel raised the point of order, that I think my hon. friends will not be surprised if I am obliged to allude to the name of one of their colleagues, the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier), in connection with these transactions. I might confide to you Mr. Speaker-


David Henderson: I again rise to a point of order. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Scott) persists in calling me the member for Peel.


Thomas Walter Scott: I beg my hon. friend's pardon ; I intended to refer to him as the member for Halton. I am obliged to confide to you Mr. Speaker, that I am not a bit surprised to find some of the members on the other side of the House objecting to my proceeding to deal with these transactions, because it obliges me to allude to the name of their colleague, the junior member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier). I may say that I would very much prefer to have that hon. gentleman here-


Mr. ROSAMOND.: Better wait until he comes.
Mr. SCOTT-when I am using the language I am obliged to use. [DOT]


Peter Macdonald: I beg to call the attention of the hon. member (Mr. Scott) to the fact, that there is a rule which says : that if any hon. gentleman wishes to bring up a question he usually gives notice to the hon. member to whom he is going to refer, and if that hon. gentleman is not in his seat it is always better and wiser to say nothing about it until he is present. That is the spirit of the rule.


Thomas Walter Scott: Well, Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend from West Toronto (Mr. Osier) is very often not in his seat. I will take this opportunity to ask my hon. friend the leader of the opposition, if he brought to his lieutenant's attention a matter of information which I quoted here just a week ago to-day and which I asked him at that time to be good enough to bring to the attention of his lieutenant from West Toronto, because I considered that the matter which was discussed at that time was one concerning which that gentleman should attempt to make some explanation. I wish therefore to ask the hon. the leader of the opposition, whether he did call to the attention of the member for West Toronto the information concerning the sale of lands by the Calgary and Edmonton Land Company, reported to have taken place last year.


Mr. R. L. BORDEN.: If the hon. member (Mr. Scott) wishes to send any message to the hon. member for West Toronto, he had better do it directly. I do not propose to be the bearer of bis messages.


Thomas Walter Scott: I am somewhat surprised at the curt answer given by my hon. friend the pleader of the opposition, for the reason especially that on many occasions since the commencement of this session, the hon. leader of the opposition has displayed what I described a week ago. as a very worthy solicitude for the reputation of the hon. member for West Toronto. As he apparently has failed to meet the request which I made a week ago. I shall have to
attempt on this occasion to make my remarks pointed enough, so that the hon. gentleman will in some manner have his attention called to the matter ; because the people in Northern Alberta, Saskatchewan and Northern Assiniboia, as well as the members of this House, have some right to a further explanation, which that hon. gentleman can give, in reference to these transactions which have resulted so disastrously to large sections of the people of this country. I may say that I have good authority for looking to the hon. junior member for West Toronto for an explanation with regard to any matter in connection with the Qu'Ap-pelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway. About two years ago I was a member of a delegation at Regina which called upon the president of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, Sir Thomas Shaugh-nessy, who was accompanied by one of the directors of his company, who happened to be the junior member for West Toronto. The delegation brought to the attention of Sir Thomas Shaughnessy certain matters in connection with the operation of this road , running from Regina to Prince Albert, and he referred the delegation to his friend, Mr. E. B. Osier, the junior member for West Toronto, and told them that they would be obliged to look to him for any information or any satisfaction of their claim with regard to that railway, because he was-I think the words of Sir Thomas Shaughnessy were-the owner of the road ; at all events, he gave to it be understood that he was the controller of the road. Now, as everybody in the House knows, that hon. gentleman has of late constituted himself a very severe critic of railway financing. A few days ago in this House, in discussing this matter he stated :
Let us not fake and fool people into investing in wildcat securities


Robert Laird Borden: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman who is addressing the House has already on three occasions referred to the debate on the Grand Trunk Pacific. Unless we are going to have that all over again in this debate, the hon. gentleman should be called to order.


Mr. E. F. CLARKE.: Especially I think he should not have attacked the hon. member for West Toronto in his absence. This is the second or third time that he has done it.


Peter Macdonald: If the hon. gentleman was referring to a previous debate. he knows that he is out of order. Of course, he can refer in a general way in illustration, but he cannot quote or use or combat an argument that has been used in a previous debate. He understands that thoroughly.


Thomas Walter Scott: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I do understand that it is contrary to the rules to quote from a previous debate; but I

would submit that if any bon. member is going to be prohibited from referring to subjects which have been dealt with in previous debates, the business of this House would not go on in the smooth manner in which it is usually conducted. It is a common occurrence for members to make reference to subjects which have been dealt with in previous debates. I do not propose to quote from a previous debate ; and if I am out of order, I shall be obliged to make no references at all. What I was going to do, when I was called to order, was to refer to the further criticism made by the hoii. junior member for West Toronto, against my hon. friend the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton). I am not going to quote his words, but if I recollect aright, he stated that the speech made by the hon. Minister of the Interior in this House would do, or had done, more to discredit Canadian securities and Canadian enterprise in the old country than anything else that had transpired. If that hon. gentleman were here-and I am sorry that he is not-


Peter Macdonald: The hon. member must remember that violating the rule with regard to a previous debate does not consist simply in the reading of a quotation from it, but in assuming an argu-' ment and basing another argument thereon. Otherwise rre could discuss the entire question without any quotations at all. A member cannot take up an argument used in a previous debate, and base an argument upon that to be used in a succeeding debate without violating the rule.


Thomas Walter Scott: If I am permitted now to proceed, I would say that if the hon. junior member for West Toronto were in iiis seat, I would tell him that he had better clear his skirts in connection with the Calgary and Edmonton Railway, and the Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway, before he attempts to throw an aspersion on anybody else, no matter what their conduct may have been, with regard to discrediting the securities of this country in the money markets of the old country. Now, what are the facts connected with these transactions ? Parliament voted more than $22,000 per mile in cash guarantees and land grants in aid of these roads; but, according to the statement which comes to us from the opposition, it was found impossible, even with this enormous aid, to secure their construction. Ten years after the contract for the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway had been made, signed, sealed and delivered, five years after that construction had been completed, so depressed were conditions in the Northwest Territories, that with cash and land guarantees which the government had granted to aid in the construction of railroads in that section of country to the extent of $22,000 per mile, our hon. friends confess that it was .impossible to secure Mr. SCOTT.
their construction. The late Sir John Macdonald, then Prime Minister of this country -so we have been told by hon. gentlemen opposite, including the hon. junior member for West Toronto-was at his wits' end about this thing ; and he said that the one man in the whole Dominion of Canada whom he considered big enough and shrewd enough as a financier and successful operator to accomplish it was the gentleman who now represents West Toronto in this House. Sir John Macdonald sent for this gentleman and asked him to sacrifice his own interests and go to the money markets of the old country, and see whether, with $22,000 per mile of guarantees from the parliament of Canada, he could not succeed in floating the enterprises in the money markets of the old land. The amount that was required to construct the roads was a matter of $6,283,162. Now, what did the hon. gentleman do ? As I have stated, with a practical guarantee of $22,000 per mile and with a further practical guarantee of the Canadian Pacific Railway for the bonds, he sold bonds to the vafue of $10,000,000. getting cash in return to the extent of $9,283,653. What I have stated are virtually the facts as shown in the public records, and which enabled me iast year to state that Mr. Osier and his associates had got towards these roads :
In cash guarantees from parliament, $3,200,000 ;
In lands worth at least $9,000,000 ;
In proceeds of bonds, $9,289,653 ;
By the issue of stock, $1,201,000 ;
Making a total of $22,684,653 ; to build roads whose total cost, as shown by the records in the Department of Railways and Canals was only $6,283,162.
As I stated last year, this left a margin to Mr. Osier and his associates of no less than $16,401,491, or a little rake-off amounting to sixteen and a half million dollars. But the hon. and junior member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier),-who did not happen to be in his seat at that time,-as he is not this afternoon and as he is very freiquentily not-came up about four days later with an explanation, in which he took exception to the statements I made. So that there may be no misunderstanding, I would ask you. Mr. Speaker, if I am privileged to quote from the debates of last year.


Peter Macdonald: Certainly.


Thomas Walter Scott: Thank you. The hon. gentleman rose in his seat on the 3rd of September, 1903. on a question of privilege, and made not only an explanation, but an absolute and direct denial of practically everything I said. He declared that he was not a promoter or charter holder in either the Calgary and Edmonton, or the Qu'Ap-pelle Long Lake and Saskatchewan, that he had not made one dollar of profit out of them, that no on? had made anything because the whole of the government subvention of land and money had to be

pledged, together with the bonds, to raise the money required, and that the difference between the money obtained and the cost of the roads lnvi to be left in the hands of the bankers as a guarantee of the interest. The House may be interested if I read a little newspaper paragraph which appeared in the Winnipeg ' Telegram ' of Tuesday, 3rd of May 1904. The paragraph is the following :
Last year, when Mr. Scott brought this subject up, he charged that the transaction had involved something of a swindle

That is not exactly correct. I do not think that I charged anything in the nature of a swindle against my hon. friend from West Toronto, but let it pass.
Mr. Osier who w'as engaged in financing this enterprise, took issue with him and made an explanation which made Mr. Scott look a little small. He was compelled to apologize for some of the expressions he used at the time. He has evidently not had enough of it, and is now coming back for more. Mr. Osier was not present when the subject was brought up to-day but will no doubt be heard from in due time.
I sincerely trust that the hon. gentleman will be heard from, in due time, from his place in this House in further explanation of this matter. It is perfectly true that, in the face of the absolute and direct denial of the statements which I made last year, which the hon. the junior member for Toronto saw fit to make from his place in this House, I did deem it my duty to retract certain of the statements which on a previous day I had made in this House. The following is one of the assertions which the hon. gentleman made at that time and which will be found on page 10499 of the revised ' Hansard ' of last year :
I do not know why they should go out of their way to make statements, which one can hardly believe they didn't know to be absolutely false. I had nothing to do with the chartering of these roads.
By the rules of the House I was obliged to accept that statement, and therefore retracted the charge I had made that the hon. gentleman had something to do with the promotion and chartering of these roads. But to my surprise, on turning up the statutes, I found that in chapter 84 of the statutes of 1S90, one of the names appearing in the list of chartered members of the Calgary and Edmonton Railway Company, is that of Edmund B. Osier. That is the fact which supports my conclusion that the hon. gentleman, who now represents West Toronto, was a promoter and charter holder in that company. The hon. gentleman said again on page 10503 :
I was not a promoter of either the Calgary and Edmonton or the Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway. I deny it absolutely.
But. Mr. Speaker, as I have just pointed out, the hon. gentleman's name appears in chapter 84 of the Statutes of 1890, among those who made application to this parliament to be organized as a company for the construction of the Calgary and Edmonton Railway. At page 10498, I find the hon. gentleman reported as having said, referring to the Calgary and Edmonton :
A new charter was obtained by some people.
There had been previously a charter in existence covering the same territory :
A new charter was obtained by some people -I was not one of them-with a grant of 6,400 acres per mile and $80,000 per year for twenty years in lieu of government service.
And on page 10,497, he used these words with reference to the financing of the Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway company .
I succeeded in raising the money by the sale of the land grant and sale of the bonds.
At page 10489, referring to the Calgary and Edmonton, he said :
The road was financed in precisely the same manner as I have described in connection with the Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway. $5,000,000 was raised by the sale of the land and of the bonds.
Again at page 10502, he said :
I make the statement that the lands were spjd at the time ; but they were sold with the bonds in both cases, and the whole of the money that was raised from the sale of lands and bonds went into the roads and paid interest on the roads.
On page 10499 he said :
Every dollar that went into the construction of the roads was paid in cash.
Now, the fact is cited against me that last year I retracted and apologized to the hon. gentleman. What else could any one in my position have done in face of these direct statements ? What interpretation could any one place upon the distinct and absolute denial made by the , hon. friend from his place in the House? What interpretation was placed upon his language by other hon. members? I find that the right hon. the Prime Minister said he understood from Mr. Osier's words that Mr. Osier ' was not one of the promoters and that not one dollar of that money-had gone into his pockets.' The hon. gentleman's colleague from Toronto (Mr. Clarke) thus gave his interpretation of the" hon. gentleman's language :
Mr. Osier declared that in making these financial arrangements and in disposing of the bonds necessary for building the roads, the land grant:? were sold at the same time, and every dollar ihus raised was put into the roads 'or set apart foi interest.



The hon. member for Elgin (Mr. Ingram) also understood Mr. Osier's language to mean :
The 'non. member for West Toronto has stated here to-day, on his honour as a gentleman, that he was not one of the promoters, but simply an agent.
Yet, when I turn up the statutes, I find his name in the list of charter holders in this railway company. These are the statements and the circumstances. I have shown some of the facts with regard to which the Winnipeg ' Telegram ' makes the statement that Mr. Osier was able to make a reply which made the hon. member for West Assiniboda look small. Well, 1 have some further information besides what I bad last year. I have now the prospectus that was issued by this railway company in London in 1889. In quoting the extract, I would ask the House to remember the statement made by the hon. member for West Toronto, that he was obliged to pledge the lands with the bonds in order to raise the money which he secured for the building of these roads :
The total issue will be secured by a first mortgage in trust upon the railway from Regina to Prince Albert, excluding the land grant, and the proceeds are sufficient for, and will be applied towards, the construction of the line.
I should think that would be sufficient- almost twice as much as they put into the roads.
$80,000 a year for twenty years (annual subsidy) will be paid over direct to trustees for the bondholders.
That is the government subvention in cash.
The company are further entitled to a grant of about 1,400,000 acres of selected lands ; a sale of a considerable portion has just been concluded, the proceeds of which will be paid to the agents of the loan, and will be sufficient to provide the balance of the interest on the above bonds until 1st February, 1896. On 1st February, 1896, the Canadian Pacific Railway will, on giving six months' notice have power of calling in and paying off the above bonds at 110.
Alluding to the circumstances 1 have already mentioned, the hon. member's opinion of what would discredit Canadian securities on the London money market, let me read an extract also from a letter of one of the bondholders of this company, one of the men who put up the money to carry out this undertaking. Let us see what this investor thinks about the methods of finance of the hon. member for West Toronto. This letter is written from England and it says in part:
The land grant was not mortgaged to the bondholders. Consequently, I suppose, the * company ' whose issued capital is $210,000, had the right to sell the land, (except one-third of it kept in hand by the government, I can't quite see why) and they did so.


Thomas Walter Scott: 
Mr. HAGGART.: What is his name 7


Thomas Walter Scott: I am sorry, but I have not this gentleman's permission to give his name, but if the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hag-gart) is anxious to have it, I think I may be able to obtain permission, in which case, I will give it to him privately. Now, this hon. gentleman from West Toronto is a great stickler for parliamentary ethics. On the whole, he is a very great man. Common, ordinary representatives from the Northwest Territories are entirely beneath his notice. He said so himself. He told the House last session that the statement I made here with regard to his connection with these roads was not worthy of his attention. And he told us that it was because of a reference made by a newspaper in the country that he thought it worth while to make any representations on the subject last year. We in the Northwest are good enough to pay dividends on the hon.

gentleman's roads. We; also have still the right to breathe the air, which is about the only thing in the Northwest that hon. gentlemen opposite, when they were in power, did not give these corporations a monopoly of. And we have a right to occupy seats in this House, if we can get here over the strength of the hon. gentleman's money. But, otherwise, we livfe only by the hon. gentleman's gracious permission, and we remain entirely beneath his notice. He is a very self-sacrificing gentleman. He has told us that himself also. He went to a great deal of trouble to build these roads for us-so he confided to us last year-and did it entirely without profit to himself. He has given us to understand also that his extreme opposition to the Grand Trunk Pacific is entirely against his own personal interest. I quote in this instance his own words. He says that if the Grand Trunk Pacific scheme is carried out, it will be of enormous benefit to the Canadian Pacific Railway of which he is a director and a shareholder and a member, as the hon. member for South Essex (Mr. Cowan) told us of the inner board or cabinet. It is a peculiar fact that every representative of the Canadian Pacific Railway whom we have heard speak takes the same view of the Grand Trunk Pacific as the hon. member for West Toronto. That hon. gentleman is not quite fair to his colleagues of the Canadian Pacific Railway board when he seeks to claim a monopoly of patriotism of that directorate with regard to the Grand Trunk Pacific proposition; We have heard Sir William Van Horne on that subject and Sir Thomas Shaughnessy also. I suppose that the speech that Sir Thomas Shaughnessy delivered in Toronto some time ago was intended wholly to improve the prospects of the Grand Trunk Pacific. And we have been told also-I have not looked up the facts myself-that one of the directors of the Grand Trunk Pacific in London, Mr. Thos. Skinner, is editor of the ' Canadian Gazette.'
If his attitude, as exploited in the pages of the ' Canadian Gazette,' indicates approval of the Grand Trunk Pacific proposition it is a matter of very great surprise to those who have read his articles. Sir Sand-ford Fleming is a director of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and is sometimes quoted in approval of the Grand Trunk Pacific, but even his statement, if you examine it carefully, means that he simply approves of the building of a road entirely north of Lake j Winnipeg, of Manitoba and of the whole organized Territories, so far north indeed that it shall not cause any competition or affect in any way either by way of benefit or damage to the Canadian Pacific Railway. Thus I think that the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) is not quite fair to his colleagues on the Canadian Pacific Railway board when he seeks to convince this House 8Si
that the other gentlemen connected with that company favour the Grand Trunk Pacific because it is going to be an enormous benefit to them. The hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) as I have explained, went to England with $12,000,000 worth of good Canadian securities in his pocket to float two schemes which demanded really only $6,000,000, and he could only get the $6,000,000 by guaranteeing additional securities in the shape of bonds worth $10,000,000. And he comes here and asks us to believe that in order to be able to bring back the $6,000,000 he was compelled to pledge the $12,000,000 worth of cash and lands, the securities which he took over with him, also create further $10,000,000 in bonds securities, and in addition to that he has told us that he had to leave some $3,000,000 of the cash in the hands of bankers in England as a guarantee of six years' interest on the bonds which yielded $9,263,653.
Before I proceed further you will perhaps permit me to read to the House an opinion from outside parties upon these transactions. I have here a very brief letter from a gentleman at Pincher Creek which came to me shortly after the debate last year. It is dated September 5, 1903, and is as follows :	,
I thank you with all my heart for showing up so boldly and clearly the infamous boodling connected with the Calgary and Edmonton and other roads in the past. We in Pincher Creek, away from the Calgary and Edmonton line al-togther, have suffered for years from this robbery of our lands and are suffering now. The towns of Macleod and Edmonton suffered by the villainous attempt to make them move by not running the Calgar^ and Edmonton line into them.
Cannot steps be taken

I would ask the right hon. the leader of the government (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) to give attention to this paragraph :
-to make these boodlers disgorge their ill-gotten gains ? There have been impeachments for similar robbery of public money before now. It would have a most wholesome effect.


John Graham Haggart: Would the hon. gentleman be good enough to give us the name of the writer ?


Thomas Walter Scott: In this case as in the other I have not the writer's permission to give his name, but I will probably be able to secure it.
This other letter is from a gentleman who is algo financially interested, through old country connections, with the bonds of the Prince Albert branch, and he says :
One thing I can not understand, and that is how Osier makes out that it took $1,500,000 to pay interest on the bonds of the company for 6 years, and why if he had raised the money it was not deposited in the Dominion Savings Bank instead of adding to the private hoards of Morton, Rose & Co. ; it is quite inconceivable too how he can explain the way in which the entire handling of these lands has been

done by his firm up to last year, if he had nothing to do with it, and lands had been already sold ; I think he is himself the president of the Qu'Appelle road and so is doubly liable to the bondholders.
Reference is then made to a supplement to my own speech which included 'a letter from Mr. Hugh Sutherland, which this gentleman says he had never seen before, and which he says is very interesting. He then proceeds :
I should think a debate like that, with the gloves off, would make such deals very nearly impossible in the future, but that does not help the widows and orphans who have been victimized by this past deal.


Mr. LANCASTER.: Will the hon. gentleman tell us who used that language ?


Thomas Walter Scott: This gentleman is a very respectable resident of the Northwest Territories, whose name I have not the privilege of communicating to the House.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Then don't read the letter.


Thomas Walter Scott: My hon. friend will permit me to use my own discretion in that regard. The gentleman proceeds :
I should very much like to hear the real ' inwards ' of the Osler-Hammond deal with Morton Rose ; McCreary exactly hit the nail when he said that the bonds were taken up on the strength of the assertion that the bonds would in all probability be taken up by the Canadian Pacific Railway at 110 ; the Canadian Pacific Railway give no separate accounts of the profits of their lease in their annual report and the report of the Qu'Appelle, Long Lake is very silent about facts and figures, and is very hard to get even by the bondholders.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Does the hon. gentleman (Mr. Scott) wish us to understand that the writers of these three letters have asked him to read these letters in the House, and at the same time refuse to tell us who the writers are ?


Thomas Walter Scott: My hon. friend (Mr. Lancaster) quite misunderstands me, I have not stated that the writers asked me to read the letters.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: And at the same time to refuse to say who the authors were.


Thomas Walter Scott: I would repeat to my hon. friend that I have not stated that the writers asked me to read the letters in the House. The last two of these letters which I have read were written to me ; the one from the old country bondholder was sent to another gentleman in the Northwest Territories. not to myself, but it has been put in my hands. I have not at the present time the permission of the writers to give their names to the House, but if my hon. friend is anxious I have not the slightest doubt that- in due course I can obtain that permission.


Thomas Walter Scott: 


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Has he the permission of these gentlemen to use that language in this House and at the same time to refuse to give their names ?


Thomas Walter Scott: I have no intention of permitting myself to be cross-examined on this occasion.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: We want to know who used that language.


Thomas Walter Scott: I have read the letters ; they were actually written by people who knew what they were writing about, and I state that on my responsibility as a member. It is my privilege to decide whether I shall divulge the names.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Does the hon. gentleman state that they were written to be read in this House ?


Thomas Walter Scott: I have distinctly stated twice that I did not say so, but I have given the House the advantage of the contents of the letters.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: It would be a great advantage to know who wrote them.


Thomas Walter Scott: I have already gone over the ground that the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) asserted flatly that he was not a promoter or charter holder, and I have also referred at some length to the statement that the land was pledged in both cases with the bonds. I have in the House the actual mortgage deed with regard to the Calgary and Edmonton road, but I will save time by reading from it only the clause which refers to the matter in question.


John Graham Haggart: What evidence has the gentleman given that the hon. member for Toronto (Mr. Osier) is a promoter ?


Mr. DAVIS.: We will get the Act.


Thomas Walter Scott: It is in the statutes of 1890.


John Graham Haggart: Then an incorporator in a railway charter is necessarily a promoter ?


Thomas Walter Scott: If my hon. friend will permit me I will return to the statement that was made by the hon. member for West Toronto who stated that:
I had nothing to do with the chartering of these roads. ... I was not a promoter of either. I deny it absolutely. A new charter was obtained by some people-I was not one of them.	[DOT]
This in face of the fact that the hon. gentleman's name appears amongst the list of charter holders.


John Graham Haggart: The new charter? .


Thomas Walter Scott: The new charter. The list will be found in chapter 84 of the statutes of 1890. Now, in regard to his claim that the land had to be pledged as security for

the bonds it is interesting to look up the mortgage deed and this is a reference to one of the clauses :
It is stated in such mortgage deed and in the bond certificates, that the bonds are secured by conveyance, by way of mortgage, to the trustees of the company's railway, with its revenues, &e., including an annual subsidy of $80,000.	' it being, however, expressly understood that the subsidy or land grant from the government, excepting as it forms an actual part of the company's line, shall be excepted from the operation of the said mortgage and shall form no part of the security for the payment of the said bonds or the interest thereon.'
That is a provision contained in the clause of the mortgage deed in reference to the Calgary and Edmonton Railway. In the statute respecting the Qu'Appelle Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway there is a subclause numbered (e) of section 1 :
In subclause (e) of section 1 of an agreement between the Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Company and the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, confirmed by chapter 82, 53 Victoria, it is recited that the former company ' shall not issue any bonds secured, directly or indirectly, on its land subsidies or any portion of such land subsidies, except so much of those lands, if any, as shall be actually taken for the line of railway and stations .'
' By subclause (c) of section 3 of the aforesaid agreement, it is recited that ' it is understood and declared that the Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Company may transfer one-half of the land subsidy from the Dominion government, from time to time, as it shall be earned, to any person or persons, as it may deem proper.'
This is apparently a provision which the hon. member for West Toronto and his associates took good advantage of. Then, his statement was that to guarantee six years' interest on the bonds the difference of 53,000,490 between the proceeds of the bonds and the cost of the road had to be left in the banker's hands. That statement will bear a little investigation. Surely this very able financier did not contract to pay interest on the money that he left in the hands of the bankers. Surely the three million dollars which he said he left in the hands [DOT]of the bankers attended to its own interest and no payment of interest there would be required. The road cost $6,283,162. Six per cent interest and that was the rate for six years would make $2,261,,934. But, we have to keep in mind the -fact that the bondholders were given a cash pledge from the government amounting to $80,000 per year on each road, or $160,000 per year on the two roads. In six years that would amount to $960,000, leaving a difference required to be provided to meet the total interest charges during these six years of $1,301,934, apart altogether from the portion of the land grant, which, as it appears by the prospectus of the Prince Albert Company, was sold and the proceeds handed over as a part of the amount to be
used in payment of the six years' interest. Perhaps the hon. member for South Lanark will be good enough, as the hon. leader of the opposition has declined to do it, to bring this matter to the attention of his hon. friend from West Toronto and ask him to repeat, if he dares repeat, the statement he made last year that he was obliged to pledge the whole of the land together with the bonds to raise the money for the building of these roads, that he was obliged to leave $3,000,490 with the bankers to meet the interest, which, even without any proceeds from the sale of land, required as I have shown, only a matter of $1,301,934. I will send over to the hon. member for South Lanark now the statutes of 1890. containing chapter 84, which includes his friend's name. That hon. gentleman who so far is not able or does not dare to repeat the assertions he made last year will perhaps be good enough to come to his place in this House and explain what became of this balance of $1,698,447. The House and the people of this country are interested in knowing and particularly the people who ought to be served and who are not served by the railways which were the result of this transaction are interested in knowing. Let us remember that the greater portion of the lands remain still to be accounted for entirely apart from the amount of $1,698,447. I will say to my hon. friends opposite that the lands were not pledged with the bonds and that the whole of the lands were not sold at the time the bonds were sold, and I will give to the House before I am through the actual disposition from the Department of the Interior of the lands, the actual people who obtained the patents of the lands which were granted in aid of the construction of these roads. I will tell the hon. member for South Lanark who may be good enough to bring it to the attention of his hon. friend from West Toronto, that, owing to the horn-swoggling with about one and a half million dollars and the hornswoggling also with the land grants voted by this parliament to these companies, brought about by selling at a very low price to subsidiary land companies, which the hon. member for West Toronto organized, with which he has been connected ever since, being a director of one of them. I believe, lands which he told us he was obliged to pledge to the bondholders, the people of the west have been subjected to the disabilities of which we complain today. If the matter of $500,000 that the Calgary and Edmonton Land Company were able to get out of the 130,000 acres of land which they sold last year had been devoted to the betterment of these roads the people of the Saskatchewan district would not have been obliged to send the telegrams which my hon. friend from Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) and myself have been called upon to read on more than one occasion, because, otherwise, these roads would not

have been in the deplorable shape in which they are found to-day. I have here a statement from the Department of the Interior in regard to the patenting of these lands. It is as follows :
Re Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan R. R. and S. Co.'s Grant.
Acres.
Area earned (less area retained re
transport subsidy)	 1,126,230
Total area patented to railway company or its nominees, made up as follows :-
Acres.
Area patented to Land Corporation of Canada	 127,651.63
Area patented to Osier, Hammond & Nanton	 128,875.95
Area patented to nominees... 29,473.16
Total	 288,000.74
Area assigned to Saskatchewan Valley Land Company
(approximately)	 840,229.26

 1,126,230
Re Calgary and Edmonton Railway Co.'s Land Subsidy.
Total area patented	to	date	
1,139,699.59Area patented to	C.	& E.Land Co	
792,979.69
Area patented to assignees
of Land Co	 12,510.17
Area patented to James
Ross	 41,130.91
Area patented to assignees
of James Ross	 505.10
Area patented to Osier,
Hammond & Nanton.. .. 25,140.79 Area patented to C. & E.
Ry. Co	 215,856.74
Area patented to nominees of railway company.. ..	51,576.19
Total	 1,139,699.59
At the end of thirteen years the Prince Albert Railway Company were still in a position to deal with a new company, the Saskatchewan Valley Land Company, composed of American land dealers, and they assigned to them last year 840,229 acres, making a total of 1,126,230 acres, which was the total area earned by the Prince Albert Company. The hon. gentleman from West Toronto (Mr. Osier) took vigorous exception to a phrase quoted by the right hon. Prime Minister respecting, if I recollect aright, 'monied and ownied men,' the Prime Minister explaining that the latter term meant landed proprietors or landlords. The hon. gentleman from West Toronto took the exception that there were no landed proprietors in this country, but it appears to me that a gentleman who was permitted to exploit-if that is the proper term-who was permitted to manipulate, or at all events in some manner to horn-swoggle with three and a half million acres of the good land of the Northwest Territories, should not take such an objection, for if there is a landed proprietor any where in the world, it seems to me that the hon. gen-Mr. SCOTT.
tleman might be put within that class. My hon. friends of the opposition have been professing for some time to have a very keen interest in the transportation question in the Northwest Territories. They take a very minute interest in the Grand Trunk Pacific question. Let me say to them that there are tens of thousands of people who occupy a very large section of the Northwest Territories, and whose main interest in the Grand Trunk Pacific proposition has resulted from these indefensible transactions which I have been describing this afternoon. If any of my hon. friends opposite are good enough to get up and make any reference to this matter with which I have been detaining the House for the last hour and a quarter-


Edward Arthur Lancaster: We are not anxious to waste the time of the House ; we want to do business.


Thomas Walter Scott: I have no doubt they will take me to task, as they did last year, for presuming, as they call it, to waste the time of the House in dealing with such a subject. In my opinion, a subject which has to do with about three and a half millions acres of land of the Northwest Territories, a subject that has to do with the resources of this country to the extent of more than $9,000,000, a subject which has to do with 550 miles of railway, a subject that has to do with a vital interest-an interest so vital that there are many hundreds of people to-day north of the Qu'Appelle valley and south of the south branch of the Saskatchewan river actually face to face with starvation ; in my opinion, I need not apologize for bringing such a question before the parliament of Canada. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues from the Northwest Territories and myself are going to continue to ventilate this subject until a proper and effective remedy is found by the parliament of this country for the conditions which are the result of these transactions. Hon. gentlemen opposite are to-day very severe critics of our railway transactions, but the kind of transactions which I have pointed out are those for which they are themselves responsible. They have been asking the Prime Minister day after day, since the commencement of the session: Why, if the people of Canada are going to contribute so much for the Grand Trunk Pacific and the company itself so little, why does not the country own the whole concern? We may very well ask in regard to these two railroads I have referred to, why, if the people of Canada contributed the whole thing- not only the whole thing, but twice as much in resources as was needed to construct the roads ; why, if the country contributed an amount equal to $22,000 per mile, while the roads themselves, by the records of the Railways and Canals Department, only amounted to a matter of $11,000 per mile ; why, if the country in this case contributed, not only the whole thing, but twice the whole thing, we may ask, did it come that the govern-
2T81

ment didn't retain possessioin of the road for the people of Canada rather than hand it over to a corporation ?


Mr. MACLEAN.: Do I understand the hon. gentleman to say that both are bad ?


Thomas Walter Scott: I do not quite understand.


William Findlay Maclean: Do I understand from the hon. gentleman's argument that both systems are bad-two wrongs do not make a right ?


Thomas Walter Scott: The case I am speaking about this afternoon is radically bad.


William Findlay Maclean: And the other is only relatively bad ?


Thomas Walter Scott: I know that the people are complaining with good reason about this case of which I am speaking. In my opinion, it is a matter of very little moment who is. the owner of a railway if the people are ensured fair rates and a reasonable service on that railway. Notwithstanding that private corporations may own these roads, if the people had fair rates upon them and were able to get a reasonable service, in fact any service at all, I would not have to complain in this House to-day. I read at the opening of my remarks a telegram in which the people of that country complain that they are faced with starvation.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Who is the telegram from ?
Mr. -SCOTT. It is from Mr. K. B. Birke-land, on behalf of the citizens of the town of Hanley. It is but the duplicate of another telegram which I read in the House ten days ago. The people along that whole line of railway are obliged to complain. As I pointed out when the hon. gentleman was not in the House, they are new settlers in these districts, this is their first seeding season, and they are obliged to Import their grain.
Mr. B'LAIN. Do I understand the hon. gentleman to say that this condition of things has been going on for some time in that district ?


Thomas Walter Scott: There has not before been such a serious state of affairs as we have to complain about at present, but the interruptions in railway traffic in that country have been continuing for many years past. They have been a matter of common occurrence. The hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) has had, on half a dozen occasions, been obliged to complain here of the interruptions in the railway mail service on account of the inefficiency of this railway company, and these interruptions sometimes lasted a week, sometimes two weeks, and sometimes perhaps for a month. It must be patent to everybody that if the. resources of this country, voted to these railway corporations, had been used in behalf of the roads, we
would not now have to complain of these conditions. It is because the resources which were voted to the railroads never went to the benefit of the roads that we have to complain. The hon. gentleman who now represents West Toronto sold bonds on the money market of the old country sufficient, not only sufficient to build the road, but sufficient to give him an amount of cash to leave in the hands of bankers for six years' interest, and the land grants have been used for the benefit of other people ; used for purposes which never allowed them to reach the railway at all. As I have already stated, there was half a million dollars which the Calgary and Edmonton Company was able to get out of 130,000 acres of land last year, and which, if it had gone into betterments on the road, the conditions we have to complain of to-day would not exist. I repeat, in conclusion, that I very much regret that the hon. gentleman from West Toronto (Mr. Osier) is not in his seat. I know that I may be reproached because I discussed this matter again in his absence, but I am bound to say that the people of that country cannot subordinate their interests entirely to the convenience of the hon. gentleman from West Toronto (Mr. Osier). I explained that this matter was brought up ten days ago when I pointedly asked the leader of the opposition to draw . the attention of his absent friend to the subject, and I expected that the very first day that gentleman (Mr. Osier) came back to the House he would attempt to give some explanation. I took good care to be in the House on the calling of the Orders every day since, but the hon. gentleman (Mr. Osier) has not seen fit to give any word of explanation.


William Findlay Maclean: Do you complain that there is a defective service, or that there is no railway service at all ?


Thomas Walter Scott: Practically none at the present time. ' The bridge over the South Saskatchewan is washed away, the Qu'-Appelle valley is flooded, and there is a practical tie-up of the railway service. This has existed not only for the past week, and even the past month, but, as my hon. friend from Saskatchewan will tell the House, ever since January. He has received telegrams from Kosthern and Prince Albert, which state that consignments of freight from Winnipeg or farther east have been on the road since January and have not yet arrived. What led me to refer to this matter again to-day was the concluding sentence of the telegram that was sent to me, which said :
Reply and give us some information, that we may know what we have to face.
If the people have to face starvation, they want to know it, so, if it is necessary, they will have to take the last means available, and endeavour to get out on their feet.


Mr. JABEL ROBINSON.: Might I ask the hon. member if he presented this telegram to the Minister of Railways or made any effort to get the people out of their trouble ?


Thomas Walter Scott: On the last occasion on which the matter was up, the Minister of Railways was here, and he stated that he intended to inquire into it ; but since that time I have not heard whether he has proceeded any length with his inquiry. Since that time we have received further telegrams, with further and more grievous complaints on the part of the people ; and, although the hon. member for West Toronto is not in his seat, I consider that I am well justified by the facts and the conditions in laying this matter as fully as possible and with as much force as I can command. before the people, the members of this House and the government.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Mr. Speaker, I ask you to direct that these letters which the hon. gentleman has read be laid on the table of the House. I am aware that he has stated that he cannot give the names of the writers, and that wihat I am asking, involves the knowledge by the members of this House that the hon. gentleman has not the permission of the writers to give their names. The hon. gentleman and the writers of the letters may have their rights, but the members of this House have their rights also ; and the veracity, I may say the honour, of an hon. member who is not present is impugned by the alleged evidence contained in these letters. The hon. member for West Toronto has made a statement of facts, and the hon. member for West Assiniboia, not contented with that statement, undertakes to contradict it by certain letters, which, as they stand now, are anonymous. I think that fact takes the letters out of the rule, under which the hon. gentleman could claim them to be private. He should have considered that before he set up the letters against the statement of an hon. gentleman who holds a seat, and holds it very worthily, in this House. The question now, is not only a question of the rights of the writers of these letters and of the hon. member for Western Assiniboia ; but it is a question of the rights of the members of this House to consider the evidence which the hon. gentleman sees fit to put before the House an which to impugn the veracity of the hon. member for West Toronto. Under these circumstances, I would ask you. Mr. Speak-ei, to rule that these letters be laid on the table of this House.
Mr;. SCOTT. I twould ask the hon. member for South Lanark, (Mr. Haggart), to whom I sent the statute a little while ago, to place that on the table. That is a public document, and might very well be placed on the table, as it has a very Mr. SCOTT.
important bearing on this matter. With regard to the letters, I have merely to repeat that I have not permission to place them on the table or to make the names of the writers public at the present time.


Wilfrid Laurier: Do I understand my hon. friend from Lincoln (Mr. Lancaster) to raise this point as a point of order ?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Yes.


Wilfrid Laurier: If it is a point of order,. I submit that it is not well taken. If a minister of the Crown reads a state document, it is his duty to place that on the table ; but if a private member reads a letter from any person, I know of no rule which compels him- to place it on the table Cf the House.


John Graham Haggart: I know the rule of the House perfectly well. The hon. member for West Assiniboia made a statement some tjme ago. The hon. member for West Toronto contradicted that statement. The hon. member for West Assiniboia, in the absence of the hon. member for West Toronto, reads a lot of private letters contradicting the statement of the hon. member for West Toronto. According to the rules of the House, the hon. member for West Assiniboia, has no right to read those letters, even though' they may be perfectly true and a justification of his course. It is against the rules of the House for these letters to be read contradicting the statement of the hon. member for West Toronto.


Mr. SIFTON.: Then hon. gentlemen opposite should have objected when my hon. friend was reading them.


John Graham Haggart: They did object at the time. The letters having been read by the hon. gentleman, are no longer private communications. They are letters attacking the honour of a member of this House, who has given a distinct denial of the statement of the hon. member for West Assiniboia ; yet that hon. member, knowing the rule of the House, knowing that he has no right to read a private letter contradicting the statement of the hon. member for West Toronto, gets up and reads the letter, and then refuses to give the name of the writer. I did not suppose such a case as this has ever occurred before. It never could have occurred in the House of Commons of England, because the Speaker *would have at once stopped it. But the hon. member for West Assiniboia, having once read these letters, I think that it is your duty, Mr. Speaker, to direct that he shall place them upon the table of the House.


Clifford Sifton: May I say a word on the point of order ? As I understand it, it is as to whether a member of the House, having read a letter addressed to himself or to somebody else, without objection been

raised to his doing so by any member of the House, can be compelled to lay the letter on the table. If hon. gentlemen opposite assert that as a principle, let them cite' their authority. I venture to say that they will not be able to cite any authority whatever. If my hon. friend from West Assiniboia, trespassed on the rule of the House in reading a communication which reflected on a member of this House, that point should have been raised and argued at the time he proposed to read the letter. The only rule there is with regard to compelling a document to be placed on the table of the House, is the well known rule that when any member of the government in debate refers to an official document, the official document must be laid on the table ; but I venture to say that my hon. friend will not be able to cite a case of a member being required to place on the table a private letter from which he has read in the course of his speech, when objection was not taken to his reading it at the time.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Surely my hon. friend remembers that when the hon. member for West Assiniboia was reading the letters I objected to his reading them unless he pave the names of llie writers.


Mr. FIELDING.: If there is anything in the objection as to the hon. members right to read the letters, the giving or not of the names, would make no difference.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Still, the objection was taken.


William Stevens Fielding: Asking for the names is not taking an objection to the reading of the documents. If the hon gentleman had no right to read the documents-as to which I express no opinion-he could not put himself in order by giving the names. The objection was not taken to the reading of the letters.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: It was taken.


William Stevens Fielding: My hon. friend says he did not object, but only asked for the names. The giving of the names would not make the matter better or worse, so far as the point of order is concerned. The only point now is whether the hon. gentleman is bound to lay the letters on the table.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The hon. minister is confusing the question of waiving an objection and not taking one. I took the objection but was willing to waive it if the hon. gentleman would give us the name.


Clifford Sifton: What I desire to point out is this. The giving of the names would not make any difference whatever. If the hon. gentleman on the other side-I have forgotten who it was-desired to prevent the reading of the letters, either with the names or without the names, his duty was to submit his objection to you, Mr. Speaker, and ask your ruling. If he could have made
good his point, he would have prevented the reading of the letters. But not having raised that point, the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) is perfectly justified in saying that he read such portions of the documents as he saw fit, that the documents were not public but private documents, and he could not be 'ordered to produce them.


Peter Macdonald: There are two rules which apply to public documents-one of which is applicable to ministers of the Crown and the other to private members. When a minister of the Crown reads a public document, he is bound to place it upon the table if asked so to do. A private member, however, can read from either a private or a public document-according to the rules in England and in the Canadian House- and is not bound to place it on the table, even if requested. If an hon. member reads anything which is a criticism upon what has been said in the House that session and the point of order is raised at the time, he would be ruled out of order. But if he is reading a criticism upon something which was said at a previous session of parliament, he is perfectly in order. The hon. gentleman, when asked to give the name affixed to a letter which he has read, is not bound to do so. The giving of it or not is a matter entirely within his own discretion.


John Graham Haggart: In view of your ruling, Sir, which of course the House will agree to, I have only to say to the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) that as his statements are founded upon what are practically anonymous letters read by him. since he refuses to give the names of the writers, I consider the matter of not sufficient importance to bring to the notice of the hon. member for West Toronto and withdraw my promise to do so.


Clifford Sifton: The question of supplying seed grain to the settlers in the town or village of Davidson upon this line of railway was brought to the attention of the House and the government some days ago. I then said-in reply I think to my hon. friend from West Assiniboia-that I would take steps to see that whatever was necessary would be done in order that these people might have this grain transported to the station from which they could procure it. I immediately did take steps to see that the matter was attended to and on Saturday last my department was advised by our immigration commissioner at Winnipeg that the people of Davidson were supplied with everything required. Anticipating further trouble, instructions were sent to the superintendent of immigration, Mr. W. D. Scott, at Winnipeg, and he went to Regina, and I believe reached that city this morning. I telegraphed him the substance of the complaint from tfhe settlement at Hanley, and asked him for an immediate report as to what could be done. So far as my hon. friend the Minister of

Railways is concerned, I do not see what pressure he could bring to bear on the railway company which would have any material effect, as at present the local officials of the railway are doing everything they possibly can. When a large bridge is carried away and four or five miles of road are under water, the House can see that the situation is one very difficult to cope with. The transfer is being made across this gap at present by ferries or boats, and our officers are at Regina doing whatever is possible to meet the emergency. Whatever we can do, my hon. friend may rely on being done.


Thomas Osborne Davis: As this railway traverses the greater portion of my constituency, I would like to say a few words before this debate is concluded. Before I make any remarks, I want to allude to the fact that the argument laid before the House by the hon. member for Western Assiniboia cannot be refuted by any one- and I notice that hon. gentlemen opposite have tried to draw a red herring across the trail by raising a point of order about anonymous letters.


David Henderson: I rise to a point of order. There is nothing before the House, and we are wasting its time to no purpose.


Peter Macdonald: I may say that it has been customary, during this and other sessions, for hon. members' to rise and declare their intention of moving the adjournment in order to put themselves in order. Although it would be more regular that the motion to adjourn should be moved and seconded before an hon. gentleman proceeds with his remarks, it has been the custom on both sides for the hon. members to delay making the motion until they concluded what that had to say. I think, therefore, we had better not find fault with that way of proceeding at present.


David Henderson: But the point I make is that the hon. gentleman after declaring that he intended to conclude his remarks with a motion to adjourn, failed to do so. He was either ashamed or forgot to make the motion to adjourn, and consequently there is nothing before the House.


Thomas Osborne Davis: If necessary, I shall move the adjournment of the House.


Peter Macdonald: Better have a seconder.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Seconded by the hon. member for West Assiniboia.


David Henderson: That hon. gentleman cannot second the motion, as he has already spoken.


Mr. CALVERT.: I will second the motion.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I want to draw attention to the fact that when the hon. member for
Lanark left the House


Clifford Sifton: 


John Graham Haggart: The hon. gentleman is out of order. He is discussing a question which has just been discussed.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I have a perfect right to reply to the statements made in this debate by the hon. member for Lincoln. I have moved the adjournment of the House, and I think I have the floor.


Peter Macdonald: There was an irregularity came in at an earlier stage. My attention was otherwise occupied when the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) finished his speech. He was the proper person to move the adjournment, because he said he would. It is a little out of order, probably, for another gentleman to move the adjournment when half the debate had taken place. But I think the House will overlook that and allow the debate to go on.


John Graham Haggart: No, we want the law ; we want your ruling, Mr. Speaker.


William Stevens Fielding: If we are to have the law, then I would point out that, as motion was not made before, and so the hon. gentleman (Mr. Haggart) had nothing to discuss.


Mr HENDERSON.: And he discussed nothing.


Peter Macdonald: If the point is raised, I shall be obliged to rule that the discussion previous to the moving of the adjournment is out of order. But that is past and gone and we cannot recall it. We now put ourselves in order by the hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) moving the adjournment, seconded by the hon. member for West Middlesex (Mr. Calvert).


Mr. INGRAM.: Are we to understand, Sir, that you allowed this House to go on for an hour and a half with a discussion which was all out of order?


Peter Macdonald: I would answer that in this way :	It was no more
out of order than the procedure we usually adopt. I remarked to a member the other day that our procedure in these cases is not a proper one, because an hon. gentleman might make a long speech intending to conclude with a motion to adjourn, and then find no seconder for his motion. But it is a procedure that has been approved by both sides, and I do not think it would be right for one side to find fault with the other under these conditions.


Mr. TAYLOR.: I rise to a point of order. I came in as you were giving your ruling, Mr. Speaker, and heard what you said. I understand that the hon. member for West Assiniboia read letters reflecting upon the conduct of an hon. member of this House. I understand that the rules of this House prohibit the reading of letters-


Thomas Osborne Davis: That was settled.


George Taylor: That point was not raised.


Robert Laird Borden: If that has been ruled, I would much like to know what your ruling is, Mr. Speaker.


Peter Macdonald: The point was not raised at the time. Another point was raised, as to whether the hon. member was compelled, after reading a private document, to lay it on the table. And, during the discussion of that point of order the other was referred to, but if it was raised as a point of order, I did not notice it. It must have been raised some minutes after the occasion had arisen. Hon. members will understand that, if a point of order is to be raised, it must be raised immediately upon the occurrence of the violation of the rule which is complained of. If there was any irregularity, I did not notice when it took place. It must have taken place some minutes before attention was called to it.


Thomas Osborne Davis: If I might be permitted to resume, I am sure the settlers of the western country, the portion of western Assiniboia and Saskatchewan especially affected, will be pleased to see that when an attempt is made to discuss these matters hon. gentlemen on the other side do every thing in their power to check that discussion, so that the people of the Dominion may not be seized of the facts. The hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) when he attempted to discuss the question, was interrupted constantly, and when I attempt to speak, every point of order that hon. gentlemen can think of is raised. I am sure, as I say, that the people of that country will note with pleasure the efforts of hon. gentlemen opposite to prevent the discussion of this subject which is of such great importance to them. It may not be regarded as of great importance by hon. gentlemen opposite, but there is no more important question for the people of that western country. These hon. gentlemen may not be aware that no less than 200.000 square miles of territory is served by the Regina, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway, to say nothing of the territory served by the Calgary and Edmonton road. As a matter of fact, neither of these roads should ever have been built. Some thirteen years ago, before these roads were built, but after the unfortunate rebellion brought about by the bungling of hon. gentlemen opposite, it was found necessary to build railways into that country. The people in Prince Albert, where I live, the largest town in Saskatchewan, and one of the largest in the Northwest Territories, sent a delegation to the government of that day to secure the extension of the Manitoba and Northwestern Railway into that section. Had that road been assisted to the same extent as these roads were, it would have
been built at once, and would have traversed the beautiful country now being opened up by the Canadian Northern. And it would have been in Edmonton in a few years, and we should not have heard of these other roads. Why was not this done ? Had the Manitoba and Northwestern been extended from Portage la Prairie where it had connection with the Northern Pacific, it would have been built through to the mountains and would have been a great portion of another transcontinental line. That did not suit the Canadian Pacific Railway or those who supported the Canadian Pacific Railway. They did not want to open up another line and bring down the traffic to a connection with the Northern Pacific. They wanted to build feeders for themselves in the shape of branch lines. Had they got the ordinary subsidy of $2,000 a mile in cash, there would have been no very great objection. But they received G.400 acres of land per mile-arable land, fine, fat acres capable of producing wheat; nothing but the choicest would do them- and, on top of that $80,000 a year for carrying in the mails. This being the case, we cannot but come to the conclusion that they received more than was necessary, even at that time, for building the road. But, when so great a subsidy was given, it is only reasonable to say that the government of the day should have seen to it that the road was properly constructed and that it was run in such a way as to give efficient service to the people. But that was not done. The company have sold the land for an average, certainly, of not less than $3 an acre ; they have sold the town sites ; they have received the grant carrying in the mails. And, after all what do we find ? We find to-day a road practically useless-a lot of rotten ties ; old rotten bridges ; old locomotives that should be in the scrap-heap ; no coal ; no water-tanks. I submit that it is not out of place for the representatives of the people of that part of the country to come to this House and ask where all the money from the sale of lands has gone.


Edward Cochrane: Has not the hon. gentleman (Mr. Davis) told them a good many times ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: And we will tell them a good many more times till we get at the bottom of this matter. When we did bring up this question in the House, gentlemen v. ijo were promoters of these roads got up and said they did not hold that relation to these concerns. The hon. gentleman from West Toronto (Mr. Osier) made a statement in the House last year that he was not a promoter.
My hon. friend from West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) has proved by the Act of 1893, the Act of Incorporation of the C. E. road, that his name appears as one of the incorporators.

The hon. member lor Lanark (Mr. Haggart) in replying to the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) said : You ask me to bring this to the attention of the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) ; I will imt do it because you have backed up your arguments by nothing but anonymous letters. I submit that, putting anonymous letters to one side, the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) has proved and has proved to the hilt, that the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) was making a wild statement when he contradicted the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott). What are the facts ? When the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) accused him of being a promoter, he said:	I am not a promoter. My
hon. friend (Mr. Scott) has proved by the Act of Incorporation that he is a promoter and that his name appeared in the Act. The hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) goes on to say that he got nothing from the sale of these lands. He said that the lands went with the bonds as security and were sold for the benefit of the bondholders. The hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) has proved by reading from the mortgage given by these people to the bondholders that the whole of the lands given by the government of this country to construct this road were exempt, and that the bondholders had a lien on nothing at all but the road-bed, and whatever little land might be used around the stations. We naturally inquire where the rest of the lands have gone. My hon. friend from West Assiniboia went on to read a list of incorporated land companies which got a certain amount of the land grant of the road, amongst others the firm of Osier, Hammond and Nan-ton, which would seem to show that the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) did receive a portion of that land through the firm of Osier, Hammond and Nanton. But that is not all. A large portion of the land that was granted to the Calgary and Edmonton road was given to a company called the Calgary and Edmonton Land Company limited. That company received some 800,000 acres. Now here is the Act of incorporation of that company which goes to prove that my hon. friend from West Toronto (Mr. Osier) was wrong when he contradicted the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott). Here is the Act of incorporation from the Northwest government and I shall read it to show who constitute the Calgary and Edmonton Land Company which sold half a million dollars' worth of the land of which my hon. friend spoke. Here are the particulars of the charter :
Incorporated name : The Calgary & Edmonton Land Company, Limited.
Manner in which incorporated :	English
Charter.
Place, where the head office of the company is situated : 6 Prince St., London, E.C.


Thomas Osborne Davis: 
Charles Bernhard Heyd: Why did the Canadian Pacific Railway buy the road ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: The Canadian Pacific Railway bought the Calgary and Edmonton. They purchased the road at the face value of the bonds although every person who travelled over the road knows that it was not worth half the money now that it cost originally.
At six o'clock House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Mr. Speaker, when the House rose at six o'clock I was dealing with the question which had been brought up on the motion to adjourn ; that is, the management and operation of the Calgary and Edmonton and the Regina, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railways. I was endeavouring to show the House that the letters which my hon. friend from West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) read before he took his seat had no direct bearing on the question at issue between my hon. friend and the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier). It was not necessary that these letters should be put in to prove the case which my hon. friend attempted to make and in fact did make against the hon. member for West Toronto. The letters were read merely as a statement in connection with the way the bonds had been sold and the way the land grant had been manipulated. The facts, as far as the Calgary and Edmonton road are concerned, remain unquestionable that the bonds were sold to build that road and that a surplus was left over from the side of the bonds sufficient to
pay the interest for a great many years. The land grant was exempt from liability on account of the bonds by a special clause in the mortgage deed so that the people who purchased these bonds, the bondholders, had no interest in that land whatever. The road has been operated by the Canadian Pacific Railway people, for, I think thirteen or fourteen years, at all events since the road was constructed. It was allowed to run into disrepair ; no betterments had been made upon it at all and the question now arises : Why has that been so ? The Canadian Pacific Railway bought the road a year ago, taking the bonds at one hundred cents on the dollar and the stock at a percentage so that all of this land, amounting to 6,400 acres per mile which was given by the government to aid the construction of the road, remains unaccounted for. Then, there is the $80,000 a year which was given for carrying the mails, and w'hich, I suppose, was used for the purpose of paying interest. The hon. member for West Toronto said that he did not benefit financially by any of these transactions, but still, it must surprise hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House as well as on this side of the House to find that the land company that got the largest portion of the Calgary and Edmonton land grant, some 800,000 acres, had as one of its directors the hon. member for West Toronto. It must also surprise the House to find that a large quantity of this land was given to the firm of Osier, Hammond and Nanton, of which the hon. member for West Toronto is the senior partner. I think in all fairness, considering that these roads have been so liberally subsidized by the government of Canada, that the government have given something like $20,000 a mile to aid in their construction and that the roads are now in a state of disrepair, we ought to be told what has become of all this money. That is what we are trying to find out. What has become of the money that was realized from the sale of these lands ? If that had been used for the purpose of keeping these roads in repair and putting in good modern iron bridges with concrete piers we would not have existing to-day the state of affairs that we are complaining of. This is a serious state of affairs. The Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway traverses a country which comprises about 200,000 square miles. Settlers are scattered all over it; there must be 60,000 people in that neighbourhood. There are the towns of Lumsden, Craik, Hanley, Davidson. Dun-durn, Saskatoon, Osier, Hague, Rosthern, .Duck Lake, Prince Albert and Battleford which are depending for their supply upon this one line of railway, and the settlers in that country are in turn depending on these towns for their supplies. The House heard the telegram which my hon. friend from West Assiniboia read this afternoon. A large number of people went in there and

tools! up homesteads last year. They did a little breaking, got their shanties up, and got their land ready so as to be able to put in some crop this spring. They go back to their homes in the United States, Ontario or Quebec, and sell out their holdings there. Somb of them are poor people. Some have gone to the west to make new homes for themselves. They go up and are stranded at Regina without any money to pay then-expense or to purchase the things which they require. They cannot get in to sow any crop, they cannot get any seed in the ground, and they cannot get a crop for another year. They have sold out their old homes and they have been looking forward to the prospect of being able to make new homes for themselves in the west. This is a very serious state of affairs and one that calls for some remedy at the hands of this House. It may be asked : What is the remedy ? The government know the facts of the case. They know what the roads cost. The road, as: I have pointed out before, is 253 miles long and I want to say right here that the road could have been built over a route 190 miles: in length through a better country, but, the more miles, the more acres of land. The acres were broad, the acres were fat and the more miles of road constructed the more rake-off. Estimating the land at $3 per acre the company received something like $19,000 a mile in land and if they could add 60 miles to the length of the road they got that much more land. I remember on one occasion hearing of an American taking a contract for building a road for the Sultan of Turkey, between two given points. The distance was 90 miles, but the Sultan made the contract at so much per mile and when the bill came in there was a claim for 250 miles of road. The contractor was making a good profit and he ran the road like a snake. I am informed that the railway in Prince Edward Island is so crooked that the conductor can shake hands with the engineer going around some of the curves. This is explained by the fact that that road was built some years ago by the old government and I suppose there were some jobs in it like this road we are discussing. The Qu'Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway could have been built, as I have said, over a route 190 miles in length and if that route had been selected there would have been no objection to a subsidy of $3,200 per mile. But, I submit that the road was not needed. It was a piece of jobbery from beginning to end. A gentleman, writing over his own signature in the Toronto ' Globe ' some years ago, addressed an open letter to the hon. member for West Toronto in which he said that it had been conceived in sin. Nobody wanted the road. The people in my part of the country did not want it. They wanted the Manitoba and Northwestern extended up through to Prince Albert so as Mr. DAVIS.
to give them connection with the Northern Pacific and so that the whole of the Saskatchewan valley would be opened up. But, this road was built so that a certain number of gentlemen could get a graft for themselves. The gentlemen connected with the road may ask : What right have the people of Prince Albert to kick ? With all the land that was given by the government to aid in the construction ofi that road and with the mail contract of $80,000 a year any reasonable man would have been satisfied to build the road, because after all, it was only a mud road. There has never been any ballast put on it up to the present time ; it is n mud road and nothing more. One would have expected that when they approached a town they would have continued the railway into the town, but this was not a part of the policy of the gentlemen who built that road. Settlers went in and established towns, trekked over the prairie, brought in their effects, built up the towns and invested their money in them. You would naturally have thought that the gentlemen promoting this railway would have built into these towns. Not a bit of it. When they came to the town of Saskatoon they went across the river, established a town site of their own and sold their lots. They did the same thing in Duck Lake. They compelled the people of Duck Lake to move about two miles up to the road so that they might have a town site at their disposal. When they approached Prince Albert, the biggest town on the Saskatchewan, and one of the largest in the Northwest Territories, they remained outside of the town and told the property owners that if they did not give them half of their lots they would not go to the town at all. As a consequence the people of Prince Albert had to hand over half of their property to these people out of which they have been making money ever since and that on top of all the money they got out of the government. Surely they have reason to kick. Now, the position of things is this :	The
road is in - a worse condition than it was when it was built fourteen years ago. There has been an occasional tie put in, but the majority of the ties are rotten and the culverts are old. The bridge at Saskatoon was fourteen years old when it was carried away a short time ago and every one knows that the ordinary life of a wooden bridge is ten years. The company have no motive power, no coal, no water and the consequence is that they have not carried a pound of freight since January over that road. The people are without supplies and cannot get anything in. When spring comes on this old bridge at Saskatoon goes out. It went out two or three years ago and they cobbled it up again. They might have known that When an ice jam came along it would go out again. These difficulties would have been avoided if they had taken ordinary precautions to see that this bridge was all right.

They did not do so. I suppose because they do not care.
The Calgary and Edmonton has bean taken over by the Canadian Pacific Railway, and I suppose that in their own interests they will operate the road properly. The question remains : who got the land grant ? That question has been discussed by my hon. friend (Mr. Scott) this afternoon, and I venture to say here and now, that it will take the member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) all his time to answer the statements made by my hon. friend (Mr. Scott). If they have got the money out of the land, and the C.P.R. bought it, nothing more is to be said, but these people still have the Qu'Ap-pelle and Long Lake road in their hands and surely there should be some power in the hands of the government to compel them to give some return for the vast sums of money and the vast grants of land we have given to these people for the construction of the road. In order to show how the people in my part of the country feel about it, I wish to read the following resolution which was passed by the town council of Prince Albert:
Resolution of Council of the Town of Prince Albert.
Whereas from the end of the first week in February to the present time there has been great irregularity in the delivery of the mails to this town, periods of twelve days having elapsed between delivery of mails, and at this date this town has received no mail since April 14th, and we are informed that no mail will be received or sent out until some time next week.
And whereas, from February the 10th, until March 10th, the merchants of this town and *district have suffered great loss of business through the inability of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company to deliver the freight ordered *and shipped over their railway, and destined for this town.
And whereas large quantities of freight shipped from Winnipeg and eastern points for this town during the months of January, February and March, are still undelivered and the railway company can give our merchants no definite idea as to when these shipments will be delivered, and we are now' informed that the *company has notified its agents to refuse all freight billed for this town.
And whereas at this date the railway bridge *over the South Saskatchewan river at Saskatoon has been swept away-, thus effectually blocking all transportation to this tow'n, and preventing the receipt of any mail, freight or other commodities, and causing to our citizens an almost entire loss of this season's trade.
And whereas there are now five steamboats under construction in this town, and the engines, boilers and other machinery to be used therein have been long since shipped, but are still undelivered and the railway company cannot now-deliver the same for many weeks, thus causing enormous loss to the owners of the said boats and great detriment to their trade.
And whereas the owners of several sawmills in this town have made provisions for the installation of new- machinery in their mills, "which machinery is in the hands of the railway company and is still undelivered, and the non-delivery of which will probably throw a large number of men out of employment.
And whereas there are now at Regina a Jarge number of settlers on their way to this district, who cannot get transportation, owing to the sweeping away of the said bridge at Saskatoon, and who will in all pobability lose this season's crop, owing to the failure of the railway company to provide transportation to bring them from Regina to Prince Albert in time to put in their crop.
And whereas the country through which the survey of the Canadian Northern Railw-ay runs to Prince Albert has never to the knowledge of the oldest inhabitant of this district experienced the severe snow storms which frequent the country between Saskatoon and Regina.
Therefore, be it resolved that this council in council assembled calls the attention of the Dominion government to the severe loss suf-'"T'sd by the citizens of this town and vicinity from the great lack of adequate railway facilities, and urge most strongly upon the government the absolute necessity of securing the construction of the Canadian Northern Railway from Melfort to Prince Albert during the coming summer.	[DOT]
Dated at Prince Albert this 23rd day of April, A.D. 1904.	.
W. J GILMOUR,	C. 0. DAVIDSON, .
Mayor.	Secretary-Treasurer."
This resolution shows the anxiety of the people to have another railway built in the town in the near future, and they refer to the fact that the Canadian Northern should be built from the town of Melfort, eighty miles east of Prince Albert. I wish to read also the following resolution adopted by a meeting of the ratepayers of the town of Prince Albert held in the town hall, April 27th, 1904 :
Moved by Wm. Cowan, Esq., seconded by R. H. Hall, Esq., and adopted unanimously.
Be it resolved,-
1.	That the great importance of constructing a joint railway and traffic over the South Saskatchewan river be brought to the immediate attention of the government, and all possible pressure be used to induce it to carry on this work.
2.	That it is of the utmost importance to the development of Prince Albert, town and district, that the Canadian Northern Railway should be built to this point at the earliest possible moment, and that it is urgently desired that the government should bring all the pressure in its power to bear upon the said railway company to complete their line to this town by the opening of the immigration season of 1905.
3.	That in the event of the government agreeing as in the case of the town of Edmonton, to arrange for the building of a joint railway and traffic bridge over the Saskatchewan river at Prince Albert this meeting place itself on record as in favour of the town giving a cash bonus of $25,000 towards the construction of such a bridge.
The hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier) at one time stated in the House that this road never paid. Well, the road never could pay. Mr. Hugh Sutherland of Win-

nipeg, who was connected with the Hudson Bay Railway, and who is well known in railway circles, wrote a letter to say that this railway was conceived in sin. It was built through a section of the country where it should not have been built. They could have reached the town of Prince Albert in a straight line of 190 miles through a good country, but they built 253 miles through a country that was not considered the very best and they never intended that the railway should pay. When they started operating the railway, they charged five cents (5 cents) a mile, and I want mv hon. friend from York (Mr. Maclean) to take notice of that fact. The freight rates were so high that people could haul their produce by team cheaper than they could by the railroad.
For the first forty miles of that road, you could hire teams to haul any commodity for far less money than you could have it hauled on that railway. At the rate of five cents a mile commerciol travellers and business men could not travel, nor could they send freight either. We had four sawmills in our town, but the rate on lumber was so high that they could 'not do business. We have timber there and could have supplied the prairie country with fuel, but the railway company made the rates so high that they apparently did not want to do business. The British Columbia members may talk about their lumber mills not being able to do business, but they never had any such experience as our lumbermen had ; they had to wait until the country in the vicinity of the mills was settled before they could sell any lumber at all. Now, Mr. Speaker, the railway commission may have power to settle this matter, but at all events, we should get relief in some way. Why should we pay them $80,000 for carrying the mails, if the mails are not carried ? There should be a commission appointed to inevstigate who got the land. They received enough from the proceeds of the sale of the bonds to build the road and leave a nice little surplus in addition to that. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Osier) said that they had to sell enough bonds to borrow money to pay back the interest. That may be financing, but if it is I do not know anything about it. If I went to the bank to borrow $500, and if they knew I had to borrow the money to pay the interest, I think they would look at me twice before sending me the money. Anyway, there was enough money left here to pay the interest for six yars on the bonds, and half a million dollars besides. We cannot get any track of that. It went for miscellaneous expenditure I suppose, or perhaps some of it went into the fund we hear about in Ontario, where each candidate got $500.
But I would like to know where all the money went; it certainly did not go into the Mr. DAVIS.
road. Now, I hope the government or the railway commission will deal with this matter. I know that the bargain was made fast and close with these railway companies. Talk about the bargain that we are now making with the Grand Trunk Pacific people; it is nothing to this bargain that was made for the benefit of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. A statesman would have built the railway up through the heart of the Saskatchewan valley to Edmonton, where there was a good country that would have rapidly been settled ; but it was located away to the south, and these two branches were built, and the Canadian Pacific Railway got the benefit. Something should be done to give the people relief, and done at once, Even though they are able to cross the river by a ferry, and get no crops, w bat can they keep themselves and their families on till next year ? Although tne bridge has been down for a month or more,
I Relieve nothing has yet been done to-v ards building a new one. I think something should be done to compel these people to put that road into proper repair at once. With reference to the controversy between my hon. friend from West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) and the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Osier), it does not interest me to any great extent, it is the operation of the road that interests me. When any of those who represent western constituencies have the courage to get up in this House and attack the Canadian Pacific Railway and demand redress for the grievances of the people, we know that we are taking our political lives in our hands. We know that the hon. member for West Toronto and the Canadian Pacific Railway Company cannot turn many votes against us as they employ few men there; but they have other means. This gentleman who was secretary-treasurer of a fund that supplied $500 to each candidate in Ontario may be able to raise a fund to supply $10,000 or $15,000 to each candidate in the Northwest. It is known all through the riding which I represent that the gentleman now opposing me is the candidate of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, and I venture to say that all those organizers are travelling around with C.P.R. passes, notwithstanding the provision in the Railway Act of last session to prevent that sort of thing. We know that we have all these things to contend against; but so long as I have a seat in this House, I am prepared to defend the interests of the settlers at large. I am not here for the purpose o? hiding the fault of corporations, no matter what corporations they may be. I have seen the hon. member for West Toronto hold up his hands in holy horror a the idea of granting any more railway subsidies; he thought it was time they were done away with. But last year a subway was brought I down to this House for 136 miles of a

Canadian Pacific Railroad, and I noticed Hat the hon. member for West Toronto *was not here to protest against it. He was conspicuous by bis absence. The bon. member for West Assiniboia moved to strike out tbe subsidy, and I am sorry tbe hon. member for West Toronto is not here to second the resolution. I am not kicking against that subsidy. It was right to grant it. I have no objection to the Canadian Pacific Railway Company getting a subsidy if they give some return for the money. 1 have never opposed that company getting a subsidy ; but when a member of this House who says it is wrong to give subsidies and who is one of the leading directors of a company w^hich applies for a subsidy, is not in his place to oppose that subsidy, it looks to me as if it depend 2d very much on whose ox wTas gored. If the grist was running into the Canadian Pacific Railway mill, it was all right; but if it was running into any other mill, it was all wrong


William Findlay Maclean: Was there any penalty clause put into that subsidy to prevent a recurrence of conditions similar to those which the hon. gentleman is now describing ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: Since this government has held office, all these things have been looked after. If my hon. friend will look at the railway legislation that has been passed in this House since 1896, and compare 't with what went before, the scales will cliop from his eyes.


William Findlay Maclean: Is there a penalty clause ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: The principle of government control was adopted by this government for the first time, and, as my hon. friend knows, every precaution has been taken to safeguard the interests of the settlers. Let him consider the legislation that was passed last session with reference to prairie fires, drainage across railways, cattle-guards, the carriage of mails, and other matters, and compare it with the railway legislation of hon. gentlemen opposite when they were in power, and he will see that this government has taken every precaution to safeguard the interests of the settlers. If my hon. friend will show me anything in this Act regarding the Qu'-Appelle, Long Lake and Saskatchewan Railway, intended to provide any protection for the rights of the people, I would like him to show it to me.


William Findlay Maclean: I do not say there is.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Let him look at the Act re garding the Calgary and Edmonton Railway; will he find anything there to protect the interests of the people in any way ? He will not find any charter passed during the time hon. gentlemen opposite were in power S9



KEVISED

[Stage Direction]
in which the interests of the people were safeguarded in any way. And yet when legislation is introduced giving the government full control over railroads in the interests of the people, these hon. gentlemen are ready to carp at it. I am sorry that I have had to take up so much of the time of tbe House ; but this is a very serious mat-tei for the people whom I have the honour to represent, when you take into consideration the fact that since the month of January they have not had any freight. The town of Prince Albert has 3,500 people ; the towns of Duck Lake, Rosthern, Saskatoon, are all large and flourishing towns ; and they all ha-ve to suffer because the people who own these railways allowed them to get into that state. We need more railways in the Northwest, and the sooner we get them the better ; and when we facilitate the Grand Trunk Pacific or any other independent line being constructed, for the purpose of affording competition with the roads which we have been discussing to-day, such a policy is popular with every one in the western country. I hope the government will do what they can to get the Canadian Northern constructed into Prince Albert this year, and also as far west as possible towards Battleford and Edmonton ; because I believe the people will never get the relief they require until that road is built. We do not suppose now that a bridge will be built. We can'not expect the poor bondholders, the widows and orphans who have invested their money in this railway, to build a bridge. They put their money in, thinking they were going to get some return for it, but I do not think they got anything, the grafters got it. Where is the money to come from to build the bridge unless we can make the people who sold these lands disgorge ? If that can be done, I hope it will be done at once. Again, let me say :	If the government can do
anything to have the Canadian Northern built to Prince Albert and also built w estward to Battleford and Bdmonton this season,-1 hope that it will be done. We have 60,000 people in that part of the country, and the question is whether we want to keep them there or not. They have all taken up homes. Many of them are not wealthy people, and something should be done to afford them relief without delay.
If the Canadian Northern people could be induced to build through that country at once, and give the people relief, their action would be looked upon as a god-send to the settler in the district of Saskatchewan and Northern Assiniboia.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. S9) to incorporate the Cedar Rapids Manufacturing and Power Company-Mr. Geoff rion.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 95) to incorporate the Vancouver Island Railway Company.-Mr. Macpherson.
Bill (No. 96) to incorporate the Crawford Bay and St. Mary's Railway Company.- Mr. Macpherson.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaRIVIERE asked :
1.	Has the following resolution of the Winnipeg Board of Trade been received by the government :-
' Whereas an application .is now before the Dominion parliament for a charter to incorporate a company with power to construct canals and improve the navigation between Lake Superior and Red river at Winnipeg, and thence by Lake Winnipeg or other channels to the Saskatchewan, and to the Northwest, and to provide a route for transportation from the head waters of the Saskatchewan to Lake Superior ;
' And whereas, if such a charter issues, it will practically give to the company control over the whole of the great waterways between Lake Superior and the Rocky mountains ;
' And whereas, the great waterways of Canada have heretofore been held in trust, and many of them improved by the government of Canada, at an immense outlay of public money, for the benefit _of the people :
1 Therefore, be it resolved, that the Winnipeg Board of Trade urge upon the government of Canada that such a charter as is referred to above, be not granted to any private 'individual or company, but such improvements as are necessary to perfect navigation be made, as occasion requires, by the government of the Dominion.
' Further, that copies of this resolution be sent to the premier of the Dominion, the Minister of Railways and Canals, and Public Works, and to such others as the executive officers consider advisable.'
2.	Will the government act on the suggestion contained in the above resolution, and undertake such -improvements as may be necessary to establish water communication and perfect navigation ?
Rt.   H@: This resolution was received a few days ago and the matter is now under consideration.


CENSUS ENUMERATIONS.
Mr. WILMOT asked :: 1.	Has the Census Official been authorized, *within the current year, to make inquiries as to the religions of the people in the parish of Lincoln, Sunbury County, N.B. ?
2.	If so, by whose authority were such inquiries made ? What was the object, and what results -were obtained ? And were the answers given under oath ? If so, why ?
3.	Have similar inquiries been made in other parts of New Brunswick ? If so, in what portion and with what results ? If not, why was Lincoln alone chosen for such inquiries ?


Hon. SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agriculture) :: 1.	lTes.


Mr. DAVIS.: 2.	(a.) By authority of the Minister of Agriculture.
(b.) The object was to investigate the statements concerning the enumeration of Baptists in the parish made in this House last session by the member for the electoral district of Sunbury and Queen's.
(c.) The results showed that Baptists were classified by religions according to the information given by them to the enumerator.
(d.) Yes.
(e.) Section 20 of the Census Act requires inquiry to be made under oath.
3.	(a.) Similar inquiries have been made in the parish of Kars, in the district of Kings county and also in St. John city, and with the same results as in the parish of Lincoln in Sunbury county.
(b.) Kars and St. John city were chosen for such inquiries for the purpose of investigating statements made in this House last session by the member for the electoral district of King's to the effect that certain persons in the parish of Kars gave themselves as Free Baptists, thinking it made no difference, and that the same thing occurred in the city of St. John.


NEWFOUNDLAND COMMERCIAL AGENT.
Mr. SINCLAIR asked :: 1.	Has the government a commercial agent in the Island of Newfoundland ?
2.	If not, has the government taken into consideration the advisability of appointing one, in view of the statements made in the public press, that an active American consul, with a staff of officials under his direction, has been mainly instrumental in promoting the increasing trade that is growing up between that colony and the United States ?


William Stevens Fielding: We have no commercial agent at Newfoundland. In view of the very close relations between Newfoundland and Canada it has not been deemed necessary hitherto to appoint such an agent, but the matter is now under consideration.


CLAIM OF HUBERT F. PAGE.
Mr. SPROULE asked :: Has the Minister of Agriculture, or the government, any information regarding the claim of one Hubert F. Page, of Matsqui, B.C., against the United States government for a refund of the duty improperly charged him on a consignment of horses for breeding purposes, sent into that country ? If so, has the claim been paid ? If not paid, is the government pressing the claim, and in what shape does the matter now stand ?
Hon. SYDNEY' FISHER (Minister of Agriculture) :
In April 1902 the Minister of Agriculture was informed by Mr. H. F. Page, of Mission, B.C., that on certain pure bred Percheron horses which he had imported from British Columbia into the state of Washington duties had been exacted by the United

States customs authorities, contrary to the provisions of the United States tariff, and the good offices of this government were asked to obtain a refund of this duty from the United States government. Mr. Page was thereupon requested to make his representations fully, which having been done, the same were communicated by the Secretary of State through the British Embassy at Washington to the United States authorities. Mr. Page had previously appealed from the decision of the local United States custom authorities in the state of Washington to the Board of the United States General Appraisers.
In December, 1902, the Treasury Department through the Department of State of the United States replied to the British Ambassador giving the decision of the Board of United States General Appraisers on Mr. Page's appeal, from which the following is an extract:
' Under paragraph 473 of the Tariff Act of July 24, 1897, these animals, it is claimed, should have been admitted free of duty as animals " imported specially for breeding purposes." The appraisers hold, however, that in view of Mr. Page's own statements of the advertisement of his horses for sale before he imported them, and of his immediate sale of some of them, they could not be held to have been imported " specially for breeding purposes." They must be held to have been imported for the purpose of sale. The fact that they were pure bred horses could not affect the purpose for which they were imported or the intent of the importer. It is held to be immaterial whether Mr. Page intended that the purchasers of his horses should use them for breeding purposes or other purposes. He did not intend them for that purpose. He intended them for sale.'
The action of the collector in the state of Washington was consequently sustained. The reply further stated that the matter had passed out of the province of the 'Treasury Department, but that Mr. Page had an appeal to the courts. This reply was communicated to Mr. Page.
This government has taken no further action in the matter and is not aware whether the claim has been paid or not.
In April, 1903. the paragraph 473 of the tariff above referred to was amended to read as follows :
' Any animal imported by a citizen of the United States specially for breeding purposes shall be admitted free whether intended to be so used by the importer himself or for sale for such purpose, &c., &c.'
At the time of the importation this article read as follows :
' Any animal imported specially for breeding purposes shall be admitted free.'


DAIRY STATION AT NAPPAN, N.S.
Mr. BELL asked :: 1. How' many pounds of butter and cheese have been manufactured at the Dominion Dairy S91
Station at Nappan N.S., in each of the last three years ?
2.	What has such cheese and butter cost per pound in each year ?
3.	What are the items which enter into such estimate of cost ?
4.	What is the cost of manufacture per pound by years ?
5.	What is the cost of marketing per pound by years.


Hon. SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agriculture).: I must ask the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bell) to move for a return of this information. I shall be glad to facilitate the bringing down of the return.


CREAMERY AT MABOU, C.B.
Mr. BELL asked :: 1.	What has been the outlay on the buildings at Mabou and other points which are used in connection with the creamery at Mabou, C.B. ?
2.	What has been the cost of machinery ?
3.	W'hat rental is paid by the government ?
4.	What salaries are paid by the government ?
5.	W'hat price is paid for milk or cream by the government ?
6.	What quantity of butter has been manufactured in each year ?l
7.	What has been the cost per pound of butter in each year ?
. 8. At what price has it been sold in eacti year ?
9. What is the government charge for making and marketing ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: In this case also, I must ask the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bell) to ask for a return.


NEWSPAPER ADVERTISING-MINERALS ON DOMINION LANDS.
Mr. CLARKE asked :: 1.	How much moneiy has been expended during the present fiscal year in advertising in Canadian newspapers a 'Synopsis of Regulations for Disposal of Minerals on Dominion Lands in Manitoba, the Northwest 'Territories and the Yukon Territory ?
2.	In what papers has the synopsis been published, and how much money has been paid to each such paper ?


Hon. CLIFFORD SIFTON (Minister of the Interior) :: 1.	$1,988.80.	[DOT]
2.	In the following papers :
The 'Chronicle,' Halifax.. .. The 'Albertan,' Calgary.. .. ' Canadian Mining Review,' tawa	Amount paid	$ 80 00 ot-	Not paid.The 'Herald,' Nanaimo.... The 'World.' Vancouver.. .	.. .. 119 06	183 03The ' Province,' Vancouver	
343 20 Manitoba ' Free Pi*ess,' Winnipeg	
Q01 nn	' L'Echo,' de Manitoba.. .	52 00Total paid	
The advertisement has also been inserted in the following : The ' Kootenay Mail,' Revelstoke, B.C. ; the ' Daily News,' Nelson, B.C. ; the ' Time^,' Victoria ; the ' Whitehorse Star,' Whitehorse ; the ' Koote-naian,' ICaslo, B.C.; the 'Herald,' Cran-brook, B.C. For which during the present fiscal year no payments have as yet been made.


PROTECTION OP TORONTO ISLAND.
Mr. CLARKE asked :: 1.	What work has been done during the present fiscal year to protect the Toronto Island from being washed away ?
2.	What deepening has been done in connection with Toronto Harbour, and by whom, during the present fiscal year, and at what cost ?


Sir WILFRID LAURIER (Prime Minister) :: 1.	Four groynes were constructed on the south shore.
2.	The shoal, at the head of the piers at the eastern entrance, was removed by a dredge owned by Mr. F. B. Poison, at the total cost of $2,106.


CANADIAN SECURITIES ON THE FRENCH MARKET.
Mr. GERVAIS asked :: 
Mr. SIFTON.: 2. Is it the intention of the Honourable the Minister of Finance to make the proper representations, or take the necessary steps to have the request of the said Chambre de Commerce laid before the said Secretary of State for the Colonies, or otherwise to take steps to have the request of the said Chambre de Commerce brought to the notice of the French government ?	[DOT]


William Stevens Fielding: The resolution to which the hon. gentleman (Mr. Gervais) refers has not been sent to me by Le Chambre de Commerce, but my attention has been drawn to it by the hon. gentleman's question. If it be received, we should be glad to transmit it through the proper channel to be laid before the French government.


TIMBER ON HOPE ISLAND.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. BENNETT-by Mr. Taylor-asked :
Has the quantity of timber cut on Hope Island, under contract between the Department of Marine and one Manley Chew, been accounted for by a surveyor, as agreed under the terms of the said contract between the said parties ? If so, what quantity of timber has been cut, also the kinds of timber cut ?
Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries).: No timber has been taken off the island yet.


George Taylor: The question is whether any timber has been cut.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: Timber has been cut, but it has not been taken away, so there is nothing yet for a surveyor to account for.


VEGETABLES AND FRUITS IMPORTED.
Mr. F. D. MONK (Jacques Cartier) moved :: For a statement showing in detail the quantity of vegetables imported from the United States and entered at the ports of Montreal and Toronto, during the years 1902 and 1903, respectively ; as well as of the amount of duties collected by the government during the said two years at each one of said ports, and indicating separately the quantities and amounts for the first six months in each year.


William Findlay Maclean: I would ask the mover of this motion if he would have any objection to inserting, after the word ' vegetables,' the words * and fruits ' ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No objection.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.


REBELLION LOSSES-CLAIM.,
Thomas Osborne Davis: For a return showing all papers, letters, petitions and resolutions in reference to payments of claims for losses arising out of the Rebellion of 1885, in the Northwest Territories.

He said : I have had the pleasure, Mr. Speaker, of bringing a resolution on practi cally the same lines before to the attention of this House on a previous occasion. Last year before the Close of the session I brought this question before the House, and I remember that I was then severely taken to task by the members of the opposition for bringing it up, as they said, in the last days of the session. I was also taken to task by lion, members opposite, including the hon. the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden), because I had not given sufficient notice. They said that I brought the question up, made certain statements about certain parties, and that they had not time to look into the papers and find out if these statements were correct. I intend to make the very same statements that I made at that time, but this year I placed this motion on the order paper at the opening of the session, so that hon. gentlemen opposite have had about a month and a half in which to look into this question and to be seized of all the facts in relation to it. Thus, if there is anything in my speech which they think is incorrect, they will be in a position to put me straight. This question, it is true, is a little ancient, but the rights of the people should never be neglected, even if close upon twenty years have elapsed since the unfortunate rebellion in the Northwest took place.
There are certain people in that part of the country who have claims against the government for compensation for lossess incurred at that time. They do not consider that they were fairly treated and they insist on having these claims brought before this House. I, as the representative of these people, have no apology to offer the House for bringing the question before the House again, because in doing so I am simply endeavouring to promote the interests of the people of the constituency I represent. We have to establish, in the first place, the question as to who is responsible for the rebellion. The people up there who have lost certain property by the rebellion are putting in claims for compensation for their losses and therefore we must establish that the government were to blame for bringing about that rebellion. I think we can establish that successfully. There are certain petitions that we would like to have got hold of that were sent to the government by the people of Saskatchewan, letters that were sent by government officials in the Saskatchewan country and letters that were sent by leading citizens of Saskatchewan previous to the rebellion breaking out. I would like to have been able to have produced those letters and petitions and given them to the House, but, unfortunately, we have not been able to get our hands on them. There is a rumour in circulation which is generally believed that at a certain time previous to this government taking power, a bonfire was kindled in the office of the Minister of the Interior. We
have heard of the ancients offering up sacrifices so that the smoke might bear their prayers up to the heavens, but in this case we have some privy councillors in the office of the Minister of the Interior offering up a sacrifice of certain petitions, letters and communications from the people of the Northwest Territories, which, if preserved, would have plainly shown that the government were responsible for the unfortunate rebellion.


Clifford Sifton: Not the present Minister of the Interior.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Not the present Minister of the Interior. I mentioned the fact that it was before this government came into power. I suppose they found that it was not convenient to carry off these documents. The petitions and letters which had been sent to the government were so numerous and so bulky that they could not very well carry them away in their grip sacks or their pockets, so that it was necessary to make a bonfire and this bonfire took place surrounded by certain members of His Majesty's Privy Council. Therefore, we are not in possession of these petitions, but I lived in that country previous to the rebellion and know the circumstances under which these petitions were sent. I know that they were sent down. I have seen the letters that were sent down and I know whereof I speak. I know that in 1882 a very large petition was sent down from that part of the country signed by all the half-breeds of the South Saskatchewan river setting forth the grievances of which they complained at that time. In the early days in Manitoba the half-breeds had settled on river lots ten chains wide. They had built their houses along the river front and were living there. When they moved into the Northwest Territories to the Saskatchewan river, the half-breeds adopted the same system and built their houses along the river front. When the government took over the country they sent up their surveyors and in place of surveying the land into ten chain lots, they insisted on surveying it into quarter sections, so that two, three and four families were collected together on one quarter section. The people objected to that. They said that the country belonged to them, that it had been the domain of their forefathers, and that the government had taken possession of it. The rights of the half-breeds had been recognized in Manitoba, and they asked why they should not be treated the same as the half-breds in Manitoba had. The answer they got to that petition was that when the proper time came each case would be dealt with on its merits, but, the proper time never came and the cases were never dealt with on their merits. Another question was the question of scrip. We know that they had a rebellion in Manitoba for which the government of that day were responsible. The government sent up a governor before they

liad consulted the people of Manitoba, and the people wanted to know how they were going to be treated and the result was that a rebellion was brought about. One of the principal causes of the rebellion in the Northwest was the question of scrip. The people there said that the children of the halfbreeds in Manitoba had been given scrip. The half-breeds of the Northwest Territories who had nothing to do with the half-breeds of Manitoba had not been treated with at all. The government in place of treating with them took possession of their country, started with their surveyors to survey the land, to cut these people's holdings up and throw them in all together without consulting the people and without giving them scrip. Petition after petition was sent down to the government of the day and indignation meetings were held with the result that the halfbreeds sent over for Riel. All this was known to the government. It was going on for six months and the government took no action in the matter at all. As a consequence the rebellion broke out. All the loyal citizens were rounded up in the town. All the farmers and settlers around Prince Albert were rounded up, brought in by the authorities and not allowed to look after their property. Their property was destroyed but they expected that they would receive compensation for it. To show that the government were to blame for the rebellion, I want to recite this fact. The half-breeds asked that their lands should be surveyed in river lots and that scrip should be given to their children. These two requests were refused by the government and the rebellion was brought about, resulting in an immense loss in blood and treasure. The rebellion was hardly settled when the government sent out to treat with these people and gave them what they had asked for before the rebellion had broken out. If they had done this six months before there would have been no rebellion at all. These people were only asking what was right because the government gave into their demands, gave them scrip and surveyed their lands. During the time this rebellion was in progress the people were brought into town and not allowed to look after their property. They had their houses burned and their horses carried away. The conduct in connection with the suppression of the rebellion was anything but creditable to the people of this country. The property of the people was loaded into boats and carried off. I do not blame the soldiers, but, the hangers on, loaded the peoples' billiard tables on steamboats and took them to Winnipeg. Whole bands of horses were driven off and some of these horses are around Stony Mountain yet. The cattle were collected and driven off ; in fact they drove off or carried away everything in sight. These people ask for compensation for that loss.


Mr. POPE.: Hear, hear.


Thomas Osborne Davis: 


Thomas Osborne Davis: My hon. friend (Mr. Pope) says ' hear, heai\ ' I hope he is going to support me in trying to get the claims of these settlers adjusted. When the rebellion was over the government recognized their liability by appointing a commission ostensibly to adjust these claims, to And out who had lost property and who had not lost property, and to see that those who had lost anything received payment. We supposed that that is what the government appointed the commission for. But later on we discovered that they had other objects in view, They appointed on that commission a resident settler, a native of the country. He was put on the commission as a local man who would see that people got justice and that there would be no room for complaint. The first commission that sat paid off a certain number of claims. I notice in the report of the claims settled by the first commission of which this resident gentleman was a member, that a majority of his relatives were liberally dealt with while other people came off without getting what they considered proper compensation.
After the first award the people asked to have the question opened again, and the commision was reappointed, and took evidence in several hundred claims. But they did not make an award, and why ? In the meantime an Act had been passed giving representation to the Northwest Territories, and the district of Saskatchewan where the rebellion took place was to have a representative, and in November we were informed that an election would take place, during the winter the commission adjourned and the local commissioner came back to Prince Albert early in the winter, and started to organize the campaign for the Conservative party. We asked if he were a claims commissioner still ; if he was sitting in judgment on us, and if we were to look to him to get justice, but we did not get any information. They were bound by hook or crook to carry the constituency to show that they were not to blame for the rebellion. I do not know where the money came from, but the people up there know that there was no less than $40,000 dumped into that constituency. This commissioner canvassed from house to house, and addressed public meetings.


Rufus Henry Pope: Who was he ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: His name was Mr. McKay if you want to know.


Rufus Henry Pope: Yes, I know him.


Thomas Osborne Davis: He canvassed from door to door, the people were told that if they wanted to get their claims paid they should vote Conservative. Then there was a little Tory lawyer who was in the town of Prince Albert; his name was W. V. McLeace, and he announced through a circular that if people wanted to get their claims paid they would have to vote for the Tories.


Rufus Henry Pope: Hear, hear.


Thomas Osborne Davis: My bon. friend says ' hear, hear.' He doesn't like to hear some of these facts, but he will hear some more of them.


Rufus Henry Pope: Come on again.


Thomas Osborne Davis: To show that I am correct in the statement that he was paid $20 a day while organizing for the Conservative party, I will read his statement :
Statement showing total amount paid to Thomas McKay tor services and expenses as Rebellion Losses Commissioner.
Services	Amount. Total.
Service 25th August, 1885, to 6th January, 1886, at $15 per day.$2,025.00 Services 15th March, 1886, to 4th July, 1887, at $15 per day. 7,110.00 Services 36 days to 9th August,
1888, at $20 per day	 720.00
Services paying out rebellion
losses cheques	 600.00

Living expenses 25th August,
1885,	to January 6th, 1886, at
$5 per day	$ 675.00
Living expenses returning to Prince Albert, 12 days at $5
per day	 60.00
Living expenses 15th March,
1886,	to 4th July, 1887, at $5
per day	 2,370.00

Travelling expenses, railway fare, pullman, stage fare,
telegrams, &c	 1,338.96

 1,338,96

You see he got $5 a day returning to Prince Albert when he was coming to do election work ; he was travelling in style. Then he has in his account a lot of ' &c.'s ' and ' &c.'s ' ; a job lot for $1,338.96, making a total of $14,498.96 ; I tell you. The election was held in March, 1887.


Andrew B. Ingram: No ; February, 1887.


Thomas Osborne Davis: You can have it in February if you like. This gentleman was paid straight through the year and this thing occurred in the middle of the year, so it does not make any difference. This gentleman was electioneering and canvassing, and he was paid $20 a day of the people's money. Just imagine this gentleman getting on the public platform and addressing the poor electors and his hands on the $20 paid by the government. The people who listened to him did not know that he was pocketing the $20 a day. This was the gentleman who was claims commissioner. Was it honest to take $20 a day, Sundays included, and put it in his pocket when he was acting as a heeler and stumper for the Conservative party ?


David Henderson: No.


Thomas Osborne Davis: My hon. friend says it was not honest.


David Henderson: I even doubt if it is true.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Well, I will show you whether it is true or not. There are hundreds of the people in my country know it is true, and when the great majority of the people say it is true there must be something in it. I was at the meetings addressed by this gentleman, but in the innocence of my heart I did not know at that time that he was getting $20 a day, and if I did I would have made it hot for him.


Rufus Henry Pope: Perhaps he will give you a chance yet.


Thomas Osborne Davis: No. Not much.


Rufus Henry Pope: Don't brag.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I am not in the habit of bragging. You will have to send a little more of the Canadian Pacific Railway money with him than he has got now, although it is reported that be is handling it, before he can beat me, I can tell you that. He will need to pay another visit to the member for Toronto's private car in Winnipeg before he will be able to defeat me. This gentleman was acting as a political stumper, organizer and canvasser. At that time it was open voting. He and his people who were in charge of the elections stood at the polls to see how the people voted. After the election was over the gentlemen who voted for the Conservative candidate, no matter what their record had been, were paid large sums of money, and I am here to say right now, that they were paid for claims that were only myth, while people who had lost a lot of property and who voted as their conscience told them to vote, had the knife put into them and they did not get paid at all. These people now come before parliament and say that they have not been fairly treated. My hon. friend says he does not believe it, but I will read the petition signed by hundreds of people, and here it is :


PETITION.
[Stage Direction]
The petition of the undersigned settlers of the district of Saskatchewan, in the Northwest Territories, humbly showeth :
That during the Rebellion of 1885 in the Northwest Territories, the said settlers did lose large amount of property for which they have not been compensated. That the government is responsible for said loss, on account of the fact that they ordered all the settlers into the towns of Prince Albert and Battleford and that they were not, therefore, in a position to protect the said property and the same was destroyed.
That the government is responsible,-
1st. That on account of maladministration of western affairs by the government of the day and neglect to answer the petitions of the people rebellion was brought about.
2nd. On account of their taking the settlers away from their homes and not leaving them
2S15
[Stage Direction]
to protect their property, the same was destroyed.
That the government did recognize certain responsibilities by appointing a commission to investigate said claims, that on the said commission a resident of the district was appointed to see that the settlers got justice, that the said commission sat upon the 25th of August, 1885, and on the 6th of January, 1886, that on 'the 18th of December, 1885, the said commission reported in favour of the payment of several claims to the extent of $131,363.35.
That the said commission was further employed to investigate said claims from the 15th of March, 1886, to August 9th, 1887.
That during the time the said commission was appointed and supposed to be sitting, the election of 1887 took place.
That the said claims were investigated, but not paid.
That during the said election campaign, one of the said commissioners, Mr. Thomas McKay, did come into the district of Saskatchewan and act as an organizer for the government of the day. That he spoke at public meetings, canvassed and did everything that was possible for a man to do in the interest of the government candidate for about two months. That the vote was an open vote and that the said McKay was in a position to know how every elector voted.
That during the said election when the said McKay was acting as an organizer and general worker, the said McKay was receiving from the Dominion government a salary to the extent of $15 a day, Sundays included, and $5 a day for living expenses, and his railway fare was paid from Ottawa to Saskatchewan and return by the said government. That after the said election was over, the said partisan, McKay, appeared on the said commission as judge of the claims of the said settlers.
Your petition is, therefore, a claim that the said McKay after taking part in the said election, as above set forth, under pay from the Dominion government, could not render justice to those who voted against the government and did not do so.
That parties who voted for the government got paid in many cases more than they were entitled to and that others who voted against the government got their claims reduced and in the majority of cases got nothing at all.
That all the settlers who put in claims swore to the correctness ol same and the wholesale disallowance of said claims was tantamount to labelling a respectable class of people as perjurers.
Your petitioners, therefore, believe that they did not obtain justice for the reasons above stated, and pray that the government will appoint a commission to look into the facts and render justice to those to whom justice is due.
Rufus Henry Pope: What is the date of that ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: These petitions were sent to me last week. I got some of them to-day. Here is one from Duck Lake, signed by over forty people. Here is one from Fort a la C-orne, signed by every man" of the district. Grits and Tories are all on that petition.


Rufus Henry Pope: How many were there at the time of the rebellion ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: They were all there. There are hundreds of names here.


Thomas Osborne Davis: 


David Henderson: All signed by one hand ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: No, signed by every man io the district-by clergymen and others who knew what they were signing. The names of some of the most respectable people in the district of Saskatchewan are on these petitions.


Rufus Henry Pope: They are the Conservatives.


Thomas Osborne Davis: My hon. friend may have his own idea about that. I will just read some of the names on one of these petitions. Here is one from Bresaylor, near Battleford, signed by James Bremner, Rev. Philip McDonald, E. J. Spence, David Taylor, W. H. English (Church of England missionary), Rev. H. Delmas, Rev. J. Poulenard (parish priest), and many others. Most of these gentlemen were all there at the time of the rebellion, and were seized of the facts. When my hon. friend from Halton says he is not sure whether the facts I am stating are correct or not, I can tell him that I have the figures here to prove everything I have said. Here is a statement which goes to show that this gentleman who was acting as commissioner was paid for his services and his expenses, including railway fare, during the time that election took place; and I make the statement that he worked for two months, speaking at meetings and doing everything he could to forward the interests of the Conservative candidate, and that during that time he pocketed $20 a day of government money. Knowing how the people would vote, he did not and could not do justice to them. Any one who resides in that part of the country and looks at the list of claims will know that. I have here a list of the claims, and I will comment on a few of the items. I have already mentioned that in the first $131,000 that was paid some of the relatives of the local commissioner were dealt with very generously. A widow woman who lived in Prince Albert was paid on her first claim $2,500 and on her second $2,000. No one around there ever knew where the $4,500 worth of property existed. Many other claims were paid in the same way. A gentleman at Batoche, a Mr. Le-tander-commonly known as ' Batoche,' the place being named after him-had a good deal of influence, and when the election came on he turned it into the Conservative party. What was the result ? $19,000 odd was paid to him for his loss. Another man, a neighbour of his, Mr. Emmanuel Champagne, who lost double what Batoche did, put in an honest claim for $13,310, and he did not get a cent. He said : ' I will not vote for the Tory party if you pay my claim ten times over ; I am not going to sell my principles '; and he never got a cent. Right across the river from Batoche two gentlemen were doing business in a little log store, not more than sixteen feet square, and they lived in the upper part of the building. There was

no railway at that time, and they brought in their stock by ox-team. They had only a few things hanging along the walls, but they were excellent workers in the campaign, and how much do you suppose they got? Something like $13,000 for what was in that littlei building. Everybody in that country knows that the whole stock could have been put on a bob-sleigh, and one horse would have been enough to haul it. If you go through this list you can always see by the ciphers where a man is a Grit.


Rufus Henry Pope: Hear, hear-every time.


Thomas Osborne Davis: I suppose the bon. gentleman believes that a man who belongs to the opposition party should not get anything. Here is another case of the same kind-Jean Baptiste Boyer, who turned out to be a good Conservative; but be was at the start as great a Reformer as there was in the country. I think he was a member of the half-breed council. He repented of his sins however ; joined the faithful, and put in a claim for $9,344.34, and was allowed $6,461.63. It was worth while, with an open vote, to cast it for the Conservative candidate in that election.
Just previous to that there was another man named Jean Baptiste Arcand, who was a great Grit, and he would not vote for the Conservative candidate. He said to the Conservative : it was you who brought on this rebellion and forced our children to wander through the woods. We lost some of them, who died from exposure and I will never poll a vote for you. Did he get anything ? No, he put in his claim, and let us see what resulted. He put in a claim for $599.15, but he got nothing at all because he did not vote right. Here is another gentleman, Anderson, who refused to vote as the faithful wanted. He put in a claim for $1,000 but three ciphers were put behind his name. There was a gentleman by the name of W. P. BeauprO, who was a well known election heeler at Duck Lake. He was employed in a store and they supposed he had a certain amount of influence. He put in a claim for $7,587.50, and being an excellent man at elections and a good worker, he got $4,606. The next gentleman is James Ballendine. They treated him with a great deal of generosity. They could not convert him, but thought they might soften him. He claimed $126.75 and they gave him the magnificent sum of $8.00. The next gentleman is Gilbert Breland. He put in a claim for $186.75, but as he was unfortunately a Grit, there are three ciphers behind his name. Joseph Corrigall comes next-one of the most honest upright and respectable men in the country, a man not capable of putting his signature to anything that is not true. Well, he put in a claim for $634.60, but because he did not vote right, there are three ciphers opposite his name and he got nothing.
I find here another gentleman by the name of Cromartie, who put in a claim for $2 215. They had some designs on him. They expected they might be able to get him to come back into the fold, and they gave him the magnificent sum of $40, I understand he refused to take it. He said they had better keep it, that he had sworn to the truth, that he had lost every dollar in goods put into the claim, and he was not going to be considered a perjurer and then take $40. I find a gentleman named Joseph Charette, who could not see his way clear to vote straight. The canvassers could not convince him to vote Conservative, so they turned him down and he got nothing. There is another gentleman named Archibald Campbell.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


Thomas Osborne Davis: There was no chance for him, because he was a good Grit like the hon. member for York. He put in a claim for $311.75.


David Henderson: For cabbage ?


Thomas Osborne Davis: I do not know whether for cabbage, or woodpeckers, or Christmas trees, but he did not get paid, although there was certainly a lot of goods cabbaged from him. Then there is Ambroise Dubois, who claimed $300 and got nothing. Madame Veronique Dumas claimed $556 and got nothing. William Diehl-here is a gentleman who took an active part in suppressing the rebellion. He put in a claim for $135, swore to the truth of his claim, is a decent respectable man, and he got nothing at all. Here is a gentleman by the name of Fidler, sr., of St. Antoines. He put in a claim for $1,695. He is a very respectable man, who lives close to Prince Albert and is well known, and he got nothing because he would not vote right. Edward Fidler and George Fidler put in claims. George put in a claim for $295. He is a decent respectable fellow, who lives there yet, and his name is on one of these petitions as well as his father's. He was told he could not get anything because he did not vote right. Here is a family of Foulds, respectable people, who have lived there many years, One of them put in a claim for $1,000 and got nothing. Alexander Foulds put in a claim for another thousand and got nothing. He would not be believed on his oath. Here is another gentleman, James E. Fidler, who put in a claim for $413. They must have imagined they could do something with James, for they gave him $68. I think they thought they could soften him. Here is another gentleman, Roger Goulet. Everybody knows that all the Goulets were good Tories, he was a relative of the old scrip commissioner in the earlier days and put in a claim for $1,957. He got $1,261. And I venture to say there was not a bigger agitator in Saskatchewan. But he


HUGH J. MACDONALD.
[Stage Direction]
This letter is dated April 8th of this year, which goes to show that Judge Sedgewick had honestly reported in favour of the payment of a certain amount on that claim and that the government, because they were afraid of opening up some other claims, refused to do justice to this man. I think that after the Deputy Minister of Justice had investigated this claim and had reported in favour of paying a certain amount, the government of the day should have acted on that report and should have paid that amount of money even if it had thereby
[Stage Direction]
opened up these other claims because I do Dot see any reason why other claims should not be opened up. It is never too late to adjust a grievance, and if these people have a just claim it should be looked into and be paid ; if it is not just it will not be paid. They are only asking to have their cases looked into, and if the statements made are true redress their grievances. If you find they are not in accordance with the facts do not pay them. That is a reasonable proposition and that is all that these people ask. Mr. McLean has letters from Sir Donald A. Smith, the present Lord Strathcona, in which he approves of the government paying Mr. McLean a certain amount on this claim. Lord Strathcona was seized of the facts as he was at the head of the Hudson's Bay Company when this unfortunate rebellion took place. Here is a second letter from Sir Donald Smith. Here is a letter from Mr. Scarth, who was afterwards a member of this House, in which he supported the claim of Mr. McLean. I have here a letter from the present Attorney General of Manitoba, Mr. Colin H. Campbell, in which he promises to support the claims and says he will do everything he possibly can to have the claim adjusted. Evidently the promises of these gentlemen did not amount to much. I have a promise of Mr. Campbell, who says he will do all that he can ; Senator Schultz is another. Then there are letters from Mr. Adam Brown, M.P., Mr. Scarth and Mr. R. W. Ross, M.P., promising support. This poor man went junketing on from year to year expecting to have payment, but up to the present time he is just where he was when he started, although he has all this influence behind him. I think these claims should be opened up. If these people have a grievance it is the duty of the government to look into that grievance and if possible to redress it. I suppose there are hundreds of names of respectable people signed to these petitions, in which the statement is made that they were not treated fairly, and that it is desirable to have a commission appointed (to investigate the claims and see that justice is done. I hope the government will take this into their serious consideration, will look into it because there is not the least doubt that there is a strong feeling all through this country resulting from the way these people were treated. The commission was used as a political machine pure and simple.. The man on whom the people depended, the local commissioner, was travelling around stumping at meetings, and taking $20 a day. People said that the reason the government did not pay the claims was because they found it cheaper to buy up the commissioner than pay the people. Now, that there is a change of government they expect that their grievances will be looked into and that justice will be done. Mr. McLean Mr. DAVIS.
was promised by all the Conservative politicians at that time that his claim would be paid. Judge Sedgewick went up and examined the claim of Mr. McLean, and although he reported in favour of a payment, the government, because they thought they might have to pay a few of these other claims, refused to open -up the question at all, and therefore they decided to put a plug in the wheel and to stop the whole proceedings. I hope the government will take the question up, look into it and see that justice is done to to whom justice is due
Thomas Walter Scott: Nothing but a sense of duty would induce me to rise in the House again to-day, but as a representative of the Northwest, as one having some acquaintance with the facts which have been related by the hon. gentleman from Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) I deem it to be my duty to corroborate, so far as I am able, his statement, and to lend my support to the plea which he has put forward for a very considerable number of the residents of the district of Saskatchewan, wdiich my hon. friend (Mr. Davis) so well represents in this House. Regardless of what may be the view of any person as to the conduct of the chief actors in the deplorable occurrences of 1885 in the Northwest, I think that there can be no difference of opinion that had it not been for the flagrant neglect of the government of the day that most deplorable affair never would have occurred. As my bon. friend (Mr. Davis) has stated, that fact is partly proved by what took place immediately after the suppression of the rebellion. A commission was appointed when it was too late to escape the trouble which had been brought about by neglect and to some extent the grievances of the natives of that country were redressed. But ever since the report of that commission, there has been a feeling in the minds of many people in the Northwest Territories that these rebellion losses claims were not dealt with in the manner in which they should have been dealt with and that the claimants did not receive then-dues as a result of the investigation on the part of the commission which dealt with the matter. I think my hon. friend from Saskatchewan has a very good case to put forward and that he is very well justified in putting forward the plea in behalf of these claimants which he has been arguing this evening. I have a claim in regard to another citizen of the Northwest Territories that I want to present to the government and the House very briefly and on account of the late hour which has now been reached I will not extend my remarks as much as I might otherwise feel disposed to do. I wish to make a plea on behalf of a citizen of this country who at one crisis in the history of Canada rendered very material

service to the Dominion. I refer to a gentleman whose name may be known to most of the members of this House, Mr. Jean Louis LegarS, whose post office address is Willow Bunch and who twenty-five years ago was a trader with the natives of the Northwest Territories at the Wood Mountain police post. Mr. LegarS removed from the province of Quebec about 1860 to the western prairies. At the time the deplorable Ouster massacre occurred across the American border. Mr. Legare had been some sixteen or seventeen years in business as a trader at Wood Mountain. As every one knows, following the Ouster massacre, the Indian Chief, Sitting Bull, with a band of 500 Indians invaded Canada and came to the locality of Wood Mountain. Had it not been for the service rendered at that time by Mr. Legare no one can tell what trouble might have been caused in the country or to the government of Canada. No one can tell what expenditure might have been necessary by the trouble which might have been raised by Sitting Bull and his band of 500 warlike Indians. Fortunately Mr. I.egarG was on the ground and in him was found a man who had already to a very large degree won the confidence of the natives of the country. Up to that time the boundary line did not have the significance that it has at the present time. Mr. Legare's acquaintance extended to the natives south of the 49th parallel as well as to those north of the line. I may say to the House, and there is a considerable number of the hon. gentlemen here who have some acquaintance with Mr. Legare, that between the Atlantic and the Pacific there will not be found a more honest or simple minded man than Mr. LegarS, of Willow Bunch. The natives understood that and had great confidence in Mr. LegarS. Sitting Bull had great confidence in Mr. Legare and as a result of the negotiations that Mr. Legare entered into with Sitting Bull at that time, Sitting Bull consented to go back to the United States and surrender himself to the United States authorities.


David Henderson: About what time was that ?


Thomas Walter Scott: The year in which Sitting Bull went back and surrendered to the United States was about 1881. It was a considerable time before that year that the Custer massacre occurred and Sitting Bull with his band crossed to the Wood Mountain country.


Wilfrid Laurier: In 1876.
Mr. iSCOTT. It was in 1876, I believe. During the time that Sitting Bull and his Indians were in the Wood Mountain country they lived upon Mr. Legare. Mr. LegarS was a trader and a trader in that district was obliged to have his supplies freighted by Red River cart from Fort Garry, and goods freighted a matter of 500 miles had a
very considerable value in the trader's store. Sitting Bull and his Indians literally ata Mr. Legare out of house and home. They not only consumed the whole year's store and trading supplies but they made it impossible for Mr. Legare in that year to do any business. He fed them out of his store and had no goods left to do business with. He lost a great deal of time as well as the supplies and the entire profits of the year's trading. I may be permitted to read to the House a brief description of what occurred at this time in the Wood Mountain district which I find here upon an official record.


David Henderson: Perhaps the hon. gentleman will tell us what year he is speaking of ? About what year did these occurrences take place ?


Thomas Walter Scott: In the year 1876.


David Henderson: I submit, Mr. Speaker, that we have wasted enough time to-day and that the hon. gentleman should be kept within the record. The motion has reference to the rebellion losses of 1885 and the question the hon. gentleman is discuss-sing has no reference whatever to the matter before the House. I think you ought to restrain the hon. gentleman and bring him within the record so that there may be some possibility of getting on with the business of the House. I ask for your ruling, Mr Speaker, as to whether he is in order or not in discussing the question he is now speaking about.


Peter Macdonald: The resolution which is now before the House makes special reference to one particular question. I will read it.
Address for a return showing all papers, letters, petitions and resolutions in reference to payments of claims for losses arising out of the Rebellion of 1885 in the Northwest Territories.
I do not really think the discussion of this item is within the four corners of the resolution.


Thomas Walter Scott: I am obliged to bow to your 1'uling, Mr. Speaker. I am very sorry that the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) has deprived me of this opportunity of bringing forward a good and just claim on behalf of a citizen or this country who is very well entitled to some consideration. I shall have to seek another opportunity of bringing forward this matter on behalf of Mr. LegarS.


David Henderson: I have listened with a good deal of interest to the farce that has been engaged in this evening by the hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) and the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott). I must confess I am surprised, considering that one of these hon. gentlemen has been sitting in this House since 1896, and the other gentleman since 1900, that they have allowed this important matter to

lie dormant and not called the attention of the government to it, knowing all the facts as they do, I think surely they have very small ground indeed to again appeal to their constituents.
I think the best Conservative literature that could be circulated in their constituencies, is a report of the speeches which these two gentlemen have delivered. If any of my constituents had what I considered just claims, and for seven long years I had sat supporting the government without demanding redress for their grievances and without bringing them to the attention of the government, I assure you I would not expect my constituents to return me. I am not familiar with the facts, and do not know whether these claims are well founded or not, but if they are, then these two hon. gentlemen deserve the censure of this House for not having brought them to the attention of parliament at an earlier date.


Clifford Sifton: I have no desire to enter into a discussion of the question, but I must say, speaking from recollection, that this matter has been already brought to the attention of parliament. There was the well known case of Bremner furs and other matters discussed in this House some years ago. I am unable to understand on what principle the hon. gentleman (Mr. Henderson) thinks the member from Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) is not justified in bringing before this House, what he regards as a grievance suffered by his constituents. The fact that parliament has taken no action in regard to any particular matter that an hon. member may think is deserving of consideration, is no reason, whatever why he should not take every reasonable occasion to bring it before parliament and the government.


Robert Laird Borden: All that my hon. friend (Mr. Henderson) said was, that if these are good claims they ought to have been brought to the attention of the House before this late date. That seems to me a very substantial point, and it has not been answered by the minister. If they have been brought to the attention of the government, then the censure which my hon. friend from Halton attributes to the two hon. gentlemen, is simply transferred to the government which has not dealt with claims which are alleged to be just, and which have remained unsettled for the eight years that my hon. friend from Saskatchewan has bten sitting in the House.


Wilfrid Laurier: My hou. friend (Mr. Davis) has brought these claims more than once to the attention of the House, at all events he has brought them to the attention of the government. Whether the claims are good or not, the great difficulty which the government finds, is


David Henderson: in opening up this matter after such a lapse of time, and in view of the fact that a commission appointed by the late government passed upon them. Whether the decision of the commission was right or wrong, my friends on the other side will, I think, agree that it is very difficult to open such a case. That is the difficulty we have on our minds yet, and I am sorry to say the government has not been able to solve it. There is no objection to bring down 'the papers.


Rufus Henry Pope: If the facts are as represented by the member for Saskatchewan-I am not here to say whether they are or not-and if this matter has been laid before the government on more than one occasion, then the government should have come to some conclusion before the lapse of eight years. I was under the impression that the hon. member for Saskatchewan was merely making a speech for (he coming election ; and considering that he is going to have a very hard fight, I thought that the House might be indulgent and give him an hour or two, although I would have thought that it would have been more courteous and more courageous if the hon. gentleman (Mr. Davis) had met his opponent face to face and had not availed of all the privileges which surround him in this House, for the purpose of attacking a man who is 2,000 miles away.


Hon. WM. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.).: It would appear that a certain class of people had their claims paid liberally while another class of people whose claims were as just and honest, as proven under oath, were not compensated. If that be the case, then the government might inquire into tile matter even at this late date, and see that justice is done. It is not a matter between the member for Saskatchewan and the candidate that may run against him ; it is a matter that concerns the people of all Canada, and if the facts are as stated, it is never too late to render justice. I think myself, that the government would be justified in appointing an independent commission, the members of which would not be influenced by local considerations, to inquire into the case. If that be done,
I think it will be found that there are a rumber of people up there who. have been ili treated.


Thomas Osborne Davis: When I brought this question up in the House last year, the leader of the opposition claimed that he had not time to look into it. This session, the notice has been on the paper for six weeks, and if hon. gentlemen opposite cared anything about it, they could have got the papers and inquired into the matter. The hon. member (Mr. Pope) says I made an election speech, but surely I did not make an election speech two years ago and three years ago wuen I brought the matter up before.

Whenever I did bring it up, the gentlemen ot the opposition seemed to be dissatisfied. I bring the matter before parliament because the people whom I represent have requested me to do so. The hon. gentleman from Compton (Mr. Pope) thinks I am going to have a hard time to get elected. He need not trouble himself about that. If he can carry his county as easily as I can carry mine, he will be all right. He says I should not speak about a gentleman who is a thousand miles away, but 1 can tell him that X am not afraid to meet any one on the platform, and that I discussed this question before my constituents, but my opponent was never present although lie was invited to come. Right in his own town he was invited to discuss this question at a meeting, and the Conservative committee of Prince Albert sent a team out for him and he refused to come. The same thing occurred at Lindsay, and he would not face the music. There was a meeting at a place called Melfort where they were all American settlers, who perhaps never heard of the rebellion and who had no claims, and he wanted to discuss the rebellion claims there, but the people said they wanted live issues and would not listen to him. I told him at that meeting that X would call a meeting at Prince Albert the night before the election to discuss the matter, but he took good care that he was not present. The people did not kno -v then that he was pocketing $20 a day or they would have asked some question about it. I can tell the hon. gentleman (Mr. Pope) that 1 am not afraid to bring this matter up either here or anywhere else.
The last time I brought the matter up in this House I did not mention his name at all. Hon. gentlemen opposite asked for his name to-night, or I would not have mentioned it. How could I have made the case of these people plain ? Thousands of them signed petitions stating that this man had acted as a partisan, and asking for an investigation Into the facts of the case. I think it only right that that should be done, and I am glad to see that my hon. friend from Victoria (Mr. Ross) has taken that ground. It is never too late to remedy a grievance and to see that justice is done to any portion of the community. These people, rightly or wrongly, say they have a grievance. They say : We have not been treated properly, while certain other people have been paid more than they should have been for political reasons. All they ask is that a commission be appointed to look into the matter and see whether their statements are correct or not. ' I do not think it is necessary to appoint an expensive commission. Why did not hon. gentlemen opposite when in power pay the claim of Mr. McLean? The late Minister of the Interior said he was entitled to be paid; Sir Donald A. Smith, Mr. Scarth, Mr. A. W. Ross, the present attorney general of Manitoba, the Hon.


Colin H.: Campbell, Mr. G. H. McDowell, the member for Saskatchewan at that time, Senator Schultz, Mr. Adam Brown, -who sat in this House for many years; all said it was an honest claim. It therefore comes with very bad grace from hon. gentlemen opposite to accuse him of not bringing up the matter before, though he had the chance time and again. I hope the government will look into the grievances of these people, and render justice to whom justice is due.


Mr. N. BOYD (Macdonald).: Mr. Speaker, it is very evident that the hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) is losing his influence with the party in pow'er. When our party was in power we were in the habit of pressing our claims on the ministers or in caucus. We used to go before our ministers and take with us our friends, the members who came from the same part of the country, and press our claims ; and if we were not able to induce the ministers to recognize our claims, we never had any chance in the House. The Liberals frequently said of the late lamented Nicholas Flood Davin that very often when addressing the House he was playing to the gallery in order that he might get something into his newspaper the next day. Of course, we would not accuse the hon. gentlemen, some of whom are newspaper proprietors and who have been taking up so much of the time of the House in discussing this matter of having any such object in view. All I can say is that these gentlemen have not that influence with their ministers which they ought to have or which we used to have with our ministers when we were on the other side of the House. My hon. friend from Victoria says that this matter should be looked into. Was there not a commission appointed at that time to look into it? I was not then in the House, but I believe there was a very important and upright commission appointed, at the head of which was Judge Street.


Wilfrid Laurier: Not that commission. Judge Street was on the commission appointed in 1885, at the time of the rebellion, to consider the claims of the halfbreeds. I think Mr. McKay was the commissioner to look into these claims.


Thomas Osborne Davis: Mr. McKay and Judge Ouimet.


Nathaniel Boyd: Well, that commission was appointed, and its report was laid before the House, and the government acted upon it. The statements made by the hon. member for Saskatchewan here to-day are largely matters of opinion, not matters of fact. He has stated these things as his opinion and the opinion of some other people who hold the same political views as he does. So that I do not believe he has any evidence that the commission entrusted with that very important mission was false to its duty ; and until evidence of that kind is Jaid before this House to show that that was the case, I think we should be spared any further trouble in the matter. My hon. friend says the gov-'

eminent must take that view, because they do not act. If they do not act, they evidently have not that confidence in the gentlemen who have brought this matter before the House that our government had in us in the days when we were on the other side of the House.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. J. E. LEONARD (Laval).: (Translation) moved
For copies of all Orders in Council, documents, correspondence exchanged between the government, or any of the ministers, and any persons, regarding the Indian Reserve established by 14 and 15 Victoria, Chapter 106, in favour of the Iroquois Indians of Sault St. Louis and of the Lake of Two Mountains, and the exchange of that reserve for any other one or for any sum of money in favour of the same said Indians.
Mr. Speaker, in connection with this motion which appears on to-day's Order paper, I wish to make a few remarks with a view to obtaining from the government some explanation in regard thereto. I may say that this matter has helped a good deal in securing the return of my hon. friend the member for Terrebonne (Mr. Desjardins) at the recent by-election.
There has been for a good many years back, in the county of Terrebonne^ an Indian reserve known under the name of Doncaster. Last year the government caused a subsidy of $11,325 to be voted for the purpose of settling these claims and the right hon. Prime Minister gave the following particulars on page 13779 of Hansard :
To provide an amount for squatters' improvements, Doncaster reserve, $11,325.
I notice that in this year's estimates the above amount no longer appears, although as yet nothing has been paid on last j'ear's appropriation. However, the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Prefontaine), whenever an opportunity offers of meeting his political friends, and among others, those gentlemen whose names appear on page 13780 of ' Hansard-,' never fails to promise that their claims will be settled, notwithstanding the fact that the House has not been called upon to revote the subsidy granted last year.
Although the government have found out that the said amount cannot be paid, the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries still persists, as well as the Dominion and local members for Terrebonne, in promising to the electors of that part of the county that the government will grant them compensation for the improvements effected on the Indian reserve.
It is a matter of surprise, Mr. Speaker, that the government, through one of its leading members, the Minister of Marine, should have agreed to compensate people who had illegally set foot on a reserve, for fifty years


Nathaniel Boyd: back the property of the Oka and Caughna-waga Iroquois.
Last year, as may be seen by referring to page 13779 of * Hansard,' the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule) asked for some explanations in reference to these $11,325, and the right hon. Prime Minister replied that the amount was voted to compensate the following persons : Israel Thouin, $3,000; Isidore Legault, $800; Napoleon Constantineau, $540. The right hon. gentleman did not condescend to give the names of the recipients of the balance of the $11,000 ; but I believe I am right when I say that the other recipients were the leading party heelers of the hon. member for Terrebonne (Mr. Desjardins) during the recent by-elec-tion.
The government would be willing to compensate people who have no right to any compensation, who have ignored the law, who, in spite of their knowledge of the circumstances of the case, that is, although they knew that those lands belonged to Indians, settled on them. I hope that this year, the right hon. gentleman will take this opportunity to give further explanations. He, no doubt, has realized that the government have no right to pay the amount voted last year, and that is the reason why it was cut out of the estimates now laid before the House.
I have raised this question, in order to put a stop to reports circulated in the county of Terrebonne by the representatives of that county, both in the Dominion and local House, to the effect that the question has been settled by the government and that the gentlemen whose names have been given by the right hon. Prime Minister are to be compensated! for improvements which they should not have effected, aud are to receive amounts to which they are not entitled, in connection with an expenditure controlled by nobody and authorized by nobody. As a matter of fact the only title these people have in the minds of the government is the fact that they have been devoted supporters of the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Prefontaine) when he was a candidate in that county, and also that they have been zealous supporters of the hon. member for Terrebonne (Mr. Dejardins) and of Mr. Prevost, the local member.
I would like to have full and precise particulars as to this matter from the right hon. Prime Minister, who, I believe was wrongly informed when he gave to the House the answer to be found on page 13779 of ' Hansard,' for 1903. I do not intend to read just now what he said at the time; but those desirous of perusing it have only to refer to the page quoted above.
In the county of my hon. friend from Terrebonne, that matter in connection with the Indian reserve is a burning one, and has been so for over twenty years past

It has not been found possible to settle the question heretofore, as the Indians of the township of Doncaster are the actual and sole proprietors of that reserve; they are in full possession of lands granted to them under 14 Victoria, August 30, 1851. If my information is correct, the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries stated in the county of Terrebonne, at several public meetings at which he was called upon to speak, that the matter would be settled, and would be settled by himself and his government.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: (Translation.) Certainly.


Joseph-Édouard-Émile Léonard: (Translation.) The hon. minister says : Certainly. I am very happy indeed that the matter should be settled at last, and that the electors of Terrebonne whom he has converted to his views by such promises should at last be satisfied.
I therefore submit this proposition, seconded by my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk), and hope that not only will the government bring down the papers for which I ask, but that the right hon. Prime Minister will gladly take this opportunity to give explanations which will satisfy the members of this House and the electors of the province of Quebec, as the latter, relying on those given during last session, had gathered the idea that this matter of interest to part of the inhabitants of the country north of Montreal would be finally settled.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: (Translation.) Is the hon. member for Laval agreeable or not to a settlement being effected ?


Joseph-Édouard-Émile Léonard: 
Joseph-Édouard-Émile Léonard: (Translation.) Will the right hon. gentleman allow me to ask him
: Does he think the squatters are entitled to compensation ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Certainly.
(Translation.)


Joseph-Édouard-Émile Léonard: (Translation.) On what grounds ?


Wilfrid Laurier: (Translation.) On grounds of natural equity. My hon. friend is well aware that the public lands m the province of Quebec are open" to settlement, and it is hard to decide that a settler who takes up land in some township or other acting in good faith, believing that the land belongs to the Crown, shall be deprived of it without compensation. As those who settled up there were in good faith, we deemed it proper to compensate them for the losses they had sustained.
If I understood him rightly, my hon. friend is in favour of a settlement being effected by the government. He has just stated to the hon. Minister of Marine that he is in favour of a settlement being effected ; he wanted the settlers to be compensated.


Joseph-Édouard-Émile Léonard: (Translation.) I am-in favour of compensating those who are entitled to such compensation.


Wilfrid Laurier: (Translation.) Who are those entitled to compensation ? As for us, we believe that all those who have settled there are entitled to compensation. And that "was also the opinion of parliament last year when they voted the necessary funds for that purpose. The only reason why those moneys were not paid was the necessity of finding out the exact status of those for whom we sought compensation. But as soon as satisfactory reports have been received, the settlers will be paid.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: (Translation.) If, in accordance with the hope expressed by the hon. Prime Minister, the government pays those claims before the end of the current year, and if the settlement is effected on a fair basis, the motion of my hon. friend from Laval (Mr. Leonard) will have had, to say the least, the effect of bringing about the settlement of these claims more promptly than would have happened otherwise.

Now, a rather strange circumstance, anil worthy of attention, is that, although this amount has been due for a good many months past, nothing has been done towards paying it. Nevertheless, according to the right hon. gentleman, the -money was due at the time the vote was granted. At all events, X think this motion will have been of actual service to these claimants.	_
In this connection there are two theories current; it is difficult to say which is true. The reserve in question was granted to the Indians over fifty years ago. The right hon. gentleman stated that people had settled on the reserve without knowing that it belonged to the Indians, and had made improvements on it. These settlers having afterwards applied to the provincial government for a title were told that they could not get it.
That is why, according to the Prime Minister considerable time had elapsed. The claimants then applied to the Dominion government and the latter, to settle the question, thought fit to have recourse to compensation, while at the same time seeking to induce the Indians to relinquish their title to the reserve which had been granted to them fiftv years ago. In the meantime, however, improvements had been effected by these settlers and it had become necessary to compensate them. That is the explanation given in last year's ' Hansard ' in regard to the item of $11,325.	.
If these claims be clear and precise, why have they not been settled before this ? That is what, no doubt, will be shown by the correspondence to be brought down in compliance with this motion.
But there is another theory which I heard in the county of Terrebonne, in several places and on various occasions, and it is to the effect that these people had settled there knowing perfectly well what were the rights of these Indians.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: (Translation.) How could they know ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: (Translation.) Very easily, since this reserve was granted over fifty years ago.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: (Translation.) But they might not have been aware of it.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: (Translation.) The fact of that grant having been made to the Indians was known to all. If the improvements referred to were effected in good faith, the matter might be considered ; but if, as was reported to me, these improvements have been carried out on the assurances given by my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, it is quite a different matter.


Mr. PREFONT  AINE@: (Translation.) In 1896, when I went there for the first time, I was not even aware that these people were settled on that reserve.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: (Translation.) I am giving the report which is current in the county.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Pledges have been given in connection with the settlement of this question of the Doncaster Indian reserve, notwithstanding which it is not yet settled. The amount has been voted for a long time back, and if the theory referred to is correct, that is if these people have settled there knowing quite well what difficulties they would have to overcome to secure a title, then I maintain that the moneys voted might be better employed elsewhere. Thus, in the city of Montreal, there are some very urgent needs which should be attended to before complying with the demands of these claimants. The post office people are requesting fairer treatment, and are being told that money cannot be found to meet their requirements. If the report as to the origin of these claims is correct, this amount would be better expended in meeting such reasonable claims as those I have just referred to, instead of these others which are, to say the least, ot very doubtful character. I think the motion wili have the effect of hastening the settlement of the question ; and if the claims are legitimate they shall be paid as they should in justice be.
iMr. PREFONT AINE. (Translation). It is clear from the remarks just made by the hon. members for Laval and Jacques Cartier, that they are not at all agreeable to a settlement of these claims; because, if they were agreeable to such a settlement, what would be the sense of questioning the rights of these settlers, and especially of questioning them with such persistency 1 From what the hon. member for Jacques Cartier has said, it is clear that the government are taken to task for having undertaken to deal with that question and to bring about a settlement, while these gentlemen on the other side had never bothered their heads with it, had looked down upon it as ridiculous,-and that to my personal knowledge,-adding that public interest required that the question should be discarded. Well, very likely it is through mere spite that they now rebuke the government for having kept their pledge.
I am familiar with the circumstances in all their particulars. The Indian reserve of Doncaster was granted in 1850 or 1851. A considerable area had been set apart for the Indians, who, however, never took possession until twelve or eighteen months ago, when they heard of negotiations being carried on through the Department of the Interior with a view of settling the matter. Thet first proposal which was made to the Indians concerned was that they should relinquish for a consideration, the rights they might have on the lands occupied by the squatters. I have not seen the report of the surveyor instructed to mark the limits of the townships-and that is one reason why the settlement has been deferred-but I understand that the church of Ste. Lucie is situated on the Indian reserve. Now, in

the interest of the poor settlers of that parish, it was important that the question should be settled.
Negotiations were carried on for a period of two- years between the department of the Interior and the Indians. I know that at one time, some Indians went to the reserve and by sheer force took possession of the improvements effected by the settlers. So, there was only one thing to do, since the Indians-unfairly to my mind-would not relinquish their rights, and that was to decide whether it was just to expel these squatters without compensation. The matter was carefully looked into by the Department of the Interior, and after a thorough investigation the conclusion was that the settlers had acted in good faith. There is no sense in saying that some of these settlers took up land with a view to securing compensation from the government. I am conversant with the facts, and I may state that none of these settlers took up land there with such an object in view. The later arrivals have been settled there for at least ten years and the others for twenty-five or thirty years.
Now, the good faith of these settlers is proven by the facts ; that reserve, which was established by statute, had no limits whatever marked out. It was stated that an Indian reserve had been set apart there, but, with the leave of the provincial government, it had been laid bare of all its timber of commercial value ; lumbering had been carried on for several years on these lands, and it was quite natural that people without much education, and not conversant with the law, should have thought that they were settling on the public domain, and not on an Indian reserve.
The charge that I suggested to these people to settle on that reserve is so preposterous, so childish, that I do not think it is necessary to answer it. These settlers who had been hobnobbed by the conservative government, saw fit to change their political allegiance m 1900 ; but that is quite easy to understand. Instead of telling these people as did the conservative government : You aie not bona fide settlers, you have no right to any compensation ; we told them that we acknowledged their rights and that we would endeavour to settle the question in a fair ancl satisfactory way.
That is a very important matter, not only for the parish of Ste. Lucie, but for the *w hole of the counties of Montcalm and Terrebonne. We said that if it were possible to induce the Indians to give up the reserve and to settle on other lands which the government would provide, so much the better tor those two counties and for the squatters concerned. That is all there is to it ; and it seems to me nothing unusual has occurred under the circumstances.
Such was the good faith of these- settlers, that they offered to pay to the government the same price for these lands as"that asked
for Crown lands. They claim fair treatment only, and it is unfortunate that these poor squatters should have been deprived of the benefit of that settlement until to-day.
I should say in passing that the amount voted last year in favour of these settlers includes the cost of opening a road connecting the two counties of Terrebonne and Montcalm and crossing' this reserve. If the settlement of the m'atter has been deferred, there is good reason for it : it was necessary to "find out exactly whether the squatters who had taken up lands there were on lots included in the reserve, or on Crown lands under the control of the Quebec government. That is why the hon. Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) came to an undestanding with the Quebec government on that subject, whereupon the latter instructed one of their officials to mark out the exact limits of Doncaster. The report of that gentleman has been handed to the department two or three weeks ago, and the official entrusted with that task is busy just now settling the matter in a way satisfactory to all concerned.
I was surprised to hear the member for Laval cast blame right and left, after stating that he was in favour of a settlement being-effected, and charge the Minister of Marine and Fisheries with having suggested to tnose people to take up lands on that reserve. I may state to the hon. member that the 'information supplied to him is altogether incorrect. Never did I make such a suggestion. What we stated in the county of Terrebonne, we are ready to repeat here and elsewhere. We ascertained that this was a case of hardship, and the government did not hesitate in doing justice. We requested that fait treatment be extended to these poor settlers, and if we did wrong in making such a request, we are willing to abide by the consequences ; but I may say that we are ready to take the same position to-morrow, should circumstances warrant us in doing so, as the correspondence will show they did warrant us in this case. ,


Joseph-Édouard-Émile Léonard: (Translation.) Will the hon. minister allow me to put one question: if, last yjar, the government did not know what were the limits of the township of Doncaster, why did they ask for a vote of $11,300 ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: (Translation.) The government asked for a vote of $11,300 last year, because they had not the time to make a survey, which required five or six months; and the money was voted with the understanding that only those whose claims were found to be correct would be paid out of it. If, as a result of the survey, it had been shown that some of these claimants were not squatters, it is evident the government would not have settled their claims.


CHEESE-CURING ROOM AT BROCK-VILBE.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. GEORGE TAYLOR (South Leeds) moved for :
Return showing :
1.	The total expenditure in connection with the cheese-cooling room at Brockville, Ontario, up to the first of March, 1904, detailed as follows :-
2.	The cost of site for curing room.
3.	The cost of construction of buildings.
4.	The cost of machinery, fittings, &e.
5.	The cost of cheese purchased.
6.	The cost of hauling cheese.
7.	The salaries of officials, labour, travelling expenses, &c.
8.	The cost of cheese boxes, chemicals, light, telephone, cqld storage, freight, and all other incidentals.
9.	The amount received for sale of cheese.
10.	The amount received for curing cheese.
He said : A few weeks ago I put a question on the paper, asking for information similar to that I am now moving for. The hon. Minister of Agriculture said that if I would move for a return, he would facilitate the bringing of it down. I have put a similar question respecting all the other cheese curing stations, namely, at Cowans-ville, St. Hyacinthe and Woodstock. The other motions were made without any comment, but I wish to say a few words with reference to the Brockville station. And I hope the hon. minister will be as good as his word and bring down the returns in a few days. As we have, however, moved for many returns which the House has ordered, some ordered last session, which are not yet down, I fear that if I do not make the few remarks I intend making on this subject now, I shall have no opportunity of doing so this session. I think myself that there was no necessity to move for a return as the information could have been obtained in an hour's time, but as the hon. minister desired a motion in detail, I have complied with his request. The Auditor General's Report of course only goes down to the 30th of June last year, and I desire information up to the 1st of March, 1904. The hon. minister has a fad of trying to convince the people that he is doing something, but the people do not take very much stock in what he does, particularly with regard to the cheese cooling stations and his poultry and dairying schemes. This cooling station was built at Brockville at great expense and is being run yearly at a heavy loss. The hon. gentleman spent a large sum putting up an illustration station, expecting that the cheese factory men would adopt the principle he is putting into application there. I see by the report of the Auditor General for this year, ending the 30th of June, that the country has stood this expense in connection with these four cheese curing rooms besides the loss sustained on the cheese' purchased and the Mr. PREFONTAINE.
money paid for hauling the cheese to this cooling station. The expenses and receipts last year were as follows :
Expense. Receipts. Loss.
Brockville	 $ 3,806 04 $ 1,550 96 8 2,255 08
Cowansville	7,224	36	1,442 48	83St. Hyacinthe....	2,700	62	444 66	2,25o	06Woodstock	12,372	41	2,507 83	9,864	58Total loss	
$20,157 50
I want to read the opinion of one of- the prominent Liberals in the Brockville constituency with regard to the Brockville station. Mr. Everetts, who is one of the largest cheese producers and one of the best known factory men in Ontario, said at the meeting held at Brockville :
Before the sale of cheese was taken up, M.
K. Everetts, the extensive cheese manufacturer, who now resides in Smith's Falls, spoke at considerable length, roundly denouncing the Ottawa government on its dairy policy, particularly the introduction of the experimental cheese curing stations which he characterized as the biggest humbug ever imposed upon the people. Mr. Everetts introduced the subject by reference to the resolution from the Ottawa Cheese Board, read at a pervious meeting of th Brockville Cheese Board, asking the co-operation of the latter organization in bringing before the Eastern Ontario Butter and Cheese Association the matter of having cheese graded as finest, seconds and thirds. He did not agree with the suggestion. Brockville section was making nothing but finests and he urged the Brockville board to have nothing to do with the scheme whatever. This led up to a fierec attack upon the methods adopted by Prof. Ruddick, chief of the dairy division, in the discharge of his duties. Mr. Everetts took occasion to hand out a few caustic remarks bearing on the government curing stations, one of which is established in Brockville. The Ottawa government, he held, in creating these stations, was taking upon itself a burden which the calls of the trade did not demand. Each province should look after its own improved methods of manufacture, while the duty of the Dominion government was to provide for up-to-date transportation services by rail and water. The money used in the erection and carrying on of these curing rooms was a useless expenditure. Mr. Everetts' claimed that the results achieved did not warrant their continuance in operation. They did not aid the patrons in obtaining one-sixteenth of a cent more for their cheese than others. He challenged a single person to contradict him. These rooms were held up as models for others to follow. How many had built curing rooms after the fashion of the Brockville ' pine monument.' Not a one. And as to the cost of construction, operation, &c., the country was yet in darkness, notwithstanding a deliberate promise made by Prof. Ruddick last year to give such information. Mr. Everetts said the dairymen were getting their eyes opened. There was too much playing to the gallery by men in high plaees. The public would not he fooled all the time and the truth will come out sooner or later. He was willing to wager that next season cheese would not be hauled to the government cool curing room in Brockville at the gov- , ernment's expense. Mr. Everetts criticized Prof. Ruddick's doing along other lines and complain-

ed that at the gatherings of * experts' to talk over matters pertaining to the trade, manufacturers and producers-the big men behind the industry, the men who have invested their money-were not called in consultation.
That is a statement made bv one of the strongest Liberals in the county of Leeds and one of its largest cheese producers.
5Ir. FISHER. What is the date of that ?
George Taylor: It was at the meeting held last fall at Broefcville. Tlie government were establishing a station there, and strongly advised the farmers to draw their cheese and put it in storage there, and have it undergo this curing process by cold storage or whatever process the hon. minister may call it. rlhis was the plan adopted in the cheese establishment there. If a man came with a load of cheese, they would take one cheese out and weigh it and put it upstairs in the curing room and would weigh the- other and putting it down in the cold storage. If the one they put in the curing room upstairs shrank two or five pounds more than the one downstairs, they charged what the shrinkage was for the handling of the man's cheese. As they could not get the farmers to bring in their cheese, the government hired an army of officials to go through the country and drum up men to draw the cheese in, and large sums were paid to people last year to bring in cheese to the Brockville curing cooling station. As much as $1,011 was paid for this purpose * and the farmers tell me that the room which the government have to experiment in upstairs is not at all in touch with the curing rooms the farmers have throughout their factories in the country. They have a pretty hot sweating room so as to make the cheese as light as they can and charge so much a pound for the shrinkage. The cheese they put downstairs of course retains its weight. The government have also developed another fad. They covered the cheese with a kind of wax called paraffin. Last year they paid for paraffin wax 1.2C3 pounds at 7 cents ; 1.045 at 7J and 1.070 at Si. What effect has this paraffin on the cheese in the market of England ? Let me read a clipping taken from the ' Trade Bulletin ' a few days ago. written by its special correspondent in London :
^ The London special correspondent of the 'Trade Bulletin' writes that journal : 'Bristol buyers advise me this week that there is too much waxed cheese coming in, and as they have objected to this before, it is a pity makers do not take the hint.'
The ' Trade Bulletin ' thereupon returns to the discussion of the subject and says : ' It is-to be regretted that the government Agricultural Department at Ottawa should have advocated the waxing of cheese with paraffine by faetorymen, especially as there is such great objection to paraffined cheese on the other side of the Atlantic, and as our makers are supposed to study the requirements of the trade there, it is to be hoped that they will discontinue this highly objectionable practice. A Montreal exporter while in England last fall was instructed by three firms there not to ship them a box. of waxed cheese, as their customers strongly objected to them, on the ground that the goods lost considerable in weight, one importer stating that he w-ould not buy waxed cheese unless he was allowed two pounds per box. What is required in the English market is cheese with a.bright natural skin in the summer time, and cheese made in the fall should appear in the natural condition with a nice dry and green mold on the skin, showing a little maturity. Paraffined cheese prevents this natural appearance, besides causing loss in weight to the retailer. As so many objections continue to be raised, in the great consuming centres of Great Britain against waxing cheese, surely our faetorymen will not persist in a practice that is calculated to injure the enviable prestige of their goods in the English market.'
The hon. gentleman not only put the country to an expense of perhaps $100,000 in building and equipping these four cheesecuring stations, but he advocated the paraffining of the cheese, so as to prevent them, as it as said, from losing weight and causing them to command a higher price in the English market. And what is the effect ? Our cheese is selling at from three cents to five cents per pound less than it sold for a year ago. And this is largely due to the Minister of Agriculture advocating the paraffining of the cheese. We have lost standing in the English market. I do not know what the hon. Minister of Agriculture will have to say in answer to his political friend Mr. Everetts, of Brockville, who charges him, more strongly than I can state it, with responsibility for this condition of affairs. He says that men in high places are playing to the gallery and making use of fads to the injury of the cheese industry which the people of this country built up before the hon. gentleman became minister. And the hon. minister is trying to make people think that he is doing something for them by establishing these illustration stations for the factory men to occupy, though they have the cooling stations that are superior to those the hon. gentleman has established. And none of these practical men favour this fad, whether of the minister or of the commissioner, of paraffining cheese to prevent them from losing in weight. Englishmen do not want that and so our cheese are practically set aside. The hon. gentleman will understand that is not my statement that he has to answer, but that of Mr. Everetts. Every one who knows that gentleman knows that, from boyhood, he has been one of the strongest Reformers in the country. And he knows what he is talking about in discussing dairying questions. He runs eighteen or twenty factories of his own and is a purchaser of cheese in the Brockville district. The loss at the Brockville station is small as compared with

that of Woodstock. It is $2,255 at Brockville, while it is $9,864 at Woodstock. In Brockville, the cheese purchased and cured was $4,497.96 and the hauling cost $1,011.60. The details of these expenditures can be found at page D-100 of the Auditor General's Report. The accounts show that the amounts paid out for cheese purchased and hauled for Brockville, Cowansville, Woodstock and St. Hyacinthe was $20,828.20. The proceeds from the sales of cheese amounted to $15,810.55. But the Auditor General puts in a remark to this effect:
Proceeds from sales of cheese (receipts from cheese paid for In June and July, 1903 (1902-3), not in this account, payments in above).
So, we do not know what that amount was, and we cannot say what the profit or loss was on the purchase and hauling of this cheese. That is why we want a detailed account. Prof. Ruddick has promised it for the last year or two to the Brockville men, and they cannot get it- so Mr. Everetts states. They want to know how much the station is costing and how much the loss has been. They want it in the interest of cheese producers of that section, to show what this fad-whether it is the Minister's or Prof. Robertson's, they do not know-is resulting. At any rate, they say that as cheese producers they do not want it, but that it is money thrown away. I bring the matter to the attention of the House and the country that we may have an opportunity to hear what answer the minister will give to the charge made by Mr. Everetts.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I need hardly say to the bon. gentleman (Mr. Taylor) that I shall be glad to have the motion pass, so that he may get the information he asks for with regard to the Brockville curing room. I only regret that he has omitted to ask for the same information with regard to the Woodstock curing room. Two other motions of the hon. gentleman have been carried, one relating to Cowansville and one to St. Hyacinthe, and this resolution covers the case of Brockville. But there is the Woodstock station also.


George Taylor: My hon. friend from Peel (Mr. Blain) had a question on the paper relating to the Woodstock establishment. He thought, as I did, that we should have had this information in answer to questions put. And, when the hon. minister declined to give the information in that way the hon. member (Mr. Blain) seems to have decided that he would let the matter diop. If the minister will accept this notice, I should be glad to have him bring down the information with regard to Woodstock.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I hope the hon. gentleman will amend his motion to that effect, so that Mr. TAYLOR.
all the information may be brought down.
I can assure him that the information is too voluminous to be given in answer to a question. I told him before that I would facilitate the return, and I can assure him now' that he shall have it in a short time. As to the remarks of the hon. gentleman,
I wTill say only a few words. I have not the full information before me. When the facts are before the House I am sure the hon. gentleman will have an opportunity of discussing them to his full content. The statements he has made in regard to the Brockville factory are not quite correct so far as the spirit and intention of them is concerned. The plan of establishing a central cool curing room for cheese was one that was discussed in the various association meetings for twro years-proposed to the people who are interested in dairying and discussed thoroughly. The reason for this proposition was that for some time, (here had been considerable complaints concerning lack of uniformity in the quality of our cheese put on the English market. We had been warned over and over again . by those handling Canadian cheese in the English market that the curing of our cheese was not satisfactory. The investigation showed very clearly that the unsatisfactory curing of our cheese was due to the very changeable temperature in the curing rooms of the various factories throughout the country-not merely different temperature in different rooms, but great changes of temperature in the same room, often within twenty-four hours, the curing rooms being so constructed that the managers of factories could not control the temperature in them. It is wrell known and understood that the home-made cheese in England commanded higher prices than ours; and experts who examined them and compared them carefully with our cheese in England found certain difficulties which were well recognized and which caused a higher price to be given for English and Scotch cheese. The reason was found to be that in the curing rooms in the English cheese factories, the temperature was actually under control. They were so well constructed that the managers could keep the temperature at an even level of from 60 to 65 degrees, while, in me curing rooms of the Canadian factories, the temperature frequently went down to 50 degrees or so at night and would rise to 75 or 80 degrees in the heat of the day. The proposition was put before the dairymen and '.bey asked that the department should undertake experiments in this line. The questions how the experiments should be carried on, and on what scale they should be carried on wrere carefully considered. It was felt to be necessary that these experiments should be carried on on such a -scale that there would be a sufficient amount of cheese cured to secure a fair expression

of opinion from the buyers in England as well as from the handlers of this country. Therefore, it was necessary to provide curing rooms which would handle a very large quantity of cheese. We picked out four dairy districts, two in the province of Ontario and two in the province of Quebec, and asked the farmers, through the cheese factory men, to send in their cheese to be cured in these thoroughly equipped and well constructed curing rooms.
Two of them, that at Cowansville and that at Woodstock, were equipped with mechanical cold storage, and those at Brockville and St. Hyaeinthe were equipped with ice coll storage, in order to see whether the one *which is much more economical than the other can be satisfactorily managed and carried out. The work was experimental in its character, and therefore required, nor simply attention to the work of curing the *cheese, but o;f careful observation and watching and careful comparison, as my hon. friend (Mr. Taylor) has mentioned by the curing of some cheese under ordinal'} conditions and by the curing of others in well constructed curing rooms. This work has been managed successfully, if I may say so, notwithstanding what the hon. gen tleman has said and read. It has been so successful that this last season we had applications for three or four times as much cheese as the room could accommodate. The first year there was some doubt and suspicion. The people who owned factories in the neighbourhood of St. Hyaeinthe, Brockville Cowansville and Woodstock did not know what the results would be, and were a little doubtful about what might occur. It was an experiment (and they did not know. But those who had sent in their cheese were so eminently satisfied with the results in the line of the shrinkage of their cheese and in the better prices which they obtained, that we had applications to take more cheese than our buildings would accommodate. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Taylor) says that Mr. Everetts declared it was not successful. I have no report of the meeting where Mr. Everetts made that suggestion ; I do not know his opinion on the matter, but I can read to the House, and perhaps will have an opportunity of doing so before the House prorogues, dozens of statements from leading cheese-makers, buyers of cheese and buyers of cheese in England, that cheese cured at these factories was far superior to the average Canadian cheese, that the experiment was an absolute success, and that the desire was expressed that all Canadian cheese might be cured under such conditions, and sent forward of the quality of that cured in these cheese rooms. I did not know that the hon. gentleman was going to bring this matter up to-night, and have not these statements of those in the trade and the resolutions passed by various dairy associations, produce associations and others who have closely watched results.


George Taylor: When the hon. gentleman's estimates come up we will be glad to discuss it.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I will be very glad to discuss it then. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Taylor) has spoken of the expense, and has taken the figures from the Auditor General's Report. These figures do not show the profits on the curing of the cheese ; they simply show the expenditure in the experimental work and the actual sales of certain cheese. There were thousands and thousands of boxes of cheese that passed through these factories the profits on which do not appear, because they went to the factorymen who owned the cheese. This cheese was handled for these factorymen by the government, and the factorymen reaped the benefit. The government only reaped the benefit of the satisfaction which these factorymen whose cheese went to these curing rooms have abundantly expressed. The department has the satisfaction of knowing what can be done in cool curing rooms. The results are for the benefit of the dairying interests of this country, and, having proved that, we are well content to rest our reputation and the future on the proof which is given, not to the hon. gentleman, but to the dairymen of Canada, who will abundantly support the action of the department.


George Taylor: What about the paraffining of cheese ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: An experiment was also made in the paraffining of cheese. A large number were paraffined and some were not. When the paraffined cheese was first sent over to England the English market, not knowing what they were and what the result might be, expressed a little dissatisfaction and doubt, but since that time we have abundant reports from the English buyers of paraffined cheese, that the experiment is successful, that the cheese so treated have turned out exceedingly well in the English market, that the cheese so treated have shrunk less and have given a better result to the people who have sent them forward than other cheese.


George Taylor: The trade bulletin does not say so.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I will give the results fully at a later stage.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.


MOTIONS AGREED TO WITHOUT DISCUSSION.
Wilfrid Laurier: If agreeable to my hon. friends, we might take notices of motion as to which r.o debate is intended and then we will come back and take the debateable ones.
For copies of all correspondence between the | Post Office Department and any person, or perI sons, referring to the change in postmasters in

charge of the post office at Irena, in the township of Matilda, in the county of Dundas.-Mr. Broder.
For a return showing :-
1.	The total expenditure in connection with the cheese cooling room in Cowansville, Quebec, up to the first of March, 1904, detailed as follows :-
2.	The cost of site for curing room.
3.	The cost of construction of buildings.
4.	The cost of machinery, fittings, &c.
5.	The cost of cheese purchased.
6.	The cost of hauling cheese.
7.	The salaries of officials, labour, travelling expenses, &c.
8.	The cost of cheese boxes, chemicals, light, telephone, cold storage, freight, and all other incidentals.
9.	The amount received for sale of cheese.
10.	The amount received for curing cheese.- Mr. Taylor.
For a return showing :-
1.	The total expenditure in connection with
the cheese cooling room at St. Hyacinthe, Quebec, up to the first of March, 1904, detailed as follows :-	.	[DOT]
2.	The cost of site for curing room.
3.	The cost of construction of buildings.
4.	The cost of machinery, fittings, &e.
5.	The cost of cheese purchased.
6.	The cost of hauling cheese.
7.	The salaries of officials, labour, travelling expenses, &c.
8.	The cost of cheese boxes, chemicals, light, telephone, cold storage, freight, and all other incidentals.
9.	The amount received for sale of cheese.
10.	The amount received for curing cheese.- Mr. Taylor.
For copies of all the petitions that have been addressed to the government, or to any of the ministers, relating to the selection of a site for the new post office at St. John d'Iberville, and of all correspondence concerning the choice of such site.-Mr. Monk.
For copies of all letters, correspondence, memorials, petitions and documents, in the possession of the government, relating to the employment, or requesting the employment, by the Grand Trunk Railway Company, or by the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company, of British subjects as engineers in the surveying and construction of the proposed National Transcontinental Railway ; and generally, all correspondence and documents in the possession of the government, in any way complaining of, or protesting against, the employment of aliens as engineers in railway surveying or construction on the line of the proposed National Transcontinental Railway.-Mr. Borden.
For copies of all Orders in Council, patents, deeds, documents, correspondence and papers, passed, executed, signed, delivered, sent or received, since the first of July, 1903, in connection with the grant of any land in the city of Quebec to the Ross Rifle Factory Company, or Sir Charles Ross, or any person or persons on behalf of or acting for the said Sir Charles Ross or the said company.-Mr. Bell.
For copies of all correspondence, letters, telegrams," petitions or other documents, from January 1st, 1901, to the present time, in connection with or in relation to the dismissal of E. A. Nash, formerly Dominion lands agent at Kamloops, B.C.; and all correspondence, let-


Wilfrid Laurier: ters, telegrams, or other documents, in relation to his application for superannuation.-Mr. Taylor.
For copies of all correspondence between the government of British Columbia, the Canners' Association, or any other person, and the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, or any official of the government, relating to the granting of fish-trap licenses in British Columbia ; also any Order in Council relating to the same.- Mr. Earle.
For a copy of the report of Blaise Dugas, who was sent to Belgium in connection writh increasing the facilities of the tobacco trade with that country, during the year 1902.-Mr. Monk.
For copies of all correspondence, representations, minutes or Orders in Council, appointments, instructions, papers and writings, in reference to, or in connection with railway cattle-guards ; or In reference to or in connection with the selection or appointment of the Cattle-guard Commission, and the members thereof ; and their actions and proceedings, including the retirement of Mr. Robertson, and the appointment of Mr. F. W. Holt, C.E., as sole commissioner ; and his instructions and subsequent proceedings ; and including all interim, partial and final reports by the original or subsequent commission, between the date of the report of Railway Committee of the session of 1902 on the Lancaster Bill No. 3, of that session, and that date.-Mr. Lennox.
On motion of Mr. Fielding, House adjourned at 11.40 p.m.

Tuesday, May 10, 1904.