1905-06-12

[Stage Direction]
Mr. ,T. G. H. BERGERON. Mr. Speaker, I think it was understood the other day that in order to avoid the necessity of carrying a bundle of cards, one for each railway in Canada, as the railways in this country are obliged to furnish transportation to the members of the House of Commons, according to the Railway Act of 1903, clause 275. paragraph 5. a certificate should be issued to each member by the Clerk of the House which would serve the purpose on all railways. I therefore beg t'o move :
That the clerk of the House do sign and furnish to members of the House of Commons *certificates of identification for transportation on railways in Canada.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day being called,
Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: Mr. Speaker, I de-s're to draw the attention of the House to
an item which appears iu this morning's ' Citizen.' I took the liberty of notifying the Minister of Militia this morning of the item and of asking him to look into it. The item reads as follows :
London, Ontario, June 11-(Special).-As the by-election here on Tuesday is likely to be close, whichever way it goes, the government is putting forth every effort to deter Conservative voters from exercising their franchise on Tuesday next. The latest scheme has been worked through the Militia Department. Six soldiers at tVolseley barracks have suddenly been ordered to report for duty at Niagara tomorrow. Every man of the six is a Conservative, and there is naturally a deal of indignation among Mr. Gray's friends at this mean political move on the part of the militia authorities.
I have not any further evidence before me than what is contained iu this item ; the facts are, though, that there is at the present time a camp in the city of Loudon, aud one would naturally suppose that this is the camp where these soldiers would be employed. The headquarters in Toronto for the permanent force is the source from which instructors would usually be drawn for Niagara. It may be stated that some of the soldiers from Toronto have been drafted away to Halifax to form a garrison there, and that therefore the London camp must be called upon to furnish men for certain duties at Niagara, but the fact stands forth that the camp at Niagara does not open until to-morrow, the date of the election, and the troops will not reach Niagara until tomorrow night. Therefore, there was no necessity, under any consideration whatever, to order these men from London before they had an opportunity of casting their ballots in the election to-morrow, whichever way they cast them. It does not matter to me how they vote, but they should have had this privilege, and then they could be in camp at Niagara to-morrow night in ample time for any instructional duties they may be called on to perform. Thg camp will not begin instructional work until Wednesday at the earliest. I trust the minister will be able to let us have full information in connection with this matter. It must be borne in mind that although these men are members of the permanent corps they lose none of their rights as citizens, that a soldier has every right which is possessed by any other citizen, and he should have his franchise the same as if he were an ordinary citizen. For some reason or other, the permanent corps, although the wages paid are high, as the rate has been increased, is not kept up to the establishment at all ; they are several hundred, I believe, short of the establishment at the present time.


Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.: No.


Samuel Hughes: Although the pay is better than the men would get in the ordinary walks of life. The minister will

be able to tell what tbe situation is. While explaining this matter, the minister might take the opportunity of explaining some correspondence which I understand he had with the Liberal candidate in Toronto in relation to the increased pay of the soldiers on the eve of the last election. It is very strange that this correspondence should take place between the minister and an ordinary candidate, but perhaps the minister knows nothing about this London affair ; it may be another case of the Minister of Agriculture and the Eastern Townships-that he is the minister of the district ; it may be that this time the minister of the district of London is exercising his functions in sending these men off without the authority of the minister. My object in speaking to the minister this morning primarily was that he might take some steps so that the men might not leave London until to-morrow. The train leaves in the afternoon in plenty of time for them to reach Niagara in the evening. If the men who are taken must be Conservatives, I take that as a compliment. The great majority of the men in the militia are Conservatives, and when they are selected as instructors I venture to say the great majority will still be Conservatives, because they have always been found to be tbe most Intelligent men in the militia.


Sir WILFRID LATJRIER.: That seems to be peculiar to the force, not to the rest of the community.


Samuel Hughes: Although I take it as quite a compliment to the force that the Conservatives predominate in it, and are the most intelligent in it when called upon for service, I would like to know the explanation of this case, and what steps the minister has taken in this regard.
I beg to move the adjournment of the House.


Hon.  C. S.@: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that it would have been sufficient for my hon. friend simply to have made his inquiry without trying to weave into the discussion a number of things which have no bearing upon it. I do not intend to follow him, but I will give to the House tlie best explanation I have of the matter to which reference has been made in the papers. I may say that this morning my hon. friend called me up by telephone, not so very early, and asked me if I had read this article or comment in the ' Citizen.' Ai that time I had not read it, but later on I did, and at about the same time I received a telegram, which was at my office when I arrived there this morning. It was in the following language :
London, Ontario, June 12, 1905. Sir Frederick Borden,
*Minister of Militia, Ottawa.
Reported several men from barracks ordered to Niagara to-day. Tuesday is election day Mr. SAM. HUGHES.
here and I should like it arranged to permit the men to vote before they leave.
(Sgd.) C. S. HYMAN.
So evidently, although the ' Citizen ' seems to have absolute knowledge, and my hon. friend also, as to the politics of these noncommissioned officers and men, my friend (Mr. Hyman) seems to have a different view with regard to them.


Mr. FOSTER.: There is a state of uncertainty.


Frederick William Borden: So I think, so far as politics are concerned, we may consider the matter square, and not of very much consequence in the approaching election Now, as to the military side, 1 shall read a memorandum which I have received. I may say that when I reached my office 1 at ouce asked for an explanation of the item in the ' Citizen.' I had heard nothing ot the case, knew nothing of it absolutely, and this is the explanation which has been sent to me by the Adjutant General :
The non-commissioned officers detailed to proceed from London to Niagara, were detailed for the following reasons :	.
1.	The number of infantry to be trained at Niagara being largely in excess of that being trained at London necessitated the employment of a larger number of non-commissioned officers of the permanent infantry for instructional duties than could be furnished from No. 2 regimental depot (Toronto).
2.	No. 2 Company, Royal Canadian Regiment (Toronto), is under orders to proceed^ to Halifax and may have to move at any time on a few hours' notice.
Under these circumstances, it became a matter of urgent necessity to make sure that, as far as'possible, a sufficient supply of experienced non-commissioned officers would be avau-!*hio fnr dnt.v at eamo at Niagara.
This is the regimental order, a copy of which was sent to me by the Adjutant General :
Extract from Regimental Order No. 330.
8th June, 1905.
Detailed for duty :
The undermentioned non-commissioned officers will proceed from No. 1 Regimental Depot, Royal Canadian Regiment, to Niagara camp for instructional and other duties in connection with the camp there. They will report to the C. S. O. at Niagara on the 12th instant on arrival. These non-commissioned officers will, at the conclusion of the camp, be taken on the strength at No. 2 Regimental Depot until further orders.
No. 3407 Q.M.S.I. E. H. Price.
No. 3536 Q.M.S.I. A. B. Blake-Forster.
No. 3005 Col. Sergt. D. Cranston.
No. 3095 Sergt. M. O'Connell.
No. 3776 Sergt. W. Beales.
No. 3040 Sergt. G. Evans.
Q.M.S.I.'s Blake-Forster and Price -will report to the Adjutant of the Canadian School of Musketry on the morning of the 3rd proximo.
On receiving the telephone message from my hon. friend (Mr. Sam. Hughes) and the telegram, which I have read, from (Mr. JUXE 12, 1905
Hyman), I made inquiry as to the whereabouts of the men, and I found they were some two or three hours on their way to Niagara. Consequently I sent this telegram to Mr. Hyman :
Ottawa, 12th June, 1905.


Hon.  C. S.@: Hyman,
London, Ontario.
Am informed by the Adjutant General the order cannot be cancelled as the detachment has already started for Niagara, and services urgently required there.
(Sgd.) F. tV. BORDEN.
Now, one word more in conclusion as to the men going on Monday instead of tomorrow :	I know enough about the camps
to know that it is always important to have a number of non-commissioned officers on hand at the beginning of the camp to assist in laying out the ground and to carry out the instructions of officers in preparing for the large number of troops who are to come in. This is all the explanation I have to give, and it seems to me it ought to be accepted as ample.


Mr. A. B. INGRAM.: The lion. Minister of Militia (Sir Frederick Borden) has referred to a telegram sent to him by lion. Mr. Hyman, also his answer to it. I do not understand from his remarks that he intends to give these men opportunity to vote tomorrow in London. Now, I wish to point out that this is a matter which has been talked of pretty freely in London, and has found its way into the public press in that c-ity. I may say to the Minister of Militia also that the politicians in London are regarded as a ' slick gang,' to use an expression that they themselves would use. This little by-play has been very well arranged, and I have no doubt it has worked out just as the hon. gentleman has stated. And any one who knows the facts knows perfectly well that if these men had been left in the city to vote they would not have voted for Mr. Hyman. So, it is arranged that they are not to be there, and this little by-play is gone through for the benefit of the public. There is the whole ease in a nutshell. I am surprised that the Minister of Militia and Defence makes no effort to arrange that these men are to have an opportunity to vote.


Mr. R. L. BORDEN.: It would be interesting to know the precise time when this matter came to the attention of Mr. Hyman. It has been referred to in the press of London this morning, and it seems a little peculiar that no telegram was received from that gentleman until reference had -been made to the matter in the public press both of London and of Ottawa. It seems a little peculiar, to say the least of it, that Mr. Hyman should know nothing of it except from the press. We have had a somewhat higher opinion of his knowledge of what was going on at the present moment in the city of
London than to suppose that he needed information on such points as this from the public press. I heard of it before to-day myself. On Saturday night I heard the rumour; that these men were to be sent away, and I got a telegram on the subject very early this morning from certain Conservatives in London. It is rather remarkable, certainly and, whether remarkable or not, it is quite timely, that Mr. Hyman should telegraph when he did.


Mr. BARR.: After the men had gone.


Robert Laird Borden: When they were two or three hours on their journey, Mr. Hyman, because considerable indignation is aroused in London, sends a telegram. And this telegram, the minister produces with a certain smile and a certain look out of the corner of his eye. And he turns to my hon. friend (Mr. Sam. Hughes) and says :	' It
does not look as if there was much politics in it ; besides the men are two or three hours on their way and it is impossible that they can be recalled.' It looks like a very well devised piece of play, a very pretty little game. But I do not think that any one's understanding of the real situation will be altered by the fact that Mr. Hyman sent a telegram at nine or ten o'clock this morning after the men had gone and when he. no doubt, thoroughly understood, that the decision of the Department of Militia would be that they should not be recalled. The telegram I received spoke not of six men. but of seven men who are supposed to be Conservatives, and who only on Saturday were ordered to start from London to Niagara this morning.
I think it would take a little more than Mr. Hyman's telegram or any such explanation as we have had this afternoon to convince any man in this House, or in this country, that there was not some little design in all this. It was very easy to bring in a pretty little report from some gentleman of the Department of Militia pointing out the necessity-the ' urgent necessity,' for it is stated that this is not only a ' necessity,' but that it is * urgent '-that these men should start on Monday, the day before election. I think we shall all have our opinion on the subject. tVbile their instruction may be necessary for camp on Wednesday, there is not a word in the communication read by the minister which, to my mind, leads to the conclusion that the men are wanted there before W ed-nesday. The minister speaks of the necessity of having a number of men on hand to make preparation for the camp. But. surely, with the hundreds of men to be assembled there to-morrow every preparation for the instruction which is only to begin on Wednesday could have been made without bringing these seven men from London. We are not to believe the reverse of that even from the minister's statement. Well, it seems tome this is a pretty small piece of business I to come down to after all-on the eve of an

election in London, a by-election, the verdict in which, according to the statements of members of the administration will be significant, it is a pretty small piece of business to send seven men from London to Niagara under circumstances that do not leave much room for doubt in the mind of any man who examines the evidence as to the real motive which led to the making of the order at that particular juncture.


Hon. D. TISDALE.: I think a little inquiry in regard to dates may be of interest here. The general order has no date, but it must have been issued some time before the regimental order. The general order is the order changing the usual practice and providing for the sending of noncommissioned officers from London instead of from Toronto. An apparently good reason is given for that by the Minister of Militia-the fact that the permanent corps at Toronto has been ordered to Halifax-


Samuel Hughes: It is not going for some time.


David Tisdale: 
Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: I agree, with my hon. friend the leader of the opposition, that this would be a very small piece of business-a conspiracy entered into in order to deprive men who have the right to vote under our law, from casting their ballots. But my hon. friend the leader of the opposition will agree with me that it would be a still smaller piece of business to charge the Department of Militia with having been guilty of an act of this kind, unless there is absolute proof. There is no evidence whatever that the thing which is complained of has been done designedly, and 1 can understand that it has been done in the ordinary routine of the Militia Department. A camp is opening to-morrow at Niagara, and as I understand from the statement made by the Minister of Militia, corroborated by the hon. member for Norfolk (Mr. Tisdale), these men, non-commissioned officers, have to be there to discharge their duty on the opening of the camp; and therefore, if there had been no election, they would have had to go just the same; and probably the militia officers who made this order did not think, it did not occur to them at the time, that there was an election in London on Tuesday. They had in mind only their military duties, and they had to provide a certain number of non-commissioned officers to open the camp, to be there, not on the day the camp opens, but on the day before, to prepare the ground and to do whatever was necessary to be done. If that be so, can it be charged that the Department of Militia acted in connivance with the Liberal candidate in order to help his election? I would be sorry for my part to believe it, I do not believe it, and I will not believe it. at all events, until some fact is brought forward to justify the charge. Now it has been said there was a little by-play between Mr. Hyman and the militia officers, because Mr. Hyman only sent his telegram to-day. Well, as I understand it. nobody knew of this order until Saturday, on Saturday there was a rumpus and excitement, and Mr. Hyman, who is a very busy man to-day. might have been there this morning or yesterday, and somebody on the Conservative side came to Air. Hyman and told him this order would deprive a certain number of his opponents from voting, and Mr. Hyman, with that chivalry which characterizes him, at once telegraphed to the Minister of Militia.

725S


Mr. IN OK  AM@: At the last general election which was held on the 3rd of November, and on the second day before it, the pay of these men was raised 25 cents a day. What was the object?
Sir WILih'KID LAURIER. That addition to the pay was decided on in the previous session of parliament, and that order was only giving effect to it, there was nothing new in that. My hon. friend knows as well as I do that this increase in pay had been decided on by Act of this parliament at the previous session. Therefore, I think that there is no ground for suspicion of any collusion. I have only this to say, that I hope we shall cease to cast aspersions upon one another's good faith unless there is clear evidence.


Frederick William Borden: I do not wish to animadvert in any way upon hon. gentlemen opposite, but it does seem to me that there is a disposition on the part or some of them always to find fault and to attribute improper motives. Now I take no exception to what my hon. friend from South Norfolk has said. I think his statement on the whole is very fair, and I feel disposed, if it can be done without injury to the public service, to act upon the suggestion he has made. I wish to say, however, that I knew absolutely nothing about the general order, or about the reasons for it. until my attention was called to this matter this morning. There was no collusion or connivance. I do not believe there has been anything improper intended in any quarter. There is something like a hundred men in the depot at London, and this is a proposal to move six selected men. I presume the best men for the purpose, from London, men who are wanted for instructional purposes.


Frederick William Borden: Is there not a camp held at London?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


Robert Laird Borden: In telegraphic communications-and several have been passed to me on this subject-emphasis is laid upon the circumstance that there is a camp being held in London at which these men are really wanted. I do not know how correct that may be, but it is a circumstance which lends colour and force to the belief, on the part of the Conservatives of London at least, that the men have been ordered to Niagara for reasons connected with the election contest in London.


Frederick William Borden: I can understand that, but as I have stated already, the whole of the company stationed at Toronto from which the non-commissioned officers would naturally be drawn to take part in the Niagara camp, has been ordered out in readiness to go to Halifax at any moment, and is liable to be ordered to Halifax at any moment.


George Eulas Foster: No actual date is set?


Frederick William Borden: No, but ready and liable to be moved at any moment, and that is the reason, and I believe it is the only reason. But in view of the fact that such improper motives are attributed to the department, and with a desire to prevent the evil effect attendant upon all. these accusations which are hurled against the management of the militia, and which are calculated to have a prejudicial effect upon the militia, I am prepared to accede to the suggestion made by my hon. friend from South Norfolk, and I will send at once to the Adjutant General to come here and see whether an arrangement can be made, without the public interest suffering too much, by which these men can be returned to London and sent back on Wednesday or on Tuesday night. If my hon. friends opposite will accept that statement, perhaps the incident may be closed-and I will inform the House later on as to the result of my inquiry.


George Eulas Foster: I think the minister has met the case very fairly indeed, and I hope lie will not insist on the conditional words at the end of his promise-' if it can be done without the public interest suffering too much.'


Frederick William Borden: I will put a broad interpretation upon that.


George Eulas Foster: I think we are all common-sense people. Now that Rojestven-sky's fleet is under the sea and various other matters have happened, I do not think that great peril will ensue to this country if these men are allowed to go back and vote on whichever side they please. The right hon. gentleman stated that we had nothing but circumstantial evidence on which to base our suspicions ; and then he made an argument on the other side which stood equally on circumstantial evidence. I think the gist of the whole thing lies here : That rightly or wrongly, a large number of people in this country will think that a game is being played with the militia, and I do not think we can afford to have that done. I am quite willing to attribute the most chivalrous feelings to all politicians and all public men, and especially to the present members of the ministry, and prospective members of the ministry ; at the same time, I am not disposed to think that the candidate running in London in the ministerial interest is not a very sharp and wide-awake politician, and I think that at the present time in London both candidates will believe that eight votes are worth making a struggle for-


Frederick William Borden: Only six.
Mr. FOSTER,-or six are worth making a struggle for and it is hard work for me to believe that Mr. Hyman was so diligent

in attending to his c-hurch duties yesterday, or resting on the Sabbath day, as not to know that from Saturday to Monday morning at nine o'clock something was going on in this direction.	I think
the hon. minister is well advised and that be meets this side of the House fairly when he virtually says that these men shall go back and be allowed to vote.


Samuel Hughes: I am very much pleased that the hon. minister lias taken the stand he has in this connection. Now, however, that the matter is up I will just repeat the case. I make the statement without fear of contradiction that that telegram from Mr. Hyman was arranged for.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Order.
Some lion. MEMBERS. Order, order.


Frederick William Borden: I would like to know what the hon. gentleman means ?


Samuel Hughes: I make the statement that the telegram was arranged for. It is a piece of by-play, as my hon. friend has stated. These men were sent away because they were Conservatives. I would ask the hon. Minister of Militia and Defence to follow this matter up. I take liis word that he knew nothing about this thing when it was going on, and I am sorry that he allows ministers from various districts around there and in connection with other departments to meddle with his department. AVe had the instance of the hon. Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Fisher) meddling in his department, and now we have an instance of some one on behalf of the Minister of Public AVorks meddling in connection with the militia. I want to tell the hon. Minister of Militia and Defence to-day that although these are only six or seven men and although they are only privates they are entitled to their franchise as much as are any voters for Mr. Hyman.


An hon. MEMBER.: Oh.


Samuel Hughes: If that little babbling Sbarretti message boy will kindly keep ciuiet we will get on very nicely. AVe want these men to have their votes in London. They are entitled to their votes and if we can secure them for them they are going to have them. If they vote for Air. Hyman all right ; they are exercising their franchise. If they vote for Air. Gray it is all the same ; they are exercising their franchise and no one has a right to question that. I venture to say that the grounds have already been located and laid out. The hon. minister's argument was that these men were wanted to lay out the camp. I will venture to say that every regiment has sent its men in advance to prepare for the camp. These instructors are not the men who will be employed to Mr. FOSTER.
lay out the camp. The men who lay out the grounds are, not the men who go from London but from Toronto. The grounds are laid out by another- set of men altogether.


Air. O. E. TALBOT.: Under instructions.


Samuel Hughes: Not at all. It is a few hours' job at best. Then it is said that they are there to receive the regiments -when they come in. There is a little too much at times of paternally looking after the regiments when they come into camp. I have had a considerable amount of experience in regard to that matter and I have never yet seen the necessity for any non-commissioned officers stepping in to receive a regiment when it comes in. These men are not attached to apron strings, they can look after themselves and not one of these non-commissioned officers will be necessary in the camp at all. I was going to ask the hon. minister to give these men permission to go back, but I want the hon. minister to follow this matter up still further. In connection with Colonel Gregory we have an instance of an officer commanding a district interfering in the most objectionable way-and we will hear more of that, I hope, before the end of the session

to get rid of Colonel Gregory. Some officer has furnished the names here. Some officer has been asked to send these men to Niagara. I want the hon. minister to be good enough to bring down all the correspondence in connection with it. AA'ho demanded the sending of these men to Niagara camp ? AY ho selected the men who were to go ? AA'as it by chance that six or seven Conservatives were selected ? Possibly there were none others to go. If that is the explanation, all right. I would like to ask the hon. minister how many lion-commissioned officers are there amongst the hundred men at the London camp. . I trow he will find that there are very few left in the London camp and he must know that these men are wanted in London for one week more. Do I understand the hon. minister that he is going to furnish these men with transport and sustenance in going from Niagara to London and from London back to Niagara ? I trust the hon. minister will not only give them permission to go but that he" will furnish them with transport and sustenance at the cost of the Dominion of Canada.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I think that is against the law.


Samuel Hughes: Not at all ; these men are in the service of the country. I wish the hon. minister to take that into consideration also and see that these men get their transport furnished to them back to London and back to Niagara again.
Alotion (Air. Sam. Hughes) to adjourn, negatived.



JUKE 12, 1905 PRIVATE BILLS.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. HALL moved that Bill (No. 172) for the relief of Philip Vibert-Mr. Zimmerman-be read the second time.
Mr. ZIMMERMAN.: I see that my name still appears on that Bill.


Mr. SPEAKER.: No, it has been struck out.


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

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 173) respecting the St. Maurice Valley Railway Company.-Mr. Bureau.

[Stage Direction]
RAILWAY BETWEEN MADOiC AND ELDORADO.
Mr. NORTHRUP-by Mr. Ingram-asked:
1.	What bonus, it any, was paid for the construction of the railway between Madoc and Eldorado, in the county of Hastings ?
2.	To what company was it paid ?
3.	Why is the road not operated ?
['Sir WILFRID LAURIER moved the adjournment of the debate.']
Hon.   H.@: It. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals) :
1.	$21,888 paid January. 1889.
2.	To the Belleville and North Hastings Railway Company.
3.	Cannot say ; not aware that it is not operated.



Mr. MONK asked :: 1.	To whom was awarded the contract for the building of the bridge over the Lachlne canal at Atwater Street, Montreal ?
2.	What was the price fixed in said contract?
3.	What was the date fixed in the said contract for the delivery of said bridge ?
4.	Why were tenders called for a second time In connection with the said work?
5.	Who was the lowest of the first tenderers?
6.	Who was the lowest of the tenderers after the second call for tenders ?


Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals).: Does that refer to the substructure or superstructure ?


Mr. MONK.: To the bridge.


Henry Robert Emmerson: The contract has" uot been let. I was asking my hon. friend fairly as to whether he referred to the substructure or the superstructure ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I refer, of course, to the work that has been given out.


Henry Robert Emmerson: Then, I will have to ask my hon. friend to let it stand. It only came under my notice this morning, and I knew- that the superstructure had not been let at all. I will have to make some further inquiry.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It refers to the work that has been or is being done.


Henry Robert Emmerson: I presume my hon. friend refers to the substructure of the bridge ?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Yes.	,


ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE-SALARIES.
[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 169) to amend the Act respecting the Royal Military College-Sir Frederick Borden-read a second time and House wrent into committee thereon.
On section 1,
David Tisdale: You do not seem to have fixed a maximum expenditure here as you promised.


Frederick William Borden: At the conclusion of the debate on the resolution, 1 understood my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) to state that there was no particular point in filling in the amount, and I rather thought that idea was accepted.


George Eulas Foster: I did not say that, but 1 qualified it by saying it was my individual view. The resolution is wide enough to allow an amount to be fixed.


Frederick William Borden: Very well.
I move to amend the section by inserting after the word ' council,' the words ' but shall not exceed in all $30,000.'


Samuel Hughes: This clause limits the salary of the head of the Royal Military College to $3,200 per annum ; I suppose there are allowances also ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes, there is a house and a good many other things besides. The salary was increased to that amount in 1893.


Samuel Hughes: My opinion is that the educationists of this country both civil and military are not paid as they should be. I would be very much pleased if the resolution should read that the salary should be * not less than $3,200,' instead of, ' not more than $3,200.'


David Tisdale: Including the allowances the salary provided is a very comfortable one and it has enabled us to get a veiy efficient officer.


Frederick William Borden: I would move that the clause should read that : the salary of the commandant shall not exceed $3,200 a year ; the salaries of the staff adjutants and professors, instructors and assistant instructors and staff, shall uot exceed a total sum of $30,000 annually.
Section as amended agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.


MILITIA ACT AMENDMENT-PERMANENT FORCE.
[Stage Direction]
On tlie order being called :
Second reading of Bill (No. 170) to amend the Militia Act.-Sir Frederick Borden.
George Eulas Foster: Might I make a suggestion to tile minister before we proceed to consider this order. It will be prettv difficult to go into a full discussion of this Bill unless we have the correspondence that has passed between the imperial government and the Canadian government with reference to taking over the defences at Halifax and Esquimau, so that we may know what is the position of each government in connection therewith. As a layman I say this is important, because it seems to'bring out pretty sharply the line of demarcation between a standing army and the militia of the country ; at least it is showing a deeidediy strong tendency towards the establishment of a regular army-not very large, 5,000 men-but still it brings up the whole question as to how far this country should go in that direction and whether it is possible for us to provide sufficient money to have a respectable standing army and at the same time do full justice to our militia, the real arm of our defence. The cost of regulars as high and although you may have only 3,000 in addition to those you now have, the sum total that will be required for the maintenance of these
3,000	men will be pretty large. Then in the second place, if we take over these fortifications, if there is no other way but that we shall do that, we incur an unknown expense of large proportions at the least, which may become very large under circumstances that may occur, it is well for us, I think, to talk over this matter before we have committed ourselves, before the second reading of this Bill, and see whether or not there is not another and a better way by which the same object can be brought about of retaining these defences and retaining them in the only way in which they would be useful, that is as absolutely modern and up-to-date fortifications and defences, therefore, it seems to me to be necessary to have that correspondence, and be able to look over it before the House should be called upon to pledge itself to a policy which is proposed by the government of taking these stations over and of laying the foundation of a regular army. Another point on which I would like Information is as to the cost. I find that in this and that newspaper calculations are made as to what the cost will be. These estimates may be near the mark and they may be a long way from it; we have to rely upon what our department gives us, and I would like the minister to have his council, those with whom he consults, make very careful estimates as to what will be the added cost. As I understand it. we


Frederick William Borden: have now about 1.200 men belonging to the permanent force.
S*ir FREDERICK BORDEN. Something over that.


George Eulas Foster: And provision has been wade to increase that to about 2,000. We would like to know what that extra cost will be when our standing force is brought up to 2,000. Then we would like to know, with as much certainty as we can possibly have, what the extra 3,000 men will cost as distributed in the two stations, with all that is necessary to keep them efficient, taking into consideration the difficulty-and I think my hon. friend will find a difficulty-of getting eligible Canadians to go into the permanent force at the very low rate of wages for which the British government lias been able to keep regulars in its service. It is becoming more difficult for them to do this, as I find by the conferences and discussions that are taking place in the British parliament. And in the United States they find it difficult to recruit men unless they pay them well. I do not imagine that in the future this item will keep at the figure at which it is to-day in the regular British service. I think we will have to face the idea of having that largely increased instead of remaining at the present rate. Well, then, if you are going to put 3,000 men at Halifax and at Esquimalt, and undertake the c-are of these fortresses, we do not want to do that simply to have two toys and somewhat expensive toys, one at each end of our country ; we want to have a station at the Pacific 'and another at the Atlantic which will be absolutely serviceable and up-to-date hi every respect. We do not know the conditions upon which we are entering into this. We have to keep up the fortifications, and, that being so, we must face the cost of keeping them up-to-date and of going as fai as modern improvements make it necessary to go, discarding one set of arms and taking another and more expensive set as circumstances require. That, of course, is a matter upon which we cannot get estimates, but we can get estimates as to what it will cost for the .men themselves and their keep, and what it will cost per year for keeping up the fortifications to the point of proficiency at which, I suppose, we aim to keep them, or we would not undertake them at all. Then, when we get that as a foundation,. we will be able to discuss the general principle as to whether Canada should not be dependent almost entirely upon its militia rather than attempt even a small standing army, and so to keep down the permanent force to what is absolutely necessary for instructional and educational purposes, and to go no further than that. I do not know what military men think of the circumstances which have developed in the South African war and the present war, but it does seem to me that things have taken on a very different aspect. I think that num-

bers and shooting power are what should be aimed at by a country that wishes to defend itself, and therefore by Canada, even though we do not now, and I hope never shall, think of undertaking an aggressive war, but still we have a country so vast and so rich that we must make its defence fairly well assured, and it seems to me that the lessons of the wars that have just passed go to show that what you want is men who can handle arms and shoot well and have numbers of such easily available. It is apparently the large numbers that avail, together with proficiency, and it is not so difficult a matter to knock an army into fighting shape now as it seemed to be under the old regime, when it was thought that no one was fit for warfare except the regulars who had been almost born and bred to it. These are the considerations which led me to ask the minister to allow this item to stand until we have obtained the information for which I have asked. Then, too, the House is very thin, and this is a very interesting question to all military men. We shall not lose by having as full a House as possible to discuss the question when once it comes up. So far as I am concerned, I feel very much disinclined to vote money for anything that appears like a standing army, vve must have instructors and we must have a nucleus. So far as that goes, we ought to have it efficient, no matter what the cost. If we go beyond that and have even a small force of regulars, very costly and without any power of multiplying itself in case of actual war, I think we would be adopting a policy that would not redound much to the benefit of the country. Of course, I speak with diffidence in this, because I am not a military man.


Frederick William Borden: I must congratulate my hon. friend upon the progress which he is making, and I welcome him very much into the discussion of these important matters. I wish that more hon. gentlemen would take the trouble to read and think about them. But I will say while I entirely acquiesce in his desire to postpone the discussion of this Bill, I think it might he proper that I should say one or two words to 'set his mind at rest as to one or two points in which I think he misunderstands the position.


George Eulas Foster: I would not take it amiss, in fact I should prefer to have the minister give as much information as possible, because it will help us in the consideration of this measure.


Frederick William Borden: What I wish to say at the outset is that there is no intention whatever to take any steps towards the establishment of a standing army; there is no intention to depart in the slightest degree from the policy which was adopted by this country shortly after confederation, , and which has been followed ever since, of
providing depots of a permanent force for the purpose chiefly of educating the active militia of the country, upon which we would almost exclusively rely for defence.
I am afraid that my hon. friend, in his desire to acquire information has been looking in the wrong quarter." l myself have seen recently one or two articles which absolutely misrepresent the situation. I do not mean to say that this misrepresentation was intentional, so perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the writers misapprehended the situation. As I have said, there is not the slightest scintilla of evidence to prove the allegation- nor is there the slightest particle of truth in that allegation-that we are going to establish, or have any idea of establishing, a standing army. So far as it goes, the fact that we are going to take over the garrisons at Halifax and Esquimalt and substitute for the units of the imperial army of these two places Canadinu soldiers. might be said to be some excuse for the statement that we are establishing a standing army; but only so far. And, in that connection, let me say that it is the intention of the Militia Council and of the government to utilize these two depots just, as all the other depots are used for instructional purposes of the militia- that at Halifax for the militia of the maritime provinces, and that at Esquimalt for the militia of British Columbia. Now, whether we should or should not take over these two garrisons, whether we should or should not relieve the British taxpayer of the expense of their maintenance, Is a question of policy, a question on which we may reasonably differ. But the government has made the offer, the offer has been accepted ; and so far as the government is concerned, it is committed to carry that offer into execution. I was under the impression-I am still under the impression-that the House, including my hon. friend (Mr. Foster), and the country generally, would approve of this additional step in the direction of assuming responsibility for the defence of Canada upon Canadian soil.
Now, as to the policy outside of these two garrisons, I said a moment ago that we are continuing a system adopted shortly after confederation, the policy of maintaining a permanent militia force-not a standing army, but a number of officers, noncommissioned officers and men, permanently employed, chiefly for instructional purposes but incidentally for the purpose of guarding and taking charge of fortifications at different points. At the outset confederation was limited to four provinces, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. A little later Prince Edward Island came in. Depots for the permanent force were established at Toronto, London, Kingston, Quebec, St. John's (Quebec) and Fredericton, for the purposes I have just

indicated. They are maintained still, at very much the strength at which they were maintained in the early days of coil-federation and for the purposes for which they were established. But the country has grown. There is a Northwest. And when the province of Manitoba, became a province a depot was established there.


Samuel Hughes: Would the minister allow me at this point to ask him how about the Strathcona Horse, of Calgary ?


Frederick William Borden: I was coming to that. The province of Manitoba was established, and the idea of an instructional force was carried out there, a depot being established at Winnipeg. In the Northwest Territories, it was not thought wise to establish the militia. Instead of the militia, a force of police, known now as the Royal Northwest Mounted Police, was established in the unorganized section of the country. In the province of British Columbia there was a British garrison. Now, we are about to establish two new provinces. The work of defending and maintaining civil order in these provinces will devolve upon the militia force. It is proposed to continue in these provinces the work begun in the east, of establishing instructional depots, and the depot referred to by my hon. friend (Mr. Sam. Hughes), that of the Strathcona Horse will be one.


Mr. BERGERON.: I do not wish to interrupt the hon. minister, but I would be glad if he would explain the reason why we should establish depots in the new provinces when we have stiH the Northwest Mounted Police ? I have not heard that that body is to be abolished. The mere fact of their being autonomous provinces will not change the condition in that respect.


Frederick William Borden: It will, to a very large extent. In addition to what 1 have said in the early years the question of defending the Northwest was a question that was not seriously considered; the practical question was largely the defence of the eastern and more populous provinces. These Territories are becoming populous and new provinces are being created. The scheme of defence which was begun in the east, is being gradually carried through the west and through British Columbia to the Pacific coast. And the idea is-and I believe it is a sound one-to carry out this policy of organizing a chain of depots of the permanent force from the Atlantic through the older provinces, through the Northwest, through British Columbia, to the Pacific coast-depots which will be in touch with each other and which will form the nucleus of an effective militia which will afford instruction to all the militia.
Now, 1 have explained very briefly, and perhaps imperfectly, the scheme which we Sir F. W. BORDEN.
have in mind-which is no new scheme but is simpiy the amplification of the policy established long ago. Now, to come to the Bill. Last year the policy was to increase the permanent force from 1,000 to 2,000 men. In the early years of confederation, 1,000 men were sufficient for the few depots in the east. But the country has grown and we thought 2,000 would be necessary. Now, it is proposed to add a depot at Montreal, to increase the force by this additional depot and by one in the Northwest. I am now advised that it is desirable to increase the number in the Northwest, not immediately. but eventually, in order to carry out this scheme. And we are now taking over the garrisons at Halifax on the one hand and Esquimalt on the other.


George Eulas Foster: Is there at present a depot in Montreal?


Frederick William Borden: No.


George Eulas Foster: And you propose to put one there? You have one at St. Johns and one at Quebec-npretty close quarters.


Frederick William Borden: The depot at St. Johns is on the frontier and is of special importance for that reason-just as tiie one at Fredericton which would not have been placed there but for a similar consideration.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I understand the depot at St. Johns is for cavalry. It would not be quite the same thing as the other.


Frederick William Borden: No. Now, I would have said, if I had been anxious to proceed with the Bill to-day, which I am not specially, that we could very well have taken up this Bill and taken the power-because taking of this power is all the Bill amounts to-to increase the permanent force to 5,000 men. Of these, 2,000 or thereabouts will be necessary for the garrisons at Halifax and Esquimalt, and something less than 2,000 for all the other depots, leaving a margin of perhaps. 1,000 to be tilled in later on. I explained the other day that while this number would not be required all at once, there was no doubt that, rvith the growth of the country, in the near future 5,000 would probably be required, and that I thought we might as well take authority now to raise that number instead of coming back at some later date. But I believe 5,000 is the full number that will be required by Canada for many years.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the number now ?


Frederick William Borden: About 1,250. not including those who have been sent to Halifax. But that is not enough, the normal number would be about 1,500 at present, if Montreal were included.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: That is, you are increasing the number to 3,800, as a matter of fact ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes. Now with regard to Halifax and Esquimau, I will not speak at present.


George Eulas Foster: Is that correspondence nearly ready ?


Frederick William Borden: I am waiting for the final touches, the final answer, from the war office, certain details which 1 hope to have at any moment. I do not think I can add any more except to say that the information which my hon. friend has asked for is being prepared. As a matter of fact, when the debate comes on which has been promised upon one of the large items of the militia vote, I expect to lay on the table of the House a memorandum, and to put it in the hands of every member, which will show what the expenditure is, and what is in volved in all this scheme.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Would the hon. gentleman say what will be the number of men in garrison at Halifax when it is full ?


Frederick William Borden: The present number is about 1,S00 to 2,000 of British troops. I am told by General Lake that he expects to be able to do the same work with from 1,200 to 1,400.
Mr. BERGERON As a matter of fact, is it not true that it is very .hard for my hon. friend to fill up that establishment ?


Frederick William Borden: No. I am glad that question has been asked, because it gives me an opportunity of reading to the House a letter which 1 received just as 1 came in, from the Adjutant General. It is as follows :
Dear Sir Frederick.-I desire to call attention to an article in this morning's ' Citizen ' on military matters. ' In this article it is stated that we caninot get sufficient recruits because the pay is too small. This is not the case. The Canadian soldier is the highest paid soldier in the world to-day, receiving as he does $15 per month during the first year of service, with a material increase in the second and third years. As paragraphs of this nature are calculated to hinder recruiting for Halifax and Esquimau, I trust you will take steps to have this statement^in regard to insufficiency of pay publicly contradicted.
As a matter of fact we have had no difficulty whatever in getting all the recruits we wanted. The statement is absolutely without foundation, and calculated, as the Adjutant General says, to cause unnecessary trouble and worry.
ilr. SAM. HUGHES. I understood from the statement that the minister had difficulty in getting recruits, that there were only 900 now, when the statute calls for 1,200.


Frederick William Borden: I know my hon. friend relies upon reports In the papers, and will not accept my official statement. I am sorry, but I cannot help it. I can assure my hon. friend, if he ever gets into office, he will find that these mischievous reports,
and intentionally mischievous reports, are very injurious, and will be very injurious to his administration.


Samuel Hughes: Is the Kingston battery establishment filled up now ?


Frederick William Borden: I do not wish to be cross examined ; but I have stated bere, I am told, tliat the force is practically full.


Samuel Hughes: That letter does not say the force is full, it merely defends the pay, and shows that the reason the men are not enlisting Is because of insufficiency.


Frederick William Borden: Then I am not able to understand the letter of the Adjutant General. But as I do understand it, it means that we have no difficulty in getting all the permanent troops we require. Now one more word as to this standing army question, as to the allegations that are made, without the slightest foundation, that in order to be able to increase tbe number of depots and to take over the garrisons of Halifax and Esquimalt, we are cutting down tbe militia, we are robbing Peter to pay Paul. There is not the slightest foundation of truth in that statement at all. W c are taking over xiaiiiax and Lsquimait to relieve the British taxpayer, and not to cut down the militia. There is no intention to reduce the expenditure upon the active militia because of taking over these two forts. It would be what might be called an Indian gift to do anything like that. While we would be relieving the British taxpayer, we would not be strengthening the British Crown and its power in this country if we were to cut down the active militia, while using the money saved In that way to pay for the garrisons at Halifax and Esquimalt. No such contemptible idea has entered into my mind, or the mind of any member of this government. I can not understand the motive which anybody would have-I am not addressing anybody in this House, but outside of the House-who may pretend to be a military critic, in putting forward a statement of that kind. On the 31st of May last the correspondent of the London 'Times' in this city cabled to England a state; ment, which was published in tlie ' Times,' to the effect that in order to be able to take over the Halifax and Esquimalt garrisons every regiment in Canada had been denuded of one of its companies, and that there had been a general reduction all along the line of the active militia. The statement is absolutely without foundation. If the man who sent that cablegram did not know any better, it was his duty to this country-I believe he is not a native of this country- it was his duty to this country, and his duty to the newspaper to whom he was sending his correspondence, and his duty to this government to come to me or to the department and get proper information before he sent a mischievous cablegram of that kind.

Now as a matter of fact, the active militia is being increased continuously every year ; every year since I came into office there has been an increase. This year there will be
6,000	or 7,000 more men of the active militia trained in camps than ever before in this country, at any rate since 1870 at the time of the Fenian trouble. There is no truth, I repeat it again, in the statement that we have adopted the policy of establishing a standing army here ; and there is no truth in the statement that we are taking over and paying for garrisons at Halifax and Esqui-malt at the expense of the active militia, and such a statement is as unfair as it is untrue.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Accepting the hon. gentleman's explanation that he is not doing this to the detriment of the militia of Canada, as a matter of fact, what will be the cost to the taxpayers of Canada of these two garrisons at Esquimalt and Halifax ?


Frederick William Borden: 
Robert Franklin Sutherland: I think that if a discussion is going on there should be a motion for the second reading of the Bill, or a motion to adjourn.


Frederick William Borden: I thought the second reading had been moved. I move that the Bill be now read the second time.


Samuel Hughes: The hon. minister stated that the establishment was completed. I hold in my hand the minister's own report and I find that the establishment of the permanent corps for 1904 was 1,24a. The strength on December 31, 1904, was 959.


Frederick William Borden: I am sure my hon. friend does not wish to draw inferences from that report which are not correct. That may have been the number then, but I stated that at the present time the strength of the corps is nearly 1,300.


Samuel Hughes: This is the latest and only information that the public has in Sir F. W. BORDEN.
the matter. The hon. minister is a little out of place in censuring any one for taking the official figures of the strength of the corps which are given as 959. To know the strength we turn to the report of the minister. The minister must not think that the public can learn these things by intuition.


Frederick William Borden: But if the public prefers to read the reports of persons who are unable to give the information rather than to read the statement I have made in the House I cannot help it.


David Tisdale: I would like to add a word to what the hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster) has said on two lines. The first and most particular information we want is as to the expenditures past and present. I will try to give a little summary so that the minister may have the information prepared as far as he can obtain it : (1) the number of men kept by the British government in these two garrisons ; (2) the number. of men the department propose to ask the House to confirm and the number they propose to substitute. Iu all possibility it may be much less or much more.


Frederick William Borden: As definite as possible. .


David Tisdale: I would like a positive statement of the estimate of the number that would he required.


Frederick William Borden: As definite as possible.


David Tisdale: As definite as possible, but in figures ; (3) the estimated expenditures of the war office, if they have it, on these men and all other expenses, if they have it, connected with the maintenance of the establishment and the pay, or in any way connected with the garrison ; (4) the estimated expenditures of the cost of the number of men who are to be substituted and their incidentals ; (5) the estimated expenditures of the fortifications themselves for the year. I think we are entitled to this Information and that is all I wish.


Frederick William Borden: I wil] give a 'A I can.


David Tisdale: Not only what you can, because I will explain why I want it as fully as possible. It may he a'little trouble but those who with yourself are responsible should figure out what you propose.


Frederick William Borden: We are doing that.


David Tisdale: In other words there may be anticipated a very large expenditure. It will all depend on how these fortifications are manned and armed at the present time.


Frederick William Borden: My hon. friend will see, if I may interrupt him, that this is something that it is impossible to

give because I do not know and I could not find out, I fancy, without the greatest difficulty, what the nature of the defences of Halifax are. It is known to be one of the most powerful fortresses in the world, but very few people know the number of guns, and it is not desirable that they should know.


David Tisdale: I do not want to know the number of guns. Without the expenditures I am foreshowing it is impossible to determine this important question. This information would have very great weight upon the question of principle which is involved. The hon. minister has assumed that the members on both sides of the House are in favour of this principle, but when the hon. gentleman assumes to believe that the House and the country are in favour of the principle of the government taking over these fortifications and supplying these garrisons I am not prepared at all to agree with him. I am not at ail prepared to agree to the principle in my present state of mind and with the information I have. At all events, I know that there are a great many other people in this country, some of them military who have mentioned it to myself, and others who are not military, who are not in favour of the proposition laid down in this House and in the country that the government should take over these garrisons and these fortifications. It depends on circumstances, so far as I am concerned, before I make up my mind. This country and this House are" in favour of Canada doing more towards defence, but I am not at all satisfied for myself, and I do not believe the country is, until we know more about it, that I should vote in favour of this proposition. I merely say this now because the hon. gentleman assumes that the House is in favour of the proposition and if later on some hon. gentlemen object to it, I do not wish it to appear as if we have assented to it at one time and objected to it afterwards. The care of fortifications is an entirely new work for the Dominion of Canada. We have no experience in regard to it. The hon. minister has made a very grave admission, a most serious admission and possibly it might be well for me to follow that up a little and call his attention to it. He frankly admits he has no idea of the nature of the magnificent defences, preparations and armaments at Halifax. That is what I complain of and what the people object to, if I do not disagree with him. Wfe have no idea of what it is going to cost or of our capabilities of manning and properly handling these defences. This is practically a matter in which we have no experience because as a rule the militia have nothing to do with fortifications and are not capable of manning them because they are not trained to such work. In these modern days it is believed that forts are no good. It is accepted as a gen-231
eral proposition and it is only in exceptional cases where enormous expenditures are being made and where they are always ready to change the equipment as .the evolution of the day indicates the necessity of new styles of arms that a fortress proves effective. It is most important that parliament should know what the government is committing this country to, and that we are capable of maintaining and providing for these defences if the empire is going to rely upon us. The minister has practically admitted to-day that he knows nothing about it.


Frederick William Borden: No, I said it was impossible for me to tell what type of guns would be used, but I do not think there is much difficulty in getting the expenditure, not perhaps to a dollar but practically.


David Tisdale: Do you know what it L eans to undertake the defence of two fortifications that ought be second to none in the world so that the fleet of Great Britain, may be safe under the guns of these forts. That is a thing that requires serious consideration. I want to know what the cost will be for five or ten years to come. I will go as far as any one eise to endorse any reasonable expenditure for the defence of Canada and the empire, but I want to be sure that we know what we are undertaking and I want to be certain also that our maintainance of these fortifications so vital to the empire, will be thorough. I would have a great deal of hesitation about committing myself to this proposition without further information. I agree to a certain extent with my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) in regard to a standing army. I suppose there is a distinction between a permanent force and a standing army; the difference may be in the name but a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. So far, our permanent force has been confined to schools of instruction, to aiding the civil power so that the volunteers may not be involved, and as forming a nucleus which we may rely ou in case we want- to call out a large military force. But now you are going to put the permanent force into fortifications, and they must be instructed in the most modern military tactics.


Frederick William Borden: Is not that desirable for Canada ?


David Tisdale: Desirable for Canada if we are to defend these outposts of the empire.


Frederick William Borden: We will never acquire that military information unless we begin.


David Tisdale: Don't begin too fast, and don't begin unnecessarily, and don't forget that you are now undertaking not only to defend Canadian interests but imperial interests as well. It is one thing to provide



for the defences of Canada alone, and it is another thing to undertake the defence of the empire.


Frederick William Borden: Canada is a part of the empire.


David Tisdale: If these fortifications were only for the defence of Canada it would be an entirely different thing. I do not want to oppose this proposition if I possibly can avoid it, but I certainly must know what we are doing before I support it. Speaking as a Canadian I would be proud to make an expenditure for the joint defence of the empire and of Canada, but it goes past pride and becomes conceit when any one thinks that the defence of Canada is more important than the defence of the empire. I will join with the government in any reasonable expense, but I want first to know what we are about.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I wish to ask a few questions so that when we come to the discussion of this measure the minister may be prepared to give me the information. The minister told us that the militia has increased since 1896; is that in number or expense ?


Frederick William Borden: Both.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the strength of the militia to-day ?


Frederick William Borden: 48,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the present cost of the militia as compared with its cost in 1896.


Frederick William Borden: I cannot say exactly but it is very much more than it was in 1896.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I am putting these questions so that the Minister of Militia will have the information when we come to discuss this Bill.


Frederick William Borden: In 1896 the annual drill cost about $425,000 and for the present year it will cost between $700,000 and $800,000, but a large part of that is due to the increase in pay which has been almost doubled.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Whatever may have been the cause, the expenditure of the Militia Department to-day is very nearly double what it was in 1896 ?


Frederick William Borden: I think so.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: When this question comes up again, wall my hon. friend be in a position to say what induced the government to replace British soldiers by Canadian soldiers in the garrisons at Esquimau and [DOT]Halifax ? Was it the result of correspondence with the imperial government ?


Frederick William Borden: The papers will be laid on the table as soon as completed.


David Tisdale: Sir WILFRID LAURIER moved the adjournment of the debate.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Grant to the imperial government to cover Canada's proportion of probable losses in connection with the operation of the Pacific cable, $125,000.
['Yes. And we hope to go into Committee of Supply taking up the estimates of the Department of Public Works.']
Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: 
Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Are you co-owners of the cable ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: By what arrangement?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: The contract was made between the imperial government and the colonies I have mentioned in 1899 or thereabouts. There is a trust created by the four governments to manage the cables. The trust is composed of the representatives appointed by the different governments. Our representative is Lord Strath-eona and the late manager of the Montreal Bank, Mr. Lang.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is this managed as a commercial enterprise ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Yes ; we have borrowed the cost of construction, two million pounds. It is expected we shall repay the interest and extinguish the capital debt. The deficit is upon, the running of the cable.


Mr. HAGGART.: 
Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: 
John Graham Haggart: 
Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: 
George Eulas Foster: What has been the income from the traffic receipts for the last five years ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: The cable has been only in operation for two years, and I have not the information the hon. gentleman asks. Our expectations have not been realized, which is largely due to the competition of the eastern companies, which have the advantage of a contract made by the South Wales government before the federation of the Australian colonies. The traffic has not been as large as we expected, but it is increasing.


John Graham Haggart: I understand that New South Wales entered into an arrangement with us which it is not exactly carrying out. Has that question been settled ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: No ; we have made representations again and again to the South Wales government, but we have had no satisfaction.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is that cable laid?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: On the Pacific coast from the shore of the island of Vancouver to Australia, passing by Fanning island, the British island to the north of Honolulu.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Are there other cables in that direction or are the others on the Atlantic?
231J


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: That is the only cable between Australia and the American continent on the Pacific ocean.
Mr. BEKUlKON. Then there must be another one on the other side ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: There is another one on the Atlantic.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: But it has no connection with the one we are talking of.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: The object was to have continuous communication over British territory from Australia to British Columbia, then across Canada and then by the Atlantic cables to Great Britain.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: We have nothing to do with the cables on the Atlantic?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: No, the Atlantic cable belongs to the commercial company.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: We are interested in the one on the Pacific ocean.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Nothing else.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: We are at the mercy of the one on the Atlantic.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: The trouble is not with the Atlantic cables, but at the other end.


George Eulas Foster: I do not understand that Australia has defaulted in her payment of five-tenths of the cost, but it has not given good commercial support to the cable, not such support as by the negotiations she would be bound to give. Apart from the New South Wales contract is there amongst the other Australian colonies an Indisposition to carry out their arrangements as regards commercial assistance to it? Are they giving commercial support to the proposed eastern extension?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I am not prepared to answer the hon. gentleman except as regards New South Wales. These negotiations were commenced before confederation in Australia and we made an arrangement which was completed with the Australian government and which was made with the Australian government and not with any other. But before confederation had been completed, New South Wales had made an arrangement with the eastern company and that is what we complain of. We have been protesting against that and asking the Australian government who are a party to that to in some way do away with this monopoly which they have given to the eastern company. Our representations up to the present time have been unavailing. New Zealand has supported us and has protested just as vigorously as we have because New Zealand Is equally interested with us, but I am sorry to say that up to the present time the matter is

still where it was and we have received no satisfaction on that point.


George Eulas Foster: I wish the minister would get the information as to the two years' traffic receipts?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I shall.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Does anybody control these despatches from the other side that come by cable; I mean principally political despatches from the different countries in Europe ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: That has nothing to do with the system.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: It may not have with this one, but I would like some information.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: This cable is -carried on upon commercial principles, the government has nothing to do with it. The trust which sits in London which has built and manages it, carries it on on commercial principles. We have no control over the despatches which are sent over. I dare say in time of war we might exercise the power which all governments possess of seizing tlie post office and the telegraph? but in time of peace, which I hope we shall always have, although we are annually increasing our militia, there is no more control over this cable than over the cables on the Atlantic.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Then we are not much interested in this; it is more between Australia and England ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: No, the reason why (Janada went into this cable enterprise is that we want to develop the trade between Australia and Great Britain through Canada. First of all we want Australia to do her telegraphic business by this cable over Canada and we want Australia to send her goods to England over Canada. There is no reason in the world why we should not carry the whole of the passenger traffic of Australia through Canada, and I believe the time is not far distant when this will be done as we improve our communications both on the Atlantic and the Pacific. On the contrary there is every reason in the world to think that every passenger who goes from England to Australia or from Australia to England must pass though America for the reason that he would thus avoid the fatigue, annoyance and misery of a trip through the Indian ocean and the Suez canal. If a passenger leaves Australia to go to England all the time he is on or near land he is in the temperate zone, he avoids all discomforts and I have no doubt that all this will tend to the same object.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: It is costly.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: It has been costly.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: 


George Eulas Foster: I think there was another consideration; Canada was to contribute as the others did in order to have a line which should not pass over foreign territory and so be an all-British line. I shall not borrow any trouble with reference to that cable; I was In favour of it from the first, and I am still; I believe it will work out all right, but my right hon. friend has got to do a little hustling if he expects to see the Australian passengers going across Canada to England in this way. It must take him less than twelve years in the future to get a fast Atlantic service if he expects this.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: That is part of it.


George Eulas Foster: You will get Australian passengers when you can carry them to London faster than they can be carried in any other way and one means of doing that is to have a fast Atlantic service. I would like to ask the right hon. gentleman what particular business carried our Postmaster General to London at the present time. Was it in connection with this ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: Have there been develop^ ments?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Nothing has developed; it is simply that the conditions to which I have alluded are not satisfactory at the present time in Australia. We want if possible to rectify the position which has been created by the contract given by New South Wales to the eastern company, it is partly that and partly to see how far the expenditure can be reduced, to see in what shape the commission is and to look into the matter generally.


George Eulas Foster: Does Australia meet us in London?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Yes, by specially accredited agents.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I do not see how we can curtail the expenditure; we are in a
contract and are bound to carry it out.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: It is our business, we are interested in it and it is part of the business to meet in London and see whether or not the expenses can be curtailed. We want to have the books examined, to see if the expenditure can be curtailed, and if the business of the company can be increased. There is one way in which we know the traffic can be increased; that is if we can get rid of the contract between New South Wales and the eastern company.


George Eulas Foster: Do we vote any money for the improvement in Ottawa each year or is that statutory.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: It is statutory.


George Eulas Foster: Do we get any report of the expenditures?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: Yearly?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Yearly.


George Eulas Foster: We have none for this year; I have been searching for it but have not been able to find it.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I am pretty sure there is a report.


Andrew B. Ingram: That is in the Auditor General's Report.


George Eulas Foster: The expenses are there, but we want more than the expenses, and I would think that when we give away $60,000 a year for fifteen years we ought to get a report each year of how this money is expended.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I am quite satisfied there is a report ; whether it has been brought down or not I do not know. [DOT]


George Eulas Foster: It does not seem quite right that we should vote this as a statutory matter and get no report as to how the money is expended. Was it a condition that the city should supplement our vote?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: No, the City does not supplement it.


George Eulas Foster: But as a matter of fact the city does?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: The city is represented on the board.


George Eulas Foster: But does not supplement the vote?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: No.


George Eulas Foster: Then all the work which has been done by that commission is done on the basis of our 15 years' vote. Another thing that I think we ought to know is whether the commission is mortgaging more than that vote of $60,000 a year for fifteen years. I have heard it mentioned that extensive improvements are projected over and above what has been indicated, and, that in order to meet these, bonds are to be issued based upon the vote that we give. We ought to be very careful to see to it that these securities, issued to get ready money, do not cover more than the fifteen-years' vote that we give. And I think we ought to have, every year, a report from that commission as to the work done. In saying that, I am not raising any objection to the commission's work, so far as I have seen it, or to the vote. I think that the work so far as I have seen it is exceedingly well done. But it would be satisfactory to have a report, so that we might see how our money is expended.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: That is most reasonable. I am sure that there is a report, and if it has not been brought down
I -will give instructions to have it produced. The statute in this matter was passed when my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) was in the House-in 1898 or 1899. At that time we provided for a ten-years' expenditure. We have amended that since, and have provided that the expenditure should be extended for fifteen years. At the same time, we have authorized the commission to issue debentures mortgaging some part of the revenues that they are to receive during these fifteen years, to enable them to purchase land. By the first statute, the commission were restricted to a certain yearly expenditure. But it was urged, and, on reflection, we thought it advisable, that the commissioners should be allowed to make purchase of lands to lay them down for parks. The idea we had in mind at that time was to allow the commission to make a large expenditure on Rockliffe Park. They were authorized to issue debentures, and they have done so. They have purchased about 80 acres of land on the bank of the Ottawa river near Rock-liffe Park and have laid it out for a park. In my opinion they should purchase double that quantity. I think all cities make the mistake of not having sufficient parks. As Ottawa will undoubtedly be a large city, a large park should be secured immediately. I shall be surprised if the report is not down, but, if necessary, I will give instructions to have it brought down.


George Eulas Foster: I suppose the government takes care that securities are not issued beyond the amount voted; otherwise we may find ourselves, one of these days, with a number of fine improvements, but with a call on parliament for an extension of this vote. The vote amounts to $900,000, which is a munificent donation for the purpose. I wish to say, however, that the city ought not to feel, because of this large prospective expenditure, that it should cease its efforts or should fail to co-operate with the government to make the city what all feel that it should be made. The city ought not to rely on this vote for all its park improvements. Public spirited citizens are doing something for the extension of Ottawa's parks, at Britannia and Aylmer there are beautiful outing places which have been provided by corporations. I do not think the city ought to feel that all such great improvements will hereafter be made by the government or by corporations. I think the donation we have given is a large and generous one, and, with proper cooperation of the city and the corporations, it should do everything that is necessary for the beautification of Ottawa. Ottawa lends itself to beautification. The extension in the direction of the rifle range, in my opinion is a most excellent Idea-that is certainly a most beautiful part of the city. When the project is carried out it will make a range of driveway and park the equal of which few cities will be able to show.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I quite share my bon. friend's opinion. The city of Ottawa ought not to rely altogether on the government in these matters. At the same time, the city has a good deal to do in the way of improving such a rapidly growing city-a good deal to do upon the streets, for instance.


George Eulas Foster: Yes, and it is doing it very well.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: The commission, so far, has been making the driveway, which is a great addition to the attractions of the city. It is proposed to extend that driveway down to the Ottawa river at the Chaudifire.


George Eulas Foster: What route will that take ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I cannot say.


George Eulas Foster: Will it come from the Experimental Farm down to the river ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: Is the route all within the city limits ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I do not know. Talking with one of the commissioners some time ago, I learned that their object is to reach the river, take in some of the islands in the river and make a park there.


George Eulas Foster: How shall we get across ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: By bridges. I think they will not be very expensive. Another, aud, in my opinion, more important part of their project is to make a park of that portion near the range. I think it will be one of the finest parks on the continent.


George Eulas Foster: There is one point that is not yet quite clear. Besides what you might call the establishment of the work, there must be maintenance from year to year. I suppose that they have to rely on the $60,000 a year for both construction and maintenance, would they not ? In the issuing of their bonds have they covered the whole of our vote, or have they taken the precaution to allow for the up-keep of the system. Or, who pays for the up-keep-is it the government, the commission, or the city ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I do not know that that question has ever been brought to my attention. I always had it in mind that the city would have to provide for the maintenance and I have not heard any opinion to the contrary. As to the reserving a portion not covered by the debentures issued, I may say that I am informed by the Minister of Justice that these are limited to $250,-
000.


George Eulas Foster: That seems to provide for maintenance.
Public works-chargeable to income-public buildings-New Brunswick, $108,000.


George Eulas Foster: 


George Eulas Foster: Is it proposed to proceed with the votes for public bridges ?


Mr. BRODEUR.: There was one item left over.


George Eulas Foster: I have great faith in the ability of my hon. friend the Minister of Inland Revenue (Mr. Brodeur), but I do not think he is quite big enough to undertake the public works with the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Hyman) so near the denouement


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: But perhaps we could deal with some of these items for public works. We might take, for example, those for the province of Quebec.


George Eulas Foster: I would much rather take some estimates for which we have the ministers here.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: Well, the day after to-morrow we will have the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Hyman) here.


George Eulas Foster: Are all the main estimates passed ?


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: I promised that we would give plenty of time to discussing the Intercolonial Railway and we propose to take that up to-morrow. In the meantime, the House is pretty thin and rather demoralized-[DOT]


George Eulas Foster: The minister has been in that division for some time.


Romuald-Charlemagne Laurier: My hon. friend (Mr. Foster) is very hard to please. He insists that we shall elect a Minister of Public Works, and then he does his best to prevent us electing him. And when we propose to go on with the Public Work estimates he objects because there is no minister here.


George Eulas Foster: That is what an opposition is for.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In connection with public works for New Brunswick, there is an item which was allowed to stand-the drill hall at St. John. The Minister of Militia was to give some information with regard to that, but I do not see the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Daniel) in his place just now. Perhaps we had better postpone consideration of that item until he gets back. In the meantime we will take Quebec.


George Eulas Foster: I think we shall have to do the same with the Quebec items, because there does not seem to be any Quebec man now in his seat.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I told the hon. member for Beauharnois (Mr. Bergeron) that we would take up the main estimates and public works for Quebec, but he is not present.


Andrew B. Ingram: I saw the member for Beauharnois a few moments ago, and he said he could not be in until after six o'clock.


Mr. FITZPATRICK.: Call it six o'clock. At six o'clock, committee took recess.
After Recess.
Committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Harbours and rivers, Quebec-Anse a, Beaufils -extension of pier, $1,500.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This vote of .$1,500 covers the estimated cost of completing the extension of the piers or retaining walls on both sides of the stream. The work was commenced in 1904-5. There was an appropriation in 1904 of $2,000. There has been expended to the 1st January, $1,458.48.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Does my hon. friend remember the first work commenced at Anse ft Beaufils? I am surprised to hear the hon. minister state that this work was only commenced in 1904.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The extension was only commenced in 1904-5, but I understand work has been going on there for some time. I see that the total amount expended has been $9,000. It began in 1887-S.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is it a wharf ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to create a harbour at the entrance of the cove and this is a kind of protection wall. The object is to enable the fishermen to get into the Anse a Beaufils without any difficulty.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is it ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In Gaspe ?


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: On the St. Lawrence ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Does that finish the whole thing ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, that completes it.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Well, we will see next year. I am sure we will see an item for Anse it Beaufils again.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There may be some repairs next year.
Anse aux Gris Fonds-improvements at mouth of river, $3,500.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This vote is of the same character. This $3,500 is for continuing the improvements commenced at the mouth of the river that flows into the Anse aux Gris Fonds.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is that ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Oil the Gaspe coast, on the River St. Lawrence. It is not very far from Anse 3, Beaufils.


Mr. COCHRANE.: Is that river navigable ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, the Anse a Beaufils is not. This is a work constructed at the mouth of the river in order to form a harbour and provide a shelter for the fishermen.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: When was it commenced ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 1904.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the total estimated cost of the work ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is that given by tender ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, there was only $1,500 voted last year and it was done by day's work. Mr. Morin conducted the work.


Edward Cochrane: Why is it that these public undertakings are done by day's work ? There is no excuse for it at all. This was a new undertaking and it should have been let by tender. Was this done about the time you were having an election ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is a kind of work that it is difficult to find contractors to undertake. I am informed that the department asked for some tenders at a place called Grands Mechins and that they' could not get anybody to tender.


Edward Cochrane: It is a very astounding thing that you cannot get contractors to undertake work like that in that section of the country. Is that in the neighbourhood of Seven Islands where work to the extent of $60,000 has been done by day labour ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed by the officials of the department that they called for tenders for work of the same kind but unfortunately they could not get anybody to tender.


Edward Cochrane: If you will vote some money for wharfs in Ontario I will venture the assertion that you will find contractors who are willing to build them.
Anse St. Jean-extension of pier, $1,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is that ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In Chicoutimi and Saguenay, on the Saguenay. This is a vote of $1,000 chiefly for the completion of the work. There was an appropriation last year of $1,200.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: But, that was spent.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How is it that you had an appropriation of $1,200 last year and that it will cost $1,000 more to finish it V


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Because the full amount was not voted last year, and it has been found that this sum Is required to complete the work.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: The estimated cost last year was $1,200 ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, the appropriation was $1,200, but the total estimated cost was $2,200.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Will this 81.000 finish the whole work ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.
Baie des Peres, Lake Temiskaming-reconstruction of wharf at Ville Marie, including dredging approach, $2,500.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Why are we called upon to build wharfs there ? This is not on a river ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: * No, but it is on Lake Temiskaming. As my hon. friend knows there are many places where we have wharfs on Lake Temiskaming. There are many steamboats running on that lake. Baie des Peres is certainly one of the most important places on the lake.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How large is Lake Temiskaming ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Seventy-five miles long by about four miles wide. As my hon. friend sees it covers a very extensive territory.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How could you get a dredge there ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is a dredge belonging to the Public Works Department on the lake.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: She must have been built there.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.
Barachois de Malbaie-breakwater, $4,500.
'Sir. BRODEUR. The total estimated cost is $16,000, and it is intended to call for tenders.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is this ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is Gaspe county, on the St. Lawrence.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is jthere a /vil&agle there ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It must be an incorporated village. The work was asked for many years ago ; there is a petition dated 1881 from the Hon. Mr. Fortin asking for a breakwater at that place. It is the centre of a large fishing trade, where sixty or seventy fishing boats are employed In the summer, and the population must be between 1,500 and 2,000.


Mr. AM MS.: I know the place ; I was there last summer. It is a large shoally bay, with a barachois at the entrance.
Belocil guide piers and booms-to make good damage by ice, $500.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There are piers below the Grand Trunk Railway bridge at Beloeii to facilitate the passage of steamers and barges through the narrow swing bridge, where the current is very swift. This vote it to repair the piers and booms.
Bic harbour-wharf at Poiute a Cote, $5,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Why has nothing been done there ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: (Because there was some difficulty with regard to the purchase of a site. No money has been spent.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is that work very useful ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I understand it is ; Bic is used by the pilots.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Was there not some difficulty about that work ?
Mr. BRODEUR, Not that I know of.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I think I have some correspondence about that, and I may have to ask the hon. gentleman to come back to tbe item again.


Herbert Brown Ames: Do I understand this wharf will be built to Massacre Island ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, from a point eastward.


Herbert Brown Ames: Will you interfere with the present high-tide approach to the existing wharf ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No.
Canton Fabre, Lake Temiskaming-wharf,$2,-
000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is that ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The item is prepared according to the estimate of the chief engineer for the construction of a wharf on lot 31, township of Fabre.


Herbert Brown Ames: Will this he reached by the new railroad ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No ; this is on the east side, in the province of Quebec.
iMr. AMES. I understand the Canadian Pacific Railway contemplates building a branch on the east side.
air. BRODEUR. I am informed that it is forty-five miles away from the railroad. It is in the county of Pontiac.
air. AMES. Would any considerable population be served by that wharf ? It is a long and narrow lake, and the steamers stop practically anywhere and put passengers off on either side of the lake in the ship's jolly-boat. Unless there is some population, there is no use in building this wharf.


Mr. McCOOL.: When air. Tarte was Minister of Public Works he visited Lake Teinis-camingue, and a large deputation waited on him to represent the need for a wharf at that point, and he promised that it would be built. The shores are very bluff, and in a high wind it is nearly impossible to land with the jolly-boat from the steamer. The only means of access they have in summer is by steamer.


Herbert Brown Ames: 'What is the population ?


Charles Arthur McCool: There must be at least 200 families within reasonable reach of the wharf.


Mr. URIAH WILSON.: What do you mean by reasonable reach ?


Charles Arthur McCool: Within a radius of four or five miles.


Herbert Brown Ames: Is It a farming poipulation ?


Charles Arthur McCool: Yes.


Herbert Brown Ames: I suppose the freight will be (mostly bulky material, such as hay, which could not be taken in the jolly-boat.


Charles Arthur McCool: Yes ; and getting in lumbermen's supplies.


Andrew B. Ingram: When did Mr. Tarte promise to build this -wharf ?
(Mr. McCOOL. It is not in my county ; it is in the county of Pontiac ; but I happened to be present when the deputation waited on Mr. Tarte. It was two or three years ago.


Andrew B. Ingram: The hon. gentleman's memory is not very good when he cannot tell within a year.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: In works like these at Bie harbour and Canton Fa'ure, it would look as if they were promised on the eve of the election last year ; and now that the election is over, I do not suppose there will be much need for them.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I do not think that is correct. There was a petition some years ago asking for the wharf, and a vote was put in the estimates last year, but there is a difference of opinion amongst the settlers as to whether it should be at Lavallge bay or Quinn point, and no decision has yet been reached.
Chambord wharf, $2,500.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to complete payment on the contract. The conttract was for $9,250. It was given to the lowest tender, Mr. Arthur Tremblay, of Roberval.


Herbert Brown Ames: Why do you want $10,500 ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: $1,250 are for superintendence and contingencies.


Herbert Brown Ames: We think an architect's charge of five per cent quite ample for the construction of a house. Why should the charge for building a wharf be greater ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There are other things and ten per cent is the amount always allowed.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is it not an employee of the government who is in charge ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, Mr. Tachfi, and then there is a Icoal inspector, Mr. A. Le-may, who gets $2.50 a day and'the expenses of these gentlemen have to be paid also going from place to place.


Herbert Brown Ames: Why not include the contingencies in the first amount and make one item ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We have always thought it better to give the contractor's price in one item and the supplementary expenses in the other.
Champlain, Quebec-wharf repairs and additional, $2,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to complete the wharf at that place. The work is done by day labour. The estimated cost was $8,200. We spent only $6,200 and require $2,000 to spend during the next fiscal year. This is no increase but simply a revote. This work is done by day labour because it is the repairs to an old wharf and is better done In that way than by contract. It was almost impossible to specify what work has to be done. It will be finished by about September.
Chateau Richer-harbour improvements, $6,-
000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is the balance required for improvements made by day labour, namely, the removal of rocks on the bar and the construction of a breakwater, the appropriation was $9,000. Chateau Richer is in Montmorency county.


Mr. MORIN.: What kind of boats go there ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Vessels carrying firewood, iron and other material and bringing [DOT]return cargoes of supplies of all kinds. The total number of schooners and bateaux at that place last year was 35 with the total carrying capacity of 3,500 tons.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Will you make the wharf longer than it is now ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: How does it come that although a wharf was built there years and years ago and the people have always used that wharf, you have this year to spend so much money at that place? 1 suppose there was no election there?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Trade I understand has been increasing and they require some more accommodation. The cargoes carried by these vessels last year were valued at $50,-
000.	My friend will see it is not a useless expenditure.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is that on the Island
of Orleans?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, it is on the mainland.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The importance of this place has increased lately because of the valuable stone quarries there. Stone is taken from there for the harbour improvements at Quebec.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Could not the people who have a quarry there build a wharf for themselves ? It is easy for them to come to the government and ask them to build a wharf because they want to carry stone from that place. You might just as well give the monev to a farmer. If a farmer goes to the west and has to buy a horse or two, a wagon and harness, you might as well rig him out with these things as to rig these fellows out with a wharf. Is that the case or not?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This work was constructed many years ago. It was commenced in 1SS4-5.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: And before that too.
Mr. BROOK UR, The note I have here gives that date and it is simply carrying out the same policy as was adopted by the former government. I do not think it would be good policy to let these works fall into decay; I do not suppose my hon. friend would recommend that.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: I do not see how that would happen. I have shipped from that wharf, and it must be remembered that the tide has to rise about eight feet before the water reaches the wharf ; you cannot load or unload unless the tide is away up and when the tide is down the water is half a mile from the wharf. It is not a great place for business there and I do not see why a wharf is so much required.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: If my hou. friend has been shipping there himself, he must understand that it is a useful work, and he must admit too that there are in that section of the country wharfs which have been built which cost a great deal more than this work, and I do not think there should be any objection to such a sanall amount as has been spent there in comparison with the amounts spent in some other places. My friend knows that other places have beeii asking for wharfs reaching to low tide and we have been spending large sums of money. There is no comparison between the amounts spent in those places and the small amount sjient in this place. There is a great deal of trade there, the extensive quarries are being exploited and I think it is a very useful expenditure which has been petitioned for by the inhabitants of the place.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I would like to have the name of the foreman, the amount that was paid, the rate of wages that was paid to him and to the men, the number of men employed, and where the material was got.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The foreman was Ed. Vezina, 1 shall get the other information.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: When was the work commenced?


Charles Fitzpatrick: 


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Last year, in July or August.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: It was done during the election time, as a matter of fact.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I suppose so ; the appropriation was voted last year and would become available some time in July or August and the work would then be commenced. If the elections happened to take place in that time of course the work must have been going on.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I am not making any insinuations at all; I am only mentioning the fact that the work was done during the election.


Edward Cochrane: I recollect distinctly that on a job of this kind there was a foreman attending to the construction of the work, a gentleman employed in buying the timber, and another gentleman who got so much per cent of the money invested in purchasing the material. The minister would not say I am sure that in a job like this it would be hard to get the material by contract. It becomes serious when you have a lot of officials and hangers-on about election time) when you have a job of this kind going on month after month and year after, year with a lot of men employed at big wages.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed this is going to complete the work.


Edward Cochrane: I never complain about where money is spent as long as it is properly spent, but I do not think that any minister or any official of the minister can get the work doue as well as it can be done by contract. And it is of no use to teli me or to tell this committee that it is impossible, either in Quebec or any other place in Canada, to get the material by contract. Here is a work, that, as I understand it, is on dry land when the tide is out, but is reached bv the sea when the tide is high. Are the men able to work when the tide is in? If not, are they paid just the same?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The wharf is not submerged at high tide, but at high tide the water reaches the wharf. In many places wharfs are built so that vessels reach them at low water, but this one is built so that it is reached only at high water, and it is so built for the sake of economy. It is one of the least expensive works in that section and for that reason.


Mr. HENDERSON.: I understand that this wharf is being completed by day labour. How does the minister get over the Act of parliament that declares that all works over $5,000 shall be done by contract? Under what authority does the minister presume to do this by day's work. Of course, I do not hold the Minister of Inland Revenue (Mr. Brodeur) responsible for this, as I suppose that it was not under his
direction that the construction was undertaken. But lie is here to defend the action of the Minister of Public Works. This is another of the many cases in which ministers come down and tell us that they are constructing public works by day labour though the Act explicitly says that such works shall be done by contract. What explanation has the minister to give for the conduct of the department on this occasion ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Perhaps I did not make myself very clear in my opening remarks. There are two kinds -of work to be paid for under this vote. One is the removal of rocks. My hon. friend knows that such work cannot be very well done by contract, because it is not easy to ascertain how much work will be required. I understand that it is impossible to find contractors who will undertake such work for a fixed amount. Then there is the work on the breakwater pier. This is not all construction, but includes also repairs, and this kind of work it. is almost impossible to have done by day's labour. And this is not a violation of tiie law. The Public Works Act provides that works over $5,000 shall be done under contract. But the same law provides that if the work can be more effectively done by day labour, it shall be done in that way. This is an instance.


David Henderson: The minister may be right. 1 have not the statute before me. But I shall be very much surprised if there is a provision in the Act such as he has suggested-that it is left by the minister to have the work done by day's labour if he thinks it is desirable to do so. I certainly have not so understood the law. I have always understood that where the expenditure is over $5,000, the work must be done under contract. X have before me the proposed amendment to the law which provides that the minister shall invite tenders for public-works, unless there is an emergency in which delay would be injurious to the public interest, or the work can be more efficiently and expeditiously done by the officers of the department, or in case the estimated cost is less than $5,000, or where it appears to the minister that it is not advisable to invite tenders. It may be to this proposed amendment that the minister refers.


Charles Fitzpatrick: No, that makes the law more stringent than it is.


David Henderson: I would like to know how the Minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick) interprets this law? If I am mistaken in what I have always supposed to be file law, til'sn it would appear that parliament has practically no protection. From what the minister (Mr. Brodeur) tells us, if the work involved an expenditure of $100,000, the minister would be as much within the law in doing it by day's work if the amount involved was less than $5,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: That is done in some cases


David Henderson: We regret to see that it is so in many cases. I hope the Minister of Justice will have the law amended to make it more stringent; because the only protection we have is that thers should be competition in works of this kind,


Andrew B. Ingram: Under this amendment, it would not even be necessary for the minister to go to the Governor in Council for their approval. That simply means that the whole thing is a farce.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There are cases in which it is impossible to have work done by contract. There are parts of the country where the contractors will not tender for such work as this, as they cannot estimate the cost. And there are cases where works constructed by day labour have been found cheaper than they could possibly have been had they been done under contract. There is no intention on the part of the department to evade the law. But, where the work cannot be advantageously done by contract, it is done by day labour. The hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) asked me to quote the law. It is found in the Revised Statutes of 18S6, section 13 :
The minister shall invite tenders, by public advertisement, for the execution of all works except in cases of pressing emergency in which delay would be injurious to the public interest, or in which, from the nature of the work, it can be more expeditiously and economically executed by the officers and servants of the department.


David Henderson: Is there any evidence that it can be more expeditiously done by officers of tbe department than by contract .


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: That is a question for the department to decide. This is not a question of construction, it is a question of repairs ; and the hon. member knows that it is almost impossible to make specifications in regard to repairs. You must have some construction first before you can make any repairs to it.


Andrew B. Ingram: We are not arguing that all work must be done by contract; in many cases of repairs it would be impossible to liave them done by contract. But this is a new work attached to au old work *, in other words, this is an extension of a pier, it is an entirely new piece of work, and therefore it should be done by contract.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is the removal of rocks. I am informed by the officer of the department that it is found much more economical to have that work done by day labour than by contract. It would he impossible, almost, to get anybody to tender.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Are you removing rocks from a bill ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: From the bar opposite the village. Vessels were iiable to strike the rock, and it was thought advisable to remove that rock in order to give better transportation facilities.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: From the wharf out to the channel is about three-quarters of a mile, and you have rocks and boulders all the way across from the wharf to the channel ; and then there is a bar above the wharf that extends for miles with nothing but rocks and boulders.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Then my hon. friend sees the need of removing these rocks for the protection of the road.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is that the only thing you have to do, to remove the rocks and boulders ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: And repair the break-tv a ter pier.


Mr.   B LAIN@: Is this harbour owned by the government, or is it private property ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The work done so far has been done by the government. This work was begun in 1884.


Mr.   B LAIN@: Is the property vested in the Crown ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.
Mi-. BLAIN. When was it purchased, and how much was paid ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I have not got the information here. The work was begun in 1884, perhaps the records have been destroyed by the fire. All harbours are vested in the Crown.


Mr.   B LAIN@: This matter was up several times before, and I notice that a considerable amount has been appropriated each year to purchase these properties from private individuals. When this very item was up for discussion last year my hon. friend from Halton asked the question :
Is this vested in the Crown, or is it private property ?


Mr. HYMAN.: Probably it will he vested in the Crown. The actual deed has not passed but an agreement has been made for the purchase from a private individual.
It is fair now that the minister should tell us what amount was paid for this property, and the name of the persons who owned the property.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed by the officers of the department that an approach has been purchased. That is the reason why that statement was made last year.


Mr.   B LAIN@: I would ask if the agreement referred to last year by the minister has been carried out, has the property been pui chased, and is it now vested in the Crown ?


Jean-Baptiste Morin: 


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 
Jean-Baptiste Morin: Will the government receive any revenue from that wharf ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Y'es, the law provides for certain charges to be made at these wharfs.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: I like to see a government clever, but there is such a thing as being too clever. Now the government has given subsidies to build a railway from Quebec, and they are giving more money to build wharfs and remove rocks. I may tell the minister that the railway goes right over the wharf twenty feet from the water. There should be an end to these things. I am willing to help people who need to be helped but those people have a railway there and that railway goes right past the quarry. Thev had even to dig down to the wharf to build this railway because there was a heavy grade there. The railway almost touches the wharf. When these people have a railway for their accommodation what is the use of going to the expense of building a wharf ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Is that a steam railway ?


Jean-Baptiste Morin: It used to be a steam railway. Now they are operating the same road by steam and electricity. They run electric cars every ten minutes in the day in the summer time and in the winter time they run steam cars about every hour in the day.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: My hon. friend knows the locality very well and he knows that most of the traffic that is carried on there is carried on by means of schooners. It is quite true there is an electric railway built nearby, but most of the traffic is carried on by schooners. Most of the traffic is between Quebec and the south shore of the St. Lawrence. My hon. friend knows that there is no bridge connecting there. My hon. friend who lives oil the south shore has told us that he has been shipping from his place to that point.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: I said that I shipped to and from there, but not from my own place.
I shipped from the north shore.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: My hon. friend knows that there is some traffic on the south shore.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Yes.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: And that it is necessary to have a wharf ?


Jean-Baptiste Morin: That is perfectly right, but I am opposed to giving too much to the same people. Somebody else needs a railway or a wharf or a bridge or the help of the government. I always have objected and 1 will object as long as I am a member of

this House to favouring oue man and crushing another. This money belongs to one man as much as it does to another, and everybody, as far as it is in the power of the government, should be protected. If the government have 8100.000 to give let them give it but not give it all to one man. Let everybody have his share. That is nothing more than right.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Equal rights.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Yes, Sir. We had the promise from the right hon. leader of the government in 1S95 that when he got into power his government would be a government of reform and a government of example. I am looking for the example, but I have not seen it yet, and I hope the" government will never display it.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: That is not a fair hope.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Well, it is politics. It is all very well to make promises and then never fulfil them.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What was the object of purchasing that piece of land my hon. friend spoke of buying a little while ago ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: It was to get access from the high road. My hou. friend knows the conditions that exist at Chateau Richer. This is a place below Montmorency Falls. The adjoining parish is I/Ange Gar-dien, the next is Chateau Richer and the next is Ste. Anne de Beauprf*. They have a stone quarry on the north side in the main road and in order to get down to this harbour which has been a harbour within my recollection for the last fifty years, they have to cross from the main road through the property of this man Guiguere to get to the wharf.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How did they get to the wharf before that?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I suppose they trespassed upon this property. The wharf has been extended as a result of these improvements and the improvements in the trade of the place. This particular place is the centre of two great industries. It is a great place for quarries and in addition they export an immense quantity of fire-wood. I suppose that two-thirds of the fire wood, that goes to Quebec comes from Chateau Richer. All that fire wood comes in bateaux from that place. My hon. friends know that the tide rises and falls there for It to IS feet and in order to get that wood out of there it is necessary for the bateaux to go into the wharf.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: When was that land bought ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Within the last four or five months. The deputy minister does not remember at this moment the exact date.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: That would be in December or January ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Can you not tell when the property was bought ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The deputy minister will find that out for the hon. gentleman.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: It seems extraordinary that you cannot tell when the property was bought. There must be a deed. You must find out when that property was bought. If this has been an important harbour for fifty years and it was found necessary five mouths ago to buy some property it does seem extraordinary, and we are entitled to get that information. I would ask my hon. friend to take a note of it and give us all the information.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.
Desjardins-Allumette Island-River Ottawa- wharf, $1,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to complete. It is under contract.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is that ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: On the Ottawa river not very far from Pembroke.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Which county ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Pontiac.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: If I am not making a mistake this is a revote ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: The amount of money to be spent on that wharf will be $11,000; $10,000 could only be spent to the first of July and the rest is a revote. That is proof of economy.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, we are trying to do what my hon. friend from Dorchester (Mr. Morin) says.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: The hon. member from Dorchester is right.
Mr. dRODEUR. I will not go as far as that.
Doucet's Landing-dredging, $15,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This vote covers the estimated cost of forming a basin 800 feet long, 450 feet wide and 13 feet deep at low water on the east side of the railway wharf at Doucet's Landing of the Arthabaska and Three Rivers branch of the Grand Trunk Railway, where steamboats calling at this landing can remain safely at anchor during stormy weather.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: We voted some money for this the other day.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It was to pay for work done during the current year. This is for next year. Tenders have been called for this work.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What will be the cost of the whole work ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: $15,000 will complete it.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How much was spent before ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The total expenditure for many years back has been $39,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What was spent last year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: We voted $8,000 the other day in the supplementary estimates.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: That was to pay for work done during the current fiscal year.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Do you mean to say you spent $20,000 in one year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, for dredging.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: And $15,000 more; that will be $35,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: $35,000. The work is being done by contract.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Who is doing that ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The work has been awarded to Mr. Randolph McDonald.


Herbert Brown Ames: Were there any other tenders ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes ; and he was the lowest tenderer.


Herbert Brown Ames: Did Mr. Randolph Macdonald have the same advantages that were given to the contractor in the Port Arthur case 1


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes ; public tenders were called for, and he was the lowest tenderer and got the work.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: At what price ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Nine cents .per cubic yard.	_


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the material to be dredged ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Gravel and boulders.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: We were told by the Solicitor Genei-al the other night that the dredging was to remove sand, and I pointed out that it would be futile to go on dredging sand year after year unless you put in some protection work to prevent the sand from chifting back.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It would cost more to do that.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: It might cost more at first, but it would be cheaper in the end. How much money has been spent at this place ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The total amount expended was $39,334.62 to the 31st December, 1904.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Mx-. BERGERON. And in addition to that we have the $8,000 and the $15,000 now, which makes over $62,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Will this complete the work ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: And when you have the work done, what kind of boats can use the wharf ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Boats having a less draught than 13 feet.


Herbert Brown Ames: Why did the government discontinue dredging by the hour and substitute by the cubic yard ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Because of a discussion iu the House it was thought better to call for public Tenders and have the work done in this way.


Herbert Brown Ames: How many tenders were there ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Three ; one at 9 cents, one at 15 cents and one at 22 cents.


Herbert Brown Ames: Did the government pay for the towing of the dredge from Cornwall to Doucet's landing ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No ; Mr. Macdonald had extensive works on the north shore, and the reason his tender is so low is that he will take the material from the south shore and use it for filling on the north shore.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is this wharf to be used by a railway company ?
Mr. iBRODEUR. The wharf there (is owned by the Grand Trunk.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Does the Grand Trunk Railway contribute anything ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No ; this vote is for dredging, and is not for the wharf.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Some years ago Mr. Tarte told the House that the dredging in the St. Lawrence could be done for three cents per cubic yard, and now you are paying Mr. Macdonald nine cents.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Mr. Tarte was referring to a very powerful new dredge called the ' J. I. Tarte,' which works iu clay, but this work is in gravel and boulders, and besides we could not expect that a contractor should have such au extraordinary dredge as the one owned toy the government.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: I uiudeustand you very plainly now.
East Templeton wharf, $6,500.


Mr. PERLEY.: How much is this wharf going to cost altogether 1


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: $6,500. This is a revote; nothing has been done.


George Halsey Perley: Is this wharf used very much toy the public, and will there be any revenue from it ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is a wharf there uow belonging to the Ottawa Navigation C-ompany, and it is intended to get that wharf for the use of the public.


George Halsey Perley: Does the government propose to buy this wharf from the Navigation Company ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It was the intention, in order to make it a public wharf.


George Halsey Perley: Well


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I made a mistake ; I am told that the wharf is to be transferred from the Navigation Company to the government, and the government will make the necessary repairs and have the wharf for public use.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: If it is in the same condition now as it was when I last saw it, it is in a very bad state of repair.


George Halsey Perley: The result of this would be that the Ottawa Navigation Company would get a new wharf built by the government without any expense to themselves. This wharf has been in existence for a great many years, and it appears to have been satisfactory to the people for what small use they made of it. A certain amount of business has always been done by the public at that wharf.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The company wants to have the prior use of the wharf, but the department will not accept it on that condi-Uon, and negotiations are pending. Perhaps there will be no final result.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: In what county is it ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In the county of Wright, a few miles from here.


George Halsey Perley: It seems to be the policy of the government to build many more wharfs than they formerly did. East Templeton wharf did well enough in the old days. Before undertaking to build new wharfs, does the department have any report to show what use will be made of them by the public and the expected revenue in each case ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, a report is made by the officers of the department in each case before any money is voted.


George Halsey Perley: On March 6th last, I asked the acting Minister of Public Works (Mr. Hyman) a question with regard to two wharfs on the Ottawa, from neither of which was the revenue sufficient to warrant the expenditure of public money. One was at Greece's point, comity of Argenteuil, on which was spent $5,452.19. Last year the gross revenue was $60.93. Then there is the wharf at Hull, across the river, built by the government at a cost of $54,000, which
last year was used by only some ten boats, and for the use of which no wharfage is charged. I have passed this wharf a great many times and have never seen it used until a couple of days ago when I saw a small row boat landing at it. While the building of wharfs is very necessary when required for the public convenience, iu many cases they are built where they are not needed by the public at all. With regard to the wharf at East Templeton, has the hon. minister any report to show that it will be used by any company other than the Ottawa River Company, which is quite well able to take care of its own wharfs.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed by the chief engineer that a report was made in the usual way before the appropriation was asked for last year. With regard to the two wharfs to which the hon. gentleman refers, they are not under the control of the Public Works Department.


George Halsey Perley: On the 6th March, 1 asked a question about the wharf at Greece's point, and it was answered by the acting Minister of Public Works.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The chief engineer says that this wharf is under the control of the Department of Railways and Canals. The one at Hull was built by the Public Works Department. The other one is in connection with the canal.


George Halsey Perley: How much revenue does the hon. gentleman expect from this wharf, according to the report, and what use will be made of it by the public outside the Ottawa Navigation Company ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The department has no information on that point because the revenue is collected by the Department of Marine and Fisheries ; hut I am sure, from the information we have, that the revenue will be sufficient to meet the interest on the expenditure.


George Halsey Perley: Then it will be very different from these other two wharfs on the Ottawa. The oue that cost some $5,000 gives $60 revenue, and the one that cost $54,000. gives uo revenue.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Have the company and the government come to any agreement?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Nothing has been decided between the company and the government, the transfer has not been made yet by the Ottawa Navigation Company, and negotiations are going on between the department and the company. The company wants the prior use of that wharf so that they would he entitled to order any boat away which might be there when they wanted to use it, but the department did not consent.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Will this money be spent if no satisfactory arrangement is come to?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No, we will not spend anything before the transfer is made to the department.


Herbert Brown Ames: The wharf should certainly not be built if any preference is to be given the company.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: That is'why no money has been spent so far in connection with that wharf.


George Halsey Perley: How have the public managed at East Templeton up to date?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: They were using Mac-laren's wharf.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: So that this wharf has not been used at all?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, by the Ottawa Navigation Company.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is it fit to be used?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Well, it is being used by the company.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Does the government allow7 steamboats to use a -wharf which is dangerous to the public?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We have no control over that. The company takes all the risk itself, and will be responsible for any accident.
Mr. BDA1N. Would the minister lay on the table the report under which he proposes to purchase the wharf?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Certainly.
Escoumain wharf, $8,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to provide for building a public pier, which is under contract. The cost altogether will be $11,478, and the usual amount for superintendence and contingencies, $1,522.	$10,000 were
voted and $5,000 of that is a revote, so we will be spending only $5,000 and $8,00u or $13,000.
Gatineau Point-repairs to wharf and to retaining wall above it, $1,100.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This expenditure is to be made on a retaining wall for shore protection built some fifty years ago. It is being done by day labour.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Do any steamboats stop at the wharf at this place ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is for repairs to the retaining wall.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Are we bound to keep) it in repair ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, because it is built by ourselves.
Grands Mechins breakwater, $20,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is a work for wTiic-h tenders have been called but nobody has tendered. It is for the construction of Mr. BERGERON.
a breakwater here, extending 603 feet from the eastern side of the harbour of Grand Mechins to afford better protection. This is in Rimouski county, fifty-four miles from Little Metis and eighty miles from Rimouski.


Mr. TAYLOR.: $5,000 has already been spent.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: $5,000 was spent during tlie wTinter for timber. We called for tenders and nobody would make any tender, but we had to buy the lumber aud it has been delivered during the last winter.


George Taylor: Are you calling for tenders again ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We will call for tenders again.


Herbert Brown Ames: By whom will the harbour that will be formed by this work he used, by the local fishermen and traders or will this accommodate the larger vessels that pass down the northern Gaspfi coast such as the ' Oampaua ' and the ' King Edward ' ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It will be for the fishermen and for the general trade. This will provide a depth of 171 feet and will be sufficient, the chief engineer informs me, to accommodate vessels such as the 'Campana.'


Herbert Brown Ames: If it is purely a local expenditure for the protection of the fishermen it is a large amount, but if it makes a harbour sufficient for the * Campana ' it is a national expenditure and a considerable sum might be permitted.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The object is to afford shelter to the fishermen and also landing and shipping accommodation. The only railway connection these peop>le have is the Intercolonial Railway which passes Little Metis fifty-four miles from there, so those people have no accommodation at all.


Herbert Brown Ames: As the minister well knows that coast is not served by railway, but by steamers passing up and down and also by the local trading schooners. There are times frequently, when there is a southeasterly wind, when it is impossible for vessels, even of the size of the 1 Campana,' to take on freight from the shore, especially when barrels of cod oil, one of the large exports from that district, are being taken on board. If this affords a protected roadstead in which large vessels of the size of the ' Campana ' can enter and load in comparatively still water then it is a worthy expenditure, but if it will not assist in any way the trade of the coast and is only to be used to protect the fishermen or a few vessels loading timber, it is a large expenditure.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The object is to afford protection to vessels like the ' Campana.'


Herbert Brown Ames: Then it would be better for the government if necessary to make an expenditure of $5,000 more in order to make an inclosed harbour 17i feet deep.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: As a matter of fact tile estimated cost is $30,000. We are simply asking $20,000 but shall have to ask a further sum. This is the amount supposed to be spent during the coming year.


Herbert Brown Ames: There is no harbour from Rimouski to GaspC where vessels the size of the ' Campana ' can enter.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is not. And there have been some cases where there has been great danger in storms to steamers passing up and down. If a harbour can be obtained for $25,000 or $30,000 the expenditure is legitimate if it will afford a port with sufficient depth of water to enable vessels to load and unload in safety.


Herbert Brown Ames: How long a roadstead will you have with a depth of 174 feet ? That depth will be all right provided you have it for a length of 500 or 600 feet along the pier, but if you have it only on the face of the breakwater that will not help you very much.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed that the depth will be from 12 feet to 174 feet for a length of about 500 feet along the pier.
Grosse Isle quarantine station-extension of landing pier to deep water, $10,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is an amount asked for by the Department of Agriculture in connection with the quarantine. It is to make provision for the extension of the west or landing pier of Grosse Isle to secure a depth of 30 feet at low water, spring tide, along the face. This will allow the largest ships entering the St. Lawrence to reach the wharf at any stage of the tide.


George Taylor: This is a revote ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, nothing has been spent.
Quebec-harbours, rivers and bridges-general repairs and improvements, $25,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to cover the cost of repairs to piers, bridges, &c., where they become necessary- as well as to provide for the travelling expenses of resident engineers in the province of Quebec during the year. The amount spent last y-ear under this head was $19,477.77.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I do not know whether the Department of Public Works have received a request from the parish of St. Timotliee. in the county of Beauharnois. There is a wharf there built by the government many years ago and the keeping of which in repair is also the business of the government. But it has been allowed to fall into very had condition. I understood that a promise had been made that it would be repaired. The authorities there were to have communicated with the department, but I do not know whether that has been done or not. But I would ask If the repairs of this
wharf could not be carried out under this vote. They would not cost very much.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: How much ?


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I suppose $1,000 would put the work in very good shape. At present it is in a dangerous condition.
Mr. BRODEUR, The officers of the department advise me that they have not received any information on the matter. But they will take note of the case and the department will look into it.
Lake St. John-dredging, $4,000.


Herbert Brown Ames: Where is the dredging being done ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: At the mouth of the river at Roberval and other places on Lake St. John.


Herbert Brown Ames: Can the hon. minister say at what other places ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: At the mouth of the three different rivers, the Metabetchouan, the Peribonka and the Mistassini.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Does the dredge belong to the government ?	*


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, and this is to pay the running expenses of the dredge.


Herbert Brown Ames: If I remember well, the dredging is .to remove the sandbars at the mouths of these rivers. Is the government able to hold the work that it has done ? Having dredged a channel, what steps do the government take to make the work permanent ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed that the channels are held with difficulty. In the supplementary estimates there will be an item for the construction of retaining piers.


Herbert Brown Ames: The government will have to do that, for it is mere waste of money to dredge without building retaining piers, particularly at the Grand Discharge.
Laprairie-ice piers and protection walls- works of reconstruction and repairs, $5,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to complete the work under contract.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Who has this contract?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Messrs. Amyot and Le-may of Montreal.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What was the amount of the vote ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Their contract was for $29,650.
Lavaltrie-pile wharf and dredging, $5,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What depth of water will be had there ?
Mr. BRODEUR, This is for the boats of the Richelieu and Ontario Navigation Com-I pany running between Montreal and Charn-



bly. The depth will be from ten to twelve feet.
Le Tableau, Descente des Femmes-wharf on River Saguenay, $6,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This covers works to be executed at Descente des Femmes, the completion of a wharf on the north shore of the Saguenay river. The wharf has to be sheeted with four-inch plank and a portion of the floor is to be completed.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: There are several
wharfs on the Saguenay. In which parish is this ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is on the north side and about fifty miles below Ha, Ha, bay.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is it a new wharf ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is there a parish
there ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is a village there -a new settlement and a progressive one. They have no' other means of communication than by this wharf.


Herbert Brown Ames: Is that to be done by day's work ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Herbert Brown Ames: What wages do you pay labourers in the Saguenay district ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: $2.50 for foremen, and $1.25 to $1.40 to others.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: When was the $1,000 spent ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The work was begun last year. There is a mistake in this item. Instead of being $0,000 it should be $000. It is an error in the printing.
Little Pabos-harbour improvements, $4,000.
Mr. BRODEUR, This is to make further provision for extending 100 feet in a westerly direction the breakwater built in 1889, in order to afford shelter to the fishing boats that frequent the locality. It is at the mouth of the river.


Herbert Brown Ames: That river is subject to great floods in the spring, and a breakwater built there would need to be carefully made.
L'lle d'Alma-removal point of rock, $1,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to remove by blasting some rocks which obstruct navigation. It is in the county of Chicoutimi, on the river of that name.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: It is very strange that the government should spend money at that place. There is a ridge of rocks in the river, and the government proposes to blast the rocks so as to make the river wider. If the government is going to make canals of all the rivers, streams, creeks and brooks in Mr. BRODEUR.
the country, they have a big job before them.
Lower St. Lawrence-removal of rocks, &e., $3,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is the ordinary vote taken every year. It is proposed to spend this money in the counties of GaspS and Bonaventure.
Magdalen Islands-breakwaters and piers,


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to make provision. in accordance with the estimate, for carrying on, during the coming fiscal year, projected works in connection with breakwaters, piers and wharfs in the Magdalen Islands, with a view to affording better shelter and harbour facilities, not only to a large number of fishing vessels, but also to steam sailing vessels and row-boats, and the coasting trade and fishing industry of the lower St. Lawrence.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: You spent $20,000 last year and $20,000 is asked for this year. Does that cover all the work to be done ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes. The chief part of this work is to be done on the islands of Pointe fi Elie, Grindstone, Bassin and Albright. These wharfs are being extended and deepened.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: The other day I understood from the Solicitor General that on account of the sandbar between the island of Amherst there is only one place where vessels of a certain dimension can go. There is enough water on both sides of the island for large steamers.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed that they slop at Pointe il Elie, Grindstone and Bassin.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: They generally get a tender to go ashore.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: That was when there were no wharfs.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the object of this 1 Is it for large navigation or particularly for the fishermen ?
(Mr. BRODEUR. It is for large navigation. It is in order to connect these islands with the outside world.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Do large boats ply between the Magdalen Islands and other ports ? .


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is a regular ferry from Pictou to these islands. Besides there Is provision for sailing boats and large fishing boats.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How many boats are there plying between the islands and Pictou ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is only one ferry.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is that every day ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Every week; perhaps twice a week. I am not sure.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is there just one vessel ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is a direct line between Pictou and the Magdalen Islands.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What other vessels are there ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There are schooners, sailing vessels and large fishing boats. These people are living especially by the fishing industry.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I know that a number have complained that they have not communication with the outside world.


Mr.   B LAIN@: There has already been $40,000 expended upon these Magdalen Islands improvements, and we are now asked for $20,000 more. This makes $60,000. May I ask the hon. minister if this will complete the work, or will next year find a similar amount of $20,000 in the estimates ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I cannot say that there will be no money expended at any place in the future, but I ma,y say to my hon. friend that this money covers the improvements at the three places I have just mentioned- Pointe h Elie, Grindstone and Bassin. I cannot say that no more improvements will be undertaken elsewhere.


Mr.   B LAIN@: It is pretty hard to judge whether these amounts should be voted or whether we should ask for a general explanation.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I have been informed by the officials of the department that the breakwater at Grand Entry lias been destroyed, and it will require some work there.


Mr.   B LAIN@: I asked this question for the reason that I notice that the same explanation is given about this work each year. Last year, when a vote of $20,000 was asked, the minister said that he thought this would complete the work.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: At these places ?


Mr.   B LAIN@: Then he qualified it by saying that a very small amount might be required for further improvements. This year the hon. minister comes along and asks for $20,000, giving about the same explanation, and saying that possibly further amounts may be required in years to come.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In some other parts of the islands. There are several islands.


Mr.   B LAIN@: I understand that. It is quite a safe ground, but it is rather severe upon the treasury to say that $20,000 each year shall be voted for an expenditure at this one point.
Mille Vaches-landing pier, $5,000.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Who recommended this work to be done at Mille Yaches ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It has been recommended on the report of the officers of the department. Mr. Taeh& recommended it.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Which countv is this in ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Chicoutimi and Saguenay.
Mistook (Delisle)-wharf, $4,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is that ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Chicoutimi and Saguenay.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Why is it called Mistook ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is in the township of Delisle, and it is called Mistook.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is that on Lake St. John 1


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How many government wharfs have we on Lake St.'John ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Six or seven.
Mont Louis-wharf and approach, $6,500.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is this ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In Gaspe. It is to complete the block of cribwork.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How much will it cost ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 



Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: We have already voted $9,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The total expenditure from the 31st December last is $8,000.


Herbert Brown Ames: What depth of water will this give ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 14 feet.


Herbert Brown Ames: That will let the trading steamers in ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: My hon. friend says we have expended $8,000 ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: And he is asking for $0,500 more. That will be over $14,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Which county is that in ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: GaspS ; it is on the north shore, and we cannot construct anything at a less cost than that.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is it a wharf or a breakwater ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to complete a block of cribwork 185 feet by 20 feet, reaching to a 14-foot depth at low water. This is being built in Mont St. Louis bay, at the mouth of the river of the same name ; and we also propose to construct an approach to the wharf 365 feet long and 20 feet wide on top.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Do steamers go there ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: No ; the steamers are not going there now, because there is no accommodation.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Will the ' Campaua ' be able to stop at that wharf ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.
Montmagny-wharf on the 1 Bassin,' $6,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is that ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: In the county of Montmagny.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I see you have a vote for $6,000. You could not spend all that next year 1


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We would not spend any money during the elections.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Will that cover the whole work ?


Jean-Baptiste Morin: Here is a supplementary vote for $2,500 for that very place.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: For this year ?


Jean-Baptiste Morin: It does not say.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: My hon. friend is mistaken, I think.


Jean-Baptiste Morin: I do not believe he is.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: There is $2,500 in the supplementary estimates.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Is it not for Montmorency ?


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Yes ; it is for Montmorency.
Montmorency Falls-crib work revetment wall along harbour front, $6,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This vote of $6,000 is asked to be taken to make further provision for building a cribwork revetment wall 8 feet wide, 8 feet high and 1,200 feet long along the harbour front of the new municipality of Montmorency Falls. This wharf-ing will afford landing and embarking accommodation to small boats and at the same time prevent the present embankment of stone-filled cribwork, the face timbers of which are decayed and here and there broken, from toppling over on to the beach when the high spring tides would undermine and destroy the harbour. This work is being done according to the report of the engineer.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How much will it cost?


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: 


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What was spent before ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: $6,000 has already been spent, and this $6,000 is to complete. The contract is $12,000. There was voted last year $4,000, and we voted the other day $2,500 and then there is $6,500 to complete, making $12,500 altogether.


Herbert Brown Ames: When the cribwork is finished will you have a permanent wharf ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Herbert Brown Ames: The old wharf was made almost exclusively of slabs and sawdust and was rotting away all the time.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The old wharf was where the old Hall mill used to be and there is a cotton mill there now. This new wharf is immediately east of the old wharf along the shore. The old wharf would cost more than it is worth to repair it.


Herbert Brown Ames: It would be waste of money to try to repair the old wharf. What depth of water will this new wharf give ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Four or five feet at the outside ; it would he more at high tide. It is near the Montmorency Falls and there are a number of industries there. This new wharf could be used by a certain number of light draught vessels, but as a matter of trade and commerce it is not very important.
New Carlisle whari-extension of pier, $10,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Tenders are being called for the total estimated cost is $25,000.


Herbert Brown Ames: You ought to have no difficulty in getting contractors at New Carlisle. Will this complete the work ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It will complete 200 feet which is estimated at $25,000.


Herbert Brown Ames: Is this the wharf that was injured by the steamship ' Admiral ' ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes. That damage was repaired and this vote is for new construction.


Mr.   B LAIN@: How much further than 200 feet does the government propose to extend the wharf ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We expect this will give us the necessary depth.


Herbert Brown Ames: The steamship ' Admiral ' has been taken off the route this year and a larger and better steamer requiring more wharf room, substituted. The old wharf was big enough for the ' Admiral ' but I question if it is big enough for the new steamer.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There will be 14 feet at this new wharf.
Nicolet River

.dredging, repairs to piers, &c.,

7313 JUNE 12. 1905 7314	
Mr. BERGEItOX. What is the estimated cost of this whole work ? Mr. BRODEUR. The total expenditure up to the 31st December, 1904, was $186,000 ; that extends over a great many years. Mr. BERGERON. Will this vote complete the work ? Mr. BRODEUR. It has to be maintained and kept in proper order and repair. Mr. BERGERON. Is that river navigable? Mr. BRODEUR. Yes, for small boats plying on Lake St. Peter. Mr. BERGERON. How far do they go up the river ? Mr. BRODEUR. There is no navigation on the Nieolet river except from the St. Lawrence to the town of Nieolet which is situated near the mouth of the river. There are five saw-mills there, and Nieolet is rather an important place. This money has been spent under the previous government and as a matter of fact I do not think the present government has spent much money there except for repairs. This vote is for dredging. Mr. BERGERON. The chief engineer is now present and I wish to know if some permanent work cannot be done there which would prevent this annual expenditure. If this place is going to fill up all the time we might try and prevent it. Mr. BRODEUR. I am informed by the chief engineer that the filling up will continue and that all we can do is to dredge it out. Mr. BERGERON. Could not some permanent cribwork be put in ? Mr. BRODEUR. The chief engineer informs me that would not meet the difficulty. Mr. BERGERON. How much does it cost a year to keep that river in order Mr. BRODEUR. About $6,000. Mr. BERGERON. Then it is a kind of annual permanent charge Mr. BRODEUR. Yes. Mr. AMES. How is this dredging done ? Mr. BRODEUR. Tenders have been called for and the contract awarded to Mr. Macdonald. Mr. AMES. Not to Mr. Poupore this time? Mr. BRODEUR. No. Mr. AMES. At what price ? Mr. BRODEUR. Twelve and a half cents per cubic yard. Mr, AMES. What did Mr. Poupore offer to do it for ?	Mr. BRODEUR. I do not know. I only know there were four tenders ranging from 124 cents to 16 cents. Notre Dame 3u Portage-wharf, $5,000. Mr. AMES. Is that government property at Notre Dame du Portage ? Mr. BRODEUR, Yes. Mr. BERGERON. Does this finish the work ? Mr. BRODEUR. Yes. Mr. BERGERON. We won't see any vote for it next year ? Mr. BRODEUR. Not unless there is a revote. Peel Head bay, $2,000. Mr. BERGERON. Who owns that wharf? Mr. BRODEUR. The government. It is an old wharf which was purchased on the 5th May from Mr. Ewing for $1,500. Mr. BERGERON. Is there much navigation from this to Missisquoi bay V Mr. BRODEUR. Yes, there are a lot of fishermen there, and there was some dispute between the Vermont authorities and the government with regard to fishing. Mr. BERGERON. What kind of navigation is there ? Mr. BRODEUR. Barges and tug boats which come from Lake Champlain. Portneuf wharf, $4,000. Mr. MONK. Is that new ? Mr. BRODEUR. Yes, it is to be built along the west bank of the river. Repentigny wharf, $15,000. Mr. BRODEUR. This is to complete the wharf now under contract. The amount voted was $10,500 and we have added to that $5,000 for a new site and improvements. The estimated cost was $17,500. Mr. AMES. From whom did you purchase the new site and what was paid for it ? Mr. BRODEUR. I can get that information. Mr. MONK. Having begun the wharf at Repentigny, it is our duty to complete it, and therefore I do not take exception to the work. In a general way that wharf is of some use. But the point I want to make is this I think the time has come to restrict our policy of building new wharfs and pay more attention to the completion of our transportation system. When this system was inaugurated of building little wharfs here and there, some of them absolutely useless-some in order to suit the demands of an individual, others merely to give con-1 tracts to some friends in the vicinity-the

problem of transportation bad not reached the importance it has gained in the last four or five years. On last Saturday the hon. the Minister of Marine courteously invited members of parliament to visit a 'very important link in the transportation between east and west-the harbour of Montreal and the channel between Montreal and the middle of Lake St. Peter. Upon that trip were a number of members of parliament and some business men whose opinion is of the highest importance-business men who have helped to make Montreal what it is to-day. I was informed by some of them that if we are ever to reach the position we are entitled to in the system of transportation between the east and the west, we should alleviate the burden which at present weighs upon the port of Montreal in the shape of dues and charges. They supplemented that information by telling me that the larger portion of the United States and ports with which we are competing have no such charges at all as weigh upon the harbours of Montreal, Quebec and our ports in the maritime provinces.
Does it not seem to my hon. friend that as men of business who know the conditions of trade, we should direct all our effort not only to improving the channel between Montreal and Quebec and improving the ports of Montreal and Quebec and making them free ports, but also to giving the same advantages to our winter ports in the maritime provinces, that unless we do that we will not attain the position in the transportation trade of this continent
to which we are entitled? Does it not seem to the government and to my hon. friend of far greater importance that we should devote our money to not only improving the port of Montreal by sweeping and deepening the channel between Montreal and Quebec, but also to diminishing the burden that weighs upon the port of Montreal. Are the people of Repentigny not much more interested in the carrying out of that improvement in the channel and port of Montreal than in the building of a $17,000 wharf at Repentigny itself? If the port of Montreal acquires the importance which is assigned to it by those who know what is the destiny of that port, if we do what I have just suggested to the minister, will not the people not of Montreal-! do not speak of it at all in <i parochial or narrow sense-but the people of the whole province, to go no further than the province of Quebec, be immensely more benefited than if we spent a little' nnnev here and there to build wharfs where they are not absolutely necessary. I have seen
"l113	in our ordinary estimates
laige quantities of money voted from year to year for wharfs which it has not been deemed necessary to commence. The money has been voted in some cases three and four times. There cannot be any very urgent necessity as the member for Beauhar-Mr. MONK.
nois pointed out a moment ago, there cannot be any very immediate or pressing need for a wharf, the construction of which is in this way put off from year to year, whereas on the other hand the necessity of immediately perfecting as far as possible and in every imaginable manner our system of transportation in order not only to benefit ourselves but to enable us to compete successfully with the American ports is something urgent, something that is being continually spoken of in the press and impressed upon the government by all who have any interest in It. What I say applies to the whole of these estimates and I think that whatever may be the small, temporary advantage which the government can derive by performing a little work here and a little work there upon these wharfs, the government would have the support of the whole country and in fact of each one of these places for which this money is voted, if it promulgated a policy with reference to our general system o-f transportation and adhered to that policy by devoting all our money available for the improvement of our harbours and rivers to the immediate improvement of our system of transportation generally. I believe that any improvements made in the direction I have indicated either at Montreal or Quebec or at our winter ports and any effort in the direction of making free national ports of Montreal and of these other ports would be a policy which if adopted by the government and vigorouslv pursued would have the support of the entire country, it is a question of changing our system, for I do not say that the present system is peculiar to this government It has been the system for fifteen years past at least. But I say the time has arrived to make that change and the expenditure should be centralized in the direction of perfecting our system of transportation.


Mr.   BKOUEUE@: The two questions whicn have been raised by my hon. friend (Mr. Monk) are certainly very important questions. first, should we continue to build wharfs in different places ? Let us speak for a moment of some cases in Quebec, and secondly, what should become of the port ot' Montreal. As to the building of wharfs in different parts of the province, I think that this work is perfectly justified and has been carried on for several years. Long before this government came into power, large sums of money were expended for the construction of wharfs in different places and it has been found advisable to keep these wharfs in Proper repair and at the same time to build some new ones where it was necessary. It seems to me that the construction of these local wharfs has tended to develop to a large extent the trade which' is now carried on in the city and port of Montreal, because those wharfs were for the accom-

modation of boats most of which plied between Montreal and those different places, and instead of being to the detriment of the port of Montreal, I think that these wharfs have tended to develop to a large extent the trade which is now carried on in Montreal. With regard to the port of Montreal itself it is a very broad question whether Montreal should be a free port or whether St. John, Quebec and Halifax should be free ports. Parliament has not had occasion this year to discuss this question but I hope before the end of this session some time may be found to discuss such an important issue. I am not so sure as my hon. friend seems to be that the whole country is asking that Montreal should be made a free port now. I never heard such an" expression used by the members representing other parts of the country, but I suppose that if it was ths general consensus of opinion in the country that Montreal and those other ports should be free ports, the question should be certainly considered as quickly as possible by the government. I suppose my hon. friend does not expect to-night that the government will make any declaration as to its policy with regard to Montreal or those other ports being free ports. 1 must add that at the same time we have been spending large sums of money in these different harbours, we have been taking money from the public chest for the construction of wharfs in Montreal. We have used public money for some improvements in Quebec and we have done the same thing in St. .John and Halifax when it was necessary. Take the port of Montreal. What would Montreal be without the large expenditure which has been made in it by the central government for the opening of the channel between Quebec and Montreal ? Therefore I do not think the port of Montreal has been neglected by this government and in every instance the government has spent money to aid the development of the port as much as possible.


Herbert Brown Ames: Did I understand the minister to say that an opportunity would be given this session for the discussion of this question of making Montreal a free port ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Certainly; any number would be free on a motion for supply to discuss such an important question, and it looks as if the session was to be rather long and so we might have an opportunity of discussing that question.


Herbert Brown Ames: That is -not quite what I gathered from the minister's remarks. I gathered that some legislation was in contemplation on the part of the government, the nature of which would afford occasion for considering this whole matter, not that H might be brought up by any private member on going into supply.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I do not think the government has come to any final decision as
to that and as to the bringing in of any legislation.


Herbert Brown Ames: As to whether they will or will not bring in any legislation ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I did not contend that the whole country wanted Montreal to be made a free port, nor did I discuss the question of freeing our great national ports. What I wished to point out was that year after year, ever since I entered this parliament in 1896, and long before, it has' been the custom to devote perhaps half a million dollars to the building of wharfs where there is no urgent necessity for them, merely to satisfy some particular individuals who desire the wha>'f or who desire a contract to build a wharf. That was the system before this government came into power, and it is still continued. I invite the attention of the minister and the government to this point-whether we have enough money to do this in the face of the competition with our great ports and the ports in the United States. The Americans are expending immense sums not only to free their ports-if the information given, to me last Saturday is correct, they are free ports at the present moment-but to make them absolutely perfect for the handling of merchandise. I ask is it not advisable, in the face of that rivalry, for the government to adopt a system different from the one that has prevailed for twenty years, to adopt a policy rendered necessary by the present needs of transportation and to spend it according to some well-considered and definite plan ? Now, a part of the plan that has always been adopted, if not expressly then impliedly, by the government is to improve the navigation on the St. Lawrence between Quebec and Montreal-that link of our transportation system which has been brought to our notice by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries lately. Would it not be better for us to perfect that link ? We are deepening the channel and we invite vessels drawing thirty feet and more to come up to Montreal. But what is the use of spending these vast sums upon the channel of the St. Lawrence if, when the vessels arrive at our ports, contrary to the plan adopted in the United States, they are oppressed by heavy charges which never diminish ? If this system were adopted, we could not have these diversified votes every year.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think they are of great use in developing the country.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not deny that if we had enough money to build whaifs all o\ei the country we should do it. I have no doubt also that within very restricted limits, these votes result in enhancing the commerce at Quebec and Montreal. But the question is, what is the most pressing need ? My hon.

friend says that we have spent money in the port of Montreal. I do not deny that. He must recognize however, that of the millions expended to improve the port of Montreal, the government has merely guaranteed-


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We have spent money besides.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I will come to that in a moment. But the greater part of that immense sum is only guaranteed by the government, the government has good security and in the payment of interest the harbour of Montreal has never defaulted. The gov-vernment has built a wharf at the foot of the current, if that is what the hon. gentleman (Mr. Brodeur) alludes to. That involved an expenditure of some $300,000 or $400,000, I think.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It was $700,000, I believe.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It was originally stated that it would cost less than $500,000. Perhaps the figure has gone up since then. The debt of the port of Montreal, if I mistake not, is some $8,000,000, for which, as I say, tlie harbour is responsible, and in the payment of interest on this it has never defaulted. But I say that, so long as that harbour is not on the same footing as Newport News, Baltimore, New York, Boston and Portland we have no right to spend money on wharfs all over the country. If we do so, we shall see our shipping go to the United States.


Herbert Brown Ames: The remarks of the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) make it necessary to call the attention of the government to the fact that the wharfs they have built at the lower end of the St. Mary's Current, the Fielding wharf, the Laurler wharf and the Sutherland wharf, are so situated that it is almost impossible for vessels to come in and go out without running aground on the shoal immediately below.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I think my hon. friend is mistaken.


Herbert Brown Ames: Only this morning, one of the vessels leaving the Sutherland wharf ran on the shoal immediately below and is stuck there at this moment, with all the tugs they can get, trying to get her off. The government should remove this shoal which is almost opposite and immediately below the Sutherland wharf.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I understand that it is the intention of the Department of Marine and. fisheries to remove that obstruction. But we have no information in the Public Works Department as to that.
. Ml; AMES. I sent for the paper containing the item to which I referred and I now have it before rue. It speaks of a vessel called the Tampican. The headings says *


Frederick Debartzch Monk: ~ '
(Translation.) The ' Tampican ' goes aground on a shoal, at Maisonneuve.-An investigation anticipated.
Then it goes on to speak of the ' Tampic-an ' running on the low ground immediately opposite the Sutherland wharf. The point is that the government have only half done their work, unless they remove this shoal.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Did the vessel go outside the channel ?


Herbert Brown Ames: (Translation.)
At five o'clock this morning, within a few yards of the wharf, opposite the street Pius the IXth, at Maisonneuve, the Leyland liner ' Tampican ' wenit aground at the foot of Letourneux street, on a shoal. For several hours, three powerful tugs have tugged away and exerted every effort to move the stranded steamer from her awkward position.
The ' Tampieian ' has on board a full cargo of hay, lumber, &c., and a few hundred head of cattle, bound for London and Leith, and the consensus of opinion is that they will have to lighter pant of her cargo, in order to set her afloat again.
In tbe other papers there is a plan showing where the vessel is aground.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This work is under the control of the harbour commissioners of Montreal; but the channel within the limits of the harbour is under tbe control at present of tbe Department of Marine and Fisheries. All tbe works which have been done within tbe limits of tbe harbour of Montreal are in tbe upper part of tbe harbour, which is entirely under tbe control of tbe commission, I mean tbe deepening of tbe channel at that place. 1 see by tbe map published in tbe papers to-niglit that tbe vessel went outside tbe channel.


Herbert Brown Ames: But the vessel, in getting away from the wharf, found it impossible to get under sufficient headway before the current took her and twisted her round and landed her aground on that shoal. The government should, have included in their work the removal of that shoal so as to make the three piers of real value to navigation.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: According to the map I have seen, I do not think the criticism made by my hon. friend as to the side of the wharf is correct, because I see that near the wharf the depth of water is 32 feet. But this vessel, instead of going near those wharfs, went on the shoal outside the channel entirely.
Rimouski-extension of pier and dredging tidal basin, including repairs, $30,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to make provision for continuing the harbour repairs already commenced, for extending tbe usefulness of tbe government pier at Rimouski, and to permit dredging to be proceeded with without harm to tbe cribwork. The work will cost $50,000.


Herbert Brown Ames: I would like to bring to the attention of tbe minister tbe fact that the

conditions which have made the expenditure on this Rimouski pier in the past necessary and valuable, have at the present time almost disappeared. When it was contemplated to build this Rimouski pier it was used as the terminus from which the mails were brought down to the steamer, and the small steamer which acted as a tender used to go along the north side of the pier and get the mails. It was also used for pilot boats to come in and shelter. Now, as the minister knows, steamers do not stop any longer opposite Rimouski, but go on to Father Point, and the mails also are taken on board at Father Point, therefore there is little trade left for Rimouski. Moreover, I think that pier is already half a mile long, and for the first half' at least the water is not more than four or five feet deep on either side, and it is only at the end that you can get any depth at all. Now it is proposed to continue spending thousands of dollars to extend that pier further out where it is impossible to get deep water. It seems to me that the usefulness of that pier to-day has to a great extent passed away. It is quite ample as it stands to serve all existing purposes. The need of that pier has practically passed five miles down below to Father Point.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I understand there are no shipping facilities at Father Point, the shipping facilities are at Rimouski, and all the shipping which is done by the railway is done at Rimouski. Now the work which is proposed does not only cover the repairs which are needed to the wharf now in existence, there is no extension provided : but the item is to construct at that place a basin. We will build another wharf at the end, and then vessels will come in there and be sheltered, and will be in a proper position to taka on cargoes.


Herbert Brown Ames: Only three years ago the entire end of that pier was completely refitted with new timber, and the shed was reconstructed. There should be very little repair required on that wharf at present. You have already a basin on the north side sufficiently large for all the vessels that come in there.' I have been down to that pier many times in the summer, and have rarely found more than two or three small schooners there of twenty or thirty tons burden. The extension pier was used as the terminus of the Intercolonial for the transhipment of the mails. So long as tenders came tnere to receive the mails, just so long that wharf had some usefulness ; but now that all that has been transferred to Father Point, the wharf becomes simply a local wharf.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The information I have, on the contrary, is that we have not proper shipping facilities for the local business.


Herbert Brown Ames: None of the lumber is ever loaded on that wharf, it is always lightered
out from the mill. The lumber mills are on the other side of the bay.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: My information is that it is loaded from the wharf.


Herbert Brown Ames: That is a large amount of money to spend for a wharf that has only local use.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We will try to make it national.


Herbert Brown Ames: You cannot, with four feet of water.
Riv.Sre Batiscan-dredging channel at mouth, $S.0Q0.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is under contract, awarded to Mr. Poupore, the lowest tenderer, at 134 cents per cubic yard.
Rivi&re Chateauguay-dredging, $1,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It is proposed to continue dredging operations during the fiscal year in Chateauguay basin, at the mouth of the river.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Ie the circumstances that prevail at the mouth of that river, you will have to go on for ever spending thousands of dollars every year for dredging.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I am informed that it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide the necessary works, and it is not certain that the permanent works suggested by my hon. friend would be sufficient.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is this in the river itself ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, at the mouth of the river.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Near the island ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: There is quicksand at that point. The government that preceded this one worked at this point and the present government are working there now. They have kept on spending so much every year, whereas, if eribwork was constructed, in the long run it would be better.
Rivi6re Chateauguay-enlargement at discharge into St. John river, $2,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is to provide for the enlargement of the waterway of the Chateauguay river at the point where a portion of its waters pass into the St. John river at the time of the debacle.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the meaning of that ? Is that our River Chateauguay r Mr. BRODEUR. Yes, this is to provide for the enlargement of the St. John river.


Mr. BROWN.: The St. John reaches from the River St. Lawrence to the River Chateauguay.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I never heard this part called the River Chateauguay before. You were working there last year ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: vote.
Yes, this is the same
Rivifire du Loup (Fraserville)- harbour improvements, $20,000.	.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is being clone by contract.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I know that a wharf was built there not long ago.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 
Louis-Philippe Brodeur: (Translation.) There is nothing definitely settled upon that point, that is to say, as to inviting tenders. As my non. friend is aware, that work will require a considerable amount of money [DOT] the cost will exceed $200,000.	'


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) What is the nature of the work projected ?
Mr- BRODEUR. (Translation.) The idea would be to build a new pier or embankment parallel to the one already existing, so as to make between these two piers a basin into which large vessels and trans-Atlantic steamers could take their cargoes from these piers. v


Mr. GAUVREAU.: (Translation.) The exports of lumber from Riviere du Loup are presently 40,000,000 feet per year. Unfortunately, the oceanic steamers are unable to come near the present pier, which is used bv the boats of the Richelieu Navigation Company, and they are obliged to lay at anchor Should this new pier be constructed, there would toe a depth of 23 feet at low water and the steamers could then easily get into the basin. As soon as these facilities are 'afforded, over 1,000 000 feet of lumber may be easily exported from Riviere du Loup every year.	1
MlBERGERON. (Translation.) Where m in that pier be constructed ?


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: (Translation.) At a distance of about 800 feet from the one now existing at Pointe des Sauvages.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: 


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) On which side ?


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: (Translation.) The intention would be to build a pier 800 feet long further below the existing wharf, so as to create a basin.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) On the river itself ?
'Mr. GAUVREAU. (Translation.) Yes ; almost opposite Hotel Bellevue.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) This new pier would then face the road to Fraserville '!


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: (Translation.) No ; that road is on the hill. The new pier would be at a distance of 800 feet from the one now existing. It would be the second wail of the basin.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) Has this matter not been talked over two years ago ?


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: (Translation.) Yes ; and nothing has been done yet.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) I wTonid like to know if plans are really made at the present time for this work 7 Has any land been bought ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: (Translation.) Yes ; from Mrs. Dansereau.
Mi'. BERGERON. (Translation.) What is tlie area of the land bought ?
. Mr. BRODEUR. (Translation.) I think it is about 70,000 feet from the road down to the river.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: '(Translation.) What is the price paid for it V


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: (Translation.) $9,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) Was it valuated ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: (Translation.) Yes ; by three valuators.


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: (Translation.) The valuation has been approved by the Deputy Minister of Public Works.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) This work will cost over $200,000 ?


Charles Arthur Gauvreau: (Translation.) That is the estimate. You must not forget that it will be the finest seaport below Quebec.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) First you asked for an appropriation of $20,000 did you not ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: (Translation.) We asked at first a vote of $32,000. upon which we have expended $12,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: (Translation.) I suppose these $12,000 include the price of the land, $9 000, and the legal expenses connected therewith for notaries and lawyers ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: (Translation.) Yes ; the price of the land and the incidental expenses, costs of survey, &c. The $20,000 we ask this year is a revote. If we use these $20,000 it will -make a total of $32,000.
RiviSre du Loup (en haut)-dredging and improvements at mouth, $15,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: By contract with Mr. Randolph McDonald.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: We had an amount of money voted the other day for that in the supplementary estimates.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It was for work done in the current fiscal year.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How much is that ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I do not remember the amount but I suppose it must have been $2,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Oh, more than that. How much money has been spent altogether?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: So far there has been expended $21,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Now you are asking for $35,000 more.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We are asking for $15,000 more.
Rivi&re du Lievre-reconstruction ot dam at Little Rapids, $35,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This vote is called for by the chief engineer to reconstruct works built in 1SS7 and 1890, in connection witii the dam swept away by the destructive land slide, October, 1903.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How much has been spent to date on account of this work ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We spent $20,000 last year ; there were $3,800 in the supplementary estimates, and there are $35,000 more to complete the work.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: That is a large amount of money.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There was a lot of damage done, and I think the money was well spent.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is the work done by contract ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: It cannot be done by contract, because the department cannot ascertain the nature of the work to make specifications. We expect to complete it next year.
RiviSre Maskinonge-dredging, $6,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: The contract is awarded to Davis & Sons, Ottawa, at 15 cents.
RiviSre Ouelle-pier, repairs, &c., $5,600.
Mr. 3ERGERON. We had better stop here now ; we have done a very good day's work.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Could we not finish the Quebec items ?


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Personally, I have no objection, but some of our friends have gone away with the understanding we would stop" here. We have done a pretty good day's work.


Mr. BUREAU.: Let us take the items for the Riviere St. Maurice.
Riviere St. Maurice-channel between Grande Piles and La Tuque, $12,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is this expenditure for ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is work that was done by the government dredge. We have a dredge on the Rivi&re St. Maurice, and this vote is for her maintenance and the payment of wages.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is that dredge kept there all the time ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Since when ?


Jacques Bureau: The dredge has been there for several years. This is to improve that part of the St. Maurice river which is navigable for SO miles, between La Tuque and Grande Piles. There are sandbars which form at different places, and the only way to remove them, in order to enable the logs to come down and the boats to get through and allow- the lumbermen to get in their supplies, is by dredging. There is another item in the estimates for the building of a dam, and when this dam is built, it w-ill raise the water and do away with the necessity for the dredging in that part of the St. Maurice river.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: The work at Nieolet and Chateauguay seems to be similar to this. I am not criticising this vote, but I think it would be better to do some permanent work there than to be constantly spending money in dredging, w-hich has to be repeated year after year.


Jacques Bureau: The other item for the dam will do away with the necessity for this.


Herbert Brown Ames: What depth of water do you get in the St. Maurice river between Grande Piles and La Tuque ?


Jacques Bureau: Five or six feet at the lowest water.
River St. Maurice-dam at Grande Piles, $19,-
000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This vote will provide for the construction of a dam 940 feet long at the head of the Grande Piles falls, w-ith the object of increasing the boom area in order to afford accommodation for the continually increasing cut of logs on the St. Maurice river and its tributaries.

Mr. BEItGBROX. Why was this work not commenced last year ?


Jacques Bureau: They have been taking soundings which is very difficult work at that particular spot, and it took considerable time before a decision could be arrived at as to what kind of a dam would be built. We have the report of the engineers, and soundings have been made in different places during the last two years. This year plans are ready and have been submitted to the department.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How much will it cost ?


Jacques Bureau: I believe the estimate is $50,000 or $60,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Will this dam do away with the necessity of constantly dredging the river between Grande Piles and La Tuque ?


Jacques Bureau: The object of the dam is threefold. In the first place, it will back up the waters for eighteen miles and make the river navigable, in the second place, it will afford accommodation for storing the legs, and I may say that within a few years the capacity of the St. Maurice river has increased from one-half million pieces to six million pieces this year. They have now no place in the river to store these logs, and the further back they have to go in order to get the logs the longer it takes to get them down to the mills. If there is no storage for these logs in the river, then the result will be that the cut of this year could not be got out until next year. Proper storage for the logs would moi'e than double the producing capacity of the St. Maurice river. In the third place, below Grande Piles the water is sometimes too low in summer for the drive, and the mills have to suspend work. The river is shallow and full of rocks in that place. This dam will raise the water and facilitate the driving of the logs. It will also do away with the necessity for dredging, it will increase the capacity of the St. Maurice river and facilitate the driving of logs.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Who are the lumbermen interested in this?


Jacques Bureau: There are quite a number of lumber concerns on the river. l cannot tell you all from memory. There is the St. Maurice Lumber Company, the Gres Falls Lumber Company, Alexander Baptist, the Burrlll Lumber Company, the Union Bag and Paper Company, the Laur-entide Paper Company, the Belgo-Canadian Pulp and Paper Company, the Burgess Sulphite Fibre Company. '


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Do I understand this is to cost $60,000?
Mr. BUREAU, i think it will cost more than that.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: 


Frederick Debartzch Monk: It seems to me that we are spending this $70,000 to help the lumber companies.


Jacques Bureau: They are paying for it.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: In what way ?


Jacques Bureau: In boom and slide dues.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: We would get that revenue anyway from them.


Jacques Bureau: I do not think so.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: 1 have no doubt that these great lumbermen contribute in a variety of ways to the national revenue; I contribute myself, we all contribute. But, the question is whether it would be proper for the government to contribute to this work, which is for the benefit of private property. It is admitted it will cost $70,000. My hon. friend said it would improve the navigation to the extent of eighteen miles at that point, but navigation there extends over ninety miles. We should certainly obtain some assistance from the lumber company.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: I thought my hon. friend wauted everything free?


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I never urged that. What I said is that a lot of these expenses should be cut down and the money spent on perfecting our transportation system. It is unfair, when we require to spend so much on that system, that we should sacrifice nearly $100,000 to advance private interests.


Jacques Bureau: Every log that goes down to the St. Lawrence contributes to the revenue of the government. We had eighty steamers last season which came to Three Rivers to load deals manufactured at our mills, and should this dam be built double this number of steamers could take their cargoes of deals at Three Rivers, but the hou. gentleman thinks they should go to Montreal. He says that this ought to be paid by the lumbermen. Not at all, every log that comes through the slides and is stored on the St. Maurice river, is an addition to the revenue of the country. The lumbermen have agreed that if the cost of this dam is more than represented by the saving in dredging and the increase of revenue, from the greater output, they will contribute.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I expressed no such desire as to bring this trade to Montreal, but I do pretend that the money would be expended to much better purpose in improving our transportation system. This expenditure is for the benefit of a lumber company, and when it comes to building a dam which will cost $100,000 and afterwards have to be maintained by the government


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: We will be getting a revenue.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Yes, but we are spending largely already In the interest of that locality. That the lumbermen should contribute to this work made in their interest is only fair.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: When the hon. gentleman speaks of private interests he should bear in mind that there are very large industries in that section of the country which have become developed to a wonderful extent during the last ten years.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I understood that this expenditure was for the purpose of facilitating the bringing down of logs.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes, the erection of that dam would have the effect of increasing the lumber industry in that vicinity. To-day the situation is not absolutely favourable to the driving of logs in that section of the country. The water is rather shut off and at some seasons of the year it is difficult to drive the logs. It is expected that by the construction of this work, the driving of the logs, will become a certainty and can be made at all seasons of the year and that consequently au increased business will be done in that section of the country. This dam is also going to raise the level of the water in that section. To-day we have to spend $12,000 a year for dredging there. We expect by the construction of this dam that this work yvill not be necessary. It is a very good piece of work. Besides that my hon. friend says it Is going to benefit a private interest. He calls the millions of money invested in those works private interest. Besides that we draw a revenue which is going to increase from year to year. Last year and the year previous we got $29,000.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: That is less than we expended for ordinary yearly charges and repairs.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: There is one view of the case where we get some revenue out of the expenditures, and I do not know why my hon. friend should object to expenditures being made in that section of the country when in other places large sums of money are being expended without any revenue at all to the country.


Herbert Brown Ames: There are two issues involved. The first one comes from the fact that we are apparently creating a precedent that at some future date may be dangerous. The conditions of high and low water are the same as exist in all rivers where lumbering is carried on. You find the same difficulty in the St. John river where there is the greatest difficulty in getting logs which are cut in one winter down to St. John to saw them the same year. If you come to the rescue of these lumber people on the St. Maurice, will you not have similar demands from the lumbermen on all of the other important lumbering rivers ? They
will ask to be enabled to carry on their industry with similarly favourable conditions to those on the St. Maurice.


Jacques Bureau: Does my hon. friend know that there arp only three rivers under the control of the government; the others are all in the hands of private corporations V The River St. John is not under government control.


Herbert Brown Ames: The government have control over the River St. John. You will find that we will be asked to vote sums for other rivers besides this. The minister speaks of the revenue to be derived. There is nothing in that argument as this will simply enable that revenue to be derived more quickly ; for the lumbermen must pay the dues sooner or later on every log cut on the head waters of the St. Maurice.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: My hon. friend knows there are over 00 miles of navigation in this district on the river and I suppose there can be no objection to the general policy of the government in seeing that the proper dredging is made in that section of the river. It costs us to-day more than $12,000 to do that dredging and it is thought that by this dam that will be avoided. This dam will cost us $100,000 and at 4 per cent that is $4,000 a year, which is a great saving.


Herbert Brown Ames: The minister has anticipated what I had intended to say in that particular connection. It does not seem to me that the dredging in the stretch above Grande Piles will be discontinued, and therefore that item of $12,000 will not be expended.
Dredging eastern channel, $15,000.


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: This is under contract to Mr. Poupore at 12i cents.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the standard for that price ?


Jacques Bureau: In this case they have to carry the dirt three miles which adds to the expense.
Some resolutions reported.
Mr. BRODEUR moved the adjournment of the House.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What business is to be taken up to-morrow ?


Mr BRODEUR.: I believe that the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) stated this afternoon that we would take up the Inter colonial discussion to-morrow.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: A statement will be made by the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Emmerson) ?


Louis-Philippe Brodeur: Yes. And we hope to go into Committee of Supply taking up the estimates of the Department of Public Works.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 11.45 p.m.
[Stage Direction]


Tuesday, June 13, 1903.