1905-01-16

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIER (Prime Minister) delivered a message from His Excellency the Governor General.
Mr. SPEAKER read the message, which was as follows :
The Governor General transmits to the House of Commons an approved Minute of Council appointing the Honourable William' Stevens Fielding, Minister of Finance, the Honourable Louis Philippe Brodeur, Minister of Inland Revenue, the Honourable Charles Smith Hyman, Acting Minister of Public Works, and the Honourable Henry Robert Emmerson, Minister of Railways and Canals, to act with the Speaker of the House of Commons as commissioners for the purposes and under the provisions of the 13th Chapter of the Revised Statutes of Canada, intituled * An Act respecting the House of Com- ' mons.'

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 2) to amend the Railway Act oi 1903.-Mr. E. A. Lancaster.
Bill (No. 3) to amend the Act respecting Certificates to Masters and Mates of iShips. -Mr. E. A. Lancaster.
Bill (No. 4) to amend the Railway Act of 1903.-Mr. W. F. Maclean.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. (SPEAKER. I have the honour to inform the House that I have received fiom the registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada a judgment of the said court in the matter of the appeal from the Lower Court respecting the controverted election for the electoral district of Lisgar, declaring that the said petition had abated consequent upon the dissolution of the parliament to which the respondent in the said case had been elected.

[Stage Direction]
The House proceeded to the consideration of His Excellency's speech at the opening of the session.
Mr. E. M. MACDONALD (Pictou).: Mr. Speaker, permit me, before proceeding to discuss the motion which I am about to make, to extend to you my congratulations, and I may say also the congratulations of this House, upon your elevation to the honourable position of first commoner of this Dominion of Canada ; and the evident expressions of satisfaction and confidence in your appointment which have come from all quarters indicate the belief that you will fill that honourable position with honour to yourself and in keeping with the manner in which the distinguished men who have gone before you have filled it in previous parliaments. I desire, Mr. Speaker, to move that an humble address be presented to His Excellency in reply to the speech with which he has been pleased to open this session of parliament; and, I may be permitted first to express to the right hon. gentleman who leads this House my appreciation of the high honour he has paid to me in committing to me the task of making this motion. You will also permit me to say that I believe that honour is not one intended for myself personally, but rather for that famous and historic county which I have the honour to represent, and which to-day for the first time in a great many years has seen fit to extend its 'confidence to the distinguished gentleman who leads this House. Permit me also, sir, to ask from this House that consideration which always in the past has been freely extended to hon. gentlemen who venture to address it for the first time, as I am doing to-day.
Coming to the address, Mr. Speaker, I am sure that this House and this country
generally, will reciprocate, His Excellency's expression of satisfaction upon his appointment as Governor General of Canada. The expressions upon public questions and the evident intelligent appreciation of the importance and greatness of this country, which have marked the utterances of His Excellency both in the mother country and since he has come to Canada, have warranted the cordial welcome with which he has already been received, and bespeak an equal reception from all classes of our people and from all parts of the country when His Excellency visits them in the performance of the duties of his office.
Let me say at once that it is evident the speech with which this parliament has been opened is one optimistic in every line. It indicates the happening in Canada of a number of new events. First, we have the advent of a new Governor General. Then the speech announces the inauguration of a new railway. Next in order we have the announcement of the creation of a new province and the coming into Canada of a new and large population, in fact, the general tone of the speech is essentially cheerful as befits the declaration of a government and a people who have confidence in themselves, who appreciate the vastness and greatness of the resources of the country, and who are full of self reliance and of hope in the future as being teeming with promise.
Let me say at the start that I do not propose to weary the House with any figures regarding trade returns, because these can easily be obtained from the blue-books, but, it mitst be eminently satisfactory to know that the trade increases which have characterized every step of our career during the past eight years show no signs of diminution but rather of continued steady improvement. Those among us who have been frightened by the bogey of an adverse balance of trade will be glad to hear that in the month of December last, the exports of Canada exceeded by two million dollars the exports during the same month of the previous year, and the additional fact that our revenue shows continual growth must of course be a matter of the greatest possible satisfaction to all. Then, with regard to surpluses, it would indeed be a great disappointment if the speech from the Throne did not, as it has done during the past eight years, announce an increase in that respect also. All signs point to the fact that the Canadian people are weary of discussions on theories of political economy. For a great number of years some hon. gentlemen have fancied that there was some virtue in' the assertion of this or that or the other theory of political economy, but the business people of Canada have come to accept the idea that the making of a tariff is a business proposition and calls for dealing with conditions and not theories, and, as a consequence the tariff requires to be adjusted

advised upon authority which I deem to he the very best, that the investigations made by the surveyors who have gone through that country justify entirely different conclusions. The reports indicate the existence there of splendid pine forests, fertile agricultural lands, mineral fields of a great variety and richness, and a most important factor under modern conditions- water-powers of the greatest value. In a few weeks, 1 am advised, almost every foot of the dine from Winnipeg to Moncton will be covered by surveying parties. Already a great portion of that territory has been traversed and the route for the railway ascertained. We were told that the eastern section of this railway was one which should not be built;-whatever advantage there might be in building the other portion of the Transcontinental Railway this eastern portion should not be undertaken. I am sure that, on reflection, hon. gentlemen who represent the western portion of Canada, animated as we know them to be quite as much as we who come from other portions of the Dominion, with a desire to make this a self-contained country, would not for one moment hesitate to declare that it will never do for our National Railway to be cut off for six months of the year from a connection through our own country with our own seaports; and I am sure that they will hear with satisfaction the information which I am in a position to say, is authentic, that the engineers who have been making the surveys from Quebec to Moncton have found not the slightest difficulty thus far in locating the line. The grades and other features are such as to assure the construction and operation of the line in that .section under the most advantageous conditions. I am sure that the announcement will be received with satisfaction that the surveys are being vigorously prosecuted, and that it is believed that tenders for the construction of several sections may be invited during the present season. Because, as the days roll on, it will be found in the years to come, that this Transcontinental Railway will open up for us a new empire to the north, and that in ten or perhaps twenty years hence this parliament will be occupied in legislating for the inauguration of a new province in that northern country, the addition of another entity to this federation to which we belong.
The announcement that the government propose to send exhibits of our products to the exposition which is to be held in Belgium, is one which I am sure, in view of the success which has attended in the past the efforts of the Agricultural Department in that direction, will be received by the whole House with satisfaction. I did not have the opportunity, except from studying the various reports which have been made in regard to the great exhibition in St. Louis, of judging of the charac-Mr. MACDONALD.
ter of the Canadian exhibit, but I believe I am in the judgment of the House in saying that Canada did well there, that her exhibits were well set forth, and that the educative result of the efforts which were put forth on behalf of Canada, more than warrants the expenditure that has been made, and has given great satisfaction to ttyose Canadians who visited that exhibition. I am sure that in the exhibition which will be held in the Low Countries, among a class of people to whom Canada should look with deep interest for immigration, a similar success will attend' the efforts of the Agricultural Department, as has marked their efforts in the various other expositions where Canada has been represented.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not propose to detain the House at any great length. But before I conclude, I would like to be permitted' to recall one or two facts to the memory of the House. Sir, thirty-eight years ago there came to this House, in the first parliament of Canada, from the province from which I have the honour to come, seventeen out of the eighteen members who then represented Nova .Scotia in this parliament, who objected that Nova Scotia had not been treated fairly in laying down the terms of confedera-ation. Only one gentleman came from Nova Scotia who took the opposite view. That gentleman lias played a great part in the history of Canada; he was prominent among hon. gentlemen opposite, and at one time he was their leader, as premier of this country. We have sent to this parliament in the intervening time other hon. gentlemen who have led our friends on the other side of the House, one of whom filled with distinction the important post of premier of this country; and we have also given our friends on the other side another hon. gentleman who has led them in opposition. But to-day we come to this parliament from Nova Scotia, animated by very much higher and nobler motives; we come here eighteeen strong, united behind the hon. gentlemen who fill the distinguished posts of Minister of Finance and Minister of Militia and Defence of this country; we come here unanimously supporting the greatest colonial statesman in the empire. We come here to support him who, for sixteen years, has led the great party to which we belong, who found it to some extent disorganized, but who has bound it together with the strongest ties of sentiment and patriotism, and have made it the greatest party Canada has yet seen; we come as followers of the right hon. gentleman who during the eight years he has been Prime Minister, has splendidly equipped the ship of state and guided her so magnifi-i cently along the glorious way she has gone, and to whom has once more been committed the direction of her destinies. Sir, animated by these feelings, we come to this House to support the right hon. gentleman in his pol-

1Y
icy of Canada first, Canada last, and Canada for ever. Those of us who have witnessed the improved conditions in the province by the sea, from which I come, during these latter years, join hands with those who come from the province by the sea on the other side of the continent, where there is a similar absence of a dissenting voice, and unanimously we offer our devotion to the great leader of our party. Mr. Speaker, in this, the first utterance which I have the opportunity of making in this House, I desire to be understood as speaking without prejudice 'and without partisanship, as speaking with a sincere desire that all of us, whether we come from the east or from the west or from any part of Canada, and whatever our party affiliations are may he animated during the time we sit in this House by a desire to do all we can towards building up this great heritage of ours so that those who come after us may feel that we have done our part in creating those conditions which will enable it to take its rightful place among the greatest nations of the world. Sir, I beg to move that a humble address be presented to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to the speech from the Throne.


Mr. GEORGE PARENT (Montmorency).: conflicts of opinion which its discussion will set forth, the principles of toleration and equal rights which should he sanctioned thereby.
It has been stated that ' Experience is a physician called in too late ' ; and I may not be wrong in thinking that the experience acquired of late years in the province of Manitoba has been of that kind. The young men of my generation, undoubtedly, have not wholly realized the painful ordeal which our country was made to undergo at a time when the cry of race and religion prevented the quiet discussion of the question of separate schools and of the use of the French language. [DOT] We were not in the heat of that battle, wherein galling epithets and hateful words were most dangerous missiles; we did not smell the powder of that fanatical warfare. But its rumblings reached our ears; we heard its echo. It may be that owing to our lack of experience, we have taken a somewhat exaggerated view of the situation; but we could not help trembling at the sight of the turmoil into which that bitter struggle of uncompromising principles might have led our country, made up of various elements, had not the present government had the happy thought of negotiating a truce which will be some day final peace, let us hope. That result was effected, on the one hand, through the advice given to the Catholic minority from a quarter familiar to them, Rome, and, on the other hand, through the gentle promptings of diplomacy, whereby the Protestant majority were induced to take a stand making concessions easier all the time.
The young men of my age are witnesses to-day, as it were, of the aftermath only of the storm; but that hurricane of prejudice has left on its train enough ruins, it has hurled too violently one against the others the sons- of beautiful France and those of noble England, born on Canadian soil to live side by side, it has caused too much pain, brought about too many quarrels; in a word, it has done too much harm to the Canadian nation for us not to concern ourselves with its possible recurrence. I am confident that the present government, in constituting these new provinces of the Dominion, will foresee all the consequences of the setting in motion of the administrative and legislative machinery which they intend to install, and will thus prevent the crisis, the terrible effects of which have been set forth by recent events.
But if I consider from another standpoint the conferring of provincial autonomy on the Territories, I cannot but rejoice at the thought of that fine page we are about to add to the history of Canada.
The entrance of a new province into the fold of the Dominion is always greeted with a hearty welcome. If that great and beautiful Northwest has reached manhood, so to speak, if it is mature for the grave function of self government, let, in the first place, all the other provinces offer their warmest Mr. PARENT.
congratulations, and let the country as a whole rejoice as well. For the birth of a new province within the Dominion is not merely an indication of our prosperity, is not only a vindication of the manner in which public affairs have been managed since 1896. It is, besides, a step forward, made by Canada, and above all it is the certain pledge that our dream of becoming a great nation will soon be carried out. The gap which almost separates the extreme west from the east of Canada is thereby filled; our country becomes almost homogeneous and one stride more is taken in our country's noble and rapid progress towards its great destiny.
Sir, if I may be allowed to express a hope, let it be this: when self government will have been conferred on western Canada, self government which we love so much because it is akin to liberty, when the majority of that country will be left to manage its affairs, may they turn their eyes towards the province, one of whose humble representatives I am here, and whence so many courageous missionaries have gone to these distant lands; may they not close their eyes to the examples of toleration and good will which our legislators give in their dealings with the minority; may the breezes from our mountains when gently passing over the wheat fields of Assiniboia and Alberta bring with them their perfume of kindliness and generosity.
If I feel at ease in thus greeting these provinces whose advent is announced in the speech from the Throne, it is because I recall the measures taken beforehand by the government on their behalf. The older provinces have extended a helping hand to that younger sister and to ensure her growth and normal development, the construction of a great railway is now ensured.
Now, Sir, it is not my intention to deal at any length with the advantages offered by the Grand Trunk Pacific scheme. All that could be said on that subject has, or at any rate, should have been said, and to agree with me, one need only recall the innumerable speeches delivered in the course of the recent electoral contest. If, nevertheless, I make a passing reference to this gigantic undertaking, if I recall the dream of general prosperity which its carrying out will suggest for the country as a whole, if I corroborate the gratitude of my western brethren with my own humble congratulations, it is because I already can see the heavy wheat trains steaming towards my native city, crossing the river at Quebec, over that marvellous bridge, whose construction was, in my childhood, so often represented to me as impossible; and in the completion of that bridge I recognize the reward due to tiie constant efforts, to the unrelenting, unceasing labour of which I was the witness in my father's home. And should such words seem presumptuous, please be indulgent towards a son who is the witness

as well of attacks of all sorts directed against liis father.
(Sir, unskilled as I am at dealing with political problems, having only my good will to offer for my country's service, I have not the right to claim your attention any longer; and as I must admit, I feel a certain fright at the mere sound of my voice in this House, I loug, as yon will understand, to resume my seat. My last thought, that which has inspired me a courage which seemed to fail me at times, and one which you will greet most warmly, is, as you surmise, for the man whom all here respect and admire, towards him who not only has won the esteem and love of his fellow countrymen of all parties, of all creeds, of all races, but who has set his striking individuality in such brilliant light, that from the banks of the Thames and from those of the Seine, rays of liis glory are reflected on the Canadian home land.
My last thought, which is one of gratitude, goes to my representative, the right hon. Prime Minister, at whose feet I lay the homage of the most enthusiastic love of the Canadian youth. Of course, my testimony will not have much weight when compared with the almost unanimous acclamations which, from the maritime provinces to British Columbia, have hailed his name, a name which on the battle field was worth a flag. My testimony appears still more insignificant, if we recall the anguish shown throughout the country when, in the course of the last parliament, a terrible disease and out of which if was terribly sought to take advantage, struck the idol of the Canadian people. And lastly, my testimony would dwindle into nothingness when compared with the feelings of joy which harkened his return to health, had it not to touch the heart of the greatest amongst us, that feature of almost filial feeling, independent of noisy manifestations, that feature of inward reverence which makes of my words the sincere, though imperfect echo of the very feelings of the whole Canadian nation,
I second the motion.


Hon.  G. E. POSTER@North Toronto: Mr. Speaker, I think I shall be entirely within my rights if I ask the kindly indulgence of the House usually accorded to a new member on first rising to address this august assembly. It is not often that it falls to the lot of a new member to follow and in some degree to criticise the speeches of the new members who ordinarily move and second the reply to the address. Such, however, is my position to-day. In the first place, I congratulate very heartily the hon. gentlemen who have moved and seconded the address, in their maiden efforts in this House. The hon. gentleman who represents the county of Pietou (Mr. Macdonald) displayed an admirable confidence and a flow of words eloquent and copious, and his ideas, if they do not altogether run current with mine, certainly commended themselves to the attention of this House. Unfortunately, I was not able to follow as closely the remarks made by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Parent) who seconded the address, but if I have a proper understanding, both of these speeches were exceedingly optimistic in their trend and eulogistic in their purpose. The country obtained a due share of the remarks, and attention of these hon. gentlemen and my right hon. friend who leads the House (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) was not bereft of a becoming share, as well in their regards and their attentions. In both these respects the country is pleased to have the congratulations, my right hon. friend is pleased to have these renewed expressions of fidelity, and we on this side of the House have no fault to find with either. I. speaking for this side of the House, may at the outset say that we heartily agrae with the hon. gentlemen who have spoken, in extending our warm congratulations to the distinguished gentleman who is our new Governor General. We welcome him as we have welcomed all Governors General to this Dominion of Canada. We welcome him especially as one of a long line of ancestors who have done grand service for the extension and government of this great empire to which we all belong, and I do nof think even in this age with all the rights and privileges of self-government, that the over-seas dominions have and possess, and intend to maintain, that the field is at all closed for the exertion of similar influences, not of extension or of conquest, but of organization of development and the knitting together of all parts of the empire. Who does not know that the Canada of to-day exercises a very large influence on the policies and the tendencies of government in the British empire ? Though no expression of opinion may be made in this House, though no expression of opinio# may be officially tendered in anyway, yet there is the attentive heed paid to what are the tendencies and thoughts and wishes of the great dependencies beyond the seas, which have their influence in determining policies and in determining the trend and action of the British government itself. Is it not equally true that distinguished men, members of the empire, coming from the mother islands to the dependencies and over-seas dominions such as this, have also a very strong part to play and to fulfil in so knitting together, in so carrying out the idea of co-operation of sentiment and of effort, that this great, but yet to a large extent, unorganized world-wide empire may become more firmly and securely united than it is at the present time ? So that our Governor General, welcomed here for himself and for his ancestry, is welcomed here also by us for the work which he has to do, and which we will welcome and co-operate with him in doing.
In reference to the speeches, we may say that the statements which have been made by the two hon. gentlemen who have moved and seconded the address, could be characterized
2;

under three or four heads-we are here; the country is behind us; the country is prosperous. We do not find fault with that assertion. On this side of the House we stand to assert and to maintain that with equal strength and power with hon. gentlemen opposite. We may be pardoned, however, il' we may have ideas differing from those hon. gentlemen opposite as to the reasons why this country is prosperous at the present time. When we take the great interests of this country and look at them separately, even though briefly, we may be pardoned the expression that though there is great prosperity in this country, it is quite possible that there might be still greater prosperity, and we are not of that kind, at least, who in these respects think it is best to let well enough alone. We never can be so prosperous in this country but that we must hope and aspire to still greater prosperity. Take, for instance, the great lumbering industries of this country; I do not think that hon. members opposite will maintain that the lumbering interests of this country from the Atlantic to the Pacific are in a very buoyant and prosperous condition at the present time. I think representations have been made to hon, gentlemen opposite as to the reasons why this great industry is not so prosperous as it might be. In this year of grace the mills and productive power in the lumber interests of this country are doing only part time where they might be doing more time, and the reason is not far to seek. It is because of the unequal and unfair competition which is imposed upon this industry from the country south of us. This then is the condition of one * of the important industries or interests in this country which might be better than it is if the government had taken the proper steps to moderate that competition and bring*it down to a fairer and sounder basis as between us and our neighbours to the south of us. Take again, the mineral interests of this country. They are great; they are important, but is it or is it not a fact that any single line of policy of hon. gentlemen opposite has contributed to make the mineral industries of this country more prosperous than they would otherwise have been ? Is there to-day a single thing which goes into the products of the miner which is got by him at less cost than in 1896? On the other hand, has the market for the minerals which are produced been widened or extended? With respect to that second great branch of the interest and industries of this country, the mineral or mining interests, things certainly have worked out in their own way, and no great claim can be made of their having been extraordinarily helped by hon. gentlemen opposite through any line of their policy.
Take again the great agricultural interests. They are prosperous in a part of our Dominion' most certainly ; in other parts of our Dominion they are not so prosperous. The centre of agricultural prosperity to-day Mr. FOSTER.
is to be found in the great Northwest ; in that land so lately opened, so richly endowed and so full of promise for the future.
Take the remaining great interest of Canada, the industrial interests of the country. Although these , are to a certain extent prosperous, one seeks in vain for any very strong reason why they should have enjoyed that prosperity from any help or aid which has been given to them by hon. gentlemen opposite through their policy. Yes, the country is prosperous, but who laid the foundation of that prosperity ? One of my hon. friends who has spoken to us to-day declared that the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Canadian Northern were the great harbingers of the prosperity of the west. The prosperity of the west is due, outside of that country's own intrinsic richness, outside of its own great productive capacity and extent, to two things : It is due to the opening up and the proving up of that country. If hon. gentlemen go back in their minds to 1897, when they came into power actively, they will find that every system of transport into and out of that Northwest which exists to-day was at that- time existent in the Northwest. By whose policy ? By whose action? If there has been any expansion of any transport system it has been by extension only, by extension in carrying out the system which was laid down, made possible, made existent under the guidance and by the aid of the Liberal-Conservative party of this country. The great Northwest had not only been opened up, but it has been proved up. There was the experimental stage. Time was necessary in order to prove to the world that however rich that country might be, and however broad its acres, its proiluctivity was likely to be permanent and to be built up upon broad foundations. It was necessary to prove to the world the uniform and permanent productive power of that country ; that required a period of experimentation, and for eight, or ten, or twelve years the pioneers of that great Northwest country were busily engaged in that work of experimentation. The frosts had to be combated and studied, the conditions of climate had to be given attention to, the methods of cultivation, which were different in that country from those in the countries to the east, had to be studied and carefully noted, and through year after year of failure and experimentation in the course of ten or twelve years, proof has been given to the world, not only of the productivity of that country, but of its permanent and uniform productivity. These two things done; the permanent productivity of the country proved to the world and its transport system opened up, then prosperity began to show itself. Then people came into that country ; then production increased ten, twenty, one hundred, a thousand-fold ; and by men who wish to reason soundly or to come to just conclusions, these things must be taken into account. The chronicler has given us a brief and interest-

ing history of this Dominion of Canada for thirty-eight years. Did it occur to him in his self-jubilation that of that thirty-eight years twenty-five years were under the guidance of a Liberal-Conservative government and a Liberal-Conservative policy ? Thus, though the country is prosperous-[DOT] and we admit that prosperity, and maintain it, and rejoice in it-we must not come to the illiberal conclusion that that prosperity is to be attributed to the hon. gentlemen opposite, who came into power in 1896.
Another note is that the population is increasing. We are glad of that. The population is increasing by virtue of immigration, the attraction of those without ; and population is also increasing by virtue of retention, that is, attraction of the people who are born within the country and who are kept within the country. There was no possibility of these two forces working to their full extent until that period of opening up and of proving up of the country was gone through with, so that confidence would be given, so that the productive power would become known and would be strong to draw people from abroad, and also to keep in this country its own sons, rather than have them go to foreign countries. These are things which we should bear in mind when we come to give reasons for the great progress and the great prosperity of this country. That hon. gentlemen opposite have done what in them lay in order to take advantage of these conditions and have, to the extent of their ability and in good faith, striven in order that this prosperity might have its constant and unchecked growth is to their credit, and we give them full credit for it, but it is quite another thing to make the policy which has been in force for eight or ten short years in this country the father and sponsor and creator of all the prosperity in this great, broad Dominion. But I can read in the smiling face of my hon. friend opposite, and in the smiling faces of the mover and seconder of the address the great ictea that the country has endorsed them; that it has wiped out and condoned all their sins of the past, that it has given them a full mandate for the future. Well, whatever comfort there is in that Jet hon. gentlemen take it, let them enjoy it to the full. But sometimes it is possible that a great victory may cost too much, and may in the end prove too expensive-too expensive for the party itself and for the country as well. A victory gained by fair and reasonable argumnt, upon a representation of policies and principles, is a victory which is enduring ; but a victory which is to be ascribed to other influences than these, may be, as I have said, too expensive and too costly.
The opposition had some things to contend with in the last election. It is strange, but it is absolutely true, I think, that prosperity tends to dull the critical faculty ; and a government which goes to a country in a time of prosperity slips through with less of its sins of commission and omission scrutinized
than it does under different and less auspicious circumstances ; and hon. gentlemen opposite, in gauging their victory, must give a little credit for their fortunate escape to the prosperity of the country and the dulling of the critical faculty which results from that prosperity.
There are some thiiigs, though, that have been injected into the late contest and that have contributed to the late victory, which are not quite so pleasant to contemplate. I do not think that ever before in the history of this country was there a hal'd and fast co-partnership made between a government and an immense and widely extended corporation. Whether that is to the interest of the country, whether in the long run it be even to the interest of the corporation itself, is something which is well worth considering. In this last election an immense corporation actually adopted the party flag and the party shibboleths, and set itself with untiring and relentless force to elect the government through whom it proposed to get, and by whom it was promised one of the greatest and richest franchises that have ever been given to a corporation. Whether that is indicative of good conditions in the present, or of sound conditions in the future, or not, is a thing which I think may be well open to doubt, and which may well he given serious consideration. But I know from personal experience, as does almost every man sitting on either side of this House, that one of the most relentless forces against which His Majesty's loyal opposition had to strive in the last ^election, was the untiring, immense and widely extended influence and power of the corporation with which the government had allied itself. In every consitueney where their power was felt, the suffrage was made to aid their purposes, the suffrage of their employees was thrown strongly, by all the influence that could he brought to bear, for the government and against the opposition:-and generally for what purpose? For the immense franchises and gain and profit which promised to come to them if the government were sustained and the opposition were defeated.
Outside of that, am I right or wrong, Mr. Speaker, in saying-and I leave it to the country to decide-that there probably never was in the history of this country an election in which the argument of the material was more profusely and relentlessly used than in this last election. I acknowledge that it is a difficult thing in a young and growing country to entirely eliminate from the electorate the discussion and consideration of public works ; but there is certainly a sane and decent limit by which this ought to be bounded; but in this last election, from one end of this country to the other, it did seem as if the grqat argument, the great consideration, the great point brought before the electorate was the dangled bribe of public works promised by the candidate

and endorsed of course by the letter or the word of mouth of the minister out of whose department the public work had to emanate. Everywhere this was so. My hon. friend said: Here is a solid Nova Scotia.
(Some hon. MEMBERS. Hear, hear.


Mr. FOSTER.: In Heaven's name, why should it not be solid, if in one county alone sixty-six appropriations for public works were sent down and held up as the price of its support ? My right hon. friend possibly may recall the circumstances of a devoted follower of his, brought out under his own wing, launched upon his constituency by my right hon. friend himself at a great public gathering, who on a postcard-of larger size than usual, of course- went into an elaborate calculation of how many dollars per minute, per hour, per week, per month and per year he had got for his constituents during the short three years that he had sat in parliament; and after having spread this over the large-sized postcard, he declared : ' And this is on-ly the first fruit, this is just the budding promise of what I will do for you if you send me back to support the government.' But is it not rather sad and rather bemeaning, that in this great country all decency in that respect should be thrown to the winds, and from the Prime Minister down to the latest acquisition to the cabinet we should have a crusade based on promises of public works? Why send a,member of the opposition, who can do nothing for you? Send a supporter of the government; here is his promise, and here is the endorsement of the minister. Well, sir, I am not going to follow out what influence that has upon a country. It is not an ennobling influence; it does not raise the morals of public life. It may be treated with the light laugh and even the sneer by the practical politician; but I tell you that we shall reap the fruits in future years in a deadening of the public conscience and a decline of public morality in this country.
What else has been interjected into this contest? How brave these gentlemen were in that time, long, long ago, when they believed in theories. Now my hon. friend says the Liberal party has discarded theories. Very true, very true; but the time was, in the memory of men sitting on either side of this House, when hon. gentlemen opposite had theories. One of the theories my right hon. friend held then, and held very strongly, was that there should be no partnership between provincial governments and the Dominion government- that provincial affairs were provincial and should be kept by themselves, that Dominion affairs were for the Dominion and should be kept for themselves, and that the joining of the two only led to corruption and a lower public life. Yet to-day, in this broad Dominion, who has been a greater sinner in this respect than the right Mr. FOSTER.
hon. gentleman opposite. In all the elections which have taken place, since this government has, been in office, the patronage and the power of the Dominion government have been joined with every possible provincial government for a common end, with of course the full and perfect understanding that in the time of trial these provincial governments would in like manner come to the rescue of the federal administration. A Liberal of the old English school ! How often have we heard my right hon. friend use that phrase ? A. Liberal of the old English school, standing in Liberal shoes and yet allowing what my right hon. friend allowed to be done in the province of Quebec in order to destroy the Liberal-Conservative party in the provincial election! In the pursuance of such tactics, long before the Quebec provincial parliament should have finished its legal existence, advantage was taken of the result of the Dominion elections and the consequent disorganization of the Conservative party in that province, to spring a dissolution on the people and put out of the way that strongest safeguard of our constitution and the political freedom of our people-a fair, reasonable, virile opposition. No English Liberal of the old Liberal school would, I am sure, have countenanced any such course. A similar course was followed in the province of Ontario. In that province the people in 1898, 1902, and since, have refused to give their endorsation to the provincial government and are to-day trying to rid themselves of a government they have denounced, which represents but a minority of the people, and has been ' in articulo mortis ' for the last five years. Seeing the dire straits into which that government has fallen, the right hon. gentleman, I understand, has come to its rescue, and is about to invoke the organization and power of this government in its behalf, and has sent around to the leading men of the party the watchword ' save the Ontario government.' These partnerships are demoralizing, they do not tell for pure politics and honest administration ; and my hon. friend was badly advised when he saw fit to lend the power and patronage of this government to aid the local administration.
But there are still worse things being done. I do not know how well founded are the stories that are being told, but I do think that they merit the attention of this parliament; and I hope that at the proper time they will, if they have any foundation, be pressed to the very end, and that this parliament will do its duty- There are strange stories floating of the manipulation of the voters' lists in Manitoba, the Northwest and the Yukon. There are strange stories told of the doings of the enumerators in the far Yukon, where, I believe, the enumerators had to be hunted among the mountains in order that electors might obtain the lists which they had concealed about

them and which they refused to make public so as to prevent the voters from exercising their rights. There are circumstances and things still worse.than any 1 have mentioned, and if they be true, I hope that they will be -placed before this House and thoroughly ventilated. The bogus ballot boxes we will not discuss to-day. They are, however, but the outcome of a long series of malpractices which have developed into a political mechanism, the invention of fertile brains, in order to manipulate elections and prevent at the last moment the ree expression of the people's will.
'My hon. friend made an appeal for cordiality and good feeling and for the repression of race and creed issues. No one would join him more heartily in that appeal than Have we not arrived at a stage in our existence as a people when we ought to be more manly, when we ought to have higher ideals and scorn to appeal to racial and creed issues and prejudices ?/My hon.
"TiTend will join me in the expression of that wish, but is it not a fact that he owes the election to this House of some of his supporters to these very racial and creed cries ?


Some hon. MEMBERS: No, no.


George Eulas Foster: We, I am sure, not only on this side but on that, deplore the absence from this House of my bon. friend from Montmorency (Mr. Casgrain). He was a public man who did credit to bis province and this parliament, and the fact that he is not in his seat to-day is not because his policy was not approved of by his constituency, not because bis character w.as unworthy of their confidence, but because of race and creed cries which were raised against him.	.


Some hon. MEMBER.: No. no.


George Eulas Foster: Some hon. gentleman on the opposite side says ' no, no.' Well, I cite this case as an example which is indicative of a sentiment which in .my humble way I am trying to show is not to the benefit of this country. Let us admit that this course was followed without the knowledge of the leaders of the party ; yet I submit that he does a public service to this country who brings out of the byeways and the lanes into full public notice political trickery of this kind. I believe that my hon. friend has, by a dexterous use of judgeships and senatorships, secured to himself an organizer in the province of Quebec. That gentleman is a senator, whose name I shall not mention here. But I believe that in the county of Montmagny there is a newspaper which is certainly controlled, if not owned, by that gentleman. What do I find published in that paper as an advice for the electors of that county ? Let me read the following which was published in it and sent broadcast to the electorate :
(Translation.)
Electors and fellow-countrymen of Montmagny, be on your guard !
In their * mandement' their lordships the bishops say that it' is our duty to vote for a man who is able to defend both our religious and national interests. Now. can you, in conscience, vote for a man like Harry Price, a mere clerk in his brother's employ, who does not speak French, an English-speaking protestant, holding the French Canadians in contempt ? Let us be spirited men. The Price concern import men from Great Britain to occupy the most important places in their offices. W-hy not do like them, chiefly when we are called upon to elect' a member, and the fate of the Laurier government is at stake ?
Once more, let us be on our guard, and shame on the cowards and those who crouch on all fours before money, drink and the crusts of bread thrown by Price, the candidate.
Hurrah for Laurier !
Hurrah for Lavergne.


Some hon. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.


George Eulas Foster: Is there any need for an appeal like that in any county in any part of this Dominion of Canada? And was it with the knowledge of the Senatorial organizer of the elections in the district of Quebec? Was it known to my right hon. friend, and if it had not been known to either of these gentlemen, would it have been allowed ? Surely then, I am doing a public Service in calling their attention to the fact that this was the kind of thing that was done to swell the majority of my right hon-friend. But something more. Here are interrogations in le Courrier :
(Translation.)
Do you speak English ? Such is the Conservative formula, this year. .
October 27, 1904.
Does Mr. Price require from his followers that they should take the test, denounce the sacrifice of the mass and anathematize the Blessed Virgin and the Pope ?
AVhy was a question like that asked ? Was it in order to forward the trade policy of hon. gentlemen opposite ? Was it to carry the Grand Trunk Pacific ? And does my right hon. friend regard it as a lofty, noble canvass ? Is this the kind of thing that will join the people of Canada in bonds of amity and will make them a people whose sole aim in public affairs shall be the good of their country ? Is this the kind of appeal that will lead to the wide and proper toleration of every creed and every race among our people ?
(Translation.)
Is it true, Mr. Price, that you have promised the fanatics of Ontario, Sam. Hughes, Dr. Sproule, Mr. Barker, &e., that you would deliver over to them the splendid and patriotic county of Montmagny, with its population, all French-speaking and deeply Catholic?
' October 31, 1904.
Who are these terrible monsters whose names have been invoked in order to swell

the majority of my right hon. friend ? And is he proud of a majority swelled by appeals of this kind ? And here is another extract : (Translation.)



TO THE ELECTORS OF THE COUNTY OF MONTMAGNY.

[Stage Direction]
The ' Courrier de Montmagny,' October 31, 1904.
Up to now I have been the Liberal candidate.
Was not that glory enough for one man to be the Liberal candidate ? It appears not.
(Translation.)
To-day, at the request of a large number of Conservatives, I become the nationalist candidate, that is to say. I take the field as the champion of French and Catholic Canada, and of its right to a fair representation at Ottawa. I am a Liberal, but before all, I am against imperialism, militarism and against Quebec being crushed under the heel of the Tories.
They -will try to buy your votes, my friends, but think of your old flag,' think of our dear province, remember our ancestors and our religion. The motto of Quebec is :
' I remember '
Do ye remember !

[Stage Direction]
Now, I leave that as a side thought for ruy hon. friend, and I ask him does he approve of that method of canvass, and does he think that is one of the things that will bind this country together, will promote high public political ideas ? Taking all these things into consideration, there are some points, which serve, may be, to diminish the apparent value of the great victory of the third of November.
But, I have been too long upon these details, and I now wish to come to the speech. The speech from the Throne itself -well there is not much to come to in this speech. It seems to have sprung from barren and unfruitful soil. It looks to me like either the product of utter exhaustion-due, I suppose, to the great efforts of the election - or the product of a proud and superior carelessness, as though the hon. gentlemen opposite had earned a holiday and a good time, without thinking very much about the country. But there is one thing in the speech and that is the autonomy of the Northwest. We are not permitted to know what this measure will be. But it is a measure that has long been asked for by the people of the Northwest, a measure that has been supported by His Majesty's loyal opposition in the late parliament, as it is in this House, but which has been consistently and persistently denied by my right hon. friend and the government which he leads. In this speech, we have a promise of autonomy for the Northwest. Was that a late preelection repentance? Was the letter that my right hon. friend wrote on the eve of the election promising that something should be done to this end wrung from him by the fear of antagonizing votes ? Whatever the reason, there was a promise, and this time there is the fulfilment so far as the speech from the Mr. FOSTER.
Throne goes. I hope that my right hon. friend, in bringing down this measure, will give to the new province a geographical area that will be sufficient. For myself, I am opposed to dividing this country up into small provinces with their burden of judical and administrative officers, duties and expenses. I hope also there will be no stinginess with reference to the resources with which the new province shall be endowed. I think it would be a mistake if it were left to come to this parliament year after year voicing its demands for means to meet what must be great expenses, and increasing expenses as the development of the province pioceeds. I hope the powers to be given to that province will be so definite, so clear and so full that the measure will be satisfactory to the sturdy pioneers who are to make that province great, and will avoid grievances and recriminations of every sort. We have no jealousy of the great west. There is no rivalry between the west and the east. The east bought the patrimony of the* country, the money of the east paid for ie The brawn and brain of the east pioneered that great country and to-day our sons, our brothers and our fathers are the dominant race of the province that is to be. Every power which can be given to them should be given to enable them to lay the foundations of a province with an almost illimitable future and one that will justify the confidence which we had in it when we made it a part of this great Dominion, a confidence which every succeeding year has increased.
There is a further mild allusion made- no, there is no allusion made to that oldtime indispensable market to the south of us. What has happened hon. gentlemen opposite? Have they discarded some more of their theories ? I know that it is impossible for heated steel always to retain its initial heat, but one would never have thought that that ardent party which called for commercial union, which vociferated its demands for unrestricted reciprocity, which reiterated its adhesion to the idea that the market to the south of us and its reciprocal enjoyment was worth more to us than the markets of all 'the world besides, should have lost all its intrinsic heat and warmth. Yet to-day the only paragraph we have in the speech that touches the country to the south of us, is that somewhat obscure one in which it is stated that an International Commission composed of three representatives from each country will be appointed
To investigate and report upon the conditions and uses o£ the waters adjacent to the boundary line between the United States and Canada.
What that may mean I do not know, but we will have to possess ourselves in patience until we find out the meaning of the clause. But for ever and for ever, it would seem, the old flag which was nailed to the top of the mast by my hon. friend, and of which he said that it would float there un-

til victory came or death to the gallant defenders, has now come down, the flag has heen furled, and there is now only the mildest of all allusions to international arrangements between the United States and Canada. Well, sir, there are many things for which we would feel less like forgiving hon. gentlemen than for abandoning these theories and allowing them to drift into oblivion.
Nothing is said in the speech with reference to a commission to investigate the state of trade and to give us information with reference to tariff changes. 1 am not sure, but I think at the last session of parliament the Prime Minister promised a commission upon that important matter. Has that been given the go-by as well ? Or is it of so little importance that it cannot claim a place in the speech from the ThroneV There is an allusion to the trade of 1904 as being up to the high water mark. That is a pleasant assertion, we are glad to hear There is another allusion which is not puite so pleasant, it is that for the last six months the revenue of the country is greater than that of the preceding six months. Now that may mean something which is not to the benefit of this country. The volume of trade is one thing, the currents of trade are quite a different thing, and should be looked after quite as much as the volume of trade. Now if this is correct-and I think it is correct-that from 1896 to 1903 the imports from Great Britain have increased seventy-eight per cent while the imports from the United States have increased about 140 per cent, there is food for reflection. If we are importing more heavily, and if the revenue for the last six months is increasing over the preceding six months, it is proof positive that we are importing more heavily, it may be true the bulk of our imports fs from the United States and consists of goods which, in a great many lines, ought to be made in this country itself, employing Canadian labour and building up Canadian business. I hope my right hon. friend has not forgotten the promise of a commission, and that we shall hear later in the session that something at least is going to be done with reference to the tariff and its incidence upon the great commercial interests of this country.
There is no allusion either to a fast line service. Has that also evaporated? Are my hon. friends, for another year in addition to the previous years, compelled to apologize for not having a fast service, an adequate service between the old country and Canada ? Is it a mere pretense ? Are they lacking in spirit, or has there been any fair, reasonable and continued effort to realize that great boon for this country? Eight years ago, under conditions the most favourable, a contract was prepared with the cooperation of Great Britain herself, she giving a large amount of the subvention under which, if it had been carried out, we should to-day have a fast line of steamers running between the old country and the ports of 2
this country, and we should have our mails and our passenger traffic, and a large amount of our freight traffic, going by this line, and we should have in addition the prestige, the almost incalculable prestige, which would accrue to Canada from the establishment of such an adequate service.
No mention is made of the Intercolonial Railway. * Now I had fully expected some mention would have been made of that. My light hon. friend, speaking I think in Toronto during the progress of the last election, declared that the Intercolonial had been a loss to this country from the earliest time, and he expected it would always be a loss. He was not quite correct in his figures and facts. Facts are not always a strong point with my hon. friend, I know. It was not quite true that the two sides of the account never were brought close together. It is on the other hand quite true that for years, under other management, there was a surplus and not a deficit between the current accounts of the Intercolonial. But the point I am making is this: My right hon. friend told the people of this country that it was a loss, a dead loss, a burden on this country; and the reason was, not the fault of the men who managed the road, but the vicious system under which it was managed. Now will you look at that for a moment? A powerful government, a powerful premier acknowledging in the face of this country that a million of deficit, nearly-that much this year, if I correctly remember the figures-must be loaded upon the taxpayers of this country, in these years of prosperity, all because a vicious system is allowed to dominate In the management of the Intercolonial. Well, sir, the power to remedy that vicious system is in the hands of my right hon. friend, the statement that it is a vicious system came from his own lips; and the fact is before us that for all these years a vicious system has prevailedj under a weak ministry, and there is no proposition for a remedy. Why should that be in this country ? It is not fair to the taxpayers of this country, it is not fair to the department itself, nor to the provinces through whose territory the road passes. And all this in years of progress, when almost every great railway in the United States, and almost every great railway in Canada, is showing by their returns, growing net receipts over and above all expenses, that, too, along with a capital and expenditure on the Intercolonial in the last five years greater than during any preceding five years since the Intercolonial was constructed. Surely some action should be taken to right that great wrong, and to delete that vicious system of management from one of the great departments of our country.
I had expected, too, that something would have been said in the speech with reference to the auditing and controlling of the accounts of this great Dominion. I will touch upon that point very briefly. It is quite possible
[Stage Direction]


that the circumstances of this country have outgrown the limited form of audit which we provided years ago. It is true that one of the most able and one of the most capable officers that this country has ever had, not a political friend of this side of the House but appointed by hon. gentlemen opposite, after years of experience, has come to the conclusion, and has told ministers and told parliament that he was unable properly to perform his duties because of the inadequacy of the Act under which he was working. Now can there be anything more important than a proper supervision of the expenditures of this country-all of course within the lines of ministerial responsibility ? But within those lines can there he anything more important than having proper control, adequate and thoroughly competent, in order that the old and faithful officers of this parliament and country may see to it that moneys are paid only when they are voted, and that moneys are not paid when they have not been earned.
One point more I will touch upon, and-that Is with reference to the defence of this great country of ours. We have been told of our wonderful progress. We know our great resources, we have infinite faith in the future of this country. Are we doing what we ought to do in order to put this country in a fail-state of defence against eventualities which lie all about us? Have we in this country ito-day, with our six millions of people, with our million of happy homes, with all the strong material resources at our disposal, have we taken reasonable and proper precautions even for keeping for this country its inestimable possessions, and defending them if need be against any enemy who may come ?	.
Is there to-day in this country one single port of entry which has guns sufficient to guard it against the marauding gunboat of an enemy? Are there in this country enough rifles to be put into the hands of the strong and adaptable men who are willing to fight for the defence of their country, but who cannot if they have no weapons? Have we today in this country, if difficulties should arise, any facilities for manufacturing what would be necessary in the form of ammunition and the implements of warfare necessary for a fair and reasonable defence? Now, it is living in a fool's paradise, surely, if we do not as sensible men, knowing and feeling the worth of our country, knowing the virtue, the ability and the power of our citizens as individuals, place this country in some reasonable form for proper defence and the maintenance of its self-respect as well. I think it is time for this parliament to give this great question full and serious consideration. No one more heartily subscribes than myself to the idea that Canada has not been recreant in the building up of an important and strong part of this empii-e. Every step we have taken in our Dominion, every material development, every mile of our railways, every step that we have taken in
George Eulas Foster: 4 #
material progress, has been a step towards strengthening the empire. We have been doing our duty in this respect and in this direction, but I think it is well to consider the question if the time has not come when something more can be done in order to maintain that sense of security, that proper feeling of self-respect which a country like this owes f to itself, a country of so many homes and of such rich resources.
Mr. Speaker, I apologize to you and the members of this House, as a new, untried and untrained member, for the length of time I have taken and for my halting speech. By and by, I promise you that when I get more accustomed to the atmosphere of this House, and when I find my bearings a little more, I will probably be in a better shape to voice my ideas more pointedly and may be a little more pungently than I have this afternoon.


Rt.   H@: Mr. Speaker, it is with more^J; than usual pleasure that I join my voice with the voice of my hon. friend who has just spoken (Mr. Foster) on behalf of the opposition, to offer my congratulations and the congratulations of this side of the House to the two new colleagues of ours who have presented the address to be submitted by the House to His Excellency the Governor General in answer to the speech with which he has opened this parliament. When my hon. friend from Plctou (Mr. Macdonald) rose to address this House he was not altogether a stranger among us, for, though it was the first time he had spoken on the floor of this parliament, his reputation had preceded him in it, a reputation earned by him in the legislature of a province which, during one hundred years or more, has produced many able men to do service for the state, and which during one hundred years or more has been a bulwark in the cause -of Liberal principles, and whose record reached its culmination in the last struggle, in which my hon. friend bore no small a part in the redemption of the hitherto unredeemable county of Pictou. But whilst the reputation of my hon. friend from Pictou has preceded him in this House, it is obvious from the age of my hon. friend from Montmorency (Mr. Parent) that his reputation could not have preceded him. The surprise is that one so young should have achieved a victory so signal as he did. But my hon. friend is a worthy son of a worthy sire, and he has proved once more that blood always tells. Now, perhaps I may be permitted also to offer my very sincere congratulations to the young member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster). I am free to say, however, to my hon. friend and to the House that if the electors of North Toronto, or a majority of them, had been true patriots- patriots in the true sense of the word-they would not have elected my hon. friend, but they would have elected my esteemed friend the present mayor of Toronto (Mr. Urqu-

hart). Toronto is a very peculiar city. It is endowed with many gifts, but it has a fatal defect. It is an intellectual city, it is a cultured city, it is a most hospitable city, as I know myself personally. In matters literary, in matters military, in matters municipal, Toronto can always be depended upon to use wise discernment. In matters literary, in matters military, in matters municipal, Toronto always knows a good man and a good thing when she sees it or him, but in matters political the vision of Toronto is deformed. In matters political Toronto is always wrong, and that is why my hon. friend has been elected for North Toronto.
But, Sir, if North Toronto is to be represented on the floor of this House by one belonging to the Liberal-Conservative party so called, for my part I am quite satisfied and happy to see once more my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) upon the floor of this House, where, even on this side we can hope to have some benefit of his experience and talents. But I must say to my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) that I was much disappointed after hearing him-for I am an old friend of my hon. friend-and will he be much surprised if I tell him that during the last four years when I looked on the vacant seat he used to adorn and which he again occupies, I often thought of him and I thought that he would profit by the time he was out of this House. I hoped that he would reflect and would change the tenor of his ways, his manner, his methods and his principles I am sorry to say after hearing him to-day that these four years that might have been years of profitable reflection have been absolutely lost on my hon. friend. He is a real Bourbon, he has learned nothing and forgotten nothing, and the speech he has delivered to-day is exactly the speech we heard from himself in the old parliament between 1896 and 1900. He has spoken of the prosperity of the country. My hon. friend (Mr. Foster) who is strong on facts, -much stronger than -I am,-had to admit that, he had to admit prosperity. We are told that if the country is prosperous it is due to tlie policy of the Conservative party. How often have we heard that speech from his lips from 1896 to 1900 ? Then I have only to say to him, it may be I will not dispute that point with him. I will say to him and to those behind him that if the prosperity of tlie country is attributable to the policy of the Liberal Conservative party it is no wonder the country would not again give control of its affairs into the hands of the Conservative party and restore the conditions existing prior to 1896, because then that policy meant ruin and now it means prosperity at our hands.
My hon. friend (Mr. Foster) is evidently smarting under the defeat of his party. I shall not discuss at present the methods of the opposition and of the government. I will simply say a word or two as to the obser-2}
rations he has made. If, as he says, the Liberal party has won such a signal victory as that which it won on the third of November, owing to their alliance with a great corporation, which brought its influence to bear wherever there were employees of that corporation, and secured the votes of these employees for the government, it seems to me that he gauged the Liberal party by the Conservative party, and that he was still thinking of the old alliance as between the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Conservative party. But, Sir, if my hon. friend will look about him he will find that the greatest victory which was won by the Liberal party in the last elections was won in the two extremities of Canada, in Nova Scotia and in British Columbia, and how many employees of the Grand Trunk are there in British Columbia and Nova Scotia ?
My hon. friend went a little further and opened a subject that I am very glad he mentioned as it will give me an opportunity once for all to dispel-I will not say wilful error-but an error as to the influences which have been brought to the Liberal party the victory which we have won in Quebec. My hon. friend (Mr. Foster) says that the defeat of Mr. Casgrain who is a personal friend of mine, was due to appeals to racial and religious prejudice, and in support of that, he cited from a newspaper called the Courier de Montmagny. But, Sir, the Courier de Montmagny was not published in the constituency of my hon. friend Mr. Casgrain, but in the constituency of my hon. friend Mr. Lavergne, and I have only this to siy-and I should not have to tell him this, because I presume from the extract which he read a moment ago, that he is a constant reader of the ' Courrier de Montmagny,' and if he is a constant reader of that journal he knows that it is not a very firm and staunch supporter of the present government, that it might almost be called a kicker in the traces of the Liberal party. My hon. friend will find if he will look at it with care some articles addressed to myself personally, taking me to task because I did not administer the party according to the views of the ' Courrier de Montmagny.' Therefore, I have only this to say, that it is altogether too late in the day to charge against the Liberal party in Quebec any appeal to race or religion. We have never won by these methods and we do not propose to win by them, and as one swallow does not make a summer so one newspaper in a country does not make a policy of a party. I shall not say more on this subject, but if my hon. friend chooses to discuss it at greater length I will be happy to go through it with him. At the present time, I have only to say that he has no cause to make the accusation which he made.
I shall now come more particularly to the speech from the Throne. My hon. friend (Mr. Foster) said there was not much in it. I thought that that which was a demerit in

the eyes of my hon. friend would be a merit in the eyes of every one ; it has the merit of being concise and to the point. I believe my hon. friend rather rejoices in high and loud redundant sentences, and that the mere clatter of syllables has some charm for his ears, especially when the syllables fall from his own tongue. I remember a time when the speech was not so concise. In the olden days, it was rather prone to conceal the paucity of material under a verbosity of expression. My hon. friend (Mr. Foster) should have realized that the people will not be fed upon words and wind, but prefer a bill of fare reduced to a single course if there is some substance in it. There is not much legislation in the speech because we do not propose to introduce much legislation. There is only one great measure which it is proposed to introduce and that is a Bill granting autonomy to the western territories. We thinlc the time has come when the western territories should have full partnership in confederation, when we should admit them as members of the Canadian family as full provinces. My hon. friend alluded to the fact that for two or three years there has been an appeal from the territories for full autonomy. Some two years ago we received delegations and requests from the legislature and in some instances from the people also, to have the territories at once admitted as full provinces, but we represented to the people and to the legislature that the timq was scarcely opportune to have this introduced, that we could not be very far from a general election and that at that time the representation of the territories in this House was small while after a general election there would be a larger representation. They had only four members in the last parliament, they have now ten and I think the wisdom of our judgment has now been justified. It is true that we found some doubting Thomases in the territories who thought that we would not implement our promises, but there is to-day in the speech from the Throne an indication and the certainty that on this occasion as on every occasion this government fulfils its pledges and carries out its promises. My hon friend (Mr. Foster) does not know the character of the legislation which we are about to introduce. I am sure my hon. friend does not expect that we shall tell him at this time the principal features of the Bill. We are working on it now ; it is far advanced, but in respect to three or four salient features we thought it better to wait for the representations of the Northwest government and also the advice of our friends on the floor of this House.
There is another suggestion in the speech upon which my hon. friend requires some information. He has not fully apprehended what is meant by our statement with regard to the commission which we have appointed to deal with the waterways between the United States and Canada. I am very glad Sir WILFRID LAURIER.
to give mj' hon. friend and the House the information to which they are entitled on this point. It is within the knowledge of everybody that along a very great part of the boundary between Canada and the United States is the water system of the St. Lawrence. Now, I am sure, that every one will admit that it is to the interest of Canada as well as the United States that the surface of the water should be kept at as high a level as possible. Some few years ago, when it was rumoured that the state of Illinois intended to connect the waters of Lake Michigan with the waters of the Mississippi river by means of a canal, there was an apprehension expressed, not only in this country but in the United States, that that work might have the effect of lowering the level of the waters of Lake Michigan and adjacent waters'. As the event turned out, this fear was groundless, as the volume of water taken away by the canal is not sufficient to materially affect the level of the lakes. But if similar works were to be undertaken right and left, if the waters of Lake Erie and our system of waterways generally were to be tapped at different points, it is possible that the volume of water removed from the lakes would be so great that the level might be appreciably lowered. That is not all. In sections of the country where the boundary is not water, but land, there are streams and large rivers which have their sources in one country and which flow into the other. Complaint has been made by the United States that Canadians have constructed some works upon rivers which have their sources in Canada and which flow into the United States, and that these works affect the flow of the waters in their country. We also have made complaints to the United States that Americans have constructed upon some rivers, the St. John river, for instance, works which affect the flow of the waters in our country. It is, therefore, to the mutual interest and advantage of both countries to have this question properly investigated with the view of having concurrent legislation if such should be found necessary. From olden times it has been a principle of Roman law, which has been adopted by most civilized nations, that the riparian owner of any stream has the right to use the water of that stream for his own benefit, provided he does not impair the flow of the water beyond the boundary of his property. This is a principle of law which dominates in almost every country; but it is not possible to have this principle followed and carried out when the works are in one country and the boundary of the property is in another country. For these reasons we have thought it advisable to respond to the invitation of the United .States to have this question investigated. We have agreed to a commission to be composed of six members, three to represent the government of the United

States and three to represent the government of Canada. The instructions to the commission shall be laid on the table at an early day ; but in the meantime, to give all the information to my hon. friend to which he is entitled, I may mention the names of the commissioners who are to represent the government of Canada-Mr. May-bee, K.C., an eminent lawyer of the city of Toronto; Mr. Louis Coste, of the Department of Public Works, an eminent hydraulic engineer, and Mr. King, the chief geographer of the Department of the In terior. These gentlemen are to represent *Canada at the conference, and we have reason to hope that they will bring in a report which will be satisfactory. 1 may say that this commission has no power to decide anything. It is not to lay down the basis of a treaty. It is simply to study the conditions and to report whether it is possible to devise remedies to meet an existing evil.
My hon. friend has entered into a discussion of questions which I do not think it advisable for me to discuss at this moment. He has referred, for instance, to the de fence of the country. This is a matter which may engage discussion later on, when my hon. friend the Minister of Militia and Defence is in his seat. As to the question of the tariff and the question of the Audit Act, I can only say to my hon. friend that at this moment I do not propose to die cuss these questions. They will be dealt with fully, and to his satisfaction, I hope- though perhaps this is too much to expect- when the Minister of Finance is in his seat. Unfortunately, he has been obliged to go to Europe for domestic reasons.
I may say, Mr. Speaker, that we do not propose this session to have any very serious or important legislation beyond the Act with reference to the Northwest Territories. I agree to everything that has been said by my hon. friend as to the importance of that measure, though I would not subscribe to all his contentions. We propose, if possible, to have a short session. We have not been blessed with a short session for a long time. We have had a ses sion of seven months and another session of five months; but I think, if my hon. friend will make a bargain with me, to make an effort to stop the flow of eloquence on both sides of the House, to keep within bounds, we may hope to see summer in the country, or spring by the time the sugar flows.


George Eulas Foster: I will go to the sugaring-up with you.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: We meet at this time under a combination of happy auspices. We have not only a new parliament, but a new Governor General. It has become a trite observation that Canada has -been exceptionally fortunate in the charac-1 ter of those who have been entrusted with the high prerogative of representing the
Crown in this the first of all the British dominions beyond the seas. Our present Governor General has been received with perhaps more favour than any of his predecessors, and there is cause for this. His Excellency has the good -fortune to bear a name dear to all the friends of liberty and constitutional government in every part of the empire, and especially in Canada. The illustrious name of Grey recalls the name of the great man whose persistent energy wrung from unwilling peers and a reluctant king the measure of reform which changed the face of England, which averted a revolution, and which transferred the government from a class to the nation. The name of Grey also recalls to the people of this country the illustrious names of Durham and Elgin-the name of the man whose bold genius conceived and designed the policy which has revolutionized the colonial system of England by transferring the government of Canada from the hands of a grasping oligarchy to the people themselves; and the name of the man whose strong courage carried that policy to a successful issue. Therefore, I say we meet under a combination of happy circumstances, and there is reason to hope and expect that the illustrious name of Grey will be associated with still further blessings to the people of Canada.


Mr. W. F. MACLEAN (South York).: tlemen opposite. I said to him : My good friend, you made a very good impression in this House, but you devoted too much of your time to standing well with your party here, and as far as I could gather there was a good cabinet timber in you ; but you forgot just one thing-that you should have devoted your time in this House rather to cultivating your constituency than to promoting your standing in your own party. Had you done so, you would not have come to grief. Well, he replied, I have learned the lesson, but Jearned it too late.
. It is fitting on an occasion of this kind to review for a moment the trend of parliamentary institutions in this country. There was a statement made in the ' Saturday Review,' an English publication, only a few weeks ago, in dealing with the conditions in England, which apples equally well to Canada. The remark was this, that parliament, and especially the House of Commons, was growing more and more into a mere electoral college for the re-election of a cabinet which was to conduct public affairs and introduce and carry any legislation that was to be carried. It is becoming more and more evident every day, I regret to say, that the House of Commons, whether in England or Canada, is becoming simply an electoral college for the purpose of choosing a cabinet to conduct the affairs of this country. If that is the case, is it not more incumbent on us to see that we choose for that cabinet men of the highest standing, men who have some grasp of the new and progressive ideas which are animating the people? But in that we have up to the present failed. We do not select the best men, but we rather select men who represent the provinces and the interests of great corporations. Parliament is becoming the instrument of great corporations rather than the instrument of the people to realize their wishes. Parliament does not represent the opinions of the people. There are new questions before the people, and the people are thinking about them ; but I am sorry to say that the views of these people are not voiced in this parliament. In the United States the same condition exists. There they have great economic problems, great problems of transportation to deal with, and the men appointed to deal with them are not dealing with them in the interests of the people. Take the question of transportation. We have often discussed that question, but what have our discussions amounted to ? More and more have the powers of the corporation increased, more and more have the grievances of the public increased in corresponding ratio, and yet parliament seems to be powerless to apply a remedy. Parliament pays too much attention to the interests of the corporations and not enough to the grievances of the people. I take it to be my duty in this parliament, as I considered it to be my duty in the last, to keep Mr. W. F. MACLEAN.
prominent the fact that parliament is an instrument whereby the grievances of the public may be remedied, and to urge upon the government to give their attention to those grievances. There is no mention in the speech from the Throne of any intention to deal with the transportation question, yet that question is more of a grievance to-day than it ever was, and more in need of some official regulations by which the great corporations will be compelled to treat the public fairly. For fifty years we have had the Grand Trunk Railway running along the lake towns of Lake Ontario, yet the people are so disappointed that they are asking the Canadian Pacific Railway to build a rival line. Surely the Railway Commission ought to be able to do something to regulate their grievances, and give the people reasonable transportation, rather than compel them to incur the expenditure involved in maintaining a rival line. Even then the grievances will not be remedied, because there will be a merger. A great question such as that should receive more attention from this parliament, but apparently the whole attention of parliament is rather given to increasing the power of the corporations and placing the people more under their rule. Instead of freeing the people, we are giving the Grand Trunk Railway greater power, in spite of the fact that that company is exercising greater tyranny in Ontario and Quebec than it ever did before. Under the statutes of this country it is bound to carry the people from Toronto to Montreal for two cents a mile. When I put a question twice last session concerning this matter, the Minister of Justice was out of his place. There can be no doubt whatever as to the existence of the law, but that law is not enforced. We are paying immense sums for the maintenance of a He partment of Justice and a Department of Railways, but it is the corporations and not the people who are benefiting by the expenditure. We are told that it is not the duty of either of these departments to remedy these wrongs, and the remedy is left to private citizens. We are referred to the Railway Commission, but the government will take no action itself. Take the telephone corporation, one of the worst monopolies which could exist, and which could be brought to book in five minutes by a letter from the government. But the government instead have done their best to strengthen that monopoly. The government could say to these gentlemen : Unless that contract between it and the big railways is repealed, we will have to step in. On Saturday night, speaking in South Ontario, I told the people that if the Hon. Mr. Dryden had been true to his constituents he would have told the Bell monopoly that if they did not remedy the grievance which existed in that constituency he and his government would repeal the legislation under which that monopoly worked in

Ontario. There are a hundred ways of putting an end to monopolies if we have men enough in office willing to do it, but neither the government nor the Liberal party are prepared to do anything. Neither will take the requisite steps to secure to the people travelling between Montreal and Toronto the two-cent rate to which they are entitled. These monopolies are the curse of parliament and the country. From time to time we have the doctrine laid down that parliament ought not to interfere. But I contend that it is the duty of parliament to regulate every one of these corporations, and give a warning to any corporation which is not treating the public fairly, that it must mend its ways or -we will wipe it out of existence. Instead, however, of giving these corporations a warning, wo give them additional concessions every time they ask for them, and the public are told to go into, the courts and recover their rights if they can, but that they need expect no assistance from the Minister of Justice or the Minister of Railways.
There is another point to which attention has been called of late, and which is well worthy of attention, and that is that in the United States, whose institutions we sometimes think but little of, they have what is known as the grand jury, which is possessed of powers of inquiry at important stages. In this country it was left to a private citizen to investigate the shameful ballot-box frauds that were attempted in the recent election. We were told that the Minister of Justice was active in the matter but still it wTas left to a private citizen to expose the crime that had been attempted. Had we had a grand jury system as in the United States, the Ci'own Attorney could have issued a warrant and an investigation could have been held. And the same with other scandals in the recent election. But, as things are, there is no promise of an investigation there is no likelihood of the air being cleared through the action of any one identified with the government.
Returning for a moment to the position of railway corporations and their influence, we find that the greatest evil prevailing in the United States to-day in connection with railroading is the granting of discriminating rates in favour of certain corporations. There are great trusts in the United States, and these have beeu built up by railroad discriminations. The people of the United States are trying in some way to stop these discriminations. The plan that they have adopted is that of establishing a court such as our Railway Commission. But this plan has not succeeded. The president has been forced to take up the question. iBut the public there see more and more clearly that the only substantial cure is in government ownership of the railways. And that, I believe, is equally true of this country. It is true that lion, gentlemen opposite say they do not believe in government ownership. But
government ownership is the new principle of this century of which the right hon. Prime Minister professes to be the exponent. He has not read aright the sentiment of the country if he thinks that government ownership is not the only cure of the grievances arising from the operation of railways in this country and in the United States. But, instead of proposing government ownership, the right hon. gentleman leaves us in doubt. As the hon, member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster) has pointed out, we are entitled to an explanation in regard to our state-owned railway, the Intercolonial. Is the rumour true that that railway is to be given over to the Grand Trunk ? We know that it is true that when the opportunity presented itself recently to couple up the Canada Atlantic with our state-owned road, the government failed to improve that opportunity, thereby injuring the interests of the people and of the people's railway. The government had the opportunity of strengthening the Intercolonial, but apparently their policy is to let that road run down and turn it over to the Grand Trunk Pacific. Such a policy is not in line, I believe, with the demand of the times. The people see that there is no cure for the transportation problems of this country except in government ownership. And if gentlemen opposite think they have a mandate from the people to destroy government ownership, I venture to tell them that they are mistaken. There is a party in this country, a national, a growing party, a party favoured by the young men of Canada, which holds that the best tiling that could happen to this country would be the nationalization of the Grand Trunk Pacific. And the agitation to nationalize that railway at an early stage of its career will go on. The carrying out of that policy will give hope of relief to the people, and especially to the xieople of Ontario and Quebec. The grievances of these people against the Grand Trunk to-day are worse than ever they were. The grievances of Toronto and Montreal, the grievances ofjhe manufacturers and the shippers and other people who live along that line are constantly increasing, and the feeling of these people is that state-ownership of that great railway is the only cure for those grievances.
Reference has been made to the promise of increased autonomy to the Northwest. It is high time that this idea should be carried out. I hope that the measure will be a wide one, and one that will allow for the growth and development of that country. But when we speak of increased autonomy for the Northwest, I think there is something to be said of the need of greater autonomy for the Dominion. The time has come when the bounds of our powers as a country should be widened. I am not afraid of the future and of the problems it will present for solution. I am not afraid to say that Canada should be more autonomous than she is to-day. I am not afraid to say that


Mr. LOGAN.: Tlie lion, gentleman means the Tory press, d*es he not ?


William Findlay Maclean: The bon. gentleman can tell us more about that later on. I believe he has filed a declaration in connection with his election that will bring that out, he says he Is possessed of the facts. Now, Mr. Speaker, I have only this to say, that I intend throughout this session, on every reasonable occasion, and within the decorum of the House, always to press upon the House the need of giving more attention to the grievances of the public instead of devoting so much of our attention to the aggrandizement of corporations. There are public grievances, they are evident to us all, and we have a great duty to assist the people in some way to recover their rights. I am sorry that the Minister of Justice (Hon. Mr. Fitzpatrick) thinks it is not his duty to enforce the law unless its violation has been pointed out to him. He resembles the Attorney General of Ontario, Mr. Gibson, in his conception of his duty about enforcing the law. We have a Minister of Railways, yet there seems to be no endeavour on his part or on the part of the Minister of Justice to get things in order. We have a Railway Commission to-day, and it is almost broken down. Why is not the vacancy on that commission filled ? Why is not that commission running ? There has been no reference made to it to-day. That matter may be discussed later on altogether different lines. But the fact is that to-day that Railway Commission that was to do so much is not performing its duty, it is still without a chief ; and the people all through the west, as well as the people in my own constituency, are very much concerned about that Railway Commission. Why has it not its full quota of commissioners, and why are its judgments not being rendered 1 The Minister of Justice and the Minister of Railways should have had that commission in running order immediately after the resignation of Mr. Blair. For some reason it is not in running order. An explanation, I hope, will be given later on. But it all comes down to this, that there is no movement on the part of the government or any of its members to do anything to rectify public wrongs; their efforts seem all to be directed towards strengthening the corporations in their tyranny over the public interests. Now, Mr. Speaker, the people are well aware that parliament is to-day fully seized of the power to remove every grievance that exists. For every legal wrong there is a legal remedy, and parliament is the instrumentality for accomplishing that end. As I said before, it is my intention this session, and as long as I hold a seat in parliament, to direct the attention of the House to these grievances; I should try in some way to get the members of this House to come back to the basic principle of representation, to convince them that we are here to rectify grievances, to
rectify the wrongs of the people, especially when those grievances and those wrongs are greater than any constitutional grievances, that we have suffered from in the past. True they may be economical grievances, but an economic and physical grievance stands in as much need of rectification as any other. The Liberal party pride themselves on having done much to remove constitutional grievances, but the economic grievances of the people have never received their attention. They have theories for dealing with the trade question, and we have heard it stated here to-day that their theories have been abandoned. As with trade, so in regard to the other things I have mentioned here to-day, you cannot deal with them theoretically, you must deal with them by legislation, not in the interests of a selected class but in the interests of the whole people.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Rt.   H@: That the said address be engrossed and presented to His Excellency the Governor General by such members of this House as are of the Honourable the Privy Council.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Hon. WM. PATERSON (Minister of Customs) moved :: That this House will on Tuesday next go into committee of the whole to consider of a supply to be granted to His Majesty.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

['That Charles Marcil, Esquire, member for the electoral district of Bonaventure be appointed chairman of the committees of the whole House.']
William Paterson: That this House will on Tuesday next go into a committee of the whole to consider of the ways and means for raising a supply to be granted to His Majesty.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Rt.   H@: That Charles Marcil, Esquire, member for the electoral district of Bonaventure be appointed chairman of the committees of the whole House.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Public Accounts of Canada for the year ending June 30, 1904.-Hon. Mr. Paterson.
Trade and Navigation Tables for the Dominion of Canada for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1904.-Hon. Mr. Paterson.
Report of the Census, 1901, vol. 2, relating to natural products.-Hon. Mr. Fisher.
[Stage Direction]
Report of the Department of Inland Revenue for the year ending June 30, 1901: 1, excise; 2, weights and measures, gas and electric light.-Mr. Brodeur.
The Civil Service List of Canada.-Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier.

[Stage Direction]
Rt. Hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIER moved the adjournment of the House.
George Eulas Foster: Before that motion is carried, I was going to ask my right lion, friend as to the state of these different reports. Probably the answer has already come down with reference to our mutual friend's report, although I think the Auditor General's Report has not yet appeared. Is it supposable that it will be ready in a short time ?


Wilfrid Laurier: The Auditor General's Report has not to be laid on the table immediately on the assembling of the House. He has fourteen days in which to lay his report before the House. I have not a great deal of information, but I can hardly hope that the report of the Auditor General will be laid down inside of that day.


George Eulas Foster: I suppose my right hon. friend is hardly able to say at what period the real Bill of the session will be ready for us.


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes, I think I may say that the Bill will be presented at an early day, but I observed from the proceedings which have taken place in caucus recently that we are to have the leader of the opposition again with us, and I think it will be proper to wait until the new leader of the opposition is seated, it is an important measure.
Mr, FOSTER. I hope my right hon. friend will not abate any of his diligence in waiting for the new leader of the opposition. He will soon be here. I would not like my right hon. friend to have that excuse for delaying an important measure of that kind. What important business will be taken up to-morrow ?


Wilfrid Laurier: To-morrow, on the motion for the adjournment, I propose to give my hon. friend from South York (Mr. W. F. Maclean) the information he has sought for in regard to the filling of that vacancy on the commission.
Mr. h OSTER. Is that all ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes. that is all for to-morrow.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 6.05 p.m.
Wilfrid Laurier: Tuesday, January 17, 1905.