1905-02-01

FIRST READING.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 22) respecting the Calgary and Edmonton Railway Company-Mr. Oliver- by Mr. Scott.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. WORTHINGTON-by Mr. Lefurgey -asked :	*
1.	Is it the intention of the government to charge a two-cent postal rate on letters from the city of Sherbrooke to a branch office in the city, and only a one-cent postal rate on letters to the central office in the city ?
2 Has the government' under consideration the establishment of postal delivery service in the city of Sherbrooke ?
Hon. Sir WILLIAM MULOCK (Postmaster General) :: 1.	The two post offices in the city of Sherbrooke are independent post offices, neither being a. branch of the other. The letter rate is fixed by statute, and not under the control of the government, and the rates charged in Sherbrooke are in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
2.	The answer to the second question is : No.


THE MANITOBA SCHOOL FUND.
Mr. BOLE asked :: 1.	What amount was paid last year to the government ot Manitoba for interest on the school trust fund ?
2.	Was the total amount claimed by the government of Manitoba paid ? If not, how much was deducted, and for what reason ?


Rt. Hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIER (Prime Minister) :: 1. The amount paid to the Manitoba government on account of interest, &c., on the Manitoba school lands fund for the fiscal year 1903-1904 was as follows :-
Interest on the credit balance of the fund on 30th June, 1904. . $31,290 60 Balance revenue, other than principal moneys, and interest on sales, for fiscal year 1903-1904. 43,934 26
Total	$75,224 92
2.	The total amount claimed by the Manitoba government has not been paid. There are two amounts, in regard Vo which a settlement has not yet been made.
(a.) The sum of $81,342.17 being the total amount of the costs of management from the time the fund was formed in 1879 to the 30th June, 1904. The reason that it has not been settled is on account of the difference of opinion between the provincial government and the Auditor General as to the mode of treating these costs.
(b.) The government of Manitoba contends that the loan of $30,000 made to the province in 18(9 and 1884, and which, in accordance with the provisions of Act 41 Vic., cap. 13, was repaid out of the first proceeds of sales' should now be paid over to the province.
BUILDINGS LEASED BY THE GOVERNMENT. Mr. SAM. HUGHES asked :
1.	How many buildings or portions of buildings in the city of Ottawa have been leased by the government for public purposes since the 1st of January, 1904 ?
2.	Where are such buildings or portions thereof located, and who are the lessors ?
3.	What rental has the government stipulated to pay for the use of these buildings or portions thereof ?
4.	By what branches of the public service are these buildings occupied ?
5.	In the preparation of the leases did -the government stipulate, in each case, that the


Mr. WORTHINGTON.: lessor or lessors should pay taxes to the municipality of Ottawa ?
6.	If such stipulation was not included in any lease, what was the exemption, and why was it made ?
i.	In the event of the government deciding to lease further buildings in Ottawa for public purposes, or to renew existing leases when they expire, is it the intention of the government to insist that the lessor or lessors must pay municipal taxes on such buildings ?


Hon. OH AS. HYMAN (Acting Minister of Public Works) :: 1 & 2. The following premises were rented by the government since 1st January, 1904 : Building on Queen street, owned by and leased from Jas. W. Woods ; two flats and store room in the Corry block, on Rideau street, owned by and leased from Jas. A. Corry ; two rooms in building, 193 Sparks street, owned by and leased from Slater & Sherwoqd ; two rooms in Orme block, 176 Wellington street, owned by and leased from J. L. Orme & Son.
3.	Building on Queen street, at $5,300 per year ; flats and store room in Corry block, at $4,600 per year ; rooms in building, 193 Sparks street (Sherwood & Slater), at $45 per month ; rooms in Orme block, 176 Wellington street, at $250 per annum.
4.	Jas. W. Woods' building, on Queen street, occupied by the Railway Commission; flats and store room in Corry block, occupied by the Georgian Bay Ship Canal Survey, by the Ottawa River Works staff, and the Hydraulic Survey of the Department of Marine and Fisheries ; rooms in buildings, 193 Sparks and 176 Wellington streets, are occupied by the Interior Department.
5 & 6. In the case of the Railway Commission lease, it has been stipulated that the lessees shall pay taxes. In the other cases, it being only for rooms and for a comparatively short period, no stipulation has been made about taxes.
7. This matter is now under the consideration of the government.


IMPORTS AND EXPORTS.
Mr. FOSTER asked :: 1.	What is the total importation of merchandise for home consumption into Canada for the current fiscal year to December 31, 1904 ; also the importation from Great Britain and from the United States respectively ?
2.	What is the total exports and the exports of home products for the same period, and also the exports of home products to Great Britain and the United States' ?


Hon. WILLIAM PATERSON (Minister of Customs) :: 1.	The total importations into Canada of merchandise for home consumption for the current fiscal year up to December 31st, 1904, was $123,043,650. For the same period, the importations of merchandise from Great Britain amounted to 828,923,454, and from the United States to $74,739,987.
2.	The total exports of merchandise exported from Canada for the current fiscal

year up to December 31st, amounted to $118,438,246. Total exports of merchandise 

borne products-for the same period, amounted to $113,229,216. Total exports of merchandise - home products - to Great Britain, $63,072,205, and to the United States to $38,077,738.


THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FRUIT DIVISION.
Mr. A. MARTIN asked :: Is it the intention of the government, in consonance with the resolution of the Fruit Growers' Association of Prince Edward Island, approved by the other organizations in Canada, to maintain its usefulness to the growing needs, the fruit industry demands ?


Hon. SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agriculture).: On the passage of the Act to providp for the marking- and inspection of packages containing fruit for sale, known as 1 The Fruit Alarks Act, 1901,' it became necessary to organize a staff for the administration and enforcement of the Act. The organization was placed, by the Minister of Agriculture, under the control of the Commissioner of Agriculture and Dairying, Dr. James W. Robertson, and became known as the fruit division of his branch.
In addition to the enforcement and administration of the Fruit Marks Act, the fruit division was charged with the supervision of the packing and transportation of fruit, particularly in cold storage and cool chambers, and the marketing of the same ; and this brought the work of the division in close connection with the cold storage and extension of markets divisions, which, having been organized principally for facilitating the transportation and promoting the sale of dairy products, were in charge of the chief of the dairy division, Air. J. A. Rud-dick, under the Commissioner of Agriculture and Dairying for several years prior to the retirement of the latter.
Upon the retirement of Dr. Robertson, and the abolition of the office of Commissioner of Agriculture and Dairying, Air. Ruddick was appointed dairy commissioner, the work of the cold storage and the extension of markets divisions being continued under him ; and owing to his close relations with the work of the fruit division, as above stated, it was deemed advisable to place the work of the latter division in his charge as well. The chief and other officers of the fruit division have been retained in office with the same duties as formerly, which they will hereafter perform under the dairy commissioner, as they formerly did under the Commissioner of Agriculture and Dairying.
It is the intention of the Alinister of Agriculture to make the work of the department, both in the fruit division and at the experimental farms, commensurate with the needs of the fruit industry of Canada.


BRITISH COLUMBIA JUDGESHIP.
[Stage Direction]
Air. SPROUDE-by Air. Lefurgey-asked:
1.	How long has the present vacancy on the county court bench of British Columbia existed?
2.	What is the cause of the delay in filling the vacancy ?
3.	Is it the .intention to appoint Mr. W. W. B. Mclnnes, ex-M.P., to the position ?
Hon. CHARLES FITZPATRICK (Minister of Justice).: There are two judicial districts, one constituted by an Act of the British Columbia legislature in 1903, and the other similarly constituted in 1904. No appointment has been made to the bench for either district.


Air. FOSTER.: The hon. member has not answered the second and third questions.


Charles Fitzpatrick: There has been no cause of delay beyond the fact that the vacancy has existed in one case since 18S3 and it has not been thought necessary to make the appointment. With regard to the third question, no doubt the name of Air. AIc-Innes will be taken into account in connection with other names when the appointments are made.


OTTAWA IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION.
Mr. PERLEY asked :: How many men were on the pay-list of the Ottawa Improvement Commission for the months of September, October, November and December, 1904, and January, 1905, respectively?


Right Hon.   S@: The number of men on the pay-list of the Ottawa Improvement Commission during September, October, November and December, 1904, and January, 1905, was as follows :
September, 139 men.
October, 164 men.
November, 152 men.
December, 157 men.
January, 102 men-


GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.
Air. PERLEY asked :: 1.	Have any appointments been made during the month of January, in connection with the Geological Survey Department or Museum ? If so, who have been appointed, and what are their duties and salaries respectively ?
2.	Were any of the employees of the Geological Survey Department, other than technical officers, absent from their duties at any time during the month of January, 1905 ? If so, who were these individuals ?


Right Hon.   S@: Napoleon Seguin, fireman, temporary staff, January 16, 1905, salary $500 ]oer annum.

Absence.	Dates.	-W. H. Boyd	3rd	Statutory leave.C. F. Kin<?	3rd	iiVincent Perrin	3rd & 4 th	,,Jane Alexander....	7th	,,


Emily F.: Goodman..	7 th	Sick leave.M. F. Connor	30th	,,O. O'Sullivan	20th	Statutory leave.F. H. Mac laren....	7 th	Not paid for absence.Paul Frereault 	28th-31st* 1 2 3 4 5


CANADA-CAPE BRETON CASE-RESIGNATION OF CAPTAIN SALMON.
Mr. H. B. AMES (St. Antoine, Montreal) moved :: For copies of all correspondence, telegrams, &c., which passed between the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, or the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries, or any other official of the said department, and Captain R. Salmon, former wreck commissioner, in the matter of the Canada-Cape Breton investigation, and the resignation of Captain Salmon from his position as wreck commissioner.


MARCONI WIRELESS TELEGRAPH STATION.
Mr. LEFUEGEY asked :: ,
1.	How much has the government contributed towards the construction of the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Station at Table Head, Glace Bay, N.S.
2.	What is the reason assigned by the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company, or by Mr. Marconi, for the delay in, or inability to operate the station at Glace Bay ?	.


Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries):: 1. $80,000.
2. Change of site because of insufficient accommodation at the first location and for the greater security of the station ; also on account of the work being interfered with by the continued bad weather.
This station has not yet been handed over,to the Department of Marine and Fisheries.


INTERCOLONIAL AND P. E. I. RAILWAYS.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. KEMP moved for a return showing :
1.	The amount of money paid by the Intercolonial and Prince Edward Island Railways, between June 30th, 1904, and January 1st, 1905, arising out of claims for damages and refunds of all kinds ; also compensations.
2.	The nature and amount in each case.
3.	The name of the person or persons, firm or corporation to whom the same were paid.
4.	The dates in each case on which the claims for damages, refunds or compensations were filed.
5.	The dates of payment of each.
Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals).: There is no objection to the order but the word ' compensation ' is very general, and if the motion were to pass in its present shape, we would be required to give a statemnt of the wages paid every employee.


Mr. KEMP.: What I mean is compensation for injuries. In the Auditor General's Report, compensations are dealt with, and it is that class of compensations to which I refer. I would ask that the motion be amended by adding after the word ' compensation ' the words 'for injuries as dealt with in the Auditor General's Report.'
Motion as amended, agreed to.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: Referring to himself.

was approached by the Deputy Minister of
Marine and Fisheries upon a certain date in this city with the specific inquiry as to the possible decision to be rendered in the case.
Let me point out the impropriety of the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries, if this allegation is true, approaching a judge who was about to deliver a decision, to ask him which way that decision was likely to go. Captain Salmon adds :
In response to the inevitable and negative reply to such inquiry, the court was offered the suggestion that it might' be advisable to consult the counsel of the Richelieu and Ontario Navigation Company, Mr. Archer, before rendering the decision, and that such action .would be exceedingly acceptable to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries.
I trust, Mr. Speaker, that it is not customary in this Canada of ours for orders to issue from ministers requesting judges to consult with counsel who may be engaged in an important case, before rendering judgment. It was evident that, through some inference probably, Mr. Archer concluded that Captain Salmon's judgment was not likely to be in favour of his clients, and consequently he deemed it expedient to take other measures, if possible, to keep the judgment from being delivered against the interest of the clients whom he represented. So it came about that Captain Salmon saw fit to give his resignation. He claimed that although as an officer of the department in ordinary matters he was bound to obey his superior officers, and when, on the demand of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, he was constituted a court of investigation, while he sat as



such court he was to all intents and purposes a judge, and could no longer be interfered with or unduly influenced until such time as he had delivered his decision. He considered that the attempt beforehand to ascertain his verdict, the attempt to delay his judgment, was certainly an attempt to hamper the usefulness of that court; and being an honourable and independant man, he felt there was but one of two things to do, either to disobey the orders that had proceeded from the department to which he belonged, or else to accept the orders, and to feel thereafter that in his capacity as a judge he had submitted to influences which he could not defend. And so he resigned his position, and he stated the reasons why he resigned, and it remains to be seen whether the reasons he gave are, by this House and the country, considered to be sufficient.
Now, I want simply to point out that to all intents and purposes Captain Salmon was a court. It is distinctly specified in the law that while constituted as a regular commissioner he is a court, and that therefore he was expected to uphold the dignity of the court, and endeavour to surround himself with the same atmosphere which should characterize any of the courts of this country. Captain Salmon resigned on the principle that our courts should be sacred and inviolate, that no man should be allowed, during the deliberation of the judge, to interfere with him in making up his mind. I may say that, speaking for the business and commercial interests of the great city of Montreal, it is a great disappointment to us that Captain Salmon should have found it necessary to resign and return to England. We had hoped that we might in time establish a Marine Court in Canada, whose decisions would be of equal value and importance to those of the Marine Courts on the other side of the Atlantic. We know that Captain Salmon in England would naturally state the reasons of his resignation, and naturally we feel that the Marine Courts of Canada will be degraded in the eyes of the mother country and of the world. Further than that, we feel that there are grave questions involved. When two great shipping companies meet with an accident and it becomes necessary to fix the responsibility of that accident upon the crew of one or other of these vessels, the possibility that undue influence may be brought to bear on the court in the interest of either of the contending parties, causes a feeling of doubt and of unprotectedness to exist throughout the entire shipping community. I would also point out that cases of this character where life and limb are at stake need to be considered with great care. In this particular case four lives had been lost. It was of course important that nothing should interfere with an absolutely impartial decision as to who was responsible for the Mr. AMES.
accident, and who was primarily responsible for that loss of life. The travelling public can never feel that they are protected until they are satisfied that when an investigation takes place it will be absolutely impartial.
Further than that, this case affects the marine and shipping interests of the city of Montreal. We are very anxious that it may become possible to reduce the amount of marine insurance that our shipping interests are called upon to pay. We realize that that can only be clone by creating, first of all, an excellent channel, and secondly, by creating confidence in the administration of everything connected with the operation of that channel. The doubt as to whether that duty will be well discharged, and as to whether justice will be impeded, militates against a reduction of the insurance which the shipping interests of Montreal are called upon to pay.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I trust that when the correspondence is brought down, and when we receive from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries the explanations which I am sure he will be willing to give, the apprehensions that have been aroused will be allayed. Certainly I think that this House, on the face of the case I have presented, is at least entitled to a full explanation and an opportunity to study the full correspondence.


Hon. R. PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries).: First of all I desire cordially to thank the hon. gentleman for having brought this question before the House, because, notwithstanding the explanations that have already been given in the newspapers and otherwise, there still seems to exist some misapprehension, either voluntary or involuntary. I do not mean to tax the hon. gentleman (l\rr. Ames) with having wrongfully represented the facts of the case, but surely the non. gentleman has not examined the law nor the facts as they have been published at various times in the newspapers. First, as regards the law. The hon. gentleman seems to be under the misapprehension, and has so stated, that Captain Salmon, when he was instructed to investigate the collision which occurred between the ' Canada ' and the ' Cape Breton,' was instructed to hold a court. That is quite erroneous and contrary to the law as it exists. First, I might state that there are two kinds of investigations held by the wreck commissioner under the authority of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. There is a preliminary investigation. Then, there is a formal investigation. The two are easy to understand with a few words of explanation. In this case there was no formal demand for an investigation. The two parties interested seemed to have thought that it was not required. After waiting for a few days or a few weeks I took it upon myself, in the

interest of the public and in the interest of navigation under section 4 of.l Edward VII, chap. 37, to instruct the wreck commissioner to proceed with a preliminary investigation.


Mr. HAGGART.: What is the statute ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: 1 Edward VII, chap. 37, an act to amend the Shipping Casualties Act, 1901, which was assented to on the 18th July, 1904. By section 4 I am empowered, as Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to order a preliminary investigation. The clause reads as follows :
The minister may appoint a principal officer of customs or any officer of the government of Canada, or any'person to make preliminary inquiries respecting such shipping casualties, and may define the territorial jurisdiction of any such officer or person.	*
Therefore, the person whom I might appoint is not designated, except that the person whom the minister designates is empowered to hold an investigation within the limits and according to the jurisdiction that the minister gives him and nothing else. Of course, it is provided by subsection 2 of section 4 how he is to conduct the inquiry and how he is to give his report upon it.
If, upon a preliminary inquiry, the officer holding it is of opinion that any loss, or damage, or the stranding of any ship, or any loss of life, has been caused by the wrongful act or default or by the incapacity of the pilot in charge, or that such pilot has been guilty of any gross act of misconduct or drunkenness, the license of such pilot may be suspended by such officer until a formal investigation under this act has been held and a further decision rendered upon the case :	provided that the
term of suspension shall not exceed a period of three days, unless the minister notifies such pilot within that time that a formal investigation will be held.
Captain Salmon held the investigation in virtue of this statute. He should have known it, and if he did not know it when he rendered judgment, and he seems not to have known it, he was unfit for the position he occupied.


John Graham Haggart: Have you the instructions to Captain Salmon ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: What is that ?


John Graham Haggart: How are we to know that it was only a preliminary investigation What are the instructions ?
Mr. PREFONTAINE The papers will show it. I will place all the documents be-fere the House, and it will appear that it was a preliminary investigation that he was instructed to hold. From the beginning of the investigation I discovered that he was rather prejudiced against one or other of the parties, and I found it very strange indeed that this officer should stand in that position in an important case like this. So I directed him to carry out his proceedings properly and see that justice should be rendered to ail 13|
parties. Captain Sainton, knowing very well that he was not holding a formal investigation, never notified the parties as to what was the accusation. Instructions were given under the section I have just read to hold a preliminary investigation. Now, I go farther. Under this clause, I contend rightly, I presume, that the officer was under my charge during the whole time that he was conducting that investigation. I discovered that the parties interested refused to produce their witnesses and refused to take part in the investigation. The proprietors of the 'Cape Breton,' as well as the proprietors of the steamer 'Canada ' were interested in not taking part in the investigation, which was only a preliminary invesigation, end why? Because at the time that the in vestigation began there was pending before the Vice Admiralty Court of Quebec a case in which damages were claimed by the Richelieu and Ontario Navigation Co., in which it was sought to establish the responsibility between the two companies and in which the two companies took part. The action uad been instituted, I understand, by the Richelieu and Ontario Navigation Co. against the proprietors of the ' Cape Breton ' the Dominion Coal Company. This investigation had begun before Judge Routhier in the Vice Admiralty Court of Quebec, and both parties were fighting for their rights. In face of that what was my duty? My duty was clearly defined. It was to see that the rights of neither party should be prejudiced. 1 was informed by both sides that there were witnesses who would be examined before the Vice Admiralty Court and who would not appear before Captain Salmon in the preliminary investigation. I made Captain Salmon aware of that fact and I also gave him a formal notification that it might be necessary to suspend that investigation of his and await the judgment which would be pronounced in the Vice Admiralty Court. He went on with the investigation. Then it came to the point where the case in the Vice Admiralty Court had been argued before the judge. When the case had been argued before the judge I believed it was my duty to instruct Captain Salmon to suspend his proceedings, and that I did under the law. It is such a clear law that surely if it had been taken communication of by my hon. friend from Montreal, St. Antoine (Mr. Ames) he would not have made the remarks he has made. All through the Act, chapter 33 of 1 Edward VII., 1901, it is clearly established that the wreck commissioner in conducting a formal investigation remains under the control of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries in order that justice may be rendered properly. Following up what I have said just now, I will cite section 15 of the Shipping Casualties Act of 1901.
Whenever a formal investigation is likely to involve a question as to cancelling or susnend-ing the certificate of competency or service of any master, mate or engineer, he shall be fur-

nished before the commencement of the investigation with a copy of the report or statement of the case upon which the investigation has been ordered.
In this case none was furnished anybody ; there was no complaint on the part of the families of those who had lost their lives in the accident, for the simple reason that coroners' inquiries had been held in each case a long time before the date of this preliminary investigation which was held by Mr. Salmon.
Then I would cite section 14.
Every formal investigation shall be conducted in such manner that ' if a charge is made against any person, that person shall have an opportunity of making a defence.
Following the well known English principle, that nobody shall be found guilty or condemned without being heard.
Now I cite from the same Act, clause 22.
The minister may, if he thinks that the justice of the case requires it, re-issue and return the Canadian certificate of the master, mate or engineer which has been cancelled or suspended or shorten the time for which it is suspended, or grant in place thereof a certificate of the same or any other lower grade.
Therefore again the minister remains the final tribunal in the case when it is a formal investigation, and in this case it was not a formal investigation.
Then we have section 25.
to any case where a formal investigation has been held the minister may order the investigation to be re-heard either generally or as to any part thereof ; and he shall do so-[DOT]
(a) If new and important evidence which could not he produced at the investigation has been discovered.
What was the necessity I would like to know of Oapt. Salmon, an officer of my department, of pronouncing a judgment when I was instructing him to hear the witnesses that had been heard before the Vice-Admiralty Court.


John Graham Haggart: Do these rules apply to a preliminary investigation ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: They apply particularly to a preliminary investigation because he .is not called upon to render a judgment, but simply to make a report to the minister in order to show whether it is necessary to hold a formal investigation. That is good law and justice too.
Now I come to subclause (b).
If for any other reason there has in Ms opinion been ground for suspecting that a miscarriage of justice has occurred.
In this case it was perfectly clear to me that a miscarriage of justice was going to take place. How could Capt. Salmon pronounce either in favour of the ' Canada ' or the ' Cape Breton ' or rather of the Richelieu and Ontario Navigation Company or the Canada Coal Company, when there was Mr. PREFONTAINE.
other evidence which had been produced before the Vice-Admiralty Court and which he refused to hear.
Now I shall cite, Mr. Speaker, the opinion of the Merchant's Service Guild of Liverpool.


John Graham Haggart: Before the minister goes on, would he give us the instructions to Capt. Salmon, so that we will know whether this was a preliminary or a formal investigation.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I have not them here but I shall produce them.
We received the following communication :
9th November, 1905. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries,
Canada.
Sir,

With reference to our communications of the 7th ultimo and 15th tost, relative to the inquiry into the ' Canada-Cape Breton ' collision, the Guild, have been favoured with a copy of the Montreal ' Daily Star ' wherein appears a full copy of the judgment, and also your own action previous to judgment being given.
Perhaps you are not aware that whenever an action for damages in the Admiralty Court between the owners of two ships is pending, the Board of Trade invariably defer their official inquiry until its conclusion in order that the civil action should not he prejudiced in any way.
This is the mode of procedure in England, and I am blamed for having done what justice demanded and for following the precedents of the Board of Trade, the English precedents, in the case of investigations of this kind.
That I think disposes of the question of law, because I submit that according to our laws and according to precedents the Minister of Marine and Fisheries was perfectly justified in acting in the way that he did act. Now we come to examine the conduct of that officer and the opinions that have been expressed of his conduct in this same inquiry. You will see that everything which I stated, in answer to the attacks that were made on me at the time, was perfectly right. I shall read the report of that interview from the Montreal ' Star ' of October 6, 1904. It is beaded ' The Minister of Marine Talks.'
Minister of Marine discusses occurrence.
Hon. Raymond Prdfomtaine, Minister ef Marine and Fisheries, to-day gave the following interview on the occurrence :
Mr. Salmon shows his want of judgment, and, therefore, his unfairness for the position he held in the Department of Marine and Fisheries, by his contemptible attempt to insinuate that he was interfered with in his duties as wTeck commissioner, as appears clearly by the documents, some private and confidential, which he communicated to the public.
to advising him as I did, I fulfilled my duty to the shipping interest with absolute impartiality, and followed numerous precedents in

tlie department. I have done what everybody does before all ithe courts of the land. Requests are made every day to re-open investigations and to suspend judgment, upon showing good grounds and reasons for so doing.
As regards exercising any political influence, it is farcical, when everybody know's that a majority of the directors of the Richelieu and Ontario Navigation Company belong to the opposite party, as do also some of the counsel engaged in the ease.
He has very bluntly and unjustly refused their reasonable and just request to hear new and important witnesses in .order to do full justice.	'
As regards his resignation, I was expecting it for some time. He had already six months ago verbally tendered it, and he knew that he could not remain in the department, my intention being to call for his resignation in the interests of the department, and the reason for my delay 'was to allow him to close the' eases before him.
That statement is exactly true. Capt. Salmon had not given satisfaction; there had been very serious complaints against him and without going beyond this case I need only cite one incident with reference to one of the officers of the ' Cape Breton.' I shall not quote from papers on this side of the water but I shall cite the Edinburgh ' Scotsman,' in which the following remarks are made as regards the conduct of this individual :	'	.
The Merchant Service Guild and Shipping Inquiries in Canada.
The conduct of marine inquiries into shipping casualties held in Canada has lately been once more taken in hand by the Merchant Service Guild. It has been urged that captains and officers have been bullied and brow-beaten whilst under evidence, and that the decisions of these inquiries have not been in accord with justice. A recent case which the Guild dwelt upon was that of the investigation into the collision between the steamers ' Canada ' and ' Cape Breton.' The chief officer of the latt'er steamer, whilst under evidence, was subjected to a searching examination in the rules of the road by the president of the court. Captain Salmon, who also held the position of Canadian wreck commissioner. In the course of his examination the officer gave an answer which the Guild considered a.s a perfectly correct one, hut the president, thinking otherwise, his anger became aroused and he ejaculated that ' it was God's mercy that he bad not had an accident previously, and that the place for him was in jail.'
Having ascertained the facts, the Guild communicated with the Minister of Marine, Canada, referring to this unwarrantable and offensive statement and requesting Captain Salmon to make an apology for the insult offered to the chief officer of the ' Cape Breton.' The reply of the Minister of Marine stated that Captain Salmon had resigned his position as wreck commissioner. but that the communication of the Guild had been filed for reference if necessary. Subsequently, it transpired that, although he had nothing to do with the collision, the certificate of the chief officer of the 'Cape Breton' had been withheld by the Court of Inquiry until such
time as he had been examined by an examiner of masters and mates, and found efficient in the rules of the road. The Guild again communicated with the authorities, stating that if would be an extraordinary thing that the court should deal with the certificate of a witness simply because of the manner in which he gave his evidence. They knew of no legal authority which permitted the certificate being withheld, and trusted that this decision would be quashed. They have now received a further letter from the Canadian Minister of Marine, who conveys his best thanks for information furnished him as to practises of the Board of Trade in connection with inquiries into shipping casualties, and alse begs to state for the information of the Guild that the certificate of the chief officer of the * Cape Breton ' has been returned to him.
Captain 'Salmon had no more jurisdiction over this man than the man in the moon, and had no power to suspend his certificate except for three days; and if during those three days the Minister of Marine and Fisheries did not give the necessary notice that there would be a formal inquiry, the certificate would have to be returned. Captain Salmon did not know that. He was determined to act as a court of justice, and committed the wrongful act that he did. I have heard of a commissioner's court in my native county which condemned a witness, and this is a case of the same kind. In the province of Quebec these commissioners have jurisdiction in small cases to the extent of $25. These gentlemen live amongst the farming community, but they generally know a little more than their neighbours. In the case I refer to and of which I am reminded by Captain Salmon's action, a butcher was suing one of his neighbours for an account of $10 for meat. The farmer contended that he did not owe the account, and the plaintiff brought as a witness the hired man of the farmer, who had lived in the house of the farmer at the time the meat had been furnished. The witness said: I know that this meat has been furnished, and that the account is correct, because I ate the meat myself. The justice said : You ate the meat, then ? The man who eats the meat pays for it-judgment against the witness.' That case was appealed to the higher court in Montreal and it cost about $200 to quash that judgment of the justice of the peace. The action of Captain Salmon in this case has been just the same. He condemned this officer and cancelled his certificate because he did not as a witness give an answer that was satisfactory to Captain Salmon. The position taken by Captain Salmon was entirely wrong, unjust and unfair, and revealed an incapacity on his part which it is hardly possible to imagine. As regards his resignation, as I stated in my interview, if it had not been tendered he would have been asked for it, because he was unfit for the position he occupied. As regards the poor fellow returning to England, that is not exactly the fact. Captain Salmon cannot get a position under any marine organization; I know that

perfectly well. He is in New York at the present time. I do not want to say any more about him. The certificates of the officers which have been cancelled, like that of the first mate of the ' Cape Breton,' have been returned to them. We could not hold the officers as suspended, and it was our duty to do what we have done in the matter. I repeat, if Captain Salmon had known his duties, if he had known the law that he was administering, he would not have rendered himself guilty of the act which he committed. I thank the hon. gentleman for having given me the occasion to state the facts as they are. The documents will be willingly placed before the House as soon as possible within the next few days, and they will bear out exactly what I have stated.


Mr. F. D. MONK (Jacques Cartier).: After the discussion which has taken place this afternoon, the members of the House will be curious to see the documents and to find out exactly what Captain Salmon's position was. I have not the pleasure of Captain Salmon's acquaintance. In fact, my estimate of him has been formed from what I think I heard from the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries himself, a couple of years ago, when, in passing his estimates through this House, ho gave unstinted praise to that individual, declaring him to be highly qualified for the position he held.


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine: I did not know him then.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: If my hon. friend did not know him he should not have gone so far as he did at that time. But my hon. friend has drawn a distinction to-day which has never been drawn before, and which I think he himself neglected to draw, when there was a great storm in the press of the city of Montreal and among the public generally, as to the action of the Department of Marine and Fisheries towards Captain Salmon. I have listened to the reading of the interview which my hon. friend gave to the ' Star ' at that time, and in which he failed entirely to point out that Captain Salmon was holding what he calls a preliminary inquiry. The matter was discussed at great length in the papers of the city of Montreal at the time. My hon. friend will remember that a great deal of indignation was shown at the interference with Captain Salmon in the performance of his statutory duties. Nobody that I am aware of claimed that Captain Salmon was not holding a court. On that point I think there cannot be any doubt. In fact, the Department of Marine and Fisheries and my hon. friend the minister himself cannot have considered that Captain Salmon has proceeded under the section of the Shipping Casualties Act of 1901, which he has quoted to the House, because if that was the case, why did the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries-and that has not Mr. PREFONTAINE,
been contradicted-say that Captain Salmon was holding a court, and endeavour to persuade him from rendering judgment, and suggest to him that he should see Mr. Archer in order to satisfy the desire of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and learn from Mr. Archer what he should do ? It has not been contended at any time that Captain Salmon was acting under the section referred to by my hon. friend. There are two kinds of inquiry, one of an informal nature, and the other, which is the one undoubtedly held in this case, under a section to which I will refer in a moment. But what I submit to this House is this, that even if that inquiry had been held under section 4 of the Shipping Casualties Act of 1901, as amended in 1904, it -was not proper for the Minister of Marine and Fisheries or his depart' ment in any way to interfere with the wreck commissioner in the execution of his duties in a preliminary inquiry. To suppose that even in a preliminary inquiry, the wreck commissioner, who is seized with that inquiry and is proceeding with it, may be dictated to by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries-to suppose that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries may order the wreck commissioner to stop the inquiry, is, I submit, entirely contrary to the very words and sense of the Casualties Act of 1901. I have no doubt that the instructions to the wreck commissioner, will show that he was not acting under section 4 at all, but section 8. Let me read that section 8 as amended by the statute, chap. 64, 3 Edward VII., 1903 :
The minister may appoint any officer of the government of Canada, or any judge of the Superior Court of the province of Quebec, or any judge of a county count, or any local judge in Admiralty of the Exchequer Court of Canada, or any stipendiary magistrate, to be a commissioner to hold formal investigations, and a commissioner shall for such purposes be a court.
Among the cases in which such court may hold a formal investigation of cases of shipping casualties and collisions, I venture to assert, without fear of contradiction, that Oapt. Salmon proceeded under that section 8. He did not proceed under section 4 which calls upon him merely to make a preliminary inquiry and report to the minister whether a formal investigation is necessary.. There never was before the commissioner any question as to the nature of the investigation he was holding. It was treated as a formal investigation, and the commissioner presiding was considered the judge. All parties interested appeared before him, and all the proceedings were conducted, as they should have been, under section 8. The proposition of my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, that because an action was begun before the Admiralty Court was a sufficient reason to warrant his stopping this investigation, seems to me absolutely without foundation.

The object of the proceedings in the Admiralty Court was to settle the question of damages due by one shipping company to the other. That court sat for the purpose of settling a private claim affecting private interests and not at all as a tribunal to settle matters affecting the public interest. But the court over which Capt. Salmon presided is one that was created by statute in the interests of shipping generally, in the public interest, for the purpose of inquiring into the causes of the accident, according to the rules of marine science, and reporting the results to the department. After an accident has taken place and a formal investigation into the causes of that accident has begun, to suppose that because the parties interested judged lit to bring their difficulties before the Admiralty' Court, the" commissioner may be subjected to an order from the Department of Marine and Fisheries to stop his proceedings, is to defeat completely the object of this legislation. The preteu-sion of my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries that, under all circumstances and at any time, a commissioner is subject to the orders of his department appears to me absolutely repugnant to any wise and proper interpretation of the Casualties Act. Whether the commissioner were holding a mere preliminary inquiry or making a formal investigation under section 8 he was not subject to orders from the Minister of Marine. I am sure that a careful reading of the authorities quoted by my hon. friend will only prove that the wreck commissioner may under special circumstances, such as when new witnesses or new evidence have been discovered be ordered to renew or reopen his inquiry. The facts of this case, as they have hem stated by my hon. friend from St. Antoine Division (Mr. Ames) and as they will no doubt be shown by the papers when brought down, show that the minister went a step further and considered himself authorized to prevent that investigation. I think that in so doing he assumed an authority which does not belong to him, and that this House should not fail to express its appreciation of such conduct.


Mr. R. FORGET (Charlevoix).: In rising for the first time, Mr. Speaker, to address this House I regret very much that I have to differ from my hon. friend the member for St. Antoine (Mr. Ames), and the member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk). The sad accident to the steamers ' Cape Breton ' and 'Canada' is one of course in which I felt a very deep interest, and the proceedings in connection with which I followed, as it was my duty, from step to step. As far as I am in a position to form a judgment, in my opinion, the course taken by the hon. the Minister of Marine and Fisheries was legal and right and gave justice to both parties. When I say that his action was legal, I am not speaking from any legal knowledge
of my own, but according to the advice received from eminent counsel-not alone from Mr. Archer, who was our attorney in the matter, but also from counsel who are acting with him, namely, Mr. Pentland and Mr. Wm. Cook, of Quebec, and Mr. Angers- not my predecessor in this House, but the Hon. Mr. Angers. And I think I may safely say that Messrs. Pentland, Cook and Angers, are recognized throughout the Dominion as the best marine lawyers in this country. This accident took place late in June of last year. A few weeks later, the wreck commissioner held an inquiry. In that investigation, the Richelieu and Ontario Navigation Company decided not to take any part, as we could not get hold of all the witnesses we required. We instituted an action in the Vice-Admiralty Court in the city of Quebec ; and while the case was proceeding in that court, Capt. Salmon, to my knowledge, came down into the corridor of the Court House of the city of Quebec and there threatened our lawyers that he would render judgment that same morning, and he made that threat in the presence of the witnesses of both parties who were in the corridor. In view of this extraordinary conduct, I, acting for the Richelieu and Ontario Navigation Company, got our counsel together and asked them what could be done to save the situation, as no doubt it was the intention of Capt. Salmon to prejudice all these witnesses. Aftqr asking Capt. Salmon without success to withhold his judgment, the Hon. Mr. Angers advised our attorney, Mr. Archer, as a last resource, to see the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, as he had a perfect right to do, and ask him to request Capt. Salmon to wait. The hon. minister was then at the Frontenac Hotel, and the request was only a fair and reasonable one, and in granting it the minister did nothing but justice to both parties. Since that ex parte enquete before Capt. Salmon-an enquete in which the Richelieu Company was not represented-took place, the Vice-Admiralty Court gave judgment. We are told that this is a civil suit and nothing else. But if the Richelieu company or any other party are civilly responsible for any damages, surely they must be criminally responsible as well for the lives of these people. One reason why we thought Capt. Salmon was unfit for the position he held was that he did not even know the local law of the port of Sorel. There was a law for the port of Sorel, but there was no law defending the limits of that port that we might know exactly where that .local law applied. That is the reason why we did not appear before Capt. Salmon's court. This is not a political question and I feel free to differ from my hon. confrere (Mr. Ames), to state that difference frankly, and to say that, in my opinion, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries showed only justice and fair play to both parties in this case.


John Graham Haggart: I do not know wliat was called for by considerations of justice between the parties, but, as to the action of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries in the case, this House can have but one opinion. The minister said he was gratified that the hon. member for St. Antoine, Montreal (Mr. Ames), brought the subject before the House as it gave him an opportunity of showing how innocent he and the department were in the whole transaction. Yet he did not tell us whether this was a preliminary or a formal investigation. This could be shown by bringing down the Instructions given to the officer who investigated the case. Yet he has not brought down those instructions.


Wilfrid Laurier: The papers have not been ordered yet.


John Graham Haggart: The minister spoke in defence of his action and said he had all the papers here. Yet, he did not quote the instructions to show whether this was a preliminary or a formal investigation. But the thing for the House to consider is not the merits of the case, but the interference by the minister with an officer, be he judge or otherwise, who was authorized by statute to investigate a casualty case. What difference does it make, as my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) has said, taking the statement of the minister himself, whether this was a preliminary investigation or a formal one. What business had the minister or his deputy to interfere or make suggestions as to what evidence [DOT]should be taken? The statute sets forth in a peremptory manner the duties and powers of an officer making a preliminary inquiry in such a case. He can inspect the ship; he can inspect premises, having the right of entry; he can summon witnesses and swear them; he can look into documents; he can allow expenses to the witnesses and inflict penalties upon those who refuse to give evidence. He is to report his opinion upon the case, accompanied with such extracts from the evidence as he sees fit. So. even if it were a preliminary investigation, it was the duty of the officer to investigate and report to the minister. Fancy a minister, when such an investigation is going on, suggesting that some other evidence should be submitted or that the officer should not give his report with reference to the matter. Why cannot the minister tell us whether it was a preliminary or a formal investigation and remove all doubt? My hon. friend from .Jacques Gar-tier says it is clear that not a question was raised in the court as to the formal nature of the investigation. In such an investigation the statute provides what the duties of the officer are, and a reading of them wall show that the reference was the same as sending the case to a court of justice to be inquired into. The minister says that if it were the preliminary inquiry, the penalty Mr. FORGET.
that the officer could inflict was a suspension of the officers for three days, pending decision of the question of holding a formal inquiry. If that is all that was involved, why was there any necessity for the minister or his deputy to interfere? As to the merits of the case I know nothing. Captain Salmon may be right or he may be wrong in his finding. But one thing is plain and undeniable, and that is that there has been tampering by the minister or his deputy with an inquiry ordered under statute. The minister brings evidence, intended to excuse himself by showing that the commissioner was unfit for the position to which he had been appointed. Why, this officer was selected by the minister bimself to investigate this case. And what is the evidence that he brings to justify his dismissal of the officer? Letters furnished to him after the dismissal. And fancy the mean insinuation of the minister that this officer, who, presumably was doing what he thought to be his duty, is now a vagrant in the streets of New York. And when he said this there was a laugh from his supporters. What is the inference? There is no inference possible except that this is a warning to all officers of the department whose duty it is to hold such investigations as this:	Do not dare to exercise an independent judgment, for the minister may differ with you in opinion, and the result will be that you will become a wanderer in the streets of New York.


Herbert Brown Ames: I believe that as a mover of the motion I am entitled to say a word in reply before the debate is closed. There seems to be considerable doubt in the minds of the minister and of the House as to whether this was a formal inquiry or a preliminary inquiry. Certain it is that Captain Salmon thought it was a formal inquiry, because as I understand the minister' to say, that if it had been a preliminary inquiry the maximum penalty he would have been permitted to impose was three days suspension of license. You have only to read his report to see that he considered himself empowered to enforce a penalty far in excess of three days suspension of license. The penalties that he permitted himself to inflict under a formal investigation shows that in his judgment it was a formal investigation. For example, he takes upon himself to suspend the certificate of Captain St. Louis. I doubt if he would have cancelled the certificate if he had considered the investigation a preliminary one. He also suspends for a period of twelve calender months the certificate of Peter Kane ; would he have done so if he had considered the investigation merely a preliminary one ? You have only to read the entire judgment of Captain Salmon to see that he thought he was carrying out a formal investigation. As we have endeavoured to follow the minister through his ex-

planations, we have noted that he is culling flowers On both sides of the path ; that whenever any reference seems to assist him on the ground that it was a preliminary investigation he claims the right to that reference; and whenever there is a reference which seems to help him in the contention that it was a formal investigation, he also claims that as well. There is one thing I would like very much to know, and that is, how it was that the minister discovered that Captain Salmon was prejudiced against one of the parties. The minister says he saw there was about to be a miscarriage of justice. How did he find that out ? Now, Mr. Speaker, I admit that the minister has the right, after judgment has been delivered and he thinks there has been a miscarriage of justice, to reverse the decision and to remit the penalties. But I submit that during the course of the enquete, while the judge is preparing to deliver his decision, the minister has no right to interfere on the presumption that the court is prejudiced against one of the parties concerned. I would like to point out also that the instructions which were given by the department to the wreck commissioner, if we are to judge from those which were given to his successor, Captain Spain, are very formal. We have only to turn to the last report of the Department of Marine and Fisheries to read : ' That the minister may appoint a commissioner to hold formal investigations and these are the instructions which were given to Captain Spain, which we find in his report of December 6, 1904 :
My instructions are to investigate every casualty, and to deal promptly with any carelessness or want of judgment showp by either pilots or shipmasters in the navigation of Canadian waters.
' To investigate every casualty and to deal promptly.' That does not mean to withhold judgments indefinitely. The minister has also seen fit to state that Captain Salmon has fallen from grace, and that he is a character no longer to be received with confidence or to be given any further opportunity of dispensing judgments here in Canada. Admitting that is the present opinion of the minister, I am sorry to see that he was so woefully deceived when he appointed him. On the 9th of October, 1903, he told the House in Committee of Supply :
Last year we inaugurated a system of holding investigations into every casualty that occurred. The members of the committee will recollect that this was done at the special request of the Board of Trade in England, in order to render the service as effective as possible. . . . We have replaced Captain Smith, deceased, by Captain Reginald Salmon', at a salary of $2,000. This department is being thoroughly reorganized under a very able officer and we try to make it as effective as possible. Captain Salmon is an officer of the Royal Navy Reserve holding the rank of lieutenant. .	.	* Captain Salmon is
a commissioner of investigation under the law and he has associated with him two expert assessors. . . . We have had a great deal of difficulty in finding a man qualified as Captain Salmon is to take the position at $2,000. It was only after a good deal of inquiry in Canada and England that we succeeded in getting Captain Salmon. He had been employed in Canada on the surveys by the British government, and he became attached to Canada and accepted the position.
Poor man ! He became attached before he knew the ways of the Department of Marine and Fisheries.
But I intend, under the advice of Captain Salmon, who is a very efficient officer, to have this matter gone into thoroughly, and have efficient schools of navigation established .at the proper ports.
Surely he must have been a good man when his advice was taken by the department in the establishment of naval schools; but now we regret to find that his services are lost to the country for ever.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Frederick Debartzch Monk: -
For a return showing 1. The present indebtedness to the Dominion government of the Montreal Turnpike Trust (a) on capital account, (b) for arrears of interest.
2.	The amounts collected at each toll-gate belonging to the said Turnpike. Trust during the year ending 31st December, 1904.
3.	The names of all parties who have commuted their tolls, and the amount of commutation paid in each case.	*
4.	The amounts expended on each section or road division under the control of said trust, during the said year ending 31st December, 1904 ; and the contracts given out during the year, with the name of the contractor and the date and amount involved in each case.
5.	The amounts paid out during the said year at each toll-gate for salaries of day and night keepers, and other expenditure at each of the toll-gates maintained.
6.	The names of all parties holding passes for free use of the roads under the control of said trust during the said year.
7.	The expenses of the said trust during the said year, for rent, salaries of the office, giving name and remuneration of each official.
8.	The actual indebtedness in detail of the said trust outside of its bonds due to the government of Canada.
He said :	I also desire to add another
clause :
9.	The amounts collected from year to year since 1896 from the municipalities, under special agreement made, as their share pro rata of the bonded indebtedness of the turnpike trust.
I intend moving a motion in reference to the question referred to in this motion, at a later stage of the session. The object of the present motion is merely to obtain as soon as possible the information which it calls for. On several occasions during
#*

the last two parliaments I have made motions to the same effect, and I would ask the Department of Finance to forward the order of the House to the Montreal Turnpike Trust at Montreal, and to get the report conveying the information. I believe that the information asked for by this motion can be compiled in two or three hours. I would ask my hon. friend the Minister of Customs (Mr. Paterson), who I think represents the Finance department pro tern, to see that the order of the House be sent down to iMontreal as soon as possible, in order that that information may be before . us at an early date, and that I may be able to move on other lines. It is my desire to bring before the House in another form the question of the toll-bars on the principal roads leading out of the city of Montreal, and I desire to make a suggestion to the government which I think will meet with the approval of the persons who are interested in the development of the roads in the vicinity of the city of Montreal. It is impossible to move the House in that direction unless we have the complete information called for by this motion.


Wilfrid Laurier: There is no objection at all to the motion being granted, but in reference to the last paragraph which has just been added by my hon. friend (Mr Monk), I was under the impression that the information had already been brought down -part of it, at all events.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No.
Sir \\ ILFRID LAURIER. Was it not brought down before ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: No, there was never brought down any of the information called for bv paragraph 9.


Wilfrid Laurier: Carried.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
For a return of all moneys spent by the government on the Toronto harbour and breakwater during ea-eh year from 1880 to 1904 inclusive ; and the particular works upon which such moneys were expended, showing how much for dredging, breakwater, piers, cribwork, piling, &c.-Mr. Macdonell.
Return showing the names of all the commercial agents of Canada ; where located ; previous location, occupation and qualifications ; amount of salary of each ; other expenses connected with their positions ; class of product they are chiefly interested in placing on the market ; procedure in the different locations ; results, specific and general.-Mr. A. Martin.
Return giving the names of all officials, clerks and employees on the pay-roll of the Board of Railway iCommissioners for Canada, on the 1st of January, 1905, with the amount ol salary in each case.-Mr. Perley.

Frederick Debartzch Monk: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are called, I would Mr. MONK.
take the opportunity of suggesting to my hon. friend the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee (Mr. Mclsaac) to call a meeting of that committee as soon as possible. The first meeting is generally employed with the orders for witnesses and documents, and I think it would be important, as we have now a sufficient quantity of the Auditor General's Report to proceed with the business of the committee, that we should have what is in reality the preliminary meeting as soon as possible.


Mr. McISAAC.: The matter having now for the first time been brought to my notice, I will call a meeting as soon as possible.


REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR-MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE.
Mr. U. WILSON.: I would like to know when we may expect the report of the hon. the Minister of the Interior, and also when we may expect the meeting of the Agriculture Committee. There is a good deal of work to be done by that committee, and unless we get to work soon it will interfere very considerably with the meetings of the other committees, as several members of the Committee on Agriculture are members of other committees.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER, I understand that my bon. friend (Mr. U. Wilson) wants to know when the report of the hon. Minister of the Interior is to be brought down. I am sorry to say that at this moment I cannot give any information to my hon. friend. I understand that at this time, and for some time past, the Printing Bureau has been engaged particularly with the Auditor General's Report. I will make inquiry as to the information which my hon. friend wants, and I will try to give him satisfaction later on. I have no doubt that tiuj Committee on Agriculture will be called to meet at once.


TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION.
George Eulas Foster: The right hon. First Minister said yesterday that he would, at a later date, give me the information in reference to the Transportation Commission. Has he that information now ?


Wilfrid Laurier: No, I am sorry to say I have not.


SECOND READINGS.
[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 11) respecting the Columbia and Western Railway Company.-Mr. Galliher.
Bill (No. 12) respecting the Ottawa Electric Company.-Mr. Galliher.
Bill (No. 13) respecting the Atlantic, Quebec and Western Railway Company.- Mr. Gauvreau.
George Eulas Foster: Probably that will be sufficient to give the Railway Committee some work to do, and it might be better to leave the others until we have a chance to look at them.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Customs-salaries and contingent expenses, ports, $1,214,865.
Hon. W'M. PATERSON. The first subitem was about finished was it not ?
["Very well, we will go on with that.\nAt six o'clock, committee took recess.", "After Recess.\nHouse resumed at eight o'clock."]
George Eulas Foster: I think the minister was giving us a list of the increases in Nova Scotia.


Mr. PATERSON.: I think I gave the gross amount of the increase. In Nova Scotia it amounted to $2,210. Of these 37 increases, I may say that 24 were in Halifax, one in Annapolis, one in Canso, one in Digby, two in Lunenburg, four in North Sydney, one in Pictou, one in Port Hawkesbury, and two in Sydney.


George Eulas Foster: What was the nature of the increases in Halifax ?


William Paterson: Largely from $550 to $600. These increases were in accordance with our policy in the large ports of raising the salaries of the lower priced men.
Salaries and travelling expenses of inspectors of ports and of other officers on inspection and preventive service, including salaries and expenditure in connection with the Board of Customs and for the compiling of statistical returns of imports and exports, $189,200.


George Eulas Foster: Will the minister explain very briefly his system of inspection ?


William Paterson: The inspection is carried on by officers duly appointed, one in New Brunswick, who also takes Prince Edward Island, two in Nova Scotia, two in Quebec, five in Ontario, one in British Columbia, one in Manitoba, who takes in the Territories, and the collector of customs at Dawson, who has supervision as inspector over Whitehorse. Their duties are to be continually engaged in the inspection of the offices, examining the clerical work and everything in connection with the business of the office. They report to the commissioner of customs as to the condition of each port. If anything improper is reported, that of course has to be taken cognizance of by the commissioner, it is brought under my notice and has to be dealt with. The Inspection is now pretty thorough. Before 1896, owing to the illness of some of the inspectors, it had been impossible to inspect some of the offices for three or four years and some things went wrong, but in 1896 under the old government Mr. McKay was appointed and since then Mr. Boultbee has died and his place has been filled. I think I can safely say that now
every port in inspected once a year if not more frequently.


George Eulas Foster: What members of the Board of Inspection or the staff of inspectors are in Ottawa ?


William Paterson: None of these to whom I have been alluding, the inspection staff, are in Ottawa. There is a board called the Board of Customs, but there are 13 officers under Mr. MeMichael, whose headquarters are at Toronto.


George Eulas Foster: Is Mr. MeMichael one of the Ontario inspectors or is he a chief ?


William Paterson: He is the chief inspector.


George Eulas Foster: And he looks after all the other inspectors ?


William Paterson: Yes, he is the head and he looks after all the others.
Mr. FOSTER, Do the reports of the others go to him ?


William Paterson: Yes, they are all forwarded through him.


George Eulas Foster: What does he do with reference to these reports ? Does he give them a thorough going over ?


William Paterson: Yes, he goes through them, makes a report and sends them to the commissioner.


George Eulas Foster: I wanted to get the modus operand! When Mr. MeMichael gets the reports of the inspectors what authority has he? Does he deal with any portion of them himself, and is there a certain time in which he has to report to the commissioner, or does he simply report upon and forward all these reports to the commissioner. I want to ascertain if any of these reports fall by the way or any portion of them, or do they all come to the commissioner with the advantage of the chief inspector's notes hnd comments.


William Paterson: Yes, they all come to the commissioner here and final action is taken here. Mr. MeMichael would not take action himself, but he would draw the attention of the commissioner to anything which he thought necessary. The commissioner, however, would have to take action.
Mr. FOSTER, Does the commissioner take the sole action in conjunction with his minister of course, or have you a board here, which assists in any way.


William Paterson: No, not in reference to that matter, because these inspectors are doing the initial part of the work, and it becomes a matter of judgment whether a search should be made. If a shortage were discovered, as sometimes happens, we would have to take a step which we do not like to take, and perhaps feel it incumbent upon

us to relieve the officer of his position. Since I have been at the head of the department we have changed the practice. Formerly we took securities from private individuals, but now the officers are all under guarantee companies, so that if there is any shortage, we simply notify the insurance company which gives the guarantee, and have nothing more to do with the matter. The company has to make the loss good.


Mr. W. J. ROCHE.: How are sub-collect-oi f paid-by salary or commission ? If by salary, is there any uniform rule ?


William Paterson: They are paid by salary, invariably I think. But at certain small points, which are not customs ports, for convenience we give postmasters the power to collect in small matters, and allow them 10 per cent commission.


William James Roche: There have been cases in which goods have been brought to the sub-agency, and a man at the place has been employed as an agent of the owner of goods, and has charged a certain fee, and the sub-collector, in stating the amount of duty which the individual had to pay, has included the agents' fee. I myself have seen an account rendered by a sub-collector at Neepawa, in which a fee of 50 cents was charged as the agent's commission on an article on which there was paid $4 of duty. It seems to me that that is entirely outside of the duties of a collector.


William Paterson: So it is. While brokers may do business for others, we do not recognize them in any way at all. They are not agents of the department. If any charge is made by them, it is no part of our duty to collect it.


William James Roche: The party could not get the goods released without paying the agent's fee. The sub-collector has no right to constitute himself an agent for the collection of the agent's fee.


William Paterson: No, certainly not. We have had occasion to point out that if people pay that, it is not on the demand of the Department of Customs at all.


William James Roche: Another thing occurred in connection with the same office. A person bringing in household effects from the old country was anxious to have them passed immediately, but could not produce his certified invoice in order to get the benefit of the preferential rate. He asked the sub-collector of customs if, by paying the full amount of the duty, and later on producing the certified invoice, he would get a rebate. The sub-collector replied, No, certainly not.


William Paterson: That would be a misapprehension of his duties, because that is our course. If a person comes with an invoice not properly certified, our regulations provide, and our officers are so instructed, Mr. PATERSON.
that the goods are to be allowed in at the full general tariff rate, and when the proper invoice is produced, a rebate is allowed.


William James Roche: And there is no time specified ?	.


William Paterson: No time specified, except that it has to be done within three years.


Mr. BENNETT.: Is there any age at which the hon. minister deems it right or proper to superannuate officials of his department in the outside service ?


William Paterson: Under the general Superannuation Act a person over 60 years of age may be superannuated, as the' hon. gentleman knows. We have many officers over that age who are capable of performing their duties, and who do not wish to be superannuated.


William Humphrey Bennett: May I ask the minister if the case of Mr. George Watson, the collector of customs at Collingwood, who is in his 77th year, is now under consideration for superannuation ?


William Paterson: I think he has not asked for it.


William Humphrey Bennett: He has been upwards of 40 years in the service. Can the minister recollect whether or not he has applied for superannuation ?


William Paterson: Not that the accountant is aware of.


William Humphrey Bennett: I do not think the accountant would be aware of it. I want to know if the minister is aware of it.


William Paterson: No, I am not.


William Humphrey Bennett: There is no question of his superannuation or the appointment of his successor before the minister at present?


William Paterson: No, not at present, so far as I remember. Is there a feeling that he is not able to discharge his duties ?


William Humphrey Bennett: No, but it was felt about the time of the election that it was very expedient to have him superannuated on account of the government receiving the very warm services of a gentleman who was to receive the position. The minister never heard of that ?


William Paterson: Oh, no.


William Humphrey Bennett: I think he will soon hear of it.


William Paterson: That is certainly an age at which a gentleman might ask to be relieved from service.


William Humphrey Bennett: I think so, and in view of the services the other gentleman gave, I think it would perhaps be quite right for him to receive the position.


William Paterson: Well, I do not know
who the other gentleman is.


Mr. ARMSTRONG.: I wish to ask the minister how the payment for overtime comes about. At the port of Sarnia you have paid for overtime during the past year $2,786. which is distributed over a number of names. How is the time computed ?


William Paterson: They are paid so much an hour. Up to two years ago a large part of that amount was paid by the transportation companies. The department and the House, however, took the view that it was only proper that, as the revenue was collected by our officers, they should be paid by us. Therefore we have assumed the payment or all overtime, and do not any longer charge it to the transportation companies ; but if the transportation companies ask for the services of our officers on Sundays, which happens in some rare cases, we do not pay for that; the transportation companies have to bear it. Is the hon. gentleman's question how we divide it among the different officers ?


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: I want to know how "ou can check it among the different officers.


William Paterson: They must serve so many hours, and the collector must certify to the fact. The work must be done before 8 o'clock in the morning or after 6 o'clock at night, and in every case they must state the amount of overtime they have put in. The collector has to certify the account, and they are paid 25 cents an hour.


Mr.   POSTER@: As regards the expenses of the inspectors, on what basis are they regulated?


William Paterson: The actual travelling and reasonable living expenses for which they furnish vouchers.


Mr. DANIEL.: How many revenue cruisers does the minister employ?


William Paterson: Really only one is under customs. In Cape Breton waters during the summer we engage a boat called the ' Gladiator.' We have many revenue cutters but they are under the Department of Marine and Fisheries.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Under whose authority do they work. The Customs or Marine?


William Paterson: The officers are wholly under my department and are under Mr. Jones. The repairs are done through the Marine Department but are charged against us.


Mr.   POSTER@: What are the duties of the Board of Customs ?


William Paterson: They decide questions that are not very clear under the law. For instance, as to whether a certain article might be a woollen or a cotton. They
have periodical meetings at which they rule upon the different questions referred to them. When a decision of theirs is approved by a Minister of Customs, he signs it, and it has the authority of law, but it is subject to an appeal to the Governor in Council.


Mr.   POSTER@: Are the statistical officers all in Ottawa ?


William Paterson: Yes, fifty-seven. They are not all new. Under the old system they would be at Montreal and other ports. They get out reports every month giving us as complete information as you will find in the Trade and Navigation returns.


Mr.   POSTER@: The work which was formerly done at the out ports by those who were removed to Ottawa is not now being done there?


William Paterson: No, it is done here.


Mr.   POSTER@: But all the data for that work has to be fro warded from those ports?


William Paterson: Yes.


Mr.   POSTER@: That does not add very much to the work of those ports? The minister does not duplicate by appointing men to fill the vacancies caused by removal of statistical officers to Ottawa?


William Paterson: We did not fill the vacancies where men were engaged at large ports exclusively in this statistical work. But in so small ports, like Guelph or Brantford, where men were engaged partly in this work and partly in other work, we could not reduce the staff by the removal of one officer. But the increase in the business has generally justified keeping the staff up to what it was before.


Mr. HENDERSON.: As to these monthly reports, I would be glad if the minister would tell us whether business men really value and appreciate them. My impression is that they are not much called for or used. But the reports would be much more interesting to me, I know-and I pay attention to the trade and navigation returns-if a column were added to these monthly reports giving the amount of revenue collected. It may be that these reports cost more than they are worth, but, if it is well to continue them, I would suggest that they would be exactly in the form of the trade and navigation returns.


Mr.   POSTER@: Can the minister say what the expense of publishing these monthly reports is ?


William Paterson: We have not that separately from our other printing.


Mr.   POSTER@: Perhaps the minister would get that information. I confess it looks well to have monthly reports, but, as my hon. friend from Ilalton (Mr. Henderson) says they may not be of enough use to justify

the expense of printing and distribution. 1 hope the minister will be able to tell us at a future sitting what the ordinary monthly circulation is and give us some idea of the expense.
iMr. PATERSON. This system of monthly report was established at the request of the Manufacturer's Association. Perhaps a merchant or ordinary business man may not value them much. But every one doing or contemplating an export business finds them of value. We have to do a great deal of this work any way in order to get out our yearly report. And it is always to be remembered that statistics in order to be of value must be fresh, tinder the old system we were not able to get out the fiscal returns for the year ending June 30, until the February or March following, when the figures were of little or no value. Now the figures are fresh and they actually help and facilitate trade. So while it involves an expense I think the expense is justified by the good done to the trade of the country at large. It may be that comparatively few business men in the country subscribe or take an interest in them, but the trade that is helped by them is large and important.


Mr. BERGERON.: How many employees are there in the Customs Department in the Yukon ? 'There is a vote of $42,000 for that.


William Paterson: There are 12 at Dawson and 11 at Whitehorse, the out-port.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: This covers the salaries of all ?


William Paterson: Salaries and expenses.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What has been the method of the Customs Department so far as living allowance is concerned ?


William Paterson: It was thought better to pay salaries and living allowance so that if the cost of living went down there might be a reduction without a reduction of salary. Formerly we paid $150 per month living allowance. Now, we pay the married men $1,500 a year and the single men $1,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I see an item in tonight's paper headed ' Will have to send for Wives.' It says :	,
An order was issued yesterday in the administration building to the effect that all married men whose wives live1 outside the Territory should have $25 a month cut off their living allowance.
I gather that, for years officers have been drawing a living allowance as for the whole family though their wives and families have been living outside the territory. The Department of the Interior at least seems to have found this out.


William Paterson: If a man is keeping, his family at one place and boarding in another I do not know that he gains much by it.


George Eulas Foster: Has there been any revision of the allowances since it was first fixed?


William Paterson: It was $1,800, and is now $1,500 for married men and $1,000 for single men. Formerly it was $1,800 all round, no distinction made.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I would call to the hon. gentleman's attention something which I find in the Ottawa ' Free Press ' of tonight-I do not know if there is any authority for it:
An order was issued yesterday in the administration building to the effect that all married men whose wives live outside the Territory should have $25 a month cut off their living allowance.
I understand from my hon. friend that married men get so much and single men so much. This report says :
Formerly married men received an allowance of $125 a month for living expenses. Now only the married men whose wives are with them will get this amount. The others will get but $100. _
They are treated like single men when their wives are not there.
It is said that a couple of men whose salaries are affected by this order to the tune of $300 a year have telegraphed for their wives to come in at once. As yet it is not known how many men in the service this new order will affect. The heads of the departments will report on the matter and will tell how many men under them are married but whose wives are not with them.
Has my hon. friend any knowledge of this in his department ?


William Paterson: No ; I do not think that refers to the Customs Department.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I think all the departments having officers in the Yukon should adopt some like plan. There seems to be a different way of treating these men in the different departments. In the Department of Justice they are treated the best of all, and in other departments they are not all treated alike.


William Paterson: When you go into the legal profession, they are not governed by the ordinary laws. As concerns the Post Office, the Interior and the Customs departments, my impression is that we are all about on the same basis. I think, so far as those three departments are concerned, the living allowance is about on the same basis. At any rate, we have reduced ours from $1,800 to $1,500 for married men, and then make a distinction for the first time between married and single men.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Whether his wife is
there or not ?


William Paterson: Of course, if the man is married, we assume that his wife will be with him. But sometimes they go into that country on temporary business. I know


George Eulas Foster: the collector at Dawson has his family with him, although he himself is out just now. There are some single men there. I fancy that other officers have their wives with them. I do not know about the appraiser, he goes to Victoria ; there is no use keeping him at Dawson all winter, and his living allowance is cut off when he is in Victoria. I presume his family is with him in Victoria.


George Eulas Foster: What proportion of the minister's officials are uniformed ?


William Paterson: I think all who come in contact with the public at stations as landing waiters.	.


George Eulas Foster: Are the uniforms furnished by the department ?


William Paterson: I think they have to provide themselves once a year. We make an allowance of $8 once a year for the uniform. They buy the cap, and we supply the cap band and the buttons for the uniform.


George Eulas Foster: Have they to get these uniforms at any particular place ?


William Paterson: No.


George Eulas Foster: You take care that the uniforms are uniform-that your officers present a uniform appearance ?


William Paterson: Yes. it is rather a neat uniform ; it is certainly a great improvement on the former one.


George Eulas Foster: You don't have to make any contracts, then ?


William Paterson: No.


George Eulas Foster: There is an item here of $12,474.65, which seems to be taken from the general expenditure and which is paid by the railways. What is that ?


William Paterson: That is a refund of money paid by transportation companies. In 1903 the committee of the House authorized the Department of Customs to pay their own officers. If you recognize the fact that trains should be allowed to run in the general interest of the country, it is part of our business to pay officers who are to collect the revenue for the Dominion of Canada. It involves asking for $60,000 or $80,000 more, and I hesitated for two or three years. But we take the position that we will not pay for, overtime on Sunday, that if you are going to require men to work on Sunday you will have to pay for that. In this amount you find there are sums that are refunded to us by the transportation companies.


George Eulas Foster: The revenue that you collect on Sunday, do you take that into the funds ?


William Paterson: The Sunday work they require to do is entering and clearing vessels, not to collect the revenue.


George Eulas Foster: No revenue collected on Sunday ?


William Paterson: I said the principal work is entering and clearing vessels. We do not encourage, in fact we discourage, any Sunday work that can be avoided.


George Eulas Foster: But the money which is collected on Sunday goes into the treasury of the Dominion ?


William Paterson: If there is any collected.


George Eulas Foster: But as a matter of fact the sum is collected ?


William Paterson: I could not say that. I think it is very doubtful.


George Eulas Foster: The hon. minister sees that he is running up against a place where he cannot find an argument, because, if he takes the revenues which he collects on Sundays, on the ground that he himself has laid down he is bound to pay the expenses for collecting the revenues on Sunday as well as on any other day. We will not pursue that point.


William Paterson: I discouraged Sunday work as much as possible. '


George Eulas Foster: The hon. minister himself does not work on Sunday.


William Paterson: No, I do not.


Mr. WHITE.: And when it is done you do not pay for it.


William Paterson: Well, I suppose we have discussed this item enough now.


George Eulas Foster: As far as I am concerned I am satisfied.	*


William Paterson: The whole item is carried is it not?


George Eulas Foster: All right.


William Paterson: We might as well call it six o'clock.


George Eulas Foster: All right. What will be taken up to-night ?


William Paterson: We are ready to go on with militia, I suppose, if the hon. Minister of Militia and Defence tSir Frederick Borden) is here.


George Eulas Foster: You must look after your minister.


William Paterson: I know, but I was asking the hon. gentleman. I think the Auditor General's Report in reference to that is down.


George Eulas Foster: Yes, 'Militia and Defence' is down.


William Paterson: Very well, we will go on with that.
At six o'clock, committee took recess.

After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.



[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 14) respecting the Molsons Bank. -Mr. Ames.
Bill (No. 15) to incorporate the St. Mary's and Western Ontario Railway Company.- Mr. McIntyre.
Bill (No. 1G) respecting certain patents of the Canada Car Company, Limited.-Mr. Bickerdike.
Bill (No. 17) respecting certain patents of the Goodwin Car Company.-Mr. Bicker-dike.
Bill (No. 18) respecting the Ottawa, Northern and Western Railway Company.-Mr. Belcourt.
Bill (No. 19) to incorporate the Calgary Red Deer and Battleford Railway Company.-Mr. Scott.
Bill (No. 20) to incorporate the Moosejaw and Edmonton Railway Company-Mr. Scott.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Militia and Defence, pay and allowances, $670,000.
['According to the newspapers changes have taken place, but up to the present this government has received no official notice whatever with reference to Halifax.\nSome resolutions reported.\nOn motion of Sir William Muloek, House adjourned as 10.30 p.m.', 'Thursday, February 2, 1905.']
George Eulas Foster: The minister might explain the large increase in this item.


Right Hon.   S@: Before going on with these estimates I would like to make a suggestion to the committee, and to my hon. friends opposite. I would suggest that the same course might be pursued this year as we have been pursuing for the last two or three years, namely, to agree upon a day on which the main discussion of the state of the militia should take place, and that in the meantime some progress might he made with the items here, with the understanding that when that discussion takes place, any subject covered by any of these items should be open to discussion.


George Eulas Foster: If anything is to be done at all that will have to be the way because the minister's report, I understand, is not yet down. We will go over these items and the minister will be able to give the explanations and we shall reserve one item for a general discussion. I think that will be satisfactory.


Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.: I would suggest that the large item of $1,300,000 might be the one to be reserved. That is the item really on which the discussion has taken place in the last two years and it practically covers every branch of the militia service. I am sorry my report is not on the table Mr. PATERSON.
but as the militia report is brought up to the end of the calendar year, it was impossible to get it into the printers' hands until about this time. As a matter of fact it has been in the printer's hands for a couple of weeks and I hope to have it in a couple of days.


Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: Would the minister in the meantime explain these items ?


Frederick William Borden: This item of pay and allowances, as will be seen in the detailed statement on page 38, is for pay and allowances of the Headquarters and District Staff, pay of Permanent Corps, pay of officers and men attending Schools of Instruction, allowances to active militia, and guards of honour. There is an increase in the pay of the Headquarters and District Staff of between $8,000 and $9,000. This is due to the fact that some changes have been made at headquarters ; some additional branches have been created, and additional officers appointed. With regard to the second item, the $460,000, there is a very considerable increase.


George Eulas Foster: Before the minister goes on to that he might say what additional officers have been appointed and what additional pay is given to the Headquarters and District Staff. What part of the $9,000 there is for new officers.


Frederick William Borden: There is a Director of Training and Intelligence whose pay is to be $2,800, an Assistant Adjutant General, a Director of Artillery, a Director of Transports and Supplies, a Director of Operations and Staff Duties, a Director of Cloth and Equipment. All these are really changes in name chiefly. There is a new officer, the Director of Operations and Staff Duties at $2,800 and an assistant at $1,700.


Samuel Hughes: Whom have you appointed to these two offices?


Frederick William Borden: They are not filled; we are simply providing for them. I may say in this connection that under the authority of the Act passed last session, a reorganization of the Headquarters Staff has taken place, under the direction chiefly of General Lake, who came from England a month or two ago, and who is Chief of the General Staff. He has'assisted me in constituting a Militia Council under the authority of the Act, and these changes have been made at his suggestion, and with the approval of the Militia Council.


Samuel Hughes: Is that a case of an officer from the old country coming out to succeed one of whom the minister is reported not long since to have said that the chief function of each general officer commanding is to prove that his predecessor was an unwise man. Are not these the changes which were made necessary by the Bill passed last session ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


Samuel Hughes: Have the regulations and orders which were to have been submitted to parliament before the Militia Act of last session became law, been passed? If so, might I suggest that the minister have a copy sent to each member of parliament?


John Waterhouse Daniel: Who is the principal medical officer of No. 8 district?


Frederick William Borden: Surgeon-major Bridges.


John Waterhouse Daniel: I saw in one of the daily papers yesterday or the day before that Dr. Bridges had resigned that position, and that Dr. March had been appointed.


Frederick William Borden: I am not aware of such being the case. I will get the information and let my hon. friend know at a later stage.


John Waterhouse Daniel: How are these officers paid?


Frederick William Borden: The Principal Medical Officers in districts where there are permanent depots receive the pay of their rank. While there .are no permanent depots they are paid during the camp, and they are given $25 a month for any duties they may have to perform between the camps.


John Waterhouse Daniel: I see that Major Bridges is put down as receiving only $2 per day for 366 days to June 30, 1904, the whole amount being $732. If he were receiving the pay of his'rank, I should think he would receive more than that.


Frederick William Borden: Yes,, $4 per day would be the pay. I am informed that that was before the permanent appointment was made. Dr. Bridges was then a private practitioner and a surgeon in the active militia, and his services were utilized after the death of Dr. McLearn, I think it was, at the rate mentioned by my hon. friend. I will look into the matter, however. My attention has been called to it now for the first time.


Mr. FOWLER.: Is he resident in Fredericton and does he attend to the military school there?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


Samuel Hughes: Is the allowance of so much per month to these principal medical officers supposed to differ from the ordinary pay the militia officers draw for their services while in camp ? In other words, does it constitute them permanent officers or not?


Frederick William Borden: No, it does not. For instance, in my own district, No. 9, in Nova Scotia, there is no depot; but still it is necessary to have the services of 14
a Principal Medical Officer, not only in camp but at other times during the year, and he is obliged to be in almost constant correspondence with the headquarters here. He is called on to make the examinations of men who are going to attend the schools and to render other services, and it was thought only fair to allow him the small fee of $25 a month to indemnify him from loss.


Samuel Hughes: The point I wish to make is this. In case one of these officers should have the chance of being elected to parliament, it will not affect his independence under the Independence of Parliament Act?


Frederick William Borden: No, it is not intended to do so. I think the Independence of Parliament Act specifically protects the militia officer from being affected by any amount of money he receives.


Samuel Hughes: I would like the minister to bring down all the details in connection with the retirement of Colonel Gregory from the command of his regiment, for I can tell him that Colonel Gregory has been illegally retired, and he has a ground of action against the government if he chooses to take it. I have also received some correspondence in relation to Colonel Herchmer. The minister considers that he does not come under his authority; but I believe it was through the Militia Department that he obtained his dismissal. Then, what act did the government take, either through the Canadian authorities or through the imperial authorities, in relation to a Surgeon Devine, at Winnipeg, in regard to his distinguished services, how did he obtain his Distinguished Service Order and on what reports did he obtain them? I would also like the details connected with the proposed reorganization of the 16th glad to give the information required.


Frederick William Borden: Those items will be in ' Hansard ' and I shall be very glad to give the information required.


George Eulas Foster: Will the hon. minister give us some idea of the duties of these new officers, one of whom is receiving $2,800 and the other $1,700 a year ?


Frederick William Borden: This officer, as I understand it, shall have special control over the instructions to be given with reference to the movements of troops in the field.


Samuel Hughes: What is his rank ?


Frederick William Borden: Director of Operations and Staff Duties. He comes immediately under General Lake, the Chief of the General Staff. He should be one of the best qualified men in the service, because the condition of the troops, the knowledge they have of tactical work and the work necessary to make them efficient in



the field, will depend yery largely on the instruction given by this officer. He will direct the officers in command of districts and of camps as to the instruction they
are to give.
<Mr. SAM. HUGHES. Does the hon. minister mean to say that this officer will be superior to the District Officer Commanding ?


Frederick William Borden: Not at all.


Samuel Hughes: Then how will he direct him ?
-Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. Through the regular authority, through the Chief of the General Staff.


Mr. .SAM. HUGHES.: If the general staff determines what the duties are to be, why could the instructions not be sent by the secretary ? What is the use of this officer ? The district officer commanding has no right to take orders from a junior officer except as representing his superior.


Frederick William Borden: What I meant to say was that it will be the duty of this officer to study and perfect himself in matters of this kind and to prescribe, suggest and advise. When his advice is accepted, instructions are sent through the proper channel to the different District Officers Commanding districts.


Samuel Hughes: Does the hon. minister suppose that an officer would occupy all his time laying out plans for drill in camp ?	,


Frederick William Borden: There are many other things besides that. There is the Intelligence Department. His business is to look over the whole field where military operations might take place-the whole country.


Samuel Hughes: What will the rank
of this officer be ?


Frederick William Borden: He will not necessarily be of very high rank-a Major, possibly Lieutenant-Colonel. I think the imperial officer to whom the place was offered had the rank of Major.


Samuel Hughes: Why did Col. Denny retire ?


Frederick William Borden: His time was up in April and he was offered a position in the Imperial Service which he would have lost had he remained here. He, therefore, requested to be allowed to go and his request was granted.


Samuel Hughes: It was on his own motion he retired ?
<Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. Entirely.


George Eulas Foster: I am not a military man but belong to the larger proportion of laymen. I understand from the newspapers that we are now to have a military coun-Sir F. W. BORDEN.
cil. That, I suppose, eliminating the minister, will be the highest authority in the administration of the Militia Department. Will the hon. member give us briefly the constitution of that council ? I do not quite see what this training master has to do.


Frederick William Borden: I regret that I am not really in a position to make as clear a statement as I would like to make on this point. I do not think I can do better than read from the regulations we have just passed and which give the scope of the new proposals, copied very largely from what is being done in England. It will be found in the King's Regulations and Orders for the Militia of Canada, 1904, page 205, Appendix A.:
Extract from a report of the Committee of Privy Council approved by the Governor General, 17th November, 1904, as amended by Order -in Council, 17-th December, 1904.
On a report dated 15th November, 1904, from the Minister of Militia and Defence, submitting that by the Militia Act, 1904, section 7, It is enacted -as follows :-
The- Governor in Council may appoint a militia council to advise the minister on all matters relating to the- -militia which are-referred to the council by the minister. The composition, procedure and powers of the council shall be as prescribed.
The minister submits that it is expedient that a militia council he appointed accordingly, and recommends that it be constituted under the title of the militia council and that it be composed of the following members :-
Pres.-The Minister of Militia and D-efe-nce.
First Military member-the chief of the general staff.


George Eulas Foster: Who is lie ?


Frederick William Borden: General Lake. -Second military member, the Adjutant General ; he is Colonel Vidal. Third military member, the Quartermaster General ; he is Colonel Macdonald. Fourth Military member, the Master General of the Ordnance ; he is Colonel Cotton. Civil member, the Deputy Minister of Militia and Defence. Finance member, the Accountant of the Department of Militia and Defence, with a secretary to be nominated by the Minister of Militia and Defence from among the clerical staff of this department. Mr. Jarvis has been made secretary.


George William Fowler: What position does Lord Aylmer hold ?


Frederick William Borden: He Is Inspector General.


George William Fowler: And not on this staff ?


Frederick William Borden: No.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Is he not a member of the council ?


Frederick William Borden: No. Those whose names I have given form the council.

The minister further recommends as regards its procedure.
1.	That the militia council shall meet once a fortnight or oftener, at his direction, for the transaction of business.
2.	That a full, but not necessary verbatim,
account of the proceedings of the council shall be kept by the secretary and printed for record, together with a schedule of the decisions arrived at'.	1
3.	That all such decisions shall be recorded as those of ' The Minister in Militia Council.'
4.	That the business brought before the council may be" any question which the minister may desire to refer for the advice of his council, and, in addition, any matter upon which the member charged with the administration of such matter may wish to obtain the opinion of the council, and the decision of the minister.


George Eulas Foster: Would the hon. minister give a case in explanation of that ?


Frederick William Borden: The work of the department is divided up, as my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) will see when I read the duties of the differenl officers of the council. This section means that a member of the Council, wishing advice on a matter in his particular branch, may bring that matter before the Council. As a matter of fact, I may say, all matters of any importance at all are brought before the Council.
5.	That in the absence of the minister the deputy minister shall preside, but that, in that case, no decision affecting questions of general policy shall be carried into effect until the minister has signified his assent.
6.	That any member who may dissent from the decision taken shall be at liberty to have his dissent recorded on the proceedings.
7.	That the minister be authorized to make such "further rules, regulating the procedure as he may deem expedient.


George Eulas Foster: Have any rules been made ?


Frederick William Borden: There have been some, which I shall be glad to bring down.
The minister further recommends as regards the powers of the militia -council, that the several members thereof be responsible to him for the proper administration of their several branches, and that they be charged with the following duties



[Stage Direction]
The chief of the general staff, as first military member, shall be charged with :
1.	Advice on questions of general military policy.
2.	The organization of military forces for active service.
3.	Military defence of the Dominion.
4.	The collection of intelligence.
5.	Training of the military forces and their employment when on active service.
6.	Education of staff officers.
7.	Telegraphs and signalling.
8.	Selection and administration of the general staff in the field.
9.	Preparation, jointly with the finance member, of estimates for the above services.
14*

[Stage Direction]
The adjutant-general, as second military member, shall be charged with :
1.	Raising and peace organization of military f orc6S.
2.	Maintenance of the establishments and officers and men.*
3.	Distribution of units to stations and orders for the mobilization of units.
4.	Questions relating to the personal services of officers aifd men.
George Eulas Foster: ' Personal service,' wliat does that mean ?


Frederick William Borden: In tlie event of an officer distinguishing himself in any way, or having a right to special consideration, the matter would come under the charge of the Adjutant General.
Mr. FOSTER, Or, if an officer had committed any fault, I suppose ?
-Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. Precisely.


Samuel Hughes: Why is the word ' personal ' used ? An officer has his personal individuality as well as his military individuality. The Adjutant General has nothing to do with an officer of the permanent force or the headquarters staff, in his personal capacity, except when he is on service.


Frederick William Borden: It only refers to his service. The word ' service' is used.


Samuel Hughes: It could not mean personal conduct.


Frederick William Borden: His conduct as an officer.


Samuel Hughes: Why not say that?


Frederick William Borden: I am not sure that it would be an improvement on this wording. However, perhaps the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sam. Hughes) will agree that it is better that I should proceed with the reading, in order that this may go upon ' Hansard ' in as connected a form as possible. We can criticise it later. Of course, if hon. members prefer to criticise it, now, the matter rests with them.
5.	-Appointment, promotion and retirement of officers.
6.	Honours and rewards.
7.	Promulgation of orders to the militia.
8.	Education of officers, warrant officers, noncommissioned officers and men.
9.	Discipline and interior economy.
10.	Ceremonial.
11.	Administrative arrangements connected with military -training and education, Royal Military College.
12.	Selection and administration of adjutant-general's staff.
13.	Preparation of militia list.
14.	Medical and sanitary questions.
15.	Preparation, jointly with the finance member, of estimates for the above services.


QUARTERMASTER- GENERAL.
[Stage Direction]
1.	The organization and training of all transports, remounts, supply and barrack services.
2.	Settling the reserves of food, clothing,
equipment, general stores and material to be held in depots, garrisons or mobilization stores, and the scales of such articles to be in possession of the troops.	«
3.	Holding and issuing all military stores.
4.	Administration of the transport, remounts, railway, supply, barrack, ordinance and veterinary services.
5.	Compensation for injuries to men, animals or material.
6.	Selection of officers for employment in the above services.
7.	Administration of the ordinance store corps.
8.	Arrangements for postal services.
it. Advising and assisting the Deputy Minister of Militia and Defence in making arrangements for contracts for the above services.
10. Preparation, jointly with the finance member, of estimates for the above services.

[Stage Direction]
The master-general of the ordnance, as fourth military member, shall be charged with:
1.	The armament of the forces, including mines, electric lights and all accessories.
2.	Sites, designs and armaments for the permanent defences.
3.	Settling scales of reserves of arms and ammunition of all kinds.
4.	Patterns, provision and inspection of guns, small arms, ammunition and artillery and engineer technical stores and vehicles.
5.	Inspection of the process of manufacture in the ordnance factories and control of ordnance workshops.
6.	Instruction and maintenance of fortifications, artillery and rifle ranges. Preparation of general plans for all military buildings.
7.	Maintenance of barracks and military-buildings ar.d lands in military occupation.
George Eulas Foster: Does the minister build these buildings, or is that work in charge of the Department of Public Works ?


Frederick William Borden: The relative positions of the Department of Public Works and the Department of Militia are not changed in any way. Our work is limited to repairs and to the purely military structures.


George Eulas Foster: Is he recognized by the Public Works as an officer of the Public Works Department, who had the duty of making plans for military buildings ?


Frederick William Borden: No.


George Eulas Foster: Then he only has advisory power ?


Frederick William Borden: That is all.


Samuel Hughes: Suppose a subordinate officer should submit plans of a buildIng, would the Public Works construct them as the Minister of Militia wished ?


Frederick William Borden: We ascertain what the requirements are, and submit to the Department of Public Works a state-Sir F. W. BORDEN.
ment of our requirements. They make a plan and return that plan to us ; if we have any criticism to make we make the criticism and return the plan to the Public Works. There are frequent conferences between the Engineer in charge of this work in the Militia Department and the Architect in the Public Works Department.


George William Fowler: Have you no architect in the Militia Department ?


Frederick William Borden: We have now hi the Engineering Branch.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Do I understand the minister to say that this ordnance officer has control of the manufacture of small arms ? For instance, would he have supervision of the ammunition at present being manufactured in Quebec, and of the Ross rifle, and that sort of thing ?


Frederick William Borden: He would control the inspection. He has the right to go into these factories at any moment and see what is going on, to have a report of the work that is being done there, to see it himself, and to have samples of the ammunition which is being manufactured. So far as rifles are concerned, the inspection of small arms will be directly under his control.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: In the event of any defect being discovered in the small arms and ammunition, or in the rifle itself, with whom would the rectification of this fault lie ? Would he look after that himself, or would it be submitted to the council or a body of experts ?


Frederick William Borden: I should think it would be submitted to the Council. But the Master of Ordnance is primarily responsible for these things being properly done. He is responsible for the inspection, there is no question about that. We are now considering a board of inspection, but that has not been done yet.


Samuel Hughes: In this connection I might suggest to the minister-I have no right to make a motion to this effect-hut there has been from time to time, as he well knows, very grave questions arising as to whether this officer was acting within his authority. For instance, I claim that Colonel Gregory has not been dismissed from the service, although his name has been struck off the list. He is illegally dismissed, and I intend to bring up that question before the end of the session. Now I was hoping that the minister would have brought down an estimate this year for a judge advocate general. He has in his department an officer admirably qualified for that position. I mean Colonel Smith ; and in case he would not take the position, I believe it is possible to find another officer in Canada of great legal ability and broad training who would take that position. Al-

though the department has not lost a great deal in lawsuits they might have lost a great deal if persons who have a right to complain against the action of officers had followed up their complaints. I hope the minister will have a judge advocate general appointed.	1


Frederick William Borden: There is a great deal of force in what my hon. friend says, and that proposition is now under consideration by the Council, and before the end of the session the House may be asked to vote the sum necessary. I will now continue with the enumeration of the duties of the Master General of the Ordnance, the fourth military member of the board, so far as we have worked them out:
8.	Administration of the engineer staff employed in the above works.
9.	Personnel of the technical inspection staff.
10.	Technical instruction at artillery and engineer schools and courses.
11.	Technical artillery and engineer questions.
12.	Preparation, jointly with the finance member, of estimates for the above services.
13.	Advising and assisting the Deputy Minister of Militia and Defence in making contracts for guns, ammunition, and works constructed under his1 control.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: I did not quite understand the minister in answer to my question as to who would he responsible in case of any defect being found in the small arms and ammunition.


Frederick William Borden: The Master General of Ordnance.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Would he have a staff of experts to decide whether they were effective ?


Frederick William Borden: Perhaps he would not be able to decide himself, although he is a man of technical knowledge in such matters, and one of the best qualified officers we have in Canada. But he would have the assistance of men technically qualified. For instance, at Quebec he would have in his employ a chemist of first rate capacity, whose services would be required to test the character of the cordite and a number of things that are used in the manufacture of the cartridge. But in any case when there is a complaint of the inferior character of the ammunition, it is always made to the minister, who would at once bring the matter to the attention of the Militia Council and of the officers specially charged with that duty.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: I ask these question because at one of the rifle ranges last season there was a suspicion that the ammunition was not what it should have been, whether through defect in the manufacture or not, I cannot say. It is a very important mattei- upon whicoa lives of men may depend. It is a question whether the Master General of Ordnance is able to supervise
thoroughly himself, without the aid of qualified experts, the manufacture of ammunition and of the new rifle which I believe is about to be adopted.
'Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. The Master General of Ordnance will have the assistance of the best technical knowledge that we can provide, and if it is not to be had here we will send away and get it. 1 am very glad the hon. gentleman has brought the question up and I will he pleased to hear from him in detail privately, if he likes, or he may write me. a letter in reference to the particular occasions on which this failure in the ammunition was found to exist. I am told that the same trouble occurs in England. It is absolutely impossible to have the ammunition uniformly and always good. I am also told that our percentage of imperfections is not greater than it is in England.


George Eulas Foster: It is all tested before it is issued, is it not ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes, samples are tested. It canuot all be tested, of course. You cannot test it till you use it, but a certain percentage of the cartridges that are made every day are tested.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Would it be in order to ask the hon. minister if the department had any adverse reports in regard to the Ross rifle V


Frederick William Borden: No, I am not aware of any adverse reports. There has been some question as to the sight but it has beeu changed and improved.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Was there not some imperfection in regard to the breach?


Frederick William Borden: Not that I am aware of. Of course I am only speaking of my own personal knowledge. I have now come to the deputy minister.
The Deputy Minister of Militia and Defence, as civil member, shall be charged with :
1.	The interior economy of the Militia Department.
2.	The administration of non-effective votes.
3.	Parliamentary business and reports to council.
4.	Formal communication to other departments of state1.
5.	The preparation of papers for submission to the militia council, of official reports of its proceedings, and record of the decisions taken.
6.	The 'administration of contracts, in consultation, with the branches specially concerned.
7.	Arrangements for the construction of new barracks and other buildings.
In the case of new barracks to he constructed for instance at Montreal, the deputy minister would carry out the business part of it. The work is really done by the Department of Public Works, but the deputy head of the department would carry

out any business negotiations in reference to the construction of these barracks.
8.	The custody of militia lands not in military occupation' and purchase- of land for military purposes.
9.	Such other business as the minister may allot to him1.
In the absence of the Minister of Militia, he will act for him in all matter of ordinary business.


Samuel Hughes: The hon. Minister of Agriculture will not act any more?


Frederick William Borden: You will have to ask him.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: The hon. Minister of Militia and Defence says that the deputy minister has charge of the purchase and selection of lands for military purposes including the purchase of sites for drill sheds. I will cite a little case that happened in my district. We were very anxious to have a new drill shed at Sherbrooke to replace the old one which existed in the vicinity of the parade ground, the only available place for drill purposes in the city, and several deputations waited upon the Minister of Militia and Defence, or his predecessor, in respect to the purchase of a site adjoining this parade ground. Nothing was done until finally an officer landed in Sherbrooke one day, who, in company with a noted publican who was a warm supporter of the government, drove about the city and on his advice purchased a tract of land which was far distant from this parade ground and which was not suitable for a drill shed. It was a site which the militia did not want and about which they were not consulted at all ; in fact, the officer came down and in connection with this hotel keeper purchased this piece of land for the purpose of a drill shed. It was not until shortly before he was leaving on the afternoon train that he had the courtesy to call on the senior officer of that town and tell him what he was down there for. In spite of all the representations which have been made to the department, they have still persisted in retaining this land as the proposed site for the new drill shed. As the hon. minister knows several deputations have waited upon him and not on him alone but on the hon. Minister of Agriculture as well. I think I was a member of one of these deputations, and while I do not mean to say that the hon. Minister of Agriculture would entirely usurp the functions of the hon. Minister of Militia and Defence, I think that on that occasion he had everything to say to us. He went so far as to tell us that if this drill shed site did not suit us we could do what we liked about it, in fact if the proposed site did not suit our regiment it would do for another which might be formed. I think that matters in connection with the selection of a site for a drill shed should not be left entirely with the Deputy Minister of Militia Sir F. W. BORDEN.
and Defence or with any one man. If you have an engineer, or an architect, or anybody who is competent and knows how to select sites of that kind he is the man who should be entrusted with the performance of that duty, but at the same time I think he should be instructed to consult with the officers in the district when buildings of this sort are to be erected. I think that the system of leaving the selection of a site of that kind entirely in the hands of one man is open to serious objection.


Frederick William Borden: It does not follow because there has been this division of work that the particular things placed under particular officers are solely under the control of those officers. Not at all. They all come under the purview of the Militia Council, under the minister and finally under the Governor in Council. As far as the particular case which my hon. friend refers to is concerned, if he were not a young member of the House, I would say that he was rather out of order in bringing it in here at this moment. It is hardly apropos because the deputy minister, as a matter of fact, is not the officer who went there. The course pursued is this :	An officer of the
Headquarters Staff, the Quartermaster General or the Adjutant General-the QuarterMaster General, I think-is sent to the locality where the building is to be constructed and is asked to make a report.
Now an officer is not able to purchase. My hon. friend says that this officer, whoever he was, went down and drove around with some one whom he does not approve of, and that he purchased a piece of land. I do not know what he means by saying that this officer drove around publicly ; whether he means to insinuate that it had any effect upon the officer's report or not, but as a matter of fact the officer who went down had no power to purchase; he did not purchase. He made a report to me-there was not a Militia Council then-with regard to certain lands available. I met several deputations of the citizens and officers of Sherbrooke, and alter listening very carefully to the mayor of tne city and other influential gentlemen, including a gentleman of the name of Col. Worthington, of that city, I came to the conclusion that the site recommended by this officer was a good and satisfactory site, I recommended it to the Governor General in Council, and an order in council was passed authorizing the purchase of this site. I have not the papers here, it is a very inconvenient moment to discuss this matter, but 'if my hon. friend wishes to discuss it I shall be very glad to bring down the papers later on and to discuss it as fully as may be necessary.	.


George William Fowler: The minister undertook to read the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Worthington) a lesson, and to intimate that he had violated the rules of the House or the rules of debate in bringing up this particular

matter at this particular time. I wish to say that in my opinion-and I am sure in yours also Mr. Clnfirman, and yours will have more weight in this house than mine, because of your official position-that the hon. member for Sherbrooke was not at all out of order in bringing up this particular matter at this particular time, because we are discussing the appointment of an officer who would be charged with the particular duty of going about the country and selecting sites when necessary. What more lit-ing time could the hon. member have chosen in which to bring this up ?


Arthur Norreys Worthington: I wish to call the attention of the minister to the fact that the deputation, of which my brother, Lt. Col. E. B. Worthington was a member, did not call on him to discuss the drill shed site, but to discuss the camp ground. Whether that question was brought up at that time or not I do not know, but the deputation were certainly not sent in connection with the drill shed on that occasion, but only in connection with the camp ground. As the minister does not understand what the connection was between the officer who visited Sherbrooke to select a drill shed site and this party to whom I refer, I may say that when this officer went to Sherbrooke he must have had some definite object and some instructions. What were his instructions ? To whom was he to report ? Was he to go around and pick out the first available site he saw or was he to go to some one who had some pull and ask for his advice as to where he should locate a drill shed ? It seems to me he must have gone there with the intention of going directly to this man, because I understand that he was met at the station and spent the day with him and reported to nobody in Sherbrooke. Certainly it would have been an act of courtesy not only on the part of the visiting officer, but on the part oi the department too if that officer had seen the military officers in charge of that locality.


George Eulas Foster: Whilst this question is fresh would the minister take into consideration one thing which if carried out would, in my opinion, be a most excellent thing for his department. The case cited by the hon. member for Sherbrooke illustrates it exactly. If any bodyr of men in a town should be aole to form a good opinion as to where a drill shed site should be it would be the men who have interest enough in military matters to form a company and carry on drill at great expense and with great trouble. If the minister would make this selecting of drill shed sites, once and for all, entirely non-partisan, and have in view simply what is best for the militia of that district, putting out of view entirely what this man or that man who may be interested because he has something to'sell would like to have done for his own personal or political advantage, and to have in view simply the suitability and fitness of a site he would do a good thing for
the militia, for his own department and for himself as an administrator in that department. I have heard of so many cases of wrong selection that have taken place, not only' with respect to military sites, but also with respect to post offices, and public building sites, that I think we are surely old enough, wise enough and strong enough to select these sites simply because of adaptability and suitability for the purpose for which they are intended. I am quite sure that the Deputy Minister of Militia, if he were left to himself, would prefer this. A deputy has no political leanings. He has no business to permit the least iota of a tinge of partisanship or political bias to influence his discharge of the duties of his office. If any political considerations are to be regarded that is the duty of the minister and not of the deputy minister, and you have the most useful deputy minister when you leave him entirely free from the trammel of partisanship or political bias. I am quite sure that if the Deputy Minister of Militia were left free to exercise his judgment he would make these selections perfectly well, honestly and fairly. Let us eliminate a little of this small partisanship and have these sites selected on the ground of suitability for the prupose.


Frederick William Borden: I endorse every word that my hon. friend has said. While I am not going to admit-I do not think it would be correct to make an admission-that in this particular case any improper act is done.


George Eulas Foster: We do not want any admissions.	[DOT]


Frederick William Borden: Still I believe in the selection of sites for public buildings perhaps, both under former administrations and under this administration, too much attention has been paid to political influences. I think that the establishment of the Militia Council will enable the minister, who is genuinely anxious to act in the interest of the public, to act independently and properly and fairly. One of my objects in desiring the establishment of this Council was to be relieved, as far as possible, of any influence, political, social or otherwise, which might be used against the public interest in coming to a determination as to the selection of sites or otherwise. I am glad to know that my hon. friend takes the view he does and I hope he will stand by me in the independent carrying out of this idea.


George Eulas Foster: It will be a great wrench to stand by you, but I will do it on this, sure.


Samuel Hughes: When these mlli-| tary properties are taken over by the depart. ment, under the control of which of these J officers will they come?
- Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. The Quarter ' Master General.


Samuel Hughes: Then, why not make him the responsible officer for selecting the sites?


Frederick William Borden: He has been. Because a certain duty has been allotted to a certain officer as being more properly within his scope, it does not follow that he has absolute control. As a matter of fact, all these things come before the Council, and in the future no selection of a drill site or a rifle range site will be made without the question being submitted to the Council.


Mr. OSLER.: If I am in order in referring to the grounds which have been allotted to the Ross Rifle Company, I would like to state that about the end of November last, I was in Quebec with a number of visitors who were strangers to the place. We walked out to the Plains of Abraham, and as we did so thp. first thing that attracted our attention, and that was in evidence more than anything else, was an immense water tank erected on the top of one of the old Martello towers, the legs being driven through the tower, and the water tank standing sixty or seventy feet in the air, the one hideous thing on the landscape. If there was no sentiment about the place, it would be ugly enough; but the rifle buildings themselves are about as ugly as they can be, and a little further on this hideous water tower. It looks as if there were some sort of plan to destroy all the beauty and interest in the Plains of Abraham or the approach to them. I may say that the gentlemen jvho were with me, some of them on their first visit to Quebec, came away with the feeling that their visit had been spoiled because of the absolute want of appreciation by the people of Canada of the place and its suroundings. Surely it is not necessary to have such a hideous eye-sore erected there to ruffle the feelings of everybody who goes to look at that historic place.


Frederick William Borden: I am very sorry that my hon. friend's aesthetic taste and poetic feelings and those of his friends have been shocked in this rude manner. I have not seen the water tank, so far as I remember, but it is true that permission was given to Sir Charles Ross to place a tank in that Martello tower in order to enable him to protect his factory against fire.
I did not understand that the structure was to be one so hideous and disagreeable in appearance, or I certainly should have insisted on some precaution being taken against that. I understood that it would not be visible from the outside at all.


Edmund Boyd Osler: Why, the legs are through the roof of the tower, and there is an erection sixty or seventy feet high, the ugliest possible mercantile tank put on top of it. If that does not destroy the view, you might just as well suggest that a tank should be put on the top of St. Paul's Cathedral or Sir F. W. BORDEN.
the Tower of London, and not do damage to the surroundings. This is sentiment, it is true, but sentiment shrely has something to do with the things of this world; and 1 can tell the minister that, little sentiment as he appears to have, if he goes down to Quebec and looks at that object, he will certainly order it to be taken down. Not a visitor will go to the Plains of Abraham who will not curse the man who put it up. It is so hideous and such an eyesore that I wonder that the citizens of Quebec have not torn it down.


Frederick William Borden: We felt that it was a very desirable thing to have an industry such as that established by the Ross Company.


Edmund Boyd Osler: I agree with that, but I do not think it should be put there.


Frederick William Borden: And even if a Martello tower has been a little disfigured, I think we shall have to try to put up with it. But as my hon. friend has referred to the matter, I will see if we cannot induce the Ross Company to make some changes. They might perhaps put the legs out of sight. Now, I want to finish reading these regulations :
The accountant of the Department of Militia and Defence, as finance member, shall be charged with :-
1.	The consideration and compilation in concert with the various branches co|ncern<ed, of the annual estimates for militia services.
2.	The review of contracts and administration-of the Militia Accountant's Branches.
3.	General consideration of the cost of the militia.
4.	Financial advice to the several branches of the department.
5.	Audit of military accounts.
The minister further recommends that the distribution of duties of the officers of the headquarter's staff, approved by the Governor General in Council on the 29th October, 1903, be cancelled. .
Tbat is,, briefly, tbe construction of the militia council. I may say tbat there Is a regulation describing lu detail tbe duties of these officers. I am sorry that I have not that here, but J will lay it on the table of the House at the earliest possible moment.
I am sure it will give in concise language a better idea of the different duties than I can. I think I have read enough to show that we have framed a very careful constitution for this Militia Council and have included therein all the important branches necessary in the public interest for the earning out of au efficient militia service.


George Eulas Foster: You have these four military heads in the council and two civilian heads. You say that each one advises with the accountant in making up the estimates for the sums necessary to carry out the work assigned to him. How do you work out that system ? Will you have a separate staff under each one of these heads ?

Sir FREDERICK; BORDEN. That is [what has been done.


George Eulas Foster: So that, for instance, your General Master of Ordnance will have under him a special staff to carry out his work ?


Frederick William Borden: Exactly.


George Eulas Foster: What staff has the deputy minister ?


Frederick William Borden: He is the permanent head of the civil branch, and has his clerical staff as before.


George Eulas Foster: Then you will need quite an addition to your working force ?


Frederick William Borden: No, not a very large addition. In fact, on the civil side there is no addition. On the military side there will be some additions, but not many, because we have been able to change around the officers in such a way that no very serious addition will result. The addition amounts to $8,200 for three or foul officers.


George Eulas Foster: Take the four military heads, will each one of those carry out what is assigned to him without having reference to any other head, or to the council as a consultative body ?


Frederick William Borden: He must go before the Council with any important question. I think that that is embodied in the regulations. It is of the first importance that the Minister in Council should have the advantage of hearing the discussions with reference to the different questions about which he may not be informed, and upon which it is absolutely necessary he should be informed. I may say, for the information of my hon. friend, that agenda are prepared a week or two ahead for the information of the Council, and are sent to every member of the Council, so that every one will know what is going to be considered at the next meeting.


Samuel Hughes: So that, practically, the minister, in consulting these officers, is merely carrying out what he formerly did individually ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: It is the one mode of communicating between these officers and the minister ?	[DOT]


Frederick William Borden: Precisely.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Where does the Director General of the Medical Service come in ?


Frederick William Borden: Under the Adjutant General.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: This is one of the most important branches of the service. The Director General of * Medical Services should certainly be a member of that council. The health of the troops and the sanitation of military camps are of such importance that it seems only reasonable the Sergeant General or Director General of Medical Services should be a member of that council.


Frederick William Borden: The Council calls before it the directors of the different branches. Whenever an important question comes up on which the Council is not fully informed, those officers come before it, or they may request to be heard before it, and their request is always granted.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Apart from that, the medical officer is entitled to a seat in that council. Proper attention is not shown to medical officers. They should have as high rank as any other except the Adjutant General.


Frederick William Borden: While I do not yield to my hon. friend in my respect for the importance of the profession to which both he and I belong, still w'e modelled our system on the British, and in the British Army Council there is no medical officer.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: The British Army Council is open to improvement.


Frederick William Borden: We could not put them all on. We made the best selection we could, and I think the fined ical service will not suffer.


Mr. TAYLOR.: I have listened very 'patiently to the minister explaining the duties of the board. He wound up by defining the accountant's duty, and said he thought every precaution was taken to guard the public interest. I am not a military man, and am not looking at this matter from a military standpoint at all, but with the eye of a business man, and I do not see in the constitution of this board any provision for the proper laying out of the people's money in purchasing supplies. Let me just draw to the attention of the hon. minister certain items in the Auditor General's Report. Take page V-25, purchased for the Montreal harbour improvements below St. Maurice current, Portland cement, 600 barrels at $1.80. Every one who knows anything about cement knows that Portland cement is the best and most expensive we can get. Then turn up page Q-61. and you will find that the purchasing officer of the Minister of Militia, whoever he may have been, went to Mr. J. B. Jinchereau and bought 19 barrels of cement for improvements in the city of Quebec at $3 and 86 barrels at $2,50
Then he went to Mr. Larose and bought 5 barrels at $3 and 52 barrels at $2.50. Then he went to Mr. Louis Larose and bought 17 barrels at $3 and 86 barrels at $2.50. From Mr. Leon Magnan he purchased 6 barrels at $3 and 98i barrels at $2.50. Thfen he went to Mr. Parent and purchased 75 barrels at $2.50 and 20 barrels at $3. From

another Mr. Parent, Pierre Parent, he purchased 35 barrels at $2.50 and 15 barrels at $3. From 51r. Renaud he bought 141 barrels at $2.50. In all, he bought 98 barrels at $3, 658 barrels at $2.50, and 237 barrels at $2.25. If he had bought all this at the rate which it could be bought In Montreal, $1.80, he would have saved the public not less than $702.05 on these few barrels of cement alone. I have brought these things to the attention of the government year after year, and still they send around in this manner buying these things and paying two prices. The cement for sale in Montreal at $1.80 was Portland cement, which as everybody knows, is the best brand manufactured. There is nothing to show what kind this other was-it may have been mere common cement and not worth half the price. Portland cement is imported and it ought to be landed at Quebec or Halifax as cheap or cheaper than at Montreal. I hope the minister, will arrange to have the supplies for the Militia Department bought under conditions of public competition, so that the public may be able to get the goods at bottom prices. This board should have a purchasing department, and let the board itself decide how these supplies should be bought in the best interests of the country. At page 67 the hon. minister will find that a bill as paid to Mr. N. E. Keefer of $3,183.56. Among the items is one for repairing roof of armouries, painting walls, &c., labourers 146 days at $3.50, and 53i days at $3.25. and masons and slaters are paid at 45 cents an hour. It seems to me that $3.50 is a very big price for labouring men in Halifax.


George Eulas Foster: Halifax came high all the way through-the minister knows that.


George Taylor: Then I find at page Q-66, they charge for 32 cedar posts at $1 a piece. Unless they are carved or something of that kind I cannot understand how they cost so much. This was at Annapolis, Nova Scotia. If there were the ordinary posts that we buy at 20 cents a piece in Ontario, I do not see why they should cost so much at Annapolis. I hope the minister will take down these figures and give us an explanation of them.


Frederick William Borden: As to the cedar posts I have paid $1 a piece for an extra quality of post myself-a post that would square 7 inches. I shall be glad to make inquiry into the matters to which the hon. gentleman (Mr. Taylor) has called attention. As to the cement, I fancy the price varies with the time and place and also witli the quantity purchased. The Auditor General must have passed this account, and I do not imagine that he would have passed it if there had been anything seriously wrong. However, as to the general question which these items are used to illustrate, I agree with the hon. gentleman that it would be a proper matter for discussion by the Mr. TAYLOR.
Militia Council. As a matter of fact, I have already mentioned the matter and it is being considered by the Council with a view to adopting a plan under which the best results in the public interest may be attained in the purchase of supplies. These purchases cannot be always made by tender, but, so far as that can be done, it ought to be done. I have brought the matter before the council, and I hope that before the session is over I shall be able to submit the plan they have adopted.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: A few moments ago we were talking about the Plains of Abraham. Will the minister please say how many acres there are in the government's purchase, what portion of it has been leased to certain parties for a factory site and whether the rumours are true that the government intend to dispose of the whole property ?


Frederick William Borden: I do not think there is any truth in the rumour that the government intend to dispose of the property. I have never heard it even proposed. I am not able to give the size of this property, but I will ascertain it. The quantity leased to the Ross Company is not large-in fact not large enough; for they are asking for more.	[DOT]


George Eulas Foster: Is it part of the Plains?


Charles Fitzpatrick: It is within a few acres of the Citadel, between the Martello towers which, as the hon. gentleman is aware, are on the top of what we call Per-rault's Hill, the highest point west of the city, and the citadel. We call it the Old Cove Fields.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What are the dimensions of the Plains ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I believe it has been proven that what we have hitherto considered the Plains of Abraham is not the Plains of Abraham at all. It is a mile away from the Plains of Abraham. If the hon. gentleman is acquainted with the locality, it is on the other side of the road from the parliament buildings, behind a block of houses, about two acres to the west on the other side of St. Louis Street.


George Eulas Foster: Where is that Martello tower?


Charles Fitzpatrick: The Martello tower is to the south, that is the one immediately over the cliff.


George Eulas Foster: There was a disposition to laugh at my hon. friend from Toronto when he spoke about that, but I do not think it is a laughing matter at all. There are impressions that our own people get, and impressions that visitors get, that have a great influence upon our future. I think we ought to have some regard for aesthetics, and keep what we have got in
that line and treasure it particularly. Take one of those old historic landmarks about which so much has been written,and around which so many memories cluster; we find our own people visit them with the idea of history in their minds, prizing the oid landmarks, and people come there from abroad with the same idea, but when they come into the actual presence of one of them they see a great big pair of legs protruding with a tank set up on top. It is an unsightly thing, and ought not to have been allowed. The factory's water tank should go somewhere else, and leave the Martello tower as one of the few landmarks we have in this country, a thing of beauty and a joy forever.


Samuel Hughes: Would the minister please explain the relationship between the directors of the various departments and these members of the council.


Frederick William Borden: The Directors are assistants of the military members, they are in charge of the important subdivisions of the work of the different branches I have read. Some of the directors will have two or three subheads and some only one. For instance, in the department of the Master General of Ordnance we have engineering as one of the important branches of his department. The Director of Engineering is under him and the Director of Engineering again has officers under him. Then artillery is naturally one of the important branches of the duties of the Master General of Ordnance and under him also we have a Director of Artillery, an officer who has been in Canada for some time. That will fairly illustrate perhaps, what the duties of the directors are. Under the Quartermaster General we have the army service corps and the Director of Supplies. We have also a Director of Clothing and Equipment.
of the Inspector General : After the general plans with reference to the control of the militia have been decided on they shall be submitted to the Inspector General, and his duty will be to carry them out, though he may act independently in accordance with his own notions. He shall make an independent inspection of all branches of the militia with reference to every one of these matters about which I have read, and to see whether the policy decided upon by the Council is being carried out. He will report to the minister and to the Militia Council with reference to what he finds. But he is absolutely free and untrammeled in every respect, except that there is placed in his hands a general scheme that has been decided upon by the Council with reference to these important matters. He has to inspect the militia and see whether the scheme is being carried out.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I want to ask whether there is any rule prescribing what uniform shall be worn by officers in the militia. I have sometimes had the honour to associate with some officers in Montreal, and I observed that some of them were in khaki uniform and others in the ordinary uniform of their corps. It is not a very nice sight to see them in different uniforms. Either they should all be in khaki or in the ordinary uniform. I would like to know whether an order has been given that all the Canadian militia should be dressed in khaki.


Frederick William Borden: There are dress regulations which are promulgated from time to time, and occasionally changed, but I think there is a very distinct rule as to the kind of mess dress which is to be worn on occasions such as the hon. gentleman refers to, public dinners or private dinners. But there are exceptions in favour of the service dress. This is a pretty serious matter. In the rural corps


Samuel Hughes: Is the Quartermaster General not a director ?


Frederick William Borden: The Quartermaster General is a member of the Council.


Samuel Hughes: Who is the Quartermaster General ?


Frederick William Borden: Colonel Macdonald, he is the third military member.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: What are the duties of the Inspector General? Is he responsible to the Council or to the Minister? I understand he has sole control of the troops, subject to the minister.


Frederick William Borden: I will endeavour to explain it to my hon. friend. I would prefer to read the duties; as a matter of fact the duties have been prescribed and published but I have not got them under my hand. But this is the business


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I am speaking of Montreal.


Frederick William Borden: In the city of Montreal, I think the rule is that mess dress should be worn, although there is an exception in favour of the service dress which is also permitted to be worn. In the country battalions it would be a very great hardship to insist upon the mess dress.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Do I understand that the officers have to pay for this uniform out of their own pockets ?


Frederick William Borden: Oh, yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: For an outsider it is a peculiar sight. It seems to me that they should all wear the same uniforms. Men of the same regiment are not dressed alike, and I do not think it is proper.


Frederick William Borden: I admit that.


Samuel Hughes: The understanding is that an officer at a function should either go in the proper uniform of his corps-that is, dress uniform-or, if it is a superior function, he should go in evening dress.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: I think one of the reasons for this mixture of uniforms to which my hon. friend (Mr. Bergeron) refers is due to the fact that he may have seen officers of the regular service in company with those of a corps of guides dressed in khaki.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I have seen officers of the 65th battalion, some dressed in khaki and some dressed in their ordinary uniforms. I have also seen some of the high officials there, some dressed in khaki and some in ordinary uniform.


Frederick William Borden: Staff officers ?


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Staff officers ; and the result is that one who is not very well posted is at a loss to know what their rank is.


Frederick William Borden: Well, I think that is undesirable.


Samuel Hughes: At the same time,
I would be sorry to see an officer obliged to go to the cost of providing himself with mess uniform. A young officer, a young chap with a small salary, perhaps not more than enough to keep him, should not be obliged to go to the expense of purchasing an expensive mess uniform. He should go to a function in evening dress.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: That would be all right if they were all on the same footing.


Samuel Hughes: When a regimental function takes place, and the officer in command of the regiment has not all his officers properly uniformed, the custom is for them to wear undress uniforms, so that all will be alike.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: If that were the rule, it would put an end to any difficulty in regard to the matter.
Military survey, $20,000.


Samuel Hughes: This is reduced from last year. In this connection, I would like to ask the hon. minister who does the chartography for the Department of Militia?


Frederick William Borden: Mr. Anderson is one of them.


Samuel Hughes: I mean the map printing. The Department of Militia and Defence wants maps, the Department of Public Works wants maps, and each of the departments requires maps. There is no uniform system in the whole business. Would it not be a good plan for the Militia Department, or the Interior Department, whichever would have the better right to do so. to establish a map department and have all Sir F. W. BORDEN.
the maps of the country constructed at the one place ?


Frederick William Borden: I think so. I think it would be probably the most convenient if that work were done under the Surveyor General, and I have suggested to my hon. colleague, the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton), that we should take the matter up some time, form a sub-committee of council and see what can be done. He agrees with me. But, in the meantime, this money is not being wasted. This is special work that is absolutely required by the Militia Department.


Samuel Hughes: I uudex'stand it, but I do not think the committee understands what it means. Will the hon. minister explain to the committee how this money is expended ?


Frederick William Borden: This is for a topographical survey of the country along the frontier and at various parts. It is not desirable, perhaps, to describe exactly where the work is done.


George Eulas Foster: Does this work proceed in consecutive order, so as to cover the whole ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes. We began it in connection with the Royal Military College. We utilized some of the professors there; and the young men there, in connection with their education, find it a great advantage to them to be given a certain amount of work to do in their vacation. We have, of course, had to pay them. Since the establishment-of the Intelligence Branch here the work has become more important. We have really taken it over here and have appointed several officers, mostly Royal Military College graduates, to go on with the work under the direction of the Director of Military Intelligence.


George Eulas Foster: When once done it is really completed ?


Frederick William Borden: Absolutely.


George Eulas Foster: It stands good for all time ?


Frederick William Borden: For all time. Every road, every hill, every building is charted, and new buildings can be added.


George Eulas Foster: Yes ; but the topographical part of it ? ,


Frederick William Borden: Yes. The closing of a road or the opening of a new load would be placed on record, but the work is performed for all time.


Samuel Hughes: Is there any object in reducing the grant ? I would like to see that part of the work kept right straight to the line.


Frederick William Borden: We had to purchase certain instruments last year which we do not have to purchase over again, and that is the reason for the reduction.


George Eulas Foster: Tlie hon. minister will not be able to get through much more to-night.


Frederick William Borden: I thought possibly we might take some of these items in view of the arrangement. We have a rule that on an item to be agreed upon, and which I will suggest shall be the large item of $1,300,000, the whole question of the militia from beginning to end shall be absolutely open for discussion.


George Eulas Foster: Yes ; the general question.


Frederick William Borden: The general question, and any details that any hon. gentleman may wish to speak of. We might dispose of a few more items.
Mr. FOSTER, We will go on with the ' annual drill.'
Annual drill. $600,000.


George Eulas Foster: This is exactly the same sum as was voted last year ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


Samuel Hughes: Is it the intention that any part of this sum shall be expended for drill at the central camp, and will the hon. minister explain the central camp idea, or will that come up under another item ?


Frederick William Borden: No, I think it would perhaps be better to leave that, because it is important.


Samuel Hughes: All right.


Frederick William Borden: The item is the same as last year.


Samuel Hughes: And for the same *purpose ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: Have you raised the pay of the force ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: What is the pay of the force now ?


Frederick William Borden: The pay has been raised from fifty cents to a dollar a day. For the first year it is fifty cents plus twenty cents, for the second'year seventy-five cents plus fifteen cents, making eighty-five cents, and for the third year a dollar. We do not treat it as pay. The pay is really fifty cents, but proficiency and good conduct pay is given to every man who behaves himself well in camp, and this system has worked admirably. I am told that last year's camps were the best camps ever held.


George Eulas Foster: What is the length of drill ?
Sir FREDERIClt BORDEN. Twelve days.


George Eulas Foster: Does that include going and coming ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: So that the actual drill-
Sir FREDERICK BORDEN-is about ten or eleven days according to the distance. 'Some corps get in in part of a day and others take a full day.


George Eulas Foster: It is not very long.


Frederick William Borden: No, it is probably not long enough'.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: In connection with the establishment of a central camp I would like to ask the minister whether it is the intention to do away with the local camp ?


Frederick William Borden: No.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Will the camps be maintained in the same old places, or [DOT] will new camps be selected this year ?


Frederick William Borden: I think it is very desirable that the camps should be held in the same places. If we secure good places I think we ought to stick to them. Sometimes it is necessary, to change for good reasons, but ordinarily I think we should stick to the same ground.


George Eulas Foster: How many does this drill 7


Frederick William Borden: Including the city corps, something like 40,000.


George Eulas Foster: This includes the city corps ?	[DOT]


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: The reason I asked about the camps is that I would think it very desirable, especially where cavalry-form the main branch of the service, as for example in the Eastern Townships, where we have the Eastern Townships Cavalry Brigade, to have the drill take place near the local headquarters. For several years back these mounted corps have been entrained at the different headquarters and taken by various trains down to Doucet's Landing, put on the ferry and taken across to Three Rivers, and the cost of transport for these mounted infantry corps is far greater than the cost of their whole term in camp. I think it would be far better to have these cavalry regiments drill in the country to which they- belong. In the Eastern Townships we are right on the frontier and it is very essential that these men should know the country which they are expected to defend, know the railroads, and rivers and bridges and for that reason I think it would be far better for them to drill in their own districts. Those who do not live in the immediate vicinity of the camp grounds could march into camp instead of being entrained. No corps there would be far enough away to necessitate entraining in order to get to camp, and a day's march coming in and going out would

be very instructive on account of tbe route march, and the possible bivouacking and camping and the stops for meals and feed. This is a very essential part of the training. For instance in connection with the Eastern Township Cavalry Brigade, I think it essential that a camp should be held at a central point, say the headquarters of the brigade, Sherbrooke, which is right on the frontier. A number of very important railroads centre there, while there are many railroads within from 12 to 30 miles of that place, all along the frontier, which these men should know and be able to protect in case of actual warfare.
*Sir I''Rill)ERICK BORDEN. No doubt there is considerable force in what my hon. friend says, but at the same time I would point out to him that in case of active service the cavalry would be serving with infantry and artillery, and it is desirable I think, to bring the different arms of the service together in the camps, so that they may understand in some degree at least the relationship which they bear to each other in active service. As to my hon. friend's statement with reference to the cost of going to Three Rivers, he is altogether at sea in stating that the cost of transportation is greater than the full cost of the camp. It is really nothing of the kind, as I can show him at any time. Three Rivers was selected some time ago, very largely owing to the fact that an outbreak of smallpox had occurred among the Indians at La Prairie, where we had been holding a camp for some years. The Director General of Medical Affairs reported that it was absolutely unsafe, and it meant either having no camp or finding another location. A very favourable location was offered to us at Three Rivers at a low figure; and the city of Three Rivers offered light, water and various inducements, and the camp has been held there for two or three years. Last year we had a camp at Laprairie and one at Three Rivers also. I do not know where the camp will be held this year, but I am sure the Council will give every considera-ation to the question.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Why were the cavalry drilled last year at Laprairie and the infanty at Three Rivers if it is so essential that the various branches be drilled together ?


Frederick William Borden: Does my hon. friend deny that it is essential to have the different branches of the service drilled together ?


Arthur Norreys Worthington: No, I think it is very essential that they should be drilled together, but there is no place at Three Rivers where artillery can be drilled or where you can manoeuvre cavalry.


Samuel Hughes: The minister has not given definite information with regard Mr. WORTHINGTON.
to the pay of officers. I am inclined to find fault with the small increase of pay he has given to officers as compared with the increases to non-coms. What is tne pay of officers of the ordinary active militia ?


Frederick William Borden: There has been very little increase ; I think some slight increase.


George Eulas Foster: The officers have the glory.


Frederick William Borden: The lieutenant-colonel has a slight increase to $5 a day.


George Eulas Foster: $5 a day? That is princely.


Frederick William Borden: A major, $4, a captain adjutant or quartermaster, $3 ; that is an increase; lieutenants, $2 ; that is a decided increase, the old pay being, I think about $1.25. Medical officers are paid according to rank ; veterinary officers, $3 ; paymasters, $3 ; regimental sergeant major, $1.25 ; quartermaster sergeants, $1 ; sergeants, 90 cents ; band masters, $1.25 ; company sergeants, 85 cents ; corporals, 60 cents, bombardiers, 60 cents ; lance corporals, 60 cents ; privates, 50 cents, plus of course the good conduct bonus.


Samuel Hughes: Take a non-com. getting $1.25 or $1.50 with the addition of the good conduct money and it puts him almost up to the second lieutenant.


George William Fowler: He has the glory.


George Eulas Foster: Do they use military bands amongst the Japanese ?


Frederick William Borden: I think so.


Samuel Hughes: They use 'banzai.' They are great lighters.


Frederick William Borden: They evidently pipe it up fairly well.


Samuel Hughes: At all events I hope the minister will not cut off the bands of any of the corps ; they tried it one year and it was a great mistake. There is nothing like the music.


Frederick William Borden: That is right.
Grants to rifle and artillery associations, $60,-
000.	[DOT]


Frederick William Borden: There is an increase of $10,000 in this vote, in view of the increased interest taken in rifle shooting.


George William Fowler: Is there an increase in the number of rifle clubs?


Frederick William Borden: Yes. I am not able to give the number, but I will have that information.


George William Fowler: I would like the minI ister to show the distinction between the i civil and the military clubs?


Frederick William Borden: I will do that.


Samuel Hughes: Has the minister taken any steps to establish miniature or sub-target ranges?


Frederick William Borden: That is being done to some extent.
Dominion Arsenal, $150,000.


George William Fowler: Is there more than one factory now?


Frederick William Borden: No, only one.


George William Fowler: Is it the intention of the minister to establish another?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


George William Fowler: How soon?


Frederick William Borden: I hope before very long. I explained last year, and I think something was said about it the year before, that there were some people in this country and in England-they have taken out articles of incorporation since-interested in the establishment of a factory for the manufacture of ammunition ; and a condition will be imposed by the government that in case this is done, they shall manufacture in this country all the explosives necessary to be used for the manufacture of ammunition, both in their factory and in the government factory at Quebec. The matter is taking shape, and I hope before the end of the session to be able to lay on the table further information with reference to it, and possibly a contract.


George William Fowler: Then, do I understand that it would be the intention of the government to abandon the manufacture ?


Frederick William Borden: Not at all. We want to have more factories for the manufacture of ammunition. Practically the only factory in Canada now is in the government arsenal at Quebec. It is desirable that ammunition should be manufactured at several points, certainly somewhere in the vicinity of Ottawa. I think it is equally desirable that we should manufacture in Canada all the explosives that are used now, in our factory at Quebec, which are at present imported. I would not propose to give a contract to any company for the manufacture of ammunition which would not also undertake to manufacture explosives.


George William Fowler: In my opinion it is inadvisable to hand over the manufacture of ammunition to any private company. I think the ammunition should be manufactured by the government itself.


Samuel Hughes: That is not done in England.


George William Fowler: I do not care what is done in England; that is not necessarily a
precedent for us. I think the ammunition should be manufactured solely by the government itself, so as to guard against the danger of its being faulty.


Frederick William Borden: I am afraid that would be a pretty expensive operation, and I have felt that it would be an advantage to encourage a private company to manufacture ammunition as a sort of check upon our own factory. That is what is done in the United States as well as in England. The government manufactures a part and the trade manufactures a part, and one is a sort of check on the other. The present seems to me a favourable moment for encouraging the manufacture of explosives in this country, when we are about to enter upon the construction of railways, perhaps to a greater extent than ever before, and large quantities of explosives will be required ; and it is a moment when private capital may be induced to go into the venture. But I can assure you that I have had very great difficulty in satisfying private capital that there will be any money in going into the manufacture of explosives for government use only, it would be such a very small quantity.


George William Fowler: It might not be a bad idea to establsh these powder factories in connection with the penitentiaries. In case anything happened, the loss of life would not be so important.
'Sir FREDERICK BORDEN. That would be better than manufacturing binder twine.


George Eulas Foster: When the minister brings down his budget of information, there is some information which I would like, and which probably the country would like as well. I would like to know just about what is the military equipment of Canada to-day -how many drilled militia we have, how many rifles we have for them, what stores of ammunition, what large guns, what fortifications, if any, looking towards the protection of our sea-board cities, we have. That indicates the kind of information I would like to get so far as it can be given without injuring our strategical position. I want to say this, that if we are pretty naked, as I think we are, I think it- would not do much harm to confess that we are, and let outsiders see simply our brawny arms, provided we make up our minds to do better things and put ourselves in a stronger position. I think we are living on rather slender resources for the defence of this country, and if our people understood the exact position we are in, you might find a larger number ready to support any measures necessary to be taken for the proper defence and equipment of the country.


Frederick William Borden: I am very glad to find my hon. friend taking a greater interest in matters of this kind than perhaps any of us took a few years ago. I might

point out that there is some information which can he given out, but other information with regard to guns and rifles or location of ammunition which I think it undesirable to give. I would suggest that a committee of kon. gentlemen from both sides might meet me or the Council and learn exactly what the conditions are. If my hon. friend who leads the opposition will consider that suggestion I shall be very glad to have a number of gentlemen who take an interest in the matter meet the council and get all the information that can be afforded.


George Eulas Foster: That is a good idea. You have to get the people to acknowledge that there is a want before you get their support.


Mr. INGRAM.: If that suggestion were carried out it would mean that those composing the committee would be bound to secrecy and we could not take any advantage from a conference of that kind. There was a good deal of difference of opinion expressed last year on this point and regarding the publication of the Major General's report. Many military men, including the major general himself, thought that the report should have been submitted to the House in order that the members might know what an officer of the high character and ability of Lord Dundonald considered necessary for the defence of the country. Was any portion of the $110,000 voted for defences at Esquimau paid the British authorities ?


Frederick William Borden: The whole of it was paid to the British authorities. There is an arrangement between the British government and this government with reference to payments for the expense of defending Esquimau. Under that arrangement we divide the expenditure. The British government has charge of it and employs its own men very largely except during the annual camp once a year, and we reimburse it one half the expense.


Andrew B. Ingram: I understood that a year or two ago our share was $35,000. Has it increased?


Frederick William Borden: A new arrangement was made three or four years ago and laid on the table, under which we pay half the costs.


Andrew B. Ingram: This is every dollar that Canada contributes to the defense of the country from an Imperial point of view?


Frederick William Borden: No ; the
Canadian government has paid considerable money for the purchase of sites for large guns. We paid $25,000 last year. That was a part of the agreement. We buy all the land necessary for the mounting of the necessary guns for defence.


Andrew B. Ingram: Has not some change taken place at Halifax also in the last year?


Frederick William Borden: 


Frederick William Borden: According to the newspapers changes have taken place, but up to the present this government has received no official notice whatever with reference to Halifax.
Some resolutions reported.
On motion of Sir William Muloek, House adjourned as 10.30 p.m.

Thursday, February 2, 1905.