1905-02-10

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 49) respecting the Century Life Insurance Company.-Mr. Maepherson.
Bill (No. 50) to incorporate the Calgary and Battleford Railway Company.-Mr. Turifif.
Bill (No. 53) to amend the Act respecting the Department of Railways and Canals.- Mr. Emmerso'n.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. CALVERT moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 48) respecting the Toronto and Hamilton Railway Company.
Mr. HENDERSON.: What is the object of the Bill ?


Mr. CALVERT.: It is to give power to the company to issue preference stock and pay dividends on the same over common stock.


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

Hon.   CHAS@: FITZPATRICK (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 51) respecting- contracts for government works. He said : This and two other Bills on the order paper in the names of Messrs. Emraerson and Hyman are practically to the same effect. The intention is to' provide that hereafter contracts in which the amount involved exceeds $5,000 will be let, not only af ter tenders have been called for, but also after they have had the sanction of the Governor General in Council. Hitherto the practice has been for the minister at the head of the department interested to dispose of such contracts. My hon. friend (Mr. Foster) will remember that in 1880 an Order in Council was passed authorizing the letting without tender of small contracts in which the amounts involved did not exceed $5,000. After I became Minister of Justice, I came to the conclusion that there was no warrant for such a proceeding. and in 1903 introduced a Bill to give legal effect to the practice. The intention now is to provide that when a contract involves expenditure of more than $5,000 it cannot be awarded by the minister alone, but must receive the sanction of the Governor General in Council.


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

[Stage Direction]
Hon CHARLES FITZPATRICK (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 52) to amend the Franchise Act, 1898.' He said: This Bill is'to facilitate proceedings in contested election cases. The effect of it will be to enable any list of electors bearing the imprint of the King's Printer to be produced in court as prima facie evidence of the original list. At the present time, in order to prove in a contested election case that the petitioner is a qualified voter, it is necessary to do one of two things, either to summon the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery to appear before the court with the original list, or to get from him a certified copy of the list. Either method is cumbrous and expensive, and to overcome the difficulty this amendment is proposed.
Motion agreed to. and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. CHARLES HYMAN (Acting Minister of Public Works) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 54) to amend the Public Works Act. He said : The purpose of this Bill is explained by the statement of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick) concerning the Act respecting contract for government works.
Hon. GEO. E. FOSTER.: How will that affect the practice, which was in vogue in 1890 at least, of giving work out without tender or doing it by day labour if it did not exceed $5,000 ? Is that excepted now under this Bill ?


Mr. FITZPATRICK.: These Bills do not affect that question. That was affected by the Bill of 1903. As I said a moment ago, my hon. friend will remember that in 1880 an Order in Council was passed authorizing the Minister of Public Works to let contra els for works that did not exceed $5,000 without tender or by private tender. I came to the conclusion that there was not statutory authority for that practice, and it was doubtful whether the Order in Council was effective. And, in order to make it effective I introduce the legislation of 1893.


George Eulas Foster: So that works below $5,000 could be carried out in tin's way ?


Charles Fitzpatrick: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: There is an ingenious way of getting around that provision, by cutting the work up in sections of $5,000 of less and spending, it may be $30,000 or $40,000 in the end. That is very much like an evasion of the spirit of the Act, and ought to be provided against in some way. I know that it is a little difficult because the minister may say : What I propose to do amounts to $5,000 or less, but when that is done, his intentions may broaden and he may want another $5,000 worth done.


Charles Fitzpatrick: I think it is the intention of the House-and after all this legislation is intended to give effect to the intention of the House-that a contract that involves $5,000 or more shall not be let except by public tender. Still, of couse, we know there are works of immediate pressing necessity that must be done without tender. When the Bill is in committee, I shall be glad to consider any amendment that will make in the direction of requiring public tenders for contracts of over $5,000.


Mr. HAGGART.: As I understand it, it is not so much the intention to interfere with the present law as to take the jurisdiction from the department and give it to the Governor in Council.


Mr. SPROULE.: But the department, apparently may carry on a work involving more than that $5,000 where there is no contract at all. Are they not building the Mr. FITZPATRICK.
post office in this city by day labour ? That is a work that will cost much more than $5,000.


Charles Fitzpatrick: That is a matter of repair.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But involves a very large outlay. And it will hardly be said that there was any urgency there.


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

[Stage Direction]
Hon. SYDNEY FISHER moved that the House go into committee on Tuesday next to consider the following proposed resolution :
That it is expedient to provide that the Governor in Council may from time to time pay out of the moneys to be provided by parliament for such purposes, such sums as are required for the taking of the census, and for the collection, tabulation and publication of agricultural, commercial, criminal, educational, manufacturing. vital and other statistics ; the remuneration of the necessary officers and clerks and the payment of all expenses incurred in carrying into effect an Act for such purpose.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
lit. Hon. Sir WILFRID LAURIER (Prime Minister) moved :
That from Wednesday next, the 15th instant, inclusive, to the end of the session, government orders have precedence on Wednesdays and Thursdays, immediately after questions to be put' by members.
He said :	I think the state of the order
paper justifies the government now in taking these two days.
George Eulas Foster: The state of the order paper might be tortured into support of an idea of that kind. But where is the government's legislation ? I think my right lion, friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) intimated some time ago, in answer to a question of mine, that the Autonomy Bill would be down about the second week of February. The second week of February is here and we have not seen any trace of the Autonomy Bill, while the minister who is most interested in it does not seem to be present with his colleagues. So, I imagine, that intimation will have to be revised. If the government work is not ready, it is not worth while taking more days for it. But, if the government will be good and get its work ready, I do not think there will be any objection from this side of the House to considering it oil Wednesdays and Thursdays even up to midnight.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: The government always wants to be good. That is its constant disposition-
Some lion. MEMBERS. Oh, oh.

Sir WILFRIED LAURIER

but very
poorly appreciated, 1 am sorry to say. I did state to my bon. friend (Mr. Foster) that I intended to introduce the Autonomy Bill during the second week in February ; but, owing to the absence of certain gentlemen who have much to do with the discussion of the legislation, bur work has been delayed. My intention is to introduce the Bill on Tuesday the 21st inst. I cannot commit myself absolutely, but X think I shall be able to introduce it on that day.


John Graham Haggart: Will the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) be here ?


Wilfrid Laurier: The Prime Minister will be here.


Mr. MONK.: I think the passing of this legislation might be deferred. The Auditor General's Report is not complete, and I do not think that the reports of all the departments are down. Possibly this may explain why there are not more notices of motion from private members. Before taking away these days from private members, I think it is the duty of the government to lay before the House all the legislation and all the departmental and other reports upon which members rely for their information concerning public affairs.


Wilfrid Laurier: My hon. friend (Mr. Monk) will remember that every private member's day during this session has been in part taken up with government business. We have gone over the order paper day after day and exhausted all the business standing in the names of private members, and then have taken up government business. Under these circumstances I think it is fair that the government should have the time for its business. It is not our fault if the report of the Auditor General has not yet been brought down. I am sure that according to the law as it stands at present, the report of the Auditor General should have been here on the 31st of January ; and I have reason to believe that on the 31st of Jaunary all the manuscript for the report was not yet in the hands of the printers. But I do not admit that we are at all at fault. If the hon. gentleman will look at the order paper he will see that there are only eleven notices of motion, most of them not contentious, and I think that they will all. or the greater part of them, be disposed of on Monday.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think the report that was to be made to this House by Judge Britton regarding the Treadgold concessions was never presented to the House.


Wilfrid Laurier: The hon. gen-gemau's memory is at fault.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: And the report on the importation of alien labour for the Transcontinental Railway-was that presented to the House?


Wilfrid Laurier: I do not remember. The report of Mr. Justice Britton was brought down during the last days of the last session.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Hon. PETER WHITE.: I would like to ask the Minister of Public Works if he will lay on the table of the House a copy of the instructions issued to the engineer in charge of the Ottawa and Georgian Bay Canal survey, before that item is taken up in the estimates ?


Hon. CHAS. HYMAN (Acting Minister of Public Works).: Do I understand the hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. White) wants a copy of the orders issued by the chief engineer ?


Peter White: Perhaps I can explain more fulljr what I want by referring to an article that appeared in one of the newspapers the other day, in which it was stated that the instructions to the engineers required them to make an estimate for a depth of water of 22 feet. Whether that be so or not, I would like to know.


Charles Smith Hyman: If the hon. gentleman wants the instructions which have been sent to the engineers by the chief engineer in charge of the work, I would be glad to bring them down.


Peter White: Will they be laid on the table ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes.



SUPPLY-THE POLITICAL CRISIS AT QUEBEC.

["The building was constructed in the usual way, by public contract. I have never before heard the first breath of complaint against the building. I have always understood that the people of Sarnia are pleased with it and consider it a credit to the town. As a matter of fact, the building itself cost $65,000, and was built by ptiblic contract let to the lowest tender. It is a solid stone and brick building, i cannot agree with the hon. gentleman that Mr. HENDERSON.\nit would be better to construct these buildings more lightly in order to provide more-room for the same money.\nAt six o'clock, House took recess.\nAfter Recess.\nHouse resumed at eight o'clock."]
Mr. J. E. E. LEONARD.: (Translation.) Mr. Speaker, before the orders of the day are called, and as the hon. minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick) has promised us yesterday in answer to the question I asked about the crisis in Quebec, I would like to know if the hon. minister of the Inland Revenue (Mr. Brodeur) has any information to give us about his mission to Quebec.
(The assistant clerk of the House called item No. 9, House again in Committee of Supply).


Frederick Debartzch Monk: Are we not entitled to the explanations which were promised yesterday by the Minister of Justice (Hon. Mr. Fitzpatrick) on behalf of the government, explanations that were to be given by the Minister of Inland Revenue ill on. Mr. Brodeur) to-day? I see the Minister of Inland Revenue back in his place. I have followed him with some dilli:silty around the House, no doubt lie has been reporting the result of his mission to the individual members of the House. Would it not be fairer to take the House into his

confidence and give us the explanations to which we are entitled?


Charles Fitzpatrick: The hon. gentleman has not stated accurately what occurred yesterday. 1 endeavoured to express myself in very imperfect French to the hon. member for Laval (Mr. Leonard). What I said was that if he would be good enough, when the minister was in the House, to put his question to him, and that was intended not for me but for him, he would no doubt get an answer.


George Eulas Foster: I would suggest to the First Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier), if the Minister of Inland Revenue is not here, that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Fisher) might give us some news, as I have no doubt the Minister of Inland Revenue confined the whole thing a few moments ago to the Minister of Agriculture.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I think we have a right to insist. I understand the French of my hon. friend the Minister of Justice perfectly well, he speaks it admirably, as he knows himself. I may be mistaken. I did not take his words down in writing, but I understood him to answer the hon. member for Laval that the Minister of Inland Revenue was absent at Quebec, and that he would give an answer to-day, which answer would not be a vague one like the stories which have been flying around, but would be certain information. Now if 1 am not in order, I will move the usual motion. But I think our demand is a just; one. We have seen ministers from Quebec who have resigned and ministers who have not resigned but were holding on still.


Wilfrid Laurier: Order.
ilr. MONK. I am in order. Mr. Speaker, I intend to move the adjournment of the House.


Wilfrid Laurier: Well, there in no necessity for that. If the hon. gentleman will let us move the House Into Supply then he will have an opportunity.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I am putting my question now, which I have a right to do, or later on, as I see fit.


Wilfrid Laurier: My hon. friend is not in order.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I ask your ruling on that point, Mr. Speaker. I am not obliged to wait to another stage in the proceedings.


Wilfrid Laurier: My hon.
friend has a right to move the adjournment of the House, but he knows that is usually done only on matters of necessity and urgency. I do not know the matter as to which be wants to have a little chaff, whether it is either urgeui or important. But he will have an opportunity to be as funny and as Mr. MONK.
pleasant as lie desires when the House is moved into Committee of Supply.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I do not think there is any such restriction. If there is in England, we have not introduced it here.


Peter White: I understood, Mr. Speaker, that you had put the motiou that the House go into Committee of Supply.


Mr. SPEAKER.: I have not yet.


Peter White: If that be so, then the hon. gentleman is perfectly in order.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: The motion has not been moved yet.


Peter White: I heard the clerk at the table call order No. 9.


Wilfrid Laurier: But it was not put to the chair.


Robert Franklin Sutherland: Sir Wilfrid Laurier moves that I do now leave the Chair.


Frederick Debartzch Monk: I wish to call the attention of the House to what is, in my estimation at least, an interference by the government with proceedings actually going on in Quebec. A political crisis has arisen in the provincial cabinet, and we are entitled here, as members of the House, to know exactly what part the government of Canada is taking in that crisis. I mentioned a moment ago that within the last ten days we have had here from Quebec interviewing the right hon. gentleman and other members of the government, ministers of the cabinet in the province of Quebec who have not resigned, and we have had others up here on alternate days who have resigned. We have had a large number of members of this House and of members of the cabinet moving down to Quebec, and down to Montreal, in connection with this crisis. Liberal organs announced freely before the opening of the session that my right lion, friend himself liad gone down to Quebec, and made no secret of the object of his mission; he had gone down there in order to set matters right, and arrange the internal difficulties that have arisen in the cabinet itself at Quebec. The government organ in the city of Montreal, the Montreal ' Herald,' states this in regard to the point which I have just raised. It contains a telegram from Quebec dated February 9.
Conciliation was in the air all day. Hon. L. P. Brodeur and Senator Dandurand were on hand as peace makers and they did their best.
Further on :



[Stage Direction]
It was obvious an hour after breakfast time, that there was ' something doing.' Mr. Brodeur had come in by the morning train. Mr. Dandurand was stopping with relatives. Presently it was whispered that these gentlemen, acting at Sir Wilfrid Laurier's request, were doing their best to make peace. In the course of the day

the ex-ministers had several interviews with Hon. Mr. McCorkill and Hon. Mr. Archambatilt.
It is conceded by all who have been in any way privy to what went on that, in a day of disappointments, the one clear gain to the party is a pronounced enhancement of Mr. MeCorkill's reputation as a public man.
I could quote from several of the Liberal organs' articles, telegrams and items which point clearly to the interference of this government and by members of the government with the difficulties which have arisen at Quebec and which are very far from a solution as my right lion, friend knows better than any one else. On two occasions the attention of the government has been called to this point. Yesterday my lion, friend from Laval (Hr. Leonard) knowing, as everybody knew, it. being a matter of public notoriety that the lion. Minister of Inland Revenue had gone down to Quebec with the mission with which lie was charged as has been intimated here by the Montreal ' Herald,' asked that we should have some report. Ministers are responsible to the House of Commons in general and they are responsible for every one of their acts. As I understood the hon. Minister of Justice (Mr. Fitzpatrick) lie stated that the hon. Minister of Inland Itevenuo was absent at Quebec and instead of listening to vague rumours of all sorts, my hon. friend would receive to-day some answer, some information from that minister. The hon. Minister of Inland Revenue has been in the House since three o'clock. He has, as has been noticed by everybody made a report evidently of bis mission to Quebec to a number of hon. members of this House, and 1 think it is only fair to us to-day in view of the promise made yesterday that he should tell us what the mission was with which he was charged and with what results he has performed the mission.
Right Hon.   S@: Well, Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that I cannot gratify the very fastidious curiosity of my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk). I wisii I could. The ideas of my hon. friend and my ideas in regard to responsible government do not agree. There is a crisis in Quebec. It is not the first time that there have been crises in governments ; it has happened before and perhaps may happen again so long as men are men and divide into opposite parties. My hon. friend said that he wanted to know what part the government intend to take or are taking in regard to the crisis at Quebec. I am very glad that I can satisfy him on that point. The government are taking no part whatever in the crisis at Quebec and the government have no part to take in that crisis. I do not deny that personally I am very much concerned in what is taking place at Quebec. I take an interest in what is going on, some of my colleagues do the same and I understand also
that on the other side of the House a very deep interest is taken in that crisis. My hon. friend is not perhaps the least of those who take an interest in it. Perhaps he is not as immediately concerned as I am, because the crisis is not amongst his own political friends, but in the charity of liis bosom he takes an interest in it as if it were amongst his own friends. I have to say that if my colleague, Mr. Brodeur, went to Quebec, he went simply as Mr. Brodeur and in no other capacity. My hon. friend! says that ministers are responsible for their actions. There is no doubt that ministers are responsible for their actions when they act as members of the government in matters which concern the government, but if a minister of the Crown goes to Quebec or Montreal, I do not think he gives an account where he sleeps or what he has done or how he has disposed of his time. I think that as much libertv ought to be given a minister as any other man. If because a man is a member of the government does it follow that he must be dogged and followed and that he shall give an account of what he has done during his trip ?


George Eulas Foster: The defence of my hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) has certainly not been a very long one and I think the House will agree with me that it has not been a very strong one.


Wilfrid Laurier: No, because there is nothing to defend.


George Eulas Foster: I do not think that any one will stand up and say that it has been a very skilful one or a very frank one. It is impossible that the whole public sentiment of the country can be under a grave mistake in believing that there is an attempt being made by the government here in Ottawa, or certain of its individual members, to interfere in the party crisis which has taken place in the province of Quebec. My hon. friend (Mr. Monk) has quoted original extracts from one of my right hon. friends own well-informed papers. Neither the editor of that paper nor the staff of reporters who work for that paper are without sense or intelligence, and it is impossible that these things would be going on and be reported as they are by my right hon. friend's own papers in plain and unmistakable terms if there was not something in them. Does my right hon. friend think that what he has stated here to-day will disarm public sentiment and operate the impression that he and the members of his government are taking no interest at all in this crisis at Quebec ? I do not think so. and I do not believe there is a man in this House who reasonably looks upon the thing who will come to that conclusion either. The hon. Minister of Inland Revenue (Mr. Brodeur) left his place and went down with that alter ego of the right hon. gentleman in matters political. Senator Dandurand,
82 T


Wilfrid Laurier: I have just one word to say ; I have not the right to speak and therefore I shall be very brief. I would simply say to my lion friend (Mr. Foster) that he has put a different complexion on the remarks of the hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk). The hon. member for Jacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) did not make the statement absolutely, but rather insinuated that I had sent the hon. Minister of Inland Revenue (Mr. Brodeur) with a mission to Quebec, a mission which meant a money consideration in some way or other. I have to say to my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) that he is absolutely mistaken. I repudiate that absolutely. I gave no instructions whatever to the hon. the Minister of Inland Revenue and especially nothing in the way of a money consideration or promise of any kind. I have to say that the lion. Minister of Inland Revenue (Mr. Brodeur) is a human being like every one else ; he belongs to the Liberal party and he takes an interest in the future of the Liberal party. There have been some feuds in former times in the Conservative party also.


Mr. TALBOT.: The nest of traitors


Wilfrid Laurier: And just as there were men in that party who took an interest in bringing about a conciliation which was effective, I hope that we may have the same success some time or other.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There is an additional reason why the House is interested in this case. Not only has a minister of the Crown gone from here to do conciliatory work but he is accompanied by the Speaker of the Senate ; both branches of the legislature have been pressed into service to do political work down there. Heretofore it has always been claimed that the upper House had no politics ; there were no political shadows there, the Senate was quite independent That was the Reform doctrine but now even the first man in the Senate, the hon. the Speaker of the Senate, is pressed into service along with a minister of the Crown to go down there and patch up some kind of an arrangement between the present leader of the provincial government and the other ministers who are rebelling against him.
That being the case, it seems to me that we are specially interested to know whether we are drifting. If members of both Houses of parliament are going to be forced to take part as politicians in these provincial feuds and troubles, the affairs of the provinces and the affairs of the Dominion are not going to be kept as distinct as we were led to believe, from the professions of hon. gentlemen opposite hitherto, would be the case.


Joseph-Édouard-Émile Léonard: (Translation). Mr. Speaker, I heard with pleasure tha Right Hon. Prime Minister state that he had given no instructions to the Hon. Minister of Inland Revenue. I am bound to accept his word ; but,-always in connection with that crisis at Quebec- may I inquire of the right hon. gentleman whether he has read an article of the * So-leil ', dated February 8, in respect to the policy followed by that paper. It runs as follows :


THE SOLEIL'S POLITICAL MANAGEMENT- WHAT IT IS.
[Stage Direction]
The stand taken by the ' Soleil,' during the present crisis, is variously appreciated. Those whose life-long weakness has been to talk too much could not very well miss this opportunity of falling into their capital sin.
Tn set things right, we may state once for all that the ' Soleil ' is the organ of the Liberal party, and as such, under the absolute guidance and control of Sir Wilfrid. Consequently, the partisans of Sir Wilfrid, those who are sincerely so, as well as those who call themselves such, will please take note of the fact.
If the above editorial states the truth, I am unable to understand how the Right Hon. Prime Minister can inform the House that he does not interfere with Quebec politics.
Then I read on the same page of the ' Soleil ' another article under the following heading :

[Stage Direction]
Now that the first moment of excitement is over, light is dawning again, and the true

[Stage Direction]
question at issue, as laid down by us yesterday, is very clearly in evidence.
It was necessary that a number of honest minded people living in far off counties, and who had been made to believe in the existence of a political scandal, should have their minds disabused as soon as possible. It cannot be said too many times, and it is an actual truth, that the whole matter is a question of personal differences and personal dislikes.
The ' Evenement ' is, therefore, completely at variance with the facts when it points to recent events as a vindication of the criticism made and the charges brought forth for the last five years by the party to which it belongs. Such an accusation, the Liberal party cannot afford to assent to, unless they wish to shamefully repudiate themselves.
It is the Parent government and no other which has been entrusted with the task of managing public affairs. Should there be any doubt as to the truth of this contention, it would be necessary in order to disprove It, to make a new appeal to the people. It is the rank and file who undergo the hazards of war, but it is the general who gets the credit for any success. The victories won by the Liberal party in 1900 and 1904 are in justice attributable to the Hon. S. N. Parent. As Scipio Africanus, he might proudly say to his accusers : ' Twice have I led you to victory, now let us proceed to the Capitol to thank the gods.' And it shall be in order to follow him.
If ever time was ill chosen to remove a leader is it not just now, hardly three months after the most overwhelming victory which ever a party has had to its credit ?
The Liberal party has come out of it so powerful as to become headstrong, believing that it can with impunity indulge all its fancies, even to the point of revelling in internal strifes for the mere pleasure of a change. But those are untoward fancies, the result of thoughtlessness. Once the first nervous crisis has been got over, wisdom will assert its rights, and it will be conceded that the least that could be expected by a political leader, after fifteen years of services of an exceptionally fruitful nature to the country, is to be allowed to depart with full honours. To attempt to remove him by sheer force would be acting contrary to common sense. It would be putting him fully in the right, and the people completely in the wrong.
Such is the question, rid of all unpleasantness, and as the representatives of the people in this province should look at it to-day.
Has that article been written at the request or at the suggestion of the Right Hon. Prime Minister ?
Frederick Debartzch Monk: Is it true the lion. Minister of Inland Revenue has' just returned to Quebec ?


Wilfrid Laurier: That is the first news I have had of it.


COMMUNICATION WITH PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND.
Mr. ALEX. MARTIN (Queen's).: Mr. Speaker, I wish to bring to the attention of the premier a question to which he promised me a reply in a few days ; I also wish to bring it to the attention of the lion.


Joseph-Édouard-Émile Léonard: Postmaster General. The question which is one of very serious interest to my province, refers to the communication at present maintained between Prince Edward Island and the mainland. As I explained yesterday, it is now7 carried on by iceboats, and when the iceboats reach the main land at Cape Tormentine, there is no special train to carry the mails to Sackville, a distance of 35 miles. This is a great hardship. Hon. members have only to go to the reading room to see that the last papers received from Prince Edward Island are nearly a week old. Any one can imagine what the business men of the province suffer in this matter. I am instructed by a telegram from my province, which I will read to the House :
Before the orders of the day, interrogate the premier every day about island communication.
Some lion. MEMBERS. Name, name.


Alexander Martin: That is a very hard duty imposed upon me, to stand up every day and interrogate the government about the communication with Prince Edward Island. I think the only thing they can do is to remedy this grievance, and thus relieve me of a very unpleasant duty and at the same time do justice to the province.


Right Hon.   S@: Mr. Speaker, I am extremely sorry that the state of the climate or the weather has interrupted communication between the mainland and Prince Edward Island. This is not the first time that there has been such interruption. I wish I could hope that it will be the last.


George Eulas Foster: Change the government.


Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.: It was worse under the late regime. I can remember in the days that are beyond recall, when a good representative of Prince Edward Island, Mr. Perry, like my kon. friend, announced to parliament how Providence, in view of the government of the day, was smiting Prince Edward Island, as it seems to be doing in a lesser degree to-day, the government of that day did not put on special trains, or even special ships. They allowed the people to get across in small ferry boats and to carry the mails as best they could, very frequently at the peril of their lives. We have endeavoured to improve the service as much as possible, and this year we have two steamers endeavouring to keep open communication. If the floating ice has made'it impossible for these steamers to navigate, I suppose the only solution would be to get more powerful steamers, perhaps ice breakers such as are used in Russia. That would be a very considerable expense. I do not say the government would not be justified in undertaking it, but there can be no satisfactory and uninterrupted communication between the Island and the mainland until some means

are devised for overcoming the difficulty of floating ice that becomes congested in the channel. My hon. friend the Minister of Justice has made a suggestion to me that would perhaps commend itself to my hon. friend. The difficulty arises from vis major -something beyond the control of the government. .


George Eulas Foster: Vis inertiae.
Sir AVILLIAiM MULOCK. No, the vis inertiae was in the olden days.


George Eulas Foster: There are some tilings that you forget.


William Mulock: There are some things the hon. member for North Toronto forgets, and it would be well to remind him of some of his history. He is a public man with a past. However, I am dealing with the present now. My hon. friend from Queen's (Mr. Martin) is seeking for information in obedience to the mandate of his correspondent, to worry the House each day, in the hope that, like the unjust judge, we may at last yield to his importunity. However, Mr. Speaker, I am afraid that we could not establish the precedent of employing special trains to meet every interruption of the mail service. That has never been done, and I doubt if any government would be willing deliberately to undertake it. Therefore, to resume the train of my thoughts when they were interrupted by the hon. friend for North Tor-oronto


George Eulas Foster: Very mean thoughts, too.


William Mulock: What does the hon. gentleman mean ?


George Eulas Foster: I will tell him when he gets through.


William Mulock: I certainly am utterly at a loss as to the meaning of the hon. gentleman, but if he wants time to invent some substance for what he says, I have no objection. I was going to suggest that this House is not the tribunal which can overcome the operations of nature. We certainly cannot overcome the congestion of ice, and I cannot hold out any hope of the government subsidizing special trains to carry the mails. We endeavour to utilize all the regular trains which the companies choose to establish, and even if they were to put on special trains for other purposes, I am sure we would be glad to use them ; but as to the department subsidizing special trains to carry the mails, I would hesitate before inaugurating any such policy.


George Eulas Foster: The hon. gentleman has, as usual, been giving free rein to his imagination, and the length to which that imagination can carry him is immeasurable. He conjured up a condition of things which never had any existence, and which he must know was purely imaginary. He painted 27
that imaginary condition in vivid colours, and then endeavoured to show by contrast how much better he and his government had done. But there never was a time under the late administration when we depended) on ferry boats to carry on navigation be-( tween Prince Edward Island and the main-1 land.


William Mulock: Yes, there was.


George Eulas Foster: There never was a time in the late administration when that was done ; but, of course, if the hon. gentleman wants to go back to pioneer times, he will find that at one period the only communication between the island and the mainland was by canoe.


William Mulock: I am referring to a time when the hon. gentleman was in this House.


George Eulas Foster: The hon. gentleman is utterly at sea. He is in the habit of drawing on his imagination


William Mulock: It is a fact.


George Eulas Foster: He is in the habit of painting an imaginary condition and then using that as a foil to show how much better things are done now. The people of Prince Edward Island have a perfect right to ventilate their grievance. When their facilities of travel are interrupted, they have a perfect right to ask their representative to plead their case before the government. But when they do so they receive but scant sympathy or mercy from this administration. In fact, some hon. gentlemen on that side were good enough to suggest that the constituents of my hon. friend should get up and use their shovels to clear away the railway tracks. I believe it was the Minister of Marine and Fisheries.


Some hon. MEMBERS: It was the Minister of Railways (Mr. Emmerson).


George Eulas Foster: That shows you how the Liberal party regards the grievances of the people. It is the old story. All they look at is what will benefit the party. The hon. gentleman was good enough to say that I was a man with a past. Has he a past ? Who does not remember ; who that was here in the days before 1806, does not re-' member how my hon. friend, in the long weary years when he was in opposition, was a prominent figure, and not a very creditable one in many ways, in this House ? Who does not remember how he looked up at the galleries and swore eternal opposition on any kind of a salary like $50,000 for the Governor General ? Can any one fail to recollect how he tried to make capital with the farmers by posing as a patron and introducing a Bill providing that no member of this parliament should have a pass and travel upon railways by the favour ana option of the railway companies ? Who



does not remember how he advocated economies which he has since repudiated V Why did he do this ? Either because he was honest and had convictions, or because he was seeking to deceive the public with the object of gaining their votes and getting into power. Well, he got into power, and what happened ? Do we not all remember how eloquent he was in opposition against members sitting in this House with promises of offices and emoluments in then- pockets V So far did his convictions carry him that he introduced a Bill to make it impossible for any one who had been a member of this House to obtain an office of emolument of any kind until he had been a certain number of years out of parliament. Yet that gentleman, who tells us that he nas no past, and who twits another hon. member with his past, sat in this House through two terms of parliament after 1896-the year the present government - took office-and when he had come to the end of the two terms, he had before his eyes a list of fifty members of parliament and seuators who had, in the course of these two years, been given offices of emolument by this government and had sat and voted in this House with promises of these in their trousers' pockets. Who does not remember the gentleman from Quebec who sat yonder with a promise from the First Minister of either a lieutenant governorship or a judgeship of a higher court in the province of Quebec in his pocket, voting for measures which, in his heart, he did not believe in, and which, with his lips, he said he did not believe in, but for which he voted because of the promise he held in his pocket ? That was wrong in itself, but, worse yet, the fulfilment of that promise was kept back by the right hon. gentleman and his colleagues for one and a half or two years, in order that they might still keep that supporter in his seat. The hon. gentleman thinks there are some things we would like to forget, and twits us with wishing to forget them. He may forget for himself a display of lack of conviction, want of sincerity and disregard of principles, which is without precedent in the public records of this country.
Sir WILLIAM MULOCIv. As the hon. member for North Toronto has spoken twice on this motion, perhaps the House will be similarly indulgent in my regard. Of course, my hon. friend must be allowed some latitude. and it reminds one of olden times to see him take his stand and, witli that digit finger of his, threaten any one against whom he directs his spleen and disappointment. He. of course, may claim some indulgence. If I had it in my composition-and I thank God I have not-to nurse during four years feelings of animosity and take the first opportunity to give vent to them, I might follow the example of my hon. friend, and, on each occasion when I rise to address the House, endeavour to misrepresent and tor-Mr. FOSTER.
ture the record of those to whom I am opposed and excite heart-burnings and vengeful feelings among them. My hon. friend has sought to vent his disappointment on my head by going back into the past. But if I should look up his past. I hardly think it would prove very edifying. I can well remember the platform upon which he secured an entry into political life, and how well he wriggled away from that platform, when he said that if it did happen that at one time he had committed himself to the doctrine of prohibition, that was only in a moment of weakness. After he had started on his public career and won his spurs and his position in__this House as an advocate of that doctrine, after he had delivered in this House philippic after philippic to show his zeal for the cause, no sooner did he get into office than he apologized for his mistake and pleaded infancy as his excuse. Well, I am willing to forget his boyhood days and throw the mantle of charity over them, but there are some events of more recent date, in which the hon. gentleman was a prominent figure, and with regard to which he cannot plead the same excuse. He could hardly plead weakness and infancy and inexperience, or even temporary insanity, for what occurred in 1896.
And what occurred ? I remember well occupying at that time the seat now occupied by my hon. friend from Dorchester (Mr. Morin). The hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) was sitting where the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) sits to-day. There was an histrionic incident in the month of January, 1896, when the ex-premier. Sir Mackenzie Bowell, coming forward to the floor of this House as the Speaker left the "chair, stated that for six months he had been sitting witli the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) and others whom he described as a nest of traitors with the hon. gentleman as their leader. He selected the hon. gentleman as the most distinguished member of that body and said that for six months that gentleman, if he might so describe him, had been endeavouring to cut his throat. What are their relations to-day, between the former prime minister (Sir Mackenzie Bowel] i and the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster)? Has the hon. gentleman received absolution from Sir Mackenzie ? Has he made amends to him ? Has he ever yet given to the public an explanation and defence of that transaction ? Why, I read in the press during the last campaign that, in North Toronto-1! think it was North Toronto-the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) was asked to explain and justify his conduct as a public man in having betrayed his leader, and having caused a strike among his friends to prevent that leader from re-forming the government. He was asked to explain and to justify, if he could, his treachery on that occasion. And what did he say ? He said that his mouth was sealed ; that he had given his explanation to His Excellency and he was satis-

fied. There was courage for you. The hon. gentleman showed the high quality of his courage by taking shelter for an indefensible transaction behind His Excellency the Governor of Canada.


George Eulas Foster: And what would my hon. friend (Sir William Mulock) have done ?


William Mulock: I certainly trust I would not have been guilty-as I think no hon. gentleman would ever be guilty-of the offence of my hon. friend. He is teaching us what our political morals ought to be. But what did he himself do? Sir Mackenzie Bowell was a member of parliament long before the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) entered this House. He was taken into the government of Sir .Tohn Macdonald in 1878. He was Sir John Macdonald's trusted colleague for many years. In 18S3 or 1885, the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) became a colleague of Sir Mackenzie Bowell under Sir John Macdonald. He sat with Sir Mackenzie Bowell in Council from the time he joined the cabinet until the lamented death of Sir John Thompson. He had ten- years association with him in the Council chamber as well in the party organization. And, when it became necessary to appoint a premier in the month of January, or thereabouts, 1895, the hon. gentleman (Mr.'Foster) I presume, joined with others in recommending Sir Mackenzie Bowell. He took office under him and served under him-if service it can be called-for a year. He waited until parliament met on the 2nd of January, 1896. After the speech from the Throne had been delivered and the House had assembled to receive that speech, instead of moving in a manly way that the speech should be taken into consideration the next day the hon. gentleman moved for some reason mysterious at the time but afterwards made clear-that the House should stand adjourned until the following Tuesday. Saturday came and then the conspiracy was laid bare before the public, and, for two weeks the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) took up his position in room 16, he and a few more, to prevent Sir Mackenzie Bowell re-forming his cabinet. He endeavoured by the arts of the striker to destroy constitutional government and betray his chief. The hon. gentleman now asks me what I would have done. I ask him if he can find any parallel for his conduct in any parliamentary body ? You will search in vain the history of constitutional government 'jn Great Britain and its colonies to find a precedent for such a transaction.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What about Quebec today ?	'


William Mulock: I am dealing with my hon. friend from North Toronto (Mr. Foster). He has asked me to refer to his history, and I am doing so. He refers to me, and he is quite at liberty to refer to me. He mentions certain propositions of 271	.
mine in days gone by. He knows perfectly well that it is one thing for a member to have individual views, but that it is quite another thing for him to impress those views upon his colleagues. It is true, since he alludes to it-though I never publicly made an observation upon the subject-that I did not approve, so far as I myself was concerned, of a member of parliament travelling upon a railway pass. I never said so before -never expressed an opinion upon the subject. I do not propose to lay down a rule of conduct for the guidance of my fellow-men. They are the keepers of their consciences, as 1 am the keeper of mine. I have entertained that view and have lived up to it strictly throughout the whole of my public career. If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) means to insinuate to the contrary, he is not correct in his insinuation. At present the law provides that members of parliament are entitled to travel free. I am under no obligation to any railway company if I travel free now in Canada, for it is my legal right to do so. Moreover if I had used a railway pass every day since I became Postmaster General I should have been within my legal rights, for it is provided in the contract between the railways and the department that the Postmaster General is entitled so to travel. However, I have not happened to make use of that provision. I did not exercise my right in that particular until parliament had placed upon the statute-book a law vesting that right in members of parliament. The hon. gentleman- says I supported a measure to prevent members of parliament being appointed to office. It is true that in the year, 1895, I introduced a Bill of that kind. When I introduced it the only person in parliament, who made the slightest inquiry of me as to its meaning was my hon. friend from North Toronto (Mr. Foster). He asked me to explain the Bill. I explained it. He with a very contemptible nod of his head, said, ' that's all.' And that is all he had to say in the way of expressing an opinion on the subject. No member of parliament expressed approval of the Bill, and I am not aware that the sentiments I gave expression to were shared by any member of parliament then or are shared by any member of parliament now. So, what was the use of my pressing an opinion that had no support in parliament, or, apparently out of parliament. There is such a thing as having views, but there is also such a thing as having to submit to the views of others; and, in this age and in the way we do business in this country and elsewhere, organization is essential to accomplish anything in life. If my hon. friend desires to discuss other features of my public life. I am quite prepared to meet him. But, before concluding I would ask him again if he would give the country an explanation-and justification, if he can-of his action in 1896 in betraying his leader, Sir Mackenzie Bowell. He knew that gentleman for 20 years, he was his

colleague for ten years, he enlisted under and served under him, he took the oath of allegiance to him, that he would be loyal-


John Graham Haggart: Where ?


William Mulock: Does not a gentleman who takes office bind himself in honour to


John Graham Haggart: The hon. gentleman (Sir William Mulock) said he took the oath of allegiance to him.


George Eulas Foster: That is his imagination.


William Mulock: Does bethink he is living up to his oath of office as a member of the cabinet if the gentleman betrays the premier? However, the matter is before the hon. gentleman. Since he has asked me to discuss his history, I give him this opportunity; now to justify to the country, if he can, his action on that occasion. We are all desirous of having his explanation. We want him to tell us why, having with his friends sat for ten years in Council With Sir Mackenzie Rowell, having joined ii. the formation of his government, having served with him for all that time, he should, between the meeting of the House on Thursday and the following Tuesday, the date ot the reassembling of the House to take into consideration His Excellency's address-wo want to know why it was that he then sprang that surprise on Sir Mackenzie Bowell, and committed that act which is without a parallel in Canadian history, and I trust ever will remain without a parallel ?


John Graham Haggart: It was not my intention to take part in the present debate; I would have been satisfied with the part played by my hon. friend from North Toronto (Mr. Foster) and my hon. friend the Postmaster General. It was the Postmaster General who commenced the attack. There was no necessity at all for that speech of his, referring to the past history of my hon. friend. 'He got exactly what he deserved.


William Mulock: I beg yom pardon, the hon. gentleman forgets. If wo are going to extend this peculiar debate -the hon. member for North Toronto interrupted me by a very offensive observation, which -was without foundation in fact.


George Eulas Foster: What was the offensive observation, I ask my hon. friend?


William Mulock: ' Hansard ' will tell it.


George Eulas Foster: The hon. gentleman does not know it.


John Graham Haggart: I listened carefully to the Postmaster General's reference to my hon. friend, and I think it was totally uncalled for, and he got the dressing which he richly deserved. The hon. gentleman, foi the purpose of finishing off my hon. friend from North Toronto, refers to an episode Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.
which took place in 1896 and to my hon. friend's part in that affair. He says it was a crime of which history furnishes no parallel, that nothing like it ever occurred in the history of any country before.


William Mulock: Do you know of any?


John Graham Haggart: If the hon. gentleman knew all the facts in relation to it he would be one of the first to justify my hon. friend from North Toronto. A correct statement has never been made of that affair, but very likely it will be made shortly. You know, Mr. Speaker, the position of the Conservative party in 189G; you know the difficulties that the hon. gentleman who was at the head of the government had ini carrying on the affairs of government. There was a question which arose in reference to school affairs in the Northwest. First of all, we had a gentleman) who left the government, left his leader at that time, as the hon. gentleman says, Mr. Clarke Wallace, a member for one of the Yorks. Afterwards Mr. Angers left the government, then two other French gentlemen, Mr. Ouimet and Sir Adolphe Caron, followed suit. They all had a right to do it; they resigned from tne government for different reasons. Afterwards there was an attempt to reconstruct the government. Sir Charles Tupper was in this country. I do not know the reasons why he came out here. My own idea is that he came out at the request of Sir Mackenzie Bowell and of some of his colleagues in the government. But there was no secret about it. It was well known then that Sir Mackenzie Bowell-I have no objections to that hon. gentleman, I have the kindliest feelings for him-it was well known that the party at that time, a party which had a majority in the country in every province, was dying for lack of good management, for want of a federal leader at Ottawa. It was with the consent of Sir Mackenzie Bowell, as well as the rest of his colleagues, that Sir Charles Tupper was asked to form a government. These are the facts. All were loyal to Sir Mackenzie Bowell until it was known by his colleagues that he was a party to Sir Charles Tupper taking the leadership of the Conservative party. From day to day, from time to time, like a sick girl hanging on to life, he did not hand in his resignation as his colleagues in the cabinet expected of him. There was then no other remedy than the remedy that the Conservative leaders, or the colleagues of Sir Mackenzie Bowell, took at that time. They did it, not for themselves. My hon. friend had nothing to gain, lie was getting no promotion, nor was I. We may have been wrong, we may have made a mistake at the time, but we did it thinking it was in the best interests of the Liberal-Conservative party and for the purpose of benefiting that party. From that moment to the present day I have never felt sorry for what I did at that time. My

iion. friend performed the same act that 1 did myself, and I am confident that he did it because he thought it was in the interest of his country, or at least in the interest of the Liberal-Conservative party. There was nothing else left for us to do, and we did it. We may have done wrong, we may have done what the Postmaster General says was not the act of gentlemen. But who has constituted him an authority to say what the conduct of a gentleman should be in reference to that affair? Who has constituted him a censor of the acts of those hon. gentlemen at that time? What I say is this, and I say it for myself and my colleagues, that we acted on that occasion, as wi believed, in the interests of the country, and in the interest of the party. For those reasons I now rise for the purpose of defending my hon. friend. When the whole history of that transaction is written, there will not be a single man from one end of this country to the other who can point a finger at any of these gentlemen and charge them with having done wrong.
iMr. FOSTER. I do not know that 1 have a right to ask it, but 1 would like to say about twenty-five words in answer to my hon. friend in a very cool and collected way- not by way of recrimination. It is not an interesting thing, and probably it is not a very pleasant thing, to hurl these recriminations against one another as representatives of a party. My hon. friend opposite has followed me from that time to this with his peculiar version of the affair of 1896, not only in parliament, but to a certain extent in every contest in which I have engaged, like a sleuth hound on my, track.


Wilfrid Laurier: Order.


George Eulas Foster: I do not think that is out of order.


Wilfrid Laurier: Like a sleuth hound.


George Eulas Foster: Yes.


Wilfrid Laurier: Is that the modem way?


George Eulas Foster: My hon. friend knows what a hound is for. He is to track his prey by whatever instincts and capabilities Providence has endowed him with. In my contest in North Ontario, my hon. friend did me the honour to track me. He followed me from concession to concession, and his chief stock in trade was this particular version of his as to my not acting as a man and a gentleman in 1896. Now, it is just as well that I should state once and for all in parliament, very briefly, just what I did and just what I conceive I was right in doing. That is all I want to do. From that time in 1896 up to this present moment, although I have been hounded-as I have stated-I do not find fault with any one for doing that if he thinks it is a good piece of party politicsalthough it has been thrown in my teeth everywhere I have never yet stood up in public when attacked, I have never once allowed myself to give the version plain and clear of my action at that time. Why ? Because I did not think it was in the interest of the public life of this country for me to do it. I felt that I would rather take the implications and the charges and whatever penalty came with them than violate what I conceived to be a good maxim in public life, that in these matters we are bound by our oath and our position as privy councillors to give our reasons to His Excellency and to let them bide there. Now, the first charge that my hon. friend brought against me was that I came into this House on the prohibition platform and that I repudiated my principles later. This is incorrect in every particular. I came into this House and I take now the opportunity of stating that I came into this House as a teetotaler in practice, as a prohibitionist in principle, well known because these had been my principles, right or wrong from my youth up-My canvass in the county in which I won my first election was absolutely outside the question of prohibition, and there is no man in this country that can say to the contrary. My published circular to my people, my call to them and my whole canvass were on the question of the policy of the government in regard to trade matters particularly and that alone, and I came to this parliament as an independent- Conservative in favour of the National Policy. The hon. gentleman says that a man may have individual opinions, but that when he becomes a member of a government he may not be able to make his opinions effective and he excused himself in two particulars for his not having carried out as a member of the government what he held to be right as a private individual. Will not the same reasoning apply to me ?


William Mulock: But the hon. gentleman abjured his principles.


George Eulas Foster: The hon. gentleman abjured his principles ? It does not lie in the mouth of my hon. friend to make that statement now nor did it ever. If the hon. gentleman can say that I have violated my total abstinence principles let him stand up and bring the proof. If he can say that I have violated my prohibitionist principles let him stand up and say so. I am not such a ninny or so absurd, or so wanting in common sense as to think, however strongly a man may hold individual prohibition opinions that he is able to put them upon the country unless the majority of the electors will stand behind his back. I never thought so, never said so, and never tried to. My hon. friend justifies himself by saying that he could not carry out in the government individual opinions because he could not impress them upon the majority of the government. It is within the judgment of the

House whether there has ever been a time in the history of this parliament when I or any other prohibitionist could impress our views on the majority of the House with sufficient strength as to bring about the enactment of a prohibitory law.
My hon. friend says that I was no gentleman in that I swore an oath of allegiance to my premier and broke it. I was not aware of swearing any oath of allegianc to my premier, nor do I think my hon. friend is aware of having sworn any oath of allegiance to his premier. Am I not to be allowed to leave the government if I differ from it on points of policy or principle ? Is a man to be branded as no gentleman because, differing from what is the policy and principle of his government, he leaves it ? Did not Mr. Angers, Mr. Ouimet, Sir Adolphe Caron and Mr. Clarke Wallace leave the government ? Were they no gentlemen ? There have been gentlemen who have left the government of the right hon. Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier). And why ? Because they differed upon points of policy and upon principle from his government. Did they violate their oaths of allegiance to the premier or were they no gentlemen because they left ? The statement of my hon. friend will not hold good in that respect. At whatever time a member of the government feels that he is out of accord with his premier and the government of which he is a member on .points of policy or administration. he has a perfect right to send in his resignation and he retains all his attributes of a gentleman and an honourable man in doing so. I did not leave the government for financial preference or personal emolument. When I left the government I left my position and I left my salary. I gave my demission in to the Governor General. I justified, as we all did, my resignation by the explanations which I made to the Governor General. I presume the Governor General who heard our explanations and received them did not apparently come to the. conclusion that we were no gentlemen or that we had violated our oaths of allegiance as was stated by my hon. friend for that very same Governor General made ns again members of the following government without stain and without reproach. Now. what does my hon. friend wish me to do ? What would he have done, I venture to ask him, if he were in the same position as I, not that I think he is apt to be in such a position ? He hangs on pretty thoroughly and pretty closely, but suppose my hon. friend came to the conclusion that he could not agree with his premier on some line of public policy, would he have violated his standard of gentlemanly conduct if he had frankly told the premier so and left ? Before I or any of my colleagues left the government, our premier knew our position and had it within his own hands. Would my hon. friend be not acting the part of a gentleman because, Mr. FOSTER.
if he disagreed with his premier to-day or to-morrow, he left the government, or, if he said : As an honest man I cannot agree with you on this question of policy or principle, and I hand in my resignation ? He will not say so. Therefore, the charge he urged against me in this respect has no force at all.
By what right did he call this a conspiracy ? Does the hon. gentleman, himself, know the circumstances of the case ? A reasonable man or a careful man will not make a statement of that kind except upon thorough knowledge. What thorough knowledge has my hon. friend of the circumstances of the case ? Has he any ? Was he within the secrets of the Council 1 Has he been made the bosom friend and confident of any member of the government of that time ? I venture to say that he has not. On what authority does he stand up here and say that this was a conspiracy, not knowing the facts of the case, not knowing a single one of the facts of the case ? So when you come to reason fairly and carefully on the premises of my hon. friend they do not hold water. So far as I am concerned that is the statement of my position. I make it here in the House and I apologize to the House for having had to take up their time to make it, but it has been often urged outside of the House and up to this time I have never taken occasion to vindicate myself by making a statement. When it was brought up and elevated to the dignity of what I might call a front bench question, I thought it was only fair for me to ask my right hon. friend and the House to indulge me in making this plain statement of the affair.


William Mulock: The hon. gentleman has asked me a question and I presume I shall be allowed to reply to it. I am pleased to recognize the more moderate manner in which he has endeavoured to express himself and I shall try to follow that worthy example.


George Eulas Foster: That is right.


William Mulock: See the effect of good example and of bad example. My hon. friend asks me on what authority 1 stated that there was a conspiracy. I made the statement upon the authority of Sir Mackenzie Bowel],


Some hon. MEMBERS: None better.


William Mulock: Sir Mackenzie Bowell made a public statement-he did not make it to me-which appeared in the press of the day charging these gentlemen with being a nest of traitors. I do not know what authority that is but it is sufficient for me because he was the premier.
I would call attention to the violence of my hon. friend's remarks. No one questions the right of any member of a government to resign. It is his duty to resign if

lie is not in harmony with the policy of the government, but my hon. friend lias not explained this point. The question is not whether a man may or may not properly resign ; the question in this case is' to explain the coincidence of seven members of a government resigning after the House was called together, after the speech from the Throne had been presented and before it had been taken into consideration; and during the time the government was in that chaotic state these seven gentlemen using their best endeavours to prevent the leader reforming his government. These are things that have not been explained.


Mr. GEO. TAYLOR.: The Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) made a motion today asking for two days now occupied by the private members of this House, so that we might get through with the business rapidly. The opposition cheerfully granted tlie motion.


Wilfrid Laurier: Cheerfully V My hon. friend (Mr. Taylor) did not hear my hon. friend from Jacques Cartier ('Mr. Monk).


George Taylor: It was done cheerfully ; your motion carried. One day of the government has been taken up by an hon. member, friend of the government in making an attack upon the opposition which was quite unjustified.


William Mulock: I did not make an attack.


George Taylor: And in his last statement he makes a charge against Sir Mackenzie Rowell that I do not think he can justify. He said that Sir Mackenzie Rowell stated that his former colleagues were a nest of traitors.


William Mulock: Not all of them.


George Taylor: I never saw that statement published and I think the only justification he had for saying that was some words that escaped Sir Mackenzie Rowell here in this House, after the Speaker had-left the Chair, when he was in a passion. I wish to corroborate a statement of the hon. member for South Lanark (Mr. Hag-gart). I was then as now whip of the Conservative party. I was the go-between between Sir Mackenzie Rowell and the ministers who had left his cabinet. I had consultations with both of them. There was a deadlock ; the cabinet had resigned as they had a right to do. My hon. friend (Sir William Mu lock) has no right to charge these gentlemen with trying to prevent Sir Mackenzie Rowell from forming a cabinet I was in the confidence of both parties and it was at the request of Sir Mackenzie Rowell that I saw Sir Charles Tupper and got them together, and they arranged between themselves and made a bargain that Sir Charles Tupper


Some hon. MEMBERS: What was the bargain ?


George Taylor: There are two or three young members from the eastern part of the Dominion who have seen fit to-day several times to insult gentlemen on this side of the House when speaking. I will ask you, Mr. Speaker, to draw their attention to the fact that they are quite unparliamentary in their conduct.


Mr. LENNOX.: And they are not at all discouraged by the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Emmerson).


Some hon. MEMBERS: Order.


George Taylor: I want you to inform them-or I shall through you-that it is not the intention of the opposition to put up with it very long. If they want the business of this House to be proceeded with, they must conduct themselves as the opposition always do and treat them respectfully. It was at the request of Sir Mackenzie Bowell that I had an interview with Sir Charles Tupper and brought these two gentlemen together. They made the arrangement that Sir Charles Tupper would conduct the session and then he would become the Prime Minister. That was the agreement that was made and these gentlemen had nothing to do with the arrangements, further until after the arrangement was fully concluded between Sir Mackenzie Bowell and Sir Charles Tupper.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into Committee of Supply.
Public buildings-Antigonish, $15,000.
Charles Smith Hyman: This is a vote for the purpose of erecting a building in Antigonish to take the place of the building there which is very old. It has been there for a number of years [DOT] and it has been reported by the architect of the department to be in a very bad state of repair, so bad, in fact, that it would not be in the public interest to attempt to repair it. Therefore I am asking a vote of $15,000 towards the erection of a new building.


George Eulas Foster: Before this goes through there are certain items of information we would like to have. In the first place what has been spent on that so far ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No expenditure has yet been made.


George Eulas Foster: What is this public building to include ?


Charles Smith Hyman: This will house the postoffice and customs, and will also include a residence.


George Eulas Foster: What building is there at present ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The old building I spoke of, a frame building 50 feet by 32 feet, two and a half stories high.


George Eulas Foster: Owned by the government?


Charles Smith Hyman: Owned by the government.


George Eulas Foster: Is that to be pulled down?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes. I think the intention in this case is to use the site on which the old building stands.


George Eulas Foster: Are the plans made for this building?


Charles Smith Hyman: The plans are in course of preparation and are nearly completed.


George Eulas Foster: What is the estimate of the minister, formed on those plans, as to the cost?


Charles Smith Hyman: The estimate for the building is about $25,000 complete.


George Eulas Foster: Will the minister read the different items ? It is well to have these on ' Hansard,' so that in another year we can have them to refer to.


Charles Smith Hyman: The estimates are : for the building itself, $16,000; heating, $2,000; electric wiring and fixtures, $600; fittings and furniture, including letter-boxes, $3,000 ; fencing and sidewalks, about $500; clerk of works, $1,000; and the usual sum for contingencies, making $25,000.


George Eulas Foster: What is the population and the postal, customs and internal revenues of Antigonish?


Charles Smith Hyman: The population is about 1,900, the postal revenue for 1903-4, $3,702, and the customs revenue, $7 7.80.


George Eulas Foster: What do you pay the postmaster there?


Charles Smith Hyman: With regard to that question the same duplicity arises from the Public Works Department acting practically as the agent for the other departments. That is information which I have not got.


George Eulas Foster: We must have that kind of information. We have always had it previously. The ministers have been going along in a very slipshod way in the matter of supplying information for the committee. I want to serve a notice, a very kindly notice, on the ministers that they must not come here and attempt to put their estimates through on information which is altogether insufficient for the committee to accept. We are to be treated as a serious House who have the revenues of the country in their keeping to a certain extent, and it is not just because a minister puts a sum of money before us and says he is going io put up a building of stone or wood, that it must go through. We always had this Mr. FOSTER.
kind of information in my time, and if the minister hasu't it, he had better shut his book, and let some other minister who has the information that we require take the floor, and we will go on.


Mr. PATERSON.: I think the hon. gentleman is asking rather too much. He has a perfect right to ask what the revenue of the post office is; but when he proceeded with the further question as to the salary of the postmaster, it seems to me that he went outside of what has been customary. It would lead to a discussion of how the Post Office Department is conducting its business, and whether it is paying postmasters more than it should, which are questions which cau only properly come up when the Post Office estimates are before the committee.


George Eulas Foster: The hon. gentleman knows a great deal of what other people's ideas and motives are. He will allow me to state my own motive in asking this question. I had no such object as he has intimated. Here is a town of 1,900 people in which it is proposed to spend $25,000 in erecting a post office. We have a great many towns of 1,900 people which have no public building at all. and what I am trying to get at is what the revenues of this town are at present, and what the cost of the administration of this building will be after it is constructed. You are going to have a different kind of post office arrangement, I presume, after you get this building, and it will be more costly. What I am trying to get at is whether it is a wise proceeding to put up a $25,000 building which will afterwards have all these excesses of expenditure which the present building does not have. Another point I want to get at is whether there is any principle in this matter at all-whether every town which has 1,900 inhabitants and is fairly situated in comparison with Antigonish, is to have a public building. I remember that the opposition of former days, among them my hon. friend himself, went very actively into this question of the principle that underlay the policy of erecting public buildings, and protested most vehemently against erecting them in towns of a certain population when other towns of larger population were without them, saying that they were granted by favour and not on a broad public principle. They went so far as to propose a resolution, which was moved by Mr. David Mills, then a member of this House, in which they laid down certain principles that should guide. The names of these public buildings are legion, and we ought to arrive at some kind of policy or principle underlying these expenditures.


William Paterson: I do not want to intervene in the discussion; but the hon. member made a remark giving notice to all the ministers, and I thought I would draw at-

tention to the matter. I was not imputing any motives to him-quite the contrary. But when he asked a question as to the cost of the management of the post office, 1 pointed out that that was a subject on which the Minister of Public Works could not be expected to be informed; that would properly come up under the post office estimates. The hon. gentleman says he supposes the cost of collecting the revenue will be increased. I do not think that will be the case. I do not suppose it will be altered at all by the fact of the post office being in a building instead of in a rented building. It was to that one point that I directed my attention, not to the other questions of the hon. gentleman, which he had a perfect right to ask. The remuneration given to the postmaster for the services he renders does seem to me an unreasonable question to ask of the Minister of Public Works.


Mr.   I@: The hon. gentleman's point is that this is not relevant to the estimates. I would regard it as rather difficult to take that position, and I am sure that my hon. friend the Minister of Public Works has over and over again answered questions which have been very much less relevant than that proposed by my hon. friend from North Toronto. We have got somewhat into the habit, during the past few years when the estimates are being discussed in committee, of accepting the stereotyped answer from the minister in charge that he is not in a position to give the information required as that comes under another department. That is one way of getting the estimates through, but perhaps it is not the best after all, and it should be the duty of ministers of the Crown to be present while the estimates are going through ; whether they happen to be in charge of the particular department whose estimates are being discussed or not, so that the House may get all .the information required.
Sir WILLIAM MULOCI-C. What is wanted ?


Mr. R. L. BORDEN.: The salary of the postmaster. It is not at all an adequate answer for the Minister of Public Works to tell us that he is not able to furnish the information asked for. The minister of the department who can furnish the information ought to be here to give it.


George Eulas Foster: The drift of my question is this. What is the position of the post office there now as regards salary and what changes, if any, will be made when the new building is finished and the post office moved into it ? Will the postmaster be put on a different footing and the expenditure increased ?
Gross postal revenue	$ 3,702 01
Number of money orders Issued.... 1,349
Total amount cf money orders	18,151 50
Total commission received from public 102 26
Number of money orders paid	 2,754
Amount of money orders paid	 66,347 OS
Amount of postal notes paid	 1,659 84
Compensation paid the postmaster on money order business	 113 46
Compensation paid to postmaster on
saving banks business	 19	23
Compensation paid to postmaster on
postal notes business	 13	09
Salary	
Forward allowance'	  iuu	uu


George Eulas Foster: When the new' building	is
completed, will the postmaster's pay be exactly the same ?
Sir WILLIAM MULOCIv. Yes, that will not affect his salary.


George Eulas Foster: What population must a town have to entitle it to a public building ?
Sir WILLIAM MULOCIv. There has been no rule laid down by any government. I have no desire to provoke any discussion or to blame any government, but I can remember quite well when we in opposition took very serious exception to the erection of a public building at Lapraire.


Mr. SAM. HUGHES.: And at Farnham You held up the House two days on Unit item.


Sir WI LI  I AM MULOCK@: The Laprairie post office, I think, had a revenue of $500.


George Eulas Foster: Something like Antigouish.


William Mulock: No, Antigomsh has a revenue of nearly $4,000, and I think at Laprairie you put up a building that cost some $20,000. I think it is well to put up public buildings in places where they were required for public convenience. Of course it is one thing to have an idea, as my hon. friend says, and another thing to live up to it, but I think after all this item has a good deal more to commend it than some which , my hon. friends opposite sanctioned in the past.


Samuel Hughes: Is the hon. gentleman now expressing contrition for his past V


William Mulock: I am afraid that remark is out of order. We have agreed, after our little discussion just now, to bury the hatchet for the present.


George Eulas Foster: What will be the staff that will be housed there ?


Charles Smith Hyman: There will be an office ic that building for the government engineers and for the Customs.


William Mulock: The information will be found in my report in the Appendix, letter ' C.' The items for Antigonish are as follows:	i


George Eulas Foster: What customs officers are there there now ?


William Paterson: Only one.


George Eulas Foster: One customs officer, one postmaster and no engineer at present.


Charles Smith Hyman: There is a government engineer there now and also his assistant.


Mr. McISAAC.: There are the chief engineer, his assistant, a clerk and a stenographer.


George Eulas Foster: They are not for Anti-gonisli itself, but for a certain district ?


Colin Francis McIsaac: For the eastern district, of which Antigonish is the centre.


Mr. INGRAM.: Have you an engineer in the post office now ?


Charles Smith Hyman: I mean the engineer representing the Department of Public Works in that locality. [DOT]


George Eulas Foster: You have an engineer and an assistant engineer ?


Charles Smith Hyman: Yes.
Mr. I< OSTER. These have no connection with the building ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No, but they will be housed there.


George Eulas Foster: Is there any Inland Revenue office there ?


Charles Smith Hyman: No.


George Eulas Foster: When the hon. minister makes this expenditure of $25,000, which will carry $1,000 for interest besides the cost of a keeper with a pretty large salary to take care of that building and the cost of fuel and lighting and repairs and all that, he is making a pretty large inroad in our revenue. That $25,000 building will have in it, one postmaster, one or two clerks, one customs officer, and an engineer and his assistant. That seems a pretty large sum to invest in a building to house that number of the country's servants.


William Mulock: But it is not merely put up to house the officials. Antigonish has a population of 1,900, and the public will have free access to the post office and the other offices, so that they will utilize the building to a considerable extent.


Samuel Hughes: Can the hon. gentleman give us an estimate of the amount of public money expended in this country on wharfs and breakwaters and for various other purposes in addition to this public building within the last eight or nine years?
Mr. HY'MAN. I am afriad if I had tried to prepare that class of information with regard to these votes, it would have taken some time. The question is not such as one would expect to be asked in putting through a vote of this kind, and therefore I am not prepared with the information.


George Eulas Foster: So far as I am concerned I have all the information I want with respect to this vote. But, as we are considering votes for other public buildings, opportunities may arise for the minister to state what principle or policy he intends to follow hereafter in these matters.


David Henderson: Has the minister fixed $25,000 as the entire cost of this building and its fittings, or is this only an estimate which may be exceeded by ten or twenty thousand dollars ? I believe that in the erection of these public buildings, the minister, in the first place, should determine how much money he is ready to expend on a public building in the particular town for which it is intended. It seems to me that he proposes here to spend a pretty large sum for a town of only 1,800 population. However, we will let that go. What I desire to know is whether this amount is the outside limit. Has the minister instructed his architect, or whoever is to have supervision of this work or the making of the plans, that $25,000 must complete the building, with lighting and heating appliances and all its internal fittings ? If the minister has not done so, I think he ought to inform the House that this vote is simply a preliminary step. In bygone years, I have discussed this question. The Minister of Public Works (Mr. Sutherland) for whom the present incumbent is acting temporarily, told us last year, or the year before, that he approved of that policy and that public buildings should be erected within the cost given. In other words, the minister told us that he would instruct those in charge of these works that in each case they must cut the coat according to the cloth furnished them-that no more cloth would be furnished to complete the garment. If the acting minister has not given that instruction to the officers, I hope he will be candid enough to tell us that we may know whether this $25,000 is to be the total amount expended on this work, or whether we may expect to be called upon to vote a very much larger sum. I shall feel it my duty to oppose with all my power the estimate for every public building unless that principle is applied. Unless that principle is applied, we cannot tell in what expenditure we are involving the country. Some years ago I advocated this principle very strongly.
I also advocated the principle that in small towns the size of Antigonish. public buildings should be erected for a smaller sum than is here proposed. I think that a building sufficient to meet the wants of a town of this size might be provided for a very much smaller sum. When we think of the enormous number of incorporated towns and villages in this country that have not had a dollar of public money expended within their borders-and at the rate at which we are going will not for fifty years to come have a public building of any kind-the condition is alarming. Unfortunately, in the county I have the honour to represent,


William Paterson: we have not a town as large as Antigonish -possibly 1,600 or 1,700 Is the largest town we have, and we have five of about the same size. To all appearances it will be many a long day before that county will have the opportunity of having money expended on public buildings within its borders, though, I am sure that it is just as important a county as Antigonish. 1 would be glad if the minister would take all these matters into consideration, and would not be guided simply by some special reasdn for giving one town a public building and, because that reason did not apply, refusing it to another town. Now, in the case of Clinton, I have it on the authority of the late member for West Huron that when he spoke to the architect of the Public Works 1 lepartment with reference to the estimate for a post office in that town-a post officei which the former Minister of Public Works, Hon. Mr. Tarte said, was to be erected as a model post office at a cheap rate, to include a postmaster's residence and so do away with the necessity for any caretaker besides the postmaster-the officer of the department said that the policy of the department was not to make plans and specifications . for a building costing less than $10,000. I would like to know who runs this government and this country. It does not seem to be even the ministers. The country seems to be run and the expenditure fixed by the departmental officers. I do not think it lies in the mouth of any officer of the government to say that he will not make plans and specifications for a building costing less than a certain sum, even though parliament may consider that sum all that is necessary. If that is the rule of the department, I am sorry that the minister has not better control of the affairs committed to his charge. If I were Minister of Public Works-which I never expect to be-I would quickly tell that officer that I had no further use for his services, and that I would put in a man who could make plans and specifications for a building costing whatever sum I thought necessary to spend upon it. Of course, we must hold the minister responsible for the conduct of his officers. As I have said, if the departmental officers will not conform to the requirements of the ministers, it will be a very difficult matter indeed for this House to control the public expenditure. I do not know who the officer was who made the statement to which I have referred, but I think the time has gone by, if it ever existed, when officers of the department should dictate to this House or to the minister what the cost of public buildings should be. The minister should lay down as a principle that the estimate for a public building must be adhered to. And we must hold the minister absolutely responsible for carrying out the construction of public buildings within the estimate, or we
can exercise no control over public expenditure.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am sure there must have been some misunderstanding as between the late member for West Huron and the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson), if the impression was conveyed that officers of the department would not draw plans for any building for which the minister had given orders. It may be, in the case which was under discussion, that the chief official of the department who has control of the erection of buildings, thought that it would have been impossible to construct a building for the services which it was proposed to make it for, at a less sum than $10,000. In the case to which the hon. gentleman refers, the town of Clinton, the actual construction of the building cost $9,650. So far as the estimate of the building is concerned, I want to say this, which is general in its character, that when this House has given its fiat by a majority that a public building shall be constructed in a certain place, it behooves us to put up a building of such a character that it will be a credit to the place in which it is erected. It is well understood that public buildings cannot be built of the same character as many others. Possibly, the officers of the department may err occasionally in making a building too heavy, possibly they are putting too much money into it. But, speaking with the responsibility of acting Minister of Public Works, I may say that I think that is a good fault, in the long run it saves an expenditure upon the buildings in the way of future repairs. I- think, taking everything into consideration, it is in the best interest of the country that when we erect a public building it should be of a character which will do credit to the government So far as the estimates are concerned, I have taken great care in having them properly prepared. I was assured by the officers of the department that a building such as is requisite here can be erected for the sum of $16,000. I have already given to the House, and it is on the ' Hansard,' the estimates of the officer for that building. Now, it is to be remembered that the cost of a building of that character, for a custom-house and post office, with the cost of furnishing the building separately, may be much larger than the cost of any other building in the locality where it is erected. I acknowledge that when this House is voting money they are entitled to all that information, and, so far as I am concerned, I hope to be able to keep the expenditure within the estimate. There may be circumstances in a large public building which may require the expenditure to exceed the estimate, but I can assure the House that special care will be taken to keep the expenditure within the estimates which are voted by the House.


George Eulas Foster: When was this Antigonish building decided upon ?


Charles Smith Hyman: The question of erecting that building lias been pressed upon tbe attention of the department for some time. For two or three years there was a question as to whether it would be better to repair it or to build a new building. The last reports we have say that the sills are so rotten that portions of them can be pulled away by hand. The building has been getting jnto a bad shape. The government own both the site and the building.


Mr. DANIEL.: Of what material is tbe new building ?


Charles Smith Hyman: It is to be a brick structure on a stone foundation.


Mr. GANONG.: Now that the government own the site, I think this proposition is still more unjustifiable. A more ridiculous expenditure, it seems to me, could scarcely be conceived of. We are not here merely to build a monument to the respected gentleman who has the honour to represent Antigonish. Here is Antigonish, not even an incorporated town.


An hon. MEMBER.: Oh, yes it is.


Gilbert White Ganong: Then the census lies. It gives the population at 1,888 souls, and we are taking $25,000, in addition to owning the land, to build a custom-house, which, I understand, is also to be used as a post office. We had better put $10,000 into the building, and get accommodation outside for the engineer and his assistants. As the hon. member for Hafton (Mr. Henderson) has said, we have hundreds of towns needing accommodation more than this one. I have two or three in my own county, and I do not ask for one-half the amount the government is expending in the county of Antigonish. There is the town of St. Andrews, a very important watering place on the Atlantic sea-board, with a population very nearly equal to that of Antigonish, with a very large revenue indeed ; and it has a post office and custom-house in a small wooden building that certainly is no credit to the government. Then there is the town of Milltown, with a population of 2, 044. If the Postmaster General would come down there he would be ashamed of the public building in that town. I think this amount should be divided in two, and half of it be given to some other place, if it is desired to do justice. I have in my hand a little circular, I am not sure it was not got up with the complicity of the acting Minister of Public Works. It says ' Vote for a new building for St. George : vote for Mr. Gilmour.' St. George is in my county. I do not see anything in the estimates for that St. George building ; but I trust the minister will see his way to carry out the suggestion made in that circular when the supplementary estimates are brought down.


Colin Francis McIsaac: In many towns with a smaller population than that of Antigonish, Mr. FOSTER.
in various parts of Canada, public buildings have been provided ; at the same time, I am free to admit that many towns with a larger population than Antigonish have not yet been provided with public buildings. But it is a fact that has been recognized by both political parties that Antigonish, according to its population, is a much more important town than many others in Nova Scotia or elsewhere with a greater population. It is the shire town of the county of Antigonish, and has a university, the only university in eastern Nova Scotia. The importance of Antigonish has been recognized, not only by this government, but recognized by hon. gentlemen opposite when they were in power. Away back, some twenty-five years or more, when the policy of erecting public buildings was being inaugurated, Antigonish was recognized as a place where the government should erect a public building. The only difference, therefore, between the two parties in regard to Antigonish is that the Conservative party went about putting up a public building in the wrong way, and the Liberal party has gone about it in the right way. In 1882 the late Conservative government purchased in the town of Antigonish, for the purpose of a public building, an old wooden building used as the St. Francois Xavier College. The authorities of the college undertook to build a brick building in a different part of the town and sold the old buildirig to the then government. I am not finding fault with that at all, except with the way in which it was done. They sold to the government of the day the old building with the lot, for a very moderate sum indeed- But I say the late government went about it the wrong way. They should have done what the present government is doing-built upon that lot a new building of brick suitable for the requirements of the town at that time. But what did they do ? They bought the building and the lot, and undertook to repair the old building, and year after year appropriations were placed in the estimates by the late government for purposes of repair, tearing down the walls and building them up again, tearing out the rotten sills, and the roof, and remodelling it, so that it has cost nearly as much, at least half as much, as it would have cost to put up a new building. What is the result ?
Notwithstanding all the expenditures that were made year after year and the interest charges accumulating, the result has been that, through age, its condition and wear and tear it became absolutely unsuited to the needs of the post office or of the officers who are occupying the building. I brought the matter to the attention of the government for several years and they refused to do anything. At last they were compelled to send an officer from the Department of Public Works to examine the building, a thorough examination was made of it and it was condemned; so that it be-

came absolutely necessary to erect a new building in Antigonish. As to the cost, as to the dimensions and as to the kind of building that should be put up in Antigonish I desire to say a few words. This is a very important point. Nobody who knows the conditions which prevail there can deny that. It is important that we should have a large building because the resident engineers for the eastern section of the province of Nova Scotia have been located in Antigonish for the last thirty years. The province is divided into two districts as far as public works are concerned. The engineers of the western part are located in Halifax while those of the eastern part have their residences and offices at Antigonish. Therefore this is not used as an ordinary public building for the accommodation of the postmaster and his staff, and the collector of customs and his staff, but a building must be provided to suit the growing requirements of the resident engineers and their assistants not only for the county of Antigonish but for the eastern part of the province of Nova Scotia. The sum which it is estimated this building will cost is not at all a large one. It will be a very respectable building indeed and will afford ample accommodation to these various public officers to which I have referred. The cost of maintenance will not be any more than it was before. We have had to keep a janitor for the last twenty-two years in charge of the old building which, on account of its age, is a very much more difficult building to take care of and keep in proper condition than an up to date modern building will be. I think the estimate for the new building is not a large one. The building will be a very modest one for the requirements of the town.


Gilbert White Ganong: I think it w'ould be very difficult for any one to get a justification out of that speech. I would like to know if the hon. gentleman had anything to do with the distribution of this circular :
Vote for a new public building in Antigonish.


Colin Francis McIsaac: No, I never deemed it necessary to refer, even in my elections, to any appropriations made for public buildings or any other work. It was so difficult for the Conservative party to get a man to run against me in the county that they had to import a man from another county for appearance sake.


Mr. W. F. MACLEAN.: Well then, you do not need a building.


Colin Francis McIsaac: No. I do not need a building or a public -work of any kind to get votes. But, the town of Antigonish needs it and it is only right that they should gel a fair share of the good things that are going.


Air. SCHAFFNER.: Being a new member I am not very familiar with these estimates.
but in looking over the appropriations for Manitoba, a country in which the conditions are changing very much more rapidly than they are in the east, I find that outside of the amounts put down for the constituency of the hon. the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) who represents the riding north of mine and outside of the city of Winnipeg, his right arm, there is only $15,000 in the estimates for public buildings for that great province which is developing so rapidly. I am surprised that any business government-


An hon. MEMBER.: You need not he surprised. -


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: Perhaps it is because I am a new member-but I am surprised that $25,000 should be placed in the main estimates for a public building in Antigonish, a town of 1.800 inhabitants. I think the population has been 1,800 for some time, it will likely be 1.800 for the next twenty-five years, and it is not likely that they will want any additional buildings. I believe this is not a fair estimate for a building in a town of that size in the eastern country. In estimating the probable requirements of a town in the next twenty years with the view of erecting a public building there is no possible comparison to be made between the east and the west. The development of the west is going ahead so rapidly that such comparison is impossible. AVhile a town in the west may to-day have only 1,800 inhabitants the prospects are that in ten years the population will be ten times as great. And we should therefore prepare for the future, but there can be no justification offered for erecting a building in the expectation of an equally rapid development in old Nova Scotia.


Charles Smith Hyman: I presume the hon. gentleman (Mr. Schaffner) who has just taken his seat knows that these estimates are not the estimates in which new expenditures are initiated. These are the main estimates. These are revotes and consequently it is impossible to say what may appear in the estimates for the province which the hon. gentleman represents.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: Well then they do not mean anything.


Air. GUNN.: Alay I ask the hon. Alinister of Public Works if it is the intention of the department to provide for the erection of a post office in the town of Seafortb. The post office revenue exceeds the post office revenue of the town of Wingham in the constituency of my hon. friend from East Huron (Mr. Chisholm) yet a new post office was erected in Wingham at a very large cost-$15,000 or $20,000. I am not finding any fault with the expenditure of that money because I believe it was necessary, but I would like to know if the hon. minister has in contemplation the erection of

a post office in our town. I have just arisen to endeavour to obtain this information because many of my constituents are interested in knowing whether the hon. minister intends to erect such a building. I may say for the information ,of the hon. minister that the post office at present in use in our town is a very old building indeed. It has been in existence for more than a third of a century and a new one has become a public necessity. Complaints are frequent in our town that the present building does not.afford the necessary facilities for handling the business there. I am sure that if the hon. minister understood the necessities of the town of Seaforth he would at once conclude to erect a building in that town worthy of the position which it holds in the county. As far as the policy of erecting public buildings is concerned, I see by the estimates that a post office is to be erected in the village of Antigonish in tiie province of Nova Scotia at a cost of $25,000. It is not my intention to ask the hon. minister to erect a building, costing anything like that sum of money, nor do I believe the people of my constituency desire it. We will be- very well satisfied with an expenditure of, say, $10,000. We have a population in the neighbourhood of 2,600, and I am perfectly confident that if the hon. minister would see to it that an amount of $10,000 was included in the estimates our people would be very well pleased and the probabilities are that when the next general election comes around they would not return a Conservative representative, but would send a follower of the government.


Charles Smith Hyman: I shall be very glad indeed to take into consideration any representations which the hon. gentleman (Mr. Gunn) may make as to the necessity of a public building in the town of Seaforth. .Speaking from memory I do not think that the county of Huron has done so badly in the way of public buildings.


Samuel Hughes: It is a large county.


Charles Smith Hyman: Quite true, but there are other large counties. There is a public building at Goderich, another at Clinton and another at Wingham.


Samuel Hughes: But. the hon. minister-


Charles Smith Hyman: May I be permitted to say a word once in a while without being interrupted?


Samuel Hughes: I will not interrupt the hon. minister if he is so fastidious.


Charles Smith Hyman: I am not fastidious at all. On almost every occasion on which I rise to speak I am interrupted. Surely the hon. gentleman can allow the county of Anti gonish a public building. There are three in Huron and if the hon. gentleman has any representations to make in regard to a public Mr. GUNN.
building at Seaforth I shall be glad to listen to those representations.


Samuel Hughes: I was going to remark to the minister, who is very fastidious-he is not always so fastidious-and 11 he was not so fastidious we might make better progress


Charles Smith Hyman: Mr. Chairman


Samuel Hughes: I was going to sug gest to him that in enumerating the public works carried out in Huron he omitted to mention some harbour improvements in Goderich. That is a very convenient omission. I would take the opportunity of pointing out that Seaforth has an income from the post office of $1,000 more than Antigonish and the minister might properly see his way to spending $1,000.


Andrew B. Ingram: I would like to put on record the customs revenue of, Antigonish. The receipts were $1,024.03. You can add that to the post office receipts and you have the grand total.


Charles Smith Hyman: Did I understand the hon. gentleman to say that the customs receipts are only $1,000 ?


Andrew B. Ingram: That is the amount given at page 745 of the Auditor General's Report. If this report is not correct he can settle that with the minister.


Mr. COCKSHUTT.: The minister was in Brantford during the recent election campaign and viewed our post office at that time. It cost about $25,000 according to competent experts. We have a population of about 19,000 and we have received no additions to the post office since its erection. It houses the Post Office Department, the Customs Department and the Inland Revenue Department, which together produce a revenue of about $350,000 per annum. We have had no expenditure there on public buildings for a great many years. The avenues for Dominion government expenditures in Brantford are very limited and we think that on the two services which we have, the militia and the post office, we are not receiving at all what is due us. In bringing this matter before the attention of the Postmaster General the other day I was referred to the Minister of Public Works, and as the estimates of that minister are now under discussion I would like to ask him if during his recent visit to Brantford he thought that post office commensurate with the size and importance of Brantford, and if he thinks that coat of paint applied to the outside and some little alteration on the inside of the post office are sufficient for a city the size of Brantford, producing a revenue I have mentioned ? I would also ask him if it is his intention to afford increased accommodation there ? I think we are entitled to a better building there and I would ask the hon. gentleman

if after his recent visit he does not agree with me ?


Charles Smith Hyman: While we are wandering rather far afield I shall briefly discuss with my hon. friend the question which he has raised. I did visit Brantford, I did see the public building of Brantford. I would not like to say that it is such a building as I would like to see the Department of Public Works erect in Brantford. There have been some expenditures made on that building. I interviewed, I think, the proper parties there, that is the custom house officer and the postmaster, and they assured me that if these expenditures were made upon the building it would vastly improve the service they were able to render. The hon. gentleman forgot to tell the House that the Department of Public Works are making a large expenditure in Brantford. He says they are practically making no expenditure there. 1 was pleased to see the drill hall there, I think it is a credit to the city of Brantford. There is an expenditure on that building and in these very estimates we are asking a vote for a continuation of this work. I think if the hon. member (Mr. Cockshutt) wants to be fair he should thank the Department of Public Works in reference to that public building. I did not suppose it would be fair to proceed with the two public buildings at the present time, but I do not hesitate to say that I think the time is coming when it would probably be to the public interest to have a better public building at Brantford. In the meantime certain expenditures are being made on the building and I was told by the officers there that, temporarily at any rate, they will meet the requirements of the people.


William Paterson: 
Charles Smith Hyman: That is the figure I gave the House.


William Foster Cockshutt: The question I raised was not in connection with the drill hall or armouries, but with the post office. I stated that there had been an expenditure to provide for increased accommodation in that building. I did not refer to the other, l think the hon. minister (Mr. Hyman) misunderstood me. I am willing to admit that there is quite an expenditure going on in connection with the armouries but I was referring particularly to the post office building, housing as it does that department as well as the Department of Inland Revenue and the Department of Customs.


Andrew B. Ingram: What is the amount of the customs collections at Antigonish for 1903-4 '>


William Paterson: I just read it, $7,000 and something.


Andrew B. Ingram: For what year ?


William Paterson: For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1904.


Andrew B. Ingram: Will the hon. gentleman turn up the Auditor General's Report ?


William Paterson: It would not make any difference, these are the figures.


Andrew B. Ingram: It makes some difference to members of the House. These are the figures given in the Auditor General's Report.


William Paterson: You will find the figures in the trade and navigation returns for the different ports.


Benjamin B. Gunn: While the Minister of Customs is looking into that matter I would like to return thanks to the Minister of Public Works for the promise that he has made me that he will give this matter some consideration. As I said a moment ago. I am perfectly satisfied that if the minister Was familiar with the conditions in our town he would give us a post office. So far as I know-and I have lived in Seaforth nineteen years-there has not been a cent of public money spent in Seaforth in that time nor for many years before that. I would like to ask the minister what course I should take in order to bring this matter up for intelligent discussion and I desire to again thank him for the kindly way in which he has treated my remarks and the hope he has inspired in my breast.


Robert Laird Borden: I think the trouble in reference to the Auditor General's Report is that the figures in the line above should be opposite Antigonish. It is exactly the amount my hon. friend said. I think there is a line left out and that the figures that are opposite Annapolis should be opposite Antigonish.
Mr. HENDEffl-SON. Before leaving this subject I desire to say a few words with reference to another post office, and I take the opportunity of doing so while the Postmaster General is in his seat-although of course I do not mean to insinuate that he is not always there. I refer to the post office at Sarnia. On a former occasion, 1 advised the Postmaster General to erect a post office in Sarnia, putting up a respectable building on a prominent site. As far as the site is concerned he did select the site that in my judgment was preferable, an excellent site fronting the river. A building has been erected there but I do not suppose the Postmaster General is responsible for the size ol' the building. I am not aware either how much it cost definitely but I was informed last summer when visiting Sarnia that it cost $70,000 to $80,000. What I complain of is that I cannot for the life of me see where $70,000 or $80,000 is put in that building.
For an expenditure of $70,000 or $80,000 we ought certainly to have a building of large capacity. The town of Sarnia is a growing town, a town which will probably double its population within the next ten years, and its requirements will far exceed

those of the present time. During the last summer when I was in Sarnia I went into the post office, and I was astonished to find that the portion of the building alloted to the public was, to my mind, entirely too cramped and narrow and quite unsuited to the needs of a town of a population of 8,000 or 9,000. I was anxious to see where the officers did the sorting, and after being allowed to look in, I was astonished to find that it was equally cramped. The whole building was entirely too shallow. As a matter of curiosity I asked what kind of an office the postmaster had, and I succeeded in haying a look into a little box of about eight feet square. I said: ' When I see the Postmaster General I am going to tell him that he ought to be ashamed of himself to put a public postmaster into such a cramped space.' The bulding is not at all in keeping with the town of Sarnia or the site on which it is erected, a site fronting on the River St. [DOT]Clair, where probably more shipping passes during the year than crosses the Atlantic ocean. On such a site a handsome building of large dimensions would be an ornament and a splendid advertisement to Canada, but I am sorry to say that even with the expenditure of $70,000 or $80,000 that has not been accomplished. I do not say that the government did not spend enough money, but I say that there is some thing wrong in the construction of these public buildings when the people of the Dominion do not get the worth of their money. The result in this case is not what I would expect from an expenditure of so large a sum of money.


William Mulock: I do not know how the building is laid out. I suppose my officers were consulted. I was in Halifax some time ago and went into the postmaster's office there. I do not know who erected that building, we or our predecessors, but the postmaster's room was no bigger than an ordinary box stall; I do not think it was more than six feet square. However, 1 suppose the real point of my hon. friend's remarks is that we have not a large enough building at Sarnia. His complaint is practically that we are too economical. So that it is hard to please him.


David Henderson: No, I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon. I did not complain that the government were too economical in the expenditure of the money, but too economical in getting results for the expenditure.


Charles Smith Hyman: The building was constructed in the usual way, by public contract. I have never before heard the first breath of complaint against the building. I have always understood that the people of Sarnia are pleased with it and consider it a credit to the town. As a matter of fact, the building itself cost $65,000, and was built by ptiblic contract let to the lowest tender. It is a solid stone and brick building, i cannot agree with the hon. gentleman that Mr. HENDERSON.
it would be better to construct these buildings more lightly in order to provide more-room for the same money.
At six o'clock, House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.


PRIVATE BILLS.
[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 11) respecting the Columbia and W7estern Railway Company.-Mr. Galliheiv
Bill (No. 13) respecting the Atlantic,. Quebec and Western Railway Company.- Mr. Gauvreau.
Bill (No. 18) respecting the Ottawa, Northern and W7estern Railway Company.-Mr. Belcourt,
Bill (No. 15) to incorporate the St. Mary's and Western Ontario Railway Company.- Mr. McIntyre.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 39) respecting the Niagara, St. Catharines and Toronto Railway Company. -Mr. Calvert.
Bill (No. 40) respecting the Niagara-Wel-land Power Company.-Mr. Guthrie.
Bill (No. 41) respecting the Regina and Hudson's Bay Railway Company.-Mr. Scott.
Bill (No. 42) respecting the Vancouver, Westminster and Yukon Railway Company. -Mr. Macpherson.
Bill (No. 43) respecting the Lake Champlain and St. Lawrence Ship Canal Coim-pany.-Mr. Gervais.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Mail subsidies and steamship subventions- ocean and mail service between Great Britain and Canada, $260,000.
['I would point out that the proposition in this resolution of the Slaritime Board of Trade is not for the extension of the present route between Pictou and the Magdalen Islands, a service performed by the Magdalen Islands Steamship Company; it is a separate proposition for a new service. I have a copy of the resolutions and they involve a steamer starting from Miramichi, calling at points in the northern part of Prince Edward Island and going to the Magdalen Islands, then coming to North Sydney and returning. The distance of the whole route would be about 625 miles. That would be apart from the service now under discussion, a service that has been in existence, I believe, ever since\nOn motion of Mr. Paterson, House adjourned at 11.15 p.m.', 'Monday, February 13, 1905.']
John Waterhouse Daniel: Will the hon. minister (Hon. Mr. Paterson) explain, before we go into the details, what change there has been in this subsidy as compared with last year.


William Paterson: I understand there has been no change in this item.


William Findlay Maclean: No chance, then, of an improved mail service between Can-si da and Great Britain ?


William Paterson: W7hen the turbines are running, faster time will be made.


William Findlay Maclean: One turbine will not effect that.


William Paterson: There will be two.
*
865	FEBRUARY 10, 1905


Robert Laird Borden: When does the hon. gentleman expect the new steamships to he in operation ?


William Paterson: One on the 23rd of March and the other in April.


William Findlay Maclean: What are the
terms as to speed ?


William Paterson: Seventeen knots.


William Findlay Maclean: How many days for the trip ?


William Paterson: Six in summer and six and a half in winter.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Has the new style of steamer been tested yet ?


William Paterson: I believe so.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Was the result satisfactory ?


William Paterson: Quite so, I understand.


David Henderson: Will any of the vessels subsidized under this item be fitted up with cold storage accommodation for the carriage of perishable products ?


William Paterson: All are so fitted up.


David Henderson: Will they be made serviceable, or will they be no improvement on what we had last year or the year before ?


William Paterson: I have here a memorandum from the Allans saying that they have been improved.


David Henderson: I ask because we remember that last year an hon. gentleman who, I regret, is not in the House at the present time, and who was very conversant with the shipping interests of this country. especially the shipping of perishable products, made a very serious complaint on the floor of this House, against the character of the 'equipment for the purpose of carrying perishable goods from Canada to the old land. I am glad to hear the minister say that an improvement has been made and that better facilities will now be afforded the fruit-growers and agriculturists of this country for the carriage of these perishable products.


William Paterson: I think it was with reference to the very statement made by the hon. gentleman that has been alluded to, and who was a member of the House at that time. The Allans were communicated with, and perhaps I had better read the answer that he received to his communication calling their attention to what had been said. It was addressed to Mr. O'Hara, of the Department of Trade and Commerce :
Montreal, October 4, 1904.
F. C. T. O'Hara, Esq.,
Department of Trade and Commerce,
Ottawa, Ont.
Dear Sir,-We duly received your various communications in this matter. We have also ' 28
read carefully the printed sheets containing the debates in the House of Commons on this subject, and more particularly the statements made by Mr. Smith, M.P.
When we entered into contracts with the government to furnish refrigerator stowage, the temperature most suitable for butter was thought to be about 30 degrees of Fahr. and this temperature was provided. Within a short time, however, after the system was in operation butter exporters commenced an agitation for 10 degrees lower temperature. After considerable demur we met this demand by altering all former arrangements, giving additional power and a larger service of freezing pipes.
These alterations involved an outlay of $23,910.72 as by the specifications and vouchers now before the department, one moiety of which is reasonably due us by the government.
There is now provided on the vessels of our Montreal service refrigerator facilities for the better conveyance of perishable cargo as follows (1) compartments for frozen goods at a temperature- varying from 20 to 30 degrees; (2) compartments for cheese, bacon, fruits, &e., with a temperature of from 35 to 40 degrees, higher or lower as may be wanted by the shippers of the goods, and (3) compartments with forced currents of external air (inlets and outlets) operated by steam-driven fans.
Details of these various facilities are explained more fully in our recent circulars to shippers, copies of which we inclose for your information. Still more detailed information is given in the typewritten memorandum sent herewith prepared by our Glasgow friends and bearing the date of March 22, 1904.
As stated above, the arrangement to give a temperature below 30 degrees was on the- demand of butter shippers. Few of these merchants, however, furnished their goods to the ship at any such degree of cold. We inclose official statements given to us by ..the Montreal government officers having the matter in charge, from which you will note that out of 31 separate shipments made in July of the current year, only six were delivered to the ship at or below 32 degrees, that six were delivered at and above 52 degrees and that the average temperature of the whole 31 shipments was above 41 degrees. We have more than once suggested that a rule should be promulgated by the department requiring that all shipments should be delivered to the ocean ship at or below the temperature which is to be maintained in the compartment wherein they are stowed throughout the voyage.
The machinery of these compartments is arranged to maintain the required temperature, but is not calculated to reduce the temperature of butter delivered at or above 52 degrees down to the minimum. Such reductions should be made in city refrigerators prior to delivery being given to the ship.
As regards deliveries of refrigerator goods to consignees at British ports, we have (broadly speaking) to complain that consignees are extremely dilatory in receiving their goods: not infrequently they are left on the wharfs for a full day after they have been discharged, and occasionally even two days. We receive occasional statements from our British friends giving details of these delays which we communicate to the shippers.
Respecting the returns made to the department of the temperatures registered by the thermographs, it should be borne1 in mind that we not infrequently make an agreement with



the shipper fixing the temperature which is to be maintained throughout the voyage in the compartment containing his goods. It may thus occur that while the thermograph registers 40 degrees in a compartment containing butter, our agreement with the shipper nfay nevertheless have been carried out. We have explained this matter to your Montreal agents who called our attention to the circumstances that butter was being carried at a higher temperature than our contract with the government required.
We return the papers sent us by you whereon we have penciled the information asked for.
Any further information you may require in the premises will be cheerfully furnished.
Yours truly,
(Signed) H. & A. ALLAN.
Then follows particulars of the shipment, which I need not read. The hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) will observe that it was owing to the comments that were made last session by the late member for South Wentworth (Mr. Smith) that this letter is written, and these are the explanations they give. It would appear from this that improvements have been made at additional cost to themselves. But they point out that the steamers cannot be held alone responsible, that the shippers themselves are partly to blame, as they deliver goods at a higher temperature than they should.


William Findlay Maclean: Did the government pay half of that increased cost ?


William Paterson: No, it was not entertained ; they had to pay it themselves.


David Henderson: I am rather pleased at the statement made by the minister, so far as it goes. It seems to meet the case very well. However, in my recollection, [DOT]one of the serious complaints made by the late member for South Wentworth, and which we are very glad has been taken notice of by the shippers, was that these agreements or conditions were not carried out during the entire voyage across the ocean ; that whilst butter was put on hoard ship at a certain temperature, which was maintained for a day or so, this temperature was not kept up during the entire voyage, and the result was disastrous to the shipper. Now, to my mind, the Department of Trade and Commerce should give special attention to that point, and see that all the requirements which entitle them to this subsidy and all the promises made are carried out through the entire voyage, so that butter, for example, will not be put on board ship at a temperature of say 30 degrees and be brought down during the first day or two to a temperature of 20,/ but that that temperature should be maintained during the entire voyage, instead of allowing it to run up probably to 30 or 40 again, to the injury of the goods. I am glad attention has been drawn to the fact that when goods are landed on the other side consignees have been neglectful in looking Mr. PATERSON.
after those goods. I scarcely see that the department could be held responsible for that, providing due notice is given of the arrival of those goods. It is certainly, to my mind, the duty of the consignee at once to take the goods away, and not allow an article such as butter to remain upon the dock at Liverpool for possibly ten or eleven days. I tbink, in some circumstances, goods were allowed to remain that length of time, of course to the great injury of the article, and to the detriment of the entire Canadian industry. I hope the department will take steps to see that these conditions are complied with throughout the entire voyage, and that we will not have a renewal of the complaints that were made last year-that that feature of the contract was overlooked, I would ask the Minister of Agriculture if he is still of opinion that 20 degrees of cold is sufficient for the transhipment of butter? I understood last year he had arrived at the conclusion that it was necessary to bring it down to 10 degrees. It seems that the provision here made is for 20.


Mr. FISHER.: From the investigations I have made, I am of the opinion that 2Q/ degrees is a cold enough temperature in which to carry butter from Canada to England in a steamship. The butter is put upon the market as soon as it gets to England, and there is no particular reason in having it below 20 degrees.


David Henderson: There seems to be one other matter that requires the careful attention of the department, and that is that ample provision should be made for fjbrwarding these perishable products to the place of shipment. I do not know what arrangement has been made with the railway companies, but it would certainly seem very essential that some method of refrigeration be provided, so that the goods will arrive at the port of shipment at the degree of temperature at which the shipowners, Messrs. Allan, have referred. If butter or other delicate articles are presented to them for shipment at a temperature which will be almost destructive, we can hardly expect that they can provide means by which their quality or utility will be restored. I am not aware whether the hon. minister has any system of providing refrigerator ears for the purpose of forwarding goods, such as have been referred to, to the point of shipment.	,


Sydney Arthur Fisher: In reply to the hon. gentleman, I would say that we have, but perhaps it would be better when my estimates come up to go into the details of that question.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There is another thing disclosed by this correspondence, which, it seems to me, is worth while referring to. That is the complaint that there were no thermographs in the various chambers. There is nothing said about them in the

correspondence, listening casually, as I did, to it being read. The question was asked if all necessary provision had been made in that direction and strenuous complaint was made by my hon. friend from Wentworth (Mr. Smith), that there were only a certain number of thermographs provided for each vessel, that they were placed in some of the chambers but not in others, and that there were no means of registering the temperature from day to day in these chambers. Then, the correspondence discloses this further fact that the Messrs. Allan claim that they have fulfilled their agreement in regard to the temperature at which they were to keep the chambers for butter. They were to keep the chambers at thirty degrees but they point out that the government, after making the contract, found out that ten degrees lower would be a better temperature for butter, and the hon. minister told us last year that down as low as eleven degrees would be a better temperature. If that be the fact then the government are to blame because their expert must have known before the contract was entered into which was the most suitable temperature. It turns out that thirty degrees is not the best temperature by any means, and while there is a difference between the hon. minister and those who complain regarding these arrangements the two facts which are brought out by that letter are that the Allans have fulfilled their contract and that the fault was with the hon. Minister of Agriculture in entering into the contract without providing for a proper temperature but in providing for a temperature about ten degrees above what it ought to have been.


William Paterson: I am told by the deputy that the hon. member for Wentworth, last year, in giving his figures had taken the records of vessels not subsidized by this government at all-not all of them but a good many of them. He quotes as instances of vessels not properly equipped, some of those which were not subsidized by the government at all and therefore the government would be in no way responsible and have no control over them. If a shipper saw fit to ship on a tramp steamer or a regular Trans-Atlantic liner, many of which were not subsidized by us at all we would not be responsible under those circumstances. If that were so the statement of the hon. member for Wentworth would have to be dissected in order to find out whether we were paying public money by way of subsidy to steamers that were not carrying out the contract. If they were getting no public money we would have nothing to do with them.
Mr. SPROUT,E. If my memory is not at fault the question was asked: What steamers are we paying subsidies to and which are operating under 'government contract? We were certainly dealing with 28}
these though there might have been some others included that were not under government contract. The hon. minister was defending what was being done and giving explanations. What we wanted to know was what steamers under government contract were violating their contract and why, if they were violating it, the government did not hold them to it. In the next place we wanted to know why the government allowed their expert to stipulate for a certain temperature as being the proper temperature although the government afterwards came to the conclusion that it was not the proper temperature. There is here disclosed a want of knowledge in connection with this contract that otherwise never would have been admitted by the hon. Minister of Agriculture, because, if there is one thing more than another that has impressed itself upon this House it is that everything is stamped with perfection that emanates from his department.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I may explain that there were two sets of contracts, one made by the Department of Trade and Commerce for vessels which are subsidized by ft he department and which vessels by these contracts now are required to provide adequate cold Storage. There was another set of contracts entered into by my department some years ago with vessels that were subsidized and some not subsidized by the government under the ordinary class of subsidy. But I entered into contracts as the Minister of Agriculture to induce them to equip themselves with cold storage. These contracts lasted for three years. At the end of these contracts these vessels were free of any control by the government. The subsidy contracts made by the Department of Trade and Commerce have been continuous and the vessels operating under these contracts are still controlled to a certain extent by the government. My hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) has spoken about temperatures. I do not know that at the present time it is worth while going into that question but I would point out that a temperature of thirty degrees which was provided for when we first made the contracts for cold storage was the temperature which at that time the dealers in butter wanted, expected and asked for the carriage of their butter. As time went on it developed that butter could be more securely carried at a lower temperature and from time to time we urged upon the steamship companies to make their temperature lower, which they did. as far as they could, with the equipment they then had. Our contracts censed. We had no control over them. They, however, in view of tile demand made, lowered their temperature for butter. They have in most of these steamers two or three different compartments. In a great many yessels they have one compartment for the carriage of butter or other articles which can be

frozen. The temperature of that compartment is brought down to about twenty'and sometimes a little below. They have another compartment for products that, while they want to be carried cold, cannot bear to t>e frozen-cheese and fruit, for instance and many meats which the people do not wish to have frozen but want to have chilled. The temperature of these compartments has been maintained at from 32 to 36 degrees. Then, they have another set of compartments which are described in the Messrs. Allan's letters. Those are compartments through which chilled air is forced. The temperature in these compartments is not required to be as low as that of the compartment to which I last alluded. X forget for the moment wliat the exact temperature is but I think it is expected to be below 45, speaking, subject to correction, from memory. In any discussion of the temperature in a compartment it is absolutely necessary to know what the contents of that compartment are before you judge the temperature. I do not wish particularly to enter into a discussion but a statement has been made in regard to what was said by the hon. member for Wentworth last session. He made some statements here in regard to what the temperatures were in certain compartments and pointed out that they were higher than they ought to have been.
Unfortunately I was not present in the House when that statement of his was made, but afterwards I had that statement analysed and I found that in a great many instances, not absolutely all but I think I am safe in saying in a large majority, of instances which he quoted where the temperature was too high, he was quoting temperatures of chambers in which not butter was being carried but fruit and cheese, which would have been destroyed if the temperature of the chamber had been kept as low as he demanded it should have been kept, and he did that with the fact recorded on the very records which he was quoting that these chambers contained fruit or cheese and not butter. I went carefully over the statements that he made and I regret to say that I found that difficulty in connection with the quotations that he made. I am quite willing to go into that matter at greater length later on and prove conclusively what I am saying if necessary. I point this out now as a quotation has been made from what was said last session.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In reply to the hon. minister I would say that I saw some of the answers which the minister made and I thought they were rather evasive and not very conclusive. I am not prepared to say that in quoting the temperatures the hon. member for Wentworth (Mr. Smith) in every case specified the contents of the chambers. I was looking over it afterwards and comparing it with the reports


Sydney Arthur Fisher: and the impression on my mind was that they were pretty accurate. There are two species of contracts here with regard to steamships and the minister tries to shield himself behind the one contract, that made by the Minister of Trade and Commerce, in which a provision is made for cold storage, and he says :	' I cannot be held responsible for these contracts because they are made by the right hon. the Minister of Trade and Commerce.'


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I beg pardon, I am not shielding myself at all.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That was the inference,
' and therefore those made by the Minister of Trade and Commerce are not up to what they should be.'


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I did not intend to convey that impression at all although I may have done so.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That is the inference that could fairly be drawn.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: That is not what I intended.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: When the subsidies were voted to the Minister of Trade and Commerce for steamships he was questioned as to whether or not there would be provision for cold storage for the carrying of the perishable products of this country. His answer was :	Yes. And on what
basis ? After consultation with the Minister of Agriculture and according to requirements as given by him. That is my recollection of the answer. Therefore it must fairly be assumed that the Minister of Agriculture would give him correct information as to the requirements of cold storage and the nature of the cold storage that the country required and that the contract would be made on the basis of these requirements, so that these vessels, whether subsidized by the Department of Trade and Commerce or by the Agricultural Department, would be required to provide cold storage adequate and suitable for the requirements of the country. Another thing about that which struck my attention as well was the large number of cases where perishable products went into the vessel at a higher temperature than that which the minister declared to be a suitable temperature.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: That is true.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: He had his inspector at Montreal to see that it was properly done. The inspector was appointed for that purpose and is paid for that purpose and it was his duty to report to the Minister at once if these vessels were not carrying out their contract, and then it was the duty of the department to call them to account. Nevertheless we find this !n the report of the department, and no effort was made to remedy

this evil so far as I can find. No information was given to the House that any effort was made to secure the carrying out of the contract. In that respect I think the Minister of Agriculture was at fault. I blame him more than the Minister of Trade and Commerce because it does not appear in my judgment to be exactly the duty of the Minister of Trade and Commerce to look after the cold storage chambers in which the perishable products of Canada are shipped.


David Henderson: Perhaps we are digressing somewhat from the subject, but I scarcely think that the Minister of Agriculture* has been quite fair to the hon. gentleman who represented South Wentworth, who I regret is- not in his place in the House as he has been asked to stand aside. My recollection is that Mr. Smith was very careful to obtain all his information from the Minister of Agriculture and if there was anything wrong in the statements made by Mr. Smith I think it must have come from the Minister of Agriculture him- , self. Mr. Smith was careful to lay his ; plans for his speech. He put frequent questions on the order paper and obtained . the desired information, the data from which he made his remarks. Now I feel quite sure, although it is a matter of recollection only, that the then member for South Wentworth spoke from information which he had obtained from the Minister of Agriculture. Certainly all these thermograph records were obtained in that way-in fact I do not know any other way in which he could have obtained them- and these were the chief foundation for his criticism. I remember quite well that the Minister of Agriculture was not present on one occasion when Mr. Smith delivered a very forcible speech on that subject and we all regretted his absence very much because we would have been glad if the minister had been present to hear what was said and to reply to Mr. Smith. I understood the minister to say that there are two sets of vessels. The Minister of Customs leads us to understand that the Department of Trade and Commerce only have control over such vessels as are subsidized by the government, but I understand that other vessels not subsidized were * aided in the fitting up of these cold storage chambers by the Agricultural Department, and therefore they were in receipt of government money and should be responsible to this House for a proper fulfilment of any contract entered 'into with the department here.
I regret that the minister should have cast a reflection on Mr. Smith in his absence because I think on further reflection he will realize that if Mr. Smith was led astfay at all it was owing to the fact he had used information obtained from the Minister of Agriculture himself.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I think my hon. friend is doing me a great injustice. I would not have brought up Mr. Smith's remarks if the hon. gentleman had not quoted these statements of Mr. Smith's on this occasion. I did not wish to say anything about Mr. Smith in his absence although he said a good many things against my department in my absence last session.


David Henderson: It was not his fault.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: It may not have been but I was often present when he did not say these things. He said he based his statements on records in my department. He did, but he did not give the whole statement which these records show ; on the contrary he gave statements which these records did not show, and therefore did not tell the whole truth about the matter. I am prepared to bring these records before the House and to put the matter before the House as I did before the country last fall.


Robert Laird Borden: When did Mr. Smith make the statements Y


Sydney Arthur Fisher: When I was in Winnipeg last summer.


Robert Laird Borden: I want the time.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I cannot give the date.


Robert Laird Borden: When was the hon. minister at Winnipeg ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I have not looked it up to see.


Robert Laird Borden: How long was it before the end of the session that Mr. Smith made the statement ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Quite shortly before the end of the session.


Robert Laird Borden: What does the hon. gentleman mean by shortly ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: A couple of weeks.


Andrew B. Ingram: I would like to point out lo the hon. Minister of Agriculture that he was present when Mr. Smith made (the statements in the House, and he did not contradict the figures given by Mr. Smith on that occasion. Mr. Smith complained that the contract did not contain certain things which it should contain in the interest of those shipping in cold storage, also that the tests provided by the department were made at the beginning of the voyage, but were not carried out to the end. I am surprised to hear the minister say that he had no opportunity to reply.


William Paterson: That is a question that pertains to the Department of the Minister of Agriculture.


Samuel Hughes: The Minister of Agriculture made a statement reflecting upon an hon. member on this side of the House, and I do not think it is the intention of

876.
this party to let it go by until the matter is settled. The hon. member for Wentworth has never been challenged for having made an untrue statement in this House or out of it. I am sorry that we cannot say that of all the persons concerned.


William Paterson: I have a great many items to be passed, and as the vote for this subsidy appears to be all right, why not let me get on ? That subject will come up again.


Robert Laird Borden: It appears to me that the Minister of Agriculture has said either too much or too little.


William Paterson: It will come up again. It is extraneous to this vote.


Robert Laird Borden: Better settle it now.


William Paterson: I will not be able to get on with my estimates.


Mr.   R.@: L, BORDEN. That is the fault of the hon. gentleman's colleague introducing matters that did not apply.


William Paterson: 1 think the hon. leader of the opposition will agree with me that in order to get on with some work


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. gentleman will have to control his colleague. He had better send him out of the House while he is passing his estimates.	[DOT]


William Paterson: I think he was led into making the remarks he did. It will come up again.


Samuel Hughes: Get him get up and apologize.


William Paterson: So far as the Allan line of steamers is concerned, I think hon, gentlemen are satisfied with that. I have some details I could give.


George Eulas Foster: The trouble seems to be that the discussion has gone on to a certain extent, in which the Minister of Agriculture has reflected pretty severely on an absent member. That is now in 'Hansard' and is going into the papers, and it seems 'to be unfair for the other side of the case not to have tlie whole matter discussed at the present time, so that all will go on ' Hansard ' and to the public together, as it ought to. I ithink my hon. friend will have to take the disadvantages as well as the advantages of colleagues. Sometimes they are a great help, but sometimes they are a sad hindrance.


William Paterson: In all seriousness my hon. friend will see that if what he proposes now is adopted, it will take the committee away altogether from the subject under consideration to discuss an item which must come under investigation on another day.


George Eulas Foster: But my hon. friend will see that there is butter as well as salt sea Mr. SAM. HUGHES.
in connection with this estimate, because the subsidy carries two things. The vessels have to sail the vast deep, and they have to carry butter and other things in a certain condition, and both are parts of the same contract.


William Paterson: Quite so, but I think it is not contended that the vessels for which I am asking this vote are not up to the requirements. If that be the case, that disposes of this vote and we had better get on, and the Minister of Agriculture and the ([DOT]tiler gentlemen can discuss the other matter at the proper time.
Mr. SPItOULE. 1 understand that we were to have cold storage for carrying perishable products. Are the vessels to provide cold storage or not ?	*


William Paterson: Certainly.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then it is absolutely necessary for us to know what kind of cold storage they are going to provide, and whether the government have made a proper contract. The Minister of Agriculture contends that they have done that. We contend that he has contradicted the statements made by (Mr. Smith on the basis of the minister's own reports and on the thermographic readings of minimum and maximum temperature given in this House. We believe that Mr. Smith's statements were based on reliable and authentic information. These statements are contradicted by the minister now. Consequently we ought to have it settled whether Mr. Smith or the Minister of Agriculture is right.


William Paterson: I think the whole matter arose from a remark I made. When attention was called to Mr. Smith's statements, the deputy had just informed me that there were facts taken by Mr. Smith from vessels that were not subsidized by the government, and therefore the government could not be held responsible for them. That remark led to this discussion. But now we are discussing the Allan Line steamers, and perhaps I may as well read the provision for cold storage in the ' Bavarian.'
1 he compartment No. 5 low-er between decks has been divided by a bulkhead on the centre line of the ship, and the starboard chamber thus formed has been subdivided by a bulkhead athwartships. The space forward of the hatch to the water-tight bulkhead, of a capacity of 5,41S cubic feet, should be capable of being maintained at a minimum temperature of about twenty degrees, while the remainder of the space on the starboard side of a capacity 3,211 cubic feet, together with the whole of the compartment on the port side, of a capacity of 8,958 cubic feet, should be able to be maintained at a minimum temperature of about thirty-two degrees as above. In addition to the above,* there is also the compartment ip the centre of No. 5 main between decks, of a capacity of 4,780 cubic feet, capable of being maintained at a minimum temperature of about thirty-two degrees as beforp. The arrangement

of piping is such that each of the chambers can be maintained independently of the others, or cut off altogether if required. Total capacity, 22,367 cubic feet.
I have also the particulars with reference to the ' Corinthian,-' the ' Hungarian,' the Ionian,' the 'Numidian,' the 'Ontarian,' the ' Pomeranian,' the ' Pretorian,' the ' Sardinian,' the ' Sicilian' and the ' Tunisian.' So that the hon. gentleman will see that it is all right so far as this vote is concerned.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Oh, no, it is all wrong; that is the trouble. We have no information, or comparatively none. The hon. minister reads what should he on one vessel ; but does not tell us how much space or what temperature is provided for on the various boats. According to the minister's own statement some products require to be carried at a temperature of 11 degrees, yet the lowest provided is 20. We have not got the contract or any information as to what it contains, which was made with these steamship companies. All that the minister gives us is the spaces contained in one steamship.
Mr, PATERSON. I only gave that as a sample. I said nothing about 11. degrees.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But I did ; and that is just where I say the hon. minister shows they have not made pro'per provision. The Minister of Agriculture has told us that butter could be kept better in a temperature of 11 degrees than in a temperature of 20 or 30, but the Minister of Trade and Commerce told us that in some of these compartments the temperature is kept down to 30 degrees and in others to about 20. Does the contract bind the company to keep the compartments at any temperature ; and if so, what is the temperature, and how much space are they to provide with one temperature and how much with another ? What' provision is made for the thermographs ? How many of them are there, and are they self-registered ? Will there be one in each chamber ? Where it is possible a register should be kept of the temperature of every day in the voyage, and where the proper temperature is known which perishable fruits and other commodities require, surely it is the duty of the government to provide in their contract for that temperature during every day of the voyage, and for a thermographic registration every day in each compartment. If that were done, and these charts taken out, we could tell whether the temperature is proper or not, and whether the government has made proper provision to carry the farmers' produce as it should be in order to have it on the market in proper condition.


Robert Laird Borden: I find that the hon. member for Wentworth (Mr. E. D. Smith) made observations on the 29th July other than those to which the hon. Minister of Agriculture refei'red.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I could not say positively without looking up ' Hansard.' * Mr. Smith spoke more than once on this question, but the particular occasion referred to by the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) was that on which he took the thermographic records and quoted them. Afterwards I was able to take the same thermographic records and compare them with those quoted by Mr. Smith, and I found that he made this mistake, that he did not take into account the fact that in many of the vessels there was more than one thermographic record.


Samuel Hughes: My hon. friend should quote Mr. Smith's statement.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I cannot do so just at the moment, but I am speaking in general terms.


Robert Laird Borden: It would be better for the hon. gentleman to defer any observation until he has the records with him.
1 find that the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir Richard Cartwright) rose and answered Mr. Smith on that occasion, and I do not find that any application was made to delay the reply of the government until the advent of my hon. friend the Minister of Agriculture, although he seems to think it was a most unfortunate circumstance that the defence of the government should have been entrusted to Sir Richard Cartwright rather than to himself. However that may be, I do find that the hon. gentleman was in his place answering questions on the 1st August, and had from that time until the end of the session to make, in the presence of Mr. Smith, the observations he has seen fit to make in his absence. It would have been far better if the hon. minister had not waited until Mr. Smith is not here to make what were undoubtedly intended as very serious reflections upon him.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I would not have alluded to the matter in any way whatever if Mr. Smith's observations had not been quoted to-night.


Mr.   I@: The hon. gentleman could have referred to them in a different spirit and tone and without making reflections on Mr. Smith, and could thus have justified the decision of the government equally as well. There was a little too much spite in his remarks.


David Henderson: Mr. Smith obtained the thermographic records from the Minister of Agriculture by asking questions across the floor. From these reports I read his statement. If there is anything -wrong in the statement Mr. Smith made which is the subject of criticism, it is because the minister furnished him with incorrect information. I hold that Mr. Smith was perfectly justified in using the information he obtained from the report of the Minister of

Agriculture and the questions answered across the floor. I cannot conceive for a moment that Mr. Smith presumed to give information to this House which he had not obtained from that authentic source. I say this in justification of an old friend who is not with us at this time. I regard the speech made by Mr. Smith then as one of the most important speeches delivered during the whole parliament. It showed a breadth of knowledge in the matter of transportation of perishable products which I believe was not possessed by any member in this House. I listened to the speech very carefully and have read and re-read many parts of it. and the one thing I felt I could rely upon was the correctness of the statement made by Mr. Smith, knowing the source from which he obtained his information.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I shall defer making any more remarks until my own estimates come up.


Andrew B. Ingram: Where the lion. Minister of Agriculture did the hon. member for Wentworth an injustice was in making the charge that Mr. Smith had reference to the ventilation of defective apples and not defective butter and cheese. That statement cannot be borne out by the record, because on page 794 of last year's ' Hansard ' you will see that Mr. Smith asked the Minister of Agriculture whether the government irf-spector had examined the compartments in certain vessels, and what system of mechanical ventilation was in each. Again, on July 11th, 1904, he asked about mechanical ventilation on steamers, and the hon. gentleman answered the question. Again, on April ISth, he put this question :
1.	In answer to question of April 6th, the Minister of Agriculture said
The steamship * Lake Champlain ' had the ordinary system of Cowl ventilation.
2.	Has the government examined these Cowl ventilators and found them in proper order and of sufficient size on this boat on each outward voyage when perishable cargo was on board ?
To these questions the hon. minister replied :
One of the inspectors for the Department of Agriculture has reported on each outward voyage of this steamship, both from the port of Montreal, both during the past season of navigation, and from the port of St. Johns, N.B., during the winter season, and in each report the ventilation is described as follows.
Then he went on to give the very statement quoted by Mr. Smith in this House. Yet, he now says that Mr. Smith's statements are incorrect. Mr. Smith, however, quoted the very information he got from the minister himself, and the minister is not justified in complaining about the conduct ' of Mr. Smith, because every one knows that there was no hon. gentleman in this House more conversant with the question than the hon. member for Wentworth, and I do not even exclude the hon. minister himself.


David Henderson: 


John Waterhouse Daniel: Are these steamers supplied with wireless telegraphy ?


William Paterson: The turbines are, and so are some of the others.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We require more information than has been given. We want to know something about the contract, so that we may satisfy ourselves


William Paterson: It is precisely the same contract.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But we were told that the contract was right in every respect. May we not be allowed to exercise our own judgment as to whether it was right or not? Why should we not be allowed to know what it actually provided for? Though we were assured that it was perfect it turned out to be very loosely drawn.


Robert Laird Borden: There was an observation in the report of Messrs. Allan respecting the condition in which goods were placed on board these ships. An hon. gentleman on this side has referred to the fact that a staff of inspectors is kept by the department of Agriculture at Montreal. I observe that that very circumstance is adverted to by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir Richard Cartwright) in his speech of last year in reply to the member for Wentworth. Mr. Smith. The Minister of Trade and Commerce said:-
As regards what the Department of Agriculture has done, the department has furnished me with this memorandum. They state that the department maintains a staff of inspectors at Montreal to observe and report concerning the condition of Canadian food products when loaded in the steamers, including the shipments carried in cold storage..
Well, it seems a rather extraordinary condition of things, if the government have a staff of inspectors in Montreal, that they should be unaware that these goods were put in the cold storage apartments at too high a temperature. How does it happen that the attention of the government was not called to this fact by the government inspectors ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: A good deal of the information has been in the hands of the government. The fact, that goods, especially butter, arrive in Montreal at a higher temperature than they ought to have when put in the cold storage chambers in the ships is true, unfortunately. We have had our inspectors carefully watching that trade, and they have made reports. I have drawn the attention of the people who handle this butter to the difficulty, aud have explained to them the wrong they were doing to them-1 selves and their neighbours. At the same time, we have not power to force people to keep their butter at a low temperature, nor have we power to prevent this butter from being p'ut in the cold storage chambers. It may be that we ought to take that power

and it may be that parliament would give it to us. But, at present we have not that power. I have a pretty complete report of the season just past and also of that of a year ago. I have pointed out to the handlers and shippers of the butter how foolish their course was, and have begged them and encouraged them to do better, but I have not power to compel them to do better.


Robert Laird Borden: Did the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fisher) take any steps in consequence of the reports of the inspectors ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I even went so far as to threaten, in the dairy conventions last winter, that if conditions did not improve during the season just past, I might have to ask parliament for this power of compulsion. I am glad to say that the reports of last season show an improvement-not so great as I would like, but still an improvement. I confess that I have hesitated to go to the extreme of asking parliament for the power to refuse admission to the cold storage chambers of goods under certain conditions. It would be going rather far. The steamship companies themselves would hesitate before agreeing that such power should be taken, because in certain seasons there is not enough freight to fill the cold storage chambers, and the companies are glad to get the goods, and they fake them. We bad this difficulty to contend with as well as with the carelessness of shippers in allowing their butter especially to get warmer than it ought to be. A considerable quantity of the butter brought to Montreal to be put in the cold storage chambers runs as high as fifty degrees, and 1 have no- hesitation in saying that butter cannot reach a temperature of fifty degrees without being harmed. It does reach that temperature, and at that temperature is put into the cold storage chambers, so that it must not merely be kept cool but actually cooled. That is one of the causes of variation in the recorded temperatures of the cold storage chambers. If you put a couple of hundred boxes of butter in a cold storage chamber at a temperature of say forty degrees when the temperature of the chamber ought to be. and is. twenty degrees, you raise the temperature of the chamber at once, and it will be a day, or perhaps two days, before the temperature can be brought down again to the proper level. As I have shown, the question is surrounded with difficulties. as hon. gentlemen will understand, and I confess that I have not been able to solve these difficulties completely.


Mr. AMES.: Is the butter that comes in at a high temperature generally delivered as package freight in Montreal, or does it come on through shipment by rail?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Most of it, I think, comes by short-haul. That which comes from a long distance comes in refrigerator cars and
is generally fairly cool; but that which comes from a distance of one hundred miles or less from Montreal often does not come in refrigerator cars, although the cars are there, if the shippers would take advantage of them. But the great difficulty is in the carriage of butter from the creamery to the station and keeping it at the station for several hours, sometimes for half a day, before it is put in refrigerator cars. The refrigerator car cannot cool butter. If the butter is put in reasonably cool, the car will keep it so, but, with the refrigerator capacity they have they cannot reduce the temperature of the butter to any great extent. The railway and steamship companies say, with a good deal of justice, that it is not their business to cool the goods but only to keep them as cool as when they were put in. So, there is a good deal of difficulty in managing this trade. We have been trying to educate the people to their true interest and to get them to work the business to the best advantage, without using any absolute coercion.


Herbert Brown Ames: Has the hon. minister conferred with the Minister of Marine and Fisheries with a view to establishing cold storage compartments in the new sheds which are being erected in Montreal, more especially .for the short-haul freight that he speaks of in the way of perishable goods?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I have not. I may say that in Montreal the cold storage accommodation provided by private concerns is fairly complete. There is no difficulty for people who ship goods on through bills of lading to have them arrive in Montreal .. day or two before they need to be put on the ships that they may be put in cold storage and properly cooled.


Herbert Brown Ames: But I was speaking of the short-haul freight.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: That appears to be the difficult question. But the goods can be very easily kept in the cold storage houses in Montreal and at a trifling expense.


Herbert Brown Ames: I refer to the goods that are carried by shci t. railway haul and shipped directly to the steamer, and that do not go into cold storage in Montreal. Is provision being made for that business in connection with the new sheds?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Not that I am aware of. I have not had any representations made to me, either by the handlers of this produce or the shippers, asking for that. Of course that kind of thing would interfere with the business of cold storage warehouses in Montreal, there would be opposition to it. though I do not say it ought to succeed, if the arrangements are advisable. This question has been discussed by the trade to a certain extent, not particularly in connection with the new sheds in Montreal, but with the whole handling of goods. I may

say that in England most of the cold storage stores are on the docks and very convenient for handling. What I have seen ot them in England has led me to think they give satisfaction.


Herbert Brown Ames: The tendency of the additional accommodation which is to be provided in the port of Montreal when the new improvements are completed, will be to create a larger amount of railway freight and a smaller quantity of local package freight. It will probably be necessary for the minister to make provision for cold storage accommodation on the wharfs themselves for the short haul railway freight that may be brought there.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There are some things that we ought to know before this passes. First, what is the temperature required and provided in the various chambers, and the capacity of these chambers for different kinds of fruit ? What is the proper temperature for carrying apples, pears, grapes, tomatoes, butter, cheese, meat and eggs ?
The officers of the department must know what is the proper temperature for carrying these various commodities. Then does the contract provide that there shall be suitable accommodation in these chambers, and sufficient capacity to carry the goods offered in those lines in chambers of the right temperature? Then, what will be the additional cost of freight on account of the cold storage they provide? I think we ought to have that information so as to enable us to understand whether the government has or has not made proper provision for cold storage in giving these subsidies to the steamship company.


William Paterson: The contract requires that they should provide cold storage to the satisfaction of the minister, with adequate space and at the different temperatures required. These are to be to the satisfaction of the minister. The vessels are running and I suppose the minister is perfectly satisfied with the facilities provided. The Allans, judging from their letter, prove that the facilities are adequate, and that whatever complaints have arisen they were not responsible for. That is where goods have been handed to them at a temperature higher than they should have been. I have before me a circular of one of the steamships, giving the space, one temperature of 30 degrees and another temperature of 20 degrees and a certain number of cubic feet. Shippers know what goods will go into the 30 degree compartment and what into the 20 degree compartment. There is no doubt that these points are fully guarded by the Minister of Agriculture. I do not know that the hon. gentleman himself can say that he has heard complaints with reference to freights. Of course, we could not govern the rates they charge for freights, I suppose they vary.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: 


Thomas Simpson Sproule: A few years ago the freight was to be so many shillings or so many cents above the ordinary rate on ves sels without cold storage.


William Paterson: A movable rate, but so much above.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There is one satisfaction in that information, and it is that we will know where to place the blame if we find out afterwards there is blame. From the information we have, there is blame, because the minister has just given us some information that our contract provides there shall be adequate cold storage according to the judgment of the Minister of Agriculture. If, therefore, the cold storage proves not to be adequate or suitable, then the Minister of Agriculture must be to blame, because he has an Inspector there to see that the goods are put on the vessel in proper condition and that the cold storage is provided as required.


William Paterson: I think the Minister of Agriculture will attend to the hon. gentlemen when his items come up.


John Graham Haggart: What is the average speed of these vessels we have been paying for?


William Paterson: The 'Bavarian,' between Moville and Rimouski, a 17-knot steamer, 6 days during summer and 6i days in winter. The ' Tunisian ' and the ' Bavarian ' should not exceed 7 days in summer and days in winter.


John Graham Haggart: I am not asking what they intend to do but what they have done.


William Paterson: They are not in service yet.


John Graham Haggart: Those we had the con-ract with last year, what was their speed?


William Paterson: The contract is for 7i days in summer and 8 days in winter. They have complied with the contract.


Robert Laird Borden: You mean the contract is for a certain number of days, not for a certain number of knots?


William Paterson: Yes.


John Graham Haggart: The Minister of Trade and Commerce gave us last year the speed of each vessel. I want to know the speed on the actual voyage.


William Paterson: I have not that with me.


John Graham Haggart: Can't you give it within a knot or two? Is it 12 knots or is it 17 knots.? If I remember rightly, it was somewhere between 12 and 14, instead of 17.


William Paterson: These turbine steamers are about 17. The 'Tunisian' and 'Bavarian,' speaking from memory, average about 14 knots on the voyage.

Mr. HAGrGART. What is the speed of the others ?


William Paterson: The others would be slower, probably 10 or 12.


Mr.   POSTER@: Will the minister be kind enough to have his clerk make out a list of the actual sailings of last year of each one of these vessels? What I want to get at is the actual speed they accomplish. We are paying $200,000 under this vote for what is called a fast line service, at least it is the fastest we have. Now, what is the real speed that has been accomplished? The minister last year, my colleague informs me, gave a table of these speeds. We may be getting an actual voyage service of 10 or 12 knots, or it may be 13, but it may not be as many knots as those knots I have spoken of indicate. But what we would like to know is how many knots we are getting, not how many days it took a boat to carry the minister over.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will any of them x'each a higher rate of speed than the ' Minnie M.'?


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: Shall this item be carried ?


George Eulas Foster: It is understood that we will get that information ?


William Paterson: The hon. gentleman will accept the statement that will be handed ir. to-morrow ?


George Eulas Foster: Certainly.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: To what extent do shippers avail themselves of cold storage for the transportation of their goods ? It is said by some-I do not know whether correctly or incorrectly-that the rates for cold storage were so high that many of the shippers decided to take the risk of sending their goods not in cold storage but in the ordinary way at the lower freight rate.


William Paterson: I am told by the lion. Minister of Agriculture that practically all of these shipments have gone by cold storage.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We have no information yet as to what the additional freight rates are to be over and above the movable rates. Have you provided for that in the contract ?


William Paterson: The rates are not controlled at all.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: They were originally.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: They were in the contract which I made when I subsidized vessels to induce them to put in cold storage. Those contracts were closed long ago and we have no further contracts.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Do you not think the government were derelict in their duty when they were giving steamships large subsidies if they did not provide for freight rates ?


William Paterson: Competition will regulate that.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We leave too many things to competition and we do not have competition afterwards. There is a great deal of complaint regarding it. The rates for shipment in cold storage were so high that a great many people thought it better to run the risk of their stuff spoiling.


William Paterson: Competition regulates that.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This is not competition. There seems to be an absence of business ability and astuteness on the part of the minister who makes this contract. It is failure on his part to make a suitable contract so as to secure the people who produce this stuff and the commercial men who ship it. In the interest of these producers and shippers it seems to me that something ought to be done; otherwise-they are at the mercy of every vessel on which they put their goods.


William Paterson: I will call the minister's attention to the suggestion.
Mr. FOSTER, What is the machinery for knowing that each one of these boats keeps the temperature at the required point during the whole voyage ? Have you an inspector on each vessel ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: There are self registering thermographs-generally two in each compartment.
Mr. FOSTER, And they are fixed at the commencement of the voyage and inspected at the end ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes, they are locked by my officer in Montreal, taken out by my officer in Liverpool and sent back.


George Eulas Foster: Is there no possibility of tampering with them ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Well, 'my officer' must have been sadly derelict in his duty last year because the information we got was that there were only a few on each vessel and that there were not two in each chamber.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Speaking from memory we have about 130 of these thermographs. Under ordinary circumstances they would serve our needs, but last year there was a large number of vessels fitted up with what is called cool storage. We did not know of that until the season was on and we could not get these thermographs in less than four months. They have to be made especially and we did not have enough of them in each of the chambers last year, both cold storage and cool storage, but they were put in just as rapidly as they could be got back. I think I may hazard a guess that eighty per cent of the chambers

of vessels which went out of Montreal were provided with thermographs.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It is rather an unsatisfactory way of providing for these things in a contract. Now, we are making a new contract. Has the hon. minister provided that there shall be enough thermographs this year ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I have ordered more.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But the hon. minister knows the number of compartments these vessels contain.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I do not know at the present time how many vessels are going to run from Montreal with cold storage chambers.
Mr. 'SPROULE. But the hon. minister knows how many will get the government suosidies.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then I assume he knows the number of chambers he will require thermographs for ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I guarantee my hon. friend that there will be a thermograph in every cold storage chamber in every vessel subsidized by the government.


David Henderson: Will the hon. minister see that thermographs are placed on the deck of the vessel so as to take the temperature of the sea air ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: We have not done that.


David Henderson: Is that not essential?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: ;My officers who have dealt with this matter have not thought so. I know that Mr. Smith brought that question forward and it was discussed, but my officers have not thought that is would be of any great value because the variations of the temperature on deck are so great that the instrument would hardly indicate them.


David Henderson: I am afraid the hon. minister's officers are hardly up to date as practical men.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In the contracts made with these vessels will there be any provision regarding freight rates ?


William Paterson: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It should be given out beforehand what the rates are to be so that shippers would know what they would have to pay for these cold storage chambers.


William Paterson: The contract is made and it is not in it. It is left to the regulation of trade competition.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The department has not shown good business ability.


William Paterson: We cannot regulate the price of commodities.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: 


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is it of such little account that it is not worth while for the government to pay any attention to it ? AVhen we were told some years ago that it was an essential element of the contract that they should pay so much more if they availed themselves of this cold storage, shippers knew' whether it would be advis-Ftble for them to avail themselves of cold storage or not. Many shippers tell us that they did not avail themselves of cold storage because the rates were so high. The contract which was made by the old government or by the present government-I forget w'hftih- was nllow'ed to run out and w'as not renewed by this government. The South African war was on and freight rates went up. They said that they could not get the same freight rates and they did not provide for the equipment of these steamers until it was too late. Another year has elapsed since then. Have the government made no effort to get the freight rates fixed so that shippers may know where they stand? If not they have been derelict In their duty and they are censurable for their failure' Surely they ought to have made provision this year for freight rates. There is now no South African w'ar on and they ought to know that freight rates, let them be what they may, could easily have been provided for so that those availing themselves of cold storage w'ould not pay more than so many shillings or so many dollars or cents beyond the ordinary freight rate,


William Paterson: I will call the attention of the minister to the suggestion of the hon. gentleman.


Robert Laird Borden: Both last year and on previous occasions there has been some discussion upon items of this character as to alleged discrimination-it is called discrimination,* at least-as against Canadian shippers. The question arose in this way : It was alleged, with what truth I do not know, that upon some of these steamship lines-I do not say upon the lines of the Messrs. Allan-rates were given to shippers in the United States which were lower than those given from Canadian points of a corresponding inland distance. . That is to say, from Chicago, for example, you can get by some of the subsidized lines a lower rate for United States shippers than you can get for Canadian shippers from a point equally far west. Therefore, we complained with respect to some lines-I do not think there was any complaint with regard to the line of the Messrs. Allan-but with respect to some lines, which eventually resulted in a certain provision being inserted in some of these contracts with other steamship owners which forbade any such discrimination, if that is the term to use. The question was discussed during the past session, and, I think, during the session previous to that, and my recollection is that difficulties were fairly acknowledged On

both sides of the House. It was, of course, pointed out, I think by the Minister of Trade and Commerce on one occasion at least, that at Chicago these lines had to compete with lines running to New York, which had quite as good railway communication with Chicago as Montreal or St. John would have, and it was said that some ol' these owners could not avoid making offers ol' low rates where that was necessary for the purpose of competition. The Minister of Trade and Commerce last year, I think, promised us some further information on the subject, and I have no doubt that it has been under the consideration of my hon. friend the Minister of Customs before he undertook these estimates. I would be very glad indeed to know whether or not he has any information on the subject which he would like to impart to the committee, especially as to whether or not there have been any complaints made by shippers with regard to this particular line. I think we were told last year that there had been no complaint so far as this line was concerned.


William Paterson: I remember myself, not in connection with this, but 1 remember that two or three years ago a person wrote me from St. John charging that a subsidized line-I do not exactly remember the name, and therefore I will not mention it-were carrying goods cheaper from Boston than from St. John, although the boats were subsidized by this government from St. John. I understood from his complaint that they would bring the goods to St. John and then forward them to Boston, and yet, with this extra charge added, the rate was lower from Boston. I thought this was a matter that demanded attention, and I mentioned it to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. X think he immediately took steps to ascertain whether the charge was well founded or not. I presume there is not much in that, but I am told by the deputy that the question has arisen, as the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) has said, with reference to some large Chicago meat houses that were able to make a contract with every ship that went out giving them a very large consignment, and that under these circumstances-the Minister of Agriculture says that they were special cold storage chambers, not the cold storage chambers prepared by us, and that for these large shipments and steady sources of freight the Chicago houses were given better terms than were given to the shippers who were not able to offer the ship-owners as much freight at a time or as regular supplies. Otherwise, it is thought that the steamers would have gone with not half a load. I suppose that if they can get a full ship load they can afford to carry cheaper for the Canadian shipper in proportion than if they had only half a load.


Robert Laird Borden: There are, of course, considerations of that character which we
very frankly admitted should have weight with the government, but, at the same time, where we are paying out subsidies to a line such as this, or any other of these lines, it does seem a little incongruous that shippers in Canada should have to pay higher freights to such a subsidized line than the rates paid by shippers in the United States by the same line.


William Paterson: I am not sure whether there are complaints as to any of the subsidized lines ; they say there are none in reference to the Allan Line.


Robert Laird Borden: I understand there has been no complaint with regard to them. I know that last year the Minister of Trade and Commerce admitted it, and justified the action of certain steamship companies, and there was very considerable weight in what he said. He took the position that they could not get the freight unless they gave these lower rates, because these lower rates were given via New York, and that it was no injustice to the Canadian shipper, but indeed tended to maintain the line that the ship-owner should take the freight at these low rates. That was from the standpoint of the steamship-owner. From our standpoint it presented itself in this way. We were paying large subsidies to these ship-owners to maintain a line, and it seemed, as I said, incongruous that our own shippers should he paying more freight and higher freight rates than those paid by United States shippers.


William Paterson: Something like through and local freight by rail.
Mr. SPROULEi Has the government made any effort in the last year to develop the chilled meat or frozen meat trade ?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: We have not taken any steps about it.


Samuel Hughes: The Minister of Trade and Commerce made a promise to me for two or three successive years that he would furnish the House with a statement of the local rates and also the general rates by rail to Canadian ports and also the rates from Canadian inland points to foreign markets, and the American western rates to these same foreign markets. I have never heard of this information being laid on the table. I do not suppose it belongs to this department, but inasmuch as this question of subsidies to steamships is up, I think it would be well for the Minister of Customs, as a business man, to look into the matter, and have a guarantee that while the freights rates from western points over our lines and by our subsidized steamships to Britain might possibly be regulated so that while the long haul to western points might be reduced, yet in no case should the short haul, viz., to and frotrn Canadian points, be greater than the long haul. I

presume the minister knows, as every one knows, that the rates from Liverpool to Chicago or any western point are much lower than to our Canadian points.


William Paterson: Proportionately lower.


Samuel Hughes: No ; actually lower. They can ship more cheaply say from (Belgium right into the western country west of the lakes than to points in Canada. I think it woud be a very proper thing for the minister to impress on his colleague-the Minister of Trade and Commerce is the one particularly interested -the necessity of having it enacted that no local rate should exceed in price the through rates.


William Paterson: Do you mean to make that a clause in the contract ?


Samuel Hughes: In granting a subsidy, to provide that the local rate to a point in Canada should not exceed the through rate. I do not want it necessarily lower, but it should be as low.


William Findlay Maclean: I hope that the statement made by the hon. gentleman just now will induce him to assist me in compelling American roads to give the same rates to Canadian as to American shippers.


Samuel Hughes: We do not control the American roads.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Last session the Minister of Trade and Commerce took an increased grant towards providing aids to navigation, especially, I think, in connection with the St. Lawrence. [DOT] He mentioned a system which could be installed in vessels which would give them notice when they were approaching shallow water, rocks, &c. It was some sort of telephonic arrangement under water. I would be glad to know if anything of that kind is being done in connection with these subsidized steamers. I think it is a matter of great importance, especially to steamers coming up the St. Lawrence in the summer months to Quebec or Montreal.


William Paterson: I do not feel at liberty to say that he has made a contract as to that, but I am warranted in saying that it has been seriously under consideration, and negotiations have been going on in reference to it.


John Graham Haggart: I understood the minister to say that all the conditions of the contract made with the Allan Company have been performed. There have been no forfeitures ?


William Paterson: I think there have been no forfeitures.


John Graham Haggart: I would like to know whether they have performed the provisions of the contract, or, if not, whether there has been an enforcement of the penalty.


Samuel Hughes: 


William Paterson: No deductions have been made and therefore no penalties have been incurred.


John Graham Haggart: That is not a consequence of the statement of the minister. A penalty may be incurred but not collected, and there may have been a forfeiture. I want to know whether there has been or not.


William Paterson: I am assured that the practice of the department has been, what I would expect it to be, that if there were any deductions to be made, they would be made at the time the cheque was given ; but that there have been no deductions, and therefore the full amount must have been earned.


John Graham Haggart: Can the minister not state Whether the voyages have been performed according to the contract or not ?


William Paterson: Yes, and paid for.


John Graham Haggart: Then, there is a new state of affairs this year as compared with last year, according to the statement then made by the minister.


William Paterson: I do not know what was stated last year. I am stating what I am informed by the deputy.


Gilbert White Ganong: The minister will find on page 62 that $70,000 is provided for a submarine signal apparatus.


William Paterson: I think that is what the hon. member for St. John has been referring to.


Mr. BERGERON.: On this item I would like to ask the hon. gentleman for some information. Where do we stand now in regard to the fast line ? When I left here we were in the bottle-necked business; where are we now ? Has there been any improvement in the communication between England and Canada ?


William Paterson: There has been a good deal of improvement. There are two turbine steamers going on in the spring which will make seventeen knots. They will make the crossing in six days in summer and six and a half days in winter.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: With what companies have we contracts for carrying the mails between Canada and England 1


William Paterson: The Allan Line.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the contract price ?


William Paterson: 
Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Was that contract given after tenders had been asked from different companies ?


William Paterson: That is a contract made on November 7, 1903.
[Mr. BERGERON. Were tenders asked from different companies plying between Canada and England ?


William Paterson: I could not say.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What proportion of the Canadian mails are carried by Canadian vessels and what proportion through the United States ?


William Mulock: I gave the figures at the close of last session in reply to a question put to me by the hon. member for Centre Toronto.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: This is a case in which it seems to me that we are spending a great deal of money for which we do not get benefit. Seven or eight years ago a contract was made by another administration for a fast line which would have carried not only our own mails, but probably a great part of the mails of the western states. The present government did not carry out that contract. Since then they have been insinuating that they were preparing a contract for a fast line, but it has never been carried to a successful issue. We are paying $260,000 a year or probably more for having our mails carried by a slow line; for in present conditions a line of fourteen or fifteen knots is a slow line. I know business men in Montreal to-day who send their mails through the United States instead of using the Canadian lines. There is no reason for that. Ivith the progressive government we have, and the growing times, when the supplies we are voting amount to about $65,000,000 compared with $35,000,000 or $40,000,000 eight or nine years ago, there is no reason why we should not have a Canadian line between Canada and England which would carry not only our own mails but the mails of the western states as well. It is the fault of the government if we have not a fast line to-day, and if we are obliged to delay the hon. gentleman's estimates by making these criticisms. I see the hon. minister looking at last year's Hansard, but I want something more fresh. I want information regarding what has happened since.


William Mulock: It is Impossible for me to give the weight of the mails carried since I spoke in this House in July last, but I shall be very happy to get the
information and give it to the hon. gentleman.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What I want to know is the proportion of mail matter carried by Canadian and American vessels?


William Mulock: I shall get the information and have it brought down on Tuesday or Wednesday next.


Samuel Hughes: What is the arrangement about the steamers in winter time? Last year there was some change in the programme about calling at St. John and Halifax.


William Paterson: They call at Halifax in the winter en route for St. John.


Samuel Hughes: What is the rule followed with regard to the sailing of all these subsidized steamers in winter time?


William Paterson: I will have that information when we are discussing the other item.


Mr. FOWLER.: Last year the contract with the Allan Line was varied so that some of the sailings to St. John were cut out. Have those been restored?


William Paterson: I am not aware that any were cut out. Here is the contract.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Perhaps I may give both the minister and the hon. gentleman a little information on that point. The contract was not varied, but as a matter of fact the Allan steamers did not call at St. John on several of their trips. It was stated by their agent that they did not obtain freight with sufficient ease at St. John and it was thought they could do better by loading at Halifax. I remember speaking of this last session. My hon. friend will remember the hon. member for Annapolis, Mr. Wade, told us that the result of that experiment was that the steamers got barely enough freight in Halifax to give them steadiness in the sea-way, so that the experiment was not a success. This year they are loading at St. John. They always call at Halifax and leave their mails and generally passengers- not always all the passengers, generally the first class, but sometimes tne immigrants are brought on and landed at St. John. That is the way the contract is being carried out this year. They are calling at Halifax both ways, leaving the mails and passengers and finishing their voyage at St. John, where they get their freight.


George William Fowler: That is very true, but, I understand they have the authority of the department for doing this.


William Paterson: The contract under which they are working now commenced in April last, and I am told they have been calling at both places since then.


Samuel Hughes: Was there not another line of steamships that had a subsidy for carrying the mails?



William Paterson: 
William Paterson: The memorandum I have on this subject says that negotiations are under way for the establishment of this service, and definite announcement may be made before the House prorogues. The Postmaster General has been carrying on negotiations and no doubt can give any information any hon. members may desire.


William Mulock: The Mexican government has agreed with the Canadian government for a subsidized line of steamers on the Pacific and Atlantic. Last spring they agreed to go as high as $50,000, we doing the same. It was hoped that that amount would get us a line on the two oceans ; but when tenders were invited it was found that the whole amount would practically be absorbed by one line.


George Eulas Foster: A monthly service ?


William Mulock: Yes. Last December I had negotiations with the Mexican government and they agreed, subject to our doing the same, that they would give another $50,000. This would mean a total of subsidies from two governments of $200,000, which would give us two lines, provided we could get them at that amount. But I think the Minister of Trade and Commerce is hardly likely to secure an Atlantic line for the sum here voted. The Mexican government will not give more than $50,000 extra, or $100,000 in all. It is probable that when the supplementary estimates are brought down the House may be asked to increase the subsidy. The amounts here voted will give us only the one line.
I think that the tenders show it would cost about $100,000 for the Pacific line-I cannot give the figures exactly.


George Eulas Foster: Which would be the more expensive?
iSlr WILLIAM MULOCK. The Atlantic line.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What are the lines now?


William Mulock: Between Canada and Mexico there are none.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: But between the United States and Mexico?


William Mulock: There is such a line but I do not recall the name.


Samuel Hughes: Would this be given to a British or an American or to a Mexican line?


William Mulock: We were to advertise and the vessels were to carry the


Samuel Hughes: British flag. The Mexican government have no ships carrying there flag.


Samuel Hughes: Oh, yes.


William Mulock: The president of Mexico so informed me, and I suppose he ought to know.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How are the mails carried between Canada and Mexico?


William Mulock: They go through the United States.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the extent of the mails between Canada and Mexico?


William Mulock: There are no statistics to show that. This is not a matter of mails.


Gilbert White Ganong: What w'ould be the ports of departure and call in Mexico and in Canada ?


William Mulock: In summer the vessels would leave Montreal and in winter some maritime province port or ports. They would call at a place called Progresso, the outport of Yucatan, which is part of the republic of Mexico. At Yucatan they raise great quantities of sisal fibre, which is used to mix with manila in the manufacture of binder twine. There would be a large import of this material, which at present we buy mainly in the New York market. The ship would then do some coasting and call at Coatzacoalcos, which is intended to be the gulf port of the Tehuantepec Railway, a railway crossing the peninsula from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific ocean. At present the only port that is available is Vera Cruz, but it is a good distance away and the Mexican government is at present making a harbour at Coatza-eoalcos. There will be a railway 196 miles across the peninsula to Salina Cruz, a harbour on the Pacific ocean now being improved by the Mexican government at very great expense. It is not in a backward state, and the contracts have been made for the expenditure of about $25,000,000 Mexican, which is about $12,000,000 gold. The next port would be Vera Cruz and then Tampico. That is connected with the interior of Mexico by a railway, just as Vera Cruz is. There are two railways going from Vera Cruz to the interior. So, if the Atlantic vessel were to call at each place it would be comparatively close to the interior of Mexico.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How long would it take a vessel to go from Montreal to the first port the hon. gentleman mentioned?
.Sir WILLIAM MULOCK. At what rate of speed?


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: If it were like the ' Gauss ' that came here from Germany, I suppose it would take seven months. But T mean an ordinary vessel of 14 knots.


William Mulock: I do not think you would put a cargo on a ship of 14 knots, it would be too expensive. I think it would be about 3,500 knots from Montreal to Vera Cruz.


William Findlay Maclean: Have you got a wharf there ?


William Mulock: No, you would have to use lighters.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: How long does it take a vessel to go to these ports from New York ? The Minister of Customs says it is not so much a question of carrying mails as of bringing trade from Mexico to Canada. We do not want to pay $50,000 or $60,000 a year for a line of steamers which would not attain that object. If it takes a much longer time to carry the mails between Canada and Mexico by the proposed subsidized line, than to carry them by steamers plying between American ports and Mexican ports we would be throwing away our money, because our mails would go by the American line. Of course, if the hon. gentleman is not in a position to answer now, he can take means to obtain some statistics and bring them down.


William Mulock: I think the hon. gentleman has had his answer from the Minister of Customs. It is not a question of carrying mails at all. Under no circumstances would Canadian mails such as letters go by this line so long as they can go by rail. When you can go from Ottawa to the city of Mexico by rail in five days, letters will be carried by the shortest route. This proposition is for the development of trade for bulky articles of commerce that cannot afford to pay a large haul, but which may be transported a long distance by a cheaper route. I think there is a large market in the republic of Mexico that Canada can supply, and there is a reciprocal trade.


Robert Laird Borden: Would the hon. gentleman state what we might export there, and what we might import ?


William Mulock: As to imports, 1 mentioned a moment ago the article of sisal fibre. I think we consume in this country about 12,000,000 pounds of binder twine, into which sisal enters, I do not know in what proportion.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: Worth how much ?


William Mulock: The raw material might be worth a cent and a half, perhaps, I do not know the price per pound. But it is a necessary article in Canada where we have a number of factories manufacturing binder twine. It is a growing industry, and we shall use more and more every year. We have to have that raw material. Canada does not produce it and Mexico does. Then coffee is grown in southern Mexico, tobacco, sugar and cotton. It 29
is an excellent country for growing raw cotton. As you are aware, grazing is carried on to a large extent in Mexico, and they export large quantities of hides of all kinds. In the mountains and central parts of Mexico where the country is rough, instead of sheep they have great flocks of goats, and the skins of goats are largely used in trade. I believe that is the raw material used in making fine leather. Then there are fruits. I do not know that we could do a banana trade, bananas being perishable. I think that trade is controlled by a company largely, and I do not think we would be able to do much in the banana trade. But we would be able to do something in many other fruits, oranges, lemons, nuts, cocoanuts, pineapples and so on. So far as our exports to Mexico are concerned, we could sell to them I think great quantities of Canadian products in the rough. We could sell them such things as coal on the Atlantic and on the Pacific. Mexico does not produce good coal to any extent. There are some coal deposits in the northeast part of Mexico, but they import great quantities of coal. Some of it comes in by rail into the northern parts, and portions of their coal are supplied from England and the United States by water. I think there is some continental coal also consumed'in Mexico. We ought also to be able to sell them pine. They have no white, pine in Mexico. We could sell them products of pine, such as household furniture and woodenware of various kinds. I was in conversation with a gentleman in the city of Mexico, who is a representative there of a Canadian house for boxes, which are shipped there in great quantities in what I think they call the knockdown state. Then there is a good market for railway ties. These are very valuable and very expensive. I was told by Mr. Brown, president of the National Railways that there would be no difficulty in marketing a million ties a year in Mexico, not to supply new roads but merely to make up the waste on existing roads. As to foods,
I am pleased to say that I found there a favourite cheese, the Imperial cheese. I believe we all know where that comes from.


David Henderson: Anything else imperial ?


William Mulock: Well, I am willing to admit-though I am not supposed to be an agent here for Canadian houses, but when the question is asked 'I am w'illing to admit that the first thing I saw when I entered the Buena Vista station-I am not making any confession, merely telling what I saw-but on leaving the Mexican Central station the first sign I saw' on reaching the street was on an establishment just opposite the station, and it was one of Walkers' advertisements-Canadian Club. I found on inquiry there was a house there which sold large quantities of that brand.


BB VISED EDITION
Robert Laird Borden: Did tlie hon gentleman find it the real article ?


William Mulock: That is a leading question.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: We do not ask the hon. gentleman to incriminate himself.


William Mulock: I would not
know it even if I were to try it. My hon. friend will have to get an expert to answer that question. Then I am glad to say that we could sell them another article of food. My hon. friend from North Perth (Mr. Mac-laren) would perhaps have some information on what I am about to say now. There is a very large wholesale and retail grocery establishment in the city of Mexico, and the enterprising owner of that House informed me that he sold large quantities of American Lams and bacons throughout Mexico in the city and elsewhere. He said that he only regretted that he could not get it in Canada and that he would be able to obtain the supplies from his own country-he is a native of our country-if we had a direct line of steamers. He is taking a great interest in this enterprise in the hope that this direct line of steamships may be the means of developing a trade of the kind I speak of. Butter is imported into Mexico in considerable quantities but it comes from France chiefly and it comes in tins. There is no reason why we should not capture the butter trade of Mexico if we put the goods up in the proper way and have proper transportation facilities. I was in conversation with a representative of some Toronto manufacturers and I found that a Toronto firm had captured the trade of the city of Mexico in what is known as neckwear. I do not know the details of that business, but I suppose it includes cravats, ties and so on. I also found that in the chief shops of the city of Mexico, Canadian leather goods were on sale in large quantities and that they came from establishments engaged in the manufacture of these goods in the city of loronto -such goods as trunks, pocket books, purses and small articles made of fine leather.


David Henderson: Gloves or anything of that kind ?


William Mulock: I did not happen to hear of those but there is no reason in the world why we should not get the glove trade to a large extent if our people are enterprising enough and we have the transportation facilities. But you cannot send anything like heavy freight by rail from here to Mexico. From where I am speaking now I suppose it would be nearly 3,000 miles by rail to the city of Mexico. That is a long distance to carry goods by land.


Joseph Gédéon Horace Bergeron: What is the trade today between Mexico and Canada ?


William Mulock: Practically nil.


William Paterson: About $200,000.


William Mulock: I think if you turn up the Trade and Navigation returns of the republic of Mexico you will find that they are importing more and more every year. Speaking from memory-I may be wrong about this and I do not w'ant to be held to these figures, but I can give the statistics as I think I have some copies of their trade returns


Samuel Hughes: Have they a high protective tariff ?


William Mulock: Yes, I think they import about $100,000,000. They are a growing and a coining people, and now is the time if we are going to get that trade before other countries get their lines of communication established. It is a very difficult thing to dislodge trade after it is once established. It is better to try and get it in its infancy.


Samuel Hughes: The hon. minister was good enough to tell us that the president told him that they had no shipping.


William Mulock: No mercantile shipping.


Samuel Hughes: Perhaps the president knows, but in going over Whittaker's Almanac and every other return given I find that they spend upwards of $2,000,000 in equipping their navy every year and that they have a mercantile marine of 23,817 tons.


William Mulock: Small coasting boats.


Samuel Hughes: Even so.


William Mulock: They have no shipping in the sense of the subject we are discussing. The president informed me so and so did the Secretary of Finances, Mr. Limantour. They may have some small coasting vessels, but not ocean-going vessels such as are required for this traffic and they very readily assented to our controlling the flag.


Samuel Hughes: That is what I wanted to make clear in the matter.


William Mulock: Yes.


Andrew B. Ingram: Last year there was some talk of tenders being invited for this service. Will the hon. minister say what was done in connection with that ?


William Mulock: The Department of Trade and Commerce invited tenders. They only got one tender for the Pacific coast service and that was from Messrs. Weir & Co., of Glasgow. There were conditions coupled with it. The company sent a representative to Canada to try to obtain some modifications of the terms, and he left here intending to go to the city of Mexico to consult with the


William Mulock: Mexican government He has not returned to Canada yet and the Department of Trade and Commerce has not had any advice as to whether he has met with any success. As to the Atlantic coast service I think there was a tender from Messrs. Pickford & Black. The Elder Dempster Company did not put in a tender in answer to the advertisement but they are in negotiation with the department to see if they can make arrangements for that service.


Andrew B. Ingram: Last year when this matter was before the House a gentleman (in Boston wrote me in reference to this service. He wanted to know what the department intended to do in the matter. I consulted with the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir Richard Cartwright) but the information he gave me was so indefinite that it was of no use to the party in Boston. Therefore the matter dropped, as far as that firm was concerned. I understood from the indefinite way in which the hon. minister made his statement that the service they intended to establish was' a Pacific coast service and not an Atlantic service. That being the case these Boston parties had no further interest in it.


William Paterson: The first effort was for a Pacific coast service, but it is hoped, I believe, if the House sanctions it, that services may ultimately be established between Canada and the Mexican republic on both oceans.


David Henderson: But the present intention is only to establish a service on the Pacific coast ?


William Paterson: No, the Atlantic is more alive now than the Pacific. It started with the Pacific but obstacles presented themselves there. The representative of Andrew Weir & Co. who was here in connection with the contract on the Pacific coast, went to Mexico but he has not come back yet and it is at a standstill meanwhile.


Andrew B. Ingram: What steps' did the department take to draw the attention of the public and of those interested in shipping to the contracts ?


William Paterson: Advertisements were inserted in the papers of the maritime provinces and then copies of these were sent to the High Commissioner with instructions to distribute them among the shipping ports of England.


Samuel Hughes: Can the hon. minister tell us how much coal is shipped from the Pacific coast or from the eastern coast to Mexico ?


William Paterson: I have not looked up my trade and navigation returns. What about the thirty-nine items between the one we carried and this?
29*
Mr. f)ANIEL. I have some remarks on one or two of them.
Steam service between Halifax, St. John's, Newfoundland, and Liverpool, from July 1, 1905, to June 30, 1906, $20,000.


George Eulas Foster: Who has that contract?


William Paterson: There is no change. Tlie date of the present contract is October 10, 1904, and it expires June 30, 1905. The contractors are Messrs. Furness, Withy & Co.	.


George Eulas Foster: Is that a satisfactory service.


William Paterson: We have no complaints. The round trip is made in seventeen days.


George Eulas Foster: I mean as far as the carrying trade is concerned.


William Paterson: We have no complaints and we therefore judge that it is satisfactory.
Steam service between St. John, N.B., and Glasgow, during winter of 1905-6, $15,000.


William Paterson: There is no change in that; the contractors are the Donaldson Line and the Robert Reford Line. They are paid $750 per round trip or $15,000 per annum and the carrying of mails is stipulated for.
Steam service between St. John, N.B., Dublin and Belfast during the winter of 1905-6, $7,500.


William Paterson: There is no change here. The date is October 20, 1904, and the contract expires with the opening of navigation, 1905. The contractors are the Ulster Steamship Company, the Head Line. The contractors have the privilege of calling at St. John's, Newfoundland, on the western trip. The subsidy is $750 each round trip. They carry mails but cold storage is not stipulated for.


Samuel Hughes: In connection with this have the government taken any steps to have it made possible for these steamers to carry cattle? At the present time they cannot carry cattle even for slaughter on landing, because the British government will not allow cattle to be landed at any but certain few points even for slaughter. It would tend to increase trade to the old country, without detriment to British trade, If it were possible to allow these steamers to carry cattle.


William Paterson: We will look into that but if the policy of the British government is to prevent the landing


Samuel Hughes: But the whole world centres around this government now and the government has only to wave its hand to have the matter attended to.


William Paterson: I think the hand should be waved.

A line or lines of steamers to run between St. John, Halifax and London, $10,000.


John Waterhouse Daniel: I would be glad if tlie minister would explain the present condition of this line and state the intention of the government with regard to asking for tenders. I may say that the Board of Trade of the city of St. John sent a memorial to the Governor General in Council with regard to this steamship service, with which I presume the minister is familiar. It was to the following effect :
That according to the records of the trade between St. John, Halifax and London which has been carried on for a number of years past by the Furness line of steamers subsidized by your government, the results have been extremely disappointing, more particularly in connection with the imports and exports of western Canadian goods (statements of which are inclosed herewith), in consequence of whch, and of the unsuitable and unsatisfactory steamers employed in the trade

Particulars concerning which I will also give directly.
*

there have been numerous strong complaints
on the part of both importers and exporters by the line ;
And whereas the Board of Trade has been informed by other responsible steamship companies, that they would be willing to tender for the service -commencing on 1st of July next, if allowed the opportunity of doing so ;
The St. John Board of Trade therefore respectfully requests that your government will, as soon as convenient, Issue a call for tenders for the following services to commence on 1st July next, viz. :-	.
A line or lines of steamers to run during the summer months between St. John, Halifax and London, and during the winter months between St John and London direct and Halifax and London direct, and that the steamship companies he allowed until the 1st April next for -submitting their tenders to the government.
(Signed) H. B. Schofield,
President.
With regard to the statement of the steamers referred to, I may say that when, this line was first subsidized, between 1S94 and 1900, the service was principally maintained by the following three steamers: The ' -St. John City,' and the ' Halifax City,' which were both new steamers, and the ' London City,' which was built in 1891, and therefore was only three years old at that time. They were good steamers but they were sold by the Furness Line, after which the service was carried on by the following inferior steamers: the ' Ulunda,' ' Madiana,'
' Dahome ' and ' Dalton Hall.' In November, 1900, the new steamer ' Evangeline ' came on, and In February, 1901, the new steamer ' Loyalist,' after which the service was maintained by the ' Evangeline,' 'Loyalist ' and ' Dahome.' -In January, 1902, the ' Evangeline ' and ' Loyalist ' were sold by the Furness Company, and the service has been carried on ever since with inferior steamers.


William Paterson: That is the statement of the Board of Trade, composed of merchants and shipping men well acquainted with this trade ; and I would like to ask if the communication which that board sent to the government has received any consideration, and whether it is the intention of the government to see that in future the company puts on such vessels as are competent to do in a satisfactory manner the work which it has contracted to do. The service has certainly not been satisfactory for the business men of St. John. T therefore take this opportunity of bringing this matter to the notice of the minister and to tell him that there are other shipping firms which are quite able and willing to tender for this service, and which would, in the opinion of the Board of Trade of the city of -St. John, carry it out in a more satisfactory manner than it appears to be done by the Furness Company under their present contract.


William Paterson: May I ask what is the date of that statement V And did 1 understand the hon. gentleman to say that a copy of it had been sent to the department ?


John Waterhouse Daniel: This copy does not give the date. The communication I got from the Board of Trade is dated January 20, 1905, and the letter of the president is dated January 19.


William Paterson: The deputy of the department has unfortunately been ill for some time, and lias not been able to give any assistance in preparing the information. The acting deputy is not aware that that memorandum has come to the department, but he has no doubt that it has from what the hon. gentleman has said. He has made a note of it, and the hon. gentleman may rely upon it being brought to the attention of the minister. There are two contracts running for those ports, one by the Canadian Pacific Railway Line and one by the Furness Line.


John Waterhouse Daniel: It is the Furness Line 1 am speaking of.


George Eulas Foster: This Item had better stand, because there are other matters to be discussed in connection witli it.
Item allowed to stand.
Steam communication between St. John and Digby, from July 1, 1905, to June 30, 1906, $12,500.


John Waterhouse Daniel: I would like to ask the minister if the government have received any communication with regard to this line from the Maritime Board of Trade ?


William Paterson: Not that the acting deputy remembers.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Then I would like to read the following resolution which was passed at the annual meeting of the Maritime Board of Trade held at Moncton, N.B., on August 17, 1904.

Whereas, the increased requirements of commerce in the southwestern section of Nova Scotia, coupled with those of the Annapolis valley, demand greater transportation facilities and in particular a daily passenger and freight, service between St. John and Digby, N.S., whicti it is understood the Dominion Atlantic Railway Company will operate for a pro rata increase in the subsidy now paid.
Resolved, That the Maritime Board of Trade urge the federal government to provide daily steamboat communication between St. John and Digby by granting such pro rata increase in such subsidy ;
Further resolved. That as the four previous request's of this hoard for an improved hay service have been overlooked by the government, the present be submitted with the respectful request that it be dealt with immediately.
I may say that this Maritime Board of tirade is composed of business men of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick. The hon. minister will notice that increased accommodation is asked for on behalf of several counties in the province of Nova Scotia. This service, I understand, is intended especially for the accommodation of those counties in Nova Scotia which border on the Bay of Fundy or which do business largely through the Bay of Fundy ports ; and if there were a better service between St. John and Digby, I think there is no doubt that the business would grow very greatly, and it would be a real boou to the people of those counties. I would be glad to know whether the matter has received any consideration from the government ; if so, what consideration it has received ; whether the government intend to act on the request of this memorial ; and, if so, how soon ?


William Paterson: The matter has been brought to the attention of the department, and is receiving their consideration. Under the present contract full round trips are made daily during June, July, August and September, four trips eacii week during October, November, December, March, April and May ; and three trips each week during January and February. If I apprehend it rightly, what the hon. gentleman read asks for a round trip daily all the year round.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Yes.


William Paterson: The contract has not been varied in that respect. It is dated June 1, 1904, and expires July 1, 1905, and is renewable for another year at the option of the minister. The minister, having that power, would I suppose, be able to take into consideration the wishes of the maritime board. He is not asking for a vote for that purpose just now ; but when he sees the remarks of the hon. gentleman and the expression of his belief that it would be beneficial, he may perhaps bring down a supplementary vote, though I cannot of course say anything about that.
Steam service between Victoria and San Francisco, $5,000.


William Paterson: This is an old item since confederation.


George Eulas Foster: Why is it kept on ?


William Paterson: I believe the contract has expired and may not he taken up again. The original amount was $17,000, and was the result of an agreement entered into with the province of British Columbia when that province entered confederation.


George Eulas Foster: We dropped that.


William Paterson: I am afraid not very effectively. According to the Post Office Department, the value of the service is very trifling, and if another contract should he given it will no doubt be less than the amount of this item. The minister apparently asked to have this amount of $5,000 put at his disposal, but will be at liberty not to make a contract if he sees fit.


George Eulas Foster: It seems to he no good, commercially or otherwise.


William Paterson: From the information given me it would seem so.


Robert Laird Borden: Then the minister should not ask for the vote.


William Paterson: My deputy thinks there might be a question as to whether we can drop it. If the hon. member for Toronto (Mr. Foster) is right in saying that it was dropped, of course that would disprove that contention. Better let the item pass, and the minister will only make a contract if he finds it necessary.
Steam communication between Halifax and Newfoundland via Cape Breton ports, $2,000.


George Eulas Foster: What ports does this take in ?


William Paterson: It is between Halifax and the west coast of Newfoundland, calling both coming and returning at St. Pierre, Grand Narrows, Baddeck, North and South Sydney and some other ports. I believe the contract has expired.


Andrew B. Ingram: How many trips does the steamer make ?


William Paterson: A regular fortnightly service.
Steam communication during the- season of 1905, i.e., from the opening to the closing of navigation, between the mainland and the Magdalen Islands, $15,000.


George Eulas Foster: What vessels are doing that ?


William Paterson: The steamers ' Amelia ' and ' Lunenburg.' Regular steam weekly service, making each week two full round trips. The contract expires on July 7th, 1908. It is with the Magdalen Island Steamship Company, Limited.

90S


John Waterhouse Daniel: I would like to bring to the notice of the hon. minister another resolution with regard to steamship service with the Magdalen Islands, passed at the same meeting of the Maritime Board of Trade, held at Moncton, the 17th August, 1904. I do not know whether this resolution was formally sent to the government or not, but I presume it must have been :
Resolved, That the federal government be respectfully requested to grant a subsidy of $200 per trip for a steamer to make a weekly service between ports on the north side of Prince Edward Island, Miramichi, Magdalen Island and North Sydney, the distance on the whole route being about 625 miles.
I am not in a position to advocate the matter very strongly, because I am not so familiar with the ports on the north side of Prince Edward Island as are the members from that province. Perhaps the hon. member for Queen's will be able to give us a little information on this matter, but I take this opportunity of bringing this resolution before the minister, in order that he may give it his consideration.


William Paterson: The steamers now ply to Stewart and Georgetown, Prince Edward Island. What other ports are proposed ?
confederation, involving a connection between the Magdalen Islands and Pictou as being the most available point on the mainland, the calling at Souris and Georgetown being mere incidents of the trip to the Magdalen Islands.


Alexander Martin: I am glad the Minister of Trade and Commerce appears to take a friendly view of this, and I hope there will be an item in the supplementary estimates for the establishment of a separate service.


William Paterson: I understand now. It is an entirely new service. Apparently the minister has not decided upon it, as there is no item in the main estimates. Whether he will ask for an item in the supplementary estimates I cannot say. The acting deputy has taken a note on it and will call his attention to it.


George Eulas Foster: It is growing late, and I think we might rise now.


William Paterson: I think we should show more progress to-day. Hon. gentlemen opposite were responsible for wasting a good part of the afternoon.


George Eulas Foster: No, it was the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Fisher) who did that.


Alexander Martin: Stanley and Rustico. I am very glad my hon. friend has brought this matter up. I think that when we look over these estimates we find that the province of Prince Edward Island receives very scant justice. The resolution moved by the Maritime Board of Trade only asks a very small measure of justice for this province, and I hope it will be acceded to and the requisite sum put in the supplementary estimates.


William Paterson: That would extend the trip and would make a difference in the subsidy asked.


William Paterson: We might take these items as far as the bottom of the page. There are no changes and there need be but little discussion.


George Eulas Foster: If there Is not much discussion we can get through them very quickly another time.


William Paterson: The hon. gentleman will have to bear the responsibility for accomplishing so little.


George Eulas Foster: At half past eleven I am willing to take the responsibility.
Some resolutions reported.


Alexander Martin: Yes.


Gilbert White Ganong: I think the request they make is for $200 a trip for a weekly service.


William Paterson: I do not know whether that is before the department or not.


Mr. E. M. MACDONALD.: I would point out that the proposition in this resolution of the Slaritime Board of Trade is not for the extension of the present route between Pictou and the Magdalen Islands, a service performed by the Magdalen Islands Steamship Company; it is a separate proposition for a new service. I have a copy of the resolutions and they involve a steamer starting from Miramichi, calling at points in the northern part of Prince Edward Island and going to the Magdalen Islands, then coming to North Sydney and returning. The distance of the whole route would be about 625 miles. That would be apart from the service now under discussion, a service that has been in existence, I believe, ever since
On motion of Mr. Paterson, House adjourned at 11.15 p.m.

Monday, February 13, 1905.