1905-01-24

Mr. ANGUS A. McLEAN asked :: 1.	What was the total expenditure in connection with the Murray Harbour Branch of the Prince Edward Island Railway up to 1st January, 1905.	,
2.	How much has been expended on Hillsboro Bridge for all purposes connected with the construction thereof up to 1st January, 1905 ?
3 What were the legal expenses in connection with the above public works since 30th April, 1904 ; and separately to whom paid, and the amount paid to each person ?


Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals):: 1 Total expenditure in connection with Murray Harbour Branch Railway to January 1, 1905, is $1,01S,711.93.
2* Total expenditure on Hillsboro Bridge to January 1, 1905, is $1,220,968.32.

3; The legal expenses in connection with these public works since April 30, 1904, up to January 1, 1905, is $261.30, made up as follows :
F.	L. Haszard	$180	16S. Blanchard	
26	09G.	S. Inman	
55	05


Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals):: 

CORNWALL CANAL EMPLOYEES.

Mr. PRINGLE asked :: L How many extra men were employed- on the Cornwall Canal during the months of Oc tober and November, 1904 ?
2 At whose request and on whose recommendation were these men placed at work ? a	was the nature of their employment?
4.	What was their remuneration per day ?
5.	When were they discharged ?


Henry Robert Emmerson: 
Henry Robert Emmerson: entrance, and repairing scow, also levelling ground at lock No. 17.
4.	Labourers $l.o0 per day. Foremen $2 per day. Masons and caulkers $3 per dav. Man and team $3 per day.
5.	The work having been completed, most of the men were discharged on November 17, 1904, and the last four men on December 3, 1904.



P. E. I. TELEGRAPH RATES.

Mr. LEFURGEY asked :: 1.	How much yearly increase in subsidy was given to the Anglo-American Telegraph Company for the service between Prince Edward Island and the mainland ?
2.	What are the services required to be performed, in detail, (a) rates now chargeable on regular messages of ten words and extra on additional words above ten, between Prince Edward Island and the following places :	Maritime Provinces, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Northwest Territories and British Columbia ; (b) rates -to United Kingdom ; (c) night rates; (d) times for opening and closing offices on Prince Edward Island, and in Sackville, N B 9
3.	Over what period of time is this arrangement binding on the company and government ?


Hon. SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agriculture) :: 1.	$5,000.
2.	(a). By the present agreement the company has reduced its former rates on messages from points on Prince Edward Island io the provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario, from 50 cents for 10 words, with free address, and 3 cents for each additional word, to 30 cents for 10 words, with free address, and 2 cents for each additional word. A proportionate ieduction is to be made for press messages.
(b)	. Rates to Manitoba, Northwest Territories, British Columbia and United States of North America are also reduced from 50 cents and 3 cents to 25 and 2 cents, to which the rates of connecting lines must be added
(c)	. There are no night rates between points in eastern and central Canada, but connecting lines allow night rates to northwestern Canada and the United States.
-(d). Under the new agreement an allnight service is given at Charlottetown, P.E.I., and Sackville, N.B., and an extended service at Summerside, which places had formerly been deprived of such privileges ; the Sunday service has also been made similar to that prevailing in Western Union offices in the maritime provinces.
3.	The present agreement is binding for a period of five years.



FREE TRANSPORTATION OF HAY ON I. C. R.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. WILMOT-by Mr. W. J. Roche-asked :
1.	Is the Order in Council still in force autho-nzmg hay to be carried on the Intercolonial Railway free of freight -charges ?
2.	Is any hay now being carried on the Intercolonial Railway free under such authority ?

3.	How long does the government intend to continue the shipment of hay free ?
4.	If the said Order in Council has been cancelled, when was it cancelled ?
Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals) :: 1.	The Order in Council limited the time for free transportation of hay over the Intercolonial and Prince Edward Island Railways to the 31st of December, 1904, except for such as had been bona fide ordered between the 6th of October and the 31st of December, 1904, and for which cars could not be provided during that period, may be carried free after that date.
2.	Yes.
3.	Answered by No. 1.
4.	The Order in Council has not been cancelled.



MOTION AGREED TO WITHOUT DISCUSSION.

[Stage Direction]
For a statement showing the amount of money spent by the government, or any department thereof, in the parish of Chateau-Richer, county of Montmorency, for building wharfs, piers, docks, breakwaters, &e., or for removing boulders or rocks from the beach in front of the said parish, or for any other public works, from the 1st of September, 1904. to the 15th of November of the same year.-Mr. Morin.

[Stage Direction]
Partial report of the Auditor General for the year ending June 30, 1904.-Rt. Hon. -Sir Wilfrid Laurier.

[Stage Direction]
On the order :
Second reading of Bill No. 4, An Act to amend the Railtvay Act, 1903.-Mr. W. F. Maclean. E.
Mr. W. F. MACLEAN (South York).: Might I ask, in connection with the Orders of the Dav, why my bill has not been called 1


Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.: It is not printed in both languages.


William Findlay Maclean: You take advantage of that ?


William Mulock: It is not taking advantage. Some member may call attention to the fact; but if no member objects, the bill may be proceeded with.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: The House is too thin to-day for such an important subject.


William Findlay Maclean: When will it be thicker ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Perhaps next week.



PAY OF NORTHWEST MOUNTED POLICE.

[Stage Direction]
Resolutions respecting the Northwest Mounted Police reported from the Committee of the Whole, read the first and the second time, and agreed to.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 8) to amend the Mounted Police Act, 1894.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.
Wilfrid Laurier: There is nothing now before the House except the voting of supply, and I understood from my hon. friend the other day that before going on he wanted to have the Auditor General's Report. We have furnished something on which we can take supply to-morrow. I now beg to move that the House do now adjourn.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 3.20 p.m.

[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, January 24, 1905.

Mr. SPEAKER.: I have the honour to inform the House that the Clerk of the House has received from the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery a certificate of the election and return of Arthur Lachance, Esquire, for the electoral district of Quebec Centre.



SELECT STANDING COMMITTEES.

Rt.   H@: That the report of the special committee to strike the Standing Committees of this House, presented to this House on Thursday the 19th inst., be amended, and that the name of Mr. Macpherson, member for the electoral district of Vancouver city, and of Mr. Boyce, member for the electoral district of Algoma West, be added to the Standing Committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines, and that the name of Mr. Macpherson, member for Vancouver, be substituted for the name of Mr. Marcil on the Committee on Printing.


Mr. FOSTER.: That adds one each to the Committee on Railways and Canals ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: I suppose Mr. Haggart had cognizance of it ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I notified Mr. Haggart.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Wilfrid Laurier: I beg to move:
That the report of the special committee appointed to prepare and report with all convenient speed lists of members to -compose the select standing committees of this House dur-



ing the present session, as amended, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Wilfrid Laurier: That a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint their honours that this House will unite with them in the formation of a joint committee of both Houses on the subject of the printing of parliament, and that the members of the Select Standing Committee on Printing, viz.: Messrs. Bennett, Bergeron, Clarke (Toronto), Cyr, Dyment, Gervais, Henderson, Hughes (Victoria), Johnston (Cape Breton), Johnston (Lambton), Lavergne (Drummond and Artha-baska), Maclean (South York), McColl, Mac-pherson, Oliver, Parmeiee, Piche, Prefontaine, Roche (Marquette), Ross (Yale and Cariboo), Scott. Sutherland (Oxford), Taylor and Tisdale, will act as members, on the part of this House, on the said joint committee on the printing of parliament.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Wilfrid Laurier: That a select committee composed of Messrs. Bourassa, Bergeron, Brodeur, Calvert, Demers (St. John and Iberville), Johnston (Lambton), Hyman, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Scott, Grant, Smith (Nanaimo), Foster, Stockton, Clarke (Toronto) and Monk, be appointed to assist Mr. Speaker in the direction of the library of Parliament, so far as the interests of this House are concerned, and to act as members of a joint committee of both Houses on the Library ; and that a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint their honours therewith.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Wilfrid Laurier: That the select committee be appointed to supervise the Official Report of the Debates of this Housd during the present session, with power to report from time to time, be composed of Messrs. Bureau, Guthrie, Gervais, Clark (Essex), Ethier, Johnston (Cape Breton), Logan, Scott, Macpherson, Bergeron, Clarke (Toronto), McCarthy (Calgary), Schaff-ner, Roche (Marquette) and Taylor.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Arthur Lachance, Esquire, member for the electoral district of Quebec Centre introduced by Sir Wilfrid Laurier and Hon. Chas. Fitzpatrick.

[Stage Direction]
Annual report of the Department of Indian Affairs for the year ended June 30, 1901.-Sir Wilfrid Laurier.
Annual report of the Department of Marine and Fisheries for the year ended June 30, 1904.-Hou. R. Prefontaine.
Wilfrid Laurier: 



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Civil government'-Department of Militia and Defence-salaries, $48,350.
['1.\t$272,000.\n2.\t$150 principally owing to the large coal consumption.\n3.\tShe is employed in the endeavour to secure the opening of navigation between Quebec and Montreal earlier in the spring, and keep it open later in the fall. Also to\nrender assistance to vessels caught in the ice,\nand establish the possibility of winter navigation on the north shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. She will also be employed in the summer time as a lighthouse and buoy tender for the province of Quebec.\n4.\tNone; her work has been above Quebec.\nWednesday, January 25, 1905.']
Rt.   H@: The first item for the deputy head requires no explanation. The second item, that of chief clerks, shows a decrease of one by the superannuation of Major Benoit. Instead of live chief clerks, there will be four.


George Eulas Foster: How old was Mr. Benoit ?


Wilfrid Laurier: He must have been thirty years in the service and about sixty years of age.


George Eulas Foster: Why was he superannuated ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Because of very serious and chronic had health. In the first-class clerks, there is an increase of one owing to the promotion of Mr. Chesley.


George Eulas Foster: Were all the vacancies filled last year ?


Wilfrid Laurier: No, there are two vacancies which we do not intend to fill. In the second class there were eight last year, and only six this year.
Mi-. FOSTER. Are all of the six clerkships unfilled ?


Wilfrid Laurier: They are all filled.


George Eulas Foster: So that the reduction is simply an apparent one, because the full number was not filled last year.


Wilfrid Laurier: We might have found people to fill them, but resisted the temptation.


George Eulas Foster: Has my right hon. friend any idea as to the outcome of that Marti-neau business ? He will remember that there was a serious lache in the Militia Department, and that there was a suit of some kind in which Martineau gave evidence. Did that evidence implicate others, and what is the position of Martineau now ?


Hon. CHARLES FITZPATRICK (Minister of Justice).: He is in the penitentiary at Kingston now. I think his sentence was for seven years. So far ns the civil remedy is concerned, the government have taken action against the Bank of Montreal to recover the money paid out on these cheques, and the case is somewhat complicated by the fact that the Bank of Montreal has taken action against the other banks through which the cheques were passed. The suit is now waiting judgment by Mr. Justice Anglin.


George Eulas Foster: It seems rather extraordinary that such defalcations could have taken place in a well organized and super-

vised department. As I understand, cheques were drawn in -a very loose way and were signed only by one person. The whole transaction seemed to show something wrong in the supervision and checking ol that kind of work. One finds it difficult to understand how a raw, new clerk could have had such facilities free of check or supervision. Have any steps been taken to 'render such defalcations more difficult ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: It is almost impossible for any individual or government to protect itself absolutely against fraud. The practice in the departments requires that all cheques be signed by two officials. In addition, when the cheques were returned to the department, the practice was to have them compared with the bank list by two of the officials, the one independent altogether of the other. It would appear that there was some remissness in that respect.


George Eulas Foster: The same man who drew the cheques, checked off the list 1


Charles Fitzpatrick: No, but instead of having two officials go over the cheques and compare them with the bank list at the end of the month, only one did the work. It appears to me that when at the end of the month the bank returned its statement of the amounts paid over, the cheques should have been in the hands of an official of the department and there ought to have been some method of ascertaining what had been going on during the month. We are in the habit of criticising very severely, on both sides, the action of the officials of the department, and we are told that there are practices in the department which would not be tolerated in any private institution. It would appear that some of the cheques in question were paid with only one signature attached. That was not the fault of the department, but of the bank that paid the amount. In fact, 1 understand, that some of the cheques bore no signature at all-simply the official cheque filled in. So, this is not a case of laxness or remissness exclusively on the part of public officials.


Mr. FOWLER.: Have any steps been taken to collect the guarantee bond which this man Martineau put up when he was appointed ? I suppose he did put up a guarantee bond ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Nothing was done with respect to the guarantee bonds. I think my hon. friend (Mr. Fowler) will bear me out when I say that it would not be the part of prudence to take steps against the guarantor until we have settled the question of liability. Our contention is that there is no liability, that the cheques being bogus cheques, the bank was not authorized to make payment to Martineau.


George William Fowler: The government are still fighting that question ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: We have it tried. It is sub-judice.


George Eulas Foster: Who are the guarantors ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I have not the names under my hand.


Mr. STOCKTON.: Do I understand the minister to say that the government repudiate the liability on cheques paid by the bank that were not properly signed ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes.


Alfred Augustus Stockton: And that stands for judgment ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes.
Civil government

Department of the Interior -salaries,$166,254.


Wilfrid Laurier: 
George Eulas Foster: Are these middle aged men ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Mr. McArthur is perhaps, 54 or 55. I do not know Mr. Bigger's age.


George Eulas Foster: The Prime Minister has not finished his explanation I think. There are some extra junior clerks.


Wilfrid Laurier: There are two second-class clerks and one third-class. The engagement of these is made necessary by the growth of the work of the department.


George Eulas Foster: All these clerks are in the department here 7


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: I would ask for information if the Prime Minister has it, concerning the change or proposed change in the deputy head. I see it stated in the newspapers that the deputy has resigned or intends to resign. He is a man in the prime of life, and, I have understood, a very efficient man. What are the reasons for giving up such a ' good sit ? '


Wilfrid Laurier: Mr. Smart has given up the service. There is no reason, so far as I now know, except that he thinks that he can better his circumstances by going into business himself. He has not been superannuated so far as I know.


George Eulas Foster: Who has been appointed in his place ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Mr. Cory.


George Eulas Foster: Who is Mr. Cory ?
feir WILFRID LAURIER. He was inspector of offices in the Yukon Territory.


George Eulas Foster: How long was he there ?
sjr WILFRID LAURIER. From July,
M,r- FOSTER. What are his special qualifications ?


Wilfrid Laurier: He has done good service in the work with which he was intrusted. Mr. Smart, who, the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) says was an efficient man, had not been connected with the service until he came here. Mr. Cory has had experience in a post that was very difficult to fill, where he gave satisfaction.' We hope he will be as efficient as Mr. Smart has been.


George Eulas Foster: The deputy head of a department, especially in such a department as the Interior, has a multiplicity of branches to supervise and a great variety of work to do. It struck me when I read of the appointment that the mere fact that a man had shown efficiency in the Yukon where there is no great variety, but only a special branch of work, might not, imply the general qualifications necessary to the permanent head of the department.


Wilfrid Laurier: I do not agree with my hon. friend. I think that a man that lias been in the service in the Yukon for five years and has given satisfaction must be a very good man. I understand that, before joining the service he was for eleven years in the office of the Attorney General for Manitoba.


George Eulas Foster: I suppose I need not ask if he belongs to the party of the leader of the House ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I do not know. But I should be sorry if he did not.


George Eulas Foster: Civil government-Department of the Interior -contingencies, $27,185.


Wilfrid Laurier: There is a decrease of $20,000 there because there is no vote for salaries and expenses of the mines branch. I do not wish to gain undeserved credit. My hon. friend will find the item again, in No. 216, Dominion Lands.
Civil government - Department of Indian Affairs-salaries, $66,382.50.


Wilfrid Laurier: There is only one item there which I think requires explanation. We ask an appropriation for six chief clerks instead of five. The reason is that Mr. Bray has been promoted to a chief clerkship. Mr. Bray has been in the department as a first-class clerk since 1881, and he has simply got promotion.


George Eulas Foster: The fact that a man has been promoted is scarcely a reason why you should establish an additional chief clerkship. When you establish an additional chief clerkship for a good reason, then of course a man is either promoted to it or another one appointed. What was the reason for adding to the chief clerkships?


Wilfrid Laurier: The reason is that Mr. Bray, as I understand, is a very efficient officer who has been in the service since 1S84; he had reached the top of his class, and I think it is only reasonable that he should be promoted one step higher as a reward for good service. My hon. friend will agree to that.


George Eulas Foster: But that must always have a limitation, because on that principle you will be constantly increasing the number of chief clerks.


Wilfrid Laurier: But When you have a man like Mr. Bray who has been twenty years in the service and lias reached , the maximum of his class, and who cannot therefore get any further statutory increase, I think it is a good practice and a good principle, in order to encourage the civil servants, to reward them in some way, and that is the only way in which Mr. Bray can be rewarded.


Mr. BERGERON.: How old is he now ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Fifty-nine.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Could you not increase his salary in an indirect way, by giving him a pension ?	"


Wilfrid Laurier: This is the only way it can be done. There is a statutory increase of $50 a year given until a man has reached the maximum of his class. Mr. Bray was in the first class, and he could not go any higher. He might serve twenty years more without having an addition to his salary. He could not get the $50 a year which everybody else gets until he reaches the maximum. So in order to give him an incentive, and encourage the

civil servants generally, be bas been pi'O-moted.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is that the general practice, or is this a special case ?


Wilfrid Laurier: It is a general practice that a man who has reached the maximum of his class, and has been long in the service is promoted.


George Eulas Foster: I have nothing to say against Mr. Bray, at all; he may be an excellent officer, I do not know him personally. If the right lion, gentleman says he is an excellent officer, I do not cavil at that. But I am saying that the principle upon which the right hon. gentleman is basing an addition to the chief clerkships is a very dangerous principle and, to my mind, is one which we have certainly not acted upon heretofore in the civil service. There is a theoretical civil service which requires a certain number of classes of clerks, and when it is determined how many of each class is required for efficiently carrying on that service, then the staff is completed with the required number. If the argument is to be taken that whenever a man comes up to the top of a lower class and is a deserving clerk, therefore you are to raise him to a higher class in order to give him promotion, I do not think that is ground on which you can possibly stand. Because if we go through the civil service here I am quite sure you will find there are scores, may be hundreds, of deserving clerks who are at the maximum of their class and have been for years, and yet they are not put into the class above, because they are met with the answer as to the theoretical organization and are told; We consider that we have already a sufficient number of chief clerks, and you are in the first-class list and are at the maximum of your class ; but because you are at the maximum of your class we canuot therefore add to the number of the next higher class in order simply to promote you. If you do that the House will easily see into what the practice would drift. The theory is, and I think the practice has been up to this time, that we do not want any more, chief clerks than the theoretical organization requires for the proper working of the department. If a man in a class below gets to the top as to salary and can get no more salary under that, then he may be told : There is no vacancy in the superior class, but when that vacancy occurs for any reason a deserving man in a lower class will go into that higher class. But if the theory of my right hon. friend is correct you will have'immediately to extend every class of clerkships above the third-class, and if that is to be the recognized principle you will have deserving men coming up from every one of your departments and saying, I have been years at the head of my class and cannot get any further increase, I have reached my maximum, you must make a clerkship in the
next class for me. If that is the principle upon which you are going to act, you can see the difficulty you are getting into. I say the principle is not right. When the work of a department is such that an additional chief clerk is absolutely necessary, and when you come to the House and ask for an additional chief clerk, then you are on good ground; then you look around among your men in the class below and you may take the most deserving man who is at the maximum. I think my right hon. friend will see that he is not going on the right basis, and probably he will revise his basis of claim.


Wilfrid Laurier: I do not see why' I should revise it. I think I have been following the practice which has been invariably followed ever since I can remember. There is no department in the service in which the number of officers is limited, beyond which number we cannot go. I agree with my hon. friend that the reason 1 stated would not be sufficient as a general principle, to promote a man from a lowdr class; but I think that the minister in every department, when he- sees* that he has a good man working steadily to the front, a man who has been in the sendee for twenty years, and has given full satisfaction-I think he is justified in promoting him to a higher class in order to reward him. I think under the circumstances the proposition is quite defensible.


George Eulas Foster: If another chief clerkship, is necesary for the work, then of course that follows.
Civil government-Department of Finance and Treasury Board, $57,865.


Wilfrid Laurier: There is an increase in this department of $1,963.50, and I will give my hon. friend the detailed estimate of it:
Chief clerks-
Two statutory increases of
$50 each	$ 100 00

First class-
Two increases at $25 eaeh..$ 50 00 Five increases at $50 .. ..	250 00
Two special increases, 1901-5, at $100 each and increases,
1905-6, $50	 300 00

 600 00
Second class-
Five increases at $25	 125 00
Four increases at' $50	 200 00
Short estimated, 1901-5, ....	12 50
One proposed promotion	.
from junior second class 1,200 00

Less difference between one new appointment at $1,200, and one vacant at $1,175..	275 00

 1,262 50


George Eulas Foster: Who is the junior second-class clerk who is to be promoted ?


Wilfrid Laurier: That has not been decided.

Junior second class-
Seven increases at $50 ..	350 00
Three short estimated, 1904-5,
at $12.50	 37 50
One new appointment	 1,000 00
Two new appointments at
$800 each .. ..		 1,600 00


George Eulas Foster: Who has been superannuated ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Mr. Tasker has been superannuated.


George Eulas Foster: Is that the only superannuation that has taken place ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes. Amongst the messengers there are two increases of $50 each, making the total increases $1,963.50.


George Eulas Foster: Is there a vacancy provided for in the estimates of the coming year that is to be filled outside of the promotion of a junior second-class clerk ?
Sir WILFRID LAURIER, There is a vacancy to be filled.


George Eulas Foster: In what class ?


Wilfrid Laurier: In the junior second class. v


George Eulas Foster: When did that vacancy occur ?


Wilfrid Laurier: There is a promotion to take place, and that will create a vacancy.


George Eulas Foster: How does the promotion take place ? Is-there a vacancy in the grade above ?
Sir WILFRID LAURIER, This estimate provides for the vacancy and promotion.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: The promotion of a clerk from the second class to the first class ?


Wilfrid Laurier: No ; from the
junior to the second class.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: No, but I understood that the promotion was to take place to a vacancy in the first class.


Wilfrid Laurier: No, to a vacancy in the second class.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is the vacancy caused by the reason which we found to exist a few moments ago in the Indian Department ; that is, by rewarding a clerk by putting him in the first class ?


Wilfrid Laurier: No.
Civil government-Department of Finance and Treasury Board-contingencies, $12,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is that for ?


Wilfrid Laurier: 


Wilfrid Laurier: The item of-
Clerical and other assistance, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act. $5,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Who controls the expenditures in that department ?


Wilfrid Laurier: In the Fin-'ata.ce Department ?


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Any department. Who controls the expenditures for stationery and ^sundries ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I can only say that so far as my own department is concerned, these expenditures, which reach the same amount nearly every year, are controlled by the Clerk of the Privy Council, and I suppose it is very much the same in other departments. These matters are controlled by the deputy heads.
Civil government-High Commissioner's office, London-salaries, $10,300.


Wilfrid Laurier: I have to make a motion there to drop one first-class clerk at $1,900. We only have one clerk.
I therefore beg to move :
That this item be reduced from $3,750 to $1,850, and that it he made to read as follows : one first-class clerk at $1,850.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
George Eulas Foster: Who is the secretary now?


Wilfrid Laurier: The secretary is Mr. Griffith, and then we have Mr. Taylor, Mr. Luke, Mr. Allin and Mr. Churchouse. There has been no change in the department since my hon. friend's time, except that Mr. Reynolds has been superannuated, Mr. Churchouse has been added and Mr. Griffith has taken the place of Mr. Colmer.


George William Fowler: Is there no salary attached to the office of High Commissioner ? I do not see any salary provided for him.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER, That is regulated by statute, if I remember rightly.


George Eulas Foster: The High Commissioner does not take any salary.


Wilfrid Laurier: Well, I think he spends more than he takes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I remember that some years ago the government of Canada bought a house in London for the High Commissioner.


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes.
100 00
is to provide for two messengers who have not passed the civil service examination. There is nothing new in that. Then there are seven extra clerks at $640 each, five at $550 each, making $2,750 ; one at $500 and two messengers at $1,100, making a total of $4,990. The estimate is $5,000. Then, for printing and stationery the estimate is $3,200.59 and for sundries $3,177.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I understand that Lord Strathcona does not live in that house, but that he lives in his own house. Who occupies the house that belongs to the government ?


Wilfrid Laurier: My belief is that we sold that house years ago.
Departments	generally-contingencies-care
and cleaning of departmental buildings, including amount of $100 required to pay for firing noon gun, which amount may be paid to a member of the Civil Service, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $35,000.


George Eulas Foster: Is not that gun very nearly worn out ?


Wilfrid Laurier: No, it is still doing good service once a day. The increased expenditure there goes to the charwomen.


George Eulas Foster: On what basis is that service now carried on ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I think the same system as that which formerly prevailed., There is a superintendent, Mr. Conroy.


George Eulas Foster: The same superintendent? Sir WILFRID LAURIER. Yes.


George Eulas Foster: And what are they paid ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I think they have an increase of 25 cents a day, they get 75 cents a day now.


George Eulas Foster: What did they get before?


Wilfrid Laurier: I think it was 50 cents, some got 50 cents and some 75 cents.


George Eulas Foster: Are you going on the uniform principle now that all are equally good ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes, it is like the Scripture, the last coiner is entitled to the same pay as the first.


George Eulas Foster: When was the increase given ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Last year. Mr. FOSTER. About what time ?


Wilfrid Laurier: My hon. friend should not put that question ; none of them have votes, I can assure my hon. friend. My friend Mr. Fraser does not know the date and I do not know either ; it was during the year 1904 and previous to October.


George Eulas Foster: About that time ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Perhaps.


George Eulas Foster: That is, taking the small and the great, the autonomy for the Northwest anil the increase to the charwomen *are given for the same reason just before the election.


Wilfrid Laurier: It is a good reason all round.
Geological Survey-civil government, $64,155. iSir WILFRID LAURIER. There is a decrease there of $500 in the salary of the deputy head and director. I could not give any explanation as to that ;	1 have
been unable to get the information yet. If my hon. friend will pass the item I shall get the information.


George Eulas Foster: If my hon. friend will make a point to give that explanation we shall pass it.


Wilfrid Laurier: I shall give the explanation when we come to concurrence.	*'
Administration of Justice-miscellaneous, including Northwest Territories, $65,000.


George Eulas Foster: Why is this any longer required ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: It will not be
any longer required if the Territories are erected into provinces, but in the interval we have to make provision for the conditions existing at the present time.


George Eulas Foster: You have not full faith that you are going to carry it ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, we have absolute faith, but at the same time we are dealing with conditions as they exist and this provision is therefore made.


George Eulas Foster: What comes under that miscellaneous expenditure ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: This amount is estimated to be spent for the maintenance of prisoners at police posts in the Northwest Territories, for the transportation of prisoners from place to place in the Territories and from the posts to Stony Mountain penitentiary, Crown prosecutors, legal services, jury and witness fees, coroners' inquests, and fees of sheriffs and clerks of courts. I can give the amounts expended last year. Maintenance of prisoners, $19,363.80 ; transport of prisoners, $12,847.46 ; crown prosecutors $9,333.20.


George Eulas Foster: Who appoints the Crown
prosecutors ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: We appoint them here.


George Eulas Foster: By this government ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: By this government. Jury and witness fees, $18,000 ; coroner's inquests $2,000; Sheriff's fees $956 ; clerk of tho court fees $1,700 ; extradition cases $188 ; copies of evidence $210 ; sundries $866.68.
Travelling allowances and expenses of judges in Manitoba, British Columbia and the Northwest Territories, $20,000.


George William Fowler: Why is there that increase in the travelling expenses ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Because of the increase in the number of circuits. Two circuits have been added in Manitoba and this provides for the increased expenditure involved by the increased number of circuits.


George William Fowler: Do the judges receive the same allowance there as in the other provinces ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: In Manitoba the allowance is not fixed by statute, it is fixed by Order in Council. In Manitoba the judges are allowed actual moving expenses and $5 per day, in British Columbia necessary and reasonable disbursements for travelling and living accommodation and $6 per day. There has been frequent complaint on the part of the judges that the $5 per day is not sufficient to pay for their accommodation. The Order in Council for Manitoba was passed on the 27th of October, 1882, and that for British Columbia in 1878.


George William Fowler: I think the minister should make a change in that respect. It seems rather infra dig on the part of a judge to have to keep an account of his travelling expenses and disbursements like an ordinary clerk. I think there should be a lump allowance made to the judges there as in the other provinces, sufficient to cover their expenses.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I quite agree with the hon. gentleman. It ought to be made a matter of statute for the newer provinces as well as for the older. If the question of the remuneration of the judges comes up this session, this matter of expenses should be' dealt with at the same time.


Mr. W. J. ROCHE.: If a new district is created, is it the intention of the government to appoint a new judge for it ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: If a new district is created, it is customary for the government to appoint a judge for that district, but that is only applicable to county court judges. The travelling allowances we are dealing with in the first instance are those payable to the judges of the high courts who go from Winnipeg on these circuits.


William James Roche: The particular circuit you are speaking of has been covered m the past by some of the present judges.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Not if it is a new circuit A county court judge may be appointed.


George Eulas Foster: Who is the Chief Justice or the Northwest Territories ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Hon. Arthur Sif-ton.


George Eulas Foster: Any relation to the Minister of the Interior ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I have not examined the baptismal certificate, but I understand that he is his brother.


George William Fowler: 


George Eulas Foster: How many judges are there in the Northwest ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I think six.


George Eulas Foster: Is Judge Richardson still a judge there ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: No, he retired last year. He had reached that period of service which entitled him to retire on his full salary.


George Eulas Foster: Who has now his place ? Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Sifton.


William James Roche: Is there any rule with reference to those judges who can retire and draw an allowance from this government ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: There is a statute which regulates the amount of the retiring-allowance. After fifteen years' service a judge is entitled to retire on a two-tliirds pension. If he has reached the age of eighty he receives his full salary. If he has served thirty years he goes out on his full salary. If he has reached the age of seventy-five, and has served twenty-five years, he retires on his full salary.


William James Roche: They can engage in any other occupation afterwards ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Very few of them do, I think.


William James Roche: Some of them engage in political work.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I am afraid we can find one of them, at all events, in the Senate.
To supplement the salary of the judge of the county court for district No. 7, Nova Scotia, $600.


George William Fowler: Why is that ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: A few years ago provision was made for the payment of this additional amount to Judge Dodd, of Syd-ney._ I understand that it was the desire of parliament to place him somewhat on the same footing as the judge of the county court at Halifax, who received an amount above what the other judges received, owing to the amount of his work being very large.
Mr. FOWLER, Why not make that a statutory allowance ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I think that ought to be done, not only in this case, but in the cases of the judges of the divorce and matrimonial. courts as well. But this has been the long usage of parliament, and we have not made the change.
Court room and offices at Prince Albert', $840. Mr. FITZPATRICK. There is no court room at Prince Albert, and this accommodation has to be provided. The present arrangement involves payment for the rental of the sheriff's office at the rate of $15 a

month and for the court room and chambers, including heating, lighting, &c., at the rate of $55 a month, making in all $840 per annum.
To be paid the government of the Northwest Territories, on account of remuneration and expense of stenographers provided by that government for the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories, $3,000.


Charles Fitzpatrick: This is under an arrangement which we have entered into with the Attorney General of the Territories, whereby stenographers provided for the Supreme Court of the Territories are paid for by us, we utilizing their services at criminal courts.
Supreme Court of Canada, $28,040.


Charles Fitzpatrick: These estimates provide merely for the usual increase recommended for the staff. All the officials received their annual increase of $50 each. There is an increase of $1,000 in the item of printing and distributing. That is due to the increase in subscriptions and involves of course an increase in the receipts. I am now negotiating with a law hook publishing company to deal with our reports as they are dealt with in Ontario. A great deal of delay at present occurs in the printing and distribution. At times judgments have been rendered three months before they are printed and distributed. I might mention, as showing the evil of this, that a case came up before the Supreme Court in which a decision had been rendered, which would not have been given by the provincial judges had they known of a judgment on a similar question which had been rendered by the Supreme Court. I hope to be able to bring about as early a distribution of the reports as is had in Ontario, where the distribution is made with very great expedition and also considerable economy.


George Eulas Foster: What "is the meaning of the item of $60.75 for ' trams ' which appears in the Auditor General's Report.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I suppose that would be for the car fares of messengers' and other officials. Frequently the judges remain at their own houses and require to have law books brought down.
Exeheauer Court, $11,690.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The only increase is $200 given to Mr. Duncan Clarke, who has been promoted from the junior second-class to the second-class. He has been in the service over ten years and is a most faithful, reliable and able officer. He has charge of the docket, acts as stenographer for the registrar, looks after the sales of law stamps, and does all the work of accountant.


Alfred Augustus Stockton: I would like to call attention to what appears to me an inequality between the Registrar and Marshall of the
Admiralty Court at Quebec and similar officials in other provinces. A salary, in addition to the fees, under the admiralty rules of 1893, is given these officers in Quebec, but no salary is given similar officials In the other provinces. All they get are the fees. I am not objecting to the salary given the Registrar in Admiralty at Quebec, but I think that a salary should be given to all the registrars and the fees abolished entirely. It is hardly the proper thing to have the registrar tax his own fees. In that case the fees now given by means of stamps could go into the revenue of Canada.


Charles Fitzpatrick: My hon. friend will understand how tenacious we are all, particularly at the bar, of our ancient privileges and rights. The reason for the distinction to which he refers is that formerly we had. an Admiralty Court at Quebec which was an imperial court. At that time we had a judge and a registrar. The registrar was appointed under the Admiralty Act ; and when the old court became a branch of the Exchequer Court, we took over the old officials. Mr. Dunbar, the registrar at Quebec, was one of the officials we took over, and consequently has been paid under the new system the same salary which was paid him when the court was an imperial court.


Alfred Augustus Stockton: But the same thing applies to the province of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. There the Vice Admiraltv Courts were imperial courts and were abolished precisely as in the province of Quebec.


Mr FITZPATRICK.: But are the present registrars those who were officials under the old Act?


Alfred Augustus Stockton: Not now, but the old registrars continued after the abolition of the Vice Admiralty Court.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The intention was to continue to the old officials the salaries they -were receiving.


George Eulas Foster: And when these go out?


Charles Fitzpatrick: The new rule will prevail.
Yukon Territory-travelling allowances of judges, $1,500.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How many judges?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Three. They are all High Court judges. There are no county court judges. Mr. Justice Macaulay, in addition to being a judge of the High Court, performs the duties of police magistrate.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Who is the sheriff ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Mr. Eilbeck.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is he a young man ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: He can hardly be, for, on looking over my list I see the name of J. M. Eilbeck as deputy sheriff. He is the son of the sheriff.
IMr. FOWLER. Mr. Eilbeck had a long leave of absence, had not he ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: No, he did not get it.


George William Fowler: In this vote there is an item of living allowance of judges at $5,000 each. This question was up last session, and the minister said that the allowance would be done away with. At least, in answer to criticism of mine he said it was unnecessary and ought to be done away with. The expense of living in the Yukon is not so high as it used t;o be, and not so high in comparison with other places as to justify so large a sum being paid by the country for living expenses. Judges in other parts of the country pay their own living expenses. If the salaries paid judges in the Yukon are not sufficient, let them be increased instead of giving a living allowance.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The judges in the Yukon are paid $5,000 a year, the same as the judges in the High Court in Ontario and Quebec, and are also paid $5,000 each as a living allowance. My objection to adding anything to the salary is that it may be found inadvisable to have three judges there, while one may be needed elsewhere in the Northwest Territories. If the salaries were at a larger rate than at present, and we wanted to move one of the judges of the Yukon to fill the new place, a grievance would arise if his salary was not continued at the same rate. When a judge is appointed at a certain salary it is very inconvenient to lower that salary.


George William Fowler: Is the salary attached to the judge or to the position ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: To the position.


George William Fowler: Then, if a judge is no longer judge of the Yukon, he would no longer receive the salary of judge of the Yukon. If he were transferred to Ontario he would receive the salary of a judge of the same rank in Ontario.


Charles Fitzpatrick: It might be considered to be, to some extent, an interference with the independence of a. judge if, being appointed at a fixed salary, he were liable to be removed to another place at a smaller salary. He would hardly be in the position of a man who felt himself independent of parliament in regard to his salary.


George William Fowler: Would not the same apply to his living expenses ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: No, that might vary according to the locality.


Alfred Augustus Stockton: That would be a yearly allowance ?


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: 


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, a yearly allowance voted by parliament each year. If the conditions change so as to make the vote unnecessary, there is no reason why it should be continued.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: These judges, I imagine, would not be changed without their own consent ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: No.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: And I suppose they would not consent to a change, because I think they are receiving higher salaries than any other judges. When this allowance was given, years ago, I thought it quite reasonable. But I am told that the expense of living in the Yukon is not nearly so high as it was, and so this living allowance is a great deal too much.


George William Fowler: There is not the slightest doubt that the expense of living in the Yukon has greatly decreased. Last session we had a discussion, and this fact was admitted, and no reasonable excuse was given for this allowance. As I understand "t, they have all the comforts of civilization in the Yukon, and there is little difference in the cost of living between the Yukon and the Northwest Territories. I do not think there would be any difficulty in finding gentlemen to fill the positions of judges if this allowance for living expenses were cut out altogether.


Mr. MONK.: What is the rule which prevails in regards to living allowances ? I see that the judges get as much for living allowance as for salary ? I understand that they live in Dawson City and that there is not circuit work.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Of course the expense for circuit work would be under the head of travelling allowance.
Mr. MONK, it seems strange that they should get as much for living allowance as for salary, and the rule seems to apply to the other officers of the court-each officer has a living allowance. The sheriff gets $4,OOt), as does the clerk of the court, and each has a living allowance. So have the deputy sheriffs, assistant clerks, police magistrate and stenographers of the territorial court. And the Crown prosecutor-besides very considerable remuneration-I think that last year he received between $7,000 and $8,000-has an allowance for expenses.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Not a living allowance.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I suppose that under the conditions that prevail in the beginning an allowance is necessary. But what is the rule now ? Is the same thing allowed for the stenographer or for the sheriff as for the judge ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: No, the living allowance for the sheriff, police magistrate,

clerks of the court, and stenographers, is $1,800 each.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: There is no distinction between the sheriff and the stenographers of the territorial court. But the allowance for the stenographers in the police court is not fixed at the same rate.


Charles Fitzpatrick: The stenographer for the police court gets $1,200 salary and $1,800 for living allowance.


Mr.  W. .T. ROCHE@: Does this practice prevail in the other departments with reference to the living allowances of officials in the Yukon ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I understand in all the departments. But I know that so far as the Yukon is concerned, a living allowance was granted to all the officials of the other departments.


William James Roche: I understand that in the province of Manitoba the officials are allowed so much for their general expenses, but not a regular living allowance. They are allowed a salary and all expenses, but they have to produce vouchers for every expenditure. It is different in the Yukon, where they are allowed so much, whatever the expenditure may be.


George William Fowler: Will the minister say how much jurors are paid in the Yukon ? Are jurors and sheriffs paid In a different manner from the other provinces ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I have not got the Information with respect to that, but I can easily procure it if the hon. gentleman wishes.


George William Fowler: About Crown prosecutors, how are the fees regulated ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: We pay Crown prosecutors iu the Yukon exactly as we do all the other counsel employed by the department. When a Crown counsel has rendered a service he sends in his hill, which is taxed in the department in the regular way. Of course I may say that we allow parties something more in the Yukon than we do in the older provinces ; but the bills are taxed in the regular way.


George William Fowler: And the only fees he gets are what he gets from the department here ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I cannot say as to that, hut not in connection with his work as Crown prosecutor. He is supposed to receive nothing at all as Crown prosecutor except what lie receives from tlie department. It would he a grave breach of propriety on his part to take fees from any one else in cases in which he is retained J>.Y the government.


George William Fowler: But he is allowed to practice besides ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes.


George William Fowler: How much was paid to the Crown prosecutor last year as fees ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I have not got that,
I nave only the Manitoba fees.


George Eulas Foster: Mr. Pattullo was paid last .'.car $7,000.95 ; Mr. Noel received $G0G. I think the minister ought hardly to dismiss this matter so easily. There is evidently something wrong in one or two particulars. This scale of living allowance was fixed when there was really a great difference in the cost between the Yukon and the Northwest Territories, for Instance, and British Columbia. But everybody knows that that scale of living has been greatly reduced since then. Take the scale of living of a Northwest judge, for instance, you allow him nothing for his living, you give him a salary. Yet you give $5,000 in the Yukon in addition to what it costs a judge to live in the Northwest Territories. It is paying a man for something which does not cost him the amount, whilst the idea under which it is paid is that it is to cover an acJ tual expense. It is not a right principle, as my hon. friend knows, to pay a man something as a solatium or salary under the guise of paying it as a necessary expense.. Now if this practice runs through ail the! other departments, as I suppose it does, then it is a very large item, besides being an unfair item and it is well worth Inquiring into.
I think some steps ought to he taken to rednce.it to a fair scale. It is unjust to the police magistrate, who has just as good an appetite and eats just as much food, and asl good food, as a stenographer, that the stenographer gets $1,800 and the police magisJ trate only gets $1,200. Why make that difference between them? The police magistrate ought to eat more, because the stenographer's work Is lighter, but there 4s discrimination in the living allowance. I have no doubt this living allowance really becomes part of the 'salary, because the difference in expenses does not at all mount up to the allowance which is given here for the * purpose of living expenses. I think my hon. friend ought to look into that matter. I noticed in the newspapers that a reign of economy has been inaugurated in the Yukon, and that many officials are being dispensed with. Probably the economies are taking place because there is less work. The other ministers also seem to be getting in a little work in this respect in their departments. I think it is unfair to discriminate, and a bad principle, to give to officials under the guise of a necessary expense what is really an addition to their salary.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I quite agree that it is proper that we should have a certain specified sum for a salary, and that the sum paid should be the remuneration for services rendered by the individual to the government. Then in addition to that, if anything further is required, it ought to be



in view of conditions existing, which may vary from time to time. But I quite agree that we should not, under cover Of granting a living allowance, enable a man to eke out an addition to his salary, that is improper. When this matter came up for consideration I made inquiry as to the conditions existing in the Yukon. My information is-my hon. friend may have better information-that since 1900 there has been no appreciable variation in the cost of living in the Yukon. The conditions now are about the same as they were at that time. I can see no good reason why they should vary. We must consider that almost everything that is needed must now be brought into the country at a considerable cost, which would add to the original cost of living. Then the cost of transport, I apprehend, would remain the same now as it was about that time. However, I may say to my hon. friend that I took the trouble, when George McCaulay was in the east, to send for him to come to Ottawa and explain what the conditions were. And I received from him the assurance that the conditions were the same, that the cost of living was practically the same as in 1900, and that of the additional sum of $5,000, very little could be saved. That is the information I have. While I agree with my hon. friend in the principle he laid down, X have given him the information on which I have acted, and I appreciate the necessity of giving this additional remuneration.


George William Fowler: Did the minister ask the sheriff whether he required $5,000 more to live in the Yukon than a judge requires in the Northwest Territories of Manitoba ? That is the very point.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Here is the position. I questioned him with respect to the difference in the increase in house rent, iu the general increase in living, and the cost of ordinary necessities of life, whether or not it cost more to procure these ordinary necessities than it did here. I was told that it did, and is was on that information that 1 based my estimate.


George William Fowler: There is no dobut it would cost more iu the Yukon than it would eithei in the Northwest Territories or in the east. But the point I make is that it does not cost $5,000 more, the difference is too great in the living expenses. The fairer way to get at it would be to attach to the office of the judge of the Yukon a certain salary, and if we give $5,000 in this country, give him say, $7,000 there, and let him pay his own living expenses. For it does not seem to be the right thing to make a certain scale for judge, a certain scale for a police magistrate and another scale for a steno-gi apher ; you are drawing distinctions that should not be drawn in a matter like this where one man is supposed to be as good as another, and considerably better sometimes. For that reason I object to giving Mr. FITZPATRICK.
the extra salary. Give an increased salary, but don't say that the sheriff shall receive $1,800, a judge $5,000, a stenographer $1,000.
I do not think that is right at all.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I do not object to increasing the salary, I think the Minister ot Justice is right in saying that the salary having been increased once, it would be difficult to change it. But I think the allowance should be reduced. 1 may mention that a day or two ago I saw a gentleman from Dawson, a political friend of hon. gentlemen opposite, and he told me that the cost of living up there was very much reduced, in fact it was much the same as it s here, for the reason that the population has gieatly decreased in Dawson ; instead of being 40,000, it is now about 12,000. There are now ample provisions there, and rents are reduced. I think the living allowance should be reduced without touching the salary. . Let the judge have $5,000 a year and reduce the living allowance. It is not a right principle to make this difference between the living allowance of the judge and the stenographer, or any other employee.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I may say to my hon. friends' opposite that all the departments are considering the question of living allowances, and if theVe is any objection to allowing the item to pass, I am willing it should stand until such time as we have made a rule applicable to all the departments, and which will be consistent with the altered conditions in the Yukon. <So far as I am personally concerned, I am prepared to allow the item to stand for a day or two until I can get better information. I know where I can get it.


George Eulas Foster: I suppose the same question will come up in other departments.
I think it ought to be looked into.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, with respect to all the departments. What my hon. friend has said is applicable not only to the Department of Justice, but to all the departments which have officials in the Yukon.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: There ought not to be discrimination anyway.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I do not agree that there is discrimination. I made a mistake when I said that Sheriff Eilbeck was in the Yukon. That gentleman is now in a hospital in San Francisco where he has undergone an operation.
Living allowances of sheriff, deputy sheriff, clerk of court, assistant clerks, police magistrate and stenographers of territorial court at $1,800 each, $14,400.


Mr. SPROFILE.: How will your determination in reference to these salaries be affected by the fact that these votes have passed the House ?


Mr FITZPATRICK.: We are not obliged to pay them. We only get authority to pay

them, and If the House attaches the condition that the authority is given upon the assurance given by the Minister of Justice that this money will not be paid except after an investigation, then, of course, whoever comes here next year and seeks to put justice estimates through will have to be responsible for the performance of that condition. It is immaterial to me. I am willing to allow it to stand over, get the information and come back to the House after the other ministers have come to a conclusion about it.


George William Fowler: What are the salaries of a police court judge and stenographer ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: The police court stenographer gets $1,200.


George William Fowler: Salary ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes.


George William Fowler: And you have a police court judge ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Mr. Justice Macaulay was originally appointed police magistrate for the Yukon Territory, but after he went to that territory it was found that it would be necessary to add to the strength of the high court. We thought that the better plan would be to confer upon Mr. Justice Macaulay the jurisdiction of a high court judge, leaving it to him to continue to perform the duties of police magistrate.


George William Fowler: And he just gets the salary of a police magistrate ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: He gets the salary of a High Court Judge.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the reason the police court stenographer does not get the same salary as the stenographer in the other court ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Because he is not so competent. We have a stenographer in the high court who can take depositions in French and English. It is very hard to get men who are competent to take depositions in French and English, and it is much more difficult to get men to report evidence in the high court than in the police court, where practically a man can take it under dictation. In jury cases, as my hon. friend doubtless knows it is sometimes very difficult work for the stenographer to report accurately.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: And you have two of that kind ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, and very competent men.


George William Fowler: Do these judges go on circuit, or only sit in Dawson ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, they go on -circuit.
Mr. ^OWLER. What circuits have they?
5}


Charles Fitzpatrick: I do not think there is much circuit work done. I think there are only two circuits.


George William Fowler: I suppose Judge Macaulay only sits as police magistrate, and then sits in the court of appeal en banc.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I believe he does considerable amount of high court work. Our experience, at least since I have been in the department, has been that judges very frequently in the winter time come out; in fact, almost every third year one of them comes out, so that when one is away the others have to perform the duties.


George Eulas Foster: Who is the Governor of the Yukon ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I cannot say. I think there is no commissioner appointed permanently, but that the officer in charge of the mounted police is performing the duties.


George Eulas Foster: Did the former commissioner resign before he ran ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I apprehend he was obliged to do that.


George Eulas Foster: A bona fide resignation ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes. I think that Major Wood of the mounted police now performs the duties.


George Eulas Foster: I suppose it would be possible for the ministers to have this matter taken up, and before the end of the session be able to inform parliament what conclusion they have come to in reference to it. It ought not to be difficult to come to a conclusion in regard to it.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I think so. In view of the fact that we have here now Mr. Cory, who has been acting as inspector of public offices in the Yukon for some years past, I think we ought to be able to get reliable information-information of such a nature as to enable us to determine what we ought to do.


George Eulas Foster: And then we have another reliable source of information-the man who is to speak for the Yukon, who will be here in a little while, and who will be able to give my hon. friend, very reliable information.


Charles Fitzpatrick: And I have no doubt it will be perfectly impartial.


George Eulas Foster: It will be truthful.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: He will know what he is talking about, anyway.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I hope there is no insinuation contained in that.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Oh, no. not here.
Maintenance of prisoners, $25,000.

13$


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How many prisoners are there there ? Are they living like the judges ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: We do our best for them. The prisoners in the Yukon are kept in the guard-room, and we allow the mounted police $2 per diem for each prisoner.


George Eulas Foster: For his keep ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes.
\


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How many are there ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I have not the figures.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How many are there generally ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I could, not tell you.


Mr. BERGERON  .@: Twenty-five thousand dollars would pay for a good many.


Charles Fitzpatrick: It occurred to me that we ought to be able to reduce that amount, and I asked the official why we could not reduce it. For the information of the House, I shall read the report which he makes.
Probably this could be reduced to $20,000 without any inconvenience as desired by the minister, but it was thought that a good margin should be left, as the rate being $2 per diem, each prisoner costs $730 and it would only take ten additional prisoners to cost $7,300 more.
Last year, of course, we did not spend the amount we estimated.


George Eulas Foster: Two dollars is a pretty high rate.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Everything appears to come high in the Yukon. We pay (10 cents in the Northwest Territories to the Mounted Police. That has been the rate established for some years, and the rate is 52 in the Yukon.


George Eulas Foster: I notice in the present contest in Toronto-to bring in an extraneous matter-that a document was sent around which represents a scientific man there as saying that it is possible to get up a good food and to keep people for three cents or so a day. My hon. friend might get a supply 'of that food, and it would be a tremendous economy.
Fees and expenses of witnesses, jurors and interpreters in criminal trials, $15,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How many terms of the criminal court have they there ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: The judges themselves regulate that; they sit when it is necessary.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: They have no regular terms ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: No regular terms.
. Mr. BERGERON.
Law books, &c., and freight thereon, for the use of bench and bar and stationery, and freight thereon, for use of courts, $2,500.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is that amount spent each year on the purchase of books 1


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, we have been-doing that for years. I may tell my hon. friend that up to the last year or two we did this for the Northwest Territories ns well. I am in the hands of the House with respect to that Item. I cut it out with respect to the Northwest two years, and it is a question whether or not we should continue to supply books for the judges and the bar of the Yukon. I think it is a vicious practice that has grown up and has been continued for many years.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: So long- as the money is expended for that purpose It may be all right.


Charles Fitzpatrick: There Is no question about that.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I suppose that my hon. friend finds out if the books are-bought ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: I know absolutely nothing about that, but I take all the responsibility for anything that is done, because it is my deputy, one of the most competent men for work of that description, who-makes a selection of books and. sees that they are sent up.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: They are sent from here ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, they are bought in Toronto and sent forward from there.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: They have a librarian in the Yukon ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, there s a librarian wlio receives a salary of 51,500 and 51,200 as living allowance.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: There is another discrimination, 51,200 for him and $1,800 for the stenographer.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I cannot help discriminations; a good man must necessarily command higher wages.


George William Fowler: Hid I understand the minister to say that he proposed to cut this item out ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: No, I did not say that; I said I was entirely in the hands of the House with respect to that. It is a practice that has grown up in all sections of the country administered from here. I found it in existence in the Northwest Territories and the same system was adopted for the Yukon, which, of course, had a provisional government similar in some respects to that of tiie Northwest Territories. Two years ago, I think it was. we dropped the item with respect to the Northwest Territo-

ries, and 1 now say that I am in the hands of the House with respect to this item. There are reasons why we should supply the judges and the har with law books and there are reasons why we should not. I could urge very good reasons why a judge out there should be required to have his own library and why the bar should provide their own books as lawyers do with us.


George William Fowler: As a matter of fact, it seems to me that the lawyers there get better fees than we do down here and are in a better position to buy books than we who nre struggling in the east.


Charles Fitzpatrick: Some of you struggle very successfully.


George William Fowler: In my judgment that Item should be struck out.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I have no objection to dropping it.


George William Fowler: It is not a large item it is true, but the principle remains the same, whether it is large or small.


George Eulas Foster: Let it drop.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: The item of $2,500 is dropped.


Mr. GALLIIIER.: Do I understand you to say that item was cut out 7


Charles Fitzpatrick: I have no objection to hearing what my hon. friend (Mr. Galli-her) has to say, but I am afraid it is disposed of.


William Alfred Galliher: If the item has been dropped, of course it is no use my saying ^anything.
Miscellaneous expenditures, including fees and expense of crown prosecutor, salary and living allowance of stenographer of police court and other officers or employes connected with the administration of justice, coroners' inquests, &c., &e., $25,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Of that $25,000 how much was spent last year ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Of the stenographers, Geo. Grey received $2,000, salary and living allowance. $1,800: J. A. Vali-quette received a salary of $2,000 and living allowance, $1,800:	H. G. Blankman.
-stenographer, received a salary of $1,200 and a living allowance of $1,800. The Crown prosecutor received somewhere in the neighbourhood of $7,030.


Mr. DANIEL.: Is the minister in possession of information as to the amount of fees that are paid in these courts ? I am inquiring especially in regard to fees for medical evidence.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I have hot that information by me, but we have in the department a scale of allowances for the Yukon Teri'itory.
Dominion Police, $37,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: There is ail increase there.


Charles Fitzpatrick: That is caused by the increase of pay to the commissioner and the members of the force. The commissioner had been in receipt of $2,400 a year, and for many years there had not been any addition to his remuneration. I myself, without solicitation on liis part, recently increased his allowance to $3,000 a year. The commissioner of police, Col. Sherwood, is one of the most competent officers in the Dominion.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If he succeeded in getting the best of those bogus ballot boxes, I think he ought to get it.


Charles Fitzpatrick: When occasion requires, be is always to the fore.


George Eulas Foster: What was the addition to the pay of the police ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Forty men received an increase of 25 cents per diem. The inspectors now get $2.90 and $2.75, the sergeants, $2.40; 14 constables, $2.15, 9, $2.05, 7 $1.S0 and S $1.50.


George William Fowler: Did you add any to the force ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes, two men have Leen added, involving an increased expense of $1,350. The justification for that is the necessity for policing- the different public buildings throughout the city. Formerly when the departments were all together here, we could do with a smaller force. So far as the police force is concerned , it is absolutely controlled by the commissioner. He makes all his recommendations, and the statute p) actically makes him the master of the force, and I think it is quite proper that it should be so.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Will the minister inform the House whether this building is under tlie control of this parliament or under the control of the provincial government ? I saw in the press the other day that the barber down stairs had been reported for shaving on Sunday, and I thought that perhaps the hon. minister could give us a little information as to what extent policemen in plain clothes or otherwise, who are not members of the Dominion police, have the right to invade the barber shop, the restaurant and other tarts of this building V


Charles Fitzpatrick: That is a somewhat delicate constitutional question, and requires some consideration before I can give an answer. I am quite safe, however, in saying this, that if the Dominion police had been aware that any outsider had invaded the premises for the purpose described by my hon. friend, he would have received very scant courtesy indeed.
Post' Office-outside service-salaries and allowances including salary of $960.00 for Mr. James Dundas, a railway mail clerk, re-instat-

ed in the service on the 1st September, 1898, and hereby restored to his former status under the Civil Service Superannuation Act on payment of a sum equivalent to the statutory deduction on that salary from date of dismissal ; his service to be considered as continuous, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service or Superannuation Acts, $1,694,238.50.


George William Fowler: Explain this.


William Mulock: Mr. Dundas was a railway mail clerk in Ontario. In the year 1896 he was reported by the judges in an election trial as guilty of some corrupt practice, and on that account was dismissed from the service.
Mr. FOSTER, 'in the Dominion elections or the provincial ?


William Mulock: In the Dominion, in a controverted election case. He was a year and a half out of the service, and ivas then reinstated. In the meantime, the civil service Superannuation Act had been repealed, and if he had not been allowed the benefit of that Act, he would have lost many of the advantages that would otherwise have accrued to him as the result of his contributions to the fund.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Whom was he dismissed by ?


William Mulock: The present government.


George Eulas Foster: What was his crime ?


William Mulock: He was convicted by the trial judges of having bribed an elector and paid money in the campaign.


George Eulas Foster: Has my hon. friend any sympathy or fellow feeling for him?


William Mulock: I do not know what my hon. friend means by the inquiry. The item itself explains the extent of our sympathy.


George Eulas Foster: It is a justification of him as a good officer anyway.


William Mulock: He was dismissed as there was nothing apparently to mitigate the offence. But afterwards some friends of his told me that his offence really arose from good fellowship and that he was not a bad sort of fellow after all. In order to be satisfied, I myself applied to the trial judges to see if they could find anything in extenuation and they did so. On the strength of their view of the case, the Council reinstated him.


George William Fowler: How long was he out- about a year and a half?


William Mulock: I think so. I have here the Order in Council which I shall read, if my hon. friend desires. The judges made a friendly report and we concluded to reinstate him.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I do not wish to criticise my hon. friend's course. On the con-Mr. FITZPATRICK.
trary, I think he took a very charitable view; but if the government are going to. look at such things in that way, I could remind them of cases of men who were dismissed simply because they had voted at the elections and without undergoing any trial at ail. Those men had paid into the superannuation fund and lost their positions and everything. If the government are prepared to continue in the course indicated by my hon. friend, I could present lot their consideration some very deserving cases.


William Mulock: I would be very sorry indeed that any one should be dismissed simply for having voted.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I could name some.


William Mulock: I do not think it possible that the government could have dismissed a man simply because he exercised his rights as a citizen, and I aru quite confident there must be some other circumstances of which my hon. friend apparently knows nothing.


George Eulas Foster: In my own county a man was dismissed, who simply went and cast his vote, and took no other part in the election at all. The only reason given for his dismissal was that he had a brother, who did not hold a government office, but who took an active part in the campaign. That was conclusively proved by one of the government's own commissioners. The only reason why this man was dismissed, and the reason given parliament for his dismissal, was that his brother was an active partisan. Now that you have made the amende honourable to this gentleman-and I am not finding any fault with you for that-surely you ought to do something in the case I mention.
Kir WiLLiAM MULOCK. I am not speaking for any other department but my own, and I have no information of anything of the kind -to which my hon. friend refers. I think it will be found that there were other circumstances to justify the government, but it is quite impossible in a general way to deal with these methods. Each case must be dealt with on its own merits. I should be amazed if any minister ever dismissed any one for having simply exercised his rights as a citizen.


George William Fowler: There were more persons dismissed in the district I represent from the hon. gentleman's own department after 1890 than from all the other departments. He seemed to be particularly vindictive against persons who had been reported to-him as having simply voted as their consciences dictated. Persons holding post offices throughout the country were dismissed without any investigation whatever. The hon. gentleman says that a man has a perfect right to vote, in which I agree with him. but I go further and say he has not only the right to vote, but the right to use

whatever influence he has to induce others to vote as he thinks right. I do not think that a man should he dismissed tor having exercised his powers of persuasion over his fellow citizens. The only ground for dis-. missal should be dereliction of office.


William Mulock: I would not like by my silence to be considered as admitting that I ever dismissed any one under such circumstances as those to which my hon. friend has referred. If he will bring any case of dismissal to my attention, he will find that the circumstances differ materially from what he thinks they were.


George William Fowler: I never knew the hou. gentleman yet to admit anything, but he must remember that during the last four years 1 have frequently brought to his attention dismissals of postmasters for no other reason than the recommendation of the person who had control of the patronage.


William Mulock: The other day I promised my hon. friend from Beauharnois an explanation why a certain messenger was getting $720. The explanation is that some officers in that class have accepted the grade system, which was inaugurated three years ago. Under that system a man is graded at so much a day and may ultimately reach the yearly amount of $725.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Where is the line of demarcation between the two classes when the appointments are made?


William Mulock: 
Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: , And they are appointed permanently ?	.


William Mulock: Yes, the difference is in the mode of payment.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Who decides how they shall be appointed ?


William Mulock: Wlien the law came into effect, every man had the privilege of electing to continue under the old
law or come under the new. The new appointments are made under the grade system.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I thank the Postmaster General for this information. Coming back to the matter we were speaking of a few moments ago, I wish to refer to a case that came under my own observation. The Postmaster at Beauharnois in 1S9G was Mr. Alexis Doutre. He was a very good officer, and nothing was ever said against the way he kept the post office. Before his appointment he had been a strong partisan, but, while postmaster he did nothing that should have excited the anger of those in the locality who did not share his political opinions. When my hon. friend (Sir Wm. Mulock) took hold of the department, Mr. Doutre was dismissed summarily, without investigation granted, though I asked for it. An officer of the department came and demanded his keys. The dismissal caused Mr. Doutre great inconvenience. He had rented a house for which he was personally responsible. The gentleman who replaced him in office, a political friend of hon. gentlemen opposite, has performed his duties well. Rut, I am sorry to say, he is very sick to-day, and I believe, cannot hold his position very long.
I think it would be a graceful and generous thing for the Postmaster General, if the position becomes vacant, to reappoint Mr. Doutrfe to the position he formei-ly held. He has not recovered financially from the disadvantages to which he was put by his sudden dismissal. It was unexpected ; it was a contingency he had not provided for. If he were reappointed, it would only he an act of justice, and it would do the party of the hon. member far more good than it would do me. It would be a wise move for the further reason that, when the time conies to fill the office, the Postmaster General will find many demands, but he will fiud few applicants who would be acceptable to himself if he knew the cases well. I might say that I have always looked at these matters differently from, the Postmaster General. Even in the old days, during the time when I supported a government in this House, there were many postmasters in Beauharnois opposed to me. Yet, I never asked for the dismissal of any of them, and some of them are there still and they worked against me. I do not complain of that, because their official duties are properly performed. But I use this argument as a further ground for asking that, if the present postmaster of Beauharnois does not hold his office, the Postmaster General will re-appoint the man who was dismissed-as he will find on looking into the matter-without any good reason.


William Mulock: My hon. friend (Mr. Bergeron) has certainly a very winning way of appealing to one. I can only say that if it becomes necessary to appoint a l postmaster at Beauharnois, what 'the hon.
/

gentleman lias said will be remembered. Of course, I cannot make any promise. I do not, recollect tlie circumstances under which the former postmaster was relieved of his duties.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I would be happy, in another place to remind my hon. friend of the circumstances.
Mr. SPROT i.E. Some time ago. it was intimated in the newspapers that, notwithstanding that the Postmaster General had increased the salaries of country postmasters, it was contemplated to give them another raise, and that that would be done this winter. Was there anything in that, 'or was it a rumour for election purposes ? It was spoken of several times in our part of the country.


William Mulock: I did not hear the rumour, and do not know of any foundation for it.


George William Fowler: Will the hon. gentleman (Sir William Mulock) please explain the increases ?


William Mulock: There is a total increase of ,$125,068. This is made up as follows :	Increases in Post Office Inspectors' offices $2,154.75 ; increases in the railway mail service $22,456.50 ; the city post offices $!)0,456.75-ail increases in salaries.


George William Fowler: Are they all statutory ?


William Mulock: I think so. The inspectors are entitled to certain- increases after certain years of service. There are seven increases of $100, seventeen increases of $50 each, one increase of $78.25, one increase of $30 and a short estimate in 1904-5 of $496.50. There are seven increases to the inspectors of $100 each. In the New Brunswick division Mi'. N. It. Colter gets an increase of $100. which will bring his salary up to $2,500. The limit is $2,600.
^ Mr. FOSTER. According to the Auditor General's Report he is not nearly up to the maximum yet.


William Mulock: At all events, lie is entitled under the law to an extra $100. The Civil Service Amendment Act raises the maximum to these inspectors. They were not entitled to promotion to a higher class until they had passed so many years in the service, that was under the old" law ; but under the amendment of two years ago many changes were made in the salaries of civil servants, and, amongst others, of the inspectors.


George William Fowler: Are they all on one footing ?


William Mulock: All treated exactly the same, no discrimination at all. no favouritism ; they are all treated according sCo the law.


William Mulock: ,
Mr: FOWLER. Discrimination is not always favouritism.


William Mulock: In the Quebec division Inspector Bolduc gets an increase of $100.


George Eulas Foster: In the New Brunswick division Mr. Colter is now getting how much?


William Mulock: What the Auditor General has assigned to him, I suppose.


George Eulas Foster: The yearly increase is $100 to an inspector ?


William Mulock: I forget what the provision of the Act is. there are a number of changes in the status of the civil service. Inspector Bolduc is now getting $2,400.


George Eulas Foster: No, he got $2,288 according to this report.


William Mulock: My officer says $2,400 is right. I cannot explain the Auditor General's figures ; I do not know which is right. But he is at his maximum.
Mx-. FOSTER. But these are all government officers. Does he get anything besides his salary ?


William Mulock: My officer explains that that will be for the year closing .June 30, 1904. and that would be $2,300. He lias probably had $100 of an increase, and then on that $2,300 there may have been some reduction for superannuation, which will bring it down to that broken sum. Now my officer says that the salary was increased from $2,300 to $2,400 in August last. Therefore, what I am reading is correct.


George William Fowler: For the new year he will g'et $2,500 ?


Sir   W ILLIAM MULOCK@: He is actually now in receipt of $2,400. and that will continue to be his salary until these estimates come into effect. Then he will get the benefit of the $100 increase.


George William Fowler: Will that $12 and some cents be the amount of his superannuation
tax ?


George Eulas Foster: It is $11.58.


William Mulock: I do not know what the deduction is for the superannuation fund. It is two and a-half per cent, is it not ?


George William Fowler: Yes.


William Mulock: If Mr. Colter entered after the repeal of the Superannuation Act, his contribution would he at the rate of five per cent per annum to the retirement fund.


George Eulas Foster: Then, I do not see how you get that figure.


William Mulock: The next item is J. W. Bain, Montreal division. He re-

reives an increase of $100.	.T. A. Madore,
assistant inspector, will get an increase of $100. Kingston office, Henry Merrick, present salary $2,500, will get $100 extra ; Toronto office, J. Henderson, present salary, $2,500. will get $100 extra ; Victoria division, E. H. Fletcher


George William Fowler: If these increases are only by virtue of the Act passed two years ng'o, how do these men come to get $100 more than the other inspectors you spoke of ?


William Mulock: I suppose they have been longer in the service, and got their promotion earlier.


George William Fowler: But I understand that all this dates from the Civil Service Act passed two years ago.


William Mulock: This $100 is one thing and the salary before that Act applied is another thing. They were appointed at different dates.


George William Fowler: But they were not getting these statutory increases before the passing of that Act.


William Mulock: Not these, of course.


George William Fowler: No, but they were all supposed, as I understand, to start even from the time the Act was passed two years ago, and I cannot understand how some persons get a little farther ahead than others.


William Mulock: We will see what the old Civil Service Act gave them. The old Act said that a first-class inspector on appointment should receive $2,200 a year, after ten years' service $2,400, and after twenty years' service $2,600 a year. A second-class inspector on appointment received $2,000, after ten years' service $2,200, and after twenty years' service $2,400. Then this law was amended by the Post Office Amendment Act, chapter 49 of the statutes of 1903 as follows :
The salary of a post office inspector on appointment shall be two thousand dollars, with increases of fifty dollars a year for six years, and one hundred dollars a year thereafter up to a maximum of two thousand six hundred dollars.
Any post office inspector who, at the passing of this Act, has completed six years of service as such may be granted an increase of one hundred dollars a year up to the maximum of two thousand six hundred dollars.
Any post office inspector who, at the passing of this Act, has completed less than six years of service as such may be granted an increase of fifty dollars a year until he has completed six years of service, and one hundred a year thereafter up to the maximum of two thousand six hundred dollars.
The salary of an assistant post office inspector on appointment shall he, twelve hundred dollars, with increases of fifty dolla-s a year lor the first six years, and one hundred dollars
a year thereafter up to a maximum of one thousand eight hundred dollars.
And so on. There are two other classes. These persons did not have the same salaries.


George William Fowler: They did not all start even ?


William Mulock: No, they did not. That disposes of seven of them. I did not give Mr. E. H. Fletcher, of Victoria, whose salary is $2,400. He will get $100. That makes $700 given to the inspectors.


George William Fowler: Are there only seven inspectors altogether V


William Mulock: There are about eleven, but the others are at the maximum. Then there are seventeen increases of $50 each, making $850. I will give those. They are clerks in the inspectors' offices, as follows :	[DOT]
Present
salary.
Nova Scotia Division-
E. A. Macdonald, junior 3rd class ..	750
New Brunswick division-
W. Hatch, first class	1,200
A. Thompson, senior second class .. .. 1,150 Quebec division-
M. Pelletier, junior 2nd class	 950
M. M. Shaw, junior 3rd class	 '750
Montreal division-
M. A. Curran, 4th class	 630
Ottawa division-
M. J. Whitty, first class	1,300
A. L. Robinson, junior 3rd class .. ..	750
M. C. Green, 4th class	 630
Kingston division-
M. Ford, junior 3rd class	 750
Toronto division-	.
M.	S. Bradley, senior 2nd	class	1,050
London division-
H. G. Sears, 4th class	 450
Manitoba division-
J. L. Broughton, first class	1,250
J. R. Simmons, senior 2nd class	1,050
E. R. A. Stevenson, senior 2nd class .. 1,050
N.	Gouin, 4th class	 630
Vancouver division-
P. Keyes, junior 3rd class	 750
Seventeen in all receiving $50 each, which makes $850. Then in the office at St. John there is an increase of $78.25. This is to advance J. O. Henderson, messenger in the office of the post office inspector at St. John from grade D to grade C, increasing his salary from $1.50 to $1.75 a day. There is also an increase of $30 to increase the salary of M. A. O'Reilly, .junior third-class clerk In the office of the post office inspector at Quebec, from $770 to $800, the maximum of the class. This includes another item of $496.50, short estimated for 1904-5. It is made up of the following particulars : The salaries of the undermentioned junior third-class clerks were raised to $700 on 13th August, 1903, which became the minimum salary of that class by the amendment to the Civil Service Act of 1903 :

14S
	From	To
Quebec division-		
M. M. Shaw		..$ 690	$ 700
Kingston division-		
M. Ford 		.. 610	700
Vancouver division-		
P. Keyes		.. 600	700
	1,900	2,000
		1,900 200
Three increases of	$50 each	granted tothe undermentioned	junior	third-classclerks which had not	been specially pro-	vided for in the estimates for	1904-5.From	ToQuebec division-	M. M. Shaw	.. $700	$750Kingston division-	M. Ford 	.. 700	750Vancouver division-	P. Keyes	.. 700	750 $150Two increases of $78.25	each.


Messrs.  J. A.@: Screaton,	messenger in	
the office of the post	office inspector	
at London, and A. Raymond,		messenger in the office of	the post	office
inspector at Quebec, were advanced from grade ' D ' to grade ' E ' from March 1, and September 1. 1904, respectively, with an increase of 25 cents a day or $78.25 a year each.. $156 50

Less an over-estimate, in the salary of Miss M. A. O'Reilly, junior third-class clerk in the office of the post office inspector at Quebec	 10 00

The next item making up this $125,000 is increases to the salaries of the railway mail clerks. The total amount of the increase in the salaries of the railway mail service men is $32,456.50.
I may explain generally that there was an amendment to the Post Office Act affecting the salaries of the railway mail clerks. Formerly the railway mail clerk service was divided into three classes. A man received, I think, $480 at entrance, and in a short time when his period of probation ended, he was entitled to be promoted to a third-class clerkship at $520. He remained in this class for at least five years and then he might be eligible to be promoted to the second class. I think" the minimum of the second class was $640. If he were promoted from the third class to the second class he would enter at a minimum of $640 and go up to $800, the maximum of the second class. He would remain at that figure until he was promoted into a higher class, which in the past depended to some extent upon the occurrence of a vacancy, so that a man might stick at $800 for a considerable period. The maximum of the first class was $960, and if a man was promoted from the second to the first class his maximum would be $960 and mileage. We changed the law a couple of years ago abolishing classes and fixing a minimum en-Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.
trance salary and a maximum salary. Men now enter the service as probationers for six months, .after examination, and they are paid $400 a year during this probationary period and also their mileage. If at the expiration of the probationary period they are considered fit to be continued in the service they are appointed and begin at a salary of $500 a year. There is now no division into classes, but every mail clerk, is entitled to an annual increase if his service is satisfactory until he attains the maximum salary of $1,200.


George Eulas Foster: What is the annual increase?


William Mulock: $50. We have 460 railway mail clerks, and this $50 a year practically applies to .all of them who are-deserving, and I think there are not many who are not deserving. Even those who-were formerly at the maximum are getting the benefit of the $50 until they reach the $1,200.


George William Fowler: Has there been .any change in the mileage rate ?


William Mulock: No, it is the same as it was, half a cent per mile in the day time and a cent at night.


George William Fowler: Who settles the routes of the different clerks?


William Mulock: The Controller of the Railway Mail Service, Mr. Armstrong.


George William Fowler: What is the duty of the chief railway mail clerk of each?


William Mulock: We have no such office now, we have .a superintendent for each province.


George William Fowler: He used to be called the chief clerk.


William Mulock: In New Brunswick for example there is a superintendent-


George William Fowler: What is his duty?


William Mulock: He is an office man to some extent, keeping tab on the clerks.


George William Fowler: Does he not settle their routes ?


William Mulock: Subject to the opinion of the controller.


George William Fowler: Always?


William Mulock: I suppose he is largely responsible for the organization in his district.


George William Fowler: The controller would not have to pass upon the route of each man. For instance, suppose the superintendent directed John Smith to run from St. John to Montreal, the' controller would not have-to pass on that before it would be made

John Smith's route, hut if there was a complaint the controller would be brought in.


William Mulock: I fancy he would have to pass on that because a railway mail clerk running from St. John to Montreal would be operating in other inspectors' districts, and that circumstance would have to be considered. Does the committee desire me to read the names of the clerks.


George Eulas Foster: They are all on that uniform basis?


William Mulock: All on that uniform basis. There may be some who do not get the increase for some reason. The controller determines the question. I jhave nothing to do with that except to act on his advice and the advice of tlh$? deputy.


George William Fowler: Where you have a system of mileage as with the railway mail clerks I suppose the amount of salary depends largely on the number of miles travelled; they are not all alike.
Sir WILLIAM MT't	j c1o not think
that there is much profit to the clerks in the mileage as when traveling they are put to extra expense. Some of them are economical and may make something out of it, but from what I hear there is not much gain to them in travelling when they receive only half a cent to a cent a mile.
That disposes of .$32,456.50. The next item making up the $125,000 is an item of $90,450.70 for city post offices.
Some resolutions reported.
On motion of Sir William Mulock, House adjourned at 6 p.m.



[Stage Direction]
3.	How many trips across the St. Lawrence, from the wharf at Riviere Ouelle or St. Denis, to Murray Bay has the said ' Champlain ' made?
4.	What is the reason why the said steamer * Champlain ' has not made regular trips between the two above named places ?
Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) ;
1.	$87,600.
2.	For wages, board, fuel, oil and clothing, an average of $80.
3.	Sixteen round trips, up to the latest report on the 17th instant.
4.	Very heavy ice which grounds on a shoal extending off Riviere Ouelle wharf (this shoal will be removed this season) combined with snow storms and fog; and for a short time undergoing repairs owing to slight accident.

Mr. MORIN asked:: 1.	What is the actual cost to the government of the steamer ' Montcalm ' delivered at Quebec ?
2.	What is the average cost per diem to the government of the steamer ' Montcalm ' since its arrival at Quebec ?
3.	What is the said steamer employed for ?
4.	How many trips has the said steamer made from the city of. Quebec to the Island of Orleans and vice versa ?


Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries):: 1.	$272,000.
2.	$150 principally owing to the large coal consumption.
3.	She is employed in the endeavour to secure the opening of navigation between Quebec and Montreal earlier in the spring, and keep it open later in the fall. Also to
render assistance to vessels caught in the ice,
and establish the possibility of winter navigation on the north shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. She will also be employed in the summer time as a lighthouse and buoy tender for the province of Quebec.
4.	None; her work has been above Quebec.
Wednesday, January 25, 1905.