1905-01-27

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEES.

Rt.   H@: That Mr. Augustin Bourbonnais be transferred from the Committee on Miscellaneous Private Bills to the Committee on Standing Orders.


That Mr.  L. P.@: Demers be transferred from the Committee on Standing Orders to the Committee on Miscellaneous Private Bills.
That Mr. Thomas Greenway be transferred . from the Committee on Banking and Commerce to the Committee on Agriculture.
That Mr. Hugh Guthrie be transferred from the Committee on Agriculture to the Committee on Banking and Commerce.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. W. F. MACLEAN.: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to ask the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) if he will tell the House whether there are any and substantial changes in the instructions of the new Governor General-changes from the ordinary instructions ?


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: I am not* aware of any.


Wilfrid Laurier: 



GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY SURVEYS.

Hon. GEO. E. FOSTER.: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to ask the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Emmerson) whether he has any information which can be communicated to the House with reference to the Grand Trunk Pacific surveys of the route between Quebec and Moncton ? I noticed in the papers some semi-authoritative statements as to what had been found as a result of these surveys, and in some eases the statements were definite. If there is any information that the House could have, I would like very much to get it. If he has not got it at his hand, would he just intimate whether, in answer to a request of an order of the House, there are any.papers that he could bring down at present with reference to those surveys ?


Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals).: I may say in reply to my hon. friend that there are no reports in the Department of Railways and Canals with respect to the surveys. The Act provides, if I remember correctly, for reports to be furnished annually by the Commissioners to the Department of Railways and Canals. The surveys already made, as I understand, are preliminary. I know there has been no report from the construction commission to the Department of Railways and Canals with respect to these surveys. There is no information In the department which I could bring down to the House.


George Eulas Foster: Do I understand the minister to say that the procedure would be something like this : That those engineering parties, through their chief, would report to the commission, and that the commission would then include these in their annual report ? Does the minister mean to say that parliament should sit here and not have the benefit of the results of those engineers' reports until they came a year afterwards through the medium of tiie commission ? Surely my hon. friend will not contend that we are to sit here and wait eighteen months for reports to be digested, or pigeon-holed, or whatever is done with them, by the commission, whilst we, representing the country, are kept without the information. Surely that cannot be the course of procedure which will be followed.


Henry Robert Emmerson: I suppose my hon. friend will have to exercise the same patience that I will have to exercise until those reports are given to the Department of Railways and Canals according to law. Then, of course, the department will be jn a position to furnish the information. It is a question of the construction of the law. My hon. friend can refer to it for himself.


Hon. JOHN HAGGART.: Mr. Speaker, what department is the commission under ?
2=>9

Surely we have a right to the reports made to the commission, if they are completed ; and there is no necessity for us to wait until the commission reports to the Minister of Railways and Canals. Under what department is that commission ?


Henry Robert Emmerson: I presume that the commission would be associated with the Department of Railways and Canals.


George Eulas Foster: How intimate would the association be ?


Henry Robert Emmerson: It is not particularly under that department ; it is a body by itself, an independent body, under the provisions of the Act which created it.


George Eulas Foster: Well, perhaps we are not in a position to discuss the matter under this order


Wilfrid Laurier: No.


George Eulas Foster: But if the rendering of the Minister of Railways and Canals is correct on that point, something will have to be done by the House, because I do not imagine that members on either side of the House would be willing to wait a year and a half for the commission to digest the information, when they want it themselves.


Wilfrid Laurier: I suppose my hon. friend will wait, at all events, until there are reports of that survey made by the parties who are in the field. They will report to the commission, and the commission will have to report to the Railway Department. The discussion is.premature now, and it may be renewed some time later.


William Findlay Maclean: Perhaps the right hon. Prime Minister will bring down the Order in Council creating the commission and let us see it. There may be some information in it as to which department the commission belongs.


Wilfrid Laurier: No, there is no necessity for that, because the commission has been created under statute and not under Order in Council.


Mr. SPROULE.: This report should be given to the public and communicated to parliament. It was given to the public through the press some time ago.


Wilfrid Laurier: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think I noticed the report in the Toronto ' Globe,' and that is evidently the government organ we may as-isume that it is correct. If the report is available for the press it should be available for parliament.


Wilfrid Laurier: What my hon. friend saw in the ' Globe ' was only a rumour. There has been no report in the press.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then it is only a rumour?
8i


Wilfrid Laurier: Sometimes there are rumours in the press and sometimes there are facts.


John Graham Haggart: Have there been any reports from the surveyors to the commission in which there was a statement, approved or otherwise, as to the location ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I assume, and probably with some degree of certainty, that there may have been interim reports, but so far as my knowledge goes there has been no final report.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
House again in Committee of Supply,
Indians-schools, Maritime Provinces, Ontario and Quebec, $49,230.
["Yes ; I am very anxious to do so. I suppose that ilex' week we shall commence a more regular", 'course of business than we have had up to this time. I should think that the bill referred to could be introduced probably during the second week in February.']
Mr. COCKSHUTT.: Mr. Chairman, may I have the privilege of addressing you for a few moments in connection with the matter of grants to'Indian schools ? My right hon. friend the First Minister had the goodness to refer to me yesterday as an authority upon educational matters in connection with the young Indians. My information is perhaps obtained from sources that are as reliable as any that can be furnished, and I desire to submit a few observations in connection with the grants to Indian schools from the experience I have had in meeting the Six Nation Indians particularly for many years past. I may say that the Mohawk institution, that figures, I think, the fourth in the list of grants, is an institution with which I have had a good deal of familiarity and it is in reference to that particularly that I wish to speak. I may say that the grants that have been made from time to time to that institution have, I believe, for the most part, been very well expended. If I were sure that all the grants to all the Indian schools were of the same nature as that I should have no hesitation whatever in saying that it was well expended money. The question was asked, and my right hon. friend referred to me yesterday, in reference to what the effect was upon the rising generation of Indians. I may say that the effect has been for the most part very good indeed. It is perhaps not generally known that the county of Brant contains the largest reservation that exists in North America, that is in point of population, the population being upwards of 4,000. Contact with civilization has not acted as was generally expected it would in the destruction of the race. The race is actually upon the increase. I know from last year's report that it has increased some 63 in numbers. This fact then leads to an observation as to what is the ultimate destiny of our Indian race so far as the Six Nation Indians are concerned. I believe their destiny is not extinction but absorption, that they will ultimately be absorbed into the peoples of this country and become consolidated as a Canadian race. The white blood has now been

so infused into the race that there are comparatively few of pure blood there. This may appear to be surprising, but it is nevertheless the fact and we have to face the facts as they are. The race is likely to be absorbed among the population of Canada. Within probably three or five generations this change at the rate at which it is going on now, will have been completed. The question has been raised :	Is the money being
well expended which is devoted to the education of Indians ? I think I may say it has been well expended at the Mohawk institution. The grant that is made at present is some $60 per head for 91 pupils, although I see that they did not obtain last year the total of that grant for reasons that I cannot explain. They obtained from $4,700 to $4,900. I find that it is stated as $4,700 in one report and $4,900 in another, whereas they were entitled to some $5,400. This grant has been made for perhaps ten years or in the neighbourhood of ten years. It was first made when Mr. Dewdney was in charge of the department, and I think I had the honour of seeing him in connection with the grant at that time. It has been continued ever since and young Indians have been turned out from that institution who are filling many honourable positions iii the land. Residents of the city of Toronto well know that one of the most distinguished residents of Toronto was a former resident of the Six Nation reserve. He has obtained a salary which is not less than that of the First Minister sitting in this House and is at the head of one of the greatest financial institutions of this country. He is a former pupil of this- institution.
I would refer also to the fact that in the days of Sir John Macdonald, it was his custom to occasionally introduce into the Department of the Interior and the Indian service, graduates of note from the Six Nation reserve and there is one young lady still in the department. I would suggest to my right hon. friend that it would be wise to continue that custom introduced in the time of Sir John Macdonald. It furnishes an incentive to the young men of the Six Nations to make great efforts and I think that it is one of the object lessons that should be set before them. These are positions that they can fill and I think they are entitled to feel there are positions that they can occupy in this country. It should be remembered in discussing this question that the grants that are given to the Six Nations are largely taken out of their own moneys, that they are not a charge upon the country. These grants are derived largely from their own interest money and the Six Nation Indians are not a charge upon the people of the country. I know not whether they are considered constituents of my hon. friend the Minister of Customs (Mr. Paterson) or of myself, but they are residents of the county of Brant, they are upwards of 4.000 in number and in the year 1887 my hon.


William Foster Cockshutt: friend the Minister of Customs and myself had the honour of polling the first Indian vote ever polled for a white man in North America. This vote was fairly evenly divided. I think the disfranchising of the Indians was a step in the wrong direction, inasmuch as I believe the Indians of the Six Nations are advanced by conferring upon them the responsibilities of citizenship. They were enfranchised in 1885, I think, by Sir John Macdonald, and up to the year 1896 or 1897 they had the privilege of voting in Dominion elections. That has been discontinued owing to the provincial lists becoming operative and they are not qualified to vote in provincial matters. I believe the advantage of voting to the race was considerable.
I believe that right should be again conferred, although I am not in a position td ask for that to-day. I say that our ideal should be the absorption of these tribes by the people of the country. With that en.l in view, I think I may well say that they will become a credit to this country and that the money we are expending on the n is well expended. Probably no nation on the face of the earth has advanced more rapidly than the Six Nations of Brant county have done during the last century and a half. It is only a century and a half since they were a barbarous race; to-day many of them occupy well tilled farms and are in comfortable circumstances, and many ol them are capable of discharging duties in high stations. That is a fact to which I can vouch from my own observation. We have had no less than eight of these Indians in our own domestic service in fifteen years, and they have all acquitted themselves satisfactorily. If my right hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) will inquire in the department, he will find that there is a young Indian lady there who for the past fifteen years has acquitted herself creditably and is to-day drawing a considerable salary .for efficient work. That is only a sample of what can be done and is being done through the instruction which is being obtained in the Mohawk institution.
I may say that the training given at that institution Is technical and manual ns well as educational, and this, I think, should be the basis of all instruction to the Indians; that is, they should be taught to work. We know that in former days, even in any earlier days, the redman's burden was carried by the Indian woman. To-day that condition has disappeared. This shows the advance of civilization among them. The only way to assist the Indians to advance to first-class civilization is to teach them to work.
The Iroquois, or Six Nations, are probably tbe most advanced tribe on tbe North American continent to-day, and their advancement is largely due to the work of the industrial school near the confines of the city of Brantford. That institution is maintained largely by the New England Com-

pany, of London, England, a charitable institution, and not the government, nor is it aided largely by public moneys. During this past year the Rt. Hon. the Earl of Stamford, a commissioner o-f the company, visited that institution, and also invests gated the schools on the Six Nations reserve. He went to Lytton, in British Columbia, also where the company has established an institution. As I said, these schools are almost entirely maintained ns charities by the New England Company, and the government grant is a small proportion of the money expended on them. That being the case, I trust that when a further grant is asked, as I think it will bo at an early day, for the purpose of furnishing fire protection for the new institution, my right hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Laur-ier) will view that application favourably, and that the Minister of Customs (Mr. Paterson) will join with me in (pressing the necessity of a grant towards this crying need of this institution. You will remember that it was burned down eighteen months ago. The buildings, which were totally destroyed, have been replaced with the insurance money, but fire protection is still required. Water mains are being laid by the city of Brantford into the country, and it is expected that it will cost $8,000 to provide the fire protection. The New England Company have applied to the department for $3,000 towards this expense, and I would be very glad if my right hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid -Laurier) could see his way to granting that request. The -lives of the children would be in danger in the event of a fire under present conditions. I trust that when this matter comes up for consideration it will not be viewed from any party standpoint, as the remarks I am making are not made in any factious spirit or with a desire to unduly criticise; my desire is to point out the -fact that the institution is worthy of the grant it is now getting, -and should also receive a further grant of $3,000 towards fire protection. That grant would be appreciated not only by the Mohawk Institute but also by the Six Nations, who are a large part, probably 10 per cent, of the population of Brant.
The right hon. gentleman (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) yesterday referred to pagan rites on this reserve. I am free to admit that they are still practised, but to a very small extent. My hon. friend says he saw them when he was there. I admit that the practice still exists, but not 10 per cent of the Six Nations or Iroquois are to-day pagans; I think less than 300 out of 4,000. It is true that the white dog is occasionally sacrificed and that the green corn dance takes place, but the occurrence of these rites is duo to the white man rather than the Indian. The Indians cater for the audience that applies for the ancient rites, and if our intelligent white men would cease to demand this kind of entertainment these rites
would cease. I am not blaming the Canadians particularly, as I believe that the British visitors are more to blame than the Canadians. They pass the Church of England, the Presbyterian Church, the Methodist Church and the Roman Catholic Church and -drive to -the long house, in order that they may see these rites performed, as they are something they -have never seen before. That causes the -Six Nations to continue the rites although they have long ceased to have any meaning. Of the 4,000 Indians in the county, a large majority are professing Christianity. I trust that when my hon. -friend visits the reserve he will visit some of the other schools and churches ; there he will not see war paint, but men seated and in their right minds, worshipping God in the -same way as we all worship Him. The Indians are, of course, largely of the Church of England, and come under the heading, as I do myself, of miserable sinners. The Mohawk chu-rch is attended by the pupils of the Mohawk institute, 125 or 130 in number, and there is also a white congregation of six or eight, of which I am generally one when I am at home. I hear them every Sabbath, and I may say for the benefit of gentlemen on both sides of tlie House, that whenever they are in Brantford, if they attend service at this church, they will hear a service of which they may be.proud, and will feel satisfied that the little grant made by the government of Canada towards the institution and the Mohawk church is well expended. I may say as a matter of information that the King of England during the past year has granted to the Mohawk church the privilege of being known as His Majesty's Chapel of the Mohawks. That is a privilege which the Mohawks enjoyed in the old days in the United States, and they were promised when they came into the Grand River valley that they would have the -same privilege there, but it was on-ly in the past year, through the Earl of Stamford and the late Governor General, Lord Minto, that application was made to the King for this privilege, which he has been graciously pleased to grant. This house of God, in which these pupils of the Mohawk Institute worship, is maintained by the New England Company, and the incumbent of the church is also the superintendent of the school. I think that the Minister of Customs (Mr. Paterson) will agree with me that the affairs of that institution, under the management of the New England Company 

because, as I have said, it is not a government institution-have been well and faithfully administered for upwards of seventy-five years. The church and institute have been a great boon for the Six Nations, and it is through their influence that the Six Nations, although they were first in war in the old days, are to-day first of the native Indian tribes in the arts of civilization and peace. That is the reputation which this

nation to-day enjoys, and I trust that this item, which refers to the grant to the Mohawk Institute will be increased. I thank the hon. gentleman for the opportunity which he has given me of making these few remarks in connection with an institution in which I take a deep interest.
Salaries of chiefs, Cape Croker and Gibson and Agent Oka, $150.


Mr. BERGERON.: Are the troubles at Oka between the Indians and the seminary now over?


Wilfrid Laurier: I am sorry to say that the trouble is not over, but I am not without hope that it may be got over. We have lately had correspondence upon this subject, and there has been an agreement, not completed, but in the way of completion, to have the rights which are claimed by the Indians and disputed by the seminary, as to the land in question, referred to the Privy Council. Counsel have been empjoyed on both sides, in order to have the question submitted in the proper way for a judicial* decision. I may say, speaking not officially, but on behalf of the department, that the government have agreed to this, and intend to ask for an appropriation from parliament to cover the expenses of the Indians.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What lips become of the arrangements which were made between the government of Canada and the Indians of Oka, in 1882, I believe, by which the Indians were to surrender their rights on condition of the seminary buying a piece of land for them in the township of Gibson in Ontario ?


Wilfrid Laurier: A piece of land was bought in the township of Gibson, on the Georgian bay, but there was never any official agreement between the Indians and the seminary in regard to it. A good many Indians left the reserve at Oka and went to Gibson to settle, but I understand that the greater part of them came back to Oka again. The Indians are under the impression that they have an absolute title to the land, that the grant made by the King of France to the seminary did not deprive them of any of their rights. This is disputed by the seminary, and until we can have a judicial determination of the question, it is impossible to expect that there will be peace in the locality. Every one of the Indians is absolutely convinced that the seminary are trespassers, and that they are the true owners of the. soil. We have asked them to agree to submit the matter to the judicial decision of the Privy Council. and I understand that they are willing to do so. The seminary are also ready to have the question of their title submitted to the courts.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Was not the sum of $16,000 paid to purchase the property which Mr. COCKSHUTT.
was to be substituted for the Oka reserve? What is to become of that money?


Wilfrid Laurier: The seminary agreed to pay and did pay $16,000 for the township of Gibson; but two years ago the money was returned to the seminary except the part which is actually held by Indians.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How is it that we are paying salaries to these Oka Indian chiefs? I do not see any such payments made to the chiefs of other reserves.


Wilfrid Laurier: Most of the bands have funds of their own; but the Oka Indians have no money of their own, and therefore we pay $50 to the chief of the band at Gibson, also $50 to two other chiefs.
Ontario and Quebec-survey of Indian reserves, $500.


George Eulas Foster: Is that a yearly business?


Wilfrid Laurier: This grant of $500 has been voted for several years, and it is intended chiefly to pay the cost of subdividing some reserves and re-surveying the lines of old reserves where the lines have become obliterated. This is in cases only where the Indians have no funds of their own. Last year the expenditure was as follows:
A. E. Hanson-Expenditure on Canvose
and York county surveys, N.B	$155 7S
Dominion Express Company-Express
charges on plan of Bury	 0 35
W. A. Hendry-Services and Expenses surveying Indian reserve, Shubenacadie, N.S	 19	00
H. W. Andrews-Making plan of Indian reserve, Head Ship Harbour, Great
Lake	 2	25
Deputy Minister of Lands and Mines and Irving R. Todd-Running lines Indian
reserve, Seven Islands	 300	61


Irving R.: Todd-Running lines Indian
reserve, Vanceboro, N.B	 14	15
Canadian Express Company-Express
charges on map	 0	25
J. K. Eaton-Sub-dividing 40-acre wood
lot, Colchester county, N.S	
35	00J. H. Honde-On account of survey Reserve Abenakis, St. Francis	
200	00


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is any of that money used for surveys on the Indian islands in the Georgian bay?


Wilfrid Laurier: No, all that expenditure is over now. I understand that the surveys there are all done.
Indian land management fund, $14,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is this the vote from which some of the salaries of the chiefs are taken?


Wilfrid Laurier: No. this item is to assist the Indian land management fund under terms of the Order in Council of July 1, 1893.

23S


George Eulas Foster: How long will it be before this ceases ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Fifteen years more.


George Eulas Foster: Then the fund will be completed ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes.
Grant for Agriculture Society, Munceys of the Thames, $90.


Wilfrid Laurier: This is an old grant, in existence about fifteen years These people organized a very creditable agricultural society and have gone to considerable trouble and expense year after year. It has been of great benefit to the farming interest of the reserve.
Erection of lockup at St. Regis, $500.


Wilfrid Laurier: It has been the policy of the department for a number of years to have a lockup at St. Regis, but the intention could not be carried out owing to some local trouble. The department had rather serious trouble with the St. Regis Indians the last few years. Peace however is now restored, and there is no difficulty in the way of having this lockup erected, its erection is recommended by the agent.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Will $500 cover the whole cost ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You had the same vote last year and there is nothing to indicate that this is a revote. Where items are revotes, that ought to be shown, so that we would know the money was voted before and not expended.


Wilfrid Laurier: My hon. friend is perfectly right. This is a revote and nothing has been expended of it yet.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is there any report of what took place in Caughnawaga when some detectives from Montreal seized liquor there. The liquor was found in a few houses but we have heard nothing about the matter yet.


Wilfrid Laurier: It was reported that liquor was being illegally sold there and we organized a raid, I am sorry to say that our raid could not be called a success. We succeeded only in getting one case.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is it intended to continue the work ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Certainly.
General legal expenses, $3,500.


George Eulas Foster: Who was the Attorney in the Buckshot case ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Mr. Lemieux.


George Eulas Foster: And in the Six Nation reserve cases at Brantford ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Mr. Lewis Heyd.
House of Commons salaries, $77,550.


George Eulas Foster: There is an increase here of $2,200. How is that accounted for ?


Mr. SPEAKER.: There are thirty-five clerks, regular increment $1,850 ; the new appointment of Mr. Paradis in place of Mr. Polette, deceased, $1,200 ; Mr. Norbert, appointed in place of Mr. Scott, retired, $800 ; Mr. Patry, in post office, $700, making a total increase of $4,550, from which have to be deducted the salary of Mr. Polette, deceased, $1,100, and that of Mr. Scott, retired, $1,250, making a net increase of $2,200.


Mr. WHITE.: There is a reduction of one clerk in the chief's branch. Has that officer been retired or has he been transferred to some other branch ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Retired.


Peter White: There has been a change in the translation branch of one second-class clerk. Was there a recommendation from the chief of the department, the Clerk of the House, for the appointment .of the additional clerk ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How many employees of the House are there ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Seventy-four. The list is given on page 29.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Does that include the sessional as well as the permanent employees ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, both.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Perhaps I shall be in order if I call Mr. Speaker's attention to a point not concerning salaries. I would like to know if rooms cannot be afforded for the accommodation of some of the old members of the opposition. I think I shall assist Mr. Speaker in meeting the existing difficulty by mentioning the matter here. There are a good many rooms in this building, and, perhaps, His 'Honour the Speaker, using a little authority, might place at least a few rooms at our disposal where we could carry on our work. I need hardly say, Mr. Chairman, that it is impossible for us to work under present conditions. During the sitting of the House we have to occupy ourselves with what goes on in this chamber, and when the House is not sitting we have no place to work. If a spare room cannot be found somewhere, I think it would be the part of grandeur d'ame for hon. members on the right of the Speaker to help us to obtain rooms where we could work.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: That is a matter that I have taken up within the last few days, but. for the present, it does not seem possible to hold out much hope of complying with

the hon. gentleman's request. Even a number of the permanent officials are in quarters outside this building at this time. Until some increase in the number of rooms is secured, it will be difficult to afford the accommodation desired. However, we are looking into the matter, and some remedy may be found.


William Findlay Maclean: Perhaps Mr. Speaker would interview the Minister of Public Works , and see if some enlargement of this building is not possible. Possibly putting on another story might meet the difficulty.
House of Commons-expenses of Commons- extra sessional clerks, &c., $25,780.


Peter White: What is the rate of pay to sessional clerks ? Is it $4 a day uniformly ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, that is the uniform rate.


Peter White: On looking over the last report of the Auditor General that is in our possession, I find that some sessional clerks were paid a less sum for part of the session -$2.50 per day, or $3.50 a day for part of the session and $4 a day for the remainder.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The rate was changed during the session.


Peter White: That would hardly apply to all, because in some instances $4 a day is paid for the whole session. But, as I understand it, the intention is to make it $4 a day uniform.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, they are being paid at that rate now.


Peter White: There are two additional clerks provided for, outside of the twenty-eight permanent sessional clerks. These two, I presume, are the clerks in the whips' rooms ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes.


Peter White: Are they paid at the same rate as the others, $4 a day ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: They are paid at the same rate, as I understand.


Peter White: I suppose the translation is paid for in the usual manner, by the page?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, in the same maimer as heretofore.
House of Commons-contingencies, $26,460.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: There is an increase of $100 for expresses between the House and the government printing office. This is necessary owing to the additional work.
House of Commons-publication of debates, $60,000.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I do not think that the French version of ' Hansard ' has been published yet. It had not been published a short time ago. The English ' Hansard ' Mr. SPEAKER.
came out shortly before the beginning of the session. I called the attention of the Speaker to the fact. This work should be published as soon as possible.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It is probable that the delay is due to the increased work thrown upon the Printing Bureau by the elections. Such a delay would not occur during an ordinary year.
House of Commons-estimate of the Sergeant at Arms, $50,055.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I see there is a provision here of $800 for a Speaker's steward. Is that a new appointment ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It is not exactly a new appointment, it is largely a change of title. The man was transferred from a similar position here and is doing a like work as before ; but under a resolution of the Internal Economy Committee of last year, he is assigned a special duty and given that title.


Peter White: Then I find there has been an addition to the staff of three permanent messengers, an increase from eight to eleven, including Mr. George, who is the Speaker's steward. What necessity was there for an increase of nearly 50 per cent in the permanent staff of messengers?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: This statement will explain the matter:
Increases to 4 on messenger staff- Connolly $50, T. Stewart $30, C. R.
Stewart $50, and Boutet $60	 170 00
Lalonde appointed permanent messenger to fill place of C. George appointed
Speaker's steward	 550 00
Two permanent messengers-one to take the place of Patry transferred to the clerk's department, and the other to take the place of Asselin appointed to
the post office, 2 at $500 each... 1,000 00
One assistant house carpenter, formerly paid by Department of Public Works 700 00


Peter White: That is another vote altogether. There are at least three additional.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: That is all that is included in this vote.
Items increased-	[DOT]
Pages $30, servants $162.50, permanent charwomen $1,095, sessional
charwomen $575	$2,262 50
4,682 50
Less items reduced-
Salary of Patry transferred to
clerk's department	$650
Sessional messengers	678

 1,328 00
Actual increase	 3,354 50


Peter White: Has Mr. Patry been taken out of tlie reading room or simply transferred to the clerk's department. Because if he has not been taken out of the reading room and somebody else put in bis

place, the explanation is not very satisfactory-


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It is merely a case of transferring him from one staff to another.


Peter White: That does not account for the increase of three in the messengers staff, in addition to the extra house carpenter. I would like to know what necessity existed for that increase in the permanent messengers staff, and whether the Speaker had a report from the sergeant-at-arms as to the necessity of increasing the messengers staff from eight to eleven.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The necessity of appointing these additional messengers was pressed upon the Speaker. The work is constantly increasing. Last session, and the session before particularly, were very long sessions.


Peter White: But surely there should have been some report of the chief official of that branch of the department that there was a necessity for an increase of these permanent messengers. You have an increase here of three permanent messengers. The explanation with regard to Mr. Patry, I have already shown, does not affect these three extra messengers at all, because Mr. Patry remains in the same position as before, but is merely transferred from the sergeant-at-arm#' branch to the clerk's branch. Now I want to know why these three additional permanent messengers have been appointed, whether the sergeant-at-arms made a report to the Speaker intimating that there was a necessity for increasing the number.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I am informed it was done under the express suggestion of the clerk. There was found to be a necessity for these additional employees by reason of the increased work. It was on his recommendation.


Peter White: And not on the recommendation of the sergeant-at-arms. Well, what is tlie maximum of the salary of permanent messengers?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


Peter White: I find there appears to have been an addition of $50 for five of these sessional messengers, and the rest appear to have only got $30 addition. Why is there that discrimination?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: By resolution of the Internal Economy Board the assistant chief received $50, and the others $30 of an increase.


Peter White: But there are five of them here who appear to have received $50 additional.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I only see one who has got an increase of $50, Mr. Connolly.


Peter White: There are five permanent messengers here at $750, and according to the last estimates, these were at $700.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Those five have reached the maximum.


Peter White: They have reached it by giving them $50 additional in one year. With regard to Mr. George, he has had an addition of $100, whereas the other messengers have only received an addition of $30 a year. If I remember well, the arrangement about increases was that the messengers were to get $30 a year. Of course if that applied to the whole there would be no special objection to it; but there should not be discrimination.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Last year, I believe, there was a general increase.


Peter White: I find in the Auditor General's Report that bonuses were paid to the permanent messengers ranging from $50 to $100 for the session of 1903. I am not making any objection to that, because all these were good men, and perhaps deserving of the recognition that was given to them. But I think the practice is a vicious one, and I hope His Honour the Speaker will not continue it. If it is desirable to increase the salaries of the messengers, it should be increased permanently, I think. But what I am desirous of ascertaining is whether the $50 bonus which was given to the permanent messengers for the session of 1903, was made a permanent addition to their salaries, and whether they had reached the maximum by having that addition made to their salaries earlier than they otherwise would have done.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The clerk informs me that the bonus was given owing to the length of the session, and was not to be a permanent increase.


Peter White: That is not a very satisfactory explanation, because these gentlemen were employed for the whole year. I am not finding any fault with granting bonuses to them, but they are employed for the whole year. It matters little what the length of the session may be, they have to be here the whole year round. With regard to that, I would like to ask Mr. Speaker as to whether his steward, during recess, is relieved of duty, or whether, having been taken out of the class of permanent messengers, he is required to be on duty as a messenger during recess.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The allowance of course is not a sessional allowance. When the session has been very protracted, with long hours and that sort of thing, perhaps there cannot be much said in criticism of an allowance of that character.


Peter White: Is tire system of bonuses to be continued or abandoned?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I cannot speak as to the future.


Peter White: Another question was as to whether the steward, who formerly was a messenger and who, during recess, performed the duties of a messenger, is to continue to perform those duties, or whether he will he relieved of duty altogether during the recess.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: He was formerly a permanent messenger. He is now in charge of the restaurant and of the property.


Peter White: I am afraid my hon. friend does not apprehend the meaning of the ques tion I put to him. What I am asking is as to whether the Speaker's steward who was formerly a permanent messenger and required to discharge the duties of a permanent messenger during the recess will still continue to discharge the duties of messenger during the recess, or whether he will remain out altogether during the recess and only be required to be on duty during the session.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I understand he is now only employed during the session except that he has to take care of the property in his charge during the whole year.


Peter White: He always had to do that.


George Eulas Foster: Do we understand then that what formerly was done by a permanent messenger detailed for that service while the House was in session, which messenger had his own duties during the remainder of the year to perform, is now done by another official, that now we have been advanced to this other stage that the Speaker has a full fledged steward of his own who comes when the Speaker comes, who goes when the Speaker goes, and who has no duties during any other part of the year ? I have not been able to find out exactly from what Mr. Speaker has said as to whether that is the condition of things or whether this steward comes back to his work when the Speaker leaves at the adjournment of the House.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: As I understand he has to be here under the order of the chief messenger during the entire year.


George Eulas Foster: But the answer so far as I can get it is not an answer to my question, but simply a statement that he has to stay here under the orders of the chief messenger. The question is what duties does he perform after the Speaker leaves ? I know this was an arrangement made by the late Speaker, and not by the present one, but at the same time we ought to have an answer.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: As far as I can understand in the interim he is responsible for the property and looks after that. These are the only duties he is required to do.


Peter White: Yes, but these duties were imposed upon this gentleman when he was


Peter White: a permanent messenger. He had to take care of the property in the restaurant and in the Speaker's chambers and he discharged other duties as a messenger during that period of time. Now we have this curious circumstance or anomaly presented to us, that there are three additional messengers in these estimates more than were provided for last year, and the explanation we get from the hon. Speaker is that the clerk recommended the appointment of these three permanent messengers. I do not know what the clerk's authority is in regard to that matter, but I always supposed when I was occupying the position which my hon. friend occupies now, in so far as that branch of the staff was concerned, if any increase was required a report should come, and I required that a report should come, from the sergeantrat-arms, who is the chief of that staff. Of course, I understand that the clerk is the chief of the whole staff, but still it seems to me that it would have been more proper if the sergeant-at-arms had recommended the appointment of these permanent messengers. We never found in former years that eight messengers were ioo few to discharge the duties required of them. Now we find that we require an addition of three permanent messengers to the staff.


George Eulas Foster: Is one of these the steward?	,


Peter White: No, there are three permanent messengers added to the staff and charged as permanent messengers and there is the Speaker's steward. In regard to the steward's duties spoken of by Mr. Speaker, they were discharged by him in former years ; that is to say he had to take care of the property in the restaurant during the recess and also of the property in the Speaker's chambers. All these properties were under the charge of the sergeant-at-arms, who was responsible for their safe-keeping. The sergeant-at-arms was responsible for the property in the restaurant and in the Speaker's chambers.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I am now instructed that both the clerk and the sergeant-at-arms concurred in the recommendation.


Peter White: The sergeant-at-arms concurred in the recommendation of the appointment of these three permanent messengers ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: So I am informed. The matter then came before the Internal Economy Committee in the regular way and they endorsed the recommendations and sent them on.


Peter White: No doubt the Committee on Internal Economy would give effect to any recommendation the Speaker might make in regard to this question, because the Speaker is supposed to know more about the needs of the House than any other

member of the Committee on Internal Economy. But I have been trying to find out what the necessity was for these three additional messengers and I confess that I have not been able to do so yet. Before we pass from the consideration of the messengers I wish to say that the two night watchmen do not appear to have received any addition to their salaries during the present year. Is there any good reason why they should not he given $750 the same as the five messengers referred to in the previous item ? They are botli good men, they have been a long time in the service, their duties are somewhat exacting, and if the maximum is $750, surely these two men ought to be considered as well as the rest of the messengers.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: As I am informed they had an increase in the previous year.


Peter White: Have not all these others had an increase in the previous year ? They have all had an increase during the previous j ear.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Well they were brought up to $700 during the previous year.


Peter White: Then these estimates are not correct because the estimates say that there was $700 estimated for each of them last year. The same amount is estimated this year as last year, $1,400, that is $700 each for the two night watchmen last year and the same amount is estimated this year so that the explanation does not appear to me to be very satisfactory.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: They came up to the $700 a year by the increase last year and they do not get any increase this year.


Peter White: Are they not entitled to reach the maximum the same as other messengers, the maximum being $750 7


Robert Franklin Sutherland: They never have been considered in the same class.


Peter White: They have not been put on the same footing ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: No.
carpenter from the sergeant-at-arms or any person in authority ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: There has always been one employed, and heretofore he was employed by the Department of Public Works and this is simply a transfer from the Department of Public Works to the House of Commons and not an increase.


Peter White: Was there one permanently sent from the Department of Public Works in addition to Mr. Sinclair ? Was there a permanent House carpenter paid by the Department of Public Works to work here all the year round 7


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I am informed that he is paid a per diem allowance; he has been on for fifteen years.


Peter White: Just for the days he was on duty ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It amounted to very nearly this amount, practically this amount


Peter White: With regard to the next item, 50 sessional messengers, at $2.75 per diem, when was the increase made in the pay of the sessional messengers 7


Robert Franklin Sutherland: At the request of the House generally, as I am informed, there was an increase all round last year, and they shared in the increase.


Peter White: There is an increase in the number.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, I think there is an
increase in the number.


Peter White: The estimates this year provide for the same number of messengers as last year, and yet there is a reduction of $678.50 'in the item. How does that occur 7


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The amount was over estimated for- the previous year; this year an estimate is taken only for the amount that it is 'expected will be expended.


George Eulas Foster: There is an over estimate this year. Does the Speaker intend to take on more sessional messengers ?


Peter White: We always had considered them the same.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: It is worth considering whether they should not be put upon the same footing.


Peter White: Yes, I think they should get the same as the other messengers. In regard to the House carpenter, is Mr. Sinclair still in the service ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: He is still in the service.


Peter White: I suppose this is his salary that is advanced to $750 ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, he is getting $750.


Peter White: Was there a report as to the necessity of employing a second House


Robert Franklin Sutherland: There Is no intention of doing so.	[DOT]


George Eulas Foster: The length of the session, of course, is an indeterminate quantity. 1 do not think my hon. friend has been well answered as to why three additional messengers should be appointed. That Is a large addition to the number now in the service. I would like to have the Speaker give the reasons why there had to be an increase in the number of messengers by one-third. What additional work made that necessary? Is it the duty of the sergeant-at-arms to make recommendations for such an increase ? He is an old officer, and the officer in charge knows the amount of work, knows the messengers and how the work is done. It would seem that he would be

the proper person, to recommend when aD increase was necessary. He would recommend to the Speaker, and if the Speakei concurred in this recommendation it would go to the Internal Economy Committee for final action. The Internal Economy Committee should ask for a report in writing from the sergeant-at-arms to the Speaker setting forth the reasons for the proposed increase. I would ask if there is such a report ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I am informed that it was at the request of the sergeant-at-arms and at his suggestion that the increase was made, hut I cannot ascertain that there was any written report on the matter. I am informed that the Internal Economy Committee acted upon the report of the sergeant-at-arms which was concurred in by the Speaker.


George Eulas Foster: I am sorry to hear the Speaker -say that; it is a reiteration of the remarks made by a responsible minister yesterday. _ The Intercolonial Is a matter of much importance to this country, and consequently to the representatives of the people in parliament. Its business is the country's business, in fact, and yet we have the Minister of Railways yesterday saying that as he was travelling around some one made a verbal report, and. he, like the Shah of Persia, or the Sultan of Turkey, immediately, on that verbal report, cut off a man's head. He had uo report as to the reasons for the action, there was nothing but a verbal report. No business is well done, I think the House will agree, unless you have the officers pinned down in black and white on these important points. The sergeant-at-arms does not get to the Internal Economy Committee, but it is stated that he lias made a recommendation. If I were on the Internal Economy Committee I should ask to see the written report. And I am sure there must be somewhere in the records of the Internal Economy Committee such a report, and I would like" the Speaker to bring it down.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I have made inquiry and I cannot find that there is any written recommendation.


Peter White: Then I hope my hon. friend will not make the appointments until he gets a recommendation from the sergeant-at-arms as to the necessity for this large addition to the permanent messengers' force. In the old days it was not found that the messenger staff was not too small, and I am inclined to think that the work of the House has not increased to such an fextent as to render necessary the addition of nearly 50 per cent to the staff.
ill1. SPEAKER. I can see the force of the hon. gentleman's observation and will endeavour to carry out that suggestion in the future and to have reports.
. Mr. FOSTER.


Peter White: Have these appointments been made ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, they have been made.


Mr. OSLER.: Are these men paid $2.75 for each working day or for each day in the week ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: They are paid for every daj during the week; many of them do duty on Sunday.


George Eulas Foster: Can the Speaker give the date at which these appointments were made ?
Mr. SPEAKER, I have not the dates by me at present.
_ Mr. FOSTER. I think this is of sufficient importance to let the estimate stand until we find out about it. I do not see how the appointment could have been made if there was uo money voted for it. How many sessional messengers are there now at work?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: There are nine permanent.


George Eulas Foster: Then the other two are not appointed ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, but not as permanent. They will commence next July to be permanent.


George Eulas Foster: Then they are not appointed yet ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Not as permanent.


Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: Does the Speaker make any examination as to the personal qualifications of these men for the position ? Last year here was a young lad, who was one of the best messengers I have seen about the House. It might be well to consider the advisability of getting active energetic young fellows, who would do the work up to time.
Mr. WHITE, if two of these messengers are not yet appointed as permanent, how are they being paid-out of the sessional vote ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: At present out of the sessional appropriation.
Mr. FOSTER, Then to say that they are not appointed is simply a technical answer. They are in the service, and they are being paid out of the people's money. I think we ought to have the recommendation of the sergeant-at-arms. There is one business way in which this ought to be managed. According to all the traditions of the House, the sergeant-at-arms is the responsible officer who should make the recommendations when additions are necessary, after which they come before the Internal Economy Committee. I do not presume to give advice to the hon. gentleman ; but if I were Speaker, I think I should rather have these appointments, which are part of the domestic



[Stage Direction]
economy of tlie House, come to me In the shape of recommendations from the responsible officer, with a derailed statement as to why they were necessary, before I brought them before the House. I think that is the businesslike way .of having the thing done.
Mr. HAG 6ART. The hon. the Speaker got a vote last year for the purpose of paying a certain number of sessional messengers, and he has had the full number up to the 1st of July next. How does he pay these two, who are above the number, when he has not a vote for them ?
Robert Franklin Sutherland: They are regular sessional messengers like the other messengers. They are included in the fifty who are being paid out of last year's vote.
* Mr. HAGGART. You got a certain vote for a certain number of sessional messengers last year. You have increased that number by two. whom you are paying as sessional messengers until you get authority from the House to put them permanently on your staff from the 1st of July next. Where does the money come from to pay them 7


Robert Franklin Sutherland: They were already on the list of sessional messengers, and they are merely to be permanent after the 1st of July.


Peter White: Have you reduced the number of sessional messengers from whom you take these two, or have you appointed the fifty and these two ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: There are just fifty, and these two men are among' them.


Peter White: Then I would again urge my hon. friend not to make these permal nent appointments.' He has made one already. When was that appointment made to the permanent staff, and who is the appointee ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: One was appointed about August last. His name is Lalonde.


John Graham Haggart: How are you paying him ? He is in excess of the number provided for by parliament.
Mr. SPEAKER, We are paying him out of the vote for permanent messengers. If it is short, we shall have to ask for a supplementary vote.


Peter White: What does the Speaker say in reference to these two permanent messengers who have not yet been appointed ? I suggest to him, that before these appointments be made, a report should be obtained in writing from the sergeant-at-arms as to the necessity of their appointment. Are we to understand that the Speaker will adopt that course, and if the report cannot be obtained from the sergeant-at-arms that there is a necessity for the appointment of these extra permanent messengers, he will not appoint them ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I think that is reasonable, and I think I can assure the House that I will follow that course.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I see in the Auditor General's Rejjort, O-20, a number of items that have a very familiar appearance. Such items as books and maps for instance, 95 Canadian Parliamentary Guides, $70 ; Canadian Politics, $5.40 ; Canadian Annual, $3.80; Canadian Annual Review, $46.35 ; New Dictionary of Larousse, $43 ; Political Appointments to Parliament and the Judical Bench of Canada, $60, and so on. Who supervises these purchases and who is responsible for seeing that they remain the property of the government ? Then there are considerable purchases of furniture every year. It is most extraordinary what a quantity has to be purchased each year, and one wonders what becomes of all the things purchased. There are purchases of desks and tables and all sorts of things from Bryson, Graham & Co., amounting to $999.13. Also from J. O. Leblanc for desks and lounges and chairs amounting to $421,50. Also from Harris, Campbell & Boyden Furniture Company, desks and tables aild chairs to the extent of $157.75. I need not take up the time of the committee in going through the list, but I remember well when years ago pages of that kind were read in the House. Of course we have had some additional rooms opened, but still I cannot understand why we should require each year so much furniture. Where do you put" it all? Who is in charge when the House rises and the Speaker goes away, and who is responsible that that furniture is not taken away from the building ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The Clerk of the House is responsible for the purchases of books. He himself has a library belonging to parliament and so have the translators, and from time to time books have to be .purchased which they require. As regards the furniture, it is only purchased on the recommendation of the sergeant-at-arms, who must initial all the accounts. The furniture is then under his charge. As regards the desks, I have been Speaker only a few days and in that time have received quite a number of requisitions from gentlemen on both sides to be furnished with desks. No doubt my predecessors have had similar experience. Of course, as in a private house, furniture gets used up and has to be replaced from time to time. I shall endeavour to keep check of these matters and see that no unnecessary furniture is purchased.


Samuel Hughes: Have you, Mr. Speaker, submitted to the members any plan showing the re-arrangement of the rooms ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I have not submitted any final plan, but am considering whether a re-arrangement can be made so as to satisfy the requests of some members. I find it a very difficult matter to deal with.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Is there not a piano (n the Speaker's rooms belonging to the House ? I see we are paying rent for one ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The piano has always been rented, and it is a question whether it would not be better to purchase one outright.


Mr. MACPHERSON.: I am sure the members from British Columbia would wish that it were in your powder, Mr. Speaker, to enlarge the chambers. We from British Columbia are in the unfortunate condition of not having any recognized room in the House. In this respect we are much less fortunate than some of the older provinces, who seem to have all the good things of this life. I would like it very much if his lion, the Speaker could see his way clear to help out the orphans from British Columbia and arrange to have them domiciled in a fitting room of their own.


Mr. GANONG.: Would Mr. Speaker be kind enough to advise me whether there is or is not a room set apart for the New Brunswick members ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: No ; I am afraid they are at present as much orphans as the hon. members from British Columbia.


Gilbert White Ganong: There is no such room, then, I understand ?


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I understand that the only room that can be utilized by them at present is the Agricultural Committee room, in which certain desks were heretofore placed for the use of the maritime province members.


Gilbert White Ganong: Walking along one of the upper corridors we find a room whose door is marked ' N.B. Members.' As far as I can learn, that means N.B. Grit members. I would advise Mr. Speaker to have the word ' Grit ' painted before ' N.B.' There is a room there, but if a Tory puts his head in, he is apt to be requested to get out.


William Findlay Maclean: I can say, on the authority of a former Speaker of this House, that there is no room in this House which any member is not free to enter. And I can remember a case where this former Speaker said that if any person put a lock on any room in the House and any member wished to enter that room, he would send his locksmith to open it.


Samuel Hughes: Now that this matter is up, I certainly think it should be made clear that if there are to be rooms for any* there must be rooms for all. It should all be done on some systematic basis, and fair-play should be shown. I trust that Mr. Speaker will see to it that the leader of the Conservative opposition in this House is given an additional room adjoining his own, where his secretary can work.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: 


Mr. LOGAN.: This discussion should show us that it is about,, time for the House to' consider how business is to be done. There is, no doubt, just ground for complaint on the part of members on both sides. Many of us have a large correspondence to attend to, and the majority must attend to that correspondence in their places in this chamber or somewhere else, no special accommodation being afforded. We should provide in some way proper accommodations for the members of the House. I understand that in the United States a member of Congress is given an allowance for a secretary and is also given a room in which to do his workj In this House, under the previous administration, I am informed, the members of the Liberal opposition had to do their work in the corridors of the House. Looking over the list of rooms that has been posted in>
this House, I find that our friends of fijie opposition have no great reason to complain in comparison with the members on this side. If they complain, I would like them to refer to the distribution of rooms of about ten years ago, and they will see what insignificant accommodation was given to the opposition of that time. I find that at present our friends of the opposition have the following rooms, outside of the rooms provided for the leader and the whips :-Room No. C, Conservative headquarters ; No. 34, Conservative members ; No. 36, Ontario Conservative members ; No. 37, Conservative ex-ministers; No. 56, Conservative members from Ontario ; No. 72, Conservative members-Messrs. White and Foster. Here we have six rooms in all. On the Liberal side we find that, apart from the rooms occupied by some of the ministers, including the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, there are the following:-Room No. 16, Liberal headquarters ; No. 48, Northwest Territories members ; No. 58, Liberal members from Ontario ; No. 49. Chairman of the Printing Committee and members from Ontario ; No. 67, Liberal members from New Brunswick ; No. 68, Liberal) members from Nova Scotia ; No. 69, Chairman of the Debates Committee and some Liberal members ; No. 71, liberal members of the province of Quebec-eight rooms in all. So that the opposition, with a membership of 76, have six rooms, while the government side, with a membership of 138, or nearly double, have only eight rooms. I think the comparison does not give our friends on the other side anything to complain of. But, outside of the comparison, all the members have something to complain of in the accommodation afforded. I presume that many members have an average mail of from twenty-five to thirty-five letters a day. Where are we to answer these letters ? If we dictate to a stenographer, where is the work to be done ? As you walk about, you see members even sitting in the corridors dictating their correspondence. Go into the Railway Committee

Room, and you find stenographers here and there writing at the dictation of members. This is not in accordance with the dignity of the House or with the work we have to do. We do not come here to play, but each of us bears a certain responsibility and has important work to do. Members on the government side of the House may have a great many questions of patronage arising in their counties, involving a large correspondence, for the carrying on of which there it now no accommodation. This discussion will have done good if it arouses the government and the House to the necessity of providing better accommodation for the members in the immediate future.


Gilbert White Ganong: Perhaps Mr. Speaker will provide a few desks for Tories in that room he spoke of. If he does, I will take my chances on getting into the room.


Mr. LEPURGEY.: The room referred to by Mr. Speaker as affording accommodation for Conservative members from the maritime provinces is sometimes occupied by the sittings of the Committee on Agriculture. Besides, if it is to be lumbered up with many more desks, it will not be possible to do work there any better than at our desks in this chamber. It will be in the interest of the House and of the country to provide better accommodation, for members would then have opportunities for research and study, and could better fit themselves for the discussion of public questions. At least rooms should be provided for the members on either side from the different provinces. New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and other provinces have been named. I will put in a word on behalf of the members from Prince Edward Island. Witli the work of the country growing every year, and, as the hon. member from Cumberland (Mr. Logan) says, with members receiving an average of from twenty-five to thirty letters a day, it is impossible to do the work unless members are given better accommodation. Outside of the discussion whether the rooms should be given to Liberals or Conservatives, I think it would be well for the government to take into consideration the matter of providing better accommodation for members.


Samuel Hughes: There is another matter to which I wish to draw the attention of the Speaker and the House. At the present moment I am informed the full lights are turned on, and we have practically' only' twilight in this chamber. A few years ago we had a very good light, and it was changed for some purpose or other, and since then.it has been very inadequate. I would respectfully suggest that the candle power should be at least doubled in this chamber. Getting old as some of us are, we find it is absolutely necessary to have the chamber better lighted. I think the old apparatus is still here, and why not combine that with the present system?


Mr. TAYLOR.: This being the first session of a new parliament and a new Speaker, I would now venture to make the suggestion that I made when the Conservative party were in power, and which I think would have been acted on had they remained in power another session, that is, to provide more accommodation for the members of both sides, to which I think they are justly entitled. The suggestion I made then, and that I make now, is that we provide accommodation outside the House of Commons for the Speaker, the sergeant-at-arms and the chief messenger. I think the House of Commons should be reserved altogether for the use of members. I do not think it would be any more difficult for the Speaker, the sergeant-at-arms and the chief messenger to go to their lodgings at night than it is for the Prime- Minister, the other members of the government and the House of Commons. We all have to make our way home. I do not see the necessity for any of these gentlemen being housed in this building. The restaurant people also-they all have too much accommodation taken away from the members. These gentlemen should have quarters, they should have rooms here; but there is no necessity' for the larger part of the House of Commons being taken up by the Speaker, the deputy speaker, the sergeant-at-arms and the chief messenger. These gentlemen should be provided with respectable quarters outside. I know the present Speaker and the former Speakers would prefer living in respectable quarters outside. In this way accommodation could be provided so that every man, or groups of a few members, could have rooms where they could do their private correspondence without being obliged to do it at their desks, as most of us have to do. I make this suggestion to the Speaker and to the Prime Minister, that arrangements be made immediately for removing all the families now living in the House of Commons and putting them in permanent quarters outside, allotting the rooms vacated proportionately between the members supporting the government and those supporting the opposition.	,


Mr. MILLER.: In the constituency I come from we are in the habit of considering the rights of the ladies. I have noticed that there is no general waiting-room in this House for the convenience of ladies. I think there ought to be such a room for ladies who come here from a distance, no matter what may be their political leanings, a room with all the proper conveniences which they would expect to find in connection therewith.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: I can inform the gallant member who has just spoken (Mr. Miller) that now, for the first time in any session, there has been a nicely furnished cloak room provided upstairs for ladies, and a couple of attendants are there to see that

tlieir wants are provided for. That is a move in the right direction. The whole matter has been very fully discussed, and I can assure the House that I will bring it promptly to the attention of the government, and perhaps make some future reference to it.


Peter White: Before we pass from this subject I would like to say a word more with reference to the sessional writers. I see by the Auditor General's Report that whilst the general sessional writers are paid $4 a day, Mr. P! A. Stewart and Mr. Tache are paid $600 each for the session. Has there been anj7 increase in the salaries of these gentlemen since this report was published? They have enjoyed that salary for a long series of years, and were getting $600 a year when the sessional writers were only getting $3 a day. I would like to know whether any increases have been made in the salaries of these gentlemen, because we have the curious anomaly here of the two chief sessional writers getting $600 a year each, and their subordinates getting a larger sum during the session of 1904. That should not continue. These chief sessional writers ought at least to get a larger pay than the ordinary sessional writers.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: There has been no permanent increase in the salaries for the last two sessions. The sessions of 1903 and 1904 were very long, and an extra allowance was made on that score of $300 each.


Peter White: Would it not be better that a permanent addition be made to the salaries of these gentlemen than that they should be dependent upon the will of the Speaker for an increase? They are both good men, at least they were in former times. I suppose Mr. Stewart must be pretty well advanced in years, but they both discharge their duties efficiently. Yet it seems anomalous that, according to the Auditor General's Report, they are receiving a less sum than their subordinates. It seems to me that these two gentlemen, instead of being dependent upon getting a bonus whenever it pleases the Speaker or the Committee on Internal Economy to give them a bonus, should have a permanent addition to their salaries.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The suggestion is worthy of consideration, and will be considered.


Jlr.   POSTER@: With reference to the books, as I understand, Mr. Speaker, these books which were purchased under the direction of the clerk go towards filling out the clerk's personal library, I mean his official library. _


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Yes, and the translators' library. Some are transferred to the library.


Jlr.   POSTER@: I notice in some cases there are a number ot copies of the same book, as for instance of the Canadian An-Mr. SPEAKER.
nual Review, a very good book, and I dare say it is well used. There are a dozen copies of that document.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: These are distributed to the leading officials of the House as being useful to them in their work.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: I agree with the opinion of the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan), except that I do not think we have as much accommodation as he says. Only a few' of us have a room to work in. We are eleven members of the opposition from Quebec, and not one of us has a room to himself. The whole opposition has room No. 6, and those who were there in the old time know how inadequate is that room for seventy-five members. I think that this practice of separating the members in that way does more harm than good. Why not move them together more ? Instead of having one room for the Liberal members and another for the Conservative, why not let all the members from New7 Brunswick, say, have one room, and the same with the members from Quebec, and with every other province ? There is no reason why the members on both sides of the House should not be perfectly friendly and near one another while attending to their private correspondence. I am afraid it will lengthen the session if we do not get a room. We have to stay here. I am very glad to be able to state publicly w'hat the conditions are so that the people w7ho have correspondence with us will know why it is that they sometimes do not get answers. I cannot write letters here. 1 can go to No. 6, but I cannot do any work there because there are so many gentlemen speaking in the room. I cannot be here five minutes until gentlemen come and engage in conversation so that it is impossible to do any work here. We should have some quarters where w7e could work. I ask the right hon. Prime Minister how7 a member can prepare any serious work in a place like this. It is impossible to do it. The consequence is that if we are not well prepared with our work we may delay the House, because our speeches may be longer than they would be if we had an opportunity of preparing them more thoroughly.
Customs-salaries and contingent expenses of the several ports in the various provinces and in the Northwest Territories, including pay for overtime of officers, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, $1,214,865.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: There was a question raised some time ago in Montreal in regard to the appointment of a deputy collector. I have not yet heard whether the question has been settled or not.


Hon. WILLIAM PATERSON (Minister of Customs).: No, there has not been any deputy collector appointed.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Was there a demand or a suggestion to that effect ?


William Paterson: Well, I have heard it suggested, but 1 would uot call it a demaud. There has been no deputy collector since Mr. O'Hara died. The department has not felt the necessity of it. We have no deputy anywhere.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Did my hon. friend get a demand from the trade of Montreal to the effect that Mr. White, the collector, had not time to answer all the questions which were put to him in the custom house there as the business of the port is very extensive ? A petition was presented by the trade of Montreal to that effect. I understand it was supported by the present collector and that it contained the statemenlt that it would be in the interest of the trade at that port to have a deputy collector appointed.


William Paterson: Perhaps there has been a petition. If there has been it has been lately. It has been running in my mind that I had seen something in the papers about it, but there has been no action.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: There has been no decision ?


William Paterson: No.


Jlr.   POSTER@: Will the hon. minister take this item up by the different provinces and tell us what are the increases in each-or by ports, whichever he chooses ?


William Paterson: We have not the estimate in that way.


Jlr.   POSTER@: In what way has the hon. minister the estimate ? Everything is lumped here. You have simply a line or two and a million and a quarter of dollars at the end of it. What is the system of explanation there ?


William Paterson: Largely comparing one year with another. The only increase asked for this year is for the salaries and contingencies of the various ports. We are asking $20,000 more.
Mr. POSTER, Will the hon. minister take it up by ports ?


William Paterson: No.


George Eulas Foster: How then ?


William Paterson: In a general way. If the hon. gentleman wants to know what has been expended last year in the different provinces by way of increase, I can give him that, and as it has been done in one year the presumption is that you may require to have something done in that way during the coming year, either in the way of new appointments which have been found necessary or in the way of increases that may have been given in the department.


George Eulas Foster: Does the hon. minister say that he is not able to take it up by ports ? That seems to be the only way in which it
can be fairly followed. Which province will the hon. minister take up first ? I suppose as Ontario occupies a very prominent position in the eyes of the world the hon. minister might take up Ontario first.


William Paterson: Last year we asked for an additional vote of $35,000.


Jlr.   POSTER@: For Ontario ?


William Paterson: No, for the whole Dominion. There was absorbed of that by increases $22,000 in round numbers. I have a list of how they were distributed if the bon. gentleman wants it. Does he want the individual names or does he want the bulk sums ?


Jlr.   POSTER@: That is for the increased expenses of last year ?


William Paterson: Yes, for the increases in salaries last year. I can give it to him by provinces if he desires it with all the names.


Jlr.   POSTER@: I suppose that is the way we will have to get at it.


William Paterson: In that way or will the hon. gentleman take it in bulk at so much ?	_


Jlr.   POSTER@: Well, it is much easier for the hon. gentleman if we take it in the bulk, but I am afraid we would not get much information.


William Paterson: If I read the names would the hon. gentleman know the officers anyway, or would it assist him in any way?
Mr. POSTER, I have here the towns and Ports and officers and everything in connection with each port. The only way you can follow it is to take them as they appear in the Auditor General's Report.
Mr. PATER-SON. I will give merely the bulk sums to the hon. gentleman and then if it will help him, I will give him the names of the officers at the differents ports. In the province of Ontario we increased the salaries of 72 officers.


Jlr.   POSTER@: That is last year ?


William Paterson: Out of the amount voted last year-the increase being $5,060. In Quebec we increased the salaries of 77 officers, the total increase being $5,076. In New Brunswick seven officers have been increased, making $500 in all. In Nova Scotia 37 officers had an increase.


Jlr.   POSTER@: New Brunswick seven, and Nova Scotia thirty-seven, and yet somebody wonders why Nova Scotia went solid.


William Paterson: New Brunswick went pretty nearly that way too.


George Eulas Foster: Oh, no.


William Paterson: The thirty-seven amounted to $3,210, in Manitoba there were



twenty-two increases totalling $3,050, and in British Columbia forty-nine increases amounting to $5,180. In Prince Edward Island we had eight increases coming to $450, in the Northwest Territories we have six increases amounting to $600. That it to say we were able last year to increase the salaries in all of 278 officers at a cost of $22.-186. We are asking for $20,000 extra this year.


Jlr.   POSTER@: You had an unexpended vote last year of $11,000.


William Paterson: Yes, there was that amount unexpended. So this year we are only asking $22,000 out of which we will make our increases, although of course I may have to ask for a supplementary vote as we can judge better towards the end of the session.
Mr. FOSTER On what basis are these increases made? There are such things as regular increases and special increases.


William Paterson: In the outside service .there is no regular increase.


George Eulas Foster: But there is the custom.


William Paterson: The custom is efficiency and the work performed. Last year we gave increases chiefly to the men who were getting small salaries of $500 and $600. We were not able to do so much for the higher classes of officers some of whom of course deserved it, and in some cases these increases were given.
Mr! FOSTER. How does the minister get ids information as to the officei's to whom increases should be given ? On the report of what officers ?


William Paterson: The collectors and the inspectors. Of course we can see for ourselves where a salary is only $500 or $600, and the commissioner has often reported to me verbally that in his view no officer should be paid less than $600. It has been urged upon us that the cost of living has increased lately and we now have most of our officers up to the $600 mark.


George Eulas Foster: I do not suppose the minister, for instance in Ottawa, takes his list of officers and finding a man who last year was getting $450 would say to his secretary,
* now increase that man to $500 ' because he might be increasing a man who is altogether inefficient, and even if a man has a low salary if he is inefficient in his work he is scarcely deserving of an increase. There must be some method by which information comes to the head of the department here, the minister, on which he makes his decision as to the increase so as to be able to know that undeserving men do not get increases. Of course in the statistical branch the minister would have the information here. He knows when the officer is appointed and how many years he has Mr. PATERSON.
been in the service. How does the minister acquire information as to outside officers.


William Paterson: We confer with the collectors and inspectors with respect to that. I might say to the hon. gentleman that we are communicated with by the officers themselves, and we make inquiries in reference to them and ascertain from our inspectors as to the services they are rendering, and upon that information we make up our minds whether we should grant the increase.


George Eulas Foster: Is that all the information my hon. friend has, is that the only system?


William Paterson: That is the only system.


George Eulas Foster: My hon. friend never receives letters or representations?


William Paterson: Oh, yes.


George Eulas Foster: These count?


William Paterson: Yes, but we cannot trust to these, you know ; we must have the official information.


George Eulas Foster: Take for instance Halifax. Is there a report required by the minister's department here as to the general condition and efficiency of the work in the port of Halifax, say in the customs house? Are these things reported on to Ottawa where the salaries are ultimately decided.


William Paterson: Yes, there is such a system.


George Eulas Foster: From all ports.


William Paterson: Yes, we have in Nova Scotia, Mr. Bremner and Mr. McDonnell-Mr. Hill was witii us for thirty-five or forty years but he has passed away, and Mr. McDonnell was appointed in his place. We have also had for many years Mr. Bremner. They visit all the ports and we expect a report from every port in the Dominion at least once a year. I think we have it oftener in some cases. We have in Ontario now a chief inspector and three officers.


Mr. CLEMENTS.: I would ask the Minister of Customs what salary the customs collector at Coatswortli, in my own constituency of West Kent, receives and what the returns for the last fiscal year for that port were ?


William Paterson: What is the name of the port ?
. Mr. CLEMENTS. I do not know. It is a few miles from Romney.


William Paterson: Thomas Robinson is the collector, and he receives $400.


Herbert Sylvester Clements: What are the revenue returns from that office ?


William Paterson: 


Herbert Sylvester Clements: While I think a port is necessary in that district, I think it is in the wrong place. I think the town of Wheatley, about five miles from there, is the proper place. I would ask the hon. minister to take that into consideration.


William Paterson: I shall be very glad to inquire as to that. I judge, from the small amount of revenue returned that it must be largely a preventive station. Does the hon. gentleman say that Wheatley would be a better point to prevent smuggling than where the office is now V


Herbert Sylvester Clements: Yes.


Mr. CLARE.: What increases of salaries were made at the Galt customs house ?


William Paterson: The salary of Mr. Denis, the preventive officer, was advanced from $600 to $650. The collector has asked for an increase, but it was not given last year. It is under consideration.


Mr. WM. WRIGHT.: I represent a large district, the district of Muskoka, in which there is no custom house at all, and we find it very inconvenient in getting goods in. I am sure that the revenue of that district is much larger than that of many others which have custom houses.


William Paterson: We have had strong representations from portions of Muskoka on that subject, among others from Brace-bridge, a large and thriving place. During the summer months, when there is a good deal of traffic, we have an office at Graven-hurst. We have had applications for new offices from thirty or forty places, but it is difficult to accommodate them all. The opening of every new port means an additional expenditure. Then, while we are very anxious to oblige the business community as far as we can, we are not able to secure the same judgment with reference to values and as to whether invoices are correct, at many of these points that we can at larger points, where we can afford to pay larger salaries and have men especially delegated for the work. In the United States there are only a few very large ports. I believe it is a fact that for their 80,000,000 people, they have not as many ports as we have in Canada-not relatively, but absolutely. But the people of Canada have been accustomed to having conveniences nearer home. I can well understand what the hon. gentleman says as to the strong claims of the district he represents; but the department feel that the fewer ports we can have, with due convenience to the people, the greater uniformity in values we can secure.


William Wright: Have you any system for opening "new offices, with reference to size or population ?


William Paterson: When we get applications of that kind, one of the inspectors makes inquiry personally, then the depart-9}
ment gets a statement from the office at which it is probable the entries were made. For instance, we would get from the collector at Orillia a statement of the goods entered for consumption in the town of Brace-bridge, and in that way arrive at the amount of revenue that might be expected.
Mr. BARKER, Does the hon. gentleman propose to make any increases in the staff at Hamilton ?


William Paterson: I do not think there is any pressing demand for increases there. 1 think we are pretty well manned there.
Mr. BARKER, I think so, too ; but there will be a great deal of disappointment if some appointments are not made.


Wilfrid Laurier: Would it be a disappointment to the sitting members ?


Mr. BARKER.: No. but to some very strong supporters of the right hon. gentleman who expect offices.


George Eulas Foster: In the United .States, where there is a small number of ports comparatively, taking into account its population, how do they overcome what seem to be great difficulties to us ?	*


William Paterson: I suppose the business is done through brokers, with power of attorney.


George Eulas Foster: That system is also in vogue here.


William Paterson: Yes. in the larger cities, but we are under no responsibility to the brokers.


George Eulas Foster: I see there are very large increases in Nova Scotia compared with New Brunswick. How does my hon. friend account for that ?


William Paterson: In New Brunswick the officers were better paid, and in raising the pay in Nova Scotia we are bringing the officers there on a footing more nearly equal to those of New Brunswick.
Some resolutions reported.


ADJOURNMENT - AUTONOMY OF NORTHWEST TERRITORIES.
[Stage Direction]
Sir WILFRID LAURIER moved the adjournment of the House.
George Eulas Foster: Can the Prime Minister give us any information as to the probable time when the Bill for the establishment of the Northwest province, or provinces, will be ready ?


Wilfrid Laurier: I cannot give any definite information to-day.


George Eulas Foster: I suppose it will be as soon as possible ?


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes ; I am very anxious to do so. I suppose that ilex' week we shall commence a more regular

course of business than we have had up to this time. I should think that the bill referred to could be introduced probably during the second week in February.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 6 p.ru.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, January 30, 1905.