1911-01-27

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).: I would like to ask the right hon. the Prime Minister whether there are any other documents to be brought down in connection with the proposal presented yesterday by the Minister of Finance, and whether there are any protocols in connection with the negotiations. Also at what date it is proposed to take up again the same question.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER.: There are no other papers to be brought down, so far as I am aware. I cannot tell to-day when the debate will be resumed, but probably within the course of next week.


Mr. FOSTER.: I would like to suggest that before we go on with the debate we should have some commercial statistics to guide us, and give us a basis of information-statistics of imports and exports as between Canada and the United States and Canada and other countries.



CIVIL SERVICE APPOINTMENTS FROM SOUTH GREY.

Mr. BLAIN.: When may I expect the return ordered some ten days ago with respect to the number of appointment in South Grey during the last few years?


Mr. MURPHY.: That is- being prepared but it is difficult to get the information.


Richard Blain: A pretty large list, I suppose.


Charles Murphy: I do not know about the size of the list, but it takes time to get the information.


Mr. FISHER.: I have been trying to get that information, but it involves our asking every employee in the department, whether he comes from South Grey or not.


Mr. ROCHE.: 


Richard Blain: That should not be a very difficult task. Surely the list cannot be so very large, and the hon. member for South Grey (Mr. Miller) could give the information.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: We do not know where our officers come from and have to find out from each one.


Richard Blain: When may we expect this return?


Sydney Arthur Fisher: We are doing everything we can as far as my department is concerned to get the information, and will send it to the Secretary of State as soon as complete.



MIRAMICHI BAY.

Mr. CROCKET.: When may I expect a return moved for on the 12th December, in connection with the bridge at Miramichi bay?


Mr. PUGSLEY.: I will make inquiries at once about it.



NORTH BAY WHARFS.

Mr. GORDON (Nipissing).: Has the Minister of Public Works any information to give regarding North Bay wharfs, which he promised?


William Pugsley: I shall make inquiries.



HOUSE OF COMMONS AND SENATE.

George Eulas Foster: I would like to call the attention of the Minister of Justice to the fact that the return called for a long while ago with reference to the House of Commons and Senate has not yet been brought down.


Charles Murphy: It has been tabled today.



UNITED STATES WARSHIPS ON THE GREAT LAKES.

George Eulas Foster: I have still another grievance. I would like to have the return called for about a year and five months ago with reference to the United States warships on the Great Lakes. This particular time may be the psychological moment to have some representation and redress in that connection.


Wilfrid Laurier: I hope to have it at a very early day.



IMMIGRATION STATISTICS.

Mr. WILSON (Lennox).: I asked a question the other day with reference to the publication of the number of immigrants who come to this country and which should be in the ' Canada Gazette ' every month and the minister said he would answer later on.


Mr. OLIVER.: A resolution was passed by the House of Commons on the 5th May, 1887 to this effect:
That the Customs Department cause to be inserted in the ' Canada Gazette ' at the close of each month a statement of imports, of exports, of immigration and of navigation for the month, and also for the expired portion of the fiscal year.
A search into the records of the Immigration Department show that during 18 years, in which immigration has been under contract of the Department of the Interior, no such return has 'been published, and no such return was ever published notwithstanding the resolution of the House of Commons. And, so far as the department is aware, no such returns were ever published notwithstanding the resolution of the House of Commons.



APPOINTMENTS FROM WENTWORTH.

Richard Blain: Will the government please inform me when I may expect the return showing the number of appointments from the constituency of Wentworth which was ordered by the House some days ago. What progress is being made with this?


Wilfrid Laurier: If my hon. friend (Mr. Blain) would tell us what he particularly has in mind, the preparation of this return would be facilitated. But, as has been stated toy the Minister of Agriculture, 'every department has to search its record to find whether anybody has been appointed from this or that riding. So far as I can ascertain, no such appointments have been made in the two departments over which I preside, the Privy Council and the Mounted Police. If the hon. gentleman tells us what he wishes to learn concerning any particular appointment, that would help in preparing the information.


Richard Blain: I can only say that the members boast about the number of appointments that have been made as a result of their efforts. They would be able to tell the Prime Minister.



SUPPLY-SALE OF OFFENSIVE WEAPONS.

[Stage Direction]
Sir WILFRID LAURIER moved that the House go into Committee of Supply.
['That the Bill might involve possible conflict between the province and the Dominion is something that I have not had before me. It strikes me, as it is read by the Minister of Public Works, that the earlier part of the clause as to doing business subject to the laws of the province, might mean that inasmuch as trustee laws are under the jurisdiction of a province as dealing with property and civil rights, in the exercise of their functions as a trust corporation they have to bear in mind that trusts are regulated by the province and not by the Dominion. The law of trusteeship is a provincial law, and I think the intention must be that they should carry out the provincial law. They would become a corporate company for trustee business, but they would have to do their business subject to the law of the province as respects trusteeships. I think that is what it is intended to mean. The latter part of the clause respecting possible conflict, is more serious.\nProgress reported.']
Mr. E. N. LEWIS (West Huron).: I wish to call the attention of the Minister of Justice (Sir Allen Aylesworth) to certain articles that have recently appeared in the Montreal papers-the ' Herald/ the * Star,'
' Pa Presse/ the ' Gazette/ the ' Witness/
* La Patrie/ ' Le Canada/ and other daily papers of January 21, 23,	24 and 25
instant, referring to crime rampant in the city of Montreal, occasioned, these papers state, by the readiness with which lethal
weapons, such as stilettos and revolvers, can be procured. Here, for instance, is what the Montreal ' Herald ' published on January 23, last :



[Stage Direction]
Saturday the 'Herald' published, with apt illustration, a story of the 'murder mills' of Montreal-the second-hand stores and pawnshops whose windows are arsenals and over whose counters revolvers, magazine pistols, rifles, daggers, stilettos, deadly weapons of all hinds, can be purchased openly by anybody.
To-day, in grim confirmation of the 'Herald's* plea for some restriction in the sale of the implements of murder, the news is published of one actual murder in the streets of Montreal and two attempts which only missed being murder hy a freak of fate.
In two of the cases the weapons were revolvers in the hands of men who had no good reason to carry arms-men who under sensible and decent legal conditions could not secure arms and would not be allowed to have arms in their possession.
For the murder of Giovanni Oland on Vitre street and for the shooting of Robert Ford on St. Antoine street Saturday night, justice should not be satisfied with the punishment of the assassins alone-it should strike through them at the murderous system that placed this means of murder in their hands and at the law which blinked complacently at the transaction.
Every deadly weapon sold should be sold only under license and only to men. who have secured special permits to carry weapons for good and sufficient reasons. In the absence of such legislation this city maintains itself in the position of a patron of capital crime.
And, Montreal is not alone in this matter, yesterday, walking from these' parliament buildings of 'Canada down Wellington street, as far as the waterworks building. I passed six different second-hand shops on the north side of that street that openly displayed, and offered for sale revolvers, stilettos, daggers and weapons of all kinds. I have here an editorial of the Montreal ' Herald,' of January 23, a part of which I quote as follows :

[Stage Direction]
On Saturday the 'Herald' published an article describing the free and open-handed manner in which deadly weapons are sold in a hundred or more of the stores of Montreal. This morning one man was lying dead and another was in the hospital dangerously wounded as a result of the fact that such weapons can be had for the asking by anybody with a dollar or two in his pocket.
There is absolutely no excuse for the freedom of traffic in deadly weapons which is permitted in this city.
In the same issue of the ' Herald ' there is a cartoon retpresent-ing two foreigners looking at a notice on the wall. The reading is as follows :

[Stage Direction]
Notice.-In order that you may feel thoroughly at home in Montreal the authorities permit the sale to you openly of revolvers, knaves, &c. Thus you are enabled to settle your differences in your native way without the trouble of going to law. If you kill any one it is murder, and if you are caught you will be hung. But it is quite easy not to be caught, so do not let that worry you.

[Stage Direction]
And here, in the ' Herald ' of January 24, is a cartoon entitled ' Accessory Before the Fact/ and representing the city of Montreal as a merchant dealing with a customer, a foreigner. And this is the conversation:
Montreal.-What do you want a revolver for ?
Purchaser.-I want to kill a man who took my girl.
Montreal.-Tut! Tut! Dreadful; don't you know that is very wicked? However, we have them all the way from a dollar and a half up.
Now, Sir, for the last five years I have introduced and urged upon the attention of the government a Bill making it an offence under the criminal law-
Mr. SPEAKER.: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member (Mr. Lewis), but as he has a Bill dealing with this question already before the House, he cannot discuss the subject at this time.


Edward Norman Lewis: I bow to your ruling, Sir, and will not discuss the matter further. I ask the Minister of Justice to take over this Bill and make it a government measure. I am perfectly willing to withdraw my Bill if the government will introduce legislation to bring about the result I seek. I think the time has come nvhen action should be taken. And this is not a matter for the city of Montreal, or the province of Quebec, but is solely a matter for the Dominion of Canada.	,


POST OFFICE AT WALKERVILLE.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. 0. J. WILCOX (North Essex). I spoke in my place in this House on Friday evening, January 13, on the question of the importance of a public building being erected in the town of Walkerville. Among other statements which I made on that occasion was a statement to the effect that three hours elapsed before the mails were distributed under present conditions. I may say that in my head notes appear the words ' a few weeks ago.' If this was not an error on the part of the ' Hansard ' reporter, then I was in error in not using the words ' a few weeks ago ' that three hours had elapsed before the mail was distributed under present conditions. I have received information from a most reliable source that I was misinformed on Mr. LEWIS.
that particular point. And in order that I might put myself right, and in order that the postmaster and his staff at Walkerville should not be placed in a wrong position, I desire to say that the postmaster at Walkerville and his staff are both able and attentive, and they are giving to the people of Walkerville the very best service they can with the facilities provided. I may say, also, that I did not realize atthe time that the words which I used might be construed to mean that the postmaster was derelict in his duties in the distributing of the mail. I regret very much being wrongly informed upon the matter, and I cheerfully make the correction now. And I am glad the Postmaster General (Mr. Lemieux) is in his seat; it is my desire that no reflection should be cast upon the postmaster at Walkerville and his staff in respect of the information I gave to the; House on that particular point.

Mr. HUGHES (Victoria and Haliburton).: Last week it was my privilege to address an audience in St. Catharines, dealing, among other questions, with reciprocity between Canada and the United States. On that occasion I took the opportunity to state, what I have long believed, that the closer union of Great Britain and her colonies, followed, as I have always claimed, by closer union between Britain and her colonies on one side, and the United States on the other, would be for the benefit and upbuilding of mankind at large. I pointed out that anything that interfered with the drawing closer of Great Britain and her colonies would to that extent militate against the upbuilding of mankind. I pointed out also that a year or two ago, when this last phase of reciprocity between Canada and the United States was proposed,
1 had given considerable attention to investigate the causes at the root of it. We know the old plans: Commercial union, unrestricted reciprocity,- oontinental free trade, annexation to the United States- all names familiar to hon. gentlemen in the House, and the battles royal that were fought up and down the country. We are now all aware that the basis of those movements was wrong. The agitators in those, days appealed to merely sordid motives; cold dollars and cents were held before the people as an enticement to support such a policy. But a new plan was adopted. I pointed out that the plan had taken a different shape. We found that gentlemen were passing up and down the country explaining it from an entirely different view point. We found, as I showed, that the United States discovered a couple of years ago that they were in considerable difficulty from the maximum clauses of their

tariff. We found that the United States press, and politicians on political platforms, were loud in denunciations of the cost of living in the United States. We found further the large centres of population such as Boston, Minneapolis and Chicago, were openly in favour of reciprocity with Canada as the only means of keeping those business centres intact. I pointed out that Canada's vast natural resources also offered a great field for exploitation to American capitalists and business men generally. They had their eye on our resources, and they wanted to get at them. I pointed out that another object was to encourage trade, not along the lines that both governments in Canada had hitherto adopted, that is, lines between the Canadian east and the Canadian west, and between Canada and the mother land, following parallels of latitude rather than meridians of longitude, but that this new movement was designed to encourage trade on lines running north and south rather than east and west. Another aspect of the movement was the advocacy of universal peace especially on the continent of America. I pointed these things out.
I went further, and pointed out that negotiations had been begun by the Rev. Mr. Macdonald, of the Toronto ' Globe.' Whether he was acting as the secret agent of some one else, or on his own personal responsibility, we have no means of knowing. But we do know, and the country knows, that Mr. Macdonald was at Washington, and brought about a condition of affairs, whether as the secret agent of this government or not, has never been officially announced-he brought about the condition of affairs which permits the Minister of Finance and the First Minister to stand on platforms in this country and speak of the ' friendly approaches ' of the United -States to Canada in matters affecting reciprocal trade between the two countries. I pointed out that soon after, if not during these reciprocal negotiations, the Rev. Mr. Macdonald, the editor of the ' Globe,' enlarged his sphere of action and usefulness by becoming the paid agent of Mr. Ginn, a well-known publisher of Boston, a well-known advocate of free trade, and a well-known advocate of peace throughout the length and breadth of the North American continent. Mr. Macdonald, I say, accepted a position in the pay of Mr. Ginn, of the old firm of Ginn, Heath & Company, of Bos. ton. I went further, and I showed that while he had the offer of a salary from Mr. Ginn for his entire services, he had the option of taking a certain sum of money, two or three thousand dollars, for part of his time in the service of Mr. Ginn and he might give the balance of his time in the service of the Toronto ' Globe.' I
stated that Mr. Macdonald had accepted the latter position, and that part of his time was given to Mr. Ginn and to the United States business, that he took his golden dollars from the Boston institution on the one hand, and his Canadian bills from the Toronto ' Globe ' on the other hand for the balance of his services. So that in making his speeches to the country we do not know which paragraph is delivered for the Yankee dollars, and which one for the Canadian bank bills; one cannot well distinguish between them. I think in future this gentleman should label his speeches and say: This paragraph, or this sentence, of my speech, is under the auspices of the Peace Society, and this other one is under the auspices of the reciprocity in trade business. At all events, I pointed all these things out, I pointed out the position which Mr. Macdonald occupied and which he occupies to-day-unless he has abandoned that position. He departed from his biblical training, and attempted to serve two masters. I pointed out further that if I had brought this matter up in the House of Commons, the Toronto ' Globe,' that bedraggled old beldame of journalism, would come out and charge me with hiding myself behind the privileges of parliament; therefore I went out, and upon that platform I made the charge which I repeat here to-day. I went further than that, and added my own conviction, which I repeat here to-day with an extension, and I promise to prove it that the peace agitation carried on by this gentleman was nothing more than reciprocity, continental free trade, commercial union and the annexation of Canada to the United States. That was the ground I took that evening, and before I am through I will prove that that is the platform, or at least the course, taken by these advocates of white-winged peace throughout the country. In days gone by we have often seen the gold bricks of these gentlemen carried around, and therefore when *this new gold brick was presented to us it did not excite us in the least, we knew there was something behind it. Accordingly we carried out an investigation. The public were surprised and shocked, liberal individuals and newspapers were shocked, and the ' Globe ' came out, after having been taunted several days, with a denial which I shall read later on. I may say here that on Tuesday evening, several days after, I was approached by a representative of the Toronto ' Globe,' who furnished the editor with the exact statements which I have given here-I shall come to that in a short time. On Wednesday this prince of ' Holy Willies ' in journalism gave out the following article under this heading:


A MALICIOUS SLANDER.
[Stage Direction]
Under a St. Catharines date line on Monday evening the Toronto ' News ' published the following statement:
Quite a sensation is being caused by a charge which was made by Colonel Sam. Hughes, M.P,. against Editor Macdonald of the ' Globe/ before a Conservative smoker here on Friday evening. Colonel Hughes is credited with making the following statement:- Dr. James A. Macdonald was sent to Washington to open up the question of reciprocity. He is to-day in the pay of Mr. Ginn, a prominent Boston publisher, receiving $2,500 a year to preach reciprocity.
I may point out that what I did say was that Mr. Macdonald was the representative of the Peace Society, but that in my opinion the two things were synonymous, and I will prove it before I am through.
He was offered several thousand a year to give his whole time to this fad of union between Canada and the United States. He was offered $5,000 for his whole time, but preferred to receive part of his pay from the Toronto ' Globe ' and part from a Boston syndicate. Reciprocity means annexation, and annexation the hauling down of the flag which graces these walls.
Now, I will quote from the ' Globe ' editorial:
The Ottawa correspondent of the ' Globe ' was asked to obtain from Colonel Hughes an acknowledgment or a denial of the authenticity of the report in the ' News.'
Colonel Hughes says that what he stated was that Dr. Macdonald, who was a former pupil of his in his school-teacher period, was offered $6,000 per year by Mr. Ginn, the well known ex-publisher of Boston, if he would devote his whole time to the advocacy in the press and on the platform of the cause of universal peace.
I do not know whether the fact about Mr. Macdonald's former relationship is an effort to make it appear that I had violated any confidential information that Mr. Macdonald had furnished to me. I have never learned directly or indirectly from Mr. Macdonald anything about these matters. Anything with reference to Mr. Macdonald other than the mere question of explaining that the word ' reciprocity ' was put in the wrong place, and that the words ' peace association ' should have been used instead, was never broached between the Toronto 'Globe' representative and myself, or put in the report. We did indulge in private conversation afterwards, but I shall not betray the confidence that that gentleman reposed in me concerning the editor of the ' Globe.'
Colonel Hughes drew the inference that the advocacy of universal peace was coupled in Mr. Ginn's offer with the advocacy of peace between the United States and Canada via closer trade relations through the medium of reciprocity, the campaign for which had been first started by Dr. Macdonald when the lat-Mr. HUGHES.
ter was in Washington last spring. Colonel Hughes said that Dr. Macdonald is now receiving $2,500 per year from Mr. Ginn for devoting part of his time to the advocacy of the above causes. Even in its modified form the statement of Colonel Hughes must be classed as a malicious slander.
I stand here to-day and I have the best reason for saying that there is not the slightest deviation from the truth between what I uttered then and what I am saying to-day, that Mr. Macdonald is, or was, unless he has thrown it up, or they have thrown him up, certainly in the pay of the peace society, and certainly drawing gold eagles from that Yankee society, while at the same time drawing Canadian dollars from the ' Globe ' for his services.
Even in its modified form the statement of Colonel Hughes must be classed as a malicious slander.
Well, any one who knows the old hypocrite knows that of all the institutions from time immemorial that has graced or disgraced the public life of Canada the Toronto ' Globe ' is par excellence the superior for its hypocrisy.
The editor of the 'Globe' is at present, as a result of ill health,
[Stage Direction]
I am sorry to hear it-
-travelling in southern California, beyond immediate reach of either wire or letter.
I did not know, until the representative of the ' Globe ' told me that he was down in California. But, when we consider the gold bricks that these gentlemen hand out in that article in order to cover up rascality, the mere fact that this gentleman is in California, where he will be near the Leland Stanford University, the president of which is Dr. Starr Jordan, the great advocate of continental peace with the barriers removed between Canada and the United States, causes us to question very seriously the idea that Dr. Macdonald may not be so seriously ill as he is represented to be. Possibly he is down there recuperating his health, or it might be that having been sent out to preach the peace platform and not being a success, he is remaining there in ordeT that he may receive more lessons in the art from the great master.
As soon as be can be located, Dr. Macdonald will deny over his own name the utterly base inference of Colonel Hughes that he is in any way under agreement with any person to advocate reciprocity with the United States.
Well, we will see about that later on.
The relations of Dr. Macdonald as an advocate of universal peace with Mr. Ginn of Boston have nothing to do with questions of trade of the internal affairs of any nation. It was publicly announced severai months ago in the 'News' as well as in every other

Toronto paper that Dr. Macdonald, while retaining the editorship of the 'Globe/ proposed to relieve himself of much of the detail work of the office that he might devote some part of his time to the advocacy of the cause of universal peace, which he has long had at heart.
So that the ' Globe ' practically admits every word I am saying.
In that work he will be associated with some of the greatest educationists and publicists of America, men of the stamp of President David Starr Jordan of Leland Stanford University
[Stage Direction]
That is the place where every one is supposed to bow the head in solemn reverence.
-and John R. Mott.
Whoever he may be.
It is incredible that men of the type mentioned should receive from the peace foundation of Mr. Ginn any commission to advocate reciprocity or to deal in any way with trade relations.	i
They say it is incredible, but I shall prove it from Dr. Starr Jordan's own speeches delivered in this city, Montreal and Toronto, one of the slickest advocates of reciprocity under the auspicious guise of peace, that I have ever heard. Even the right hon. Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier), in his palmy days, or the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir Richard Cartwright), cannot -begin to hold a candle to him.
Colonel Hughes' assertion even in its modified form is one that reflects very little credit on the man who made it, and still less on the papers that, knowing the facts, give it currency.	.	. [DOT] 1
And what about the paper that, knowing the facts lies deliberately and maliciously about it ? Never mind the papers that do not know about it, even if they do not tell a straight story, but the paper that knows the whole of the facts, is the one paper that, under the heading of ' A Malicious Slander ' stands out from among the rest and tries to make it appear that I have been telling what is not true. So much for that. It is not necessary that I should go farther than to take from the ' Free Press ' a journal which is particularly friendly to the government and the cause represented by it, published in Ottawa of date December 12, 1910, the following report of Dr. Starr Jordan's speech delivered in this city. He sjooke on the following Monday in Toronto, and I think, he had spoken previously in Montreal:
The movement for peace must have its centre on the American side of the Atlantic ocean. It is recognized also that Canada holds the key to the whole situation.
I remember that the hon. Minister of Marine (Mr. Brodeur), was present and
he straightened himself up and said: What is going to become of the navy ?
Reference was made to the 5,000 miles of boundary between Canada and the United States.
Those of us who were present will remember how beautifully Dr. Starr Jordan treated this matter, and I have to give him credit for being one of the slickest artists I have ever seen on a platform. These are his words:
We are impressed as the people of Europe are, with the fact that along this border there is not a warship
[Stage Direction]
And yet my hon. friend from North Toronto (Mr. Foster), was just asking for a return about warships a few minutes ago.
-not a soldier, not a gun, nothing
Wilfrid Laurier: He had forgotten about Col. Hughes.


Samuel Hughes: I am only quoting this in order that any intelligent man may see the utter fallacy and absurdity of the remarks of this gentleman.
-nothing that looks towards any unfriendly suspicion, so far as violent acts are concerned. The only thing that is wanted to make this boundary ideal is the removal of the customs officers.
Yet the ' Globe ' holds this man up as the prince of peace advocates, and says that there is nothing connecting this man with the advocacy of reciprocal trade relations between Canada and the United States. You should know that Dr. Starr Jordan did not speak of the removal of the customs house officers along the outer border, but only the removal of those officers between Canada and the United States which means that the Yankee flag would fly from the north pole to the sandy plains of Popocatepetl. Then, Dr. Starr Jordan on making that remark-and I remember how beautifully he did it-noticed three gentlemen who applauded him and he said:
I only expected half a group of cheers for that and it is mighty good to get that.
Not content with impressing the business men, -and the rising generation in the city of Ottawa, after showing us the horrors o>f war and the blessings of peace, he insidiously donned the garb of the Meek and Lowly one, and on a Sunday, occupying a pulpit, this advocate of white winged peace could not keep his fingers out of the reciprocity pie. And, here is what we find reported as his sermon on page 2 of the ' Free Press,' column 3, delivered in a Unitarian church in the city of Ottawa by Dr. Starr Jordan :
' The establishment of international peace rested with the United States and Canada/ he said; 'Canada particularly was in a very

unique position because of her relation in politics and common thought to the two greatest nations in the world.'
You will notice that he always slicks us down a little before he ruibs us up. I watched him very carefully, and he is without exception one of the greatest artists I ever saw to captivate an audience ; why, he had the Minister of Marine and Fisheries ready to sell the ' Rainbow ' and the * Nioibe.' Then, after meeting the people in this reverential mood, in a sermon that was well advertised he was catching the spiritual end of the town, he said :
If we can only do away with the custom house officers.
And this in a sermon mark you.


Wilfrid Laurier: That makes it worse.


Samuel Hughes: He says :
If we could only do away with the customs officers it would be an ideal frontier, said the speaker, in referring to the fact that in 100 years not a gun has been fired between Canada and the United States.
I need not say anything more. I have at least proven to my own satisfaction that the Rev. Dr. Jordan, and the Rev. J. A. Macdonald, and the whole outfit of them were taking Mr. Ginn's money under false pretenses when they would get on a plat form or in a pulpit to preacli the removal of the customs officers between Canada and the United States, for every child in the Dominion knows that means the annexation of Canada, and the dissolution of the British Empire.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House went into Committee of Supply.
Montreal new barracks, $100,000.
William Pugsley: This item stood over in order that I might be able to give information to mv hon. friend from St. Anne's (Mr. Doherty) with regard to the new barracks at Longueuil. This, is the information in my possession:
St. Helen's island lias been handed over to the city of Montreal with the exception of three reserves containing the ordnance store buildings and magazines. These are to be reserved for use of the Department of Militia and Defence until buildings are erected for that department to contain the stores, &c., now accommodated there.
Longueuil site was purchased from various individuals in 1846-7 by the Honourable Board of Ordnance for the purpose of a Tete-du-Pont on the east side of Hochelaga bay, below St. Helen's island for the defence of Montreal. It was recently transferred from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Militia and Defence for the purpose of a barrack site.
The area of St. Helen's island is approximately 123 -8 acres and the areas of the three reser-Mr. HUGHES.
various are:-A., 2-735; B., 8-637; C., 9-62 acres.
The Montreal barracks are intended for the accommodation of the permanent troops at the headquarters of the Quebec command, comprising nearly all branches with departmental details and a large number of attached who will be attending for instruction. They will provide a proper school of instruction for the Montreal garrison and the commands and districts. The actual details of the various establishments have not yet been determined, but the totals will probably be about 450 or 500 all ranks, and from 275 to 300 horses.
As regards buildings, there will be approximately 25.


Mr. DOHERTY.: Are these buildings to be used for a military school?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Was it considered whether Longueuil was a suitable and convenient place for a military school for the different corns in the Montreal district. It would seem to me that the Longueuil site is a very great distance away from the places of residence of the officers and men, and the headquarters of the different militia corps in the city. If the agreement were that* \\re should have a military school in Montreal it is hardly fulfilling that agreement to establish a military school at Longueuil which I should think must be six or seven miles away, generally speaking, from the residences of the officers and men of the militia -who would use the school


William Pugsley: I think there is an electric railway.


Charles Joseph Doherty: You could hardly cross the river on an electric railway.


William Pugsley: There is steamboat connection too.


Charles Joseph Doherty: There is an electric railway to the foot of the current and a ferry across the river to Longueuil, but nevertheless Longueuil is a very long distance away from the centre of the city. Taking into consideration the transportation facilities I would be inclined to believe that a school at St. Johns is practically just as accessible as a school at Longueuil would be. When you agree to establish a military school in Montreal and you then establish a military school at Longueuil it seems to me you are far away from tulfill-ing the spirit of that agreement.


William Pugsley: Accommodation for 300 horses would be needed and it is very desirable to have a large area of land which could not be got_ right in the city of Montreal. Montreal is growing rapidly and the means of communication with the suburbs are increasing.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Have the militia officers in the Montreal district been consulted about this?


William Pugsley: I have no doubt whatever that in accordance with the usual custom the local militia officers have been consulted, but as to that I have no personal knowledge. I do know that the matter has been under serious consideration for a considerable period, and thL is the sober judgment of the Militia Department.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Of course, if the minister is not in a position to tell us positively that the militia officers were consulted it will not help us any for him to make a guess at it. It does seem to me that it would be a highly proper thing that they should have been consulted, and before we can form a judgment on ths vote we ought to be in possession of the opinions expressed by those interested in military affairs in the Montreal district. Until we have that, we are lacking in information essential to enable us to pronounce upon the desirability of locating these new barracks at Longueuil. Of course, so far as I am concerned, I have no idea of objecting to the erection of a military school and to providing the money for it, but we certainly should have some responsible minister here who could furnish us with the information necessary to enable us to form a judgment as to whether Longueuil is the proper place to spend the money for the purpose. It is another instance that impresses the very unfortunate results of the system under which the minister whose department is reallv in question, and who in the last resort decides these matters, is not here to give us the information on which to arrive at a conclusion. We have no information as to whether in the judgment of the persons to meet whose wants the school is being provided this is a suitable place in which to put it.


Mr. SPROULE.: I thought this was one of the items that was to stand in the absence of the Minister of Militia?


William Pugsley: No, it stood in order that I might get some information.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The Minister of Militia should be here to give us the information instead of being down in Nova Scotia running elections. He was not elected for that purpose and is not paid $7,000 a year to do that. It is here he ought to be, and we should not be asked to vote this money without this essential information.


Samuel Hughes: The troops who are to occupy these barracks, are very much dissatisfied with the place. I am told it is very unhealthy, it- is low and at certain seasons, damp, and very inaccessible. There is no reason why it would not be better to have it out at Back Mountain so that the boys from Montreal could attend the military school at night, reaching the place by cars. It is impossible to do this at Longueuil.


Mr. M. MARTIN (St. Mary's, Montreal).: (Translation.) Mr. Chairman, I wish to offer a few remarks in reply to what the hon. member for St. Anne's division (Mr. Doherty) has just stated. When the question of building that military school on Lafontaine park came up, I deemed it my duty, in my capacity of representative of that division, to oppose that proposal, as such a building would disfigure that park. Everybody knows that Lafontaine park is the most beautiful park in the city, next to Mount Royal park.
The hon. member for Victoria and Hali-burton (Mr. Hughes) told us that the Longueuil site was unhealthy, but in my opinion the sanitary condition of the place is better than in any other place in the city of Montreal. Moreover, I am informed by the hon. the Minister of Public Works that this Longueuil site was recently given or transferred to the Militia Department. Now, if the government were to buy a site on the island of Montreal, no matter where, they would have to pay for an area 'of about forty acres, from $100,000 to $150,000 in the least, and that site would necessary be at a very great distance away from the centre of the city. I have no hesitation in saying that so far as distance is concerned, the Longueuil location would be nearer and more accessible than any other place available on the island of Montreal.
The island of St. Helene has been sold to the government for $200,000, -as also that portion of land owned by the government on the edge of Lafontaine park.
For my own part I am entirely opposed to that school being built in the vicinity of Lafontaine park.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I should like to ask my hon. friend whether) he considers that there is not to be foun-d on the island of Montreal any land on which these barracks could be built, without disfiguring as he says, or infringing on Lafontaine park.
I think my hon. friend is aware that it would be much more convenient for the young men who shall take the course of that institution to reach those barracks, if they are built on the island of Montreal itself. It is true one may cross- the river at the foot of the current. But the greater number of the interested parties live at too great a distance from the foot of the current where there is a ferry across the river to Longueuil. In the winter time, I suppose they would have to cross over the ice, or pass by the Victoria -bridge, which would oblige them to take a very considerable roundabout way.
I am surprised that my hon. friend, who is one of the representatives of the city of Montreal, should not realize the inconveniences that would result from building

that military school at Longueuil rather than in Montreal, as this means a very considerable difference.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I submit that we have not the requisite information even with the additional light which the hon. member for St. Mary's division is able to throw on the subject. We have the additional information that this establishment is to be used as a military school, but we have no information as to how the conclusion was arrived at that Longueuil was the best place for a military school'. As one who has had some military experience in the past, my strong impression is that you are putting a school in a place which will be highly inconvenient for the service to which it is to be devoted. For a considerable time there has been a very strong desire among those who interest themselves in military matters in Montreal that we should have a school there, and the reason why is that many young men who would be glad to take the course if the school were in the city, find it impossible to get away to St. Johns and follow the course there. You can go to St. Johns from Montreal by rail in three-quarters of an hour and the service is most excellent, so that, so far as convenience is concerned, I would just as soon go from my residence in the city to St. Johns and back as to some point in Longueuil. Nor have we any light as to the particular point in Longueuil at which these barracks are to be built, and the parish is a pretty large one.


William Pugsley: Does my hon. friend know where the Tete du Pont is? It is about 190 acres in extent and belongs to the government, and that is the place where it is proposed to build these barracks.


Charles Joseph Doherty: This is the first time I have heard that place mentioned, and I do not know in what part of Longueuil it is. This is a matter of considerable importance, concerning which we ought to have some one here able to tell us all the circumstances and what are the reasons in favour of this location. At first glance it is rather surprising to find that a school which we were to have in the city of Montreal is to be located, instead, at Longueuil, and the only reason given us for that location is that the land can be procured there without being paid for, besides the further reason that if you 'were to build the school in Montreal you would have to disfigure the Lafontaine park. Well, the Island of Montreal is large, and there is a great deal of vacant space in the city on which to build these barracks without at, all infringing on Lafontaine park. I sympathize with the hon. member from St. Mary's (Mr. Martin) in his desire that Lafontaine park, which is very beautiful, should not have Mr. DOHERTY.
any portion of it devoted to this particular purpose, but, after all, we are not reduced to a choice between Lafontaine park and Longueuil. There is a good deal of other space in the city available, and we ought to know whether the men interested, those who are going to use the school, have been consulted. If they have been, we should have the result of that consultation. If they have not, they should be consulted before this matter is finally decided.


George Eulas Foster: What is the use of wasting time? If the minister wants to get his items through, he need not spend any time on this. The Minister of Militia should be here to answer these questions, which cannot be answered without him, and, as far as I am concerned, none of these items should go through until he is present.


Samuel Hughes: There is another point of importance. My hon. friend from St. Anne (Mr. Doherty) has pointed out the drawbacks in having this school outside the city. These are well known to men of the permanent force, but they are in the regular service, and they dare not publicly and openly object, but they do object very seriously, and I can assure the hon. minister that they would much prefer remaining at St. Johns, or Quebec, or the other places where they now are rather than move to Longueuil. The minister might as well hold this item over until the return of the Minister of Militia, and until the officers and men concerned can be consulted. I am satisfied that fifty places can be found on Montreal island a short distance from the centre of the city where this institution could be located with much greater convenience to the men. Many of these men are in business, and the man who wants to retain his position in business cannot give the time required to go from his work and attend this military school if it be at Longueuil, and you might just as well have it at St. Johns as at Longueuil. But if it were situated in the city, or at Back River, or at fifty other places on the island, a business man could attend the course there without trouble, and if night schools were held they would be a tremendous advantage to the city. I would, therefore, ask that this item should stand.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend will observe that the item is for Montreal new barracks, and I do not take it that, in passing this item, parliament binds itself to an approval of the Longueuil site. I have said that that is where it is proposed to erect the barracks. But everybody will agree that new barracks are necessary, and that it is absolutely essential in order to carry out the understanding that the $200,000 obtained from the city of Montreal

for the salq of St. Helen's island should be used in the erection of new barracks, that this item should pass. If the Minister of Militia were here I think all he would say would be that because of this Longueuil land being owned by the government, and because of its situation, it was deemed the most desirable place.


Samuel Hughes: Has the minister any report on the sanitary condition of this place ? How high above the river is it and what is the fall ? I am told that it is dead level and that at some seasons of the year it is unfit to be occupied. I am told also that the .ground consists of clay and not sand.


William Pugsley: I have great respect for the opinion of the hon. member for St. James, because he lives in Montreal.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have great respect for St. James, but, as every one knows St. Anne is the particular patron saint of our province, and I am particularly proud to represent a constituency honoured by her name.	t | ;[DOT]


William Pugsley: I apologize to my hon. friend. From a military standpoint, I have more than respect for my hon. friend from Victoria and Haliburton )(Mr. Hughes), and my respect grows to admiration of him with regard to military matters. I have great confidence in his judgment and will consider it my business to present to the Minister of Militia the views which he and the hon. member for St. Anne's have expressed. It may be that, instead of using the land which the department owns, it would be better to go to an expenditure of $100,000 or $200,000 or perhaps $400,000 or $500,000.


Samuel Hughes: Certainly, no matter what it is.


William Pugsley: In order to get land nearer the city of Montreal, I would say that by passing this vote it is not understood that parliament approves one site or another, but that all it does is approve the erection of a barracks.


Charles Joseph Doherty: If the vote is passed in this way, we shall have voted the money and the barracks will be erected wherever the minister decides without consulting parliament. It is not inconceiveable that parliament might be willing to vote the money for barracks to be erected in a place that would suit the purpose and not in a locality that would not. But to ask us to vote the money and leave the department to decide where it will put the barracks is to give the department absolutely carte blanche. If we are to be judges as to whether this money is to be spent or not, it is an extraordinary position to say that it makes no difference whether the building is to be in one place or another. In other words, that we would be assumed to be as willing to vote the money to put the barracks in an absolutely unsuitable place, if that were shown to be the case, as in a suitable place. I do not wish any misapprehension of what I say. I am not in favour of preventing the construction of the barracks. All I ask is that we should be put in a positon to determine whether the money should be spent wrhere it is proposed to spend it.


Mr. RIVET.: May I ask if the hon. member (Mr. Doherty), has received any protest from any military men in Montreal regarding the contemplated site of the new barracks, and if, in speaking as he does, he is expressing the views of these gentlemen ?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have not received any protest from the military men of Montreal. I have nothing to show me that they know at all that the military school of Montreal is going to he built in Longueuil. This item in the estimates does not convey that information, for it only says ' Montreal-New Barracks.' And, so far as I know, it is only in answer to questions from the hon. member for St. Antoine (Mr. Ames) and myself, put the other evening, that the fact came out that this new building was to be erected at Longueuil. The minister (Mr. Pugsley) is not in a position to tell me that any communication has 'been had with these gentlemen or that they have been consulted in any way. Why does the hon. member for Hochelaga (Mr. Rivet) assume that they know anything about it?


Louis Alfred Adhémar Rivet: I do not assume it.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Then, how can he expect that they would have communicated with me? And that leads me to say that the main point I would like to bring before the minister is the one I have already mentioned-though he does not seem to pay attention to it-that the absence of consultation with these gentlemen seems to be a reason why this money should not be voted. It seems to me only proper that these gentlemen, who are in the best position to form a judgment as to the location of the military school from the point of view of meeting the needs for which this building is provided, should have been consulted before this vote was proposed. I am not saying that that has not been done, but the minister does not know whether it has been done or not, and neither do I.
I may say, that, on my own responsibility, since I got the information that this building was to be at Longueuil, I have written to some of these gentlemen asking for information as to their views, and I hope to receive that information. The Militia Department may have that information

already, but, if so, surely it should (be at our disposal.


William Pugsley: This ought to be satisfactory to my hon. friend, and I hope it will, for the does not want to .prevent the vote from passing, but only wants to (have the local militia officers consulted : I give the assurance to my hon. friend on behalf of the Minister of Militia, and will acquaint him with that assurance, that, if these officers have not been consulted, they shall he consulted with regard to the location of the new barracks. I will also present the views of the hon. member for Victoria and Haliiburton (Mr. Hughes) as to the question which he raised regarding the location. I think he will agree with me that not all the members of the committee, probably not even my hon. friend himself could form a judgment on this question. All he can ask is that before the minister decides upon a location, he should consult the officers to whom reference has been made.


Richard Blain: The point is not whether the members of the opposition would toe able to form an opinion as to where this college should ibe located ; the question, as I understand it, is whether the government has come to a decision as to where this building should be erected. If they have, the committee surely is entitled to receive that information. It is not enough for the Minister of Public Works to say : Vote the -money and I will communicate with the Minister of Militia, and then we will do just what we wish. Surely, that is another new doctrine of the Minister of Public Works. He pays -a great deal of respect, to my hon. friend from Victoria and Halliburton-


William Pugsley: From the military side.


Richard Blain: I listened to his remarks, but it seems to me that if he wished to pay very much respect to my hon. friend (Mr. Hughes) he might accept his suggestion that the item be allowed to stand over until the matter was settled. Surely, after having had so long a time to secure the information -from the Militia Department, and to consider it, he should be in -a position to do something -more than come forward and -say : 'We have not decided.' I would like to know who really did suggest that this building should ibe erected at this point ; was it the Minister of Public Works, the Minister of Militia, or the sitting member for the district?


William Pugsley: The deputy Minister of Militia has informed me that it is proposed to erect these barracks at Longueuil, on property owned by the government and, which, of course, will cost the government nothing. It is a large area, something over 190 acres. What I said to my hon.


Charles Joseph Doherty: friend from St. Anne (Mr. Doherty), was that I would represent the views "of the hon. member for Victoria and Haliburton who says there is some question about the sanitary conditions there and also the views of the hon. member for St. Anne (Mr. Doherty), that this is not as convenient a place as some others that might be chosen, to the Minister of Militia, and I have given the assurance that, before finally deciding upon the site, which, as at present advised, is Longueuil, the matter will -be looked into further, and the local officers in Montreal consulted. That, I think, is alj that can reasonably be asked.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The promise was merely that the local officers shall be consulted. That having been done, there will be nothing to prevent the department, overriding their views and going on, with the money we have voted, to build the barracks in some place where these officers do not want it. But we would like to know what they think, for this would influence our judgment as to whether the money should be voted to build this barracks on the site proposed. While I do not doubt that these officers will be consulted according to the minister's promise, that does not secure to us the advantage of their opinion, and it does not leave it to us in any way to influence the decision as to whether their opinion should have weight or not. However, I have urged all that I can urge in the matter.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The position of the minister is much the same as that of the farmer who consulted his neighbours about the location for his proposed new bam. He invited them to tea, and afterwards showed them over the place and pointed out localities any one of which might be selected. Then hei said:	' I have
drawn your attention to the facts, and, while I want the benefit of your advice, yet, to economize time I may tell you that I am going to build the barn on that knoll, facing the south.' That is about what would be the result of this proposed consultation. The consultation might not influence the government against putting the building in a place which this House, if it had the information it ought to have, would consider an unsuitable place. But, outside of all that, this House, in my judgment, is doing wrong when we allow estimates to go through in the absence of ministers who ought to be here to give us the information we are entitled to in order to be able to form a reasonable judgment in the question before us. I think the government, when they submit these items, should see that a minister is present who can give the information.


William Pugsley: Does the hon. gentleman who is now leading the opposition, and who

has just spoken, take the ground that there will be an objection to any military items going through until the Minister of'Militia returns? If so, we might as well understand it, because I know that they can delay, and even prevent the estimates going through. If the hon. gentleman takes" that view, I will agree to let this and all other militia items stand until the minister returns.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: To many of the items there would be no objection. But this is one of so much importance, involving a large expenditure for a public building, that I think the Minister of Militia ought to be here to give us information.


Samuel Hughes: I am not objecting to this item in itself, and I do not care whether the minister is here or not. But I want it understood that the site is regarded by military men-and I have correspondence galore from them about it-as an unsuitable site. In the first place, in order to reach there by land, one has to go across the bridge and then follow the road down the river side. In order to reach it by water, you have to go down below the rapids to cross over. Every one will admit that it is an awkward place to reach, and I am satisfied that every member representing a Montreal constituency will so advise the minister. We can name twenty places on the island more suitable than this is. I am free to say that I believe the reason Longueuil is selected is that the government have, unfortunately, in their possession a little swamp over there, a few hundred acres of land flat, boggy, heavy clay, in the rainy season, practically impassable-I am giving merely the data that I have received. Now the House will freely vote the necessary money for an important institution like this if it is on a proper and convenient site for the officers and men in Montreal to reach. Therefore, in all kindness I ask the minister to postpone the item.


William Pugsley: In view of the representations made by my hon. friend I will consent to let the item stand until the Minister of Militia and Defence returns.


Mr. SHARPE (Ontario).: With regard to the St. Lambert building the minister promised to furnish us with the options that were procurred in connection with the purchase of the site, the dates and the names.


William Pugsley: I have that information.
I find there is only one option on file, that is from Mr. Noel Marcil, dated February 11, 1910, for four months, covering lots Nos. 112, 113, 114, 115 and 116, for $4,140. I have a copy of a resolution of the town council of St. Lambert adopted at a meeting held March 5, 1909, as it is here. I think that must be a mistake, and that it should be 82
1910. There was a letter from the Department of the Secretary of State, dated May 2, 1910, inclosing the resolution purporting to be dated March 5, 1909, therefore, my deputy concludes that there was a clerical error, and that 1910 was the date intended. The site was reported on by Mr. G. S. Gin-gras, clerk of works at Montreal, on the 21st of May, 1910, recommending the purchase.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: The hon. gentleman evidently spoke under a misapprehension of the facts when he stated before that there were several options taken. He will recollect what was said bv the representative of the constituency (Mr. Geof-frion).


William Pugsley: There was only one written option, apparently. Some times the official of the department visits the different owners and gets their prices, but I would not call that an option.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Were there any other sites in St. Lambert suggested to the government for this building?


William Pugsley: That is the only one that was considered by the government, the only one which the town was in favour of. The lot is situated Tight opposite the academy.


Richard Blain: The other evening my hon. friend laid on the table some information in respect to a clock furnished his department at Lunenburg. I noticed, in the correspondence of the minister's department, that he asked the clock dealer to write ,the specification himself, and he accepted the price offered under that specification. Is that the policy of the government? I thought it rather strange that the minister should ask a gentleman to supply the clock and at the same time ask him to write the specification.


William Pugsley: I do not see why it would not be proper to ask a dealer in a special line of clocks to do so. This was not an ordinary clock; it was a clock to be put in the tower of a building. We asked him to send us a specification of the clock he proposed to furnish, along with the price. We did not accept his price. The chief architect fixed the price that was paid, asking him to take a lower price than the one he had fixed. The chief architect knew from his knowedge, and the information he had got from other clock dealers, what would be a fair and reasonable price, and this gentleman accepted the price offered by the chief architect. Now, with regard^ to asking for specifications, that was done in case of the Quebec bridge; the tenderers were requested to submit their specifications, I mean the proposed new bridge.


Richard Blain: Does the minister say that $1,600 is a reasonable price for a clock of this kind?


William Pugsley: The chief architect says that it is, according to his judgment.


Richard Blain: I would direct attention to the fact that the general price of these clocks supplied in his department heretofore was $700 instead of $1,600. If the gentleman supplying the clock _ was a manufacturer, and this was a special kind, the hon. gentleman's explanation might have some basis. But was it fair that he should have asked tenders from other people supplying clocks, rather than assisting this gentleman to procure the order, and giving him liberty to write the specification himself, finally paying him $1,600 for the clock. Where did this clock come from?


William Pugsley: It came from Germany.
Mr. BLAIN1. Why did not my hon. friend purchase it direct from the manufacturer?


William Pugsley: What item is the hon. gentleman speaking on now?


Richard Blain: I am speaking about some information that was delayed and laid on the table for the information of the House.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.: The discussion is scarcely relevant to the item in the present resolution.


William Pugsley: I would like, by your consent, Mr. Chairman, to give my hon. friend the explanation, so that we may get this disposed of once and for all. There is just as much difference between clocks as there is between watches. If my hon. friend wanted to get a watch would he go around the city and ask people to tender and name the price at which they *were willing to deliver watches to him? There are hundreds of kinds of watches and' hundreds of different prices. There is a great difference between a striking clock and a non-striking clock, which you can get for about $700.


Mr. LANCASTER.: This is a striking clock?


William Pugsley: Yes, a striking clock of the very best description, and the chief architect tells me that he got it at the lowest price at which such a clock could be obtained. A small amount was paid to the dealer.	.


Richard Blain: What was that amount?


William Pugsley: The installing of the clock was included in the $1,600, and there was considerable work about it. It meant repairing the place in the building and all that sort of thing.


William Pugsley: 


Richard Blain: My hon. friend cannot have correct information, because there is a payment for making the place and doing what my hon. friend said had been done, to a Mr. Pyke.


William Pugsley: That was for arranging the platform upon which the clock stands, putting in the floor and making cuttings in the tower. My hon. friend golf all this information in the Public Accounts Committee.


Richard Blain: Here is a clock to be sup-i plied for the Lunenburg public building! Looking over the list of clocks supplied for public buildings in Ontario and other provinces, I find the price to be about $700. I asked why $1,600 was paid for Lunenburg and my hon. friend answered by saying that this is a very rare clock.


William Pugsley: Yes, it is a striking clock.


Richard Blain: My hon. .friend tells us something, I suppose, that nobody ever knew before, that there are clocks that strike and clocks that do not strike. My hon. friend asks if .1 would go around the city asking for tenders for a watch. I do not know what my hon. friend would do himself but I know what I would do if I were administering a department as my hon. friend is; I would keep the middlemen out.


William Pugsley: He was kept out here.


Richard Blain: My hon. friend decides how much they will give for the clock. Information is supplied to the chief architect saying that it should cost $1,600. The chief architect and my hon. friend know full well that this clock is not manufactured in Canada. They know where it could be purchased. Why does the hon. gentleman select an individual supporter in Halifax without asking for public competition when he had decided upon the kind of clock that he wanted, and allow this gentleman to supply it? What is a middleman? A middleman is one who stands between the government and the manufacturer, in this case, when, the government want to buy a clock. My hon. friend could have sent for this clock himself, if it was not manufactured in Canada' but instead of that he decides that there- is to be a middleman in it and he selects the one who shall supply the clock. When we are discussing these items the hon. gentleman says that we always have public competition No competition in this at all. What would my hon. friend call this Mr. Shultze who purchased this clock in Germany and supplied it?


William Pugsley: I would not call a dealer or merchant a middleman.


Richard Blain: I would call a person like this who charges such a price a middleman and a dealer too. The truth is that money could have been saved to the department if my hon. friend had been a good administrator, and if he had not been in the hands of the middleman or the dealer, he can call him whichever he wants. If my hon. friend wanted to carry out the policy in connection with all these important matters of havingpublic competition why did he not ask other people to give prices upon this clock? There were other dealers in Halifax carrying on business in a larger way than this gentleman. This gentleman did not have such a clock in his store. No one else in Halifax had such a clock in his store. Why should my hon. friend select this individual, a political supporter, and say: Put in a clock, and write your own specification when he knew the price at which it could be bought for? My hon. friend comes here and says that there is no middleman in his department. I would like to ask my hon. friend how he draws a distinction between the dealer and the middleman in this case?


William Pugsley: As I understand it, a man who deals in any particular article and who buys of the manufacturer gets the article at the wholesale price. I could not go individually and buy direct from the manufacturer, and my hon. friend could not. I do not imagine that the government could, and what I understand is that dealers would get whatever discount there would be from the manufacturer, and that it would be deducted from their price. The wholesale dealer always gets that. Suppose we required to make some arrangements about bath tubs; we would buy them from the man who deals in bath tubs. We would not buy from the manufacturer, and I doubt if the manufacturer would sell to us. In this particular case this gentleman was a dealer in clocks. He would get this clock from the manufacturer at the same price, included in which would be his dealer's reasonable profit, as that at which the government or my hon. friend could get it.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Did the hon. gentleman try to get a price from the manufacturer?


William Pugsley: The chief architect says that he knew that was the usual price for a clock of that character.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Did the department obtain a price from the manufacturers?


William Pugsley: No. When this gentleman asked a price the chief architect made a counter offer of what he believed the clock was worth. This price of $1,600 includes all the work of installing the clock and the manufacturer would not send a 82J
man from Germany to install it. The chief architect tells me that such a clock as this could not be purchased for a smaller sum. than was paid.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: What policy does the department follow in erecting a clock in one public building, and not in another? Does it depend on the wishes of the municipality, or the political influence of the representative of the constituency?


William Pugsley: We endeavour to meet the reasonable requests of the different places, and in a new building we sometimes provide for a clock, but if there is already a public clock in the town we do not install one as a rule. My attention has been called to a number of buildings erected 15 or 20 years ago by the Conservative government and they were so scarce of money that they left holes in the towers where clocks ought to be.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: They were not so extravagant.


William Pugsley: They should not have left the holes there because that was a temptation to the people to ask for clocks.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: How would you ever get in if they did not leave holes.


William Pugsley: For instance, in the constituency represented by my hon. friend from Huron (Mr. Chisholm) we are putting a clock in the public building at Wing-liam.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Costing $1,600?


William Pugsley: 
William Pugsley: The chief architect estimates the total cost at $8,630, and contingencies $1,370, making $10,000. A report from the engineer of the Printing Bureau stated that the boilers had been in continuous use since 1888 and they have been constantly under pressure during all that time. He recommended that these boilers should be renewed, and the chief architect is of opinion that for the safety of property, and perhaps life new boilers should be installed.
Ottawa departmental buildings, fittings, $50,000.


William Pugsley: This is a vote which it is found necessary to take practically every year for the purpose of fitting up steel file cases, book shelves, steel drawers, &c.


Richard Blain: Is this done by tender after public competition ?


William Pugsley: By tenders in each case. There are two companies manufacturing

the steel fittings, the Eclipse Manufacturing Company and the Office Specialty Company.
Ottawa departmental buildings, improvements in lavatories, plumbing, &o., $10,000.


Samuel Hughes: I would again point out that the sanitary accommodation in this building is in a prehistoric condition, some of the accommodation is not up to the standard of a modern railway closet.


William Pugsley: I remember a conversation with my hon. friend and I gave direction to the chief architect to have the improvements made. He reported to me that he had them made as far as the premises would permit.


Samuel Hughes: Nothing was done at all.


William Pugsley: I regret that it was not possible to make the improvements as complete as they should be made.


Samuel Hughes: Nothing was done at all.


William Pugsley: I shall have to ask the chief architect to see my hon. friend because he says that considerable work was done.


Samuel Hughes: I do not think that even a drop of paint was put on the. bathrooms and barber shop.


William Pugsley: A shower bath was put in.


Samuel Hughes: I have not seen it. The bathroom should be taken out of the barber shop as any one coming from a bathroom is liable to strike the arm of the barber while he is shaving a customer.
Another matter of importance is that the water of Ottawa is certainly impregnated with typhoid. I believe there are a couple of places in the building where we can get water which is supposed to be purified. If it is a good system, why not put it through all the different departmental buildings ?


William Pugsley: I made a statement last night of what has been done. We have one supply of purified water on each floor.


Samuel Hughes: Why not have it all over the offices ?


William Pugsley: We are providing for that. We have communicated with the Finance Department with a view of putting that system in each of the blocks.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It seems to me there is an obligation resting on others' as well as on the government. We pay a consideration to the city of Ottawa for the provision they have made to give us water for these buildings. It is natural to assume that that means healthy and pure water, and if nothing is dished up but what is mixed Mr. PUGSLEY.
with sewage we are throwing away our money and are very careless with regard to the health of those who come from every part of the country to spend four to six months of the year attending parliament. 1 thought that the First Minister the other evening spoke about this in a very trifling and flippant manner. It is too serious to be dealt with in this way. There is an obligation on the city to furnish pure water in proper quantity and if they do not do that, we should revise our contract with them. There is an obligation resting on the health officer to see that the health of the people is properly loked after in regard to the water supplied for drinking, It was said as an excuse for the failure to analyse the water from month to month, that the health officer had not bottles to send it in. What a trivial excuse, what supreme carelessness it is. What is the city council doing ? What kind of a health officer have we ? Are these conditions to be allowed to continue with the imminent danger which exists ? Already immense trouble, expense, suffering and death have been brought to many people in this city on account of the impure water they are obliged to use. This condition of things has been going on for weeks and it is time the department should wake up and realize the importance of forcing the city to take prompt action. If the city have not an efficient health officer they should call on him to resign and put some competent man in his place, and not allow the health of the people to suffer through so apparent a dereliction of duty in the management of the health department.


Samuel Hughes: When the officers of the council have been going around indulging in pyrotechnical displays and using their energies in kow-towing to the powers that be, you cannot expect them to attend to the business of the city, and I am astonished that my hon. friend from Grey (Mr. Sproule) should expect anything of the kind. The attention of the city council has been drawn for years to the danger. A certain medical officer has frequently pointed out to the council and to the health officer the fact that this city is at the mercy of the towns along the river and that steps should be taken to provide a remedy. It would be well to follow the suggestion of the hon. member for Grey and stir the city council up.


William Pugsley: We do not appoint the health officer. He is appointed by the Ontario government.


Samuel Hughes: No, by the city council.


William Pugsley: At all events we have no control over him. My hon. friend from East Grey (Mr. Sproule) is so accustomed to fault finding that he naturally pitches

right in to the city council and its health officer, hut we ought to have some little consideration for them. I believe they are doing the best they can in the serious conditions with which they are confronted. Either some other source must be obtained from which the supply of water can be got or else something should be done to sterilize and purify the water contaminated by the sewage which is emptied into the Ottawa river from towns such as Aylmer, Arnprior, Pembroke and Renfrew and others along its banks. The city of Ottawa is doing the best it can. It has engineers endeavouring to find some other source (from which water can be obtained. The only thing we can do, in the discharge of our duty, is to sterilize the water and make it as palatable as we can. Our officials are giving their utmost attention to that; and if hon. members will be careful to drink only the sterilized water, they need not fear any danger.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. minister says that I am so accustomed to fault finding that I cannot allow an opportunity like this to pass.


William Pugsley: Hear, hear.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Does he say that there is not just ground for fault finding?


William Pugsley: Not against the health officer.	.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Parliament is asked to vote a large sum to the city of Ottawa for the supply of water, and we must presume that the citv is bound to supply pure and healthy water. If water of that kind is not supplied we ought to stop the pay. The only parties which parliament can hold responsible are the ministers of the Crown. All the minister can say is that he supposes the health officer is doing what he should, but I remember distinctly that instructions were given the health officer to have the water analysed every week or every month but, in reply to a question as to when the last analysis was made, we are told that it was made away back in the month of November. Then the question was asked why did the health officer not attend to this, and the reply was that the city council would see that this was done. When the health officer was asked why he had not had an analysis made, his excuse was that he had not proper bottles in which to send the water to be analysed. Such an excuse should not be tolerated. It is true we can get our water sterilized by distillation, but it may be found that in our private rooms and in places where we take our meals, no such water is provided.


William Pugsley: Why should not private individuals boil the water and so sterilize it just as is being done here?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why should not private individuals look to the health officer whose duty it is to see that we are furnished with pure water? Why should they be obliged to drink sewage water because of the dilatoriness of the health inspector? When there were practically but few cases of typhoid fever in the city, the prediction was made that unless proper precautions were taken these cases would increase, and so they did. According to the newspapers there are 210 cases reported at present and how many more not reported we do not know. In this matter the government are just as lax as the city council and its health officer, because they do not bring their influence to compel the city authorities to do their duty.


Mr. BRADBURY.: The government has a large number of employees directly under the control of the Department of Public Works. I do not know that there is any provision for .furnishing pure water to the different departments of the government. I do know that there are a very large number of typhoid cases in this city? I understand that the epidemic has become so bad that the citizens have had to secure the old geological survey building as an emergency hospital. I do not know that the government can be held responsible altogether for the water of the city of Ottawa-


William Pugsley: How can they be held responsible at all?


George Henry Bradbury: I do say that the government are responsible for the water their employees are consuming. And I say that, if there is any virtue in the sterilizing apparatus we have in the House of Commons, it is the duty of the government to furnish them to every department immediately. But, outside of this, there is the greater question. I believe the government exercises considerable influence on the city of Ottawa to-day. The government haS a contract with the city to furnish water for these buildings. The government has a right, as the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule) says, to expect that pure water should be furnished. There is no doubt that, if the government had taken this matter in hand and had told the city plainly that if pure water was not furnished, the supply would be cut off and we would put in our own plant and the buildings supplied-


William Pugsley: Where from?


George Henry Bradbury: That would be a question to be decided. We might take it from the same source, and do what the city of Ottawa should have done years ago-purify the water. I understand the city is making arrangements now for water purification. But those in charge of the government of the city of Ottawa have been derelict in

their duty to the citizens. Many precious lives have been sacrificed; many people are on sick beds who should not be there. I appeal to the Minister of Public Works, not so much as far as the city is concerned, but for the employees who, in this matter, are directly under his charge, and who cannot come to this House of Commons and raise their voices in protest against the water supplied to them. Every department is running the same danger that the citizens are running of drinking water from the Ottawa river, which is little better than sewage. The minister asks why the citizens do not boil the water. I am not a scientist, but I venture to say that boiling the water is not a sure preventive of danger. If you boil a pail of sewage, how much better is it than it was before? By boiling you kill anything alive that is there, but I have grave doubts whether you remove all danger.


William Pugsley: The best physicians say the microbes will be killed.


George Henry Bradbury: I do not agree with the Minister of Public Works. A few days ago I rvas laid up, and feared an attack of typhoid. I told my physician who attended me that we were taking the precaution of boiling the water, and he said: ' If you boil a pair of sewage, does it make it any purer? You kill anything that is alive, but you do not purify it.'


William Pugsley: Microbes have life; surely if you kill them you get rid-


George Henry Bradbury: I would like to see the government have a little life on this question.


William Pugsley: We have been trying to kill the microbes.


George Henry Bradbury: I say, in conclusion, that this is no laughing matter, but a very serious one. If the cost is $10,000 or $500,000, to provide pure water for the employees of this government, the honour of the country is at stake, and it ought to be done and done immediately.


Samuel Hughes: The Minister of Public Works asks how the government can do anything. The government has a contract with the city for a supply of water. If the city persists in supplying sewage, the minister can indict the council for maintaining a common nuisance. This would call the attention of these gentlemen to the fact that they have something to do besides self-advertising. I did not intend to speak on this point; I rose, in-the first place, to help the minister out on the question of supplying pure water. But, when he asks what he can do, I tell him he can indict these people for maintaining a common nuisance.


George Henry Bradbury: 


Mr. McGIVERIN.: I have listened with interest to the discussion, and am glad to hear the expressions of sympathy from hop. members with the sufferers in this typhoid epidemic. The question, to my mind, is one for the mayor and corporation of the city of Ottawa. I regret that, for the past three or four months, there has been such a difference of opinion among the experts as to leave one at present quite at a loss as to avoidance of the danger. It has arisen only within the last two or three weeks, owing, no doubt, to the exceedingly low water in the Ottawa river from which the supply is drawn. It would have been quite impossible for the government or any one else to advise the city council when, apparently, the experts were at odds themselves as to the best course to be followed. But, since this very serious outbreak, every precaution, as I understand it, has been taken to do away with the poisonous condition of the water


Samuel Hughes: By whom?


Harold Buchanan McGiverin: I am not a technical man in this matter, but I understand that some chemical preparation is to be mixed with the water which will purify it.
So far as holding the-government responsible is concerned, the responsibility seems to me to rest entirely on the shoulders of the corporation of the city of Ottawa. The fact has already been mentioned that the government has given the use of the geological survey building as a temporary hospital. I may explain that, the moment we learned there was need of more room, the chairman of the board of health, the medical health officer and I went to see the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley) on this matter. That hon. gentleman at once gave his consent to the use of the building, and hastened matters in every way to place it at the city's disposal. And the same was true of the Militia Department in trying to help out. I can only say-in common, I am sure, with all members of this House-how deeply I regret that this outbreak has occurred in this city which has always tried to carry out any obligations into which it has entered with the government.


Samuel Hughes: I do not find fault with the hon. member for Ottawa (Mr. McGiv-erin) in seeking to whitewash the government. I was not blaming the government until the minister asked what he could do. I think he could do a good deal. For years, we have been reading how gentlemen in this city have protested again and again against the threatened contamination of the city water. But the mayor and corporation declared that the water was the finest in the world-everything around Ottawa was the finest in the world. As a matter of fact, Ottawa has been drinking the sewage of Pembroke, Almonte, Arnprior, Alymer

and all these other towns on the river. How the people of Ottawa have escaped trouble so long I cannot tell. However, the main thing is that the minister should notify the city that we want puTe water, he has a contract with the city. Let him notify the mayor that the city must supply these buildings with pure water. Let him for once put down his foot firmly, while at the same time maintaining his genial countenance.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I would suggest that the minister tell the city that, he will not ask this item to be carried because the city is not fulfilling their contract. When they are giving us poisonous water to drink they are not giving us what their contract was supposed to call for. When the minister notifies the' city that he will not carry this item of $115,000 otherwise, he will be doing something to get pure water. I do not believe for one minute that the city of Ottawa cannot get pure water, and the minister can help the city get pure water if he refuses to pay them this $115,000 until it is supplied us.


Mr. CONMEE.: I think the minister could iijring a little pressure to bear on the city by letting this item stand.


Mr. PUGSLEY  .@: This iteifi has nothing to do with pure water.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Does the minister want to drive us to drink something else?


William Pugsley: I would be awfully sorry.


Mr. CROTHERS.: On behalf of the members of this House I would suggest that the minister has the remedy in his hands by having an emergency consultation with Hiram Walker.


William Pugsley: Will the hon. gentleman be the chief executive officer at the conference?


Richard Blain: I see that the firm of A.
K.	Mills & Son, Ottawa, have received $5,866 for plumbing, &c., last year. Was any of this work done after public competition?


William Pugsley: That was for the supply and installation of marble lavatories.


Richard Blain: That is only one item in a total of $25,866.


William Pugsley: That was jobbing work, there were no tenders invited. It could not be done very well 'by tender. If you take an old building and tear out the old lavatories and put in new ones, it is something that you cannot do satisfactorily by tender. If I were doing it for myself I would not think of calling for tenders, but would try and get good reliable men. Any one doing it by tender would be sure
to exact a large margin for unexpected difficulties.
Ottawa Departmental Buildings-Langevin Block-new boilers and alterations in heating apparatus, $5,000.


William Pugsley: $5,000 of this is a revote. It is to make provision for replacing four boilers in the Langevin block on the east side, also to complete necessary changes in connection with the heating apparatus. It was done by public competition, after advertisement in the newspapers of Ottawa.


Richard Blain: In how many newspapers was this advertisement inserted?


William Pugsley: It'could not have been in a great many, because it only cost $35 for advertising. I presume it was in one of the Ottawa papers.	-


Richard Blain: Perhaps the chief architect could tell in which one.


William Pugsley: He does not remember in what paper it was advertised. It is done through the secretary of the department.


Richard Blain: Was this put in two or three papers?


William Pugsley: I think I can safely say there would only be one.
Mr. BLAIN- Which one?


William Pugsley: If in only one, it would be the * Free Press.' But if it was in any of the others, I cannot tell which. I will give my hon. friend a list of the papers in which it was published.	.
Ottawa Parliament	Buildings-improvements, $10,000.


William Pugsley: That is to make provision for general improvements to the interior of the parliament buildings and the library. I can tell what was done last year : Tiling the library, $4,025 ; partitions, $1,450 ; ventilation, $800 ; plumbing, $453 ; furniture, $653 ; painting and gilding tower and roof, $600.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Will that have to be done every year ?


William Pugsley: Practically the same amount is expended every year.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Is it spent simply because the money is voted every year or simply because it is necessary ?


William Pugsley: It is actually necessary.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: It seems strange that the gilding and painting in the library that the hon. gentleman has mentioned have to be done every year.


William Pugsley: No, this is to the interior of the building and the library.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Do the interior of the building and the library require to be painted every year ?


William Pugsley: No. but there are painting, gilding and other improvements necessary to keep the buildings in repair.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What is proposed to be done with regard to providing more suitable accommodation for the library than we have at present ? The library is so crowded both in the basement and on the general floor that it is very inconvenient both to the members and to those engaged in it. In fact, I find it very difficult to get much satisfaction in the library because three times out of four, you cannot get anything you want. There is a general complaint that everything is bundled together and there seems to be no possibility of any system or order being evolved out of it, so that one can go and get anything he wants. There is a number of people in the library, but if you send in a hurry or go in yourself you cannot get what you want sometimes in three or four days and sometimes cannot get it at all. For years it has been apparent that there was urgent need for increased accommodation and the government state year after year that they intend to take it up, but we have not yet any distinct information from them as to what is contemplated.


William Pugsley: I am very glad that my hon. friend has mentioned this question which certainly is one of a good deal of importance, owing to the very crowded condition of the library. The matter was mentioned last year and certain suggestions were made to me. One was that an additional story should be put on to cover a portion of the building that is now occupied by the reading room and that we should also extend the library so as to take in the room which is occupied by my hon. friend the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Graham), and also the members' smoking room. In that way additional accommodation might be given. Another idea is to erect an additional wing to the eastward in connection with the Senate part of the building. The question of the relative expense of the two modes of affording accommodation has been talked of. Another idea which has been suggested is to erect another building towards the edge of the cliff which would be used as a stack room and have a tunnel connecting the present library with that building. All these are under consideration, and it is expected that the Speaker of the Senate and the other nfem,bers of the Library Committee will very soon have a meeting at which the chief architect and myself shall be present to go quite fully into the whole matter. I have an idea myself, which is entirely my personal idea, Mr. PUGSLEY.
that it is worthy of consideration whether we should not carry out a wing, say, from the western side of the building for the purpose of affording a new chamber for the members of the House where there would be perfect ventilation on each side and which would be open to the pure air of heaven and then utilize this chamber for purposes in connection with the library and reading room. I have that idea; I do not know whether it is worthy of consideration or not, but I do not like the idea of having a couple of hundred people who are constantly in attendance in this chamber in addition to the spectators in the galleries, shut off from direc^ ventilation and from the open, free air. I do not know whether it is worthy of seriously considering or net.


George Henry Bradbury: I hope you will develop it.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: That would be a much better arrangement than we have now.


Richard Blain: I never could understand why files of newspapers ten or twelve years old, are kept piled up in the library from year to year. Why could they not be put in some room >
They are not wanted very often and they are taking up the best space in that building.


William Pugsley: That is for the Library Committee to decide.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then I take it that I am correct in saying that nothing has been done up to the present except talk. This talk has been going on for years. It seems to me that it is time that somebody got busy, and did a little more than talk. The process of evolution has been so slow that I think we will all be dead before there is a new library if we do not do more than has been done lately.


William Pugsley: I have no control over the Library Committee, but I certainly do think that they ought to have these files of old papers removed. I do not see any necessity for them. I quite agree with the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Blain) that there is no reason why they should be kept there taking up room in the library. I do not know whether they are kept there to emphasize the necessity of additional accommodation or not-I do not suggest that-but that is the effect of it because everybody feels upon going in there that something ought to be done. I think the first thing that ought to be done is for the Library Committee to order these files of old newspapers to be removed because there is no need of keeping them there.
Ottawa parliament buildings, driveway pavement, $20,000.


William Pugsley: We have put down pavement on the driveways all around the parliament grounds.
, Mr. LANCASTER. Is that not an enormous price? It must have been paved with silver dollars.


William Pugsley: No.


George Henry Bradbury: What was the total cost?


William Pugsley: From the 1st April, 1910, to 30th November, 1910, we paid to the Ottawa Construction Company $5,000, to T. S. Kirby for broken stone, $2,439.03, for stone, sand and cement $3,436, and for labour $5,904.03. The appropriation was $21,000 and that left an unexpended balance of $4,220.81 on the 30th November.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: That is about $17,000. How many yards, or miles, of surface did that cover?


William Pugsley: That was applied in laying pavements around the east and west blocks, square facing on Wellington street, and covering the roadway in front of the House of Commons. There were 8,000 superficial yards of pavement altogether. It is a very nice pavement.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: It ought to be a very nice pavement at the price of $2 a yard. Does the hon. gentleman not seriously think this is an exorbitant price to pay for putting a roadway in condition? If the hon. gentleman would take that before any ordinary road builders in any province he would have difficulty in explaining such an expenditure.


William Pugsley: 
Edward Arthur Lancaster: How deep did they dig?	,


William Pugsley: There was about eight . inches of solid concrete put down and it was covered over with asphalt.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Has the hon. gentleman ever compared this with any work done by municipalities or other institutions that are constructing these roads in every province? I think that is a most extravagant price to pay.


William Pugsley: This was done by day work under a competent foreman.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The different counties of Ontario do similar work to this, and I do not believe they pay any such prices. Has inquiry been made to ascertain what prices are paid for similar work by other public bodies?


William Pugsley: About five years ago we invited tenders for the work on Wellington street, and it cost us $2.49 per yard.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Was it the same class of work?


William Pugsley: About the same. There is a great variation in the character of this work, and I understand it runs from $1.80 in some localities up to $2.50. When you come to a permanent pavement for a driveway, which is on a slope, and you have to put eight inches of solid concrete I do not think the cost is too great.


Richard Blain: Why was this done by day work instead of by contract, as formerly?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Who was the foreman?


William Pugsley: Mr. Baxter, an employee of the department, and an experienced man.


Richard Blain: I should think it would be a great relief to the hon. member for Ottawa (Mr. McGiverin) if this were done by contract, because it must be a great deal of trouble to him to supply the workmen for day labour. I wonder if it was the influence of the hon. member (Mr. McGiverin) who caused the minister to change the system from contract to day labour. I should think that the city of Ottawa would be a dangerous place to experiment in doing work for day labour.


William Pugsley: The work was done by the permanent staff, with the addition of a few extra men. We had a competent foreman. and I believe the work was done as economically as possible, and it is well done.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Is this not what is commonly known as tar macadam?


William Pugsley: No; it is an asphalt composition.


Richard Blain: There is not very heavy traffic around these grounds, and I should think it would not be necessary to do 'the work as it has been done.


William Pugsley: There is a great deal of driving, and I suppose the chief architect thought it was better to make a good job of it at once.
At six o'clock, House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.


PRIVATE BILLS.
[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill (No. 44) respecting the Lachine, Jacques Cartier and Maisonneuve Railway.-Mr. Geoffrion.
[Stage Direction]
On section 4,
Louis Alfred Adhémar Rivet: I have an amendment to offer to section 4 of the Bill. The amendment is not important, and I understand the committee have power to accept it, waiving the rule. The effect of the amendment is to give the company power to connect its line with the Canadian Pacific railway and the Canadian Northern railway. The amendment provides:
Subject to the approval of the Commission the company may connect its line of railway with the Canadian Pacific railway and the Canadian Northern railway.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We have usually followed the course in the Railway Committee of giving the company power to amalgamate with such lines as are set out in the Bill. This was not done in this case, and, therefore, following the usual custom, it should not be done in the House. It is an important amendment and no notice has been given.


Louis Alfred Adhémar Rivet: If there is an objection, of course I shall have to give notice of the amendment, and will ask the committee to report progress and ask leave to sit again.


William Pugsley: I would like to be informed of the route of this railway. Section 1 declares that a railway authorized by the legislature of Quebec, which would therefore be regarded as provincial in its character, shall now be declared a railway for the general advantage of Canada. Personally, I am opposed to putting in that declaration unless there is some evidence before the committee that the road is of rather a national character and not simply local.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In the committee I objected to the principle of taking over these provincial lines and bringing them under federal jurisdiction without some strong reason, because there are often provisions in the provincial Bill that we destroy by making the railway a federal line, thus bringing it under another authority and jurisdiction. We had the same thing last year in connection with Ontario railways. By taking them under our jurisdiction we removed them from the control of the Railway Commission of Ontario. That occurred in connection with telegraph and telephone lines. Then there was the other objection which the Minister of Public Works has raised. We have of late years made it a rule to compel the party who desired to have a provincial railway declared to be for the general advantage of Canada to give some specific and justifiable ground for making the declaration which transfers the road from the control of the one to the other. But in this case even the local Act was not looked up. The discussion was hurried through and little time was given to it.


Mr. PUGSLEY  .@: 


Mr. GRAHAM.: I was not present when the Bill was before the committee. We generally discuss those features to. which my hon. friend refers pretty thoroughly, but he was present and says they were not thoroughly discussed. I plead guilty to being quite partial to putting all the railways possible under Dominion jurisdiction, on account of the control we thus get over the traffic, which is conceded to be very complete under our Board of Railway Commissioners. The point has been raised during the past year, in fact a case is now in progress, in which it is contended that even where a provincial line connects^ with a Dominion line the Dominion Railway Commission has no power to even regulate the through rates on that part of the line which has a provincial charter. This makes it all the more necessary, even to control through rates, that we should have jurisdiction. If my hon. friend will give notice that he is going to move this amendment and let that stand until the next meeting of the committee, the promoter will be here.


Mr. NESBITT.: There was a discussion about that in the committee and the provincial statute was turned up to see where it differed and I understand an amendment was added in sections 3 and 4.


Mr. HENDERSON.: I was under the impression that instructions were given to have the names of those other railways with which this one is connected inserted in the Bill. The committee will remember that Mr. Wainwright came before the Railway Committee, and said that they were extremely anxious tlhe Bill should go through in order t<x give them a connecting link between the Grand Trunk railway and the Grand Trunk Pacific. So urgent was the demand that there was no apposition, and his request was granted.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think that was in connection with another Bill entirely.
Progress reported.


SECURITY TRUSTS CORPORATION.
[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill (No. 32) to incorporate the Security Trusts Corporation. -Mr. Martin (Regina).
Edward Walter Nesbitt: This Bill was considered toy the Committee on Banking and Commerce.


Mr. FIELDING.: I have no knowledge of the Bill, tout if it has received the consideration of the Committee on Banking and Commerce, I shall not object. If there be any abjection, I shall toe glad to look into it. No doubt the committee gave it very careful consideration.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The consideration of the . committee was largely ^long the same lines as that of a Bill we passed the year before last, about which there was a good deal of controversy. I think it was the Bill of the Prudential Loan and Trust Company. There is one amendment that, in my opinion, should be made that does not appear in the Bill. It should be a part of all Bills to incorporate trust or loan companies, insurance companies-though it does not apply so much to these-as banking companies. It should be provided that whenever such a company becomes possessed of money or valuable consideration which does not belong to the company, but for which there are no claimants and no heirs, that property should be transferred to the state. At present these companies treat such moneys practically as their own. It was urged by the hon. member for Oxford (Mr. Nesbitt) that this provision should be in a general'Bill. I think it would be natural to have it in a general Bill, but, in the meantime, I think we should make it a part of every special Bill of this kind. Of course, I am not going to try to stop the Bill for the purpose of making this amendment, but I draw' the attention of the Minister of Finance to the matter. No individual is allowed to do what these corporations do-appropriate money which does not belong to them because they happen to become possessed of it and no heir or claimant is found. If the property were real estate, it would pass, under the law of escheat, to the province.


William Stevens Fielding: Does not that apply to personal property?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In connection with real estate the province of Ontario has asserted its clftim in some such cases. And, in the case of personal property held by individuals, it passes to the_ state, but I am not aware of instances in which this rule was applied to these companies.


William Stevens Fielding: I find that the law clerk has made a memorandum that one of these sections is not so carefully drawn as it should be. I suggest that we allow this Bill to stand, and the points raised can be inquired into before it comes up for consideration again.


Mr. HAGGART (Winnipeg).: I would call the attention of the Minister of Finance to subsection 3 of section 6 which reads:
3. The company may, by by-law, provide that a resolution in writing signed by all the directors shall be valid as if it had been passed at a meeting of the directors.
That practically does away with the holding of directors' meetings and I do not think this sort of thing should be encouraged. The business is supposed to be directed by the joint action of directors, after
consultation. But, if the matter be left in this shape, each director practically becomes a rubber stamp for the manager. And we find that that is the origin of trouble in many of these cases. I think that such a provision should not be in any of these Bills.


William Stevens Fielding: I think that similar provision is to be found in other Bills. I cannot recall the particular case, but I recollect the question being before the committee, and the argument was put forward that, in matters of no very great concern, it was found inconvenient to get the Board of Directors together, and the convenient way was to send a memorandum round and have each director sign the resolution. And I have known that to be done in graver bodies in cases of emergency. Of course, it might be difficult to draw the line between matters requiring conference and matters more of routine requiring merely the formal approval of the board. I will bear in mind the suggestion, which is in the direction of safety and prudence, and will call the attention of the law officers who advise us in such matters to the observations of the hon. member for Winnipeg (Mr. Haggart).


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I drew attention to this matter in the committee, and thought that the provision had been struck out. I thought and still think, that the provision is a bad one. The reason urged in its favour is the difficulty of getting the board together. But this is a trust company belonging to one province so that its directors are not scattered so far that they could not be got together for the companies business. I have seen the working of this law in one or two instances where, had it not been checked in proper time, it would have been likely to do great harm. When it is proposed that the 'board should take certain action, a paper is prepared and sent to each director with all the reasons that can be advanced why the resolution should be signed at once and sent on. There is usually some plea of urgency and some intimation of pending loss if the action proposed be not taken. The memorandum does not bring out all the facts that would be brought out in a discussion at a board meeting. But the individual director dislikes to burk or check the proposed action, and so, instead of directing, as a director is supposed to do, he signs and sends the resolution on. The effect is to give power into the hands of a small executive. I think it is a bad provision, and should not be allowed in these Bills.


David Henderson: The objections to this provision were not overlooked in the committee. The section was fully considered before being adopted. We thought there was a sufficient safeguard in the fact

that all the directors-not a majority only -have to sign in these cases. If the same question were brought before the board, it might be brought before a bare quorum a majority of whom would carry. We thought that the proviso that every director's name should be signed would be an equal safeguard. We came to the conclusion that we would allow the clause to go through, because it had gone through if I am not mistaken, in the case of the Prudential, a Bill that as I understood the matter, had received very careful consideration in the committee and had been made something of a model Bill. But having adopted that Bill only a year or two ago, it was thought well to allow this clause to go through.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think the hon. gentleman's arguments are neither strong nor sound. I do not think you will analyse any question that is presented before a board as well by sending it to one individual with all the arguments on one side and more on the other, no board is doing its duty which does this. In the first case you are more likely to make the directors figure-heads than intelligent and useful officials. Take the Farmers' Bank, how easy it would have been to pass something around like that. The manager, who seemed to dominate everything, could get it signed.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: How much good would it do to have a meeting?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That a certain number of men there did not attend to their duties was not on account of the fact that they did not meet but because they didn't do their duty when they did meet. But if they desired to pass around something, would it not be more easy to do it if there had been only a few sharp men on the board? I know one party that had to make two trips to New York to safeguard the interest of himself and friends on account of a provision such as that, made foolishly or maliciously by the manager and one or two of the members of the board who were acting in concert with him, and who stood to benefit if it was carried through. The result was that he was endangering the financial interests of all the members of that board and of that company. If it had not been burked they would have suffered a serious loss.


David Henderson: I am not sure but that I may say that the hon. gentleman's arguments are neither strong nor sound, as he characterized mine. Now, I still submit that with a board of four, which you could have with this comnany, because that would be a majority of the seven, the smallest number of directors, you might have on that board a very strong minded man who was sufficiently persuasive to induce the other members of the board to come to Mr. HENDERSON.
his opinion. If you sent the motion around to the various directors, and let them sit down in their quiet and reflective moments, and consider the whole question for themselves, I am not sure but that you would get a much better judgment than you could where you had one strong minded man dominating the rest. I still hold that the opinion expressed by the committee was wise and sound.


Gilbert Howard McIntyre: There is a motion that the committee rise.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: My hon. friend from Hal-ton (Mr. Henderson) expresses my view3 completely.


William Pugsley: Before the committee rises, I want to ask an explanation of section 15. [DOT] There is a section in this Bill which provides that this company may do business throughout Canada, but subject to the laws of the province, and if there is any conflict, the laws of the province shall prevail. Now, I do not think we are doing our duty in this parliament to incorporate a company and then say that its powers shall not be exercised if they happen to conflict with the law of any province. That i3 not good legislation.


David Henderson: I think that is a good clause. You would fiot want to enact anything in one province that was in conflict with the laws of that province.


William Pugsley: But let not the province enact a provincial law which is in conflict with a Dominion statute.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The Act respecting the Observance of the Lord's Day is based upon that principle exactly.


William Pugsley: I think perhaps that was a law of an exceptional character. But here we are claiming jurisdiction to incorporate this company for Dominion purposes, with power to do business throughout Canada, and yet the effect of this would be that in one province they could do certain things, and in another province they would not have the same power ; their power might be different in each of the provinces of Canada. If we have authority to incorporate this company with power to do business throughout Canada, then we should not make it subject to the laws of each particular province in which it might happen to be carrying on business.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What would happen if, when your Bill became law, a province should make a law of their own saying that you should not do business in that province unless you complied with certain provisions of their law?


William Pugsley: I should say that their law was void unless there was a question

of taxation. They might impose a tax on the company, as they do. But any statute *which attempted to interfere with the larger rights which this parliament gave to a company, would, I think, be ultra vires of the provincial legislature. But here we assume to pass an Act, and then we say that it may be picked to pieces in any province.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: We have done the same thing to-day with an insurance company.


William Pugsley: There has been a case under consideration as to the powers of a provincial legislature to incorporate a company to do business throughout Canada. But here there is no question of our authority to incorporate this company. But we are saying that although we give you such rights, these rights must be exercised subject to any law of any province, and if there is any conflict with that, the provincial law shall prevail.


Mr. MIDDLE.BRO.: I understand there is a stated case being sent to the Privy Council to determine the respective rights of a province and the Dominion in case of conflict. There may be concurrent jurisdiction.


William Stevens Fielding: That the Bill might involve possible conflict between the province and the Dominion is something that I have not had before me. It strikes me, as it is read by the Minister of Public Works, that the earlier part of the clause as to doing business subject to the laws of the province, might mean that inasmuch as trustee laws are under the jurisdiction of a province as dealing with property and civil rights, in the exercise of their functions as a trust corporation they have to bear in mind that trusts are regulated by the province and not by the Dominion. The law of trusteeship is a provincial law, and I think the intention must be that they should carry out the provincial law. They would become a corporate company for trustee business, but they would have to do their business subject to the law of the province as respects trusteeships. I think that is what it is intended to mean. The latter part of the clause respecting possible conflict, is more serious.
Progress reported.


CONSIDERED IN COMMITTEE.
[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 46) respecting the Ottawa, Northern and Western Railway Company.-Mr. McGiverin.
Bill (No. 53) respecting the Dominion Atlantic Railway Company.-Mr. Pickup.
Bill (No. 66) respecting the Brockville, Westport and Northwestern Railway Company.-Mr. Stratton.
Bill (No. 57) respecting the London and Northwestern Railway" Company.-Mr. Beattie.
Bill (No. 67) respecting the Burrard, Westminster Boundary Railway and Navigation Company.-Mr. Taylor (New Westminster).
Bill (No. 82) respecting the Kettle River Valley Railway Company, and to change its name to the Kettle Valley Railway Company.-Mr. Burrell.
Bill (No. 71) to incorporate the Empire Life Insurance Company.-Mr. Macdonell.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 99) to incorporate the Niagara, Welland and Lake Erie Railway Company. -Mr. German.
Bill (No. 100) respecting the Orford Mountain Railway Company.-Mr. Hunt.

[Stage Direction]
The order for private Bills being exhausted, House resumed in Committee of Supply.
William Pugsley: Just before six o'clock we had considered the amount for the driveway pavement-$20,000. I rather think the discussion was concluded. If no other hon. gentleman has anything to say it might be carried.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: My recollection is that the minister said that $17,000 had been expended.


William Pugsley: Up to the 30th November, $16,779.19.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: What was the number of yards?


William Pugsley: About 8,000.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: There is $3,000 or $4,000 to be expended?


William Pugsley: That would lapse on the 31st March.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I also understood the minister to say that a number of men in the permanent employment of the government were utilized in making this pavement?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I did not understand if their salary was included in this $16,000?


William Pugsley: Yes, although they are permanently employed we pay them out of the vote for each particular work.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: That would be the total expenditure including the salary of the men employed on the work?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: If the concrete is eight inches thick, and well laid I do not think

the price is an exorbitant one. I have had some experience in laying pavements.


William Pugsley: I think it is exceedingly well laid. I noticed it before the snow came and I was much pleased with it.
Peterborough post office building, addition to, $9,000.


William Pugsley: This is to make provision towards the erection of a one story brick adjunct on a stone basement 36 feet frontage by 50 feet, the full depth of the building, extending the frontage to North lane. This is an addition to the ground floor of the building and to the working space of the post office. There has' been some little money expended. The total probable cost will reach $12,999.70. The whole amount is a revote.


Mr. SEXSMITH.: Is $1,000 of this not a revote?


William Pugsley: We have expended up to the 31st of December $386.70 and we assume that by the 31st of March we will have expended about $1,000.


John Albert Sexsmith: Is this an addition to the present post office?


William Pugsley: Yes.


John Albert Sexsmith: Is it the intention to proceed at once with the construction of this addition?


William Pugsley: Yes, it is under contract now.


Uriah Wilson: I understand that theis building is only one story?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Uriah Wilson: It would seem to any one looking at that post office that it is altogether too small for a city the size of Peterborough. Now that you are making an addition to it you should at least make a two story building of it. I think you will be cramped for room if you do not.


William Pugsley: All they are asking for is the enlargement of what is called the working part of the office, and the Post Office Department is satisfied.


John Albert Sexsmith: The minister should deal as generously with Peterborough as he does with other places in the matter of public buildings. Peterborough is an important city, one of the most important in the province of Ontario, and I surely think the minister ought to build a post office that would do credit to the place as well as accommodate the public. Peterborough is not like some of the villages of 700 or 800 inhabitants where you erect a $30,000 building. It is a rapidly growing city, and should have more generous treatment from the government.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: 


William Pugsley: There is already a very good post office there with which the people and the Post Office Department are well satisfied. We are now building an addition which will give ample accommodation for some years to come. I trust my hon. friend will not urge me unnecessarily to expend public money on this building. Of course if you were to believe hon. gentlemen opposite one would suppose that I would be very glad to have an opportunity of expending money.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: In some places.


William Pugsley: I do not want to be unduly pressed by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sexsmith) because I think very much of him. There is also a public building in Peterborough for a customs house and if really is not necessary to expend any more money on this post office than we now propose.


John Albert Sexsmith: As the minister is going about the job it would be cheaper for him now to make the building a two story one than to do it later. The building would have a much better appearance if he did.


William Pugsley: It would be no advantage at present, and I would not wish to put up a two story building just for appearance sake.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: You could put another story on that building for the $1,600 you spent on a clock where it was not necessary.


John Albert Sexsmith: Does the addition
front on a street?


William Pugsley: Yes, it extends through to the north lane.


Richard Blain: Does the government own the land?


William Pugsley: Yes, the building is on our own land.


John Albert Sexsmith: If it is necessary to increase this item to make a complete job of improving the post office in Peterborough so as to accommodate the people for some years to come, I would urge on the minister that now is the time to do it. I think the people of Peterborough should be generously dealt with.


William Pugsley: Peterborough has an excellent post office building now.


John Albert Sexsmith: It is quite a small building for such an important city as that. Does the minister intend to make changes in the interior of the post office?


William Pugsley: Yes, we propose putting up additional fittings.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What kind of a roof is there t.o be?


William Pugsley: A flat roof covered with gravel and felt.
Port Perry public building, $15,000.


William Pugsley: This is to erect a public building at Port Perry in the county of Ontario, for post office purposes, &c.


Richard Blain: North Ontario?


William Pugsley: No, South Ontario. Out of last year's appropriation of $5,000 we have paid $1,800 for the site, and we assume that by the 31st of March we will have expended $1,195 more, making $3,200, leaving $1,800 as a revote and we ask for $15,000.


Richard Blain: Is the contract let?


William Pugsley: No. The population of Port Perry nine years ago was very close to 1,500. The postal revenue last year was $3,223, money orders issued $15,200, money orders paid $20,000.


Richard Blain: From whom did you purchase the site?


William Pugsley: From Miss Elizabeth Sinclair for $1,800. The property consisted of two lots, one of them being 40 feet 6 inches by 89 feet. Port Perry is a thriving town, there are 30 stores, 2 banks, a sawmill, a flour mill, a machinery shop, &e.


William Sora Middlebro: I have been observing the different towns in which post offices are to be built and am convinced that one town has been forgotten by the Minister of Public Works, that is the town of Mea-ford. It has a larger population and a greater revenue than any of the towns with which we have been dealing.


William Pugsley: Is it in my hon. friend's constituency ?


William Sora Middlebro: Yes. I find that the population and postal revenue of the towns in which buildings are to be erected are as follows:
Town.	Postal Revenue.	Popula- tion.	Cost of Building.$ 3,500 4.300 6,000 4,097 4,924 3,223 6.300	],2C0 1,296 2,693 1,945 2,019 1,500	$ 14.000 14.000 18.000 18,000 18,000 15,000Fergus....,


Mount Forest ....: Meaford				
			
I have not the exact population of Mea-ford, but it is nearly 4,000. If all of these other places are entitled to postal buildings, I cannot see how, in the light of the minister's announcement, that it is
the postal revenue, the number of industries and the population that determines the erection of buildings, Meaford is not more entitled to a building than these other towns.


William Pugsley: Have they not good accommodation there now ?


William Sora Middlebro: No, just a small building, the rental of which is three hundred and some odd dollars.


William Pugsley: $300 ought to rent a very good building in a town of that size. Where the postal revenue is larger a greater allowance is given to the postmaster and he can rent better accommodation. As an illustration, my hon. friend from North Essex (Mr. Wilcox), referred to the necessity of better accommodation at Walkerville. He corrected his statement to-day and I also got a letter from a gentleman in Walkerville who said the hon. gentleman's statements were entirely without foundation because there was very excellent accommodation at Walkerville; the postmaster had rented very suitable premises and there was not that urgent need for a building that the hon. gentleman sought to make the House believe there was. So it might be in Meaford; with a rental of $300 there might be quite good accommodation.


William Sora Middlebro: To follow that to its logical conclusion, if the minister would get better premises in all these towns he would get better postal revenue.


William Pugsley: No, if we had better postal revenue we could have better premises.


William Sora Middlebro: That is why I want better premises, because we have a greater postal revenue than any of the towns the minister has mentioned, and a customs revenue as well. I am prepared to say there is twice as much revenue, postal and customs, as in any of the towns the hon. gentleman has mentioned. I really do think the town of Meaford is entitled to a public building. We do not want anything elaborate, but just need a comfortable, respectable building in which to do public business. I ask the minister for thjs in all earnestness. I am not pleading for anything, but I want to stand up for my rights. I lay claim before the minister on these grounds.


William Pugsley: Meaford is an imnort-ant place, a place which, I am glad to know, is doing considerable business. I had the pleasure of visiting Meaford last summer. It is to be borne in mind that the Department of Public Works is spending a very considerable amount of money for the improvement of the harbour of Meaford. That makes a considerable difference.

Some towns which are inland, where they have no public moneys expended, may have a stronger claim for the immediate construction of public buildings to meet public .necessities than towns where a large amount is being expended for the improvement of the harbour and so for the development of business. My hon. friend knows that Meaford is a town of something over 2,000.


William Sora Middlebro: Nearer 4,000.


William Pugsley: I know it is a very good and thriving town. I had not the opportunity of going all over the town. But 1 think we are spending money to a very good public advantage in Meaford in improving the harbour. My hon. friend's representation as to the need of public buildings will, I can assure him, have my careful consideration. If I remember rightly, this is the first time the matter has been brought to my attention.


William Sora Middlebro: I am obliged to the minister for his consideration. I would point out that in the case of Owen Sound which is also a lively town of about 14,000 the same arguments for its not receiving a public building might have ibSfen advanced, but the government gave a public building costing $10,000. If it was proper to do it in Owen Sound, where we receive considerable harbour assistance, the same thing might apply to Meaford.


William Pugsley: Both towns are in the same constituency ?


William Sora Middlebro: That should not make a difference, every town should stand on its own merits.


William Pugsley: Does not the hon. gentleman see that having just erected a very handsome and expensive public building in Owen Sound in the same constituency as Meaford and that as we are spending a good deal of money in the harbour at Meaford we might well consider the claims of other places where no public money is being expended and where there is need of public buildings, especially where there is no public building at present in the constituency. However I shall be very
glad to give consideration to the claim.


Richard Blain: If the hon. minister intends to discuss it from that point of view, that will lead to considerable difficulty, for the reason that he has been expending a very large amount of money in South Ontario at different places.


William Pugsley: If it should happen in the not far distant future that I should put in an amount for Meaford, will the hon. gentleman object to it?


Richard Blain: So long as the minister spends the money wisely, every item of Mr. PUGSLEY.
expenditure will receive fair consideration from this side. But the difficulty is we do not know what is his policy, and he does not seem to know it himself. Therefore, we are not able to apply a fair test to his expenditures.


William Pugsley: I suppose we may take it for granted that the hon. gentleman would approve of expenditure upon buildings in towns of a reasonable size .and which are in need of public buildings, always providing, as is actually the case, that the money is wisely expended?


Mr. MEIGHEN.: Perhaps if the minister would answer a question of mine, it might be of some assistance to the electors before the next election. Would it make any difference in his own attitude towards the erection of a public building in Meaford, if the electors there should see fit at the next election to return a supporter of the government?


William Pugsley: I have always been very careful not to make any promises with regard to the erection of public buildings.


Mr. ARMSTRONG.: I notice that the minister is very anxious to establish post offices in smali villages which are in the party fold. For instance, he puts up a $25,000 building in a village which has but a population of 700. In Napierville, a village with 900 population, he puts up a $15,000 post office. But Meaford, with a population of 4,000, has no attention given it. Port Perry, with a small population, gets a $15,000 building, whereas Milton, with 1,800 people, with no other public building in that district, and which is an inland town and a shire town, has no attention paid to it whatever. Neither has Parry Sound, with 4,000 people, or Uxbridge, with 2,000 people.


William Pugsley: What is the trouble with Uxbridge?


Mr. GLEN CAMPBELL.: It has a Tory representative.


William Pugsley: There is an amount in the estimates for Uxbridge.


William Sora Middlebro: The trouble is you will not spend it.


William Pugsley: Yes, we will.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Come to western Ontario-


William Pugsley: I had a very delightful trip through there last summer.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: Yes, but you only went through a certain section represented by members of your own party, and did not go through the other ridings.


William Pugsley: I was at Meaford, Owen Sound, Goderich and Windsor.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: That is only a very "small portion of western Ontario. The minister knows wrell that his policy is merely to grant post offices to constituencies on his own side, which return supporters to this government.


Mr. TOLMIE.: What about Port Stanley?


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: No doubt the minister made the promise before the last election.


William Pugsley: Not at all.


John Tolmie: What a/bout Chesley?


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: I merely rose to enter my protest against the manner in which public moneys are being expended on these buildings.


Mr. SINCLAIR.: On looking over the list of public buildings, I am greatly surprised to find hon. gentlemen making the statement that -all the money is spent in Liberal constituencies. Such is not the case in many instances. For example take the province of Nova Scotia where there are eight items for public buildings The first is Halifax citadel, new quarters for single men. Then Halifax Dominion build-ing~P0st office. Then Halifax quarantine station, and again Halifax Dominion buildings. These are all in the constituency represented by the leader of the opposition.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: When were these buildings started, and were they not promised previous to the last election?


John Howard Sinclair: I am not able to say when they were started.


Arthur Meighen: What is your point?


John Howard Sinclair: I am talking now about the expenditure in my province. Then we come to the item of the Lunenburg public building, which county is represented by a Liberal. Then to Parrsboro', which is in the county of my hon. friend from Cumberland (Mr. Rhodes).


Arthur Meighen: Is the money being spent on this, or is it simply in the estimates?


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: How long has it been in the estimates?


Arthur Meighen: Is the money being spent or is it simply remaining in the estimates to be spent?


William Pugsley: The moneys are ready to be spent when required.


John Howard Sinclair: I understand that we are voting the money for the purpose of spending it.


Richard Blain: Voting it for political purposes.


John Howard Sinclair: In the province of Nova Scotia there are five items of expenditure in constituencies represented by Conservatives, as I have shown, and only three in counties represented by supporters of the government. I am not so well acquainted, with Ontario, but look at the items in that province for a moment. The very first is in the town of Athens, which, I understand, is in the constituency of the Minister of Railways.


Arthur Meighen: It was not in the estimates of 1908.


Richard Blain: Take the next one.


John Howard Sinclair: There is a vote for Chesley which is a town in a Conservative constituency.


William Sora Middlebro: That was put in the estimates immediately before the last election for party purposes.


Arthur Meighen: I may tell you also that there has not been a dollar spent there.


William Pugsley: Yes, the site is bought and the contract is about ready.


Arthur Meighen: There has not been a cent spent on the building, as the minister knows.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: And I venture the opinion that there will not be a dollar spent there until the eve of the next election.


John Howard Sinclair: Take Gananoque in the constituency of my hon. friend from Leeds (Mr. Taylor).


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: When was that put in?


William Pugsley: That is an irrelevant question.


John Howard Sinclair: The dates of these items are not so important as the fact that we find many of them in Conservative constituencies. Passing on down, we have four considerable items in the constituency of my hon. friend from Frontenac (Mr. Edwards).


Arthur Meighen: Were they put in?


John Howard Sinclair: I understand that some of these are new items. There is another item for Sudbury, _ in the constituency of Nipissing. I am just blundering through these Ontario towns, because I am not so well acquainted with the geography as I would like to be. The next that I notice is Toronto-no less than four items one of them for $100,000 which is more than is voted for the whole province of Nova Scotia in which we have twelve Liberal members. Then we come to Uxbridge, in the constituency of my hon. friend from North Ontario (Mr. Sharpe).


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the date?


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: That vote was promised on the eve of an election. Not a



dollar of it has been spent, and I prophesy that not a dollar will be spent until the eve of the next election.


John Howard Sinclair: It is very appropriate and honourable that the promise should be carried out. Now, I do not know how many votes there are in Quebec and other provinces. But there is a considerable list. My criticism of the present administration is that it is too liberal to hun. gentlemen opposite. Under the old administration, for fourteen years the county of Guysborough which I have the honour to represent, did not appear in the estimates of the Dominion at all.


Richard Blain: How is it doing now?


John Howard Sinclair: For fourteen years out of eighteen under that administration, the county did not appear in the estimates. For four years it was represented by a Conservative, and during that period some small votes were given. I question if you will And a record like that under the present administration in any county in Canada. The Minister of Public Works in the old administration came down to the capital of my constituency and made the bald statement that if we wanted to get public works we must vote for the Conservative party. That is the doctrine hon. gentlemen opposite have been taught and that they practised when in power. I think that they are rather surprised to find us voting so many public buildings in constituencies represented on their side of the House.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: If I needed anything to confirm the statement I made, the remarks of the hon. member for Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair) would furnish it. He has not shown a single case of a public building in any Ontario constituency represented by a member of the opposition which was not promised on the eve of the last election. He says that the government are carrying out their promises. But, why do they make these promises and then, year after year, vote this money but never spend a dollar of it? What right has the government to monopolize the expenditure of public money for constituencies represented on their side of the House, and to make promises to constituencies represented on this side in the hope of changing their representation. He tells us of statements made in years gone by in his own county. But his own followers from Nova Scotia, speaking at Lethbridge, held out to the people there a definite statement that, unless the present government had a representative from the district, the people need not expect a post office building.


William Pugsley: I trust the hon. gentleman (Mr. Armstrong) will withdraw that statement. The hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald), when a similar statement Mr. SHARPE.
was made on a previous occasion, rose in his place and denied that he had made any such statement. The hon member (Mr. Armstrong) is bound to accept that denial, and I have no doubt he will accept it cheerfully.


Joseph Elijah Armstrong: I presume I shall be forced to accept the statement that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Macdonald) made. But the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley) remembers that the Prime Minister, on that very occasion, distinctly gave the people to understand that he would grant them a post office, and repudiated the position taken by the hon. member for Pictou. Be that as it may, the hon. member (Mr. Sinclair) has simply emphasized the position I took in this matter.


William Pugsley: When the Prime Minister was at Lethbridge, his attention was most emphatically called by the people to the urgent need of a public building. Lethbridge is a place of about 14,000 and is increasing at the rate of from fifty to one hundred per cent a year. The post office accommodation there was utterly inadequate. The matter had been under the consideration of the government foT some months, and we had made up our minds to erect a public building. What was wrong in the Prime Minister, at a time when no election was pending, and every reason to suppose that the appropriation would be made long before an election, telling the people that he was impressed with the necessity of a post office, and would ask the Minister of Public Works to provide for one? That is all he did.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Not quite all. At the same meeting, when the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald) said whatever he did say, the Prime Minister corrected him, and put the-


William Pugsley: That is denied.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I have said it in the presence of the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid ' Laurier), and he did not deny it, and will not dare to deny it, and I do not propose to take a denial at second-hand from the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley).


William Pugsley: The member for Pictou denied it.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: But the Prime Minister has neveT denied it. He corrected the matter going to the public press, and said that if they got only what they deserved they would not get a public building, but he would be more generous, and deal with them better than they deserved.


William Pugsley: If the Prime Minister took the trouble to deny every false statement made with regard to himself he would be kept busy. I do not think the matter

has been seriously brought to his attention. If the hon. gentleman would draw it to his attention I am sure the Prime Minister would feel it of sufficient importance to refer to it.


Arthur Meighen: Of course, we are bound to accept the statement of the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald). But a reference to the newspaper files will show that the newspapers of that city do not accept the denial, and neither do the people. As to the statement of the hon. member for Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair) that this government was not influenced by the political complexion of the members for a constituency, it may appear merciless to make any reference to it, because his claim so completely fell down while he was speaking. and his absolute refusal to answer the questions put to him showed the weakness of his position. But if he goes through the whole Ontario list of public buildings he will not find an item for a new public building that has been inserted since the *election of 1908 in any constituency; represented by a member of the opposition.


William Pugsley: And the hon. gentleman will find no new items in any constituency represented by a Liberal.


Arthur Meighen: I repeat what.I said. Now let him go through the list, and he will find no less than eight items of new public buildings inserted since 1908, in constituencies represented by members supporting the government. Now does that teach any lesson to the hon. gentleman ? If not, he must be obtuse politically. Now let us come to Nova Scotia. He says that in some building in Toronto, there is an appropriation greater than for the public buildings of Nova Scotia. I believe that appropriation is $100,000, and that the public buildings in Nova Scotia he refers to amount to about $90,000. But let him turn to rivers and harbours in Nova Scotia and he gets, not $90,000, but $847,000. And if he goes back to the supplementary estimates prior to the election of 1908, he gets appropriations of $448,000 in Nova Scotia for public buildings, or about eight for every constituency in the province, and all made in the month of July just on the eye of a general election. Now the. principal of bribing constituencies could not be placed on a lower level than the Minister of Public Works has placed it, and he only adds to the general demoralization of politics by protesting that he is not following that principle. It would do less harm to the country if he frankly admitted that he was governed by the political complexion of the member of the constituency.
I asked him a few moments ago whether he would say that if the people of the riding of North Grey, at the next election, returned a supporter of the government.
83J
his attitude rvould be at all altered with respect to a public building in Meaford, and he answered that he always avoided giving promises. Now will he assure this House that his attitude towards that constituency will not change if it sends to parliament a representative of a different, complexion.


William Pugsley: The hon. gentleman should not ask me for an assurance. I would hesitate very much to give him an assurance.


William Melville Martin: There is an item in the estimates this year for the constituency of North Grey, there is also an item for the constituency of East Grey.


Arthur Meighen: They were in before 1908.


William Melville Martin: The member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule), last week made a considerable comment onwhatNorth Wellington was getting. The constituency I represent has never had a dollar spent in it until this last year or two, and it was always represented by a Liberal. East Grey and North Grey have items, tout South Grey has no item. I think the item for East Grey has been put in the estimates since the election of 1908. The minister would know if I am correct.


William Pugsley: I have not the estimates for the previous years here. I may say that I sometimes have a feeling that I am doing even more for constituencies represented' by our friends opposite, than I ought to do; and a good deal of fault is found with me by some of our. friends because they do not get the public buildings to which they think they are entitled and they blame me for erecting public buildings in constituencies represented by our opponents; Sometimes it makes it more difficult for me to give grants in constituencies represented by hon. gentlemen opposite, when I find them so lacking in appreciation. In an election which took place a short time ago down in Nova Scotia, one hon. member sitting on the other side of the House went there and claimed credit for every item of public expenditure which had been made in the county, he said he was entitled to credit for it


An hon. MEMBER.: Who was it ?


William Pugsley: The hon. member for Digiby (Mr. Jameson). He claimed the entire credit for grants which had been made, grants to wharfs and other improvements. I have that upon authority so strong that I must give all credit to it.


Arthur Meighen: When did that take place ?


William Pugsley: Six ot eight weeks ago. 'That hon. gentleman went upon the platform and denied to the government, denied to me, denied to our supporters any credit for these improvements, and claimed that he was entitled to the entire credit for them all. It is conduct such as this by our friends opposite that makes it a little harder for me sometimes to grant them all the improvements they ask for.


Arthur Meighen: In the absence of the hon. member for Digiby, I think I would be safe in denying that he made any such assertion, or claimed all the credit.


William Pugsley: That is my information.


William Sora Middlebro: As the hon. member for Digby is not here it seems to me that this is an assertion that the minister is not entitled to make.


William Pugsley: We will come to the Nova Scotia items for wharfs and the hon. member for Digby will have the fullest opportunity of speaking on the question.


Richard Blain: We have just sent for him now.


William Sora Middlebro: Are all the expenditures which have been made in the riding since the hon. member for Digby was elected, proper expenditures?


William Pugsley: Yes, every one.


William Sora Middlebro: Were these expenditures asked for by the hon. member for Digby?


William Pugsley: A number were asked for by our own friends as well.


William Sora Middlebro: The hon. gentleman would be perfectly justified in asking for the expenditures which have been made in that riding?


William Pugsley: Yes.


William Sora Middlebro: Then, what fault has the hon. minister to find with the hon. member for Digby?


William Pugsley: I will tell the hon gentleman. Instead of the hon. member for Digby getting up on the platform and saying that the Minister of Public Works has -expended public money wisely and properly in his constituency and in the public interest, the hon. gentleman got up and told the people that the government was not entitled to the slightest credit. I see that the hon. member for Digby is now in his place and I will repeat the statement that I made. I was saying a short time ago that it made it a little more difficult than it would otherwise be because hon. gentlemen opposite are in the habit of going through their constituencies and claiming the sole credit for public expenditures made by the government, and I had in my Mr. MEIGHEN.
mind more especially the hon. member for Digby, who, I was informed, went upon different platforms in the last local election in Digby, claimed for himself the entire credit of the expenditures which had been made by the government in the county of Digby and contended that the government and the friends of the government were not entitled to any credit at all but that he and he alone had succeeded in getting these moneys expended in the county. That was the statement I was making, and what I said in the absence of the hon. gentleman was that I did not think that that was a course that hon. members opposite ought to take. If the expenditure is wise the government ought to be given the credit for it.


Oswald Smith Crocket: I supnose it was public money that was expended?


William Pugsley: Clearly public money that was expended. In my own judgment it is entirely a misconception on the part of an hon. member * of the opposition to say, that because he makes a representation to the minister, the minister considers the representations along with the representations of others, and an amount is put in the estimates, he is entitled to claim all the credit of it.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: If a constituency is represented by one of the minister's own political friends and public money is expended in that constituency, is the representative entitled to the credit, or is the Minister of Public Works?


William Pugsley: The government is entitled to the credit of it.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Not the representative?	.


William Pugsley: The representative, as a supporter of the government, when he goes to the people, claims credit for the government and claims that the public ought to support the government. But the hon. gentleman in one breath stated:	I
am entitled to the credit for these expenditures, but the government is not entitled to any credit.


Mr MIDDLEBRO.: Then the minister acknowledges that it is the proper principle for his candidates to go to a constituency and say:	You should support the
government because they have spent a certain amount of money in your constituency?


William Pugsley: It is fair to say that.


William Sora Middlebro: That is what I call bribery in the different constituencies.


Mr. JAMESON.: Mr. Chairman, as the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Pugsley) has referred to me personally in the House, it is only right that under the circumstances

I should make some remarks on the subject, With regard to these expenditures which are being made in Digby and with regard to the appropriations placed in the estimates for that purpose, the minister very well knows that I drew his attention on several occasions, personally and by correspondence, to the necessity of these works. I had the pleasure of several interviews with the minister and I also had considerable correspondence with him on the subject. I do not think that I ever asked for an expenditure that was not perfectly warranted by the facts and necessities of the case. I furthermore think there were many instances to which I might refer in which the minister did not comply with the requests that were made in that behalf. But the minister has gone further and has said that upon public platforms I have claimed the entire credit for these votes. The minister is labouring under a misconception. On the contrary, it was the gentlemen who were opposed to me and to the Conservative candidate in Digby who thus claimed the entire credit. It was my duty to myself, it was my duty to the constituency which I have the honour td represent, to, in so far as I could, rectify that misconception and counteract those influences. I did not begin it, nor did I begin the discussion with regard to these public works in Digby or the votes made therefor. I did not do so because I did not think it was a question which should enter into a local election, but when I noticed that gentlemen who were opposed to the Conservative candidate were going about the county of Digby and asserting that they and not I had made the representations upon the strength of which these votes were made and these public works were going to be undertaken, I felt it was my duty, to set the matter right. I also understand that these gentlemen were exhibiting letters from the Minister of Public Works himself, stating that it was upon their representations that these votes were placed in the estimates. I thereupon took the correspondence which I had had with the hon. minister, and I also took the different issues of * Hansard ' which referred to these matters when they were brought up in the House, and I read them, as I considered it was my duty to read them before the electors of Digby. It was not I who projected this question into the local election. I did not think it was altogether proper, I thought it was entirely out of place, but when the question was raised by gentlemen on the other side and when they sought to detract in every way possible from the efforts of myself as a Conservative sitting in this House and representing the county of Digbjq I thought it was only right and proper to set the matter right. The minister seems if I gauge properly the state of mind in which
he was when I entered the House, to have been a little irritated.


William Pugsley: Not at all.


Clarence Jameson: I am glad to know that


William Pugsley: Not a bit.


Clarence Jameson: Because I do not think the minister has any reason whatever to object to a statement of bald facts and facts, which are borne out by the records, on the part of any man who has the honour to represent a constituency in this parliament. The statement which I made upon every occasion was simply that these were the facts as disclosed by the records, .that in so far as I was personally concerned I was perfectly satisfied that any gentleman who had assisted should have the credit to which he was entitled, but that I also, as the one who had brought these matters to the attention of the minister and the House,, felt that I was entitled to credit, in so far as the records disclosed my efforts in that, particular regard. I do not think that the-minister, when he hears this explanation from me, will question the propriety of what I did. If this question, which came up on that occasion should arise again, I should do exactly the same thing under similar circumstances.


William Pugsley: I rather was given to understand that the hon. gentleman had denied- credit to anybody else, but that he had claimed the whole credit for himself. Did the hon. gentleman give due credit to the Minister of Public Works for these useful public works that he was having done in the county?


Clarence Jameson: The minister has stated what he understood to be a fact, namely, that I had denied credit to any person else, and he also has asked me whether or not I gave credit to the Minister of Public Works. I do not know that I said in so many words that the Minister of Public Works was entitled to any particular credit for this expenditure of public moneys in Digby, or for the votes made for that purpose, but I certainly read the correspondence between the minister and myself, my own letters to the minister and the minister's reply to me. I also quoted from ' Hansard,' in which my statements were reported, and the statements of the minister in reply, and I allowed the electors of the county of Digby and others present to draw their own conclusions. I merely did that because it had been put up to me that I had done nothing whatever in the way of assisting to get these works, or urging their necessity on the minister. I did not begin it; it was begun by my political opponents, and I only displayed the records in self-defence, so that the people might understand how matters really stood.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The hon. gentleman from Wellington (Mr. Martin) said there had been a considerable expenditure of public money in East Grey, and he instanced the expenditure of $1,000 in Thorn-bur.y to repair a wharf. I would remind him that that is the only appropriation in these estimates for East Grey. I think the work is needed; I am not complaining about it, and even though the amount is small, the people will be grateful for it.


William Pugsley: No one suggests the hon. gentleman would complain of an expenditure there.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No, but in the county of Wellington no less than four of these public buildings have been erected or are . under way in small villages, some of them within two or three miles of each other when there are large counties in which there is no expenditure on public buildings at all. It would seem to me that is due to the fact that the county of Wellington is represented in this House by three Reformers and that the other counties happen to be represented by Conservatives. I think the comparison I make is a fair one. Further, I do not think that the amount proposed to be expended in East Grey, in Thornbury, $1,000, is likely to influence the electors one way or the other.


William Melville Martin: I was not finding fault with the expenditure of public money in East Grey or in Wellington, but I cited it to show that the arguments of hon. gentlemen opposite that money was being promised to influence voters on the eve of an election, was not correct. I do not think any man could imagine that the money expended in Thornbury could carry the election against the hon. member for East Grey, and I do not think that item was in the estimates until after the election of 1908.


Mr. PERLEY.: It strikes me very forcibly that the Minister of Public Works has shown us very clearly to-night what his idea is in trying to administer this' department. I was very much astonished at some of the remarks he made, not because we did not know that was the way he looked at things, but because we did not expect him to acknowledge it. He sets to work and he asks the hon. member for Digby if he gave the Minister of Public Works CTedit for making improvements in 't)he countv of Digby, and he also gets up in this House and states that he thinks the government of the country ought to have the credit 'for these improvements in that constituency. Surely the Minister of Public Works knows that the people of this country think that he is spending their money and not the Grit money of this country. And when the minister erects public build-Mr. JAMESON
ings in any constituency he is supposed to erect them on some principle and in the public interest, but to-night he has acknowledged to us right here that he is using the machinery of the Public Works Department practically for the purpose of trying to bribe the various constituencies in this country. We have felt all along that that is the principle on which he decides where he will carry on public works in this country. We see, before the elections, hundreds of appropriations brought down for public works that are left over from year to year, and we find such items in the appropriations for Ontario, which are now before us. We have items here revoted every year since 1908, which were put in by the government as the minister himself says, in order that the government might have credit for building the works in these constituencies, and so that the government might be able to get the people to vote for their candidates. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that it is an extraordinary thing for a minister of the Crown in this country to get up and claim that he and the government should have credit for building public works in any constituency, and should appeal to the voters of the country to vote for his party because he has done so. I would like to ask you, Mr. Chairman, if any one could possibly make a balder statement as to the attempt to bribe the constituencies of this country by means of public works erected by the expenditure of the money belonging to all the people of Canada,


William Pugsley: It is all very well for my hon. friend to talk that way. Suppose there is a public work that he thinks is needed in a constituency and the government does not build it, surely he would blame the government, and on the other hand surely it is not an unreasonable recognition of what the government does, if in any constituency it has met the* public requirements so as to encouragef trade by the improvement of harbours or1 the building of wharfs; surely it is not unreasonable to suppose that a member of the opposition going on the public platform who claims credit for getting that work done, should say: So far as this constituency is concerned I recognize that the government has met the reasonabld demands of the public and has done in this respect what ought to be done for' the advancement of the interests of the people, and in meeting their just and reasonable demands. What I object to is that a member of the opposition should claim credit to himself when certain things are done, while at the same time he condemns the government for things that do not happen to be done.


Glenlyon Campbell: Who did that?


William Pugsley: We had that story and, we do not want it over again.


Glenlyon Campbell: It was denied.


Mr. PER LEY.: I object to the principle laid down by the Minister of Public Works in this regard. If the Minister of Public Works would adopt some principle in expending the money under his control with regard to distributing it throughout the country in places most) needing it, according to their size and the revenues they contribute, irrespective of who represents these constituencies, there would be no objection. If the minister should go to the people after the election and say: I have administered my department fairly and honestly for the benefit of all the people of Canada, then he could take credit to himself for administering his department wisely. But, it is neither right nor just that the minister should go into a particular constituency and say: You are a community of 700 or 800 people, I have given you a building to which you were not entitled in fair play, and therefore you should vote for this government-That is not proper.


William Pugsley: I would never say they w'ere not entitled to it.


Mr CONMEE.: I take exception to the views expressed by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Perley), and I do not know that he realizes himself what he did say. He made the statement that the Minister of Public Works had come here to-night, that he had put these items on the estimates for the very purpose

Mr. PERLEY'. I did not say that.


James Conmee: I took your words down.


Glenlyon Campbell: Read them; you haven't got them there at all.


James Conmee: The hon. gentleman stated that these items were put in the estimates for the purpose of getting the support of the people for the government candidates. If the hon. gentleman did not make that statement, and if he denies that he did, I will have to take his word.


George Halsey Perley: I know the hon. gentleman does not want to be unfair. What I said was that the Minister of Public Works said that when he erected buildings in a community he and the government should have credit for so doing, and what his statement practically meant was that when the elections came on the people should vote for him on that account.


William Pugsley: What I said was if the government with respect to my constituency had done justice by that constituency, had acted fairly by it, had done what was reasonable and proper for the development !
of the place by the improvement of harbours, &c., it was only fair that the government should get reasonable credit for that.


James Conmee: I have to accept my hon. friend's explanation, but I fear that when some gentlemen speak, they perhaps go further than they intended to go. But hon. gentlemen know that they go on the platforms of this country and condemn the government for not having expended money in certain cases. I have never met one of them on the stump who did not take that ground. In the House every day attacks are made on the government for extravagant expenditure, for wasting money in building public works, wharfs, &c., which hon. gentlemen allege are not prudent expenditures; but when it comes to their own constituencies, every one of them has his hand out, every one is on his feet .pleading for some expenditure in his own riding. I do not think that is consistent. We have resolution after resolution submitted, condemning the expenditures of the government. Hon. gentlemen do not as a rule condemn any particular expenditure. I have been watching the proceedings of the House for some years but I have not seen hon. gentlemen moving to strike out this item or that item very often, they are very careful about that, they are afraid to put themselves on record as against this or that public undertaking, for which the government are spending money.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Was the hon. gentleman present the last time we were in supply, when we moved to strike out an item ?


James Conmee: I say there are few cases where hon. gentlemen do more to strike at a particular item.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The hon. gentlemen said never.


William Pugsley: I did not say any such thing. There are a few cases where hon. gentlemen are very careful not to strike at any particular item and seldom if ever, condemn an item of expenditure in the constituency of a Conservative member.


Arthur Meighen: In the very nature of things such items would not be likely to be subject to attack.


James Conmee: It is legitimate for hon. gentlemen to condemn the government for not having made any expenditure they think should have been made that has been voted, but it is just as fair for a government supporter to take credit to the government because the government did make expenditures which he and the electors think meritorious.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: We are obliged for this lecture, but as a business man, would not the hon. member not condemn a manager of his, who would spend $25,000 on a building where a $5,000 building would do ?


James Conmee: If a superintendent of works represented that a foreman or manager in another department had expended $20,000 on a building that should have been erected for $5,000 and on investigation, I found that he had misrepresented and drawn on his imagination that he had no foundation in fact for his statement, I would dismiss the superintendent-and that is what the ridings of the hon. gentleman should do with them.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The hon. gentleman would condemn a man who, in building for him a building that should cost $5,000 or $6,000 placed a cupola on it and lined it with diamonds and gold and clocks, the' hon. gentleman knows that our objection to the heavy expenditure has never been proved unfounded. Last session I pointed out that if they took $100,000 and built ten post offices they would be doing more service to the country than by building only four post offices at $25,000 each.


James Conmee: A superintendent who in building a warehouse would add a cupola and line it with gold should be dismissed. My hon. friend knows that there has been no such case as that, that he was drawing on his imagination, that it is a mere fiction in the mind of my hon. friend.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: The hon. gentleman does not know what he is talking about.


James Conmee: It might be economy to build substantial buildings as far as the money goes as otherwise they might have to be renewed.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Does the hon. gentleman say that as a rule, a town of 600 or 700 inhabitants needs a $10,000 post office? Why you would see such a post office long before you saw the rest of the village. At the same time there are places in the country going without buildings, producing ten times the revenue and progressing ten times as rapidly. The hon. gentleman talks about drawing on the imagination, can he find in his imagination any justification for a $10,000 or $12,000 edifice in a village of 600 inhabitants ? He knows quite well that a $5,000 building would be all that place would need for the next two or three decades.


Richard Blain: This is all due to the partisanship which hon. gentlemen opposite introduced into the Public Works Department many years ago. Prior to the election of 1900, one of the ministers then in office sent out a private circular addressed Mr. CONMEE.
to the Reform candidates all over Canada. I have a copy of that circular in my hands but shall not read it as it has been put on ' Hansard ' in former discussions. The first question it contains is this : Does your constituency require any public works? If so, would you recommend that it be done by public competition or day labour? Thus inviting the Reform candidates all over Canada to take this circular into the election and tell the voters to say Whether they required a public work, and also whether that work should be put up to public competition or be done by day labour. That circular, signed by a cabinet minister, was sent out to the Reform candidates all over Canada. No doubt many hon. gentlemen behind the Minister of Public Works received that circular.


William Pugsley: That was a long time ago.


Richard Blain: It was just prior to the election of 1900. I read it at the time in the presence of hon. gentlemen opposite, and not one dared rise in his place and contradict me. Therefore, if there is flagrant partisanship in the Public Works Department-


William Pugsley: Which there is not.


Richard Blain: It was introduced into the department by this government. Talk about partisanship, why up in Wellington, when the government were selecting a site for a public building,_ an advertisement was put in the papers calling all the Reformers of the village together for the purpose of selecting a sue.


William Melville Martin: I deny that.


Richard Blain: Does the hon. gentleman deny that there appeared in a newspaper in that village-


William Melville Martin: What newspaper?


Richard Blain: I will give the name. Does he deny that there was an advertisement calling the Reformers together in order to decide what site should toe selected for a public building?


William Melville Martin: I utterly deny that statement. There never was such a thing done in North Wellington.


Richard Blain: When the hon. gentleman was in his seat the other day it was stated in answer to that charge: ' Oh, but the government did not select the site which the Reformers named.'


William Melville Martin: I never said a word about it.


William Pugsley: The hon. gentleman is barking up the wrong tree.


Richard Blain: No, there is no tree I could bark up in which my hon. iriend would not be found in connection with su6h matters.


William Melville Martin: What paper do you refer to?


Richard Blain: The hon. gentleman knows that this was a case which occurred in Wellington county. Did it happen to be in the county of South Wellington?


William Melville Martin: I represent the north riding.


Richard Blain: Did it happen in the other riding?


William Melville Martin: I cannot tell you. -


Richard Blain: I made the statement the other night and it may be that the public building was in the other riding of Wellington. but the statement is all right.


William Melville Martin: It is not all right. You connected my name with it as the representative of North Wellington, and I certainly deny it and you ought to apologize.


Richard Blain: If I am incorrect as regards the riding my hon. friend represents, I still make the statement that an advertisement such as I have described was published in a newspaper in that county, and that may have been in the south riding.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend does not suggest that the Public Works Department had anything to do with any public meeting either in South or North Wellington.


Richard Blain: The Public Works Department had to do with the circular to which I referred in the beginning of my remarks.


William Pugsley: Not at all-not the slightest thing to do with the circular.
_Mr. BLAIN. Why, the document was signed by the acting Minister of Public Works, who was a member of the government at the time.


William Pugsley: The hon. gentleman has just been referring to a public meeting of the Liberal electors in the riding of South Wellington, and I understood him to say that the Public Works Department was responsible for that. The department had nothing to do with it.


Richard Blain: I was not saying anything of the kind.


William Pugsley: That is what I was referring to.


Richard Blain: I was pointing out that at the very root of this partisanship was this circular to which I have alluded and which no minister of the Crown has ever cared to deny.
Seaforth public building, $15,000.


William Pugsley: The lot has been pur chased and the building is to be used for post office and customs purposes, also for armoury accommodation for a company of the 33rd Huron regiment. It is expected to cost about $20,000 without the site. The postal revenue is $6,050, customs duties $14,615, money orders issued $25,610, money orders paid $31,359. Nine years ago Seaforth had a population of 2,300.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: When was the first vote?


William Pugsley: 1908-9.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Has the work started?


William Pugsley: The plans are being prepared, and the lots have been purchased. We paid to one gentleman $1,300, and to the other $2,700. The two lots cost $4,000. The land is quite large. The frontage is 91 feet, and the depth 132 feet.


Richard Blain: In what riding is this?


William Pugsley: South Huron. Seaforth is a good town. Its postal revenue is about $6,000. '


Arthur Meighen: Was the old building burned down?


William Pugsley: There is no building there now.
M,r. LANCASTER. Who selected this1-site?


William Pugsley: An expert of the department.


Richard Blain: Did the expert send in a report?	[DOT]


William Pugsley: Yes.


Richard Blain: Has the minister that report here?


William Pugsley: No, not here.


Richard Blain: What will be the total cost for this Seaforth building?


William Pugsley: It will cost $20,000 exclusive of the land.


Richard Blain: What about the fittings? And what will be the total cost of the building ready to occupy?


William Pugsley: The chief architect informs me that the fittings will bring the co^t up to something like $25,000-not exceeding that.
Sudbury public building, $20,000.


William Pugsley: This is in the constituency of my genial friend from Nipissing (Mr. Gordon). He will agree with me that Sudbury is an important town and well entitled to this public building.


Arthur Meighen: This was in the estimates prior to 1908?


William Pugsley: Yes.


George Gordon: Have the plans been prepared?


William Pugsley: They are not yet ready.


George Gordon: Is it the intention to commence building this year?


William Pugsley: That is the present intention.


George Gordon: The building now in use there is far from being large enough. I hope work on the new building will be started soon.


William Pugsley: I assure my hon. friend we. expect to start this year.


Richard Blain: When was the estimate for this building first put in?


William Pugsley: In 1907-8.


Arthur Meighen: And the minister states it is the intention to spend the money this year. I presume that the necessary corollary is that there is to be an election next year?
Tilbury public building, $15,000.


William Pugsley: The lot for this has been bought. Tilbury and Tilbury east together had a population in 1901 of 4,200.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Is this a new vote, or is it one of the election votes?


William Pugsley: Leave out the alternative and I will answer. We calculate to get this building for about $15,000.


Richard Blain: In what constituency is it?


William Pugsley: In West Kent.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, in South Essex.
Air. PUGSLEYL However, it is needed in whatever constituency it is. We have a fine lot with 108 feet frontage, and a depth of 99 feet.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What did the site cost?


William Pugsley: It cost $1,975.
Tillsonburg public building, $25,000.


William Pugsley: Tillsonburg is in South Oxford. The postal revenue last year -was $7,500; customs revenue $25,000; money orders issued $26,000 ; money orders paid' $23,000. Hon. members will see that it is an important place. The population, in 1908, according to Lovell's 'Gazetteer' was 3,000.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: What is the building to cost?


William Pugsley: It is to cost $25,000 in addition to the site.


William Pugsley: 


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Are you renting there now?


William Pugsley: Yes.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: At what rental?


William Pugsley: For the post office, $375 ; for customs house, $160.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: When was the first vote?^


William Pugsley: In 1907-8.


George Gordon: Is it the intention of the minister to bring down a supplementary estimate for a public building at Sturgeon Falls. He is aware that two years ago a lot was purchased there for that purpose. And less than a year ago the post office there was burned down. At present, the postal business is being carried on in a building which probably did not cost more than $300. It is simply a 'disgrace to allow the post office to toe carried on any longer in such a building.


William Pugsley: I cannot give an assurance that an amount will be put in the estimates this year for the purpose referred to. Of course, that is a matter I cannot speak of until the estimates are brought down. But the outlook for Sturgeon Falls is not sufficiently good just now to warrant us in undertaking the expenditure for a public building.


Arthur Meighen: Does the hon. minister mean the political outlook?
Mr. PUGSLEY". The sulphite mill there has not been running since 1906, and I believe that the mill and the timber limits are now in the courts, and are about being sold, if they have not been sold already. Until prospects improve, we should hardly be justified in the expenditure for such a building as we contemplated at Sturgeon Falls. However, the matter is under consideration, and I cannot say at present what will be done in regard to the estimates of this year.


George Gordon: The mills the Minister of Public Works has referred to will be sold in April, and after that the business will be much larger than it is at present. If something is not put in the estimates now and a building started within a short time, matters will go from bad to worse. Even now it is simply a disgrace to allow any government business to be done in such a building as we have there. The revenue at present is $3,611; postal orders issued, $22,300 last year. In view of the fact that in other places with seven or eight hundred population and a revenue about the same, buildings worth $15,000 or $20,000 are being erected, I think I have a right to complain. Unlike some other members here, I realize that we who are

in opposition cannot expect much in the way of getting public buildings. I would have no complaint to make if these buildings which are being put up in towns represented by supporters of the government were put up in places where the revenue justified the expenditure. But when they are being put up in these little obscure places where there is very little revenue, I think we have some reasonable cause for complaint. In this instance particularly, I think the Postmaster General would be justified in seeing that something was done forthwith. I hope he will take the matter up. Now, I am not asking for any other building in the constituency I represent, although I may mention that so far as the revenue is concerned, we could present strong claims. Take for instance, Cobalt. Last year the revenue was $25,756; postal orders issued, $486,000, Cobalt ranking with many of the lesser cities of the Dominion. Yet the business there is being carried on in a very poor building not at all fit for the business. I believe something should be done immediately to relieve the situation in these two places particularly. I may say that I am prepared to give the Minister of Public Works all due credit for everything that he does.


William Pugsley: I am sure the hon. gentleman will feel that I am endeavouring as far as I can to treat the important constituency which he represents with justice. We are spending a good deal of money in that constituency. We are providing a wharf at Haileybury and another at New Liskeard, we are dredging the river and Lake Temiskaming. we are building a dam atLatchford for the purpose of improving navigation, we have provided for the interprovincial bridge over the North Temiskamiifg, and we are providing now for a public building at Sudbury. I regret that I do not see" my way clear to put in an item for a building at Sturgeon Falls. I do not want to discourage my hon. friend, or his constituency, but the naper mill there has not been operated by the receiver, and business has greatly fallen off. The postal revenue there has decreased a igood deal. It is $600 less than it was four years ago, the customs duties are only about one-fourth what they were four years ago. Money orders paid have increased, but money orders issued are $11,000 less than they were four years ago. However, I hope these industries will be started again, and I can assure my hon. friend that the claims of Sturgeon Falls will have my careful consideration.


George Gordon: What about Cobalt ?


William Pugsley: The difficulty we found at Cobalt wras to buy a lot. The prices were away up beyond what we thought was
reasonable. I think it has been arranged to rent temporarily suitable accommodation at Cobalt. I hope before long to be able to visit Cobalt, with my hon. friend the Postmaster General, when the matter of a new post office will have our best consideration.
Uxbridge public building, $15,000.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: This is a very deserving expenditure. Would the minister inform the House who recommended the purchase of the lot ?


William Pugsley: Uxbridge stands in the same category as most of the buildings in the smaller towns. The population in 1901 -was 1,657. The postal revenue is $4,111; money orders issued, $27,068; money orders paid, $17,854. We have purchased a lot, and propse erecting a building to cost $15,000, exclusive of the site and exclusive of armoury accommodation. My hon. friend asks on whose recommendation the site was bought. In the first place, a strong recommendation was made in the shape of a letter from Mr. Grant, the then member of parliament, 'and from Mr. Alexander Graham.


Richard Blain: Will the hon. minister read that letter.


William Pugsley: This is the substance oi it:	The erection of a public building at
Uxbridge was recommended by G. D. Grant, Esq., and Alexander Graham, Esq., December 31,	1907. Their letter gives
the population of the town, its industries, speaks of it as being the centre of an excellent agricultural country, drawing its trade from a large section, gives the postal revenue, and presents very strong reasons for the erection of a public building. With regard to the site, I sent an expert from the department who recommended the site which was chosen, and which seemed to meet with general approval at the time.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Did any public bodies, such as the council or board of trade, pass resolutions favouring this site?


William Pugsley: I have no record of any.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Had there been any communications from -any public bodies to the minister adverse to this site?


William Pugsley: Yes, there was one that, according to my information, has met with the favour of my hon. friend. I do not know whether my hon. friend promoted the action of the council or not, but I understand that the action of the council met with the approval of my hon. friend. The O'Neil site recommended by the council after we had made the pur-

chase of the other will cost $1,500 more, it is very uneven, being about 20 feet higher than the street level, and would necessitate heavy excavation and the erection of a retaining wall. The Hutchinson site which we had purchased before getting this resolution from the council only cost $1,200, and is an infinitely better site. It is on the opposite corner of the same street, and only 40 or 50 feet from the present post office, which situation it has occupied for a quarter of a century. It has a frontage of 60 feet against a frontage of 32 feet' for the O'Neil property, and the town council-I hope I have been misinformed when I say that it has been represented that they were prompted by the hon. gentleman-have asked us to pay $2,700, or more than double the amount, for another property that has little more than half the frontage, and which, according to my information, is situated some 20 feet above the level of the street, a very uneven lot, and one which would be absolutely undesirable in so far as the public interest is concerned.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: I desire to inform the House and the minister that in so far as I am personally concerned I have not expressed any opinion or indicated any preference with regard to this matter.


William Pugsley: I am glad of it.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: I was not. instrumental in securing the council's action in passing a resolution in favour of that particular site ; in fact, I very discreetly kept out of the dispute. The O'Neil lot which is recommended by the town council is central. It is one that could have been purchased infinitely cheaper than the price which the minister mentioned. But the chief Liberal worker in Uxbridge went to Mr. O'Neil and told him to keep up a good, stiff price, that the government were going to purchase it, or secure an option, and that no doubt he would secure his price. He stiffened up his price, but the other man sold his lot simply 'because a few Liberals living in the vicinity were supporting that lot which is situated at their end of the town. I understand that the Minister of Public Works has received a resolution from the town council advocating the purchase of the central lot, which would admittedly serve the municipality much more advantageously than the lot at the other end of the town.


William Pugsley: By no means admittedly because the lot we bought is right opposite the present post office which is in the central part of the town.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Because the central post office has been situated in one end of the town for a generation is no Mr. PUGSLEY.
reason why the new post office which will last several generations Should be situated in one end of the town. There is no reason why because it has been in an inconvenient place to a great many citizens who go to the post office it should be located in the same end of the town, and still continue to be an inconvenience. The following resolution was sent to the Minister of Public Works :
To the Hon. W'm. Pugsley, M.P.,
Minister of Public Works, Ottawa.
Whereas the government has decided to erect a post office in the town of Uxbridge.
And whereas the government has purchased the Hutchinson site, which is situated in the west end.
And whereas two-thirds of the population of the said town of Uxbridge reside east of the said Hutchinson site.
And whereas the O'Neil site, which is more centrally located, can be purchased at a reasonable price for the erection of a post office.
And whereas the public library and market buildings are situated on opposite corners to the O'Neil site.
Therefore, the municipal council of the corporation of the town of Uxbridge do strongly recommend the honourable Minister of Public Works to purchase the O'Neil site, believing that the _ erection of a post office on the said O'Neil site would be in the interest of the great majority of the residents of the said corporation.	[DOT]
Dated at Uxbridge the 26th day of November, 1910.
(Sgd.) W. R. BEAL,
Mayor.
W. H. CROSBY, Clerk.
I would suggest that the Minister of Public Works should in future communicate with public bodies representing the municipalities and not with his own private supporters in these various towns. I think he would find that it would work far more satisfactorily, would serve the public much better, and that he would secure better advice. It would not be partisan, biased advice, but the advice of the municipality as represented in the municipal council. I would like to ask if it is the purpose of the minister to erect an adjoining armoury in connection with the post office?


William Pugsley: It is intended to provide armoury accommodation.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: The options were obtained some time in 1908.


William Pugsley: This was voted in the session of 1907-8.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Will the minister kindly tell us the reason of the delay? This is 1911. The people are clamouring for the accommodation and it is very badly needed.


William Pugsley: There were several reasons, and not the least was the delay

caused by the inquiry which had to be made about the sites in consequence of the action of the council in urging us to secure a different site. That caused a very considerable delay. Then, there was the delay of a year which took place in common with almost all of the other public buildings owing to the decline of the revenues when it had to stand over. Outside of this I do not know that there has been any undue delay, certainly not more than has been caused in connection with many other buildings. I may repeat what I have already said that we have a great many public buildings for which parliament has made appropriations and the chief architect is working upon the plans one after another as his staff is able to follow up the work.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: The resolution passed by council is dated November, 1910, so that there was a delay of two years in the erection of this building before the council took action at all.


William Pugsley: But the hon. gentleman approved and made representations in parliament in regard to the unsuitability of the site.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: I did not object to the site at all; I was simply urging the erection of a building.


William Pugsley: My information is that the hon. gentleman made representations with regard to the site as well.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Are the plans prepared?


William Pugsley: The plans have been prepared and now are in the Post Office Department for approval.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Will the work be done by contract or day labour?


William Pugsley: By public tender and contract. All pulblic buildings are done by public tender and contract.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: When may we expect the advertisement to appear?


William Pugsley: I cannot tell until we get the plans back from the Post Office Department.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: In the course of a jnonth or two?	[DOT]


William Pugsley: In the course of a couple of months or so; I cannot tell exactly.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Not longer than two or three months?


William Pugsley: I would not like to say because I do not exactly know.
Wallaceburg public building, $15,000.


Richard Blain: We want a little information about this.


William Pugsley: This is for the purpose of erecting a public building in Wallaceburg. We have purchased a good site at the corner of Nelson and James streets 60 x 90. The postal revenue is $6,603, customs revenue $235,410, money orders issued $18,038, money orders paid $16,124, imports $1,279,308. We propose that this building shall be for post office and customs purposes. We have bought the site for $3,000.


Richard Blain: On whose recommendation?


William Pugsley: This has been urged by Mr. Gordon.


Richard Blain: What constituency?


William Pugsley: East Kent. Wallaceburg is a very important and growing town.


Richard Blain: What will be the cost of the building complete and ready to occupy?


William Pugsley: $20,000 estimated, outside of the land.
Waterloo public building, $41,000.


William Pugsley: Waterloo is a very important place. We have a contract already let for the erection of the building. We have bought the land for $5,000; we have let the contract for $36,975, fittings, lock boxes, &c., $5,000; sidewalks, &c-., $1,000; contingencies and superintendence, $2,669; total probable cost, inclusive of the site, heating apparatus, wiring, fittings, furnishing, &c., $51,072.69. The building is for post office, custom house and accommodation of G Company, Waterloo regiment. Postal revenue last year, $11,423; mail orders issued, $17,922; mail orders paid, $66,414. In revenue, $509,941; estimated customs revenue, $60,666. It is in the constituency of Waterloo North.


Richard Blain: The constituency of the Minister of Labour.


Arthur Meighen: When were the plans approved by the departments concerned?


William Pugsley: Contract entered into on 3rd October. This was voted in 1907 and 1908.


Arthur Meighen: Just before the election. When were the plans approved by the departments concerned?


William Pugsley: In June or July.


Arthur Meighen: Is the minister sure of that?


William Pugsley: That is what the deputy minister tells me, to the best of his recollection.


Arthur Meighen: Then there is no necessity for waiting longer to let the contract than three or four months after the approval of the plans.


William Pugsley: In the ordinary course I would think not.


Arthur Meighen: What would be the extraordinary course that would entail longer delay.


William Pugsley: If there were a considerable number of plans approved at the one time the specifications would have to be printed and take their turn at the Printing Bureau, and then the working plans have to be prepared after the approval. How long it will take depends on the quantity of worS on hand; my hon. friend can see that.


Arthur Meighen: I can see that. If that is the outside time required in one constituency it should be the outside time required in another.


William Pugsley: Not necessarily.


Arthur Meighen: I suppose the preparing of the specifications is done in order of the approval of the plans.


William Pugsley: That does not follow.


Arthur Meighen: Why should you change the order.


William Pugsley: The chief architect is allowed to use his .iudgment as to that.


Arthur Meighen: Does the minister think it not dangerous to leave that to the chief architect? Surely the minister is responsible for seeing that justice is done in the several constituencies.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend would not expect me to look after these details.


Arthur Meighen: I have a strong suspicion that the minister does look into them carefully. Does he state that _ there is absolutely no interference from himself after the plans are approved.


William Pugsley: I would not like to say that, because sometimes if there is a strong complaint made to me as to the delay I may send a memo or telephone the chief architect asking for the cause, and he gives me what I always thought was a reasonable explanation of the delay. To that extent I do interfere. He might think that I thought it desirable to proceed with that particular building and probably he would look into it. I cannot recall any particular case in which it has hurried him up, tout that is what I sometimes do.


Arthur Meighen: So that the member for the constituency can do nothing once the plans are approved.


William Pugsley: I remember in the case of the Portage la Prairie building, that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Meighen), wrote me about it, and I sent a memo at once to the chief architect asking what caused the delay, and I was informed the plans had Mr. MEIGHEN.
been sent to the Militia Department for approval. I followed that up in order to see -what was the delay there. I can assure my hon. friend that I gave no instructions which would cause or justify any delay. I made the usual inquiries with regard to the building at Portage la Prairie that I do in respect to those in constituencies represented toy our friends.


Arthur Meighen: Have the working plans and specifications been prepared in that case ?


William Pugsley: They have not been fully prepared, but are pretty nearly prepared.
Wiarton public building, $10,000.


Richard Blain: Where is Wiarton ?


William Pugsley: North Bruce. I had the pleasure of visiting Wiarton last summer and I was very much impressed with the necessity of a public building there. Wiarton is situated upon the lake and they have a little bit of a building, which is totally inadequate for the accommodation of the people. We had a splendid public gathering and I looked at the Mayor's office, which was no better than the post office, and I told him that if he would undertake to erect a new building which would be a credit to the street, I would consider the question of a postoffice.


Richard Blain: Did you go any further than that ?


William Pugsley: That is all.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: Is the minister sure
he spoke to	the mayor,	because	there	isno mayor, reeve.	This is a	village	with	a


William Pugsley: Oh,		yes, there is		a
mayor, and a fine looking mayor too.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: He is a fine looking man, but he is not a mayor, unless the village became a town last year.


William Pugsley: We have not yet purchased the site, but we propose putting up a building at a reasonable cost of perhaps $15,000 or $20,000. Wiarton has an excellent harbour, which is being improved, and it is not only a good town at present, tout it has an excellent future.


Richard Blain: Who urged this public building?


William Pugsley: Mr. Tolmie.


Mr. RHODES.: It would be interesting to know if his worship the mayor has kept his part of the bargain?


William Pugsley: I think it is quite certain he would.


Richard Blain: There was a sugar refinery there a few years ago that was closed up. That seems to be an objection in the Sturgeon Falls item.


William Pugsley: It has not affected this [DOT]town because the revenue here shows an increase.


Richard Blain: My hon. friend was up there in the summer and rather suggested he might do something for them.


William Pugsley: I was very much impressed with the necessity of doing something.


Richard Blain: Is there any correspondence about the site?


William Pugsley: Not yet, I thought there would be no difficulty in getting a site at a moderate price.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: What is the population? .


William Pugsley: Nine years ago it was 2,423.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: I thought the minister intended to keep the cost of buildings in such towns below $15,000.


William Pugsley: This is larger than usual. I was speaking rather of places under 2,000.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Who is the mayor?


William Pugsley: Mr. German, a very excellent man indeed; he is a Conservative.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: That is why you were so much impressed by him.


William Pugsley: I was impressed, there is no question about that. I think Mr. Tolmie, the hon. member for the constituency was able to point out the advantages of the town.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Is it the minister's intention to put the officers at work on this plan and start this building before other buildings for which votes have been standing for two or three years are commenced?
Mr. PUGSLEYL I have no present intention of doing so.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Is it the rule of the department to have the buildings taken in turn?


William Pugsley: Not an inflexible rule.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: In fact a very flexible rule. In the county of Ontario there are two votes, one in Whitby, which was taken in the fall of 1908 when the elections were on, and one in my town of Uxbridge. To-day, South Ontario being represented by a Liberal, the Whitby building is completed, but for the Uxbridge
building the working plans have not been commenced. That is not a fair way to treat the members of the House. The minister has put a vote in the estimates this year for a public building in Port Perry. Will he allow the Port Perry building to be erected before the Uxbridge building?


William Pugsley: The intention to provide a public building in Port Perry will not prevent the building at Uxbridge going on with reasonable speed.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Will you proceed with the Port Perry building before the Uxbridge building?


William Pugsley: I have no present intention of doing so.


Samuel Simpson Sharpe: Would that not be a great hardship on the Uxbridge people.	.


William Pugsley: That would depend on the circumstances.
Some resolutions reported.
Mr. FIELDING moved the adjournment of the House.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Monday being private members' day I suppose will be entirely taken up by private members?


William Stevens Fielding: As usual, yes.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and House adjourned at 11.10 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, January 30, 1911.