1909-12-03

Mr. SPEAKER.: I have the honour to communicate the following letter to the House:
Ottawa, Dec. 3, 1909.
Sir,-I have the honour to inform you that Chief Justice, the Right Hon. Sir Charles Fitzpatrick, acting as Deputy Governor General, will proceed to the Senate Chamber this afternoon at 3.15 for the purpose of assenting to a certain Bill which has passed the Senate and the House of Commons during the present session of parliament.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,



C. J. JONES,

[Stage Direction]
Assistant Governor General's Secretary. To the Honourable
The Speaker of the House of Commons.
A message was delivered by Captain J. Ernest Chambers, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, His Honour the Deputy of His Excellency the Governor General desires the immediate attendance of your honourable House in the Chamber of the honourable the Senate.	,
Accordingly the House went up to the Senate Chamber.
And the House being returned.
Mr. SPEAKER informed the House that his honour the deputy of His Excellency the Governor General had been pleased to give, in His Majesty's name, the Royal assent to the following Bill:
An Act respecting a certain supplementary convention between His Majesty and the President of the French Republic.

Mr.   J.@: DEMERS (St. John and Iberville) -(Translation)-moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 56) to amend the Bank Act. He said :	These amendments are made
primo, .in order that banking operations may be more known to the shareholders when advances to a considerable amount are made to the bank's customers; second, to make the special general meeting of the shareholders more easy by allowing fifteen amongst them, in possession of one-twentieth of a bank share, to ask for the convocation of such meeting, instead of twenty-five shareholders in possession of one-tenth of these shares, such as prescribed by law; certio, this Bill is designed to get rid of those dishonest or undesirable shareholders; last, the object of the fourth amendment is to- establish a system of banks' inspection through the Department of Finance of Canada.
Bill read first time.



BANK ACT AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. SAMUEL SHARPE moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 57) to amend the Bank Act. He said: This is the same Bill as that which I introduced in the early part of the session with the exception of the clause with regard to the payment of interest. It was suggested to me, that, owing to that clause, if the Bill became law, it might involve a charge upon the consolidated revenue of the country and in consequence would be irregular. It was-suggested that I should secure the discharge of the order and reintroduce the Bill with the omission of that clause. The object of the Bill, as I explained on a former occasion, is to provide that the unclaimed balances at the banks should be transferred to the government who shall become the custodians and trustees thereof.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER moved:: That when this House adjourns on Tuesday the 7th inst. it stands adjourned until Thursday the 9th.


Mr. FOSTER.: What is the trouble with Wednesday?


Wilfrid Laurier: Wednesday is a legal holiday by statute-the feast of the Immaculate Conception.



INQUIRIES FOR PAPERS.

George Eulas Foster: I want to ask the right hon. the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) if there is any correspondence in existence between himself and the two ministers who went over to the conference this summer, or with any member of the British government, concerning the negotiations, business and attitude to be taken by the representatives of Canada, or any letters of instruction or anything of the kind? I had a motion prepared to ask for all the papers and correspondence. I did not push it because these papers that ,we have came down but they do not include anything except that it took place over there. If there is any correspondence, in the nature of instructions, letters or otherwise I think we ought to have that before the discussion on the second reading of the Bill comes on. I am not sure whether there is any or not.


Wilfrid Laurier: All the correspondence upon this subject has been brought down. If there had been any correspondence of a confidential nature, of course, it would not have been proper for me to have brought it down, but I can tell my hon. friend that there is not even correspondence of a confidential nature. Everything is before the House.


Mr. DEMERS.: 


Mr. DANIEL.: I would like to ask the government when those papers ordered on the 22nd November will be brought down. The hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Brodeur) is not in his place. Perhaps the Prime Minister will call his attention to it.


Wilfrid Laurier: I will take a note of it.



IMPRISONMENT OF MRS. ROBINSON

Mr. GEO. GORDON.: I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Justice (Mr Aylesworth) whether he has under consideration a recommendation of further executive clemency in the case of Mrs. Robinson, recently found guilty of murder at the Sudbury assizes and whose sentence was subsequently, upon the petition of upwards of 100,000 Canadian citizens, commuted by His Excellency in Council to imprisonment in the penitentiary of Kingston for ten years. Is it the intention of the Minister of Justice or the government to release Mrs. Robinson on parole or otherwise, or in any other way to effect any further mitigation of the very severe punishment which she is suffering, which will result in her release at any early day?


Hon. A. B. AYLESWORTH (Minister of Justice).: The case referred to was the subject of very anxious and careful consideration before the date fixed for the execution of the capital sentence with the result that His Excellency was advised to commute the capital sentence into a sentence of imprisonment in the penitentiary for a period of ten years. Since the announcement of the decision on the part of His Excellency, I have received a few letters from different individuals who were interested in the case, some of them in the nature of expressing their appreciation and gratitude as to the course which was taken in the matter, one or two expressing the hope that at some future time it might be possible to extend a further measure of clemency in the case of this particular prisoner. No formal application and no suggestion of further clemency, except of the nature I have described, have been made and the matter is not therefore at the present time under consideration.


George Gordon: I would like to elicit the sympathy of the Prime Minister, of the Minister of Justice, and of the whole cabinet on behalf of Mrs. Robinson, who is imprisoned for a crime which she was forced to commit. There is no doubt that this poor woman had to face a position which no other woman was confronted with since the time of Eve. I am sure that if the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice should consider this matter care-

fully they will come to the conclusion that each hour and each minute this poor woman remains in prison is a blot on the justice of this country. I shall not go into the details of this horrible crime, and when I call it a horrible crime I do not refer to what this unfortunate woman did, but to what she was forced into by her monstrosity of a husband. I hope the Minister of Justice, and the Prime Minister particularly who we all know has a sympathetic heart will have mercy on this unfortunate woman.



SUPPLY-RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENTS.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. FIELDING moved that the House go into Committee of Supply.
["One would naturally expect that when the Minister of Public Works is submitting his estimates to Council, for the consideration of that body, he would supply them with better data than he furnishes this House to justify council in passing the estimates. There does not seem to be any system whereby he can reach a conclusion regarding the absolute need of buildings or the wisdom or otherwise of erecting buildings in these places. He has a request from somebody and cannot tell us. in some cases, from whom Not from the Post Office Department, the Post Office Department does not seem to give him any information whether there is a need for a public building or not. He does not seem to go to the trouble of making any inquiries from the Post Office Department or from any other source as to what the population of the place is or what its needs are. In defending the building of a post office costing about $20,000 in one place he said that it was on a railway. He could find places of three, four, or five times the size and importance of that place on railways all over this country that have no nublic buildings and no post offices erected by the government. I think that is no justification at all and no information.\nAt six o'clock, House took recess.\nAfter Recess.\nHouse resumed at eight o'clock."]
Mr. LANCASTER.: Mr. Speaker, before that motion is carried I would like to draw the attention of the government to matters of legislation that, I think, should be attended to. Over a week ago this House dealt with two measures to amend the Railway Act, and saw fit at the instance of the government, to send these measures to the Railway Committee for consideration. These Bills passed their second reading in this House, and then at the instance of the government they were sent to the Railway Committee. That is over a week ago and the Railway Committee has not yet met to consider these Bills. When it does meet it will be so congested with Private Bills that these public measures which provide a remedy for evils which the people of Canada are suffering under will be relegated to the background. The government is responsible for sending these Bills to the Railway Committee, and the government should see that they are dealt with there. I, with other members of the House, am opposed to sending these Public Bills to committees appointed to deal with private legislation, but as the gov-' ernment has taken the responsibility of that course they should see that no delay occurs. We all know that these Bills are necessary legislation in the interest of the country, and that if they are not dealt with early in the session and reported to the House, the government will later on have taken all the sittings for government business, and even though the committee should report in favour of them, if they are presented to the House at that stage they would only be so much waste paper. I appeal to the Prime Minister to see that these Bills are dealt with by the Railway Committee immediately.


Wilfrid Laurier: The committees of the House are under the control of the House itself and not under the control of the government. I believe that had the attention of the chairman of the Railway Committee been directed to this matter he would have promptly called the committee together. I shall deem it my duty to call his attention to it at once.



George Eulas Foster: When does the Minister of Finance intend to introduce the Banking Bill?


Mr. FIELDING.: Not for some little time. There are one or two measures before the House which in due course will, I hope, be referred to committee, and if so I shall ask them -to be detained in the committee until other legislation is brought forward. The matter has engaged our attention, but I fear I will not be able to promise the Bill before the Christmas recess. In the meantime there are other matters concerning my department which will engage our attention.


George Eulas Foster: Is there any probability that the budget speech will be delivered before Christmas?


William Stevens Fielding: I would like if possible that it should be, but I will make an announcement with reference to it next week.


George Eulas Foster: There is so much delay in bringing down the Naval Bill that we might take some of the legislation of the Finance Department if it were ready.


William Stevens Fielding: There are a large number of measures to be dealt with.


Mr. LENNOX.: Mountains of them.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into Committee of Supply.
Quebec Province Immigrant buildings generally, $5,000.
Hon.   WM@: PUGSLEY (Minister of Public Works.) This is to make provision for repairs to various immigration buildings. $5,000 was voted last year and $975 expended.


George Eulas Foster: How many immigrant buildings are there in Quebec?


Mr. PUGSLEY.: There is one at Montreal, one at Nominingue, one at Peri-bonka, one at Roberval and one at Quebec, also others. Each year it has been customary to take a vote for making repairs to the immigrant buildings and to cover what is not otherwise provided for.


George Eulas Foster: I think we shall have to have some further information on this vote. The difficulty about discussing these matters arises from the fact that the minister who is concerned in the public works for which the vote is taken makes it his business to be absent. The ministers who are concerned in the votes ought to make a point of

being here when they are being put through. If they do not, their absence is going to retard the business very much. I would like to know what the policy of the minister is in regard to the construction of immigrant buildings at these small places?


William Pugsley: If my hon. friend desires, I will allow this item to stand until the Minister of the Interior can be here.
Item allowed to stand.
Roberval Public Building-revote of $1,000 lapsed, $15,000.


William Pugsley: This building is required for post office purposes. There was an appropriation last session of $5,000, out of which we paid $4,000 for a site in April, 1909. The lot has a frontage of 70 feet by a depth of 170 feet. Roberval is a rapidly growing town. It has three churches-two Roman Catholic and one Episcopal, twenty-one stores, three hotels, three flour mills, a branch bank, telegraph and express office. The population of the town is somewhat over 3,000. The revenue is $3,334.18. The money orders issued amount to $30,168.10 and the money orders paid amount to $22,443.79.


Mr. CROCKET.: Was there arbitration on the site?


William Pugsley: I regret that I am unable to tell my hon. friend at this moment, as my deputy is absent, but will be here shortly.


Mr. ARMSTRONG.: What is the total cost?


William Pugsley: It is estimated at $25,000, exclusive of the site.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Will that cover lighting and heating?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Is it the custom of the minister to grant to towns of 3,000 inhabitants and with a similar amount of revenue, a public building similar to the one he proposes to build at Roberval?


William Pugsley: To a certain extent that is correct. We have laid it down as a principle that a county town, with a population of 2,000 or 3,000, might very well be given a public building; but we have not decided as to when that should be done. We cannot give all the county towns public buildings at once. We have to proceed gradually, according to our financial ability; but speaking generally, I myself would be favourable to giving a county town, with a population of 2,000 or 3,000 people, a public building at as early a date as possible. Of course, if the town has ample post office accommodation, situated in a good building and suited to the requirements of the people, we might very well postpone for a considerable time the erection of a public building.


George Eulas Foster: 


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Does the minister
set apart a certain portion of the moneys of the department for the building of post offices in towns of about 3,000 inhabitants or is it only to party friends that he allots this money?


William Pugsley: I may say no to both my hon. friend's questions.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Is there any particular policy about it or is it all surmise? It would be well if the public could have some idea of what may be expected in these matters. For instance, some years ago I brought to the attention of Sir William Mulock, then the Postmaster General, the post office at Grimsby, a post office that produces a revenue of over $4,000, serving a population in the village of 1,400 or 1,500 and including the immediate surrounding portion of the township of North Grimsby which is thickly settled by fruit farmers, a population of about 3,000. The postmaster's salary is about $1,300 and he is allowed a rental of $120 a year for the use of his store where the space for the accommodation of the public is about four feet by perhaps eighteen or twenty-five feet, so that in inclement weather hundreds of people have to wait on the sidewalk for their mails as not more than two or three dozen people can enter the post office at once. Sir William promised that he would have this remedied within a year but nothing has been done yet.


William Pugsley: Is this a county town?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: No.


William Pugsley: Are there any public buildings in the county?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: There are in the county, certainly. Grimsby is half way between the two county towns, Hamilton and St. Catharines. It is a very prosperous and up to date place. The people of Grimsby and the district being engaged largely in the fruit business, have a great deal of correspondence in connection with the disposal of their fruit and the postal revenue would justify much better accommodation than they now receive. I am not finding fault with the government for not having erected a public building in that particular place, but I do say that when money is being expended for the erection of post offices the fact that a town is not a county town is not important. The government are not using a good system to ascertain whether the needs of the public require increased postal accommodation. There is no need to have better accommodation than the business warrants, but there is a class of places like Grimsby that I think should have some attention from the Public Works Department. The customs business at Grimsby is large but the citizens have to go to Hamilton or St. Catharines to make payments. A build-

ing costing $4,000 or $5,000 could be built there with the customs office up stairs and the post office down stairs. It would be a mighty good investment for the country. I hope that next year the minister will do something to bring about a more equitable and fair arrangement, generally speaking, throughout the country to serve the people in regard to these public buildings.


William Pugsley: I would judge from what my hon. friend says that speaking in a general way the town of Grimsby is about of equal importance, from the standpoint of post office receipts and business, with the town of Roberval, in regard to which we are now asking a vote for a public building. But, if I know anything about the people of Grimsby, I am satisfied that they would not be content to have a public building erected there for post office and customs purposes not to cost more than $4,000. If my hon. friend, speaking on behalf of the people of Grimsby, is prepared to say that they would desire a public building and would be thoroughly satisfies with a building costing $4,000, I would take the matter into my favourable consideration with a view to complying with their request.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I shall take the minister up right now on that, he can take it right into his serious consideration forthwith, because many prominent people in Grimsby have told me that $4,000 would build a building that would give five times as much accommodation as we are now getting, for which the country is paying $120 a year. They said that the interest on a building of $4,000, at the rate at which the government can borrow money, would involve little more expense than the $120 rent which is now paid annually, and for which ipracticajlly no acteommodation !is obtained. The people of Grimsby would be very glad indeed, rather than have the present state of affairs continue, to see a little, narrow $4,000 building built there that would accommodate them. The people of Grimsby know that they cannot expect such a building as a city or large town would have but they do think that the revenue they pay entitles them to a better service and more accommodation than they now enjoy. The people of Grimsby would thank the minister if he would erect a $4,000 building as soon as possible.


Haughton Lennox: The minister has spoken several times of county towns, justifying his expenditure where it was not otherwise justifiable largely upon the fact that although the population was very sparse, still it was a county town. I submit to the hon. minister that that is no justification for expenditure, if the expenditure be not otherwise justifiable, and he ought to revise his opinion. In any case there can be no additional claim by reason of the fact alone 30
that the place is a county town. I do not understand that this government erects the public buildings required for the administration of the law or municipal government. What reason therefore is there why a small place of two or three thousand inhabitants should be supplied with a public building while places with a population of from five to ten thousand are denied the same accommodation, and denied it simply because they do not happen to be county towns? We are continually getting these lame excuses, these palpably unfair excuses, for the expenditure of public money, and I hope, therefore, the hon. minister will change his policy and not select county towns, no matter how small and insignificant, in preference to larger and more important towns.


Mr. ARTHURS.: I would like to call the attention of the hon. minister again to the claims of Parry Sound. That town fulfils all the requirements stated by the minister as essential. It is a county town with a population of four or five thousand. It has a postal revenue of over $9,000 per year, and during the last fiscal year the Postmaster General's report shows that the post office money orders issued there exceeded $200,000. It is also a customs port with a revenue of over $50,000 per year and is quite a large and progressive town, and so far it has not any public building. Last session I drew the matter to the attention of the minister and he said he would consider it and I again call his attention to it.


William Pugsley: I have had the claims of Parry Sound under (Consideration. When my hon. friend brought the matter up last session, I said that I was considering the possibility of erecting a public building there; but as my hon. friend knows, there were, very few votes for public buildings in the estimates of last session, and in the estimates now' under consideration there are few new items. They are nearly all for public works provided for two years ago, but which were allowed to stand over. I fully realize the fact that Parry Sound is a growing town, and that it has claims for a public building, and I do not think it will be long before I shall ask parliament to recognize its legitimate claim.


Mr. OWEN.: Might I bring to the notice of the minister the claims of the town of Campbellford? It is a flourishing town with a population of probably 3,000 and a postal revenue of between $5,000 and $6,000 and a customs revenue of about $15,000. Our assessed valuation is slightly over a million dollars. There is not a government building in the riding I have the honour to represent, and I think we are entitled to a customs house and post office combined. I know that all



I have to do is to bring, this matter to the notice of the minister and he will grant my request.


Mr. WRIGHT.: I should like to know by what process the minister arrives at his estimates of the population of the different towns he is favouring with public buildings. Roberval. he said, was a place with a population of 3,000 and so on. Well, the official figures show that the population is but 1,248.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend is taking the village of Roberval as it was in 1901.


William Wright: I am taking the last official figures, and these are the figures which are given us in the case of other places in Ontario or Quebec. If we take the estimates given by other parties, we know how utterly unreliable they are, so that we have to fall back on the official figures, except in the case of some town which is growing very fast. I have frequently drawn attention to the fact that the riding I represent has not a single public building. We have not any place in which we can do our customs work, and have to go to Toronto to get anything through the customs in the district where I live. I have been informed by the manager of one of the leading concerns in the town which I represent that they have to put goods through the customs house amounting to a million of dollars annually, and one can easily imagine what trouble ai d difficulty that entails on that firm. Perhaps the postal business is not suffering to the same extent, but it is utterly unfair that the minister should leave these places out and give his preference to places with a revenue of a thousand dollars and sometimes less, simply because larger places do not happen to elect government supporters. After all it is the public money which is spent on these buildings, and when a constituency sends a representative to parliament it does so on other grounds than simply the amount of public money spent there. It is not right that the minister should single out those smaller places for the erection of public works and discriminate against more important places simply because the latter do not favour the government. I hope he will revise his method of determining in what places he will put up public buildings and select instead places yielding the largest postal revenue and which have no public buildings. He is now putting up public buildings in such places as Roberval and other little villages in Quebec and Ontario and the other provinces, which entail an average annual expenditure of $2,400 each, when an expenditure of $300 or $400 at the outside would be ample. In fact, I have heard of Mr. OWEN.
one place, not in my riding, where the people do not want the government to put up a post office. They said that the government would be called upon to pay an enormous amount to some favourite for a site and that would remove the property from the tax roll.


William Pugsley: Might I ask the name?


William Wright: I will give it when I am ready. I said it was not in my riding. I think it is time to look at this thing seriously. It is a serious matter when we are rolling up a vast debt in this country, going to the old country and borrowing money to put up these buildings in places where the country gets no Teturn for years to come. When we are obliged to borrow enormous sums of money annually to meet this deficiency, it is time that we put' an end to the custom of a minister carrying through the estimates of another department when the minister charged with that department is not here to justify the expenditure. Some of us might wish to inquire as to the necessity of this public building, and there^ is no one here to give us any information about it. That is altogether wrong. There is no one here to tell us whether this post office ought to be built or not. Did the hon. gentleman go to the Postmaster General and get him to say that this place was in sad need of a post office, and that there would be a return from the -office that would justify its erection? Nothing of the kind. But somebody comes down from the riding and says: We want so much money spent in this riding; and the hon. gentleman will tell us that he cannot put up a post office in some place where it is much needed because he is building a wharf ot something else there. What in the world has that got to do with it? If a post office is needed, it ought to be put up; and if it is not needed, it ought not to be put up. It seems to me this whole thing is altogether wrong.


Mr. BLONDIN.: Last year the minister put in the estimates a sum of $5,000, if my memory serves me right, for the erection of a post office in the town of Grand-Mere. I do not see such an amount in the estimates for this year. I would like to know why it is that the minister has failed to put in such an amount this year for a post office in a place of the importance of Grand-Mere? Grand-Mere has a population of considerably over 5,000; I could not say what the revenue is, but I am sure there is sufficient revenue to justify the government in allotting the amount which I mentioned. I would ask the hon. gentleman to tell me whether he will make such a provision during the course of the present session.


William Pugsley: I may say to my hon. friend that it is quite true that two years

ago there was an amount put in the estimates for a public building at Grand-Mere, and I have left it out of the estimates this year. But I may say to him that my attention had not been called to the urgent necessity of that building at Grand-Mere, and as I had not heard from my hon. friend on the subject, I thought perhaps the matter was not extremely urgent, and that possibly there might be sufficient post office accommodation at present, and that the erection of a new building might be postponed, at all events, for a short time. Therefore, there is no item in the estimates for this building, and I am not able to give my hon. friend any assurance as to when a public building will be undertaken there. Now, with regard to Campbellford, which has been so forcibly presented to my attention by my hon. friend from East Northumberland (Mr. Owen), and who also mentioned the necessity for a public building during the last session of parliament. I will say to him now, as I said then, that I am impressed With the arguments he has advanced, and I think the claims of Campbellford are entitled to my careful consideration. A little later I will have the matter more carefully looked into, and I trust it will be possible before long to take the necessary steps towards the erection of a public building at Campbellford.
With regard to the remarks of the hon. member for Muskoka (Mr. Wright), I desire to say that he does me a great injustice when he makes the statement to this committee that we pick out places for the erection of public works simply in view of the support which we have got from the constituencies. If it were necessary, I could appeal to hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House, going over different constituencies all the way from Prince Edward Island to the Pacific ocean, and I am sure that if the hon. members from these constituencies were to rise in their places, they would bear testimony to the fact that I have endeavoured to do complete justice to the various constituencies which they represent, as well as to those which have returned supporters of the government. Let me ask the hon. member who represents the district of Nipissing (Mr. Gordon) whether he thinks the charge of the hon. member for Muskoka is well founded. Let me ask the hon. member who represents the constituency of Digby (Mr. Jameson) if he thinks the charge is well founded. Let me ask my hon. friend who represents the constituency of Cumberland (Mr. Rhodes) if he thinks the charge is well founded. Let me ask my hon. friend who represents the city of St. John (Mr. Daniel) if he thinks the charge is well founded. The people of St. John, by a majority of the votes, supported the hon. gentleman who represents that city, and whom I do not now 30i
see in his place. I might go all over the Dominion of Canada, I might go to the city of Vancouver, to the city of Victoria, to the city of New Westminster and to various other constituencies in the province of British Columbia, and the hon. gentleman will find that I have recognized the legitimate claims of the various sections of th^t province, entirely irrespective of political and party considerations. Go to the city of Toronto, a city which for years has been sending only members in opposition to this government, and where we are spending, not merely $100,000, but in the vicinity of $700,000 in much needed improvements. I say we might go all over the Dominion, and the facts will show that I have endeavoured, and it has been my honest endeavour, so far as I possibly could, to recognize the legitimate claims of the various sections of Canada. I know there are many public buildings and there are many wharfs which ought to be attended to, but we are not able to do all these things at once'. I am doing all I can with the limited amount of money which has been placed at my disposal by the Minister of Finance, and' have endeavoured to meet the most urgent needs, and have done so, as I say, entirely irrespective of political and party considerations. It is a matter of regret to me that I am not able now to meet the demands of all sections of the country, but the best I can do is to attend to those needs as I have the means of doing. So I can assure my hon. friends opposite that any legitimate demands which they present to me for consideration with respect to public buildings, wharfs, dredging, or other improvements, will receive my most careful consideration, Now one word with regard to the erection of public buildings in the smaller towns. Some hon. gentlemen opposite take the view that any kind of a building is good enough for the smaller towns and cities throughout the country, and that we ought not to put up a public building in any city or town where the interest upon the cost and the expense ol caretaking will amount to more than the postal revenue. Now, Sir, I entirely disagree with that proposition. In the larger cities, in the city of Ottawa, in the city of Montreal, in the city of Toronto and other larger cities of Canada, when we are proceeding to erect public buildings, we do not limit the class of building to one which is immediately sufficient _ for the purpose, but we look to the question of beauty, we look to the providing in that city of a public building of which the people will be proud, in which they will take a just pride and which they can point to strangers as being worthy of the Dominion of Canada. Now, if that is the case, why should we not do a little something in the smaller cities and towns towards the erection of suitable public buildings which will be somewhat ornamen-

tal in character and to which the people in those communities can point with pride and say, this is a public building which has been given us by the Dominion of Canada. In the great majority of these towns there is no other public expenditure. They have no harbours to be dredged, they have no navigable channels to be improved, there are no wharfs to be built, and the only public expenditure which they get is the small amount of money which may be expended in the erection of a public building. Therefore, I am prepared to say that so long as I remain Minister of Public Works I shall give reasonable and fair consideration to the' requests which may be made to me for the construction of public buildings in the thriving towns throughout Canada no matter in which counties they may be situate and no matter what may be the political complexion of the representatives whom they send to parliament.


Mr. SCHAFFNER.: I am delighted to hear the remarks made by the Minister of Public Works. I am not inclined to too severely criticise him, but as he has made the statement that his aim as Minister of Public Works is to distribute public money over this country regardless of what maybe the political complexion of any particular constituency, I have a case right in point. He did not ask me, he asked others, but I think I might as well state the situation with reference to my own constituency. There is the constituency of Brandon and there is the constituency of Souris immediately south of Brandon. Brandon has had hundreds of thousands of dollars of expenditure in it because it was the home of the late Minister of the Interior, while the constituency which I have the honour to represent, lying immediately south of Brandon, has never had one dollar of public money expended in it although I have several times, during the last two or three years, tried to bring the claim of my town and my constituency before the Minister of Public Works. I do not ask for a large amount of money. I do not just exactly agree with the Minister of Public Works that it is necessary to expend as large an amount of money in a town of 2,000 or 3,000 inhabitants for a post office as it would be in a larger place. If you could erect a solid brick building, say, 30 x 50 or 60 feet in dimensions for $6,000 or $8,000 I know you would have a very good building, and I believe it would be adequate for post office purposes in any of these towns and that these towns would be very glad to get it; in fact, if a larger amount were expended upon such a building they would consider it a matter of extravagance. The town of Souris is in the constituency of the late Minister of the Interior and the late Minister of the Interior has the town of Souris to thank for his seat at the present time. He formerly had a Mr. PUGSLEY.
majority of some 800 or 900 but he came out of the last election with a majority of 65. I brought up the question of the dismissal of the postmaster at Souris, another which must be added to disgraceful acts of the late Minister of the Interior in connection with that post office. He turned a man out of that office who had held it for years and years and who had gone to considerable expense in preparing the office according to the instructions of the inspector. But, that is not what I am talking about now. The town of Souris and my own town of Boisse-vain are about the same size. I have asked the Minister of Public Works to give me a post office in Boissevain. I think that for $12,000 you can buy a corner site _ in the centre of the town and erect the building. I believe a site can be secured for between $3,500 and $4,000 and the remainder will erect a building with which we will be well satisfied. I find that the little town of Souris is down in the estimates this year for $15,000 for a public building. I have been unable to get anything. Will any hon. member of this House say that the political complexion of the constituency of Brandon had nothing to do with putting $15,000 into Souris and nothing to do with absolutely refusing to give me anything for my constituency. I think the minister will have to take back some of the arguments he used in that respect. I could not present to this House a better argument to show that the political complexion of the constituencies is very largely taken into _ account in giving necessary public buildings to this country. However, he has got so near to my constituency now that _ I want to put in a plea for the town of Boissevain to be considered and I want to express the hope that in the supplementarv estimates provision will be made for a $12,000 building in that town.


William Pugsley: What is the population of Boissevain?


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: About 1,300.


William Pugsley: Will my hon. friend guarantee me against the most-I shall not say violent-but against attack from the other side?


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: Yes, sir, I will defend you against all comers.


Oswald Smith Crocket: I would like to know if the minister justifies this Roberval vote on the ground that it is the county town aside from the question of whether the business requirements of the place warrant the expenditure?


William Pugsley: No, I did not mention that Roberval was the county town, but I understand that Roberval has a population of some 3,000 and that it is a rapidly growing town. Its population has increased

from 1,248 in 1901 to something over 3,000 at the present time.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Where does the minister get his figures as to population?


William Pugsley: I am told that it is a county town as well.


Oswald Smith Crocket: The hon. member for Muskoka (Mr. Wright) referred to the census figures as, I think, 1,200. Where would the minister get any figures showing the population since that time?


William Pugsley: We had a petition from the municipal council of the town, but I do not know whether that states the population or not. Then, we have an assurance from the member for the county that the population is over 3,000. I made inquiry from other sources and that is verified.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Certainly the minister made some reference to the rule upon which the department has been acting as to the propriety of public buildings being erected in county towns, but I think he laid it down that there must also exist the condition that there is no other public building in the riding.


William Pugsley: I did not lay down any hard and fast rule. What I said was that it had been laid down as a rule that each county in the Dominion might fairly claim a public building and that, as a rule, that could be placed in the county town, but I did not say that there should never be more than one building in a county. There might be a county town, a thriving town, and there might be another town somewhat larger and at a considerable distance away from the county town. One cannot lay down a hard and fast rule.


Oswald Smith Crocket: I understood the minister to lay down the rule that the Minister of Finance laid down two or three years ago and that was that claims would be recognized for public buildings in county towns and in constituencies in which there was no other public building. That is the rule, as I understood the Minister of Finance to lay it down a few years ago, and the one which I understand the Minister of Public Works to rely upon this afternoon.


Oswald Smith Crocket: In what constituency is Roberval?


William Pugsley: Chicoutimi and Saguenay.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Are there no other public buildings in that county?


William Pugsley: There is one at Chicoutimi.


Mr. TALBOT.: Roberval is the chief town of the county of Lake St. John. Lake St. John and Saguenay, for local purposes,
are two distinct counties, and they are of immense territory, occupying the northern part of the province of Quebec and extending as far as Labrador. In that federal district there are two chief towns for judicial purposes, and Roberval has a population of at least 3,000.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Was there any request from the Post Office Department for this building?


William Pugsley: I assume there was not or otherwise I would have a record of it here.


Oswald Smith Crocket: On whose request was the building erected?


William Pugsley: There was a petition presented from the municipal council of the town of Roberval, and also a strong recommendation from Mr. Girard, the member for the constituency.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Is it not a rule that the Post Office Department should send a requisition to the Public Works Department for a building which it considers necessary?


William Pugsley: It is not the rule.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Is it not customary?


William Pugsley: It is not.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Was there an arbitration on the value of this site which cost $4,000?


William Pugsley: No. We sent Mr. Gin-gras, clerk of works at Montreal, who reported this was a fair and reasonable price.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Did the owner offer it for $4,000 in the first instance?


William Pugsley: He wanted more, and Mr. Gingras recommended $4,000 as a fair price. The lot is a large one having a frontage of 70 feet and a depth of 170.


Oswald Smith Crocket: I understood the minister to tell us the other night that it was the practice of the department to have the [DOT] value of these sites determined by arbitration.


William Pugsley: I did not intend to convey that it was a general practice. We did it in the case of the St. Roch property, and the arbitrators in that case were: Thomas M. McCarthy, O.E., acting for the government, J. A. Gignac for the property owners and Joseph Gauthier was the third arbitrator. We have in the department some officers who are accustomed to value property and upon whose judgment we rely when we do not have arbitration.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Upon whose recommendation -was the government arbitrator in the St. Roch case appointed?


William Pugsley: My recollection is that in that -case I consulted with the Prime Minister. We satisfied ourselves that he was a reliable man and acquainted with the value of property.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The minister spoke about buildings that the people could point to with pride as beautiful in architecture and meritorious from the aesthetic point of view, and that is all very well if we had money to burn. But the minister is limited in his expenditure on these buildings, and the business people of the country would prefer to have ten $10,000 buildings suitable to accommodate the business offering rather than five $20,000 buildings which wrere not necessary except as beautiful pictures.


William Pugsley: Would the hon. gentleman say that, in reference to these build, ings in Ottawa which could be erected for half the money if they were plain buildings?	[DOT]


Edward Arthur Lancaster: This is the capital of the Dominion and the buildings here are a concern of national pride, and you cannot compare them with a post office building in a small town of 3,000 inhabitants.


William Pugsley: But why waste money on ornamentation?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The buildings in the capital city of this Dominion are in a different position altogether from the small buildings in country towns, and even in the capital it is just a question whether you should not erect buildings free from expensive ornamentation but which would supply twice as much space and light in which to transact the business of the country.


William Pugsley: Does the hon. gentleman think that in a town where the people take a pride in their private buildings, we should put up a plain building -which the citizens would be ashamed of?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: That is the other extreme, and I do not go that far.


William Pugsley: What we should aim at is to be moderate in our expenditure.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Yes.


William Pugsley: And at the same time recognize that these people in the smaller towns are just as much a part of the Dominion as are the people in the larger cities. My hon. friend from the constituency in which the town of Boissevain is situated stated that the town of Souris gave to the Hon. Mr. Sifton a majority, and so saved his election in that constituency, and that is the reason why we are giving it a public building. My information is that the town of Souris went strongly Conservative in the Mr. CROCKET.
last election, giving a majority against Mr. Sifton. So that the reason assigned by my hon. friend falls to the ground.


Mr. ROCHE.: If the minister looks up the figures, he will find that although Souris is strongly Conservative, the majority was very small.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: It seems to me that the item for that building first appeared in the estimates before the general election, when it gave a different majority.


William Pugsley: Yes, it appeared before the general election.


George Gordon: The hon. gentleman referred to Nipissing as one of the constituencies which has been fairly treated in the matter of public buildings. I am pleased to be able to say that that is tthe case. In fact, the minister has done more than I expected. I want to speak fairly and frankly. In North Bay, which is a county town, and which yields a postal revenue of $12,000 or $14,000, a good building has been erected. For Sudbury I notice an appropriation of $20,000 in the estimates this year. That town produces a postal revenue of $8,000 or $10,000, and is larger than any of the towns mentioned here to-day. The town of Cobalt, which has a population of over 6,000, while there are over 12,000 people in the immediate vicinity, has at present very poor postal accommodation. I called the minister's attention to -this last session, and he told me that owing to the falling revenues of the country he could no-t do anything then; but I hope that this year he can see his way clear to do something. The fact of the minister being pretty fair to Nipissing I attribute to our asking for public buildings only in places which absolutely require them. I thank the minister very much for what he has done for us, and I hope he will keep on in the good work.


Mr. SMYTH.: I am delighted to hear that my hon. friend from Nipissing is so well satisfied with what the Minister of Public .Works has done for his riding. I would be delighted if I could say the same thing about my riding, but things are entirely different there. In almost every part of the riding where I went las-t fall, I found that public works of various kinds had been promised from the platform; but in looking over the estimates I find that only two points in my riding have been taken notice of at all-Providence Bay and Little Current. The town of Sudbury, which my hon. friend from Nipissing has mentioned, is a growing town which, in the near future, will be a city. The Ontario government has spent a great deal of money in erecting public buildings there. My hon. friend is satisfied with an appropriation of $20,000 for

a public building in Sudbury, whereas a little town of 1,500 inhabitants is getting a $25,000 post office.


William Pugsley: $20,000 is only the start.


William Ross Smyth: Perhaps the minister will give us the estimated cost of the post office at Sudbury?


William Pugsley: I will get the information when we come .to that item; but the amount of $20,000 is only for the work to be done during the coming , year.


William Ross Smyth: I will be delighted if the the minister will take notice that there are some very large towns giving large revenues to the Post Office Department in my constituency which have great need of good buildings; for instance, the town of Thessa-lon with a population of 2,000, Blind River with a population of over 3,000, Massey, Webbwood, Gore Bay, Little Current and Manitowaning; and they would be entirely satisfied with buildings costing $4,000 or $5,000. So, while everybody is asking the minister to think of their Tidings, I hope, out of the goodness of his heart, he will not forget the most important Tiding in the province of Ontario.


William Pugsley: Are Sault Ste. MaTie and Michipicoten in the hon. gentleman's riding?


William Ross Smyth: No.


Mr. MAGRATH.: I am not going to ask the minister out of the goodness of his heart to do anything for me. I take for granted that this country can afford to pay officials to attend to the public business. I take for granted that there is a Post Office Department that knows its needs and is able to communicate them to another department. If that were done in a businesslike way, I would not be placed in the humiliating position of having from time to time to come here and urge the necessity of a post office at Lethbridge. The difficulty is that the minister seems to think that his function is to please certain people, whereas it seems to me that the function of parliament is to spend the public money where the requirements of the people demand it. I put a question to the hon. member a few days ago. I asked him in simple English :
Has the Post Office Department made any demand or representation to the Public Works Department for better post office accommodation in the city of Lethbridge?
Evidently the hon. gentleman thought himself exceedingly clever in the way he answered the question. He did not give me the information I asked, if he had I would have been satisfied. He told me a story about the building that was erected in
Lethbridge in 1892 or 1893, which he said was used for customs and inland revenue purposes.


William Pugsley: May I say to my hon. friend that when I received the answer from my department I (thought myself there possibly might have been some later request to which my hon. friend was referring, but I am informed by my deputy and was then informed that there had been no late request from the Postmaster General and therefore the answer was correct.


Charles Alexander Magrath: I should be very sorry to misrepresent the hon. gentleman or any one else. I do not want to waste the time of the House in matters of this kind but I wish to place before the House the exact situation that exists. The hon. minister does not seem to know it. If he will come to the House when asking for a post office and say that the application is endorsed by the Post Office Department, well and good, but when he says these applications were endorsed by boards of trade and by town councils, it is time for us to have something to say in this matter. I picked up a copy of the Montreal ' Star ' only on Saturday last in which reference was made to the business activities in various cities in this country. It gives a list of 21 cities and refers to the value of the building permits for the month of October. Here is the order in which they stand: Toronto 1; Montreal 2; Winnipeg 3; Vancouver 4; Calgary 5; Hamilton 6, Lethbridge 7; Victoria 8; Fort William 9; Edmonton 10. Thus Lethbridge stands next to Hamilton.


William Pugsley: Is that not simply the percentage of increase?


Charles Alexander Magrath: It is the actual building permits for October, 1909. The city of Lethbridge last year had a postal revenue of $19,000 and I venture to say that by now it has reached $25,000 a year, and they are suffering from the lack of postal facilities. I do not want the money of this country shoved into Lethbridge to put up buildings, the people going in there can put up the buildings, but I want to see the people there put in a position to attend to their business in a proper way and if it is a question of getting petitions. from boards of trade or city councils, the hon. gentleman can get all he wants. Political snipes went through that constituency at the time I was running that election, saying: It is no use electing this man; you want a post office and if you elect him you will not get it. Yet, in the face of that, the hon. gentleman gets up here and says there is no politics in this matter. Is the hon. gentleman satisfied from the clipping I have sent him that the reference was to building permits?


William Pugsley: Yes, the hon. gentleman seems to be correct.


Charles Alexander Magrath: Lethbridge stands next to Hamilton and Edmonton, which stands 10th on the list, has a $200,000 building while Lethbridge has nothing. The hon. gentleman knows nothing about the situation there or he would have brought down some appropriation for Lethbridge. This appears to me to be the only opportunity of bringing this matter forward. It is humiliating to have to do this; I do not conceive that the people of Canada sent me here to do this work, I think there is something else to attend to, and if the hon. gentleman had a force of competent men going through the country to pass on these things there would be less said about them in the House. I hope I shall not have to discuss this again and that I have said enough to convince the hon. gentleman of the necessity of granting this building. Every one is crying out for it, and why the minister is giving a small place with a population of 1,300 and a postal revenue of $1,500, a public building costing $25,000, without a request as the hon. gentleman himself admitted, from the Post Office Department or from the Customs Department, is something that I cannot understand in any country where they are attempting to have their affairs administered with some system of business.


George Eulas Foster: What are the rental and salary at present?
_ Mr. PUGSLEY. The postmaster's salary is $1,192 besides $75 for commissions on money orders and $7.65 on postal notes. The rental paid is $175, a total of $1,308.97.


Charles Alexander Magrath: I want to hear from the hon. gentleman about this matter. Has he got this thing thoroughly in the back of his head?


William Pugsley: My hon. friend is so genial and he has such a good cause to plead, that I cannot refrain from saying a word in reply. The hon. gentleman sent me a statement of figures showing the number of building permits in Lethbridge, and they show, what I was told when I "was in the west, that Lethbridge has recently taken on a very rapid growth. If my hon. friend will look at these figures which he has sent me he will see that in October, 1908, there was not a single building permit in Lethbridge.


Charles Alexander Magrath: There were building permits but this paper did not get them, that is all.


William Pugsley: That may be. At all events, by the statement the hon. gentleman sent me, there does not seem to have been a building permit in Lethbridge in October, 1908. That, of course, would show that there has been a very sudden increase in growth. But I know and my


William Pugsley: hon. friend knows that it is within the last year or so that Lethbridge has suddenly begun to forge ahead, and it is forging ahead with great rapidity. I told my hon. friend the other day and I tell him now that I recognize the strong claims of Lethbridge for better postal accommodation. I have unfortunately no amount in these estimates for the purpose, but, as I explained to the committee before, there are very few new items in these estimates, they are mostly for public works provided for two years ago. But I would say to my hon. friend that I will consider carefully the claims of Lethbridge, and if there should be supplementary estimates-I do not know whether there will be-these claims will be noted for consideration in connection with these estimates. I' can make no promise further than may be implied in this statement at the present time, but I beg to assure my hon. friend that no one can recognize more strongly than I do the necessity for giving better postal accommodation in Lethbridge than they have there now.


Charles Alexander Magrath: Will the hon. gentleman take this up with the Post Office Department? He said that there is nothing from the Post Office Department in connection with this matter.


William Pugsley: Nothing beyond what was returned to the House.


Charles Alexander Magrath: My information is different, I am sorry to say. I would like to get the minister in touch with the Post Office Department. I am sorry to have to say that if the Post Office Department does not know its business better than that there is something wrong there. I was given to understand the hon. gentleman had been written to about this matter in April last by the Post Office Department.


Mr. BLAIN.: I understood the minister to say that there was some requisition from the sitting member for the county. Will he read that communication?


William Pugsley: I have not the communication here but can give the gist of it.


Richard Blain: We ought to have the document itself.


William Pugsley: I cannot give it now. The effect of the communication was that the town was increasing rapidly, that it has a population of over 3,000, that numerous tourists frequent it in the summer months, that the post office is in the postmaster's house and not at all suited to the public convenience, and that, in the interest of the good reputation of the Dominion, a public building should be provided adequate to the wants of this growing town.


Richard Blain: That is a very nice statement, but it would be only fair to the committee that the minister should bring' down the letter itself. It would be interesting to have that part of the communication which he has not quoted, and I suppose he has no objection to bringing down the letter.


William Pugsley: None whatever, but I have really stated all it contains.


Richard Blain: What we are trying to find out is, if possible, the policy of the department in the construction of public buildings.


William Pugsley: That policy is to construct, to as reasonable an extent as possible, public buildings where they are required in the public interests.


Richard Blain: Of course we could not expect the hon. minister to say anything else, but I think he was rather severe in his criticism of my hon. friend from Muskoka. My hon. friend suggested that possibly somewhere in the department there was political partisanship, and if that suspicion be aroused, the government is responsible for it. Before the hon. gentleman was Minister of Public Works the department had a clear cut policy, well understood in the country. Prior to the general election of 1900, the Department of Public Works sent out a letter, a copy of which I have under my hand. The late Mr. Tarte, who was then Minister of Public Works, had absented himself a little while from the department, and Sir William Mullock, who was then Postmaster General, was acting in his stead, and Sir William Mullock sent out a circular to Reform members of parliament and defeated government candidates, but was careful to leave out altogether Conservative members and the defeated Conservative candidates. In that circular he called upon those to whom it was sent to state what public buildings they wanted in their counties, whether they would recommend that the contracts be given after public competition, and also a number of other inquiries along that line.


William Pugsley: Perhaps he was merely seeking information.


Richard Blain: But it was rather peculiar that he only sought it from government supporters. My hon. friend says there is no partisanship in his department. Would he then explain how this circular came to be sent to government members and government defeated candidates and not to any others?


William Pugsley: Sir William Mulock may not have thought that hon. gentleman opposite would give him the information he required.


Richard Blain: There is another reason far more likely. My hon. friend ought certainly to be sparing in his criticisms on my hon. friend from Muskoka, who suggested that somewhere in the department there was a taint of political partisanship. Who can be responsible for that suspicion, if not the government that sent out a circular of that kind, more especially as the circular was issued shortly before the general election of 1900 and read on the public platform in every province. The hon. minister cannot therefore complain if the public suspect that instead of spending public money where the public interests may best be served, he selects here and there a county, where the issue is uncertain, and where it would be likely such expenditure would have the greatest effect, and where the proposed expenditure for the purposes of erecting a public building or a wharf or _ doing some dredging in that locality might influence the public vote in the government's behalf. Since the hon. gentleman will not explain what the policy of his department is now, we are perfectly justified in assuming that this policv, which was inaugurated in 1900, is still in force. I understand my hon. friend to say he will bring down the letter.


William Pugsley: I will.


Richard Blain: Perhaps in the future it will be better for the hon. gentleman to produce the original documents than give synopses of them.


William Pugsley: Not unless specially desired.


Richard Blain: It would be less troublesome for the department to give him the letter itself, than to copy passages out of it which might suit his purpose.


William Pugsley: These selections which I have quoted never came to my knowledge, but were simply made by the officials of the department with the view of giving the requisite information as to who had applied for public works. I had no more to do with the selections than my hon. friend.
Rock Island public building, $5,000.


William Pugsley: This is to provide for the purchase of a site and the erection of a public building in the village of Rock Island, Stanstead county. The proposed building is required for post office and customs purposes. I may say that this matter had been under consideration some little time, and when first pressed upon my attention by the member for that constituency, I made particular inquiries of the Minister of Customs. He in turn inquired of the officials of his department and I am in a position to say that this building is urgently required there for customs purposes, and I can say the same with regard to its necessity for post office purposes.

Rock Island is close to the boundary between Canada and the United States, and it is necessary to give accommodation there for the customs officials. A good deal of postal business also is done there.


George Eulas Foster: What is the population?


William Pugsley: It was only 615 in 1901, but has grown considerable since.


George Eulas Foster: What is the revenue?


William Pugsley: $3,013-very much larger than one would expect from its comparatively small population.


George Eulas Foster: What is to be the cost of the building?


William Pugsley: From $15,000 to $20,000 including the site.


George Eulas Foster: What is the cost of the service?


William Pugsley: Salary $1,252, besides commissions on money orders. The rent is $175 per annum.


William Wright: Will the hon. minister read the requisition from the Customs Department?


William Pugsley: The commissioner came to the department and gave verbal assurance that this building was urgently needed. This item was agreed to after consideration extending over several weeks.


George Eulas Foster: How many customs officers are there permanently?


William Pugsley: I cannot say, but quite a number. Then some three miles away from Rock Island there is another place where a good deal of customs business is transacted. But Rock Island is the principal place.


Charles Alexander Magrath: Has there been any d.emand for this particular service from the Post Office Department?


William Pugsley: No demand from the Post Office Department.


Charles Alexander Magrath: I think the time has arrived in this country when these departments that are being served should be hel l responsible. I realize that the hon. gentleman is in a very disagreeable position, he has to put these matters through. I say that these departments which are being served should be held responsible, and the hon. gentleman should not be allowed to pass an item until he produces evidence from the department that they need the service.


George Eulas Foster: I would like to know whether Rock Island is a customs port.


William Pugsley: 


William Pugsley: I think the actual customs port is about three miles away, at Beebe Plain, but Rock Island is an important place.


George Eulas Foster: How far is Rock Island from Stanstead Plain?


Mr. FISHER.: Rock Island itself is not the customs port, but it is the place at which the customs work of the port of Stanstead is done. Stanstead village which, in years gone by, used to be an important village, has not grown, while Rock Island is a manufacturing and industrial place on the border line, and has been growing rapidly. I think it has a population of about 3,000.


George Eulas Foster: The Minister of Public Works told us it was 615.


William Pugsley: I gave that population as of nine years ago.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I have been there several times, and I was told the population was about 3,000.


William Pugsley: My information is that there are twelve stores, two hotels, a grist mill and ten factories at Rock Island; also a bank, and the ordinary express and telegraph offices.


William Wright: Is it intended to close down the customs office at the other town?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: The real business of the Customs Department is now being done at a place called Stanstead Junction, which is, I think, a little over two miles to the west of Rock Island. The reason the business is done there is that it is a junction of the railway. But Rock Island itself is the place where nearly all the duties are paid, being an industrial centre. Beebe Plain, where the railway junction is, and where the manifesting is done, is a hamlet of only three or four houses and a railroad station. Rock Island is an important industrial village on the border line; there is a little spur from the railroad which runs up to Rock Island, and which serves the Canadian village as well as the American village. The station is almost on the boundary line. The real business of the port is largely done at Rock Island, and it is at Rock Island that the customs officers want their accommodation.


George Eulas Foster: How many customs officers?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: At the whole port, I think five. A part of the work is done at Beebe Plain where the station is.
Shawenegan Falls, revote, $8,000.


William Pugsley: This is to make provision for the construction of a public building at Shawenegan Falls. The commit-

tee are aware that Shawenegan Palls is an important manufacturing centre. It has a superior water-power, a large number of factories, and the population is growing rapidly. The population is estimated at 2,300. The postal revenue last year was $2,586, and from the Customs Department, $42,000. The cost of the building will run from $30,000 to $35,000, and is intended to give accommodation, not only to the Post Office Department, but to the Customs and Inland Revenue also. That price does not include the site, which has been given free by the municipality. At present we pay a rental of $175 per annum for the post office, and $143 for customs. The salary of the postmaster, including commissions, is $1,300. That is outside of customs.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Does the hon. gentleman really think a building of that price is required under those circumstances?


Mr. PUGS LEY.: I think so. My hon. friend will observe that it is to accommodate three departments, post office, customs and inland revenue. Last year, as I say, the customs revenue amounted to $42,521.53; the year before it was over $80,000, when, I suppose, a considerable quantity of machinery was imported.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: There are a great many, places where comparatively small buildings would answer the purpose, costing $10,000 to $12,000, and I would suggest to the hon. gentleman that instead of spending so large a sum of money at a place like Shawenegan Falls, he should spread it over a larger number of places, putting up less expensive buildings. At present he is erecting expensive buildings at some places, and leaving other places, perhaps with a larger population and more business, entirely unserved, or served inadequately.


Mr. BUREAU.: I think the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lancaster) has not chosen a good instance to illustrate his theory in the case of Shawenegan Falls. If he does not know, let me tell him that Shawenegan Falls was practically a desert ten years a^o, whereas during the last two years alone between $10,000,000 and $12,000,000 have been invested to develop the water-power. There has been invested by the Northern Aluminum Company, which is a branch of the Pittsburgh Reduction Works, over $2,000,000 in establishing and enlarging their works. Besides, there is a vast amount of capital invested by foreigners, for instance by the Belgo-Canadian Pulp and Paper Company, who are supposed to have the most modern and best equipped pulp and paper mill in Canada. It is true that last year the revenue fell off from the preceding year. In 1907-8 the customs revenue at Shawenegan Falls was $83,539.41, Whilst in 1908-9 it was
$42,521.53. I see that the customs entries have decreased all over the county in the last fiscal year. The population decreased at Shawenegan Falls because of the fact that the Northern Aluminum Company had to close down their works for a while for want of orders. When the aluminum business was started at Shawenegan Falls there was a great demand for the products of this industry and prices were very high. The large prices that they were getting for that commodity caused new mills to spring up and induced those that were already in existence to enlarge their plants. Therefore, there was an over production which caused a falling off in the orders of the Northern Aluminum Company. They had to close down their works for a while which caused a considerable emigration from Shawenegan Falls because a number of men were left without employment. I may say that they have entered into a number of contracts lately and that the shops have been re-opened. They have had a contract from the government of Ontario for a transmission wire for the Hydro-Electric Power Commission. For the last seven months the customs revenue collected at Shawenegan Falls, including the entries for Grand Mere, amounted to $27,367.36.


George Eulas Foster: Would the hon. gentleman tell us the nature of the imports there?


Jacques Bureau: New machinery was imported from the United States to be installed in the Northern Aluminum plant. Machinery is now being imported for a large cotton mill which is being constructed on the same improved principle as the mill of the Wabasso Cotton Company at Three Rivers. They propose to manufacture a finer kind of cotton than is now manufactured by the other mills in Canada. They will manufacture the kind used in underclothing and shirts-what we commonly call linen.


George Eulas Foster: Linen faced?


Jacques Bureau: I do not know what they call it, but it is the linen used in shirts, collars, cuffs, &c. When the Shawenegan Falls was divided into town lots the Shawenegan Water and Power Company, who owned most of the land, would not sell a lot unless the buyer agreed to put un a house of certain dimensions, a certain height and plan and costing so much money. They wanted to have a fine .town.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Does the hon. gentleman remember the minimum amount that they had to spend on each building?


Jacques Bureau: It depended on the street where the building was located. They had to spend more on business streets than on residential streets. I do not know but that certain streets were exempt from that. Shawenegan Falls is a growing town, and

it will grow more in the future because they are putting up new plants every day.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The hon. gentleman has not disposed of the suggestion that I was making to the minister. I am not objecting to Shawenegan Falls or any other part of the country being properly served with a public building, but I do not think that the hon. gentleman has proved that a $10,000 or $12,000 building would not serve that town. You can put up quite a chunk of a building if you are not going in for a lot of style and waste space for $10,000 or $12,000.


William Pugsley: Surely my hon. friend does not pretend seriously to assert that you can erect a suitable building for the post office officials, for the accommodation of the public, for the customs officials and for the accommodation of the public doing business with that department, for the inland revenue officials and for the accommodation of the public doing business with that department, provide accommodation for the caretaker, as there must be a caretaker for these public buildings, all that for $10,000-a good substantial building of stone and brick with proper sanitary arrangements, heat and light.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I do.


William Pugsley: I have nad a great deal of experience in building and I am unable to agree with my hon. friend. I do not think that a suitable building for the accommodation bf these three departments, such a building as one ought to put up in an important town like Shawenegan, which is destined to be a very important place in the near future, could be erected for less than $30,000.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: All you would need in that place is practically three good large rooms. You could erect a building of three, or perhaps two stories, and have three good large rooms in it, one for the post office, another for the customs and another for the Inland Revenue Department, and you could do it for $10,000 or $12,000 if you did not want to waste the money.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I agree with what the hon. Solicitor General (Mr. Bureau) has said. I think that if there are any young towns which justify the government in spending money certainly Shawenegan is one of them. I must say that Shawenegan and Grand-Mere have grown and are growing very quickly. I think that before long these towns will have a population of at least 20,000 and it may go beyond tnat mark in the near future. But I must remark that what the hon. gentleman said with reference to Shawenegan Falls applies with doubled force to the town of Grand-Mere. While Mr. BUREAU.
Shawenegan Falls has a population of 2,000 and a few hundred, and while I agree that it has a right to have this public building, we have in Grand-Mere a population of 5,300. While they have a gross total revenue of $2,500 from the post office we have a total revenue of $4,221. I see that the government are spending large sums of money in towns which give little or no promise of future development. For instance, there is the town of Nicolet, which has a gross total revenue of $3,800, and I think I am safe in saying that the post office which the government are building there will not cost less than $20,000 or $30,000. The same applies to Roberval, where the revenue is only $3,300. I would say to the minister that petition after petition has been sent to the government asking for the erection of a public building in Grand-Mere. I remember coming as a delegate to ask the government to erect a post office in that growing town. We were promised that something would be done, but while $5,000 was granted for the erection of a building the government made it a condition that the corporation should supply the land. We did not accept this offer, because we maintained that $5,000 would not erect the building which we would like to see in our town.


William Pugsley: That was only to make a start.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I think I have a right to ask the minister to grant us at least $5,000 for a building in Grand-Mere.
St. Henri Post Office-improvements-revote of $270 lapsed, $7,000.


William Pugsley: This is to be applied to the erection of a one-story addition to the post office at St. Henri, as requested by the Post Office Department as long ago as 1908. The acting Deputy Postmaster General asked for this extension, and as one argument in favour of it he said that the letter-carriers for St. Cunegonde, Cote St. Paul and St. Henri are massed at the St. Henri depot and that an enlargement of the building is absolutely necessary. The appropriation for 1908-9 was $1,200, of which we expended $930 upon inside improvements and $270 lapsed. The chief architect estimates it would take $7,000 to make the addition required. St. Henri is an important suburb of Montreal.


William Wright: Will that complete the work?


William Pugsley: Yes.
St. Jacques de FAchigan public building, $15,000.


William Pugsley: This is to make provision towards the erection of a building for post office purposes. There is a largely

signed petition of the people and also of the' municipal council. The site was purchased in October, 1909, for $3,000; it is 53 feet on the main street by 123. The population at the last census was 2,580.


George Eulas Foster: What is the revenue?


William Pugsley: 


George Eulas Foster: What is to he the cost of the building?


William Pugsley: It will not exceed $20,-
000.


George Eulas Foster: Including the site?


William Pugsley: Including the site.
Mr. FOSTER, What is the present cost of that post office, salary and rental?


William Pugsley: $340, and commissions $42.


Mr. NANTEL.: Is it in the county of Montcalm?


William Pugsley: Yes.


George Eulas Foster: What is the present rental for the building?


William Pugsley: Very small, only $38.


George Eulas Foster: Has the minister received any request from the Post Office Department for this building?


William Pugsley: No.


George Eulas Foster: The whole revenue here is $779, and with a population of 2,500 in the town, that is not much of an argument for the expenditure of $20,000 on a post office building. We must protest most strongly against this. I agree with the hon. member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Magrath) that in these cases there should be a request from the responsible minister of the department whose business is to be conducted in these buildings. I had always supposed that to be done and that there was consultation between the minister for *whose department the building was to be erected and the Minister of Public Works as to what kind of accommodation would be necessary. The moment this building is erected it will mean an annual charge of $2,000 which will swallow up more than three times the entire revenue. I do not know whether this is a growing town or not.


William Pugsley: It has a tobacco factory, a branch bank, three saw-mills, and it is on the line of the new Canadian Northern.


George Eulas Foster: Well, it is a large recommendation that it is on a railway line. Is it the policy of the government now to build $25,000 buildings in each county town and $20,000 buildings in each town that is on the line of a railway? This is one of
the worst cases yet, and as a protest against that kind of thing, I move that the vote be reduced by $10,000.
Amendment (Mr. Foster) negatived.
Yeas 17; nays 33.


Haughton Lennox: The practice indulged in by the Minister of Public Works this session is to present an item on behalf of say the Post Office Department, for the erection of a building and then to tell us that he knows nothing about it. In this case he has told us that the request for the building did not originate with the Post Office Department. The Post Office Department is supposed to know the needs of the country for increased postal facilities. The Postmaster General should know how much money is to be expended and having looked over the whole Dominion he would, if his department were properly conducted, select the most deserving cases for public expenditure in view of the means at his disposal. But nothing of this kind is done, and the Minister of Public Works, simply because he gets a petition from some people in a locality,'decides to erect a post office without consulting the Postmaster General as to the necessity for it. The head of the Post Office Department, having determined upon a scheme of public expenditure within the resources of the country, shall submit to the cabinet his proposals, showing just what is required and why it is required. This, having been properly brought before council, it will be or will not be, according as it is considered right, brought in as an estimate and submitted to this committee. If we, a# a committee, do not insist upon procedure of that kind, we are not discharging our duties to our constituents. All these preliminaries have been disregarded in this case. But assuming that they had all been complied with, that is not enough. When the Minister of Public Works submits an estimate to the committee, it is most unreasonable that he should be alone in the matter. He does not profess to have, and we could not expect him to have, a competent knowledge of the requirements. It is absolutely necessary, in the consideration of estimates for another department, that the responsible head of that department should be here to explain why the money is demanded. We are proceeding to-day on an entirely improper basis. We have the fact that no demand has been made by the Post Office Department for this expenditure. We have the fact that the Minister of Public Works has no competent knowledge of the matter. We have the fact that there is no pretense that the Post Office Department has taken a broad, general survey of what should be the expenditure in Canada as a whole, and how that expenditure should be distributed. We are pro-

ceeding on a piece-meal policy, based on certain local and perhaps political demands made upon the minister and based upon those alone. I appeal to the members of this committee on both sides. It is our duty as a committee to insist that this matter should be dealt with in a different manner. I do not often talk on the estimates, but I wish to enter my protest as earnestly as I can against the manner in which we have been proceeding.


Richard Blain: Since the hon. minister has promised so much to my hon. friend from Medicine Hat, I would like to put on record the fact that Lethbridge has eleven banks, that the value of goods which have passed customs at that port of entry was last year $800,000 and the duties collected thereon $136,000.


William Pugsley: It is a very important town and is growing very rapidly. ,
St. Lambert public building, $10,000.


William Pugsley: This is to make pro-', vision for the construction of a public building to be used chiefly for post office purposes. There has been a petition signed by influential inhabitants of the town as early as March, 1907. This came to the Post Office Department first and was transmitted by the deputy Postmaster General to the Minister of Public Works. It is represented, I have no doubt correctly, that St. Lambert is rapidly increasing in population, having doubled in ten years, and that it is a town with all the modern improvements -waterworks and a sewerage system-and is going ahead very rapidly.


George Eulas Foster: What is the population?


William Pugsley: Nine years ago, according to the census, it was 1,362; but that is no criterion of what it is to-day.


George Eulas Foster: The minister ought really to have that information in definite form.
Mr.' PUGSLEY. I do not carry in my pocket information as to the population of all these places.


George Eulas Foster: The minister's first duty is to give us information as to the number of people to be served.


William Pugsley: I can only give the hon. gentleman the population according to the last census. I am not supposed to go and take a census of these places from year to year. The population of St. Lambert today is probably from 2,000 to 2,500. The revenue last year was $2,615, and the year before it was $1,756.


George Eulas Foster: What has the site cost?


William Pugsley: It has not been purchased yet.


Haughton Lennox: 


George Eulas Foster: What is the estimated cost of the building and site?


William Pugsley: Not exceeding $20,000.


George Eulas Foster: Have the plans been prepared?


William Pugsley: No.


George Eulas Foster: No plans, no estimate, no statement of population?


Mr. CAMPBELL.: In whose riding is this?


William Pugsley: Chambly and Vercheres, represented by Mr. Geoffrion.


George Eulas Foster: What is the salary?


William Pugsley: 


George Eulas Foster: And what is the present rental?


William Pugsley: 


Mr. SPROULE.: One would naturally expect that when the Minister of Public Works is submitting his estimates to Council, for the consideration of that body, he would supply them with better data than he furnishes this House to justify council in passing the estimates. There does not seem to be any system whereby he can reach a conclusion regarding the absolute need of buildings or the wisdom or otherwise of erecting buildings in these places. He has a request from somebody and cannot tell us. in some cases, from whom Not from the Post Office Department, the Post Office Department does not seem to give him any information whether there is a need for a public building or not. He does not seem to go to the trouble of making any inquiries from the Post Office Department or from any other source as to what the population of the place is or what its needs are. In defending the building of a post office costing about $20,000 in one place he said that it was on a railway. He could find places of three, four, or five times the size and importance of that place on railways all over this country that have no nublic buildings and no post offices erected by the government. I think that is no justification at all and no information.
At six o'clock, House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.


SECOND READINGS.
[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 51) respecting the Montmagny Mutual Fire Insurance Company, and to change its name to Manufacturers Fire Insurance Company.-Mr. Roy (Montmagny).
BiR (No. 52) to incorporate the Nelson River Railway Company.-Mr. Rutan.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
["It is necessary for me to give some explanation. I thought the hon. gentleman spoke of the ' Acadia ' which is a very small boat. We do not consider this as anything more than an ordinary boat, a boat that runs along the coast and if we have to build a breakwater at Ingonish costing $30,000 for the accommodation of a boat that might run there once a week or\n\nonce a fortnight it is quite a large sum to pay for the service which we would receive. It is a serious matter for us in Nova Scotia where we have a great deal to do with the small amount of money that is spent. We think of our province as the wharf of Canada jutting away out into the Atlantic ocean and therefore we require a great deal. The province of Nova Scotia has done much for the west and for other parts of Canada. There is not a harbour in that province that does not.require some expenditure in the line of providing breakwater accommodation for the fishermen. Therefore, I was anxious that this sum should be divided up amongst some of the other ports. I have no objection at all if the government are willing to spend $30,000 for the accommodation of a very small steamer which will run perhaps not more than once a week or once a fortnight to Ingonish. I think it is not fair to other parts of the province of Nova Scotia which are really in need of breakwaters and wharfs, and which will continue to be in need of them as everybody knows in that part of the country.\nSome resolutions reported.\nOn motion of Mr. Fielding, House adjourned at 11.40 p.m.", 'Monday, December 6, 1909.']
William Pugsley: Before recess, we were at the item for a post office building at St. Lambert, which, I think, I explained very fully. I might, however, add that the present post office accommodation there is very poor. The postal service is transacted in a small grocery store with little or no accommodation for the people waiting for their mails, and there has been a very strong request from the people of that locality for a suitable building.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How did the hon. gentleman happen to get that information?


William Pugsley: From a petition of the inhabitants.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is that the way in which he usually gets his information regarding the necessity of a public building in any locality? In my part of the country, whenever the public need demands anything in the post office line, we usually apply to the Postmaster General, and one would naturally expect that he would be better posted on the matter than the Minister of Public Works. The Minister of Public Works has no one to rely on. He may have the member for the constituency, and it would be natural to expect that he would urge the requirements of his constituency as strongly as possible. In other cases he may have the defeated candidate, who may not happen to be in the locality and may pay very little attention to it. It would be natural therefore to expect that there would be some communication to the Postmaster General from the locality and that the minister would look to him for information. Take the Public Works Department, when a public work has to be done in connection with harbours and rivers, the department usually sends its own engineer to examine the locality; and if the department desires to get information regarding postal matters, it can call on the post office inspector to examine and report; but in none of these cases has the minister said he applied to the inspector for information to know whether the public building asked for is needed or not. What is the result? We have items in the estimates for the building of post offices in small places where there is little or no revenue and larger places are neglected, and in those small places buildings are provided at a cost out of all proportion to the needs of the locality. It seems to me that the minister ought to have some businesslike system by means of which he could obtain reliable information which he could submit to council and afterwards to the House in justification of the proposed expenditure.


William Pugsley: I thought that before recess I had shown clearly the needs of this town for a public building. The place in the last eight years has about doubled its population. Its population is given by the directory to-day as 2,500. It is a very important suburb of Montreal. A large number of very fine residences have been erected in it, and the present post office accommodation is utterly inadequate. I did not depend solely on this petition but made inquiry of the sitting member who at first did not say he would urge it at present, but I asked him to look into the matter further, and give me his more matured judgment. After he bad been to St. Lambert, he urged very strongly that I should comply with the request of the petitioners. The building will not cost more than $25,000 at the outside. It will be a substantial structure which ought to serve the wants of the people there for the next half century, and I do not think I am asking any extravagant amount. With regard to consulting the Post Office Department, my hon. friend rightly says that, in respect of post office matters, the people generally communicate with the Postmaster General or his department. Speaking in a general way that is true. But that remark applies to postal services such as the establishment of additional post offices, and the giving of increased accommodation. I venture to say that not once in a hundred times do the people, when they desire a public building erected for a post office, apply directly to the Postmaster General, they make their application to the Department of Public Works. That has been my experience, and it is then my duty to get the best information 1 can as to the need of that work, and I do not know of any more reliable source to which I can apply than the sitting member for the county. When my hon. friend from Northumberland (Mr. Owen) told me of the population and needs of Campbellford, I felt that I could rely on his statement, as I feel I can rely on the statement of any other member of this House.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am not opposing this expenditure, I am only speaking in general terms with reference to what principle the Department of Public Works adopts in determining whether these buildings are required or not. The minister said he depends on the member. I do no.t object to that. But there are many places where there is no supporter of the government, and he does not seem to rely quite as much on the information he gets from an opposition member as he does on that he gets from a supporter of his own side. But I was speaking more particularly with regard to the general principle. Take the case we dealt with before six o'clock, a proposal to expend $20,000 in a village where the

revenue is only $700. I gave to the House a list of cases in a radius of, perhaps, less than 100 miles, in a locality with which_ I am well acquainted, where there are villages and towns much larger than this, and where the revenue was ten dimes as great, and yet there was no effort displayed on the part of the Minister of Public Works; to serve the needs of the public in these places. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the principle which guides the Minister of Public Works is not the urgent needs of the people. I do not think he can justify these expenditures in so many instances in the province of Quebec and so few in the province of Ontario.


William Pugsley: Just as many in Ontario.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I do not think so, but I have not verified it. He cannot justify passing by so many places like Lethbridge, and other places in the west and in Ontario, where, notwithstanding every effort on 'the part of the people to get better accommodation, it has been heartlessly refused them; whereas in other places where the people scarcely asked for it, it has been given them. Now the minister says that when people want additional postal service and the like of 'that, they apply to the Post Office Department, but not in the matter of buildings. Now I know, speaking from long experience, that the very reverse of what the minister says is the case. Over and over again, in my own constituency and in others, have I been consulted, written to and urged by the people who told me that they had communicated with the Posit Office Department and could get no satisfaction.
Three Rivers-new public building-to replace buildings destroyed by fire, June 22, 1908, $60,000.


William Pugsley: This is to provide for a new post office and customs building in the city of Three Rivers to replace those that were destroyed in the great fire. We have been using a _ temporary building in the meantime, but we think the time has now arrived when we should begin the erection of a new and permanent building. The appropriation for 1909-10 was $40,000. Of that, however, we only expended $10,000 to provide temporary quarters; so $30,000 is a revote, and we are now asking for an additional $30,000. This amount of $60,000 will be sufficient to enable us to enter into a contract for the construction of the building. We estimate it will probably cost somewhere from $125,000 to $150,000 when the building is entirely completed.
Quebec province-immigrant buildings generally, $5,000.


William Pugsley: I would ask the committee to go back to this item in regard to Mr. SPROULE.
which the hon. member for North Toronto asked some explanations before recess. I mentioned that in addition 'to those at the city of Montreal and the city of Quebec, there was an immigrant building at, I think, Peribonka, Nominingue and, I think, Temiskaming. The question was asked as to -the principle upon which these small immigrant buildings were erected, and now that the Minister of the Interior is present, I thought he might make some statement.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: What kind of immigrants do 'the government provide for at Nominingue?


William Pugsley: Ordinary immigrants. I may say to my hon. friend that there is an immigration society which is working quite industriously in bringing immigrants into that locality and settling them upon 'the land.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: The only settlers there are from the province of Quebec. They are not, as I understand, from outside.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I think my hon. friend is mistaken, because there is a considerable repatriation.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: From where?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: From the United States into the northern parts of Quebec. This work is carried on by one of the immigration societies formed in Quebec, which societies are subsidized by the government for that express purpose.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: So much the better.


Mr. S. SHARPE.: If these societies are paid for that work, what is the necessity of the government erecting buildings for them? Is it for the accommodation of the immigrants?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: Certainly.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: How many would be brought in at a time?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: I cannot say as to that.


Mr. OLIVER.: The immigrants are not brought in, they come in of their own accord.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: I thought the society was bringing them in.


Frank Oliver: The society employs special means of bringing the attractions of a special district before the immigrant. The government's business is to bring the advantages of the country at large before the immigrant, but the society is organized for the purpose of bringing to the attention of the immigrant a certain district, and that is the business of the societies that my hon. friend (Mr. Fisher) has alluded to.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: What aTe the buildings that are used for this purpose?


Frank Oliver: There are, first, the Quebec immigration building on the Louise embankment; second, the Detention Hospital erected in 1907 at a cost of $75,000; third, the immigration building at Montreal, which serves the purposes of a hospital and immigration quarters, on St. Antoine street, and which costs $3,000 rental per annum. Then, there is the immigration building at Nominingue. This is a shelter for immigrants, the building being 45 by 27 feet 10 inches, and being the property of the government. This building is at the point which was the terminus of a branch of the Canadian Pacific Railway system and was the distributing point for immigrants in the northern part of Labelle. It was built for the purpose of giving accommodation for these settlers at the end of their railway journey before setting out for their locations in the surrounding country. In this building, and for the accommodation of the settlers, the Quebec government have their local land agent. The building contains four large rooms, two downstairs and two upstairs with cooking stoves, so that the immigrants have the advantage of being able to rest and cook during the time that they are preparing to go on their locations. There is an immigration building at Roberval, in the Lake St. John district, or a shelter for immigrants, the dimensions of which building are 60 by 30. The conditions are the same as in the case of Nominingue. There is the Peribonka immigration building, also in the Lake St. John district, for the same purpose. The dimensions are 45 by 25. This is the list of immigration buildings in the province of Quebec.
_ Mr. NANTEL. Is the minister in a position to give the cost of the building in Nominingue?


William Pugsley: I cannot do so to-night, because the amount we are asking for is simply for repairs for the different immigration buildings in the province as a whole, but I will get it and lay it on the table.


Wilfrid Bruno Nantel: Is the building used for post office purposes or only for immigration?


William Pugsley: Only for immigration.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: I would like to ask the minister whether he knows anything with regard to the report which appears in the press to the effect that several thousand Doukhobors are coming to our country in the near future and whether they are likely to be received?


Frank Oliver: I have no knowledge of any such movement, and I have no belief that any such movement is likely to take place.	*


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Has the , minister any information as to the number of immigrants who have come into these localities within the last few years?


Frank Oliver: The estimates under consideration are those of the Public Works Department, and I am not able to give my hon. friend the information at the present time, but when the immigration estimates are up, and I have the assistance of the officers of the department, I hope to be able to give my hon. friend an answer.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I -would like to ask the minister if it is the policy of the government to erect these immigration buildings in all of the provinces for local needs? I thought that would rather be an expenditure * which would be expected from the provincial governments. Do they do that in other provinces where immigration work is carried on by the provincial authorities?


William Pugsley: Yes. it has been done in other parts of Canada, for instance, I think in Alberta and Saskatchewan.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But these have been under the direct control of this federal government all the time?


William Pugsley: Well, the Dominion is just as much interested in securing immigrants for the provinces of Ontario, Quebec and the maritime provinces-


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But you do not put up any buildings in these provinces?


Mr. PUGSLEY  .@: -as it is in securing immigrants for. the west with the exception that it has land in the west. Still, to the ordinary settler, that land is given away upon the ordinary homestead conditions but even then the federal government is just as much interested in getting immigrants into the eastern provinces as it is in getting them into the western provinces. It is not undesirable to take care of the immigrants when they arrive in a new and unsettled district and make them as reasonably comfortable as you can until they set out for the land which they are going to occupy. There seems to be a considerable immigration into .the Lake St. John district and to the westward. There has been quite an extensive movement in the way of repatriation from the United States and I think that the small amount of money which has been expended upon these immigrant buildings has been very well expended and certainly has been productive of good results.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am nut complaining of the amount of money which has been spent there. I am only asking what is the general principle, if it is the principle to erect these buildings in the different provinces, or have the provinces been doing this work themselves? There is a good deal of immigration going into the northern



part of Ontario, but I am not aware that the government has gone to the trouble of erecting immigration buildings to accommodate those who go there. The minister says that we have done tms in the northwest. There is good reason why we should do it there because we practically owned that country until the new provinces were established. Are there any other provinces where this is being done except that which the minister has referred to to-night? We should do the best we can for the immigrants who come to our shores, and I am not complaining if this is to be a general policy, but I was not aware that the federal government provided accommodation for immigrants brought here under the auspices of the different provinces.


William Pugsley: We have immigration buildings in all the provinces, in Halifax, St. John, Montreal.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: But these are sea-port towns.


William Pugsley: What difference does it make in principle whether the immigrants come by train or by steamer; should we not provide accommodation for them? _ I can quite conceive that an immigrant building in the Lake St. John district from which the immigrants are distributed may do as effective work as an immigrant building in St. John or Halifax.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: There is a good deal of immigration into the Cobalt district; would a proposition to erect an immigration building there be entertained by the minister?


William Pugsley: If the immigrants were sent to Cobalt and distributed thence through that northern country and it would be desirable to house them comfortably, I think such a proposition might be entertained. For instance, we have an immigration building at Port Arthur.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That again is a sea-port and immigrants come to it by water and by rail.


William Pugsley: The object is to make the immigrant comfortable until he gets located, and it does not make any difference by what means of transportation he arrives.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I see all the difference in the world between providing a building for immigrants at Port Arthur whence the immigrants are distributed all over the country, and providing a building at Lake St. John.
Westmount Public Buildings, $25,000.


William Pugsley: Westmount is a very important suburb of Montreal, and this vote is asked to make provision for the purchase of a site and towards the erection of a post office building. It will be known as the St.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Catharines Street West Postal Station. It will be admitted that the building to be erected in Westmount should be of a substantial character and in keeping with the other handsome buildings in that city. The rent paid for the post office and letter carriers' depot last year was $1,200; the postal revenue was $9,131.43; money orders issued, $41,330, and money orders paid, $10,791. We have not prepared the plans as yet, nor purchased the site, but I should think that the site and building, all complete, will cost somewhere in the vicinity of $100,000.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: What is the population of Westmount?


William Pugsley: I understand that two or three years ago it was 11,000, but West-mount has grown rapidly and the population is now estimated at 15,000.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: I do not think it is quite as large as that. I understand that in some of the smaller cities of from 10,000 to 12,000 population the post office has practically been closed, only a small portion of it being used for the purpose of getting the mail matter ready for the carriers. That brings up the question whether we should expend such a large amount of money on a post office in a small city.


William Pugsley: If what the hon. gentleman says is the case, it is a matter for the post office authorities to consider. But I am not aware that the establishment of free delivery in any city has been the means of doing away with the post office or lessening the business done there. This building is going to be a centre from which the mail will be distributed over all that western part of Montreal.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: I understand that Westmount is a part of Montreal or will ultimately be brought within the city; and if so, the postal business will be done through the general post office, this building will become a sub-station, and should not cost more than $15,000 or $20,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is this building expected to cost?


William Pugsley: Between $100,000 and $125,000.


Richard Blain: I would like to ask the hon. minister how many of these expenditures in the nrovince of Quebec, covering about 40 items, are in constituencies represented by members on the opposition side. I ask this question because this afterneon we were endeavouring to ascertain the policy of the minister as to the expenditure of public money. .


William Pugsley: If my hon. friend will tell meliow many opposition members there

are from the province of Quebec and in what constituencies there are demands for public buildings, I will give him the in-.formation. I think my hon. friend is not serious, because he can tell as well as I. For instance, there are expenditures at Lachine, at Sherbrooke, in the city of Montreal and in the city of Quebec. So if my hon. friend counts them, I think he will find that they are doing pretty well, considering their numbers.


Richard Blain: Perhaps a little more specific answer would be more satisfactory to the committee. I understand there is a small item for repairing the post office in Sherbrooke. My hon. friend would not suggest that that is an expenditure of public money other than to keep up a building erected several years ago.


William Pugsley: An absolutely necessary expenditure, like all the others.


Richard Blain: I am not objecting to that. I am asking the minister to state how many expenditures for new buildings are to be made in counties represented on the opposition side. My hon. friend would be able I am sure, having all the information *before him, to give us an answer to that question.


William Pugsley: I regret to say that I have not had that classified in that way and therefore I could npt just at this moment, give my hon. friend all the information, but really I do not think it is fair that my hon. friend should ask me. He knows that I am the target of a dozen or more of my hon. friends opposite; I have to answer legitimate and proper questions. My hon. friend is entirely a gentleman, at leisure just at the moment and he could make up the figures just as readily as I could, and he would be obliging me very much if he would do it himself.


Richard Blain: That may be all right for my hon. friend the minister, but I do not think the committee will gather very much information from that statement.


William Pugsley: They will take my hon. friend's statement.


Richard Blain: Well, I will ask the minister to give an answer to the question with a list of the expenditures, and if my hon. friend is unable to do it now, he has a good many clerks in his department and perhaps it could be made up and submitted at a future sitting, if my hon. friend would say he would bring a list


William Pugsley: No, I cannot say I would like to undertake that.


Richard Blain: Perhaps he had better take it now.
31J


William Pugsley: Does my hon. friend intimate that he is going to force me to do this? In what way does he propose to force it?


Richard Blain: I have no thought in my mind of anything of the kind.


William Pugsley: I am glad of that.


Richard Blain: My hon. friend knows very well that we on this side are not anxious to force my hon. friend to do anything-he is doing too many things now without any suggestion from this side. I think it has been made clear that what the committee are anxious to know is whether it is the policy of the government to grant public buildings in all towns where there is a large revenue from the customs and postal service or if that is a policy that applies only to constituencies represented by supporters of my hon. friend. I thought my hon. friend would be glad of an opportunity to assure the committee that there was no partisanship in the expenditure of this money.


William Pugsley: I think that before my hon. friend asks whether these improvements are in constituencies represented by Liberals or Conservatives, he ought to be able to show that in some case in the province of Quebec represented by a Conservative there has been a real necessity for some public work which I have refused. The only cases which have been referred to are those of Grand-Mere and Ste. Th6rese, and I explained that in these towns the public buildings have been allowed to stand over simply because I had no representations made to me before these estimates were prepared that public buildings were urgently required in those two places. This afternoon I was able to appeal to hon. gentlemen opposite representing constituencies in all parts of Canada as to whether or not I had discriminated against their constituencies and my hon. friend must rfemember that strong testimonly was borne to the fact by at least one gentleman on his side of the House-and I think if other hon. gentlemen had an opportunity they would bear like testimony-that their constituencies had been treated not generously, because we do_ not treat constituencies generously, but justly, that the reasonable requirements of the people had been met as far as their constituencies were concerned, and I do think, under these circumstances, that my hon. friend will see that it is not reasonable that he should take up the time of the committee by asking consideration of this matter. If my hon. friend wishes to point out where I have done any injustice to any constituency represented by a Conservative let him do so, but I am not aware of any such case.

967


Richard Blain: I need not go very far to answer that. Take my own county, for example.


William Pugsley: That is not Quebec, these are Quebec buildings that are under consideration.


Richard Blain: I understand that, but my hon. friend knows that the statements made by the hon. gentlemen on this side were Erom other portions of Canada and not from Quebec at all. My hon. friend from Nipis-sing was the member to whom the minister particularly referred. That was not in Quebec. My own county is an example. My hon. friend's two immediate predecessors both stated in this Chamber that a very necessary expenditure of money in the county of Peel would be made. When I directed the attention of my hon. friend to that statement in ' Hansard,' my Iron, friend was not prepared to fulfil the pledges of his predecessors to this House, and to my constituency. I do not wish to make a personal matter of this. I am expecting, of course, that out of the fulness of my hon. friend's heart the work will be done this coming year, and therefore I shall not enter into any severe criticism of that matter.
Quebec Citadel-drill shed for school of gunnery, $16,000.


Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.: The object of this is to afford a school of gunnery for the whole Dominion in which lectures can be delivered and the use of every type of gun in Canada illustrated and taught. There will be lecture rooms for instruction on ammunition, coast defence, electricity, range, &c., a complete gunnery school.
Military Buildings-additional storage to ordnance stores, $5,000.


William Pugsley: This is an additional story to the ordnance stores as requested by the Department of Militia and Defence, May 26, 1909.


Frederick William Borden: This is simply additional accommodation absolutely required.
Quebec Military Buildings-additional storage to ordnance stores.


Frederick William Borden: This is to provide additional accommodation for stores of every kind. There is a large storage building in Quebec, but it has become too small. The stores there are issued as required in different parts of the country. In many respects perhaps next to Ottawa, and in some respects larger than in Ottawa, stores of the Dominion are lodged there. In particular there is a much larger quantity of rifles stored in Quebec than any where else.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Is the building fire-proof?


William Pugsley: 


Frederick William Borden: I hope the new part will be at least.


Mr. BOYCE.: What is the capacity of stores buildings in Quebec t


William Pugsley: 10,000 square feet.


Arthur Cyril Boyce: What is the total capacity for storage in the city of Quebec for military purposes?


Frederick William Borden: I could not say just now but will get the information.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Have tenders been asked for?


William Pugsley: We have not started this yet, but of course will call for tenders.


Oswald Smith Crocket: Are any buildings provided for military purposes without requisition from the Militia Department?


Frederick William Borden: No


Oswald Smith Crocket: Why is that rule not adopted in the case of the post offices and customs houses?


Frederick William Borden: Because that never has been the rule, and the conditions are entirely different.


Oswald Smith Crocket: I do not see that they are. It seems most extraordinary that the Minister of Public Works should go on spending money erecting post offices and customs houses in different constituencies without any report from the Post Office or Customs Department that such buildings are required. I should think that a new practice ought to be adopted and that in every case there should be a requisition from the department for whose use the building is provided, and such requisition should set- forth the necessity for it.


Mr. WORTHINGTON.: Are the stores under the care of the Ordnance Stores Department and are they for the use of the permanent corps or active militia?


Frederick William Borden: All the stores are issued from the same building. The stores, both for the permanent force and active militia, are put in this building. I believe the stores are entirely under the control of the ordnance store corps except in so far as some police protection naturally would be given by the city authorities.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Are the stores there under the same supervision as here in Ottawa ?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No insurance?


Frederick William Borden: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No watchman?


Frederick William Borden: Yes, there are watchmen.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The care taken seems to be of very imperfect character. In Ottawa by one fire we lost $120,000 in stores and $30,000 in damage to the building. There was neither insurance, nor regular watchmen who visited the building at stated periods in twenty-four hours.


Frederick William Borden: The government never in suae but simply follow the rule which has been followed in every department since confederation. The $30,000 loss was caused by damage to the building, and I hope that the loss in clothing will not amount to $120,000. Some of the clothing, I might mention, was clothing which would not have been issued again.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Let me remind the hon. gentleman that I put a question, on the paper as to whether this $120,000 worth of goods was a total loss, and his answer was yes.


Frederick William Borden: I understand that the damage to the building was $30,000 and the damage to the clothing $120,000. As to whether proper precaution was taken that might be a matter of opinion, but we believe that we were taking proper precautions, and it was understood that the building was fire-proof. I have had a careful investigation made, and when the time comes I propose to make a statement to the House. But I may mention that the result of the investigation went to show that the fire resulted from a defective electric wire.


Mr. J. A. CURRIE.: What is the value of the new clothing in the building?


Frederick William Borden: About $900,000.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: Is it not a fact that the regulations of the ordnance stores department require that where a large quantity of stores are kept, it is necessary to keep a military guard at night?


Frederick William Borden: No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think that the consensus of opinion of good business men would be that there ought to be some insurance in the case of valuable property stored. It seems to me that would be money well invested. Only a short time ago a portion of the legislative buildings in Toronto was burnt down. The present government there did what this government might do to good purpose. When they came into power they found that there was no insurance on the building; they put an insurance on it, and now they have something to fall back upon in the way of insurance; otherwise there would not have been a dollar to help replace the building that was burned. Would it not be better for the minister to consider
making a new departure, and to provide, either insurance, or better care by watchmen?


Frederick William Borden: I agree that that is a fair question for investigation and inquiry. It would be necessary to carry the inquiry over a good many years, and to see what amount of property would be risked in this way, what the actual losses have been, and what it would cost to insure the buildings. I think that is a very desirable thing to do.


John Allister Currie: Do I understand that the total value of the clothing destroyed was $900,000?


Frederick William Borden: No, the total amount in the building was $900,000, of which about $120,000 was destroyed. I misunderstood the hon. gentleman's question.


John Allister Currie: A question arises in connection with this fire which I think the minister should seriously consider. The equipment and clothing of most of the militia men in Canada is kept in a stores building at Ottawa. In case war or trouble of any kind should occur, it would take three or four weeks to get that clothing out of this central depot and distribute it all over the country. Should not the minister consider, when we are building barracks or drill sheds in various places, whether the policy of decentralization would not be better in regard to these stores than the present system under which the country has lost $120,000? It has often been a subject of comment by military men, that if they wanted a pair of trousers, or a Glengarry, for one of their men 200 miles away, they had to send along a requisition and that has to come from Ottawa. Under the system that obtains in other countries, every district is eauipped with its own stores, its own ammunition, its own rifles, it is a complete unit by itself, and is capable of taking the field armed inside of two or three days. Under no system could this clothing be distributed from Ottawa in case of war, and sent to the various quarters inside of four or five weeks. It seems to me that the old policy of the department of centralizing everything at Ottawa in order that somebody may have a ]ob of overlooking it, is at the bottom of this, and when we get to the bottom of the whole thing, we find there is1 nobody looking after it when it takes fire. These stores might just as well have been at Toronto, at Kingston, at Esquimalt, distributed equitably amongst them in that way, and then in case of emergency the stores could be got out in two or three days.
Sir FREDERICK BORDriN. I do not think it desirable to enter into this discussion now very fully. But I may tell mv hon. friend that he is quite mistaken if he

supposes that all the stores are here in Ottawa, that is not the case.


John Allister Currie: I did not say that.


Frederick William Borden: It is true that the reserve stores are here. But I quite agree with him that it would be desirable to distribute these stores more than they are distributed now, and that is our intention. Unfortunately at the present time we have not a suitable building, and we have been unable to get one. We are now occupying some buildings rented before this fire, a year ago, a large building in Montreal and one in Toronto, and it is intended to distribute the stores more than they have been. My hon. friend refers to other countries. Well, this country, for instance, compared with!, the mother country, is a country of magnificent distances; and while in England the stores are kept pretty much together, and possibly we might have been governed to some extent by that fact, we must remember that the centres in Canada are widely distributed, and it will be necessary for us to have several centres of distribution. At the present" time we keep a certain amount of stores in Winnipeg, considerably more than the usual quantity; nearly all the saddlery stores are in Toronto, and there are stores at London, some at Kingston, some in Mont-treal, a large auantity; there are stores in Halifax, in Quebec, and on the Pacific coast. I agree that the point raised by the hon. gentleman is worthy of consideration.


John Allister Currie: Is the ammunition distributed in such a way that it can be got at?


Frederick William Borden: Yes.


John Allister Currie: I understand there is a small quantity stored at various points; but what proportion of ammunition is centralized and what proportion is at Ottawa?


Frederick William Borden: That is a question which I think my hon. friend, being a military man himself, must understand is not one that it is desirable to answer. That question has been raised more than once, and the answer I have given is that if any hon. gentleman, a member of this House, will come to my office, I will be glad to tell him the distribution of the ammunition. But I do not think it is desirable to publish to the world exactly how the ammunition in Canada is distributed.


John Allister Currie: That is like the right hon. gentleman when an embarrassing question is asked him; he takes refuge by saying: If you ask me privately I will tell you this, that, or the other thing. Let me tell the Minister of Militia that in the mother country a government was upset on Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.
this question of ammunition. The question was brought up in the House of Commons, and the minister had to answer that he had not sufficient ammunition to meet the country's needs, and the government was thrown out of office. Questions of this kind must be answered in some place where the people will know. The minister says he will answer me privately how this ammunition is distributed. I am not asking how many cartridges he has at various points, but if he has inaugurated a fair system of distribution, in order to avoid the abuse that has occurred where, when a man requires a shell, he has to wire to Ottawa to get it.


Frederick William Borden: I don't think that is the case.


Arthur Norreys Worthington: The minister says that questions of this kind have been asked several times in the House. I asked the other day something about Hie stores on the Great Lakes, and I received the same answer. Now, as my hon. friend from Sim-coe (Mr. Currie) says, you can always find out these things in the United Kingdom. You can go most anywhere and buy a little manual for one and six and find out where the different stores are. I do not see any objection in giving the information to the public.


William Stevens Fielding: To return to the question of insurance, particularly to what has been said by the hon. member for East Grey as to the good luck that the Ontario government had in having its building insured at the time of the fire. It might be a wise and proper policy for a provincial government to insure its property, and not necessarily a wise policy for the Dominion government to do so. From my own experience in the provincial government, it seemed desirable that we should carry a large amount of insurance. But in every large business the principle is adopted that, as you increase the volume of your property, the need of insurance in a certain sense diminishes. A man can afford to insure for himself, but the steamship people who have a large number of vessels do not find it advantageous to do so. If a man has only one or two vessels, he may insure them; but those who are fortunate enough to have a dozen vessels, in many cases do not insure; they simply open an insurance account; and they have found that, take it all in all, they were making a profit by not taking their business to the companies. I am not saying the province of Ontario was not wise, and from my own experience in the provincial government, I believed in carrying an insurance. But when you have the vast volume of property which the Dominion government has, stretched over the whole continent, it might be the best policy

not to insure. That seems to have been the policy of all the governments in Canada.
I am bound to say the fact that we occasionally have a fire does no't by any means prove that that policy is a mistake.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: If the government had gone into a calculation to determine whether, from their experience of the last 50 years, it would be better not to insure, I could understand such an argument. But this day and age, when insurance is so very reasonable in cities and towns, where you have good fire protection, waterworks and fireproof buildings, it seems to me that it is doubtful wisdom'to have great stores of supplies in any building without being insured. I would at least expect that the government would be in a position to present the House with some data which would justify that conclusion. If they have not got it, I think it would not be amiss for them to take the earliest opportunity to make some such calculation. I think the experience of most business people would be that it is not the part of wisdom to allow large collections of property to remain anywhere without some insurance, or some better protection, than that which we had for the military clothing and supplies thait are stored in Ottawa, Quebec and elsewhere


William Stevens Fielding: So far as protection is concerned, I am with my hon. friend when he says that the government is bound to see that every possible care is taken for the protection of its property. I do not differ from him on that. If there be a large volume of property accumulated at one centre where the risk is very great, certainly it calls for insurance, but where you have the same volume of property distributed over a wide area the risk is reduced to a small figure and I do not think it needs any calculation to justify the noninsurance of such property. It is a principle that where your property is widely distributed you can just as well insure it yourself as any insurance company could do it. It might be a matter of convenience and of curiosity to make a statement, but a government is not bound to do it to the same extent as a private corporation. Even if a big fire burned down these magnificent parliament buildings I do not think it would necessarily prove that the policy of the administration is wrong.


William Pugsley: Assuming that we have $50,000,000 worth of property belonging to the government and that the average insurance rate would probably be one per cent, there would be $500,000 a year.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Oh, the average insurance rate would not amount to that.


William Pugsley: Put it at one-half per cent, which is very low; there is $250,000 a year. I doubt if, in the forty-two years
since confederation, there has been a million dollars worth of property destroyed, whereas the insurance premiums would have amounted to a great deal more than that. As my hon. friend, the Minister of Finance said, it is purely a question of the amount of property you have. The experience of our St. John ship-owners is just the same as that of those to whom my hon. friend refers in Nova Scotia. These firms, owning a large number of vessels, never thought of insuring their vessels because it would be cheaper to lose a ship ocasionally than to pay the premiums. If we could tell when a fire was going to occur and insure just before it took place it would be all right, but we should have to take the insurance year by year and it would cost a great deal more, as experience since confederation has shown, than the fire losses would amount to.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The minister says that there might have been a loss of a million dollars since confederation. Why, two or three years ago we had a loss of a good portion of a million dollars when the fire in the west block occurred. Then, take the fire which occurred in the militia stores building when $120,000 worth of clothing was entirely destroyed and $30,000 damage was done to other clothing, not entirely destroyed, besides the loss to the building. These are only two fires out of others which could be mentioned. But then the same principles would apply to a private corporation or to the government. Would any business man in this country follow out the same principle in dealing with his own private business?


William Pugsley: Ship-owners do it constantly.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am not familiar with their business, therefore I do not know, but the argument that because the risks are distributed amongst a large number of centres reduces the need for insurance I do not think carries any weight at all, because a man worth $10,000,000 having property distributed all over the continent insures on the same principle as though he had it only in one province. He regards that as a good business principle, and it is generally recognized as a good one.


William Pugsley: But the loss is lessened by the distribution of the property?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It may be lessened to a certain extent by distribution of property, but if it is lessened the insurance will cost less. Take the mill owners, factory men or merchants who are handling produce or cattle-they all insure, but the government do not think it wise to insure. I do not think they can give any data to justify them in reaching that conclusion.


Mr. MILLER.: I think there is quite a difference between the Dominion government insuring its property, scattered ail over the broad Dominion, and the case of a private party insuring his property whether it be a large or a small property. An insurance company, calculating its rates and business, expects to reach an average rate of loss and be able to fix, on that average, the premium it should collect. The Dominion government has so much property scattered all over the Dominion that it will reach about the same average of loss that the insurance company will and that being the ease the government, in doing without insurance, saves the commissions paid to agents, office management of the insurance company and all the profits that the insurance company expects to receive.
Mr. SPRObkE. If the hon. gentleman's argument is worth a cent it applies to insurance in every line, whether there is one centre or a dozen, because every man who insures pays for carrying the risk and pays a profit to the party who is carrying it whether it is upon a barn in the country or a factory in the city. If it applies to the government property that may be distributed in a hundred centres it applies on the same parity of reasoning to the property which is distributed in three centres, or is in one place.


Henry Horton Miller: Perhaps I have not made myself clear, but it would be utterly impossible that all the property of the government would be destroyed at or near the one time. Because of the law of average, the saving that through non-insurance will De effected at toe very many points where no losses occur will make un, or more than make un, the occasional losses of properties that do bum.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You might say that of any business.


John Allister Currie: Might I suggest to the minister that buildings containing valuable government property should be in the future built with a system of sprinklers and the protection called for by the insurance companies which reduces the risk, they claim, from about one per cent to one fifteenth of one per cent. * It does not add very much to the cost of the building and if the government is not going to carry any insurance it would be a very wise investment.


William Pugsley: It is worthy of careful consideration.
Military Buildings-barrack accommodation for Canadian Permanent Army Service Corps, $8,000.


Frederick William Borden: This is to provide accommodation for 25 officers, noncommissioned officers and men. These


Thomas Simpson Sproule: troops have been stationed at Quebec during the last two years and no baracks have been available. They have been temporarily quartered at the Riding School. This vote is to provide new quarters for them. The proposed site is in the Cove Fields near the Riding School.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is to be the cost of the building?


Frederick William Borden: 

Harbours and Rivers, Nova Scotia-Annapolis harbour - improvements, ice piers, $15,000.


Mr. JAMESON.: This matter was under discussion at considerable length last year and the minister gave a very fair statement to the committee so far as he was able at the time. Who has the contract, what is the amount of the contract, and does the minister believe that the work will be satisfactory in fulfilling its purpose?


William Pugsley: The contract was first awarded to Messrs. Reid and Archibald for $34,400, but they declined to sign the contract as drawn by the department because it made them responsible for the work during construction. New tenders were called for and three tenders were received, ranging from $46,736 to $47,000. The lowest tender was that of the Nova Scotia Construction Company, Limited, and the contract was awarded to them. Their tender was a little above the chief engineer's estimate, which, was $45,625. The work is going on satisfactorily and it is expected that this amount will complete the payments to the contractors. The work is designed to resist tne flow of the ice coming down the river and so keep the harbour of Annapolis open all the year round.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Is it the intention to connect these piers with any superstructure?


William Pugsley: It is not the present intention.


John Waterhouse Daniel: Is it intended to do so in the future?


William Pugsley: No; it is not like the wharfs at St. Genevieve that were referred to the other day.


John Waterhouse Daniel: It is not intended to make a bridge of it?


William Pugsley: Not that I am aware of; it could not be.


Mr. CROSBY.: Who are the officers of the Nova Scotia Construction Company?


William Pugsley: The names are on the contract, but I have not the contract with me. I shall be glad to get the names if the hon. gentleman desires.


Adam Brown Crosby: I should like to have them.

Arichat wharf, $10,000.


William Pugsley: It is understood that the Plant line of steamers are going to make Arichat a nort of call when this wharf is completed. The total estimated cost is $25,000.


Clarence Jameson: Is it the intention to have this work done by contract?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Clarence Jameson: Is there any policy in the department as to when work shall be done by contract and when by day work?


William Pugsley: In all cases where the work can be as well done by contract as by day work we call for tenders, but where there is repairing to be done it can often better be done bv day work where you have a good foreman. However, we prefer to call for tenders whenever we can.
Black Point breakwater, $5,000.


Clarence Jameson: Will this work be done by contract?


William Pugsley: I think it will be, unless it should be better to do it by day work.


Adam Brown Crosby: What would make it better?


William Pugsley: It may be more economical. This is an out-of-the-way place, and it might be better to send a competent foreman to do the work.


Adam Brown Crosby: Will this cover the whole cost?


William Pugsley: No, we will require $3,300 more. The total cost of the work will be $8,300.
Blue Rocks Island-breakwater at western end, $5,000.


William Pugsley: The total estimated cost of this work is $15,000.
Bluff Head-breakwater extension, $2,500.


William Pugsley: This is to extend the breakwater 90 feet, recommended by the resident engineer. This amount it is expected will complete the work.
Breen's Pond-breakwater, $8,000.


William Pugsley: This is to build a breakwater to provide shelter for fishing boats. The estimated cost is $14,000.


Clarence Jameson: Will tenders be asked for this work?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Mr. RHODES.: The minister mentioned that the Bluff Head breakwater extension had been recommended by the resident engineer. Do I understand that such a recommendation is peculiar to that item alone?


William Pugsley: Oh, no. My memorandum happened to be to that effect. The course pursued with regard to all works is that when an application is made, it is referred to the chief engineer for the purpose of obtaining a report from the resident engineer as to the public necessity which exists for the work, the extent of traffic which will be accommodated or the protection which will be given, and the estimated cost of the work.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I wish to bring to the attention of the minister the fact that the wharf or pier at Parrsboro is in a very bad condition. The planks upon it are so rotten that horses and carriages cannot go on it with safety. Parrsboro is an important point, not only as a railway terminus, but because there is a daily steamship service between that point and Canning in the county of Kings. The condition of the wharf has been a serious matter to the ship-owners this year. The repairs would not cost much, as there is on the wharf a large quantity of plank owned by the department which could be used for the purpose. I brought the matter to the attention of the minister and the deputy minister some time ago, and was informed that it would be referred to the resident engineer for a report.


William Pugsley: Direction was given some time ago to have a report made on the wharf at Parrsboro. I do not at this moment remember what the report was, but the matter will receive consideration. It may be that the work can be done out of the general vote for repairs.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I inspected this wharf personally last summer and I think $50 for labour, with the material on hand, would put the wharf in repair. It is very urgently needed.
Brooklyn-towards reconstruction of breakwater, $25,000.


William Pugsley: This is not a new work, but it is to rebuild a work which was constructed a good many years ago, and which has gone to considerable decay.


Clarence Jameson: In this connection I wish to mention the landing wharf at Cen-treville. This work is not only in the interest of the people of that locality, but in the interest of the department itself. As I am informed, owing to the fact that the toredo has eaten off the lower end of the piling, the whole work is in danger of collapsing in any heavy storm. I brought this matter to the attention of the minister by correspondence, and he informed me that it would be put into the hands of the engineer for inquiry. Has the minister ascertained just what the state of the work is, and if so, will steps be taken to protect

it at an early date in order that the work will not he entirely destroyed? The work itself is not sufficient to furnish the facilities required by that place. It was constructed prior to confederation and lengthened twelve or fifteen years ago and a comparatively small expenditure of $500 or $600 was made later. A prosperous settlement has developed there and the business now warrants much greater harbour facilities than are available. A steamboat makes connection with St. John, and there is perhaps the largest manufacuring plant for the putting up of fish in the county of Digby. Many hundreds of people are absolutely dependent on the industry prosecuted within the protection of this particular harbour. If the wharf or breakwater were extended, or indeed if a new structure were built, as I believe will be necessary, further to the right of the present structure, a much larger business would develop there. But in the meantime it is absolutely necessary that some work should be done to protect the present structure from destruction.


William Pugsley: As there is no item in the estimates for the wharf at Centreville, I have no memorandum with me about it, but I shall look the matter up and give my hon. friend the information later on. I regret that I have not the information.
Brule wharf-repairs and extension, revote of lajjsecl amount, $2,200.


William Pugsley: This is for repairs and extension of the wharf at Brule. This is the total estimated cost.
Burk's Head or Robert's Cove, North In-gonisk-breakwater, $28,500.


William Pugsley: This Is the total estimated cost of this breakwater. It is to be 300 feet in length with an ' L ' on the outer end, 75 feet long. It will have to be heavily built as it is exposed to severe gales, and the full sweep of the Atlantic.


Adam Brown Crosby: What accommodation will this afford and how many vessels or ships will be accommodated by it?


William Pugsley: Perhaps my hon. friend from Cape Breton North (Mr. McKenzie) who is personally familiar with the situation could give the most satisfactory information


Mr. McKENZIE.: The breakwater at Burke's Head is required like the few breakwaters we have along North Victoria for the purpose of protecting the fishermen. We have at Ingonish, North Bay and South Bay a large settlement of fishermen who are entirely dependent for their living upon fishing. The coast is exposed to the full swing of the Atlantic, and when it is blowing at all they cannot go out or come in without something in the shape of a breakwater. The making of a harbour is Mr. JAMESON.
out of the question and this protection is absolutely necessary. This breakwater has been asked for many years to create a shelter behind which boats can run when coming in and where they can be moored at nights in safety even in a storm. Hon. members who are familiar with the use of breakwaters will not require any further information about it except that it is absolutely necessary for the protection of the fishermen, that without it they are suffering great loss. We are very pleased indeed that this vote is in the estimates. No hon. gentleman who is familiar with the needs of the fishermen will object to it.


Adam Brown Crosby: I have no desire to object to it but I wish to know what accommodation it is going to afford to people in that end of the province. We require many breakwaters in Nova Scotia, our fishermen require a great deal of assistance, and I only wish to ascertain whether it is essential that we should spend so much money at that particular point or whether it would not be well to spend some in other ports. If the hon. gentleman would state whether there is any shipping there, we would have more information than we have at present.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: It will serve as a wharf at which the steamboat now plying between North Sydney and North Victoria will call. It is impossible for the boat to call without a dock and the fishermen, in order to send out their fish and land supplies, have to run out a couple of miles to meet the steamboat. That is a very inconvenient and hazardous way of doing business and one which causes a great deal of loss to these men because they cannot make any definite contract to send away their fish as they have to depend entirely on weather conditions as to whether they can put their freight on board the steamer or not. This will enable the steamer to come in in all reasonable conditions of weather. I cannot promise that any large shipping will get shelter ttjere because to make a breakwater which would protect large vessels would involve much more expenditure than the comparatively small amount required here. It will, however, afford shelter to 50 or 60 boats that are fishing off there and to other boats from Neill's harbour or North shore which may be caught in bad weather when fishing off Ingonish.


Adam Brown Crosby: What is the size of the steamer which this breakwater is to accommodate?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The ' Weymouth ' is the steamer doing the business now but I cannot tell her size. We are getting a new steamer called the 'Aspev', a very much larger boat, built recently at Shelburne and fitted out at Weymouth. My hon. friend may perhaps remember the 'Scotia' running between Halifax and somewhere

down in Guysboro. The 'Aspey' is largely on the lines of the 'Scotia' and a little larger.


Adam Brown Crosby: Now that the Minister of Public Works has handed over his task to my hon. friend, we cannot fail to be convinced that there is no question of nolitics in this. I have no desire whatever to interfere with any estimate because the only trouble we have is that we have not sufficient money to go round, but when he says this breakwater is to accommodate a steamer of between ten and fifteen tons, one cannot help questioning the necessity for it.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I do not think my hon. friend would like to venture on the North Atlantic. along that coast in a ten ton steamer.


Adam Brown Crosby: I know the steamer very well and he does not. She is not over fifteen tons, as he will find if he refers to the blue-book.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am quite willing to have the records in the blue-books produced, and if so my hon. friend will find himself in a very ridiculous position. The ' Weymouth ' is seven times that capacity.


Adam Brown Crosby: I did not understand there was more than one boat running to this place. When will this new boat commence running there?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: There is only one boat making regular trips along that shore as there is not enough traffic for more than one. The 'Aspey' is taking the place of the 'Weymouth' which has been running there the last ten years, subsidized both by the Nova Scotia government and this government. She is getting to be old and not equal to_ the business, and a new boat has been built called the 'Aspey', but I do not think she is yet on the route. The hon. gentleman will find a nhotograph and description of her in the office of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. .


Adam Brown Crosby: What is the tonnage of this new boat?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Not being a shipping man myself, I do not carry her dimensions in my mind, but my hon. friend can get all the details he requires from the Department of Trade and Commerce.


Mr. LAW.: When the hon. gentleman says that the 'Weymouth' is only ten or fifteen tons, he cannot have ever seen her. She is five times that tonnage. I know the boat for she ran between Weymouth and Yarmouth a number of years.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: How many feet of water does she draw?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: About 8 feet and the new boat about 10 feet.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the depth of water at low tide?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: That will depend on how far you run out the breakwater. This breakwater, when built will have a depth of water at low tide of ten feet to accommodate that boat.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: We ought to know, before we vote to build a breakwater, how far out we shall have to build it and what are its dimensions.


William Pugsley: I have said already that the breakwater is to be 300 feet in iength with an L on the western side 75 feet in length.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: How comes it that in the province of Nova Scotia with a population of 450,000, you have 111 separate items in the estimates and are going to spend there just about the same amount as in Ontario with a population of 2,114,000, not including the city of Ottawa.


William Pugsley: The principle which has guided me, is, as far as possible, to get appropriations for what seems to be necessary for public works which have been brought to my notice. The size of a province or its population is not always the governing factor as to the amount of money required to be expended there on wharfs and breakwaters. Ontario is a very large province but a great deal of it is inland and does not call for expenditures on wharfs. But when the hon. gentleman speaks of the amount being expended in Ontario, he forgets altogether the very large expenditure made in Toronto, amounting to something like $700,000, which alone overtops all the expenditures in all the harbours along the whole coast of Nova Scotia. He leaves out altogether also the expenditure of some $900,000 at Fort William and Port Arthur, which is $300,000 more than all the expenditures asked for upon harbours and rivers in Nova Scotia. He likewise omits the expenditures at Tiffin and Victoria Harbour, which together amount to one-half the total expenditures on wharfs and breakwaters in Nova Scotia, also the exDenditures at Collingwood and Goderich.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Do these appear under the heading of expenditure in the estimates for Ontario?


William Pugsley: No, Tiffin and Victoria do not, Goderich does.


William Stevens Fielding: My hon. friend knows they are in Ontario, does he not?


William Pugsley: Tiffin and Victoria are in capital account, and do not appear in these items, because there is no capital account for the province of Nova Scotia, whereas there are $1,200,000 for harbour im-

provements in the province of Ontario which are charged to capital account. You have in those three places alone twice as much as we are asking for in respect to all the harbours, breakwaters and wharfs in the province of Nova Scotia, and that leaves out altogether the large improvements going on in the city of Toronto.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Let the minister look at his own book in the matter of current expenditures, and he will find $684,000 is spent in the province of Ontario on current expenditure. While some of these ' other expenditures are being made in Ontario, the large ones have been made in the eastern provinces.


William Pugsley: Look at page 55 and you will see the harbours in Ontario.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: I am taking the items in Ontario, 44 items, and 111 separate iteips in the province of Nova Scotia. I merely ask the minister to explain that.


William Stevens Fielding: The hon. gentleman has in his hands the estimate which shows that for harbours and rivers in the fresh water province of Ontario you have $1,262,000; while in the inland province of Nova Scotia out in the ocean, you have $600,000. Yet the hon. gentleman thinks it is too much.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I would like to say just a word here. Since I came to Ottawa I have heard in the corridors, and outside as well, this same remark made by some members from Ontario on both sides of the House. I think they forget the fact that every one of the 18 counties of Nova Scotia fronts on the sea, and it is necessary that these counties should be provided with wharfs. As a matter of fact, whichever government might be in power, I have no doubt that there will be misappropriations and male expenditures from time to time. But in any case it is necessary that these expenditures should be made, and there is no other body to make them but the Dominion government. I think it ill becomes members from the other provinces to criticise the small amount the province of Nova Scotia is getting, which is only a fair proportion of the amount expended on public works.
Mr. ARMSTRONG- I was just asking for my own information. If the hon. gentleman will look at the province of Ontario, he will see that there are a large number of counties fronting on the great lakes and on the river, and he will recognize that they have important wharfs to build and maintain. If the Minister of Finance had been here this afternoon he would have heard from a number of gentlemen from the province of Ontario who have been pleading with the Minister of Public Works for years, not only with this minister but Mr. PUGSLEY.
with his predecessors, begging him, I might almost say, to spend a small amount of money in making public works where they were really necessary. We know that he has been making expenditures in other parts of the country where they were not nearly as necessary as many of the towns mentioned this afternoon.


William Pugsley: I do not believe the people of the great province of Ontario will justify my hon. friend in seeking to raise prejudice against one section with respect to these expenditures. He asked how it was that there was only the small sum of $600,000 being expended in similar works in Ontario, while there was about an equal amount being expended in Nova Scotia. But as the Minister of Finance has pointed out, for public works chargeable to income in the province of Ontario, the amount which we ask is $1,262,850, for harbours and rivers only, outside of public buildings altogether. To that is to be added the amounts found in page 55, $800,000 for harbour improvements in Port Arthur and Fort William, also in the province of Ontario, $120,000 for improvements at Tiffin harbour, in the province of Ontario, and $145,000 for improvements at Victoria harbour, also in Ontario. There you have altogether upwards of two million and a quarter dollars being expended in the inland province of Ontario for harbours and rivers alone.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: I do not wish the minister to try to lead this House to believe that I am attempting to raise prejudice between the provinces. Of the amounts that he has mentioned, a large portion is for capital account.


William Stevens Fielding: What difference does it make?


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: I might say the same in Nova Scotia, a large portion, I suppose in Halifax would be.


William Stevens Fielding: Nothing in capital account for 'harbours and rivers in Nova Scotia.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Possibly not this year.


William Stevens Fielding: For harbours and rivers in Nova Scotia I do not recollect a dollar being voted on capital account.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: For harbours and rivers in Ontario, has a dollar been voted on capital account?


William Stevens Fielding: Yes, here to-day my hon. friend has just shown you sums amounting to $2,000,000.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: These were for special improvements such as were necessary on the Welland canal. You might as well call that harbours and rivers.


William Stevens Fielding: It is for the harbour of Fort William, the harbour of Port Arthur, the harbour of Collingwood, the harbour of Goderich. What are these but harbours?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Are they on capital account?


William Stevens Fielding: Many of them. Tiffin and Victoria harbours and Fort William, these are all capital account, and there is not a dollar for capital account in the province of Nova Scotia, in that service.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Some of the harbours and rivers are, put into capital account and some into current account. Explain your system of book-keeping.


William Stevens Fielding: Large development works, such as the class of works in the river St. Lawrence, have for years been charged to capital account. They differ only in volume. The smaller works are usually charged to income account. The province has nothing to do with it.
Central Economy Wharf-renewal of stem -revote of $1,200 lapsed, $2,000.


Clarence Jameson: What is the nature of the work?


William Pugsley: Some four years ago this work .was damaged by ice, it had not been completely close piled. There was a heavy run of ice and the wharf was damaged, and it required to be repaired. I may say the stem of the wharf at a distance of 120 feet from the shore was lifted by the ice, and the crib-work abutment at the shore end was undermined.
Chapel Cove Breakwater-revote of $3,000 lapsed, $5,000.


William Pugsley: This is for a breakwater 240 feet in length and twenty feet wide on
top.	It is to be constructed partially of creosoted timber. The estimated cost is $7,800.
David's Cove Breakwater-wharf extension, $4,300.


William Pugsley: This is for the purpose of extending the breakwater and is urgently required.


Clarence Jameson: Will that work be done by contract?


William Pugsley: I think this will probably be done by day labour, but we have not decided.


Clarence Jameson: I know the locality and the people there and I would like to suggest to the minister that tenders should be asked and that if possible the work should be done by contract. I think it could be done more satisfactorily for a variety of reasons. I think the department will get much better value for the expenditure, and that the people would be better satisfied.


William Pugsley: That matter will be carefully considered.
Deep Brook-pile wharf-revote of $500 lapsed, $1,500.	*


William Pugsley: This is to make provision towards constructing a substantial wharf and pile work about 200 feet long with a return at the outer end, giving a frontage of 150 feet. It will cost about $3,500. We will have probably next year to ask for a further vote, but $1,500 is all we require this year.
Delap's Cove Breakwater-part reconstruction of shore end-revote of $800, lapsed, $1,000.


William Pugsley: This is to complete the reconstruction of a portion, being about half, of the shore end block of the breakwater at this place. This will finish the work.
Delorey's Beach, Monk's Head-breakwater -revote of $4,000, lapsed, $6,500.


William Pugsley: This is to complete the breakwater which is 300 feet long.
Devil's Island-breakwater-extension of- revote of $4,800, lapsed, $6,000.


William Pugsley: This is to provide for the extension of Devil's island breakwater with an arm at the outer end. The object is to provide a shelter for motor and other boats of the fishermen. There is a large fishing industry at this place.
Digby Harbour-improvements, including repairs and additions to pier, $30,000.


William Pugsley: This is to continue the improvements now under way at Digby harbour.
Diligent River Harbour-breakwater-revote of $1,600, lapsed, $7,500.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: How much money has been expended at Diligent river, what is it proposed to construct and what is the total cost of the work estimated at?


William Pugsley: This is for the construction of a breakwater to make it safe for vessels going in and out of this harbour.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: How much has been expended?


William Pugsley: Only a small amount- $400.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: What is the estimated total cost?


William Pugsley: 


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Would the minister state what the dimensions of the wharf are?


William Pugsley: 360 feet in length, 14 feet wide on top and 30 feet high at the outer end.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Is it the intention of the department to call for tenders and begin operations on this work during the coming year?	.


William Pugsley: I cannot say anything beyond this to my Iron, friend, that we are now asking for the amount in the estimates and I have no reason to suppose but what the work will be proceeded with during the coming year. Of course, we have a great many works and we have to get the plans and specifications all ready before we can call for tenders, but I have no reason to suppose that there will be any unnecessary delay in connection with the work.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: That answer does not convey very' much meaning to me. I can see that this item is in the estimates, and apparently it is the intention at some time or other to construct this work. But am I to understand that the department say that they will spend $7,500 to construct this wharfs and that after the plans and specifications are brought down they will go ahead and construct it? Surely the department does not do business in that slap-dash sort of fashion. I would like seriously to know if it is the intention of the minister to see that this work is constructed. That is a plain question and I would like to have a plain answer.


William Pugsley: The fact of the amount appearing in the estimates is evidence of the intention of the government to proceed with the work. But, before going on with the work, after this appropriation is passed, there will be a very careful survey made by the engineer, plans and specifications will be prepared and in the ordinary course, speaking generally, tenders will be invited. When the tenders come in it may be that the amount will be very considerably higher than what we estimate. I happen to have in my mind a case in my own province last year where an amount was put in the estimates and I expected to go on with a work, but when the tenders came in the amount was considerably higher than the chief engineer estimated and we did not proceed with it. Therefore, I am unable to give my hon. friend the positive assurance that the work will be proceeded with.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I do not profess to be an expert wharf builder but I can say without any hesitation that the department can construct a wharf of splendid quality and of the dimensions mentioned by the minister for the sum placed in the estimates. He need not have the slightest worry about exceeding the amount in the estimates. I find, on looking at the Auditor General's Report for last year V-150, that the sum of $367.77 has already been expended upon this work.


William Pugsley: 


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Was that on election day?


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Just prior to the election. Am I to understand from the minister that this amount has been expended without any serious intention .on the part of the department to proceed with the work, no plans or specifications having been prepared? The minister is unable to say when this work is to be constructed. He even intimated that if the work cost more than the amount in the appropriation it might not be constructed. It surely is a-most remarkable position for a minister of the Crown to be put in. Could the minister give me an explanation of what this sum was spent for?


William Pugsley: My hon. friend has not given me the particulars of the expenditure.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: 
William Pugsley: That appears to have been some work done on the Diligent Harbour breakwater. I see there was a foreman and there have evidently been a rock driller, a quarryman and some labourers employed.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I can see that quite as well as the minister can by reading the Auditor General's Report.	.


William Pugsley: What does my hon. friend desire me to give him?


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I am asking what this sum was expended for and was it expended as a matter of experiment to know whether this wharf should be constructed at a certain point, or was it intended to be a partial sum expended on this wharf which will be completed with the estimate now under consideration?


William Pugsley: I cannot tell my hon. friend at this moment but I will look at the engineer's report and give him the information at a later date.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I would like to have the information because it is in my constituency, and if one of my constituents wants to know when the department is going to proceed with this work I want to be able to answer him. That is one of the reasons why I am here. I do not object to the work : indeed I may say it is a very necessary public work. I want to be able to say to my constituents when I go home that this work will be constructed and I feel like pressing the Minister of Public Works to tell me

when he will have it done. There is a very large lumber district around here and large quantities of lumber are shipped, so that the immediate completion of the work is of great interest to Liberals and Conservatives alike.


William Stevens Fielding: If every hon. gentleman should demand a similar pledge with respect to the particular work in his constituency the Minister of Public Works might have a larger contract on hand than he could fill. I take it that the presentation of these estimates shows the desire of the minister to carry out the work. If he is asked to say that every one of these works should be commenced at a particular time and carried to completion during the year I certainly should advise him not to give such a pledge.


William Pugsley: I would assume that the $367 was for making the testing and boring in the bottom of the harbour which is necessary in all works of this kind in order to estimate the cost.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I do not wish the Minister of Finance for one moment to think that I am unreasonable, but this item has appeared in the estimates at least once before.


William Stevens Fielding: There are quite a number like it.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: It is an old friend in the county and I wanted to know whether it was the intention of the minister to complete it in the near future, so that I may be able to tell the shippers in that locality when they will have a wharf on which to land their goods.


William Pugsley: The hon. gentleman can tell them what has taken place to-night.
Dover Wharf, $5,000.


Adam Brown Crosby: Will this be done by tender and contract?


William Pugsley: We have not decided.


Adam Brown Crosby: I thought that all public works were to be done by contract.


William Pugsley: I have explained that all work which can be done as economically by contract as by day work will be done by contract. It sometimes happens that the tenders are higher than the estimate of the chief engineer and he recommends that it be done by day labour, or that the work is so remote from the contractors that it can be more economically done the other way.


Adam Brown Crosby: Dover is not far from Halifax and there is no difficulty in getting contractors.


William Pugsley: This Dover is in Guys-boro' county.


Adam Brown Crosby: I might have supposed that it was not in my county.


William Pugsley: There are some publie works to be done in your county.
Dublin Shore-breakwater pier, $10,000.


William Pugsley: We expect to finish the work this summer.
Duncan Cove, $6,000.


William Pugsley: This is to build an adequate shelter for the lifeboat station, to protect the wharf, and to accommodate fishing boats. The estimated cost is $19,000. This is in the county of Halifax.
Eastern passage harbour, $8,500.


William Pugsley: This is also in the county of Halifax. It is for the improvement of the boat harbour which has become almost filled with sand to the great inconvenience of the fishermen. The total probable cost is $13,500.


Adam Brown Crosby: Will this be done by contract ?


William Pugsley: I think this will have to be done by day labour.


Adam Brown Crosby: This work is badly needed but I think that every working man applying for work there, no matter what his politics, should have a fair show. Of course, there is a lot of favouritism shown and it always will be shown by politicians, but at the same time when a man asks for a day's work he should not be asked what his politics are or to bring a certificate from some party man before he is employed. Men living in the locality should be employed regardless of their political opinions or of anything else ' except that they give a fair day's work for a fair day's pay.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend will see how impossible it is for the minister to interfere in these cases. - We endeavour to get a competent foreman, and we leave him free to employ good men in the locality. We give him no instruction about their politics at all. He is expected to use his own judgment and to select men who will give an honest day's work for a fair day's pay.
Fox Island-extension of beach protection work, &c., $1,500.


William Pugsley: This is to construct a breakwater. The materials were purchased in 1908-9. This is to complete the work.


Clarence Jameson: Is this to be in the nature of beach protection or the construction of a breakwater?


William Pugsley: There is a breakwater there now, which operates, I take it, as a means of protection from the sea. This is merely for an extension of that work.


Clarence Jameson: Last year there was an item for beach protection, if I remember rightly, in the county represented by the Minister of Finance. On ithat occasion the Minister of Public Works justified the work as being necessary to protect certain properties on the water-front which were being more or less carried away from year to year by the action of the water and the tides. At that 'time I drew his attention to the fact that a certain property owned by the Dominion government, and known as Battery Point, at Digby, was becoming from year to year worn away by the action of the tides and the water. Not only was the property diminished in area, but the earth and rocks which were being washed away were being carried into the harbour and forming a very serious sandbar. The minister said he would make a note of my remarks, and he thought some protection would be thrown up in front of the Point to prevent this erosion. Guns owned by the Militia Department are mounted 'there, and I think the property is under the control of the department. I would ask the minister to bear it in mind and provide for it in 'the estimates, if not this year, then next year. It is a very serious detriment to the harbour of Digby.


William Pugsley: I will have a note made of it and perhaps confer with the Minister of Militia about it.
Gulf Shore-to complete breakwater between Pugwash and Northport, $1,200.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: A year or a year and a half ago the government partly constructed a wharf at the - Gulf Shore in the county of Cumberland. At the same time a survey was taken between Pugwash and Northport. These are two entirely different places. Northport and Pugwash are 18 miles apart.


William Pugsley: This is six miles from Pugwash. There was expended on the woTk last year $2,489.95, and the total cost will be $3,700, and this vote is to complete it.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Gulf Shore, Pugwash and Northport would form a triangle. There has been no work other than a survey between Northport and Pugwash, and these points ate 18 miles apart. I would ask the minister to make a memorandum and let me know later if it is -the intention of the department to also construct a wharf between Northport and Pugwash, or if this is only to complete the breakwater at Gulf Shore.


William Pugsley: This is to complete the breakwater at Gulf Shore. We have expended $2,489.85, and this amount is asked ito complete the work. The hon. member says that the statement that it is between Pugwash and Northport is an error.


William Pugsley: 


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Yes, it was in contemplation at one time tto construct a wharf near Northport.


William Pugsley: That is probably how the error has occurred. I would move to amend the item by striking out the words 'between Pugwash and Northport.'


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: It is no*t the intention to do anything further towards the construction of a wharf between Northport and Pugwash?


William Pugsley: We cannot at present, because there is no appropriation.
Habitant River-to lengthen and complete approach to wharf at Canning, $2,000.


William Pugsley: The estimated cost of this extension is $25,000. The expenditure to the 31st of March, 1909, was $2,763.17. The expenditure for this year has been $5,256.83 and we are asking for $2,000. That will make $10,000 which will have been expended, and if the further extension is carried on it will take $15,000 more but we are not asking for that now.


Clarence Jameson: That is merely to complete the approach to the wharf at Canning?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Clarence Jameson: And the additional $15,000 of which the minister spoke would be required to complete an extension of the wharf, not on the approach.


William Pugsley: Yes, that would extend it 750 feet down stream.


Clarence Jameson: Where is this public work?


William Pugsley: In the county of Kings.


Clarence Jameson: Represented by the Minister of Militia?	[DOT]


William Pugsley: Yes.
Hampton Breakwater-extension-revote of lapsed amount, $3,000.


William Pugsley: This is to extend the existing wharf about 100 feet. The object is to prevent the silt and gravel from being washed into the schooner berths which are there alongside the pier. There was a previous vote of $3,000 of which none was used, and we are asking a revote to complete this work.
Harbours, rivers and bridges generally- repairs and improvements, $37,500.


William Pugsley: This is the usual general vote, but it is less than last year.


Clarence Jameson: I spoke to the minister with reference to Churchpoint breakwater a few days ago. The minister was kind enough to say then that out of this general vote he would endeavour to provide a berth

on the shoreward end of that wharf which would cost a comparatively insignificant sum, $300 or $400. I would like to have the matter noted now so it may appear as a matter of record.


William Pugsley: That is under consideration and if it is decided to proceed with it it can be done out of the general vote.


Adam Brown Crosby: I would ask the minister to consider the breakwater at Portuguese Cove. They have a very good breakwater there, but it is not as useful as it would be if it had a T across the end. That would make it much more commodious for the people there and would greatly improve the breakwater. I brought the matter to the minister's attention last year and would be glad if he would take it into his consideration with this general vote and could see his way clear to do the work in that way.


William Pugsley: It would be an improvement but still it is not an actually necessary work, and I am afraid that the T would cost more than the amount we could take out of the general vote. The general vote is for repairs and small works not exceeding $500. We are providing for a good many wharfs and breakwaters and I did not feel that I could make a special provision for it this year, but I will have it carefully looked into.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: What has been the policy in the last few years in purchasing piles for the repairs on existing wharfs and for the construction of new wharfs? Have they been purchased in large quantities for the whole province, or does the department purchase a few here and there in the districts where the work happened to be? Is there any uniformity of price in the purchase of piles?


William Pugsley: There has been annually in the maritime provinces an appropriation of a lump sum to purchase creo-soted piling. That piling is purchased in the Southern States, creosoted there and used for various public works. We like to keep a quantity on hand to be used in the construction on wharfs, in the waters affected by the teredo. In harbours into which there is a flow of fresh water the teredo is not nearly so destructive as in harbours not so supplied with fresh water. We endeavour to get it under competition getting prices from the different firms dealing in creosoted timber. There are two large companies in the Southern States which deal in this and we endeavour to buy in fair quantities and at the lowest possible price.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I had not in mind the question of creosoted timber because that cannot be purchased locally. My point was whether there was any policy of pur-32
chasing piling in quantities in order that it might be obtained at a uniform and comparatively reasonable price or if the piling was purchased from different persons in various parts of the province, where work happened to be going on, at any price that the person chose to charge the department, within comparative reason.


William Pugsley: We are not in the habit of purchasing ordinary piling in large quantities. We purchase for each particular work. Where we let the work by contract the contractor buys the material himself. If we do the work by day work, we purchase the material for the particular wharf we are proposing to construct. Our engineer or foreman looks around and advises what is best to be done. The piling suitable for one wharf would not do for another. It may depend on the foundation, on the distance before you strike rock, on the rise and fall of the tide, &c., so that we have to buy the piling we require from time to time, and it would not do to buy in large quantities.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I can quite understand that piling varies in size and is purchased at so much per foot. Does the department call for tenders for a certain quantity of piling at so much per foot, or allow the engineer or foreman to go into the locality and do what he thinks best?


William Pugsley: It is largely left to the judgment of the engineer to purchase at the lowest market price.


Clarence Jameson: Is this creosote timber purchased direct from the company?


William Pugsley: There are two southern companies which supply the timber, and the custom of the department is to keep a fairly large quantity on hand.


Clarence Jameson: It has been brought to my notice that this timber is not purchased from the companies direct, but from a purchasing agent or private individual, who gets the middle man's profit.


William Pugsley: 
Clarence Jameson: Have they agents in every province in Canada?


William Pugsley: I think there are two in the lower provinces.


Clarence Jameson: Then the rule of the department is to purchase from the agents of these companies?


William Pugsley: Yes, from their authorized agents.
Inverness, Broad Cove Mines-harbour improvements, $10,000.


William Pugsley: This is to provide for the carrying on of the proposed works for the accommodation of vessels and to acquire the necessary property from the Inverness Railway and Coal Company. The matter has been under consideration quite a number of years and we have expropriated certain properties from the Inverness Railway and Coal Company. The resident engineer estimates the cost at some $60,000.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Will this complete?


William Pugsley: No.
Joggin's Mines-breakwater wharf-repairs and extension, $9,000.


William Pugsley: This is to extend the breakwater. The total estimated cost is $9,000.
Judique-approach to breakwater at Mckay's Point, $1,350.


William Pugsley: That is the estimated cost to provide for an approach.
Kingsport breakwater pier - extension,


William Pugsley: This is to extend the breakwater piers some 200 feet. The present pier is 700 feet long and 40 feet wide, and it is necessary to extend it further to get deeper water and give much needed accommodation to vessels.
Lallave River-to provide for the disposal of saw-dust and other dredged material deposited on foreshore, $4,000.


William Pugsley: This is to provide for the removal of dredged material which was deposited at convenient places instead of being carried a good many miles further to the sea.
Lake Ainslie-protected boat channel leading to wharf at Kenlock (Lockbay railway station), $8,000.


William Pugsley: This is to give a channel of 15 feet wide and 6 feet at low water at the eastern end of the pier and give access to the wharf.
Leitche's Creek-wharf, $3,500.


William Pugsley: This is to afford protection to that wharf. The total cost is estimated at $7,000.
Liscombe Harbour Wharf, $3,000.


William Pugsley: That is the estimated total cost.
Litchfield-extension of breakwater, $4,000.


William Pugsley: This will be sufficient for the extension of the breakwater.
Little Anse-breakwater, $10,000.


William Pugsley: This is to afford protection to fishing vessels. The total cost will be $24,000.
Little River-breakwater-wharf, $4,000.


William Pugsley: 


William Pugsley: The total cost will be $10,000. This is to construct a landing pier 165 feet long right out to the depth of 12 feet at low water to afford proper landing and shipping facilities.


Clarence Jameson: Is it intended to call for tenders and give the work by contract?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Clarence Jameson: Have thd plans been prepared.


William Pugsley: Not the working plans.


Clarence Jameson: I suppose that after the New Year this work will be taken in hand?


William Pugsley: Yes, after the Appropriation Act passes. There will be some 45,000 cubic feet of crib-work.
Little Tancook Island-breakwater pier, $5,000. .


William Pugsley: This breakwater pier will cost about $18,000. It is to protect the cove formed by a long projection of the southwest part of the island. It is to afford a well sheltered harbour.
Lower Argyle-wharf, $5,000.


William Pugsley: There is an old wharf there now almost useless and this is to construct a new one. This is the estimated cost.
McNair's Cove-extension and repairs to breakwater wharf, $6,300.


William Pugsley: The total estimated cost is $10,000 but we have expended $3,900 and this will complete.
Main a Dieu-wharf at outer end of eastern breakwater, $10,000.


William Pugsley: The total estimated cost is $15,000.
Meteghan-breakwater - renewals and repairs, $4,000.


William Pugsley: I move that we amend that item to read ' Meteghan River Breakwater.'


Clarence Jameson: I would be surprised if the minister made that change. There is a place known as Meteghan River wharf, where there is a breakwater, and there is also a place known as Meteghan where there is a public wharf now in a sad state of dilapidation, and which, unless it is speedily protected, will certainly be carried away by storms this winter. I had hoped when I saw this item that it was to be an expenditure at Meteghan where the work is sadly needed. The breakwater at Meteghan, as I have also shown the minister bv means of photographs, is in a bad condition, and unless some repairs are speedily made upon it, it will be damaged if not destroyed. If the minister wishes to amend his estimates by inserting an item for the extension or improvement of the

Meteghan River breakwater, I will have no objection. But where the amount is mentioned in the estimates for Meteghan, which is an entirely different place from Meteghan river, I should object to the change.


William Pugsley: The work is very much needed at Meteghan river, and it will take this amount to repair it, while it would take a comparatively small amount to repair the breakwter at Meteghan. This is needed for Meteghan river. But if it is necessary to get a special vote for Meteghan, I will consider that a little later. But I had thought that the repairs there were so comparatively small that they could be done out of the general vote. In the meantime, I ask that this be passed for Meteghan river.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: If the motion means a diversion of the vote from its original intent, I could not receive it.


William Pugsley: It was originally intended for Meteghan river, and it is necessary to alter the reading of the estimate in order definitely to show where the work is to be done.


Clarence Jameson: I have no desire to prevent the expenditure of this sum at Meteghan river. But I have to say with regard to Meteghan that I believe an amount is absolutely necessary to effect the repairs there which are required in the interest, not only of the people who have to use this work, but of the department itself which owns the work. The minister is confusing the breakwater at Meteghan, for which a *comparatively small expenditure is required, with the public landing which is inside that breakwater, and which is an entirely separate structure.


William Pugsley: Supposing we voted the money for Meteghan breakwater, it could not be used for a wharf inside the breakwater. We would have to get another vote for that.


Clarence Jameson: As the minister has inserted the word ' breakwater,' meaning a breakwater or a public wharf, I think the amount might be applied to that. But as an amount corresponding to this is necessary for that breakwater and public wharf at Meteghan, I do not think it would be desirable to divert the sum. I do not think the minister would be justified in saying that there could be any possible confusion between the two. I think the work at Meteghan stands in greater need of this expenditure than the work at Meteghan river. The latteT is a comparatively new work, while that at Meteghan is in need of this expenditure to keep it from 'being carried away. If the minister, however, feels that under the circumstances he 32J
could not amend this then providing that a further sum corresponding in amount should be granted for Meteghan, I think would be the most suitable way of meeting the difficulty.


William Pugsley: I could not do that, I could not amend these estimates except in-so far as the amount is concerned. As to Meteghan, that is a matter that would be considered later. Suppose that this amount had been allotted to Meteghan breakwater, it could not have been used for the purpose of repairing a wharf at Meteghan, as it is inside the breakwater, while the sum you require for the breakwater at Meteghan is very small, and could be done out of the general vote. There are two Meteghan s, and there is a breakwater at each place. One is known as Meteghan river and the other as Meteghan. Now this was intended for Meteghan river, therefore I would ask the committee to change this to Meteghan river for greater definiteness. If you, Mr. Chairman, feel that you could not make the change, I shall bave to ask you to strike the amount out of the estimates altogether. It is true that my hon. friend spoke to me about the breakwater at Meteghan, and he certainly led me to suppose, whether intentionally or otherwise, that only a small amount would be required to make these repairs.


Clarence Jameson: I do not wish that there should be any misapprehension between the committee or the minister, and myself with regard to this matter. I did state that the expenditure necessary on the Meteghan breakwater would be comparatively trifling, but I also pointed out that the expenditure upon the wharf at Meteghan would be a more serious matter, and I understood from the minister that the matter was receiving attention, and that it would be provided for in the estimates. When I saw this item I concluded that the minister had conceded the necessity and was preparing to meet the emergency. As for his suggestion that if this amendment is not made he will have to move to strike out the item, if that is meant as a mild kind of threat, it does not affect me in the least. I do think that if the minister is unable to allow this item to stand, as it seems to me proper that it should stand, he should be prepared to take the matter of Meteghan breakwater and public landing into immediate consideration because, in the interest of the department over which he presides, repairs are very urgently necessary at a very early date.


William Pugsley: I have to tell my hon. friend I would be very glad to do that, but I could not allow an amount which was voted for Meteghan river to go to a breakwater in another place, and I could not allow a single dollar of that to go to the wharf at Meteghan because it is for a

breakwater. Therefore, it would not help my hon. friend, but at the same time I would say that repairs at Meteghan can be met out of the general vote. I will look into the question. If the chairman does not feel that the committee can make this amendment then I shall have to do only what I have power to do and that would be to strike it out altogether.


Gilbert Howard McIntyre: If it appeared that the change was actually a diversion of the vote I would be inclined not to receive the motion, but in so far as it appears to me to be for the purpose of greater definiteness I think I am at liberty to receive the motion.


William Pugsley: I therefore beg to move that the word ' river ' be added between the words ' Meteghan ' and ' breakwater.'
Item as amended agreed to.
Middle Island-Port Medway-breakwater- revote of $1,800, lapsed, $2,500.


William Pugsley: This is to construct a breakwater on the north side of Middle Island and this is the total estimated cost of the work.
Mira River-wharfs-revote of $700, lapsed, $750.


William Pugsley: This is to construct a wharf on the east side of Mira river 3i miles below Victoria bridge. The total estimated cost is $1,160 of which $414 has been expended, leaving what we are asking for to finish the work.
New Harbour-repairs to breakwater at Black Point, $1,000.


William Pugsley: This is to repair the breakwater, some fifty feet of which was carried away by a storm. This is the total estimated cost.
Northport-pile wharf-revote of lapsed amount, $3,000.


William Pugsley: This is in the county of Cumberland and it is to construct a wharf 200 feet long 30 feet wide and 14 feet high. This will complete the work.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Has any money been expended?*


William Pugsley: No, this is probably the one that my hon. friend spoke of.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I think so.
Nyanza Wharf-extension of, &c., $2,500.


William Pugsley: This is to extend the wharf fifty feet, using creosoted timber and the object is to enable three vessels to lie at the wharf at the same time. It will provide an increased depth of from eleven to 14 feet of water and the total estimated cost is $2,500.


William Pugsley: 


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Where is this?


William Pugsley: In Cape Breton at North Victoria.


Clarence Jameson: Perhaps it would not be inadvisable for the minister to say what he means by the word ' &c ' ?


William Pugsley: Strike out ' &c Mr. Chairman, if it is objectionable. This is only for the extension. I move that the word ' &c. ' be struck out.
Item, as amended, agreed to.
Owl's Head-to complete wharf, $900.


William Pugsley: This is to make provision for the completion of a ballast and crib-work wharf, about 180 feet long, 20 feet wide, for 120 feet from the shore and 30 feet wide for the outer 60 feet. This is to give increased depth of water at the end of the wharf. This will complete it.
Parker's Cove-harbour improvements-revote of $1,600 lapsed, $2,000.


William Pugsley: This is to complete the breakwater on the west side of the stream flowing in at Parker's Cove, in order to improve and enlarge the sheltered area for fishing boats and schooners.
Pictou Island-removal of wrecked portion of east, wharf and addition of new sheathed cribwork, &c.-revote of $4,200 lapsed, $6,800.


William Pugsley: This will complete the work.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Before the committee rises, there was a statement made by the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Crosby) in connection with an item in the estimates which would give a wrong impression and I desire as a matter of explanation of the merits of the item, to present the facts. He made an attack upon the building of a wharf to accommodate a steamer Of only 10 tons capacity which he said was the capacity of the ' Weymouth.' I have the record of the Department of Marine and Fisheries in which the name of the steamer appears and she is put down as being 102-7 feet long, 19 feet wide 7-6 feet in depth, gross capacity 154 tons, net tonnage 106 tons and 26 horse-power. He made a similar attack upon the new boat. That boat was built after the pattern of the ' Scotia ' and has a tonnage of 350. This is a fair sample of the valuable information that we received from the hon. member from Halifax.


Adam Brown Crosby: It is necessary for me to give some explanation. I thought the hon. gentleman spoke of the ' Acadia ' which is a very small boat. We do not consider this as anything more than an ordinary boat, a boat that runs along the coast and if we have to build a breakwater at Ingonish costing $30,000 for the accommodation of a boat that might run there once a week or

once a fortnight it is quite a large sum to pay for the service which we would receive. It is a serious matter for us in Nova Scotia where we have a great deal to do with the small amount of money that is spent. We think of our province as the wharf of Canada jutting away out into the Atlantic ocean and therefore we require a great deal. The province of Nova Scotia has done much for the west and for other parts of Canada. There is not a harbour in that province that does not.require some expenditure in the line of providing breakwater accommodation for the fishermen. Therefore, I was anxious that this sum should be divided up amongst some of the other ports. I have no objection at all if the government are willing to spend $30,000 for the accommodation of a very small steamer which will run perhaps not more than once a week or once a fortnight to Ingonish. I think it is not fair to other parts of the province of Nova Scotia which are really in need of breakwaters and wharfs, and which will continue to be in need of them as everybody knows in that part of the country.
Some resolutions reported.
On motion of Mr. Fielding, House adjourned at 11.40 p.m.

Monday, December 6, 1909.